Our World and Everything in It

There was a reason Bush reluctantly put the polar bears on the endangered list but then curiously omitted protection for their habitat. Not so curious anymore. It seems in the latest round of attacks on the environment by the Bush administration and more than likely in support of oil, coal, and the natural gas industries, the president doesn’t find habitat protection necessary. To quote an article on NRDC’s website, the president will argue, “that studying and protecting the places that are essential to species survival is unnecessary. Specifically, the Department of Interior is planning to insert language into all future critical habitat designations that argues that these protections have no value in species protection.” Ah and Dirk Kempthorne, Secy. of Interior is at it again.

Protecting animals but allowing their habitat to go unprotected is so straight out of the dogma of big oil and other fossil fuel industries that we don’t even have to wonder why this underhanded push is happening. I say underhanded because the same article on Defender’s website stated that: “The first attack, contained in a rider on the House version of the Defense Department appropriations bill, would have arguably given the Secretary of the Interior sole discretion regarding where and when-and whether-to designate critical habitat for endangered species. Although the appropriations bill still contains a damaging ESA exemption for the Department of Defense, the more radical rider was defeated by the House on May 21.” Sneaky.

The Bush administration may not get their way the second time around either but there are other rotten ways of doing things.  The administration appears to be overly restricting funds for species protection by the USFWS. Bush only requested a measly $9 million dollars for it this year even though the agency knows it would take $153 million or more because there is a backlog. Congress even requested more money for the agency in the past to no avail. So no one is actually keeping track of or properly protecting our wildlife habitats because there is no money.

This is a “frightful” disregard for living things. If this administration can so ruthlessly overlook one natural resource for another, oil vs. animal habitat, than it’s not a stretch to think humanity is not being overlooked in the process either. We’re not suffering all that different a scenario from the animals on the endangered species list really. By continuing with the quest for oil and possibly more fossil fuels, our habitat won’t be around much longer either. What is it people don’t get? The earth is a closed system. If we put too much pollution into it, it will eventually break down. If we go on the way we are, we are no better than a cancer to our environment.  Yet this administration is destroying our habitat right under our noses while we go on believing someone is looking out for our best interests.

I hope that someone isn’t specifically Dick Cheney. Because when I watch what’s happening all I keep remembering is an article I read back in 2004 about Cheney. John Perry Barlow, a former Cheney supporter, said, “He has the least interest in human beings of anyone I have ever met.” That explains a lot.

http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/030528.asp.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/6450422/the_curse_of_dick_cheney/.

Boy, am I slow. I just got around to putting a bunch of e-mail and newsletters together to figure out why wildlife, habitat, and our national parks have been under attack by the Bush administration. Well, at least the how. A group of wealthy hunters that comprise Safari Club International (SCI) are using their funds to permeate congress once again to allow hunting polar bears, and everything else on their exotic big game list of course, whether or not the animals are endangered, and to bring the carcasses back into the U.S. as trophies.

People all over the world are outraged about our treatment of polar bears already by not putting them on the endangered species list much sooner and continued threats to the bear’s environment by oil drills. And these guys want to hunt the bears. Is that not adding insult to injury that we civilized humans just dismiss a beautiful species and hundreds of other equally beautiful species already threatened by global warming as trophies? How utterly superficial. We fight the use of ivory, but condone canned hunts. Do we know what we’re doing half the time?

I read a little about SCI on Wikipedia, and Source Watch and how they direct their lobby money predominantly toward Republicans as their allies in congress. SCI also advertises that they donates money for the preservation of animal species and that they do not advocate canned hunts–except they do it. And they pretty much are interested in the preservation of species so they can hunt the animals they preserve. Got a crippled exotic, put it in a canned hunt. Got too many exotic offspring put them in a canned hunt. Nice, real sporting.

