U.S. wants to lift protections for wolf and grizzly

[Turborama]

Source: Reuters

The Obama administration is seeking to lift Endangered Species Act protections from two of the most iconic symbols of the American West, the gray wolf and grizzly bear, in moves likely to spark fierce resistance from environmentalists.

The administration intentions emerged in an interview on Wednesday with two top-ranking officials from the Interior Department, whose agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oversees federal safeguards for the bulk of imperiled species.

Both the grizzly and gray wolf occupy the figurative pinnacle of the greater Yellowstone ecosystem encompassing parts of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho. Previous efforts to remove them from the U.S. endangered species list have met with staunch opposition in court from wildlife conservation groups.

Environmentalists have raised concerns that while both species have made a comeback under protection as endangered species, their recovery could falter if they were de-listed, a move that would likely open the animals to public hunting.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B10FD20101202

---

[No Elephants]

1. Okay, who's going to make the first Palin Mama Grizzly joke?

[Lorien]

6. There's nothing to joke about here. Nature keeps losing under this misadministration

and we lose right along with it. Every time I think that I can't get more disgusted with Team Obama they prove that they can be more disgusting. :grr:

[Mojorabbit]

7. I thought when Obama was elected that I would no

longer have to write countless letters to help protect the wolves. I thought I could finally relax and that they would have a chance. It has been one of my biggest disappointments.

[Frank Booth]

35. I agree. This is outrageous and disgusting.

I wish Obama had run as a Republican. At least that way, he wouldn't have destroyed the shreds of credibility that the Democratic party still had.

What cowardly pieces of shit they are.

[OnyxCollie]

2. Do Not Like. nt

[Lucky 13]

3. Bastards

That's all I have to say: Bastards

[Metta]

4. This administration will go around the block to get next door to right wingers.

They're becoming increasingly Republican in their actions, if you ask me.

[wordpix]

41. and yet, the admin. just reversed course on offshore drilling - WOOT!

Digest | December 2, 2010 by admin | 0 Comments
http://apolloalliance.org/digest/feds-reverse-plan-to-expand-offshore-drilling/

Feds Reverse Plan to Expand Offshore Drilling

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the U.S. will prohibit new oil offshore drilling along the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, as well as in portions of the Gulf of Mexico. Salazar said the move was part of a plan to focus resources on already existing activity.

The impact of a Congress dominated by newly-elected climate change skeptics is already being felt. The House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming was shut down yesterday. The committee was created in 2007 by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D. – California).

A new National Wildlife Federation report (co-sponsored by over 35 other organizations, including unions, businesses, and utilities) says the Atlantic Coast has the potential to generate about 212 gigawatts of offshore wind energy. While the U.S. has yet to get one offshore turbine spinning, Europe, the report says, has over 900, generating enough energy to power about 450,000 homes.

Fossil fuels receive 12 times as much money in global subsidies as clean energy, and the discrepancy is a major reason for the slow growth of the renewables industry, according to a report from USC’s Marshall School of Business. more...

:woohoo: But I'm really disappointed in THIS bad decision about wolves and grizzlies. :puke:

[liberation]

5. As long as the "hunting" only involves knives and bare hands, I say let them...

[applegrove]

8. Wolves are such pretty animals.

[DissedByBush]

39. Until they're attacking you

It still happens.

[Ferret Annica]

60. Bull, it does not. By your mis-informed logic to support this...

...we are long overdue to ban the biggest killer of people; automobiles.

[DissedByBush]

83. I don't believe I supported banning wolves n/t

[beforeyoureyes]

9. It just never ends, does it?

[coffeenap]

10. Really, are we just going to destroy absolutely everything?

What has happened to our brains, our consciences, our decency? No one is putting on the brakes as we slide into the destruction of our people and our planet. I have almost had it....(But, I will not give up--that's why I work with teens--maybe they will see the light before it is too late.)

[OnyxCollie]

12. Corporations don't have consciences.

What you see is the result of government under the influence of "rational" corporate actors.

[DissedByBush]

11. If they aren't endangered, then remove them from the list that says they are

Or is that too logical?

They are supposed to come off the list if things work as they are supposed to.

This is the Act working as designed.

[Turborama]

16. As long as people want to kill them for "sport" they will always be endangered

Or is that too obvious?

[glinda]

18. It is for the "Sportsman Repubs". It is devastatingly stupid. I want this crap to end.

[DavidDvorkin]

19. Then every animal that's hunted for sport should be on the list.

[Turborama]

20. Agreed. n/t

[niyad]

24. great idea.

[DavidDvorkin]

27. Which would then make the worthles, further

endangering truly endangered animals.

[Turborama]

28. Not hunting them for sport/fun should just be part of the long list of things that protect them

Not the only thing.

[DavidDvorkin]

29. I despise hunting for sport

but that needs to be a different argument. I'd love to see sport hunting outlawed, although I'm sure that's not politically possible. Adding sport hunting as a qualification for the Endangered Species List would lead to the scrapping of the list.

[Turborama]

33. My point is, if they are taken off the "endangered" list, they will be hunted for "sport" again

Until they are near extinction, and then have to go back on it, and so it will go on yo-yoing ad infinitum.

From the OP (count me in as one of the concerned environmentalists)...

Environmentalists have raised concerns that while both species have made a comeback under protection as endangered species, their recovery could falter if they were de-listed, a move that would likely open the animals to public hunting.

Sportsmen and ranchers, who make up a powerful constituency in Western states, have strongly advocated delisting wolves and grizzlies, arguing the predators are diminishing herds of big-game animals like elk and are preying on livestock.

=snip=

Yellowstone area grizzlies were delisted in 2007, and states promptly planned hunting seasons. But environmentalists gained a legal victory last year, forcing the government to re-list them, arguing that the federal government had failed to take into account such factors as climate change. They also questioned whether 500 animals was a viable population.



As far as all animals being endangered is concerned: I think the way humans are abusing their habitat at the moment we have become a major threat to earth's ecosystems and have begun an http://www.well.com/~davidu/extinction.html">extinction event. But that is another argument, or an extrapolation of this one.

[DavidDvorkin]

34. Unfortunately, that's probably true

However, is that criterion in the law that established the list? If not, how much leeway does the government have in making the rules for keeping/putting a species on the list?

[DissedByBush]

42. That's why they have limits in hunting

Hunters are not allowed to kill enough animals that would endanger the species again.

There will be poaching, but there will be when they are endangered too, the penalties for that are thankfully quite draconian in either case.

It's nice to see a yuppie lose his $60,000 Land Rover, his $5,000 ATV and his $4,000 rifle, plus get fined and be charged replacement costs.

[Turborama]

44. How would you personally define hunting?

Killing for food, fun or both?

[DissedByBush]

52. As far as the status of the species is concerned

The purpose of the hunting is absolutely irrelevant.

Personally, I find trophy or sport hunting immoral.

But that's just my opinion. I don't have the right to force it on anyone else.

[Turborama]

53. It isn't irrelevant to me

I'd like to see ALL killing for fun made illegal everywhere for eternity.

That's my personal opinion.

[DissedByBush]

54. I just have this thing about not being power-hungry

I don't think I have the right or power to enforce my opinions on others.

I think abortion is immoral, a horrendous act.

But I'm pro-choice. Why?

Obviously, I don't have the right to take away a woman's choice.

[Turborama]

55. OK, you want people to have the choice that lets them kill for fun or not & I don't

I think we know where we both stand now.

Abortion has nothing to do with this, so therefore it = a strawman.

[DissedByBush]

59. Abortion not a strawman, it's the principle

Do you think you have the power in a free society to stop them from doing something you don't like?

I don't like sport hunting or abortion.

You will NOT see me campaigning to make either illegal.

But you will not see me engaging in, endorsing or facilitating them either.

[Turborama]

63. It is in this discussion, which is about killing for fun

Unless you think some people have abortions for fun.

[DissedByBush]

74. Well, let's see

Have sex for fun, and for the consequences get an abortion as a method of birth control.

At least most sport hunters give the meat away for someone to eat.

[Turborama]

76. You might want to have a discussion about abortion in a thread about hunting, but I don't

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

1) Person A has position X.

2) Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:

2.1) Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position and then refuting it, thus giving the appearance that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.

2.2) Quoting an opponent's words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy and quote mining).

2.3) Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person's arguments — thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.

2.4) Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.

2.5) Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.

3) Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man#Reasoning

[DissedByBush]

80. Misapplication of logical fallacy

The case here is:

1) State principle of not wanting to outlaw things I find distasteful

2) Apply it equally

What you are doing IS a strawman since you are misrepresenting my position and attacking the misrepresentation.

I am not trying to distract from the hunting issue, I am clarifying my position using the example of another well-known issue.

