Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Cave conservation issues, techniques, questions. Also visit the NSS Cave Conservation and Management Section.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds

Postby tncaver » Feb 22, 2011 5:53 pm

Anonymous_Coward wrote:Wishing that wolves and the CBD would move to my neighborhood is cute and all, but I don't see how it helps to further this discussion.

Let's see if we can go in another direction. You have stated that conservation is overstepping its bounds. What, in your view are the "bounds" that conservation should stay inside? What actions should be taken in the name of conservation, and what actions are "out of bounds?"


This thread was started with some examples.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/301716
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110216/ap_ ... es_montana


However, I will give you another example which I consider over stepping bounds. The EPA wants dairy farmers to build containment ponds around their
storage facilities in case there is a spill. Since when is milk so dangerous that it requires a containment pond like an oil well? Many dairy farmers are
still small operations. The expense of building containment ponds just might put them out of business. And is it necessary? This country seems to be
getting along quite well with out containment ponds for dairy farms so far. The story about this issue was printed in the Tennessean newspaper about
a week ago. Maybe you think milk is dangerous but in my HUMBLE opinion I don't. If this is forced upon dairy farmers the price of milk will go up because
there will likely be farmers going out of business and/or they will have to pass on the expense to everyone. Either way this is not a pro business
idea IMHO. This country is falling apart due to such regulations. When will it end? Soon I hope.
Here's a link: http://www.nyfb.org/resources/topic_detail.cfm?ID=223

Here's another issue that involves conservation organizations over stepping their bounds:
http://nssmembersforum.proboards.com/in ... 932&page=1
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds

Postby Anonymous_Coward » Feb 22, 2011 6:46 pm

I assume you mean the editorial that is referenced by this response:
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110210/OPINION03/102100318/Columnist-erred-stating-EPA-intent-dairy-regulation'

If you read this you will see that the original columnist was in error regarding the scope of the regulations and also their intent. The regulations were intended to stop fuel and waste spills into local waterways. Milk and dairy product tanks were EXEMPT from the start. It even states that small dairies would not have to comply to the same standards as large ones. So basically all of your points on this are moot.

So this is not a good example of conservation overstepping its bounds. It is however a GREAT example of a fear-monger editorialist distorting facts in order to whip up anti-government sentiment. This is exactly what I was warning you about in my first post in this thread. Make sure you are thinking for yourself. Dairy waste, animal waste, silage waste, and oil are very dangerous pollutants when handled improperly. The EPA came up with some regs to protect your environment from these pollutants. Then look what happened, and this is the telling part. Someone decided to write an editorial about this. They did not think the true story fit their worldview, so they embellished a few facts. They made it sound like government was putting an unreasonable burden on small business, they skewed the facts to say it was milk, not pollutants that the EPA wanted contained. To top it off, they titled the column "EPA Seeks to Expand its Bureaucracy," just to make sure it would catch the eye of people that already are mad at the government. The worst and saddest part is that you fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. There are people out there that are trying their damnedest to further this agenda. Make sure you run it through your own personal BS filter before spewing it back out here on Cavechat.

Back to the question at hand: What do you see as "conservation overstepping its bounds," and what do you see as within the reasonable "bounds" of conservation? The wolf articles you reference don't help me to know what you consider over the line. They only reinforce your view that wolf reintroduction is foolish. You can list more examples if you wish, but give us some guidelines on what constitutes an acceptable conservation measure.
Andy Armstrong
American Carbide Council
User avatar
Anonymous_Coward
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 892
Joined: Feb 3, 2006 1:40 pm
Location: Inside the Beehive
NSS #: 45993RL FE
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Paha Sapa Grotto
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby tncaver » Feb 22, 2011 7:11 pm

Andy's link stated: "EPA stands with President Barack Obama in his commitment to using common sense and transparency to review federal regulations. This commitment to transparency is precisely why EPA publicly announced its intention to delay compliance requirements for milk and milk product storage tanks in October 2010."

That is good. All of us humans base our reasoning upon what we see, hear and read. I'm glad you found that link Andy.

