Update: National Wildlife Federation v. Harvey, E.D.Ar, 4:05CV001278WRW, July 20, 2006 (PDF; [PACER login required]). In this action to halt an irrigation project, the parties stipulated that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker exists, and the court improperly accepted the stipulation of fact even though there is no competent evidence that the Ivorybill has existed in the U.S. since 1944. The court entered a preliminary injunction against the project under the Endangered Species Act. In footnote 16, the district judge wrote: "As stated, no party has questioned the existence of the IBW. Some ornithologist have questioned whether the bird in the film is an IBW or a Pileated Woodpecker -- the latter is common in both the Cache and White River Refuges. However, I have seen nothing that has questioned the authenticity of the sound recordings." In fact, Jerome Jackson explicitly questioned the authenticity of the sound recordings in his article in the Auk, and this website questions the authenticity of the sound recordings. The "kent" calls in all likelihood were given by Blue Jays, and the double-knock noises could have had a number of possible sources, including playback of tapes of Neotropical Campephilus drums. The findings of fact underlying this decision are "clearly erroneous", and it appears from footnote 16 that counsel misled the court by suppressing evidence contrary to the Official Story. The court should, sua sponte, schedule a rehearing and call Jerome Jackson, David Sibley, and Louis Bevier as witnesses, and the court should subpoena the original Luneau video and internal drafts, memoranda and emails. I would hate to see the Endangered Species Act die because a court was fooled by the Ivory-billed Woodpecker hoax.I just signed up for a PACER login and downloaded the PDF document above.
Update: The wording on Worldtwitch has been slightly revised--a newer version is now above. Also, I'm told that there is no charge for the 31-page PDF document.
Posts
2 comments:
I always knew USF&WS was good. Didn't know they were clairvoyant. They've already determined how much each woodpecker needs.
"Wilson said the agencies’ assessment in light of the news of the bird wasn’t thorough enough. He criticized the Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to ask the Corps to conduct a survey of “all suitable habitat within a one-mile radius of any construction site in a forested area,” when the service already had determined that the woodpecker “forages between 0.75 miles to 1.5 miles from their nest cavities, with an outer limit of 2.5 miles for a lone male and an even greater winter range.”
Gosh, who could have predicted this unfolding disaster? :)
Man, how lucky I was to stumble on two of the world's biggest suckers over at Cornell's Creationist Club website. Otherwise I would never have found this blog.
The irony that the suckers were defenders of science is utterly lost, of course, because they just happened to be Cornell students. LOL!
Post a Comment