- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 14,697
- Reaction score
- 5,704
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.
"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.
Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News
I wanna hear from the board expert on owls before commenting:mrgreen:
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.
"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.
Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News
Now that they've figured that out, can they get out of the way and let the loggers go back to work? Maybe that would help unemployment, bring down the cost of lumber, and maybe open the way to clear off some of the overgrown forests before there is yet another devastating wildfire.
No, come to think of it, that would be logical and rational, and therefore beyond the scope of Washington politics.
More Con games-
The logging industry was not 'devastated' by restricting the wholesale harvesting of lumber for an owl. It was restricted to save the salmon industry and maintain a sustainable industry. Fact is the logging industry was fouling water supplies far more than hurting any owls. But rather than admit that, the CONs ignore that and focus on an owl.
The logging industry lost 90% of it's jobs between 1947 and 1964. These days loggers are losing jobs as increased mechanization has gained ground in the industry- just like every other industry.
So just how much land was barred from harvest because of the spotted owl? Most harvest management policies were passed before any Owls were thought to be in any danger. To be honest about the regulations it simply bans clear cut logging of 70 acres per documented nest on private land and the harvesting of old growth timber on federal lands. Biologists figure 1,500 acres is the actual habitat for a breeding pair but yanno how it goes when it's bird vs Weyerhaeuser.
Another CON game is the 'one thing' con. It takes FAR more than a nesting site to ensure a species survives. Invader species that are in no danger of extinction can devastate native species. Protecting natives from invaders is part and parcel of any CONservation plan, just some CONs don't like to admit it.
What the PNW has resisted is what most other timber regions have already adopted- you have to base the industry on sustainable harvest management- like Weyerhaeuser does here in SE Oklahoma. The days of free range grazing is over on the Great Plains, time for clear cut logging on Public lands has come.
Blame a bird or blame a fish... don't matter....eace
When the enviros succeeded in killing logging in the PNW with the spotted owl thing there were many people telling them it was Barred owls moving in that was decreasing the spotted owl population not logging and now it has become to obvious to deny. Now that the feds have killed logging and put thousands of men out of work they want to kill thousands of Barred owls to stop a naturally occurring species shift. I swear DC gets more stupid and figures out more ways to waste money every day.
"The federal government first listed the northern spotted owl as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1990. Their population is dwindling by an average of 2.9 percent every year, it says.
Barred owls are native to eastern North America, but they've arrived in the West only relatively recently, first having been seen in western Washington in 1973. The Fish & Wildlife Service says there's a direct correlation between the growth of the barred owl and the disappearance of the northern spotted owl." The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service published an environmental impact statement explaining why it had approved the removal of about 3,600 barred owls — some by "lethal" means — in four "test areas" of Oregon, Washington and California.
Feds move ahead with plans to kill barred owls ? to save spotted owls - U.S. News
It's just another example of government doing what government does best; micromanaging things that rather clearly do not need to be micromanaged, and creating more problems than it solves in the process.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
I'm curios what the cost will be per owl to kill 3,600 of them. I'm guessing around a million per owl when you figure in all the so called studies.
Whoa! Where's my shotgun? I'm going owl hunting.
I hear the meat is tough and stringy.:lol:
Believe me, we experience the same thing on the eastern side - just not in the volume you guys in the west do.This is one of those times I realize most of the people on this forum are not in the west they just yawn about this stuff
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.I'm curios what the cost will be per owl to kill 3,600 of them. I'm guessing around a million per owl when you figure in all the so called studies.
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.
A few years ago in nearby Roanoke, the city paid "sharpshooters" to kill some of the urban deer population. I don't know what it cost per deer taken, but I do remember it was astronomical. The hunters were only allowed to hunt at night with suppressors and night scopes. They didn't make a dent, needless to say. Now, they finally realized the need for an urban deer season. Duh. It generates revenue, provides meat for the hungry, and has made a significant dent in a problem over-population of deer in the city neighborhoods.
Isn't that funny? The same is true of logging here. There are rabid environmentalists that want the forests to remain untouched, until their house is threatened by fire. The lack of understanding of forest management is astounding in these types, but they desperately want to maintain that untouched look for their own self-gratification. The tracts I logged in the national forrest 20 years ago are impossible to distinguish from the surrounding forrest now. This fact is completely lost on the tree huggers.We had the same thing happen here. The deer population had increased to he point that there was not enough vegetation available to keep them all fed, and many were starving. And this was in a 1000 acre park. The "poor little deer" crowd that objected to the humane killing quickly changed their minds when it was learned that the meat would be available for free to anyone who signed up. Then it was, "put me on the list!" Human nature at its finest? :thumbdown:
Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
Agreed. We should manage what we have here and remember that without that responsible management, we will lose it, and a piece of ourselves in the process.actually species diversification tends to be higher on public and private lands where use is high, than national parks, due to the fact the deer tend to over graze the later when their populations are not controlled. And there has been a clear shift in environmental protection that takes account for economic benefit in the protection models.
The "leave mother earth alone" mantra of the brain dead hippies is pretty much on the historical trash pile at this point
Too stupid and misinformed to respond to.:roll:
actually species diversification tends to be higher on public and private lands where use is high, than national parks, due to the fact the deer tend to over graze the later when their populations are not controlled. And there has been a clear shift in environmental protection that takes account for economic benefit in the protection models.
The "leave mother earth alone" mantra of the brain dead hippies is pretty much on the historical trash pile at this point
Isn't that funny? The same is true of logging here. There are rabid environmentalists that want the forests to remain untouched, until their house is threatened by fire. The lack of understanding of forest management is astounding in these types, but they desperately want to maintain that untouched look for their own self-gratification. The tracts I logged in the national forrest 20 years ago are impossible to distinguish from the surrounding forrest now. This fact is completely lost on the tree huggers.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?