Sage Grouse Dirty BackRoom Politics

[JoseCuervo]

Industry coalition's internal sage grouse memo causes flap
By SCOTT SONNER
ASSOCIATED PRESS

RENO, Nev. (AP) - An industry group opposed to federal protection for the sage grouse threatened legal action against environmentalists who publicized the group's internal memo that outlines lobbying tactics and political strategies to avert listing the small game bird as an endangered species.

The Partnership for the West - a coalition of ranchers, miners, oil and gas interests and other commercial users of public lands - demanded the six-page memo be removed from the conservation group RangeNet's Web site.

The memo advocates enlisting Colorado Gov. Bill Owens to offer an "anti-listing resolution" next month at a meeting of the Western Governors Association and goes on to outline other methods to persuade the U.S. government not to protect the sage grouse under the Endangered Species Act.

"Unleash grass-roots opposition to a listing, thus providing some cover to the political leadership at (the Interior Department) and throughout the administration," the memo said.

The goals include waging "a highly coordinated, multi-industry effort across 11 Western states to make the science-based case for the right listing decision" by organizing experts who can "scrutinize the science of those supporting a listing" and engage "political leaders in the West and in Congress to lobby the administration against listing."

The memo recommends approaching the Interior Department directly if members get rebuffed by the Fish and Wildlife Service, the department's agency responsible for sage grouse protection.

"Engage with USFWS regional directors. ... If they do not readily engage, back channel with DOI officials."

The Fish and Wildlife Service had no comment, agency spokeswoman Betsy Lordan said Thursday from Washington D.C.

The memo also suggests highlighting potential impacts on recreational fishing and hunting on federal lands with sage grouse "to assist in outreach to the hook and bullet crowd."

Larry Walker, a Bureau of Land Management retiree who runs RangeNet's Web site from his home in Beaverton, Ore., said the memo "smacks of special access," by using its ties with the Western Gov.'s Association and the administration.

"It looks like an awful lot of coziness between government and industry," he told the Associated Press.

Walker said he was considering the demand to remove the memo.

Jim Sims, executive vice president of the Partnership for the West in Golden, Colo., demanded in an e-mail to RangeNet on Wednesday night that Walker remove the memo from the site "and destroy any paper or electronic copies."

Later, Sims told AP there was nothing inappropriate suggested in the strategy.

"I don't know how those people got hold of an internal memo. It is not appropriate for that to be distributed outside the coalition. But the strategy itself is a very straightforward, very public effort," he said by telephone.

"It involves leaders across the West in agriculture, the oil and gas industry, coal, energy, basically everyone who has come together in this task force who wants to make sure at the end of the process, state and county and local officials are kept in charge of conserving the sage grouse," he said.

Sims said a federal listing could affect more than 110 million acres across 11 Western states.

"The restrictions that could be placed on this amount of land would affect virtually every activity in the West. The economic fallout can be stupendous," he said.

The 375 members of the Partnership for the West include the Nevada Farm Bureau, Petroleum Association of Wyoming, Colorado Cattlemen's Association, Idaho State Snowmobile Association, Northwest Mining Association, United Four Wheel Drive Association, AngloGold North America, Coldwell Banker Commercial, Kennecott Energy Co., Peabody Energy and Placer Dome America.

RangeNet is affiliated with the Western Watersheds Project, a group Jon Marvel and others founded in Hailey, Idaho, in 1993 to oppose livestock grazing on public lands in the West.

Marvel said the industry campaign is not surprising given those who stand to be affected most by protection of the sage grouse are "corporate ranching, corporate oil and gas, corporate mining."

"It looks like an excellent way to undermine the intentions of the Endangered Species Act by politicizing a possible listing."

 

[Ithaca 37]

Is the Blue Ribbon Coalition a member?

"The Partnership includes more than 300 companies, associations, coalitions and individuals who collectively employ or represent hundreds of thousands of people across America. The Partnership’s membership spans a wide cross-section of the West, including these sectors: farm/ranching, coal, timber/wood products, small businesses, utilities, hard rock mining, oil & gas, construction, manufacturing, property rights advocates, education proponents, recreational access advocates, county government advocates, local, state and federal elected officials, water proponents, school funding/tax base advocates, grassroots advocates and others.

http://www.partnershipforthewest.org/default.asp

Sounds like a real sneaky underhanded group!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Hey Hangar,

Is that Fat-Assed ATV lady that is the head of the People for the Owyhees also the lady that is ahead of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association? Why would a bunch of Snowmobilers be against protecting Sage Grouse?

 

[pawclaws]

I'll bet Bush started it! Wouldn't you agree ElkGunner??

 

[Ithaca 37]

I wasn't aware the Snowmobilers were that radical!

 

[Hangar18]

My guess as to the ISSA's opposition is that it will restrict riding in known sage grouse habitat, which is everywhere in the Great Basin / Sagebrush Sea area.

Members list: http://www.partnershipforthewest.org/ourmembers.asp

It includes the BRC Ithaca. Does that mean you are automatically against the group?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Should the ISSA be against protecting an Endangered Species? I thought one of the arguments for snowmobiling was that it had no lasting impact on the Environment.

 

[Hangar18]

The ESA does have an impact on where we can ride. I'm going to look into this a little deeper over the weekend.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Hang., I'm against the Partnership For the West. It seems like more sagebrush rebellion to me. How about you----for or against?

 

[Oak]

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s own data shows that only 12 of the law’s roughly 1,300 protected species have recovered. That is a success rate of less than .01 percent.

I don't think this equals a 99% failure rate. Just because something hasn't succeeded yet, it doesn't mean it's failed.

Oak

 

[Hangar18]

Originally posted by Ithaca 37:
Hang., I'm against the Partnership For the West. It seems like more sagebrush rebellion to me. How about you----for or against?

Hang. LMAO!!

I read the bulletin they posted on this topic. In it they say

"In the 30 years since it was enacted, ESA has notched a 99 percent failure rate at recovering species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s own data shows that only 12 of the law’s roughly 1,300 protected species have recovered. That is a success rate of less than .01 percent."

Like I told EG, I want to spend some time this weekend looking into all this further. I don't know enough about the ESA to make an informed opinion yet. I am all for protecting endangered species, but if this is the wrong way to go about it...I don't know right now.


I will tell you if this is BS, the ISSA will be getting a letter.

The Sage Grouse I saw while snowmobiling at Goose Lake two years ago was doing fine.

edit: A good friend of mine is an individual partner. I'll be talking to him over the weekend.

 

[Hangar18]

Oak, that was why I posted that statement - it is ridiculous.

I have to side with the radical fat-assed sage-brush rebels on this one, in that an ESA listing is not the solution. I think in this case, it is a conservation management issue, in that the habitat that has been relatively ignored for decades needs to be addressed. An ESA listing adds another level of enforcement as far as who treads in the habitat and how they do it if I understand it right.

How can the restrictions relating to recreation as part of the ESA not adversly effect the economy of 11 states and 50 million acres?

Just because someone suggests it doesn't mean it is a good idea.