Saturday, March 17, 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Train Wrecks With Wildlife
Train Wrecks With Wildlife
By Tom McDowell
NM Stockman Feb. 2012
The story of North American wildlife management began early in the last
century. It began with hunters, trappers, ranchers and farmers demanding
something be done about the dwindling herds and flocks across our nation.
Folks from these groups, to one degree or another, lived off the land and saw
firsthand the effects that over exploitation was having on our wildlife;
they set out to fix the problem and did so at their own personal expense.
License fees, taxes, sweat equity and numerous volunteer hours were amassed
and expended to give us the tremendous wealth of wildlife that all enjoy
today.
Fast forward to the 70's: the place, the Tennessee Valley; the villain,
the Army Corp of Engineers; the victim, the Snail Darter and the "heroes",
the courts, their officers and the ESA (Endangered Species Act). This event
and others of the time, like Cleveland Amory's production "Guns of Autumn",
ushered in the era of "train wrecks" for our wildlife. Think not? Just
imagine where our wildlife and habitat could be if the millions wasted on
meaningless litigation would have been spent for its intended purposes.
Today, so many jump at the ESA as the source of all evil and the lawyers
as the devil's own, that far too often the true engineers of the "wrecks" go
unacknowledged. The ESA was intended, by its drafters, to be an
educational tool; a beacon on the real value of our wildlife and habitat. It was
not envisioned as a club to be used by the agenda driven animal rightist, who
today cloak themselves as "conservationist" with group names that sound
like they must care about our wildlife and wild places; alas they don't.
These groups have a few things in common: they seek to curtail consumptive
use; want families and individuals off of the landscape; want to be the
controllers of our values in regard to wildlife, wild places and rural life in
America and finally want everyone else to pay for it and for their elitists
lifestyles.
It is true that the ESA is in dire need of revision. Some in congress
have seen this truth, have acted and hopefully, with sufficient pressure,
will continue to act. The recent delisting of the Gray Wolf across the
northwest may finally enable these managers to right that "train" and restore
balance among both wildlife and rural-life. There is hope that shortly the
citizens of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan will once again have the ability
to manage their own.
Closer to home, Arizona has followed the lead of Governor Martinez and our
Game Commission and said no more wolves. After three decades of stalling
and failures it is obvious, to even the most casual observer, that federal
oversight / management of local wildlife is the problem not the solution.
The experiment to reintroduce "pen raised" habituated wolves is a failure.
These creatures, at least in the current environment, won't revert to
their wild ways. So long as there are people living in the area, these
wolves will continue to seek handouts in the form of livestock and family pets
(for food and sexual companionship). The solution is simple, remove the
people and everything will be good; just listen to today's
"conservationist". Folks it is obvious, our customs and cultures are as archaic as the
village blacksmith. We just need to give up and rollover into our new beds in
the concrete jungles of the world; I don't think so!
Yet another fight is brewing in our backyard; ban the "cruel and barbaric
steel jawed leg-hold" (foot-hold) traps from public land. Having failed
at pulling the proverbial wool over the eyes of our Game Commission and game
managers, the animal rights coalition is focusing its campaign of
sophistry and name calling toward the general public, with a clear focus on our
legislature. If they are successful, another train wreck for our wildlife and
rural-life will follow. In the face of ever expanding human populations
balanced management is the only hope for protecting our wildlife; trapping
is the most effective, and in many cases, only tool available for the
management of many species.
The allegations that foot-hold traps are cruel and that trappers are
barbaric may be a useful ploy in the attempt to derail effective wildlife
management, however, these allegations are completely false. The groups
spreading these myths have never let the truth stand in their way, nevertheless
the truth is out there for all to see. It is not possible for a trap to be
cruel; traps are inanimate objects and as such have no capacity for
behavior towards another. Furthermore, humane traps and trapping are governed
at the international, national and state levels. Not one but two
international standards exist through the ISO process; one relates to humane
restraining devices (foot-hold traps, cages and some snares) and the other for
traps that kill humanely. At the national level, new era “conservationists"
would have you believe that the data collected to bring the United States in
compliance with an European Union "Agreed Minute", which bans fur
importation from countries that permit inhumane trapping practices, has been
falsified by the Game Departments and Game Commissions of 38 state.
