Wolf Peer Review Report?

[katqanna]

I was sent the Review of Proposed Rule Regarding Status of the Wolf Under the Endangered Species Act a few days ago and finally made time to read it this evening.

This is a review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS’s) plan to delist the Gray Wolf. An independent, peer-review panel reviewed all the documentation utilized by the USFWS, was given a number of questions to determine if they had met certain criteria, based on science, not policy. They agreed that the USFWS had not utilized the latest science; they had pretty much relied solely on Chambers et al, which was written in house by 4 USFWS employees (I am not sure if they determined if that paper had ever been peer reviewed.) Chambers et al is not widely received and based on older science, so not a good foundation for a current decision making process.

An example of the science is that Chambers bases the wolf genetics on a study that only used mitochondrial DNA (from the mother) and only used less than 25 markers, where current science is using mtDNA, microsatellites (kinship and population) and Y chromosomes (from father to son). This is at the heart of part of the controversy - was the gray wold in the eastern part of the US? The wolf there currently, if determined to be a different species genetically, would not be part of the endangered species restoration of the gray wolf, likewise the Mexican wolf.

I know y'all frequently discuss the wolf issues and wondered if any of you read the paper, or even Chambers et al, and what your thoughts were, I mean serious thoughts, not the, "they look good mounted on my wall" thoughts.

 

[mdunc8]

I appreciate all of your efforts to keep us informed, but your ratio of grip/grin to political posts is ridiculously low.

 

[noharleyyet]

I know y'all frequently discuss the wolf issues and wondered if any of you read the paper, or even Chambers et al, and what your thoughts were, I mean serious thoughts, not the, "they look good mounted on my wall" thoughts.

I appreciate all of your efforts to keep us informed, but your ratio of grip/grin to political posts is ridiculously low.

The wolf lover query post has over 2400 views...looks like even a Montanan's eyes glaze over in the off season if'n there ain't pictures. (no offense dunc)

Good stuff Kat,

 

[Lawnboy]

I appreciate all of your efforts to keep us informed, but your ratio of grip/grin to political posts is ridiculously low.

You're a glutton for punishment.

 

[mdunc8]

You're a glutton for punishment.

If your idea of "glutton for punishment" involves having a little fun with someone knowing that people I don't know, and will likely never meet, might say mean things to me on an internet forum then yes, I'm a glutton for punishment. Had I included the in my initial post, would it have been better received?

 

[noharleyyet]

Pardon me for misinterpreting the ebullient nature of your cul de sac familiarity. Perhaps had I smiley'd the 'no offense' it would've been better received?.

 

[mdunc8]

Perhaps had I smiley'd the 'no offense' it would've been better received?.

No, I think the wink would have been more appropriate.

 

[katqanna]

I appreciate all of your efforts to keep us informed, but your ratio of grip/grin to political posts is ridiculously low.

Mdunc8, if you are referring to grip/grin as the political grin and shake hands, I am afraid, (could be the lack of sleep from the shoulder and pain levels) I do not see the application. If you are referencing it to joking around posts, versus science/political posts or comments, then yes, there is a disparity. I am afraid that I have a very mischievous and sarcastic sense of humor, which does not translate well through email or forums (especially when you dont really know them), has been taken to be offensive in the past, so I have to severely restrain myself from typing what pops into my head. While I constantly joke around with people I know (less likely to accidentally offend), there are only a few hunters that I know personally, that are on Hunt Talk, and a couple that are acquaintances.( Edit: I am going to just chalk this up to the bloody fatigue and brain fog, I just got your reference to the grip/grin. Kill shot photos referenced below, which I dont take, so my mind didnt even relate to that. Your word "political" set my mind off in that direction for grip/grin.)

While I know the views and stands of a number of users, from hate them all and kill them to respect, never hunted them, this is a policy issue on a larger scale than just submitting public comments at your local FWP office. If in the bigger arena you engage in dialogue and in essence are using cotton balls (not the cotton balls saturated with petroleum jelly, lit on fire and launched with a sling shot), while your adversary is using hard ammunition, then your arguments are not going to be effective. If this is a battle of science, I want to know what is available from multiple perspectives.

I have had conversations with Rod Bullis about Mountain lions in the Bitterroot. He explained that they had to get the science interjected into the conversation to force policy. So, I was asking.

 

[mdunc8]

I honestly don't care who you associate with in Helena or DC. You have provided plenty of good sources to keep folks informed on relevant issues. I just haven't seen a post of you enjoying the things you spend so much time defending. That's all. Just giving you a hard time.

 

[noharleyyet]

No, I think the wink would have been more appropriate.

It's a third person pronoun smiley...or wink. Your pick.

 

[Oak]

Many, many years ago I gave Shoots-Straight grief over posting political issues and having never once posted a hunting picture. I promptly received an email full of photos of big elk, deer, lions, and sheep, with an explanation that he didn't feel it necessary to throw things that were personal to him on the internet for everyone to judge. I have never questioned anyone about not posting photos again, because he was right.

Now, I think all of those photos have eventually made it to HT, and heck, SS even has an avatar now. So anyone can change.

 

[katqanna]

I honestly don't care who you associate with in Helena or DC. You have provided plenty of good sources to keep folks informed on relevant issues. I just haven't seen a post of you enjoying the things you spend so much time defending. That's all. Just giving you a hard time.

Mdunc, lol, you might have me confused with professional conservationists. I dont know or associate with anyone in DC, never been there. I am not a non-profit, just a seriously passionate citizen. I recently, in dealing with this elk brucellosis debacle, contacted someone in Helena. I know more hunters from Helena that I keep in contact with about these issues.

As to pictures, I have never taken a picture of a hunt. I have of wildlife while they are alive. At the point that I or someone else kills them, it is meat to me. For me, it would be like taking a picture of my chickens when I slaughter them. I understand why others do and dont disagree with it. Respecting that this is a hunting forum, and not wanting to get into my more personal views of the hunt being a personal/private thing, I have avoided simple wildlife shots. I do however post such things to my site, under the Inspiration tab, to show that this is what it is all for.

I have to say Mdunc, I read a lot of threads that I never comment on, even those of kill shots. There have been posts that have moved me greatly, in the awesomeness of the setting. One man posted a short series of photos, I think there were three hunters, it was a very cold setting, they were after Bighorns or Mountain Goats. They showed the fire setting, a lone man on a scenic ledge, a couple guys scouting the distance. The photography was stunning, but the feel from them was probably the closest I have felt from pictures here, to what I experience and enjoy from hunting.