U.S. drafts plan to bring grizzly bears back to Washington’s North Cascades (WAPO)
- Thread starter kmudgn
- Start date
- Status
Stole the whole 'hooved locusts' bit from John Muir.That's too bad...
I thought the whole 'open range hooved locusts' thing was a pretty good start.
Hope you'll be watching from the side...with some friends.
View attachment 134256
It's an apt descriptor...
Livestock grazing is the main reason why nearly 60 million acres of BLM rangeland fail the agency's own standards for land health and due to loopholes in regulatory rules 24% of BLM grazing land leases were not surveyed before renewing those leases.. so that 60 million acres is likely on the low side.
More people are killed by cows than bears, wolves and otters put together...so what's the real threat here ?
Hmmmm....
Livestock grazing is the main reason why nearly 60 million acres of BLM rangeland fail the agency's own standards for land health and due to loopholes in regulatory rules 24% of BLM grazing land leases were not surveyed before renewing those leases.. so that 60 million acres is likely on the low side.
More people are killed by cows than bears, wolves and otters put together...so what's the real threat here ?
Hmmmm....
Human ignorance? Lack of cow hazard awareness?
Last edited:
Probably because he realized we'd be learning this lesson over and over again until the whole inevitably shitty end to the human race.
Last edited:
Jeez...that was bleak. Maybe cut back on the MD2020?
Meh...
Causal overdetermination/ historical repetition say you're correct on the lesson learning part.
This whole human being experiment thing is shaping up to be a huge failure, while viruses and bacteria seem to be figuring it out for the most part, after some notable early missteps on their part.
To be a successful guest you don't kill the host.
Same goes for a dinner party invite...
Causal overdetermination/ historical repetition say you're correct on the lesson learning part.
This whole human being experiment thing is shaping up to be a huge failure, while viruses and bacteria seem to be figuring it out for the most part, after some notable early missteps on their part.
To be a successful guest you don't kill the host.
Same goes for a dinner party invite...
justme2024
Steelhead
I volunteer with a watershed council who recieved funding for multiple culvert replacements from the Inflation Reduction Act. Some other WSCs nearby got funding for a dam removal and floodplain improvement/reconnection from the IRA. I volunteered at a camp doing youth environmental outreach and met a scientist who studies wildfire prevention who was fired under trump and got his job back under biden. A friend of mine has an internship doing park maintenance and conservation work funded by the IRA.
When I spend time offline actually trying to help and interacting with my community it is clear to me who is doing more for the environment. I would encourage avoiding the partisanship common online and instead investing in your community and learning who is helping the world become a better place.
FinLuver
Native Oregonian…1846
Sounds an awfully lot like some people in general
FinLuver
Native Oregonian…1846
Rob Allen
Life of the Party
I completely avoided partisanship...100% avoided it
Spent 3 years as the conservation director for the Clark-Skamania Fly fishers
Volunteered as part of the WDFW advisory group to determine wild steelhead sanctuary streams in the Lower Columbia.
Worked hands on in numerous habitat restoration projects.
Found an illegal and highly dangerous dam on a wild steelhead spawning tributary of the Washougal river, well it was a wild steelhead spawning tributary before it was restored... yeah sometimes we'll meaning experts know less than a 14 year old kid who knows a creek lije the back of his hand...
Spent thousands of hours doing spawning surveys..
Many people have done a lot more than me but I've done at least a good portion of my share.
Flymph
Life of the Party
There used to be an old show on TV called the "Paper Chase" about first year law students at, I believe Harvard U. The wise old prof used, what would he would refer to as the Socratic method of teaching. He insisted that his students were well versed in the assignments given to the point where they could execute solid evidence of internalizing with critical thinking skills. If they failed to answer with such authority he would place a "shroud" over their heads and never call on them again in class. Consider such a shroud placed over your head because of the two most unfounded, unrealistic, unsupported, sentences I have ever seen displayed.
I would love to share massive differences over the past 10 years and enlighten you as to the horror that is about to belay our planet. You know I am unable to do that on this forum due to political restraints.
JimTravers¤£a!!Travers
Steelhead
Once grizz gets on the ground there ain't no stopping!! Ain't nothing stoppin griz!!! Several GRIZZ waiting outside the beef house!!! Don't get near the BEEF HOUSE in a grizz vicinity!!
The problem is you state "demonstrably and objectively false" (my bold), but you never provide "objective" evidence to demonstrate your claim. Your statements of volunteerism, while commendable, do not demonstrate anything other than your efforts regarding the environment.
