Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

National wildlife refuges feel the budget ax

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-15-07 10:29 PM
Original message
National wildlife refuges feel the budget ax
Edited on Thu Mar-15-07 10:33 PM by nam78_two
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17634561/

WASHINGTON - Faced with a $2.5 billion budget shortfall, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is eliminating hundreds of jobs, cutting back programs and leaving more than 200 national wildlife refuges unstaffed.

In all, the agency is planning to cut 565 jobs from wildlife refuges by 2009 — a 20 percent reduction.

The national refuge system encompasses 547 wildlife refuges and more than 96 million acres in all 50 states, attracting more than 40 million visitors a year.

Environmentalists say the staffing cuts — which follow two years of reductions — will leave an already lean work force depleted and result in a decrease in habitat management, restoration projects and education projects. More than 200 wildlife refuges across the country will be unstaffed.

“Our national wildlife refuges are literally crumbling before our eyes. Across the country we’re seeing how the culmination of years of negligent funding devastates these special places,” said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife.

William Reffalt, director of the National Wildlife Refuge System in the 1980s, lamented the deterioration in the refuge system, which celebrated its 104th anniversary this week.

“Our nation had the foresight to establish these sanctuaries to conserve fish and wildlife, but we are failing to provide the ongoing stewardship that is required,” he said. “We need leadership in the spirit of Theodore Roosevelt,” who established the first wildlife refuge in Florida in 1903.

Attrition strategy
Agency officials acknowledged that the budget cuts will affect services, but said that with a $2.5 billion backlog in operations and maintenance, the reductions were unavoidable. Few, if any, layoffs will be needed, they said, with most job losses occurring though attrition.

“If the Service does not act decisively now, it will become unable to effectively operate most national wildlife refuges within a few years, even if budgets remain level,” said David Eisenhauer, an agency spokesman.

The job cuts should increase efficiency and free up funding for refuge management and operations, Eisenhauer said.

But critics said leaving refuges unstaffed could lead to problems with invasive species — and increased crime or vandalism on the rustic sites, many of which are within an hour’s drive of a major city

“In this day and age, no land can really be left alone,” said Noah Matson, director of federal lands programs for Defenders of Wildlife. About 8 million refuge acres nationwide are infested with invasive species such as beetles and carp, Matson said.

Six officers in four-state area
The cuts also mean fewer law enforcement officers. In the Pacific region, only six officers will patrol a four-state area. In Oregon, just one full-time officer patrols the entire coastline, with a half-dozen wildlife refuges.

“That’s just pathetic,” Matson said.

President Bush has requested about $398 million for the National Wildlife Refuge System for the next budget year, a $12 million increase over current spending but far short of what is needed, critics say.

The agency estimates it needs a $15 million annual increase to keep pace with inflation, and a much larger amount to chip into the $2.5 billion backlog for maintenance and operations.

About 221 refuges will be unstaffed after the staffing reductions are finished, Eisenhauer said. All refuges will continue to be managed, he said, although some will become unstaffed “satellite units” of larger refuge complexes with no day-to-day management.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Reterr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-15-07 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. k&r.eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ftr23532 Donating Member (334 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-15-07 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. six officers patrolling four states?
I'm not sure why I'm still surprised by anything coming out of this admin, but that elicited a :wow: for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-15-07 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yeah...that was pretty egregious.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-15-07 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
4. The San Luis Refuge Complex is already practically dead because of this.
44,000 acres, on three different rivers, spread over three refuges physically separated by 40 miles of farmland. The largest freshwater wetland complex in California. 90,000 visitors a year. All patrolled by one ranger and his dog. I've met Tony Merril the ranger while birding at the San Joaquin National Refuge component of the complex, and he's an incredible guy, but it's an impossible job. He has to deal with poachers (it's the last bit of range for the California Tule Elk , and for numerous critically endangered birds and rabbits, and yet morons still go out there to hunt them), vandals, squatters, pot farmers, and assholes who think it's fun to go mud boggin in critical wetlands. He has no backup, and when he's off work there is no ranger at all.

And they want to cut their budget even more??!?!?!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-16-07 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
5. ...
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PinkyisBlue Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-16-07 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. This saddens but doesn't surprise me.
The Bushies goal is probably to let the land get so run down that either the land will be sold off to the highest bidder for development or the management of the refuges will have to be privatized, which will open the land to hunters, three wheelers, and other destructive activities. Either way, the wildlife and the people who want to enjoy the beauty of the refuges will lose. And this land has already been bought by us, the American people. We own these refuges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jcrowley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-16-07 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
7. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
semillama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-16-07 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
8. The Ottawa NWR here in Ohio just had to reduce its staff
by one - getting rid of a vacant position altogether rather than fill it. Which means they have to cut back on stuff like public interpretation and invasive plant control (a huge problem in the Lake Erie marshes). They do, however, still have a nice capital budget which paid for a brand new visitors center. Hopefully they can use it to increase public awareness of the problems facing the NWR system.

If you've never been to ONWR, next time you're in Cleveland or Toledo, make the trip, especially this time of the year. You have nesting eagles and huge concentrations of waterfowl. I was up there last weekend and we counted 6 bald eagles and about 1300 tundra swans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-16-07 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Typical.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC