Gee whiz - society has such short memory. You'd think that nothing happened in the world except what's in living memory. Check out this article for a reality check on "global warming". We've seen it before, gang - and not that long ago.
Global Warming Deja Vu
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Happy Holidays
Copyright © CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
This time of year is sacred to many cultures. It has to do with the short days and the long dark nights that bring out the darkness in our souls – the primitive fears and feelings of aloneness and powerlessness that make us huddle around the small light of our hearths, nervously jumping at every noise from the shadows. It seems that we are such little spots in the infinite universe, tiny points of brightness that burn so feebly against those dark nights.
Times are hard now for most of us, here on the bottom half of the economic pile. It’s so easy to feel cheated, to feel that everything we’ve worked for and striven for is being sold out from under us, impoverishing us and disenfranchising us. We fear that our rights and our livelihoods are being stripped from us while the few in power – the few we’ve put there to act in our best interests – profit from our losses and wallow in our suffering.
The sacred holidays approach but many of us are not uplifted by them. We instead become withdrawn in stress and trepidation, resenting the symbols of celebrations around us, feeling left out. We worry that as bad as things are, worse is yet to come and nothing can be done about it. Is the end truly so near? Will we - can we - keep up the struggle? Should we bother?
But this is just the reaction to another long, dark night. We are, after all, humans – each of us more alike than not. We lash out at perceived dangers in our dark private terrors, when in truth safety is all around us. We forget that we are each the one who stands at our neighbor’s back. It has always been that way, from the days of saber-tooth tigers. It is no different today.
Truly, it is time for us to open our eyes and see that the shadows contain no danger, for they are cast by our family and friends – those who share the vigil of the long night with us. It is time for us to cease to cower in fear or lash out in anger. It is time for us to remember our faith in who we are, in what our place is in this life.
It is time to give thanks that we have come this far and to trust that we, together, can and will endure and prosper.
It is time to band together, to find cause to celebrate and to forget our fears for a few hours or days. To focus on hope and faith and a brighter future.
These are the facts: The solstice always passes, the days always start lengthening, and even though it is still cold and dark and hard for a long time afterwards, somehow we can push through it. Brighter days will come.
Like our ancestors before us, let us make merry and joyful noise and, in doing so, banish the darkness of the night.
Happy holidays.
www.onestillfree.com
This time of year is sacred to many cultures. It has to do with the short days and the long dark nights that bring out the darkness in our souls – the primitive fears and feelings of aloneness and powerlessness that make us huddle around the small light of our hearths, nervously jumping at every noise from the shadows. It seems that we are such little spots in the infinite universe, tiny points of brightness that burn so feebly against those dark nights.
Times are hard now for most of us, here on the bottom half of the economic pile. It’s so easy to feel cheated, to feel that everything we’ve worked for and striven for is being sold out from under us, impoverishing us and disenfranchising us. We fear that our rights and our livelihoods are being stripped from us while the few in power – the few we’ve put there to act in our best interests – profit from our losses and wallow in our suffering.
The sacred holidays approach but many of us are not uplifted by them. We instead become withdrawn in stress and trepidation, resenting the symbols of celebrations around us, feeling left out. We worry that as bad as things are, worse is yet to come and nothing can be done about it. Is the end truly so near? Will we - can we - keep up the struggle? Should we bother?
But this is just the reaction to another long, dark night. We are, after all, humans – each of us more alike than not. We lash out at perceived dangers in our dark private terrors, when in truth safety is all around us. We forget that we are each the one who stands at our neighbor’s back. It has always been that way, from the days of saber-tooth tigers. It is no different today.
Truly, it is time for us to open our eyes and see that the shadows contain no danger, for they are cast by our family and friends – those who share the vigil of the long night with us. It is time for us to cease to cower in fear or lash out in anger. It is time for us to remember our faith in who we are, in what our place is in this life.
It is time to give thanks that we have come this far and to trust that we, together, can and will endure and prosper.
It is time to band together, to find cause to celebrate and to forget our fears for a few hours or days. To focus on hope and faith and a brighter future.
These are the facts: The solstice always passes, the days always start lengthening, and even though it is still cold and dark and hard for a long time afterwards, somehow we can push through it. Brighter days will come.
Like our ancestors before us, let us make merry and joyful noise and, in doing so, banish the darkness of the night.
Happy holidays.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Obama Lies About Pandemic?
Obama says 1000 have died from H1N1 flu but CDC data shows no such thing – the CDC hasn’t been testing for H1N1 deaths since last July, probably because the majority of specimens tested are not only not H1N1, but not even flu!
Massive PR campaign by Obama to what end? To justify the massive spending on vaccines (to support Big Pharma) or to set up one more control of the population through fear?
I’m betting both.
Evaluate for yourself: http://articles.mercola.com/swine-flu-article/20091027.htm If you've been told you have H1N1 after August 1, since there's been no actual testing for it, your doctor *cannot know* but is only assuming the diagnosis.
Listen to the audio at the Mercola website - they read actual quotes from CDC!
Massive PR campaign by Obama to what end? To justify the massive spending on vaccines (to support Big Pharma) or to set up one more control of the population through fear?
I’m betting both.
Evaluate for yourself: http://articles.mercola.com/swine-flu-article/20091027.htm If you've been told you have H1N1 after August 1, since there's been no actual testing for it, your doctor *cannot know* but is only assuming the diagnosis.
Listen to the audio at the Mercola website - they read actual quotes from CDC!
Saturday, October 3, 2009
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
AMERICANS FOR PRESERVATION OF WESTERN ENVIRONMENT, INC.
PO BOX 612
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chair
Contact: Ed Wehrheim FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: info@amprowest.org
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
Group Asks Is Mexican Wolf Really Worth The Cost
RESERVE, N.M. On August 11, 2009, the Tucson-based environmental litigation group, Center For Biological Diversity (CBD), filed a petition with Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
“The petition calls for taking the Mexican wolf off of its current experimental, non-essential” status and putting it on fully endangered status,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chair of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment (APWE), a citizen-based New Mexico non-profit corporation. APWE was formed in 2008 in response to the outrage of New Mexico and Arizona residents and business owners over the callous disregard for the welfare and safety of human beings by the Mexican Wolf Program.
“CBD also wants a critical habitat designation for the wolves,” Wehrheim said. “This means expansion of the existing designated Mexican wolf area, closure of our trails and roads, denying human access, and hunting and grazing restrictions. In other words, our public lands will be closed to the public. ”
The 22 page petition (with additional 10 pages of citations) claims that the Mexican wolf’s historic range is not precisely known, and that wolves can live anywhere that hosts an adequate prey base of ungulates, yet also claims that these wolves occur in an unusual and unique ecological setting.
“The only unusual and unique setting for the Mexican wolves is that this is a low human population area, so CBD figures that the people don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “Americans for Preservation of Western Environment intends to set CBD straight on that issue.”
APWE’s first annual meeting is being held in Reserve, NM on Saturday, October 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. at the Reserve Community Center. APWE’s board will present an accounting of its work on behalf of the people who live in the Mexican wolf recovery area over the past year, and talk about plans for future actions. Everyone is welcome to attend.
“It’s not as if humans weren’t here, as if humans don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “We’re citizens, we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like anyone else. We don’t intend to be run over by environmental litigation groups like CBD.”
"After ten years, more than $400,000 per wolf and untold damage to our communities, they’re trying to blame their own failure with the Mexican wolf program on us, the people who live here in the program area," Wehrheim said.
# # #
PO BOX 612
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chair
Contact: Ed Wehrheim FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: info@amprowest.org
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
Group Asks Is Mexican Wolf Really Worth The Cost
RESERVE, N.M. On August 11, 2009, the Tucson-based environmental litigation group, Center For Biological Diversity (CBD), filed a petition with Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
“The petition calls for taking the Mexican wolf off of its current experimental, non-essential” status and putting it on fully endangered status,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chair of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment (APWE), a citizen-based New Mexico non-profit corporation. APWE was formed in 2008 in response to the outrage of New Mexico and Arizona residents and business owners over the callous disregard for the welfare and safety of human beings by the Mexican Wolf Program.
