Anti baiting group for ID

[n_mathews13]

https://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/hunting/article223314975.html

[Machias]

Grrrrr

[n_mathews13]

Western bear foundation said they would let me know what we can do to help, if anything

[CaNINE]

Double grrrrr

[n_mathews13]

Got this from Joe from WBF
"We are just drafting a Sign on letter that we will send to all the US Senators for Idaho and Wyoming as well as directors and game and fish commissions.  Right now that is about all we can do other than just make sure everyone knows what is in the works. It has not been filed as a lawsuit just yet.  We will keep you posted"

[Machias]

 

[pianoman9701]

I'm surprised at how one-sided that article in the ID Statesman is. They didn't used to be so far left, as I recall. Must've been bought by Tribune Publishing.

[bearpaw]

I'm surprised at how one-sided that article in the ID Statesman is. They didn't used to be so far left, as I recall. Must've been bought by Tribune Publishing.

Boise is becoming a liberal stronghold in Idaho

[bornhunter]

Many from Wa who have moved to Idaho say Idaho is only a few years behind Wa before same liberal type wackjobs are in control.

[n_mathews13]

Got this today:

Hello Everyone,

I spoke with a team from the US Sportsmen Alliance today via the phone, Included on call was Evan Heusinkveld and the US Sportsmen Alliance lawyer Jim who has tried similar cases for them.

I was really curious as to their support and what their thought were on the direction of this intent to sue.  I got some great information but to be honest I am a little more nervous now than I was before.

The intent was filed against the US Forest Service so that is not a great thing for us, they are backlogged with work and right now completely shut down. This intent is up in a few weeks and it is very likely that their will be no response from the Forest Service, USFWS, or USDA due to this shut down.  They will likely then file the suit as they have planned. Jim and Evan both mentioned cases similar to this in the past, specifically in Alaska where they sued to ban baiting on USFWS and National Parks Land.  The groups suing understood they would likely not get an all out ban on baiting so they compromised on a NEPA Analysis of the effects of baiting on the land and people.  The agencies tasked with this got in their hands a report saying how bad baiting was for habituating bears to food and complied with ban on their lands. 

This is likely the approach they will take in Wyoming and Idaho,  The suit will likely be held in Idaho in 9th circuit court as it will be a friendlier court than Wyoming.  If the Forest Service is not keen on fighting will likely look for a compromise in which case the organizations filing suit will ask for a full NEPA analysis of all forest service lands and the use of bear bait on them.  We all agreed that this is a hassle for the local FS to handle and if that happens they will be more likely to sign off on the path of least resistance, which is an all out ban on their forest.  This also leaves them vulnerable to influence from these activist groups to side with them.  Its a nasty tactic and one they will continue to use as they have seen benefit. 

We all agreed the use of the ESA was bogus but did see that this tactic is effective for them as anything with the ESA holds so much weight in the courts and with public.  They also mentioned Montana heavily and their decision not to use bait to hunt bears. This is not a new decision, but one that could effect this one. I need to do some homework and see if that bait ban in statute or a commission rule.  The did mention that this lawsuit will be negatively effected by their neglect in doing a petition or a petition to agency for rule changes.  That is the protocol and it was passed up for litigation.

They both recommended I contact USDA and USFS and just get their gauge on the intent and what their plan may be without asking for them on a decision.  We need to know who we have on our side moving forward. 

That is all I have for you right now. We have all the sign-on's for our letter and I will be sending that out this week as well as sending to Game and Fish Commissions, US Senators, USFS, and USFWS.  I thank you all for your interest and pro-active stance

[mulehunter]

I'm surprised at how one-sided that article in the ID Statesman is. They didn't used to be so far left, as I recall. Must've been bought by Tribune Publishing.

Boise is becoming a liberal stronghold in Idaho

Agreed, There 600,000 new residences thur Idaho in last 5 years all Liberals trying to take over Idaho from Ca.

[Machias]

I'm surprised at how one-sided that article in the ID Statesman is. They didn't used to be so far left, as I recall. Must've been bought by Tribune Publishing.

Boise is becoming a liberal stronghold in Idaho

Agreed, There 600,000 new residences thur Idaho in last 5 years all Liberals trying to take over Idaho from Ca.

Mulehunter, how have you been?

