Thursday, October 18, 2018
Breaking News
Home » Rockies » Idaho » Boise » Obama’s First Days Brings Change to West
It took just hours for the Obama administration to take action that could have sweeping effects on the western landscape. Shortly after Obama took office, his chief of staff issued a freeze on so-called “midnight rules” put in place by the outgoing Bush administration to give the new administration a chance to review them. Those last-minute Bush regulations include plans to remove the wolf from the endangered species list. The freeze, which puts on hold any regulation not already published in the Federal Register, has been welcomed by environmentalists, among others, who hope the Obama administration will roll back some of the controversial parting shots from the Bush administration. “What Obama has just done is a message of hope and change to the environmental community,” says Michael A. Francis, deputy vice president, public policy, for The Wilderness Society.

Obama’s First Days Brings Change to West

It took just hours for the Obama administration to take action that could have sweeping effects on the western landscape. Shortly after Obama took office, his chief of staff issued a freeze on so-called “midnight rules” put in place by the outgoing Bush administration to give the new administration a chance to review them. Those last-minute Bush regulations include plans to remove the wolf from the endangered species list.

The freeze, which puts on hold any regulation not already published in the Federal Register, has been welcomed by environmentalists, among others, who hope the Obama administration will roll back some of the controversial parting shots from the Bush administration.

“What Obama has just done is a message of hope and change to the environmental community,” says Michael A. Francis, deputy vice president, public policy, for The Wilderness Society, who says his organization is still trying to figure out what the freeze will mean.

Tuesday’s memo from Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel calls for a withdrawal of any regulation yet to be published, a ban on new regulations and a request that departments wait 60 days to implement any regulations that have been published and reopen public comment periods.

“It is important that President Obama’s appointees and designees have the opportunity to review and approve any new or pending regulations,” Emanuel wrote to federal departments and agencies.

Environmentalists are still trying to sort through the impact of Emanuel’s memo, and what it will mean to have Ken Salazar, the new Interior chief plucked from his seat as a senator from Colorado, examining rules governing the Endangered Species Act and Bureau of Land Management. Conservationists were divided over the choice of Salazar for the top Interior seat.

Wolf advocates are hopeful the measure will scuttle Bush administration plans to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list in states including Montana, Idaho and portions of Washington, Oregon and Utah.

“We’re glad that a fresh set of eyes will look at it,” says Michael Robinson, conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, which advocates for wolf reintroduction. “If they’re looking at it through the prism of the Endangered Species Act and scientific findings that have been made rather than politics I think they would have come to a very different conclusion.”

The Bush administration had tried twice before to delist the gray wolf but was blocked by lawsuits and court orders. In the latest move, the Interior Department ruled wolves had recovered enough in the northern Rockies to be taken off the list, although they were kept on in Wyoming, where no state management plan has been passed to protect them.

“We are not going to second guess what [the Obama administration] may or may not do going forward,” said Jon Hanian, spokesman for Idaho Gov. Butch Otter, who supported the delisting. “We look forward to working with our congressional delegation and the Obama administration to explain the importance of delisting and why this process should continue.”

Wolf advocates have argued that the fate of the wolf is still too tenuous, even in states where they have thrived, to be taken off the list.

“It doesn’t make sense, biologically or legally, to delist it piecemeal without a national wolf recovery plan that has standards for how many wolves in what distribution in a good portion of their range would be needed to ensure the wolf will survive in the long run and be viable,” says Robinson, who would like to see wolf recovery extended to other states, including Colorado and Utah.

It’s not unusual for an outgoing president to issue a flurry of eleventh-hour regulations, or for his successor to try to undo them. Among President Clinton’s final moves was a measure to protect roadless areas. Bush sought to slip in about two dozen rules, hoping to have them published before Obama could block them.

Many already went into effect. They include efforts to lease 2 million acres in the West for oil shale projects and a measure to rescind a ban on guns in national parks. Changes to the Endangered Species Act would have let public land managers approve projects without considering impacts to endangered species and would have barred global warming from being considered in species decisions. One measure would have stripped requirements for emergency protections on sensitive Interior lands threatened by development. Others exempted factory farms from air pollution reporting, allowed for the burning of hazardous waste and permitted mountaintop mining companies to dump the waste in rivers.

“We are still waiting to find out what all those impacts are going to be,” says Frank Smith, with Western Colorado Congress, a group that has opposed plans to speed oil shale development in the region. “I might venture a guess that even the incoming administration isn’t quite sure.”

The freeze on those regulations comes as Salazar takes the helm of Interior, a department fraught with scandals. Salazar was confirmed on Tuesday, pledging “openness in decision-making, high ethical standards and respect for scientific integrity,” and promising to “work for a more proactive and balanced stewardship to protect our national parks and open spaces.”

Environmentalists hope that even before the Obama administration forges any environmental policies of its own, it will at least halt some of the final measures pressed forward before Bush left office.

Correction: This story has been updated to show many regulations were already published and are not affected by Wednesday’s memo. We apologize for the errors.

About David Frey

Check Also

One Big Sky Center

Hammes Company Joins One Big Sky Center Venture in Billings

Billings, Montana is moving ahead with discussions on the One Big Sky Center proposal, which ...


  1. This part absolutely blows my mind.

    “Changes to the Endangered Species Act would have let public land managers approve projects without considering impacts to endangered species and would have barred global warming from being considered in species decisions. One measure would have stripped requirements for emergency protections on sensitive Interior lands threatened by development.”

    “Other proposed regulations would have exempted factory farms from air pollution reporting, allowed for the burning of hazardous waste and permitted mountaintop mining companies to dump the waste in rivers.”

    How can any human being look at this and think that it is a good thing?

  2. I have said several times since FWS filed the new rule last week, that they had no intention of it becoming law. This is surely no surprise to anyone. The government may have to give money outright to the enviro groups that need the taxpayer monetary award for “expenses” filing lawsuits.
    WE are in for a very bad time in the next few years, I’m afraid. Don, I wish I could be as certain that the country will survive.

  3. Don and Marion, you people are nuts. That land belongs to all of us, not just the energy and factory farming industries. Big Energy and Corporate Agriculture have wailed about the slightest curbs on their ability to pollute at will for decades and the country has survived just fine. This time will be no different.

    Cheer up…maybe someone will find a way to finance a new nuclear power plant and they can put the waste repository near your hometowns!

  4. I hope the black yuppie is precisely what your nightmares tell you he is. I have been dreaming of the kind of world you fear…

  5. Dave, Don and Marion: You all seem to forget about the national nightmare of the last 8 years, otherwise called the Bush Administration. Your boy Bush left office with what, a 25% approval rating and Uncle Dick was the most unpopular VP in US history? You think the Bush Administration’s policies had anything to do with that?

    Please explain to me how President Obama’s action to freeze Bush’s late executive orders is any different than 8 years ago when Bush froze Clinton’s late executive orders?

    Like Jason pointed out above, how any human being and proud American can bitch and moan that President Obama has put a freeze on Bush’s efforts to exempt factory farms from air pollution reporting or permit mining companies to dump waste in our rivers is just bizarre. Please explain to us how American’s would benefit from more mining waste in our rivers or more air pollution from factory farms?

    Do you people actually read aloud what you write down or do you just enjoy sounding like a bunch of fools?

  6. Ah Skinner/Marion and others,
    Freedom of: culture, economy and society, eh??
    A culture of: War, genocide, extinction, raoe, ect!!
    A Society and Economy of: theft, lies, greed, haves’ – have not’s, ect!!
    WHAT are you all going to do when the next election doesn’t go your way – again!! South of the Border looks good – if you have the $$$$ to join the Gov’t down there to do all these crimes to those people and land!
    STICK a SOCK in IT!!

  7. Hey Vill, I live in Wyoming where uranium already lies naturally on the ground! None of us including the deer and antelope glow. I have no problem at all with nuclear plants. I find it most interesting that libs not only do not want energy from nuclear, fossil fuel, coal fired electric, they want clean plentiful fuel, so far that means wind….unless of course the windmills interfer with their view of whatever, in that case not that either. Any suggestions?
    I am well aware of the popularity of President Bush and VP Cheney, it is even worse in Iran. And of course it is near zero among terrorists who would like to attack the US again.
    I have not and cannot comment on farms big or little (except sugar beets and beans and alfalfa) I live in ranch country where private familes are required to feed their livestock to wolves to entertain folks like you. Libs do not want food produced in the country if it doesn’t grow on air and magically appear in the store. Any suggestions? By the way when you say we can just import it, remember that it takes fuel to import.
    Be careful what you ask for…you might just get it.

  8. Marion – AGAIN; total nonesence ranting with NO viable, creative or logical suggestions. To YOU, everyone lese is WRONG – only YOU, or your ilk, are Right.
    WEll, right you are – Correct you are NOT!! Don’t bother with another foolish tirade/reply – as VILL aid; you shouldread your own post and try to see another pt. of viewe. Everyone of these posts helps to to think clearer – especially about YOU!!

  9. Marion, that’s terrific! You’ve just solved one of the major issues curbing the growth of nuclear energy: Where to store the spent fuel. Please write your elected representatives and encourage them to bring the spent nuclear fuel dump that’s been looking for a home for years to Wyoming; I’ll do whatever I can to help. Call Sen. McCain’s office, he has been pushing for a location in Nevada but I’m sure would jump at the chance to put it even further away from Arizona. Also, tell all your friends and neighbors and the people who rely on tourism in your state that you want it in Wyoming so they can jump on the bandwagon.

    Let’s do this…together we can make it happen!

  10. I wish Marion would have stuck to her 2 best themes. The first is that it is cold at her house and her trick knee is acting up, therefore global warming is a conspiracy (plus Al gore is fat!). The second is that Obama kinda looks like MLK Jr. and since she and her type don’t believe in MLK Day, Obama is not a good person.
    When she gets off those themes her posts get a little crazy.
    P.S. there might be a third topic she is good at, as she doesn’t sound the least bit crazy when she lectures us that liberals are scared of Sarah Palin and will rue the day that we made fun of Palin for lying every time she opens her mouth (thanks but no thanks!) and not knowing anything about the world (as someone once said, I can see the moon from my house, I guess that makes me an astronaut).

  11. The people that look at numbers of wolves on a piece of paper need to take into account that wolves have moved into where people live. There just isn’t enough habitat for more. Wolves are not just impacting hunters and ranchers. Wolves have killed dogs, horses, mules, even a guard donkey not far from our home. Visitors camping up here have had their animals attacked.

    While I’m glad to see wolves restored to the wilderness, I do not think they belong in residential neighborhoods. When you have a pack of wolves around your home howling all night (and you can’t run them off because they are not afraid of people) maybe you might change your mind about wanting more wolves.

    Its time to delist wolves, they have made an astounding comeback, genetic connectivity has been proved, and they need to be managed just like other large predators.

  12. The regulation regarding concealed firearms within national parks is NOT a last-minute “midnight rule” and should NOT have been included in this article.

    The final rule was published in the Federal Register (Vol. 73, No. 238, Pages 74966-74972) on Dec. 10, 2008, and went into effect thirty days later, on Jan. 9, 2009.

