San Fran City pays for building golf course on garter and frog habitat

[Jeff B]

They should have to pay a lot more and have to destroy the clubhouse and return to national park. Judge Orders City to Pay Fine for Killing Snakes and Frogs at Sharp Park Golf Course - San Francisco - News - The Snitch (http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2013/07/judge_orders_city_to_pay_fine.php)

[RedSidedSPR]

I'd have considered the gallows.

[Jeff B]

lol not sure the punishment need be that extreme. The build shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. Classic example of abuse of power. I enjoy playing golf now and then but not at the expense of snuffing out 2 of the most beautiful species in the world.

[infernalis]

lol not sure the punishment need be that extreme. The build shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. Classic example of abuse of power. I enjoy playing golf now and then but not at the expense of snuffing out 2 of the most beautiful species in the world.

You may wish to think twice before you eat pineapple and coconut products then ;)

[the_edsta]

You may wish to think twice before you eat pineapple and coconut products then ;)

Why stop there?

:)

But it is good to see people being coerced into caring about what they've destroyed. It took the indigo snake being categorized as "threatened" here (fl) for anyone to care (and by "care" I mean "worried and annoyed by potential fines and interruptions").

[jwolfe152]

it doesn't sound like they actually "care" then, its just an annoyance and don't want to potentially pay a fine. if they did care then they would be doing something about it, as in not developing an area or making or setting up a sanctuary for animals that get displaced from development. thats just my opinion.

[jwolfe152]

You may wish to think twice before you eat pineapple and coconut products then ;)

why is that?

[aSnakeLovinBabe]

On that note, just stop consuming all products, forever. Go out int the forest and become a hermit and only take what you personally have to for survival. Even then, something somewhere suffers in some way because of your existence.

On another note, they can take that over glorified chunk of fake grass and pesticides and shove it.

[jwolfe152]

golf courses just take and destroy way to much land to be considered acceptable for a sport/game. miles on miles of clearing land and destroying ponds and then trying to replant trees and grass and make new ponds so it "looks pretty" when it looked beautiful in the first place. all for a hole in the ground for a ball to roll into.

[Jeff B]

You do realize farming has taken millions more acres of natural habitat than golf courses right? And the American Indians are the only native humans beings to this country. Really the idea of preservation/restoration/conservation is good, but has always been an afterthought, and in some ways small potatoes if you consider the big picture of human nature and our increasing global population. Like Shannon said who is actually ready to sign up for "hermit in the forest"? I like ham and pineapple pizza, but hate coconut, so what is my pizza whipping out, Wayne? I knew I should've stuck with sausage and mushroom. Probably should make it mushroom only so no pigs are harmed.

[jwolfe152]

i know farming does use a lot of land but the food they grow a lot of people can benefit from but how does a golf course benefit anyone? im not saying im doing anything to help the situation, or ready to be a hermit because im not, its just messed up they build a golf course (im not sure if it was public or private) that a lot of people probably cant even get past the gates because they dont make 6 figures and now they are mad because they have to pay fines with the money they made killing all those frogs and snakes(when was the sf garter but on the threatened/endangered list before or after the course was built?)

i really hope this made sense to someone besides me

[the_edsta]

it doesn't sound like they actually "care" then, its just an annoyance and don't want to potentially pay a fine. if they did care then they would be doing something about it, as in not developing an area or making or setting up a sanctuary for animals that get displaced from development. thats just my opinion.


I agree, but still, that is a semantic argument. Care doesn't need to be emotional or even 'authentic'... It will mean one thing to one philosopher, something else to another, or to a sociologist, or to a behavioral economist. At any rate, what does matter is that people (developers particularly) modify their behavior in a way that is amenable to those with some 'authentic' concern for the natural world (even if the notion is ultimately selfish -- or at least in the spirit of self preservation) rather than seeing it as something that can be used (exploited) for the accumulation of wealth (eg corporate capitalism). And gladly, snake enthusiasts have a voice in that game... Which is why I stick to domestic snakes only! Similarly, fresh water anglers have always had a voice when it comes to preservation, as have hunters, in their own way.

[jwolfe152]

that sounds about what i wanted to say. its hard for me to explain how i feel about things. best for someone to have the same view and then me agree lol

[the_edsta]

that sounds about what i wanted to say. its hard for me to explain how i feel about things. best for someone to have the same view and then me agree lol

Well, you're ideas are right on! (Easy to say, since we agree!)

:)