End of Grizzly Delisting?

[Hunting Wife]

And just like that, an avenue to rewrite the regulations that govern implementation of ESA (and Migratory Bird Treaty Act…and FLPMA….and others).

Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose.

www.whitehouse.gov

 

[Forkyfinder]

And just like that, an avenue to rewrite the regulations that govern implementation of ESA (and Migratory Bird Treaty Act…and FLPMA….and others).

Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose.

www.whitehouse.gov

Can you expand/translate that a bit? Perhaps a realistic scenario that you see that could change? I know those acromyms and little of the regulation, but near nothing about practical implementation of it. I cant be alone.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Can you expand/translate that a bit? Perhaps a realistic scenario that you see that could change? I know those acromyms and little of the regulation, but near nothing about practical implementation of it. I cant be alone.

Basically, the Acts themselves provide very little detail about how they should be implemented. The Acts generally direct an agency to develop the rules and regulations, which are then published in the Federal Register and become part of the Code of Federal Regulations. ESA rules and regulations, for example, are primarily covered by 50 CFR 17. They cover the nitty gritty- when is a permit required? What constitutes a “taking”? What criteria are used for listing/delisting? How will monitoring be done? How do you determine/designate critical habitat? That kind of stuff is what gets spelled out in the CFR.

The Executive Order says that agencies must now put a sunset date on the rules and regulations governing the Acts specified by the EO. By my reading, the rules will expire, unless they are rewritten and republished in the Federal Register or extended for a period not to exceed 5 years. Oh, and DOGE has final approval of all rules.

Problem is everyone that works on this stuff is being/has been terminated. So not sure what that means- if there are no staff to work on them, then they expire? More likely, these are the civil service positions that will be replaced by partisan appointments and the rules will be essentially gutted.

I fully acknowledge some updates to the rules are necessary. But that should be done in a thoughtful way and in good faith. Based on what is happening, I’m confident we will see neither.

 

[Bigjay73]

How much of this is reality vs political bias? I can't trust any source at this point, everyone has an agenda

 

[BuzzH]

Congress needs to get its shit together and start passing some decent legislation. This nonsense with EO's has got to stop, its just going to be a whipsaw like the stock market responding to tariffs.

 

[Big Fin]

How much of this is reality vs political bias? I can't trust any source at this point, everyone has an agenda

A week in DC and a follow up day of conference calls with folks in DC tells me this is reality. When I went there, I figured it was partially hyperbole. Nope. Lots more to come that is gonna hammer the things important to hunting and conservation. Hopefully folks will get it out of their system and they focus their efforts on other goals before too much more damage is done.

I made my first trip to DC on these kind of issues 28 years ago. This is far beyond anything I could have ever imagined.

None of our issues are anywhere on a priority list of those who control the levers of power, rather the institutions of conservation and public lands are viewed as obstructions in the "path of progress." I wish I could say differently.

 

[Deleted member 16864]

A week in DC and a follow up day of conference calls with folks in DC tells me this is reality. When I went there, I figured it was partially hyperbole. Nope. Lots more to come that is gonna hammer the things important to hunting and conservation. Hopefully folks will get it out of their system and they focus their efforts on other goals before too much more damage is done.

I made my first trip to DC on these kind of issues 28 years ago. This is far beyond anything I could have ever imagined.

None of our issues are anywhere on a priority list of those who control the levers of power, rather the institutions of conservation and public lands are viewed as obstructions in the "path of progress." I wish I could say differently.

So nobody cares at all in Washington DC, is what you’ve saying.

 

[Big Fin]

So nobody cares at all in Washington DC, is what you’ve saying.

When it comes to hunting, conservation, and public lands, very few in DC could give a damn. Very few being a very small minority.

 

[Deleted member 16864]

When it comes to hunting, conservation, and public lands, very few in DC could give a damn. Very few being a very small minority.

Grizzlies are in the same boat as bighorn sheep, and the state needs to manage both species aggressively.

 

[kwyeewyk]

One more way to circumvent? Was going to put this in one of the dire wolf threads but maybe more relevant here?

After Dire Wolves Are Resurrected, Trump Administration Says U.S. Endangered Species List Should 'Go Extinct'

After biotechnology and genetic engineering company Colossal Biosciences said it successfully created three dire wolf puppies earlier this week, the Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum shared his thoughts on resurrecting other extinct animals — and is reconsidering the endangered species list.

people.com

 

[Lucky_Lep]

I am still new to the hunting space, but one overly broad observation I have made is that “we” are unorganized and afraid.

If we want to make a difference, we have to get more organized and be fearless.

 

[Forkyfinder]

When it comes to hunting, conservation, and public lands, very few in DC could give a damn. Very few being a very small minority.

So nobody cares at all in Washington DC, is what you’ve saying.

Is it at an asset? Or a hinderence?

A vast majority of what we consider political issues - are "principled" positions that Red/Blue cant/wont/dont compromise on. Conservation and wildlife though - seem variable or at least unabsolutely right/left depending on the topic. Look at public land sales - whens the last time you've seen further right republicans step out alone on something like that? Simply stated - we should find hope in that this isnt simple red/blue issue and these legislators are at least capable of being compelled to change their mind or have at least have a discussion.

I imagine that republicans hearing from constituents about gun control or democrats abortion restriction doesnt gain as much traction as a position on waterfowl regulation/funding.

Tldr - your voice means more about conservation than it does typical cnn/fox news topics. Use it.

 

[Dave N]

With how slimy D.C. can be with the underhanded things they pull, MAYBE there could be someone who slips something helpful into a much bigger bill that would fly under the radar because "very few give a damn" and be a positive result for us. Maybe.

 

[Lucky_Lep]

With how slimy D.C. can be with the underhanded things they pull, MAYBE there could be someone who slips something helpful into a much bigger bill that would fly under the radar because "very few give a damn" and be a positive result for us. Maybe.

Tester successfully delists wolves in Montana, returns management to the state - Former Sen. Jon Tester Official Press Release | LegiStorm

(U.S. SENATE) – Congress today approved Senator Jon Tester’s plan to remove gray wolves in Montana from the Endangered Species List and return their...

www.legistorm.com

Not exactly on point, but makes your point.

Nothing is impossible. Be fearless.

 

[Nick87]

This nonsense with EO's has got to stop, its just going to be a whipsaw

Yah, but the whipsaw back and forth sells tickets (gets emotional votes) for either side and they know it, unfortunately. Seems like that's becoming the norm now.

 

[Big Fin]

Tester successfully delists wolves in Montana, returns management to the state - Former Sen. Jon Tester Official Press Release | LegiStorm

(U.S. SENATE) – Congress today approved Senator Jon Tester’s plan to remove gray wolves in Montana from the Endangered Species List and return their...

www.legistorm.com

Not exactly on point, but makes your point.

Nothing is impossible. Be fearless.

A lot of people wonder how we Congressionally delisted grey wolves in MT, ID, and WY, but we can't do the same in the Midwest or do the same with Grizzly Bears. The link above shows that we got Congressional delisting of grey wolves, which is because of how the reintroduction deal was negotiated.

We discuss this topic on the next episode of Elk Talk Podcast. Below, I will explain the difference.

In 1994, hunters and wildlife agencies in MT, ID, and WY knew they were getting wolves reintroduced, no matter what our opinions. Thus, the goal became to secure the best possible deal we could with the Federal official who were ramming this through (mostly Clinton and Babbitt).

We ended up negotiating that these wolves would be considered to be a reintroduced population and governed under a subsection of the ESA, section 10(j). Under 10(j), these wolves were considered "non-essential and experimental," which gave states way more authority and made for a far easier path to delisting criteria.

