There's more than one way to deal with invasive species...

Puerto Rico to kill iguanas, export meat

The island's government is announcing plans to kill as many of the reptiles as possible and export their meat in hopes of eradicating an imported species that has long vexed residents and entertained tourists.

The U.S. Caribbean territory has roughly 4 million iguanas, which is a little more than the island's human population, according to Daniel Galan Kercado, secretary of the Department of Natural Resources.

"This is a very big problem. We have to attack it," he said in an interview Friday. "It has impacted structures, the economy, crops and the ecosystem."

Puerto Rico has long struggled to eradicate the bright green reptiles that can grow up to 6 feet (1.8 meters) long and have a life span of some 20 years. Iguanas are considered an endangered species throughout most of Latin America, but Puerto Rico is overrun with them, in part because they breed so quickly and have few natural predators.

Maybe they can just run a scam like The Freshman. No. Wait. They didn't actually kill the endangered species in that movie.

I wonder what iguana tastes like?

Heh. Doesn't matter. A little stir fry with snap peas, broccoli, some of those baby corns and Sriracha sauce and it'll be fine. Just like chicken!

Bats and Windmills, not so perfect together.

I was going through some posts over at Watts Up With That and came across one (Holy irony, Batman!) about how the death of one Indiana bat (an endangered species) has caused a small wind farm (36 turbines) east of Pittsburgh to be shut down at night.

That, in turn led to a blog post about a Canadian project on Wolfe Island in the St. Lawrence River and a proposed New York project in the same area. (Cape Vincent, NY and Wolfe Island are located at the drainage of Lake Ontario in to the St. Lawrence.) The Indiana bat has a documented territory that overlaps some of the proposed wind farm.

(The latter also points out the personal involvement of Darrel Aubertine, New York's Department of Agriculture and Markets Commissioner. Seems he owns some of the land involved in the development of the New York wind farm project. But that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.)

Meanwhile, alternative sources of energy just do not seem to be as "green" as their backers claim them to be.

Aerie Report, November 19, 2009

Sheesh! I managed to make it back to the Aerie a little after 2 PM yesterday after a lovely drive. No clouds, lots of sun and light traffic made it enjoyable. The only thing that stank was the $2.90 per gallon I paid for gasoline as I started out. Thank you President Spend and Print!

******

One good thing about driving between Noon and 3 PM is the talk radio. Yeah, I'm a bit of a ditto-head. Like to hear him pontificate, but finding more and more that he's a day or so behind the blogs that I frequent. (And which he often sites as sources.) And I find some of his callers to be just a tad, well, looney. I'll hut the radio off maybe five or six times just to regain my sanity as I listen.

******

Oh, and the other thing that ticked me off was the change in heart the weatherman apparently has had. Tuesday, the rains showers were supposed to happen on Friday. Yesterday they moved them up to Thursday afternoon and early Friday morning. And they bumped the odds from 40% up to 70%. Since the stuff is coming from the southwest, that means it will be raining at the Aerie earlier...perhaps as early as my departure after my PT.

It's currently foggy as all get out with the "ceiling" at around 1900 feet. Since the Aerie is at 2100 feet that means we're in the clouds. Sort of a Shangri-La moment, if you will. Who knows what's happening down in the valley below? IS there a valley below?

******

The Tiadaghton Audubon Society diner last night was a small affair. Only about 25 people were in attendance to hear one of the two men who work on endangered species within the PA Game Commission. I kept my mouth shut--mostly--and only challenged him a couple of times. Once after he harped on the fact that many raptors were shot in the 1800s and early 1900s because shooters didn't like them. (Hello?! Can you say bounty paid for by the state? Hard times? Loss of chickens, turkeys and other small critters that would have been either supplying breakfast or serving as dinner to hawks and owls?) And again when he started on our "destroying habitat". We don't destroy habitat. We change it. Sometimes this benefits a species, sometimes it doesn't. He mentioned the changes after around 1870 or so and I brought up the number of farms that went back to forest around that time as men either did not return from the Civil War or opted for 1) higher education 2) city/factory life. Coupled with the mechanization of farming practices, the old sloppy hedgerow disappeared either into the woods or under the plow. Either way, species who found the hedgerowed farm ideal habitat had to move on.

I'll think on this a bit more and perhaps start writing a few posts about what is wrong with our approach to wildlife management and the use of key phrases that are geared to stir up the pot but are too often misused.

