Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Talk about a lousy call
#1
Just found this link on FB and checked it out. Hadn't had time to check today's news so it was a bit of a shock to come home to. Hopefully they can get this cluster straightened out in a timely manner but not betting on it.

[url "http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/apps/releases/view.cfm?NewsID=5539"]http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/apps/releases/view.cfm?NewsID=5539[/url]
[signature]
Reply
#2
Yup, I saw that. It doesn't look too good, when the supreme court rules it takes a TON to turn the verdict around..

Hopefully our elk and deer herds don't hurt too bad from this..
[signature]
Reply
#3
This just goes to show you that if you work for the government, and know nothing about a certain subject, you can still make important decisions that will affect many people lives on a daily basis whether right or wrong and still go home and say you did your job today without a care in the world because it does not affect you personally.

Someone is making some money off of making a ruling like this. It is hard to believe they can keep wolves on the endangered species list, but have problems getting other animals on that have a smaller population. Even Utah is now having problems with wolves and they were never released there. In just the last two weeks there have been 2 articles about wolves killing sheep and a sheep dog, and a few sightings.

They will be out of control soon. That may be a good thing tho as if there gets to be too many, the hunting season may become unlimited. It may be bad for the big game, but who knows. Big game dealt with these predators for thousands of years before we came along and they made it then, I guess they can make it now.
[signature]
Reply
#4
2nd worst news on hunting in Idaho ever![mad]
1st was bringing them here in the first place![mad][mad][mad]
[signature]
Reply
#5
it won't stop some..........[Image: bobwink.gif][Image: bobwink.gif][Image: bobwink.gif]
[signature]
Reply
#6
We need to put the judge in a room with a pack and see if he thinks they are endangered as he is scrambling for his life. Of course, BTW, without a gun. [mad]
[signature]
Reply
#7
I 2nd that!!!!!![cool][cool][cool][cool]
[signature]
Reply
#8
MAN YOU GOT THAT RIGHT!!!!!!!
[signature]
Reply
#9
No, I say give him a gun. That way we can eliminate multiple wolves at the same time! The four legged and the two legged. Just have to make sure there are enough of the first ones.
[signature]
Reply
#10
I agree that wolf management should be in the hands of the states. However, I disagree with where the blame is being placed in this case. The litigation and the judicial rulemaking that have come out of this wolf case (and many other ESA listings) is part of a process that could be fixed by national legislators if they were to take a more active approach to public land and public trust management instead of leaving it to the bureaucracies.

Value-laden issues are the responsibility of the legislature and not of the administrative branch nor the judicial. If you are truly upset, don't get mad at the cogs that are just part of the broken machine. Demand change from your representatives, as this is a responsibility from which they have continually shirked away from.
[signature]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)