Read Ebook: Elävänä haudattu: Tosi kertomus vuodelta 1857 (Ps. 85 10) by H Cker Oskar

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 409 lines and 20627 words, and 9 pages

Page

Need for rodent control 1 Federal, State, and local cooperation 2 Training of E.C.W. crews 2 Timeliness of emergency aid 3 Forest and forage protection 3 Aid in erosion control 4 Examples of benefits derived 4 Safeguarding harmless species 5 Control work illustrated 6 Prairie dogs 7 Ground squirrels 13 Pocket gophers 15 Kangaroo rats 20 Rabbits and hares 25 Porcupines 27 A typical E.C.W. crew 30

Need for Rodent Control

The Emergency Conservation Work Program has been of inestimable value in the control of prairie dogs, ground squirrels, pocket gophers, kangaroo rats, rabbits, and porcupines. The citizens of the West have been forced to carry on campaigns for the control of these rodents since the settlers first staked out claims on the prairies. To the agricultural interests of the West the control of rodents is as vital as is the proper spraying of trees throughout the East to prevent damage by insects. These small mammals cover the western ranges by countless thousands, and control is necessary if crops are to be grown.

Federal, State, and Local Cooperation

When the Emergency Conservation Work Program came into being, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Division of Grazing, and the Bureau of Biological Survey took the opportunity to treat a vast acreage that would have been treated years ago had funds permitted. During the three fiscal years 1934 to 1936 a total of almost 20,000,000 acres had been covered by E.C.W. for the control of these various rodent pests. On the statute books of several Western States rodent-control laws provide that landowners may establish rodent-control districts wherein all lands are treated simultaneously by paid crews working under the supervision of the Biological Survey. Never before the E.C.W. program were there adequate Federal funds to make these laws effective by taking proper care of infested public lands adjacent to private holdings.

The most concrete proof of the necessity of rodent control is found in the amount of money expended by private individuals throughout the West for this purpose. The Federal Government, while owning as much as 60 percent of the land in many of the Western States, contributes only about 25 percent of the total cost of rodent-control operations. During the fiscal year 1936, States, counties, and private individuals expended 5,785 for the purpose, while the Biological Survey was able to expend only 6,623 from regular appropriations. The E.C.W. program afforded the first opportunity of somewhere near meeting the Federal Government's obligations to the citizens of the West in the matter of adequately controlling the rodent pests that breed and range on public lands and from these strongholds infest and reinfest adjacent private holdings.

Training of E.C.W. Crews

Rodent control is one of the most popular projects with E.C.W. enrollees themselves as well as with the local people benefited. In many cases, crew foremen supplied by the Survey took boys who would not work satisfactorily on any other type of project and made real hands of them on rodent-control crews. The boys liked to work in these crews, as it afforded them opportunity to become acquainted not only with methods of rodent control but with the various habits of wildlife as well.

In order to employ proper methods and place all possible safeguards around poisoning operations for the protection of beneficial and harmless species, the Biological Survey has insisted upon approving the appointments of all men employed on the supervision of rodent-control work for its various cooperating agencies. This is for the reason that when poisoning campaigns are properly handled and carefully supervised, there is little danger of the accidental poisoning of other animals. The records indicate that there have been practically no cases of destruction of other forms of life through the E.C.W. rodent-control program. Naturally, the supervisors not only must know rodent control but also must be acquainted with the habits and status of wildlife in general, and in handling the crews they have imparted knowledge to the beys that will be of permanent benefit to them and to the Nation.

Educational programs were provided as regularly as possible, in order to tell the C.C.C. enrollees of various wildlife problems. The entire personnel of E.C.W. camps were shown films depicting the work of beavers, showing measures for the protection of elk, deer, and other big-game animals, and portraying the need of sane, sensible conservation methods, in order that the remnants of our fast-vanishing forms of valuable wildlife might be preserved. Mimeographed leaflets on wildlife management studies were made up by district agents of the Survey for the boys in order that they might be given as broad instructions as possible in the protection and preservation of species that are an asset rather than a liability to man's interest. It has been the attempt of the Biological Survey to make the rodent-control project a field laboratory for the education of the enrollees in natural history and wildlife management, and the popularity of the project among the boys attests to the wisdom of this course. In many camps more applications for places on rodent-control crews were received than there were places to fill.

Timeliness of Emergency Aid

Fortunately, the E.C.W. program came at the most opportune time. The extreme drought throughout the west had forced rodents from the open lands into adjacent irrigated valleys and mountain meadows, where they became especially objectionable in their competition with livestock for the available forage. Livestock and rodents together, during dry periods, have in many places almost entirely denuded the surface soil of its vegetation. This has caused the beginning of sheet erosion in areas where there would still be ample forage for livestock had it not been for the excessive numbers of rodents. On many areas, grazing by livestock and rodents combined has practically eliminated the native grasses, and these are now being replaced with weeds and poisonous plants. Damage in some instances has amounted to at least 75 percent of the available forage, and the average loss has probably been approximately 25 percent.

On some of the Indian reservations of the Southwest, the condition has been pitiful. On the Navajo Reservation, in particular, the Indians have carried on a losing fight against drought and rodents. It has often been necessary for them to replant their corn three and four times a season, since kangaroo rats and other native rodents dig up the kernels as rapidly as they are planted. Prior to the spring of 1936, there had been four years of drought, and this, coupled with rodent damage, had reduced corn production to the point where the Indians had barely enough for the spring seeding. All were clamoring for aid, and in order to save their last crop of corn it was necessary to detail a foreman with four or five E.C.W. Indians to go from farm to farm and conduct rodent-control operations.

Forest and Forage Protection

The Forest Service is endeavoring to carry on a reforestation program throughout much of the cut-over area in the Lake States and the Pacific Northwest. One of the chief problems to successful reforestation is the control of rodents, particularly the snowshoe hare. In the Olympic Forest in Washington, the snowshoe hare has destroyed as much as 40 percent and damaged 70 percent of the Douglas fir seedlings. In Michigan and Wisconsin, it was necessary to carry on extensive rodent-control operations to permit the seedlings to survive. Much of this work would never have been possible but for E.C.W. help.

In the open area, jack rabbits have become a serious pest. The Biological Survey, in 1934, received a petition bearing the signatures of more than 8,000 individuals of eastern Colorado, requesting Government aid in killing jack rabbits, which were ravaging the meager stocks of forage left after drought and wind had taken their toll.

The Forest Service recognized that rodent control would be essential if the Plains Shelterbelt program of planting trees from the Canadian border to Texas was to be effective, and in 1935 approximately one-tenth of its entire appropriation for the program was expended for rodent control under the supervision of the Biological Survey. Crews patrolled the planted areas constantly to prevent the gnawing of the seedlings by jack rabbits and pocket gophers.

Aid in Erosion Control

The permanent benefits accruing from the E.C.W. rodent-control program have been enormous from the standpoint of erosion control alone. An associate range examiner of the Forest Service has the following to say regarding the effect of rodents on erosion in the Boise watershed of Idaho:

"Rodents, numerous and spreading over nearly 80 percent of the Boise watershed, have undoubtedly been responsible for no small part of the present erosion. Wholly dependent upon the herbaceous plants for their food supply, their tremendous numbers, along with over-grazing by livestock and unfavorable climate, have been an important contributing factor in depleting this cover, and thus have greatly reduced the protection afforded the soil and subjected it the more to increased sheet erosion. Even light rains on rodent-infested areas are likely to start cutting, which may develop into destructive gully erosion because of the almost immediate accumulation of run-offs in the myriads of burrows and channels which these animals construct just under the surface of the soil."

The control of rodents is vital to the successful operation of reclamation projects in the western third of the United States. Rodents, particularly pocket gophers, find the banks of irrigation canals an ideal location for their burrows and runways. These subterranean passageways frequently are the cause of serious breaks in canals, through which the flow of irrigation water is diverted and wasted to flood adjacent lands, destroying valuable crops, and indirectly ruining others by causing delays in delivery of water. Through the E.C.W. program, C.C.C. crews working under the direction of experienced foremen trained by the Biological Survey have greatly reduced this menace. In the past year alone half a million acres of canal banks and contiguous lands were treated by C.C.C. rodent-control crews with a thoroughness that will be of lasting benefit to the nation's reclamation projects.

Examples of Benefits Derived

A few concrete examples will illustrate the great good that has resulted from the E.C.W. rodent-control program. A group of farmers living at Springfield, Idaho, suggested to the camp superintendent there that the jack rabbit control work done by the E.C.W. crew during the summer of 1935 might pay the cost of the camp. It is estimated that not less thanottivat turhaan Rupperttia; h?n ei pit?nyt vaivaa ansaitsevana, onneansa n?ille molemmille ilmoittaa.

