USFWS CONTROLL

[BrianC]

This post brings to light what the real issue with WNS and USFWS is! I have read many posts concerning the state meetings involving parties from all spectrums of concern for WNS . In every response quoted from representatives at those meetings , I hear "the only thing we can control is the human vector" and "Unless we respect this control we won't get any information ".

OK! So control is the issue here! Lets submit to their demands!

I would like to be led by the USFWS by a chain! I would like to believe that spending 17 million on one small tract of land with a cave and 20,000 bats is a better than only spending 1.9 million on monitoring and surveillance for WNS across the entire USA! I would like to believe that humans spread WNS from cave to cave to attics to bridges to the climbing routs and hiking trails to streams and rivers to trees and any small crevice across our country!
We have been captured! now control us! Tell us what to do next! Call us R2D2! You have smacked us into submission! Now we should respect you!
Now the relief felt will keep me from posting anything that might involve spreading WNS from bat to bat and remarks negatively affecting your ALL powerful control! Anyone that doesn't feel ashamed for making remarks criticizing the actions of the USFW should be scolded!

Respectfully Me!

[Dan Henry]

When asking for permission to go into a cave, I do not begin by urinating on the landowner's front porch.

[dfcaver]

USFWS - UNITED STATES would be the first two letters of this acronym. I AM the United States. I am a federal taxpayer. I OWN all federal lands, parks, monuments and forests. Every taxpayer does. We all do. If I'm urinating on a front porch, it's my front porch. The landowner of USFWS is all the citizens of this country. That's why cavers are upset - these lands belong to WE THE PEOPLE. It's not hard to understand. These lands are held in trust for US, for our use, recreation and enjoyment.

[BrianC]

When asking for permission to go into a cave, I do not begin by urinating on the landowner's front porch.

Should they be allowed to urinate on me first?

[Dan Henry]

You miss my point. If you really think all federal, or public owned lands are yours to do with as you please, go try pitching a tent on the front lawn of the White House. These lands are indeed those of the citizens of the United States, but they are managed by agencies, with whom we have to develop positive working relationships. Just as you wouldn't approach a private landowner in an abrasive manner, you have to realize that relationships with these agencies can be sensitive, and that they are already dealing with an unexpected crisis, so try and help be part of the solution rather than exacerbating the problem. Your righteous indignation and sense of entitlement lead you to lash out at these agencies, making you a thorn in their sides at an already vulnerable moment, which is just what organizations like the CBD want you to do.

[reeffish1073]

Well said Dan!!!! I could have not done any better myself!

[driggs]

USFWS - UNITED STATES would be the first two letters of this acronym. I AM the United States. I am a federal taxpayer. I OWN all federal lands, parks, monuments and forests. Every taxpayer does. We all do. If I'm urinating on a front porch, it's my front porch. The landowner of USFWS is all the citizens of this country. That's why cavers are upset - these lands belong to WE THE PEOPLE. It's not hard to understand. These lands are held in trust for US, for our use, recreation and enjoyment.

Yeah! I should be allowed to dump chemicals in my sinkholes! I should be allowed to burn trash into my air, or burn down my forest, or hang a Bald Eagle on my living room wall. I should be allowed to do whatever I want in the name of recreation because I'm 1/304059724th the current population of this country, and all future generations can deal with the consequences!

</sarcasm>

Take off your tinfoil hat. These agencies are not proposing cave closures to take away your rights, their intention is to protect the ecosystem and wildlife resources which will hopefully continue to belong to this nation long after you are gone. If your "recreation and enjoyment" endangers my lands, then the point of agencies like the USFWS is to ensure that the lands and wildlife are preserved "for the continuing benefit of the American people."

You can argue against the policies of the USFWS (and I assure you, I do); you cannot argue against their obligation to protect national land and resources (for example, caves and bats).

Arguments like yours give all cavers a bad name.

[wyandottecaver]

Where is the line? Some states now allow private developers (aka Wallmart) to imminent domain your house for the "common good" even though it is a private entity benefiting in cash from your financial loss. The Agencies do indeed have statutory obligations to protect public lands and resources. Study after study has shown they generally fail miserably. They are either straw men for private interests (BLM), Government amusement park operators (USPS) Federal timber companies (USFS) or simply make bad decisions that result in unsustainable practices.

