NYT condemns Salazar and his acquiescence to delisting the wolf by legislative rider-
A Hole in the Endangered Species Act. New York Times.
A Hole in the Endangered Species Act. NYT editorial
by
Tags:
A Hole in the Endangered Species Act. New York Times.
by
Tags:
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University. He was a Western Watersheds Project Board Member off and on for many years, and was also its President for several years. For a long time he produced Ralph Maughan’s Wolf Report. He was a founder of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He and Jackie Johnson Maughan wrote three editions of “Hiking Idaho.” He also wrote “Beyond the Tetons” and “Backpacking Wyoming’s Teton and Washakie Wilderness.” He created and is the administrator of The Wildlife News.
Comments
Another good commentary, by Professor David Cassuto, is here: http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0419/True-cost-of-budget-deal-will-be-paid-in-blood-of-gray-wolves
Had the occasion to take a class in Water Law from Cassuto when I was working on my LLM at Pace. Excellent teacher, and very fair-minded and concerned about the environment – both domestically, and internationally. Good guy.
The NYT editorial is pretty weak. Too bad about that…
Congress is on its 2-week break for “Easter”. We Westers who advocate for species should not squander any opportunity to let them hear about the underhanded backdoor treachery that was the Wolf Rider.
Somebody has a lot to answer for in allowing that rider to ride all the way to the final bill without being challenged along the way.
“According to a 2004 review conducted by the center, 42 species went extinct in the first 21 years of the Endangered Species Act’s existence while waiting to be listed. The study found that 24 species — including the four-angled pelea, a Hawaiian flowering plant, and the honeyeater, a bird native to Guam — became extinct while on the candidate list. ” WOW! I respect what the Fish and Wildlife Services does especially with so much pressure on their hands, but government and FWS really needs to step up their actions on providing crucial help for the species who need it. I knew there was a waiting list for species who are in trouble but I would like to know the average length of wait for each species under the Bush administration compared to the Obama administration? It seems like it will be longer now.
This was in the NYT yesterday:
http://nytimes.com/2011/04/21/science/earth/21species.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
Cody- The democrats REID< BOXER< CARDIN rubber stamped this travesty after getting the administrations green light. Rancher Ken never met a whining sniveling rancher that he didn't like
I never thought the USFWS would be as dysfunctional as it was during the Kempthorne era again. I was wrong. All Salazar needs to do is rehire Julie Mcdonald
It is my understanding that Don Peay met with Reid to talk about the wolf rider and give his support to it. He later changed his mind in favor of language which would have removed all protections for wolves by amending the ESA.
Harry Reid needs to be challenged over this. He inserts these kinds of riders into bills regularly so that big, environmentally damaging projects can’t be challenged.
I agree with all the above regarding the dark path that the Wolf Rider took to become’ law’. Eleven lines that will live in Infamy in the world where people actually care about the planet , not profits nor hunter’s pride ( read: conceit wrapped in deceit). Or care about the democratic process rather than the ends justifying the means. That other Senator Simpson —my hometown Alan K Simpson, retired—always told me you never ever want to watch either sausage or Legislation being made on the packing plant floor…
Were I 25 years younger I would begin some investigative reporting to determine how the Wolf Rider was whelped then protected all the way to Obama’s desk, and by whom. Even if it meant putting out enough FOIA’s to become a flak pattern. I would not stop till I had the names locations and talking points of the wretched mess that became an insurrection against ESA .
You are most certainly right, William H. this had to have been known, worked, and approved by the top leadership of both parties and the White House. I just want to know why, and how. Who gave? Who got what in return ? What was the political calculus and the end product? Keeping Jon Tester in his Senate seat as D-Montana hardly seems like the low hanging fruit of the Golden Apple tree and Obama’s re-run . Obama does not care one whit about the American West …anything from west Chicago all the way to the Sierra’s, with the exception of Colorado . That’s Ken Salazar Country. Not one whit. He’s a city kid. What are wolves to him anyway ? What is ESA to him might be the better question. Gaylord Nelson’s ghost should come back and haunt his sorry house.
I’d like to be able to prove that Obama cavalierly sacrificed 1600 wolves with even fewer wolf supporters for 40 ( billion) pieces of silver at High Noon . In the end, somebody at the White House had to let the wolf rider remain attached, despite everybody’s claims these past two years that legislative riders and porkish hidden amendments attached to unrelated budget bills were no longer allowed. Yeah, right.
The complicity and the duplicity resulting in the Wolf Rider needs to be revealed in full sun. Do we know a good investigative reporter willing to do this ?
Meanwhile, the rest of us can go to work getting Wildlife Services budget cut below the point where they can no longer afford helicopters or radio collars. For starters.
