Justabirdwatcher
Well-known member
The 1973 act did not exist, but the 1966 Endangered Species Protection Act did - just as a point of clarification.
Changes to ESA rules
- Thread starter SAJ-99
- Start date
Well Amy Klobuchar stands a good chance at being the next Governor just because she is a democrat. She has authored numerous bills to delist the wolf and let the state's manage them. I don't know if she is on record saying she supports a hunting season or not, but it seems likely given her efforts to delist them. As for the republican candidate (Qualls), I don't know. Certainly something I would like to see them both answer directly.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 2,008
Walz and the state cant do anything until the feds delist them, which they wont because its MN.
And he changed course long ago, after that old piece you posted.
As noted Klobuchar will be our next governor...Trump all but locked that up when he came out to support the My Pillow idiot...who has the lowest poll numbers of any candidate. Amy was the polling favorite already, but Trump killed any chance the pubs had.
Amy has long been in favor of delisting.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Your wolves were delisted in 2021. They were relisted in 2022 after the usual litigants sued. Walz supported the relisting in 2022.
"Minnesota Governor Tim Walz supported the federal gray wolf relisting in February 2022, which restored protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). His administration favored keeping wolves under federal protection to manage them for conservation rather than allowing recreational hunting."
You live there. You should know all this.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 2,008
And that changed to a neutral position. I am FAR closer to it it than you are!
What do you know about his lieutenant governor and her views and influence on this?
And is it your opinion that wolves should immediately be hunted if they are delisted? And what would the purpose of hunting be? And which state greatly influenced the relisting?
Could be its own thread.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
You are the guy whining about the feds not delisting Minnesota wolves, not me.
"Walz and the state cant do anything until the feds delist them, which they wont because its MN."
Federal delisting process started .... again ....
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I think state endangered species laws still apply. So before some hunter starts lobbing lead at wolves because of a Truth Social post they might want to check those laws too.
Experts would generally disagree with you.
Not to say that States can't enact new laws going forward so long as they don't attempt to override federal laws. And can they legally enforce any of those on Federal lands without consent by the Federal Government? Bigger issue is the ability/willingness to fund enforcement of those added laws.
Last edited:
SAJ-99
Well-known member
That article is about the original point of this thread - habitat. Your post was about wolf delisting. We shouldn't confuse the two.
Point being the same issues apply, States for the most part don't have endangered species laws on the books nor the infrastructure in place to enforce them if they existed. So state ESA laws will not apply as you suggested.
And since you like to quote AI so much; per AI:
Federal laws generally take precedence over state laws when it comes to endangered species protections, meaning that state laws cannot override federal regulations like the Endangered Species Act. However, states can implement their own laws that provide additional protections beyond federal standards.
Overview of Endangered Species Laws
Federal laws, particularly the Endangered Species Act (ESA), generally take precedence over state laws regarding endangered species protections. This means that state laws cannot override federal regulations.State vs. Federal Protections
Key Points
- Federal Precedence: Federal laws, including the ESA, are the primary regulations governing endangered species. States cannot enact laws that contradict these federal protections.
- Additional State Protections: States are allowed to implement their own laws that provide additional protections beyond what the federal law offers. This means states can enhance protections but cannot diminish them.
Implications
| Aspect | Federal Law (ESA) | State Law |
|---|---|---|
| Authority | Takes precedence over state laws | Can provide additional protections |
| Scope of Protection | Sets minimum standards for species | May offer more stringent protections |
| Legal Conflicts | Federal law prevails in case of conflict | Cannot contradict federal law |
Conclusion
While states can create laws that enhance protections for endangered species, they cannot override or diminish the protections established by federal law.SAJ-99
Well-known member
You just want to argue and clearly don't understand what you posted means from a practical standpoint. I point you the part that says-
Again, the Feds can remove wolves from the ESA, but Minnesota can protect them just the same. While I hate that as much as you, I would not want to be the one test that in State courts.
I am not arguing that states can't take up the slack in terms of managing a delisted species (see post #109). Per the ESA, if a species is removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, it returns to being managed by the state(s) in which it is found. So yes, states can provide protections through banning hunting or limiting the take/possession of a delisted animal. Do they have the funding to manage/enforce that protection and everything that goes with recovering an endangered species? Colorado doesn't. At least not currently. What funds CO has allocated for wolves for example are mostly tied to compensation to ranchers for wolf depredation. And CO is spending more than 3 times what the Polis administration said it would cost when they pushed for reintroduction in the first place so CPW is havng to continually go back to the well for more funding. So tacking on additional funding that currently comes from the Feds through the ESA is not going to be an easy sell. Whether it is managing the animal or managing the animal's habitat, most states are not equppied (as CO has demonstrated with their complete botching of the wolf reintroduction program from day 1) to take up the slack if the Feds step out.
And feel free to argue with the folks at Stateline all you want if you disagree with their position. They are the experts, along with you of course ...
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
