The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”

[wolfbait]

The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
by Alan CarubaMarch 25, 2014



A recent article in The Wall Street Journal took note of what has occurred since the 1990s when some three dozen gray wolves were captured in Canada and transferred to the wilderness of Idaho. According to federal biologists, this was necessary to restore the ecological balance in a region teeming with elk and other creatures on the gray wolf food chain.

The article noted that more than 650 wolves roam the state today according to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game which has been hearing a lot of complaints that the wolves “are wreaking havoc on Idaho’s prized elk and livestock, and prompted the governor’s office to embark on an effort to wipe out three-quarters or more of the population.”

So the federal biologists bring in the wolves and a few years later the governor’s office says kill them. Why? Because the elk population has fallen about 15% since the wolves arrived, along with 2,589 sheep, 610 cows, and 72 dogs.

Take a moment on contemplate how arrogant and unconscionably stupid it is to take gray wolves from Canada and put them in Idaho in the name of “ecological balance.” The only balance achieved was a significant imbalance in the elk population and witless destruction of sheep and cows which represent a livelihood to ranchers and dinner to the rest of us.

Throughout America we are all paying for the environmental notion of “endangered species” and the quest to “save” some from extinction. The problem with that conceit is that 95% of all the species on Earth have gone extinct over hundreds of millions of years. One paper on this noted that “Mass extinction of biological species has occurred several times in the history of our planet.”

The Endangered Species Act became law on December 28, 1973, just over forty years ago. It’s not about saving species. It’s about providing a vehicle to environmental groups to shut off access to vast areas of the nation in order to prevent drilling for oil and natural gas or mining them for coal and other minerals.

In a December 2013 Wall Street Journal article, Damien Schiff and Julie MacDonald reported that,

“A law intended to conserve species and habitat has brought about the recovery of only a fraction—less than 2%–of the approximately 2,100 species listed as endangered or threatened since 1973.
“Meanwhile, the law has endangered the economic health of many communities—which creating a cottage industry of litigation that does more to enrich environmental activist groups than benefit the environment.
“One reason the Endangered Species Act has spun out of control is that the federal agencies that decide whether to list a species—the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—no longer based decisions on what the law calls for: data. Instead they invent squishy standards like ‘best professional judgment.”
The result of that can be seen in California’s San Joaquin Valley where much of the nation’s almonds, broccoli, onions, watermelons, lettuce and tomatoes have been grown. About 13% of all agricultural production in the nation takes place in the region where some 250 different crops are grown. That is, until the Natural Resources Defense Council won a lawsuit against California’s water-delivery system that they claimed was endangering Delta smelt, on the Endangered Species list since 1994. The result was a manmade drought for the valley’s farmers and ranchers. If you wonder why the cost of everything in the vegetable section of your supermarket costs more, you can thank the NRDC.

Lying about animal species is so much a part of the environmental movement that polar bears have become a fund-raising symbol over the years despite the fact that polar bear populations, said to be threatened by melting Arctic ice, have been thriving since the 1970s. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, there are between 20,000 and 25,000 polar bears worldwide, living in Canada, Greenland, the northern Russian coast, islands of the Norwegian coast and the northwest Alaska coast. Hunting them was banned in the U.S. and worldwide with the exception of Alaskan Natives for tribal needs.

Currently almost half the land west of the Mississippi river belongs to the federal government and environmentalists want to expand on that to prevent the nation’s booming oil and gas development. That development could make the U.S. energy independent, create many jobs, and its revenues could significantly reduce the tremendous national debt.  At the heart of the environmental movement is an intent to destroy capitalism and reduce the U.S. among other nations to an era before fossil fuels improved life for everyone.

One way to do that is to increase the endangered list by a record 757 new species by 2018. Two species with the greatest impact on private development are range birds, the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Among the environmental groups who specialize in using the Endangered Species Act are the Wildlife Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity who have been party to more than one thousands lawsuits between 1900 and the present. The Center has made no secret of wanting to end fossil-fuel production in the U.S.

The Endangered Species Act should be repealed because it has a pathetic record regarding its goal over the past forty years and because it threatens the economic development of the nation. Unless or until this occurs, environmentalists will continue their assault on America.

http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/the-green-scam-of-endangered-species/



In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.  s: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[AspenBud]

One way to do that is to increase the endangered list by a record 757 new species by 2018. Two species with the greatest impact on private development are range birds, the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Among the environmental groups who specialize in using the Endangered Species Act are the Wildlife Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity who have been party to more than one thousands lawsuits between 1900 and the present. The Center has made no secret of wanting to end fossil-fuel production in the U.S.

