Florida Environmental Issues

FWF associated with radical environmental organizations!

2005-06-15T01:15:00.000-07:00

I wonder just how many of the Florida Wildlife Federation members really know the groups and movements this organization is associated with. I found a report by the Beldon Fund on exactly just how much money this group received from them.

According to the Beldon Fund Report (the first link is in pdf format. If you don't have Adobe Acrobat Reader, here is the link in html format: Beldon Fund Report) in 2003, the FWF received over $300, 000.00. I don't know about you, but to me, that is a substantial sum! This report also shows the groups that receive monies. Please, check them out when you are bored. Have a care though, these sites are not for the faint of heart, or for those who wish to stick their heads in the sand about what the left-wing, radical, environmental groups are really all about. Keep in mind that this is only one fiscal year ago. I doubt the FWF has changed back to a "hunter friendly" group in that time.

Now it is true, that this report is only for 2003, but if you read the mission statement of the Beldon Fund, you will see just how radical this organization really is. The Beldon Fund's home page is full of information on just how radical it is.

It is either, very late at night, or early in the morning, depending on how you look at it; so this rambling might sound a little off. Please, don't take my word for it. Read the information for yourselves. Take the time to do a little surfing around these groups. Read their mission statements, then decide for yourself whether groups like FWF deserve your money or your time. Watch out for them. Keep an eye on them, and don't trust what they tell you. Check out their sources of funds, do what I did, "Follow the money".

My thoughts....

2005-06-14T12:45:00.000-07:00

Okay folks,

I have been posting on other's thoughts and information so far on this blog. It is time for me to vent a little. Many of you who are reading this want to help, but don't know how; or you know there is a problem, maybe grasp the enormity of the situation and think someone else can take care of keeping your rights in place. Or, you think that; "there are so many hunters, fishermen, hikers, and horseback riders out there, that we will never lose our trails entirely." Think again.

The problem of keeping our public parks public is enormous. Actually, it is monumental. What the environmental groups are pushing for is closed parks where only animals roam. "Inner buffer zones" where some human activity is allowed, and "outer buffer zones" where humans live. Totally seperating humans and the wilderness. Won't that be wonderful? The only ones who will be allowed into these remote wilderness areas will be the "scientists" and "warm, caring environmentalists" because, after all, they are the only ones who really have the animal's and nature's interests at heart, right?

Time and again I come across information the shows me this is how far the environmentalists are going. Some groups pose as "hunter friendly" such as the Florida Wildlife Federation (FWF). Many groups and individuals are leaving this organization because of the left-leaning, radical ways; as well as the environmental groups they are supporting and backing. Including the radical idea called the Wildlands Project, the project I mentioned in the above paragraph. Doesn't sound very "hunter-friendly" now does it? In fact, the FWF letterhead blatantly states that "whole regions" should be set aside for the animals free from human "interference". Below is a link to the "zones" I am talking about:

http://www.wildlandsprojectrevealed.org/htm/show/page5.htm

Recently my husband and I were discussing the type of people who are involved with the United States Forest and Wildlife Service, the DOI and DOF on state levels, and who have become rangers in state parks and forests. Growing up, we assumed those who were serious about conservation open for all to enjoy would make a career out of the Parks and Services areas. That hasn't be the case nearly as much as it should be. Many radical environmentalists have "infiltrated" such positions and are now working to "protect nature from man".

Any group that uses the turtle for its logo, or in any of their other artwork, is part of the radical environmental agenda. Their only goal is to lock humans out of "nature" and have "nature" take care of itself. Don't be fooled by people who "seem nice" at shows, or meetings, or any other place where environmental groups are represented. When they meet you, all they see is a nuisance, an hinderence, a stumbling block to overcome to achieve their goal of herding you, a human, onto land they select for you.

Are my thoughts extreme? No, they are truth, what is extreme is the radical agenda that is being promoted in America. The idea that humans don't have the right to be on land their taxes are paying for (no matter what front group collects the money) is unAmerican, unpatriotic, and could be considered treasonous. It sure would have been by our Founding Fathers! Apathy almost cost America her freedom, are you going to let apathy, or even fear that this fight is too enormous, stop you from keeing your rights? No one else is going fight for you, so, are you going to let your rights be stripped from you, or are you going to be an American and fight for what is yours?

Response letter to Sun article

2005-06-13T16:00:00.000-07:00

First is the link to the Sun article:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050613
/LOCAL/50613005/1078/news

Next is the letter:

Ms. Swirko,

I just read your article on airboats. I wanted to introduce myself and
leave you with a few comments.

I'm Captain Phil Walters. I own a statewide airboat and alligator hunting
charter business called Gator Guides. Welcome to Gator Guides! I chair the
Rules & Public Information committee for the Florida Airboat Association
(FFA), a statewide organization composed of 45 sportsman and airboat
organizations and related airboat manufacturers and suppliers.

The sound level issue as it relates to sportsmen who use vessels including
airboats is a statewide issue and as such we are attempting to deal with it
on a statewide level to avoid county by county piecemeal rules. As a user
group, we feel that this approach is fair and appropriate.

As Florida's wild areas are developed, which are the traditional areas
where sportsmen use airboats, conflicts over past use habits Vs new
residents are brewing. As a user group, we are actively working towards
solutions to keep areas open to the public for recreational uses while
reducing the legitimate complains of waterfront property owners concerning
sound levels.

We have composed a "Code of Ethics"
(www.citrusairboat.org/codeofethics.html)
for airboat operators and are working with the Florida Fish & Wildlife
Conservation Commission on distributing this code to users for wider
acceptance. Already, the numerous Airboat related Sportsmen Associations
have adopted this code into required practice for their members.

We are supporting statewide rules requiring automotive type mufflers for
all airprop propelled vessels instead of the current interpretation of rule
that allows straight pipe as a sufficient muffling device. Though this will
not alleviate all complaints, it will reduce sound levels in the low and mid
range operation.

Sportsmen were the first environmentalist, starting with President Teddy
Roosevelt. Sportsmen who use airboats continue this tradition with 23
statewide Associations and Clubs that are active in diverse issues as clean
water, Everglades restoration, Kissimmee River restoration, preserving
wildlife habitat and keeping our recreational areas pristine. We actively
participate in Earth Day for a cleaner environment, Coastal Conservation,
Derelict trap removals, non native vegetation removal and public education
of Conservation issues.

Speaking specifically of bird rookeries, our associations have been active
and supportive of site specific reasonable human & vessel access setbacks to
protect our wildlife. We have both volunteered people & vessels to post
areas and have contributed monies towards protection.

Last, I'll add that the Sportsmen who use airboats groups across Florida
continue to contribute for the benefit of all Floridians by volunteering
thousands hours of manpower and vessel use. From entertaining and educating
physically challenged children on Florida's wildlife via wilderness airboat
rides, to hurricane flood evacuation, to raising thousands of dollars for
the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation to Polk County's Project Eagle to
River Beautification programs, to name a few endeavors.

I hope these comments offer another side to the story.

Thank you,
Captain Phil Walters
813-968-6154
Feel free to contact me for information or for an in depth look at airboats

Panthers range far from home....

2005-06-07T13:10:00.000-07:00

Florida panther killed on Interstate 95 near St. Augustine

Associated Press
Posted June 7 2005, 9:50 AM EDT

ST. AUGUSTINE -- A Florida panther was killed by a vehicle on Interstate 95 in St. Johns County, far away from the normal range of the endangered cats in southwest Florida.

The cat was a 6-foot-long, 120-pound male and probably died instantly when it was hit last weekend, Mark Cunningham, a veterinarian with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, said Monday.

``Otherwise, he was healthy and in good condition, probably 3 years old,'' Cunningham said. He believes the male was looking for female companionship.

Joy Hill, a spokeswoman for the commission, said this is the farthest a panther has ranged since a restoration project began in South Florida in 1995. Panthers rarely stray north of the Caloosahatchee River in southwest Florida.

The carcass was spotted Saturday on the highway just north of the Flagler County line by St. Augustine Beach Mayor Frank Charles. It was not tagged and did not have a radio collar, which is fairly common for animals tracked to the south.

The panther population was down to about 30 in 1995. To increase genetic diversity, seven female Texas cougars were released in the wild. Since then, several hybrid litters have been produced, and the population count is now 87, not including kittens.

Ivory-bill Followup pg.2

2005-06-05T20:40:00.001-07:00

If I go to a lawyer and launch an appeal or deposit funds and let them bleed
me dry, either way I will only break myself on their anvil and still not
determine what they did with these Universities and Non-Government
Organizations. So what you say? I know this amuses many State and Federal
bureaucrats and it delights University professors and the Non-Governmental
Organizations from The Nature Conservancy and Audubon to Ducks Unlimited but
it should alarm the rest of us. What does it say about "open" government or
"freedom of information"? Would a reasonable man think they have something
to hide?

Look at what havoc the northern spotted owl has wreaked in the Pacific
"northwest since being listed as Threatened in 1990. Public lands closed to
activities and logging, private property encumbered by Federal fiat, and
many families and local communities devastated because of Federal economic
dislocation. There are two other spotted owl populations in the US that are
widely distributed, the Mexican and California spotted owls; there are no
other Ivory-billed Woodpecker populations in the US. Both the owl and the
Woodpecker are said to "require" "virgin" forests in great expanses. The
northern spotted owl has traditionally inhabited a narrow mountain expanse
in Oregon and Washington; the Woodpecker once inhabited the entire Old
South. The West has the lion's share of Endangered Species Listings used to
close public lands, encumber private property, restrict every manner of
economic and recreational activity, and increase the authority of the
Federal government over State governments and citizens; the South has (so
far) relatively few such Listings. The Federal agencies and radical
(environmental and animal rights) organizations working with Universities
that have parlayed (through lawsuits and Federal influence) the spotted owl
into a means to control large expanses of Oregon and Washington have worked
together on the Woodpecker "discovery" and with 15 years experience of using
the spotted owl as a hammer will have little trouble accelerating their
influence over large segments of the South.

Of course logging is enemy #1 for "saving" Ivory-billed Woodpeckers (just
like the spotted owl and the red-cockaded woodpecker another southern
woodpecker listed as Endangered though there are thousands throughout the
South). But, what about hunting? While the Federal bureaucrats soothingly
say hunting won't be affected; a 1942 book about the Ivory-bill says, "In
flight the Ivory-bill looks surprisingly like a Pintail; its neck is long and slender, its tail long and tapering, and the wings rather narrow." Spring turkey hunters go in the woods when Ivory-bills are either breeding or raising their young. Don't worry about hunting restrictions though!

Federal bureaucrats recently promised to allow hunting on a proposed refuge in south Florida if they got approval from Congress for a Florida Panther
Refuge. The first thing they did when they got it was to close deer hunting
for good. Private landowners in the South, just like Pacific northwest
timber companies like Weyerhauser will HAVE to come to an "accommodation"
either willingly as "good" companies or by Court Order with Federal
bureaucrats and their notorious "partners." Southern State Fish and
Wildlife Agencies and their political overseers will acquiesce to all this
even quicker and more thoroughly than their western cousins because their
State residents haven't been harmed as severely or as widely (ranchers, big
game hunters, pet owners, public land users, private property owners, etc.)
as their western cousins - yet.

I know whereof I speak here about Southern attitudes. I wrote an article
about this and I have received a slew of e-mails from Southerners that
ridiculed me as misinformed, unfamiliar with the South, and amusing to think
Arkansas and Oregon were comparable. Whether or not they put up a notice
about my also being a "LIAR" in the Post Office somewhere in the South I
have yet to determine. What they all lacked was any serious refutation of
what I said or any reason not to question the mellifluous tones of the
bureaucrats or the fate that lies around the corner.

The State fish and wildlife agencies are silent about the 15+ months of
secrecy and scheming because they increasingly rely on Federal funds from
the Federal agency and Federal Department perpetrating this secrecy. The
Universities are part of the whole scheme to get millions in grants down the
road.

The Nature Conservancy will likewise ease and buy untold acreages
across the South and sell it to the Federal government at the usual markup.
By the way they (TNC) recently argued successfully with the Department of
the Interior that they did not have to allow public scrutiny of their books
since they "didn't get grants" (how sad is that?). Ducks Unlimited is
silent because they are moving inexorably toward a future without hunting
where their wetlands will be the excuse for future jobs and salaries.
Turkey hunters and deer hunters won't believe it will affect them until it
is too late. I'll wager that some study will soon "reveal" that fishermen,
and boats with outboards and even trapping are threats to breeding or
brooding (eggs not temperament) Ivory-bills and some judge will then confirm
that it is so. The anti-Bush people won't push this because their radical
green wing was part of these negotiations and the media won't ask what went
on because the Ivory-bill discovery is a sacrosanct environmental saga that
will brook no close examination by anyone. Who will ask? Who will ever
find out what went on? Who cares?

What happened? I believe that staff of the Secretary of the Interior and
staff of the US Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to work secretly with The
Nature Conservancy and Audubon and Cornell and (others?) for at least a year
or two to use this discovery to derail the Congressional intent (weak though
it was) to review the Endangered Species Act. In doing this they all
plotted for their individual future profit from a cooperative attempt to
make this "discovery" a "spotted owl scenario times 10." Land acquisition,
grants, Federal power over private property and citizen activities have all
been planned with the technique of a Federal agency keeping the public in
the dark. While hunting seasons and private logging proceeded, their demise
was plotted and is now underway.

Those involved are right now being
congratulated and probably given awards. Future acquisition, future land
easements, future grants, future regulations, and future controls were all
in the planning stages before we even knew what was happening. The staff
that is responsible for this probably took advantage of a traveling and
somewhat remote Director (now gone) of the US Fish and Wildlife Service and
a Secretary of the Interior that like all her predecessors just couldn't
resist being part of a memorable environmental milestone. Those involved
probably are like most of the top managers in Interior, secure in their jobs
and basically big government-types that look forward to a more activist
President and even more growth for themselves in the future.

The bottom line is who are you going to believe, those well-paid
bureaucrats, those professors, and the big Non-Government Organization
executives at the joint news conference, or some "LIAR"? If this was
announced to us all (as opposed a select few) when it occurred (how long
ago?) those about to be affected might have been able to get their
politicians to blunt what was about to happen and work out a reasoned
approach. Instead certain politicians had already been compromised to
promise millions, Federal bureaucrats have feathered their nests, any
Endangered Species Act review has been made nefarious, anti-hunting groups
once again snookered or co-opted the supposed "hunting organizations", and
Universities hungry for grants all started the train from the station
without the least scrutiny about how Ivory-bills survived to date and how
they might be preserved in the future without disrupting the entire South.
Someone might have even asked the $64 question about the genetic
relationship between these Woodpeckers and their Cuban cousins.

Jim Beers
5 June 2005

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91

Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:
JimBeers7@earthlink.net

Ivory-bill Followup FYI

2005-06-05T20:40:00.000-07:00

IVORY-BILLS, SPOTTED OWLS, & LIARS

Recently I spoke to a group of landowners in western Virginia concerned
about how the National Park Service and several Federal politicians are
using a Historic District Foundation to buy up land, kill State road
improvement projects, reduce the tax base, and prevent future small town
improvements such as water treatment facilities and expansion. Although the
Historic District Foundation (a Congressional designation) uses Acquisition
Funds Appropriated annually by Congress (i.e. our Federal tax dollars) and
buys land that the National Park Service designated and Congress dutifully
approves plus any nearby lands that become available, the claim of this
thinly-disguised National Park Service front-group is that they "are not the
National Park Service". When asked who will manage these lands (maintain
them, fence them, enforce regulations on them, interpret them, oversee
contracts and concessionaires, maintain safety, etc.) they mumble that that
will be worked out. When asked if they intend to prevent road improvements
(as they already have), the answer is that "it is not our goal to prevent
road improvements". This County lies on the west side of the Shenandoah
Valley where families still remember the callous land clearances and family
home destruction by the State and Federal government in the 1930's to
establish the Shenandoah National Park on the east side of the Valley. I
leave it to you to judge what is going on here.

Anyway, during the meeting it was mentioned that a typed notice was hanging
in the local Post Office for several days prior to the meeting that people
should come and hear the "LIARS" (this was in bold print) at the meeting I
was invited to. Evidently, the other speaker (an expert on Federal Heritage
Areas) and I were the "LIARS". Other than calling us "anti-government" and
"familiar" with local conditions or the history of this effort, the
employees and supporters of the Foundation (a decided minority) had no
answer to what we two "LIARS" described had happened elsewhere and what
would surely happen here.

I was reminded of this when I returned home the next day and picked up a
registered letter at the Post Office. The letter (from the Secretary of the Interior\'s Freedom of Information Officer) told me that the Interior Department had denied my Freedom of Information Request for a fee waiver for:

"All correspondence, memoranda, phone logs, e-mails, meeting notes, and
other documents concerning the discovery and announcement of the discovery
of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker in the Lower Mississippi Valley as well as
any and all planning, coordination, and decision-making regarding this
discovery, it's announcement, and any planning decisions regarding future
strategies utilizing this discovery between the U.S. Department of the
Interior, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service and
other governmental and non-governmental organizations including but not
limited to:

The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, Audubon Society, Life
Sciences, Journal Science, American Bird Conservancy, Cornell Laboratory of
Ornithology, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, and Members of Congress
or their staff."

This means that in order to review the nature of a 15 month or more period -
when the US Fish and Wildlife Service and others mentioned above kept secret
and schemed (to derail any Endangered Species Act reform, kill an Arkansas
US Army Corps project, introduce the necessity for The Nature Conservancy to
buy and control more private property and otherwise plan to use the
announcement as effectively as possible to get millions ($10.5M already)
from Congress and position themselves to have the US Fish and Wildlife
"familiar" with local conditions or the history of this effort, the
employees and supporters of the Foundation (a decided minority) had no
answer to what we two "LIARS" described had happened elsewhere and what
would surely happen here.

Why was my request for a fee waiver (a perfectly legitimate request granted
to the friends of bureaucrats intent on justifying government programs or
radical groups wanting to kill some project or activity the bureaucrats want
killed) denied? Because:

"A contribution (to public understanding) will not be significant if
disclosure will not have a positive impact on the level of public
understanding of the operations or activities involved that existed prior to
the disclosure."

"A significant contribution (to public understanding) is not likely to arise
from disclosure of information already in the public domain."

Finally, I failed "to meet" the following requirements:

"Is there a logical connection between the content of the requested record
and the operations or activities in which the requester is interested? Are
the disclosable contents of the record meaningfully informative on the
operations or activities? Is the focus of the requester on contribution to
public understanding, rather than on the individual understanding of the
requester or a narrow segment of interested persons? Does the requester
have expertise in the subject area and the ability and intention to
disseminate the information to the general public or otherwise use the in
formation in a manner that will contribute to public understanding of
Government operations or activities? Is the requested information sought by
the requester because it may be informative on Government operations or
activities; or because of the intrinsic value of the information independent
of the light that it may shed on Government operations or activities" What
part or parts I failed to meet is for me to guess and them to dribble out if
I appeal. Whether I am classed as a journalist or blogger or speaker or
consultant, the fact that I occasionally get paid and do not represent
someone else means I can be flicked away like a ladybug on a screen.

Miccosukees Pg. 2

2005-06-02T11:01:00.000-07:00

"It's the end of an era," said Nancy Payton, a field representative for the
Florida Wildlife Federation.

The Miccosukee decision comes after high-profile holdout landowner Jesse
Hardy agreed in April to sell his 160-acre homestead in Southern Golden
Gate Estates for $4.95 million.

With land in hand, the DEP plans to restore natural water flows across
Southern Golden Gate Estates to the Ten Thousand Islands by installing
pumps, filling in canals and digging up roads that developers cut through
the landscape decades ago.

The Miccosukees aren't through fighting just yet though.

Attorneys for the tribe filed a motion May 18 with Brousseau for a
rehearing of his decision that the tribe had waived its right to object to
the state's eminent domain claim.

The case raised sensitive legal questions about tribal sovereignty and more
practical arguments about whether the state had served tribal leaders
properly with notice of the eminent domain claim.

The tribe and the DEP are familiar foes. The Miccosukees have been at the
forefront of legal battles over the pace of efforts to clean up the
Everglades and provide more water to part of Everglades National Park.

Ernie Barnett, the DEP's ecosystem restoration director, said he hopes the
eminent domain case will not harm what he calls the DEP's "positive working
relationship" with the tribe.

The tribe acquired one Southern Golden Gate Estates parcel along U.S. 41
and the Miller Boulevard extension for $15,000 in 2001.

Two other larger parcels southeast of the Estates' grid of platted lots
were acquired in 1998 for $438,000.

Attorneys say the tribe uses the land to collect palm fronds for
traditional chickees and to gather materials for tribal medicines.

A consultant for the Miccosukees took the DEP to task Thursday for forging
ahead with eminent domain against the tribe instead of working out some
other mechanism by which the state could use the land for restoration and
the tribe still could own it.

"They (tribal leaders) want to use it in its natural state," said retired
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Col. Terry Rice, now an engineering consultant
for the Miccosukee Tribe.

Col. Robert Carpenter, Jacksonville district engineer for the corps, said
Thursday that he had been trying to work out such a deal.

The corps is the federal partner, with the South Florida Water Management
District, for Everglades restoration, which includes the Southern Golden
Gate Estates project.

Under a special financing scheme, Florida is using its own money to restore
Southern Golden Gate Estates instead of waiting for federal money.

Carpenter said he had been unable to get his talks with the tribe to the
point where he could be confident that tribal activities wouldn't interfere
with the restoration.

"The state did what they needed to do, the right thing, to continue to move
forward," Carpenter said.

Barnett said it was only fair for the state to seek title to the tribe's
land because the DEP had pursued title to every other parcel in the buyout
area.

"In the eyes of the state, they are a landowner like any other landowner,"
Barnett said.

He said Florida allows the Miccosukees to use public land in other parts of
South Florida for their tribal customs, and Southern Golden Gate Estates,
also known as Picayune Strand State Forest, ought to be no different.

"We would like to pursue this type of opportunity within Picayune Strand as
well," Barnett said.

The DEP's court fight with the Miccosukees puts a contentious cap on what
has been a rocky and prolonged buyout.

To this day, the buyout is a rallying cry for property rights advocates
upset with the way the state treated landowners in Southern Golden Gate
Estates.

Southern Golden Gate Estates landowners from all over the world filed
lawsuits in 1988 and 1992 charging that the state had effectively condemned
their land by putting it on a state acquisition list, asking low prices for
it and making it difficult to build there.

In 1997, thousands of landowners agreed to a settlement by which the state
and landowners would agree on new and binding appraisals.

The settlement, followed by a $25 million infusion of federal cash, jump-
started the buyout.

Starting in 2002, Gov. Jeb Bush and the Cabinet authorized the DEP to use
eminent domain to acquire land in Southern Golden Gate Estates.

Collier circuit court judges handled some 1,800 eminent domain cases in
Southern Golden Gate Estates.

http://naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/
0,2071,NPDN_14940_3809907,00.html

Miccosukees forced to give up land to Glades restoration

2005-06-02T11:00:00.000-07:00

May, Salt, Col Carpenter

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

It seems the courts and State know how to treat all people the same under the U S Constitution and Bill of Rights.

You know you should treat the Airboat Club of Florida as you have treated their independent Indian neighbors. To not treat them the same would be consider what?

Since non-Indians had to sell their land in this project that is a part of CERP and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration then the reverse is true too. The treatment given to the two independent Indian villages must be provided to all other landowners who are in these projects. This includes MOD Waters because MOD Waters is a part of South Florida Ecosystem Restoration. Remember this was stated and supported many times by the Sustainable, which you and your agency participated in. At no time did DOI, NPS, USACoE object to this position. You all agreed to this concept of no losers, the entire system is being restored, so live to your agreement. Figure out to make them whole.

Thanks,

Jack Moller,Commissioner Sustainable Commission of S. Florida

CC: National Sportsman List

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

Miccosukees forced to give up land to Glades restoration

By ERIC STAATS, emstaats@naplesnews.com

May 27, 2005

http://naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/
0,2071,NPDN_14940_3809907,00.html

Florida's ambitious and controversial land buyout to make way for Southern
Golden Gate Estates restoration has reached a milestone, but the Miccosukee
Tribe of Indians is not celebrating.

Collier County Circuit Judge Ted Brousseau signed an order May 17 forcing
the tribe to give up more than 800 acres it owns in the restoration area in
exchange for $2.2 million from the state.

The tribe's land was the last of some 19,000 parcels the DEP has been
trying to acquire since 1983 across 55,000 acres of the failed subdivision.
The land cost more than $111 million, according to state figures. State and
federal money paid for it.

Surprising (not really though) quotes from "Greenies"

2005-06-02T10:58:00.000-07:00

Here is a link to several quotes by environmentalists. Folks, I thought they could be reasoned with. I thought maybe "greenies" were just misguided. They are not. They believe what they say. Whether they have looked at our side and dismissed our philosophy (for whatever reason) or they would never consider looking at anything other than their own perspective, greenies who are in it this deep, may never accept man as anything other than a menace to the world, a blight to be erradicated from nature and our forests.

Now, here is the link:
http://htomc.dns2go.com/text/ENVIRO.TXT

ACoE and DOI attack diverse cultures pg.2

2005-05-24T15:34:00.000-07:00

So, what assurances can you provide, I mean you in the global tense here, that you will keep this cultural study of sportsmen in S Florida from being used against us? Maybe a treaty would be a good idea. You seem to honor them, as indicated by the way our neighbor down the street-The Cypress family village, an independent Indian village- was treated.

In my opinion, the first thing you must do is figure out how to restart the budding trust that, was in an infancy stage, from the work done by the Sustainable. I do not think the $11.6-million spent on public outreach to develop trust has been successful. What measures do you have to show that any group in S Florida or Florida trust you more today than they did in 1992? How are you accounting for, and measuring, this objective of the funding directions from Congress?

You both know these are not new issues for me, and that I have raised them in numerous public meetings. The last time was with Mr. Michael Davis who responded that I, you, can trust him and his word is good. Well, he is gone and so are his words, thus you attack the culture of the sportsmen and the Airboat Association of Florida. An organization who was historically important enough that they were not a part of the Everglades National Park Expansion. Congress and the Nation determined their historical cultural values when they drew the boundary of Everglades National Park around them. Why is it that you continue to want fail to honor this value?

I will close by, informing you that many, many people are telling me the only way to make Everglades Restoration Work is by removing the involvement of the Federal agencies and allowing the State to continue moving forward. I have heard no sportsmen say they support, believe, trust or like having the Federal agencies in their backyard. In fact, it is just the opposite, they all say get the Federal agencies to return to Washington and return the natural resources to Florida that have been assigned to the DOI to manage.

I look forward to hearing from you and will share your response with my national sportsmen's list.

Jack Moller

self

Commissioner, Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South FL.

cc: National Sportsman's list

ACoE and DOI attack diverse Culutres

2005-05-24T15:27:00.000-07:00

Mr May and Mr Salt;

DOI-South Flolrida Ecosystem Restoration

Your people are certainly consistent in locking up land. I suspect some folks with experience will contact this poor rural part of the USA and explain the DOI and ACoE is not the savior they think they are. Their money and involvement will finish destroying the local culture and remove them from their lands.

On the subject of culture.

I understand you, DOI/ACoE, has hired a person to do a study on and complete a report about the culture of the sportsmen of S. Florida. This is interesting. Now that you have seen a little opposition to your de-peopling plans, and some impacts on DOI desires to name US41 a National Scenic Highway, and then taking it over; you are starting to implement the part of the Sustainable Commission's report to protect the diverse culture of the area. I am sure you remember this document. You know, the one you supported and sent to the President and Congress.

The DOI/NPS has already done one such study on the Big Cypress National Preserve. I suggest you get a copy. However, if I am asked; should we, the sportsmen, talk with this new person I am not sure I can encourage this communication, at this time. Why is this? Because the DOI/NPS/BICY used the last cultural study to target all the items of our culture that were/are important to us in their overly aggressive and abusive ORV management plan. A plan created to destroy the local culture, and a plan that violates that part of the Sustainable report.

The questions that must first be answered and responded to in a manner that assures all sportsmen in S. Florida, Florida and now the nation is: What are you doing this study for, and, how will it be used? These questions go back to the long standing problem the Federal people have had; the integrity of their word. You two may say what folks want to hear, but that does not stop the next person(s), the Donahues and Clintons of the world, from doing something else with the information you gleam from us.

Closings pg. 2

2005-05-24T11:50:00.000-07:00

In Virginia the Manassas Battlefield National Park has prevented the
improvement of the two State highways through the Park for years. Now the
Federal government proposes to close the two highways. Commuters and local
drivers have been disadvantaged for years and now their displacement will be
complete. Would this battlefield be any better managed by the State
government or even a private contractor who would be powerless to claim
surrounding lands or the access of drivers using public roads?

As the US Fish and Wildlife Service buys new refuges by promising to keep
hunting open and then close hunting after they get Congressional approval
(Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge) they help destroy hunting. As
they tell Arkansas duck hunters that duck hunting in Arkansas may have to be
"regulated" (i.e. restricted) because of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker
"discovery" they assist the radical anti-hunting organizations steady
constriction of hunting. Since most National refuges were authorized by
Congress for waterfowl habitat because of the strong desire to maintain
huntable waterfowl populations, should refuges be closed and transferred as
hunting is restricted as happens with military bases? When refuges that
were purchased with the clear intent to provide hunting, fishing, and
trapping no longer provide these things, should they be closed? When
Federal Refuge personnel are opponents of hunting, fishing, and trapping;
how do they differ from Defense or military personnel who are opponents of
war? How is it that we condone the switch of such lands from wild plant and
animal uses to no-management, no-use enclaves without Congressional
authorization? Could we switch military bases and personnel from their
current duties to anti-war activist centers simply because the Secretary of
Defense and the generals said so? I don't think so.

How about the National Forests? As they become Wilderness Areas of no use
or management, as they become no-timber-use and no-timber management areas,
as they no longer generate revenue, as they become fire hazards to the
States and communities where they exist, as they no longer provide hunting
due to predators and restrictions, as they no longer allow stocking of
desirable fish species, as they prohibit dogs and horses and camping and all
manner of uses, as they close access roads, as they force out grazing and
ranchers.., at what point do they reach the redundancy level of a military
base that no longer provides the purpose for which it was created? What
would be the effect of transfer to State ownership? Well for starters,
State politicians would provide management, use, and revenue or they would
be voted out of office - try that with the Federal politicians. For that
matter, what would be wrong with private ownership? Home building, roads,
logging, big game, ranches, strong local communities, control of the
politicians that control the area, lower lumber prices, families, a stronger
economy all sound a lot better to me.

The lands under the Bureau of Land Management (the biggest acreage) have
been redundant for years. They originally remained in Federal ownership to
provide grazing and hunting and fishing and mining and roads to citizens in
an environment where 19th century living dictated a sparse population would
live forevermore. That is no longer the case. Placing those lands, in
whole or in part under State ownership (where State politicians must of
necessity be responsive or hit the road, unlike their Federal cousins) or
even better under private ownership would instantly create an economic boom
authorization? Could we switch military bases and personnel from their
current duties to anti-war activist centers simply because the Secretary of
Defense and the generals said so? I don't think so.

How about the National Forests? As they become Wilderness Areas of no use
or management, as they become no-timber-use and no-timber management areas,
as they no longer generate revenue, as they become fire hazards to the
States and communities where they exist, as they no longer provide hunting
due to predators and restrictions, as they no longer allow stocking of
desirable fish species, as they prohibit dogs and horses and camping and all
manner of uses, as they close access roads, as they force out grazing and
ranchers.., at what point do they reach the redundancy level of a military
base that no longer provides the purpose for which it was created? What
would be the effect of transfer to State ownership? Well for starters,
State politicians would provide management, use, and revenue or they would
be voted out of office - try that with the Federal politicians. For that
matter, what would be wrong with private ownership? Home building, roads,
logging, big game, ranches, strong local communities, control of the
politicians that control the area, lower lumber prices, families, a stronger
economy all sound a lot better to me.

The lands under the Bureau of Land Management (the biggest acreage) have
been redundant for years. They originally remained in Federal ownership to
provide grazing and hunting and fishing and mining and roads to citizens in
an environment where 19th century living dictated a sparse population would
live forevermore. That is no longer the case. Placing those lands, in
whole or in part under State ownership (where State politicians must of
necessity be responsive or hit the road, unlike their Federal cousins) or
even better under private ownership would instantly create an economic boom
in the west and an explosion of freedom as an increasingly oppressive
Federal presence would lighten considerably. Who could even question the
desirability of State or private owners managing the natural resources of
these lands far better than the remote Federal bureaucrats serving national
agendas of no-use, no-access, and no-management? Imagine for a moment the
opportunities throughout the west for ranch improvements, city and town job
creations, for kids to find work where they grow up, for schools and taxes
at the local level where local control can be exerted.

Finally, consider the revenue to the Federal government for the sale of
lands. Think deficit and your tax bill. Think of the potential for local
taxes. Taxes that, like lands transferred to State and local ownership, we
control locally. Think of the change in the national rural/urban balance of
power (the red/blue county map) and what it would mean for amendment of the
Endangered Species Act, or taking without compensation, or new Treaties or
Conventions with the UN. Think of these things and smile.

This could all be done like military base closings by keeping what we need
for truly legitimate national purposes. The other stuff, you know the stuff
that allows the Boston apartment dweller and the L.A. commuter to dictate to
eastern Oregon or West Virginians, why not put it up for closure and
transfer and let Congress take a look at it, just like these base closings.
What is needed is politicians that realize funds absorbed by these lands are
every bit as precious as military funds. Politicians are the ones that must
control and direct the bureaucrats. What we need is leadership that bites
bullets instead of catering to the whims of various and sundry groups in
order to get reelected. Like the Marines we need a few good men.

Jim Beers

23 May 2005

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:

JimBeers7@earthlink.net

Closings pg.1

2005-05-24T11:49:00.000-07:00

CLOSINGS

The President has proposed and Congress is considering the closure and
disposition of many military bases as I am writing this article. The
newspapers have recently given prominent attention to both the rationale for
closing certain bases and the effect this will have on various areas and
economies. Those bases that are duplicative and those that are no longer
needed for weapons testing or training are to be turned over to States or
cities or counties or even the private sector. We accept these decisions
when we understand that national defense no longer depends on certain bases
proposed for closure and the costs of simply holding such lands is
prohibitive just as we accept the fact that lands under the control of local
government or the private sector are more useful to society.

The exact opposite rationale is applied to Federal land ownership when we
discuss National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, National Forests, and the
lands under the control of the Bureau of Land Management. For instance,
current national trends spurred on by bureaucrats, politicians, and
extremist organizations aim to eliminate all logging on National Forests.
While the Forests were established to provide timber, and create wildlife
uses and fire control utilizing managed timber harvests, and to generate
revenue by the sale of timber; no one calls for the closure of particular
Forests when they no longer serve their Congressionally intended purpose.
They are like military bases that the government decides should no longer be
bases but just fenced areas where bureaucrats and certain people (those who
can pay entrance fees or the young and fit say) only can enter and recreate
in specified areas and specified ways under permit.

I recently visited Zion and Bryce National Parks in southern Utah. Forty
years ago there were more roads and access and they were free. Today,
visitors are crowded on a single road and each visit costs $20. Would the
giant rock formations no longer be there if the State of Utah or a private
owner owned the park? Would you (in the case of Zion) have to pay $20 to
use a State highway in an area where alternatives are non-existent?

Also interested in Global Warming?

2005-05-23T19:05:00.000-07:00

Here is a link to a good friend of mine. We "met" at Protest Warriors and found we share the same thoughts and interests. Since he knows more about the Global Warming arena, I branched out to environmental issues.

Check out his site. He updates his site about once a week: http://anti-environmental.com/

Dinner Island

2005-05-23T18:49:00.000-07:00

If you are interested in Dinner Island WMA you need to call FWC can get a copy of their first management plan for this unit. ARC will consider and most likely act on the plan on June 2 and 3, 2005.

To obtain a copy of the management prospectus for the Dinner Island WMA, contact the FWC Land Management Planning Section, 620 S. Meridian St., Tallahassee, or call (850) 410-0656 ext. 17331

Meeting announcement. Try to attend!

2005-05-23T17:45:00.000-07:00

SFWMD Public Meetings

Try to attend if you can

Monday May 23, 6:30 pm Kissimmee Civic Center, Kissimmee 407-935-1412

Thursday, May 26, 6:30 pm SFWMD, Lower Westcoast Service Center, 2301 McGregor Blvd, Ft Myers 800-248-1201

Monday, June 6, 6:30 pm IGF Fishing Hall of Fame, Dania Beach 954-922-4212

Thursday June 9, 6:30 pm SFWMD Okeechobee Service Center, 2501 N Parrot Ave, Okeechobee 800-250-4200

CONTACTS: Randy Smith Office: (561) 682-6197 Cellular: (561) 389-3386

THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND
Workshops offered to gather public feedback
on recreational use on public lands
The South Florida Water Management District is the steward for approximately
375,000 acres of public land. Over the years, the agency has taken great
strides to expand public recreational use opportunities on land purchased
with public dollars - and it keeps getting better.
As the agency continues its aggressive pace to acquire land for Everglades
restoration and other ecosystem restoration and water resource projects, it
is taking proactive efforts to enhance and expand its recreational use
program throughout its 16-county jurisdiction.

The South Florida Water Management District is hosting a series of workshops
to gather public feedback and comments on rules for the agency's
recreational use program. From hiking, fishing, camping, bird-watching,
horseback riding, nature study, cycling, hunting and more, the workshops
will provide citizens the opportunity to tell the District what recreational
features they would like to see on District-managed public lands while
protecting natural resources and intended land use priorities.
Monday, June 6
6:30 p.m.
IGFA Fishing Hall of Fame
300 Gulf Stream Way
Dania Beach
(954) 922-4212

Airboat Leg. pg.2

2005-05-23T17:40:00.000-07:00

We need to gather a number of house & senate sponsors & co-sponsors before June 15. If you want to volunteer to be a leader in this effort, contact me for a full presentation. Later in the summer, we need start visiting our elected offices in numbers. THIS MEANS YOU!

Now is the time to stop complaining and ACT! This is very important to our future so I hope you treat as such. It will take less than an hour for you to stop by your Representatives office & ask for his support, so this requires very little effort on your part.

Last, an FYI. It has taken a number of us over 3 years, countless meetings and hundreds of hours of UNPAID time to arrive at this point. Either we (YOU) act now & get this passed in 2006 or we will just continue a slide in the areas we can operate. I think if this window passes (2006) there will not be sufficient volunteer effort and political climate to achieve this legislation in the future.

Happy hunting,

***************************************

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/05/23/State
/Pressure_for_permissi.shtml

To add my input here; I have never been on an airboat, yet I am doing something to save the sport for others. Surely those who love the sport can take the time to do something to save it as well. I am sure you will find your representatives would love to see you, instead of being pursued by those trying to take your rights away from you!

Airboat Legislation pg.1

2005-05-23T17:36:00.000-07:00

Hi,

I hope you have time to read the story below. The point to note is the response government agencies have to inquiries by elected officials. While we may not have deep pockets, personal appearances by constituents will gain results.

The Florida Airboat Association has accepted proposed legislation for the 2006 legislative season. In order to gain this legislation, I ask each of you to contact your state House & Senate members this summer. This could very well be the most important proposal to offer safeguards to our activities, so I hope each one of you will invest less time than it takes to watch a football or baseball game & go visit your representatives.

327.60 Local regulations; limitations

The proposed legislation has five key elements:

1) Changes the state enabling act for vessel sound the counties can adopt from 90db@50' to 94db@100'. This level will allow us to power up to get on a plane.

2) Requires a "modern, stock factory muffling" devise capable of adequately muffling the sound of the exhaust of the engine. This means "a muffler." This is long overdue.

3) Defines an airboat in the statues.

4) Adds the words "an airboat" to the non discriminatory clause of the statues. This is a very important point as it will make an airboat "equal" to an other vessel in the eyes of the law.

5) Adds SAE J1970 sound testing standards to the statue. This is a shoreline or property line test of 100' or greater, with the vessel operating on a plane, tested by professional grade sound equipment.

Survey, make your voice heard!

2005-05-16T11:00:00.000-07:00

URGENT !!
TAKE FWC Stakeholder Survey
Must be completed by May 20

Standing Watch Action Alert
Posted Monday, May 16, 2005

Standing Watch Members and Friends
PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT AND TAKE THIS SURVEY.

It is about the financial future of FWC and their desire to RAISE FEES...so it's important to take the time to do this.

ALSO: Please forward it to your friends and relatives and ask each person to take the survey and put in Standing Watch's name where appropriate...you'll see when you start it.

www.fwcteam.com/members

John Kinney
Standing Watch

Urgent action needed!

2005-05-16T10:35:00.000-07:00

URGENT !!
Ask Governor Jeb Bush to sign HB 989
Standing Watch Action Alert
Posted Monday, May 16, 2005

HB 0989 Relating to Public Marinas/Boat Ramps/DEP Mayfield
Public Marinas/Boat Ramps/DEP; directs DEP to adopt rules to authorize local governments to construct & maintain all facilities, including public marinas & boat ramps; exempts certain facilities from development-of-regional-impact review; provides for regulatory criteria & for use of submerged lands; revises permit exemption requirements for floating vessel platforms or floating boat lifts. Amends 373.118, 403.183. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2005.

THE GOVERNOR IS STILL THREATENING TO VETO HB 989!
WE MUST GET CARDS AND LETTERS AND/OR EMAILS TO HIM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

Jeb Bush, Governor
jeb.bush@myflorida.com
850 / 488-4441

Here is the message:

I AM A FLORIDA BOATER. I SUPPORT HB 989. THIS BILL HAD UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS EVERYTIME IT WAS VOTED UPON ON THE HOUSE AND SENATE FLOOR.

WE ARE LOSING WATER ACCESS EVERY DAY AND THIS BILL WILL HELP US GET THE BOAT RAMPS AND PARKING LOTS WE SO DESPERATELY NEED. IT KEEPS THESE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN WHICH WE ALSO NEED.

PLEASE SIGN HB 989.

THANK YOU,
NAME
ADDRESS

Letter to Ms. Scarlett Ass. Sec Management, Policy and Budget, U.S. DOI

2005-05-14T21:27:00.000-07:00

Ms. Lynn Scarlett

Assistant Secretary Management, Policy

& Budget, U.S. Dept. of Interior

Ms. Scarlett,

I have serious concerns about DOI current program concerning the Ivory billed woodpecker. Quite frankly, to give 10 million dollars to The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and other groups through the Corridor of Hope program seems a little premature. So far the only evidence presented is an extremely poor quality videotape, Hard to believe in the digital age this was the best they could present. Other so called evidence was the tapping sounds on the wood. What are they using as a baseline study on these sounds. No one has seen this bird since the 1940's, an age when radios were half the size of refrigerators, and recording equipment was as large and poor quality. I find it difficult to believe that this could have been taken into remote wet areas at that time.Are copies of these sounds available through your agency? TNC and other groups are agenda driven, and just taking their word for it without having their discovery verified by independent groups isn't the best use of taxpayer money. Before we spend 10 million there needs to be some due diligence.

1.Is the video authentic or has it been enhanced?

2. Is this just one bird, or possibly a bred pilated or illegally imported from Cuba.

3. A simple fallen feather could provide DNA evidence.

I am not accusing TNC of illegal activity, however this needs to be fully addressed before further funding is granted.

I'll be the first to admit, I am no ornithologist, just a dumb Florida redneck, so for a minute lets take TNC at their word. Please explain how could this bird go undetected by USFWS for 60 years? We are not talking a microscopic organism, or a small nocturnal bird here, we are talking about a large bird referred to as "The Lord God King Bird". I live in semi-rural Collier County FL and when a pilated woodpecker (distant cousin of the ivory bill) is within a quarter mile, you know it. With an army of state and federal biologist running around you really expect me to believe no one detected it? If so how many other endangered species have gone undetected for the last 60 years. How many FL panthers, manatees,red-cockaded woodpeckers have managed to elude your agency? A professor from FL Gulf Coast Univ. is now claiming there are 3 unconfirmed sightings of ivory bills in Big Cypress, and one in Fakahatchee Strand right under your noses. Granted your agency didn't make that claim but If TNC is right, your data on all endangered species is so flawed it should be thrown out and warrant congressional investigation. Recently I toured an area with a USFWS biologist, Kim Dryden, looking at recreational opportunities. During the tour she said we had to consider not only what species are there now, but what might be there in the next 50 years. Interesting statement, being how your not sure what has been there for the last 50.

Hopefully your agency will find out what is wrong with this issue, and not take your usual action of throwing out money, denying hunting, recreational, and property rights.

I look foward to your reply.

Brian McMahon

Outrageous issues involving Florida Panther Refuge!

2005-05-10T13:11:00.000-07:00

I am hoping to get the original letter that was sent, however this should be enough to outrage all of us for right now!

Please note that Ms. Hamilton claims the land is hers. She needs to be reminded this land belongs to us, not her. She is given the privilage of managing it for us, and if she doesn't do her job right, we can find someone else who will appreciate the responsibility given them, not abuse it!

"Rob Batron

WRAC Commissioner and

Chair of the Recreation subcommittee

I received a lengthy letter from Lynn Hamilton, the Fl Panther NWR manager. The letter did not answer the question I ask: Where in the legislation does it say we cannot hunt on the the NWR?

She did explain everything I already knew because I participated in their farce, trumpt up, management plan process. A process that was not truly transparent and controled by the then anti-hunting anti-use Clinton appointed manager of this NWR. The staff of the Florida Panther NWR would tell John DiNunizo and I in the hall way of these meetings that hunting of deer and hogs could take place in the Fl Panther NWR and not harm the wildlife population and not harm the panther.t They would go on to say the refuge manager would not allow them to speak up on this issue with these truths.

Thus the current plan was developed with control of the facts, science if you like, and with the preceived management objective of not allowing people to use or hunt this NWR.

The real failure of Ms Lynn Hamilton's letter is that it shows she does not even know the history of the land she is managing. This was one of the reason we tried to get the USFWS to include in their management plan's history section that hunting was a part of this lands history. We need in writing a true history of the land so future generations will know what we know not what the Federal re-write wants people to know. She states that the land was private before it became public. She states that because the land was private it was not hunted. She states that the land was only used for grazing. Well, all this is some what ture. But in good Federal fashion she is trying to re-wright history. True the land was private, true the land was used for cattle grazing and not true the land was not hunted. The truth about hunting is that the land was leased to a hunt club of 40 individuals, Fakahatchee Conservation and hunt club. These individuals all had to either pay for the up keep and use of the land as a hunt club or bring one visitor each weekend of the hunting seasons who paid $40 to hunt on the club's ground (now the Florida Panther NWR). However, the anti-hunting Clinton manager would not include information about the hunting on this land in his management plan. The USFWS calls this the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP).

The really dangerous statements in Ms Hamilton's letter is that the USFWS, even under her leadership, does not realize that they are causing the human relation problems between man and panther and its release in the other parts of the cat's original home range. She states that hunting cannot take place because a panther might get shot. She sights the shooting of a Texas release panther in 1998 as why hunting cannot take place on her land. Well, she does not state that the reason this Texas panther was shot was becaue of the fear people have from the way Ms Hamilton continues to manage this NWR. No one wants this cat on their land or in their area because it will be used to stop what they enjoy doing. She could change all this by changing her CCP.

She does point out that there is a lot of land to hunt on in SW FL. But she does not admit that no panther has been shot on all these other lands even by a deer, hog, turkey or small game hunter. Hunters enjoy seeing these cats when they get the rare opportunity to see them. Thus she has totally attempted to mislead the reader of her letter and make the uniformed reader think she is managing this NWR in such a manner because she fears a MAYBE action by humans. This is not the way to manage public land or society. Following her logica she would outlaw guns becasue someone might rob a bank with it. Her attempt to move the issue of hunting to other units is a red herring and avoids the real reason for the need to allow hunting on her land. She does not, yet, realize that her actions are doing more harm to the panther's ultimate survival than the few deer hunters may take from this NWR.

In Ms Hamilton's attempt to shift the issue of hunting to other land units in SW FL she points out that the Picayune Strand State Forest allows hunting. What she does not state is that it was her agency and she who stopped the Florida Department of Forestery from issuing special use permits to allow hunters use of ORVs to access this hugh area. Thus while it is true that hunting is allowed, like the Big Cypress National Preserve, hunters are denied reasonable access to allow them to hunt. This action by Ms Hamilton and the USFWS further provides proof to people in the panthers original home range that if the cat is re-introduced there it will stop them from hunting. If not directly it will do so indirectly by denial of reasonable access.

She attempts to make the reader believe that the USFW supports hunting, I suppose this is so we will continue to support taxing ourselves via the sporting goods tax, by pointing out that hunting on the Loxihatchee NWR is allowed: Duck hunting. She does not say that only a small part of this is NWR is open to hunting. She does not say that deer and hog hunting are no longer legal under the CCP of the USFWS philosophy.

She does get down to the turth about why hunting is not allowed today on this NWR. She points out she has been charged with manageing this land but does not have enough money to manage this unit even without hunting. It is obvious we have given too much land to the USFWS and Federal Government when they are establishing management position because they do not have the staff to do the job. We must give serious consideration to what this means and how we assign public property to what agency to manage. It also follows what is happening with CERP. The Fed's say we will do this but then do not get the money. They then continue to seek absolute control of the land and management of it even though they cannot manage the land properly.

Ms Hamilton avoids the truth in that she does not recognize before the land was an NWR that the area was a center of panther movement and the land had hunting, hunting with dogs, ORV use without regulation, and human use all year long because of the cattle grazing and hunt lease owners. I know this because I had good friends in this hunt lease.

Ms. Hamilon's summary statement is a good example of what is wrong with the USFWS. She provides a long list of work that she would have to do to manage her land. This is not any different than what the Florida Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Commission or Florida Divsion of Forestry would have to do. In short the employees of this NWR would have to work to allow hunting and they do not want to do this. I get from her summary that she wants money to allow her to consider allowing hunting on her land. The bottom line is money not species protection. Why don't we consider giving this unit to the Indian tribes of Florida. They have money. They allow hunting on their lands in the west. They allow hunting on their lands in Florida and they have panther on these lands. We need to consider new ways of doing business because the Federal people are how many trillion dollars in the red?

She does say hunting was considered during the development of the CCP. However, she does not say that the Florida Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Commission (FWS) supported deer and hog hunting in the Florida Panther NWR when the CCP was being planned. This is but another example of how the Federal people do not work with the State of Florida, they fail to recognize the professionalism of the FWC.

It is too bad that Ms Hamilton, with such a responsible job and representing all the people of America, could not present a truthful and balanced position in her letter.

Rob, thanks for taking the time to look into this for all the sportsmen of America and for uncovering the fact that even with the new USFWS law and a change in Administration the USFWS continues to operate as it did under the Clinton Administration in S. Florida.

I encourage you to continue attempting to change the way the USFWS and DOI work in S. Florida and America. They are using my tax dollars to keep hunters off of hunting land in America.

Jack Moller

Self

Katy, Tx"

Battle won, but the war is not over!

2005-05-10T12:53:00.000-07:00

Progress has been made. Many folks have been working on getting more access for motorized recreation in our state. This link lets you know of the victory won for this battle, now, it is up to all of us to win the war!

http://www.floridatrailriders.org/articles/landuse.htm

A site for those interested in hunting in Florida.

2005-05-07T20:57:00.000-07:00

The title says it all, here is the link:
http://www.responsivemanagement.com/

Shenanigans Pg. 2

2005-05-06T16:48:00.000-07:00

>From the National Wildlife Federation -

"This discovery is also further proof why the ill-conceived $300 million
Grand Prairie pump-canal-and-pipeline project that threatens to drain the
White River water flow through these National Wildlife Refuges and other
adjoining conservation areas is one of the worst ideas ever presented to the
American public by the U.S. Corps of Engineers.

"Using the safety net provided to imperiled wildlife by the
Endangered Species Act, we can now look forward to the day our children will
enjoy seeing the ivory-billed woodpecker recovering in the wild."

>From Greenwire-

"The discovery demonstrates there is hope for species on the brink of
extinction, said Tess Present, science director at the Audubon Society.
"Even if things look grim for other species, if there's action we can take
to turn this around we need to do that, no matter how slim the chances may
be."
Endangered Species Act implications?
The discovery was announced as members of Congress are taking a strong look
at revisions to the Endangered Species Act, long criticized by many Western
Republicans as a hindrance to public lands management and private property
rights as well as having failed to adequately recover listed species.
"We can hope this rediscovery might indicate a new chapter in bird
conservation where perhaps a new symbol of bird conservation in the Americas
will stimulate a national will to save other species as well," Shire said.
"We shouldn't need to rediscover the ivory-billed woodpecker to want to
preserve the Endangered Species Act rather than weaken it, but maybe this is
the shot in the arm the act needs."

Also on 28 April, the Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton, had a large
press conference to announce all this with the following groups in
attendance with her -

Mike Johanns, Secretary of Agriculture
John Fitzpatrick, Ph.D., Director, Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Katrina Kelner, Ph.D., Deputy Editor, Life Sciences, The
Journal Science
Steve McCormick, President, The Nature Conservancy
Scott Simon, Arkansas Director, The Nature Conservancy
Scott Henderson, Director, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission

I apologize, but I find it incredible that all the Ornithology University
professors and graduate students in the US have accepted as extinct a bird
existing in the middle of the nation for 60 years. I further find it
incredible that all the loggers, mushroom hunters, fishermen, duck hunters,
deer hunters, turkey hunters, alligator hunters, trappers, rural residents,
birdwatchers and other assorted woodland users have been blithely unaware of
the existence of this bird for 60 years. One never crossed a road or a
stream or field or pasture? The same professors that assure us (and the
Courts) that there are only X numbers of this "endangered" plant or that
"invasive" animal missed this bird for 60 years?

How long did the US Fish and Wildlife Service know of this? A year?
Longer? How long did the US Department of the Interior know of this? How
long did these bureaucrats keep us (the public) in the dark as they schemed
with the National Wildlife Federation and The Nature Conservancy et al to
announce this in connection with "ill-conceived" Corps of Engineer projects
or "as members of Congress are taking a strong look at revisions to the
Endangered Species Act"? Likewise The Nature Conservancy plug (for more
money or tax breaks or both) that TNC "has protected a large segment of land
in the area". Are we children that our own employees (sic bureaucrats) keep
us in the dark? Are we only to be told things known to our own employees
when proper provision is made to propagandize us about the need for the ESA
to remain untouched or more government/NGO land control or the need to
eliminate certain Corps of Engineers projects?

In order to seek answers to these questions, I have today filed a Freedom of
Information Act request with the Secretary of the Interior, the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service. A copy of the primary FOIA
is attached to this article. I am publicizing this because I am but one
person. I have seen how the government hides documents, releases partial
information and otherwise frustrates citizen requests. One need only look
at the shameful treatment in Federal Court and by the Federal agencies of
the National Wilderness Institute attempt 5 years ago to document and stop
the dumping of toxic material twice a month at night for decades into the
Potomac River flowing by the District of Columbia by the Corps of Engineers
through a National Park under a permit from EPA approved by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service onto the sole
spawning grounds of the Endangered Shortnose Sturgeon with the knowledge of
the DC government and the State of Maryland. Today the dumping continues
and the National Wilderness Institute is no more.

While I have provided my Congressman and my most reliable Senator a copy of
this request as well as the Senate Environment and Public Works and House
Resources Committee, I am unsure of any help from any of them if I get a run
around by the bureaucrats. I am asking you to look at the request and be
prepared to help out if information is not forthcoming or if there are
indications of illegality or policies that need to be changed that emerge in
the response. Information in the hands of concerned citizens is our best
defense and ultimately our best offense. I will try to keep you posted and
thanks for any support.

Jim Beers

4 May 2005

Ivory-billed Shenanigans

2005-05-05T11:46:00.000-07:00

IVORY-BILLED SHENANIGANS?

The 1942 book by James T. Tanner was dusty when I pulled it from my library
the other day. It has been years since I read it but it is still an
excellent example of the sort of wildlife biology and honesty that was once
prevalent in this nation. The title is The Ivory-billed Woodpecker. Mr.
Tanner was at that time a recent graduate of Cornell University and the
recipient of the Audubon Ivory-billed Woodpecker Fellowship. He had
participated in expeditions to the American South to find and document the
presence and status of "the largest North American woodpecker".

Mr. Tanner tells us the Ivory-bill is longer (20 inches) and "stockier" than
it's cousin the Southern Pileated Woodpecker (17 inches). In flight the
Ivory-bill "looks surprisingly like a pintail" (sic a duck). "By comparison
a Pileated is stocky with shorter wings, the tail is slightly forked, and
the white is on the front half of the wing." "The Ivory-bill's call
resembles very much the call of the Red-breasted Nuthatch, only of course
much louder." "There is little possibility of confusing the calls of the
Ivory-bill and the Pileated; both the tone and the form of the calls are
different. The mating call of the Pileated has some resemblance to that of
the Ivory-bill, but that is all. Once heard and recognized, the Ivory-bill's
call is not easily confused with any other sound to be heard in the woods;
it is a fine aid in identification."

The Ivory-bill has reportedly been extinct since 1946 (59 years). A
subspecies of Ivory-bill, barely distinguishable from ours, has been known
to exist for years in Cuba. On 28 April 2005 the following news items were
announced:

>From the Washington Post and Associated Press -

"The Nature Conservancy, which has protected a large segment of land in the
area, reported that the first sighting (sic of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker)
came on Feb. 11, 2004, by George
Sparling of Hot Springs, Ark.

After learning of the sighting, Tim Gallagher of Cornell and Bobby Harrison
of Oakwood College in Huntsville, Ark., traveled to the area with Sparling
and also sighted the bird. Other sightings followed, including one on April
25, 2004, in which David Luneau of the University of Arkansas at Little
Rock videotaped the bird taking off from the trunk of a tree.

The Nature Conservancy reported 15 sightings of the bird in 7,000 hours of
search time concentrating on a 16-square-mile area"

Think again. Pg. 3

2005-05-04T17:22:00.000-07:00

The reason this topic made it to this blog is very clear, once you read a comment by a South Florida Parks and Forests user.

Here is the comment, note to whom it is addressed:
Jay Slack
USFWS

"Great, kick out the sportsman and their swamp buggies because the USFWS says panthers do not come around or live where these folks are out. Then put in a USFWS swamp buggy to ride tourist around. Great move?!

I suppose this is what the future holds for all Federal lands. The only way a citizen can see their land is to get on a federal swamp-bus.

Do you really think the USFWS is helping the problems it faces in the rest of Florida by taking the actions they are in this refuge? So far the panther is not welcome in other parts of FL. Is it any wonder that it is not. If there are panthers, there is either no hunting and human access or there is such a reduction in use and access that the activity is not worth the effort and expense to go. The latter is a very real strategy by the Federals to stop hunting in FL."

Sit up and take notice folks! Your access IS threatened! No matter what sport you are involved in, this will happen to you if you do not get involved. To find a group that is involved with protecting public access to publically funded lands, read my first post on the environmental issues we all face here in our state!

Think again. Pg. 2

2005-05-04T17:21:00.000-07:00

He pointed out several ecosystems and the visitors looked around at the
pine flatwood with its pine trees, palms, understory and shrub, then a
willow head, lower and moister ground where the lime green willows grow,
and a hardwood hammock of oak and gumbo limbo, just behind the willow head.
Giardina noted that fire usually does not cross the moist ground of a
willow head, thus the hardwood hammock is rarely touched by fire. Jumping
down from his perch he turned the four-wheel drive locks on the vehicles
and the tour rolled on into the water of a cypress forest.

The refuge was established in 1989 and has been closed to the public except
for occasional educational tours. "This is a true refuge, like an oasis,
(for the panther)," Giardina explained. "When the refuge was created it
looked as though there was a good chance the panthers weren't going to make
it, so it made sense to have one little chunk of the puzzle closed to
humans."

Since its beginning, the refuge management strategy has revolved around
panthers. Giardina noted the kinds of management questions they ask, "What
do panthers need? They need space. They need deer, because deer is their
number one species they prey. What do deer need? They need nutritious
forage. What do we need to do to provide that? We need to do burns in
certain ways at certain time of year," because fire provides a place for
new growth of the kind of grasses the deer need. The root and goal of the
process has been the panther's survival.

"Panthers seem to be doing fairly well," Giardina noted, "but they are not
out of the woods. The panther habitat is like a wild zoo, and it will
always require intense management."

Brad Cornell noted that a major benefit of protecting the panther is that
the panther is an umbrella species. "If we can protect their habitat we
have protected a whole host of other wildlife species, including whole
ecosystems." This is because an adult male panther requires 200 square
miles of territory that includes a variety of ecosystems and their
inhabitants.

The Florida Panther Refuge is one small piece, just 26,400 acres, in a very
large area of panther habitat south of Lake Okeechobee, but within the
refuge there are 24 other species of mammals, birds and reptiles that are
listed as threatened, endangered, or of special concern as well as many of
the state's threatened and endangered native orchids. That makes the
Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge a very special place.

The small train of human visitors moved out from under the cypress canopy.
A swallow tailed kite flew overhead, clutching a lizard in its talons and
eating on the fly. One of the visitors commented she'd hadn't swatted one
mosquito. Giardina interpreted. So long as there is enough standing water
there are also many things to eat the mosquito larvae. It is all part of
the system that makes up the panther's habitat.

www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?
newsid=14418659&BRD=2605&PAG=461&dept_id=523946&rfi=6

Think it can't happen here? Think again! Pg1

2005-05-04T17:20:00.000-07:00

Panther Refuge welcomes visitors

By Carl Kelly

Naples Sun Times
http://www.naplessuntimes.com

04/27/2005

www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?
newsid=14418659&BRD=2605&PAG=461&dept_id=523946&rfi=6

Many Florida Panthers contracted feline leukemia this past yeart year, a disease
that seems to have jumped over from domestic cats. Many were tracked and
darted with a feline leukemia booster dart in an attempt to save them from
the disease. Panther #117.
http://images.zwire.com/local/Z/Zwire2605/zwire/images/ACF6492955.jpg

The panthers, the reclusive species that they are, failed to greet the
humans or show themselves. The visitors accepted the snub agreeably and
proceeded to their four-hour educational tour of the panthers' home. Oh, it
would have been nice to see the panthers. But, no matter. The object of the
day was to learn how and why the Florida Panther and its habitat are
protected.

The visitors climbed up high onto two swamp buggies, the first driven by
Dennis Giardina, biological science technician for the refuge and
guide/interpreter for the tour, the second by Brad Cornell, environmental
policy analyst for Collier County Audubon Society and tour organizer. The
buggies moved slowly, with a swaying, elephant-like motion, through wet
prairie, pine flatwood and cypress forest.

"The panther is one of the most endangered mammals in the world," Cornell
began his advocacy speech. "There are fewer than 100 of them left. This
refuge is the heart of their current territory." Although their numbers
were formerly reduced mainly by hunting, "Today their biggest threats are
cars on the road and loss of habitat."

The caravan of two vehicles rolled slowly across a wet prairie, then
stopped. Giardina climbed out of his seat and stood, one foot on a side
rail of the buggy, one on the back of his seat. "The habitat types here
depend upon two things," he began, "soils and elevation. When we talk about
elevation change here in South Florida we're talking about feet or
sometimes inches."

Orginization of the "greenies".

2005-05-04T17:19:00.000-07:00

I posted earlier about how organized the "greenies" are. How they are using the internet to get the word out to clubs and organizations via web pages, links and email. Here is another example: http://www.1000fof.org/Florida_Planning_Process/Florida_Planning_Main.asp

The good thing about this is not only are they getting the information out to their "groups" but we get that information as well. We learn how they are manipulating the system, how they are contacting our politicians and how we can make our voice heard just as they are making their voice heard. The main advantage they have right now, is that their people do write emails and letters, they make phone calls and attend meetings. We must do the same.

Links for GOOD Four Wheelers

2005-05-04T17:17:00.000-07:00

Here are some links for those Four Wheelers who are environmentally friendly and would like to find others who are like minded! Please pass these around!

http://www.sharetrails.org/

http://www.treadlightly.org/

and how could I not add this one? If you are interested in environmental issues and how they apply to off-roading, check out the Land Use/Volunteer Ranger forum.

http://www.floridajeepers.net

I will probably be adding to this post, so check back often.

Environmentalists Utilize the Web

2005-05-04T17:16:00.000-07:00

As I continue my research, I am finding out just how organized the environmentalist groups are. I would like to take this time to clarify something. An evnironmentalist is someone who actively participates in the protection and care of the environment. That is something most people who play outdoors in the forests and parks of our great country do! For the purposes of this blog, environmentalist groups are groups that are trying to close parks and forests to public recreation usage.

These groups have email lists, they have pages dedicated to sending canned emails to our states' representatives. They will even send the email for you, using your name, place of residence, etc. It is time we, the Silent Majority wake up and realize what is going on.

A couple of links Florida's outdoor recreationists should keep an eye on are:

http://www.fwfonline.org/

http://www.floridaca.org

and

http://flan.e-actionmax.com

Florida's Environmental Issues

2005-05-04T17:15:00.000-07:00

I am new to this endeavour. I will be posting information, links, contacts, etc. as I delve into this world. Through my research, I have found this site: www.f-r-a-n.org while the site is not operational yet, it is a good place to go to find links to out door groups who use state parks and forests; groups like Florida's Outdoor Alliance, or Standing Watch, or Coastal Conservation Association. Links to these and other organizations are on the F.R.A.N. site under the Participants link.

Whenever getting involved in issues like this, one must be aware of the vocabulary used in writing bills, in how organizations promote thier particular side of an issue, and how that will effect your rights. This is the most important part of the research. It is very important that folks understand how things are worded in bills, and as I post information on the issues, bills and potential closings, I will make sure key words that are red flags for a hidden agenda are known to the public.

Please feel free to add links, bill numbers/names, and other important issues that we Florida residents and public recreational users should be aware of. I am hoping this will be a place folks can come to from all over the state to gather information and learn more about issues that effect them personally.

Manatees need off Endangered Species list. Pg. 2

2005-05-04T16:58:00.001-07:00

From 1981 to 1986, four additional records were reported by O¹Shea (1988).
Between 1986 and 1992, an additional 25 records were recorded by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR).
Thus, only 52 records of manatees in the state were documented over a period of 142 years (1850 - 1992), suggesting that manatees are rare visitors in South Carolina.

During the summer of 1993, SCDNR began a project to document manatees in our state waters. We placed posters in many of the coastal marinas in the state requesting information on manatees. Several news releases were issued and we were somewhat surprised when 77 reports of manatees were received. Most sightings were along the south coast, but regular reports were received from the entire coast. During 1994 and 1995, we received an additional 40 and 32 manatee reports, respectively. Between 1996 and 2003, an additional 848 manatees were reported. The greater number of sightings in recent years may reflect the public's increased awareness of manatees.

Manatees need off Endangered Species List. Pg. 1

2005-05-04T16:58:00.000-07:00

FEDS Seek Comments on Status of Manatees

The federal government is considering whether to take manatees off the endangered species list. The U-S Fish and Wildlife service says it will conduct a five year review on how manatees are doing under their protected status. They've been listed as endangered since 1967.

As part of the review process the government is asking to hear from the public. So if you would like to weigh in on the issue call 904-232-2580.

Git Er Done-
Call as members of Standing Watch and urge your friends and family to do the same- the proper message is that there are more manatees now than there have ever been by any measure of credible science - and that the only people who will say otherwise are those that make their living off of the alleged crises.

Call U-S Fish and Wildlife service now 904-232-2580

A Brief History of Manatees in South Carolina

South Carolina department of natural resources
wildlife and freshwater fisheries division
http://www.dnr.state.sc.us/marine/manatee/index.htm

Manatees have been observed in South Carolina as early as 1850.
Between 1850 and 1981, a total of 23 records of manatees in South Carolina were documented (Rathbun et al., 1982)

Transportation Bill HR 3

2005-05-04T13:58:00.000-07:00

This week, the Senate begins debate on the transportation bill,
which includes funding for the Recreational Trails Program
(RTP).

The House version of the bill provides more funding ($503
million for six years) for RTP than the Senate's version ($325
million for six years). Write to your Senators and let them know
they need to match the funding level in the House bill--$503
million.

You can make a difference, so write NOW!!

Visit the web address below to tell your friends to write to
their Senators today. We encourage you to take action by May 6, 2005

Transportation Bill H.R. 3

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA THE WEB:
If you have access to a web browser, you can take action on this
alert by going to the following URL:

http://www.arra-access.com/campaign/TransportationBillSenateAlert/dg8ke34a5jmktb

Letter to Editor...Pg. 2

2005-05-04T13:22:00.000-07:00

The decision on the commission's April 14 agenda was merely to adopt an updated version of the criteria it has used since 1999 - criteria developed by the highly respected International Union for the Conservation of Nature's 10,000 scientists from 120-p lus countries.

Individualized Management
We were puzzled to read in the editorial that ``a creature would have to be nearly wiped out before it would be eligible for Florida's highest protections.'' Under the updated criteria, any species that meets any of the five criteria for listing at any of the three levels - endangered, threatened or species of special concern - will have full protection with all the resources the state can mobilize.

The crux of your criticism seems to be the notion of tying a species' classification to the types of protections it is afforded. That was the old way, which ignored the unique needs of individual species - just look around to evaluate whether it worked.

Whenever our agency considers listing, reclassifying or delisting a species, staff will develop a management plan tailored to that species' needs. This ensures that if a species improves and shifts categories, the protections needed to continue that species' recovery remain intact.

For 62 years the people of Florida have entrusted this agency's scientists - hundreds of the country's best - to sustain this state's fish and wildlife resources with wisdom and innovation. The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is uniquely qualified to bear that responsibility and always has measured up to that trust.

The commission is undergoing a great deal of scrutiny concerning the updated listing process, and that's as it should be. But by focusing your criticisms on one aspect of our agency's efforts to manage and preserve our state's wildlife, you have missed the big picture.

Implementing protections for a species requires justification for those measures. Our listing process accomplishes that goal by relying on data rather than intuition and by making decisions publicly and objectively.

We are actively working to keep species from reaching these levels of imperilment through Florida's Wildlife Legacy Initiative. This longtime approach will outline what species and habitats are in need and why, and what we can do about it. That's the future of Florida's wildlife, the context to apply to the commission's decision to update its imperiled-species listing process.

Protection of species has polarized the public, resulted in litigation that has crippled the process and led to ineffective protection in many cases. We must be bold and improve the process.

Unassailable Record
We have full confidence that the updated process will sustain the natural character of this unique state. We have also acknowledged stakeholder concerns about how it might affect certain species. We pledge to review the listing process and make further refinements if unforeseen problems arise during its implementation.

Look at the commission's record of balancing the needs of nature with the rights and needs of people. In a state with 17 million residents, no decision is likely to generate unanimous support, but attacks on the commission's trustworthiness are needlessly destructive.

Ken Haddad is executive director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Letter to Tampa Tribune Editor: by Ken Haddad. Exec. director of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Pg 1

2005-05-04T13:20:00.000-07:00

Imperiled Species Retain State's Full Protection
http://tampatrib.com/opinion/MGB9TMO558E.html

Published: May 2, 2005

``Slamming Door on Imperiled Wildlife'' (Our Opinion, April 14) was an uninformed treatment of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's decision to update the way it classifies imperiled species. Actually, the commission solidified a very effective, science-based, recovery-oriented process for identifying species that need special attention to protect them from the threat of extinction. That certainly does not amount to slamming the door on imperiled wildlife.

Charges that the criteria undermine protections for the manatee, gopher tortoise, peregrine falcon and other highly imperiled species are simply inaccurate and misinformed. In fact, it is very likely that these new criteria will actually result in uplisting the gopher tortoise from its current status.

Del Albright, a very important site.