The US Department of Agriculture, The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the
trappers of New Mexico and the rest of the country; this data must be bogus
for it supports modern trapping as a humane and ethical practice. The
truth be known, never in history has such scrutiny, testing and actual field
study been conducted on traps, trappers and trapping.
Coalitions of animal rightist conveniently ignore the facts that thousands
of animals have been captured for experimental tracking purposes,
relocations, reintroductions, protection of endangered species and population
control using the foot-hold trap. The widely successful reintroduction of the
River Otter across America (including NM) was accomplished by trappers
using foot-hold traps. Their beloved Gray Wolves, reintroduced into
Yellowstone, were caught by trappers using foot-hold traps, as are the problem Lobos
in the Gila. These traps are one in the same as those being used
annually across New Mexico to harvest fur and control predators.
Surrounding states which have misguidedly banned traps are frequently
lauded as role models for New Mexico. When have these states revived an
endangered species to sustainable levels compatible with hunting? New Mexico
has just done this with the Desert Bighorn Sheep. Desert sheep and trapping
you ask; the success of the sheep is directly tied to the trapping of
lions by New Mexico trappers who used foot traps. It was New Mexico game
managers and our Game Commission that demonstrated the leadership and foresight
necessary for this grand accomplishment while true conservation groups
raised monies to help fund the recovery. I wonder if becoming more like
California is really such a good idea.
There are numerous other examples of wildlife "train wrecks" including
disease transmission, crippling economic losses to predation and depredation
and destruction of our marshes and roadways to name a few. For example, a
few years ago we had an incident of rabies in our Gila fox populations.
The viral strain originated in Arizona (which has banned trapping) and
spread into the healthy population of fox in New Mexico. An outbreak of rabies
in one species can lead to ancillary cases of the disease in many mammals,
domestic and wild. Luckily, the rabies outbreak was short lived and
relatively isolated. Regulated trapping clearly has a role in a variety of
management strategies.
September of 2011 The Wildlife Society, a professional group with over
10,000 wildlife biologist and managers as members, released a statement
relative to the animal rights position. A portion of the summary follows: The
TWS "Support an animal welfare philosophy, which holds that animals can be
studied and managed through science-based methods and that human use of
wildlife—including regulated, sustainable hunting, trapping, and lethal
control for the benefit of populations, threatened or endangered species,
habitats, and human society—is acceptable, provided that individual animals are
treated ethically and humanely.
“There is a profound conflict between many
tenets of animal rights philosophy and the animal welfare philosophy
required for effective management and conservation,” says TWS President Tom
Ryder. “Established principles and techniques of wildlife population management
are deemed unacceptable by the animal rights viewpoint, but are absolutely
essential for the management and conservation of healthy wildlife
populations and ecosystems in a world dominated by human influences.” I suppose
that this group of professionals is also wrong.
With proper balanced management, our wildlife will flourish for all to
enjoy and our wild places and rural life styles will remain intact for future
generations. It is imperative for the "true" conservationist to join arms
in support of our wildlife, managers and Game Commission. To this end the
New Mexico Trappers Association has established an annual scholarship
to cover the tuition, room and board for a Game Department biologist or
officer to attend the Trappers College accredited by Purdue University. New
Mexico's hunter, ranchers, trappers, farmers and outdoorsmen must be vigilant,
with a unified goal of keeping the "North American Wildlife Express" on
her tracks.
Tom McDowell
Legislative Liaison
New Mexico Trappers Association
Supporting photos:
Female Bobcat released from a foothold trap. Contrary to the hyperbole of
the animal rights campaign, modern traps and trapping practices do not cut
the feet of captured critters.
Modern traps restrain catches and the trapper decides to harvest or
release. In some cases released critters just hang out; some seek odd vantages
from which to watch.
