It has been quite some time since I posted here. Call it the tyranny of the times. I’d like to dedicate today’s commentary to my friend, Justin, from Wyoming who has been reading me The Riot Act about getting back to business on this site.
So, back to business it is and Justin is to blame!
As is generally the case, the federal government has been kind enough to provide me with a ready supply of material. Here we go again – your wildlife management tax dollars at work.
USDA stops using beetles vs. invasive saltceder is the title of today’s highlighted article and it starts like this:
Concern about an endangered bird has caused the U.S. Department of Agriculture to declare a cease-fire in its biological war against saltcedar, an invasive tree that has taken over riparian areas across the west.
Let’s first put this in historical perspective. Saltcedar, aka tamarisk, was introduced at the behest of the government as a “stabilization” project.
Excerpt:
The tree was introduced to the West during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s and has since spread along streams throughout the region.
In typical government fashion they eventually decided this hadn’t been such a good idea.
Imagine that, the Feds found that their problem solving created Unintended Consequences insofar as one expensive program expanded into yet another expensive government program.
They began releasing saltcedar leaf beetles under the theory that they would eat the saltcedar. Believe it or not, the program was actually proceeding as intended.
Excerpt:
Now, scientists think the beetles are likely to spread from the states where they were introduced. They say it could be just a matter of time before the insects chew through saltcedar all the way down the Colorado River drainage in Arizona and eastern California.
But wait; there’s another dilemma!!
Excerpt:
The released beetles proliferated, the groups said, destroying several saltcedar trees containing southwestern willow flycatcher nests.
As it happens, the southwestern willow flycatcher is listed as an endangered species.
Let’s briefly recap so we don’t get lost in the maze. However, I’m going to add just a bit more history to keep today’s predicament in perspective.
In 1916 the Feds passed the Federal Farm Loan Act. This legislation allowed for farmers to obtain easy credit to expand the size of their farms and invest in machinery to make farming more efficient.
In the mid-30s, as a direct result of these new farming methods and subsequent overproduction (coupled with drought) the Dust Bowl was created. Erosion of the land became the newest Unintended Consequence and, thus, government concern.
Saltcedar was introduced to help stabilize riparian areas. As it spread, it choked out willows and cottonwoods (you know, Nature’s preferred choice for streamside stabilization).
As the willows and cottonwoods disappeared, the southwestern willow flycatcher adapted to its changing environment and started nesting in saltcedar.
To repair the damage created by saltcedar, the saltcedar leaf beetle was introduced to eat the saltcedar and the little buggers followed the meal ticket wherever it took them.
Apparently some government bureaucrat neglected to give the bugs a map of the places they were supposed to go.
And now, environmentalists are afraid that if the beetles are successful in removing the saltcedar outside the planned area those poor flycatchers will have no place to nest. Despite the fact that they adapted before to their changing environment.
Excerpt:
“It’s very serious,” said Robin Silver, with the Center for Biological Diversity.
Here is another quote I’d like you to consider.
Excerpt:
The federal government’s view that saltcedar leaf beetles could do no harm was an “illusion,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
He’s right, you know, but in far more areas than beetles.
The true illusion is that the federal government can do much of anything without causing harm. Which is exactly why our Founding Fathers restricted their reach.
Excerpt:
“Perhaps the best hope for the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher is for it to develop a taste for leaf beetles,” Ruch said.
I disagree.
The best hope for flycatchers – and for the citizens of this country – is for the federal government to get out of the loan business, the saltcedar business, the beetle business, the endangered species business, and any other business that isn’t specifically outlined in our U.S. Constitution.
When will we learn that our reliance on Washington is not only nonsensical, it is suicidal. Like the southwestern willow flycatcher, our Freedom is endangered…
There is a glimmer of hope that truth may actually find its way into the discussion. Only time will tell.
Agencies seek help to quell bear woes is the title of today’s highlighted story and it starts like this:
State wildlife officials are looking for volunteers to help teach the public how to avoid conflicts with bears in Aspen, where 20 bears were killed last year after threatening people.
Another tack to try to ease troubles between bears and people in the mountain resort town has raised the concerns of one environmental group. The Colorado Division of Wildlife has proposed almost doubling the number of bear hunting licenses in the region, including the Vail and Glenwood Springs areas, to about 1,100 from 630.
The “environmental group”, as is typical, has raised a stink over the concept of additional hunting opportunities.
Excerpt:
“What I’m afraid they’re trying to do is hunt their way out of this,” said Wendy Keefover-Ring of WildEarth Guardians.