Like I said Wolfbait, where were you before the wolf? You don't give one hoot about "the end of hunting" unless it applies to the animals you like to hunt.

[wolfbait]

One way to do that is to increase the endangered list by a record 757 new species by 2018. Two species with the greatest impact on private development are range birds, the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Among the environmental groups who specialize in using the Endangered Species Act are the Wildlife Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity who have been party to more than one thousands lawsuits between 1900 and the present. The Center has made no secret of wanting to end fossil-fuel production in the U.S.

Like I said Wolfbait, where were you before the wolf? You don't give one hoot about "the end of hunting" unless it applies to the animals you like to hunt.

Actually Aspenbud, I didn't know too much about the ESA until the wolves, since then I have learned quite a bit as have several others. I guess the fraud of the wolf introduction has alerted several about the ESA, EPA, DOE and the crooks that run them.

What we are seeing here on W-H are those who support crooks also support the wolves that were Illegally introduced. My guess is you know right from wrong, but the agenda and $$$$ means more.

[pianoman9701]

I was on the ESA long before the wolf. When some guy in CA couldn't develop his own land back in the early 90s because he had a certain rat living there, I knew the ESA was being manipulated to forward the personal goals of greenies. It's been used by greenies to make our forests incredibly unhealthy here in the PNW through the fiasco of the spotted owl. As a result, it's another onslaught on our ungulates with loss of habitat and proper grazing in the forest. The ESA is a tool of enviro-wackos and the wolf is just another example of how they manipulate it and use taxpayer money to sue the federal government when it tries to manage wildlife. The extremists use it as their personal tool.

[villageidiot]

 

[Special T]

The ESA is a tool used for control. I was on to the ESA during the spotted owl era in the late 80's It devastated logging and THAT was the purpose... And we have learned today the REAL reason for the spotted owls demise had NOTHING Tot do with habitat but rather a competitor... When some one tells me its all about "Habituate" All I hear is some one is trying to control the use of land that is NOT theirs. 

[wolfbait]

Jamie Rappaport Clark, when she became a political appointee as Director of Fish and Wildlife Services. She was in that job to evaluate the deployment of money from the federal aid program to bring the wolves in. Even though she didn’t receive the money from Congress because it had been turned down, she in turn is the one who set up “ Defenders of Wildlife” as the organization that would investigate predation and pay for damages. And then when she lost her job when President Clinton went out of office, she went to the National Wildlife Federation at a salary of $200,000 – $250,000/yr where she did very little before getting fired. She did score a nice severance with bonus. A couple of months later, she pops up in the Defenders of Wildlife as a top official with them where she is today. So it is all interwoven. Clark would not be where she is now; if the wolf had been delisted years ago and we were controlling them and managing them. Her stake was not in achieving efficiency but rather from how organizations could benefit and make money. - See more at: http://www.skinnymoose.com/bbb/2010/03/10/panel-roundtable-canadian-gray-wolf-introduction-into-yellowstone/#sthash.FAkDYDWZ.dpuf

[WAcoyotehunter]

So now the HuntWA group is against ALL endangered species???  Good grief. 

I agree that the wolf delisting has been a nightmare, and that the ESA should not be used as a hammer to further personal agendas.  The ESA should be used to keep animals that are declining or going extinct (or extirpated) from being lost forever.   
 H
As a "hunting group" (if that is what this forum should call itself?) how can you support idly standing by and watching species go away?  Our hunter/conservation forefathers would roll over in their graves.

[pianoman9701]

So now the HuntWA group is against ALL endangered species???  Good grief. 

I agree that the wolf delisting has been a nightmare, and that the ESA should not be used as a hammer to further personal agendas.  The ESA should be used to keep animals that are declining or going extinct (or extirpated) from being lost forever.   
 H
As a "hunting group" (if that is what this forum should call itself?) how can you support idly standing by and watching species go away?  Our hunter/conservation forefathers would roll over in their graves.

Really, that's what you read into this conversation WAcoyote, we're all about killing panda bears and peregrine falcons? This thread isn't about opposing the saving or protection of endangered species. This discussion is about how extreme greenies use it to forward extreme greenie agendas. Wolves need management and the game departments of WY, ID, and MT have decided on management plans. Greenies are using the ESA to oppose them because they don't want any killed under any circumstances. Do you agree with them or do you agree with the game departments who are experiencing wolf problems?

[AspenBud]

One way to do that is to increase the endangered list by a record 757 new species by 2018. Two species with the greatest impact on private development are range birds, the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Among the environmental groups who specialize in using the Endangered Species Act are the Wildlife Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity who have been party to more than one thousands lawsuits between 1900 and the present. The Center has made no secret of wanting to end fossil-fuel production in the U.S.

Like I said Wolfbait, where were you before the wolf? You don't give one hoot about "the end of hunting" unless it applies to the animals you like to hunt.

Actually Aspenbud, I didn't know too much about the ESA until the wolves, since then I have learned quite a bit as have several others. I guess the fraud of the wolf introduction has alerted several about the ESA, EPA, DOE and the crooks that run them.

What we are seeing here on W-H are those who support crooks also support the wolves that were Illegally introduced. My guess is you know right from wrong, but the agenda and $$$$ means more.

What I see here is a double standard. You go railing against wolves and belly ache about how it is supposed end to all hunting and then turn around and effectively say "the hell with upland birds if it messes with my land or grazing rights." Upland bird hunters talk about hunting sage grouse and prairie chickens because they don't know how much longer they'll be able to. Why? Because their habitat is disappearing thanks to development and the grazing practices of some ranchers on leases further degrades what's there. To be fair, a number of ranchers have gotten religion and started working with people trying to save the birds, but for anyone to single out these birds, birds that people like to hunt, because it interferes with their property rights just tells me that they don't really care about what happens to hunting. They care about their pocket book or political ideology.

[Special T]

And in ID they are going to kill 4k ravens because those PREDATORS have gone unchecked for 40+ years

[idahohuntr]

they don't really care about what happens to hunting. They care about their pocket book or political ideology.

  Saving endangered species is all fine and good for some folks until it has even the slightest hint of harming their immediate bottom line...tragedy of the commons.

I think ESA has been abused to further agendas in many ways, but it has also done a lot of good in terms of addressing environmental problems.  ESA has a lot of "teeth" that other environmental laws and regs lack...which is good and bad.   

[mulehunter]

I was on the ESA long before the wolf. When some guy in CA couldn't develop his own land back in the early 90s because he had a certain rat living there, I knew the ESA was being manipulated to forward the personal goals of greenies. It's been used by greenies to make our forests incredibly unhealthy here in the PNW through the fiasco of the spotted owl. As a result, it's another onslaught on our ungulates with loss of habitat and proper grazing in the forest. The ESA is a tool of enviro-wackos and the wolf is just another example of how they manipulate it and use taxpayer money to sue the federal government when it tries to manage wildlife. The extremists use it as their personal tool.

Well said.   

[pianoman9701]

One way to do that is to increase the endangered list by a record 757 new species by 2018. Two species with the greatest impact on private development are range birds, the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Among the environmental groups who specialize in using the Endangered Species Act are the Wildlife Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity who have been party to more than one thousands lawsuits between 1900 and the present. The Center has made no secret of wanting to end fossil-fuel production in the U.S.

Like I said Wolfbait, where were you before the wolf? You don't give one hoot about "the end of hunting" unless it applies to the animals you like to hunt.

Actually Aspenbud, I didn't know too much about the ESA until the wolves, since then I have learned quite a bit as have several others. I guess the fraud of the wolf introduction has alerted several about the ESA, EPA, DOE and the crooks that run them.

What we are seeing here on W-H are those who support crooks also support the wolves that were Illegally introduced. My guess is you know right from wrong, but the agenda and $$$$ means more.

What I see here is a double standard. You go railing against wolves and belly ache about how it is supposed end to all hunting and then turn around and effectively say "the hell with upland birds if it messes with my land or grazing rights." Upland bird hunters talk about hunting sage grouse and prairie chickens because they don't know how much longer they'll be able to. Why? Because their habitat is disappearing thanks to development and the grazing practices of some ranchers on leases further degrades what's there. To be fair, a number of ranchers have gotten religion and started working with people trying to save the birds, but for anyone to single out these birds, birds that people like to hunt, because it interferes with their property rights just tells me that they don't really care about what happens to hunting. They care about their pocket book or political ideology.

Well, there's no double-standard in this thread that I can see. No one's talking about upland birds except for you, so that's way out of left field. And, since it sounds like you don't know the facts, I'll give one to you; licensed hunters have NEVER caused the extinction of an animal in the US, ever. So, have your rant that has nothing to do with anyone at all. We'll go back to talking about greenies who are using the ESA to forward their extreme agendas.

[AspenBud]

And in ID they are going to kill 4k ravens because those PREDATORS have gone unchecked for 40+ years

I wish them luck. I have serious doubts that it will help.