Dubya chooses big business over wildlife...again

[Oak]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD class=articleBody align=left>U.S. official axes forest protections for lynx, water


Article Published: Monday, February 14, 2005
By Theo Stein and Bob Berwyn
The Denver Post


<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=right border=0 valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD><SCRIPT> <!-- // Hide from older browsers function openEnlarged(url, width, height) { wid = window.open(url, "EnlargedImage", "toolbar=no,status=yes,directories=no,location=no,scrollbars=yes,width="+ width +",height="+ height +",resizable=yes"); wid.focus(); } function showVideo(url, width, height) { wid = window.open(url + '?path=', "EnlargedImage", "toolbar=no,status=yes,directories=no,location=no,scrollbars=yes,width="+ width +",height="+ height +",resizable=yes"); wid.focus(); } // --></SCRIPT></TD></TR><TR><TD><TABLE class=articleThirdColumn cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- cdaFreeFormDetailByName.strSQL = FreeForm_GetTextBySectionIDPaperID @Name = 'ArticleFreeform1', @PaperID = '36', @SectionID = '53', @ArticleID = '2710092', @Filter = 'Article', @LiveFilter = '1', @DateTimeContext = '2/14/2005 4:57:16 PM' --><!-- ArticleFreeform1 not found -->













</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Rules designed to protect reintroduced Canada lynx and to keep water in streams and rivers would be stripped from the White River National Forest management plan under a recent decision by an Agriculture Department official. David Tenny, deputy undersecretary for natural resources, sided with ski resorts and off-road-vehicle groups when he ordered the forest to eliminate rules that require the agency to assess potential damage to lynx habitat by ski-area projects, forest health treatments and other activities.

Tenny also ordered forest officials to scrap environmental standards that would give them more authority to protect water for fish and recreation in the 2.3-million-acre forest, which stretches between Summit County and Glenwood Springs.

After five years of debate, White River National Forest officials adopted a new management plan in June 2002. Appeals were resolved by Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth late last year.




</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
But Tenny's decision reverses Bosworth's rulings. Comments on the latest changes are due Tuesday.

One reason for easing lynx rules, Tenny wrote, was to make the White River plan consistent with a lynx management strategy proposed for other southern Rockies forests.

Forest officials admit the regional plan may not protect lynx habitat or significantly improve the shy snow cat's chances for survival. That plan contains exemptions for oil and gas development, energy-transmission lines and healthy-forest projects that comply with White House policy directives.

Tenny also argued that stronger lynx protections were unnecessary because "since 1974, there has been no documented evidence that lynx exist" in the White River forest.

But Colorado Division of Wildlife officials say satellite transmitters on the radio collars of reintroduced lynx show they are using the forest.

No one from the Forest Service contacted the Division of Wildlife for information about lynx in the forest, said Rick Kahn, state wildlife program manager.

In ordering 10 water standards eliminated, Tenny said many were unrealistic and could conflict with state law and other forest policies, in particular a memorandum of agreement inked by federal and state officials last year.

"It's going to make it harder for them to say, 'Hey, we need some water in this stream,"' said Rocky Smith of Colorado Wild.

Smith noted that in 2001, Tenny ordered forest managers to remove requirements aimed at protecting key species such as the Colorado River cutthroat trout, western boreal toad, wolverine and pine martin from new plans for the Rio Grande, Arapaho-Roosevelt and Routt forests.

The White River management plan is intended to guide land-use decisions for the next 15 years on a rugged landscape that hosts 8.4 million visitors annually and contains the state's most popular ski areas and eight wilderness preserves. The forest is split by Interstate 70 and surrounded by some of the fastest-growing communities in the West.
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2710092,00.html

 

[BuzzH]

What a shock...dubya choosing to continue his poor management of MY federal lands.

The American voters are completely out of their minds.