Done Peay, Harriet M. Hageman, Jim Hagedorn
good place to start
The worst part of this sellout and it remains unclear, if Reid and Boxer even tried to make sure or get assurances that Idaho would adopt a responsible management plan (500)instead of the 100 number that has been threatened by otter. You can be sure if they attempt the lower number all the “tools”- Baiting, Trapping, etc will be part of their plan, and will turn into a slaughter
I like the people that cry about gas prices, but then drive 75 or 80 down the freeway. By slowing down to even 60 MPH, they would decrease there gas consumption by about 20%. But then again, they do have things they need to do. Pilates, movies, mall, beauty shop, tanning, and a bunch of other important things ya know!
“… hunter’s pride (read: conceit wrapped in deceit)…”
“The complicity and the duplicity”
Well-spoken. And truly spoken.
Yesterday at an Earth Day Festival a man at the Sierra Club booth said that hunters finance all the preservation of our federal and state lands and that no one else would do it if the hunters didn’t.
Question: is it feasible for Americans who love our fields and forests to finance their upkeep if hunting licenses and fees were replaced with a fairer system that doesn’t allow hunters to unduly influence the commissions and agencies that manage our public lands? (I’m not sure I’m phrasing this correctly, but I hope you get my drift.)
I don’t think this is the right time to bring up any tax increases, though your point is understood. It would be interesting to see how they would go about raising funds to offset what hunters and fishermen contribute. There are already fees at some trailheads, which only allows people who are middle class to enjoy certain areas. People already have to pay for fuel to get to these trailheads and now they have to pay fees on top of that. Many people can’t afford both. It’s sad that people who are less fortunate can’t/won’t be able to enjoy nature. Personally, I hate seeing fees at trailheads. It is really annoying. Just my opinion.
Not to sound rude, but most of the country could care less about wolves or the ESA. So long as they can watch Dancing w/ the Stars, text on there Iphones, and grab a Bigmac at McD’s they are fat n’ happy. Sad but true.
If people want to see wolves they will have to go to Denali or Yellowstone National Parks anyhow. The typical american isn’t going to go trudging through the Frank for instance to watch truly wild wolves.
It’s clear that people want to exploit natural resources, even if it harms wildlife and the environment, so long as they can have there SUV’s and $2.50 gas.
wolf moderate: Well pointed. I think if you directy ask people about wolves and the ESA most (in my opinion) will have a positive opinion about both, but as a everyday issue to most it is not relvant.
P.S. I can’t stand the morons who drive 85 on a snowy day in the freeway with their SUVs.
Phil I agree. If you ask the average american if they want the ESA and wolves they would say yes almost always. Now if you add that by having the ESA they will have to pay a bit more for gasoline, utilities, etc…Then there views would change quickly. We could save the salmon by removing the dams on the Columbia so why don’t we? It would cost a bit more for electricity? Why do we drill for oil in sensitive ecosystems? To keep the prices low. Europeans pay 2-3 times what we pay for fuel.
Would most like to end poverty world wide? Of course! Would everyone like to donate ALL discretionary spending to accomplish this? No. So, basically yeah, people would like a lot of things so long as it does not impact there lives at all.
wolfm,
Yep, I believe it is called NIMY (not in my back yard). You are right, people want a lot of things, just as long as they don’t have to pay more for it, in general. Habits are hard to break. Being good little consumers, that we have been re-conditioned over and over to be, clouds our thinking, and reinforces our wants repeatedly.
While I agree with most on this blog about how low down a method by which the wolf was deslisted again, (stinks for sure), I would have to agree with you to having a little more faith in the states (hopefully not being naive about it) doing a good enough job in mgt so as not to let the wolf get listed again.
I will probably get skewered for this, but perhaps wanting more wolfs is a reminant of that amercian consumerism thing, always wanting more, thing (conditioning) that is hard to shake. Do, I want more wolves? Yes. But I am willing to live with less (as long as they don’t get listed again) if that means it will quell a lot of the mess spawned by all the legal wrangling on both sides.
opps. Meant, “NIMBY” and “wolves”.
So now what will the welfare ranchers whine about?
The report by Buffalo Field Campaign that the Park Service is considering a “token” sacrifice of 100 buffalo to the Livestock industry is disturbing enough. Now to know that Don Peay has access to our leaders in the Senate is even more disturbing. Some of the things this man has said about wolves proves the man has no clue about ecosystems or science. All the world is a big game park. You would think Reid’s staff would have researched Peay’s record over the last 15 or 20 years. So we should be grateful that Reid didn’t go for the more outrageous plan that would have sacrificed the Mexican Gray wolf’s survival?
Don Peay, the SFW, and the “abundance management” mantra that they are peddling are a direct outgrowth of and have the complete, total, and vehement backing of the dominant religious/cultural influence in Utah. Although Reid is from Nevada, state boundaries matter little in comparison to the “pull” of this religious/cultural influence and Reid, Reid’s family, and pretty much all of Reid’s staff who have any real standing are all products of that influence. You can bet Peay has access to Reid and his staff. Unfortunately, when it comes to that Senate seat, you can have Reid or Sharron Angle; it isn’t pretty; take your pick.
Quite the dilemma- a democratic sellout short on democratic principles or a rabid right wing nutcase! We are screwed!