“CBD also wants a critical habitat designation for the wolves,” Wehrheim said. “This means expansion of the existing designated Mexican wolf area, closure of our trails and roads, denying human access, and hunting and grazing restrictions. In other words, our public lands will be closed to the public. ”
The 22 page petition (with additional 10 pages of citations) claims that the Mexican wolf’s historic range is not precisely known, and that wolves can live anywhere that hosts an adequate prey base of ungulates, yet also claims that these wolves occur in an unusual and unique ecological setting.
“The only unusual and unique setting for the Mexican wolves is that this is a low human population area, so CBD figures that the people don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “Americans for Preservation of Western Environment intends to set CBD straight on that issue.”
APWE’s first annual meeting is being held in Reserve, NM on Saturday, October 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. at the Reserve Community Center. APWE’s board will present an accounting of its work on behalf of the people who live in the Mexican wolf recovery area over the past year, and talk about plans for future actions. Everyone is welcome to attend.
“It’s not as if humans weren’t here, as if humans don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “We’re citizens, we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like anyone else. We don’t intend to be run over by environmental litigation groups like CBD.”
"After ten years, more than $400,000 per wolf and untold damage to our communities, they’re trying to blame their own failure with the Mexican wolf program on us, the people who live here in the program area," Wehrheim said.
# # #
Thursday, October 1, 2009
What's Truth Got To Do With It?
Defenders of Wildlife is using pity for three legged wolves to raise funds. They say in a "news" release: "Will you help us protect the Middle Fork wolves? Your tax-deductible donation today will help us."
Pay attention here folks! DoW is saying your deduction will help THEM, not the wolves. Those three legged wolves of the Middle Fork pack (that are not too lame to stop killing cattle)? One lost her leg because Fish & Wildlife Service amputated it after an elk kicked the wolf. The other probably was a FWS trapping, too. In fact, FWS has damaged a number of wolves in traps - and I bet you thought they used "have-a-hearts" when they trapped those wolves. Nope. Jaw traps. Your government in action.
Don't forget: The wolf program traps wolves routinely for all kinds of reasons - they just won't let the poor critters alone. They trap to vaccinate them, to change the batteries on their collars, and they trap them when they want to catch up the pups to raise them in captivity.
DoW would have you think that wolves need protecting from mean ranchers who hurt and trap them. But really, wolves need protection from the wolf program more than anything else.
And the public needs protecting from organizations like DoW, that take your money by appealing to your heartstrings. Not to be confused with presenting the facts.
Pay attention here folks! DoW is saying your deduction will help THEM, not the wolves. Those three legged wolves of the Middle Fork pack (that are not too lame to stop killing cattle)? One lost her leg because Fish & Wildlife Service amputated it after an elk kicked the wolf. The other probably was a FWS trapping, too. In fact, FWS has damaged a number of wolves in traps - and I bet you thought they used "have-a-hearts" when they trapped those wolves. Nope. Jaw traps. Your government in action.
Don't forget: The wolf program traps wolves routinely for all kinds of reasons - they just won't let the poor critters alone. They trap to vaccinate them, to change the batteries on their collars, and they trap them when they want to catch up the pups to raise them in captivity.
DoW would have you think that wolves need protecting from mean ranchers who hurt and trap them. But really, wolves need protection from the wolf program more than anything else.
And the public needs protecting from organizations like DoW, that take your money by appealing to your heartstrings. Not to be confused with presenting the facts.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Here's something to think about
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."
-- Alexis de Tocqueville (1805 – 1859)
Gee - isn't this what we're seeing right now?
-- Alexis de Tocqueville (1805 – 1859)
Gee - isn't this what we're seeing right now?
Monday, August 31, 2009
Who’s The Terrorist?
copyright (c) 2009 CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
Also published in Glenwood Gazette Sept. 2009 (Gale Moore, pub., Silver City NM)
The other day I got thinking about terrorism. So much of our lives these days are dictated by the fight against terrorism. We’ve all come to accept the invasive tactics of the US Government everywhere around us in the name of security. We even have a branch of government, Homeland Security, that has in a short time secreted its tentacles into everything in order to keep us safe from terrorists. We have to accept wands and pat-downs and X-rays of our person and our belongings in airports and public buildings, we have travel restrictions and passports to visit neighboring friendly ally countries, phone taps, email taps, credit checks, security cameras on street corners, photo-traffic citations on and on, all in the name of public safety.
Of course, doesn’t this all assume terrorism is something external to the US, that it comes from bad guys from other countries who want to render the US helpless?
I got thinking about how a bunch of bad guys that were really organized and very well financed could most effectively pull the US or any country down. (I want to point out to Homeland Security that I read a lot of fiction and much of what I’m writing here is already in print don’t come busting my doors down while telling me free speech doesn’t count because of the Patriot Act). Anyway, it has become clear to me that, logically, terrorism really would be just a first step. A kind of softening up a country for the real blows that will bring it down. The KO, if you will.
What would weaken a country more than flying planes into landmark buildings? Homeland Security and/or the media would have us believe that it would be nuking a big city. But really, would that take down the US? Were a resilient bunch of citizens I think that wiping out LA (for instance) would just make us all really, really mad once we got over being really, really sad (think of how sad and mad - wed be at losing our Famous Faces in such an attack).
No, I think what would really work to weaken a country would be to literally weaken its people. And it seems to me that the traditional ways of weakening a people would be just as effective now as they have been throughout history: Starvation and disease and isolation.
Here’s the thing: People who eat well are healthy and they don’t get sick as easily. So, if you think about it, wouldn’t the smartest thing be, if you were terrorists and wanted to take down the US, to destroy the food supply, thereby make people dependent on bad food so they’ll get sick more easily?
My thinking goes like this: The US agricultural base is being destroyed by factory farming and by more and more restrictions on small farming (NAIS, anyone?). Our forests, the biomass from the thinning of which could probably replace the use of petroleum for transportation fuel in 10 years, are being burned up because of more and more restrictions on hazardous fuels reduction projects and a push to expand wilderness and create roadless areas on public lands.
Where are our environmental groups in this picture? Are they supporting local production of healthy foods, which is so much less destructive to Mother Earth than factory farming? No, they work hard to destroy small farmers and ranchers. Are they supporting forest restoration that would result in reduced carbon pollution of our atmosphere by reduction of forest fires? No, they work hard to suppress the cutting of any trees at all. Are they supporting use of biomass to create an alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels? No, they fight efforts to develop sustainable, renewable energy.
What do environmental groups do to make our planet a healthier place, where humans and all species can thrive?
Well, actually, when you add up what they are doing, the answer to that question is: Nothing. In fact, when you look at the big picture of environmental efforts by the Big Name Environmental Groups (whose board members are mostly attorneys, not scientists), what that picture really looks like is a series of well-coordinated actions that are aimed to weaken the citizens of this country through starvation, disease and isolation.
Its so plausible: Destroy the family farms and ranches in the name of endangered species. Further destroy local production of healthy foods in the name of pure water. Destroy the possibility of alternative energy sources by attacking wind farms and use of biomass from forests. Destroy the forests themselves by not allowing restoration work, thereby encouraging massive wildfires only one of which can in a few days or weeks dump as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as one big city does in a year. (Ironically, the supposedly endangered species' habitats are destroyed as well by wildfire). And when things go down the tubes on our planet because of the success of the above actions, blame it on small farmers and ranchers and you and me, average Joe and Jane US citizen, and file even more lawsuits in the name of environmentalism, because, don’t you know, they’ve got to save the planet.
And then… TKO?
www.onestillfree.com
Also published in Glenwood Gazette Sept. 2009 (Gale Moore, pub., Silver City NM)
The other day I got thinking about terrorism. So much of our lives these days are dictated by the fight against terrorism. We’ve all come to accept the invasive tactics of the US Government everywhere around us in the name of security. We even have a branch of government, Homeland Security, that has in a short time secreted its tentacles into everything in order to keep us safe from terrorists. We have to accept wands and pat-downs and X-rays of our person and our belongings in airports and public buildings, we have travel restrictions and passports to visit neighboring friendly ally countries, phone taps, email taps, credit checks, security cameras on street corners, photo-traffic citations on and on, all in the name of public safety.
