If you prefer your life and limbs to remain for the most part unmolested after your next wilderness outing, the Forest Service recommends not harassing things with talons, claws or beaks.
The bipedal critters venturing in the Tongass National Forest are kindly asked to give a wide berth to the other fauna living along the way. So says the Forest Service.
But what do those stuffy old Smokey the Bear Forest Service folks know about running afoul of birds?
Turns out, a lot.
The Forest Service advised keeping a respectful distance from eagles and other birds during nesting season in a press release issued Friday. Especially early-nesting birds such as eagles, ravens, crows and owls.
Watch for eagles carrying branches and other materials and behaving defensively against other birds, these are “obvious signs that they have begun nesting for the season,” according to the release. This is a particularly vulnerable stage.
Brian Logan, Forest Service Forest Wildlife Biologist for the Tongass, said in the release that the risk of nest abandonment is far greater during the early stages of nesting. Early on, the birds have less invested in their young.
Bald eagles often return to one nest and one mate throughout their two or more decades of life. Disturbances, however, can cause raptors to abandon nests, Logan said. This can cause one or more years of failed reproduction for mated pairs.
All of this disturbance can be avoided by staying at least 100 to 200 yards away from nesting raptors.
Southeast Alaska is home to 13,000 to 26,000 bald eagles, the highest density anywhere, according to the Forest Service release.
This density is due to “the strong ethic of natural resource stewardship that exists in the collective community of Southeast Alaska,” Logan said.
For more information contact Brian Logan, Forest Service Forest Wildlife Biologist at 789-6298 or blogan@fs.fed.us.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (11)
Add commentQuestion
I wonder if these federal employees realize that to pay their salaries and other costs related to their "work" to tell us to stay between 100 and 200 yards from eagle nests the federal government is borrowing over 40% of the money?
I saw on the news that a town in RI has now largely reduced payments to retirees. That is, the unfunded liability will not be paid! With federal employees it's all an unfunded liability.
If a day comes when China and other lenders cannot be repaid, and if one day federal retirees cannot be paid the amounts they expect, I hope someone reminds the federal employees that not all of them were engaged in productive work.
Most of the money the federal
Most of the money the federal government borrows is from itself and the American people. Federal bonds.
It might behoove you to understand how public debt works before railing against it.
Also, if you don't think what Forest Service employees do is real work, then I have to wonder what exactly your experience is with what they do.
Glacierdogs: Nice rant. not
Glacierdogs:
Nice rant. not remotely related to the news article, but thanks for sharing.
"Most of the money the
"Most of the money the federal government borrows is from itself and the American people. Federal bonds."
Haha! Did you have a straight face while you typed that? It's called printing money. Gotta love Zimbabwe Keynsianism....
blackdog
Um, no? The problem with printing money wantonly is it results in inflation. Except the U.S. has had much lower than average inflation for the past few years (as is to be expected in an economic downturn).
The government issues debt in the form of securities. Most of this debt is bought by American citizens. Sometimes other entities (like China, Canada, and other countries) buy U.S. debt, because it's considered one of the safest investment choices in the world.
It pays to learn a little about what you're talking about. If you have a 401(k) or similar retirement account, you most likely have some treasury securities yourself.
yo blackdawg...
i aint got no econ degree, but as a restraunt werker i can safely say PP jus served u up hawd!! hahaha, on da real, whutchu kno bout da homie john maynard anyway? pleeze....u been readin da daily bell 2 much muh neeeeeeeee
"Except the U.S. has had much
"Except the U.S. has had much lower than average inflation for the past few years...." (blackdog chokes on a $.75 swig of beer)
You're either very gullible or a shill....I'm going with the former but you may have a future as the latter.....
So how come a couple years ago I paid $3.50 for a half gallon of ice cream and now the grocery is asking $6.50 for 1.5 qts?
How come the Federal Reserve has $2.8 trillion of T-bonds and MBS on their books? Borrow from yourself? That's rich......
Ice cream isn't the metric by
Ice cream isn't the metric by which inflation is measured. Are you an idiot?
I also have to wonder what expensive brand you're buying. MY ice cream has cost me about the same for the past three years. Alden's Organic ice cream. Mmm. Great stuff (which, oddly enough, costs about $6.50 for 1.5 quarts, but it most definitely cost about that much two years ago).
G-Dogs
How many of your slum tenants are on the government dole of some sort? Just wondering.
The facts
Over 40% of the Obama administration debt is owned by foreign entities, predominately China and Japan. The Chinese government is likely the largest single creditor. Neither Obama nor Congress has a plan to repay the creditors. Paying the money back with worthless dollars (due to inflation) is one possibility. War with China is another.
Inflation is rampant right now but the federal government has recently, markedly changed the calculation in order to have a lower number. Many large banks, think tanks, etc. now calculate their own number because the federal government has destroyed its own credibility.
I have no tenants but if I did I would not use the elitist term slum tenant. I don't look down on someone because of where they live or other economic circumtances but I know Juneau has at least its fair share of elitists.
I agree that my comment was only tangential to the article. The article was useless and a waste of newsprint.
Citations? No? Could it be
Citations? No? Could it be that you pulled all of those "facts" out of a certain orifice? Or are you, too, basing your inflation calculations on the cost of frozen delights?