by Jim Beers

It is good to see that folks that have experienced the effects of Endangered
Species declarations and their impacts on citizens of all stripes understand
the need to come together with others who are similarly threatened.  In this
vein, a western reader is actively pursuing the truth about the discovery of
the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Arkansas.  He has spoken with the Federal
Refuge Manager involved in the area closure and he is following all aspects
of the issue because, I believe, he knows that things will never change
unless the law is either seriously amended or repealed and that will not
happen until more people realize how they are being fooled and harmed by the
current law and those manipulating it.

This reader mentioned his skepticism about the origin of the Ivory-billed
Woodpecker.  He reminded me of the lynx-hair episode wherein government
scientists faked the presence of lynx on public lands while the lynx was
being considered for Listing under the Endangered Species Act.  In his
recent (yesterday 28 June) telephone conversation with the US Fish and
Wildlife Service Refuge Manager in Arkansas, he was told that the Manager
has "at least one woodpecker there".

He very adroitly suggested to me that DNA testing of a molted feather might
provide a check on the origin of "the" bird in Arkansas.  There are
Ivory-billed Woodpecker mounts and specimens (skins) of both American and
Cuban birds in US bird collections in the Smithsonian and at several
Universities.  Now I know that it is probably out of the question that "the"
bird be handled or trapped and that the likelihood of getting a feather
unless a nest is discovered is highly unlikely.  However, the possibility of
such a check is definitely a possibility.

The Ivory-billed Woodpecker is one of four New World (North and South
America) woodpeckers.  These four woodpeckers are all closely related
genetically, behaviorally, and physiologically.  Up to forty years ago the
Ivory-billed Woodpecker found in the southern US was considered one species
and the Cuban Ivory-billed Woodpecker was considered another species.  Today
these two birds, that are practically identical, are considered subspecies
meaning they were practically the same and could very likely interbreed.
The other two closely related, but not identical in appearance, woodpeckers
are the Emperor Woodpecker of NW Mexico and the Magellanic Woodpecker in
Argentina and Chile.

The internet sites concerning Ivory-billed Woodpeckers (both subspecies) are
overwhelmed with the "recent" discovery in Arkansas and ads for everything
from T-shirts to government news releases and funding appeals by the
environmental and non-profit land-buying organizations.  However buried in
there is some interesting but old information about the Cuban Ivory-billed
Woodpecker.

Several news releases state that the Cuban birds have been thought extinct
since 1986.  A check of old papers and articles shows that in 1986
ornithologists observed eight (8) Cuban Ivory-bills when they searched the
southern Cuban forests.  The birds were again declared extinct in 1996 but
1998 reports indicated some birds were still present.  Their status today
(some Cubans eat the young, others nail them to their home to ward off evil
spirits, tree cutting is haphazard, and as travel to and wandering about
Cuba has for quite awhile been difficult to say the least for Americans) is
uncertain.  One expedition in the 1950's mentioned how the Cuban birds
(unlike the American birds that were believed extinct by then) seemed to be
able to adapt to logged areas and even pine forests as old hardwoods and old
growth was used up.  They observed that a similar adaptation, albeit
similarly resulting in less dense populations seemed to be going on in NW
Mexico with the Emperor Woodpecker.

It is not unlikely that there are still a few Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in
Cuba.  If so, this is due to the low level of habitat destruction found in a
communist dictatorship more than any other factor.  This is the direct
result of impoverished citizens and the failure of such governments to
utilize natural resources as will free citizens that own property.  Think
about this.  While the US has built and maintained a society with the
highest level of human affluence known to any society throughout history;
habitat, countryside, the environment, and the ecosystem have changed
dramatically and they still change at a rapid pace as we cut trees, grow
food, build homes, etc.  Simultaneously, we have the strongest property
rights protections (until Kelo v New London?) and the most abundant,
sustainable, and widely available (to citizens) hunting, fishing, trapping,
and natural resource use levels of any other nation.  This in spite of
environmental and animal rights drives to eliminate all these things.
Couple all this with our knowledge and experience regarding environmental
management and resource use and we are at a level of capability that allows
all these things to proceed while we provide simultaneously for a diverse
and healthy environment. In short, we can today provide even for woodpeckers
that seem to be unable to adapt to the changing world of the 21st century.
The thing to focus on here is not how we can be more like Cubans.  The
emphasis should be, if this discovery is legitimate (truly an American
Ivory-bill), how do we maintain the American dream and the Woodpecker?

The likelihood of this lone bird being a sole descendant from others that
remained hidden in the American south for 60 years while other woodpeckers
like the Endangered Red-cockaded Woodpecker were studied intensively and the
woodlands entertained a wide spectrum of regular visitors and users is
remote, to say the least.  When the implications of this "discovery" - more
Federal, State, and Non-profit land acquisition and easement; increased
Federal and State budgets, workforces, and authority; University grant
bonanzas for the foreseeable future; restrictions on hunting (they "look
like a Pintail"), spring turkey season coincides with nesting, deer hunters
and dogs are disturbance factors, squirrel hunters shoot into trees, etc.),
fishing (boats and fishing disturb nesting birds), logging (they need
"virgin" forests), farming (those fields should go back to forests to
provide a "corridor" for the birds), rural communities (where are the
hunters?, no one can fish here anymore, how come the sawmill closed down?,
Bill was arrested for cutting down that oak for firewood, etc.); funding,
tax, and donation bonanzas for environmental and animal rights radicals to
develop the level of clout for their agendas in the south that they have
achieved in the west; and temptations for every politician to grandstand
support for unimaginable (today) government programs to "save" the
Woodpecker - this is not an unfair question.  For all these reasons and
more, asking about the validity of this Ivory-billed Woodpecker discovery
involves far more than the status of a bird formerly believed to be extinct.

The cumulative effects of extinctions throughout the world to date have
resulted in DIFFERENT, neither better or worse, mixes of plant and animal
species.  Sure I wish there were still buffalo wandering around so I could
shoot one occasionally and feed my family with it but that is neither
possible nor desirable if we are to live in a nation of free citizens where
property is guaranteed and we produce a super-abundance of food year after
year.  The same thing goes for those who would cripple this country for
wolves or spotted owls or jumping mice or snail darters.  So considering the
shameful 35-year history of the Endangered Species Act and current trends
exemplified by Kelo v New London the question about where this bird came
from is not only legitimate, it is imperative.

Only "one" bird after two years of looking and checking by a battalion of
experts and volunteers and every company that wants an endorsement for their
product and only "ONE" bird?  Something is fishy.

Given the history of the ruthlessness of those that stand to profit from
this and the level of financial and citizen control (power) profit involved,
even an Aruban investigator would smell a rodent.

Finally, given the T-shirts and media coverage and managed public education
and information control by the Universities, bureaucrats and non-profits;
hopefully the westerner (that wrote about how to check the origin of the
bird forensically) and the Canadian that wrote me yesterday (about my
mistaken point of the Ivory-bill having only 3 instead of 4 toes) and I are
not the only ones considering the importance of this matter.


Jim Beers
29 June 2005

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91

Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak.  Contact:
JimBeers7@earthlink.net