[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: NANFA-- RE: legislators vs wildlife experts?
Luke, you make very good points. We're all in this together, aren't we?
I just want cooperation and discussion, not a "your way or my way"
attitude about resource management. Keep fighting the good fight, my
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcclurg luke e [mailto:mcclurgl at washburn_edu]
> Sent: Friday, September 04, 1998 12:18 PM
> To: 'nfc at actwin_com'
> Cc: 'nanfa at aquaria_net'
> Subject: NANFA-- RE: legislators vs wildlife experts?
> On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Jay DeLong wrote:
> > Howdy, Luke.
> > I understand your frustrations, and it was unfortunate that
> the turkey
> > biologists were so against giving credit where they should have. My
> > whole point is that whomever makes natural resource
> decisions needs to
> > do so by using the best available science. Bozos are in
> every walk of
> > life and some make their way to natural resource agencies.
> When you
> > are faced with an issue and disagree with a scientist or trained
> > biologist, don't say he/she is wrong, power-hungry or
> unresponsive to
> > your needs as a citizen.
> I'm not saying that at all...however, you must agree that in
> the world of
> science that not everyone agrees on evrything. There are as
> many opinions
> as there are people. Certainly there are some 'general'
> precepts that are
> widely acknowledge as a 'norm' but by no means are they observed by
> everyone. Remember, the bozo's get important management jobs too. I
> don't criticize someone just because they are wrong (in my
> opinion) what
> really erks me is when I have something to say and the so called
> "proffesionals" won't listen because of one reason or
> another. That could
> be because of a lack of degree, lower degree or various other
> reasons. Don't misunderstand, I respect the people who work
> hard in the
> various bilogical occupations...I just don't think they alone
> should be
> making all the environmental decisions. It reminds me of an
> old biblical
> proverb: "...in the multitude of counselors there is safety"
> (paraphrased). Excluding anyone from the process generates ill will.
> Stop and consider their position and what
> > experience they've had on the subject. At the same time,
> that biologist
> > shouldn't belittle you unless your idea is really flawed.
> If you keep
> > coming back with similar ideas, there may be a point when
> they become
> > irritated and unresponsive.
> > The times they are a changin'. Management decisions that require
> > careful consideration of many factors (positive and
> negative outcomes,
> > true costs and benefits (not just monetary), needs of the
> > over public needs) that many people are not aware of.
> Resource managers
> > need to keep up with the state of scientific knowledge, and so do we
> > all.
> Yes, and in considering cost especially monetary, your
> average biologist
> may not have the correct economic background to truly know
> the full extent
> of a projects costs...where resources will come from, etc. That's why
> others need to be included in the decision making process.
> > I'm sorry, but I absolutely disagree that there's some sort
> of down-home
> > common sense that's always been around, and that it is all
> you need to
> > do the right thing.
> Didn't say that...or at least didn't mean it the way you put it. But
> common sense DOES go a long way towards achieving basic
> goals. A lot of
> the old timers I knew cared about the environment but didn't
> know what to do about it. If they had been included in the
> and their basic knowledge about localities and species had
> been considered
> perhaps a lot of valuable money and time could have been saved.
> You mentioned the knowledge of old timers. I'm not
> > disagreeing that some are wise, but I once knew an old guy
> that everyone
> > classified as wise. I did, too. He was a fascinating talker and a
> > great storyteller and outdoorsman. But this fellow still thought he
> > lived in another time where populations were less dense,
> what one person
> > did didn't affect others, pollution wasn't a problem
> because it could be
> > diluted by air and water, and our earth's resources were unlimited.
> > This guy had his own ideas about resources and I respected
> him because
> > they made sense when I looked at where he came from and how he was
> > raised. He still had an outhouse over his creek in the
> country, but he
> > didn't use it because he had indoor plumbing. He was
> intelligent and
> > persuasive, but not a person most of us would want making resource
> > management decisions today.
> I would not want him making the final decision either...but I WOULD
> consider what he had to say. And I bet he knew at least one
> or two things
> that would have been helpful. Simple public awareness work might have
> helped bring it out.
> > Not everyone can go to school, and you don't have to have a
> degree to
> > affect positive change. I spent too much time taking too
> many classes
> > I didn't like, but I was changed for the better. Learning
> how to use
> > libraries is an invaluable thing that all of us can do. Access to
> > information is a benefit we all enjoy, but many of us never realize.
> > Also, I can't stress enough the need to develop critical thinking
> > skills. With time you can be more logical and persuasive.
> These are
> > very important talents/skills/tools and they help you in
> every aspect of
> > your life.