As is also typical, this group will act like spoiled six-year-olds if they don’t get their way.
Excerpt:
Keefover-Ring said the underlying problem is enforcing laws requiring bear-resistant trash bins so the animals stop identifying people with easy-to-find food. Bears need to be chased out of town and individual problem bears need to be removed, she added.
Keefover-Ring said her group would “raise a ruckus” if the state wildlife division pushes to dramatically raise the number of bear hunting licenses.
There is more to the story, however, as expressed in another article I found on the same topic.
Excerpt:
The long-term argument that the human-bear conflicts were considered “people problems, not bear problems,” because of failed efforts to control waste and garbage storage, no longer was working.
“There’s some truth to that, but after 20 years it’s not getting any better,” he said. “It’s time to take a more comprehensive approach.”
I must applaud Colorado DOW for their thinking.
Excerpt:
While the hope is that hunting may alleviate some of the trouble, DOW spokesman Randy Hampton emphasized that hunting alone will not solve what is proving to be a continuing and growing problem.
Hampton said hunters each year on average kill only 5 percent of the approved quota.
“So 1,100 licenses do not equal 1,100 bears,” Hampton said. “But we want to shift the killing of bears to sportsmen rather than wildlife officers or local law enforcement agencies.”
That “shift” is the way it should be. As I have said for many years, it makes little sense to spend tax dollars for government officials to kill animals when sportsmen are willing to purchase licenses to do the job.
There is another concept I’d like to address.
We need to quit tip-toeing around our sport as if we’re ashamed of it.
Excerpt:
“What I’m afraid they’re trying to do is hunt their way out of this,” said Wendy Keefover-Ring of WildEarth Guardians.
So what!?
Look at the math.
DOW is looking at an increase of 470 bear tags for that area. Hunter success averages about 5 percent. That translates to an additional hunter harvest of 23.5 bears.
Hmmmm; how many bruins did DOW kill last year?
20.
This proposed increase is not overzealous and sportsmen can assist in managing bear numbers and in making their home turf safer for themselves and the general public.
Hunt their way out?
Sounds good to me…
My friend, Ray, from South Carolina sent me an article that begs a very serious question:
How much are we willing to pay in the interest of promises we know cannot be kept?
Francis Marion has hidden cameras is the title of this story and it starts like this:
Last month, Herman Jacob took his daughter and her friend camping in the Francis Marion National Forest. While poking around for some firewood, Jacob noticed a wire. He pulled the wire and followed it to a video camera and antenna.
The camera didn’t have any markings identifying its owner, so Jacob took it home and called law enforcement agencies to find out if it was theirs, all the while wondering why someone would station a video camera in an isolated clearing in the woods.
I am one of those individuals who spends a huge amount of time in remote and isolated areas of our country to hunt, fish, camp and simply “get away from it all”.
The thought of someone spying on my activities via video equipment sends a shiver up my spine. Were we to catch some “citizen” doing something like this, the guy would be classified as a real freak and we’d lock him up and throw away the key.
But that wasn’t the case.
Excerpt:
He eventually received a call from Mark Heitzman of the U.S. Forest Service. In a stiff voice, Heitzman ordered Jacob to turn it back over to his agency, explaining that it had been set up to monitor “illicit activities.”
That is a vague excuse and, naturally, it brought up the question of personal safety.
Excerpt:
“He sounded all bent out of shape that I had his camera,” Jacob recalled. He asked Heitzman about the camera’s purpose. When Heitzman told him that illegal activities were taking place in the area, Jacob said he asked whether it was safe to camp there. He said that Heitzman reassured him that it was. Jacob said he later wondered why the Forest Service would set up a camera in an area they considered safe.
Well?
As would be expected, the US Forest Service was not forthcoming with further information.
That brings me back to my original question.
How much are we willing to pay in the interest of promises we know cannot be kept?
They cannot provide us with cheap health care.
They cannot “reform” any of the failing programs they’ve created in a meaningful or positive manner.
For crying out loud, our government officials cannot even pay their share of taxes!
And we know that the government cannot keep us “safe”.
There is no question that government promises are hollow, meaningless and expensive and yet we continue to sacrifice so much because they tell us that it is for our own good.
It’s time to answer the question.
How much are we willing to pay…
The decision comes as no surprise but is distasteful nonetheless.