2005-05-04T13:09:00.000-07:00

This link is for anyone interested in saving public access to state and federal parks and forests.
http://www.delalbright.com/article_list.htm

Urgent! Immediate attention! Pg.1

2005-05-04T13:07:00.000-07:00

Urgent! Immediate attention! Pg. 2

2005-05-04T13:05:00.000-07:00

mailto:dawson.mandy.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:portilla.alex.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:dockery.paula.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:fasano.mike.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:garcia.rudy.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:geller.steven.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:haridopolos.mike.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:miller.lesley.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:villalobos.alex.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:margolis.gwen.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:lynn.evelyn.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:lee.tom.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:lawson.alfred.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:klein.ron.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:hill.anthony.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:king.james.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:jones.dennis.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:smith.rod.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:wilson.frederica.web@flsenate.gov
mailto:wise.stephen.web@flsenate.gov


Sample Letter

Dear_________,

Please support SB 2288 and HB 989.

This legislation simply provides that the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection SHALL, within 60 days, begin rulemaking to provide
for a general permit for marinas less than 50,000 square feet in size, or
boat ramps to be owned, operated and maintained by local governments.

These bills provide the answer to providing more water access and getting
more boat ramps built throughout the state.

These bills have passed UNANIMOUSLY through all of their committees in the
House, and has just one remaining Committee in the Senate and are endorsed
and supported by rec fishing and boating advocacy organizations and members
alike State wide.

As a Florida resident, voter, boater, fisherman and outdoor recreationalist
I ask that you support these very good bills (SB 2288 and HB 989) which will
help provide more Public Water Access points which are so desperately
needed.

Thank You
Name __________
Address__________

News Items/Translations: by Jim Beers

2005-05-04T13:04:00.000-07:00

News Item: "The Fish and Wildlife Service has drawn up a list of 113 birds
it is proposing to exclude from protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act. As required by the 2004 Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act passed by
Congress in the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, FWS will exclude non-native
birds from protection under the law."

Translation: Federal bureaucrats and appointees in the Departments of the
Interior and Agriculture want what the environmental radicals want. That is
Federal authority to embark on a Federal program of mammoth proportions that
will dwarf the Endangered Species Act in so far as growing the Federal
bureaucracy. They want to transfer the remaining State jurisdiction over
plants and animals to Federal agencies, and in the name of Native Ecosystem
restoration (which is synonymous with Invasive Species eradication) generate
unimagined new Federal authority over citizens and property owners. The
abuses and results of this will be the harms of the Endangered Species Act
times 10.

Every time the subject of Federal Invasive Species or Native Ecosystem
legislation comes up, it is rejected on the facts. United Nations
bureaucrats are involved in such efforts as they look for an opening to
convene a UN meeting to discuss a Treaty or Convention to give the UN
bureaucracy and US Bureaucrats who would implement such a Treaty the same
sort of Constitution-trumping Federal authority as was done with the
Endangered Species Act.

So what do the Federal bureaucrats do? Why they draft legislation to set
the precedent that they can exclude Non-Native birds that have been
protected by Federal law and an international Treaty for nearly a century
from Federal protection because the bureaucrats don't think they should be
managed or protected. So, without any hearings as is customary in a
democracy or any open warning of what was afoot, the bureaucrats slip an
accommodating Congressman a copy of their "bill" and he or she drops it into
a must-pass Omnibus spending bill at midnight just before Congress adjourns
at the end of it's Session. The president must sign such a "Bill" (buried
in the massive spending bill) to keep the Federal government going so,
(voila!) you have the "Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act" and 113 species of
birds deemed unworthy of protection because of their purported arrival date
according to some professors and bureaucrats. On what factual basis other
than the personal wishes of bureaucrats catering to environmental extremists
is there ANY justification for certain animals to be exempt from Federal
protection simply because they are purported to have arrived since 1492 or
1776 or 1812 or some other arbitrary date? Who are these bureaucrats to
tell us that a mute swan is less deserving of federal protection AND
Management than a tundra swan or a trumpeter swan or what bird at our feeder
is "better" than another?

I can't begin to count the times I have heard recently that I should not
mention Endangered Species Act REFORM. I am told it is merely ammunition
for the environmental radicals (another word that I shouldn't mention at
this time because it is inflammatory) as they protest ANY modification of
the Endangered Species Act. However, I notice that Congress has no
compunction about passing a "Migratory Bird Treaty REFORM Act" without
notice or hearings at midnight before they adjourn for that Session of
Congress. Perhaps that is how we should REFORM the Endangered Species Act!

Even those of you that don't give a hoot about this Invasive/Native thing,
better wake up and think about this. The Federal establishment has taken a
big step through subterfuge to get what they are unable to get openly and
honestly in our Republic. Most disturbing, what about the precedent they are
setting? At the end of the next Session of Congress all the agencies should
draft wording for "REFORM" Acts that they can't get passed otherwise. How
about a "Native Ecosystems on Public Lands REFORM Act"? Think about that
one you hunters and fishermen and trappers and ranchers and loggers and
public land users. How about an "Invasive Species Eradication REFORM Act"?
Why not even an "Invasive Species on Private Lands REFORM Act"? Remember,
Non-Native and Invasive Species include not only brown trout and rainbow
trout and Great Lakes salmon and pheasants and chukars and Hungarian
Partridge but also a lot of recently established turkeys and a whole host of
other critters we all like and use. What do we know (based on the
Endangered Species Act) will happen when the professors see that they can
get grants for feeding this Federal monster act by pronouncing species and
subspecies and races and populations as "Not Native" or "Invasive" in this
State or that County or that valley or that watershed? How about an
"Invasive Landscaping Plant REFORM Act" for the homeowner? How about a
"Hunting and Fishing Species REFORM Act"? The mind boggles at the potential
for Federal growth and citizen oppression possible in the dead of night by
ethically-challenged bureaucrats and one pandering politician that can stay
up late once every two years.

If the Federal bureaucrats can con a politician to engage in such subterfuge
and you consider the ruthlessness of the environmental extremists and the
animal rights radicals, there is nothing that is impossible. The
Constitutional protections we thought we had are being shredded right before
our eyes. A Republic depends on an informed citizenry. An informed
citizenry depends on information and openness within both the bureaucratic
and political wings of the government. Sadly both of these things are
evaporating.

When we are forced to accept wolves, to watch our State agencies become
Federal representatives, and to see our rights and freedoms from private
property to animal use and management given to bureaucrats that lock them
away and rule us like subjects, the time for REFORM is past. We are forced
to play by the Federal rules for all the harms they are generating but they
can be selective about who they prosecute, what species they will choose to
protect and do it all in the dark of night as they make "Laws" with all the
secrecy of a communist directorate. (I apologize to all who are offended by
this comparison but it is true nonetheless).

Jim Beers

5 March 2005

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at

http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91

Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:

JimBeers7@earthlink.net

Congratulations! No fees!

2005-05-04T13:03:00.000-07:00

HB 955 is in the Senate and SB 1316 is on Special Order. Senator Bennett has amendments to conform the Senate Bill to the HOuse BIll and true to his word, HE IS REMOVING THE VESSEL FEE INCREASES! So, the bill will pass without the fee increases. Thanks to each one of you for your hard work on getting this bill "right."

Panthers 1 People 0

2005-05-04T08:51:00.000-07:00

Panther 1; People 0

Henry Lamb
Tuesday, May 3, 2005

It’s wrong! It’s just plain wrong for the federal government to force private land owners to not only allow government panthers to roam on private property, but to let the panthers feast on the landowners’ pets.

The Third Amendment forbids government from "quartering" soldiers on private property without the owner’s consent; panthers, however, and other so-called "endangered species" must be quartered and fed by the landowner - without his consent.

Jack and David Shealy’s petting zoo at their campground near Ochopee, Florida became a buffet table for a radio-collared panther released in the area by the Game Commission. Night after night, the panther jumped the fence into the petting zoo, and helped himself to goats and emus and chickens - without the owners’ consent.

Jack pleaded with the Game Commission to remove the panther, as the Commission had done when another panther pestered pets at a nearby Indian Reservation. The Game Commission refused, and scolded the Shealys for being in the area they considered to be panther habitat. Never mind that the Shealys opened their campground in 1971, and never had a problem until the Game Commission decided to release its panthers.

A neighbor, Jan Michael Jacobson, Director of the Everglades Institute, offered to set up a video camera and a light, to try to catch the panther in the act. A videotape of the slaughter, they reasoned, would provide proof positive that the menacing panther should be removed. On the appointed night, the Shealys staked out a goat in their front yard, and Jacobson set up his camera. They were not disappointed.

The panther attacked the goat. Jacobson’s camera was rolling, even as he banged on the side on his camper to scare off the panther. The goat survived. Jacobson and the Shealys, however, were hauled into court, for conspiring to commit animal cruelty.

Tying a goat to a stake in the front yard is no more "illegal" than tying a dog to a stake in the front yard. Putting a spotlight on a goat in the front yard is no more "illegal" than putting spotlights on the corners of a house. Apparently, both become illegal if a panther attacks the goat. It would not have been illegal, however, had the attacker been a neighbor’s dog.

The difference is the "special rights" Congress has conferred on a wild animal, by virtue of the Endangered Species Act. Jacobson cites many scientific studies that conclude the panther is in no way "endangered." It doesn’t matter. Once a species has been declared endangered by the government, it is protected - whether it is endangered or not.

Had it been a neighbor’s dog that gobbled up the Shealys’ animals, the neighbor would have been responsible for the Shealy’s loss, and required to pay damages. Why then, is the government not required to pay the damages caused by the government-owned panther?

The Shealys were told that they could go to jail for a year and be fined for the offense, unless they pleaded guilty. They did. They are awaiting their sentence.

Jacobson did not plead guilty. He had done nothing illegal. He simply filmed the panther attack which he and the Shealys had asked the Game Commission to prevent, by simply removing the panther.

In the posh resort town of Naples, Florida, a six-member jury listened to Jacobson’s attorney explain how none of Jacobson’s actions were in violation of any law. It seemed like a slam-dunk for the defense - until the pictures from the videotape were shown to the jury.

The jury deliberated for six minutes, and returned a guilty verdict. The prosecution asked for a fine and jail time, and an extended probation period. The judge fined Jacobson $500 and court costs of $260.

The wrong people were on trial. The Game Commission should have been on trial for violating the Shealys’ private property rights. The jury should have seen photos of all the slaughtered carcasses of the dozens of privately owned animals the government-owned panther had killed.

Jacobson believes he has done nothing wrong. He is going to appeal. He believes the government is wrong in forcing private individuals to provide food and lodging to wild animals - without consent or compensation. He believes it is wrong to protect an animal as "endangered" when the same animal is shot as vermin in many places in the world.

Jacobson and the Shealys are more victims in the long list of people who have been damaged by the Endangered Species Act - which values panthers, wolves, and grizzly bears above human life.

Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO), and chairman of Sovereignty International