I truly believe our democracy is broken at the hands of special interest groups. If we do not get rid of lobbying forever, the good with the bad lobbyists, all of them unfortunately, we will no longer be a nation of the people by the people with resolute honest representation in congress. I say this because I have petitioned, written, called, and donated so much money to efforts to protect our wildlife that I could probably own my own wolf pack, polar bear family, whale, dolphin, etc., yet nothing much happens on their behalf, or the going is so slow as to be baby steps. And in the interim, we lose more wildlife. I know I am not alone. I’ve read more than one place for example that 70% of Alaskans are against the wolf aerial hunting program depicted in my blog today, and that Governor Palin has plans to not only continue the program but to escalate it beyond normal hunting seasons, and to include bears now.
It takes so much activism by citizens of this country to stop atrocities against wildlife and for the preservation of all we hold dear in this country like our peaceful forests and parks against the likes of the NRA and big time hunting consortiums, that I’m beginning to believe America has lost its way. We simply do not present ourselves as a decent, Christian nation any longer. Our talk is cheap. We’re known for our deeds and the picture is not pretty when it comes to wildlife and habitat.
Do we as this supposed Godly nation realize the Lord specifically mentions the word wolf/wolves 13 times in the bible? In every instance He makes it perfectly known that wolves are to exist as predators. They have a purpose and in no way are they to be extinct in the world to come. They will indeed lay down with the lamb.
From a scientific viewpoint, wolves inhabited the U.S. for 750,000 years; one would think that by now in the 21st century we as “the smartest of the animal chain” would have figured out how to live with them. Stop the carnage as seen in the video below:
Science is not a part of Alaska’s wolf hunting program. There is no official wolf count. Alaska only guesses as to how many wolves it has or has not. To continue to escalate a hunting program like this with no clear figures as to how little or much the wolf populations there are being decimated is criminal.
To many of us Africa is still the land of Tarzan and the Lion King. But Africa has changed greatly and no differently than other continents in that the human population is growing, spreading, and creating greater conflict with wildlife. This situation is similar to the U.S. west with ranchers moving into predator territory where wolves, large cats, and grizzly roam. The difference between our situation in the west and those of African ranchers is the type of predator, the size of the ranch, basic human needs, and the way in which the situation is resolved.
African ranchers like those in the Massai in Tanzania have trouble with lion predators attacking their very small livestock herds that are used basically for their own sustenance. Yet even though the Massai ranchers have killed too many lions whose populations are suffering to begin with, the Massai are interested and willing to avert the lion attacks rather than kill the lions whenever possible. They are willing to pay half of the expense for chain link fencing around their stockyard pens called “bomas” to keep attacks down instead. Bomas are traditionally thorny brush piled high for a tall perimeter of organic fence around livestock. This type of thorny enclosure works to keep the livestock in but unfortunately does not always keep the lions out. The lions come out of their reserve due to hunger for lack of prey. The Massai ranchers have learned through organizations like the African Wildlife Foundation that a little preventative care will thwart a majority of attempts at their livestock from lions. The African Wildlife Foundation donates the other half of the expense for the chain link fence the Massai ranchers are willing to use to save the lions, as well as, their livestock.
This is the type of cooperation with wildlife that would be expected of educated ranchers interested in preserving indigenous wild predators while saving their livestock especially where the ranch is huge and the rancher is certainly wealthier than those of the Massai, and the livestock is not intended for sustenance by the rancher as much as profit. But U.S. ranchers just don’t see it that way relative to predators like the Yellowstone wolves.
What’s wrong with this picture? Like the lions of the Massai, there are alternatives to killing the Yellowstone wolves. But U.S. ranchers simply state that it takes a lot of time and effort to maintain the safety of their herds in the open areas near Yellowstone. It’s just easier to turn the wolves over to the hunting industry with little thought or intervention even though U.S. ranchers have the ability to end the endless cycle of slaughter perpetrated on wolves and other predators forever by adopting methods to avert attacks. After all, wolves were here long before ranchers decided to keep their herds in predator territory while expecting everything else to just get out of the way or else.
I thought this was an ironic scenario I read about where African natives that stand to lose the food on their table, and the little bit of income they get for their livestock to invest in alternatives to killing the predators, while the majority of U.S. ranchers refuse to change their habits and invest the time and money it takes to live and work around the wildlife that surrounds them.