By Tom McDowell
NM Stockman Feb. 2012
The story of North American wildlife management began early in the last
century. It began with hunters, trappers, ranchers and farmers demanding
something be done about the dwindling herds and flocks across our nation.
Folks from these groups, to one degree or another, lived off the land and saw
firsthand the effects that over exploitation was having on our wildlife;
they set out to fix the problem and did so at their own personal expense.
License fees, taxes, sweat equity and numerous volunteer hours were amassed
and expended to give us the tremendous wealth of wildlife that all enjoy
today.
Fast forward to the 70's: the place, the Tennessee Valley; the villain,
the Army Corp of Engineers; the victim, the Snail Darter and the "heroes",
the courts, their officers and the ESA (Endangered Species Act). This event
and others of the time, like Cleveland Amory's production "Guns of Autumn",
ushered in the era of "train wrecks" for our wildlife. Think not? Just
imagine where our wildlife and habitat could be if the millions wasted on
meaningless litigation would have been spent for its intended purposes.
Today, so many jump at the ESA as the source of all evil and the lawyers
as the devil's own, that far too often the true engineers of the "wrecks" go
unacknowledged. The ESA was intended, by its drafters, to be an
educational tool; a beacon on the real value of our wildlife and habitat. It was
not envisioned as a club to be used by the agenda driven animal rightist, who
today cloak themselves as "conservationist" with group names that sound
like they must care about our wildlife and wild places; alas they don't.
These groups have a few things in common: they seek to curtail consumptive
use; want families and individuals off of the landscape; want to be the
controllers of our values in regard to wildlife, wild places and rural life in
America and finally want everyone else to pay for it and for their elitists
lifestyles.
It is true that the ESA is in dire need of revision. Some in congress
have seen this truth, have acted and hopefully, with sufficient pressure,
will continue to act. The recent delisting of the Gray Wolf across the
northwest may finally enable these managers to right that "train" and restore
balance among both wildlife and rural-life. There is hope that shortly the
citizens of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan will once again have the ability
to manage their own.
Closer to home, Arizona has followed the lead of Governor Martinez and our
Game Commission and said no more wolves. After three decades of stalling
and failures it is obvious, to even the most casual observer, that federal
oversight / management of local wildlife is the problem not the solution.
The experiment to reintroduce "pen raised" habituated wolves is a failure.
These creatures, at least in the current environment, won't revert to
their wild ways. So long as there are people living in the area, these
wolves will continue to seek handouts in the form of livestock and family pets
(for food and sexual companionship). The solution is simple, remove the
people and everything will be good; just listen to today's
"conservationist". Folks it is obvious, our customs and cultures are as archaic as the
village blacksmith. We just need to give up and rollover into our new beds in
the concrete jungles of the world; I don't think so!
Yet another fight is brewing in our backyard; ban the "cruel and barbaric
steel jawed leg-hold" (foot-hold) traps from public land. Having failed
at pulling the proverbial wool over the eyes of our Game Commission and game
managers, the animal rights coalition is focusing its campaign of
sophistry and name calling toward the general public, with a clear focus on our
legislature. If they are successful, another train wreck for our wildlife and
rural-life will follow. In the face of ever expanding human populations
balanced management is the only hope for protecting our wildlife; trapping
is the most effective, and in many cases, only tool available for the
management of many species.
The allegations that foot-hold traps are cruel and that trappers are
barbaric may be a useful ploy in the attempt to derail effective wildlife
management, however, these allegations are completely false. The groups
spreading these myths have never let the truth stand in their way, nevertheless
the truth is out there for all to see. It is not possible for a trap to be
cruel; traps are inanimate objects and as such have no capacity for
behavior towards another. Furthermore, humane traps and trapping are governed
at the international, national and state levels. Not one but two
international standards exist through the ISO process; one relates to humane
restraining devices (foot-hold traps, cages and some snares) and the other for
traps that kill humanely. At the national level, new era “conservationists"
would have you believe that the data collected to bring the United States in
compliance with an European Union "Agreed Minute", which bans fur
importation from countries that permit inhumane trapping practices, has been
falsified by the Game Departments and Game Commissions of 38 state.
