Us house of representative vote on wolves nov 12th read this, send a message

[JLS]

. why shouldn't the politicians overrule one judge? our republic is checks and balances,

I think you answered your own question.

 

[Sytes]

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation maintains that state wildlife agencies are best to manage predator and prey populations through public hunting and other management tools in order to strike a balance for gray wolf and ungulate populations.

Wish the best for the other states where cuddle puppy wolf lovers have roadblocked opportunities to manage these predators.

Montana needs to take heart RMEF's "...other management tools" as we watch the wolves population continue to exceed our ability to hunt/trap for effective management.

 

[tjones]

In case neither of you are aware of it, this is nothing new and is the only reason that wolves are being hunted now in MT and ID after Congress overruled the Liberal Judges that had put them back on the ESA!

Actually MT an ID wolves got delisted because congress voted on a CR/budget bill, which happened to contain the Simpson/Tester language to delist wolves. It was not a stand alone wolf delisting bill. The CR had to pass to fund Merica.

 

[Hunting Wife]

So when the tables eventually turn and a Democratic Congress votes to list sage grouse and bar any state or judicial intervention, will those who are excited about Congressional management of wildlife still be singing “Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy”? That’s the precedent being set here. If this is the way you want to do business, it’s only a matter of time.

Any means necessary cuts both ways, and having wildlife management decisions being made and enacted outside of the agency processes is a very dangerous precedent. If the process isn’t working, then fix the process. Circumventing the process and removing all recourse and public comment is not adding checks and balances. It removes all checks and balances. If Congress really wants to resolve the problems with litigation holding listed species hostage, they should do their real job and fix the damn ESA. I don’t want them micromanaging individual species as it suits them.

 

[HSi-ESi]

^^^ 100% this. Thanks Hunting Wife.

 

[BigHornRam]

Actually MT an ID wolves got delisted because congress voted on a CR/budget bill, which happened to contain the Simpson/Tester language to delist wolves. It was not a stand alone wolf delisting bill. The CR had to pass to fund Merica.

And it would have never been signed if it was a stand alone bill. Sausage factory at its finest.

 

[BrentD]

. If Congress really wants to resolve the problems with litigation holding listed species hostage, they should do their real job and fix the damn ESA. I don’t want them micromanaging individual species as it suits them.

I have no beef with the ESA. Without it you wouldn't have grizzlies to argue about in the 1st place. Leave it alone, it works just fine.

 

[BigHornRam]

If Congress really wants to resolve the problems with litigation holding listed species hostage, they should do their real job and fix the damn ESA.

Amen to that. That political football will only take 50 or so years to be accomplished.

 

[BigHornRam]

I have no beef with the ESA. Without it you wouldn't have grizzlies to argue about in the 1st place. Leave it alone, it works just fine.

Okay, make that 100 or so years.

 

[Sytes]

Actually MT an ID wolves got delisted because congress voted on a CR/budget bill, which happened to contain the Simpson/Tester language to delist wolves. It was not a stand alone wolf delisting bill. The CR had to pass to fund Merica.

Circumventing the judges seems to fit Topguns point...

Good post Hunting wife. Great post.

 

[Hunting Wife]

I have no beef with the ESA. Without it you wouldn't have grizzlies to argue about in the 1st place. Leave it alone, it works just fine.

The point of the ESA is recovery of species, is it not? It does not work just fine when it is impossible to delist species even though science based delisting criteria and goals have been met. The result is that inordinate amounts of time, money and resources go to fighting over delisting the charismatic megafauna while lesser known species (dare I say woodland caribou?) get no resources directed to them and slowly fade away.

Delisting a species isn’t the death knell some people seem to believe. It’s where recovery ends and conservation begins. In the modern era, the states have a pretty good track record of species management. Let them manage, and let’s direct the federal resources to moving other listed species towards recovery. Right now, the endangered species list is where species go to die. That is not how the ESA is supposed to work.

 

[BrentD]

Hunting wife, you speak in hyperbole which does not lend itself to very constructive conversation. Obviously, it is not impossible to get species off the endangered species list. Wolves in the West being one, alligators another, soon grizzly bears. And others. It's just not happening fast enough to please you. That's the checks and balances part. But it will happen.

 

[BigHornRam]

Hunting wife, you speak in hyperbole which does not lend itself to very constructive conversation. Obviously, it is not impossible to get species off the endangered species list. Wolves in the West being one, alligators another, soon grizzly bears. And others. It's just not happening fast enough to please you. That's the checks and balances part. But it will happen.