I'm also glad to read that COMMON SENSE prevailed.
The EPA WAS GOING TO PUSH THOSE REQUIREMENTS ON DAIRY FARMERS until someone overrulled
them. The President perhaps? In fact the link states that the EPA is only delaying those requirements for milk and milk products.
The EPA may yet come back to haunt the dairy industry. :doh:
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby tncaver » Feb 23, 2011 7:31 am

Why ranchers do not want wolves reintroduced to the lower 48 states.

http://washingtonwolf.info/livestock_attacks.html
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby BrianC » Feb 23, 2011 9:50 am

Overstepping the global warming theory with Co2 regulations is the first idea of crockery that comes to mind. Co2 is the building block of life. Carbon dioxide levels in our atmosphere are 100 times lower than what would be considered dangerous to breath. There has never been any proof that humans can lower the Co2 levels even if we wanted. When one volcano erupts, it probably provides more Co2 in one day than the entire population produces through industry (including automotive) in one year. Global warming conservation is overstepping its bounds.
User avatar
BrianC
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Oct 2, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: up on this here mountain
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby BrianC » Feb 23, 2011 10:45 am

Isolating and engineering hard shell algae strains for alternative fuel source has caused streams to clog, lakes having trouble growing fish, causing the need for harsh chemicals for control. The spores travel everywhere quickly continuing growth. All in the name of conserving our environment from Co2 emitting fuels.
User avatar
BrianC
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Oct 2, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: up on this here mountain
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby LukeM » Feb 23, 2011 11:46 am

BrianC wrote: There has never been any proof that humans can lower the Co2 levels even if we wanted. When one volcano erupts, it probably provides more Co2 in one day than the entire population produces through industry (including automotive) in one year. Global warming conservation is overstepping its bounds.


Brian, when you say "probably provides more Co2 in one day..." do you mean to say that you have evidence to suggest that's the case, or just that that's your opinion? You're making a lot of statements that aren't supported by evidence as far as I know. In fact, it sounds like you're regurgitating Rush Limbaugh-style talking points.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm
User avatar
LukeM
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Jan 30, 2008 2:53 pm
Location: Albany, NY
Name: Luke Mazza
NSS #: 59317
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Syracuse University Outing Club
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby BrianC » Feb 23, 2011 12:41 pm

LukeM wrote:
BrianC wrote: There has never been any proof that humans can lower the Co2 levels even if we wanted. When one volcano erupts, it probably provides more Co2 in one day than the entire population produces through industry (including automotive) in one year. Global warming conservation is overstepping its bounds.


Brian, when you say "probably provides more Co2 in one day..." do you mean to say that you have evidence to suggest that's the case, or just that that's your opinion? You're making a lot of statements that aren't supported by evidence as far as I know. In fact, it sounds like you're regurgitating Rush Limbaugh-style talking points.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm

I have never listened to Rush, maybe I should. this link http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2655036.htm Is what you are referring to. I'm not sure that your dissatisfaction with this reality and link to (supposedly real science) is valid. But we can agree to disagree here, as facts about human Co2 emissions should be irrelevant because if humans were to quit breathing and therefore stop emitting Co2, this would not matter.
User avatar
BrianC
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Oct 2, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: up on this here mountain
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby BrianC » Feb 23, 2011 1:39 pm

Remember that it has not been proven that C02 emissions even promote global temperature extremes.
User avatar
BrianC
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Oct 2, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: up on this here mountain
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby tncaver » Feb 23, 2011 2:05 pm

BrianC wrote:Remember that it has not been proven that C02 emissions even promote global temperature extremes.


There are two other extreme causes of green house gases that are natural. Volcanoes, and wildfires create tons
of those gases all over the world on a continuous basis. Currently volcanic activity is up world wide.
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby LukeM » Feb 23, 2011 2:27 pm

tncaver wrote:
BrianC wrote:Remember that it has not been proven that C02 emissions even promote global temperature extremes.


There are two other extreme causes of green house gases that are natural. Volcanoes, and wildfires create tons
of those gases all over the world on a continuous basis. Currently volcanic activity is up world wide.


TN, the link I posted addresses that exact claim. If you're not willing to talk about relative scales of emissions then what's the point?
User avatar
LukeM
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Jan 30, 2008 2:53 pm
Location: Albany, NY
Name: Luke Mazza
NSS #: 59317
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Syracuse University Outing Club
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby tncaver » Feb 23, 2011 3:02 pm

LukeM wrote:
tncaver wrote:
BrianC wrote:Remember that it has not been proven that C02 emissions even promote global temperature extremes.


There are two other extreme causes of green house gases that are natural. Volcanoes, and wildfires create tons
of those gases all over the world on a continuous basis. Currently volcanic activity is up world wide.


TN, the link I posted addresses that exact claim. If you're not willing to talk about relative scales of emissions then what's the point?


