Bald Eagle off the endangered species list

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]

Just as an aside --- what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Convince rappers that bald eagles are more balla than pit bulls.

[goodsamaritan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]
ownership.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHA. I'm sure ownership would really protect an animal that has a range of hundreds of miles.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Just thought that some might find it interesting to see the success of the endangered species list in saving the bald eagle from extinction. According to the article, the bald eagle has gone from 417 breading pairs in 1963 to 9,789 breading pairs today. (I'm sure as will probably be pointed out that this survival came at the sacrifice of property rights everywhere...)

Article

Just as an aside --- what are the potential free market solutions here?



[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify. You don’t really think there were only 417 breeding pairs in the U.S. in 1963 do you? Also, no way was the bald eagle ever in any danger of extinction. In the 1970's we were paid, I think $5.00 a head ( maybe $.5, I can't remember) to kill bald eagles by fishermen in Alaska. These things were considered trash birds and a huge nuisance. They are and have been ubiquitous on most sea shores in Alaska. In the 60's through 90's, there were more bald eagles per acre of sea shore than seagulls at landfills.

I am happy however that measures worked to preserve those birds in the lower 48.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]
ownership.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHA. I'm sure ownership would really protect an animal that has a range of hundreds of miles.

[/ QUOTE ]
ROFL The government assumes ownership of them now. That seems to have brought about positive results.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]
ownership.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHA. I'm sure ownership would really protect an animal that has a range of hundreds of miles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horses have ranges of hundreds of miles. Horses are privately owned. We don't seem to be running short of horses.

The world has never run out of any privately owned resource in history.

Only resources in the commons have ever been totally depleted.

[goodsamaritan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]
ownership.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHA. I'm sure ownership would really protect an animal that has a range of hundreds of miles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horses have ranges of hundreds of miles. Horses are privately owned. We don't seem to be running short of horses.

The world has never run out of any privately owned resource in history.

Only resources in the commons have ever been totally depleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, thats a really intellectually honest argument. The horses that people own are kept in captivity on one acre farms. The goal of the endangered species act was to keep bald eagles alive in the wild.

And the world has run out of privately owned species in the past. Since I only need one example to prove your statement false: see the Tasmanian Tiger. But there are many other examples as well.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what are the potential free market solutions here?

[/ QUOTE ]
ownership.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHA. I'm sure ownership would really protect an animal that has a range of hundreds of miles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horses have ranges of hundreds of miles. Horses are privately owned. We don't seem to be running short of horses.

The world has never run out of any privately owned resource in history.

Only resources in the commons have ever been totally depleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, thats a really intellectually honest argument. The horses that people own are kept in captivity on one acre farms. The goal of the endangered species act was to keep bald eagles alive in the wild.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are plenty of wild horses running around. The existence of privately owned horses protects them. Do you see why?

[ QUOTE ]

And the world has run out of privately owned species in the past. Since I only need one example to prove your statement false: see the Tasmanian Tiger. But there are many other examples as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol. The Tasmanian Tiger was hunted to extinction at the behest of the Australian government.

[goodsamaritan]

[ QUOTE ]

Lol. The Tasmanian Tiger was hunted to extinction at the behest of the Australian government.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? People owned them, but they still went extinct. That means your statement: "The world has never run out of any privately owned resource in history," is false.

Back to the horse example, do you know of anyone who owns wild horses?

[Richard Tanner]

I don't get why the argument is even going this direction. There's no question that the Bald Eagle would die out, because some people might try to save it, with others would hunt it for food, and I'd be willing to wager the hunt crowd would outweigh the save crowd.

The better issue is why are they worth protecting, or why for that matter is any species worth protecting. After all, if the people kill off the eagle, doesn't that just mean we (and by extension the market) don't value the eagle? Certainly another bird or fowl will pop up to be coveted.

Hint: There is a right answer here.

Cody

[HeavilyArmed]

And the manatee too! More freedom for Americans. Less takings of property without compensation.

Used to be an eagle nest on your property was that same as deeding the land to the birds. That won't change tomorrow but maybe soon.