Bruce Babbitt vs Gayle Norton

Tue Jan 16 16:26:11 EST 2001

My last political post for a while I hope. Sorry to post it at all, but it
concerns land use in the US.

The Clinton administration was hardly an environmentalist's dream or a left
wing takeover. Bruce Babbitt is a political moderate from an old Arizona
ranching family who drives a Suburban. He was the most successful governor of
that Republican state in many years. Even Republicans respected him. Babbitt's
projects as Secretary of the Interior included ending the old mining law that
gives away land to whoever claims it (That is my land too!) and increasing
public lands grazing fees rather modestly. The enemies of these efforts went
rabid in defense of their very destructive land use policies.

As for the Antiquities Act reclassifications of land and the roadless area set
asides. These could be argued, but the great majority of Americans polled
supported these actions. More than I expected.

The great majority of American oppose the environmental policies favored by
Bush and Gayle Norton. He is a cipher. She may have a few good ideas in her. I
suspect and hope that she is not as radical as her resume suggests. But if
George Bush really wanted to be a uniter not a divider, he would have kept
Babbitt in office or hired an environmentalist Republican for the job. This
would have been good for the land and his party. What he did was good for a
fight. He' ll get one.

Patrick Foley
patfoley at csus.edu

Ron Gatrelle wrote:

> And Mike it is the lay publics view (right or wrong) that we should not
> ignore or just chalk up to Rush L. ignorance (I listen to Rush. This post
> is for those who don't). In fighting for species and environmental help one
> needs all the allies one can get. Which means that one often has to work
> within the box of the  other guy.
>
> Here is an example. Patrick stated that after four years of Bush a whole
> new generation of environmental activists would be birthed as a backlash to
> his environmental policy. Don't we realize that life works both ways? Eight
> years of Clinton and Gore has created a _huge_ "anti-environmental
> movement" - movement!  I never heard of tree-hugger, environmental-wacko,
> and similar terms till the last 8 years. A whole lot of regular people in
> this country are frankly P.O'ed with environmentalists (I am an
> environmentalist)! Why is this? There are many reasons, but not the least
> of which is the pompous condescending attitude projected by *the
> enlightened* toward all the Joe Six-packs. These guys vote too - and in
> case we failed to note, they just elected BUSH. We need to proceeded wisely
> in the next few years. And this involves communication in terms the people
> in the other box understand. Thus, as Mike pointed out, the average guy
> thinks dinosaurs are gone forever -extinct (a word for which  -they- only
> have -one- definition). I wish everyone had a broad enlightened education
> so they could understand the nuances of scientific terminology.
>
> HEY - I just shouted. My objective is to save the Carolina Bays ( which the
> US GOV. (under Clinton)) just said could be drained and tree farmed!!!!!!!!
> HEY alienating Joe Six-pack and Bubba Truck-alot aint gonna help. We HAVE
> TO enlist these guys with the dune buggies, dirt bikes, four wheelers, tree
> farms, cattle ranches, etc etc. or it is all gonna go NOW.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Gochfeld" <gochfeld at EOHSI.RUTGERS.EDU>
> To: <fnkwp at aurora.alaska.edu>
> Cc: <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 8:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Extinction vs accuracy
>
> > Ken's dictionary searching was really interesting.
> >
> > Clearly the IUCN and some other definitions are "operational" in
> attempting to
> > allow terms to be used in decision making of one sort or another.  I
> imagine
> > that the 50 year rule might have different implications for elephants vs
> > springtails.
> >
> > But what impressed me most about the two definitions in the ECO
> dictionary is
> > that NEITHER refers to the totality of "extinction is forever" which the
> lay
> > public ascribes to the term.
> >
> > I bet the author believes that dinosaurs never really went extinct
> because
> > there are still living descendants.
> >
> > Mike Gochfeld
> >
> > Kenelm Philip wrote:
> >
> > > Out of curiosity, I looked up 'extinction' and 'extirpation' in
> > > 'A Dictionary of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics' by Lincoln,
> Boxshall,
> > > and Clark, 2nd edition, 1998, Cambridge U.P.--a most useful reference.
> > >
> > > "extinction  1: The process of elimination, as of less fit genotypes.
> 2:
> > > The disappearance of a species or taxon from a given habitat or biota,
> not
> > > precluding later recolonization from elsewhere.
> > >
> > > extirpation  1: Surgical removal of a part; destroying totally; pulling
> > > up by the roots. 2: Extermination of the population of a given species
> > > from an area."
> > >
> > > I see little difference between 'extinction 2' and 'extirpation 2'.
> > >
> > >         More to the point, however, might be the following entries:
> > >
> > > "extinct (Ex)  In the IUCN Categories q.v. of threatened species. those
> > > taxa that have not been definitely located in the wild during the past
> > > 50 years.
> > >
> > > extinct (EX)  In the proposed IUCN Criteria q.v. for threatened
> species,
> > > a taxon is categorized as extinct when there is no reasonable doubt
> that
> > > the last individual of that taxon has died.
> > >
> > > extinct in the wild (EW)  In the proposed IUCN Criteria q.v. for
> threatened
> > > species, a taxon is categorized as extinct in the wild when it is known
> to
> > > survive only in cultivation, in captivity, or as naturalized
> populations
> > > outside the former range."
> > >
> > >                                                         Ken Philip
> > > fnkwp at uaf.edu
> > >
> > >
> > >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> > >
> > >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
> >
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>

 ------------------------------------------------------------

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl