David, your last statement is a good one, I would push very hard to get the city cited for breaking their own law by allowing the birds to feed in the dump - I think you’re on to something! But what youre onto is precisely what you distane.

That said, I agree that politics get in the way of good wildlife management. Your statement, "just gripes my soul when people get laws, bills and ordinances passed about Fish & Game matters that has more to do with politics instead of biology."

All I can say is that you must be new to wildlife management issues. I'm not putting you down, only using your words to say that EVERY wildlife management decision is a political decision. Biology only is one part of the decision making matrix.

I dont support the ordinance, I dont even have a dog in this fight, but I though you might want to know that I cannot recall a single decision, outside the ESA, where the biology or the ecology of the place makes the decision.

In fact, there's an article just out yesterday in my local paper that says the biology supports the decision, but the people dont. The fish wildlife and parks wanted to change the deer-hunting season. Biologically it made good sense, but the people in the local area did not comment so the FWP people said there's no public support. Go figure.

I'm with you, more biology, less politics, but bust them over the dump if you can!

LOL - take care

"In fact, there's an article just out yesterday in my local paper that says the biology supports the decision, but the people dont. The fish wildlife and parks wanted to change the deer-hunting season. Biologically it made good sense, but the people in the local area did not comment so the FWP people said there's no public support. Go figure."

Hey Tony,

I agree. It appears that most decisions are made politically and not depending on fact. A perfect example is the private use of Federal Grazing lands. There is evidence that the livestock does a great deal of damage to stream beds and other pieces of the environment that they are grazing on yet very little seems to be done to make sure that the areas are maintained effectively.

Another example is the fishing industry with farmed fish. Apparantly they can actually damage native stocks in areas due to the concentrations of waste, feed and other chemicals. The funny thing is I do not consider myself in any way shape or form an extremist. I understand the value and need for many of these products - I just feel that there seems to be no balance in how our resources are used. Money and power uber alis.

Having said that, I believe that people are able to promote change. The bigger question goes back to David's situation. What realistically can be done to make change here?

James

Why is it that the council has continued to allowed Ms. Keane to continue feeding the birds for the next 4 years?

Lou