Comments on: Ignorance Is Bliss

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 06:23:36 +0000

In reply to Jack K., the Grumpy Forester.

Yeah, but I screwed up making assumptions based on personal experience rather that doing the research, and got snarky about it. I know better, but I really don’t like this White House, and I get carried away.

Unlike the professional “journalists”, I like to get my facts straight, and correct any errors.

I don’t take corrections “personally”, I assume they are corrections of facts and that I make mistakes. I appreciate people caring enough to tell me when I screw up, so people don’t get misinformation from me.

I assumed that he got the basic points correct, and I should have known better.

By: Jack K., the Grumpy Forester

Jack K., the Grumpy Forester — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 06:06:44 +0000

…well, it wasn’t actually you that my comment was directed toward; it was Obama’s cutsie comment in the SOTU speech that you excerpted that I was responding to…

…it’s all cool…

By: Bryan

Bryan — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 05:35:27 +0000

OK, I was led astray by seeing all of the interactions in reference to Native American fishing rights, primarily in Alaska, and in changes in water flow in rivers, both impacting the salmon, and both dealt with through Interior bureaus or services, i.e. BIA, BLM, NPS, but not, now that you mention it, FWS.

I’ve updated the post accordingly, thank you, sir.

Yes, we need to eliminate some of the many jurisdictional conflicts in many areas and streamline things, but when offered the opportunity with the Department of Homeland Security, they botched the job. As long as Congress is involved, you can’t streamline things because that would reduce their ability to acquire power.

By: Jack K., the Grumpy Forester

Jack K., the Grumpy Forester — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 05:06:21 +0000

…the salmon thing was a cute enough joke and may have been intended to covey a particular point (and when it comes to natural resource management, I don’t really disagree with the fundamentals of that point), but it was incorrect. When a federal land management agency proposes a project that may have an impact on federally listed (i.e., “Threatened” or “Endangered”) salmon species, the required consultation regarding that impact is conducted with the National Marine Fisheries Service (an agency in the Department of Commerce) and not the Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of Interior). FWS isn’t involved, nor is any other DOI agency, in the management of salmon during the fresh-water portion of their life cycle…