Have they provided protection for wholesale loss of those resources...mostly. But they are still essentially a self interested set of corporations who want to simplify their management headaches (us) I assure you.

But in this case even if you want to argue that saving bats takes precedence over recreation the USFWS has screwed it up. They are not protecting bats at all. Not 1 single thing they have done has saved a real bat population in the real world. WNS hasn't slowed, The bats of Hellhole WV are doomed. Maybe nothing they could do would help. But revoking rights to public resources should be based on data and observational realities. Not a gee I better do something, this is something, so lets do it.

[dfcaver]

Pitching a tent on the White House lawn is a bit of a straw man argument. The federal lands are set aside for recreation and other reasonable uses. Reasonable uses include hiking, camping, hunting and caving. It's not a sense of entitlement to seek the reasonable use of what belongs to all citizens.

If a cure for WNS is found tomorrow, it will take years to roll back these closures, if ever.

[Dan Henry]

Pitching a tent on the White House lawn is a bit of a straw man argument. The federal lands are set aside for recreation and other reasonable uses. Reasonable uses include hiking, camping, hunting and caving. It's not a sense of entitlement to seek the reasonable use of what belongs to all citizens.

If a cure for WNS is found tomorrow, it will take years to roll back these closures, if ever.

It is certainly possible to get a permit to pitch a tent on the White House lawn. http://www.nps.gov/whho/planyourvisit/permits.htm
However, you would need to have a valid reason, not be a national security risk, and they might not allow it if there were some other unforeseen circumstances that your presence there would complicate, but that would depend on them, you and whatever working relationship you had with them. However, if you jump the fence and loudly protest your right to be there, you may get shot, but you'll definitely get arrested, and your chances of ever getting a permit after that are slim.

The concept of reasonable use is open to interpretation by the agencies. Is it reasonable to ask for a permit to hold a 1812 war re-enactment on the grounds of the White House in the midst of an ongoing "war against terrorism"? Might be considered too much of a risk. How about asking for a permit to cave recreationally in a cave on Forest Service land 2 states away from WNS and agreeing to abide by decontamination protocols. That seems reasonable. How about asking for a permit to continue work on a cave survey project in a National Park in a WNS confirmed state? This might be also be possible, depending on how you handle yourself, and what working relationship you have with the agency in question.

There's an old saying about flies, and honey and vinegar...

[wyandottecaver]

yea... I seem to remember another one too...if you boil a frog slowly he wont jump out. What happens when your not "special" anymore and all the other caves are closed?

[dfcaver]

In theory, yep, we'd all get along and work in one friendly partnership that protects everybody's rights and responsibilities. Things get a bit more muddled on the ground, however. Many times, common ground with agencies tends to move.

The concept of reasonable use is open to interpretation by the agencies

On this we agree - and this is where I believe the problem lies. I think we've all learned that in the "agency" world view, conservation minded cavers count for a lot less than what we thought or believed. The "experts", i.e. employees of agencies have the whip hand.

[tncaver]

Most caves are not bat hibernaculum. USFWS wants to close ALL Caves. That is the problem. Control is out of control.

[Dan Henry]

Put yourself in the position of the person at USFWS who had to figure out what to do. What options would you have with hardly any information. Hindsight is 20/20, but what would you do differently?

I think given a little more time, the Moratorium will be revised. Hopefully it will be less restrictive, and not more.

[tncaver]

Put yourself in the position of the person at USFWS who had to figure out what to do. What options would you have with hardly any information. Hindsight is 20/20, but what would you do differently?

I think given a little more time, the Moratorium will be revised. Hopefully it will be less restrictive, and not more.

The USFWS has had since 2006 to make revisions to the "close them all" policy. Cave closures are like WNS, steadily moving Southward, but a little ahead
of bat migration. You know, if people were spreading WNS it would have already spread over every part of the country that has caves with bats and that hasn't
happened. People move a lot faster than bats and people go in every direction, yet WNS has not.