******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Feds Ignoring Greatest Threat to Dunes Sagebrush Lizard

Sure, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may be about to shut down oil production in a key region of Texas to protect the Dunes Sagebrush Lizard. 

But the Feds are ignoring the threat from this environmental danger, the Texas Roadrunner, caught here eating a, um, Dunes Sagebrush Lizard:


(Thanks to reader Danelle for the photo taken by friend Dena on her porch in Winkler County, Texas (pop.7700) in the heart of the Permian Basin.)

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Bumper Stickers - The Series

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Bookmark and Share

15 comments:

  1. This regime will use any excuse to hamstring our economy and our fossil fuel domestic production.

    It MUST be intentional; there is no other logical conclusion. It is obvious that these lizards are doing fine. We need someone to bind this administration until a president can be elected who wants the US to thrive.

    Come on 2012!! In the mean time: Speaker Boehner - stand up to these tyrants! Cut them off at the knees - cut their FUNDING!!! EPA, Dept. of Interior, DoEnergy, DoEducation!! No more funding!

    (Although I must admit, there is a part of me that WANTS this to continue, forcing up the gas prices.... Then people will EAGERLY throw this bum out! But can we survive that long?!)

    ReplyDelete
  2. "George Monbiot of the left-leaning British newspaper The Guardian has a must-read column in which he admits that because of a whole series of intellectual mistakes, the global green movement’s policy prescriptions are hopelessly flawed."

    "Monbiot gets it, and furthermore concedes one of the main arguments of the anti-green case. The ‘problem’ is not a shortage of carbon rich non-renewable futures. The problem is the abundance of these fuels. We are not running out of hydrocarbons; shale natural gas, tar sands and coal offer enormous reserves that can cover our needs for the foreseeable future. We have an abundance of fossil fuel. Moreover, it seems likely that for a very long time to come, fossil fuels will be substantially cheaper and more abundant that expensive renewables. (One should also note that these new fuel sources are found in places like Canada and the United States rather than Saudi Arabia and Iran.)"

    "This is an awesome admission of categorical intellectual, political and moral failure. For two decades greens have arrogated to themselves the authority of science and wrapped themselves in the arrogant certainty of self-righteous contempt for those who oppose them. They have equated skepticism about their incoherent and contradictory policy proposals with hatred of science and attacked their critics as the soulless hired shills of the oil companies, happy to ruin humanity for the sake of some corporate largesse."

    Walter Russell Mead

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Shale Gas Shock

    "Shale gas is like wax candles. It is not a perfect solution to our economic and environmental problems, but it is here when it is needed, and it makes an enormous difference to the human condition. Matt Ridley gives us a fair and even-handed account of the environmental costs and benefits of shale gas. The lessons to be learned are clear. The environmental costs of shale gas are much smaller than the environmental costs of coal. Because of shale gas, the air in Beijing will be cleaned up as the air in London was cleaned up sixty years ago. Because of shale gas, clean air will no longer be a luxury that only rich countries can afford. Because of shale gas, wealth and health will be distributed more equitably over the face of our planet."
    Freeman Dyson

    The Global Warming Policy Foundation

    ReplyDelete
  4. Professor,

    May I suggest offering the unique services of my beloved cats?

    They hunt lizards, birds and mice, and one even cornered a diamond-backed water snake not long ago. If about a thousand people here in this state offer their cats as volunteers to aid the road runners, it might make a difference...

    Paraphrasing the infamous Uncle Joe, Texans have the solutions to all of their problems. No lizard, no problem.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The mockingbird just got some competition for Texas' State Bird designation!

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is so much more than this admission by George Monbiot and the greenies. It is a total repudiation of their intellectual schematic by a well documented, thoroughly researched, and intellectual take down of all that they know to be true. It is the Shale Gas Shock!

    http://punditpress.blogspot.com/2011/05/shale-gas-shock.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. I, Sir, have a solution. Allow me to introduce myself. Wile E. Coyote, super genius at your service. Now if you will kindly send 1 Trillion in stimulus funding to Acme Corp, I will solve that mild road rummer problem.

    ReplyDelete
  8. May I endorse the offer of Mr. Coyote, referenced above? He has, for generations, kept within reasonable limits the populations of rats, mice, salmonella-carrying lizards, and leprosy-laden armadillos. Roadrunners, alas, are outside his purview, but he is exceptionally adept at the other various varmints.

    Interested parties may contact me at #stopbeingstupid for further references.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I hate to spoil a good joke, but that's not a sagebrush lizard. The slender build, pointed snout, and long tail identify it as a (non-endangered) whiptail lizard, of which there are several species in the West. It's still funny, though.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Sarah - maybe it's a baby. (Do you ruin all parties you attend?)

    ReplyDelete
  11. No, nor do I insult people who visit my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @Sarah - sorry you took it that way, was not intended.

    ReplyDelete