    Hopefully, the new administration will not try to rescind this ruling. The new Secratary of the Interior, Ken Salazar (D), was one of the fifty Senators who asked for a change to the then-current policy, and feels that this is a “sensible” improvement. (Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, Dec. 5, 2008)

  13. Obama is the center piece of ObamaNation. It is those 100 people closest to him that will make the decisions he has to approve or disapprove. Those can be set up, phrased, to leave him no other option than the one they want. Bush is not a bad guy. He had bad advice. Clinton had bad advice. The US bombing Belgrade when Orthodox Christian Serbs took up arms after the muslim assaults on their kind in Bosnia, was wrong. The mujahideen muslims from Bosnia, home from helping to run Russia out of Afghanistan, could not refrain from continuing jihad against the Orthodox Christian Serbs in Bosnia, and began to kill Serbs in the night.

    1,500,000 Serbs were executed by muslim mercenaries, Catholic zealots, and Nazi camp followers in WWII with no post war trials, only a getaway path to South America for the war criminals. Serbs suffered greatly, as they have as Christian Serbs since the conquest of Serbia by Sulemein in 1561, and forced sharia law and death to those who did not convert. We, the US through NATO, stopped the Serbian “genocide” by Gen. Clark’s bombing of their capitol. Now Serbia is aligned with Russia after having been twice screwed by the West. They have never been subject to justice for the cruelties of sharia law, for the executions of civilians during WWII. I find it cruel, and disingenuous, that the architects of that bombing of Serbia, Holbrook among them, Hillary Clinton as Sec of State, are once again making policy for the Balkans that supports radical Islam, and not the native Orthodox Christians of Serbia and Russia. Evidently 9/11 didn’t underline the danger of jihad, of muslim zealots, of US policy not quite protecting Americans as steadfastly as most would like. At least under Bush, no more attacks in our country were suffered. That happened on his watch, but was planned, the infiltration by agents of jihad, all happened under the last Democrat President, Clinton. Now we have once again the same players running the show. It is natural for more than some to be fearful. Jihadists at the door are just human wolves in the pasture of our way of life, and the results just as predictable. Ask any Serb. They have both.

  14. Rightwing bitterness appears near where it was as reconstruction began in the deep south after 1865. I suspect we will soon see revivals of organizations similar to the Knights of the White Camelia and the KU Klux Klan.

  15. After eight years of the worst hatred and bitterness I’ve seen since the liberals went after Newt and tried to destroy him,after all the hate and bitternes witnessed at the inauguration with the booing of every republican introduced and the hate and bitterness shown as the Bush family flew away in the chopper,
    with the willingness of most republicans to accept and work with the new president, I think you have it bawards Redman.
    I hope you don’t turn on President Obama as he moves to the right, which he’ll have to do to successfully govern.
    Extremism on either side won’t work.

  16. When the colonists were struggling to establish their homes and farms and push back the wilderness the wolf was a major threat.

    The wolf was described as “unscrupulous,” “despicable and bloodsucking, the wolf was hated in every settlement along the Eastern seaboard. He slaughtered sheep and cattle, killed valuable dogs and it has been said that he even attacked humans.

    The first wolf bounty laws were passed in every colony, payment equaled the budget for all other purposes. Payments of hogs, wine, tobacco, grain, rum, powder and lead were paid for killing a wolf. Maryland residents used wolf scalps as currency. 1632 Virginia issued a permit to kill a wild pig to anyone killing a wolf, as pigs were deemed protected by the colonist.

    1642 wolves became so bad in Rhode Island day hunters were hired. Massachusetts paid bounties by method used to kill the wolf, forty shillings to anyone employing hounds, ten shillings any other way.

    The colonist knew they could never farm in peace as long as the wolves were near. Diaries, notes, and reports of those times recorded in North Carolina in 1752 stated it was useless to try to raise cattle until the wolves and bears were wiped out, adding the wolves have killed many of our calves.

    As late as 1820, a businessman failed in his woolen-goods mill at Ding-mans Ferry Pennsylvania because his sheep were killed off by wolves.

    George Washington and Thomas Jefferson spoke and wrote with feeling of the wolf problem in Virginia in the closing years of the 18th century.

    The war against the wolf killing livestock traveled westward as the people settled the land and provided a home for their families. Even though wildlife present, wolves continue to seek out livestock, capture and eat them alive at great economic loss.

    Here in New Mexico:

    In 2009 the same problems exist between wolves and livestock that began in the colonial days. Nothing has changed and nothing will change in the future between wolves and livestock.

    For the last several years there has been a major problem with habituated wolves that seek out humans and human use areas. The killing of pets in front of children at homes and wolves confronting children has produced documented psychological trauma, “PTSD” post traumatic stress disorder. Still there is no action by AMOC or any of the Wolf Recovery Signatory Agencies to mitigate this problem.

    The Endangered Species Act was intended to help animal, but it has been used by pro-wolf organizations to destroy the lives of minority rural people.

    If Obama does not look at the adverse effects of wolves then there there is no hope of survival for the rural people…the plain truth, scientific facts are that wolves destroy wildlife, livestock, pets, and cause psychological damage to children…How about addressing these issues….

  17. I hear a lot of hate regarding this article, and while I am not suggestion a rousing rendition of Cum-by-ya. I think there is room for both sides to step into one another shoes and go for a walk.

    I think the Big Bad Wolf has been given that name for a reason. Also, I do not believe that President Obama has suffered the plight of a home steader. For the majority of Liberal America the struggle of survival for the Grey Wolf is something they associate with puppies or domesticated dogs.

    If the number of these predatory animals is causing hardship among the American people than the animals should be dealt with. They certainly do not belong in neighborhoods.

    I miss the days when you could take of yourself and your family. Today we are required to rely on Uncle Sam to look over our shoulder and over the shoulder of the scientist that they hire to determine if there is a problem with the number of wolves prowling the neighborhood. What a waste!

  18. I think the problem is people want sound bites and pretty pictures, not reality. It sounds so noble to claim the wolf has been mistreated and must have it’s home again…..well only in certain places. Certainly New England & the east coast are much to important to have to deal with wolves, but westerners have way too much land & should be penalized.
    There is as much common sense in planting wolves in ranch country and adamantly insisting that the wolves be protected above the ranch families and their animals as it would be to insist that every department store be forced to provide shelter for the homeless at night when the store was closed. It of course would be up to the store owner to provide enough security to keep damage to a minimum.
    No one should have to be under siege in their own home in this country just to entertain others who have no investment and no responsibility.

  19. Three Trees you are right on and you are well spoken. The human habituated wolves the FWS has loosed on the citizens here, continue to wreak havoc on many lives and livlihoods here in the Mexican Gray wolf release area.

    Give em hell Marion! You are right on contrary to the babbling of your haters.

    Tom Klumker

  20. Absolutely the comments of three threes is on the money. Anyone who wants wolves in historic habitat so they won’t deteriorate as a population should definently look into placing full packs into the east coast areas where historically they were present and scientific and historic documentation exists that they existed. Anything less is simply a violation of equal protection under the law. OK lets all have wolves. Pennsylvania needs about 2000 that is the smallest self sustaining wolf population according to the scientists paid by the Turner fund.
    Rhode Island about 500 would be right if they are allowed to move accross state lines and establish breeding with other genetic lineages. Throughout california and into Los Angeles as well. Don’t try to tell me it is no longer appropriate habitat the ESA says nothing about that.
    Obama needs to use his constitutional background to bless the entire country with wolves. Once others who apparently feed they are necessary to the ecosystem get enough I will be happy to tolorate mine in a more reasonable fassion.

  21. I think what really bugs me, is that people Jason included seem to read the spin on Bills or Exectuive Orders or other regulations but seem not to have read the actual documents. Spin put out by radical environmentalists in press releases rather than the actual bill or order. Heck they don’t even bother to read the science available or the analysis on it. But then, when you are sheep that is what you do. listen to people who tell you what to think rather than using the brain God gave you to learn on your own.
    Marion I believe your lack of suggestions that you note come from ignorance and the constant need to pretend to be intellectual rather than the actual ability to think. You will never see any real suggestions from these people they don’t want any and aren’t capable of thinking for themselves.

  22. Janice, you nailed it with your need for a wide distribution of wolves. Of course the fact is, wolves are not what enviros want protected, it is power and money. It is no accident that the big enironmental groups have millions in assets each. One can only imagine how much money would be brought into national coffers if they were taxed.
    The alternative energy is like all of their projects, a means to impose their will on others and haul in the money for it.

  23. Guys, I’m really afraid of Obama. I think he could really hurt this country. I’m worried that we could have the worst economic collapse since the great depression. I’m worried that we would lose our leadership ability around the world. I’m worried that health care will get worse, the rich will get richer, that college costs willl go up, that gas prices will reach $4 a gallon and that we won’t respond when one of our major cities floods. I’m worried Obama may hate public lands and implement dozens of actions against them like a “healthy forests” plan. I’m worried Obama will invade the wrong country and drain us of hundreds of bllions of dollars. I’m worried Obama will grow the size of the government to record levels and spy on it’s own citizens. I’m worried Obama will leave office in shame with the worst approval rating of all time, and with the most hated and unpopular vice president of all time.

    Wake up, people. The grown ups are back in charge.


  24. Mike:
    If you believe President Bush left office in shame, you’re delusional.
    If given a chance, Obama might be a good president, but far left morons like yourself are making hard for the rest of the nation to listen to what our new president has to say. Is it your intent to drag this country into the toilet, or are you just too stupid to realize that the country needs to work together if we expect to have a country in 4 years?
    What did you hope to accomplish with such childish post?

  25. Amen Tom, a lot of childishness in the far left causes more problems than necessary. I ignore most of what the media tells me even the far right media, becuase it is just the same drivel coming out of Mike besides I know exactly how media handle our issues they completely ignore this side of the story and do what marion says, look at pretty pictures and hope the grocery stores majically re-stock themselves. George Bush did some things not quite right and some things he did wrong and a whole lot he did just fine including stopping the murders of millions of American’s short.
    I am praying President Obama has good judgement but to say the grownups are back in charge is just silly fantasy.

  26. Ahhh yes, Mike, I’m sure the whole world was impressed by the “grownups” when they saw the photo seen around the world of one of Os top execs, Rahm Emannuel thumbing his nose at those he disagrees with. Perhaps in your world that is a symbol of grown ups. Somehow that is not my vision of the Chief of Staff of the most powerful man on earth. The class clown in a junior high class comes more readily to mind.
    The whole world must have been assured by that….not!

  27. I haven’t heard reported any “dirty tricks” from departing White House Staff. Bush, like a good steward, left the White House with respect for the incoming President. We cannot say that about Bill Clinton and his staff, including Rahm “Deficient Digit” Emanuel.

    When Clinton flew off with the booty at his term’s end, his crooked financial supporters pardoned, there was no booing from the inauguration crowd of Republican supporters. That the Dems have no class is understandable and known. Obama is trying to show some, and I hope that he steps on any in his administration who do not, including that one man tower of babble, his Veep Biden. Yackety Yack Biden. Leno showed him last night as the favorite old drunk uncle, with Obama trying to shut him up. Funny. True, uncut, and funny.

    I hope ObamaNation is off to a good start, the White House and Executive Office Bldg computers have all their keys, there are no toothpicks in locks, or whatever else childish remains that Bush’s staff had to endure as a result of Clinton staff clowns. If you don’t think that kind of stuff lingers, and colors relations, shifts responses, you are not in the real world. Having half the White House staff coming from the Clinton presidency is not universally received with grace and goodwill. Robert Reich spouting off about making sure the stimulus does not give jobs to the educated, or to white males in construction is a peek inside the upcoming legislation. Microsoft is laying off thousands, flooding the streets with Geek Nationals. HP is still shedding people. On the left coast, the construction blue collar jobs are gone, and now it is the techies who are getting sacked. That they appear to discriminated against in proposed stimulus legislation is good for the Right, for Conservatives. We might have a vigorous mid term election as an outcome.

  28. Obama seems to at least be trying for bipartisanship, but queen Nancy seems bound and determined not to let that happen.

  29. Marion,

    You and your “side” will get exactly what you deserve over the next 4-8 years. You supporters of republican policies affecting public lands, resources, wildlife etc. rubbed it in the faces of environmentalists for years when your side had absolute power. This arrogance created Obama and you will have to live with the consequences. Your whining, complaining and increasingly crazy theories and rants may be the best side effect of my vote for Obama.

  30. Are you nuts? nobody has approved of President Bush allowing wanton destruction of private property through predators. We are already “getting what we deserved under the Republican Administration why do you think none of us voted McCain and your guy is in.
    Exactly why is it that liberal greens seem to believe rural people deserve their idealism and contempt? Why is it that liberal greens seem to believe that only their rights matter?
    Becuase let me tell you, nothing much was good for us under the endangered species act under the Bush Interior Department.
    Can it get worse, I guess if it does some of you might someday be happy..

  31. Wow, Steve, “my side” stopped timbering and turned the forest into beetle nurseries and fire traps? We introduced wolves to kill off the beef supply? We shut down wheat fields to protect mice? We have prevented coal fired electric plants from being built, or prevented oil refineries from being built or protested and prevented wind farms from being built? Boy, no wonder you are so angry.
    Once you cool down, you might want to check the facts. Perhaps 24 hours with no coal fired produced electricity, no fossil fuels in your vehicle or home, no American farm or ranch grown food to eat and you might be surprised how your attitude would change.

  32. Marion,

    Why do you have to make every argument to the extreme one way or another? Nobody is talking about eliminating fossil fuels overnight. As for the wolf issue, your tired whining means nothing to me now as none of your doomsday predictions ever come close to coming true. Have you considered a career in standup comedy?

  33. Actually Steve, what you were saying was how awful we conservative are, we haver ruined the whole earth. I simply disputed that.

  34. Marion isn’t the only person suffering under Bush Administration ESA regulatory practices and environmental legal action. Our “side never had absolute power or we wouldn’t have suffered so much under Bush policies in place to placte so called environmentalists who certainly didn’t suffer any under a Bush administration environmental policies. They merely said they did but can’t really show it. So Marion’s tired whining is something you will likely hear more of in the future. Steve, What you actually said is vindictive and sorely lacking in the Obama mandate for balanced rhetoric and understanding of their fellow American’s.

    “You and your “side” will get exactly what you deserve over the next 4-8 years. You supporters of republican policies affecting public lands, resources, wildlife etc. rubbed it in the faces of environmentalists for years when your side had absolute power. ”

    What was rubbed in my face for the past 8 years was wolf kills on our livestock, removal of my neighbors for environmentalists extremists whims, and destruction of my childrens well being and future. What did you suffer other some potential harm to your idea through having to fight a modified ESA and I might add winning?

  35. wow 3 trees nuf said.

  36. The proof is in the pudding people’s unalienable rights are violated on a daily baisis and those who support it blithely accuse those who expose it of seeing black helicopters. wow.

  37. Self Education,

    is the only path to truth. Do not let yourself be lead like sheep, look up all the facts yourself then make a decision.

    Anyone talking to me in the past about the United Nations I viewed as a wacko. Then I spent months researching all aspects of the UN and directives that effect every aspect of human life.
    I then compared those directives to environmental organizations and found them to be the same.

    When I finished reading hundreds of copied pages, the realization light went on, I sat there numb in disbelief. I thought how could my fellow Americans support directives from foreign countries??

    Do they think they would be better off with a one world government? Do they think they will be part of it with authority over those opposed?

    At 61 years I have seen many changes coming so fast before my eyes. In the past you had to go to a history book to read about change.

    Clinton did sign onto Sustainable Development, communities could not get a government grant unless they bought into those guidelines. Do any of you remember when your city, town, village, community had a new “Vision” for the future, “sustainable development” (often the name is changed, and they do not use the term sustainable development). It happened in our village, and I provided information but it was rejected and now we have our streets paved, but only one stop light in the whole county. Sustainable Development is alive and well.

    Events in the rest of the world are relatively small when your life and the welfare of your own family are in jeopardy.

  38. I think 3 Trees has his roots in Timothy Leary’s work shop sink.

  39. Sorry Mike,

    I was never a hippie in the 60’s, though I saw some. It was Johnny cash, George Jones, country for me….I was always in the woods hunting, fishing and running hounds.

    No time for dope, long hair and protesting for me. Then 3 years in the Marine Corps, 1966 to 1969 after high school.

    Been married to my only wife for 40 years. My values are probably a lot different than yours.

    Diversity is what makes up America, I won’t try to pass laws to make you believe and live the way I do, will you do the same for me????

  40. Janice,

    You mean rights like the private property rights of people living west of yellowstone who have to endure the livestock gestapo hazing bison on their private land at the behest of cattle ranchers? Those rights?

  41. Uhh, Steve, I think you have things backward, those folks want the buffalo and object to trying to keep them in Yellowstone. The idea of spreading infected buffs far and wide is to infect a cattle herd and get rid of cattle that way. It only takes one animal in a herd of cattle to get it destroyed, so they dont’ even have to work for mass infections. Since about half of the buffs are infected……

  42. If it is possible to repeal 28 years of anti-nature in four or eight years, January 21st was a good day to have begun it…

  43. I am here but no I don’t check this website every 5 minutes to see if I can insult someone on it. Hatemongering is why we are in this boat.
    When government is so powerful that it can use an animal species to enforce environmental organizations anti human agenda’s, that is a violation of every man’s unalienable rights, sadly most don’t notice because they haven’t been impacted, yet. But some, especially those who actually have been impacted by having livestock killed children harrassed or media savage their family’s at the behest of certain pro-activist rags do notice.
    Several of my neighbors have been forced out of business by unmitigated wolf kills while government and greens just thumb their noses. By the way the Bush administration did nothing to stop this. When government can allow wolves to destroy peace and security in a small rural community by allowing wolves to follow children around that is a violation of unalienable rights. When government aided and abbetted by environmental extremists refuse to remove a wolf pack that is crapping on someones porch where a 3 year old plays that is a violation of unalienable rights. Just becuase rural communities are often poor and often do not have access to the legal system or to the media doesn’t justify unbridled bullying of those people. When children are having nightmares due to wolves coming into their yards and killing their dogs that is a violation of their unalienable rights. When government does nothing time after time and refuses to follow their own rules and regulations and force people to swallow their jack booted thuggery or go to court to stop them or worse risk going to jail that is clealy a voilation of unalienable rights. These were the battles this country grew out of and perhaps it is time people recognized that. You quasi intellectuals who feel everything so deeply should wake up.

  44. Tme thing about enviros, nothing they do affects the environment negatively. Many of them fly around in private jets, and so many of them flew in to celebrate the new dawn of environmental control of people with the new administration. I guess they figure that the commoners can shut their heat down awhile to make up for it. The inauguration was touted as being the “greenist” ever, instead it was the brownest.
    This double standard is what drives me crazy. We must have wolves, not where they were first eliminated from, but in the areas where the enviros want to eliminate ranching.

  45. Unfortunately, for them though, Barack Obama has no real environmental record so this unbridled celebrating may be for naught. They may have actually done better under GW.

  46. Reality is living with the situation, not talking or writing about it. Reality is accomplishing something yourself, not forcing others to do it so you can take credit.

  47. Oh my gosh Jeff is able to run down the FWS Mexican wolf website good for him it is a sure bet he won’tget much reality from that spin or from that incredibly big fibber, Michael Robinson from the anti ranching source. All investigators use both sides then work to learn for themselves which is correct. Darn too bad Jeff isn’t able to do that.

  48. Jeff, like those folks who call me a liar, you fail to provide anything to substantiate your claim. You throw it out based on your own feeling of self importance and go on your way.
    If the wolf kills brought to us by those seeking to impose their will are so irrelevant in the overall picture of the United States, why do we worry about hurricane victims etc? Certainly they represent a very small portion of the entire country too.
    The wolf introduction has taken substantial amounts of money out of the pockets of individuals, and it is delibertly inflicted. Just what good does that do for the people in this country? It has cost 10s of millions of taxpayer dollars to be able to cost these folks their money and untold grief when dogs and horses and other pets are among those torn limb from limb dying horrible deaths. I cannot understand those that revel in the power to do that to other people.

  49. Hey, I thought I could post on Ralph’s site if I used a different name, knowing he can’t stand me, obviously he recognized my writing syle and banned me. I’ve never tried to hide the fact he banned me, actually I consider it a badge of honor. I really enjoy pointing out that all of the wolves we actually have a record of in Yellowstone (which was supposedly the wolves we were “restoring” after extirpation) is the 136 that were killed over a 42 year period, 56 of which were adults and the other 80 pups. Since they were getting a bounty on wolves how many coyote pups do you imagine were palmed off as wolf pups?
    It does concern me that he is a taxpayer paid teacher and as intolerant as he is to opposing views, I can’t imagine it would be easy for a thinking student who disagrees with him in his class. But I would imagine he is tenured.

  50. I agree. You two have taken up half of this page attacking Marion and said not one word about the subject.
    I thought they hadrules about trolling.

  51. Refutation is unnecessary. The guy–3 trees–is clearly a believer in the supremacy of homo sapiens.
    People who continue to believe that GOD made man steward over the earth’s species is not aware of the awful failure of man’s big brain…

  52. it is pretty easy to use statistics to pursue an idiotic agenda guys. Love it that we live here and see the destruction of both livestock and families and you all read a few anti ranching websites and seem to feel you have more information than anyone else. Let me remind you figures lie and liars figure. It is in the best interest of all agency personnel to fudge the numbers and in the best interest of wolf advocates to spin everything to meet their thinnly veiled agenda. I actually heard Michael Robonson on the radio yesterday claiming all he wanted was wildlife where it was historically doing what it did in nature. What a crock if that is the case why has he used his position to denigrate ranchers have investigations launched against innocent people and file one lawsuit after another against ranching. That is even if he believes the fossil and historic record shows wolves were in the SW which it barely shows anything at all.

    I have to take a trip to an environmentally sound conference that does something to preserve watershed so I am out for now.
    Agree Tom trolls all no middle ground just hatemongering as usual.
    I too can’t get a word up on Ralphs website it is only for like minded wolf lovers.

  53. Redman,

    I do believe in God….You don’t???