African lions used to number nearly 200,000 on the African continent and are now reduced to number from 25,000 to 40,000 total. This decline is horrible with man being the lion’s biggest threat. Bernard Kissui of African Wildlife Foundation’s Lion Conservation Science Project has been saddened by what he has seen lately. Thirty-eight lions have been lost to retaliatory killing since 2007, nearly 20% of the area’s total population. By raising money for fencing for cooperative African ranchers, he proposes to lessen the kill rate of lions. So far he’s been successful introducing the chain link fences. Many African ranchers are interested in the additional sturdy fencing. The African Wildlife Foundation is asking for any donations to raise $75,000 quickly for the cost of fencing to avert more attacks on lions in the Massai Steppe region in Tanzania, home to half of Africa’s lions.
Imagine Kissui’s sadness when he visited a small ranch recently and found the male and female lion he studied for quite some time covered with blood from being speared to death. This reminds me of the rangers of Yellowstone that produced a documentary on behalf of the wolves they’ve studied to show how well the wolves helped the ecosystems of Yellowstone. And of course, the sadness of the many who over a course of years viewed Limpy, the famous wolf that was shot to death in the last hunt of the Yellowstone’s wolves.
If you’ve enjoyed the “Lion King,” admired big cats in Tarzan movies, or want to keep the “King of the Jungle” from being threatened further, goto AWF’s website and donate if you can to raise what is a rather small amount of money to conserve and protect the African lions.
View the good impact AWF has made on behalf of Africa’s wildlife.
Good Morning America’s Sam Champion broadcast from one of our national parks in Virginia this morning because he said: “What better way to celebrate Earth Day than to view what it is we’re trying to protect.” He’s absolutely right.
So this is one heck of a video I found on You Tube that does just that. Its owner frotix says that it is the first part of his national parks of America video and hopes we like it. I like the Native American music. It’s appropriate. Watch the first half:
I couldn’t resist adding another video by owner mhnatt who states that it was his first attempt at making a movie. I think he deserves a big hand. He crossed 10,000 miles in 3 months and 3 countries in his trip out west. It’s poignant and a very good mix of all the different terrain we’re trying to protect by curbing global warming and the impact it will have on these places and critters. Notice there is a clip of a wolf.
I watched a very informative documentary about wolves with interviews from ranchers, defenders of wolves, wildlife experts, park rangers, eco-scientists, and even economists. The economist called the wolves in a particular area “Million Dollar Wolves” because that is what they represent as far as extra annual income for Yellowstone Park, and all the businesses that benefit from tourists.
Economists conducted a survey that was pretty productive with a 66% response. The survey revealed that 94,000 of the some 3 million visitors to the tri state area of Yellowstone Park visited there solely for the purpose of viewing the wolves, which have become famous. It was ascertained that each visitor spent an average of $340.00 each during their vacation. The result is an extra $35 million dollars in income. Because there were only 15-20 wolves, they would indeed be worth over a million dollars each.
One rancher said why isn’t just 10% of that income put aside to study the wolves and come up with reasonable means to contain them that would be passed on to the ranchers? Good question.
Surely there is a better way. My feelings after watching this documentary remain the same. We have a “kill it” mentality in this country first because it’s the easiest/laziest way of doing things. Eradicate a species because we’ve decided to ranch there. Eradicate a people because we want to build a civilized country. So how civilized have we become?
Many ranchers are accomplishing no loss to their herds even moving them miles over different terrain due to more effort and diligence on their part while working smart with wildlife and park personnel. So living with nature can be done. Man just needs to realize the places we decide to settle were settled by other living things first. We are in their territory not vice versa. And every time we tend to upset the original inhabitants of an area, we more or less cause an imbalance in an ecosystem.
Watch the video to get a pretty unbiased picture of the dilemma. It’s very well done:
Almost one year to the day, the anniversary of Limpy’s shooting coincides with Secy. of Interior Salazar’s decision to take Yellowstone’s wolves off of the endangered list leaving them vulnerable to hunting once again.
Many environmental groups are taking this action to court. And yet others are petitioning President Obama to look more closely at the science behind the introduction of wolves in our parks once again, the benefit they provide, and the fact that they haven’t been allowed to reach their full potential in numbers that was decided upon when they were first introduced.
The main problem with allowing states the right to decide on hunting species relative to those that make their homes in our national parks is just that. Yellowstone is a NATIONAL park spanning several states. Why should any one state decide to hunt wolves while others do not? State parks are one thing, but national parks come under federal rule.
So to help with the plight of the wolves so many are trying to protect watch the following video of Limpy’s shooting, and pass it along to friends to spread the word and e-mail president Obama that we want to keep our wolves alive thank you.
Hopefully, watching the famous crippled wolf get gunned down will show the ugly side of what we call good sportsmanship. It looks like the only sportsmanship involved with the wolf kill is the push by the huge hunting lobby tied to the NRA. The same people that continue the movement to bring guns to our peaceful national parks.
The word extinction is being tossed around a lot regarding bats and the rapid spread of “White Nose” disease affecting them in our Northeastern States. The disease is currently active in Connecticut, New York, New Hampshire, Vermont, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Virginia.