Of course, doesn’t this all assume terrorism is something external to the US, that it comes from bad guys from other countries who want to render the US helpless?
I got thinking about how a bunch of bad guys that were really organized and very well financed could most effectively pull the US or any country down. (I want to point out to Homeland Security that I read a lot of fiction and much of what I’m writing here is already in print don’t come busting my doors down while telling me free speech doesn’t count because of the Patriot Act). Anyway, it has become clear to me that, logically, terrorism really would be just a first step. A kind of softening up a country for the real blows that will bring it down. The KO, if you will.
What would weaken a country more than flying planes into landmark buildings? Homeland Security and/or the media would have us believe that it would be nuking a big city. But really, would that take down the US? Were a resilient bunch of citizens I think that wiping out LA (for instance) would just make us all really, really mad once we got over being really, really sad (think of how sad and mad - wed be at losing our Famous Faces in such an attack).
No, I think what would really work to weaken a country would be to literally weaken its people. And it seems to me that the traditional ways of weakening a people would be just as effective now as they have been throughout history: Starvation and disease and isolation.
Here’s the thing: People who eat well are healthy and they don’t get sick as easily. So, if you think about it, wouldn’t the smartest thing be, if you were terrorists and wanted to take down the US, to destroy the food supply, thereby make people dependent on bad food so they’ll get sick more easily?
My thinking goes like this: The US agricultural base is being destroyed by factory farming and by more and more restrictions on small farming (NAIS, anyone?). Our forests, the biomass from the thinning of which could probably replace the use of petroleum for transportation fuel in 10 years, are being burned up because of more and more restrictions on hazardous fuels reduction projects and a push to expand wilderness and create roadless areas on public lands.
Where are our environmental groups in this picture? Are they supporting local production of healthy foods, which is so much less destructive to Mother Earth than factory farming? No, they work hard to destroy small farmers and ranchers. Are they supporting forest restoration that would result in reduced carbon pollution of our atmosphere by reduction of forest fires? No, they work hard to suppress the cutting of any trees at all. Are they supporting use of biomass to create an alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels? No, they fight efforts to develop sustainable, renewable energy.
What do environmental groups do to make our planet a healthier place, where humans and all species can thrive?
Well, actually, when you add up what they are doing, the answer to that question is: Nothing. In fact, when you look at the big picture of environmental efforts by the Big Name Environmental Groups (whose board members are mostly attorneys, not scientists), what that picture really looks like is a series of well-coordinated actions that are aimed to weaken the citizens of this country through starvation, disease and isolation.
Its so plausible: Destroy the family farms and ranches in the name of endangered species. Further destroy local production of healthy foods in the name of pure water. Destroy the possibility of alternative energy sources by attacking wind farms and use of biomass from forests. Destroy the forests themselves by not allowing restoration work, thereby encouraging massive wildfires only one of which can in a few days or weeks dump as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as one big city does in a year. (Ironically, the supposedly endangered species' habitats are destroyed as well by wildfire). And when things go down the tubes on our planet because of the success of the above actions, blame it on small farmers and ranchers and you and me, average Joe and Jane US citizen, and file even more lawsuits in the name of environmentalism, because, don’t you know, they’ve got to save the planet.
And then… TKO?
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
How stupid does Obama think we are?
U.S. Raises Estimate for 10-Year Deficit to $9 Trillion
NY Times 08/25/09
The Obama administration, citing an economic downturn that has been deeper than it had first thought, raised its estimate on Tuesday of the government's deficit over the next decade to $9 trillion from $7.1 trillion. More...
$7.1 trillion, $9 trillion - what difference does it make? We've been sold out, people. We're talking $9 with 12 zeros after it in debt! In just over half a year we've gone from "mere" billions to trillions in debt. Does Obama really expect us to think this is an economic improvement?
And, perhaps more worrisome - is it possible that the number is even worse than that?
NY Times 08/25/09
The Obama administration, citing an economic downturn that has been deeper than it had first thought, raised its estimate on Tuesday of the government's deficit over the next decade to $9 trillion from $7.1 trillion. More...
$7.1 trillion, $9 trillion - what difference does it make? We've been sold out, people. We're talking $9 with 12 zeros after it in debt! In just over half a year we've gone from "mere" billions to trillions in debt. Does Obama really expect us to think this is an economic improvement?
And, perhaps more worrisome - is it possible that the number is even worse than that?
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
The economic bailout issue in one sentence
"When you’ve got 27 percent unemployment, that is a full-fledged depression down in Perry County, and let’s just see if we can’t figure out how to do something that’s just much more on the ground and direct, that actually gets people jobs." GOV. PHIL BREDESEN, of Tennessee, on using stimulus money to ease joblessness.
Wolves vs. Humans: Which Do the Feds Value More?
Wolves vs. Humans: Which Do the Feds Value More?
For Immediate Release
Thursday, July 23, 2009
For further Information, contact:
Paul Gessing 505-264-6090 or Jim Scarantino 505-256-2523
(Albuquerque)— The federal government's wolf reintrodduction plan is the very definition of big government in some rural areas in New Mexico. While the Rio Grande Foundation has not taken a position one way or the other on whether wolves should be reintroduced, its Investigative Journalist Jim Scarantino, has uncovered what appears to be a rather shocking example of misplaced priorities.
In his new report, "Does the Federal Government Value Wolves More Than Humans? The Money Says It All" Scarantino takes a closer look at the wolf reintroduction program. Since the Mexican wolf reintroduction program was launched more than a decade ago, millions of dollars have been spent by the United States, Arizona and New Mexico governments. The goal was to reestablish a target population of 100 wolves in the mountainous areas of southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona
• According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the New Mexico and Arizona game departments, by the end of 2009, these agencies estimate that their total expenditures will be approximately $20.5 million;
• According to the USFWWS' 2008 year-end survey, only 52 wolves were roaming the Arizona-New Mexico reintroduction area. This means that each living wolf cost taxpayers nearly $400,000;
• In response to the terrorist attacks oon the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Congress passed the 9/11 Victim's Compensation Act. This law set the intrinsic value of a human life at $250,000. Higher sums were paid to compensate families for the lost incomes of a love one killed in the attacks. But the value of a human life itself, without regard to that person's ability to earn money, was set at $250,000.
"At $400,000 a wolf and rising," Scarantino asks, "government is valuing the intrinsic value of each wolf more than its values the intrinsic value of human life. Residents in the affected areas have frequently complained that the government seems to care more about "El Lobo" than the human residents who must live with these powerful predators. With these figures, they can now point to government's excessive and endless spending on wolves to prove their point."
The full report is available here: http://www.riograndefoundation.org/new/articles/?EC=ReadArticle&ArticleID=305
For Immediate Release
Thursday, July 23, 2009
For further Information, contact:
Paul Gessing 505-264-6090 or Jim Scarantino 505-256-2523
(Albuquerque)— The federal government's wolf reintrodduction plan is the very definition of big government in some rural areas in New Mexico. While the Rio Grande Foundation has not taken a position one way or the other on whether wolves should be reintroduced, its Investigative Journalist Jim Scarantino, has uncovered what appears to be a rather shocking example of misplaced priorities.
In his new report, "Does the Federal Government Value Wolves More Than Humans? The Money Says It All" Scarantino takes a closer look at the wolf reintroduction program. Since the Mexican wolf reintroduction program was launched more than a decade ago, millions of dollars have been spent by the United States, Arizona and New Mexico governments. The goal was to reestablish a target population of 100 wolves in the mountainous areas of southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona
• According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the New Mexico and Arizona game departments, by the end of 2009, these agencies estimate that their total expenditures will be approximately $20.5 million;
• According to the USFWWS' 2008 year-end survey, only 52 wolves were roaming the Arizona-New Mexico reintroduction area. This means that each living wolf cost taxpayers nearly $400,000;
• In response to the terrorist attacks oon the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Congress passed the 9/11 Victim's Compensation Act. This law set the intrinsic value of a human life at $250,000. Higher sums were paid to compensate families for the lost incomes of a love one killed in the attacks. But the value of a human life itself, without regard to that person's ability to earn money, was set at $250,000.