The US Department of Agriculture, The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the
trappers of New Mexico and the rest of the country; this data must be bogus
for it supports modern trapping as a humane and ethical practice. The
truth be known, never in history has such scrutiny, testing and actual field
study been conducted on traps, trappers and trapping.
Coalitions of animal rightist conveniently ignore the facts that thousands
of animals have been captured for experimental tracking purposes,
relocations, reintroductions, protection of endangered species and population
control using the foot-hold trap. The widely successful reintroduction of the
River Otter across America (including NM) was accomplished by trappers
using foot-hold traps. Their beloved Gray Wolves, reintroduced into
Yellowstone, were caught by trappers using foot-hold traps, as are the problem Lobos
in the Gila. These traps are one in the same as those being used
annually across New Mexico to harvest fur and control predators.
Surrounding states which have misguidedly banned traps are frequently
lauded as role models for New Mexico. When have these states revived an
endangered species to sustainable levels compatible with hunting? New Mexico
has just done this with the Desert Bighorn Sheep. Desert sheep and trapping
you ask; the success of the sheep is directly tied to the trapping of
lions by New Mexico trappers who used foot traps. It was New Mexico game
managers and our Game Commission that demonstrated the leadership and foresight
necessary for this grand accomplishment while true conservation groups
raised monies to help fund the recovery. I wonder if becoming more like
California is really such a good idea.
There are numerous other examples of wildlife "train wrecks" including
disease transmission, crippling economic losses to predation and depredation
and destruction of our marshes and roadways to name a few. For example, a
few years ago we had an incident of rabies in our Gila fox populations.
The viral strain originated in Arizona (which has banned trapping) and
spread into the healthy population of fox in New Mexico. An outbreak of rabies
in one species can lead to ancillary cases of the disease in many mammals,
domestic and wild. Luckily, the rabies outbreak was short lived and
relatively isolated. Regulated trapping clearly has a role in a variety of
management strategies.
September of 2011 The Wildlife Society, a professional group with over
10,000 wildlife biologist and managers as members, released a statement
relative to the animal rights position. A portion of the summary follows: The
TWS "Support an animal welfare philosophy, which holds that animals can be
studied and managed through science-based methods and that human use of
wildlife—including regulated, sustainable hunting, trapping, and lethal
control for the benefit of populations, threatened or endangered species,
habitats, and human society—is acceptable, provided that individual animals are
treated ethically and humanely.
“There is a profound conflict between many
tenets of animal rights philosophy and the animal welfare philosophy
required for effective management and conservation,” says TWS President Tom
Ryder. “Established principles and techniques of wildlife population management
are deemed unacceptable by the animal rights viewpoint, but are absolutely
essential for the management and conservation of healthy wildlife
populations and ecosystems in a world dominated by human influences.” I suppose
that this group of professionals is also wrong.
With proper balanced management, our wildlife will flourish for all to
enjoy and our wild places and rural life styles will remain intact for future
generations. It is imperative for the "true" conservationist to join arms
in support of our wildlife, managers and Game Commission. To this end the
New Mexico Trappers Association has established an annual scholarship
to cover the tuition, room and board for a Game Department biologist or
officer to attend the Trappers College accredited by Purdue University. New
Mexico's hunter, ranchers, trappers, farmers and outdoorsmen must be vigilant,
with a unified goal of keeping the "North American Wildlife Express" on
her tracks.
Tom McDowell
Legislative Liaison
New Mexico Trappers Association
Supporting photos:
Female Bobcat released from a foothold trap. Contrary to the hyperbole of
the animal rights campaign, modern traps and trapping practices do not cut
the feet of captured critters.
Modern traps restrain catches and the trapper decides to harvest or
release. In some cases released critters just hang out; some seek odd vantages
from which to watch.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Bush Master 223/5/56 24" fluted barrel Like new
This rifle has had less than 50 rounds shot thru her. It is being sold as is on www.GunBroker.com under my FFL name BPBRS. $1,400.00 Price includes shipping and all you see including the case that is not pictured.
