December 12, 2019

Senate, House push to remove gray wolves from endangered species list

And in typical “liberal,” biased, media coverage, this report only collects comments from those who oppose the action to insert language into an Interior Department budget bill. Perhaps the newspaper could have done some honest journalism and reported that due to the relentless, always taking and never giving of the Environmentalists, Congress is left with no other alternatives than to write law to circumvent activist judges operating within a rigged system.

The language provides for the delisting of gray wolves and prohibits the rule from ever being subjected to judicial review — which means it could never be overrruled by a future judge.

Source: Senate, House push to remove gray wolves from endangered species list – StarTribune.com

Share

Preventing Congress from Ratifying a Flawed CSKT Water Compact

The Water Rights Compact (treaty) recently signed by the Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes, the State of Montana and the U.S. Department of Interior is a complex, first-of-its-kind agreement that will seriously impair the rights of Montana land and water rights holders, including CSKT Tribal members. The Compact also will reshape, for the worse, future water rights compacts currently being contemplated by other U.S. states and regions (including in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Oklahoma, the Midwest and the East).

The Water Rights Compact must first be approved by Congress before it can be implemented by the Parties. This means that Congress will have the opportunity to closely examine the processes these Parties employed to enter into the Compact as well as the Compact’s specific terms, andthat Congress bears the primary legal and fiduciary responsibility for ensuring that such processes and terms, as defined and as to be applied, willnot violate federal, state and/or tribal laws and the U.S., State and Tribal constitutional rights of Montana’s citizens.

You are cordially invited to attend an exclusive meeting organized to discuss these critical issues. The meeting will be led by a team of experts who will provide an overview of these issues and potential paths forward for educating Congress about them. These experts include:

· Lawrence Kogan, The Kogan Law Group, P.C., NY, NY, an attorney specializing in international trade, regulatory and treaty law;
· Quentin Rhoades, Rhoades & Siefert, PLLC, Missoula, MT, an attorney specializing in Montana and Federal trial and appellate court litigation;
· Elaine Willman, Board Member, former Chair, Citizens Equal Rights Alliance, specialist in Indian law and policy; and
· Robert Fanning, former Republican Candidate for Governor (2012).

Given Congress’ indispensable role in reviewing the Water Compact, it has been confirmed that top aides from both congressional offices will have senior representatives in attendance.

The meeting will take place on Thursday, May 21, 2015 at 3:00 pm, at the Lexington Inn and Suites, located at 3040 King Ave W, Billings, MT 59102. Directions are provided below:

http://www.lexingtonbillings.com/ (406) 294-9090

We would be honored to have you come and listen to their presentations, and we welcome your constructive inputs.

Thank You!

Mae Woo
406-651-9103

On behalf of Lawrence Kogan, Quentin Rhoades, Elaine Willman, Robert Fanning and Eric Olsen

Share

Wyoming congresswoman, others press for national wolf delisting

Wyoming U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis and others in Congress are pushing the U.S. Department of Interior to end federal protections for wolves nationwide.
Source: Wyoming congresswoman, others press for national wolf delisting

Share

The Courts v. Congress

What a mess the Courts have made as it may pertain to Endangered Species Act (ESA) rulings. Court interpretations of the ESA have essentially rendered the Act a useless instrument to deal scientifically with specie issues. Because of out of control Courts, it has literally taken an act of Congress to effect some sort of sanity back into reality…..or not.

In the latest issue of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM) newsletter, Gerry Lavigne, a former Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) biologist, now works with SAM as a science adviser, wrote an article titled, Trojan Lynx.

In that article he writes: “To make matters worse, the USFWS lumped all 14 states into one recovery area, or “Distinct Population Segment” (DPS). Biologically, there are four distinct and separate lynx populations in the lower 48 states. Each of these four lynx populations extend into Canada….

“Recovery and removal of the lynx from the endangered species list depends on all four subpopulations attaining some as yet undetermined recovery standards simultaneously. What are the chances? How the USFWS chose to define the listing appears corrupt, and lacking biological integrity.

Lynx canadensis  Canada Lynx

The yellow-shaded areas show the historic range of Canada lynx throughout North America.

