READ MY LIPS: "NO DEALS" THESE DEAL MAKING ATTEMPTS ARE FOR THE WOLVES!!!

[bearpaw]

After some serious thought on this subject I have come to a conclusion:  

READ MY LIPS: "NO DEALS" THESE DEAL MAKING ATTEMPTS ARE FOR THE WOLVES!!!  

This deal (below) is being made for Idaho and Montana only. Minnesota has over 3000 wolves and their moose herd is disappearing! Northern Wisconsin and Northern Michigan deer herds are disappearing, plus ranchers are losing cattle on a regular basis in Northeast Oregon! Literally this deal feeds all the other states to the wolves and leaves the door open for environmentalists to take Idaho and Montana back to court if they are unhappy with wolf management. READ THE STORY BELOW!!!

Of course wolf groups want to make this deal, they come out on top. Right now they know they are losing in congress, they are hoping this deal is made so they don’t lose control of having wolves on the ESA and the ability to go back to court. I strongly suggest urging congress to remove wolves from the ESA completely. Then all states can manage wolves and Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming can manage for 100 wolves per state as was originally agreed upon!

Support H.R. 509 and S.249
Remove Wolves in all states from the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) Once and For All!!!

Go to this page:  http://capwiz.com/biggameforever/home/  

You can easily send email messages telling congress:  
READ MY LIPS: "NO DEALS" THESE DEAL MAKING ATTEMPTS ARE FOR THE WOLVES!!!  Please pass HR 509 and S 249.

Best Regards,
Dale Denney
www.graywolfnews.com


http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/03/19/1572014/settlement-reached-on-wolves.html

Deal reached to lift wolf protections in Idaho, Montana
If a judge agrees to delist the predators, hunters in Idaho could be targeting wolves in a matter of months.

BY ROCKY BARKER - rbarker@idahostatesman.com
Once again U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy will decide whether to take wolves in Idaho and Montana off the endangered species list, after a settlement announced Friday between environmental groups and the Obama administration.

If Molloy goes along with the deal, Idahoans could again hunt wolves this fall. The settlement came because legislation to remove Endangered Species Act protection for wolves sponsored by Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson and Montana’s two Democratic senators was likely to pass Congress.

“This settlement proposal makes it clear to me that those who have forced wolves back on the endangered species list realize that their position is not defensible,” Simpson said in a statement Friday.

He said that if Molloy does not accept the agreement, Congress may still step in. “I will continue to push to have this measure signed into law.”
Molloy will have a chance to rule on the issue as early as next week when he has a hearing on another wolf case.

Ten of the 13 groups who had initially sued agreed to ask Molloy to restore the delisting approved in 2009 in Montana and Idaho but to leave Utah, Oregon and Washington out of the Rocky Mountains recovery area. Wyoming remains in the same recovery area, but since it doesn’t have an approved recovery plan like Idaho and Montana, wolves there remain under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

By leaving Washington and Oregon out, wolf advocates hope they can now develop a second wolf population in the Pacific Northwest that is distinct from the Northern Rockies population.

“This opens the door for what we think will be real wolf recovery in Oregon and Washington,” said Kieran Suckling, director of the Center for Biological Diversity, another of the groups that settled.

The agreement lasts only five years. The environmental groups also got the Obama administration to agree to set up a scientific panel in two years to determine how many wolves would be in a fully recovered population.

The agreement makes no reference to a 2008 Idaho Department of Fish and Game plan that set a goal for wolves in Idaho at just over 500. It does specifically reference the state’s 2002 management plan, which required only about 150 wolves.

“We look for professionals to make reasonable judgments,” said Mike Clark, executive director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, one of the groups that settled.

After Molloy’s decision in 2010 placing wolves back on the list, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission backed off its 2008 plan. Idaho Gov. Butch Otter was traveling Friday and had no official comment, said his press secretary Jon Hanian. Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer supports the deal.

The current Idaho wolf population is estimated at 705 wolves, a 19 percent drop from 2009.

The Idaho-based Western Watersheds Project and Friends of the Clearwater did not agree to the settlement. Neither did the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

Rocky Barker: 377-6484

[rtspring]

email sent to those stated above........

[ribka]

I feel the same way. This deal stinks. Contacting my reps

[bearpaw]

These wolf groups know that if they can exempt states like Oregon and Washington that we will never get a reasonable wolf plan, too many wolf lovers live in these states and we will end up with more wolves than the other states. 

[grundy53]

I feel the same way. This deal stinks. Contacting my reps

[bearpaw]

Earth Justice is worried about congress as are all of them, that's why they are trying to cut a deal....

Leave a few comments, I did... 

http://earthjustice.org/blog/2011-march/congress-v-endangered-species-wolves-up-for-a-vote

[Elkaholic daWg]

 RIGHT ON Bearpaw!! these people are only trying to deal so they can REGROUP, LAWYER UP (more)and screw us AGAIN later!! and we pay their legal fees!

[rtspring]

BEARPAW,

copied this post from Earth Justice....

Where is your proof of this Dale? post the proof. dale, what you Washington hunters don't understand is that you hunters DO NOT OWN THE WILDLIFE IN Washington. The wildlife is not there just so you hunters can shoot it. You are anti-predator and you care next to nothing about wildlife. All you care about is killing it and that is why you have an outfitting business. You view wolves as competition. People like you are a threat to wildlife.


Didnt know if you seen it or not.

[bearpaw]

BEARPAW,

copied this post from Earth Justice....

Where is your proof of this Dale? post the proof. dale, what you Washington hunters don't understand is that you hunters DO NOT OWN THE WILDLIFE IN Washington. The wildlife is not there just so you hunters can shoot it. You are anti-predator and you care next to nothing about wildlife. All you care about is killing it and that is why you have an outfitting business. You view wolves as competition. People like you are a threat to wildlife.


Didnt know if you seen it or not.

Well I posted some fun answers for them to chew on...  

http://earthjustice.org/blog/2011-march/congress-v-endangered-species-wolves-up-for-a-vote

I imagine they will remove my posts....

[bearpaw]

rtspring is that your post after my last post?

definitely a hunter that posted....

[rtspring]

can't see that website now, got computer issues....

can you copy and paste it on here?, i will tell you if i wrote it....

[bearpaw]

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
How did they survive? Because wolves were allowed to be shot anytime anyplace. And they were by all kinds of indian tribes, fur trappers and such. We did not have a bunch of tree huggers standing on every corner trying to protect the big bad wolf. Wolf populations then and now should be controlled by hunting them to keep that at predictable levels.........

reply Submitted by Letnaturebalanceitself! (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
Really? So in 1400, 1500, 1600, 1700, and part of the 1800's wolves were being shot on a regular basis because they were killing off all the Deer, Elk, Moose and Bison. The Native American Tribes were killing off all the wolves centuries ago before the white man came and settled in their land. So the Native Americans now are helping save the wolf, why?
The answer is that they understand the balance of nature and don't just thirst to kill for the sake of killing. Why do the latest statistics support the fact that there is now a balanced ecosystem in the region.
Has any species ever caused the extinction of another species other than human beings? Please share your wisdom and knowledge.

reply Submitted by graywolfnews (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
Just like the caucasion populace, not all tribes want wolves. You need to get your facts straight.

reply Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on March 19, 2011
No Dale, you need to get your facts straight. Why weren't you able to answer my question? You said that wolves are spreading disease to elk and I asked you to provide proof and as I expected, you couldn't. Why? because you have none. You only assume it to be true. All you did was post a link and an article talking about e. granulosis. Nothing in there says that wolves are spreading disease to elk.

reply Submitted by graywolfnews (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
Excuse me, the photos were infected moose lungs, my mistake, but the same effect. Documented proof has been shown by reasearchers that canids are a difinitive host and spread the disease to ungulates and even humans.

Pretty hard to discount documented and photographed facts. Face it, you can't win a discussion based on fact, that's why congress will most likely remove wolves from the ESA as they should be. They are not endangered, there are over 60,000 wolves in north america.

Submitted by Letnaturebalanceitself! (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
It is amazing that any ungulates ever survived before white westerners settled in North America to protect them. How did they survive without your help and with all those wolves roaming the greater Rocky Mountain region? How did the American Bison survive in such huge numbers without the white man's help?
With your logic, the wolves would have killed all of them by the mid 1800's.
How did the Nez Perce tribe ever survive with all those wolves and without the whiteman to protect them?
How?
I would sincerely like to know the logic behind any of your arguements.

reply Submitted by graywolfnews (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
Actually if you read the logs of Lewis and Clark, large areas of the mountains were void of wildlife. Documented proof of the consequences of unregulated predators.

The problem with you people trying to live the natural balance dream is that this isn't 1492. This is 2011 and there isn't room for unregulated wolf populations. Sorry bud, it just won't work in todays modern world! Wolves need to be kept to the most remote areas.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
Dale, you really don't know much do ya? just because there was not a lot of wildlife back then, does not make it was wiped out by predators. Again, there you go against placing blame on predators. I thought you said you respect predators? How does one respect predators byt yet kill them? You are a hypocrite Dale to the highest degree.


replySubmitted by graywolfnews (not verified) on March 19, 2011.
I am telling you what the L&C journals said. Are you telling me you were there to discount their historical records?

[rtspring]

Bear paw,

First one is mine that you quoted....I'm done talking to those idiots.

RTSPRING

[bearpaw]

Bear paw,

First one is mine that you quoted....I'm done talking to those idiots.

RTSPRING

I'm still having fun with them...

[rtspring]

My latest post, had to go back one more time 

How bout some of you that appose the hunting of these wolves go for a hike, without a gun in the National Forests of Idaho and Montana..

I mean get of  your subaru and hike 10 miles into the wildernes without a weapon. I bet you have a different perspective of these "LOVELY CREATURES"....  They are so nice, we should save everyone of them.......NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I am sure they love me now........