Big Game Hunting > Wolves
The Mess Current Idaho F&G Commissioners Inherited is NOT Wildlife Conservation
wolfbait:
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 07:17:56 PM ---
--- Quote from: mfswallace on March 31, 2015, 02:30:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 12:38:53 PM ---Tom Remington and George Dovel wouldn't know wildlife conservation if it walked up and spit in their face. I started to read some of the article and then realized it was just some re-tread garbage dug up from stale old meaningless arguments about what letter a former director signed back in the early 90's. I don't understand why these fiction writers can't come up with new stuff...when you are not bound by facts and accurate reporting it should be easy to produce new material. :dunno:
--- End quote ---
Would you know wildlife conservation if Tom Remington spit in your face?
I'm guessing Tom Remington has forgotten more about wildlife conservation in his older age than you know in your youthful new age ignorance...
There's more than just a letter but you don't care to read more or accept the re-introduction of wolves as being done with skewed facts and lies
Why would you believe the "facts and numbers" of agencies that have been proven to manipulate, outright lie and steal to do whatever they want :dunno:
--- End quote ---
I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction. The federal government had authority under ESA to re-introduce wolves. The President of the United States showed up to help release the darn wolves. I think its ridiculous some folks believe a low level bureaucrat like an IDFG director could possibly have stopped wolf reintroduction in Idaho. There is no believing in "facts and numbers" when talking wolves. Like it or not the federal government had the authority to re-introduce wolves to recover an endangered species...they did not need IDFG permission, they did not need to prove there would be no negative impacts to hunters, other wildlife, rural communities...whatever the concern. I understand people don't like that and many of those criticisms are often repeated as reasons for modifying ESA law; but its important to acknowledge reality when understanding where ones effort should be placed in fighting to ensure wildlife is managed in a way that protects the hunting heritage...which I would hope is a mutual concern of folks on this forum.
--- End quote ---
"I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction."
In other wards, don't get worked up over the fraud and corruption of IDFG etc., it's ok if the state game agencies pull crooked deals because the feds would have forced their agenda anyway. :roll eyes:
It's just some of that wolf history that the pro-wolf people don't want remembered, nor do they want to recognize much of the same fraud that is happening in WA and OR with wolf introduction.
When the news breaks that WDFW released wolves in WA, will their excuse be the same? The USFWS was going to release wolves in WA anyway so we beat them to the punch? Or the wolves were going to migrate anyway, we just wanted recovery to move along a little sooner. Can't wait to hear why they lied to the people of WA.
bobcat:
Nobody lied! :bash:
idahohuntr:
--- Quote from: wolfbait on April 01, 2015, 06:47:25 AM ---
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 07:17:56 PM ---
--- Quote from: mfswallace on March 31, 2015, 02:30:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 12:38:53 PM ---Tom Remington and George Dovel wouldn't know wildlife conservation if it walked up and spit in their face. I started to read some of the article and then realized it was just some re-tread garbage dug up from stale old meaningless arguments about what letter a former director signed back in the early 90's. I don't understand why these fiction writers can't come up with new stuff...when you are not bound by facts and accurate reporting it should be easy to produce new material. :dunno:
--- End quote ---
Would you know wildlife conservation if Tom Remington spit in your face?
I'm guessing Tom Remington has forgotten more about wildlife conservation in his older age than you know in your youthful new age ignorance...
There's more than just a letter but you don't care to read more or accept the re-introduction of wolves as being done with skewed facts and lies
Why would you believe the "facts and numbers" of agencies that have been proven to manipulate, outright lie and steal to do whatever they want :dunno:
--- End quote ---
I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction. The federal government had authority under ESA to re-introduce wolves. The President of the United States showed up to help release the darn wolves. I think its ridiculous some folks believe a low level bureaucrat like an IDFG director could possibly have stopped wolf reintroduction in Idaho. There is no believing in "facts and numbers" when talking wolves. Like it or not the federal government had the authority to re-introduce wolves to recover an endangered species...they did not need IDFG permission, they did not need to prove there would be no negative impacts to hunters, other wildlife, rural communities...whatever the concern. I understand people don't like that and many of those criticisms are often repeated as reasons for modifying ESA law; but its important to acknowledge reality when understanding where ones effort should be placed in fighting to ensure wildlife is managed in a way that protects the hunting heritage...which I would hope is a mutual concern of folks on this forum.
--- End quote ---
"I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction."
In other wards, don't get worked up over the fraud and corruption of IDFG etc., it's ok if the state game agencies pull crooked deals because the feds would have forced their agenda anyway. :roll eyes:
It's just some of that wolf history that the pro-wolf people don't want remembered, nor do they want to recognize much of the same fraud that is happening in WA and OR with wolf introduction.