    Thanks for pointing out that “Big Brain Failure” of man. That big brain failure is scientist, biologist, that put forth facts that are self serving depending on their agenda. One thing that is apparent is the lack of “Common Sense”.

    One fact is prevalent, a biologist can saddle an endangered species and ride it to retirement!

    The rural people who live on the land know the forests, the wildlife, the range and the state of condition there in. They did not learn this from a college book or reading environmental propaganda, they know it by living everyday of their lives on the land.

    And you think you know what is best, based on what?????

  54. Redman,

    Here is some good information not know by the general public.

    Recommended Citation: Paquet, P. C., Vucetich, J., Phillips, M. L., and L. Vucetich. 2001. Mexican wolf recovery: THREE YEAR


    Wolf-human interactions have been reported consistently and regularly since the beginning of the program. Approximately 25% (1/4 of the wolves are habituated, how can this be acceptable?) of the individuals in the free-ranging population have been
    involved with wolf-human interactions. As the wolf population grows, the Program should be prepared for steadily increasing frequencies of wolf-human interactions (what protections have they put in place”none”)

    Over time, the frequency of wolf-human interactions (per wolf) may decline with wild-born wolves that are less tolerant of
    humans. Because wolves can pass information between generations, the attraction to humans may take some time to extinguish.

    The Program has responded well to wolf-human interactions, although documentation and data recording have been poor (Unacceptable). For example, in the databases USFWS provided us no response dates or times were recorded for 7 events (actually there were numerous wolf/human events on the blue where no FWS reports were written). It is critical that the Interagency Field Team keep comprehensive notes on wolf-human interactions(why notes instead or accurate reports?). The Program should continue its practice of responding to all wolf-human interactions with immediate on site inspections and investigations.

    The Interagency Field Team appears to have made responsible decisions regarding the recapture of wolves involved in human interactions. (not so, habituated wolves dangers ignored)

    Question I have are:

    Has habituated wolves declined from 2001 to 2009? NO!

    Has habituated wolves caused documented psychological trauma to children? YES!

    Have any protective measure to this adte been enacted to mitigate this problem? NO.

    The rest of the story… bet

  55. The biggest problem to understanding the situation is one side has all of the power, and absolutely none of the cost or responsibility, the other carries the entire burden of these big ideas. I imagine most enviros have never really accomplished, invested, or built anything themselves and the environmental movement makes them feel they are really doing something without having to put anything into it or make any sacrifices themselves. They send off their $25. for a “free bag” and save the earth or a species. They do no realize their money does nothing whatsoever for the object of the fundraising, it goes to lawyers to sue for more control over other people forcing them to do the saving and paying. The money they get goes to courts who award them even more money as “expenses”.
    The funny thing is corporations as huge as some environmental groups are hated by enviros because the actually produce something besides pain and heartache for others. These environmental groups produce nothing and contribute nothing except to their own property and power structure. They are “nonprofits” with 10s of millions in assets each.
    The ability to raise money with virtually no oversight is one of the reasons there is a group for each species, that way they do not have to check the effect of their species on another species that another group wants to save. How many articles have you seen about the devastation of the Yellowstone elk? Elk calves are a rarity now days, the rut is a pathetic shadow of it’s former glory. It is so pathetic that when a visitor to Mammoth asked one of the rangers what happened, he informed her that the bulls stay in the mountains for the rut and that is why it was mostly a few cows left. The does explain the lack of calves also I guess. What will the loss of elk mean to the bears ultimately? They are forced to go outside to find meat, the question is brushed off and not dealt with because “bears are omnivores”. Besides when they get into trouble on ranches, the ranchers can be blamed, not the enviros that put them into that situation. In Wyoming the griz are earning frequent flyer miles at an astonishing rate as F&G;moves them from one area to another and back again as they get into trouble.

  56. Insofar as I can tell, the question comes down to this:
    Shall our society be pro-violence?–or and anti-violence?
    Nature is inherently violent; but our big brains has thrown out any notion of balance.
    Homo Sapiens will kill everything which is inconvenient. No other species will do that.

  57. A grizzly will kill a cub that isn’t his, so will a lion. Chimps will form gangs like inner-city thugs and wait for a stranger to come into their territory and attack and kill it. Dogs will form packs and roam the neighborhood looking for something to attack and kill. So will wolves. Man is not a stain on this planet, and I for one am not going to commit suicide so a feild mouse can have it’s natural habitat without having to share it with me. This liberal notion that man is the only animal that kills is rediculous. An entire class of so called civilized people who would so oppose killing a wild animal in self defense, yet adamantly support the killing of a new born child who survived a bothched abortioin attempt is a sad testimony of todays liberalism.

  58. A better question Jeff, would be what you yourself are willing to give up for wildlife to have a home. You do realize that your home, job, etc also displace wildlife don’t you? Set by example, not litigation and demands.

  59. Tom sounds as stupid as most rightwingcrazies. Certainly he needs at least remedial training in reading…

  60. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers!

    Wow! I’m late to this party, but it sure looks like FUN! Hey, 3trees, if you REALLY want a fella to insult you to your face, you should PROBABLY use your real name instead of a handle! Otherwise, poor Jeff is gonna have to cover LOTS of ground in the “remote rural areas”, holding a sign like people do at the airport when they’re looking for someone! You know, maybe a sign that says, 3trees, you’re a moron! THEN, you’ll get some satisfaction, and you can whup some of your “customs of life that you’re willing to die for” on poor Jeff’s azzzz! BTW, you’re NOT from round theze parts, are you, 3? You see, no one out here in Montana talks that way. And just WHAT are them “values” that are SO special to you pioneers out there in the “remote rural areas”? I’d really like to know. Got lectricity out there yet? Indoor plumbing? TV sets? Oh hell, I just KNOW you’d like the Beverly Hillbillies! THEM folks have values too! You’re too funny, 3.

  61. Larry,

    If you don’t know about values and customs of life I cannot explain it to you.

    I suspect you are a “New Age Believer”. Therefore, there is no use trying to explain it to you, its either part of your life or not.

    No, I have not been to Montana even though I know it is a beautiful place, but I have trapped in Wyoming.

    Environmental Rangers, wow, have you gotten full control of Montana yet? Have you ran all the rural people off the land for the “Wildlands Project”? If you left any family ranchers in business you are slipping. More wolves should do the trick.

    I guess this site is only for you and two or three more of your elitist buddies….To you everyone else is a Moron……Right

  62. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers!

    3trees, SURE! You see, I think I saw your movie! Borat! I now know EVERYTHING about your “customs of life that you’re willing to die for”! But I gotta tell ya, the scene where you were rolling around with that naked fat dude was too much! I do like the concept of the marriage sack though. BTW, that PTSD for kids that you’re talking about made me laff! Gotta tell you a story. I was up in Heart Butte a while back for a sporting event, and the parents there were told to pick up their kids from school for next couple’a days. Why? Well, seems that there was a GRIZZLY BEAR hanging around the playground! No big deal to them folks, simply don’t walk home alone for a day or two. A very common occurence there. And guess what. I didn’t hear ONE remark about PTSD for kids! I think that Montanans are just a wee bit tougher than wherever it is that you’re from. But still, keep makin’ them movies! I luv’em!

  63. Threats of–and a willingness to live with, and romanticize– violence seems a major theme in this discussion between right wing crazies of the christian and libertarian varieties.
    Such a high level debate this has turned into..!

  64. Larry,

    Wolves as with your bears…. Its not the fact that they are hanging round for a few days that cause psychological trauma.

    If a grizz was sitting by your front door eating one of your pets and your small children could not get back into the house would this cause a psychological problem to those children??

    It is the fact that wolves kill pets while children are present as close as eight feet. Children witness at close range the screams, the guts flying and the death of a member of their family. The same would apply to your family. PTSD has been documented by a Child Psychologist and a Psychiatrist from wolf interactions. Does these interactions occur in the federal forest..seldom, it occurs on private property at the front door of homes.

    Larry, if you think the ongoing psychological problem is laughable then you would champion the wolf at any cost, even children.

    Habituated wolves seek out humans and human use areas. They lack wild wolf characteristics. Habituated wolves did Kill and consume Kenton Carnegie at Points North Landing Nov. 2005

  65. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers!

    There you go, 3. Lay off the threats and stick to the facts. It’s more effective. Now, about the fella that got ate, I have never heard of that. If an animal threatens my grandkids or animals, I shoot it. Wolf or whatever. ‘Bout fifteen years ago, we had a mountain lion in my neighbor’s tree. If I had seen it, it would’a been DOA. FWP nailed it a couple’a weeks later on the other side of the river. I purposely choose to live with wildlife. I like seeing them, as do most Montanans. The chances of getting eaten are quite slim. So, I just never worry about it and take the necessary precautions. It’s simply part of life here. Your wolf comments may have merit, and then again, they may not. Time will tell. One more story. A Californicator moved to Lincoln, Mt. Well sir, one day a big griz walks through his property. He’s furious! He calls up FWP and reams them a new one cause he feels that they’re not doing their job by keeping him safe from bears! Everybody had a damn good laugh at THAT dumbass’s expense. We just sorta live with’em. If you have a close encounter, as we all do, they make for good story telling. I did run into a wolf one time on the Bearttooth Plateau. He scared the crap outta me. I was running down the trail, and I heard a big rush coming out of the brush. I immediately thought griz. I stopped, and the wolf stopped, in the middle of the road. We kind of eyed each other curiously for a minute or so, then he ambled off. It was kinda neat. The wolf wasn’t scared, and after a bit, neither was I. We were just a couple’a animals crossing paths. I value those experiences, and teach my grandkids to love the nature around us too! Now, if we could do sumthin’ bout them damn rattlers that I see daily!

  66. One wonders if you could extrapolate PTSD in children from several centuries of Russian literature regarding wolves. Fairy tales, children’s songs, old wives tales, myths and old songs. Little Red Riding Hood, the Big Bad Wolf, etc.

    That Disney did Peter and the Wolf was not by happenstance. It was a distinct piece of Russian literature and culture. Like coyote in Native American past history, tales, discussions of their being, I believe the wolf was that to Europe. A nasty reputation, well earned, in the Northern European culture. People and wolves have a history in Europe, in the Steppes, in Western Asia. Those beliefs and histories travel with cultures as the people inhabit new worlds.

    As far the wolf goes, he is a wolf. Not a dog, and not a pet. And not a benign presence in land shared with humans. That the wolf runs free, and has a distinct family life, courage, steadfastness, are all anthropomorphized to a high degree by humans looking for what is lacking in their lives. An admired animal with characteristics and habits parallel to that of the Mexican drug cartels. You have to wonder. But even in historical Russia, the peasants did not hate the wolf, but only that the wolf ate their mare, their milch cow. The loss of the horse that could give you another in time, that plowed your field, that kept starvation from the door, the cow that gave you milk, butter and cheese, those were life threatening losses. The wolf did not care then, nor does it now. People who must live in close proximity to wolves share a common fear, threat, and have for centuries. That most humans now live in urban areas, have only to fear the urban human wolves running in packs, their pit bull enforcers close by, don’t have people from Wyoming regulating their lives and obfuscating their attempts at maintaining the common good of the neighborhood. What a shame.

    I have always said, as some doctor serves as the chair of the committee that regulates logging, how it should be that a logger sit on the tissue committee as the public member, and evaluate and punish medical treatments and transgressions against patients. Or a rancher sit on the ethics committee of the state bar association to judge and punish lawyers. But the world does not work that way and is therefore inherently unfair. It is unfair for wolves to be foisted on graziers, and it is unfair that forests are burned rather than logged. It is especially unfair, if only the voting public knew, was informed, that wildland fire in the West puts out more greenhouse gases than autos on an annual basis, and is scheduled by benign neglect of land management, to put out even more. Having to purchase inefficient autos for great expense to mitigate and reduce greenhouse gases while forest fires roar to the applause of the green lobby is insane, but insanity does prevail if that is the choice of the urban majority.

    The sad part of this thread, this commentary, is the personal attacks, the personal judgements, the personal nature of the defenders of all things “environmental”, “green”, and “liberal.” I find it quite disingenuous that liberal thought is a free pass to humiliate, demean, insult individuals with opposing views. If that is the nature of the beast, and it appears to be an arising beast, then civility being lost reduces the value of our society of freemen, and we are on the path to bowing to gods of the NGO propaganda, the non-profit science of the moment, and anyone whose ass is not in the air, head on the magic carpet, is to be killed, and paradise on earth will be for those who survive.

    Push people too far, and reason leaves, and vindication is all that is left. I hope that is not the path the radical left is proposing. One of the enduring qualities that President Obama has shown to this point, is his natural ease and readiness to listen to all sides of the objective, and his earnestness in addressing dissenters to gain consensus in pointing the US on a path to righting the country and putting it on a course of honor and success. This incessant name calling on his behalf by those of you who feel you have superior intellect, grander financial sense, a better love of the land, is childish playground bullshit that the “new” schools and decades of litigation by lawyers encourage by not allowing kids to sort out anti-social behaviors on the playground as was the case years ago. A smart ass mouth might end up being surrounded by swollen lips. Absent that, now kids shoot each other with guns. That did not happen when every kid had a gun, a pocket knife, even if they only had one pair of shoes.

    Argue the issues, not the people proposing them. Not all people are geniuses, nor are they all social cripples. If we don’t listen to all, we have no idea of the range of thought any one idea can have. My life experience is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Or a wolf.

  67. Dear bearbait,

    Very well said, as usual! It is very hard for me to keep from commenting back to those individuals who try and belittle those of us who do not agree with their viewpoints.

    3 Trees is a super human being in my book and I don’t care what anybody else thinks. I know him personally and I think he is truly a rare and beautiful gem amongst the rural citizens of the West! Period…

    We are talking about human habituated wolves and not truly wild wolves here. There is a huge difference. I even like the wild wolves, if managed. The “Spanish speaking” (Mexican Gray Wolf) we have here are 95% human habituated and have no fear of man. When a wild animal loses fear of man and their accompanying scent, they present a highly probable negative risk factor to humans, as I can personally attest to on an experience that happened in my hunting camp in the Gila Wilderness in 2007.

    Many of my friends and their children have not only been terrorized by these abominations of human habituated wolves, but traumatized, and this is very well documented by professionals, contrary to the pro-wolfers ideological manifestations and denials. The Mexican Gray Wolf program is 10 years old and millions and millions of dollars of the US taxpayer’s money, into a failing social cleansing program of government sponsored terrorism being foisted on the good citizens of eastern Arizona and western New Mexico.

    We do not expect any kind of relief in the near future and especially with the Obamanites in control. Enter folks like Ms. Browner into the frey, which she had been a part of the Clinton administration, and it makes conservatives collective heads spin in wonderment what the nation will look like in four to eight years.

  68. Probably a lot better than it ever did under Bush.

    What a bunch of whiny little posts by a bunch of right wing children, here. Marion, whose only answer to anything must be analogous to her own life, bearbait that makes assumptions about every other “agenda” out there but has little to no introspection, Tom K that thinks ranchers are the best thing to happen to wildlife and janice that seems to be a cheerleader without a winning team.

    What a thread.

  69. I disagree; I think Bearbait is one of the few moderate, original thinkers out there. The others, yes, for the most part they’re right-wingers simply regurgitating tired old conservative ideals. But there are a lot of whiny left-wingers spouting their hackneyed liberal agenda as well.

    Here are a couple questions for the wolf-haters… and these are simply questions, not an attack:

    In any democracy, the will of the people at large takes priority over the will of the individual. And if the people — right or wrong, informed or ignorant — want wolves, then isn’t it the duty of the individual to cooperate?

    Seems to me, the world has changed and there are new cultural realities. One of those new realities seems to be a widespread respect for the life of a wolf.

    Every industry has costs of doing business. In my own business, I deal with tremendous obstacles that seem to serve no purpose and to originate in ignorance. Yet instead of getting angry at that ignorance and its resultant obstacles, I think of ways to accommodate it all and succeed anyway. If I can’t continue to do that, well, I’ll change my business.

    Ranchers: If the cost of wolves is too great for you to accommodate, why not change your business?

  70. Bearbait,

    I just got home from our big city of 300.

    I agree with your comments 100%.

    You also seem to understand “Push people too far, and reason leaves, and vindication is all that is left”.

    I wish to retract the hateful words I wrote and apologize to all.

    You all have a nice day!! Later

  71. Hedgehog, are you also in favor of the right of the majority to move into your home if more of them want to than you and your family don’t want them to? If the majority want to increase your taxes to 50% of your income to support their favorite religion is that ok? Environmentalism is a religion.
    Beleive me when you allow tyrany by the majority because it is the majority, it is the end of this country as we know it. To say that folks should give up their homes because you have a different use for it than they do, is tyrany of the worst sort, definitely the C word.

  72. Marion,

    that was perhaps the most ignorant thing you’ve ever written. Good job, I didn’t think you could top some of the other things, but there you go.

    A better way to have answered Hedgehog is that we have laws, regulations and the Constitution to protect the minorities from the majority. Majority rights only extend so far.

    However, hedgehog is very correct in his statement that if you can’t hack it with the wolves, then change. With populations growing so large that public land is a valued and rare asset, why do you think ranchers should get first dibs over nature?

    And the provocative language that “environmentalism is a religion” is another example of the overwhelming ignorance, here. Most environmentalism, at its base level, is based in science and fact. Global climate change/Global warming – fact supported by massive amounts of data and theory. The basis of endangered species acts are based in science. The knowledge that mankind’s unnecessary actions are destroying species, species that we may rely on for our own health, is well understood. If you can’t see past your own wallet to a future where the wild is still wild, then you’re hopeless.

    Biologists and other scientists are interested in a biodiversity that keeps all of the world in tune, in balance. Extinctions cause further extinctions. If we can change, why not do it sooner, rather than later?

    Oh wait, I know why. It’s because Marion might throw even more of a fit because her family is slightly put out by something a liberal did.

  73. There is no more credible evidence of wolves killing and eating a human being than there is that Jesus Christ once lived–in the Holy Land–or Meso-America.
    Third-hand statements are simply not acceptable to a thinking person…

  74. Hedgehog,

    it has inconvenienced Marion, so therefore they must all die.

    Oh, and don’t forget, the right-wing thrives and lives on fear. Wolves => Fear. Muslims => Fear. Therefore Wolves ~= Muslims?

    They know where the WMDs (wolves of mass distraction) are, they’re somewhere north, south, east or west of Yellowstone.

  75. This doesn’t have as much to do with wolves as with the government violating state’s sovereignty, real or imagined. When the Clinton Crime Family forced the wolves down our throats, they told the states, mind your own bussines. We’ll manage the wolves and you and your residents have no say in the matter. This condition still stands.This may work for Hugo Chavez, but do you reallly expect American citizens to lay down and accept that kind of tyrany? What’s the differnce between this the the range wars? The environmentalist thugs are hiring crooked polticians instead of hired killers. Same results. Forcing people into submission.

  76. B-b-b-b-b-b-b-but Clinton!

    Of course you’re for the state in this one, Tom. They have the same plan you do, kill ’em and be damned with the environmentalists and ecologists.

    But I’m sure if the state had a well developed plan that included moving ranchers off of public lands, you’d then just switch to attacking the state for that, as well.

  77. Although I hate the entire drug culture, I supported Califonia’s right to enact their own laws legalizing pot. I thought it was wrong for other states to influence the vote on prop 8. I don’t live in California, so it’s none of my business. If I don’t like what’s going on there, I’ll stay out.
    I may comment on Montana issues, but I don’t get involved in trying to influence ligislation. I live in Idaho, not Montana. It’s not my business to vote in another state’s affairs. My opinion on Idaho issues is valid. On other state’s issues, it’s just an opinion. Does not and should not have any validity. As I said, this has little to do with killing wolves and a lot to do with citizen’s rights to run their own states. I don’t think wolves should be exterminated, just managed by the states. If Idaho wants to protect or exterminate wolves I should be given a voice in that actioin. What ever Wyoming and Montana want is up to them. I may express my opinion, but why should it affect their legislation?

  78. So your priorities appear to be:

    Christian First
    Republican Second
    Idahoan Third
    American Fourth
    Human Fifth

    Do I have that about right? You’re willing to allow the extermination of a species because of where that species is located? Or you just don’t care?

    Do you have any understanding of the roll of predators and carrion eaters in nature? Do you subscribe to the idea that man has dominion over nature, so rape and plunder at will?

    Do you want all of the bears, coyotes, eagles and other predators killed off at the same rate as wolves?

    Do you think you can go out and train all of the animals about state lines? I think that also might be a very helpful thing to do, because they don’t seem to get it right now.

  79. Jay: Did you even read my post?
    “I don’t think wolves should be exterminated, just managed by the states. If Idaho wants to protect or exterminate wolves I should be given a voice in that actioin.” Where does that say I want wolves exterminated?
    Do you want to discuss the topic inteligently or just troll around until you find an argument?

  80. Maybe the wolf fear deal is ingrained. Why are people, including me, reticent to befriend snakes? I know snakes are important, that they have a place, but damn, I don’t like to touch them, hold them, be near them. I was looking out for snakes one hot day, fishing along this stream, and I jumped up on and over a ponderosa windfall, and heard this rattle, and re-launched, in reverse, back over the log, and up the trail, with this rattle sound still audible…..and then I figured out it was the few split shot remaining in their tin case like the old Doans or aspirin cases…..that snake was chasing me….I was out of breath when I stopped. Ten year old kid out of breath. Fear. Irrational snake fear. Or rational if you are one of the many bitten by poisonous snakes each year, many of whom die. And I imagine there is irrational wolf fear left over from centuries of wolves having a detrimental impact on human lives, as they ran off the game, ate the milk cow or the ram, your plow horse, scattered the geese, ducks and chickens, all which could have serious consequences for winter survival.

    In that vein, I was reading last night that this winter is so cold, and the economic situation so bad, that some interior, isolated Alaskan villages are suffering from lack of food, and energy to run the snow machines to seek food, or keep the stove running to stave off cold. It has been a bleak, cold, cruel winter for
    Alaska Natives entangled in the social welfare system that cannot help them because they make too much to garner help, but have money and benefits that only buy a portion of what they did last year or the year before. And no dogs to eat. The Yukon salmon run in 2008 was a bust, and no fish left to eat, and little earnings from fish to carry them through. Some families have only moose meat to eat for weeks on end. This has been a way colder winter than usual. No wolf stories, though. Yet.

  81. Jay, you are ignoring the fact that the wolves that are now here were NOT natural occuring wolves, they were imported from Canada. They were imported with the full knowledge & intent that they would destroy personal property. You make think that is fine because you do not like ranchers or farmers, make no mistake the same thing can be done to you. It doesn’t have to be wolves, it can be anything enough people with enough money and influence to sway lawmakers to take away private property rights.

  82. Marion: “They were imported with the full knowledge & intent that they would destroy personal property.”

    Prove it or shut up.

  83. Yes, Tom, I read your post. You don’t care what Wyoming or Montana do, you want your own isolated state, limited by invisible lines that keep the bad things out, or something just as silly. Idaho, Wyoming and Montana have all submitted their “plans” and those plans were pretty piss poor, especially Wyoming’s.

    As for wolves not being dangerous? Again, put up the proof. Who said it, when and where? Who calls them cuddly animals? Who downplays their roll in nature as a killer of large animals?

    I’m not saying the wolves should be kept from harm, but I’m also not going to sit by while people lie about them, or about the people that are trying to support their reintroduction.

    As for them being Canadian Wolves? So what? Their sizes haven’t reached the full size of those in Canada, keeping them much more like the original wolves that were here.

  84. Tinfoil hat time.

  85. Jay: I’m not saying that wolves should or shouldn’t be protected. I’m only saying it should be up to the state, regardless of the outcome. Make the rules and live with the consequences, positive or negative.

    WOW! Very long, but well worth reading.

  86. Occasionally environmental lawsuits cause other damage — to the very groups that file them.

    One such case unraveled in Arizona recently when the Southwest Center sued the U.S. Forest Service, alleging that it failed to “consult” with the Fish and Wildlife Service about cattle grazing’s effect on endangered species — a violation of federal law.

    The suit targeted large swaths of federal land leased to ranchers, including a lease held by Joe and Valer Austin, owners of the picturesque El Coronado Ranch in the Chiricahau mountains.

    The Austins are no ordinary husband-and-wife ranch team.

    Since buying El Coronado in 1984, they have invested more than $1 million to return it to ecological health. They have constructed 20,000 erosion control structures, cut back herds dramatically and reduced the seasons they graze, and worked to restore threatened and endangered species. They have welcomed university and government scientists to the ranch to observe their efforts.

    Their work has earned them numerous awards, including the Joseph Wood Krutch Award from The Nature Conservancy in 1996 and, two years later, the W.R. Chapline Land Stewardship Award from the Society for Range Management.

    That didn’t satisfy the Southwest Center, which alleged in its 1998 Forest Service suit that the Austins’ ranching practices were harming endangered species.

    “It was a real slap in the face,” Joe Austin said.

    Valer Austin added: “They just put us in the same bucket with everybody else. They didn’t even come out here to see what we were doing.”

    The Austins didn’t stand idly by. They jumped into the lawsuit with the federal government — and emerged victorious. Senior U.S. District Judge Alfredo Marquez in Tucson ruled that the suit had been brought in bad faith and ordered the center to pay the Austins’ $56,909 legal bill.

    Still, Joe Austin feels conservation has suffered a defeat.

    “Everything we were trying to do to convince other ranchers and landowners that endangered species are not a liability has been lost,” he said. “The Southwest Center proved me wrong. The Southwest Center proved to everybody that having an endangered species is a liability.”

    “In fact, many people think you should just get rid of them,” Austin said. “That is the exact thing I didn’t want to happen.”

    What’s the center’s view? “It’s a bummer,” said Suckling. “I wish it had not come down this way.

    But would I sue again? Absolutely. (The Austins) are having an impact on public land. The fact that they are doing good things elsewhere doesn’t excuse it.”

  87. Jay the fact they set a plan to at least sort of pay for livestock losses, even though it was inadequate and DOW got out of it as fast as possible is prooof they knew privet property would be killed and eaten by the wolves. The possibility that the property owners might be partially repaid for their losses was supposed to make it easier to impose the wolves on them. Actually some of the wolves are in the 100-120# range. I wouldn’t want one chasing me.

  88. So you admit you lied that they had intent?

    I’m actually surprised, I didn’t think you would admit it.

  89. 3 Trees, that isn’t the only black eye that enviro groups in Arizona have gotten. The Chilton family in Southern Arizona sued and won $600,000 from the Center for Biodiversity for defamation. That is good, but as you pointed out the fact that environmental groups are doing this to people discourages anyone from cooperating in any way. Sadly most ranchers do not have the money to fight back and are destroyed.
    The hunger for power and money drives the enviros like any psuedoreligous sect.

  90. The Delphi Technique or some form of it was used at the Three Year Review of the Mexican Gray Wolf Program of which I was invited as a stakeholder representing our Catron County citizens group.

    I referred to this meeting in my last post. It was rigged and stacked from the get go. Paul Paquet was invited as the lead scientist selected by the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group which is a branch of the SSC/ICUN or the Species Survival Commission and the World Conservation Union. Michael K. Phillips of the Ted Turner Foundation was the other invited biologist and supposed wolf expert. You talk about a stacked deck. this supposed review workshop was directed and ran by Dr. Ulysses S. Seal who is or was the CBSG Chairman.

    Folks, wake up and smell the roses! It is not our US Fish and Wildife Service that is running the show or our very own Endangered Species Act, it is the United Nations and their various endangered species experts and their world programs who are in charge.

    Some head in the sand sheeple person keeps mentioned Tin Hats or some supposed derogatory remark. It doesn’t take much research to find the root of the problems that the rural citizens of the rural west and all of America are confronted with.

    At the Fourth World Wilderness Congress held in Denver Colorado in 1987, over 1500 people from sixty countries participated. and were told to protect the reindeer, the spotted owl and other endangered species. Ninety per cent of the group consisted of conservationists, ecologists, government and United Nations bureaucrats. The other ten percent were world banking heavyweights, such as David Rockefellar of Chase Manhattan Bank, London banker Edmund de Rothschild and Secretary of the U.S. Treasury James Baker.

    The first three days the group was told that the Wilderness Congress was about beating the ozone deterioration and bringing the rain forest back. The following days with only the bankers in attendance, the topic of discussion centered on the creation of a World Conservation Bank with collateral being derived from receipt of wilderness properties throughout the world. This bank would have central bank powers similar to the Federal Reserve. It would create currency and loans and engage in international discounting, counter-trade, barter and swap actions. Rothschild personally conducted the monetary matters and the creation of the World Conservation Bank. The bank would refinance by swapping debt for assets. A country with a huge national debt would receive money to pay off the debt by swapping the debt for wilderness lands. The plan was to swap one trillion dollars of Third World Debt into this new bank. In the long term, when the countries won’t be able to pay off the loans, governments from around the world will give title to their wilderness lands to the bankers. Title to the lands will go to the World Wilderness Land Inventory Trust. World Bank loans as they stand now are not collateralized but may be soon.

    When James Baker made his keynote speech at this 1987 conference he stated that “No longer will the World Bank carry this debt unsecured. The only assets we have to collateralize are federal lands and national parks.”

    Guess at what crossroads we are at now?

    The list that the World Conservation Bank has now, stands at and includes 851 properties in 141 countries, comprising over one third of the earth’s land mass. Even with this land mass it still won’t collateralize the world’s debt. The bankers are in the process of accumulating the wealth of the world. Very few privately owned assests can be termed “real wealth”. We are seeing a much bigger role in the federalization of private lands with the Nature Conservancy and other land grab schemes by the government to do just this.

    The recent consolidation of the Banks is bringing us one step closer to this control of the worlds wealth. Now the huge trillion dollar bailouts are upon us like a thief in the night. How do they get this money? By borrowing. What are they using for collateral? Are our very own and nationally treasured natural resource federal lands being mortgaged? You tell me. I have witnessed first hand just a taste of the heavy hand of the World control people. It was not pretty and that Mexican Gray Wolf Three Year Review was an eye opener for many of us.

  91. I’m wondering, should those tin foil hats be made from the good high quality aluminum foil, like Reynolds Wrap, or can you just use the cheap store brand stuff?

    One world order!!!!eleventy!!!!!one!one!!

  92. Tom K:
    That sounds pretty hard to believe. Maybe because I just can’t imagine such a thing happening in this country. I’m complaining about losing our rights as states, and you’re talking about losing our rights as a nation. I think I’ll just bury my head in the sand and wait for it to happen, then join the resistance, of which there will be plenty. Nothing else we can do but enjoy whatever time we have left.

  93. WOLVERINES!~!!!!@!!@!!!

    (blatant Red Dawn reference)

  94. Mr. Redman you stated;

    By jedediah Redman, 1-28-09
    There is no more credible evidence of wolves killing and eating a human being than there is that Jesus Christ once lived–in the Holy Land–or Meso-America.
    Third-hand statements are simply not acceptable to a thinking person…

    I posted the facts on Kenton Carnegie’s death by four wolves and you did not comment?

    I have posted facts on issues instead of making a comment because according to you “Third-hand statements are simply not acceptable to a thinking person…

    Sir, I see the facts are not acceptable to a thinking person either.
    So I ask you, what is acceptable to you?

    Your latest post is so far off in left field and not anywhere near the subject of “Obama’s first actions could mean new directions for wolves and public lands in the West”.

  95. I agree with Redman that demonizing and dehumanizing the enemy is considered very effective. Isn’t that what the term “ANTI-WOLF RIGHTWINGCRAZIES” is meant to do? How many people do you think are influened just by hearing that term or reading it here in these pages?

  96. re: marion’s lies

    Here is one just from this thread:

    “The wolf introduction has taken substantial amounts of money out of the pockets of individuals, and it is delibertly inflicted.”

    Delibertly? or maybe that’s “deliberately”? You have no proof of this, you will never have proof of this and that is one of the reasons you are labeled as a liar.

    I’ve caught you dozens of times with the claim that wolves are destroying vast swathes of elk. The problem with that claim is causus beli, on one hand. On the other, the numbers are actually at a state where the normal fauna and flora of Yellowstone has been allowed to grow back, instead of being eaten by gigantic herds of elk.

  97. Jay, are you denying that the wolves are not intended to end grazing on leased land? The fact that biologists and environmental groups knew the wolves would kill livestock means they intended for them to do just that when they went ahead and put them in ranch country.
    As for the elk, it is true that the northern elk herd has dropped from 19,000 to barely 6000, I consider that a dramatic decrease, the fact you consider it wonderful does not make it a lie that there has been a dramatic decrease in the elk. The Madison-Firehole herd has decreased greatly also, just because you are happy with the result does not make it a lie.

  98. Did it ever occur to you that you may have attributed the wrong cause to the reduction in the northern herd?

    Because you have, and you continue to do so.

    As well, PROVE that the intention was to drive ranchers off the land. Stop whining and prove it.

  99. And the “multiple” names? As I explained I used a screen name on his site instead of my own because I knew he Would not allow me on his site. I have NEVER denied being banned from his site.
    For all I know Jay, Jeff, and Steve are all one and the same. Do I care enough to find out? Nope!
    By the way how many of those folks disagreeing with Ralph on that particular thread are still allowed to post??????????? I have good company.
    So what has caused the drop of the NYEH if not the wolves? Remember you are saying it is a lie to blame wolves, and hunting has been dropped so let’s hear the TRUTH per Jeff/Jay/Steve.
    So far you have posted disagreements with me, but no lies, so what does that make your statements?

  100. And there you go, Marion. The NYEH was decimated by winterkill, bears, wolves and other climactic variations. Calf numbers have dropped significantly, NOT because of wolves, but because of drought.

    But don’t let the facts get in the way of your wonderful whining. The anti-wolf crowd should have already disowned you, you’re not helping them.

  101. You’ll work on what? Trying to understand it?

    Give up, there are far too many big words for you.


    There are other causes. You mentioned the northern herd, and the report states, very clearly, that the numbers are due to many factors, that the wolf packs have declined in numbers and that you’re just not very smart. OK, I made the last part up, but we really don’t need a report to tell us that little fact.

  102. Trees:
    What precisely was it about your post that established it as fact?
    There was nothing there to convince me that it was not just more bogus anti-wolf propaganda…

  103. widespread elk calf destruction is going on all over the west leading to a severe lack of recruitment numbers and evidence in strong that elk herds are getting older and older and not replacing themselves through successful reproduction. It is out there in all kinds of scientific literature for those who are less faithful to the wolf love religion and actually do care about the bigger picture. So what do we do, remain in denial as so many here seem want to do. If the widescale destruction continues at this rate, due to environmental intervention through legal action, and it seems it will, then starvation for wolves is inevitable unless they are allowed to continue to kill cattle at will with absolutely no repercussions. Once the ungulate herds are gone, then what?

  104. It is my OPINION that is why FWS made the half hearted attempt to delist last year to get DOW off the hook for paying for livestock kills. It was becoming apparent that with elk numbers declining that livestock kills would go up…way up. As it was some folks had claimed to wait as much as 3 years for approved kills and still had not gotten paid. When DOW was interviewed by the newspaper, they said they were jsut awfully busy and hadn’t had time.

  105. Mr. Redman,

    It is clear that you do not accept anything as fact no matter what the source. I am not trying to convince you to accept anything, others can read the Carnegie Case and read your posts then make up their minds.

    The Carnegie death case was an Official Coroners Inquest, the jury found 4 wolves killed and feed upon his body….This is a fact


    What are the facts behind this???

    When a person dies the official Cause, Manner and Mechanism of Death is determined in a short period of time. Even if the cause is undetermined it is officially listed as such.

  106. 3 Trees, it is exactly this kind of sentiment:

    “Supporters of wolves will only loose sleep if they do not succeed in establishing wolves in every state and county.”

    that makes you a grade A lying a-hole.

    End of discussion.

    And Marion, shove it you twisted lying freak.

  107. Jay Kanta,

    It is a true statement, ‘you will only loose sleep if you do not succeed, so why state otherwise. You are not putting your pets, livestock, economic viability or your children on the line as the people are who live and are impacted with wolves.

    OK Jay, tell me what you will loose if wolves are not recovered the way you wish they were??? Explain it to me….

    The people that are effected negatively by the wolf are the people with “documented losses”. Loses are not attributed to ranchers alone, but non-ranching families also. You could find the documented losses from official documents if it mattered to you, but I an sure it does not.

    So, again to you I,m a grade A lying a-hole….does that change the facts….NO

  108. I still don’t understand what’s wrong with letting the states agree to maintain a viable population and turning management over to them. Are we too dumb to run our own state’s affairs in a way that best benefits us and not some liberal in New York City who thinks meat grows on grocery store shelves?

  109. There are those who have come to believe in the delphi effect. There are those who still have confidence in the new world order.
    And then there are those who just plain believe the rightwingcrazies…

  110. Tom: There’s nothing wrong with that, that’s been the plan from the get-go. Only two problems:

    1. leftwingcrazies can’t let the endangered species designation go, even though Montana and Idaho have excellent management plans in place and are ready and able to assume responsible control.
    2. stubborn rightwingcraziesfromwyoming can’t seem to come up with a responsible, viable management plan. they’re living in the dark ages and until they join the 21st century, their battles with both leftwingcrazies and moderates will go on uninterrupted.

  111. Mr. Redman,

    I have attended USFWS wolf meetings that had hired a moderator and the meeting was conducted as per the Delphi Technique.

    If you think a one world order is not on the agenda that is OK with me.

    Also, watch out for those “rightwingcrazies”…Liberals could choke on them………

  112. Roy McBride has expert knowledge of the Mexican Gray Wolf more so then any person. Not to mention he has captured wolves all over the world.

    McBride was hired as such by the USFWS, and he trapped the Mexican Wolves in Mexico for the captive breeding program. Mr.McBride stated to me he trapped 5 wolves in Mexico, during transit 2 arrived dead. The live wolves were two males and one female that was due to have pups. I also trapped another male that had breed a ranch dog. When he came in to see the pups I caught him. This was the last wolf I caught in Mexico.

    Mr.McBride also stated to me: That he was present a lot at meetings during the structuring of the Mexican Wolf Program concerning the Mexican Wolves in captivity, “the Ghost Ranch Linage” (Sonora-Desert Museum), and the “Aragon Linage”. ‘These wolves in captivity did not look anything like the wolves I trapped in Mexico.

    Mr.McBride also stated to me: When Mr. Parsons suggested only a small number of livestock would be killed by the release of Mexican Wolves I laughed and said you are kidding! I know they will kill a lot more livestock than what you are saying.

    Note; shortly after this Mr. McBride’s job ended.

    Below Mr. McBride’s Letter to Mr. David Parsons:

    June 2, 1997

    David Parsons
    Mexican Wolf Recovery Program U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service P. O. Box 1306 Albuquerque, NM 87103-1306

    Dear Mr. Parsons:

    In reading the recent status report of April 1997, I was shocked to see that the wolves from the Ghost Ranch lineage were being included in the captive breeding program. In the early days of Mexican Wolf Recovery, the origin and genetics of the Ghost Ranch animals were discussed and investigated ad nauseam. In fact, the conclusion by all members of the early recovery team was that the animals were wolf-dog hybrids. This was the primary factor behind the decision to seek and capture the remaining wild population, because it Was the only pure genetic stock available.

    I was sent to inspect the Ghost Ranch animals that were in captivity at the Living Desert Zoo at Carlsbad and the private collection of Norma Ames. While some of the animals had some wolf characteristics, some specimens showed more dog than wolf. Nobody, dead or alive on the planet earth, has caught as many wolves in Mexico as I have. But none of the wild wolves resembled the animals that I saw represented in this captive collection.

    The explanation that the Ghost Ranch animals “do not look like wolves because of captivity and diet” is science right out of the Twilight Zone. The real reason that many of the Ghost Ranch animals look like dogs is because that is what they are.
    With the understanding that the Endangered Species act does not protect hybrids, all the wolves from Norma Ames and Carlsbad Zoo were anesthetized.

    Since you have now revised history, and consider the Ghost Ranch animals are actually wolves, wouldn’t the anesthetizing of these wolves be considered a “taking” of endangered species? Aren’t you likewise guilty, of a “taking” by mixing the hybrids with the wolves? How are these facts going to be handled by law enforcement and have you notified them?

    I have remained neutral about the reintreduction of the Mexican wolf in Arizona/New Mexico, because I don’t believe it to be any of ray business. But dumping out a bunch of hybrids to fcill livestock, game animals, and restricting traditional activities is just taking it too far.

    If the Ghost Ranch animals are true wolves, then what are the animals that I took out of Mexico that are so different? And why was I sent to catch them when these other animals were already available? If you are concerned about genetic variability, why not augment the Mexican Wolf genes with those from Canada? Isn’t that exactly what is going to happen in the wild when the reintroduction in Idaho and Wyoming meet with the reintroductions from the Southwest? By including the Ghost Ranch hybrids in the breeding program, you are threatening the validity of genetics of the entire wolf reintroduction program, both North and South.

    When the first Mexican wolf is killed by some rancher or trapper, and it enters the courts as a legal matter, you will never be able to convict anyone of killing a true wolf. The early records of the recovery meetings, the credentials of the participants, and their conclusions will be contrary to your case, and they are
    a matter of public record easily recovered.

    You may put dog blood in the wolves, but you will never take it out. And you will forever cloud the issue of what it is you have released into the wild. I believe you have made a serious mistake.

    Roy McBride

  113. So, there is support for uncontrolled wolves killing livestock to eliminate the family ranching permit tee off Federal Lands.

    The Mexican Wolf Program has cost 18 million dollars of taxpayers money. I am tired of my tax dollars being spent on an experimental Mexican Wolf Program.

    With 52 wolves in the wild, each wolf cost the taxpayers $346,153.85. Talk about subsidizing something with no return.

    I guess it is all in how a person views this, that and the other……

  114. Mr. E,

    Thank you for the documentation.

    “As a group, moreover, they are the most genetically distinct population of North American gray wolf.

    Question, What will happen genetically to this genetically distinct population of Mexican Wolves when the Canadian wolf disperses into Mexican wolf territory? Is it a concern to scientists?

  115. 3Trees, I can answer that last question. I believe it was in 06-07 a wolf killed over a hundred head of livestock during a period of something like a year. At one point a government trapper had it in sight and was refused permission to kill it as he wasn’t “authorized”. Months later when it was finally killed, FWS decided the coloring wasn’t quite right, and sent if off for genetic testing. Well you knew right then it was to get DOW off the hook for all of the documented kills by the animal. When the testing came back it had Alaskan, Canadian (gasp) and other US (maybe Great Lakes) wolf blood, so they came to the conclusion that it was a released domestic wolf. Accepting responsibility for bad outcomes is simply not a part of the plan.
    By the way JeffE for doing a much better job proving my point that eliminating ranching was the goal.

  116. Tree farms stocked with a population of domesticated animals seems the aim of the rightwingloons who post anti-wolf propaganda…

  117. Dear jedediah,

    Your continual jibberish about those of us who only want a fair shake and equal treatment, as is being given to the radical enviro’s by our government agencies such as the BLM, US Forest Service, the US Fish & Wildlife Service and the liberal judges who seem to end up ruling on most of the natural resource issues, and who continually rule against most of the credible scientists and resource managers.

    I am not agaisnt the wolf per se, only against the junk science being perpetrated on the citizens of the US, that does not fully consider the actions of what is happening and has happened to our ungulate wildlife, our livestock, our pet dogs and horses and our children, not to mention our severely crippled economy as a result of these actions.

    No, jedediah I do not want livestock all over the “tree farm”. I want a balance. I want healthy wildlife populations including the wolves and all that most of us “rightwingloons” as you call us, are asking is that we have balance. I hate poor management and especially poor federal lands ranch managers who have no care what so ever about the health of the land. Thank God there are not too many of them. There seems to be just enough of them to give the whole industry a black eye. You and your ilk continually rant and rave about this subject and you never acknowledge the fact that livestock growers are good stewards of the land. Quite to the contrary jedediah!