******

I've my PT in a little over an hour. Then it will be a quick lunch and back to the Bolt Hole.

Oops!

Bird Suspected to Be Extinct Photographed for First Time ... Then Eaten

The article ends with this quote:

"What if this was the last of its species?"

Well, if it was the last of its species it wouldn't really matter if it was eaten then, now would it? I mean it's not like there would be more of them from a breeding program or anything.


(h/t Hot Air)

Who's that howling at my door?

Last winter (2006-07) a logging man working the woods around the Bolt Hole claimed he had seen a wolf in our Adirondacks. We kind of pooh-poohed the idea saying it must have been a coydog (coyote-dog hybrid), which are known to grow quite large, but our logger insisted. He had been to Alaska often, he said, and knew what a wolf looked like. Based upon this story, from western Massachusetts, he might have been correct.
Wolf Shot in Western Massachusetts Last Fall

H/t to Maggie’s Farm

Whoosh!

3rd manmade Grand Canyon flood planned

PHOENIX - For the third time since 1996, officials plan to unleash a manmade flood in the Grand Canyon next month in an effort to restore an ecosystem that was altered by a dam constructed on the Colorado River decades ago.

When Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Powell were constructed it changed the flow of water through the Canyon. Waters released by the dam are usually from the bottom of Lake Powell, where temperatures are cooler. Silt and sediments are trapped by the still waters of Lake Powell and they do not flow down the Colorado into the Canyon. The Water flowing through the Canyon is, therefore, cooler and less muddy than it was before the Glen Canyon Dam was constructed.

So what, you ask. The water is clearer and cooler. Big deal.
Ah, but it is a big deal to the native species that grew up in that warm muddy water and depended upon the silt and sediment to provide nutrients and sand bars.

Without spring floods to flush the system and help rebuild beaches and fish habitat, native species suffered even as non-native fish thrived. The shift helped speed the extinction of four fish species and push two others, including the endangered humpback chub, near the edge.

Okay, you got that. Several species of fish have finned their way off this mortal coil because the dam has altered the ecosystem where they lived. (Apparently the Grand Canyon is the only place they lived.

What to do about those that are still threatened? Why, create a replica of the annual spring floods, of course. That ought to do the trick!

If approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior, next month's flood will scour and reshape miles of sandy banks on the floor of the Grand Canyon. The department's decision is expected this week.

If approved, flows in the Grand Canyon would increase to 41,000 cubic feet per second for nearly three days — four to five times the normal amount of water released from the Glen Canyon Dam. What scientists and environmentalists want to see is what will happen to the fish and the canyon when the gates close at dam and the staged flood recedes.

As the headline says, they’ve done this twice before starting in 1996. Huge amounts of water are released from Glen Canyon Dam. It scours the Canyon and reshapes the sand bars and beaches in the little nooks and crannies. No word of how the fish fare, Do they get flushed as well, like some belly up goldfish won at the local carnival?

Where’s all that “flushed” material go? Why to the next impoundment downstream, of course. That would be Lake Mead. You know, the major electrical for Las Vegas and water source for half of the southwest. No mention of the troublesome sedimentation filling Lake Mead, however.

According to an article in the Goat, a High Country News blog:

Lake Powell, on the Arizona-Utah border, was created to benefit Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. Three hundred miles away, on the Arizona-Nevada border, Lake Mead stores Colorado River water for Arizona, California and Nevada

So water will be pulled from one groups supply and dumped (along with lots of mud and other rubbish) into the holding tank of another group. Doesn’t sound so bad, especially when BOTH reservoirs are only at about half their capacity do to 1) drought and 2) over use. (The former problem may be alleviated slightly this spring when all that snow in the Rockies melts. See: Wet Snowpack Holding for Now from February 22, 2008 for an idea of what the problem might be come April and early May—Hint: it won’t be drought. “…over a wide area of the Rocky Mountains. Statewide, the snowpack is 132 percent of normal, with the highest levels recorded across the southern half.”)

Hopefully, the current snowpack will be absorbed by both the reserve capacities of the manmade lakes all up and down the western rivers and the thirsty soils of the agricultural areas. Otherwise, we’ll be reading about gargantuan flooding along the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers—again. (Who am I kidding? There will be flooding as there is every spring whether the snowpack is above or below average. With some luck, however, the melt may be a long, slow event and there won’t be the serious flooding that occurs from a rapid warm spell.)

