Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 White House blocks rule protecting endangered whales Juliet Eilperin, Washington Post Thursday, May 1, 2008 (05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect. North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money. The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange " appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts. " In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned " the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position. " The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that " the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers. " NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, " The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced. " A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued " that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference. " NOAA again fired back, writing that there was " no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales. " Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers. Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that " the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this. " Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. " We will make an appropriate response to the committee, " she said, adding that " we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals. " This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco Chronicle What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. - Mark Twain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2008 Report Share Posted May 4, 2008 Your government seems to have a good track record at "questioning" the results of scientific study on anything to do with animals or the enviroment. The mighty dollar eh? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx"doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com" <doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com>; vegan chat Saturday, 3 May, 2008 6:02:51 PM Cheney then shot the whale in the face... White House blocks rule protecting endangered whalesJuliet Eilperin, Washington PostThursday, May 1, 2008(05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange "appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts."In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned "the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position." The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that "the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers."NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, "The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced."A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued "that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference." NOAA again fired back, writing that there was "no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales."Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers.Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that "the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this."Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. "We will make an appropriate response to the committee," she said, adding that "we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals."This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco ChronicleWhat gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.- Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2008 Report Share Posted May 4, 2008 hey, those ships need to get to their destination of time! those chinese made geegaws are needed at wal mart! who cares if the ships happen to run over a few whales er somesuch..speedbumps.. they should get out of the water and let decent ppl sail...er motor, er wotever... besides, it's the whales fault, you saw the way she was dressed! she ran into a door knob...she feel down the stairs...she should watch where she's going etc and so forth.... Peter VV May 3, 2008 11:49 PM Re: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... Your government seems to have a good track record at "questioning" the results of scientific study on anything to do with animals or the enviroment. The mighty dollar eh? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) net>"doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com" <doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com>; vegan chat Saturday, 3 May, 2008 6:02:51 PM Cheney then shot the whale in the face... White House blocks rule protecting endangered whalesJuliet Eilperin, Washington PostThursday, May 1, 2008(05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange "appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts."In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned "the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position." The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that "the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers."NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, "The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced."A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued "that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference." NOAA again fired back, writing that there was "no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales."Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers.Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that "the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this."Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. "We will make an appropriate response to the committee," she said, adding that "we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals."This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco ChronicleWhat gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.- Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. - Mark Twain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2008 Report Share Posted May 5, 2008 And what about the national parks, or Alaska or endangered species that happen to co-habit prime realestate? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx Sent: Sunday, 4 May, 2008 9:19:11 PMRe: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... hey, those ships need to get to their destination of time! those chinese made geegaws are needed at wal mart! who cares if the ships happen to run over a few whales er somesuch..speedbump s.. they should get out of the water and let decent ppl sail...er motor, er wotever... besides, it's the whales fault, you saw the way she was dressed! she ran into a door knob...she feel down the stairs...she should watch where she's going etc and so forth.... Peter VV May 3, 2008 11:49 PM @gro ups.com Re: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... Your government seems to have a good track record at "questioning" the results of scientific study on anything to do with animals or the enviroment. The mighty dollar eh? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx@earthlin k.net>"doomerism@googlegr oups.com" <doomerism@googlegro ups.com>; vegan chat <@gro ups.com>Saturday, 3 May, 2008 6:02:51 PM Cheney then shot the whale in the face... White House blocks rule protecting endangered whalesJuliet Eilperin, Washington PostThursday, May 1, 2008(05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange "appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts."In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned "the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position." The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that "the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers."NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, "The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced."A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued "that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference." NOAA again fired back, writing that there was "no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales."Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers.Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that "the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this."Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. "We will make an appropriate response to the committee," she said, adding that "we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals."This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco ChronicleWhat gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.- Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. - Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2008 Report Share Posted May 5, 2008 wasn't that long ago they were talking about putting RIDES in yellowstone and yosemite.... Peter VV May 5, 2008 6:41 AM Re: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... And what about the national parks, or Alaska or endangered species that happen to co-habit prime realestate? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx (AT) earthlink (DOT) net> Sent: Sunday, 4 May, 2008 9:19:11 PMRe: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... hey, those ships need to get to their destination of time! those chinese made geegaws are needed at wal mart! who cares if the ships happen to run over a few whales er somesuch..speedbump s.. they should get out of the water and let decent ppl sail...er motor, er wotever... besides, it's the whales fault, you saw the way she was dressed! she ran into a door knob...she feel down the stairs...she should watch where she's going etc and so forth.... Peter VV May 3, 2008 11:49 PM @gro ups.com Re: Cheney then shot the whale in the face... Your government seems to have a good track record at "questioning" the results of scientific study on anything to do with animals or the enviroment. The mighty dollar eh? Peter H fraggle <EBbrewpunx@earthlin k.net>"doomerism@googlegr oups.com" <doomerism@googlegro ups.com>; vegan chat <@gro ups.com>Saturday, 3 May, 2008 6:02:51 PM Cheney then shot the whale in the face... White House blocks rule protecting endangered whalesJuliet Eilperin, Washington PostThursday, May 1, 2008(05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange "appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts."In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned "the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position." The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that "the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers."NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, "The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced."A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued "that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference." NOAA again fired back, writing that there was "no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales."Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers.Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that "the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this."Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. "We will make an appropriate response to the committee," she said, adding that "we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals."This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco ChronicleWhat gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.- Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. - Mark Twain Sent from Mail. A Smarter Email. What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. - Mark Twain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2008 Report Share Posted May 17, 2008 The whale shot back that's why we rite about it its last words did not go un heard says spock. ha ha . No realy said by angelo if you saw the movie then you know. Some times it's what we didn'.t hear that matters That's why we have hearts and emotions.--- On Sat, 5/3/08, fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote: fraggle <EBbrewpunx Cheney then shot the whale in the face..."doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com" <doomerism (AT) googl (DOT) com>, "vegan chat" Saturday, May 3, 2008, 5:02 PM White House blocks rule protecting endangered whalesJuliet Eilperin, Washington PostThursday, May 1, 2008(05-01) 04:00 PDT Washington - -- White House economists and Vice President Dick Cheney's office have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales for more than a year by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.The documents, which House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, released Wednesday, show that the White House Council of Economic Advisers and Cheney's office repeatedly questioned whether the rule was needed. Waxman, who sent a letter to the White House asking for an explanation, said the exchange "appears to be the latest instance of the White House ignoring scientists and other experts."In one document, the Council of Economic Advisers questioned "the reliability of analysis in the published literature on which NOAA is basing its position." The council conducted its own analysis and concluded that "the relationship between (vessel) speed and (whale) injury ... may not be as strong of a relationship as is suggested in published papers."NOAA scientists were not swayed, writing in response, "The basic facts remain that (1) there is a direct relationship between speed and death/serious injury, and (2) at vessel speeds at or below 10 knots the probability of death/serious injury is greatly reduced."A separate document reveals that Cheney's staff argued "that we have no evidence (i.e., hard data) that lowering the speeds of 'large ships' will actually make a difference." NOAA again fired back, writing that there was "no basis to overturn our previous conclusion that imposing a speed limit on large vessels would be beneficial to whales."Since NOAA initially proposed the regulation, at least three right whales have died from ship strikes, and another two have been wounded by propellers.Amy Knowlton, a scientist at the New England Aquarium who has studied right whales, said the documents show that "the rule really is based on good science. NOAA has done a very good job in sticking to its guns on this."Kristen Hellmer, spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the office is reviewing the Waxman letter. "We will make an appropriate response to the committee," she said, adding that "we are confident this long-standing rule-making process will provide an approach that will achieve our shared goals."This article appeared on page A - 3 of the San Francisco ChronicleWhat gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.- Mark Twain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.