I’m not sure I agree totally with Lavigne’s assessment but that has little bearing on the bigger issue at hand. There was corruption all around during the Canada lynx listing process, and so we know that the choice to list the lynx was all based in political corruption and animal rights activism. Little can be done to reverse that act as history has shown government agencies and their pal environmentalists are not held accountable for any of their corrupt actions.

At this juncture, it matters not whether the USFWS listed lynx as “threatened” in one recovery area, 4 or 4,000, the Courts have decided, twice that I am aware of, that the USFWS doesn’t have authority to do that. Yesterday I explained this in an examination of Judge Beryl Howell’s recent gray wolf nonsense ruling.

Lavigne states that the only way the lynx can be taken off the list of protected species is when all lynx in all of the Lower 48 States are recovered – and we don’t know what the recovery criteria is because the USFWS has, of yet, to make that determination. (Sanity would suggest that in order to declare something “threatened” there must be some kind of data to show that and at the same time to have knowledge of what it will take to declare a species recovered. Otherwise how can such an act come about other than through corruption? But we don’t deal in normal things.)

At the present moment I think Lavigne is correct, according to the Courts. Judge Howell’s and Judge Friedman’s rulings both said that the USFWS doesn’t have authority to create a DPS for the purpose of delisting a species. And yet reality shows that they have authority to create a DPS for the purpose of listing a species. This cannot be and makes no sense at all. A complete one way street as I see it.

I almost never support the USFWS because they are agenda oriented, biased, corrupt and inept, but I do believe that part of the USFWS’s decision in listing the lynx originally as one segment in the Lower 48 States, their belief was, from past events, that they could chunk out a separate population segment and declare lynx (or any other species) within that segment recovered. The Courts have said no way.

Even though the USFWS has provided the Friedman Court an explanation of where they get authority within the ESA to create DPS and delist, and the Obama Administration drafted and entered into the Federal Register their definitions of historic range, current range and “significant portion of its range” evidently the Courts don’t want anything to do with that stuff.

The Courts have created a legal mess, destroying the ESA and rendering the functioning of the USFWS as nothing more than a government agency trying to work with both hands tied behind their backs. This all brings the solution back to Congress. As with what happened in Montana and Idaho, because the Courts are so ignorant of wildlife issues, and corrupt due to activism, then the Legislature has to do what legislatures do and that’s write more laws. When a corrupt Congress decides that the corrupt courts can’t interpret laws as they were corruptly written, then the lawmakers simply write new corrupt laws even if if means circumventing the corrupt rule of law. Make sense to you?

Lavigne asks what the chances are that lynx will be recovered simultaneously throughout 14 states. The answer is never and that is the reason why the Courts rule in favor of the environmentalists because animal protection, in their perverted minds, must be continual, and that includes no hunting, trapping and fishing. Go ahead. Keep denying it.

Share

Scrap the Endangered Species Act? What Took So Long?

Owls

WHO?

It was October 1, 2007 when this writer, sometimes alone on a remote island, exclaimed that it was time to abolish the Endangered Species Act. I began that piece by saying:

The Endangered Species Act is unconstitutional. It is nothing more than a strong arm tool used by out of control animal rights groups and power hungry administrators. It strips Americans of their constitutional rights and is probably doing our wildlife more harm than good in many ways.

And yet, here we are over 7 years later and absolutely nothing has been done about the Endangered Species Act. I have written about the ESA many times, often describing it as the most powerful and destructive law ever devised. This is mostly true because of the unreasonable restrictions, regulations and seizures of rights and property ever levied upon American individuals, while at the same time possessing a success rate that is abysmal.

In a free E-book I wrote, “The Crippling and Destructive Power of the Endangered Species Act,” I described the law as:

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 is a draconian law that offers no flexibility, ruling out any semblance of common sense; strips states of their sovereign right to manage and care for their own flora and fauna; denies property owners of the right to use their land for the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness; allows for the destruction of the country’s economic well being; and abdicates this nation’s sovereignty to International powers, to name a few.

Today, in a Townhall.com article, written by Taylor Smith of the Heartland Institute, many of the very exact same things I wrote about in 2007 are brought to the forefront for discussion as to why she believes it is Time to Endanger the Endangered Species Act.

