Here is the AP story from the Casper Star Tribune. By Matthew Brown.

The story got the main point — the 10j changes are designed to get around the legal “problem” of delisting the wolves by treating them on the ground as if they had been legally delisted.

The story did not point out that the new rules would give states the right to kill wolves not just for being a suspect in the population decline of an elk herd, but for any “herd management objectives” (which, by the way it is defined, could mean for any reason the state wildlife departments want).

The only Montana hearing is tonight. Story on tonight’s hearing in Helena. By Eve Byron.

 
avatar
About The Author

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 President of the Western Watersheds Project.

13 Responses to Cody hearing on the new wolf rules (10j rule) saw both opponents and backers

  1. avatar Mike Wolf says:

    Unbelievable. How does the author of this article get away with that first paragraph. “At the cost of large game” or whatever. Sheesh.

    This just strengthens my supposition that the media, playing to the sensational viewpoint, just makes matters worse.

    THis proposal is a crock of sh*t and I wish like heck I could go down to Boise Thursday and say so. I’ll have to settle for writing comments and submitting them though.

  2. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    Comments to the FWS should focus on the necessity for independent peer review of any state demand to shoot wolves to benefit big game. To date, nothing the WGFD has done regarding the impact of wolves on elk comes near to scientific validity. Until Dirk the Jerk took over Interior, the FWS was clear that scientific claims from G&F about wolves and elk were invalid. Now the FWS has decided that science doesn’t matter.

    In other words, a decision by the FWS to allow Wyoming to kill wolves for whatever reason would be arbitrary and capricious.

  3. avatar be says:

    Mike Wolf and anyone – i will be posting a link to a live webcast of the boise hearing. if you would like to have your comments read in front of the crowd – have them ready to post on the blog that will air the webcast ~ we will have a volunteer reading them to demonstrate that there are people who could not make it (a couple of weeks notice is weak) but are watching.

    agencies have a tendency to give as little/short notice as possible – agile organization/mobilization is probably a good thing…

  4. avatar Steve says:

    Is it just me, or have the Bush administration and their appointees become more blatant and aggressive with their attacks on wildlife (including these recent wolf related attacks on the endangered species act) since the democrats came to power? Shouldnt the opposite be happening? I was hoping for an environmental resurgence after the midterm elections, but it seems that the dems are only focused on the war and nothing else. It is very depressing…

  5. avatar skyrim says:

    I think the current administrations efforts have been the same all along. It is only recently that we have become focused on ALL of what they are doing to nature. While I have serious doubts about the ability of the Dems to make a definitve change, you have to sit back and see the enormity of what they have to clean up. This war must be first on any agenda. I still have hope. Without that………..we are lost in the woods.

  6. avatar JEFF E says:

    my humble opinion is that Dick Kempthorne was given a point by point agenda to accomplish on an obviously limited time line when he was appointed and is aggressively pursuing it at the wishes of the various big money lobbing groups that inundate politicians in money. If even partly successful watch the NRP anoint Dick as a rising star with a bright future.(VP 2008??) He makes James Watt under Reagan look like a country bumpkin.

  7. I think JEFFE brought up an excellent point. Bush has just a little time to do all those favors he likely promised before leaving office and put Dick in charge of handing out the favors. It is so frustrating!!! I had hoped that Bush and his Bush Babies would be too busy to do any more damage. My gut says he’s going to do as much damage before he’s out of there. I also think it is getting more blatent and aggressive because they are in one heck of a hurry.

  8. avatar Mike Wolf says:

    Anyone who didn’t forsee the disaster of having the governor who presided over two direct attacks against wolves simultaneous with attacks on the sovereignty of the federal government (read: people of the United States) coming in as secretary of the interior deserves the surprise they are getting.

    I saw it when Kempthorne was fingered for the job. I started thinking about moving my research facility to Canada back then…

  9. avatar Sal says:

    Hmmm…. I went to the early session on the 10j rule changes. That session was sparsely attended and was reminiscent of many that I have attended in Idaho. Once again the main arguments were based on myth and emotional anecdotes.

    When I asked about the peer review process in the Wyoming plan during the “open house” portion of the event, I was informed that the state of Wyoming would handle the process and they would set the parameters of the review process which would only be performed once and used as the benchmark for all cases thereafter.

    That’s not an independent review by any stretch of the imagination and I would suspect that the selection of reviewers would be questionable as well.

    Others asked about the process as well with concern for the “case by case” elimination. Seems like a ram-rod-rubber-stamp job to me.

  10. Sal—Thanks for the report. I sure wish I could have gone too. The way this thing is being run is so illogical. And I get so angry that there are folks who buy in to all that emotional bs. I am not someone who goes around name calling, but I have to say that anyone who blindly follows something they don’t understand is an idiot.

    I am a little female too and I have to say that it really throws people a curve ball when they see we are not afraid.

  11. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    By the way, a Wyoming managed “peer review” process would be run through one biostitute on the staff in Cheyenne who could never make it as a regional big game biologist. This individual is the author of all the “scientific” documents put out by the Wyoming G&F regarding wolves and elk. He even got an award from Wyoming’s Attorney General Pat Crank for all the “work” done on wolves. A little like Al Capone giving an award to the best stooge.

  12. avatar kt says:

    d. bailey hill: It sounds like you may be able to view the Boise hearing tonight on-line, and submit brief comments that could be read into the record by folks present in that forum. See BE’s note in this string.

    And regarding Kempthorne – He is just a smiling poster boy (time for yet another photo-op of Kempthorne in rolled up shirt sleeves sitting in a National Park visitor center figuring out how to best to privatize it, please?) fronting for the livestock, oil and gas and other industry evildoers busily operating and directing him behind the scenes.

  13. The Boise hearing tonight may be available live on-line here tonight. At a minimum there should be link to it.

    BE will be editing this blog the next while. I’m going to the Greater Yellowstone for a while.

Calendar

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: