Montana Wolf - The waiting is over!
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
Topgun 30-06
Active member
MightyHunter---Good retort/reply to the Wyoming comment by BenLamb, LOL! Now we need to get BuzzH in on this (NOT, LOL!!!) because his view is the same as BL's thoughts!!! The comment by Ben Lamb: "Idaho's is far from what Wyoming's approach was. Everything that Idaho is doing is done under the structure of an approved adequate regulatory mechanism. No regulation on wolves outside of the trophy zone means no regulatory mechanism to ensure their viability outside of that zone." is exactly why Wyoming should have been allowed to do long ago what is going to be passed in the near future, and that is kill every one outside the Trophy Zone. The wolves will stay within their agreed upon minimum numbers in the western areas and they are probably already well enough established in some of the "kill on site any time" zone that they will always be there to some extent IMHO.
Last edited:
BuzzH
Well-known member
Mightyhunter,
You need to listen to people that have been involved in this issue from the late 80's/early 90's.
Anyone that could read sign could have predicted, at least 3-4 years in advance, exactly what happened. tjones, BigFin, shoots-straight, 1-pointer, Ben Lamb, myself, to name a few that keep up to speed on the issue easily called it.
The 2 key cases that Molloy ruled on, solidified the case that the above mentioned were trying to make along.
The decision to allow the first wolf hunts in Montana and Idaho in 2009...while EXCLUDING Wyoming was the first "clue"...Molloy didnt mince words, stating that unless Wyoming could come up with an approved plan...and pronto, he'd have no choice but to relist if his ruling to allow the hunts was challenged.
Apparently those that had their head in the sand...and couldnt read the most obvious of sign, thought he wasnt serious.
Shortly after the hunts, a lawsuit was filed, based on the fact that the tri-states were ALL required to have an approved plan before delisting had happened. Of course, good to his word, Molloy ruled to stop the hunts...because of WYOMING'S lack of an accepted plan.
At that point, SFW, BGF took the ridiculous route of trying to gut the ESA. Thats well beyond a joke of an approach. Take a 35+ year old Act of Congress, that most Americans are in favor of...and try to gut it to allow the legal hunting of a contentious animal in a State that doesnt have a USFWS approved plan for that animal.
Always a good idea...and about what you'd expect from SFW and BGF.
Their "approach" was squashed at no shock to anyone that followed the issue.
At the same time Simpson and Tester, who COULD read sign, did what any good Represetative from ID and MT should do. They listened to Molloys ruling and knew they had to shed Wyoming and their shit wolf plan if they ever wanted a chance to manage wolves in their states.
Thats exactly what they did...and it held up in court and will continue to hold up in court.
Also, Ben Lamb is 100% right that if Wyoming would have dropped the dual classification in 2004-2005, we wouldnt be having this discussion.
Wyoming has stalled wolf delisting and management of same at a rate that would make any PETA member proud. Wyoming delayed it wayyyy better than an anti-hunting group ever could have.
Also, for the record, the hunters I talk to in Wyoming are getting really tired of this issue. In particular when neighboring states are having seasons and taking control of management...while they sit on the side-lines. The wolf plan in Wyoming was not written to what hunters in this state wanted, it was written with the interests of livestock producers and landowners in mind at the expense of sportsmen and their PUBLIC wildlife.
It should come as no shock that groups like SFW and BGF think Wyoming has the best plan...they are in full support of giving control of wildlife to landowners and outfitters, the average hunter can have the scraps. They also have to make a lame attempt to save face with their membership since they trashed Simpson/Tester.
SFW, BGF, and the state of Wyoming are getting exactly what they called down...and anyone without their head in their aaa...butt could see it coming from 2 miles.
You need to listen to people that have been involved in this issue from the late 80's/early 90's.
Anyone that could read sign could have predicted, at least 3-4 years in advance, exactly what happened. tjones, BigFin, shoots-straight, 1-pointer, Ben Lamb, myself, to name a few that keep up to speed on the issue easily called it.
The 2 key cases that Molloy ruled on, solidified the case that the above mentioned were trying to make along.
The decision to allow the first wolf hunts in Montana and Idaho in 2009...while EXCLUDING Wyoming was the first "clue"...Molloy didnt mince words, stating that unless Wyoming could come up with an approved plan...and pronto, he'd have no choice but to relist if his ruling to allow the hunts was challenged.
Apparently those that had their head in the sand...and couldnt read the most obvious of sign, thought he wasnt serious.
Shortly after the hunts, a lawsuit was filed, based on the fact that the tri-states were ALL required to have an approved plan before delisting had happened. Of course, good to his word, Molloy ruled to stop the hunts...because of WYOMING'S lack of an accepted plan.
At that point, SFW, BGF took the ridiculous route of trying to gut the ESA. Thats well beyond a joke of an approach. Take a 35+ year old Act of Congress, that most Americans are in favor of...and try to gut it to allow the legal hunting of a contentious animal in a State that doesnt have a USFWS approved plan for that animal.
Always a good idea...and about what you'd expect from SFW and BGF.
Their "approach" was squashed at no shock to anyone that followed the issue.
At the same time Simpson and Tester, who COULD read sign, did what any good Represetative from ID and MT should do. They listened to Molloys ruling and knew they had to shed Wyoming and their shit wolf plan if they ever wanted a chance to manage wolves in their states.
Thats exactly what they did...and it held up in court and will continue to hold up in court.
Also, Ben Lamb is 100% right that if Wyoming would have dropped the dual classification in 2004-2005, we wouldnt be having this discussion.
Wyoming has stalled wolf delisting and management of same at a rate that would make any PETA member proud. Wyoming delayed it wayyyy better than an anti-hunting group ever could have.
Also, for the record, the hunters I talk to in Wyoming are getting really tired of this issue. In particular when neighboring states are having seasons and taking control of management...while they sit on the side-lines. The wolf plan in Wyoming was not written to what hunters in this state wanted, it was written with the interests of livestock producers and landowners in mind at the expense of sportsmen and their PUBLIC wildlife.
It should come as no shock that groups like SFW and BGF think Wyoming has the best plan...they are in full support of giving control of wildlife to landowners and outfitters, the average hunter can have the scraps. They also have to make a lame attempt to save face with their membership since they trashed Simpson/Tester.
SFW, BGF, and the state of Wyoming are getting exactly what they called down...and anyone without their head in their aaa...butt could see it coming from 2 miles.
Last edited:
Topgun,
If WY adopted the originally proposed plan (trophy game statewide) they could have had shoot on sight outside of a predetermined area. WY's trophy game statute is written broadly enough to allow for open quotas and season, just like Idaho is doing. Only difference is that you'd have to buy the $5 wolf tag.
Chest pounding aside, the predator zone does nothing that the trophy zone could do, other than deny compensation to livestock producers who have been impacted by wolves outside of the trophy zone.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Predicted with hindsight?
Really? Since 2004?
Laffin'....
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=217357&highlight=wolf+delisting
Who stalled delisting, oh the beauty of hindsight
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=217390&highlight=wolf+delisting
Pay attention to shoots-straights comment:
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=230112&highlight=wolf+delisting
fowladdict
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 2,545
18 more days and someone from MM will be buying Buzz a beer.
mightyhunter
New member
Ben Lamb,
Absolutely yes, you and your fans are right, Montana and Idaho, are hunting wolves in 2011 and Wyoming hunters are not. Your comment said this would have been going on for the last 5 to 6 years. That is what I am claiming to be total BS (buffalo sh**). You often downplay the power of the animal right's groups, their money and their political ties in the discussion. In my opinion, that is naive and it clouds your judgement and the conclusions you often express.
If I were going to engage in the same kind of speculation that you do on this subject, I could blame this whole debacle on Montana. Montana's Senator Max Baucus (D) was responsible for the appointment of Donald Molloy to the Federal Bench. The majority of the unfavorable decisions on the ESA in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have come from this source. Does that make it Montana's fault that this wolf debacle has continued as long as it has? I know that you are a big supporter of both Baucus and Tester so you would likely say "no".