Smith claims that, as we saw when Congress passed Obamacare, when Congress passed the Endangered Species Act and President Nixon signed it into law, nobody in Congress had a clue as to what was in the bill. With my ever growing disdain for all politicians and the growing proof that few do their jobs, tell the truth or even have a clue as to what truth might be, I think that probably Congress did pass a bill in which most had no clue. But just as important, I believe there were enough of the “connected insiders” that knew exactly what was in that bill and perhaps a handful of others that did know were threatened in order to keep their mouths shut. That is the power of the Environmental Movement.

We see evidence each and everyday of a growing number of disgruntled Americans of Endangered Species Act fallout. This becomes very important to people when the effects of environmentalism hit at home. While some of us worked diligently with lawmakers to see about getting effective amendments to the ESA, and while progress was being made, those with less patience derailed our efforts and instead opted to take the route once taken in Tennessee with the Telico Dam, and got Congress to pass a budget bill with a “rider” attached that would effectively exempt gray wolves in Idaho and Montana from ESA protection along with preventing any further lawsuits against the action. Is this how we want to do business? That legal door swings in at least two directions.

What I find troubling in the Townhall article is the suggested remedy for some of the ESA problems. There is a call for a governmental program where money will be used to pay private landowners for their losses when government steals their lands and rights on that land in order to protect species and species habitat. What could possibly go wrong? It is wrong for government to practice “illegal takings” without compensation. This effort might help in reducing public ill feelings toward the Endangered Species Act, but like with most issues these days, does nothing to take a bite out of the real problems of the ESA.

Just the other day I was watching an interview with Thomas Sowell. In that interview, Sowell points out that after the Stock Market crash of 1929, it wasn’t until after President Roosevelt forced his socialistic welfare programs onto the American people that unemployment skyrocketed and the economy went to hell. This is the problem with government.

When you take a law like the ESA and have it administered by government, a government that is corrupt in addition to using non governmental organizations, many of which are environmental puppets of government, the effort becomes tyrannical in nature.

Government never solves government’s problems!

Scrap the ESA, seriously amend the Equal Access to Justice Act, and place ALL management of wildlife in the hands of the states. Reasonable protection of species, as described in the ESA, does not place that effort above the needs of human existence. What is wrong with us?

Share

You Didn’t Really Think the GOP Would Defund Obamacare? Did You?

Or how about funding for immigration? And a whole bunch of other stuff you thought the GOP would “take care of.”

“The $1.01 trillion spending bill unveiled late Tuesday will keep most of the federal government funded through next September — and it’s packed with hundreds of policy instructions, known on Capitol Hill as “riders,” that will upset or excite Democrats, Republicans and various special interest groups.

So, what’s in the bill?”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Wolf Canards and Other Agendas

A Letter to the Editor of the Wall Street Journal – by James Beers

The “Wolf’s Return is Big and, for Some, Bad” has one major prevarication and a humbug paradox intended to keep the wolf issue cloudy while advancing other agendas. The wolves introduced into The Lower 48 states by federal fiat are only good for Non-Government Organizations, urban readers and bureaucracies; while being “Bad” for rural economies and residents from children, ranchers, and the elderly to hunters, dog owners and campers.

First, it is a prevarication to say, “In 1995 and 1996 federal biologists at Congress’s direction shipped wolves (from Canada) to central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park”. The US House of Representatives had previously denied a federal Budget Request for funds to do that. Under President Clinton and without Congressional knowledge, the US Fish and Wildlife Service “diverted” (or stole or misappropriated) $45 to 60 Million from Excise Taxes; that could only be used by state agencies for state wildlife programs; to trap, transfer and release those wolves on an Indian Reservation and in an Exclusive federal enclave (YNP) where state permission was not necessary. When this was revealed in 1999 by a GAO Audit Report to the US House of Representatives’ Resource Committee under Chairman Young of Alaska, the wolves were long “out of the bag” and state agencies had become so dependent on federal funds and federal career opportunities that they quietly refrained from asking for Congress to replace the funds. Hardly the honorable “federal ecological experiment” described in your article.

Second, it is a humbug and a paradox to continue this myth that “the US in 2011 and 2012 stripped wolves in Idaho and several other states in the region of protection by the Endangered Species Act”. In the very next paragraph you note how Idaho must be careful “to avoid a potential relisting under the Endangered Species Act”. Thus the feds release and spread the wolves and tell the State residents to pick up the tab for all the destruction and losses and to keep X amount or the feds will step back in and take over. Today, the urban enthusiasts and NGO’s go into federal courts to stop controls, forbid methods, and seek land closures while the fiction of “state management” drains state coffers. Actual state jurisdiction would include the authority to exclude or even exterminate wolves in line with state resident’s desires: no such authority exists today. This is like telling rural Americans that they have a “right” to freedom of speech but only insofar as federal bureaucrats and urban speech police allow.

Just as we are witnessing federal erosion of 2nd Amendment (gun) rights and 5th Amendment private property rights: so too is this wolf fiasco a glimpse of what is happening to the 10th Amendment rights of “States” and “the people” to all those powers “not delegated to the United States by the Constitution”.

James Beers
22 March 2014

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Lawmakers Will Try to Overhaul Endangered Species Act

*Editor’s Note* – The opening paragraph pretty much describes what any effort to change, say nothing about “overhaul,” the Endangered Species Act will amount to. It’s too big of a cash cow for those who control Congress and the Environmental Movement. In addition it falls too heavily along partisan political lines and has been used as a heavy instrument in the destruction of the rights of people. More than likely, this dog and pony show is because of the upcoming November mid-term elections.

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) – Republicans in Congress on Tuesday called for an overhaul to the Endangered Species Act to curtail environmentalists’ lawsuits and give more power to states, but experts say broad changes to one of the nation’s cornerstone environmental laws are unlikely given the pervasive partisan divide in Washington, D.C.<<<Read More>>>

Share

75 Members of Congress Call for Wolf Delisting Nationwide

From the House Committee on Natural Resources web page:

75 Members Send Letter Calling for the Obama Admin to Fully Delist the Gray Wolf

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 13, 2013 –

House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04) and 74 Members of Congress sent a letter today to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe in support of the June 2013 proposed rule to nationally delist the Gray Wolf as “endangered” or “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act, and in opposition to a proposal to list the Mexican wolf as a separate, endangered sub-species. This is the second letter, led by Chairman Hastings, Rep. Cynthia Lummis (WY-At Large), Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and more than five dozen other bipartisan and bicameral Members of Congress and Senators to Director Ashe calling for the delisting of the gray wolf. Despite issuing a proposed rule to delist the wolves five months ago, the Administration has yet to issue a final decision.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delisted the wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains in 2009 and in the Great Lake States in 2011. The current situation has created a confusing management and regulatory scheme that has left some states – including Washington, Oregon and Utah – in the unsustainable and random situation of having wolves listed on one side of a highway and delisted on the other.

“The statutory purpose of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is to recover species to the point where they are no longer considered ‘endangered’ or ‘threatened.’ The gray wolf is currently found in 46 countries around the world and has been placed in the classification of ‘least concern’ globally for risk of extinction by the International Union for Conservation Nature (IUCN) Species Survival Commission Wolf Specialist Group. This is a clear indication that this species is not endangered or threatened with extinction.” wrote the Members in the letter.

In the letter, Members also express opposition to the proposed provision to list the Mexican wolf as an endangered sub-species: “Since wolves were first provided protections under the ESA, uncontrolled and unmanaged growth of wolf populations has resulted in devastating impacts on hunting and ranching and tragic damages to historically strong and healthy herds of moose, elk, big horn sheep and mule deer. This is why we believe it is critical that you reconsider your decision to list the Mexican wolf as a sub-species under ESA, which would have a severe impact on private landowners, including ranchers, in Arizona, New Mexico, and surrounding states. We believe that state governments are fully qualified to responsibly manage wolf populations and are better able to meet the needs of local communities and wildlife populations.”

Click here to read the full letter.

Share

Get Out of My Park

When the Federal Government tells Americans to stay out of THEIR parks, some people think the Feds are “#1.”

getoutpark

Share