A "Letter" Re: "Biologists"

THE REAL EDITOR

Anyone remember “What’s My Line?”? After the panel ran out of questions the moderator would say, “would the real (editor?) please stand up”. I am reminded of this line while reading the Saturday 25 November Washington Times.

First I read the “Letter” from a Washington Lobbyist (Senior Washington Representative Sierra Club) masquerading as some sort of environmental missionary. He attacks Alaska Governor Murkowski for “attacking biologists who research on behalf of state and federal government fish and wildlife agencies”. (Imagine a Governor questioning Bureaucrats: why the nerve of him!)

The Lobbyist goes on to wit, “These are the men and women who seek to bring unbiased science and their professional expertise to the important task of conserving fish and wildlife on America’s public lands.” That was true decades ago but it sadly is no longer the case. The prima facie evidence of verbal bouquets from a Sierra Club Lobbyist ought to be enough for any thinking observer to conclude what these biologists are today: they are no-management, no-use, anti-American activists.

Forgetting for a moment the unpunished scandals of stealing $45 to 60 Million (that was never repaid) from hunting and fishing funds to introduce wolves or the felonious planting of lynx fur to gain an Endangered Species Listing or the economic devastation of the spotted owl that “needed” virgin timber but has since been found to nest on billboards or the “phantom” Ivory-billed Woodpecker that squeezed Millions out of Congress and stopped a dredging project in Arkansas and now is stopping an airport construction project in Florida: I could go on but you get the point. One need look no further than the self-serving “biologist” lies about wolves and cougars and bears that have resulted in human deaths and injuries and economic devastation of rural communities and the decimation of big game herds and the death of untold pets and livestock and working dogs to see how the once solid reputation of “fish and wildlife biologists” has carried these destructive programs that should have never been started and should now be repealed.

Our Lobbyist though is cynically riding this same historic horse as he concludes his “Letter” with, “Bottom line: we need to maintain a strong Endangered Species Act.” Just as he is 180 degrees out of line about “biologists”, so too is he 180 degrees out of line about the ESA that should be either seriously amended or tossed in the “Repealed Bin” with Prohibition.

But you dear editor are either an imp of major proportions or seriously disconnected from reality. You are either slyly running this “Letter” with a contradictory article to point out it’s perfidy or you are (as the young girls of today might say), “like seriously out of it”.

On page A9 your article “Oysters adapt to diseases” is the perfect condemnation of the Lobbyists propaganda piece about those angelic biologists and evil “Governors”. An “assistant research scientist” tells us that “We have what appears to be an evolution of disease resistant oysters” in certain areas of the Chesapeake Bay. Also a “molecular geneticist” tells us “It could take hundreds of years but, hopefully in 5 to 10 years we’ll start to see a real difference.”

Oyster populations are way down in the Bay. Oystermen, oyster shuckers, restaurateurs, and oyster lovers everywhere all want to restore the oyster HARVEST. Governors want to restore the oyster HARVEST. So what do these “scientists”, “biologists”, and bureaucrats (we pay their salary) conclude?? Why the lady “geneticist” and the young man “assistant research scientist” tell us “it would be a mistake to sow those oysters in the Bay because the strain is so narrowly bred that it lacks genetic diversity. The only real option, Miss Reese said is to maintain sanctuaries where nature can take its course. ‘Over time nature will select oysters that are tolerant to disease.’”

“Over time”? “Nature will select”? We pay “scientists” for this? We might as well pay witch doctors to read chicken guts!

These two biologists show their true colors just like the Ivory-billed Woodpecker and Lynx and spotted owl and wolf “scientists” show theirs. In this case the “discovery” of “disease resistant” oysters is not an advancement to restoring oysters for HARVEST: no it is merely an excuse to justify “maintaining sanctuaries”. No wonder Sierra Club Lobbyists love these boys and girls. Whoopee!

So which is it Mr. Editor? Are you purposely pulling the rug out from under the environmental Lobbyist or are you simply running “cutesy” stuff to (like so many politicians today) assure us that you are “caring and sensitive”? Which is it? Will the real editor please stand up?

Jim Beers
25 November 2006
- 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://jimbeers.blogster.com (Jim Beers Common Sense)

- Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:
jimbeers7@verizon.net

- Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Centreville, Virginia with his wife of many decades.