[Turborama]

81. You are still trying to move the goalposts and I'm not getting drawn into it

I think you made your feelings about hunting clear enough before you brought abortion into it.

[DissedByBush]

82. Absolutely clear

Like you I don't approve of sport or trophy hunting.

The difference between you and me is that I don't think I have the right to enforce my opinion on others.

Just like abortion.

The goalposts have always been in the same place.

You are authoritarian. I'm not.

[Turborama]

84. As I said, I'd like to see ALL killing for fun made illegal everywhere for eternity.

If that makes me authoritarian on that issue, I don't have a problem with it.

[DissedByBush]

37. That would be the "I don't like hunting" list

Not the endangered species list.

[Turborama]

40. No, it would be the "Only killing for food, not for fun" list.

Hope that helps clarify what was being discussed.

[wordpix]

56. and as long as they keep losing their habitat, they will always be endangered

[Turborama]

61. Yep, that's the other key factor n/t

[boppers]

66. Are cows endangered?

After all, they're killed for food, therefore, they're even more endangered, right?

[Turborama]

67. What an odd question. Of course they aren't. Are cows killed for fun?

Are there wild cows (I'm talking about cows specifically as you mentioned them, not buffaloes etc)?

[boppers]

68. All animals started out wild, and most can return.

Yes, people not only kill cows for food, they kill them for clothes, they even put them in arenas and have them charge at guys waving capes (as they gradually, brutally, kill them).

Then there's ducks, turkeys, possom... humans kill, and eat, a lot of things. There are a lot of things we kill as nuisances, as dangers... mice, rats, snakes, bees, lions, bears, roaches, etc.

Simply being an animal that is frequently killed by humans doesn't make the population endangered. For that to happen, the number killed has to be greater than the number replenished.

[Turborama]

69. I was talking about as long as they are killed for "sport"

That means I think until humans see animals as more than just a toy and actually respect them as sentient beings they will be endangered. I was hinting at a paradigm shift that I feel is needed in our relationship to animals, a deeper concept than it might have seemed on the surface.

[boppers]

71. Gotcha, thank you for clarifying.

It wasn't until I moved to Oregon that I met and spent a lot of time talking with modern hunter/conservationists.... environmentalists who like to hunt animals, but hold a deep respect for the animals and the land. Interesting folks.

Without predators, the herbivores can over-graze, and suffer large die-off, so sometimes these people's "hunting trips" are actually "planting trips"... they head off into the woods with tools for replenishing the ecosystem that they're a part of.

So, the paradigm shift is happening. It's not easy, by any means, because the balance is complex.

[niyad]

22. it says they are making a comeback, NOT that they are no longer endangered.

[truebrit71]

31. They ARE endangered, that's why they're on the list. The Rancher in charge at Interior..

..is doing what ranchers do, fuck the wildlife keep my cattle safe..

[DissedByBush]

38. By definition,

If they are coming off the list, that means they are no longer endangered.

[Turborama]

43. By who's definition? The politicians who are pleasing "a powerful constituency in Western states"

That's who.

[truebrit71]

48. They were moved off the list by politicians NOT by scientists...there were no "facts" involved...

...just kowtowing to political pressure..

[DissedByBush]

51. Proof, please

The law says it must be done according to scientific facts. To do otherwise is illegal.

You are welcome to contact the proper authorities with your proof.

Reference Endangered Species Act Section 4

"(b) BASIS FOR DETERMINATIONS.—(1)(A) The Secretary shall make determinations required by subsection (a)(1) solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available to him after conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by any State or foreign nation, or any political subdivision of a State or foreign nation, to protect such species, whether by predator control, protection of habitat and food supply, or other conservation practices, within any area under its jurisdiction, or on the high seas."

[Derechos]

13. Speechless.....

They keep thinking that if they increase gun rights, open our coasts to offshore drilling, or ease protections for endangered species they will somehow get more votes from people who will never ever vote for them. They are kidding themselves. Why not instead stand up for what the people who actually voted for them stand for and see what happens. Give us a reason to go to the polls.

[snagglepuss]

15. BINGO. nt

[RandomKoolzip]

36. You got it.

[Derechos]

14. Speechless.....

They keep thinking that if they increase gun rights, open our coasts to offshore drilling, or ease protections for endangered species they will somehow get more votes from people who will never ever vote for them. They are kidding themselves. Why not instead stand up for what the people who actually voted for them stand for and see what happens. Give us a reason to go to the polls.

[wordpix]

57. these jokers want a cut of the money action, that is all. The Dems are split between those who

know the right thing to do and those tainted by money and power. Those in the latter category are just repukes in Dem clothing.

[Amonester]

65. Why not stand up for THEIR voters?

The Professional Losers. That's what they do all the time (gain more for themselves for a while, then it's buh-bye).

[awoke_in_2003]

17. that photo of mama...

with her 3 cubs- I don't think they make a zoom lens big enough to get me to take that pic. An irate grizzly mama is not to be trifled with. Great pic, though.

[madrchsod]

21. oh..... that`s really nice of them...

i guess there`s nothing sacred......

[niyad]

23. cripes, I thought I had seen enough bs for one day--is this kind of stupidity never going to end?

[tomm2thumbs]

25. A Christmas present to our wildlife heritage - thanks

such a nice way to ring in the season

so touching, and thoughtful

and they do say 'timing is everything'

[xchrom]

26. well -- hm -- wow -- that was unexpected. nt

[Haole Girl]

30. I think I'm voting Green Party for the first time, next time.

This B.S. is getting out of hand.

[truebrit71]

32. Simply unacceptable.

You know, with a republican in office I expect the environment and wildlife to get fucked over, but not when there's a Dem there.

I don't care what level of jedi-mind-trick multi-dimensional chess we have been bullshitted into believing he's playing, on THIS issue I draw the line.

If this policy goes into effect he can expect precisely ZERO effort and support from me.

I will have to look for a candidate that represents the Democratic Platform, not whatever bullshit this guy is following.

[Skittles]

78. there is no Dem in office now

[ellie]

45. This is complete and utter bullshit.

Fucking assholes. To whom do we lodge our protests? As if it will do any good.

[inwiththenew]

46. I have the right to "bear" arms

It says it right there in the Constitution...

Sorry. I shouldn't joke about this.

[flvegan]

47. But they kill animals that humans want to kill. Don't compete with what the selfish want

my animal friends, as you'll lose every time.

Spineless fucking admin. Oh well, better than McCain/Palin (God I'm tired of saying that).

[X_Digger]

49. At some point, their numbers will be up to the level to support sustainable hunting.

I don't know if that point is anywhere close right now, but it will happen.

Much like the american alligator, whose numbers were so low at one point that scientists didn't think they could recover, wolves and grizzlies will bounce back.

I know that sport hunting is an unpopular concept here, but it does provide the single largest source of monies for wildlife preservation- every gun, every bow, even ammunition and arrows are subject to an 11% federal excise tax, not to mention hunting licenses. There wouldn't be as much wildlife to see if it weren't for hunters. In 2009, half a billion dollars was collected in FET, and it can't be used for any purpose other than conservation.

http://www.fws.gov/southeast/federalaid/pittmanrobertson.html

[Creative]

50. So...they are no longer endangered; thus, they no longer require "special" protection.

[wordpix]

58. they're no longer endangered when they're extirpated in nearly every state where they used to roam?

Hell, the grizzly is CA's state animal and there's not one grizz left there. BS :grr: don't tell me they're not endangered.

[Creative]

79. Like humans, if animals must adapt to the environment if they are to survive.

If they are unable to adapt, they will perish.

It is called evolution.

[Ferret Annica]

62. I am not voting for Obama in 2012

EARTH FIRST!

[Major Hogwash]

72. This may be the straw that broke the camel's back for me, too.

With everything else pointing to him being ineffective as a Democrat, this is the last thing I needed to hear.

[QC]

64. This is exactly what the Bush Administration would do,

and if they had done this, DU would have melted down with outrage.

[marasinghe]

70. fucking humans: largest brains - dumbest assholes; in the universe.

[Ferret Annica]

73. Wrong, whales and dolphins have larger brains

Tursiops truncatus, the bottle nosed dolphin has thirty percent more cortical surface area of the brain. And the folds are because this surface area are were the important neurons of the brain are that govern intelligence.

They also remember 10/14 nonsense syllables in tests to the usual human 6/8.

Don't be so quick to buy into being an egotistical human and speciocentric.

[downeyr]

75. This is terrible! n/t

[Hawkowl]

77. I really HATE Obama

I'm really surprised at the amount of animosity Obama has inspired in me. I really couldn't imagine this level of hatred towards a supposedly Democratic president. Unbelievable.