--- The Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
<<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10660-2003Oct10?language=printer>>
> 
> U.S. May Expand Access To Endangered Species 
> The Bush administration is proposing far-reaching
> changes to conservation
> policies that would allow hunters, circuses and the
> pet industry to kill,
> capture and import animals on the brink of
> extinction in other countries.
> 
> Giving Americans access to endangered animals,
> officials said, would feed
> the gigantic U.S. demand for live animals, skins,
> parts and trophies, and
> generate profits that would allow poor nations to
> pay for conservation of
> the remaining animals and their habitat.
> 
> This and other proposals that pursue conservation
> through trade would,
> for example, open the door for American trophy
> hunters to kill the
> endangered straight-horned markhor in Pakistan;
> license the pet industry
> to import the blue fronted Amazon parrot from
> Argentina; permit the
> capture of endangered Asian elephants for U.S.
> circuses and zoos; and
> partially resume the trade in African ivory. No U.S.
> endangered species would be affected...
<snip> 

If an animal is "worth" more dead than alive, it will
be killed.  If an animal is worth more captive than
free, it will be caught.  To "sustainably harvest"
endangered species will require careful and continuous
oversight -- will these poor governments be able to do
that?  How can it be *guaranteed* that the ivory you
bought comes from a 'legally killed' and not a poached
animal?  <curls lip at the waste of killing any
creature for mere parts -- no shark fin soup for me,
thank you very much! >:/ >
http://www.colszoo.org/animalareas/shores/shfinning.html

Yet the economic need of these countries is very real,
and compromises have to be made.  Instead of capturing
wild parrots for sale, start a local captive-breeding
program which will sustainably supply birds for sale,
and provide on-going employment in the country of
origin.  Ecotourism has positive and negative impacts,
but if an animal is worth more alive for X number of
years than dead once, it will be allowed to live and
may become even protected.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12348875&dopt=Abstract
"...a single pod of 16 whales in Japan would produce
$41 million from whale watchers over 15 years as
compared to the $4.3 million they represent to
hunters..."

Here is a general overview of ecotourism which seemed
to touch on most of the points made in various
articles I read/scanned:
http://www.philpost.com/0899pages/frontier0899.html

Here is an economic impact study re: sandhill cranes:
http://www.fermatainc.com/eco_nebplatte.html
"... The cumulative TGO [Total Gross Economic Output]
of birding along the Platte, regardless of where the
expenditure had been made, ranged between $21.8 and
$48.5 million [per year]..."

This is an abstract of an Argentinian/Bolivian plan to
use ecotourism as one part of improving the lives of
citizens while preserving a watershed area:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12290384&dopt=Abstract

This paper cites several successful conservation
efforts by corporations working with communities:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8895418&dopt=Abstract


> ----
>
<<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A21575-2003Oct13?language=printer>>
> 
> In Bethesda, Hiring Policy, 'Competitive Sourcing'
> Clash 
> Naval Medical Center Considers Replacing Disabled
> Workers 
> 
> President Bush's efforts to make government run more
> like a business
> collided this month with the reality that, in many
> ways, government is not a business.
> 
> For the past two years, the Navy, as part of the
> Bush administration's
> initiative, has been studying whether a private
> contractor should take
> over the custodial and food services provided by 21
> federal employees at
> the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda...
<snip> 
> But in one important way the 21 workers in the
> hospital scullery are
> different: All are mentally retarded, beneficiaries
> of federal policies
> that promote the employment of people with
> disabilities... 
<snip> 

So they can either be productively employed by the
government, contributing to society and keeping the
dignity of that contribution, or they can be 'dumped
on the streets.'  (There are also private companies
that employ the mentally retarded, but local
communities don't always have these progressive
companies as resources.)  Seems a fairly easy decision
to me.

Debbi

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to