At the last minute, the Wyoming passed a wolf bill. The bill would give the governor power to negotiate boundaries where the wolf would be protected somewhat in the state. Because the governor has this generic power anyway, it’s hard to say if this bill has any practical meaning.
Pete Jorgensen, D-Jackson, voted against the bill because he saw it as political posturing that gives the governor power he already had and has no effect on the delisting time line.
“I think it’s just a hokey deal,” he said. “Everyone has room to negotiate anyway, regardless of what the Legislature does.”
“I just think it’s just testosterone posturing,” he said. “I think we missed the boat when we didn’t do what Montana and Idaho did.” Both Montana and Idaho already have federally approved wolf-management plans.
Read the rest in the Jackson Hole News and Guide. By Noah Brenner and the AP
Print Friendly
Ralph Maughan
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is past President of the Western Watersheds Project.
The key thing to understand about this bill is that it directs the Wyoming G&F Department to exercise “aggressive management” of wolves, to include aerial gunning. In that sense, it creates even worse wolf management policy than the original underlying dual status law.
“I just think it’s just testosterone posturing,” he said. “I think we missed the boat when we didn’t do what Montana and Idaho did.”
Wow – at least there is one person in Wyoming who sees the big picture.
Pete Jorgensen is just about the only adult in that pathetic group!