Subject: [Tweeters] Wildlife Rehabilitation Bill SB5188 - It's the right
Date: Mar 11 17:44:23 2007
From: monte merrick - montemerrick at speakeasy.net


dear all
first let me put this forward, written and sent to one of the parties
that has weighed in on this topic (meant to post it here but neglected
to select reply all)

i am not sure about the answers to any of these questions regarding the
bill proposed, but it would seem very hard to make the distinctions
that these questions imply as favorable. how could money be earmarked
for only native species unless the state were to demand a priori that
any recipient hospital treat only natives. if this were enacted, any
rehab center that treats non-native species will now be financially
pressured to stop doing so - and this would be very unfortunate - human
management of wildlife has, as we all know too well, a very poor record
- treating wounded living things is a decision that we make because of
compassionate desire to alleviate individual suffering. this is good
and honest work in its own right - it is sad that in a world as rich as
ours, with hundreds of billions spent on destroying people and places
and the nonhuman inhabitants, that we talk of not having the money to
support a wildlife hospital and endangered species protecction. that we
look at a bird's species before we look at its wound.

now, having looked at the bill in question, it does seem to have some
unfortunate wording and criteria. first off, as dave points out, it
disallows anyone with a conviction for a felony or gross misdemeanor -

and i, for one, am very put off by language such this: The wildlife
of Washington belongs to the citizens of this 8 state and is a
valuable resource that must be protected and cared for in order to
preserve this resource for Washington's future.

obviously the salient feature of all wildlife, native or "invasive" is
its freedom - meaning is belongs only to itself - a cougar is no one's
but his or her own - same goes for pigeons.

as far as the renewal of license, i wonder (will look into this) what
separates the licensing process from before 2006 with the current -
while i generally feel that most wildlife workers, whether in law
enforcement or rehabilitation are on the same team, i strongly doubt
the ability of bureaucrats to ever do the right thing. surely standards
are a good thing, which is why the regulation of this critical field by
the state government worries me - one of the joys and benefits of
rehabilitation being supported financially by private parties is the
distance the rehabbers have from state control - something that becomes
more important as wildlife managers, anathema to rehabbers (whether
rehabbers admit this or not), try to dictate which animal will receive
treatment and which will not.

i recall a UW professor quoted in the seattle times back in 2001,
complaining that PAWS was rehabbing 100 western grebes that had been
beached by a storm at ocean shores - he felt that the money was wasted
and should be spent on habitat protection. fortunately, PAWS was not
beholden to him, but to its donors, who by the very fact of their
donations, gave PAWS the mandate to care for individually stricken
animals. besides, the argument is specious - individual animal care is
not at the cost of the species - unregulated development, boondoggles
such as the nuclear power scandal in washington twenty years ago,
corporate fraud and bureacratic waste do far more damage to species and
habitat in this and every state than wildlife rehabilitation -

for a model of state help in wildlife rehab, maybe california can be of
some assistance - providing means for particular events (oil spills)
and supporting rehabbers who desire to be a part of the statewide oiled
wildlife care network. (interested parties can check out this website
for more info on that http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/owcn/

none of this is to say that i do not support the notion of state money
shook loose for the care and feeding of injured and orphaned wildlife,
just that it may be impolite but some gift horses need their teeth
examined.




monte merrick
wildlife rehabilitator/oiled bird care specialist
lummi island washington
montemerrick at speakeasy.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 4365 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20070311/0feee7ff/attachment.bin