Call the Geese Police!
My Labs go insane when they see a flock of Canadas (or a flock of anything else for that matter). They run them off and harass them until they leave town. So do the Border Collies used by Geese Police.
Posted on 04/04/2007 11:51:05 AM PDT by Bob Buchholz
Gov. Mike Easley on Friday strongly objected to any use of poisons by the Navy to control birds at a proposed airstrip near a national wildlife refuge. Easley said the Navy's plan would destroy the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge.
"I want to make sure you are aware of this threat to our state's fragile and priceless natural heritage," Easley said in a letter to state officials before six public hearings, starting Monday, scheduled by the Navy to gather comments on the proposal.
The Navy wants to build a jetway for pilots to practice aircraft carrier landings about five miles from the refuge. The refuge attracts tens of thousands of snow geese and tundra swans each winter to Eastern North Carolina. The waterfowl would pose a severe risk to pilots and aircraft about half the year.
A U.S. Department of Agriculture report done as part of the Navy's new environmental study recommends driving away birds that pose a risk by taking away the food crops they eat, scaring them with dogs and fireworks, and using poison and guns if scare tactics don't work.
Among the poisons the report says should be considered are Avitrol, which causes birds to give out distress calls, fly in erratic patterns and spook other birds.
"Under no circumstances should this chemical be used in proximity to tundra swans, snow geese or any other migratory waterfowl," said Wes Seegars, chairman of the state Wildlife Resources Commission.
Federal agriculture officials who wrote the report said poisons could be used if necessary on smaller species such as blackbirds, starlings, pigeons and gulls. They said if lethal measures were required to control migratory waterfowl, the birds would be shot, not poisoned.
The Navy said in a statement Friday that news reports focusing on the lethal methods created a misleading impression.
"Poisons and other lethal means are only used as a last resort," the Navy said.
The Navy said using dogs to harass birds and removing the crops that attract the birds were the most effective means of driving off birds. The Navy said it expected it could manage the risk of bird collisions without adversely affecting the refuge -- a statement that federal wildlife officials question.
It turns out that the Navy had falsified some of the EPA data and were going to be building this right in the middle of our states most active bird sanctuary which means the birds will also intefere with the jets.
When this was pointed out to them they claimed that they could get rid of the birds by using dogs, eliminating the crops and if necessary poisioning the birds.
Please help us out down here and let everyone know what is happening. I can't believe the Navy will get away with this if everyone is aware of what they are trying to do.
Easley should appoint Mike Nifong in charge, since he did such a wonderful job as Durham County District Attorney.
The Navy wants to build a jetway for pilots to practice aircraft carrier landings about five miles from the refuge.
No one is putting poison inside the refuge. The border of the refuge is where protection stops. Otherwise, borders mean nothing. Five miles outside the zone of protection, the Navy can do what they want, as far as I care.
It's on hold for now. ...but the developers never give up.
Why don’t they use that airfield in Goldsboro, built as a “Trade Zone”?
Dear Bob,
Do you want the Navy to protect this country?
If so, sit down and shut up.
If not, you’re on the right track...
Instead of “Easley Opposes Poisoning Birds”, maybe they could try the equally deceptive “Easley Supports Killing Navy Pilots with Swarms of Birds”
Call the Geese Police!
My Labs go insane when they see a flock of Canadas (or a flock of anything else for that matter). They run them off and harass them until they leave town. So do the Border Collies used by Geese Police.
So my question is why the carrier can't operate of the coast of NC instead of Va to aide in pilot training?
F-14's and A-6's operated out of there in 1990.
There is something else up with the airfield crap.
Oops. Kinston, not Goldsboro. I wasn’t too far off, however. This taxpayer’s disaster was developed to attract business, then no one wanted it. Maybe the Navy would like to lease it.
http://www.ncgtp.com/pg/airport1.html
Why don’t they take a retired aircraft carrier and permanently place it off the coast? I guess I just don’t get why the sudden need for all the new landing strips, considering all the ones already available. How about putting the USS Enterprise on the beach in front of John Edwards’ vacation home?
I agree with you. It was a stupid decision on the part of the Navy to put a landing strip near a bird refuge. Only an idiot would think that birds stay exclusively inside a sanctuary. And only a bigger idiot would blindly support any military decision because it came from the military. And now the Navy wants the birds gone! Sorry, but they were there first and are protected. The Navy could have found another location where they don't have to worry about birds and the birds won't be threatened by the Navy.
Because the Navy falsified EPA data, it is clear that they knew about the ecological sensitivity of the area, that they would negatively impact it and deliberately tried to avoid repercussions.
Like I said the BRAC military stuff is what is pushing this so the pencil pushers can justify "saving money" so political contributors can get fed dollars in the form of construction contracts, etc., etc.
There is no reason for the Navy to put the strip there. Too f'n bad about the residents who decided to build next to an airfield. The same argument came up a while back with all the transplants who bought houses north and south of RDU's approaches to each of its runways.
Well guess what? When a jet drops to 500 ft on final, yes there's going to be some noise; and even more noise with the throttles maxed for take off. I live 20 mi north of RDU, in the country, and depending on weather (rainy / foggy) and wind direction (out of the south SE, or SW), those same jets are at 1000 ft directly above my house on an extended ILS approach patterns. Hell, I can see the people in the windows (man or woman --- color of clothes top for example) at night in my yard. Laser pointers are fun at the passengers then. And yes, I sometimes miss the dialog on TV shows because of it.
It's the same political BS that allowed NC taxpayer's money to be wasted courtesy of Jim Hunt's corrupt political machine on the Global Trans Fart.
Notice how many of Hunt's former 'power payers' have been popped since Jim left and Mike stepped in?
How about the Navy puts a runway through your house? You want the country protected, right?
Perhaps you misread the situation. The Navy ALREADY has the OLF. They simply want to move it out of Warner’s state into ours. There are hundreds of places here in NC that would be happy to have it (Cherry Point has already been mentioned, the Global Transpark has been mentioned as well).
My problem is the Navy’s methods. They have falsified reports, lied about what planes would be operating there, been caught lying to the judge and want to put this directly in the migratory bird path for no really good reason. I grew up in an Air Force town (Altus, OK)so the noise or the traffic is not my objection.
As far as it being the military so I can’t complain or I’m anti-American: BS.
I had nothing to do with the following site,so I do not take responsibility for the poor organization, but the entire history of this debacle can be found at http://www.noolf.com
I find it pretty frightening that we haven’t managed to come up with technology that makes it safe for jet aircraft to fly in airspace that contains birds. Completely apart from the environmental issues, military aircraft are supposed to be capable of operating all over the world, in less than optimal, and often enemy-controlled locations. This just doesn’t strike me as something that should be a hard-to-solve problem. For example, if the poison Avitrol causes birds to emit distress calls that spook other birds and drive them away, it seems to me that the military ought to be able to produce sound-emitting devices that emit the same sounds as poisoned birds. And why can’t jet engines be designed to instantly shred incoming birds into harmlessly tiny pieces?
The proposed airfield is 5 miles from the border of the refuge; however, the flight paths for approach, departure, and for the actual training patterns extend into the refuge. And as someone else has stated in this thread, do you really think the birds know where the borders are? The Navy had a demo over the proposed site last year, to show the public that the birds were not a problem. A few minutes into their "show" the pilots of the F-18s called the demo off. Guess why???? Too many birds, some within 100 feet of the low and slow flying Hornets. All this is about is getting John Warner and his Virginia cronies more money in their pockets. Dude, I'm no card carrying enviro weenie... but if the rest of the country knew the real politics behind this situation... many of them may have more of a tendency to side with the birds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.