See The Future Is Drying Up, published in the NY Times last October 21, 2007, for an interesting look at the usage of and claims upon the water supply in the American southwest.
Also from the NY Times of December 10, 2007: Western States Agree to Water-Sharing Pact

Endangered? Or an Excuse?

U.S. to Study Protection for Alaska Loon

A petition seeking Endangered Species Act protection for a rare loon that breeds in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve has been accepted for review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Conservationists hope an eventual listing of the yellow-billed loon will curb petroleum development in the 23-million acre reserve that covers much of Alaska's western North Slope.

The petition was filed three years ago by the Center for Biological Diversity. , the National Resource Defense Council , Pacific Environment and other U.S. and Russian scientific and conservation organizations.

This is an environmental story of an alleged endangered species with a “must stop oil drilling” mantra in the background. I hope it doesn’t turn out to be another Spotted Owl episode.

From Cornell Labs All About Birds: Spotted Owl

Conservation Status
Because of its preference for old-growth forests, it is heavily affected by clear-cut logging. The northern form is considered Endangered in Canada and Threatened in the United States. The California form is a species of special concern in California, and the Mexican form is considered as Threatened in the United States and Mexico. Listed on the Audubon Watchlist.

(Here’s the 2007 Draft Recovery Plan for the Spotted Owl: 2007 Draft Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl Now Available for Public Comment)

During the heated debate about the Spotted Owl, claims of incredibly small populations were circulated making one think they were as rare as Whopping Cranes or California Condors. People chained themselves to trees to prevent loggers in the Pacific Northwest from doing their jobs. Eventually, the spotted owl was listed as either Endangered or Threatened in much of coastal Canada and the US. Afterwards, studies of the real population indicated they may very well be far more numerous than thought. Much of the action on the Owl’s behalf was from those who opposed logging. They just shopped for a species that would serve their purpose and created a firestorm f hyperbole to push the Endangered and Threatened labels. And these preservationists won the day to some extent. Logging operations were shut down, some mills had to close and lots of people lost jobs.

If the same thing is going on here, environmentalists using the yellow-billed loon as a means of halting oil exploration in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve…. Well, you can only cry wolf so many times before people start to catch on.

The yellow-billed loon breeds in tundra wetlands in Alaska, Canada and Russia, and winters along the west coasts of Canada and the United States.

Petroleum development through leasing ordered by President Bush could reduce its numbers, said Brendan Cummings, ocean program director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

"The yellow-billed loon is one of the rarest and most vulnerable birds in the United States, yet the Bush administration's plan to 'protect' it is to approve oil drilling in its habitat," Cummings said.

Of course! It’s all Bush’s fault. Don’t suppose you fly to any conferences or even drive anywhere do you Mr. Cummings? And you live in a very small, environmentally friendly, super-duper efficient home. Right?

Just how rare is the yellow-billed loon?

The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates there are 16,500 yellow-billed loons in the world, including 3,700 to 4,900 that breed in Alaska. More than 75 percent of the Alaska breeders nest in the petroleum reserve. Smaller numbers breed on the Seward Peninsula and on St. Lawrence Island.

Approximately one-third of the yellow-billed loon population nests in Alaska. And they are notoriously poor at raising a family.

The large-bodied birds have low reproductive success and depend on high annual adult survival to maintain population levels. Individual birds must live many years before they can reliably replace themselves with offspring that survive long enough to breed, according to the agency.[Fish and Wildlife Service]

So if the drilling does occur, it could have a substantial impact on yellow-billed loon survival according to these numbers. Right?

But, let’s go back a few years when oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) was first discussed. Environmentalists were up in arms about how this activity would affect the caribou in the area being opened for drilling. After all the hollering was done and people pointed to the maps of the drilling area, Area 1002 which consisted of 1.5 million acres, was an area bordered the Prudhoe Bay area that has been in production for years. The remaining 19 million acre ANWR was to be left untouched. That left a whole lot of habitat for the caribou to roam.