It is my belief that the fault for the wolf debacle lies in many places, including the following:
1) Wyoming's unwillingness to compromise and also Montana and Idaho's giving in to the federal government;
2) The eco-elites and animal rights groups that abuse our political process with their money and lobbying;
3) The eco-elites and animal rights groups that abuse our legal system with the EAJA;
4) The failure of SFW, RMEF, MDF and other similiar groups to get out in front of the wolf issue many years ago;
5) The unwillingness of many sportsman to voice their opinions and get involved in this issue before it exploded;
6) The greed of various sportsman's groups which prevented them from getting on the same page when it counted;
7) The current partisan nature of politics in our country and its total corruption by money;
8) The public's total complacency on the issue of judicial appointments;
9) The public's ignorance of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Consitution and their willingness to allow the federal government to continue to usurp powers that rightfully belong to the states;
10) The self serving nature of the USFWS. No endangered species with control by the USFWS= no job and no bureaucracy. They have no incentive to see any species delisted and every incentive to see new species listed;
11) Finally, the ESA should have been clarified, amended and changed many years ago to address how and when species delisting will actually take place. Now it is performed in a drawn out willy-nilly fashion with little or no deference to science, finality, the states and their citizens who are stuck with these decisions.
I have no problem being challenged on the facts, arguments and my opinions. If you think that none of these factors had anything to do with the current wolf situation, tell me why.
Absolutely yes, you and your fans are right, Montana and Idaho, are hunting wolves in 2011 and Wyoming hunters are not. Your comment said this would have been going on for the last 5 to 6 years. That is what I am claiming to be total BS (buffalo sh**). You often downplay the power of the animal right's groups, their money and their political ties in the discussion. In my opinion, that is naive and it clouds your judgement and the conclusions you often express.
If I were going to engage in the same kind of speculation that you do on this subject, I could blame this whole debacle on Montana. Montana's Senator Max Baucus (D) was responsible for the appointment of Donald Molloy to the Federal Bench. The majority of the unfavorable decisions on the ESA in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have come from this source. Does that make it Montana's fault that this wolf debacle has continued as long as it has? I know that you are a big supporter of both Baucus and Tester so you would likely say "no".
It is my belief that the fault for the wolf debacle lies in many places, including the following:
1) Wyoming's unwillingness to compromise and also Montana and Idaho's giving in to the federal government;
2) The eco-elites and animal rights groups that abuse our political process with their money and lobbying;
3) The eco-elites and animal rights groups that abuse our legal system with the EAJA;
4) The failure of SFW, RMEF, MDF and other similiar groups to get out in front of the wolf issue many years ago;
5) The unwillingness of many sportsman to voice their opinions and get involved in this issue before it exploded;
6) The greed of various sportsman's groups which prevented them from getting on the same page when it counted;
7) The current partisan nature of politics in our country and its total corruption by money;
8) The public's total complacency on the issue of judicial appointments;
9) The public's ignorance of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Consitution and their willingness to allow the federal government to continue to usurp powers that rightfully belong to the states;
10) The self serving nature of the USFWS. No endangered species with control by the USFWS= no job and no bureaucracy. They have no incentive to see any species delisted and every incentive to see new species listed;
11) Finally, the ESA should have been clarified, amended and changed many years ago to address how and when species delisting will actually take place. Now it is performed in a drawn out willy-nilly fashion with little or no deference to science, finality, the states and their citizens who are stuck with these decisions.
I have no problem being challenged on the facts, arguments and my opinions. If you think that none of these factors had anything to do with the current wolf situation, tell me why.
Mighty,
The power of the animal rights groups is only based upon their legal challenges. If WY had adopted the original plan, as proposed by WGFD, then the requirements for the ESA to delist would have been met, and assuming that the fed (I know, big assumption) wrote the delisting rule correctly, then the legal challenges that would have occurred would have been groundless. The key to all of this is to get all states included in the EIS to write plans that were "adequate regulatory mechanisms" that could pass muster. WY failed to do so. Genetic diversity and connectivity were reached in 2005. That science is clear, even the plaintiffs had to agree to that.
My analysis is only based on working on this issue for 8 or 9 years, at an almost full time level. I realize that doesn't carry much sway with folks who have been involved for a couple of years, and who disagree with the position that I've formulated.
Molloy's ruling was based on a solid interpretation of the law. Your speculation is ignoring that little aspect. Molloy certainly didn't rule how I wanted him to do, but give me the legal analysis as to why his rulings were wrong.
As for TEster and Baucus, yes, I think they've done a hell of a lot of good for hunters and anglers. So has Mike Simpson of Idaho. Before I get accused of being partisan, I'd also say that if it wasn't for Republican legislators in the Bitterroot, we'd not have a wolf hunt this year. Pat Connell (R-Darby) and Ron Ehli (R-Hamilton) stepped up to the plate and as freshmen legislators in the circus that was the 62nd MT Legislature, defended the MT wolf plan, and kept us from following the same path as WY, which would have derailed Simpson/Tester, and kept wolves listed.
I don't give a rip about party, I care about the outcome and the issue.
You forgot the UN and black helicopters.
1.MT and ID did what was necessary to adopt plans that could withstand litigation. WY did not. I'm with you 50% here.
2. Absolutely agree
3. FYI - they only get paid if they win - they only win if the Fed screws up. Blame the Fed for screwing up as well as the litigators for exploiting the system.
4. Most groups were operating within the framework of the ESA. To think that sportsmen's groups weren't involved is erroneous.
5. I've never met a hunter who hasn't voiced a strong opinion on wolves. I don't think this bears up what is actually going on. Wolf meetings in ID, MT and WY have been contentious since 1988.
6. You bet your ass. 100%
7. 100%
8. meh
9. The 10th amendment debate ignores centuries of case law that has effectively settled this issue. In the context of the ESA, there is a lot of precedent to reinforce the role of the Fed in wildlife management. This argument holds no water.
10. The USFWS has been leading the charge for delisting. This is 180 degrees from what is actually occuring
11. I agree that the ESA could use some reform. However, see # 7
"Montana and Idaho's giving in to the federal government"
Didn't you post previously that Idaho was so aggressive that that it could backfire and cause problems for surrounding states? Now you list Idaho giving in to the federal government as a problem that prolonged the protected status? How are these two comments not completely opposite? The bottom line is Idaho and Montana came up with acceptable management plans. Because Wyoming didn't wolves remained protected. Idaho and Montana are currently managing wolves using management plans based on the best scientific data available. How can Idaho or Montana possibly have any fault in wolves not currently being delisted in Wyoming when both states have control?
Didn't you post previously that Idaho was so aggressive that that it could backfire and cause problems for surrounding states? Now you list Idaho giving in to the federal government as a problem that prolonged the protected status? How are these two comments not completely opposite? The bottom line is Idaho and Montana came up with acceptable management plans. Because Wyoming didn't wolves remained protected. Idaho and Montana are currently managing wolves using management plans based on the best scientific data available. How can Idaho or Montana possibly have any fault in wolves not currently being delisted in Wyoming when both states have control?
BuzzH
Well-known member
6speed,
Good post.
Its easy...you see Montana and Idaho were expected to stick together with Wyomings failed plan and allow wolves to continue to be listed and not managed under their approved plans.
MT and ID should still be expected to not have a wolf season or wolf management just like Wyoming.
Wyoming has always been in the right on this issue...and thats why wolves are still listed in Wyoming and why Wyoming hunters are not enjoying a wolf season/management like Montana and Idaho.
Because MT and ID, both had acceptable plans, we are now the bad guys for not sticking with Wyoming and its failed wolf plan and desire to gut the ESA via SFW and BGF. Its perfectly fine for the WY stockgrowers association., SFW, and BGF to kick WY hunters to the curb and play marlboro man at the expense of WY's wildlife.
You need to get up to speed on this...Wyoming is just a victim of circumstance...
Good post.
Its easy...you see Montana and Idaho were expected to stick together with Wyomings failed plan and allow wolves to continue to be listed and not managed under their approved plans.
MT and ID should still be expected to not have a wolf season or wolf management just like Wyoming.
Wyoming has always been in the right on this issue...and thats why wolves are still listed in Wyoming and why Wyoming hunters are not enjoying a wolf season/management like Montana and Idaho.
Because MT and ID, both had acceptable plans, we are now the bad guys for not sticking with Wyoming and its failed wolf plan and desire to gut the ESA via SFW and BGF. Its perfectly fine for the WY stockgrowers association., SFW, and BGF to kick WY hunters to the curb and play marlboro man at the expense of WY's wildlife.
You need to get up to speed on this...Wyoming is just a victim of circumstance...
Last edited:
mdunc8
Well-known member
Mighty, I'll let everyone deal with the other particulars but have you not seen the list of species that warrant listing but are precluded due to higher priorities? There's definitely not a shortage of critters that the USFWS could be dealing with. I'm sure the USFWS would rather have their hands full with the wolf issue than even begin to think about what's gonna happen when sage grouse get listed.
npaden
Well-known member
Is this a live hunt thread or a wolf debate thread?
There have been plenty of wolf debate threads over the last year, but I'm hoping that this turns into a live hunt thread soon.
Let's get on with the hunting part already!!
I want to see Randy hugging a big ol Alpha dog!
Good luck!
There have been plenty of wolf debate threads over the last year, but I'm hoping that this turns into a live hunt thread soon.
Let's get on with the hunting part already!!
I want to see Randy hugging a big ol Alpha dog!
Good luck!
JohnCushman
Well-known member
It did start out as a live hunt thread...lol Good luck, Fin!!
JoseCuervo
New member
I have never been called "eco-elite" before, I kind of like it.
I am the 1%!!!
I am the 1%!!!
Is this a live hunt thread or a wolf debate thread?
There have been plenty of wolf debate threads over the last year, but I'm hoping that this turns into a live hunt thread soon.
Let's get on with the hunting part already!!
I want to see Randy hugging a big ol Alpha dog!
Good luck!
Good call. I was thinking the same thing. Let's hear how the morning has been for BF and Critter.
mightyhunter
New member
By the way, I only commented on the Wyoming wolf issue because Big Fin asked me to in an earlier in this post. If you want one side of this issue just listen to Ben and Buzz.
Ben Lamb,
Black Helicopters and the UN, certainly you can do better than that. Ben,you love to scapegoat as long as fault doesn't fall on your political buddies, Tester and Baucus or the groups that support them. Do you lobby these two in your position? Are they your friends? Do you honestly believe that the eco-elite groups did not seek out a friendly face on the federal bench with Judge Molloy? By your reasoning, every federal district judge in Wyoming, Idaho and Montana would have ruled the exact same way as Judge Molloy. Their hands were tied and they would have had no choice. Really? You are extremely naive when it comes to the nature of politically appointed federal judges. Absent corruption or criminal behavior, federal district judges are untouchable. The people that nominate and appoint them know this and so do the judges.
What is your opinion of the appointment of Dana Christensen as Montana's new Federal District Judge? I posted on this a few days ago on MM and OYOA and got almost zero response. That kind of supports my earlier position about the complacency of the public on the issue of judicial appointments. Your guy, Max Baucus, sought his appointment to the federal bench. Earlier, Max Baucus had used him to do the vetting of the Melodee Hanes appointment as U.S. Attorney for Montana. During that vetting, Christensen failed to discover that Max and Melodee were involved. That must surely just be a coincidence.
We have conflicting rulings on Obamacare that are now proceeding to the U.S. Supreme Court. By your reasoning, they all should have come to the same decision. Right? They are all just interpreting the same law.
What will you say if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturns the latest ruling of Judge Molloy on the wolf ? I find that such a ruling is doubtful but certainly not impossible. If the issue is so clearcut, we should have had a decision by now. Courts and judges can twist the law to effectuate any result they seek. Only time will tell. Do you know the makeup of the judicial panel deciding that case? It might surprise you. Did you predict the last decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the last decision of Judge Molloy that kept the grizzly bear listed? If I decide to come out of retirement as a lawyer, I may need your services to predict the outcome of any litigation I am involved in.
Buzz H,
I love the personal attacks and the name calling. You remind me of the bully in elementary school that was always taking lunch money from little kids with his threats and bluster. I seriously doubt that anyone with any authority has ever listened to much of what you say on the subject of the wolf. Your bombastic behavior turns people off. You blame the two R's for everything. Republicans and Ranchers. If I were still practicing law, I would love to cross examine you under oath. Push a few buttons and you would go off like a rocket.
I am curious as to how you work for the USFS during the day yet find time to post during the day on MM and OYOA. I want to congratulate you on your 2011 hunting season? Six weeks of paid vacation courtesy of the taxpayers must make for a great time in the Fall. Certainly a great gig if you can get it.
By the way, I liked the opinions you expressed on MM concerning corner jumping and trespass. It is too bad that you had to personally attack the fellow that disagreed with you. I think you indicated he didn't have a single firing brain cell.
Big Fin,
Good luck with your wolf hunt. I am waiting to see the pictures. Hopefully, the hunting gods will be more kind this time. You have worked hard this year in your hunts. All the best.
Mightyhunter
Ben Lamb,
Black Helicopters and the UN, certainly you can do better than that. Ben,you love to scapegoat as long as fault doesn't fall on your political buddies, Tester and Baucus or the groups that support them. Do you lobby these two in your position? Are they your friends? Do you honestly believe that the eco-elite groups did not seek out a friendly face on the federal bench with Judge Molloy? By your reasoning, every federal district judge in Wyoming, Idaho and Montana would have ruled the exact same way as Judge Molloy. Their hands were tied and they would have had no choice. Really? You are extremely naive when it comes to the nature of politically appointed federal judges. Absent corruption or criminal behavior, federal district judges are untouchable. The people that nominate and appoint them know this and so do the judges.
What is your opinion of the appointment of Dana Christensen as Montana's new Federal District Judge? I posted on this a few days ago on MM and OYOA and got almost zero response. That kind of supports my earlier position about the complacency of the public on the issue of judicial appointments. Your guy, Max Baucus, sought his appointment to the federal bench. Earlier, Max Baucus had used him to do the vetting of the Melodee Hanes appointment as U.S. Attorney for Montana. During that vetting, Christensen failed to discover that Max and Melodee were involved. That must surely just be a coincidence.
We have conflicting rulings on Obamacare that are now proceeding to the U.S. Supreme Court. By your reasoning, they all should have come to the same decision. Right? They are all just interpreting the same law.
What will you say if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturns the latest ruling of Judge Molloy on the wolf ? I find that such a ruling is doubtful but certainly not impossible. If the issue is so clearcut, we should have had a decision by now. Courts and judges can twist the law to effectuate any result they seek. Only time will tell. Do you know the makeup of the judicial panel deciding that case? It might surprise you. Did you predict the last decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the last decision of Judge Molloy that kept the grizzly bear listed? If I decide to come out of retirement as a lawyer, I may need your services to predict the outcome of any litigation I am involved in.
Buzz H,
I love the personal attacks and the name calling. You remind me of the bully in elementary school that was always taking lunch money from little kids with his threats and bluster. I seriously doubt that anyone with any authority has ever listened to much of what you say on the subject of the wolf. Your bombastic behavior turns people off. You blame the two R's for everything. Republicans and Ranchers. If I were still practicing law, I would love to cross examine you under oath. Push a few buttons and you would go off like a rocket.
I am curious as to how you work for the USFS during the day yet find time to post during the day on MM and OYOA. I want to congratulate you on your 2011 hunting season? Six weeks of paid vacation courtesy of the taxpayers must make for a great time in the Fall. Certainly a great gig if you can get it.
By the way, I liked the opinions you expressed on MM concerning corner jumping and trespass. It is too bad that you had to personally attack the fellow that disagreed with you. I think you indicated he didn't have a single firing brain cell.
Big Fin,
Good luck with your wolf hunt. I am waiting to see the pictures. Hopefully, the hunting gods will be more kind this time. You have worked hard this year in your hunts. All the best.
Mightyhunter
Lawnboy
Well-known member
Lets just put Ben, Buzz and Mighty in a steel cage match and settle this.
I'm also hoping to see fur pictures real soon.mightyhunter
New member
Lawnboy,
I am in. Where is the cage?
Mighty
I am in. Where is the cage?
Mighty
BuzzH
Well-known member
mightyhunter,
Not sure what obamacare has to do with wolves...only you could manage to twist that into the wolf issue...nice work.
I put the blame on the people that cause situations, I dont spend any of my time looking for red herrings. You whine about bullying? How do you explain the livestock industry in Wyoming selling out the hunters in Wyoming and Wyomings PUBLIC wildlife for the last 10 years by playing the marlboro man? The livestock interests have lost NOTHING by their bullheaded insistence on dual classification. They dont have anything to lose...if wolves stay listed, they continue to kill Wyomings PUBLIC wildlife (deer, elk, moose, etc). They constantly whine all the time about elk, deer, moose, pronhorn, etc. for competing with their livestock, breaking down their fences, eating their hay, etc. Further, with less big-game they dont have to be bothered by those pesky hunters cutting their fences, leaving their gates open, beating up their grandma's, asking for permission to hunt, etc. That stuff is all a huge pain in their ass...wolves help solve that problem. They have no real flesh in the game...not even their livestock. Wolf killed livestock is compensated at 167% of the value. Beats hauling them to market...
I can assure you that I'd be no fun if you had me on a stand for anything...mainly because I'm typically a good 2-3 steps ahead of people like you. You'd get nowhere fast, I can assure you, I've seen me in action before. Being a lawyer doesnt atuomatically make anyone smart...if only obviously.
You're wrong, I dont get 6 weeks...only 5 weeks plus one day. I also work a maxi-flex schedule and I can work anytime I want between 5 a.m. and 10 p.m. over a 14 day pay period. I usally work about 120-200 hours of over-time each year as well...never take time and a half for it though...all comp. time payed out at my normal hourly rate. I chose my field of study, my education, and my job wisely. Anybody out there can do the same.
Just saw the cage match comment...you wouldnt be in the cage long...if you could even find it.
Not sure what obamacare has to do with wolves...only you could manage to twist that into the wolf issue...nice work.
I put the blame on the people that cause situations, I dont spend any of my time looking for red herrings. You whine about bullying? How do you explain the livestock industry in Wyoming selling out the hunters in Wyoming and Wyomings PUBLIC wildlife for the last 10 years by playing the marlboro man? The livestock interests have lost NOTHING by their bullheaded insistence on dual classification. They dont have anything to lose...if wolves stay listed, they continue to kill Wyomings PUBLIC wildlife (deer, elk, moose, etc). They constantly whine all the time about elk, deer, moose, pronhorn, etc. for competing with their livestock, breaking down their fences, eating their hay, etc. Further, with less big-game they dont have to be bothered by those pesky hunters cutting their fences, leaving their gates open, beating up their grandma's, asking for permission to hunt, etc. That stuff is all a huge pain in their ass...wolves help solve that problem. They have no real flesh in the game...not even their livestock. Wolf killed livestock is compensated at 167% of the value. Beats hauling them to market...
I can assure you that I'd be no fun if you had me on a stand for anything...mainly because I'm typically a good 2-3 steps ahead of people like you. You'd get nowhere fast, I can assure you, I've seen me in action before. Being a lawyer doesnt atuomatically make anyone smart...if only obviously.
You're wrong, I dont get 6 weeks...only 5 weeks plus one day. I also work a maxi-flex schedule and I can work anytime I want between 5 a.m. and 10 p.m. over a 14 day pay period. I usally work about 120-200 hours of over-time each year as well...never take time and a half for it though...all comp. time payed out at my normal hourly rate. I chose my field of study, my education, and my job wisely. Anybody out there can do the same.
Just saw the cage match comment...you wouldnt be in the cage long...if you could even find it.
whyelkhunt
New member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 122
This reminds me of the saying "dont get in an argument with an idiot because others will not be able to tell the difference"
Similar threads