[n_mathews13]

Hey folks,

I spoke to Lee Jacobson the Head ESA guy for the USFS based out of Ogden, UT.  He gave me some good insight as to what is happening moving forward on this Notice Of Intent. Basically the Forest Service is now reviewing the intent and trying to decide if it has any merit or if it is refutable.  He said in these cases the USFS leans 2 ways, either develop a letter refuting claims or trying to compromise if the intent as any merit. In this case he said their are some possible points made by the suing parties that they may have to look at. It all hinges on whether they think they can win in court or not.  He did note that he feels this suite is just a witch hunt on bear baiting and really doesn't think the suing parties care about grizzly bears.  They have 60 days to respond and we are well into that.  Sometimes nothing happens but he feels the groups involved will push for a response.  He said in most cases like this the USFS leans toward defending their position.  This case is tricky because it involves state regulated wildlife and the USFS is a federal agency that does not manage black bears in either state.  They do not like getting into Federal/State issues like this but feels it may come down to it. 

If the states become involved I am confident both Wyoming and Idaho will defend bear baiting.  He is going to mail me the response to NOI as soon as they have it complete so I can share with your their response. Sorry not more of a definitive answer, I will continue to keep you all updated

[rasbo]

I came across a bait site outside of McCall last year,what a mess.. McCall is full of anti-hunters,guys need to keep their sites clean,I was pissed and cleaned up the mess. These people are looking for any reason to stop hunting. I was surprised just how many people that live there are anti hunter....

[n_mathews13]

It is easy to miss a piece of trash in a bait. So for a lazy no good, it would be easy to have a mess. Once in a while I’d show up to rebait and find a wrapper, man it makes you feel so bad. And  litterly find myself looking to see if anyone is watching, cause it’s  embarrassing.  I agree, I’ve seen some poor maintained baits.

[huntnnw]

CDA is also getting bad.. walking around downtown looks like seattle

[rasbo]

It is easy to miss a piece of trash in a bait. So for a lazy no good, it would be easy to have a mess. Once in a while I’d show up to rebait and find a wrapper, man it makes you feel so bad. And  litterly find myself looking to see if anyone is watching, cause it’s  embarrassing.  I agree, I’ve seen some poor maintained baits.

plastic bags everywhere, then the bears scatter them. I used garbage bags inside my pack and just dumped the bait.

[idaho guy]

Thanks for keeping us updated on this mathews  I haven’t seen anything in our local paper or anywhere else. Thanks again

[bearpaw]

Thanks for the insight! 

[n_mathews13]

Now we wait

[Machias]

Got my baiting site tags on Friday!

[n_mathews13]

Emailed today :,


“Yesterday the Western Watersheds, Wilderness Watch, and Wild Earth Guardians filled a federal suit against the US Forest Service and USFWS. The groups say the government has violated the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act by allowing incidental kills of grizzlies by black bear hunters using bait. The suit seeks to force the Forest Service to stop allowing black bear baiting in areas of national forests in Wyoming and Idaho where grizzly bears may be.

I had hoped it wouldn't come to this, We will be actively monitoring this and reaching out to those who can help us fight it!”

https://www.courthousenews.com/feds-sued-to-stop-use-of-bear-bait-by-hunters-in-idaho-and-wyoming/ 

[Special T]

Anti Trapping and Anti baiting measures are how they hamstrung Washington. If they succeed in this endeavor it will wreck ID & WY.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Stein]

WY will certainly fight it, ID probably, WA rolled over and asked them what else they could do to help.

[Machias]

 

[n_mathews13]

I should have baited this year

[idaho guy]

I should have baited this year

Its not too late  Might have some bald spots though!

[n_mathews13]

We have been working with Brian and Idaho Wildlife Federation on how to proceed on this bear bait ban.  This is what we have come up with so far. The USFS is still deciding on what level to handle this (local, regional, national). We also get a strong feeling that both Idaho and Wyoming will fight this as possibly an intervenor to the USFWS and USFS. 

Brian Recentl chatted with IWF lawyer (president of IWF) this morning and a few things came out of this:

1. Anyone can act as intervenor for the USFWS and USFS. As in, WBF could hire a lawyer to side against the enviros, but it will cost money. Possibly a lot. Our president offered his services at a discount but everyone needs to eat so it wont be free. We need to talk to IDFG Deputy Director Kathleen Trevors to see what this would look like from a cost/time perspective. Is it a good idea?