Wolves in the west were delisted through means you stridently oppose, and now you want to use their delisting as an ESA success story? Okie dokie.

Great post HW. No hyperbole, just reasonable dialog that reasonable people can easily understand and agree with.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Hunting wife, you speak in hyperbole which does not lend itself to very constructive conversation. Obviously, it is not impossible to get species off the endangered species list. Wolves in the West being one, alligators another, soon grizzly bears. And others. It's just not happening fast enough to please you. That's the checks and balances part. But it will happen.

IMHO you are now really out of your league with that post to her! She hit the nail on the head with the way the ESA delistings keep getting derailed by the antis when all they to do is find a Liberal Judge that puts the animal right back on the list for all kinds of BS reasons after it's met appropriate numbers and been delisted. Wolves were a biggy out west like the grizzly is right now and continued to be listed until the Congressional Bill that had the Simpson/Tester amendment attached to it passed. That has allowed state control of the species with hunting in ID and MT allowed and no further interference by the Judicial system can take place. Politics of any type should not take place with the ESA, but the facts are clear that until the antis going through the Judicial system is taken out of the mix the system in place right now is broken. I don't like it any better than the other posters that Congress is now getting involved in these decisions, but IMHO I'd rather see a number of elected officials be able to circumvent one appointed Judge like the Simpson/Tester did than not have any other recourse to get an animal delisted so that proper state controls can take over. That appears to be the only way right now that delistings will take place and I don't like it at all due to reasons other members have stated, but will live with it for the time being until something better comes down the pipe.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Hunting wife, you speak in hyperbole which does not lend itself to very constructive conversation. Obviously, it is not impossible to get species off the endangered species list. Wolves in the West being one, alligators another, soon grizzly bears. And others. It's just not happening fast enough to please you. That's the checks and balances part. But it will happen.

I think you mistake me for someone who thinks delisting should happen overnight. I’m not that naive. But I also don’t think a decade or more of litigation is at all reasonable. Which brings us back to the original point of this thread...wolves were not delisted via the ESA process. They were delisted via Congressional action because after decades of litigation, there was no progress towards delisting. Given the current state of litigation, I think the only way grizz get off the list is via the same type of action. Only this time Congress won’t wait a decade, the ESA process will be preempted, and now we have wildlife management being run by politicians. And we’ve now come back full circle to the problem at hand.

I ask again, isn’t the point of the ESA to recover species? Keeping species listed in perpetuity was never the intent. Call it hyperbole if you wish, but I’ve spent a decade working on species recovery. We continue to spend millions of dollars trying to delist a couple of species that, by all biological measures have met the previously established recovery criteria (criteria that today’s litigants now dispute even though they participated in establishing those criteria during the recovery planning process). Some of these litigants also make no secret of the fact that their main concern is keeping these species from being hunted. That is a misuse of the ESA, and it just fuels those who would just as soon see the entire Act abolished. Meanwhile, those of us working on one of the other 1700-ish species on the list can’t get funding to do even basic research on habitat characteristics and selection, population dynamics or threat assessments to move some of those species towards recovery. Many of these species have continued to decline in the interim. So I stand by my statement that for the majority of listed species, the ESA isn’t working. There have to be limits to litigation and alterations of recovery criteria. Some adaptive management of the ESA would be a good thing.

 

[BigHornRam]

So the house votes and passes this bill. I'm sure my rep will vote in favor of it. Then what? Will it get mixed in with a LWCF reauthorization bill to get it through the Senate? What's the game plan here?

 

[BWALKER77]

Then prepare to have more things like mountain lion hunting and bear hunting and everything else be politicized. There is a process, let it work.

Not all judges that oppose something you like are liberal. This particular one might be, but eventually, he will be overcome and the longterm goal of stable, managed hunting will be worth the wait.

As it pertains to wolves, grizzly bears, etc it is liberal judges that are the problem. Thats why its important to not elect democrats.

 

[BrentD]

bwalker, w/o democrats you wouldn't have wolves, grizzlies, etc.

 

[BuzzH]

As it pertains to wolves, grizzly bears, etc it is liberal judges that are the problem. Thats why its important to not elect democrats.

Montana Senator, Jon Tester (D) was responsible for the rider that delisted wolves in MT and ID...your "logic" holds as much water as a spaghetti strainer.

 

[BigHornRam]

bwalker, w/o democrats you wouldn't have wolves, grizzlies, etc.

Speaking of hyperbole.........