    Any old day of the week jedediah I personally invite you down to New Mexico and Arizona to show you the real world out here. I think you would be pleasantly surprised as to the good job the good people here are looking out for your (federal) land. Somehow up in your glass house you have lost touch with reality. All most of really want is to have a fair shake. We are not out to reap the land at the cost of wildlife and the natural resources. We have a deeply ingrained sense of helping all forms of flora, fauna and the earth’s grandness and well being.

    It all boils down to I don’t think I really know any “rightwingloons”, but I do know a lot of leftwingloons. I guess it takes one to know one. Refer to the above statement!

  118. I reckon it took two years to convince the coroner’s jury that it was wolves, not a black bear, tree; but there is no doubt in my mind the anti-wolf community has convinced more and more of you
    rightwingloons to hate the demon lobos…

  119. There may be no Canadian wolf, but there is or was a Canis Irremotus until the “scientists” dropped that classification in order to bring an entirely different larger wolf into the Northern Rockies.
    I am amazed that the moderators allow the hatred and venom from those who feel entitled to impose their will and their destruction on others. I wonder how many potential supporters of NewWest advertisers are turned off by the dirty names, filth, and hatred spewed by these folks

  120. Let us not forget that 25% of grazing fees got to rural schools and 25% go to local highway maintenence and government. Just becuase the federal administrators aren’t efficient and they never are doesn’t mean use of federal lands for economic purposes isn’t cost effective. Get rid of the cost of the middle man and reissue allotments and allow timber and it pencils out once again. Stop the environmentalist attacks on anyone using these lands and you will see the change back to prosperity in these small communities.

  121. Same goes for you pal. Figures lie and liars figure. you folks have been using your own talking points for so long you have forgotten that they are incredibly well spun to reflect your own fantasy not the reality. You hate ranchers have been a hate monger throughout this discussion calling people names and using false data yet I doubt there is any end to the discussion and it is really getting boring with your 20 year old anti grazing cattle free by 93 talking points.

  122. I don’t care if you feel yours is proof and mine is not. It is immoral to destroy people for statistics that are made up one side or another.

  123. Mr. E,

    I used the reference of “Canadian Wolf” cited by those in publications that they Trapped Canadian wolves and released them into the Yellowstone… As where they came from.

    Similar to publications on Texas Mountain Lions trapped and trans located into Florida to bred into the Endangered Florida Panther. When non- endangered Texas Mountain Lions are released into Florida, do they take on the endangered status of the Florida Panther?

  124. Your data may or may not be wrong it is merely nationally defied statistics neither correct or incorrect and subject to statistical error and subjetivity. You seem to want to use it as science when it is not anywhere near scientific.
    We American’s don’t do rule by mob in the United States we rule by representation therefore we don’t use national statistics as representations of local ecnomic well being we certainly don’t use national subjective statistics to destroy state and local economies who’s data is somewhat different and who’s 2% on a national scale would equate to total destruction on a local scale as you seem to approve of doing.
    Don’t tell me to shut up either, that First Ammendment to the Bill of Rights applies to me as an American citizen too, regardless of your idea that what you have to say outweighs what I believe and voice. The fact that you insist on shutting down anyone’s opinion or data but your own is pathetic. You can’t form the argument so you want to take your ball and go home. Why dont you contribute to solutions rather than dictate your demands using your data that isn’t even valid? Get a clue ranchers aren’t leaving the wolves probably aren’t either, join the discussion for positive solutions and stop the intolerance and demand for destruction of your fellow man.

  125. As far as the small percentage of cattle produced by family ranchers permitted on federal lands (part of the multiple use of Federal land);

    to some, it may be compared small in the overall scheme of things, but it is “the” major economic industry here. Livestock provide a major tax base that provide funding for our schools and so on.

    One thing to remember, many ranch homesteads were homesteaded in the 1880’s and the land grazed by livestock long before the Forest Service and BLM authority. Then, through regulation grazing Federal lands have became what it is today.

    All these homestead lands are considered to fragment the Federal lands by some, even though homestead lands have standing prior to regulation. With these homesteads, the only economic viability was grazing. If grazing for livestock is eliminated, then the only option for the homestead land owner is to sell to a developer and he in turn will subdivide it into a subdivision.

    I do not like subdivisions because of all the negative effect it brings. Instead of having a few families living within the Federal Forest lands, there will be hundreds and hundreds.

    But, I understand that a family rancher has no choice to sell to a developer so his family can survive an alter net life.

    I am not a rancher, but I have seen many struggle to survive.

  126. This is quickly becoming a contest of intellect.
    The average IQ appears to be lower than the average hat size…

  127. Good work Tom I had forgotten all about those links and really just don’t have the energy anymore. Becuase as you have probably noticed none of it matters. NOT ONE THING. these guys are bent on their own ideals and they do not include real dialog so expect another rant. It is not possible to reason with or prove anything in their jaded perceptions. Although the only reason I am here is to hopefully educate someone who might show up and see these posts without any other resourses.

  128. Yes, I think the ole dead horse has had all it can take.

    You know, I have read articles that state certain persons are not safe coming into our county. I think that certain persons may feel this way because of their direct involvement on issues. I laugh at the fact some people do wear cowboy hats as a disguise so they won’t stand out. There is no reason for this. People are as safe her as anywhere else.

    Crime is no different here than in the big city. We have had several unsolved homicides, a triple, a double and a few singles, but compared to the national average these homicides are not above average. I will bet you have more crime where you live than where I live……….

  129. I have to say that a hope of educating thsoe who really have no idea about the wolf situation, in fact have no idea how many tens of millions have been spent on wolves and the damage they do. At a time when the country is in financial difficulty it might surprise to the majority of folks who do not live out here. Folks who come to this site looking at prperty or some of the products sold by advertisers on the site may be enlightened to the methods and goals of environmentalists, and to the harm to real folks from these things. Since so many have no idea unless they read these things and invstigate further, it is worth taking the verbal abuse of some on this site……for a while anyway.

  130. How about a laugh…….

    A DEA agent, together with an ATF and an FBI agent, as part of a task force, arrive at a ranch in western Nebraska . The agents tell the rancher, “We need to inspect your ranch for illegally grown drugs.”

    The old rancher says, “Okay, but don’t go in that field over there.”
    The DEA agent verbally explodes saying, “Mister, we have the authority of the Federal Government with us.” Reaching into his rear pocket and removing his badge, the agent proudly displays it to the farmer. “See this badge? This badge means we are allowed to go wherever we wish on any land. No questions asked nor answers given. Have I made myself clear? Do you

    The old rancher nods politely and goes about his chores. Later, the old rancher hears loud screams and spies the three agents running for their lives and close behind is the rancher’s bull. With every step the bull is gaining ground on the agents. They are clearly terrified.

    The old rancher immediately throws down his tools, runs to the fence and yells at the top of his lungs….. “Your badges! Show him your badges!”

  131. I don’t mind if you ranchers want to share my wolves’ range. I will object if you loons start shooting them to make room for your livestock…

  132. Tom it doesn’t matter that we have economic science on written buy phd’s from our state that backs up what we stated about the importance of livestock on federal lands grazing allotments. This guy is only interested in his ego. He insists on us validating his points but refuses to acknowlege our valid arguments that most reasonable American’s would certianly acknowlege especially in times of economic turmoil. It certainly won’t matter that in the 5 year review socio economic review the Mexican wolf depredation numbers are listed at 100 times what was expected. And all that data was pre Jess Carey data. It is officially recognized by the economic scientists in the program.
    This guy gives nothing credibility but his own agenda. Nor does the your cows are on my wolves land guy who has not been able to show a fossile record of this being wolf country and there is no data on wolves being present in this region prior to cattle drawing them in in the 1400’s and on to the present. There is no evidence of the whole there were thousands of wolves here pre european settlement claim at all but it matters not one bit.
    If you haven’t read the petition for rule change put out by New Mexico Cattlegrowers you ought to there are a lot of documents cited there as well.

  133. Tom,

    There is no use trying to provide any more documentation or information on this site. Those that champion the wolves will not even concede that wolves killed and ate Kenton Carnegie.

    So you are wasting your time here. I suggest you provide your information to the general public, who do not know the negative facts about wolves. The more you educate the general public, the less they will believe and support the propaganda that wolves cause no harm and are cute fluffy little critters. As you have seen, even with peer reviewed documentation there are dissenter’s.

    You know and I know the ones that manipulate federal agencies to do their dirty work. These same manipulators think there is no personal accountability for their actions because they are shielded behind federal agencies.

    One Fact is apparent, as uncontrolled wolves saturate every State their devastation alone will produce more and more opposition. The pro-wolf supporters are not helping the wolf by demanding unlimited numbers of wolves on the landscape. At some point, when common sense rules again these same wolves they have championed will be hunted and killed.

    With all that combined intellectual power of the elitists, you would think that they would have been satisfied with a low impact wolf population, maintained as such, so no hunting of them could ever happen.

    I guess they figured wolves would maintain full protection status. But, it is apparent that hunters are going to thank the pro-wolfer’s for supplying them hundreds and hundreds of wolves to shoot….Go figure

  134. Your wolves Jeff? Does this mean that if/when “your” wolves attack a kid doing his chores or waiting for a school bus that you are taking FULL responsibility for “your” wolves and paying all costs and liabilities?

  135. Rightwingcrazies seem about ready to throw in the towel. Their efforts to further demonize lobo have been pitiably ineffective…

  136. Mr. Redman,

    If you look, there are few that post here. At what point do we stop beating a dead horse. I know and you should know that nothing is going to change the present post positions on anything.

    Wolves produce negative results by nature of the beast, which results in their own demonizing. You can paint it whatever color you want but it is still transparent.

  137. Ol’ jed has no expectations of change, trees.
    He has been posting to internet forums for a long time–and has come to realize the one consistent thing is that rightwingcrazies persistently will not change.
    Their two basic ideals are white supremacy and the good old days.
    Now that we have at last elected a black man to the presidency the ignorance which has always underpinned all conservativism has become more obvious.

  138. Ol’ jed

    Are moderate conservatives rightwingcrazies? Are people that believe in sound conservation rightwingcrazies? I do not believe in ‘white supremacy’ but I do believe in what my folks taught me.

    You down people with opposing views as “rightwingcrazies” and according to you all the “supposed” underpinning all conservationism is their fault. Are you really going to give credit to “rightwingcrazies” for loosing sleep?? You make me laugh, people who read all the comments here will also laugh and pity your simplistic position.

  139. So where is this monument driven in the firmament that determines the center and what is the measurement of “right wing crazies” of “loons” or other demeaning description? How many whoseits to the right of said monument do you have to be to be “crazy” or a “loon” or “redneck”? And as long as race and hate is being discussed, how is the J. Redman discussion not race based? Or is it all part of where you lie in terms of that monument, that permanent point from which all thought is measured?

  140. That will come as a real shocker for Jeff’s better half, treed.

    As for ol’ jed–he puts skinner marian, you and barebate in the bin marked rightwingloons–there are others, certainly. I’ll leave it to you better educated folks to sort them out and apply labels you find more suitable.
    Ol’ jed finds it satisfactory to use loons and crazies interchangably; but others may wish to put a finer definition on the multiple sociopathies therein…