Friday, February 17, 2012
Magazine Capacity Bill another failure of true legislative duties
SCOPE Comment on Magazine capacity law.
Shooters Committee on Political Education
Prohibits the possession of ammunition feeding devices with a capacity exceeding ten rounds.
PURPOSE
Shooters Committee on Political Education
Magazine Capacity Bill
Click here for PDF VersionMakes all large capacity ammunition feeding devices, regardless of date of manufacture, subject to the provisions of the penal law
A5866 Jeffries Same as S3573 AdamsProhibits the possession of ammunition feeding devices with a capacity exceeding ten rounds.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this legislation is not clearly stated other than to make all the devices that were exempt from the original ban passed in 2000 illegal. There was no specific purpose for the original 2000 ban other than to mirror the then existing federal law , which has since sunsetted, and enable law enforcement and prosecutors to pursue state charges against violators.
POSITION
SCOPE strongly opposes this proposed legislation. This proposal is based on the fallacious premise that limiting the magazine capacity of a firearm will in some way reduce gun violence. The enactment of legislation that restricts lawful firearms owners only impedes the legitimate and fully justified use of firearms for self-defense, competitive and sporting purposes.
Imposition of a capricious magazine capacity on law-abiding firearms
owners is egregious at best.
Private citizens desire maximum magazine capacity for the same reason as law enforcement personnel.
owners is egregious at best.
Private citizens desire maximum magazine capacity for the same reason as law enforcement personnel.
The victims of violent crime are always the “first responders.” If imposing an artificial impediment on law enforcement is not acceptable, there can be no justification for applying it to a law abiding citizen who may face the same risk.
Both handguns and long guns are used for personal defense. Such instances tend to be sudden and violent events that have to be dealt with using the weapon at hand. A high magazine capacity increases the defender’s odds. Not all shots are hits nor do all hits stop an attacker. And, according to the Justice Department, one third of aggravated assaults and robberies involve more than one assailant. When your life is on the line, more is better.
The federal ban was a failure and subsequent state restrictions have been
equally unsuccessful.
The federal ban on “assault weapons” and restrictions on magazine capacity enacted in 1994 were a complete failure. Congressional studies have uniformly stated that there was no reduction in the number of victims per firearm homicide incident or in the gunshot wounds per victim. This is an attempt to revitalize a failed law by trading on a tragic incident that would in no way have been prevented by legislation of this type.
equally unsuccessful.
The federal ban on “assault weapons” and restrictions on magazine capacity enacted in 1994 were a complete failure. Congressional studies have uniformly stated that there was no reduction in the number of victims per firearm homicide incident or in the gunshot wounds per victim. This is an attempt to revitalize a failed law by trading on a tragic incident that would in no way have been prevented by legislation of this type.
Nothing in this proposal addresses the illegal acquisition, possession or
use of firearms.
Nothing in this legislation does anything to keep firearms out of the hands of ineligible individuals. It is directed solely at legal firearms owners. It is not likely that an ineligible individual, having obtained a weapon and planning a criminal enterprise, is likely to be deterred by a prohibition on the size of the magazine in their already illegal firearm.
use of firearms.
Nothing in this legislation does anything to keep firearms out of the hands of ineligible individuals. It is directed solely at legal firearms owners. It is not likely that an ineligible individual, having obtained a weapon and planning a criminal enterprise, is likely to be deterred by a prohibition on the size of the magazine in their already illegal firearm.
Only two states have a ban on magazines produced prior to the 9/13/94
federal legislation.
Hawaii prohibits the possession of pistol magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds and New Jersey bans all magazines with a capacity of over 15 rounds. California, Massachusetts and New York grandfathered magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds. Maryland prohibits the sale or transfer (but not possession) of magazines with a capacity of over 20 rounds. None of this legislation has had any impact on the availability of the targeted product.
federal legislation.
Hawaii prohibits the possession of pistol magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds and New Jersey bans all magazines with a capacity of over 15 rounds. California, Massachusetts and New York grandfathered magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds. Maryland prohibits the sale or transfer (but not possession) of magazines with a capacity of over 20 rounds. None of this legislation has had any impact on the availability of the targeted product.
What the legislation terms “high capacity” has in fact been the standard
for decades and is not going away.
Magazines are durable and essentially fungible products. Many firearms owners are using guns with “high capacity” magazines that were made before they were born and in some cases before their parents were born.
for decades and is not going away.
Magazines are durable and essentially fungible products. Many firearms owners are using guns with “high capacity” magazines that were made before they were born and in some cases before their parents were born.
The AK series of rifles were designed in the Soviet Union and went into production about 1950. It is estimated that over 100 million have been made. No attempt has been made to estimate magazine production but it is clearly in the tens of billions.
The NATO standard magazine used in the AR type rifles dates to 1960 and is used by the United States and allied countries around the world. Over 70 different rifles use this magazine and they have been manufactured on every continent except Antarctica. Estimated rifle production exceeds 30 million and magazines in the billions.
Magazine capacity in pistols went over 10 rounds with the introduction of the Browning HiPower in 1935. Virtually every service or sport pistol designed after World War II has a magazine capacity of over 10 rounds.
Conclusion
The assumed purpose of the proposed legislation is to impose a perceived utopian society through legislation. We feel that this is naïve at best. Unfortunately, we live in a world where there are bad individuals that will try to do horrific things to innocent people. To hope to reduce violence with legislation of this type is irrational. It is the creation of the hoplophobic and politically motivated. This legislation is widely supported by the gun control movement because it represents a ban on firearms based on demonization of a characteristic – magazine capacity - not on its demonstrable utility. It is to condition the public to accept a piecemeal destruction of the Second Amendment.
Accordingly, it should not be enacted.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Shale gas more is now less. We pay
I came across an fracking article this week and read it over two times. It is an opinion of a report released on the amount of natural gas that may or may not be under us. First had reports and industry stumping for fracking claimed trillions of cu/ft could be extracted from the shale in several states.
Natural-Gas/End-of-the-Boom-The-True-State-of-the-Shale-Gas-Industry.html
So instead of say 400 trillion cu/ft we now maybe have 150 trillion give or take. Isn't it always the way of the supporters and industry to hyper-inflate a product. Then a few years later that very same product is somehow now quite as golden as we were first told.
Stump 101:
"Lots of jobs to be had" in these areas especially since the manufacturing went teats up 30 years ago. The drilling in those small towns has been under a economic depression for several decades. These areas were once steel foundry's,coal mines and heavy manufacturing that supported Americas infrastructure.
If it's built,you'll benefit $:
It like one big scam to the rural American. First the jobs are to raise wind turbines that have a pay back of something akin to the radioactive half-life of Bikini Atoll. Now we're slammed with the dwindling expectation of more is less again. The cry went out, we need more natural gas availability's and it goes to who? My propane cost last fill up which was January 2012 was $2.75 gallon. Up $1.85 gal from 1994.
EPA mandates:
Many small towns were forced to upgrade their existing water and waste treatment processing to handle the billions of gallons of waste water & sediment from the drilling operations.
Lets get this straight , I'm not against drilling. I'm against corporate BS. Goverment inflated statics no matter what they are. I.E. natural gas,weapons of mass destruction and the other investment lies.
Where's the money at?
As I drove from upstate NY a few weeks back down to rural Georgia. I could not help notice all the new "for sale" bill boards on properties. Last October 2011 I made the same drive and many of those sales signs were not present.
I saw dozens of homes many over priced by the realtor's that are still living in the 80's that is as far as home sales and affordability go. A group of properties I was watching on a weekly basis are now up for auction. Foreclosures that is.
If you really want an awaking take a side road, run into that small town. Many store fronts are abandon while a few are filled with second had shops. Unless your area is one that can attract a hoard of tourism to help keep the local economies going no amount of green jobs or get rich corporate schemes are going to sustain you for very long.