"At $400,000 a wolf and rising," Scarantino asks, "government is valuing the intrinsic value of each wolf more than its values the intrinsic value of human life. Residents in the affected areas have frequently complained that the government seems to care more about "El Lobo" than the human residents who must live with these powerful predators. With these figures, they can now point to government's excessive and endless spending on wolves to prove their point."
The full report is available here: http://www.riograndefoundation.org/new/articles/?EC=ReadArticle&ArticleID=305
Sunday, July 19, 2009
The economics of socialism
I just got this in an email - thought I'd forward it on. Food for thought.
Students in an economics class at a local college insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
Their professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade - no one would fail but no one would receive an A unless everyone got an A.
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D. No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. Bickering, blame and name-calling had resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All the students failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Students in an economics class at a local college insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
Their professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade - no one would fail but no one would receive an A unless everyone got an A.
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D. No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. Bickering, blame and name-calling had resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All the students failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Mongol Derby - why not just shoot the horses before the start?
Mongol horse race - guaranteed to kill horses
The largest non-sanctioned endurance race ever attempted is set to be run this summer in Mongolia. Nearly a thousand under-sized native horses have been drafted into an effort which deliberately flaunts international endurance racing rules. Worse, none of the 25 amateur riders have any previous endurance riding experience and all will be riding Mongolian ponies they have never met before. No safety arrangements are provided by the promoter, no water or food for the ponies, inadequate numbers or no veterinarians - how many of the 800 equines will be dead before they reach the 1000 km line, how many more will die afterwards as a result of the abuse they will receive?
More at http://lifstrand.blogspot.com/
The largest non-sanctioned endurance race ever attempted is set to be run this summer in Mongolia. Nearly a thousand under-sized native horses have been drafted into an effort which deliberately flaunts international endurance racing rules. Worse, none of the 25 amateur riders have any previous endurance riding experience and all will be riding Mongolian ponies they have never met before. No safety arrangements are provided by the promoter, no water or food for the ponies, inadequate numbers or no veterinarians - how many of the 800 equines will be dead before they reach the 1000 km line, how many more will die afterwards as a result of the abuse they will receive?
More at http://lifstrand.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Common Sense Uncommonly Rare
For millennia human beings survived and thrived because they used common sense. Those who didn’t enabled their own removal from the gene pool (they died). Maybe its just me, but it sure seems that the gene pool is getting a wee bit murky these days as whatever has contributed since the dawn of history to common sense is somehow fading away.
The disappearance of common sense from everyday life is a scary thing, if you ask me, because common sense is really the basis for the success of democracy. The founders of the USA were a pretty brilliant bunch, but they didn’t expect that everyone who was going to have a vote was going to be brilliant. In fact, democracy doesn’t require brilliance to succeed; it just needs good old common sense to keep it going and healthy.
The point of voting is to let everyone who is ruled by our government have a say in how that ruling is going to happen. This was a very bold, exciting concept back in the day, and it still is. Our brilliant founders knew that extremists would be moderated by the overwhelming mass of people who didn’t need brilliance or higher education to see the right thing to do. That’s because people then, who had to rely on common sense applied in their daily lives to survive, would apply that same common sense to identifying what was the right thing to do.
Thing is, it doesn’t take common sense any more to make it in our daily lives. With the mass withdrawal from fundamental interaction with nature (growing our own food, building our own houses, being responsible for our own safety) that has resulted from mechanization, technological innovation and the internet, we have lost the need for exercising our common sense. Industrial farming and the importing of so much of our food and other commodities means that fewer and fewer people in this country are connected to the real world. Fed by the fantasy world of TV, movies and video games, spending all day long indoors, has created a gap between what is real and possible, and what is desired - and the gap is growing faster and faster.
Simply put, most people just aren’t practicing the use of common sense any more because they don’t have to. So, like any other faculty that doesn’t get used, common sense is just dying out. Unfortunately, what we’re losing is what is needed to vote in something approaching a rational manner in order to maintain a living, healthy democracy. Without common sense, it all falls apart.
Today, our health, our well being, our communities, our society and our country are all going away so rapidly that it’s hard to see how things can be brought back to equilibrium again. We’re all being fed information that has so little connection to reality that it’s stunning. There is so little common sense being used that sometimes I wonder if we’ve been taken over by alien beings from another dimension. Such irrational behavior isn’t all that surprising, since that’s pretty much what has happened - just substitute media, government and political correctness for alien beings.
Really, coming up with a solution is tough, but it seems to me that a first step would be to return power to the people via local governments, because it’s obvious that locals know best about local issues. This means that locals should be the ones who implement federal and state programs in the places that they’re meant to be implemented. It’s only common sense that locals would do a good job of it as they have throughout history - because they’d be the ones who’d suffer if they screwed up.
You can’t force people to use their common sense, and you can’t expect people to suddenly begin using any faculty when it has become atrophied. Still, things have a way of balancing out over time. I’m hoping people wake up and shake themselves up on their own before too long, though, because as bad as it’s become, those who will be paying for the folly of this and past generations will be our children, their children and beyond. That’s not a legacy I’m happy about leaving for them.
The disappearance of common sense from everyday life is a scary thing, if you ask me, because common sense is really the basis for the success of democracy. The founders of the USA were a pretty brilliant bunch, but they didn’t expect that everyone who was going to have a vote was going to be brilliant. In fact, democracy doesn’t require brilliance to succeed; it just needs good old common sense to keep it going and healthy.
The point of voting is to let everyone who is ruled by our government have a say in how that ruling is going to happen. This was a very bold, exciting concept back in the day, and it still is. Our brilliant founders knew that extremists would be moderated by the overwhelming mass of people who didn’t need brilliance or higher education to see the right thing to do. That’s because people then, who had to rely on common sense applied in their daily lives to survive, would apply that same common sense to identifying what was the right thing to do.
Thing is, it doesn’t take common sense any more to make it in our daily lives. With the mass withdrawal from fundamental interaction with nature (growing our own food, building our own houses, being responsible for our own safety) that has resulted from mechanization, technological innovation and the internet, we have lost the need for exercising our common sense. Industrial farming and the importing of so much of our food and other commodities means that fewer and fewer people in this country are connected to the real world. Fed by the fantasy world of TV, movies and video games, spending all day long indoors, has created a gap between what is real and possible, and what is desired - and the gap is growing faster and faster.
Simply put, most people just aren’t practicing the use of common sense any more because they don’t have to. So, like any other faculty that doesn’t get used, common sense is just dying out. Unfortunately, what we’re losing is what is needed to vote in something approaching a rational manner in order to maintain a living, healthy democracy. Without common sense, it all falls apart.
Today, our health, our well being, our communities, our society and our country are all going away so rapidly that it’s hard to see how things can be brought back to equilibrium again. We’re all being fed information that has so little connection to reality that it’s stunning. There is so little common sense being used that sometimes I wonder if we’ve been taken over by alien beings from another dimension. Such irrational behavior isn’t all that surprising, since that’s pretty much what has happened - just substitute media, government and political correctness for alien beings.
Really, coming up with a solution is tough, but it seems to me that a first step would be to return power to the people via local governments, because it’s obvious that locals know best about local issues. This means that locals should be the ones who implement federal and state programs in the places that they’re meant to be implemented. It’s only common sense that locals would do a good job of it as they have throughout history - because they’d be the ones who’d suffer if they screwed up.
You can’t force people to use their common sense, and you can’t expect people to suddenly begin using any faculty when it has become atrophied. Still, things have a way of balancing out over time. I’m hoping people wake up and shake themselves up on their own before too long, though, because as bad as it’s become, those who will be paying for the folly of this and past generations will be our children, their children and beyond. That’s not a legacy I’m happy about leaving for them.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Gila Sustainable Community News
My last post was about having my rebuttal of some statements by Nancy Kaminski rejected and my thoughts about bias, propaganda and censorship. I just wanted to say that I received an email about "problems with the software" and eventually my comments did wind up on that forum.
I tell you, you have to watch everyone and everything all the time. It would be easy to get into conspiracy mode, but sometimes accidents do happen.
I tell you, you have to watch everyone and everything all the time. It would be easy to get into conspiracy mode, but sometimes accidents do happen.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Bias, propaganda and censorship
Using them says more about the user than about what is being said
Copyright © CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
I received a copy of a post to the Gila Sustainable Community News, Calendar and Forum about the Mexican wolf. Because I wanted to rebut some of the statements by the author, Ms Nancy Kaminski, I properly joined the forum. After being accepted as a member, my rebuttal post was rejected.
Bias, propaganda and censorship are tools for those who cannot stand the light of truth. Those who resort to such do so because they have no truth to convey. Ms Kaminski’s forum post is chock full of inaccuracies and downright misinformation – is that all that pro-Mexican wolf people have in their arsenals?
What bias, propaganda and censorship say is that the message is suspect. What Ms Kaminski’s post and the Gila Forum are saying about themselves is the truth be damned - they want what they want and they’ll stoop to whatever it takes to get it. But heck – that’s what we have blogs for – I can say what I want to say anyway, right here.
So, here’s the reply I tried to submit:
In the interests of truth and accuracy, I would like to provide corrections and comments regarding Ms. Kaminski’s article about Mexican wolves.
“We brought these beautiful wolves to the very brink of extinction.”
I have asked many people – including those with the Mexican wolf program - to tell me how many Mexican wolves are in Mexico. No one has answered. I wonder if anyone knows? Without knowing, can anyone say truthfully that Mexican wolves were brought to the brink of extinction?
“There may have been thousands of them when we first drove cattle across the plains and into what would become New Mexico and Arizona.”
There may have been, but that is unlikely, given that the local wolves were Mogollon wolves. The Mexican wolf program will tell you, if directly asked, that the Mexican wolf recovery area is actually the extreme limit of the possible hunting (not denning) range of Mexican wolves (there is no definitive scientific evidence of Mexican wolf presence in the area). It is hard to imagine Mogollon wolves not protecting their territory. It’s more likely that there were occasional Mexican wolves here, and you bet they were being very, very careful about it.
“A trapper named McBride was sent to Mexico to find wolves there [in Mexico]. After several months he found only six, one pregnant female and five males”.
I have always thought how awful this history is for the Mexican wolf. Trapped and kidnapped from the place where they were born and lived wild, transported and kept in captivity in a non-native area, some dying, others bred and rebred in captivity (from one female!) so that their gene pool is extremely limited - how frightening for the original wolves. How miserable they must have been in captivity. What a horrible experience for those wolves and a shameful beginning for the Mexican wolf program.
“With these and others in zoos and wildlife centers across the US, which were genetically tested to be sure they were pure Mexican wolves, the captive breeding project began.”
Actually, from the information available on the Mexican wolf site and it would seem from Ms. Kaminski’s assertions just above, the original Mexican wolves captured in Mexico were the only Mexican wolves. There were none at that time in zoos and wildlife centers. Therefore, all Mexican wolves in captive breeding programs around the US are descended from the original prisoners. If I am incorrect about this, I would appreciate a link to documentation for such.
“Currently fifty-two of these roam freely in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area which is nearly 7000 square miles of public lands in Arizona and New Mexico. Every Mexican wolf alive today is in a stud book.”
Actually 52 collared wolves roam the area, and an unknown number of uncollared wolves are out there, too. The 7000 square miles of land includes private land as well, a fact that is conveniently overlooked so much of the time. Further, most of the uncollared wolves, if not all, are not in any stud book.
But heck, don’t believe me. Do the research yourself – just go to the source, don’t believe those Mexican wolf program supporters, who can’t be bothered with the truth.
Copyright © CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
I received a copy of a post to the Gila Sustainable Community News, Calendar and Forum about the Mexican wolf. Because I wanted to rebut some of the statements by the author, Ms Nancy Kaminski, I properly joined the forum. After being accepted as a member, my rebuttal post was rejected.
Bias, propaganda and censorship are tools for those who cannot stand the light of truth. Those who resort to such do so because they have no truth to convey. Ms Kaminski’s forum post is chock full of inaccuracies and downright misinformation – is that all that pro-Mexican wolf people have in their arsenals?
What bias, propaganda and censorship say is that the message is suspect. What Ms Kaminski’s post and the Gila Forum are saying about themselves is the truth be damned - they want what they want and they’ll stoop to whatever it takes to get it. But heck – that’s what we have blogs for – I can say what I want to say anyway, right here.
So, here’s the reply I tried to submit:
In the interests of truth and accuracy, I would like to provide corrections and comments regarding Ms. Kaminski’s article about Mexican wolves.
“We brought these beautiful wolves to the very brink of extinction.”
I have asked many people – including those with the Mexican wolf program - to tell me how many Mexican wolves are in Mexico. No one has answered. I wonder if anyone knows? Without knowing, can anyone say truthfully that Mexican wolves were brought to the brink of extinction?
“There may have been thousands of them when we first drove cattle across the plains and into what would become New Mexico and Arizona.”
There may have been, but that is unlikely, given that the local wolves were Mogollon wolves. The Mexican wolf program will tell you, if directly asked, that the Mexican wolf recovery area is actually the extreme limit of the possible hunting (not denning) range of Mexican wolves (there is no definitive scientific evidence of Mexican wolf presence in the area). It is hard to imagine Mogollon wolves not protecting their territory. It’s more likely that there were occasional Mexican wolves here, and you bet they were being very, very careful about it.
“A trapper named McBride was sent to Mexico to find wolves there [in Mexico]. After several months he found only six, one pregnant female and five males”.
I have always thought how awful this history is for the Mexican wolf. Trapped and kidnapped from the place where they were born and lived wild, transported and kept in captivity in a non-native area, some dying, others bred and rebred in captivity (from one female!) so that their gene pool is extremely limited - how frightening for the original wolves. How miserable they must have been in captivity. What a horrible experience for those wolves and a shameful beginning for the Mexican wolf program.
“With these and others in zoos and wildlife centers across the US, which were genetically tested to be sure they were pure Mexican wolves, the captive breeding project began.”
Actually, from the information available on the Mexican wolf site and it would seem from Ms. Kaminski’s assertions just above, the original Mexican wolves captured in Mexico were the only Mexican wolves. There were none at that time in zoos and wildlife centers. Therefore, all Mexican wolves in captive breeding programs around the US are descended from the original prisoners. If I am incorrect about this, I would appreciate a link to documentation for such.
“Currently fifty-two of these roam freely in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area which is nearly 7000 square miles of public lands in Arizona and New Mexico. Every Mexican wolf alive today is in a stud book.”
Actually 52 collared wolves roam the area, and an unknown number of uncollared wolves are out there, too. The 7000 square miles of land includes private land as well, a fact that is conveniently overlooked so much of the time. Further, most of the uncollared wolves, if not all, are not in any stud book.
But heck, don’t believe me. Do the research yourself – just go to the source, don’t believe those Mexican wolf program supporters, who can’t be bothered with the truth.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Lawsuits Are Not Environmentalism
The truth about Center for Biological Diversity
Copyright © 2009 CR Edmunds
When the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) asks for donations, most people likely think they’re contributing to projects that will improve the environment. But it just ain’t so. CBD has become a money-making litigation machine. They aren’t out there with shovels and seeds, working on the environment, they’re paying lawyers, sneaking onto private property to spy on conditions and – if they don’t find the conditions sufficiently bad to claim the property owner is ruining the environment- they’re publishing phony photos of "environmental devastation". No actual environmental work going on that CBD is doing - just about everything they do these days is rather to support litigation.
Yeah, it may seem like CBD’s litigation is for the good of endangered plants and animals, but when you start looking at the results of what they do you start noticing the real cost to humans and environment alike. This is because CBD activities, particularly litigation, are not environment-driven, but rather CBD agenda-driven. They’re not shy about their plans to evict private property owners from their own land, to create Gardens of Eden in their Sky Islands. No matter that some of the species in the areas being touted as endangered aren’t endangered (or never even lived in the place – look at the weird Mexican wolf situation). No matter that so much of the litigation results in grinding the US Constitution into the dirt. When they win note that someone else always has to bear the burden of environmentalism – never CBD. No, CBD lawyers and CBD personnel are all living nice, safe, well-funded lives, while the rest of us pay and pay and pay – either by losing property, losing our rights, or by being scammed for the donations CBD says it needs to “protect the environment”. All that money, effort, suffering by property owners – and none of it for actual environmental work, just lawsuits. Paperwork, that’s all it is – but it’s not solving problems, it’s causing more.
Humans are a legitimate species on this planet, too – a fact that CBD and other radical, terrorist environmental groups ignore. None of their projects, their agendas or their litigation truly take into account the human right to live and thrive on this planet.
God created the Garden of Eden to have people in it. It was Satan who caused people to have to leave that Garden. Kinda makes you think about CBD, doesn’t it?
---
Here’s a list of articles about recent litigation by CBD. I might add to it over time – I can only look at this information for so long before it makes me sick. Not that the critters involved don’t need protecting, but CBD is doing nothing for them, only filing lawsuits. Lawsuits are not environmentalism!
Loggerhead turtles lawsuit with Oceana Inc. and Turtle Island Restoration Environmental Law360 - http://environmental.law360.com/
Two ocean species of turtles lawsuit with Oceana and the Turtle Island Restoration Network Twilight Earth - http://www.twilightearth.com/
Ocean acidification impacts lawsuit Switchboard, from NRDC - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/
Desert Lizard lawsuit http://www.yumasun.com/news/lizard-50356-habitat-yuma.html
Global warming impacts lawsuit against six (6) federal agencies. Global warming is a THEORY, people! http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/global-warming-01-15-2009.html
Coal-Fired Power Plants lawsuit www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/13-4
Improper jaguar killing lawsuit www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/jaguar-05-12-2009.html
Stop beach driving lawsuit www.rzrforums.net/public-lands-advocacy/11153-center-biological-diversity-lawsuit-oceano-dunes.html
Desert tortoise lawsuit with the Sierra Club, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility www.globalclimatelaw.com/tags/center-for-biological-diversit/
Force the DOI consider listing the American pika as threatened or endangered lawsuit http://greenoptions.com/tag/center-for-biological-diversity
Snowy Plover http://bit.ly/pJWb1
California red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes; notice of intent to sue. http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/5035
Nevada water project lawsuit. http://www.lvrj.com/news/39421007.html
Protect wildlife and roadless areas in CA, with 6 other environmental groups. http://tinyurl.com/nodgau
Block thinning of trees in AZ lawsuit (note that because the thinning was stopped, the result was one of the largest forest fires in the US) http://www.forphoto.com/issues_info/local/thinning_lawsuit.php
North Fork Eel River lawsuit http://www.wildcalifornia.org/pressreleases/number-20
Raptor habitat (as compensation for wind turbine kills) lawsuit https://www.earthislandprojects.org/news/new_news.cfm?newsID=649
Bighorns lawsuit http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090325/NEWS01/903250314/1144/news01
Ely NV travel management appeal http://tinyurl.com/ccwdop
Freshwater turtle harvest lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/naorbl
Not enough land designated “critical habitat” lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/n4th92
Enough! I can’t stand to look at more of these.
Copyright © 2009 CR Edmunds
When the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) asks for donations, most people likely think they’re contributing to projects that will improve the environment. But it just ain’t so. CBD has become a money-making litigation machine. They aren’t out there with shovels and seeds, working on the environment, they’re paying lawyers, sneaking onto private property to spy on conditions and – if they don’t find the conditions sufficiently bad to claim the property owner is ruining the environment- they’re publishing phony photos of "environmental devastation". No actual environmental work going on that CBD is doing - just about everything they do these days is rather to support litigation.
Yeah, it may seem like CBD’s litigation is for the good of endangered plants and animals, but when you start looking at the results of what they do you start noticing the real cost to humans and environment alike. This is because CBD activities, particularly litigation, are not environment-driven, but rather CBD agenda-driven. They’re not shy about their plans to evict private property owners from their own land, to create Gardens of Eden in their Sky Islands. No matter that some of the species in the areas being touted as endangered aren’t endangered (or never even lived in the place – look at the weird Mexican wolf situation). No matter that so much of the litigation results in grinding the US Constitution into the dirt. When they win note that someone else always has to bear the burden of environmentalism – never CBD. No, CBD lawyers and CBD personnel are all living nice, safe, well-funded lives, while the rest of us pay and pay and pay – either by losing property, losing our rights, or by being scammed for the donations CBD says it needs to “protect the environment”. All that money, effort, suffering by property owners – and none of it for actual environmental work, just lawsuits. Paperwork, that’s all it is – but it’s not solving problems, it’s causing more.
Humans are a legitimate species on this planet, too – a fact that CBD and other radical, terrorist environmental groups ignore. None of their projects, their agendas or their litigation truly take into account the human right to live and thrive on this planet.
God created the Garden of Eden to have people in it. It was Satan who caused people to have to leave that Garden. Kinda makes you think about CBD, doesn’t it?
---
Here’s a list of articles about recent litigation by CBD. I might add to it over time – I can only look at this information for so long before it makes me sick. Not that the critters involved don’t need protecting, but CBD is doing nothing for them, only filing lawsuits. Lawsuits are not environmentalism!
Loggerhead turtles lawsuit with Oceana Inc. and Turtle Island Restoration Environmental Law360 - http://environmental.law360.com/
Two ocean species of turtles lawsuit with Oceana and the Turtle Island Restoration Network Twilight Earth - http://www.twilightearth.com/
Ocean acidification impacts lawsuit Switchboard, from NRDC - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/
Desert Lizard lawsuit http://www.yumasun.com/news/lizard-50356-habitat-yuma.html
Global warming impacts lawsuit against six (6) federal agencies. Global warming is a THEORY, people! http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/global-warming-01-15-2009.html
Coal-Fired Power Plants lawsuit www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/13-4
Improper jaguar killing lawsuit www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/jaguar-05-12-2009.html
Stop beach driving lawsuit www.rzrforums.net/public-lands-advocacy/11153-center-biological-diversity-lawsuit-oceano-dunes.html
Desert tortoise lawsuit with the Sierra Club, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility www.globalclimatelaw.com/tags/center-for-biological-diversit/
Force the DOI consider listing the American pika as threatened or endangered lawsuit http://greenoptions.com/tag/center-for-biological-diversity
Snowy Plover http://bit.ly/pJWb1
California red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes; notice of intent to sue. http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/5035
Nevada water project lawsuit. http://www.lvrj.com/news/39421007.html
Protect wildlife and roadless areas in CA, with 6 other environmental groups. http://tinyurl.com/nodgau
Block thinning of trees in AZ lawsuit (note that because the thinning was stopped, the result was one of the largest forest fires in the US) http://www.forphoto.com/issues_info/local/thinning_lawsuit.php
North Fork Eel River lawsuit http://www.wildcalifornia.org/pressreleases/number-20
Raptor habitat (as compensation for wind turbine kills) lawsuit https://www.earthislandprojects.org/news/new_news.cfm?newsID=649
Bighorns lawsuit http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090325/NEWS01/903250314/1144/news01
Ely NV travel management appeal http://tinyurl.com/ccwdop
Freshwater turtle harvest lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/naorbl
Not enough land designated “critical habitat” lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/n4th92
Enough! I can’t stand to look at more of these.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Defenders of Wildlife... or irresponsible animal dumpers?
News release from Defenders of Wildlife today says: "Raised in South Salem, New York’s Wolf Conservation Center, she [a female Mexican wolf] was released with excitement into her native habitat in Arizona late last year."
