Endangered Species cleanup

[Clay Diggins]

I'm surprised the press hasn't caught on to this. Maybe too many words to read through for the Twitter crowd?

The administration has completely changed the rules on endangered and threatened species as well as how critical habitat is defined. This is a really big deal. No more climate change or locking up land to protect extinct species. The "red wolf" is now just a backyard dog the coyotes bred for fun one night. Hopefully all those tree hugging, grizzly bear mating FWS will quit in frustration.

You've got 60 days to send in your comments - I'd suggest something like WooHooo!

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision of Regulations for Interagency Cooperation

Them dam yellow legged froggies are gonna be tasty!

Heavy Pans

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[goldenmojo]

I'm sure me well enough now to know I didn't take actual offense... as I know I am not a MOOK

It's too bad you cleared that one up so quick. The thought of hearing the call of Little Mookie bouncing off the canyon walls had me ready to go mining with you next Wednesday...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Capt Nemo]

I think the best Wolf management/control tool is...exhale slowly and squeeze. Bingo! Problem solved.

Well you got the first "S" of the 3-S Rule down pat. There are two more you need to do to finish. (Shovel & Shut-up)

 

[Clay Diggins]

Three Federal Registry Notices of Proposed Rule changes to comment on
Endangered and Threatened Species:

Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat;
*Habitat has changed or moved might be only a few left in one area but millions other places
but they still lock up resources because it "could" support the critter even though they haven't been seen for a hundred years?
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...on-of-the-regulations-for-listing-species-and

Thanks Winners. All good points. I see you really do understand the impact of what's going on with these regulation changes. I was going to post these up as part of the discussion but I've been hella busy lately. Thanks for following up.

I'll make some comments regarding this second Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat rules and comment on the other two later when I have time.

These are the essence of the new changes and they are huge. One of the biggest items is where they throw out the regulation put in effect just before Trump took office that declared that climate change had to be considered as a factor in threatening species. The fools had taken that as a reason that all animals and plants were endangered into the foreseeable future. Fake science.

Here's the important part that throws out climate change as a reason to consider a species as endangered in the "foreseeable future".

The foreseeable future can extend only as far as the Services can reasonably depend on the available data to formulate a reliable prediction and avoid speculation and preconception. Regardless of the type of data available underlying the Service's analysis, the key to any analysis is a clear articulation of the facts, the rationale, and conclusions regarding foreseeability. Ultimately, to determine that a species is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future, the Services must be able to determine that the conditions potentially posing a danger of extinction in the future are probable. The Services will avoid speculating as to what is hypothetically possible.

Another change addresses the fact that when a species is extinct it should be taken off the list. Seems like common sense that if there is no critter to protect there should be no more critical habitat designation or restrictions on land use right? These idiots have continued to "protect" species that are extinct! This will stop that nonsense.

We are proposing to replace the current section 424.11(d)(1) with a new section 424.11(e)(1) that simply states the first reason for delisting a species as, “The species is extinct.”

The FWS has been protecting "species" that don't actually exist. A prime example is the eastern "red wolf" which has been shown genetically to be nothing but a dog that was mated with a coyote. The FWS has spent years and millions of dollars trying to "save" these hybrids as if they were a species despite the genetics saying they are not a separate species. Lately the FWS has taken to threatening landowners around the area where they have been maintaining a "non essential" population of dogs they have been calling red wolves. That stuff ain't going to fly anymore.

We are proposing to add a new provision, section 424.11(e)(3), clarifying that listed entities will be delisted if they do not meet the definition of “species” as set forth in the Act.

Here's a biggie in the changes to critical habitat designation. In the past animals like the yellow legged frog have caused huge areas of land to be designated "critical habitat" even though the reason the frog is threatened is because of introduced fish species that eat frogs. The conservation of the frogs habitat will not change the inevitable outcome that the fish the State stocks in the streams will eat the froggies until they are all gone. Since the habitat itself is not the cause of the froggies demise and protecting habitat outside of the riparian area wouldn't contribute to the froggies well being there is no reason to withdraw the non-riparian areas and possibly no reason to withdraw the streams either. It's definitely man's actions that are threatening the frogs but that activity could be stopped tomorrow just by no longer stocking non-native fish for anglers.