"He tulevat sen jo n?kem??n", virkki h?n juomatovereilleen, "ja vaikka mielell?ni n?kisin Anteron nurjat kasvot, joka luonnollisesti kovin siit? n?rk?styy, etten sotamieheksi voi tulla, niin, kuitenkin tahdon kohtaamistamme karttaa, -- ?itini juttelee liian paljon minulle raamatusta ja kuolemasta sek? ijankaikkisesta kadotuksesta; vaan min? seuraan tuota vanhaa sananlaskua: Joka iloisesti on el?nyt ja autuaasti kuollut, on h?iritsev? paholaisen tilintekoa."

T?t? tosi-lausetta oikeassa muodossa: "Kuitenkin paholainen iloitsee hurskaankin kuolemasta, ett? sekin vaikeata on", ei tuo kevytmielinen nuorukainen aivan taitanut ja sitten kulki h?n tovereinsa kanssa siell? t??ll? laulaen, meluten ja tupakoiden, tielt? ravintolaan ja ravintolasta tielle. Ja t?ll? huikentelevalla matkalla olemme tehneet h?nen tuttavuuttansa ja t?ss? tilaisuudessa samalla kertoneet molempien veljesten kohtauksen. Arvattavasti lukija l?yt?? syyn kurjan Anteron surulliseen silm?ykseen, kun h?n huomaa n?m? kolme laulavaa nuorukaista.

Herra, kuinka usein minun pit?? antaman anteeksi veljelleni, joka rikkoo minua vastaan?

Oli viikkoa my?hemmin. Suloinen pyh?aamun aurinko paistoi tilavan talonpoikais-pirtin akkunoista sis?lle, jossa komea talon is?nt? mukavasti istui vanhassa nahkatuolissa ja maistellen lasissa kuohuvaa rajakreivin viini?, heitti kaikille suloisia silm?yksi?. Niin, niin, Flurenbauer tiesi el??, sen todisti aamiaisensa, joka oli p?yd?ll? edess?ns?, sek? vanha hyv? viini. H?n taisikin sen, sill? h?n iloitsi varallisuudestaan, jonka saattoi melkein sanoa rikkaudeksi, ja jokainen olisi suonutkin h?nelle h?nen suloisen elantonsa, ellei Flurenbauer olisi suosinut tuota itserakasta lausetta "itse saapi, itse sy?pi." Mutta h?n ei suonut, lukematta omaa arvollista persoonaansa, kenellek??n hyv?? palaa eik? hyv?? juomaa, vaan n?ytt?ytyi enemmin mit? pahimman laatuiselta.

H?n saattoikin suloisella hymyll? kuohuvan viinin huulillensa, kun pyh?-kellot alkoivat kuulua ja kutsua kristityit? pieneen Jumalan huoneesen, siell? kiitt??ksens? Luojaa laupeudestaan ja rakkaudestaan. Flurenbauer kuuli juhlalliset ??net ja olisi kyll? ollut paikallansa, ett? h?nkin olisi ollut kirkkoon menevien joukossa, sill? eik? h?n tunnustanut varallisuuttansa ainoastaan Herran hyvyydeksi? eik? h?n vuodattanut hedelm?lliseksi tekevi? auringon s?teit? Flurenbauer'in laajoille vainioille ja antanut kasvaa h?nelle tuon komean juoman, joka ihmisten syd?nt? ilahuttaa? Ja kuitenkin n?yttihe komea talon is?nt? varsin toiselle, lip?si kielell?ns? ja kiljasi pirtiss? ty?skentelev?lle piialle:

"Miss? on Antero? H?nen pit?? tulla t?nne."

"Ei, herra", vastasi palveluspiika, "tied?tteh?n, ett? Antero aina on ensimm?inen, joka menee kirkkoon, -- h?n on jo viisi minuuttia ollut poissa."

Talonpoika myrisi muutamia ymm?rt?m?tt?mi? sanoja ja veti otsansa ryppyyn; h?n vei uudestaan pikarin huulillensa ja viini n?ytti rauhoittavan h?nen kiivastunutta luontoansa, sill? h?n sanoi leikillisell? ??nell?:

"Kun pastori Antero tulee kotio, niin sano h?nelle, ett? tahdon h?nt? puhutella."

Piika nauroi ja meni matkaansa.

Pieni kyl?n kirkko ei ollut kaukana komeasta hovista, jota Flurenbauer kutsui omakseen, ja niin voi h?n eroittaa hurskaat urun s?velet, jotka Jumalan huoneesta tunkeutuivat h?nen korviinsa, eik? h?n kuitenkaan kuullut niit?, kun ajatteli maallisia asioita, viel?p? nauroi sangen kavalasti, ja n??st?ns?kin huomasi oitis, h?nen jotakin edullista seikkaa miettiv?n, kun kansa hiljaisessa hartaudessa lauloi:

"M? rukoilen, Is?, sinua, Kuin murheess' ja tuskiss' autat, Vahvist' vahvaan uskoon minua, Sinun Pyh?n Henkes' kautta: Kun min? j?t?n t?m?n luolan, Josta ei hengiss' p??st?, Ann' ilon kanss' silloin kuolla, Ja helvetist' minua s??st?."