Grizzlies, and grey wolves in other parts of the country, never disappeared, so they are not reintroduced populations. And thus, they do not qualify under Section 10(j) as "non-essential and experimental." A population considered 10(j) versus non-10(j) is a very large difference.

That is the big difference in how we got Congressional delisting of reintroduced grey wolves and why we will not get Congressional delisting of grizzlies.

 

[BuzzH]

I am still new to the hunting space, but one overly broad observation I have made is that “we” are unorganized and afraid.

If we want to make a difference, we have to get more organized and be fearless.

I agree 100%, but good luck with that one.

I mean FFS, we had a grand total of only 2128 people that contributed to the gofundme effort to open up 3 million acres of public access via challenging corner crossing...and only 1 hook and bullet group that stepped up, along with meateater. There's what, 15 million or so hunters in the U.S. IIRC...and 2128 people is all that stepped up?

The rest hid under the bed, whimpering in fear that we might offend a landowner, or a state legislature, or a governors office, or heaven forbid "lose", something we never had.

IMO/E, very few have the stomach to put themselves out there, afraid to challenge the status-quo, and afraid they might lose. Its why we never win.

If you want to see truly fearless efforts, watch how anti-gun and anti-hunting groups go about things. They don't give a shit if they lose, they aren't afraid to go to GF meetings, they aren't afraid to talk to people to sway them and push their agenda, they never give up.

Hunters and fisherman don't show up, they don't talk to anybody but those in their echo-chamber, they won't put themselves out there, and if they lose one time they toss in the towel. Its pathetic, it really is.

Unless hunters and fisherman can start getting off their butts, putting their money where their mouths are, and start showing up in force to support wildlife, public lands, etc. we're going to continue losing.

You can watch things happen, make things happen, or wonder WTF happened. Hunters are constantly wandering around mumbling "WTF happened?"

 

[Treeshark]

“They” unite against things. We spend as much time defending ourselves from each other as we do fighting together. Probably way more if HT, Rockslide etc is any indication.

Take a look at the Montana thread right now: an enormous amount of mental energy is being spent over what, like less than 100 tags?

We tend to pick stupid hills to die on, myself included.

 

[Chase0109]

As Someone who deals with the bald and golden eagle act, the migratory bird treaty act, and the wild bird conservation act on a daily basis……….. I’m 100% on board!

I know this is gonna bring some bad things along with the good. But I believe our current regulatory system is so broken that the only way to make any change is to tear it all down and start over.

If it’s important, they can put it in the register every five years. If it isn’t, let’s get all these junk regulations out of the way.

Nothing is gonna make everybody happy. But from what I care about this is a great move in the right direction.

Chase

 

[Lucky_Lep]

A lot of people wonder how we Congressionally delisted grey wolves in MT, ID, and WY, but we can't do the same in the Midwest or do the same with Grizzly Bears. The link above shows that we got Congressional delisting of grey wolves, which is because of how the reintroduction deal was negotiated.

We discuss this topic on the next episode of Elk Talk Podcast. Below, I will explain the difference.

In 1994, hunters and wildlife agencies in MT, ID, and WY knew they were getting wolves reintroduced, no matter what our opinions. Thus, the goal became to secure the best possible deal we could with the Federal official who were ramming this through (mostly Clinton and Babbitt).

We ended up negotiating that these wolves would be considered to be a reintroduced population and governed under a subsection of the ESA, section 10(j). Under 10(j), these wolves were considered "non-essential and experimental," which gave states way more authority and made for a far easier path to delisting criteria.

Grizzlies, and grey wolves in other parts of the country, never disappeared, so they are not reintroduced populations. And thus, they do not qualify under Section 10(j) as "non-essential and experimental." A population considered 10(j) versus non-10(j) is a very large difference.

That is the big difference in how we got Congressional delisting of reintroduced grey wolves and why we will not get Congressional delisting of grizzlies.

Yep, the Tester deal is totally different than the Grizzly situation. But it shows that thinking outside the box, there is always a solution. It just might take an unconventional approach.