 

[ringer]

Seems to me that the toads can live in the eight wilderness areas. The voters, Buzz, are shifting to a position of moderating enviro whackos who want to close all of THEIR land to public use. People like yourself who trash anyone who doesn't agree with your position are responsible for voters putting Dubya back in for four more years. Maybe you can do the Dean scream and get some attention for your cause. It's just like hunting. 5% of the population strongly support it and 5% strongly oppose it and the other 90% don't give a shit about the Canadian lynx-toad and don't like Canada much anyway.

 

[cjcj]

What a shock...dubya choosing to continue his poor management of MY federal lands.

The American voters are completely out of their minds.

What choice did we have Buzz? Tell us who was your choice and why?

 

[Ithaca 37]

Hopefully enough hunters and fishermen will wake up in the next few years to elect a President who's much better on the environmental issues. The pendulem is going to have to swing way far the other way to make up for the damage Dubya's doing. It's really disgusting to see hunters supporting what Dubya's doing and it proves the national education system is a failure at teaching kids to think logically and with a sense of values.

The only people kept out of roadless areas are the ones who are too lazy to walk and a few who have some kind of handicap, and those are very few. IMO that's a tough break for the handicapped. If I ever become handicapped I'm just going to accept that there are some places I can't go and I'll find something else to do. I'm certainly not going to demand that I be allowed to ride anywhere I want.

 

[BigHornRam]

Buzz,

Have you been working with Hillary to get her up to speed with how you would like her to manage YOUR federal land? Four years is not a lot of time. It would be better spent working than whinning.

 

[BuzzH]

Paul,

I dont think Hillary will be running for President, so I wont be wasting my time.

Ringer,

Its pretty obvious you dont know a couple things:

1. You have no idea why I fight for roadless country.
2. You dont know me at all.

The one part of your post that does make sense is that 90% of America doesnt know what they have, what they stand to lose, or how to fight for whats left....I'll agree with that. The only thing I would say is that the percentage is more like 99% dont know, dont care, and dont have a clue.

The reason why I fight for things that you dont give a shit about is because if I dont nobody else will. Funny though, how hunters, as a group are supposed to be "conservationists"....I'd say about 2% are, the rest just care about crawling their fat asses on the seat of an ATV and "gettin' my deer". That isnt conservation, that isnt promoting healthy environments, that isnt maintaining traditions.

Heres why I fight for things like lynx and the habitat they need.

While you dont give a shit about lynx, I do, you know how exciting it was to see this lynx come into a call? You know how great it is to be able to take an animal like this? You know how good of a feeling it is to just see lynx tracks on your trapline in the lower 48?

A few more critters not many people give a shit about, that I do...

Bobcat:

Fisher:

2 weeks take on the line...

If I want future generations to have the opportunity to enjoy the intrinsic values associated with wilderness and the animals that live there...I not only feel compelled to protect it, I feel its my RESPONSIBILITY as a conservationist, professional, and hunter/trapper to fight for what little is left.

Its attitudes exactly like yours and the nut-job in the whitehouse....mainly just flat complacency, that will take away these opportunities as well as many others.

To me, its well worth the fight....and if feathers are ruffled, tough shit.

 

[BigHornRam]

Buzz,

I know you have never been wrong in your life, even once, but let's suppose that this will be the first when Hillary wins the Democrat nomination for President in 08. Then what?

Also there are some people out there that "give a shit" about the same critters you claim to and would take offense at seeing photos of them dead, in traps and as a coat on some ladies back. What do you say to them? These people have the same attitude as you about "MY" federal land. What if they decide to tell you to trap and hunt somewhere else?

 

[cjcj]

Oh Hillary is running ..thats for sure.

 

[BuzzH]

BHR, then its business as usual for me, writing in my choice for president and expressing my continued discontent for presidential candidates. Been the same story since I was old enough to vote...I've NEVER been given a decent choice, IMO.

Oh, and as to your other worry...if those people that find a photo of a dead critter offensive, maybe they should pony up and financially support the critters they care about. Maybe they should log all the track activities (for Fish and Game research) they found on their wilderness treks like I did while running trap lines for several years. Maybe they should buy fishing/trapping/hunting licenses to support management and research of those animals...along with voting for a President that is serious about the environment, wildlife, and its management. A President that understand research, enforcement, and management cost money and need FUNDING. Funny how Bush gives the war in Iraq a freaking BLANK check, but cant scrape together even .001% of that amount to fund wildlife programs. While you may not have a problem with BS like that, I do. Slash the budgets for research, management, and wildlife at home...but piss money, lives, and future generations down the drain for some grudge match in the sand.

Also, I'd challenge the folks who think trapping/hunting/fishing is bad to present some hard evidence as to why it is. I'd fight them the same way you fight the fat-assed atvers and welfare ranchers....it isnt that tough if you're committed, and the proof is in the puddin'. Everything involved with public lands and public wildlife is a fight, but well worth it if you care...and definately worth it for the experiences I've had while trapping, hunting, etc.

By the way, I wont be expecting any support from you or anyone else on these tough issues...I dont think you get it.

 

[Nemont]

Buzz and I have had this dicussion before I think it came down to Hillary will run but not be nominated.

Ithaca,
It might surprise you that some hunters and fisherman also have to balance the realities of the world and consider the entire picture prior to casting their vote. If I only had to consider whether or not the candidate would improve hunting and fishing then that would be an easy choice. To say no hunters care what is happening is simply stupid. I care about public land as much as you do. I hunt them, my children hunt, fish, camp and hike on public lands. I am tired of hearing your rhetoric. If the opposition would run a viable candidate I would look at voting for them. Who in the past election was the viable alternative candidate? First the dems run not on the issues but on, "Bush Sucks", they offered no alternatives to the status quo. Since that was the case then the majority of voters, hunters included, decided: better to sleep with the devil you know then the one you don't know. We weren't able to say: I like the way this is being done but not the way public lands are being managed.

Also if you love and believe in our democracy then you have the chance to participate. Look at what the voters did in the House and Senate. They increase the Republican majority in both. Face facts Hunters are a very small minority of people. The majority of the voters decided they liked things the way they are.

So don't oversimplify it by saying those who support the president don't care about public lands. That is not true.



Nemont

 

[BuzzH]

Nemont,

Hunters may be a small minority...but people that believe public lands should be managed correctly are not...the number of people that support the ESA are not...

These public lands and wildlife issues are a lot bigger than just hunters and fishermen...

 

[Nemont]

Buzz,
I agree with you. I was pointing out to Ithaca that it is stupid to rail against hunters and fisherman. I care about what happens to the public land. I am politically active in a lot of issues. I spend time in Helena testifying and advocating for hunters. It just touches a nerve with me when I get lumped into a group by someone who doesn't know.

Yes the ESA and correct management are all important but news flash not everyone in this country agrees with what is "endangered" or "correct management". That is the beauty of democracy we all get to voice our opinions and the majority rule after that. I don't agree with dropping a CBM well every 40 acres, I don't agree with overgrazing, I don't agree with alot of things that take place on both sides of the aisle.

Nemont

 

[BuzzH]

Nemont,

You didnt say anything with that last post I disagree with at all.

I just think that many of the issues with public lands, wilderness, wildlife, etc. are not just the worry of hunters and fishermen.

I also think that the public (not just hunters, fishermen, etc.) is:

1. More aware of these issues.
2. More active in demanding accountability.
3. Ready to see correct management.
4. Willing to fund research.
5. Make their voices and VOTES heard.

I think that the whitehouse, both sides, better start taking a much closer look at what the PUBLIC thinks is important. Complacency will also bite them in the ass.

Despite hunters and other outdoor users being a diverse and somewhat fragmented group, I've seen the number of conservation organizations grow by a HUGE margin. I've also seen more groups coming together to address common problems.

I have to tell you this...kind of a funny story...and at the same time one that warmed my heart.

When I pulled into the parking lot to give my testimony on the Rawlins/Great Divide RMP the truck I was parked next to was a classic. The guy had Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, Mule Deer Foundation, and FNAWS stickers on the window of his truck....and a huge bumper sticker that said "Bush Sucks"....I dont care who you are, thats just flat great to see.