> Sure, no argument there. I learned to think on my feet from an early
> age. Remember, I'm 34 now and have been out in the real
> world somewhat
> already and had to survive there. Had I not been injured, I
> would still
> be out there surviving today. There is always room for
> improvement of any
> skill, mental or physical. Just remember that college isn't the only
> classroom out there. There is also a "school of hard knocks"
> to mention
> only one. :)
> > Jay
> > > Jay,
> > >
> > > It's not that I don't agree that the "experts" should be in
> > > control of
> > > any wildlife program...my only concern is "who watches
> the watchers"?
> > > Back about 1980 here in this part of Kansas there was a
> big push to
> > > re-establish the wild turkey in the state. It had been hunted to
> > > extinction in the last century. Wildlife officials began
> > > efforts around many of our large federal reservoirs.
> Private citizens
> > > also began restocking programs...include my grandpa,dad,
> and me. Our
> > > efforts and the efforts of several others in our area had
> Wild Turkeys
> > > well established before any stocked birds were released
> > > within 25 miles of
> > > the area. I know this from direct observations of the flocks.
> > > Still the wildlife people stubbornly refuse to credit private
> > > landowners with any
> > > stocking successes...they say the "well meaning but
> misguided attempts
> > > were failures". BULL.
> > >
> > > So I guess I'm just a little leary of leaving it all up to the
> > wildlife
> > > people (don't forget I want to be one too) whose egos won't
> > > allow them to
> > > acknowledge that the "uneducated" of the world just might
> be able to
> > > accomplish some good now and then. Simply because one has an
> > > education
> > > does not necessarily mean they know more about the local
> > > flora and fauna.
> > > There are a lot of 'old timers' in these parts that could
> teach all us
> > > students of biology (graduated or not) a lot about our
> > > environment. Plus,
> > > no matter how well educated or trained, many people still
> > > follow there own
> > > personal agenda once they have some "power". That is why
> I for one
> > > applaud it when that authority is put under a checks and
> > > balances such as
> > > some minor legislative action. Authority works best when it
> > > is limited.
> > >
> > > Luke
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2 Sep 1998, Jay DeLong wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Luke.
> > > >
> > > > > Our legislative body is OUR governing voice. Don't
> > > forget WE THE
> > > > > PEOPLE... These legislatures oversee the wildlife and parks
> > > > > people and
> > > > > the latter can do nothing contrary to the established
> > > > > laws...and if they
> > > > > do, they answer to the legislature. I personally would
> > > rather have a
> > > > > representative who will listen to my views instead of a
> > > > > "wildlife espert"
> > > > > who will do what he/she thinks is best come hell or
> high water.
> > > >
> > > > No offense intended I promise. You're a great guy and I
> > > respect you.
> > > > But, I don't understand why you categorize people like
> this. If you
> > > > have had problems with a biologist in Kansas, or talked to
> > > someone who
> > > > had problems elsewhere, it isn't fair to say this
> about state or
> > > > federal biologists everywhere. Also, politicians do
> not always have
> > > > your best interests in mind. There's nothing that peeves
> > > me more than
> > > > career politicians who turn more often than a weather vane.
> > > And the two
> > > > are not enemies or on opposite ends of the opinion
> > > spectrum. State and
> > > > federal biologists were once college biology students like
> > > you are right
> > > > now.
> > > >
> > > > Legislators want to trust their state's natural resource
> > > agency staff to
> > > > make the technical decisions, and I think we should want
> > > them to, also.
> > > > The legislature funds the agency. The agency develops
> programs, and
> > > > hires employees. The employees use their knowledge,
> > > background, etc,
> > > > and develop management plans and carry them out. At
> each step the
> > > > politicians are further removed from the technical aspects
> > > of the work
> > > > being performed by the agency. Sure, some agency biologists or
> > > > administrators can be stubborn and unresponsive, but they
> > > are not evil
> > > > people simply because they don't agree with you.
> > > >
> > > > It may take time, but I think we all need to establish a
> > > relationship
> > > > with our state and federal natural resource agencies if
> we want to
> > > > influence them. Their biologists are educated people, and
> > > you'll need
> > > > to interact with them in a professional and intelligent
> manner. An
> > > > anti-agency attitude isn't going to make your tasks easier to
> > > > accomplish. I am not a state or federal biologist, by the way.
> > > >
> > > > Jay
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> / This is the discussion list of the North American Native
> Fishes Association
> / nanfa at aquaria_net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help,
> send the word
> / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject)
> of an email to
> / nanfa-request at aquaria_net.
> / For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,