According to an article from Connecticut’s Hartford Curant: “The syndrome, first discovered in New York state in 2006, is a condition in which the heads, legs and wings of hibernating bats are coated with a white fungus that scientists have identified as a rare form of geomyces, a fungus usually found in cold, dry environments, such as the tundra in the Arctic.”
Bats store body fat for hibernation. The fungus causes them to itch and scratch, disturbing their sleep. As a result the bat’s body fat is depleted before winter is over and they leave the cave in search of food and die from the cold. Millions of bats have died in our Northeastern states already as scientists narrow the causes down to two.
One group of scientists is studying the difference between European White Nose fungus and that found in the U.S. Thousands of tourists are attracted to underground caves in New York to view bats where “White Nose” was first spotted as a problem. It’s quite possible that a traveler introduced the fungus from Europe. U.S. bats would not be immune to this strain. Another group of scientists found that the digestive makeup of bats with the fungus is different. They are unable to process the hard shell bodies of bugs that are their main diet.
The race is on to uncover the main cause of the disease and then administer some sort of bio or chemical control to stop it before it hits the greater bat populations of our southern states. Bats eat their body weight in insect pests and are every bit as important as bees for pollination. Without bats the U.S. will see a serious rise in insect populations and suffer as much relative to food crops that rely on pollination.
Imagine an escalating mosquito population in states like Michigan that are surrounded by so much water and no swooping bats to eat them by the thousands on a nightly basis. Funny, but when most people think of plagues, they would more than likely include creepy little critters like the bat, when that couldn’t be farther from the truth. It looks like the poor little bats need better defenses against mankind, a truth that relates to many other living things on earth these days.
As a matter of fact, it appears we’re creating tribulations and plagues all by ourselves.
In an unusual Sunday vote called by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Bill 22 moved forward with a vote of 66-12 that would add 200 million more acres of U.S. land under the Wilderness Protection Act. The Associated Press reported that this bill is “the largest expansion of wilderness protection in 25 years. Prior to this, the bill met with opposition from Republicans. The Sunday vote was an effort to bypass their stalling that some say will “derail” the pledged cooperation between Republicans and Democrats in the near future.
In any event, the bill is making its way through to senate approval and according to the same AP article includes California’s Sierra Nevada mountain range, Oregon’s Mount Hood, Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado and parts of the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia for protection under the act.
This is pretty binding stuff once it’s decided. It would take another act of Congress to take the same land away from the Wilderness Protection Act. I wondered what the Wilderness Protection Act actually does. In my mind if a place is already a national park, why does it need further protections? According to Wikipedia, which is a good enough source for explaining things, the basics of the Wilderness Protection Act are:
The lands protected as wilderness are areas of our public lands.
Wilderness designation is a protective overlay Congress applies to selected portions of national forests, parks, wildlife refuges, and other public lands.
Within wilderness areas, we strive to restrain human influences so that ecosystems [the Wilderness Act, however, makes no specific mention of ecosystems] can change over time in their own way, free, as much as possible, from human manipulation. In these areas, as the Wilderness Act puts it, “the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man”—untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.
Wilderness areas serve multiple uses. But the law limits uses to those consistent with the Wilderness Act mandate that each wilderness area be administered to preserve the “wilderness character of the area.” For example, these areas protect watersheds and clean-water supplies vital to downstream municipalities and agriculture, as well as habitats supporting diverse wildlife, including endangered species, while logging and oil and gas drilling are prohibited.
Along with many other uses and values for the American people, wilderness areas are popular for diverse kinds of outdoor recreation—but without motorized or mechanical vehicles or equipment. Wilderness is the haven of quiet beyond the end of the road, the wild sanctuary we meet on its own terms by leaving the machinery of twenty-first-century life behind. The wild popularity of wilderness recreation shows how hungry Americans are for just such sanctuaries.
The Wilderness Act was reinterpreted by the Administration in 1986 to ban bicycles from Wilderness areas, which led to the current vocal opposition from mountain bikers to the opening of new Wilderness areas.
Interesting, because I did see some protesting the fact that this will be 200 million more acres no one can use, unless we decide to see the place the good old fashion way—by hiking. But the whole idea is to protect the wilderness from man so we either walk through it leaving the least amount of impact, or we don’t see it at all.
There is also the questionable $3 million earmark to Alaska for another road to nowhere through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge there.Maybe they should add that area to the Wilderness Act. No mechanical or motorized vehicles in protected areas, no need for a road. And didn’t Alaska’s governor denounce earmarks anyway?
I caught CNN report a national poll about the top 3 things people wanted president-elect Obama to tackle in the New Year.
1.77% of all people polled want something done about national health care.
2.75% of all people polled want something done about the environment.
3.70% of all people want to end the war in Iraq.
I’m a little amazed. I’m not running into many of these people who want something done about the environment. Truth is not much can be done if we allow the Bush administration to continue against the environment the way they have been. If Bush is successful at lifting the obstacles to more drilling, mining, and lumbering and those industries move quickly to begin their projects, how will a new president be able to come in and simply put a halt to it?
And Bush is moving toward that goal. According to the Wilderness Society, in the past few weeks the Bush administration has:
Announced plans to lease iconic areas in Utah – including Desolation Canyon and greater Nine Mile Canyon – to the oil and gas industry;
Released new oilshale plans that could affect up to 2 million acres in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming with this as yet unsafe and unproven technology;
Made changes to the Endangered Species Act that would all but eliminate protections for fish, wildlife and forests; and
Proposed to allow clearcut logging in ancient forests in Oregon.
Bush plans to remove critical scientific review of the impact of federal permits on endangered and threatened species. This will weaken the Endangered Species Act even further according to Care2.com’s petition site, which also stated that Bush is:
Allowing the EPA to ignore unsafe levels of rocket fuel in drinking water that pose a risk to nearly 40 million Americans; and,
Permitting more uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.
And Earthjustice reports that the fate of U.S. rivers, lakes and streams — and years of Earthjustice legal efforts — hang in the balance next month when the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether mining wastes can be dumped in an Alaska lake. This is bad because it sets a precedent for the mining industry in general to be able to dump what they don’t want/need into bodies of water like streams and rivers.
Clearly this is like a last minute corporate takeover of America. The heck with national forests, critters, birds, and fish in lieu of big dirty business like oil, mining, lumber. When we look at the anti-environmental moves of this exiting administration vs. numbers like 75% for the environment, it’s pretty evident we as citizens haven’t had much of an impact on Bush/Cheney, and waiting for a new president is too late.
Contact your legislators, and/or email the White House that we want change for a clean future, that we love our land, national parks, animals, streams, rivers, and lakes. This should be a given for everyone in America, especially our leadership.
When we think of Oregon, we think of lush forests and the shores of the Pacific; forests that have been in tact long enough to call ancient. These ancient forests of cedar and fir trees are along the western side of Oregon. After all the devastating fires we’ve had out west, it’s good to know that this ecosystem still stands. Its trees, wetlands and miles of rivers are a respite for the environment, an oasis compared to the scorched California terrain.
Oregon’s ancient forests are also home to black bear, and deer, as well as endangered species like the spotted owl. But that may change quickly. Bush is planning on handing out last minute offerings to his industry buddies, like two million acres to big lumber who will mow through the middle of Oregon’s ancient forests. The Wilderness Society said: “It would fragment this old growth ecosystem with the desolation of stumps and logging roads.” Two million acres would indeed look like desolation from the air.
Nice real nice. But it’s not a done deal. Conservation groups have backed the president down and now he’s accepting public comments. So let him know that in view of all the fires, and what might be a lack of water out west, to waste 2 million acres of Oregon’s forests is just plain sinful. What I want to know is where is all the lumber going? No one is building right now because of the economy. This really does look like nothing more than a wasteful hand out with no foresight as to how it will affect the environment, animals, their habitat, and all of us in the future.
Take action against this last minute logging: http://action.wilderness.org:80/campaign/ognw/xwnke5kr1ent8k5?.
While many are busy trying to make change in this country through our upcoming elections, the Bush administration is feverishly trying to deregulate more. And some of this deregulation would not only have horrible consequences for the environment, but also public safety.
Think that it’s no problem because either Obama or maverick McCain will undo the Bush damage? Think again. The Clinton administration tried to put through regulatory laws a little too late at the end of his administration. When Bush took office he scrapped over 250 of Clinton’s regulations for the environment, public safety, etc., quite easily. So this time around the Bush administration is making sure there are no loose ends to their lobbyist loving deregulation push. It will take a heck of a lot of time, trouble, and interest to undo what Bush puts in place now. It affects farms, animals, our food, imports, fishing, environment, clean air, water, global warming, and public safety.
We’ve seen what deregulation has done with tainted food, toys, the sell off of our national parks, a spike in killing wolves, buffalo, and wild mustang horses, and many -other things that affect global warming like over fishing, which allows the growth of rotting plants that results in increasing methane explosions into the atmosphere. We’ve slowly learned that every little thing affects something else in a big waya process that the Bush administration has never grasped. Their concern is for corporate gain at the expense of many things that directly and adversely affect us.
Please read the entire article and contact your congressional reps to stop this last minute deregulation that could prove to be the last blow to the environment and our own safety!