I just read my mail from the Humane Society Legislative Fund about canned hunts. I had no idea that 25 states still advocate them and the trend is growing via lobby money from SCI and others. America is hitting rock bottom on ethics/morals when it comes to money vs. our national parks, animals, and habitat lately. I couldn’t figure out how the wolf slaughter, the buffalo slaughter, the push to put guns in our National Parks and a lot of other abuse was happening with help from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service despite thousands of protests. It seems Dirk Kempthorne, as Secy. of the Interior isn’t the only hunting/gun advocate working too closely with wildlife and habitat.  Director of our U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Matt Hogan, is the former chief lobbyist for Safari Club International, and another Bush appointee. Figures. Talk about conflict of interest. I thought the EPA was bad!

Considering the plight of all of animals and humans due to global warming, there really should be a moratorium on big game hunting for trophy’s sake. The people in Gana Africa are eating exotics to just stay alive for Pete’s sake. Complain to you senators and reps about canned hunts and lobbyists like SCI.

From my e-mail, I read that Earthjustice attorneys filed a case to stop the wolf slaughter in the northern Rockies. A coalition of environmental and animal rights groups like the NRDC, the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Humane Society urged Earthjustice to use its legal expertise to stop the killing immediately and “compel the federal government to reinstate Endangered Species Act protections for wolves until true recovery is achieved.

This didn’t come out of the blue. Earthjustice filed intent to challenge the decision to take wolves off the endangered list, but the USFWS didn’t answer. So now they go to court because as Earthjustice charges: “The USFWS failed to take into account basic principles of conservation biology, disregarded its own policies, and departed from past practice in delisting the wolf.” And Earthjustice will argue in court that the USFWS

used an outdated and biologically inadequate standard for determining the number of wolves that must be protected in order to maintain a genetically viable population;

ignored the agency’s own requirement that wolves in the northern Rockies’ core recovery populations must be connected and interbreed before they can be deemed recovered; and

failed to take into account that state laws that currently govern the fate of the wolves in the absence of federal protections allow unregulated wolf killing.

What angers me most about this is the time and expense that goes into something like this that shouldn’t have happened in the first place in the U.S. of America. You know from my postings that petitions with signatures in the thousands hit the USFWS before the delisting, as well as, thousands of phone calls. Washington went ahead anyway, a total disregard for their responsibility to us—again. And none of this will bring Limpy or the other 19 wolves back.

I’ve already blogged that Idaho and Wyoming’s own state statistics show elk and deer populations are far over the limit for their species. The proper scientific limit for wolves to be secure from extinction should be near 3000, yet the number 1500 seems to be the norm for these states to begin to eradicate wolves because they pose a threat to deer and elk populations???

The hunt has already begun. Defenders of Wildlife states: “Locals have organized weekend eradication “wolf hunts” to kill any wolf that they find. One group tracked a wolf for 35 miles on snowmobiles before shooting it dead.” Now that’s real sporting. You know we’ve had a war going on for how long, isn’t that enough blood thirst for most Americans, or has it heightened the sense of the kill for some so much that they can’t turn it off? On the other hand, has it desensitized us to pain, suffering, and death that we just bury our heads anymore? To look forward to killing animals that are clearly being eradicated for no viable reason except for the sport is an indication of a nation’s decline in my book.

But the biggest testament to a nation’s decline is knowing full well we’re being lied to about many, many things, and doing nothing about it, even something that could be championed like this wolf slaughter issue. A study by the Dept. of Agriculture proved wolves are not attacking cattle in huge numbers either. And this N.Y. Times article just 2 years ago shows how badly the wolf populations were suffering from the parvo disease. It shows a pack of new wolf cubs that died shortly after the picture was taken. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/national/15wolf.html So in 2006, the gray wolf population declined from disease, yet two years later wolves are out of control?  What a pack of lies, and the liars head up departments in our U.S. government.

A lot of people think no big deal. But it was a big deal when the first gray wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone not very long ago. The rangers there have good things to say about the balance the wolves restored to the forest. As part of this reintroduction and study, many wolves are numbered, their packs have names, and some of the wolves have been viewed so much they gained notoriety and names, like Limpy, number 253M. Defenders says: “Limpy was many things to many people – to wolf-watchers, he was the hobbling member of Yellowstone’s famous Druid Peak Pack. To Utahans, he was the first wolf to be seen in the state for more than 70 years.”

For wolf novices the Druid Peak Pack was the second pack introduced to Yellowstone from Canada, and one of the most observed. Check out one girls sighting at her visit to Yellowstone and her video of the Druid pack on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNeFetdSHrQ. We’re talking tourism and educational fodder here.

I don’t know if the girl saw Limpy with hind legs that were crippled in a fight. No matter now, Limpy was shot dead in Wyoming on elk feeding grounds the first day wolves were taken off the endangered list. Remember elk numbers are beyond where they should be in these states. The wolves were out doing their job. Limpy obviously wasn’t speedy enough as a cripple. Two other wolves were shot with him.

So what we have here is the beginning of a slaughter perpetrated by lies from U.S. officials to practically eradicate a species that have only reached half their peak. Meanwhile, people have posted pictures on You Tube and commented on their trips to Yellowstone and the opportunity to see the notorious wolves.

You know what this reminds me of? Natives in Africa, deprived of an education, with very little means of sustenance for survival that kill endangered species in order to take the habitat over for farming, as well as, eat the bushmeat. Once the natives are taught that protecting the animals brings tourism to the area to view the animals, and all types of new income opportunity is opened to them, they embrace it wholeheartedly and the animals begin to flourish under the native’s good stewardship.

What’s the excuse for the states of Idaho, and Wyoming? They are neither stupid nor starving, but appear to be shooting themselves in the foot relative to tourism by killing the wolves, or there are ulterior motives worth a heck of a lot more money. It can’t be the hunting industry. It will only flourish from wolf hunts for so long. A few hunting seasons and the wolves will be gone, and then what’s to shoot? Oh yeah, all those excessive deer and elk populations.

My best guess for ulterior motives still lies with Bush’s plan to reverse the Roadless Rule, where Idaho might find themselves stripped of a heck of a lot more than the wolf population. If that happens, the second largest forest in America will slowly disappear from mining, drilling, and logging. Wolf hunters could face eminent domain issues in the future and it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch.

Click on Defenders at the right to sign a petition to stop this senseless slaughter.

As for Limpy, he’s famous.  Just search “Limpy the Wolf” on the internet. There are pages of urls for him.

Currently, I’m getting all kinds of e-mail about slaughtering animals our country took careful issue to propagate not long ago. First wolves, now buffalo/bison. USFWS wants to kill off buffalo because of a bison disease that could spread to cattle. Here we have the cattle issue again. Except there are no cattle nearby. What is with all the slaughter lately?  I don’t recall such an unleashed fury to kill wildlife like we’re seeing lately. We’re moving so slowly on environmental issues relative to animals that we’re soon to kill them off anyway.

Then I saw this comment that is well worth printing here about wolves from Dr. Dr D. Vreugdenhil . He says: “Wolves most certainly are not dangerous and finally they are on the increase again worldwide, expanding their territories in Europe and in some countries in the middle east. However, to fully integrate them into society, we must deal with the most pressing issue in nature conservation:
The most limiting factor in conservation world wide is the shortage of rangers: estimated at over 100,000 in developing countries. Currently no government or conservation organization in the world addresses this problem. That is why the Adopt A Ranger Foundation has been created:  http://www.adopt-a-ranger.org/.

I didn’t know there was a shortage of rangers anywhere but Asia or Africa? Adopt-a-ranger website says there is a need for 140,000 rangers worldwide, but evidently not enough funding. You know this looks like one of those places where funding is also cut to the bone.  It is also a very good lead as to why all the slaughter of wildlife is taking place, at least in this country. With no one to watch over our parks, it’s economical to just get rid of the critters.

I’m looking into adopting a ranger. Now I know the reason the mountain gorillas are disappearing, there is a large bushmeat trade, and all types of illegal use of animals is happening. It’s due to this shortage. Even elephants are being shot out of their sanctuary over coffee plants because no one watches over them. 