Check out the maps from the Sierra Club via the link in the given here. The "1002" Area

The area to be drilled this time around, consists of 4.6 million acres within the 22 million acre National Petroleum Reserve. Granted, 4.6 million acres sounds llike a lot of land to someone who might live on a ¼ acre in a typical suburban setting or maybe a 5 acre lot in some more swanky development, but let’s put the numbers in perspective. Alaska measures 424,490,880 acres (663,267 sq. miles). They don’t mention where in Alaska the loon nests, but even if all of the NPR were open to drilling, the loon would still have over 400 million acres in which to find suitable habitat. Let’s say there are 500 yellow-billed loons that nest in Alaska. The loons, of course pair up to mate (their not that looney)so there are 2,500 pairs of loons, each pair looking for that perfect hideaway. Take the 424,490,880 acres of Alaska and subtract the 4,600,000 acres in the proposed drilling area and that leaves each pair of loons over 167,950 acres in which to find a lake that contains some fish for food and a suitable nest site.

The agency's finding, called a 90-day finding despite the filing of the original petition in March 2004, is based on scientific information provided by the conservation groups.

They cite threats including destruction and modification of habitat due to development and pollution and lack of regulatory protection.

Birds that breed in Alaska spend winters off the coast of Russia and face drowning in fishing nets, plus threats from petroleum development in the Sea of Okhotsk, Cummings said.

Yellow-billed loons do not recover easily from population declines, are susceptible to disturbance and may be vulnerable to habitat loss, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Inundation of their freshwater breeding areas by saltwater levels rising because of global warming is another threat, Cummings said. However, oil and gas development in nesting areas is foremost in the petitioners' minds.
"Industrializing the Arctic is not the way to protect a rare bird," he said.

Of course, global warming threats are to be considered as well.

(All emphasis is mine.)The information being provided is that of the environmental groups who have apparently already decided they drill should not be permitted. I wonder just how independent the researchers were or if any research that is not along the lines of the "no drilling" crowd will make it to the Fish and Wildlife Service's desk.

If this turns out to be a case built on hyperbole, something that may be difficult to determine considering the location of the yellow-billed loons habitat--the area in question is so remote that there are NOT a lot of people in the area to take measurements and make observations--the entire environmental movement will receive another mark against its reputation. Enough of those and it will be difficult to pay attention to warnings when they are real.

Endangered? How about existent?

We are coming up on the end of May, right? I thought so. But how to explain this story that sounds like an April Fools’ Day gag?

Endangered Species Protection Sought for Bigfoot

Don’t you need proof that the damn thing exists in the first place before you can go about “protecting” it?

The man behind the petition was a Bigfoot enthusiast named Todd Standing, who claims to have definitive proof of Bigfoot but is withholding it until protection for the alleged animals is in place. “When I get species protection for them nationwide, I will make my findings public and I will take this out of the realm of mythology. Bigfoot is real,” Standing said.

Apparently, the Canadian dollar isn’t the only thing Looney north of the border.

But as Benjamin Radford says:

Protecting endangered species is important for biodiversity, but protecting animals that may not even exist is putting the cart before the unicorn. No one has ever injured or killed a creature not known to exist; Bigfoot and lake monsters are no more in need of legal protection than are leprechauns or dragons. If the creatures are eventually discovered, scientists will do all they can to preserve and study the species. Until then, surely lawmakers have more important things to worry about.

Cute little monk seals vs. Evil sharks

Time to save an endangered species by..well…killing another species.

NOAA eyes shark kill to rescue monk seals

Culling particularly aggressive Galapagos sharks is just "one piece of a multifaceted program" that includes captive care to help underweight female pups, researching the diet and foraging habits of seals, and other measures, Mike Tosatto, deputy administrator of the NOAA Pacific Islands Regional Office, said yesterday.

Last year, the state board approved killing up to 10 predatory Galapagos sharks with a rifle, said Dan Polhemus, DLNR aquatic resources administrator. But after a whole summer, there were no kills.

Between 2000 and 2005, scientists killed 12 Galapagos sharks that had been preying on young seals, fishing for the sharks from small boats with pole and line.

This year, the scientists propose fishing for the sharks with 100-foot-long lines left overnight in areas where the sharks have been seen.

I guess nobody likes sharks. It’s those dead eyes they have. And the fact that some of them can bite you in half before they realize you’re not the food they thought you were. But here it’s a case of predator and prey. Natural selection. So why can’t man keep his nose out of the interspecies interaction? Helloooo! We ARE NOT God! Not in this case and not in any other.

(I know, it’s just 10 sharks their talking about. Unless they’re in a tank, those sharks will be replaced by the surrounding population. And it will have to be done over and over and over.)