Jumalan palvelus oli lopussa, syd?miss??n vahvistettuina meniv?t kirkkomiehet kotio.

Vanhan ?itins? rinnalla kulki Antero, saattaen h?nt? pienelle majalle. Kuinka mielell??n h?n olisi j??nyt ?itins? luo, kuinka mielell??n h?n kesken?isess? ajatuksen vaihetuksessa olisi viel? kerran kuunnellut saarnan sis?llyst?, vaan h?n ei uskaltanut en?? viipy?, sill? h?nen t?ytyi palata maallisen herransa palvelukseen. Tosin t?n??n ei tehty ty?t? kedolla, vaan sit? vastoin oli huolehtiminen karja navettaan, joka toimi vuorotellen tapahtui sunnuntaisin rengin ja talon ty?miesten v?lill?. T?n??n se oli Anteron velvollisuutena ja uskollisena alammaisena h?n kiiruhtikin toimituspaikalleen. Viel? oli h?n vett? noutamassa, kun piika huusi:

"Antero kiiruhda, is?nt? kysyy sinua."

"Niin, taivahiseni, t?ytyy kuitenkin ensin huolehtia el?imet", vastasi Antero.

"Min? otan ty?n teht?v?kseni", vastasi hyv?ntahtoinen piika, "mene oitis is?nn?n tyk?, sill? h?n ei n?yt? minusta muutoin olevan hyv?ll? tuulella."

Antero kiitti palveluspiikaa ja k??nsi askeleensa is?nn?n luo.

"No, onko Antero pastori vihdoinkin t??ll??" virkki h?nelle Flurenbauer, jonka p??h?n nauttimansa viini hieman n?kyi kajahtaneen, kuten h?nen hohtavat kasvonsakin osoittivat. "En suvaitse mielell?ni, ett? renki is?nt??ns? odotuttaa."

"Minun puolestani se ei ole aikomuksella tapahtunut", vastasi Antero, "olinhan kirkossa."

"Eip?h?n", tiuskasi talonpoika, "is?nn?n palveleminen edell?k?ypi Jumalan palvelusta."

"Sit? mielipidett? en min? ole", virkkoi Antero rauhallisesti, vaan vakaasti. "Jumala on ylin ja ensimm?inen kaikista herroista, ja joka h?nt? ei palvele, h?n on oleva maallisia herrojansa kohtaan vasta oikein lev?per?inen."

"L?rp?tyst? vaan loppumatta", kiljasi Flurenbauer ja otsallensa vet?ytyi paljon ryppyj?. H?n nousi vaivaloisesti istuimeltansa ja k?veli k?det taskussa akkunan luo, ja katseli vaieten akkunasta kadulle. Antero, ep?tietoisena, l?htisik? h?n vai viipyisi, virkkoi vihdoin:

"Olette kutsunut minua. Mit? minulta tahdotte?"

"Taidathan odottaa, poika, kunnes itse alan", sanoi Flurenbauer karkeasti. "Katsopahan t?t? uppiniskasta keltanokkaa." T?m?n sanottuansa k??ntyi uudestaan akkunaan p?in, taas kotvasen aikaa vaietakseen.

Antero huomasi, ettei tainnut mit??n oikullista talonpoikaa vastaan, ja laskeutui sent?hden uunin vieriselle penkille istumaan, k?rsiv?isyydell? odottaen lis??. Kun Flurenbauer kotvan aikaa oli seisonut akkunan ??ress? vuoroonsa sen ruuduilla rumputtaen ja taas vihellellen, k??ntyi h?n yht'?kki? ja kiljasi tuimalla ??nell? Anterolle, joka my?s oitis nousi:

"Veljesi on kaunis renttu, jolle tahdon pit?? pienen puheen. Jo kahdeksan p?iv?? sitten palasi h?n Freiburg'ista, kuitenkaan h?n ei hetke?k??n ole katsonut t?ihins?. Luuleeko h?n, minun pit?v?ni antaa korkeata palkkaa h?nelle laiskuttelustaan. Kauempaa en en?? tarvitse, etenkin nyt, kun ajat ja palkat ovat huonot ja tuskin suolaa saapi leiv?lleen."

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet