USDA again

Ron Gatrelle gatrelle at tils-ttr.org
Sat Feb 9 16:35:40 EST 2002


----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Cherubini" <monarch at saber.net>
To: <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: USDA again

snips

> Is there evidence Dr. Wehling harbors a negative personal bias against
> releases of Monarchs?  The post below reveals how Wayne Wehling
> viewed Monarch releases in 1997 prior to landing his USDA job in
> 1999.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 16:03:31 -0500
> From: Wayne F Wehling <wehling at PILOT.MSU.EDU>
> Subject: Re: Go Bob Go
>
> Regarding the release of reared monarchs (and insects in general), I
> must agree with Bob Pyle.  Please don't further pollute butterfly
> populations by releasing reared material.  Genetically speaking, it's a
big
> mistake.However, I disagree with Bob on one issue- I would not
> recommend releasing tagged reared monarchs either.  All-in-all, releasing
> reared specimens sounds good but it just isn't scientifically sound.
>
> Wayne Wehling
________________________

When current Attorney General Ashcroft was nominated there was a huge
outcry as he is an ordained Assembly of God minister and strongly
pro-life/anti-abortion.   I am also a minister and pro life - but what he
went through to get confirmed was totally called for and in order.  It is
also important that he be kept under a magnifying glass to make sure "his"
views are not imposed on the rest of the citizenry under the cover of
"official" unbiased government action.

Let's say Wayne IS totally opposed to shipping anything.   That would not
be a reason why he should not have his job.  Virtually all of us have
strong leanings beliefs etc that we carry with us into our jobs.   This is
why we have a Democrat like Clinton and a Republican like Bush as
president.   BUT - we all need to know up front about these leanings
especially when individuals wield a lot of power in remote bureaucratic
rooms.   It is also why people with integrity disqualify themselves from
certain decision making processes. Unfortunately in real life this rarely
happens.  In fact the opposite is usually the case - the opportunity to
inject personal bents into officiality is jumped at.  If one group can't
vote in a ban on smoking then zone ordinance it in by a committee of five
(3 to 2 vote).  If one group can't legislate in a ban on collecting, or
shipping, or making a living -- then implement it through regulations via a
committee of three (2 to 1 vote) - or executive decision of ONE.

Our country goes a long way in providing lots of room for freedom of
opinions and actions.  That is why it also places restrictions and
limitations in various arenas -- this is our wise system of checks and
balances.  Thus, we do not allow an all white jury (in any state) to try a
black man type of thing.   Jurors are disqualified if they are show to have
leanings that would prejudice their ability to render a fair verdict.  We
are not about to allow a committee of Creationists to decide the Origins
Curriculum in our public schools.   Those with agendas have found that the
way around our constitutional system of checks and balances is by simply
putting people with "their" agenda in obscure, off the beaten path, out of
the public eye, but very powerful bureaucratic positions.

Once again,  this is not a finger pointing at Wayne (I have my own
reservations about far flung releases).   This thread is simply the spring
board to bring the above editorial perspective to our attention.   I don't
think Paul is picking at Wayne either.  Paul is also just trying to make
sure we don't have our gullible heads in the sand all the time.  Freedom of
speech to challenge our leader's and government's  _actions  and policies_
is the greatest check we have to keep the balance.  Only those with a
hidden agenda have something to hide.  If people can't stand the heat they
shouldn't be in the oven of public service (ministers, politicians, and
non-profit org leaders to mention a few).

Ron Gatrelle



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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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


More information about the Leps-l mailing list