Sea otters are indisputably cute. They are also an
endangered species.
But that didn't stop Alaska state senator Bert Stedman (Republican)
from introduced legislation that would have Alaska pay $100 for each sea
otter lawfully killed under the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Let me let that sink in for a moment. Otters are federally
protected—so Stedman says, "We'll pay a $100 fine if you let us kill them
anyway." Why kill otters? Because they eat shellfish and ONLY ALASKAN
FISHERMEN should be able to harvest those.
Fisherman Ladd Norheim also gets honorable mention
here. He said:
“If a crab stock gets low or something or ... any fishery, they shut us off or close us down to protect a crab or a fish. Yet when a sea otter comes in and absolutely decimates an area, they don’t do anything about it. They just say, ‘Oh, they’re warm and fuzzy and cute.’ Well, I’m pretty warm and fuzzy and cute, too, but I don’t totally wipe anything out. I mean, crab have rights. Clams have rights. Where do sea otters come out being so holy?”
Three Things:
1.) I think he's confusing "endangered" with
"holy."
2.) That's Ladd to the right. You can be the judge of his
claim to being "warm and fuzzy and cute."
3.) But I'm glad to hear that Ladd's worried about the
rights of clams and crabs. So maybe it's time to get a job for him to get a job
where he isn't yanking them out of their habitats to kill them?
But this isn't likely for any person who makes a living by
"extracting" from the natural environment. As Upton Sinclair
wrote, “It is impossible to make a man understand something if his
livelihood depends on not understanding it.”
NOTE: This blog had a previous incarnation—and this post generated these comments:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your thoughtful comments.