We propose to further clarify when the Secretary may determine that an unoccupied area may be essential for the conservation of the species. In order for an unoccupied area to be considered essential, the Secretary must determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that the area will contribute to the conservation of the species.

This change in the rules also throws out "critical habitat" where there is no way to protect the species through habitat designation. Weather and natural processes can not be changed so if the species is threatened by natural processes designating critical habitat would be useless. This may be a subtle point but it will open up more land than any other regulation change.

We have encountered situations in which threats to the species' habitat stem solely from causes that cannot be addressed by management actions that may be identified through consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. In those situations, a designation could create a regulatory burden without providing any conservation value to the species concerned. Examples would include species experiencing threats stemming from melting glaciers, sea level rise, or reduced snowpack but no other habitat-based threats. In such cases, a critical habitat designation and any resulting section 7(a)(2) consultation, or conservation effort identified through such consultation, could not prevent glaciers from melting, sea levels from rising, or increase the snowpack. Thus, we propose in section 424.12(a)(1)(ii) that designation of critical habitat in these cases may not be prudent because it would not serve its intended function to conserve the species.

That just touches on some of the changes in one of these notices. There is a lot of slippery language in these notices. These changes are required by presidential orders but the agencies are clearly unhappy with their new job. A lot of the language is designed to preserve their nonsense while giving an ineffective nod to their bosses orders. Notice that each of these are "proposals" and your comments are encouraged. Believe me when I tell you every effort will be made to remove the teeth from these new regulations over the next 60 days. A lot of you make comments when there are new regulations you don't like but it's just as important to support new regulations you do like.

Heavy Mooks becoming informed Monks

 

[T.C.]

Well you got the first "S" of the 3-S Rule down pat. There are two more you need to do to finish. (Shovel & Shut-up)

Yup, I had a guy from Adin, Ca., tell me that years ago. He said school personnel caught sight of one stalking kids on the playground. They took care of that problem fast!

 

[Mad Machinist]

Get rid of a big one: https://www.sfgate.com/green/articl...oise-relocation-3190632.php#item-85307-tbla-3

Ravens are hell on tortoises too.

 

[Mad Machinist]

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ng_Common_Raven_Predation_on_Desert_Tortoises

 

[rodoconnor]

The ravens are extremely tough on sage grouse . Having Federal protection, they are thriving in Idaho and Utah .

 

[Mad Machinist]

Yep, the common raven is protected under the Migratory Bird Act. It is also a voracious predator of many declining species that are blamed on man. Gat an endangered species, blame a know nothing eco freak that doesn't understand how things work.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Ravens are neither threatened nor endangered species. They are classed as a "species of least concern" under the ESA. Their population over the last 40 years has nearly doubled in the United States. The endangered species Act and it's regulations have no connection to Ravens.

Under the Migratory Bird Act Ravens are protected unless you have a license to trap them. Idaho recently got a license to trap 4,000 of them. The curious things about Ravens is they are not a migratory species but the Fish and Wildlife Service keeps them on their migratory bird list. Go figure.

Sage Grouse are neither threatened or endangered. During the largest animal study in history the Sage Grouse population multiplied by more than 500% with no help from man. The one thing learned from the Sage Grouse study was that they, like most ground nesting birds, have a cyclical fluctuation in their population.

Your government - hard at work misinforming you.

Heavy Pans

 

[Mad Machinist]

Just listing the common raven as a reason for the decline of other species through predation.

 

[bedrock bubba]

Just listing the common raven as a reason for the decline of other species through predation.

"nevermore, quoth the Raven" E. Poe