If you like nature websites, Dr. Vreugdenhil offered this one with a very dire outlook that says with a good scenario only 40% of all species on earth will disappear in this century, worst scenario we will see 70% of all species DIE.   http://naturalplaces.blogspot.com/2007/02/earths-largest-upcoming-species.html#links.  Yet we’re aerial hunting wolves, killing bison, cyanide poisoning coyotes, and fox in this most civilized country. There’s something horribly wrong with this picture.

To quote from “Sunday Morning,” a poem by Wallace Stevens: “Death is the mother of beauty; hence from her, alone, shall come fulfillment to our dreams.”  It means death enhances the beauty of life.  We’ll cherish it all when it’s gone.

I just received this e-mail by Defenders of Wildlife. Do you believe it? The government is planning on killing wolves, which control coyote populations. Instead the EPA, uses these deadly poisons out in the open in nature. What is wrong with this picture? The Environmental PROTECTION Agency should really get a new name. Their decisions for dealing with wildlife is outright archaic and dangerous, especially when:  According to government reports, Wildlife Services is unable to account for stockpiles of theses toxins, increasing the risk of theft and misuse that threatens homeland security and the safety of humans and animals. Please take action today to ban these deadly poisons.

Each year, more than 10,000 wild animals are poisoned to death with sodium cyanide and sodium fluoroacetate, experiencing horrific deaths that can take hours. These deadly poisons are designed to kill coyotes but they also have killed swift foxes, wolves and other imperiled wildlife… as well as family dogs and people.

We have little more than 36 hours to convince the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban these poisons — two of the world’s deadliest. Please take action right now!

Sodium cyanide and sodium fluoroacetate (commonly called Compound 1080) are considered by the EPA to be some of the deadliest toxins known to humanity. Yet, for decades, Wildlife Services, a program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), has routinely relied on these two poisons to kill coyotes and other carnivores.

But these poisons don’t just threaten their intended targets. They can also poison any threatened or endangered species, people and pets.

How bad are they?

Sodium cyanide is used in M-44s, spring-loaded devices topped with bait lures that can attract swift foxes, wolves and other endangered carnivores. When an animal tugs on the bait, a spring shoots a capsule of sodium cyanide powder into the animal’s mouth. A victim of an M-44 device may die after less than two minutes of exposure to the poison, but deaths have been documented to take eight hours.

Based on data from Wildlife Services, more than 10,000 animals are killed by M-44s each year, including domesticated dogs, and a whole host of other non-target species including rare kit foxes, ringtails, javelinas, and swift foxes. M-44s have also killed California condors and wolves.

Compound 1080 is classified as a chemical weapon in several countries. It can be deployed in poison collars placed on sheep and goats and is highly toxic to birds and mammals. It has been used to illegally to kill wolves, and carcasses with Compound 1080 must be handled as hazardous waste. If consumed, these carcasses can kill wolves and other animals.

There are effective alternatives to these poisons, including a wide range of proactive, nonlethal methods such as fencing, guard animals, fladry, non-lethal ammunition and improved animal husbandry. And yet, Wildlife Services continues to rely heavily on the use of sodium cyanide and Compound 1080 to address predation on livestock. I’m sick and tired of this excuse for using poison, or killing off wolves.  Most ranchers are reimbursed for losses to their livestock anyway. Wildlife organizations pay out thousands of dollars a year for loss of cattle, which the Dept. of Agriculture’s study about predator wolves shows is just not the case.  I’d like to know who we are supposed to believe.

Help end the use of these deadly poisons. Send your personalized message to the EPA now.

We only have a short time to make a big difference for swift foxes, wolves and other wildlife. The official comment period on the ban of these toxins officially ends this Wednesday (March 5th), so please take action before noon Eastern Time on Wednesday, so we have time to compile and deliver your messages to the EPA.
PLEASE RESPOND HERE IMMEDIATELY: http://action.defenders.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=30461.0&dlv_id=52121.

In honor of this being Wolf Moon month and that the fate of wolves in our national parks, in Idaho, and in Wyoming hangs in balance with a Secretary of Interior that is oblivious to thousands of voices to spare the wolf, I thought I’d do a piece on dogs and wolves. I ran into this interesting page along the way.

