Well Ben?
WY wolves protected again?
- Thread starter jlmatthew
- Start date
- Status
Well Ben?
RobG
Well-known member
Well, it seems sixes to me. Both sides use the biggest hammer they can and the wolf advocates don't want any hunting so simply getting the rules changed wouldn't suit their donor base.
mdunc8
Well-known member
You are no fun.
I prefer substantive arguments especially when I'm having to hit the refresh button every other minute. Carry on. I'll stick to the sidelines from here on out.
The press was correct on this one. See below.
Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Fund for Animals, Humane Society of the United States, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Sierra Club, in this consolidated case,challenge the September 30, 2012 decision of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS” or “the Service”) to remove the wolves from the list under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA” or “the Act”). See Final Rule: Removal of the Gray Wolf in Wyoming from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, 77 Fed.
Case 1:12-cv-01833-ABJ Document 68 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 40
2
Reg. 55,530 (Sept. 10, 2012) (“the 2012 rule”). The 2012 rule transferred management of the gray wolf in Wyoming from federal control to state control. Id.
Yeah, it was. Both from inside WY and later, outside WY.
WY decided they would jump in the sack with the Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife/Big Game Forever crowd. When SFW and BGF went after Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) for trying to find a solution that SFW/BGF thought might hurt their cash flow stream, it then became political.
Those who have been advising WY since the beginning, and we all know who, should be de-toothed down at the local pub. It is that political positioning that continues to leave WY with an open flank.
I get the state's rights and "We'll do as we damn well please" ideas. Yet, when WY signed on to the reintroduction agreement back in 1994/95, they gave up those options. When they let SFW start running the ship about ten years ago, things started going south for WY.
Too bad. As I stated earlier, we all know this is part of the landscape when dealing with a species like wolves. Knowing that, it would make sense to account for that when developing strategy. Or, just accept that you will be in court for a long, long time, and it will take a lot of time and resources to prevail when you take that course.
In the long run, I do see Wyoming prevailing, but not without long delays, more court battles, and eventually being forced to implement a management strategy that is not too far different from what their biologists has proposed from the start, only to be tossed by the politicians being spoon-fed by SFW.
But, some will say that Wyoming "Showed the Feds." So far, it appears the courts have "Showed Wyoming."
Carry on .....
BigRack
What exactly is your point here? Here you go again with this ridiculous series of vague and cryptic questions with no real apparent point you are trying to make other than to argue.
We are adults here. We can all (hopefully) debate in a rational manner. If you are trying to prove a point, can you please do so in a direct and logical manner?
What exactly is your point here? Here you go again with this ridiculous series of vague and cryptic questions with no real apparent point you are trying to make other than to argue.
We are adults here. We can all (hopefully) debate in a rational manner. If you are trying to prove a point, can you please do so in a direct and logical manner?
I didn't know that Wyoming agreed to the Re-introduction.
My only problem is Ben saying it's the ranchers. I know ranchers don't support HSUS.
T
tjones
Guest
What is your problem with me defending hunters?
Move over and make room for me. Do we have any whiskey?
Nemont
Well-known member
Bigrack,
Explain why Montana and Idaho were not also hauled to court and yet have state management of wolves and are hunting them?
You are asking only 1/3 of the question.
Also why would the wolf lovers try to get Wyoming to change their plan instead of going for full relisting? Since when do hunters and other have a say so in what suits and goals the anti hunters have? HSUS wants no hunting and killing of wolves period, the place they see vulnerable is in Wyoming which continues to play into HSUS hands by being hard headed.
Nemont
Explain why Montana and Idaho were not also hauled to court and yet have state management of wolves and are hunting them?
You are asking only 1/3 of the question.
Also why would the wolf lovers try to get Wyoming to change their plan instead of going for full relisting? Since when do hunters and other have a say so in what suits and goals the anti hunters have? HSUS wants no hunting and killing of wolves period, the place they see vulnerable is in Wyoming which continues to play into HSUS hands by being hard headed.
Nemont
Randy addressed the politics.
It would be nice if all hunters were against HSUS and the Sierra Club.
jryoung
Well-known member
Who wrote the wolf plan for WY? It sounds like WYFG had a reasonable plan, but politics took over and SWF/BGF got involved. So how did the final plan get drafted? Was WYFG strong armed from the legislature?
Nemont
Well-known member
It would also be nice if all hunters held everyone involved responsible to act in the best interest of hunting but that isn't the case here. There isn't a single hunter on this board that supports the position of HSUS.
SFW and their cronies are responsible for helping divide hunters on this issue and for insisting on a plan the guaranteed future lawsuits against Wyoming.
Don't piss down my back and tell me it is raining: everyone who was involved with the wolf issue predicted this was going to happen when Wyoming decided to get into a dick measuring contest with the Federal Government in order to appease the low hanging fruit of the SFW supporters who profess to the love the Constitution but only read the parts that they like.
Hunters should all be opposed to the agenda of HSUS and they should also be all be opposed to those who work to limit hunting for the average Joe like SFW.
You can't be in the middle of the circle jerk and then cry when one of the participants grabs ahold and squeezes. That is what Wyoming did with their idiotic plan, they knew it wasn't a valid plan and that it left open the potential for a relisting lawsuit and they did it anyway.
Nemont
The US Government signed off on Wyoming's plan. HSUS had a problem with it. How is that Wyoming's fault?
Nemont
Well-known member
Because Wyoming refused to address all the other issues that left open the door to a lawsuit by the wolf lovers.
Again why didn't HSUS and Sierra club go after Montana and Idaho? Why was Wyoming not included on the Simpson-Tester Rider to enforce the 2009 delisting?
The USFW signed off that the wolf was recovered but Wyoming failed to uphold their end of the bargain. Why do you think the judge found merit to relist the wolves based on the HSUS lawsuit?
Nemont
They can't sue MT and ID because of Federal law or else they would have.
This lawsuit wasn't about changing the plan or helping hunters.
The judge made the wrong ruling.
- Status
Similar threads
