sage brushThe Interior Department says that a bill proposed by U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner allowing states to continue multi-million dollar efforts to preserve the sage grouse is bad because it doesn’t protect brush from fire or weeds.

Playing parse the bureaucrat gets rather tiresome; rarely do they make it easy to read between the lines.

Gary Harmon from the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel has the story:

“The time to address the threats to sagebrush habitat is now – not five or 10 years from now, when the West is more fragmented, wildfires are more intense, or invasive species have gained more ground,” Interior Department spokeswoman Jessica Kershaw said.

See? Threats to the sagebrush — the habitat, not the bird.

We have been aware of a growing, and we might add, disturbing trend of enviros and their leader Interior Secretary Sally Jewell bowing down to worship sagebrush.

But not just any sagebrush, old growth sagebrush. Those gnarly bushes that grow everywhere, are being compared to the majestic Redwoods of California.

As every enviro knows, there is only one way to protect old growth sagebrush from the ravages of weeds and wildfires – wink, wink, nod, nod, read between the lines — and that is to oppose Gardner’s bill and ban fracking.

Gardner’s staff didn’t bother beating around the sagebrush and cut straight to the chase.

A Gardner spokesman said the comment seemed like preparation for a lawsuit.

“Instead of preparing for litigation, the Department of the Interior should be preparing for cooperation,” Gardner spokesman Alex Siciliano said.