Just saw this posted by Tom over at the Black Bear Blog: Judge places gray wolf back on endangered species list.

Tom says this:

Judge Donald Molloy of the U.S. District Court in Missoula, Montana returned the Northern Rockies gray wolf back under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. One report stated that Molloy said he thought the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acted “prematurely” in removing the wolf from protection “despite scientific evidence”.

Once again this ruling shows us that science plays no role in the decisions that drive the Endangered Species Act or any kind of wildlife management programs for that matter. Whichever organization pushing or defending a lawsuit that can present the most emotional case wins, the rest can be put to hell.

Of course those who filed the lawsuit seeking the injunction are happy and stating that removing the wolf from protection will endanger its survival. The scientists, whose job it is to manage wildlife, say that is not true but obviously have little say in these matters anymore.

This is ludicrous. Just when I think nothing will surprise me any more, something does. I wouldn’t want this judge deciding a traffic ticket.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Sharon Hayden (614) 888-4868 ext. 226

July 14, 2008

Sportsmen Against HSUS Fund Issues Fact Sheet

(Columbus) – A new fact sheet that details the dangers of the nation’s largest and most active anti-hunting group is available from the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance.

The educational fact sheet is part of the organization’s Sportsmen Against HSUS Campaign, designed to educate sportsmen and sportswomen, elected officials, media decision makers and the public at large about the nation’s largest animal rights group.

“Thousands of people each year donate millions of dollars to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) without truly knowing where their money is going,” said U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Senior Vice President Rick Story. “Our idea is to give sportsmen the information they need to understand the dangers of the HSUS and its anti-hunting agenda and to pass the information on to friends and family.”

New members of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance will receive a copy of the HSUS FACT SHEET. Memberships start at $25. Click here, or go to www.ussportsmen.org and click on Join Now to become a U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance member.

Also, sportsmen who contribute one dollar to the fund will receive a fact sheet about HSUS that details the organization’s anti-hunting programs, its annual funding and other important facts.

Money collected will be used exclusively to continue the battle against the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and its animal rights campaign.

The Sportsmen Against HSUS drive will also fund campaigns that combat the public policy threats initiated and supported by the HSUS. The HSUS lobbying machine claims to have played a role in getting 86 different state laws passed in 2007 alone.

Sportsmen who wish to receive the FACT sheet or to otherwise contribute to the Sportsmen Against HSUS Fund may send their contribution to Sharon Hayden, Communications Assistant, U.S. Sportsmen’s Aliance, 801 Kingsmill Parkway, Columbus, OH, 43229.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and its work, call (614) 888-4868 or visit its website, www.ussportsmen.org.

Off-highway vehicle bill signed by Governor Janet Napolitano

Long-awaited legislation that will help better manage off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreation and protect wildlife habitat has been signed by Governor Janet Napolitano.

SB 1167 will provide long-overdue resources to better manage issues created by the dramatic increase in OHV use in Arizona (347 percent in the last decade). Irresponsible riding has damaged habitat and created the potential for closures of some areas.

With the signing of SB 1167, revenue raised through an estimated $20 annual user fee on off-highway vehicles will help provide funding for additional law enforcement, trail/facility maintenance and reconstruction, rider education and information (including identification of lawful places for operators to ride), and mitigation of resource damage from OHVs.

The bill passed through the Arizona House of Representatives in April by a vote of 42-13 and the Arizona Senate last week by a vote of 16-7 with 7 absent.

The now signed OHV bill will become law on Jan. 1, 2009. For more information, visit www.azgfd.gov/ohv.

Well, some said it was too much; others argued not enough. Some were afraid becasue the fees were unspecified. I say “Finally, something!” I hope this starts to change the tide of OHV abuse.

Information needed to solve deer poaching near Whitehorse Lake

The Arizona Game and Fish Department is asking for the public’s help in finding a poacher that killed a large mule deer buck on the evening of June 13 or 14. The poaching occurred near Whitehorse Lake along Forest Road 110, southeast of Williams.

The deer had large antlers, and it was shot and left along the road to waste.

“This is a blatant example of poachers’ disrespect for wildlife, and the laws and seasons that are established to protect our wildlife resources,” said Larry Phoenix, Game and Fish field supervisor. “With the public’s help, we can catch the poacher. If you were in the area recently, please think back about anything you might have seen or heard, or any conversations you might have had. Maybe someone doesn’t realize he or she has the key to solving this case.”

Wildlife resources are owned by the residents of Arizona, and poaching of wildlife is considered a major loss.

Anyone with information about this poaching incident can call the department’s Operation Game Thief hotline toll free at (800) 352-0700. Callers may be eligible for a reward up to $250 in this case. All calls may remain confidential upon request.

Poachers sure are a special breed aren’t they? Gutless jerks.

I have mixed feelings about this. First, she did a great job. Second, she was right on a few points. Third, she has been brain-washed by the environmentalists and touchy-feely crowd. My daughter and I just watched it together. My daughter is 10, and thought the speech was wonderful. We then had a talk about the issues raised.

Watch the video and tell me what you think.

To summarize, I admire her effort, but respectfully disagree.

Not sure what I think. As much as I disagree with the way the Feds are handling wolf introductions - I fear that the “3-S” method (shoot, shovel, shut up) just reinforces some peoples’ notions that those opposed are hillbillies and Neanderthals.

Read the full article HERE.

3 Mexican gray wolves killed illegally

15 comments by Kate Nolan - Jul. 3, 2008 04:14 PM
The Arizona Republic

Of nine Mexican gray wolves that died in the Southwest in 2008, at least three were killed illegally, Federal authorities say.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identified three female wolves and a possible male illegally shot in Arizona or New Mexico. Each of the dead wolves was an “alpha” or lead member of a pack.

Two other Mexican wolves, protected in the Southwest under the Endangered Species Act, were killed in traffic and another female died of natural causes, leaving behind two pups that did not survive. Fish and Wildlife did not disclose where the wolves were killed.

“I am disturbed that there are suspicious circumstances around their deaths and I want to know what happened to each wolf,” Fish and Wildlife Southwest regional director Benjamin Tuggle said in a prepared statement Thursday.Illegally killing a wolf can result in fines up to $50,000 and a year in prison.

From AZGFD:

Mexican Wolf AMWG Public Meeting in Morenci AZ on July 30, 2008

Adaptive Management Work Group Public Meeting

Location: Morenci AZ, at the Morenci Club in Morenci Plaza (next to Basha’s Grocery)
Time: AZ Time: 6 pm – 9 pm
Host: Arizona Game and Fish Department
Participants: Public meeting, open to all

Note: agenda may be modified during meeting; meeting will be adjourned early if business has been completed.)

Agenda
6:00 pm Welcome, introductions, ground rules, and agenda review
6:15 pm Interagency Field Team items
· Staffing changes
· 2008 breeding season (results to date)
· Depredation and nuisance responses in 2nd quarter 2008
· Outreach activities in 2nd quarter 2008
· Other IFT items
7:15 pm Break
7:30 pm AMOC items
· Update on NEPA scoping process for possible changes in the 10(j) rule
· Project guidelines and practices for loaning radio telemetry receivers
· Discussion of population objectives for the Reintroduction Project
· Update on Lead Agency consideration of Clarification Memos for SOPs 11.0 (Depredation Incident Investigation) and 13.0 (Control of Mexican Wolves)
· Other AMOC items
8:30 pm Other business
8:50 pm Dates and locations of future AMWG meeting
9:00 pm Adjournment

Notes: (1) Information on the Mexican Wolf Blue Range Reintroduction Project is available on the Internet at http://azgfd.gov/wolf and http://mexicanwolf.fws.gov. (2) Notices for AMWG meetings and other news about issues pertaining to the Reintroduction Project are disseminated electronically through a self-subscription newsletter, the Endangered Species Updates. A self-subscription form is available at: http://azgfd.gov/signup. (3) Send email messages to the Reintroduction Project to: mexwolf@azgfd.gov; this is a passive account, so messages received will be read but individual responses will not be sent. (4) Send postal mail to: Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project, 5000 West Carefree Highway, Phoenix, Arizona 85086.

This is pretty good. I found it posted over at the CWT Forums.

40 Reasons to Ban Guns

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, Detroit & Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates,which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense - give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.

14. These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.

15. “The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.

18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting,government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s,anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations,variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.

19. The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”

27. Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA was a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don’t need a gun for self- protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

37. “Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.

Mike Hanback of the BIG DEER Blog had a chance to bounce some questions off of John McCain.

Some snippets:

I am proud of my environmental record. I believe that somewhere along the line we (Republican Party) lost the Teddy Roosevelt commitment to the great outdoors, but at the same time I think the environmental movement was hijacked by extreme environmentalists. Teddy Roosevelt would never agree with Sierra Club on a broad variety of issues, that’s just a fact. I think we Republications let them become the voice of the quote “environmental movement” when we were clearly the leaders.

“I am proud to run on my record of consistent support of the Second Amendment and the Constitution,” Senator McCain said. “It’s pretty obvious that Senator Obama has taken positions that are clearly not the same views I have of the Second Amendment, and where the NRA is.”

Would he sign a bill to ban so-called assault weapons? “No, I’d veto,” said the Senator.

“I’m happy that in Arizona we have a concealed carry law, and I strongly support that,” he said.

For more of Mike’s interviews, and lots of other cool hunting stuff, please visit the link posted above.

From SCI

For Immediate Release
June 5, 2008

SCI Wins Important ESA Victory in Court

Washington, D.C. — On June 3, 2008, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals handed Safari Club International an important victory in an Endangered Species Act (ESA) case involving “enhancement” permits. These permits, issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), authorize a state or other entity to “take” a small number of an endangered species if doing so enhances the overall survival of the species. Such permits are often necessary to allow states to properly manage wildlife and their habitats.

The appellate panel granted SCI’s request to vacate a 2006 D.C. district court opinion issued in a case brought by the Humane Society of the United States and other animal rights groups. Safari Club International and Safari Club International Foundation joined the case as intervenors to defend the legality of an ESA permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the state of Wisconsin. The “enhancement” permit authorized state wildlife officials to lethally remove wolves that repeatedly preyed on livestock and pets. The appellate panel vacated the district court’s ruling in which the lower court found that the ESA does not ever allow the issuance of enhancement of survival permits for the lethal removal of an endangered species.

The FWS delisted the gray wolves of the Western Great Lakes in 2007. Upon delisting, the question of the legality of Wisconsin’s permit became moot, but the district court’s ruling persisted as a deterrent to future enhancement permit activity. SCI persuaded the Court of Appeals to vacate the district court’s opinion. Although the FWS also appealed the decision, the Court indicated that SCI’s involvement was essential to the Court vacating the lower court’s decision.

The Court of Appeals’ ruling effectively wipes the slate clean on the question of whether the FWS has legal authority to issue enhancement permits for the lethal removal of members of an endangered species.

SCI President Dennis Anderson said, “This victory underscores the important role that SCI plays in wildlife litigation. The Appellate Court made it clear that SCI’s request to vacate the district court’s opinion made all the difference in its decision. By participating, SCI has neutralized a troublesome lower court decision on the FWS’s authority to issue enhancement of survival permits. By doing so, SCI has advanced both sound state management of wildlife and sustainable use conservation.”

Contact:
Nelson Freeman
Governmental Affairs
and Public Relations
Safari Club International
nfreeman@safariclub.org

Wow, this story has it all - a rare bird, ATV recklessness, access issues.. you name it.

You can read the full story online HERE

I know the exact spot they are talking about. Saw it on my first-ever javelina hunt, and have been there quite a few times since. Not sure if I saw a southwestern willow flycatcher though. Here is some of the article:

Road war: bird vs. residents
San Pedro River crossing wrecks animal’s habitat, groups say

Article by Lynh Bui - Jun. 3, 2008 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Pinal County and environmental groups are at odds over a river crossing near Dudleyville that is home to an endangered songbird.

The Center for Biological Diversity, the Nature Conservancy and the Bureau of Land Management have filed complaints against Pinal, saying the county is illegally maintaining a road near the San Pedro River that allows cars and off-road vehicles to destroy the habitat of the Southwestern willow flycatcher.

But Pinal officials and residents in Dudleyville say the road has been there for decades and closing it would mean commuters and emergency vehicles would have to drive an extra 7 to 10 miles to get to the major highway out of town.

The Southwestern willow flycatcher has been on the federal endangered-species list since 1995.

With about 2,000 of the birds scattered throughout the Southwest and California, the lower San Pedro River is one of the two largest willow flycatcher habitats in the state, said Robin Silver, co-founder and board member of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Arizona is home to about one-third of the flycatcher population, which has dropped by about 50 percent in the past few years.

“The problem is uncontrolled access to off-road vehicles, which are tearing up the river,” Silver said.

Keeping the road open as a “shortcut for the convenience of a few people in Dudleyville” is destroying the birds’ habitat, Silver said.

But the crossing is more than a shortcut, said Olivia Morales, chairman of the board of directors for the Dudleyville Volunteer Fire Department.

“If there is a fire or an accident on the river or anywhere east of the river, we will have to travel approximately 7 extra miles on the highway to even get to a crossing, which increases our response time dramatically and puts lives and property at additional risk,” Morales wrote in a letter asking that the road be maintained.

Paul and Sarah Schwennesen own the Double Check Ranch next to the river crossing.

Last year, the ranch owners piled boulders along the path, frustrated that the same traffic tearing up the river did the same to their land.

The Schwennesens kept a gate open through their property to allow access for emergency vehicles.

The board of supervisors voted to take the Schwennesens’ land using eminent domain and bulldozed the barrier last winter. The couple has filed a separate claim against the county to win back its property.

That bulldozing may have been a mistake, according to the BLM, which has filed a complaint to several federal agencies, including the Army Corps of Engineers and two branches of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Tom Dabbs, a district manager for BLM, said the bulldozing may have violated the Clean Water Act and defies a conservation easement designed to “strengthen and protect the Southwestern willow flycatcher.”

Here is my take:
In any other situation, the CBD and their pals would be creating a tempest in a teapot. As the county has alluded to, the road/crossing has been there for decades. In this instance, however - attention had been drawn to the area, and perhaps - environmental concerns legitimized - by ATV abuse. Sound familiar? Then add the folks’ mess with their property, denying access, then having it taken by the county.. this is a “wild” story indeed.

I have posted local examples of these before. Zero-tolerance is CYA jumble-talk for “not make any decisions”, as far as I am concerned. It’s amazing that our 18-year old soldiers are expected to make split-second, shoot/don’t shoot decisions under fire, flawlessly - every time. Same with our police officers. Many bureaucrats, however, seem incapable of weighing information objectively, taking as much time as they need, and considering their rules and intent, with the specifics of a given situation. Damn, that crap riles me!

From NRA-ILA:

Friday, May 30, 2008

Outrage Of The Week

This week’s outrage comes to us from Winchendon, Massachusetts where, in yet another case of “zero-tolerance” enforcement defying common sense, fourth-grader Bradley Geslak was suspended from Toy Town Elementary School for bringing a Memorial Day souvenir to school.

According to a May 29, Telegram.com article, a uniformed veteran gave the 10-year-old two empty rifle shell casings from blanks used during the town’s Memorial Day celebration Monday morning. Bradley gave one of the empty casings to his grandfather and kept the other as a souvenir. The trouble began when he took his souvenir to school the next day.

“He was just playing with it at lunch,” explained Crystal Geslak, Bradley’s mother. “He wasn’t showing it to anyone; he had it in his hand and was playing with it.”

A teacher saw him with the harmless piece of brass and confiscated it. Ms. Geslak was then called at work and told to come and pick up her son, who had been suspended for five days!

Ms. Geslak arrived at the school to find her son in tears. “I was totally shocked. I couldn’t believe this was happening,” she said. “It was just an empty shell, not even from a real bullet. A sharpened pencil would be more dangerous than this piece of metal.”

“He was so proud to have been given them. His dad’s a veteran, his uncle’s a veteran, both his grandfathers are veterans. Memorial Day is a big thing to us. It’s a very important holiday and we have a big celebration every year,” Ms. Geslak said.

Ms. Geslak, who will be forced to miss work in order to stay home with her son, says she is worried about what having a “weapon-related suspension” on his school record will mean to his future.

To add insult to injury, the family says a school official told them that the shell would not be returned, and that the next step might involve assigning a probation officer to Bradley! Yes, you read that right, a probation officer.

A young boy punished over a harmless souvenir. By any standard, that’s outrageous.

If you’d like to express your concern over this incident, please visit http://www.winchendon.mec.edu/. To leave a voice message for Brooke Clenchy, Superintendent of Schools, please call 978-297-0031.

If you see something that you feel would be a good candidate for the “Outrage of the Week!” section, please send it to: freedomsvoice@nrahq.org. Please be sure to send additional background and citations where available.