 

[BigHornRam]

Buzz,

You don't make any sense. On the same thread you contridict yourself. First you say:

".The one part of your post that does make sense is that 90% of America doesnt know what they have, what they stand to lose, or how to fight for whats left.......I'll agree with that. The only thing I would say is that the percentage is more like 99% dont know, dont care, and dont have a clue."

Then you say:

"I also think that the public (not just hunters, fishermen, etc.) is:

1. More aware of these issues.
2. More active in demanding accountability.
3. Ready to see correct management.
4. Willing to fund research.
5. Make their voices and VOTES heard."

Did you teach Kerry how to stake out each side of every issue?

Instead of calling it "MY" federal land, how about calling it OUR federal land. I think you've allienated just about every user group to our federal land out there including a number of hunters that just don't exactly hunt the way BuzzH hunts. Do you think there will be anyone left in your corner to help you defend what's important to you? How about groups like Defenders of Wildlife and Preditor Conservation Alliance? They raise funds to protect the critters you have caught in your traps. What is their view on trapping?

 

[ringer]

Buzz-You don't know me from crap either and I did not say I was against preserving critters. My point was that by far the majority of voters hear the horror stories about enviro nuts that burn, trash, sue and destroy to push their cause. Too many decisions that save the willow flycatcher at millions of dollars in cost to taxpayers as well as putting businesses under that have not destroyed habitat. The majority also supports unlimited home construction and urban sprawl. Both are killing habitat here faster than any atv rider so you might want to think about alienating every hunter that thinks we have a right to own and ride one as long as we do it legally. As for your support of the enviro groups out to close off access I bet those same people want to eliminate your hunting priveledges as well. As for your beaver elimination program it's fine with me and I hope you can trap a few yotes and wolves while you are at it. I understand your anger at Dubya as he is cutting funding that pays your check.

 

[mtmiller]

I understand your anger at Dubya as he is cutting funding that pays your check.

No worries we still get paid, we just don't have any dollars for project work or improvements.

 

[MarvB]

miller

I remember (USFS days) back in the early 80's when they sent us home because the Budget hadn't been approved yet and no $$ was appropriated....
you might have been a little young for those times

 

[BuzzH]

MarvB, I remember that.

Ringer, the funny thing is, the group I work for is fully funded, despite budget cuts pretty much across the board...not sure why, but thats the way it is.

BHR, there is no contradiction in what I said.

The fact is, most Americans dont realize what they have...but of the ones that do...they make their voices heard in a more efficient manner. They're also the ones carrying the rest of the uneducated, undecided, and plain ignorant individuals. Being complacent and sitting on the side lines doesnt accomplish much, and you're letting someone elses voice carry more weight. Personally, I'm glad that the most vocal get their way, thats why all the right-wing anti-enviro nuts are continuing to lose their ass on these issues...both in the courts and through NEPA, ESA, etc.

Thats what I meant, just to clarify the confusion you seem to have. Also, in case you missed it the first time...I dont want or expect your help on tough issues. WE dont want the same thing for public lands management, wildlife management, or most anything else...thats intuitively obvious, even to a casual observer. You're into things like compromising bighorn sheep down the shitter, backing WY's plan stalling wolf delisting, dont want less motorized access, etc. etc. etc. Those things arent part of preserving hunting, fishing, and the environment for future generations. Keep up the good work on all your compromising...maybe someday you'll wake up and find out we've all compromised TOO MUCH ALREADY.

Oh, and Ringer, I think anyone with more than a thimble full of sense can tell what camp you fly your flag over. Let me just say, "thanks for sitting on the sidelines"...every team needs a water-boy.

 

[ringer]

Buzz-I'm pretty clear about my position and I also own a business and find it amusing that people on the public dole find it pretty easy to rally hard for more tax dollars. I don't oppose paying for teachers, cops etc and not even you but I do oppose throwing money down toadholes just to make a few hippies happy. Glad to provide water for you.