Hearing on Idaho’s “Wolf Control Board” at 1:30pm MST Today.
By Ken Cole On January 27, 2014 · 14 Comments · In Idaho, Idaho Wolves, Law, Wolves
The House Resources and Conservation Committee will hold a hearing on the introduction of legislation that will establish the “Wolf Control Board” proposed by Governor Otter in his State of the State Address. The hearing will be held in room EW40 of the State Capitol building in Boise. You can listen live to it here: Video from the House Resources and Conservation.
The presentation of the legislation will be be made by Senator Brackett and Representative Gibbs.
Ken Cole is a 5th generation Idahoan, an avid fly fisherman, wildlife enthusiast, and photographer. He is the interim Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. We do not accept unsolicited “guest” authors or advertising.
14 Responses to Hearing on Idaho’s “Wolf Control Board” at 1:30pm MST Today.
Subscribe to Blog via EmailJoin 972 other subscribers
- The Logging Juggernaut June 6, 2023
- New Bison Video From Yellowstone Voices June 5, 2023
- We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate. May 31, 2023
- Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges May 27, 2023
- Grizzlies Get A Win On Upper Green May 26, 2023
- Jeff on The Logging Juggernaut
- Charles Fox on The Logging Juggernaut
- Maximilian Werner on New Bison Video From Yellowstone Voices
- Steve Kohlmann on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Ida Lupine on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Kevin Bixby on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Lyn McCormick on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Jannett Heckert on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Rick Meis on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Ida Lupine on Save Our Sequoias Act–A Stealth Attack On NEPA, ESA and Our Sequoia Groves
- Mary on Save Our Sequoias Act–A Stealth Attack On NEPA, ESA and Our Sequoia Groves
- Rambling Dave on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Ida Lupine on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Mary on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Jeff Hoffman on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
It appears that the 1:30 meeting is on water fees rather than wolves.
They just finished up – talking about their wolf RS – I was looking at the list of names on the agenda and it seems to me there were 18 names. Only 17 voted – it was 9 yes to 8 no. Am I alone in this?
Anyone know where I can read 1. the State Wolf Control Plan and 2. The bill to create a Wolf Control Board.
The wolf control board bill will be published tomorrow. http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/plan02.pdf
That is the one in place now.
Ken, what were the reasons that those 8 people who voted against this proposal gave for opposing it? Did Idaho fish and game speak?
There seemed to be different reasons. Some didn’t think money should be spent to create a new board. Others didn’t think that the board was justified considering wolf populations are declining so quickly. One representative, a democrat, seemed totally uninformed about the issue. She asked why the bounty couldn’t be increased to $2000 to provide more incentive to kill wolves. Clearly she didn’t know that there was no public bounty.
Idaho Department of Fish and Game did not speak.
I didn’t see where creating a separate group to make decisions on managing wolves would be of any consequence. Possibly, since this was driven by Butch, it would generate a even more aggressive plan against the species.
Ken, I am now retired and would help in any way to promote fair treatment of wolves in Idaho.
Two stories about the hearing
BOISE, Idaho: Lawmakers: $2M aimed to kill more than 500 wolves | State wire | Idahostatesman.com.
Wolf-control bill barely introduced, on close 9-8 vote – Eye On Boise – Spokesman.com – Jan. 27, 2014.
The state of Idaho sucks, I know there have to be people in that state that are PRO- Wolf. Vote these idiots out, or am I not in the know about the percentage of folks that are anti-wolf. When I was in Boise a few years back, @ a meeting @ Fish & Game there were more pro then anti wolf. But they had their minds made up – the folks who spoke about the positive effects that wolves have on the environment were very well spoken, professional folks. but, the board knew exactly what they were going to do – they don’t give a shit about how many pro-wolf folks there are, they already know what they want to do … eradicate the the wolves. (sorry I went off on a little tangent there)
The recent open public meeting of the IDFG had 43 people speak on wolves. 30 were obviously pro and 13 were obviously anti. Two years ago this yearly meeting had 36 people speak on wolves. 32 were pro and 4 were anti. In these two years combined the anti group was made up of hunters and trappers plus one rancher. The pro group was made up of hunters, veterinarians, ex IDFG biologists, wildlife rehabilitators, members of the Shoshone Bannock tribe, wildlife biology professors, Defenders of Wildlife representative, Idaho Conservation league representative, members of Old Broads for Wilderness, Western Watershed representative, Vietnam veterans and just Idaho citizens such as myself.
In discussion before the actual meeting, there was agreement that the IDFG would ignore every pro-wolf point that was made.
We certainly have a majority of people who are disgusted with Idaho’s wolf management. We need experienced people to lead this group.
It is quite clear that opponents of delisting were right all along concerning what the state of Idaho would do once they had control. History now shows that those who pooh-poohed wolf advocates were wrong.
Mark Gamblin(IDFG) has been shown to be simply a liar. We all remember his posts about a “robust” population. He knew all along what was coming but tried to cover it up with bureaucratic BS. At least the politicians in Boise are honest about their devious intentions. Although I don’t mean that as a credit to them.
I agree with rick about public comment. I’ve seen the same thing here in Montana. The decision has already been made and the hearings are just “window dressing.”
At least in Idaho, I am certain that a large majority of citizens are in favor of wolves. If some person or organization (with appropriate knowledge) steps up to lead, we will change the fate of wolves.
Simply put, this is a phenomenal waste of the public’s money. It’s also an “expansion of government” brought to you from (arguably) the most conservative state in the nation. More evidence that the “government is the problem” rhetoric we here from conservatives is just that.
Guess it depends on who’s “government” it is!