Idaho considers wolf hunt rules. By Todd Dvokak. Associated Press writer.

Update May 7. Defenders: meetings not scheduled in pro-wolf areas on purpose. By Jason Kauffman. Idaho  Mountain Express Staff Writer

Tagged with:
 
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.

14 Responses to Idaho considers wolf hunt rules (news story on what you can talk about at the meetings)

  1. avatar sal says:

    Well the FIRST thing that everyone should be SCREAMING about is the fact that the announcement came out in the public sphere THE DAY AFTER THE MEETINGS STARTED!!!!!! The Pocatello meeting was obviously calculated to have wolf advocates come and speak up in rather high numbers so if they announce the event AFTER it’s happened then… guess you guys missed out.

    Common practice in a state where repugnican rules are what we get no matter what the truth is.

    AND, in Pocatello there has been a history of the media not noticing things until they’ve happened… you see the local news reporting, regularly, that some event took place today but nobody showed up, gee wonder why.

    In this case though, it appears to be a premeditated delay in public information flow. Thanks IDF&G, your true colors blaring through again.

  2. avatar Jon Way says:

    Once again non-hunters have no say in wildlife management. Not one area in Idaho will be designated a wolf/wildlife watching area where they are protected from getting shot.

  3. avatar sal says:

    The governing/controlling interests in Idaho like it like that, Mr. Way.

  4. avatar Brian Ertz says:

    this is an absurd illustration of the department’s underhanded or incompetent – take your pick – regard for the public trust. after speaking with the department about the fact that there will not be meetings in Boise and Blaine County, finding later that the Pocatello meeting was not adequately announced until after the meeting took place, and listening to their indignant response over the phone – one thing is obvious – The Idaho Department of Fish & Game is unable or unwilling to give due regard to a large community of people in Idaho who are demanding adequate measures of protection for wolves and diverse wildlife.

    This is not an oversight – public notice of these events has consistently abridged public participation. Notice of a mere 2 days, omission of entire communities of Idahoans whose interest is well known and pronounced, and of course the employment of the “open house” format – a format which obstructs the public’s ability to be heard among all in attendance – including decision-makers, opting instead for a format where the public is spoken down to and afforded a brief opportunity at the end of lecture to wander around a room in competition with others among a crowd for the attention of IDFG bureaucrats – many of whom are not involved in management of wolves and most of whom have no answers.

    Equal opportunities for voiceless, faceless emails and written letters are not enough. The Department must provide equal opportunity for public in every forum with which they solicit public input. Wildlife managers need to know the hope in our eyes and the resolve in our voices.

    Idaho law requires 48 hour notice before public events such as these. The Pocatello event appears to be in violation of that requirement – a violation that might be worth looking into if not for the brazen disregard IDFG has for all measure of equity and public input – they’re spreading wildlife advocates thin with opportunity for complaint – and it appears effectively so.

    Do not forget that a meeting of the Wolf Management Plan was only afforded Blaine county upon Blaine County Commissioners’ announcement that it would hold public hearings regarding management of wolves whether IDFG showed up or not. No other Idaho communities were afforded the reception of the ‘public hearing’ format.

    IDFG’s mismanagement of two of Idaho’s most salient wildlife species – wolves and bighorn sheep – both managed under the political shadow of the ag/Livestock lobby – give substantial credibility to the ominous suspicion that federal leverage is not enough. We must begin building association and appropriating resource at the state level.

    Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana have each been given ample opportunity to respond to substantial communities of informed citizens who are interested in the well-being of western wildlife. Each in their own way has failed to respond equitably or with regard for their obligation to honor the public trust.

    We will not be taken seriously unless we demand to be heard – the consequences of this fact will continue to be felt among western wildlife communities, wild places and future generations robbed the rich diversity of life we have shamelessly taken for granted.

    Please attend meetings in your respective regions and please be honest and assertive about your advocacy for wolves and diverse western wildlife.

    Wildlife Watchers
    Western Watersheds Project

  5. avatar JB says:

    “…opting instead for a format where the public is spoken down to and afforded a brief opportunity at the end of lecture to wander around a room in competition with others among a crowd…”

    I’ve heard this referred to as the MAD style of management:

    -Make a decision
    -Announce the decision in some public venue
    -Defend the decision

    Alternatively, I’ve also heard it referred to as the “invite–inform–ignore” style of management. Either seems to apply in this case.

  6. avatar Lynne Stone says:

    An anti-wolfer (“XgoodwolfX) posted two comments in response to the article in today’s Mt Express (May 7th) that Ralph mentions above. Here’s what “x” said (note reference to Ralph’s blog and myself):

    “Idaho wolf hunters……..Check out the Stanley area when the season opens……..Contact Lynne Stone for some great VIEWING areas!!!!”

    “I feel kinda sorry for the Ralph Maughan lemmings….where will they waste their money next….once the lawsuits are thrown out????
    Sportsmen please comment on the wolf plan……support the longest season possible…we have our work cut out….It’s not going to be easy to whack 328 wolves…hopefully by 2010 we will be able to hunt year round and drop tag prices to encourage more hunters to get out and turn some wolves into GOODwolves!!!!

    shoot straight”
    —————————–

    So, fellow “lemmings” have at it.

    Go to http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005120581

    to leave a comment.

  7. avatar Nathan says:

    Lynne,
    I said my two cents, thanks.
    Please do not let XGoodWolfx discourage you from providing information to those who seek your knowledge with good intentions.

  8. avatar Lynne Stone says:

    Nathan – I’ve got a thick skin from living among more than a few people like “X” for the past 27 years in Central Idaho. Comments from those like “X” aren’t pleasant but it seems to go with the territory when you speak up for the right of wolves to exist. So onward!

  9. avatar Layton says:

    Lynne,

    I know this is “off topic” for this thread — but, did you happen to notice my response to your “bet” that F&G wouldn’t lower the numbers for elk hunts in unit 36 on another thread?

    I thought the new numbers were kind of interesting.

  10. avatar Lynne Stone says:

    No, Layton, I didn’t notice. Have been a little busy. Save me some time – what thread.

  11. avatar GrizRich says:

    I would not blame Idaho Fish and Game for this. The strategy and planning that is going is in the State House on Capitol Avenue. In other words the Governors Office. In the past several years the wolf hearings that have held have resulted in the majority of Idaho folks going against the State of Idaho proposals to kill wolves. The Governors Office does not give the people of Idaho much credit and they can see through these bogus plans.

    The State of Idaho proposal is to kill off up to half of the wovles in Idaho, depending on hunter success. That number of wolves is greater than the number of wolves in Yellowstone National Park!!! And the reason is? They have no reason.

  12. avatar GrizRich says:

    The State of Idaho looks upon the wolves as a threat instead of looking at cost versus benefits of having wolves. What is the cost of having wolves? Well they sometimes prey on livestock but those owners are reimbursed for those loses although sometimes they are not. And what are the benefits? They keep the elk and deer herds healthy and benefit ecoystems by keeping them from being overgrazed by these ungulates.

    And the topic the State of Idaho does not like to talk about…..Chronic Wasting Disease. (CWD). CWD kills elk and deer. The epicenter for CWD is Colorado and Wyoming and it continues to expand its range in Wyoming. Colorado is spending big bucks to kill deer that have CWD. And what keeps CWD at bay? Wolves. Wolves. And WYomings plan is to kill lots of wolves and to feed elk during the winter which concentrates elk and furthers the spread of the CWD. They are making horrible decisions.

    We need every wolf we have to stop the spread of CWD at the Wyoming border. Hunting..sure allow hunting but design it to keep a robust populatoin of wolves..

  13. avatar GrizRich says:

    Does anyone know when and where the wolf hearings are being held in south Idaho? I thought I saw there was going to be a hearing in Nampa but for the life of me cannot fine when and where it is going to be.

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: