Whooping cranes mean more than people.

["W"]

All I want for Valentines is a whooping crane with a gold hook beak that has my name in glitter on it, with a salt life foot tag

[Smalls]

I never said 90% of the species need expensive government programs. I never said 90% of the funds, or even 50% should be dedicated to the 90%. But just because a species doesn't have any direct economic value, doesn't mean it isn't valuable.

Come on dude, you ought to know that better than anyone with all of your fish studies. Is a minnow or a mullet a valuable species? No, but it feeds redfish and specks. Are dragonflies a valuable species? No, but they feed fish fry.

Go find some proof that "most P-R funds and license revenues are diverted toward programs which do not directly benefit those paying the taxes and fees" and then come back and talk to me. I haven't seen one SHRED of evidence posted here that supports that statement. One of the largest P-R funded projects in the history of the Act was the Wild Turkey Restoration. Pretty sure that benefited hunters.


Check out this report from Washington State on P-R projects in 2005. I don't see a single one that was done solely to benefit nongame.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/grants/wildlife_r...5pr_grants.pdf

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You missed my point. My point was that license fees and taxes paid on sporting equipment should be focused on benefits for the taxpayers who paid those taxes. You are more than welcome to go to the LA Legislature and request funds for WC and the other 75% of species from the general fund.

But consider your own reasoning too. Why are 90% of species "doomed" unless megabucks are spent on their management? Why do 90% of species in Louisiana need expensive government programs?

When I was trained as a hunter's ed instructor, they emphasized how license fees and P-R funds go into supporting wildlife management and how much hunters and anglers benefit from these funds being invested in good management. This pitch seems dishonest if most P-R funds and license revenues are diverted toward programs which do not directly benefit those paying the taxes and fees. Benefiting other wildlife is a fine and noble goal, which I support. But why should this burden fall disproportionately on hunters and anglers?

Its much bigger than just a whooping crane, its the habitat that supports the whooping crane. All of it is disappearing (most of it is gone). Whooping crane habitat is great habitat for a variety of wetland species - many which you can go out and shoot. It sometimes takes a 'warm and fuzzy' charismatic species to get folks onboard (thats why you see panda bears on some of the conservation organizations logo and not a snail darter)


Other non-consumptive users such as birdwatchers pay into the system as well (they also buy sporting goods equipment, and they spend billions with a 'B') for their hobbies which go into the same system (Pittman-Robertson Act). They also have to purchase a wild La stamp if they want to go onto public WMAs If they make up 5% of the sales tax on sporting goods, then it seems fair that 5% of the fund should be dedicated to their needs/wants. I believe the LDWF budget is public info as well.


Sorry bout jabbin you on the gov't employee post up above too, low blow on my part

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You missed my point. My point was that license fees and taxes paid on sporting equipment should be focused on benefits for the taxpayers who paid those taxes. You are more than welcome to go to the LA Legislature and request funds for WC and the other 75% of species from the general fund.

But consider your own reasoning too. Why are 90% of species "doomed" unless megabucks are spent on their management? Why do 90% of species in Louisiana need expensive government programs?

When I was trained as a hunter's ed instructor, they emphasized how license fees and P-R funds go into supporting wildlife management and how much hunters and anglers benefit from these funds being invested in good management. This pitch seems dishonest if most P-R funds and license revenues are diverted toward programs which do not directly benefit those paying the taxes and fees. Benefiting other wildlife is a fine and noble goal, which I support. But why should this burden fall disproportionately on hunters and anglers?

So why should my tax dollars go to schools if I don't have kids? Me paying for education doesn't benefit me directly. (I know it does, just don't have a better example to make my point)

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

I never said 90% of the species need expensive government programs. I never said 90% of the funds, or even 50% should be dedicated to the 90%. But just because a species doesn't have any direct economic value, doesn't mean it isn't valuable.

Come on dude, you ought to know that better than anyone with all of your fish studies. Is a minnow or a mullet a valuable species? No, but it feeds redfish and specks. Are dragonflies a valuable species? No, but they feed fish fry.

Go find some proof that "most P-R funds and license revenues are diverted toward programs which do not directly benefit those paying the taxes and fees" and then come back and talk to me. I haven't seen one SHRED of evidence posted here that supports that statement. One of the largest P-R funded projects in the history of the Act was the Wild Turkey Restoration. Pretty sure that benefited hunters

Check out this report from Washington State on P-R projects in 2005. I don't see a single one that was done solely to benefit nongame.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/grants/wildlife_r...5pr_grants.pdf

Come on man, comparing a mullet and minnow to a whooping crane is ridiculous. Mullet and minnows are baitfish and are extremely important. You know better than that.

Tell me what kind of environmental downfalls we will have if we whooping cranes go extinct.

I'm all for whooping cranes if they can make it, but if not it's not a huge deal. I'm for spending money on habitat that supports multiple species of birds, mammals, and fish. Yall have gone out pretty far on a limb trying to justify the existence of a dang crane. I'm all for private funding of this, but back to the reason the thread was started, it's just ridiculous that this is news worthy with the way the country is going right now.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Come on man, comparing a mullet and minnow to a whooping crane is ridiculous. Mullet and minnows are baitfish and are extremely important. You know better than that.

Tell me what kind of environmental downfalls we will have if we whooping cranes go extinct.

I'm all for whooping cranes if they can make it, but if not it's not a huge deal. I'm for spending money on habitat that supports multiple species of birds, mammals, and fish. Yall have gone out pretty far on a limb trying to justify the existence of a dang crane. I'm all for private funding of this, but back to the reason the thread was started, it's just ridiculous that this is news worthy with the way the country is going right now.

I just, I don't even know how to respond to that. Where did you get that I was comparing a crane to a mullet? I was talking about nongame species. I was talking about the economic value of species, and how nongame species are percieved to have no economic value. Mullets and minnows have no direct economic value, but they are valuable in the sense that they provide food for other economically valuable species.

Go back and read it again before you misquote me, fella. I said nothing about cranes in that, and was no way insinuating what you assumed I was saying.

It's never a huge deal, until one day it affects something the majority is in favor of. If ducks were dwindling to only several thousand, or deer, or turkeys, all hell would break loose to save them. But when its a species that people percieve to have no economic value, they get all up in arms over it.

Why are whooping cranes in danger? Because they were over hunted. Why did they hunt them? I don't know, probably because they tasted good. Who are any of you to say that with restoration efforts this species won't have a season on it again. No one has a problem with the black bear restoration, because they will have a season on them eventually. There is a season on sandhill cranes in Texas, who is to say we couldn't have one on Whoopers one day?

I have never, EVER, suggested that there will be some environmental issues happening if the whooping crane goes extinct. It is not a species that another species or a habitat relies on. But they do occupy habitat that waterfowl utilize, so if this population had all the protection of the ESA, there would be A LOT of waterfowl habitat preserved because of this bird's presence.

[Goooh]

1.) y'all didn't work today

2.) that was the most draindedest marsh I ever seen

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

So why should my tax dollars go to schools if I don't have kids? Me paying for education doesn't benefit me directly. (I know it does, just don't have a better example to make my point)

Public education has gotten so poor and the return for tax dollars is so low, that a case can be made for elimination of public education.

Capitalism did a much better job with health care, why not give the free enterprise system a chance to fix education?

[ThePinkBanana]

you shoot the bird, I'll turn you in.. We split the cash.. Don't worry... I've got a friend in the DA department. Any takers?

[Nickt87]

Today we mourn. Just heard news that the wounded bird from the February 6th shooting had to be put down do to declining health. Visitation will be at LSU Vet School, $50 admission(to help fund "the cause").

[drbones]

The whooping crane program is supported almost solely through philanthropy. So get your panties out of a knot and relax. These wealthy people surely can spend their wealth as they see fit!

[Nickt87]

Originally Posted by drbones

The whooping crane program is supported almost solely through philanthropy. So get your panties out of a knot and relax. These wealthy people surely can spend their wealth as they see fit!

"Almost solely"? Attorney terminology 101

["W"]

Originally Posted by drbones

The whooping crane program is supported almost solely through philanthropy. So get your panties out of a knot and relax. These wealthy people surely can spend their wealth as they see fit!