When the news breaks that WDFW released wolves in WA, will their excuse be the same? The USFWS was going to release wolves in WA anyway so we beat them to the punch? Or the wolves were going to migrate anyway, we just wanted recovery to move along a little sooner. Can't wait to hear why they lied to the people of WA.
--- End quote ---
The level of ignorance one must posses in order to make such a big deal out of a single letter signed in the early 90's by a state director...talk about grasping at straws.
I guess that's what you are forced to do when you make repeated claims about WDFW releasing wolves but you can never provide anyone with any evidence of these secret wolf transplants. Sad.
wolfbait:
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on April 01, 2015, 07:08:42 AM ---
--- Quote from: wolfbait on April 01, 2015, 06:47:25 AM ---
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 07:17:56 PM ---
--- Quote from: mfswallace on March 31, 2015, 02:30:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: idahohuntr on March 31, 2015, 12:38:53 PM ---Tom Remington and George Dovel wouldn't know wildlife conservation if it walked up and spit in their face. I started to read some of the article and then realized it was just some re-tread garbage dug up from stale old meaningless arguments about what letter a former director signed back in the early 90's. I don't understand why these fiction writers can't come up with new stuff...when you are not bound by facts and accurate reporting it should be easy to produce new material. :dunno:
--- End quote ---
Would you know wildlife conservation if Tom Remington spit in your face?
I'm guessing Tom Remington has forgotten more about wildlife conservation in his older age than you know in your youthful new age ignorance...
There's more than just a letter but you don't care to read more or accept the re-introduction of wolves as being done with skewed facts and lies
Why would you believe the "facts and numbers" of agencies that have been proven to manipulate, outright lie and steal to do whatever they want :dunno:
--- End quote ---
I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction. The federal government had authority under ESA to re-introduce wolves. The President of the United States showed up to help release the darn wolves. I think its ridiculous some folks believe a low level bureaucrat like an IDFG director could possibly have stopped wolf reintroduction in Idaho. There is no believing in "facts and numbers" when talking wolves. Like it or not the federal government had the authority to re-introduce wolves to recover an endangered species...they did not need IDFG permission, they did not need to prove there would be no negative impacts to hunters, other wildlife, rural communities...whatever the concern. I understand people don't like that and many of those criticisms are often repeated as reasons for modifying ESA law; but its important to acknowledge reality when understanding where ones effort should be placed in fighting to ensure wildlife is managed in a way that protects the hunting heritage...which I would hope is a mutual concern of folks on this forum.
--- End quote ---
"I'm just pointing out the obvious...it does no good to get worked up over what any state agency role was with respect to wolf re-introduction."
In other wards, don't get worked up over the fraud and corruption of IDFG etc., it's ok if the state game agencies pull crooked deals because the feds would have forced their agenda anyway. :roll eyes:
It's just some of that wolf history that the pro-wolf people don't want remembered, nor do they want to recognize much of the same fraud that is happening in WA and OR with wolf introduction.
When the news breaks that WDFW released wolves in WA, will their excuse be the same? The USFWS was going to release wolves in WA anyway so we beat them to the punch? Or the wolves were going to migrate anyway, we just wanted recovery to move along a little sooner. Can't wait to hear why they lied to the people of WA.
--- End quote ---
The level of ignorance one must posses in order to make such a big deal out of a single letter signed in the early 90's by a state director...talk about grasping at straws.
I guess that's what you are forced to do when you make repeated claims about WDFW releasing wolves but you can never provide anyone with any evidence of these secret wolf transplants. Sad.
--- End quote ---
Sounds like you haven't been around the wolf issue too long I-h. Below is some info. you should probably read if you plan on staying with the wolf topic. You will see simularities with WDFW and their wolf introduction into WA.
What They Didn’t Tell You About Wolf Recovery
On January 14, 2008 Idaho F&G Director Cal Groen authored a News Release titled, “Wolves Are Here to Stay.” He emphasized that wolves will be managed like deer and elk but with the following differences:
Allow Wilderness Packs to Increase
No F&G Plan to Reduce Wolf Population
Wolf Plan Ignores Idaho Wildlife Policy
Predicted Wolf Impact Based on False IDFG Data
“Nothing Wrong With Lying to the Public”
Oversight Committee Bias
F&G Illegally Agreed To Canadian Transplants
Idaho AG, Congress Ignore False EIS Info
Bangs Ignored ESA Subspecies Criteria
Existence of Many Wolves Ignored
Wolf Numbers Underestimated
“Wolf Advocates Give Low Estimates”
Low Estimates Hide Extent of Impact
F&G Ignores Legislative Wolf Plan
Excuses For Not Controlling Wolves
http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Website%20articles/George%20Dovel/The_Outdoorsman%2026%20January%202008%20full%20report.pdf
mfswallace:
Idahohuntr is a new age biologist trained recently, enough said for the education/indoctrination system :bash:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version