Save the salamander

[extraspecialman]

Hes just a bit east of Cheat Mountain,so Im guessin the Cheat Mountain species is what they are protectin.I was kinda surprised anybody on here has even heard of Cheat Mountain.Randolph,Pendleton,Pocahontas and Grant counties are all beautiful counties,some of the last places not overrun with people.But on the other hand,they take in over 1 million acres of well protected National Forest.Im sure there are some of these salamanders on these 1 million acres,or are at least capable of makin the 5 minute drive from private land to NF.

 

[redprospector]

Not as much as I like salamanders and Spotted Owls. Ohh, and Saber Tooth Tigers are cool too, but some other guy killed the last one with a tree.

Shhhhh, That could have been me that bagged that tiger with a Doug Fir.
All species in my strip are endangered.:hmm3grin2orange:

Andy

 

[slabhead]

have any of the tree huggers considered how much habitat the loggers create w/ branches & tops? Those little critters have to hide under something to propagate their species.

 

[redprospector]

Hes just a bit east of Cheat Mountain,so Im guessin the Cheat Mountain species is what they are protectin.I was kinda surprised anybody on here has even heard of Cheat Mountain.Randolph,Pendleton,Pocahontas and Grant counties are all beautiful counties,some of the last places not overrun with people.But on the other hand,they take in over 1 million acres of well protected National Forest.Im sure there are some of these salamanders on these 1 million acres,or are at least capable of makin the 5 minute drive from private land to NF.

Do you mean to tell me that these salamander's may be found on more than 1 mountain?

Andy

 

[extraspecialman]

yes,ive heard that they can travel over 2 miles a year

 

[redprospector]

have any of the tree huggers considered how much habitat the loggers create w/ branches & tops? Those little critters have to hide under something to propagate their species.

Nah. I tried that aproach on the owl around here. The "environmentalist's" claimed that the Sacramento Mountains were the "stronghold" in the US for the Mexican Spotted Owl. My thinking was that these mountain's have been logged for well over 100 year's.............Maybe logging is good for the Mexican Spotted Owl.
Must have been too logical, it went in one ear and out the other (maybe there wasn't anything between them).

Andy

 

[litefoot]

Dude, that's a rough one... Say they were thinking that when the last saber tooth tiger was running from the falling tree. I think there's a need for balance with EPA. It's not like there's no where else to cut. I cut tons of trees, I also swerve when a frog jumps in the road and have been known to turn around to take a frog or turtle off the road. Balance is key bro. Would you want to know that your the one that ruined the last place on earth the american eagle bred and raised their young?? I doubt it... I'm not siding with either so you know, just siting both sides bro... I would like to hear more about it though... See if you can get any details eh?

I think you've got it right, Cisco. Balance, middle ground or whatever you want to call it sore lacking these days. Thank God someone realized back in the 60's and 70's that we can't keep on doing things without considering the long-term repercussions of our actions. However, the pendulum has swung past the middle all the way to the other side so that progress is unnecessarily impeded and "environmentalist" has become a dirty word. Do animal rights trump the right to make a living? Is the "pursuit of happiness" as set forth by the founding fathers being further defined by activists. In other words, should there be laws that say by definition that we will not be "happy" if all those salamanders are gone?

I find myself in the middle here. Tough questions for sure.

 

[TimberMcPherson]

Creatures like the salamander are a one off, only found in a few places, they have no choice where they can live, once gone there aint no more.

Jobs on the other hand are plentiful, and even if they arent available locally you can move to find more, and even if you havent got one its possible to survive. We do have the choice.

 

[slowp]

I wouldn't mind "saving" a salamander if it was truly endangered and people really cared about it. But, what happened in Northern CA was a farce. We'd lay out a timber sale. Then every 'ologist would take a chunk out for what was perceived as threatened or endangered. Pretty soon nothing was left, or the unit was so patchy it couldn't be logged. You could go along a busy road, flip up a rock, and there'd be a Del Norte salamander. Aren't rock pits pretty desolate? You could go there and do the same. It was a species that someone wanted to study, and obtain grants to study, and by the way, they didn't like logging so since they were the expert, they could say yup, salamanders are hurt by logging. This, like the owl, like the murrelet, etc. is just a tool to shut down the woods.

What I've found amazing is that if the folks who moved into that area from the bay area wanted to start a small rustic furniture business, their cutting of wood for it was harmless as was their leveling of trees for vinyards and organic farms. But call it logging or timber and the lawsuits start flying.

By the way, amphibian logs just doesn't have the right ring to it. Therefore, salamanders got named lizards and lizard logs are the downed logs that must be left for them and all the other little critters.

 

[PB]

Salamanders travel an average of 310 meters from their birth spot, destroy the birth spot, destroy an entire population of salamanders. There are different species of salamanders, just like deer and birds. Would you say the same thing about the bald eagle, just a bird?

Regardless they are protected by the FEDERALendangered species act. Debate all you want, but until the populations recover, deal with the law.

You know for every environmentalist over the top, there is someone on the other side that makes them look bad as well. If people did a little more compromising in the beginning, I am not so sure things would be as hard lined. Call me an environmentalist all you want, I know the limits of right and wrong, and I firmly believe that this species of salamander deserves to be on the list.

 

[Haywire Haywood]

The way I look at it is this. If they are already down to the point that they only live on one mountain, then what great impact is it if they too disappear. It's not like that mountain will cave in if they're not there anymore. I don't get why people freak out when the last of something dies off. It happens and has happened for hundreds of thousands of years. We're just more efficient about helping mother nature make it happen... LOL

Ian

 

[litefoot]

Salamanders travel an average of 310 meters from their birth spot, destroy the birth spot, destroy an entire population of salamanders. There are different species of salamanders, just like deer and birds. Would you say the same thing about the bald eagle, just a bird?

Regardless they are protected by the FEDERALendangered species act. Debate all you want, but until the populations recover, deal with the law.

You know for every environmentalist over the top, there is someone on the other side that makes them look bad as well. If people did a little more compromising in the beginning, I am not so sure things would be as hard lined. Call me an environmentalist all you want, I know the limits of right and wrong, and I firmly believe that this species of salamander deserves to be on the list.

I find it interesting that on the one hand you say "just deal with it" and on the other you say there needs to be some compromising.:monkey: As a biologist, I'd say your code of conduct includes protecting the natural world. That's OK. That's your job. But the tone of your posts leads me to believe that compromising isn't your modus operandi.

 

[PB]

I find it interesting that on the one hand you say "just deal with it" and on the other you say there needs to be some compromising.:monkey: As a biologist, I'd say your code of conduct includes protecting the natural world. That's OK. That's your job. But the tone of your posts leads me to believe that compromising isn't your modus operandi.

My point is if people weren't so hard headed in the beginning and compromised, things might be a little more flexible and due to the inability of both sides to be understanding of the others points we now have the law. You have to deal with the law, no compromising left to do.

I am probably one the most reasonable persons you will ever meet, so I think compromising is important.

You can protect the natural world and use the land at the same time, we all know that. Some just don't want to, and that is why we have some of the strict laws we do. If people acted more like stewards, it would be common knowledge to impact the environment of an endangered species in the slightest way possible. Because some people choose to rape the land, we need to have these laws in place.

 

[Haywire Haywood]

Nice polarizing words you choose... We've got the kind "stewards" in woodland green leotards and "rapists" running greasy exhaust puking heavy equipment.

I prefer "aggressive utilization". Sounds more political and business-like. We need some more "aggressive utilization" going on in the Alaskan oil fields. Our gas prices wouldn't be as high as they are if we did.

Ian

 

[PB]

Stewardship

Steward is not a polarizing word, tree hugger maybe, but not steward. A logger can and should be a steward. This is a definition of an environmental steward from UM, I hate Michigan, but oh well.


* We need to manage our resources in a manner that is fiscally responsible.

* We need to manage our resources in a manner that is compliant with the rules and regulations established by society.

* We need to manage our resources in a manner that provides the facilities to perform our mission of education and research in order to better society.

* We need to manage our resources in a manner that is as sustainable as possible to help ensure they are available for future generations.

 

[Haywire Haywood]

hehe... just yanking your chain... I got no dog in this fight either way. :greenchainsaw:

Ian

 

[PB]

hehe... just yanking your chain... I got no dog in this fight either way. :greenchainsaw:

Ian

Gotcha, I know what I post isn't going to make that much of a difference in the minds of many people here, but I feel obligated to share some of the information that goes into protecting species. Clearing up misconceptions if you will. Protecting species isn't all about tree hugging, although maples are mighty sexy this time of year.

 

[RAYINTOMBALL]

Salamanders travel an average of 310 meters from their birth spot, destroy the birth spot, destroy an entire population of salamanders. There are different species of salamanders, just like deer and birds. Would you say the same thing about the bald eagle, just a bird?

Regardless they are protected by the FEDERALendangered species act. Debate all you want, but until the populations recover, deal with the law.

You know for every environmentalist over the top, there is someone on the other side that makes them look bad as well. If people did a little more compromising in the beginning, I am not so sure things would be as hard lined. Call me an environmentalist all you want, I know the limits of right and wrong, and I firmly believe that this species of salamander deserves to be on the list.

OK first let me start by saying I could not care less about some salamander. Yeah call me a Neanderthal, thats OK I can take it. But this " Debate all you want, but until the populations recover, deal with the law. " is a bunch of crap. When the law favors the environmentalist they say deal with it. How about all the places it is legal to log and environmentalist want to shut it down. How about fishing in the oceans. The law says it's legal but the environmentalist want to stop alot of it. How about hunting? The law states I can hunt but there's people who want to take that privilege from me. How about the 2nd amendment of the Constitution that gives me the RIGHT to keep and bare arms. That's the law but there's all kind of people who want to take that RIGHT from me. So this crap its the law doesn't wash with me. Sometimes laws must be challenged are before long you will be RULED not GOVERNED. Just my 2 cents

A GOVERNMENT WHO FEARS ITS PEOPLE IS LIBERTY.
A PEOPLE WHO FEARS ITS GOVERNMENT IS TYRANNY.

By the way, those salamanders go great on toast.

 

[PB]

OK first let me start by saying I could not care less about some salamander. Yeah call me a Neanderthal, thats OK I can take it. But this " Debate all you want, but until the populations recover, deal with the law. " is a bunch of crap. When the law favors the environmentalist they say deal with it. How about all the places it is legal to log and environmentalist want to shut it down. How about fishing in the oceans. The law says it's legal but the environmentalist want to stop alot of it. How about hunting? The law states I can hunt but there's people who want to take that privilege from me. How about the 2nd amendment of the Constitution that gives me the RIGHT to keep and bare arms. That's the law but there's all kind of people who want to take that RIGHT from me. So this crap its the law doesn't wash with me. Sometimes laws must be challenged are before long you will be RULED not GOVERNED. Just my 2 cents

A GOVERNMENT WHO FEARS ITS PEOPLE IS LIBERTY.
A PEOPLE WHO FEARS ITS GOVERNMENT IS TYRANNY.

By the way, those salamanders go great on toast.

I don't see your point, not being a smart a**, but the law is the law no matter what it is. Environmentalists have to obey the law just like everyone else. Until the law changes, people have to respect logging, hunting and the 2nd amendment if they don't they are in violation and should be punished. The law does not discriminate. Debate all they want, it still doesn't change the law. You are just enforcing my post.

So you are saying that you willingly break the law if you don't agree with it? Disregarding laws is a break down of democracy.

There was a lot of hand waving in your post, but you didn't say anything meaningful to the conversation. The laws about hunting, logging and guns rights should be challenged according to your post as well, so what are you trying to say? The laws should only protect you and your interests?

 

[Zodiac45]

Hey I'm a Logger and we got shut down due too salmon. Wild salmon that "used" too swim up river in large amounts too spawn. I'm not very close too the river's but there are several streams that tie in. It is what it is.
Plant Bio's got a point. If people hadn't been so adament back when we could have made a difference, it would never have come too the present day laws that now force us too do the right thing. I don't like it, but I abide by it.