The website page is: http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/genetic1.htm. There is a list of References for Wolf-Dog Genetic History. I started to read the summaries of a variety of books written about the genealogy of the dog. Dogs are direct descendants of wolves, all dogs, little bitty pocket dogs, hairy dogs, smooth dogs, hunting dogs, even Pekinese dogs. The DNA of dog and wolf is almost identical. The dog is not the descendant of the combo wolf/jackal as many used to believe. Our dogs are tame wolves basically.

So I kept reading the short synopsis of each entry, there must be 15 of them on this page, and one after the other: “Scientists believe that wolves are the direct ancestors of today’s domestic dogs,” and “…on the basis of a large number of skull measurements and examinations of the size and structure of the brain, blood factors, and numbers of chromosomes that all dogs, whether Pekingese, bulldogs or Alsatians, were descended solely from the wolf…[t]he domesticated wolf is the dog,” and “Although the subject continues to be controversial, most authorities now agree that all dogs, from Chihuahuas to Dobermans are descended from wolves which were tamed in the Near East ten or twelve thousand years ago.” There were some summaries more genetically oriented, but all of them concurred the dog, man’s best friend is really a wolf in pedigree skin. That is except for one entry

That one entry is odd because it’s about proving whether the canine carries wolf blood. They have the same DNA for Pete’s sake. Trying to ascertain whether the dog carries actual wolf blood, when their DNA is identical, looks like a technical way around relating man’s best friend to the wolf. And look from whom and where the study comes. The Wyoming Game and Fish Dept. contracted a New York lab to do this study and look whose questioning the ties between wolf and dog, the Idaho Fish and Game Dept. back when the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan was instituted there. It was stated “There is not presently a valid test that will guarantee analysis of whether a particular canine carries wolf blood. Certain DNA studies have been conducted by a New York laboratory under contract by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, but a much larger population study of wolf and dog breeds would have to be done before conclusive results can be obtained.” Jerry M. Conley, Director, Idaho Fish and Game Dept. From letter to Gov. Cecil D. Andrus, March 19, 1992.

Idaho and Wyoming have been gunning for wolves for years. It’s coming close to a head now. And it’s not about control of an untamed, voracious animal. It’s certainly not about maintaining balance in our ecosystems of which the wolf plays an important role.  And it’s not about killing livestock.  It’s about exterminating an animal that is the grandfather of our pet dog, so that man can hunt for sport instead. And sport hunting is about money. It always gets back to money.
 

So I threw open the door this fine warm morning and bounded outdoors, coffee in hand, immediately inhaled about 3 “midges” put my hand over my coffee mug really quick and came back inside. There is a bumper crop of those little mosquito looking insects this year. I went back out sans the coffee, kept my mouth shut and tried not to rustle into any bushes. In the recesses of my memory, midges mean fish will be biting but with that VHS disease in the fish it might not matter. I saw in the news recently, that it was a consideration to limit fishing this year if the disease keeps spreading.

And now those cute little Chickadees (small black and white birds) are threatened by the West Nile virus along with beautiful Bluebirds. No one thought much of it when it was only affecting crows but it’s stretched to other species of birds now. My bird feeders have been in place at least ten years and I get a lot of bird traffic, even escaped parakeets and canaries, and I saw exactly one Chickadee this spring. They are usually around all winter and are pretty friendly and sweet. I’ve actually had one peck at our glass door and stare in on us. Not long ago Michigan considered changing the state bird from Robins, which didn’t hang around all winter, to the Chickadee, which was plentiful. Now whole populations are being wiped out by West Nile. I wondered why I haven’t seen a lot of Chickadees for a couple of years. I miss them.

We’re getting all these viruses that start out as not so significant because masses of people aren’t dying from any of them or they only affect a certain species, so we don’t care much.  Well ecosystems are important. Everyone’s read somewhere about the honeybee and how it affects our food supply. Take pause to notice all the species of things that are in trouble:  fish, birds, bees, and just try to remember we are part of the animal chain. There might come a virus that affects humans in the future so have a little empathy for even the smallest things. To me it’s a warning sign.