2. A petition means nothing in court. We could get people to sign one and it will have no impact on the outcome. However, it is an opportunity for WBF to collect data (emails and other contact info) from folks who care about this issue. You could use this list to keep more people involved/engaged over targeted email, as well as grow your network/membership for issues like this over time. IWF can provide you the software to collect that if you'd like. We can set it all up on the backend. Just know it will not be an effort to move the case in one direction, but instead to keep up to date on this and other bear issues.

3. Amicus Brief: IWF is drafting one and it is a big pain in the ass to figure out legal jargon. I say that only to let you know we are working on it and it may take a few days to get the format and syntax correct. We have paid staff so this falls on us and we're happy to do it. We believe at the moment multiple groups can sign on to one. If not, we can provide you a copy for your group to sign on to. I am shooting for getting this done by Thursday.

4. Publicizing information on this: Guys, we are living in a changing world. Getting combative with these a-holes is what they want. And they know it is a losing battle for us in the court of public opinion. That is why I stress, strongly, we disengage from the crazies and argue the defensible aspects of baiting, the defensible aspects of the North American model, the irresponsibility of allowing game to be managed by legislation and the judiciary, etc. I will repeat, do not call them out. Do not give them the platform. They eat that up. They want to drag us into an ethics conversation on an issue the general public does not support. Make the conversation about who should make these decisions (courts vs game commissions), not whether we should be allowed to bait or not. Talk science. Talk successful recovery of griz even through decades of black bear baiting. These are what I have identified as our strongest talking points:


Here are some good talking points if your drawn into a conversation


- Idaho already does not allow baiting in recovery zone currently.

- Grizzly bears are proliferating even while baiting black bears outside core recovery habitat has been practiced.

- Yes, baiting is divisive. As sportsmen we should always be challenging each other and have thoughtful conversations about hunting.  Those conversations can, and have, eventually come to fruition through game commissions where new policy is set. Let's talk about bear baiting. It's ok to do so. But let's not talk about betraying the Commission model and put important decisions in the hands of judges who know nothing on the subject.

- Management of wildlife through legislation or the judiciary is neither ideal or scientifically sound. Entire agencies full of scientific expertise guide those decisions, which are not taken lightly. Whether you support baiting or not is of no matter. We all need to support these decisions being made by game agencies, commissions, and input from the public. Not one person (a judge).

- Bear baiting is actually defensible. You can take closer and more accurate shots. You can accurately sex as well. Baiting can actually help hunters avoid accidental take of grizzlies.

- This is an inappropriate use of the ESA. How many elk, deer, or bird hunters have had to shoot grizzlies in self-defense? How many berry pickers? Point is, whatever gets humans into these areas sets us up for conflict. Bear baiting is likely the lowest conflict starter (ie- there are far fewer black bear hunters than there are trail runners).

- There are an estimated 40 problem grizzlies killed a year in the three states. As hunters we support efforts to mitigate these conflicts (like infrastructure to keep grizzlies from entering county dumps and becoming habituated to food, wildlife overpasses, whatever). The lawsuit claims 0.33 grizzlies are killed per year by black bear baiting. Certainly, we stand with other hunters and non-hunters to reduce the 0.33/year, but the 40 per year killed by other conflicts.

[idaho guy]

  good stuff! He says it like it is. Thanks again for staying on top of this. Any ideas on how to better publicize this in north Idaho? I still have yet to see any mention of this here. I was thinking foundation for wildlife management ( I know they have their hands full with wolves ) but at least they could send it to members so hunters are aware. Also the trapping group and Rocky Mountain elk etc? Hunters need to know regardless of if they bait or even like it. His approach is perfect I think arguing for game departments to make management decisions instead of uninformed voters and or a judge. I remember in 93 when they tried to get rid of hounds and baiting in Idaho it didn’t fly then but there is a lot of transplants here now. Who knows what would happen today feels like a fight to keep management decisions in the hands of the experts and everybody who hunts Idaho needs to fight that fight

[bearpaw]

n_mathews13 thanks for keeping us informed.

