Hacker News Reader

Comment by maaku | Hacker News Reader

Those eradications were paid for by the Department of Agriculture (and equivalent organizations in other regions). Who is going to pay for the mosquito?

I'm not objecting. I think we should eradicate the mosquito. But as someone who has worked for the government (albeit a different branch) I know that bureaucrats are not being evil or heartless when they don't allocate funds for necessary work that falls outside of their mandate: they could go to jail for misallocation of taxpayer funds. So whose mandate is this?

View on HN

>"bureaucrats are not being evil or heartless when they don't allocate funds for necessary work that falls outside of their mandate: they could go to jail for misallocation of taxpayer funds. "

Which bureaucrat has gone to jail for making any decision of this sort? The BLM sold ~1700 protected wild horses to a slaughterhouse a few years ago, and I don't think anyone was even reprimanded.[1] EPA allowed 11 million litres of contaminated, toxic wastewater to pollute the a river, and no disciplinary action was taken (that I know of), even though it seems this would be negligence (or a criminal offense) if a private party had done it.[2]

[1] http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/14/17708998-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Gold_King_Mine_waste_wate...

Clearly the EPA screwed up, but the BLM should have promoted rather than jailed the bureaucrat who sold the feral horses. That program should be ramped up: it would be better for the horses and for the arid environment that they inhabit if the absolutely necessary regular culling resulted in nutrition rather than thousands of horses penned up to no purpose for the rest of their lives. It's not as though we're going to run out of them, for the several hundred people every year who decide to buy a mustang. Giant ungulates with no natural predators, there will always be more mustangs, at least until irresponsible humans allow them to destroy their habitat completely.

I have heard of equivalent 'screwups' described as horrific criminal actions, described as being done by greedy, stupid, and lazy people who should be sent to federal prison; but alas, those were private parties. My point was that catastrophic negligence goes unpunished when committed by a bureaucrat.

Horses were native to North America, and existed on the continent before humans arrived; they were probably wiped out by said humans. These 'giant ungulates' have much the same natural predators as bison and deer, which also happen to be 'giant ungulates', but whose presence I do not believe you would object to.

I suppose we just have different ideas about what constitutes "catastrophic negligence", although I agree that government employment shouldn't shield one from the consequences of negligence.

The "horses" you're talking about were a different species, they were much smaller, they disappeared 12,000 years ago, and their predators included Smilodon and dire wolves. Environmental conditions have changed since then. The feral horses I'm talking about descend from long-domesticated stock of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. They are larger and more robust than typical deer. They inhabit desert country that currently doesn't have gray wolves and has only a tiny population of cougars. These two are really the only predators that could take down feral horses on a consistent basis, and they don't control feral horse populations in these areas. The vegetation in these areas is continually degraded by the presence of feral horses, which harms many actually wild species. Bison are not a factor because these areas are too hot and arid.

My objections to feral horses are not philosophical. If they occupied a sustainable niche in these environments I'd be happy. That just isn't the case. For more information about the mustang as it currently exists, I recommend the movie Unbranded, currently on Netflix. That movie sets up some sort of fake conflict between feral horses on BLM land vs private cattle on that land. It's true that horses' dentition means a single horse damages plants more than a single cow does. It's also true that neither domesticated animal should be present on much of this sensitive wild desert land in anything close to their current numbers.

I would. The hunting to scarcity of gray wolves led to a boom of deer who ravage crops and woods, carry disease, and create hazards for humans on roadways and when they end up in cities. And look up rates for CWD in your state, and hope it never becomes transmissible to humans.

Bison have the same issues with overpopulation and overgrazing, and they're being allowed to roam outside of Yellowstone again soon, which is making people nervous. They're destructive, dangerous, and carry diseases transmissible to other cattle, and they've been underculled in recent years, so no one is sure what's going to happen.

So you hear things where the people are the bad guys, but that doesn't make the problems for people living around these animal populations go away. It's a common oversight by people from (sub)urban areas; because they live in world built by and for humans, they forget they're only a relatively few miles in any direction from unforgiving wilderness.

The solution to problem animals (deer) is not to add more problem animals (wolves) into the mix. The only thing "good" about wolves is that they kill deer. They also kill people.

The proper solution is to encourage hunting. The idea of "deer season" is crazy; they should be hunted continuously. To the extent that it is safe, this should be allowed in suburban neighborhoods and city parks.

I live near Yellowstone. No one that I know is concerned about bison roaming outside of Yellowstone. In the park itself, they should allow bison hunting because there are indeed too many. The wolves are at least helping.

I wouldn't be too concerned about horses when deer are already a much much bigger problem.

Catastrophic negligence by bureaucrats is being prosecuted as we speak http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/20/health/flint-water-crisis-char...

You did say it goes unpunished but having charges filed is a step forward.

