1. Troutnut Forum
›
2. Fly Fishing
›
3. Piscicides for Reclaiming Trout Habitat, Page 2

Quote Jmd123: "I have to make another comment here due to TroutHooker's take on "environmentalists". I PROUDLY wear this title like a badge of honor, and I am sure as hell not a "professional fear monger". I happen to make my living as a scientist with a B.S. in botany and an M.S. in entomology (trout fishers, pay attention). There are certainly some uninformed envrinmental types who have not done their homework nor have graduate degrees in biology, but don't put ME or any of my colleagues in this category. In fact, when I hear someone slamming the environmental movement as being scaremongers, it causes ME to assume that the speaker is a card-carrying member of the GOP who gets their information from REAL fearmongers like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, two of the most uninformed idiots ever to walk Planet Earth. I am going to assume that TroutHooker is not one of their kind, unless he proves me wrong."

"I am a scientist because I believe in reason, not emotional hyperbole.

Jonathon"

HUH?

"HUH?"

What's the "HUH?" for, Phil? I don't see any "emotional hyperbole" in my statement. I merely explained that some individuals have a habit of branding all environmentalists as radical "chicken-little" types who always think the sky is falling with scant knowledge or reason to back it up. Which is, in fact, just what Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck types do as well. Which is also exactly WHY I make my living as a scientist, to find out what the TRUTH (or as close to it as I can get with what knowledge is available) is amongst all of the uninformed opinions, emotional outbursts, and outright lies. If you object to my characterization of the GOP, feel free to ask any of the numerous scientists who worked under the Bush/Cheney administration who left in disgust because they saw solid scientific findings being overridden by political considerations in natural resource management decisions. Many of the other folks who post on this website will back me up on this.

If you wish to continue this discussion, you can send me a private email, but I do think the other posters are enjoying a spirited discussion on this matter so I would prefer to talk about it here.

BTW, I will always admit that I am certainly NOT immune to emotional outbursts when I see fools and idiots enthusiastically destroying the natural world for their own short-term profits.

Most sincerely,

Jonathon

"Well, when you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all." - Ronald Reagan

P.S. I will happily send you a resume if you wish to review my scientific credentials.

I'm not a scientist, but as an academic I am committed to careful analysis of information in pursuit of truth, and, based on the research I have done concerning the past administration, I stand proudly next to Jonathon and am in full agreement with his assertions.

Thanks, Martinlf. I stand firmly behind EVERYTHING I have and will ever post on this site.

Jonathon

you label me, i label you. how many people have died as a result of ddt being banned? answer-millions. is it a good chemical for the earth absolutely not. do people stay alive as a result of using it? absolutely. there are rarely perfect answers. its a shame people have to make assumptions about people and the political views they hold and let that stand between and above all sense of reason. OBTW glenn talked about the coming financial collapse a year and half before it happened. damn fear mongerers.

Sadly, our society sems to have become quite politically polarized these days, and I certainly won't deny that I am not immune to it. Sure, we call each other names and label each other in uncomplimentary ways, but somebody starts it and seems unwilling to stop because they think it works for them. If I respond to it in the same way, it is because I get tired of hearing it from the same sources continuously and I begin to believe that the issuers are, or have become, simple-minded talking heads who maintain their audiences and their ratings by doing so. And when it personally insults me and my intelligence, I take objection and react accordingly. Pardon me for not turning the other cheek, but the vast majority of Christians won't do so either.

In my humble opinion, and though it is ONLY MY opinion it is derived from reason and experience, the GOP has been responsible for the vast majority of this type of behavior for at least the last 16 years, as in questioning the patriotism of those who disagree with their consistently simple-minded policies which have caused MAJOR problems in this country. How am I NOT supposed to label these parrots, or their followers, as idiots when I see policy after policy end in miserable failure?

With regards to Glenn Beck's prediction of the financial crisis, I will quote my boss: "Even the stupidest pig finds a truffle every now and then." After all, Dick Cheney is a fly fisherman...

You can feel free to label me anything you want, if that somewhow satisfies anyone's urges to put me down for what I have said.

BTW, I saw John McCain on the Tonight Show last night, and he is back to his good old bipartisan self again. Perhaps we can ALL take a lesson from him.

Jonathon

Still with you Jonathon.

