On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 23:57:10 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:58:36 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science....ap/index.html

No doubt this is just one of many more attempts to undo decades of bipartisan
pro-environment policy in the final months of this pathetic administration...

/daytripper

As I said...

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed...f_indignation/

GOOD GOD!!! SLASHING 23% OF THE HABITAT!!! THEY'LL BE GONE IN WEEKS!!!
THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY SURVIVE ON...ON...on...on...wait...how many acres
will they have left...? 1? 50? 100? 200? Well, let's
check...hmmm...around 5 million, down from about 6.5 million. Gee, 5
million acres...almost 8000 square miles...boy, these owls must build
some _big_ feathermoltin' nests...

Even more to come...no doubt...

/daytripper

Hey, now, waitasec...this might have a happy ending, if you're willing
to put your effort where your keyboard is...why don't you see if you can
get your fellow Patriots there in Mass to agree to give up the entire
state for the owls (and hey, other critters, too). By happy
coincidence, the area currently under protection almost exactly the same
size (well, to be fair, the area is just a bit larger than the state),
but since it appears the owls may get a reduction in area anyway, they
should be able to make do with it...OTOH, the protection area (or
rather, its size) has been questioned by many since its creation,
including GASP California Dems, and REGASP the proposal of a
mid-20s-percent reduction has been about the same since REREGASP
Clinton was Prez...

HTH,
R