Wolf wing nuts lose again!

[Big Fin]

In the last hope of desparation, the wolf wing nuts have lost their final battle on the Simpson-Tester rider that gave MT and ID delisting. YEEEEHAW!

They wanted to convince the court that the Simpson-Tester rider was unconstitutional. That Congress could not pass a bill that caused a court decision to no longer be valid. Most could see this as desparation. And now the court agrees.

Here is an email I just got from RMEF:



This is great news. Even the most liberal of the Federal District Court of Appeals, the Ninth District, told the wingnuts to go pound sand.

How long unit SFW/BGF come forward and take credit for this one, also. I am sure they are crafting their email as I write this.

 

[gman82001]

Gotta plan another hunt now . Finally!

 

[Big Fin]

I knew it wouldn't take Sportsmen For the Wealthy and Big Game For Us very long to claim victory in the court case of this morning, even though they admitted trying to kill the S-T rider that got us delisting in MT and ID.

Let me explain this in summary - SFW/BGF works to kill Simpson-Tester. The S-T rider becomes litigated in court. S-T is upheld by the 9th Circuit. Now SFW/BGF take credit for its success. Hypocrisy abounds among simple minds.

Here is a quote from an email I just got from the glory hogs:

Big, Big News.
30 minutes ago, we found out that we have won in court when it comes to wolves and wolf delisting. The ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco clearly supported the legality of the Congressional action to delist wolves in the Northern Rockies. The opinion, written by Judge Schroeder, dated March 14, 2012, ruled that Section 1731 (the wolf bill) was constitutional and that this action by Congress to delist wolves in the Northern Rockies was fully legal. This is a huge victory for wildlife conservation and will allow wolf management to continue in Montana and Idaho. It also protects Wyoming's legal victory and leaves the door open for a Wyoming delisting later this year.

As many of you are aware, Big Game Forever and other conservation organizations, including partner organizations Sportsmen for Fish and Widllife and Mule Deer Foundation are parties to this litigation.........................

.........................The bottom line is that once again, the courts have ruled in favor of wolf delisting. Wolf management will continue in the Northern Rockies by state fish and game agencies including regulated hunting by sportsmen.

Thank you for your ongoing support. We will continue to keep you apprised of developments as they arise.

A great victory for healthy wildlife populations and for our outdoor heritage.
--
Ryan Benson
http://biggameforever.org/
[email protected]

Almost as if on cue, these two groups run to grab the credit for something they fought to kill and whined about since it passed. Now that it passed and the great political strategy it represents has been upheld, these bozos want to claim credit.

Not that anyone is surprised.

 

[stillkickin]

No suprise here!

 

[Carrion Carrier]

Come on Randy, you are a representative of hunters. Further the debate. Be above the name calling.

 

[AZ402]

Come on Randy, you are a representative of hunters. Further the debate. Be above the name calling.

Serious?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Told ya so.

 

[Elkmagnet]

In the last hope of desparation, the wolf wing nuts have lost their final battle on the Simpson-Tester rider that gave MT and ID delisting. YEEEEHAW!

They wanted to convince the court that the Simpson-Tester rider was unconstitutional. That Congress could not pass a bill that caused a court decision to no longer be valid. Most could see this as desparation. And now the court agrees.

Here is an email I just got from RMEF:

View attachment 29573

This is great news. Even the most liberal of the Federal District Court of Appeals, the Ninth District, told the wingnuts to go pound sand.

How long unit SFW/BGF come forward and take credit for this one, also. I am sure they are crafting their email as I write this.

I feel the tide turning! This one reaches far beyond wolf hunting, had the court ruled in favor of those nuts it could have set a bad precedent that stripped congress of a lot of power and put it in the hands of any one judge on any given day. Now that's a bad idea.

 

[shoots-straight]

Come on Randy, you are a representative of hunters. Further the debate. Be above the name calling.

He's not calling them anything they don't deserve.

You belong to one of those groups? That's OK you don't have to answer.

 

[Carrion Carrier]

No, I don't belong to one of these groups. I believe we should hunt predators. I don't think we should exterminate them. That has nothing to do with this.

I'm just saying that name calling is not helpful and can be detrimental. We need to represent ourselves properly. Hunters are a small percentage of people in this country. We need the backing of non-hunters to be able to continue to hunt. It's that simple.

Keep it respectful and make good factual arguments.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Carrion,

I agree that we need to represent ourselves properly and that we need the backing of non-hunters.

That's why so many of us are shedding light on SFW and their corruption. Eliminate them from the gene pool and we increase the public's perception of hunters in general.

 

[1_pointer]

Feel free to forward this on to Don Peay and/or Ryan Benson...

 

[CabinFever]

Slight change of subject here, but this just got me thinking. For you guys that seem to be much in the legislative know, is there, or will there ever be anything on the horizon for delisting Grizzly in the lower 48? I have no idea what "objectives" there might be for them, or if there is much current opposition on the subject. Is there a possibilty or likely never?

 

[Ben Lamb]

We're in a better spot with Grizz than we were with wolves.

In the last decision from the courts, a clear path to delisting came out, and we recieved a very favorable mention for the three states management plans. Now we just have to effectively address the white bark pine question and we should be good to go with the Yellowstone population.

The Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) population is still being evaluated through numerous studies and researchers believe that there are more bears than previously thought, and that we'll be delisted in 5 years.

It's a slow march towards progress, and I doubt that congress would act on this issue like they did on wolves. We had a lot going for us on the wolf issue: multiple states fighting over management, a legal framework that required congressional action, and enough political pressure to do the right thing.

We also had two effective champions who put aside the rhetoric and actually worked together to get wolves delisted in a manner that wouldn't get stuffed by Boxer and others.

A good strategy, a salient point (ID and MT shouldn't have been tied to WY) and effective legislators.

God bless Mike Simpson and Jon Tester.

 

[mdunc8]

Here's some more information if you're interested. Scroll a little over halfway down and take a look at the five year review. Pages 100-108 will probably catch you up to speed.

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A001

 

[Big Fin]

No, I don't belong to one of these groups. I believe we should hunt predators. I don't think we should exterminate them. That has nothing to do with this.

I'm just saying that name calling is not helpful and can be detrimental. We need to represent ourselves properly. Hunters are a small percentage of people in this country. We need the backing of non-hunters to be able to continue to hunt. It's that simple.

Keep it respectful and make good factual arguments.

Carrion - I see your point, given I used nouns to indentify those responsible for despicable actions, rather than verbs that notate the action itself.

I think I am usually within the code of conduct I think you expect. I don't see that post as being outside those bounds, but if others do, I respect that and take note. Not saying I will change anything in that post, but it always helps to have people make good comments that I can consider.

With that said, I have no problem being very pointed in my descriptions of the actions of SFW/BGF.

Your comments make me think I might have been better served to use the verb that they are "hogging the glory" rather than a noun of "glory hogs". And rather than bozos, I could have used the term "clown-like" to describe their actions. Thanks for pointing that out. I failed to do so, and I move on.

I try to make my points in effective ways, truthful and factual, with use of pointed and descriptive verbs, when appropriate and deserved. I will continue my approach of using very descriptive references to these actions.

Sorry if my use of those nouns took away from the substance of this discussion. That substance being the great news that we have prevailed in the Ninth Ciruit, and in predicable "clown-like" fashion, some have raced to "hog the glory" for successes that they previously tried to ruin.

Carry on ........

 

[Big Fin]

Slight change of subject here, but this just got me thinking. For you guys that seem to be much in the legislative know, is there, or will there ever be anything on the horizon for delisting Grizzly in the lower 48? I have no idea what "objectives" there might be for them, or if there is much current opposition on the subject. Is there a possibilty or likely never?

Most recently, a USFWS decision to delist grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) was overturned by a Federal court for failure to address the affects Global Warming may have on GBs in the GYE area.

The USFWS had ruled the GBs were recovered in the GYE and that the state management plans were in place to turn over management. Without question, we all knew that would be litigated. And it was. And, it will be again. Just part of the process we must go through.

The plaintiffs have now used one bullet - their biggest bullet. The USFWS is accumulating the data to counter that issue. They will explain how the GB plans will provide for a safety net regarding such. Eventually, these plaintiffs run out of bullets, the same as happened in the wolf issue.

I spent three years on the Governors' Grizzly Bear Roundtable. The govs of MT/ID/WY each appointed five citizens to sit on that committee and work with the USFWS to integrate the Federal recovery plan with the state concerns and then for us to help with formation of the state mangement plans.

I learned more about GBs in those three years than I ever thought existed. I gained a ton of respect for the biologist of the USFWS who are studying GBs. They know their stuff. Same with the state GB coordinators.

I quickly learned of the weaknesses the enviros saw in the GB plans. They would lobby all of us on issues in the plan they thought were their best points of vulnerability.

Good news is that the plan required unanimous consent from the GB roundtable members. We all were able to provide one "drop dead" issue that if missing from the plan, would cause us to vote against the final recommendation in the plan. That drop dead issue varied by which constituency the panel member was expected to represent. And, it was a very difficult job to get fifteen people from different backgrounds to agree on the drop dead issue of the other fourteen.

I was told by the MT Governor that I was appointed to that panel to represent hunters. None of the other states sent anyone to soley represent hunters, so I was the token hunter on the panel.

Given that, my drop dead issue was that the plan must not prohibit grizzly hunting as part of state management, and must explicity state that hunting is an expected management tool when management is handed over to the states. We were fortunate that most on the panel were ranchers, outfitters, county commissioners, etc. Not too much turmoil came from the hunting demand. I think some not too keen on the idea had the fallback position that they will litigate hunting into submission, so long as they got their drop dead topic.

The idea that states will hunt GBs is now in the Federal recovery plan. You can bet it is going to be litigated like crazy once we start hunting them, or even propose to hunt them. But, the roadmap that is laid out now expects that hunting will be part of the equation.

Given the tactics that these normal plaintiffs had on the GB issue, and then watching the wolf deal come together, we have staked out some fertile ground in our battle on wolves. The wolf issue has weakened their position on many topics. They over played their hands with both public opinion of wolves and on the legal strategy on wolves.

Thier cavalier approach to litigating everything related to wolves has helped us with GBs, and in my opinion is why they do not want to play many more cards on wolves. Most every card they have played on wolves has been an eventual loss to them and a loss of turf they thought they owned under the Endangered Species Act.

It was important that hunters follow the recovery plans and the way of the process to get wolves delisted, as that is the same way it will have to happen with GBs. We are now better prepared. We have sorted out some of the options previously considered off the table. And, hunters are more aware of what they are in for with a delisting issue on a species such as GBs.

Even with that, they are loaded for bear when it comes to GBs. The wolf issue will look like a small bump in the road compared to the resources they are marshalling for the GB fight.

And before they claim otherwise, SFW and BGF were not at any of those GB meetings either. I know, as I was at everyone of them. Three day meetings, every other month, for almost three years, at locations all over the states of MT/IDWY.

Anyone interested in the plan should go read Dunc's link or this link. All you ever wanted to know about Yellowstone Grizzly Bears.

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm#Post-delist


Here are links to each of the state GB management plans.

Montana

Idaho

Wyoming

 

[npaden]

That is great to hear about potential delisting of grizzlies in Wyoming and Montana.

I guess the only problem is that those tags seem like they would be much easier to fill than a wolf tag so I would expect them to be draw tags and I doubt there will be very good odds at drawing one as a nonresident.

 

[Carrion Carrier]

Carrion - I see your point, given I used nouns to indentify those responsible for despicable actions, rather than verbs that notate the action itself.

I think I am usually within the code of conduct I think you expect. I don't see that post as being outside those bounds, but if others do, I respect that and take note. Not saying I will change anything in that post, but it always helps to have people make good comments that I can consider.

With that said, I have no problem being very pointed in my descriptions of the actions of SFW/BGF.

Your comments make me think I might have been better served to use the verb that they are "hogging the glory" rather than a noun of "glory hogs". And rather than bozos, I could have used the term "clown-like" to describe their actions. Thanks for pointing that out. I failed to do so, and I move on.

I try to make my points in effective ways, truthful and factual, with use of pointed and descriptive verbs, when appropriate and deserved. I will continue my approach of using very descriptive references to these actions.

Sorry if my use of those nouns took away from the substance of this discussion. That substance being the great news that we have prevailed in the Ninth Ciruit, and in predicable "clown-like" fashion, some have raced to "hog the glory" for successes that they previously tried to ruin.

Carry on ........

Fin, I think you do a great job and I hope you don't hold this against me.

I know some members will judge me for being the PC police. The fact remains that hunter numbers have been dwindling and we need to be able to convince non-hunters that they do not need to be anti-hunters. Hunter culture needs to be accepting of other ideas to persuade people who do not have an opinion, and to not alienate people that are, at least ideologically, supportive of hunting. That's the only way hunting will continue.

 

[CabinFever]

That is great to hear about potential delisting of grizzlies in Wyoming and Montana.

I guess the only problem is that those tags seem like they would be much easier to fill than a wolf tag so I would expect them to be draw tags and I doubt there will be very good odds at drawing one as a nonresident.

I agree, thanks Ben and Dunc for the heads up. I would love the opportunity to hunt them with out forking it out in Alaska or Canada.