The Chief wrote:gedurkee wrote:It's true that we do a good job of messing things up, but we're now becoming pretty good about fixing some of them. The froggies are a good case in point. There's now about 15 years of data that shows that we can, in fact, restore their habitat. Peninsula has done a good job here of posting that information. To a certain extent, what's been missed in a lot of the discussion has been the basic reasons for a National Park. Most of the western parks have become islands of what ecosystems were like before Europeans got here. Sure, we can quibble about what's natural. But a park is there to protect and preserve those fragile ecosystems as best we can; to restore, where possible, what's been lost. As critters, the mountain yellow legged frogs are critical to that ecosystem. It's not just about frogs vs. fish; it's about bugs, bears, snakes, birds etc. This is pretty well established. This is not just some whimsical hope, it's a matter of founding principals, law, court decisions and a very long history with discussions exactly like this.
But the other huge thing that seems to be missed in all the discussions on all the boards is how cool these frogs are and what a loss their presence has been to our experience of being in an alpine area. I think their rapid and widespread population crash over the last 20 years has most people wondering what's the point? -- simply because they have never seen them. Without the frogs for the last 20 odd years, they become some sort of nebulous abstraction that's too easy to dismiss. To me, the yellow legged frog is one of the iconic critters of the Sierra. I well remember hiking along lakeshores in the 60s and having hundreds of frogs leap from the grassy banks into the water; hearing the quick plop as they hit the surface and dived down into the mud. Within the next 20 years, most of those places were gone.
If you're going to dismiss the importance of native frogs, then the loss of pikas, golden eagles, wolverine, badgers, golden mantle ground squirrels etc. etc. isn't a much of a loss either, I suppose. Where do you draw the line? But everything that's there is at the heart of what the Sierra is. At the very least, it's what a National Park is there for. We can and do screw things up in enough other places that we really ought to do all we can to make sure parks, at least, maintain their ecological integrity.
Thanks,
George Durkee
And what about the 100's of 1000's of fish that will die in order to "possibly" restore these frogs to the Sierra habitat?
Aren't they..."cool".
I guess not.
But of course we know better, again, Right?
Chief,
No doubt, you know I agree with Durkee. I'm also figuring you enjoy getting into a pissing match just because you are you.
Those frogs are good critters. I like the fish too, but thinning 'em out isn't going turn the ecosystem upside down and there will still be plenty left for the likes of me or you. Look at this way, if hunters did not hunt deer or whatever, the deer and company would overpopulate and thin themselves out via starvation because we have no more grizzly or wolves where they ought to be. I've seen plenty of snakes for fish in the Sierra to know they are not necessarily a picture of a healthy ecosystem. That does not mean they can't stay, but there is plenty of room for others that have just as much a place in the Sierra if not more.
than you think. Their livelihood depends on them trout. And not one on the Eastside will stand for any of what you state to be completed.