Doesn't it occur to anyone at DoW how unfair it is to wolves to raise them among humans, in captivity where they never learn to hunt, in a very different (humid) climate and then release them to act "wild"?
If anyone did that to a dog, it would be a crime that could be prosecuted. What is different between the Mexican Wolf Program and any other irresponsible animal dumper?
Doesn't it occur to anyone at DoW how unfair it is to wolves to raise them among humans, in captivity where they never learn to hunt, in a very different (humid) climate and then release them to act "wild"?
If anyone did that to a dog, it would be a crime that could be prosecuted. What is different between the Mexican Wolf Program and any other irresponsible animal dumper?
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Vulcan Logic and The Good Of The Many
Copyright © 2009 CREdmunds
Mr. Spock, with his pointy ears and his dispassionate logic, said that "the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one" at the end of Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan. A noble thought indeed, but putting it into practice necessitates having a clear idea of what the “good of the many” actually is.
In the USA, the good of the many is based on the rights of the individual. That is, the “many” is a collection of individuals, the rights of each collectively protected by the Constitution.
Currently in this noble country of ours, we have a situation that threatens our Constitution and our American way of life, and it is based on a warping of the notion of the “the many” to mean a homogenous group of like-thinking people. This new point of view is promoted by special interest groups - in my opinion the most dangerous threat we have to this country today.
What are special interest groups? They would be the well-funded, powerful groups that want each of us to think and act like they want us to - like zombies instead of independently thinking individuals - so that their decision makers (you know, CEOs and such) can afford to live in the lifestyles they have become accustomed to. (Check out my article Global Warming Zombies from November, 2008.) These groups don’t care what damage they do to the rest of the country - or the world - to achieve their ends.
How can you identify a special interest group? Let me count the ways.
First, special interest groups are just that - their interests are unique, and narrow-based interests rather than the interests of the many. Their point of view does not represent the truth for all (and in my opinion may not represent the truth in any shape or form).
Second, special interest groups use fear tactics to achieve their goals. While they say they are working for the betterment of all - which should be enough motivation for people if that was really true - they use the whip of predictions of disastrous results if they aren't supported or don't succeed in their work.
Third, special interest groups put a lot of money into spreading their own version of the truth and dire predictions of disaster. Since most people will not act unless they are personally involved, generally the public just believes the propaganda they read and hear, and pretty soon it's "universal truth". Then the special interest groups get to do whatever they want.
Fourth, special interest groups will file lawsuits at the drop of a hat - even if they don't plan on following through. Since most people avoid lawyers and courts, people figure that if a group is willing to sue, they must be right.
Fifth, special interest groups also seek to implement legislation, usually legislation that involves other people losing their personal and property rights.
Sixth, special interest groups generally don't do any actual on-the-ground work themselves in the field they are supposedly improving.
Finally, and perhaps most tellingly, special interest groups put out that they are working for the betterment of all, but almost always their "truth" requires that other people give up something or change in a fundamental way. In the movie, Mr. Spock was telling Kirk why it was right that he, Spock, should sacrifice himself “for the good of the many”. Special interest groups don’t give up anything for their cause. The sacrifices always come from others.
Isn’t it time that we all used Vulcan logic to look more closely at what special interest groups are doing to - not for - the people of this country, and to our Constitution? Isn’t it time that we all started defending our rights as individuals, a fight that would truly protect the good of the many? I’m pretty sure if we don’t, to paraphrase Spock in Amok Time, that we, the people, may discover that the freedom we are having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as the freedom we are wanting.
Mr. Spock, with his pointy ears and his dispassionate logic, said that "the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one" at the end of Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan. A noble thought indeed, but putting it into practice necessitates having a clear idea of what the “good of the many” actually is.
In the USA, the good of the many is based on the rights of the individual. That is, the “many” is a collection of individuals, the rights of each collectively protected by the Constitution.
Currently in this noble country of ours, we have a situation that threatens our Constitution and our American way of life, and it is based on a warping of the notion of the “the many” to mean a homogenous group of like-thinking people. This new point of view is promoted by special interest groups - in my opinion the most dangerous threat we have to this country today.
What are special interest groups? They would be the well-funded, powerful groups that want each of us to think and act like they want us to - like zombies instead of independently thinking individuals - so that their decision makers (you know, CEOs and such) can afford to live in the lifestyles they have become accustomed to. (Check out my article Global Warming Zombies from November, 2008.) These groups don’t care what damage they do to the rest of the country - or the world - to achieve their ends.
How can you identify a special interest group? Let me count the ways.
First, special interest groups are just that - their interests are unique, and narrow-based interests rather than the interests of the many. Their point of view does not represent the truth for all (and in my opinion may not represent the truth in any shape or form).
Second, special interest groups use fear tactics to achieve their goals. While they say they are working for the betterment of all - which should be enough motivation for people if that was really true - they use the whip of predictions of disastrous results if they aren't supported or don't succeed in their work.
Third, special interest groups put a lot of money into spreading their own version of the truth and dire predictions of disaster. Since most people will not act unless they are personally involved, generally the public just believes the propaganda they read and hear, and pretty soon it's "universal truth". Then the special interest groups get to do whatever they want.
Fourth, special interest groups will file lawsuits at the drop of a hat - even if they don't plan on following through. Since most people avoid lawyers and courts, people figure that if a group is willing to sue, they must be right.
Fifth, special interest groups also seek to implement legislation, usually legislation that involves other people losing their personal and property rights.
Sixth, special interest groups generally don't do any actual on-the-ground work themselves in the field they are supposedly improving.
Finally, and perhaps most tellingly, special interest groups put out that they are working for the betterment of all, but almost always their "truth" requires that other people give up something or change in a fundamental way. In the movie, Mr. Spock was telling Kirk why it was right that he, Spock, should sacrifice himself “for the good of the many”. Special interest groups don’t give up anything for their cause. The sacrifices always come from others.
Isn’t it time that we all used Vulcan logic to look more closely at what special interest groups are doing to - not for - the people of this country, and to our Constitution? Isn’t it time that we all started defending our rights as individuals, a fight that would truly protect the good of the many? I’m pretty sure if we don’t, to paraphrase Spock in Amok Time, that we, the people, may discover that the freedom we are having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as the freedom we are wanting.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Swine Flu or Swindle the Public?
In the news today: President Obama Tuesday sent a letter to Congress asking for $1.5 billion to fight the swine flu outbreak, a request he said he was making “out of an abundance of caution,” as U.S. officials confirmed 64 cases of swine flu, including five individuals who had to be hospitalized.
Excuse me - didn’t we get into the economic crisis we’re in today because of spending too much money we didn’t have on too much stuff we didn’t need? Aren’t we all – the taxpayer who is going to have to cough up this money that Obama is spending – being told to stay out of debt right now? Shouldn't our government be following its own advice?
Abundance of caution??? With all due respect to a President of the USA, it appears that he is doing his best to drive this country down the tubes, throwing economic caution to the winds.
Excuse me - didn’t we get into the economic crisis we’re in today because of spending too much money we didn’t have on too much stuff we didn’t need? Aren’t we all – the taxpayer who is going to have to cough up this money that Obama is spending – being told to stay out of debt right now? Shouldn't our government be following its own advice?
Abundance of caution??? With all due respect to a President of the USA, it appears that he is doing his best to drive this country down the tubes, throwing economic caution to the winds.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Wolf News Release: WildEarth Guardians lawsuit setback
Contact: Ron Shortes, Catron County Attorney
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6265
Email: shortes2@gilanet.com
April 17, 2009
WILDEARTH GUARDIANS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST CATRON COUNTY DENIED
Environmentalist attempt to deny County the right to protect its own citizens stalled
RESERVE, N.M. Catron County, New Mexico has learned that a WildEarth Guardians’ lawsuit, which attempts to deny the County the right to protect its own citizens from imminent harm, has been stalled. A US District Court Judge in Santa Fe recently denied a bid by the environmental group for a summary judgment against the County.