It's sad , it was preventable.
The world economies is not something new. Marco Polo lived in a world economy. Those who argue "it's a world economy" are idiots. They are like those who call you a name in the middle of a discussion because they have no history or facts to back up the BS they repeat.
Who pays~You do!:
Look at your utility bills folks. Notice all those dollar or two fees. Those are to fund green jobs and sustainability. Sustainability is a word that has been used way out of context. Sustainability use to mean one produces or grows a product and it will sustain or feed support an individual or group of people. Now days "sustainability" is used as a way to say, hey Idiot! We're going to charge you an extra fee er ah tax to help my corporations , governments bottom line. Their thinking is , You're going to pay me a few hundred dollars extra annually for something that you or the public will never benefit from.
Wake up people~
A tax cap is a cap. A green fee is a tax. Don't feel guilty becaue they say it's your fault. It's all a scam.
Sustainability is a goal that reduces the consumption of resources. In this writers opinion, today's sustanability is a way for corporations & government to reduce the consumption of their profits by taking our resources.
Natural-Gas/End-of-the-Boom-The-True-State-of-the-Shale-Gas-Industry.html
So instead of say 400 trillion cu/ft we now maybe have 150 trillion give or take. Isn't it always the way of the supporters and industry to hyper-inflate a product. Then a few years later that very same product is somehow now quite as golden as we were first told.
Stump 101:
"Lots of jobs to be had" in these areas especially since the manufacturing went teats up 30 years ago. The drilling in those small towns has been under a economic depression for several decades. These areas were once steel foundry's,coal mines and heavy manufacturing that supported Americas infrastructure.
If it's built,you'll benefit $:
It like one big scam to the rural American. First the jobs are to raise wind turbines that have a pay back of something akin to the radioactive half-life of Bikini Atoll. Now we're slammed with the dwindling expectation of more is less again. The cry went out, we need more natural gas availability's and it goes to who? My propane cost last fill up which was January 2012 was $2.75 gallon. Up $1.85 gal from 1994.
EPA mandates:
Many small towns were forced to upgrade their existing water and waste treatment processing to handle the billions of gallons of waste water & sediment from the drilling operations.
Lets get this straight , I'm not against drilling. I'm against corporate BS. Goverment inflated statics no matter what they are. I.E. natural gas,weapons of mass destruction and the other investment lies.
Where's the money at?
As I drove from upstate NY a few weeks back down to rural Georgia. I could not help notice all the new "for sale" bill boards on properties. Last October 2011 I made the same drive and many of those sales signs were not present.
I saw dozens of homes many over priced by the realtor's that are still living in the 80's that is as far as home sales and affordability go. A group of properties I was watching on a weekly basis are now up for auction. Foreclosures that is.
If you really want an awaking take a side road, run into that small town. Many store fronts are abandon while a few are filled with second had shops. Unless your area is one that can attract a hoard of tourism to help keep the local economies going no amount of green jobs or get rich corporate schemes are going to sustain you for very long.
It's sad , it was preventable.
The world economies is not something new. Marco Polo lived in a world economy. Those who argue "it's a world economy" are idiots. They are like those who call you a name in the middle of a discussion because they have no history or facts to back up the BS they repeat.
Who pays~You do!:
Look at your utility bills folks. Notice all those dollar or two fees. Those are to fund green jobs and sustainability. Sustainability is a word that has been used way out of context. Sustainability use to mean one produces or grows a product and it will sustain or feed support an individual or group of people. Now days "sustainability" is used as a way to say, hey Idiot! We're going to charge you an extra fee er ah tax to help my corporations , governments bottom line. Their thinking is , You're going to pay me a few hundred dollars extra annually for something that you or the public will never benefit from.
Wake up people~
A tax cap is a cap. A green fee is a tax. Don't feel guilty becaue they say it's your fault. It's all a scam.
Sustainability is a goal that reduces the consumption of resources. In this writers opinion, today's sustanability is a way for corporations & government to reduce the consumption of their profits by taking our resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)