Not familiar with bison, but we do have the same issue with deer, as I understand it. We've driven out their natural predators, so they have a habit of overpopulating and eating their environment clean, then starving off. That's why we encourage controlled hunting. Keeps the numbers down to what they would have been if we still had wolves/bears around eating them.

The deer population in Michigan appears to be quite a lot higher than it might be under predation, the DNR manages the herd to have a large population so that there can be a larger harvest.

IANAL and not in the US but legally 'Negligence' is a tort; it's a civil law matter not typically criminal unless it's Criminal Negligence because you actually kill or injure someone, I think. Someone would have to show how the destruction of the horses caused them damages and if no-one owns them because they are feral, who would this be?

In the USA, the bureaucrats are shielded from individual liability when their actions are under color of their government job. And the government is sovereign, and can only be sued if it chooses to allow the suit.

Thus, almost nothing is ever done.

Hence, you see epidemics of prosecutorial misconduct, for example. Prosecutors go after people they know (or reasonably suspect) to be innocent, withholding exculpatory evidence, etc., just to score the credit of more convictions. Such people ruining the lives of innocent people are almost never (and I really that - it approaches zero) prosecuted themselves.

Do you have any hard evidence to back up these claims about wild mustangs?

> ~1700 protected wild horses

you mean invasive wild horses, don't you ? the ones that were brought here by western conquistadors ?

It doesn't matter where their ancestors came from, if they were categorised as protected.

As an Alaskan AND a Floridian: If they wanna auction/raffle off the privilege of throwing the switch I would attempt to give them all my money.

I am pretty much ground zero of where they want to release them down here in the FL Keys and I am all for it. The amount of chemicals they pump out in the summer months is enough to sway me towards the belief that it can not be much if any riskier. When we hear the hum of the mosquito truck we have to yell, to our kids playing outside, to get in the house and stay out of the mist. Most of the other locals are vehemently opposed to their release. I say they cannot release them fast enough.

When my mom was little, "it was very exciting when we heard the DDT truck coming and all the kids would run out of their houses or off the beach and run behind the fogging truck...the smell was kind of sweet and running in the DDT fog was fun."

My mother and aunt both have fond memories of doing this - apparently the mist was really cool and refreshing. Also they're both breast cancer survivors.

The solution? Make it smell like ass.

"The Winged Scourge" is an interesting piece from that time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y68F8YwLWdg

Same here: release early and release often. I live in Bahama Village, would be happy to host the trial run.

The opposition to the Oxitec project spout the most depressing anti-science nonsense.

>The amount of chemicals they pump out in the summer months is enough to sway me towards the belief that it can not be much if any riskier.

That's the spirit.

That is actually a really good idea. A national lottery to decide who presses the switch. Lots of people will enter.

...but then Alaska would have to find a new state bird.

Play up the (Zika) birth defect angle. Potential parents will be scared to death and will scream at their legislators to do something. There's all the funding they need.

Think of the children!

Isn't zika a real danger? From all the news I've been hearing there could soon ben an epidemic in Florida.

I’ve actually wondered if we should create some kind of ‘blackops’ X-prize. Crowdfund a million dollars in bitcoin and release it to someone who can prove they released a gene drive that wiped these monsters out.

Obviously this would be a major violation of the democratic process, but I feel like the utilitarian ends here justify the means. Should an individual have the power to take a global decision like this? Probably not, but this action is needed because the current GMO debate is so bogged down in unmovable, politically entrenched positions.

The environmental and social justice NGOs who campaign against this technology may be doing the world one of the greatest environmental dis-services we’ve ever seen. Biology is the ultimate sustainable technology, it’s crazy that environmental groups are opposing it’s use so strongly.

Of course, the big problem with utilitarianism is that, in the immortal words of Gandalf, "Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

So you make the best decision you can knowing what you know at the time. The non-utilitarian alternative by definition consists of making a decision that you think is worse.

I think you are vastly understimating the cost of gene engineering.

Not really a problem; if everyone is convinced it's safe, the Gates foundation would probably pay for it.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601213/the-extinction-inv...

Throw a kickstarter to completely get rid of mosquitoes and you'll have the largest, most successful kickstarter ever seen. Nobody likes mosquitoes, nobody likes malaria.

"they could go to jail for misallocation of taxpayer funds" can you site a source where this has happened before...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Bell_scandal came to mind in less than 5 seconds; I'm sure there are many others.

That's a case of corrupt officials using funds to pay themselves more money and other misuses not in the interests of the city. This isn't in the same category as using funds inappropriately for something that is in the interests of taxpayers.

I don't think those two statements invalidate each other.

http://www.hhs.gov/

> Preventing disease, including immunization services

This seems to fall under that. xD

YC W17? I mean if they can try fusion who knows.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com