We just won't think about ecological collapse, will we

Submitted: Aug 01, 2013
By: 
Badlands Journal editorial board

The primary cause of frog and toad population decline seems to be the spread of the chytrid fungus — probably spread by introduction of non-native African clawed frogs.

Introduction of non-native trout to lakes within the habitat range of these threatened species may be the second most important factor. Recreational activities seem to have far less impact on the success of frog and toad populations, yet seem to be under consideration for limitation according to the information in the Federal Register. – Merced Sun-Star, Aug. 1, 2013

 

 

 

Non-native trout were introduced to these lakes by the state Department of Fish and Game (now Department of Fish and Wildlfire for some bureaucratic reason incomprehensible to ordinary people) for the great recreational activity of trout fishing and fishing-license sales. 

 

The African clawed frog was introduced as the essential feature of the most reliable pregnancy test available for 50 years. “The old frog test was clear: A woman's urine was injected into the clawed frog, and if she was pregnant, the frog quickly began to ovulate - it was as simple as that.” SF Chronicle, May 20, 2013.

 

The foreign frog has also made a fine pet for people who like frogs.

 

The whole premise of the article below is typical: blame the species; condemn any land-use restriction to protect wildlife that stands in the way of exploiting the habitat for profit; ignore the human manipulation of the natural environment that caused the problem; and ignore the reason for the human manipulation. We are left to guess whether that old-fashioned pregnancy test is to graphic to describe in a family newspaper.or the “outdoors” columnist was too lazy to spend two minutes on an Internet search provider.

 

When one traipses through the woods gathering wilderness experiences, he ought to develop a little bit better sense of how “all things hang together,” as John Muir was supposed to have said. But this one, like other Merced Sun-Star outdoors writers seems to take a more exploitive angle on the out-of-doors. Too bad.

 

And we won’t even mention the well documented relationship of global warming to amphibian fatalities, will we, because we are out to exploit the out-of-doors, not understand it or have any feeling for what’s going on out there.

 

Nor, to conclude, will we bother to look too closely at what the designation "critical habitat" actually means, practically speaking, for fear of disturbing the far-right huntin' fishin' trekker types with facts. This column looks like it was written by the once famous duo called the Pomboza, composed of the former congressmen Richard Pombo, Buffalo Slayer-Tracy, and Dennis Cardoza, the Pimlico Kid-Merced. These bozos, working in concert with the flamboyantly corrupt US Fish&Wildlife Service deputy assistant secretary, Julie MacDonald, once voided a large swath of critical habitat near Merced on economic grounds (i.e. it might have endangered development around UC Merced). A federal judge nullified the decision and the Pomboza danced a ponderous jig. Today, the duo might be visible in the halls of Congress, sweeping staffers to the walls as they lurch through on their ways to appointments with newly elected little Tea Sackers who wouldn't know an environmental law or an endangered species from a book but they know they're agin all three of 'em.

 

Badlands Journal editorial board

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-1-13

Merced Sun-Star

Blauert: Threatened frogs could affect tourism…Adam Blauert…7-31-13

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2013/07/30/3138513/threatened-frogs-could-affect.html

MERCED — The recent public comment period for Yosemite's Merced River Plan brought forth a storm of comment and concern.

Although we probably won't begin to know what the final plan will look like until the end of the year, a far larger land management change that could drastically alter recreation and economic activity on public lands in our mountains may be at our doorstep.

The "worst case scenario" suggested by opponents of these proposed regulations includes elimination or strict limitation of public access to 2 million acres of land within the Sierra Nevada.

Hopefully the situation is not that dire; however, past experience indicates that quickly-implemented and far-reaching changes in policy and management can have drastic effects. Just last year the National Park Service decided to not issue any further permits for horse and mule packers within the wilderness areas of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, in effect putting several small businesses out of business. They were saved only by a bipartisan effort in Congress that led to the passage of a bill to make sure the permits would be issued.

Here's the short version of the current issue as well as I understand it: On April 25, two proposed rules designed to protect Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frogs, mountain yellow-legged frogs, and Yosemite toads were published in the Federal Register. If it's been a long time since you took government in high school, this is the publication where proposed regulations, finalized regulations, and changed regulations are published by federal agencies.

Every day, this behemoth document averages over 300 pages. There are so many things proposed that there is no way for the average citizen to be aware of all of them.

The first rule proposes to designate these three species as endangered and the second to establish critical habitat areas in which protective measures will be carried out. No specifics have been announced about exactly what limitations on current recreational and economic activities might be introduced and that's where a lot of the uncertainty lies.

The primary cause of frog and toad population decline seems to be the spread of the chytrid fungus — probably spread by introduction of non-native African clawed frogs.

Introduction of non-native trout to lakes within the habitat range of these threatened species may be the second most important factor. Recreational activities seem to have far less impact on the success of frog and toad populations, yet seem to be under consideration for limitation according to the information in the Federal Register.

A USFWS press release dated July 18 does clarify that "recreation use is not considered to be a significant threat to any of these species," and hopefully that will be reflected in the implementation.

The proposed rules went largely unnoticed until late May when they were discovered and publicized by Defend Rural America. Meetings have been held in Placer, El Dorado, and Fresno Counties — three of the 14 counties that will be affected by the proposed rules. Since that time, several counties have requested additional hearings and the comment period has been extended through Nov. 18.

If this issue concerns you, I strongly encourage you to attend the public forum that Representative Tom McClintock is holding in Sonora on Aug. 6. It is scheduled for 2 p.m. at the Mother Lode Fairgrounds (220 Southgate Drive).

Decisions made by the Fish and Wildlife Services are supposed to be based on science and no doubt if the species are found to be endangered, some kind of new rules will be put into effect.

Based on what I've learned, they certainly seem to be endangered and if this is correct, they will be protected. Where public involvement will be important is in the implementation.

My primary concern at this point is that the main causes of population decline — chytrid fungus and non-native trout — will not be the main factors addressed by the rules and that overreaching regulations that eliminate or heavily limit public access, recreation, and economic activity may be the result.

Although the rules published in the Federal Register state that there will not be major economic impacts, I am not convinced. The counties in which these lands are located are heavily dependent on tourism, recreation, agriculture, timber harvest, and mining.

Fortunately, there are provisions in the law that may be used to exclude areas from critical habitat designation and to temper the implementation of species protection to minimize economic impacts.

All species have their needs, and one of ours is economic. There has to be a compromise that is in the best interest of all and the best way to find it is for as many people as possible to be involved in the decision-making process.

Other concerns that have been raised by leaders throughout the 14 counties that will be effected include the broad swaths of land proposed for critical habitat designation when the frog and toad populations only live in narrow corridors along lakes and waterways, a lack of focus on limiting the chytrid fungus and its effects, and evidence used in the decision-making process that seems incomplete or speculative.

Looking around for similar species issues in the past, the best comparison I've been able to find is with the southern population of the mountain yellow-legged frog, listed as an endangered species in Southern California since 2002.

To my knowledge, this listing has only affected public access in two areas and trails have been rerouted as a result. The April 25 Federal Register mentions this, but also notes that the northern population, "requires different management."

The concern that rules to protect the northern population may be more restrictive is bolstered by the large swaths of land proposed for critical habitat designation. With so many more lakes and waterways in our part of the state, the proposed critical habitat is correspondingly larger. 

 

| »

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

To manage site Login