Just a few "objective" facts from the last 3 administrations:
- Under the Obama administration the EPA issued rules to cut waste water discharge "laced with mercury, arsenic and other dangerous pollutants" from coal plants
- The first Trump administration reversed the rules
Trump's EPA Made It Easier for Coal Plants to Pollute Waterways
Obama-era rules could have reduced the chances of spills like the one caused by Hurricane Florence’s floodwaters
- The first Trump administration rolled back Obama era auto emission standards and goals - if you don't think this has an effect, look at Lahore and other east Asian cities air quality (largely the result of auto emissions)
- The Obama administration tried to expand the protection of clean waters by "clarifying" the "Waters of the US (WOTUS)" definitions - it was struck down by the Supreme Court
- The first Trump administration went the opposite direction, ie, shrinking the protection of clean waters, again by trying to "clarify" the WOTUS rule, and again, it was struck down by the courts
- The Biden administration took a third swipe at it, trying to find a middle ground - remains to be seen what happens with it
What the New “Waters of the U.S.” Rule Means for Local Governments
In December, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) released a new final rule on which waterbodies are federally regulated as “waters of the U.
www.nlc.org
- Under the First Trump administration, there were many role backs on clean air act regulations and the release of green house gasses into the air - whether you believe these contribute to global climate change or not is irrelevant, the release of these compounds, including mercury, can only be detrimental to the environment
What is the Trump administration’s track record on the environment? | Brookings
Samantha Gross compares the Trump administration's record on environmental regulation to proposals laid out by Joe Biden.
www.brookings.edu
- The same report by Brookings counted 74 actions that weakened environmental protection by the first Trump administration
What is the Trump administration’s track record on the environment? | Brookings
Samantha Gross compares the Trump administration's record on environmental regulation to proposals laid out by Joe Biden.
www.brookings.edu
Late this year under the Biden administration, the EPA passed a rule designed to restrict the amount of methane gas released at drilling and well sites, the incoming Trump administration is expected to reverse this rule
Tarrant residents await Trump reversal of EPA rules capping methane at oil and gas sites
President-elect Donald Trump plans to reverse the Biden administration’s latest wave of methane regulations.
fortworthreport.org
The incoming administration is projected to propose massive cuts to the EPA and role back more regulations and enforcement of rules designed to protect our water and air
McGlinchey Stafford PLLC
Full-service law firm providing innovative legal counsel to business clients nationwide.
www.mcglinchey.com
How much of an affect these have is unclear to me, but the intent seems clear, role back regulations to favor industry over protection of the environment, so the statement that "The concept that one party has been better or worse for the environment is demonstrably and objectively false" is in fact demonstrably false
Rob Allen
Life of the Party
Lots of talk about regulations and deregulation... no talk about actual harm or benefit to the environment..The problem is you state "demonstrably and objectively false" (my bold), but you never provide "objective" evidence to demonstrate your claim. Your statements of volunteerism, while commendable, do not demonstrate anything other than your efforts regarding the environment.
Just a few "objective" facts from the last 3 administrations:
- Under the Obama administration the EPA issued rules to cut waste water discharge "laced with mercury, arsenic and other dangerous pollutants" from coal plants
- The first Trump administration reversed the rules
Trump's EPA Made It Easier for Coal Plants to Pollute Waterways
Obama-era rules could have reduced the chances of spills like the one caused by Hurricane Florence’s floodwaterswww.scientificamerican.com
- The first Trump administration rolled back Obama era auto emission standards and goals - if you don't think this has an effect, look at Lahore and other east Asian cities air quality (largely the result of auto emissions)
- The Obama administration tried to expand the protection of clean waters by "clarifying" the "Waters of the US (WOTUS)" definitions - it was struck down by the Supreme Court
- The first Trump administration went the opposite direction, ie, shrinking the protection of clean waters, again by trying to "clarify" the WOTUS rule, and again, it was struck down by the courts
- The Biden administration took a third swipe at it, trying to find a middle ground - remains to be seen what happens with it
What the New “Waters of the U.S.” Rule Means for Local Governments
In December, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) released a new final rule on which waterbodies are federally regulated as “waters of the U.www.nlc.org
- Under the First Trump administration, there were many role backs on clean air act regulations and the release of green house gasses into the air - whether you believe these contribute to global climate change or not is irrelevant, the release of these compounds, including mercury, can only be detrimental to the environment
What is the Trump administration’s track record on the environment? | Brookings
Samantha Gross compares the Trump administration's record on environmental regulation to proposals laid out by Joe Biden.
- The same report by Brookings counted 74 actions that weakened environmental protection by the first Trump administration
What is the Trump administration’s track record on the environment? | Brookings
Samantha Gross compares the Trump administration's record on environmental regulation to proposals laid out by Joe Biden.
Late this year under the Biden administration, the EPA passed a rule designed to restrict the amount of methane gas released at drilling and well sites, the incoming Trump administration is expected to reverse this rule
Tarrant residents await Trump reversal of EPA rules capping methane at oil and gas sites
President-elect Donald Trump plans to reverse the Biden administration’s latest wave of methane regulations.
The incoming administration is projected to propose massive cuts to the EPA and role back more regulations and enforcement of rules designed to protect our water and air
McGlinchey Stafford PLLC
Full-service law firm providing innovative legal counsel to business clients nationwide.
How much of an affect these have is unclear to me, but the intent seems clear, role back regulations to favor industry over protection of the environment, so the statement that "The concept that one party has been better or worse for the environment is demonstrably and objectively false" is in fact demonstrably false
Fuel efficiency standards....... the better gas mileage you get the more miles you drive .. you burn the same amount of gas...
Is it needed, though, really? I know after I get home from work in my Prius, I immediately start driving around the block until I burn the same amount of fuel I would have commuting in an F150. Drives my wife crazy that I won’t just come in and get to helping with the kids and dinner and whatnot, but she just doesn’t get it. I have all that mileage surplus to use up!
- Status