|03-06-2001, 04:18 PM||#1 (permalink)|
Well Done Man!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Member # 398
Location: Concord, CA
Blog Entries: 3
Some additions to the Frog story
Some additions to the Frog story
NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY
For release: March 1, 2001
Federally felonious frog transfers, and other endangered species
WASHINGTON, DC -- Warning: You can go to jail for moving frogs.
That's right, frogs. Transferring certain little green slimy
from one place to another is now a federal felony.
That's what John J. Zentner found out in 1999 when he moved
60 red-legged frogs and 500 tadpoles from a stream to a pond in
Although Zentner moved the frogs so they wouldn't be harmed by
a building project where he worked as a consultant, he violated a
law, since the red-legged frog is classified as an endangered
So moving them is a crime, even if no frogs were harmed by the
As punishment, the federal Department of Frogs -- oops, the
of Justice -- demanded a 10-day jail term because of the
of the frog-moving crime.
A local judge, however, had mercy, and in February sentenced
to only 200 hours of community service, and imposed a $65,000
fine on his
company and a $10,000 personal fine.
But either punishment is too extreme, the Libertarian Party
"Any law that could put people in jail for gently moving some
is a load of bull ... bullfrogs, that is," said the party's press
George Getz. "There's no way you can kiss this frog of a law
and turn it
into a prince."
Unfortunately, red-legged frogs aren't the only species the
government likes better than people, noted Getz.
Under the guise of protecting endangered species, federal
are now giving special treatment to:
* Flies: After the federal government designated the Delhi
fly an endangered species, San Bernardino County, California had
$10 million to build a special 10-acre "preserve" for the
In 1999, the Interior Department demanded an additional
2,200 acres be
set aside for the fly -- land that cost more than $200
* Angry grizzly bears: In 1993, the Environmental Protection
banned an Alaskan pepper-spray called BearGuard that people used
attacking bears. The product, similar to pepper sprays that
can be legally
used against human muggers, is irritating but not
harmful. Despite the
fact that two people in Alaska had been killed by
bears the previous year
-- and although the EPA admits the spray is
safe enough to eat -- it was
banned under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.
* Rats: The federal Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) designated
acres in Riverside, California as a "rat preserve" to protect
rat. Homeowners were threatened with $100,000 fines if
they cleared brush
from around their properties, since it might
inconvenience the rodents.
As a result, dozens of homes burned to the
ground in 1993 after the piles
of dry brush caught on fire.
* Theoretical birds: The FWS told 75-year-old Margaret Rector
Texas that she could not develop her property because the golden-
cheeked warbler "might" one day alight on it. The bird, an endangered
had never actually been seen on Rector's property -- but the
it could, theoretically, one day visit her land was enough to
as "suitable habitat." The ruling caused her property to
drop in value
What do all these examples have in common?
"Thanks to federal regulations, rats, bugs, and frogs now have
more rights than the people who own property in this country," said
"This proves once again that the federal government is one
-- and the frog police are the strangest species of
ahh screw it call me Mark
No matter what you do or say someone will take it too seriously