I for one don't know anything about relative scales of emissions. However, news reports that volcanic activity has been up in the past year.
I've also seen graphs that show green house gasses increasing on a scale that is almost identical to a graph of mechanization of America.
If those gasses are created by mechanization of America then they should be going down now instead of up because the US is losing a
large portion of it's manufacturing to foreign countries. China should have a ton of those gases hovering over it by now though. :laughing:
tncaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: May 17, 2007 7:03 pm
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby BrianC » Feb 24, 2011 1:39 pm

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/301716 This is exactly why any listing with the ESA must reveal a recovery plan. If a plan cannot be properly presented, then the species should not be considered for the list period. If wolves cannot be re-introduced,if bats cannot be cured of WNS, etc...No listing should be accepted. Studies should be continued through private funding, and habitats that have had acceptable time for the species troubles to have run their course,could be privately curated. I would be interested in helping with both species concerned here, only if not mandated with all the red tape associated.

There is an elephant home right here in Tenn., it has had a hard time because of all the red tape.
User avatar
BrianC
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Oct 2, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: up on this here mountain
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds

Postby commanderzoom » Mar 17, 2011 1:19 am

BrianC wrote:Some of you will understand this, some eventually will, some never will. I have a six year old grandson that gives me more enjoyment in one day than my entire lifetime outdoors. I have spent more time outside in nature, than many of you have lived. I love being out in the forest, the rock walls, the deepest and most beautiful caves, but being able to bring my grandson into this enjoyment is enjoying life. He might never get to see the Rumble Room, he might never have the opportunity to pitch his tent in a big wild field and view the wild critters, he might not because so many groups think that the natural environment wasn't meant for him to enjoy. Believe me when I say, I will not stand for this, EVER. He will be educated to conserve nature as I have, and respect what our great planet has to offer. He will have the same opportunities that I have had. I will fight for what is right!

:boxing:


I don't have any grandkids (and better not for at least another decade) but I hear what you're saying loud & clear. I do have 3 children, ages 10, 6, and 4, who love spending time in nature doing activities ranging from swimming in the river to caving. I don't want the opportunity to do those things taken away from them by overzealous conservationists who believe nature should only be enjoyed by the wild animals. I'm already starting to lose my oldest to the lure of the screen during the colder months so I don't even want to think about what taking away all the fun stuff to do outside would do to him.

FTR, I don't have anything against wolves in general as long as they leave me, my family, and my pets alone. However, an endangered wolf (or any other endangered species) will NEVER be found and/or officially documented on our land as long as I or my parents are here. My grandparents worked too hard to buy & keep this land to hand down through the generations to risk losing it over an endangered critter. You can take that statement to mean whatever you want. When the government pulled that eminent domain crap on Grandma to take about 100 of her acres for the failed Meramec Dam Project, she didn't just meekly hand it over but went down fighting. I won't say what she did because it was highly illegal but I'd do the same or worse.
commanderzoom
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 287
Joined: May 28, 2009 5:15 pm
Location: MO
NSS #: 61484
Primary Grotto Affiliation: MVG
  

Re: Conservation overstepping it's bounds?

Postby plicpriest1 » Mar 17, 2011 2:19 pm

Hmmm just a thought on economics: Let the invisible hand run the funding of different groups instead of uncle sam. Why? Because we will see if this is where the people really want to see their hard earned money to run off too. Once again just a thought.

Oh and about "green house gasses", what is the number one green house gas? WATER! No my friends not CO2. Though after just a touch of research here is what I find: A sample rom basalt eruption on Etna in 1970 produced 49.14% H2O and 23.41% CO2. Compare that to Kilauea basalt flow. 37.00% H2O and 48.90% CO2. The % is based on % of the total gas emissions. In other words volcanoes do belt out some serious gasses. Note that in general basalt type eruptions are not the super massive explosive eruptions. Also note that fumaroles on Kamchatka and Momotombo released 95% and 97.1% water respectively.

SO if H2O is the number one greenhouse gas, why in the world are we so concerned over CO2? ( actually I think I know the answer but Im curious if anybody will respond with an answer :big grin: )

Now to be a good person and cite my sources. The above information was taken from Volcanoes Global Perspective. Page 80 Table 3.3. Authors are J.P. Lockwood, and R.W.Hazlett. ISBN: 978-1-4051-6249-4 Copy Right 2010 (I know I didnt put in correct citation format!All the info is there though).

Hay if you dont already own this book, BUY it NOW!!! It is a fantastic read. I highly recommend it.

Any way enough said
plicpriest1
Prolific Poster
 
Posts: 182
Joined: Jan 3, 2009 8:47 pm
Location: Castle Rock
Name: Brian
NSS #: 60892
  

PreviousNext

Return to Conservation Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users