Budget Cuts Threaten Wildlife Programs

[Weedy1]

Check this article out. I wonder who the "sources" are, how the priorities are set, and who's telling the truth. If there’s any truth to it, I personally find it disgraceful. Cutting a 1.9 million dollar budget from a group that protects nationally significant habitats for wildlife and birds? Give me a break; we probably spend more money on toilet paper for the MP's in a year.

 

From: http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...anada-cuts.html

 

Serious budget problems at Environment Canada are threatening wildlife programs and services within the federal department, freezing allotted money for some and reducing funds to nothing for others, CBC News has learned.

 

Of most concern to conservationists among a handful of cuts is that the Canadian Wildlife Service has had its service budget frozen for the rest of the fiscal year, meaning all its scientific field and survey work has been halted. The national wildlife agency is directly responsible for studying and protecting wildlife in Canada and puts out the Hinterland Who's Who public service ads.

 

"Wildlife doesn't have a voice, and sometimes the results of cuts today aren't realized for many years," said Sandy Baumgartner, executive director of programs and communications for the Canadian Wildlife Federation.

 

Sources say the budget cuts are as follows:

 

• The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Network, which observes changes in ecosystems, has lost 80 per cent of its budget.

• The Migratory Bird Program, which monitors the health of bird populations, has seen its budget cut by 50 per cent.

• The budget for the National Wildlife Areas, a program that protects nationally significant habitats for wildlife and birds, has been slashed from $1.9 million to zero.

 

Bob Bailey, a hunter and conservationist, was shocked to hear the federal government's support for Canada's 144 National Wildlife Areas has been reduced to nothing.

 

"I simply can't believe. Have we become this urbanized, have we become this uncaring that these places could be in jeopardy?" said Bailey, who is with the Delta Waterfowl Foundation.

 

Sources told CBC that funds to those programs were slashed after Environment Canada overspent its budget.

 

Environment Minister John Baird wasn't available for comment. His department sent an e-mail stating that no programs have been cut and that spending is being prioritized for climate change initiatives.

"The government has been clear that its priorities are being a climate change champion, and taking real action to provide clean air and clean water for Canadians," the e-mail said. "We think Canadians are supportive of those priorities."

[dryfly]

In a very large part, we have Al Gore and David Suzuki to blame for this. They've whipped the public into climate change frenzy and the public is demanding that something be done to combat climate change. The feds have wasted at least two billion dollars so far on their climate change policies and you and I know bloody well that the money should toward environmental protection, clean air and clean water. We cannot change climate change as it is driven by the sun and oceans.

 

It is time for people to wake up and realize that REAL environmental (health and humanitarian) issues will go begging because we are wasting to much on a bogus issue--AGW. Millions of destitute souls don't have clean water to drink and health care in many countries is grossly lacking. And the rich developed world is pissing away billions--soon to be trillions--on bullshit climate change programs. It is a disgrace.

 

This eco terrorism by Gore and Suzuki is the biggest crime to the environment and to humanity of all time. It is a disgrace and a crying shame.

 

Don't blame the feds. Blame those bastards Gore and Suzuki.

 

Ask me how I feel.

[Weedy1]

I take it you've been simmering for awhile Clive. Is the that the whistle on the kettle I hear?

[Castuserraticus]

The programs cut were quietly doing their job - too quietly. Some of their data may have flown in the face of the alarmists - like the study released last year that found polar bear populations at historic highs.

 

Governments need to justify the taxes collected. AGW is huge so they can tax big.

[wongrs]

We don't have all that much control over government spending. We can only have a legitimate say during voting periods. One way we can all make a difference is to......

 

Come down to the bow river cleanup this saturday! Free food, lots of prizes, and wicked awesome fisher people to hang with! I'm sure dryfly and weedy would come on down if they were in town! Wouldn't ya? Wouldn't ya?

 

For those interested, after Toolman's high stick demo we can have a discussion on the finer points of climate change.

 

 

Seriously, come on down and make a real tangible difference on the water you fish. Prove that you care.

 

hijack, complete.

[Grizz]

While I don't fully agree with Clive on this, I do agree that the climate change issue has sucked funds from departments NPO (non-pay operating) budgets. No question. Don't know if I'd go so far as to blame the greying chicken littles, but there's definitely moneys being diverted.

 

In some cases salary dollars are hurting in these departments as well due to funds going elsewhere and the "beefing up" of staff compliments to address hot topic/in fashion issues (such as Clive's example).

 

During the liberal reign, they would have likely just pumped more cash into it all and rode it out (into the red if need be).

 

Since the conservatives are in power, they are just doing what they do best - tightening purse strings across the board. They want to see the cash going into business programs towards growth and expansion (getting rich on our resources), NOT towards sustainability or the environment (or social programs for that matter).

 

From the federal standpoint - likely we will soon be looking at the usual job cuts for fed employees in many departments (probably any departments dealing with environment or sustainability). Another broken promise from Stevie (I still think the guy looks like a Ken Doll! - His head is about as empty too!).

 

Now, ordinarily everyone says "Who gives a crap? Just a bunch of whiney govt. workers who should be glad they have a job!". However, interestingly, we keep hearing how the environment is not managed properly, long-term thinking by government is lacking, and why aren't they taking care of issue X? Answer is, there's few government workers left to do it. Less workers and more responsibility, for average pay - and we expect these folks to work until 8:00pm every night to cover the work of a department that just let it's workers go? Makes no sense to me. Might as well go work in the private sector where you work til 8:00pm and actually get paid way more than the govt. salary. I just spoke to a fellow a few months ago who worked for the Feds in Calgary. He had, what ordinarily would be a great job. High level physical science job paying around $90,000/year and he was responsible for the entire province of Alberta under his mandate. He was doing a good job but expectations of him were ridiculous. He left to another job to - get this - drive a truck with a device on the back used in the oil patch (not operate it - just drive the truck!). He told me his pay was quite significantly higher than he was making with the Feds. This is an educated young fella! Smart as a whip, capable and a very "take-ownership" kind of work ethic. But it just wasn't worth it anymore. He was just another example of what I keep hearing in provinces and federal offices.

 

We write letters to ministers, government agencies, rant and rave about why they aren't doing anything, but they just don't have the budget, or the swinging dicks in the field to drop what they are mandated to do on a daily basis (or was the hot topic 2 years ago and they are still working on), and start focusing on what folks want now. We want more COs, and we call them pick up jockeys. How much does a CO make? How often is he working well past a normal work day, infringing on his family time, etc. etc.? All that for average pay? *hit, he might as well go work in the oil field and get paid well for missing his family time.

 

After being in and out of government, academia, and private industry for years in various roles and on various sides of the table - I have made the repeated observation that "Lazy government workers" does not apply anymore (Personally - I think it used to - just not for the last 10 years or so). Everyone I know in government, beyond a front desk agent level (Federal AND provincial), seem to have waaay more responsibility and expectations laid on them than I've ever seen. They don't make near as much as their counterparts in private industry (or academia either!).

 

I'm sure someone can pull some statistics out of a hat somewhere that will show the opposite and prove how lazy our government guys still are and how thankful they should be that we don't all torch their houses. And, if I gave a crap about what I'm shooting my mouth off about, I'd find some more showing the vary reverse (statistics are so wonderful to make your point with regardless of what it is! Hell 82% of people know that!). But these are just my observations over time. Yeah, there's always a lazy guy around the office, but that's pretty much the same in the private sector too - always some bad examples.

 

Further, and more to the point of the thread, government spending is so often not about wasting money, just mis-allocation (arguably the same thing) and poor prioritization. Funny how you're listening to the radio and you hear something like "It was announced today there would be 3.5 million dollars available for the expansion of the construction project in bum-f**k, Alberta" then 2 minutes later "The Calgary homeless shelter stated today that due to lack of government funding they will be closing their doors in two months unless $75,000 is raised." You can insert whatever examples you like in there. Years ago in Edmonton, the Journal was lambasted (by the city) for printing side by side the announcement that Mayor had pledged almost $500,000 to a city celebration of it's birthday downtown (?? I think that was the reason, but I cant remember the occasion precisely), next to it ran an article on the Boyle street shelter which may have to close it's doors due to funding being cut off by the city (or words to that effect - It was some time ago). I always thought that highlighted money management in government.

 

But back to the topic really. Who didn't see this coming? Conservative government gets in after years under the Libs, how long til the conservatives can make some real damage? It take a year or two before they can start screwing things up again. Then the Libs get back in, and it takes them a few years before they reallocate the dollars to where they see fit. Same old cycle. Govt. workers in environment an social areas always duck when the conservatives get in. It's about timing really. If we could predict the economy for the next few years, we'd best get the Cons in, if things look good, best get the Libs in. The Liberal scandal in Quebec was just peanuts compared to what goes on regardless of the government in place. The Cons will get bad press and a rep for scandals soon enough. Longer they are in - the higher the likelihood of an "Airbus-gate" or "Shawini-gate" or other type of scandal. The Conservatives suits will get wrinkled soon enough, likely after they've managed a majority (God help us all if that happens!).

 

OK enough of my ranting...

 

Time to cut my opinion to shreds now...

[Pipestoneflyguy]

I wish I could weigh in on this one,...(without putting my ass in a sling)

 

Good to see these signifigant decisions and their impacts being discussed. The importantance of truly understanding actions taken by all levels of government cannot be over emphasized. Leaving authorities to determine, monitor and police their own accountabilities is like leaving the fox to watch the hens.

 

In the movie "Traffic" there is a great scene where a story is told..

A leader was taking office and he asked his predecessor, "what do I do when I get myself in a jam I can't get out of ?" - The predecessor says "I left you two envelopes in your desk, when you get into that jam open the first envelope" - sure enough the leader gets into a jam and opens the first envelope, it reads "Blame everything on me", so the leader blames the situation on his predecessor and then moves on, eventually he gets into another jam, so he opens the second letter. It reads "Sit down and write two letters"

 

I love that little story because it clearly shows how governments systematically can use the application of personal accountability to avoid overall government accountability (pre-planned scapegoating), the result is that very little really ever changes. Our electoral process is such that accountability is retroactively applied. If you really want to impact whats happening in government, take a more active role by asking questions and demanding changes directly to the existing authorities while they are knee-deep in the business of governance - The idea of canadians keeping gov in line by saying "I'll vote for the other party if you piss me off" really does very little in terms of bringing about changes to immediate decisions. I guess what I'm saying is if an issue is worth writing about on an internet forum, it is also likely worth-while writing a letter or email to your MP and/or local paper. We as Canadians, myself included, need to take a more active role in our governance, especially regarding issues that really matter to us.

 

If this does turn into one of those full scale debates please keep in mind their are two types of government worker, working or operational class, and executive class - they are not the same thing by a long shot