(McCain) scoffs at pouring millions into studying grizzly bear DNA, but scientists say it's key

[hedgehog]

to preserving the species"

"This is not pork barrel at all," says Richard Mace, a research biologist with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). "We have a federal law called the Endangered Species Act and the federal government is supposed to help identify and conserve threatened species."

The grizzly has been listed as a threatened species since 1975 and scientists say that it is essential to get a handle on the population to preserve it. But, according to Kendall, until the feds decided to invest in this grizzly bear DNA study, researchers lacked the funds to conduct research at the scale necessary to get a reliable measure.

So is forking over huge chunks of change to protect grizzly bears "unbelievable"—or a joke—as McCain charges?

No way, scientists and environmentalists say. Protecting wildlife is expensive, but grizzlies are priceless, says Louisa Willcox, director of the Wild Bears Project for the National Resources Defense Council. "Grizzly bears are a symbol of our frontier past—of untamed wilderness," she says. "Lewis and Clark saw them eating buffalo carcasses on the American plains."

Not only are grizzlies "treasures of United States history," Servheen says, but they help us understand how effective our conservation efforts are. Despite their ferocious reputation, he notes, grizzlies are exquisitely sensitive to human activity and can only live on the wildest tracts of land. "They are an indicator of the health of ecosystems," he says, and they emblematize "the preservation of wilderness, which is becoming rarer every day."


http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=mccains-beef-with-bears



I suspected that this was the back story to McCain's claim of pork. I love the Internet!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

1. Pork Barrel Spending = Spending in Somebody Else's District

The Bridge to Nowhere is an extreme example. Most pork barrel spending has been for things that have a legitimate purpose.

[abumbyanyothername]

11. You know what about nowhere?

If they had a bridge, it might not be nowhere.

If Palin McCain were not so "anti-earmark" I would even have some sympathy for the Pork Queen of the Yukon. Alaska is a pretty wild and harsh environment. By no means a majority, but a lot of people don't enjoy things like running water, or electricity. For some of these people, that is a choice. For others it is not.

The US wants those people up there to extract the oil. Now maybe some would say, let the oil royalties or oil companies pay for it.

But I can at least see the argument that it costs more to be in Alaska and at the same time AK is playing catch up with the rest of the country on standard of living.

[PBS Poll-435]

2. And I hate that McCain attempted yet another lame joke about it

Something about a paternity test or something.

No one laughed.

[Motown_Johnny]

3. McCain is speaking to the people who don't give a fuck about saving any species

they rather have their one fucking dollar in taxes back.

[arewenotdemo]

12. Exactly!

[x-g.o.p.er]

4. But why does the govt have to pay for it?

Look, when times are tight, I have to decide on what I need, and what I don't need.

I think it's absurd that government gets to grow almost exponentially every year, but average Americans like me have to cut down to make ends meet.

Government needs to as well.

[Ikonoklast]

5. The Defense Department probably spent more on paper clips last year

Than this whole study cost.

[x-g.o.p.er]

7. That's not the point

If the govt is spending money for something non-essential, then it should be eliminated.

The study of polar bear DNA is a waste of money in this economic climate, and could be funded privately.

[insanity]

9. I'd argue that much of our defense spending is nonessential

And that we wouldn't be in this shithole economic situation if we had any amount of foresight.

[Ikonoklast]

10. Thank you.

You made my point.

[x-g.o.p.er]

13. A lot of it is, I agree

And I'm in the military. All areas of unnecessry spending need to be eliminated.

Starting with polar bear DNA research, along with $10 billion/month in Iraq.

[quaker bill]

16. You have it backwards

If you wish to shrink the economy, one of the easiest ways to get about it is to reduce aggregate demand. One third of aggregate demand for goods and services in this economy is government spending. If you actually want to grow the economy, the only way to do it is spending to consume goods and services. In a time where private sector spending is falling, the only way to prop up demand and keep the economy going is government spending, in deficit if necessary. Racheting down government spending at this moment is the one surest way to go from a recession to a depression.

To some extent, it doesn't even matter where you spend the money, although some places are more effective than others, all government domestic spending is stimulative. The one place spending has the greatest negative drag on the economy is when the spending is overseas, such as in Iraq. That money is largely lost to the economic cycle. However, grizzly bear scientists need food, clothing, transportation, and shelter. They will patronize this economy to purchase their needs.

Defense spending is least effective, because the goal and most of the finances are spent to produce equipment that is stockpiled, and either never used or used at extreme cost overseas. Research and public works projects are the most effective as the benefits are spread more broadly and largely retained in this economy.

Government spending is a very good thing, particularly at a time like this. Pork is tasty in this economy.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

6. I'm sure McCain doesn't believe in science or conservation, and he probably hates animals.

He's 100% nasty.

[JBoris]

8. Apparently McC agrees. He voted for the bill (and didn't try to strip that earmark). nt

[all.of.me]

14. Well, I scoff at pouring billions into Iraq, and that is key to preserving our species.

:P

[iiibbb]

15. The Vetrans had it straight... McCain isn't frugal... he's cheap.