WildEarth Guardians, a Santa Fe, NM based environmental group formed through the merger of Forest Guardians, Sinapu, and the Sagebrush Sea Campaign, filed a suit against Catron County last year. The group claimed that a 2007 County ordinance, providing for protection measures for Catron County Citizens in the event of problems with wolves, violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In October of 2008, Judge Martha Vazquez issued a ruling stating that WildEarth Guardians’ claims were moot, as the County had amended the ordinance. Nevertheless, WildEarth Guardians continued to press the lawsuit, claiming that the Catron County Commission allegedly violated the ESA by setting traps for a pair of wolves. However, the Court has now denied a request for summary judgment against the County on this issue.
“It is the responsibility of government to protect its citizens,” said a Catron County spokesman. “We have a problem here with wolves and have had one since the beginning of the program. The incidents have escalated to the point where our people - particularly our children - are at risk.”
Catron County has submitted numerous requests to the Mexican wolf program to include realistic consideration for human safety - something that is currently lacking in the ESA’s 10j Rule regarding reintroduction of Mexican wolves.
“The Mexican wolf program people are well aware of our concerns for the safety of our children,” the County spokesman said. “All WildEarth Guardians is concerned about is wolves - they apparently don’t care if a child is at risk.”
“Our citizens rely on local government to protect them,” the spokesman said. “They demand that of us, and by law we are authorized to protect our citizens. We cannot, legally or morally, allow the threat from habituated wolves to reach the point where our children and families are in imminent danger. That is clear.”
# # #
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6265
Email: shortes2@gilanet.com
April 17, 2009
WILDEARTH GUARDIANS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST CATRON COUNTY DENIED
Environmentalist attempt to deny County the right to protect its own citizens stalled
RESERVE, N.M. Catron County, New Mexico has learned that a WildEarth Guardians’ lawsuit, which attempts to deny the County the right to protect its own citizens from imminent harm, has been stalled. A US District Court Judge in Santa Fe recently denied a bid by the environmental group for a summary judgment against the County.
WildEarth Guardians, a Santa Fe, NM based environmental group formed through the merger of Forest Guardians, Sinapu, and the Sagebrush Sea Campaign, filed a suit against Catron County last year. The group claimed that a 2007 County ordinance, providing for protection measures for Catron County Citizens in the event of problems with wolves, violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In October of 2008, Judge Martha Vazquez issued a ruling stating that WildEarth Guardians’ claims were moot, as the County had amended the ordinance. Nevertheless, WildEarth Guardians continued to press the lawsuit, claiming that the Catron County Commission allegedly violated the ESA by setting traps for a pair of wolves. However, the Court has now denied a request for summary judgment against the County on this issue.
“It is the responsibility of government to protect its citizens,” said a Catron County spokesman. “We have a problem here with wolves and have had one since the beginning of the program. The incidents have escalated to the point where our people - particularly our children - are at risk.”
Catron County has submitted numerous requests to the Mexican wolf program to include realistic consideration for human safety - something that is currently lacking in the ESA’s 10j Rule regarding reintroduction of Mexican wolves.
“The Mexican wolf program people are well aware of our concerns for the safety of our children,” the County spokesman said. “All WildEarth Guardians is concerned about is wolves - they apparently don’t care if a child is at risk.”
“Our citizens rely on local government to protect them,” the spokesman said. “They demand that of us, and by law we are authorized to protect our citizens. We cannot, legally or morally, allow the threat from habituated wolves to reach the point where our children and families are in imminent danger. That is clear.”
# # #
Monday, April 13, 2009
How is the Mexican wolf program like waterboarding?
Food for thought
Copyright © 2009 C.R.Edmunds
It is a crime for a human to stalk another human, not because of actual physical harm that has occurred but because it causes psychological damage (trauma) and could lead to physical harm.
Psychological abuse can be justifiable cause for divorce or removal of a child from a home even though no physical abuse has occurred.
Waterboarding, deprevation and humiliation are used as forms of torture even though no physical damage occurs.
According to a report in the March issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, one of the JAMA/Archives journals, non-physical torture appears to cause as much mental distress and traumatic stress as physical torture. (See Science Daily article).
Yet environmental groups and the Mexican wolf program do not consider psychological damage (what looks very much like PTSD) that is documented in the families of Catron County residents to be cause for removal of Mexican wolves that stalk children and families in the program area.
What is wrong with this picture?
Copyright © 2009 C.R.Edmunds
It is a crime for a human to stalk another human, not because of actual physical harm that has occurred but because it causes psychological damage (trauma) and could lead to physical harm.
Psychological abuse can be justifiable cause for divorce or removal of a child from a home even though no physical abuse has occurred.
Waterboarding, deprevation and humiliation are used as forms of torture even though no physical damage occurs.
According to a report in the March issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, one of the JAMA/Archives journals, non-physical torture appears to cause as much mental distress and traumatic stress as physical torture. (See Science Daily article).
Yet environmental groups and the Mexican wolf program do not consider psychological damage (what looks very much like PTSD) that is documented in the families of Catron County residents to be cause for removal of Mexican wolves that stalk children and families in the program area.
What is wrong with this picture?
How is the Mexican wolf program like waterboarding?
Food for thought
Copyright © 2009 C.R.Edmunds
It is a crime for a human to stalk another human, not because of actual physical harm that has occurred but because it causes psychological damage (trauma) and could lead to physical harm.
Psychological abuse can be justifiable cause for divorce or removal of a child from a home even though no physical abuse has occurred.
Waterboarding, deprevation and humiliation are used as forms of torture even though no physical damage occurs.
According to a report in the March issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, one of the JAMA/Archives journals, non-physical torture appears to cause as much mental distress and traumatic stress as physical torture. (See Science Daily article).
Yet environmental groups and the Mexican wolf program do not consider psychological damage (what looks very much like PTSD) that is documented in the families of Catron County residents to be cause for removal of Mexican wolves that stalk children and families in the program area.
What is wrong with this picture?
Copyright © 2009 C.R.Edmunds
It is a crime for a human to stalk another human, not because of actual physical harm that has occurred but because it causes psychological damage (trauma) and could lead to physical harm.
Psychological abuse can be justifiable cause for divorce or removal of a child from a home even though no physical abuse has occurred.
Waterboarding, deprevation and humiliation are used as forms of torture even though no physical damage occurs.
According to a report in the March issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, one of the JAMA/Archives journals, non-physical torture appears to cause as much mental distress and traumatic stress as physical torture. (See Science Daily article).
Yet environmental groups and the Mexican wolf program do not consider psychological damage (what looks very much like PTSD) that is documented in the families of Catron County residents to be cause for removal of Mexican wolves that stalk children and families in the program area.
What is wrong with this picture?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
US no longer competitive, article says
NY Times online article today says "The U.S. ranks sixth among 40 countries and regions for innovation, a non-partisan group noted in a report."
Duh!
Every new alternative energy innovation since 1972 has been squashed. Of course the US is no longer competitive. And only now the media is noticing??? What's wrong with this picture?
In Innovation, U.S. Said to Be Losing Competitive Edge
By STEVE LOHR
Duh!
Every new alternative energy innovation since 1972 has been squashed. Of course the US is no longer competitive. And only now the media is noticing??? What's wrong with this picture?
In Innovation, U.S. Said to Be Losing Competitive Edge
By STEVE LOHR
Thursday, January 22, 2009
More on Global Warming
"pollutant just boggles my mind. What used to be science has turned into a cult. . . . All the evidence I see is that the current warming of the climate is just like past warmings. In fact, it's not as much as past warmings yet, and it probably has little to do with carbon dioxide, just like past warmings had little to do with carbon dioxide. . . . Science is one of the great triumphs of humankind, and I hate to see it dragged through the mud in an episode like this"
- William Happer, former chief scientist at the Energy Department and the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics at Princeton, quoted in the Daily Princetonian on the rush to pin climate change on human industrial activity.
- William Happer, former chief scientist at the Energy Department and the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics at Princeton, quoted in the Daily Princetonian on the rush to pin climate change on human industrial activity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
