Breaking: California Gov. Jerry Brown Cancels Official Reports About Australian Kangaroo Harvests!


Anybody who thinks California Gov. Jerry Brown is taking it easy in his second round as the Golden State's top official can suck on this:

California lawmakers won't be briefed any longer on kangaroo harvests in Australia under a plan to scrap more than 700 reports required by state law that GovernorJerry Brown unveiled on Tuesday.

Australia's annual kangaroo harvest report, which California's Department of Fish and Game is required to track and provide to lawmakers, is one of 718 "unnecessary bureaucratic" reports discovered in audits of state agencies and departments ordered by Brown in December, according to a statement from his office….

"It wastes a lot of time and money to write, track and file these reports," Brown said. "Government should be focused on providing information that is actually helpful to taxpayers, not on checking boxes to meet outdated bureaucratic requirements."

More here.

Such bold action is surely a sign that the West Coast magic is back. Except for all those stories about California's—and especially Brown's—zealous devotion to money-wasting high-speed rail and so much more. Including spending $205,000 to move a $15 shrub. But I guess you have to crawl before you can walk before you can flush billions of dollars on really fast trains.

Hat Tip: Reason contributor Philippe Lacoude, who notes, "That there ever was a law to commit the California administration to produce a kangaroo harvest report is telling.  That the Schwarzenegger administration did not dismantle this provision is even more telling.  That a Democrat goes after it, definitely shows they are running out of money."

NEXT: A.M. Links: Taliban Commander Turns Himself In, Blowback in Yemen, Michigan Lotto Winner Charged With Welfare Fraud

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow, who’s the chick in that photo? The one without a beard, I mean.

    1. That’s a kangaroo.

    2. Linda Ronstadt. Chicks with beards are the Eagles, Jackson Browne, and David Lindlay maybe?

      1. Are the two guys behind Linda zombie hippies?

  2. Yeah, yeah, dump the kangaroos, whatever…but please keep the photos of Miss Thigh coming.

    1. My guess is Linda Ronstadt.

      1. it didnt age well plus teh fatz

        source: google images

      2. Of course that’s Linda Ronstadt

  3. That the Schwarzenegger administration did not dismantle this provision is even more telling.

    First they would have to know it existed. I mean, who here would have thought Cali was keeping track of Aussie ‘roo harvesting?

    1. I’m still trying to figure out why anyone in California wanted to keep track of kangaroo harvesting in a continent/country 7,500 miles away.

      1. Maybe it was part of an exploratory committee to study the feasibility of ranching kangaroos in California?

      2. It’s a fool who looks for logic in the chambers of the California legislature.

      3. My guess it’s the animal rights/busybody network at work.

        I would think that the same people who don’t think you should be able to kill horses for food would likewise think that it is simply awful for those nasty Ockers to be killing those cute kangaroos. Never mind that they are basically a pest to anyone who actually has to live anywhere close to them.

        Just because it’s 7500 miles away is no reason for busybodies to be concerned. Busybody concern knows no boundaries or limits.

        1. Nobody who doesn’t live in Australia can understand that *all* the animals there are vicious killers and its all they can do to keep them at bay.

          1. Kangaroos are not particularly vicious but they are a big nuisance in the eyes of the graziers who’s mobs of sheep are in direct competition with roos for grazing land.

            Now snakes there’s something in Australia that’s deadly.

      4. To prevent California from becoming Somalia, that’s why.

  4. For the first time in my life, I’m proud to be a Californian.

  5. What I find hardest to believe is that they only found 718 unnecessary reports.

  6. Paging IFH…Paging IFH…please snag the Al Capone…

  7. Where was Kenny Logging that day?

    1. Friggin’ Android spell checker has no appreciation of our great artists.

  8. Brown is in the pouch of Big Kangaroo.

  9. Still on about the $15 plant eh? I guess you missed the part where Jalopnik updated his post. Apparently he didn’t understand that the species name is actually important. As far as he is concerned, Home erectus and Homo sapiens are completely interchangeable. So good luck finding that species at any price, let alone $15. But if you enjoy looking stupid, please keep plugging away at that one.

    1. In all seriousness, help me out:

      What’s the difference between Arctostaphylos franciscana (the relocated shrub) and Arctostaphylos hookerii franciscana.

      The latter is available for sale at Yerba Buena nursery, although out of stock currently:

      It appears to be in stock at Moosa Creek Nursery.

      Links eaten by squirrelz.

      The nurseries seem to think this is the exact species that was recently moved at exorbitant expense.

      1. plus, half the exorbitant expense is for future care. So really, they spent 100k to move it. Of which most of that would likely have been spent for removal anyway.
        Then there is the fact that it’s not the popular shrub some have made it out to be thus even further decreasing the chance that a mature specimen could be found for sale. It’s simply a stupid comparison.

        1. OK, I can buy all of the argument of why it cost a lot to move it, but removal of a shrub would cost $100 max, including dump fees.

    2. Yes, I’m sure it’s worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to humanity.

  10. Imagine the difference between a wolf and a pomeranian.

    1. whoops that was supposed to be under RC Dean.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.