I think the argument against baiting is pretty weak based on .33 mortality on grizzlies per year from bear baiting. A strong argument would be to concentrate efforts on resolving more significant causes of mortality. The huge loss of recreation and losing a needed management tool is not worth it. This is nothing more than an excuse by anti-hunters to shut down another form of hunting.

[n_mathews13]

“Any ideas on how to better publicize this in north Idaho? ”


For starters, I’d get on board with WBF and become a member. That will help keep up on updates and what we should do.

Just send info to whoever it pertains to that may not know this is going on.
I wondered about as simply and making a flyer and putting it on sporting goods pin up boards
I know joe has a lot of groups and foundations on board already. He will let us know what we can do and when.

[idaho guy]

“Any ideas on how to better publicize this in north Idaho? ”


For starters, I’d get on board with WBF and become a member. That will help keep up on updates and what we should do.

Just send info to whoever it pertains to that may not know this is going on.
I wondered about as simply and making a flyer and putting it on sporting goods pin up boards
I know joe has a lot of groups and foundations on board already. He will let us know what we can do and when.

   

Flyer sounds good 👍 I will get on board with wbf I agree with bearpaw that their argument is really weak. I am just not sure it matters when you look at what happened in Washington and also how they delayed Idaho state wolf management WAY beyond the original requirements. This stuff gets in the hands of the wrong judge and science and proper management means nothing (especially one in Missoula somehow these things always seem to end up on his desk).The cancelled grizzly  hunt is a prime example of facts meaning nothing. Thanks again for what you’re doing with this I am on board with wbf! I will get it out to my circle of bear hunters who I think are oblivious that this is even happening.

[n_mathews13]

Sent today:

Hello everyone

Just a quick update on timeline.

Brian Brooks has the Amicus Brief about 1/4 done, and it will take until next week. Sorry about that. Good(ish) news is we have until 30 days after they filed the suit, which was June 5.  So we do have some time to draft it up, send it to our allies and make sure it's good to go.

In the meantime I could use a show of hands/emails who would like to join us on this thing.  If so, I need a quick ONE SENTENCE descriptor of your org. Like this:
Since 1936, the Idaho Wildlife Federation  strives to promote the conservation of Idaho’s wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for current and future generations through public education, outreach, advocacy and policy development as Idaho’s largest coalition of sportsmen and wildlife organizations.

Sorry to continually jam up your emails, we are just very concerned over this issue and want to make sure we are doing everything we can.

Let me know if you want included in amicus brief.



Joe Kondelis | President
Western Bear Foundation | PO Box 2044 Cody, WY 82414 |
direct: 307-899-0461 joek@westernbearfoundation.org| www.westernbearfoundation.org |

[n_mathews13]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bear-hunting-magazine-podcast/id1436632534?i=1000441015475

Real good podcast on this topic

[justyhntr]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bear-hunting-magazine-podcast/id1436632534?i=1000441015475

Real good podcast on this topic

Thanks for keeping us up to date. Listen to the podcast a couple days ago, good stuff.

[n_mathews13]

We have been working on this with a few other larger groups including Wyoming Guides and Outfitters, Safari Club, and Idaho Guides and Outfitters. WYOGA has contacted a lawyer on our behalf and we got some good news the other day. Below is a quote from lawyer. As always we are staying up to date on this and will intervene if necessary.  If you have any questions please let us know!

"At this time, the US Forest Service has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint based on a legal argument that the Plaintiff is not legally entitled to request the relief that it has requested.  Based upon this Motion, the Court has entered an Order putting the case on hold until it can decide whether the case should proceed.  Relevant to WOGA, the Court has also dismissed attempts by other parties, including the Idaho Fish & Game, State of Wyoming, and the Safari Club, to intervene in the case.  The thinking is, if the case is dismissed based on the USFS Motion, there is no longer any case in which to intervene.   Therefore, the urgency to determine whether WOGA wants to intervene is lessened.  Since we have some time, and the February Board meeting is coming up soon, I thought we could discuss those options in more detail at that meeting."

 


 

Joe Kondelis | President
Western Bear Foundation | PO Box 2044 Cody, WY 82414 |
direct: 307-899-0461 joek@westernbearfoundation.org| www.westernbearfoundation.org |



They emailed this today