Sage grouse protections expanded is the title of today’s highlighted article and it starts like this:
The U.S. Department of the Interior will expand efforts with state, local and tribal governments to map lands that are vital to the survival of the greater sage grouse, a ground-dwelling bird that inhabits much of the West, including northern Summit County.
The article further states:
Salazar made the announcement in conjunction with a finding by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that, based on scientific data, the greater sage grouse warrants the protection of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but that listing the species at this time is precluded by the need to address higher-priority species first.
The greater sage-grouse will be placed on the candidate list for future action, meaning the species would not receive statutory protection under the ESA, and states would continue to be responsible for managing the bird.
There are a couple of facts that need to be emphasized in order to put this topic in proper perspective.
There is no accurate method for estimating actual grouse population numbers. We do not know how many there are – we never did – so claims that populations are in decline is speculation at best.
Population trends are estimated by calculating the average number of males found on breeding grounds (leks) each year.
The average number of males per lek in the 1990s was 12. In 2008 the average was 30.
Even at that, I have personally been involved in lek counting activities and found that we do not know where all leks are located. We do not know if males move between leks. We do not know the percentage of males within a population on any given lek or how that actually correlates to total population numbers.
What we do know for certain is that sage grouse are found – at a minimum – in 11 western states and their current recognized habitat covers 160 million acres.
To even suggest that this bird faces any risk of extinction is hyperbole at best and more likely outright fraud.
Here is another fact, we have been studying this bird since at least the 1960s. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife has been spending tax dollars on “decisions” for at least a decade and this latest analysis was worked on by a team of 38 scientists.
The director for the Nevada Department of Wildlife was quoted in another article.
Excerpt:
“This level of federal scrutiny could alter our ability to manage the species, and we are concerned that a listing could impact other activities in the area, such as mining or ranching,” Mayer said.
Mining and ranching are not the only concerns.
Our country is in serious economic trouble. Our government is spending tax dollars like drunken sailors on a weekend furlough. Our citizens are experiencing unemployment at levels unprecedented in recent history.
All the while we are exacerbating these problems by spending time, energy and resources on a bird that is under zero threat from extinction.
Rome burns, U.S. Fish and Wildlife fiddles and we watch…
Just when you think you’ve seen people drop to their lowest level, they’ll prove that the bottom is limitless. Today’s highlighted article made even me shake my head in disbelief.
Afghanistan protects newly rediscovered rare bird is the title of this story and it starts like this:
Afghanistan’s fledging conservation agency moved Sunday to protect one of the world’s rarest birds after the species was rediscovered in the war-ravaged country’s northeast.
The remote Pamir Mountains are the only known breeding area of the large-billed reed warbler, a species so elusive that it had been documented only twice before in more than a century.
No stretch of the imagination could label me as naive, nonetheless I find it incredible that a country ravaged by warfare and with citizens plagued by a lack of basic services could spend time and resources on “endangered species”.
Excerpt:
The Afghan environmental agency also added 14 other species to the protected list on Sunday. It now includes 48 species including the rare snow leopard, the Asiatic cheetah and the markhor, a type of wild goat with large spiral horns.
While conservation efforts are in their infancy in Afghanistan, there have been some recent successes. Authorities in Badakhshan last week seized a snow leopard from villagers who had trapped it and planned to sell it. The snow leopard — one of an estimated 150 left in the wild — will be freed once its injuries from the trap are healed, Zahir said.
In my not-so-humble opinion this simply reaffirms what I’ve said in the past, environmentalists suffer from one of two afflictions. Either they are out of touch with reality or they honestly believe that animals are more important than people.
While time, effort and resources are being spent on critters, the people in this country are going without. Additionally, our military service members are fighting and dying in that region and our tax dollars are being spent to provide for those same people.
Here is an excerpt from another article about that region:
The American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, has made the rapid delivery of governmental services, including education, health care and job programs, a central part of his strategy in Marja, referring to plans to rapidly deploy what he has referred to as “a government in a box” once Marja is pacified.
Back to the original article.
Excerpt:
Mustafa Zahir, the agency’s director-general, acknowledged the difficulties of trying to protect wildlife in a country preoccupied with the Taliban insurgency. On Friday, suicide attackers killed 16 people in Kabul, the capital, and thousands of Afghan and NATO forces are fighting to root out the hard-line Islamists from their southern stronghold.
Yup, that’s right, while we are preoccupied on the efforts to provide a government in a box the Afghan environmentalists look to other, more important, issues.
I cannot help but wonder if environmentalism isn’t simply an outward symptom of an inward pathological disorder…