P.S. Who are the "millions of people" who supposedly died after DDT was banned? What, NOBODY had any OTHER, SAFER pesticides to use (e.g., pyrethroids, derived from natural botanicals, non-persistent, and NOT known to be endocrine disruptors)? Beware, you are arguing with very well-read scientist who, if I need to remind you, has a Master of Science in entomology and who knows well more than a little about pesticides. I suppose someone is going to argue that sodium arsenate saved lots of folks too - those that it didn't poison, anyway...

Jonathon

jonathon, maybe you should go to south africa and help out. many countries in that region are bringing ddt back. guess they're tired of seeing friends and relatives die. i know you wouldn't understand all that living in your utopian cocoon.

"If I respond to it in the same way, it is because I get tired of hearing it from the same sources continuously and I begin to believe that the issuers are, or have become, simple-minded talking heads who maintain their audiences and their ratings by doing so. And when it personally insults me and my intelligence, I take objection and react accordingly."

now, who is personally attacking whom in that paragraph and not talking issues.

ya know jonathon we should be like best friends. we both live in michigan, we both love trout fishing, neither of us like simple-minded talking heads who parrot what they hear and can't come up with an original thought, and we both have contempt for stupidity and have to speak out against it.

i've heard it said once, maybe twice you have a degree. congratulations. if that is meant to scare me or prove to me that you are some kind of brainy elitist, that's just funny. do i get to talk about my I.Q. testing at 147. i've probably been following politics since before you were born. i can trace every problem this country has back to the democratic party. you might know your science, you can learn a lot by reading a book or two. it just doesn't substitute for common sense. you should have taken some history and an economics class or two.

have a nice day buddy, tight lines to ya.

Trtklr, I certainly have no desire to get into any arguments or pissing contests with you here or anywhere else. And before we do so, we should probably get together and go fishing so we can connect on something we both love so as to insure that we DON'T get into any silly confrontations. So I intend to respond as politely as I can to your last post.

First of all, I am a genuine bookworm and history is one of my favorite subjects - I have read far more than a book or two. I am also 45 years old, have been in the environmental consulting industry for over 11 years as a field biologist (including GA, TX, and MI) and studying field biology as a profession for over 25 (including work in OR and MO). I hardly think these experiences qualify me as a "brainy elitist", rather I mention them to let folks know that I am not speaking from a position of ignorance but rather from intense study and real hands-on experiences (as is true with fly fishing - I don't do anything half-assed). During my entomological studies, both during my MS and a not-completed PhD (does post-graduate education make me an "elitist"?), I learned a huge amount about modern agriculture and its addiction to pesticides. My ex-wife did her Masters on integrated pest management, i.e., the use of ALL possible techniques to control pests including biological, mechanical, cultural, AND chemical, in the right balance and at the right times during the growing season. Too much propaganda from the big chemical industries have led too many farmers around the world to believe that the ONLY way to control pests is through chemicals, and the more the better. And, too often in the past, insufficient studies were done on the longer-term effects of these chemicals not only on the environment but on Homo sapiens as well. If you wish, I can explain how certain simple alternative methods can eliminate certain pests without the need for ANY chemicals whatsoever.

In addition, if South Africa goes back to using DDT, this compound has an extremely high avian toxicity so they can kiss their songbirds goodbye. Which means, less birds to eat the pest insects, which means more pest insects, which means more DDT, which means still less birds, which means yet more pest insects, which means yet more DDT...can you see where I am going with this?

If you perceive these latest writings to be the words of a "brainy elitist" rather than a well-informed scientist (or if you consider all scientists to be "elitists"), well, I can't help that, its not my intention but rather your perception, and I sincerly hope I'm not sensing an anti-science bias on your part. If you really want to get into a pissing contest on who's experiences and opinions are more relevant, well, I can't help that either. As a scientist, I only wish to share good knowledge with those who have open minds.

I do expect that your response will be polite and well informed. If so, I look forward to reading it. If not, well, than I can't necessarily promise politeness on my part, either. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and expect to enjoy it.

Jonathon

P.S. I hardly think that being unemployed and living with family at my age is a "utopian cuccoon", which, by the way, YOU live in too. Do you think I'm rich and insulated from the world or something?? As a field biologist??? As far as IQ is concerned, mine is somewhere in the upper 130 range, probably about the same as yours given statistical variations. Since you felt it necessary to announce yours, who's being the "elitist" now? Economics classes? What good have they done ANYONE lately, given that our "best and brightest" financial managers have all taken them??? Maybe what's taught in those classes IS the problem...

Admittedly, this message is considerably more harsh than the last. That's because I just reread your latest response and realized there are some insults in there. What did I say about politeness?

Jonathon

The issue of using DDT in Africa is complex as the following article notes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/15/AR2006091501012.html

The article points out that environmental groups have had mixed responses, and it is important to note that DDT is being used for indoor spraying, not widespread use in agriculture, which was what decimated songbirds and other small animals when we ignorantly broadcast it everywhere.

I guess it is possible to make the argument that all the problems in the U.S. and perhaps in the world can be traced to Democratic administrations, but I'm ALSO certain that counterarguments could be made to indicate the exact opposite. People tend to see what they want to see and ignore what they don't.

But what I do know for an undeniable fact is that Republican administrations have consistently, time and time again, given the go ahead to polluting the air that we breathe and the water that we drink. Data that prove this can be piled up to the moon and beyond. I'm not aware of arguments to the contrary. How anyone who cares about the earth and its creatures, human and otherwise, could support such wholesale disregard for life is beyond me.

There are huge dead zones in the Chesapeake Bay where virtually nothing can live; the ocean is so filthy that our children can't eat tuna from it without eating mercury. What will it be like for our children's children, and theirs? Short-sightedness is selfishness, and may be suicide for the human race. Where will the planet be in a thousand years if we continue on the path we are on? God help us if anyone like Bush or Cheney gets control of this country again.

I would NEVER be the first to say that the Democratic Party hasn't made some major and terrible mistakes. How about LBJ and the Vietnam War? Or the failed hostage rescue attempt in Iran in 1980? And there have been plenty of corrupt dems in congress as well. But, once again in my humble opinion, based upon plenty of historical reading (yes, I did in fact take several history classes in my undergrad days) and LIVING THROUGH IT for 45 years, these sins pale in comparison to what happened during the Nixon (Watergate - let's have a dictator in the White House), Reagan (sold weapons to our ENEMIES [Iran] and future enemies [Iraq], then used the funds to support death squads in Central America), Bush I (buddied up to Sadam Hussein & Manuel Noriega before FINALLY realizing his mistakes, then needed two wars to cleanup his mess, one of which he left unfinished), and do I even need to mention Bush II (where the hell do I even begin???) administrations? How many violations of the Constitution of the United States of America can you find in those regimes without even trying??? How much danger was our country put in by these self-serving numbskulls???

This isn't even to mention the abuse of the natural world. The GOP wasn't always this way - after all, it was NIXON who happily and enthusiastically signed the Endangered Species Act, The National Environmental Policy Act, and the Clean Water Act, three pieces of landmark environmental legislation that his GOP successors have been desperately trying to get rid of FOR DECADES. I was witness to the legacy of the Reagan & Bush I administrations in the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, '92-'93 - bald hillsides, no salmon, and rivers running the color of chocolate milk) and the Engler administration (MI Governor, '90 -'03 - handing out development permits like candy to his buddies, emasculating environmental protections by chronic understaffing and underfunding of the Department of Environmental Quality, and raiding dedicated Department of Natural Resource funds so he could say he "balanced the budget").

So, let's hear from those of you in the GOP defend the actions that I have mentioned above. And just why the Democrats are instead responsible for all of the problems in this country for the last 50 years (let me guess - you must be reading...ANN COULTER!!!) I am really, really looking forward to it...

Jonathon

P.S. Spraying DDT INDOORS means that people will be exposed to much higher levels. Fine if you don't mind cancers and the inability to reproduce in later years. Sounds like damned if you do, damned if you don't - die now or die later. Really, isn't there a BETTER solution out there??? Louis, feel free to educate me further on this.

Jonathon

Louis, I just read the Washington Post article, and I have to take issue with one point:

"The most famous pesticide in the world, DDT has few if any adverse effects in human beings."

Check out Our Stolen Future by Theo Coburn. DDT is now known to be an endocrine disruptor, in other words it mimics substances like estrogen when ingested and locks into receptors meant for the body's natural hormones. Which means it can accelerate cancers and cause reproductive malformations, like posessing both male and female reproductive organs. While I certainly commend the effort to protect babies and children from a dreadful disease like malaria, I can't help but think there are better, safer, and not necessarily more costly solutions out there. If the big pesticide companies were truly concerned about the good of humanity and not just next quarter's profits, they would be providing safer and just as effective pesticides at little or no cost.

If I am just full of shit on this one, someone needs to give me a good reason why.

Jonathon

P.S. Dimethylsilbesterol (DMS) was thought to be perfectly safe until daughters of mothers taking it found out they had severely deformed uteruses (uteri?) upon reaching childbearing age. Not all toxic effects show up in the short term.

Jonathon,

I'd have to do more research to be sure on the DDT question, but I tend to go your route and always try to find a less toxic approach. I did completely organic vegetable gardening for years and also had fruit trees. I used many organic approaches with the fruit trees, such as making apple maggot traps out of soda bottles, and using BT for codling moths and borers, but I sprayed Imidan once or twice each spring when plum curculios were most likely to damage the fruit (compared to the up to fifteen sprayings that commercial growers do). The fruit wasn't perfect, but I could usually expect about 80-90% usable fruit. I researched Imidan as fully as I could, and noted that the manufacturer claimed it broke down fully in a few weeks. I never was entirely sure about that, and actually was relieved when we moved and I no longer felt I had to make that decision each spring. The stuff smelled nasty, and I always used a full suit, with hood, gloves, goggles, and respirator. Local markets now have lots of organic choices, and my spring is completely devoted to chasing fish, which is much more fun than spraying or pulling weeds, and fishing doesn't require me to be swathed from head to toe in Tyvek. :). Finally, I too would like to see someone try to defend recent Republican administrations' policies on the environment. And I'm not too happy about their other policies you mention either. And if anyone doesn't follow, my last statement is a good example of litotes.

Kudos to you, Louis, for using integrated pest management! And for finally getting rid of the nasty stuff, and for being smart enough to protect yourself while using it. When I was in the Peace Corps in Chile (oh boy, the right wingers are really going to think I am a communist now) we saw a horrible story on the TV news about birth defects in children of pesticide applicators, even those who wore full chemical suits with respirators (they could have ingested the pesticides when they were taking off their suits). The images showed an application in progress: a person on a tractor, wearing said protective clothing, flips a switch and proceeds to DISAPPEAR in an opaque cloud of smoke!! Then they give birth to children with spinal columns on the OUTSIDE of their bodies (spinal bifida)! So there's your alternative: children who run the risk of dying from malaria or being born horribly malformed and in obvious pain. Not much of a choice in my mind...

I don't give a flying f*ck what the chemical industry says. There have been far too many cases of supposedly "safe" compounds turning out to be the worst imaginable. Think PCBs, for God's sake!

BTW, I mispelled the author's name for Our Stolen Future. It's Theo Colburn, I believe. If something can cause malformations in a lower vertebrate, just what the hell is it going to do to US?

Jonathon

P.S. I think that those people who think that DDT and related compounds (halogenated hydrocarbons) are perfectly safe for humans should go ahead and use it inside THEIR homes. Really, does anyone wonder why cancer rates are so high in this (chemically saturated) country?

P.P.S. My former employer insisted that I get a Pesticide Applicator's License from the MI Dept. of Agriculture for a project we never ended up getting (thank goodness!). Although judicious herbicide application can be an important tool in the control of aquatic (and terrestrial) nuisance species, I would rather have someone other than myself doing it...

ya know you folks have completely missed the point. let me reiterate. . .there are rarely perfect answers. its a shame people have to make assumptions about people and the political views they hold and let that stand between and above all sense of reason.

this conversation isn't about ddt or piscicides, its about irrational behavior and personal attacks. its about people going absolutely rabid about a differing view. and you all are guilty as charged. its this rabid emotion that locks our hands today and keeps us from making the improvements to our society we need. notice i said "we need" not i need or they need. look how you folks have went on and on. i think i could define this as insanity. the fact that there are not "perfect answers" as i have said, should humble you all. because you are not smart enough, nor i, to have that perfect answer. so when you spout off about those people over there. . .realize that you are just part of the problem.

you want me to talk to you about the evil conservatives who are damaging the planet. do you have plastics in your house? do you drive a car? your incredible! you reap the rewards of an industrialized society and tear down the very people who made it possible. we are all on a learning curve here. you people are concerned about the environment, well i am too. but since i've been labeled an evil, simple-minded conservative you will not listen to anything else, i can't really defend myself. i will say this (bashing about to take place jonathon, just so you don't miss it) democrats have taxed industry so much and placed so much regulation on it, other than environmental regulation, that a great deal of companies that manufacture have left this country and went to china where there isn't much of an environmental voice or concern. they are destroying that environment instead of being here where we have some control. and as good environmentalists we know it's all connected. BTW the reason bush didn't sign the environmental treaty was because he knew the other large industrialized nations wouldn't sign it either. which if he would have, would have further strapped us economically and would have put MORE pollution into the earth, by your own regulation you are poisoning the earth at faster rate. kind of reminds me of that stupid legislation that has us all using mercury filled bulbs after 2012.
now that's bright.

let me give you some reading material that might help us all. i hope you will read it. the book is called "POWER vs. FORCE the hidden determinates of human behavior". that's a good one for you non christians, christians here, just dust off your bible.

anything else you wanna talk about?
you all have a nice day, hope you all have a "fish on" day.

Trtklr,

I don't recall labeling you as anything, nor addressing you directly before now. I've only discussed some politicians who have caused the world a lot of damage. Here's the a good example of labeling, though: "you all are guilty as charged. its this rabid emotion that locks our hands today and keeps us from making the improvements to our society we need. notice i said "we need" not i need or they need. look how you folks have went on and on. i think i could define this as insanity."

So, you have called me crazy.

I find that amusing, since I haven't taken an emotional approach to any of this, but a calm, logical one. I asked for a defense of the recent Republican environmental policies, and what I got from you was name calling. That's funny.

To avoid the issue, though, you're trying to blame Democrats for jobs being shipped overseas, but if you are as smart as you have claimed to be, you'd know that the cause for that is relatively complex.

Here's a simplified view, though, that might clarify some of the reasons for you: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/15/eveningnews/main606478.shtml Basic economic principles are at work, and the behavior of workers, consumers, and business executives drives the shift.

Here's another silly quotation: "do you have plastics in your house? do you drive a car? your incredible! you reap the rewards of an industrialized society and tear down the very people who made it possible." Of course I have plastics in my home, but I do everything I can to limit the problems they cause, and I drive a fuel-efficient car, more of which will be on the road in the future, due to initiatives of the Democrats in control now. Repugnicans blocked fuel efficiency standards for years, causing myriad environmental problems that we could have been heading off. One can enjoy modern society and still try to make it environmentally sound. To claim otherwise is to set up a false dichotomy.

Oh and let's consider this one: "you people are concerned about the environment, well i am too. but since i've been labeled an evil, simple-minded conservative you will not listen to anything else, i can't really defend myself." I hadn't labeled you anything, but since you've taken it upon yourself to call me insane, I'll simply say this: as long as you have the blinders on, it's going to be hard for me to see you as anything else than what you've labeled yourself as.

Case in point: "BTW the reason bush didn't sign the environmental treaty was because he knew the other large industrialized nations wouldn't sign it either. which if he would have, would have further strapped us economically and would have put MORE pollution into the earth, by your own regulation you are poisoning the earth at faster rate." So now you are privy to Bush's motives? It had nothing to do with his refusal to believe scientific proof of global warming, and his being in the pocket of big business. Yeah, right.

Finally, "kind of reminds me of that stupid legislation that has us all using mercury filled bulbs after 2012."

CFL's do pose complex problems, but your characterization characteristically over-simplifies the issues. Here's one source that shows why they reduce the amount of mercury in the environment:

http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3585_30068_30172-90210--,00.html

We do need to do a better job of disposing of them, and I'll tell you, I trust the Democrats to take us in that direction a lot more than the GOP, which would say it's too expensive to do the right thing.

I guess I have one question that will determine whether or not I waste any more time on you. Did you vote for McCain and try to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from running this country?

Your answer to that question should clarify a lot of things.

insanity does not equal crazy. i think i've said enough, you all have established and reestablished my point. driven it home and nailed it down.

have a nice day. tight lines to ya.