Baucus, Tester introduce wolf bill

Montana and Idaho could win back state management of gray wolves through legislation offered by senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester late Tuesday. The state’s two Democratic senators introduced their bill in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg drafted a bill removing wolves from Endangered Species Act protection on Sept. 15, but has not introduced it yet. Baucus’ and Tester’s bill would remove Rocky Mountain gray wolves from the federal threatened or endangered species lists in Montana and Idaho as soon as the Secretary of Interior approves each state’s wolf management plans. Both states already have such plans, which would limit wolf numbers by both government and public hunting. Rehberg’s draft bill is considerably simpler. It would amend the Endangered Species Act to read: “Any Rocky Mountain gray wolf in Idaho or Montana shall not be treated as an endangered species,” and would give those states “exclusive jurisdiction” to manage wolves...more

Federal wildlife agency to review status of gray wolves

Agreeing that petitions to remove Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in the Upper Midwest may have merit, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced last week it will begin an in-depth review of the species' status. The decision, known as a 90-day finding, is based on scientific information but also includes a public comment period. It comes on the heels of four petitions to remove protection from the gray wolf in the states of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. The petitions were submitted by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance and Safari Club International with the National Rifle Association. Several groups, including the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, also expressed intent to sue the agency to allow delisting. The finding responds only to the petitions, according to the agency...more

Scientists: Wolf Hunts More Deadly Than Previously Thought

A policy to sustainably manage gray wolves via recreational hunting appears to rely on faulty ecological science, says a new paper published today in PLoS ONE. The paper challenges a long-held assumption that gray wolf populations won't be decimated by hunting and predator-control programs. It has been believed up till now that such efforts can remove as many as 28% to 50% of the animals in a population without causing long-term harm to their numbers. The paper comes on the heels of last year's first gray wolf hunting seasons in Montana and Idaho. (Wolves are disliked because they eat elk and livestock.) Hunters killed 260 wolves, close to 20% of the two states' wolf populations, including members of one of Yellowstone National Park's research packs. Combined with wolves harvested through predator-control programs, some 37.1% of the wolves in Idaho and Montana were eliminated in 2009. Can the recovering wolf populations, which were removed from the protection of the Endangered Species Act in 2008, be killed at this rate? Although the hunting season for this year has been canceled following a recent court ruling to reinstate the wolves on the federal endangered species list, the question remains important, say Scott Creel and Jay Rotella, ecologists at Montana State University, Bozeman. And the short answer is no, the two say...more

Hey, those hunters did better than I thought. Way to go guys.

Developer, others seek to remove beetle from endangered list

Attorneys with Pacific Legal Foundation filed papers Thursday with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, petitioning for the removal of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle from the federal endangered species list. Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys represent a broad coalition of Sacramento area landowners, businesses, farmers and flood control agencies in the case, Yolo County Farm Bureau v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The beetle is listed as “threatened” under the federal Endangered Species Act. According to the PLF, in 2006, Fish and Wildlife completed a mandatory five-year review as part of a settlement agreement in a case brought by PLF attorneys. The review concluded that the beetle should be taken off the list, but that has not taken place, according to the PLF...more

Marin County spends $5.3 million on salmon plan

Marin County officials are spending more than $1 million a year to protect endangered coho salmon. An audit of county spending on fishery restoration projects indicates that at least $5.3 million has been devoted to fish habitat and improvement initiatives since 2005, including $3.2 million for eight public works fish passage projects in the San Geronimo Valley. About half the money is from state and federal grants. The tally of county spending was issued by the county administration after the Independent Journal requested details backing county assertions that officials have worked diligently to restore the troubled coho salmon fishery. The Civic Center spending is in addition to more than $9 million allocated for fishery projects since 1997 by the Marin Municipal Water District. The county has spent more than $1.1 million this year alone on salmon programs - in spite of a budget crunch in which $20 million was cut from other public services to make ends meet - and intends to do more to help the endangered species, County Administrator Matthew Hymel said...more

Too bad we'll never get a figure on how much the ESA is costing us...feds, states and private sector.

Song Of The Day #417

Ranch Radio is back on the air. We're stepping out of our normal venue this week to bring you tunes "Just Cuz I Lik'em".

Today's selection is Breakfast In Hell performed by Slaid Cleaves.

You'll find the tune on his 10 track CD Broke Down.

Wife of murdered rancher still hospitalized after being struck by car

This video report is from KFOX11-TV



I received this email from Joe Delk:

I spoke with Tammy and Steven Smith on the OK Ranch which neighbors the Krentz Ranch up on top of the Chiricahuas. Tammy told me that Sue suffered multiple injuries from head to toe almost. She suffered a crushed orbital on one of her eyes, back broken in 2 or 3 places, broken pelvis and a crushed knee cap and is sporting a halo. Tammy said she is in ICU in critical but stable condition.

Her 80 year old friend suffered a broken pelvis and 5 fractures to one leg.

The guy that hit them is a 74 year old with multiple DUI's. He claims he was blinded by the sun but after he hit them, Sue was knocked about 20 to 30 feet and he still managed to run over her.

We can only trust that GOD does have a plan in all of this.

Border Patrol base should be closer to border

The Bootheel region of southwestern New Mexico and the adjoining desert of southeastern Arizona has been a weak link in the effort to secure our nation's southern border for some time. Border Patrol officials say that more than a quarter of the El Paso Sector's area classified as "uncontrolled" is in the Bootheel region. The tragic murder of rancher Rob Krentz in March, most likely by a drug trafficker who fled back across the border, has finally drawn attention to a problem that Krentz and his neighbors had been trying to alert the government about for years. And now there is finally action being taken. A forward operating base will be constructed in the Bootheel, allowing officers to patrol the region without having to make the 90-minute drive each way from the Lordsburg headquarters - consuming three hours or an eight- to 12-hour workday. The base will include living quarters for 16 agents, horse corrals, a fueling facility and a helipad. Agents stationed at the base for short intervals will provide a permanent presence in the region and be able to respond much more quickly when needed. That's terrific news. At the same time, we agree with those in the area who argue that the forward operating base is not as forward as it ought to be...more

Congrats to the Sun-News for their editorial.

The area of the New Mexico/Mexico border which is "uncontrolled" will get a huge expansion if Senator Bingaman's bill to create Wilderness along the border becomes law.

Obama says Salazar acted too slowly to overhaul MMS

President Obama is acknowledging that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar — and the White House — did not move fast enough to overhaul the former Minerals Management Service (MMS). “What Ken would admit, and I would admit, and what we both have to take responsibility for, is that we did not fully change the institutional conflicts that were inherent in that office,” Obama told Rolling Stone, in an interview published online Tuesday. “If you ask why did we not get that done, the very simple answer is that this a big government with a lot of people, and changing bureaucracies and agencies is a time-consuming process. We just didn’t get to it fast enough.” He said he personally delivered that assessment to his Interior secretary. “I had to just let him know, ‘You’re accountable, you’re responsible, I expect you to change it.’” Obama added he has “confidence that he can change it, and I think he’s in the process of doing so.”...more

Building with wolves

Wolves, as you have undoubtedly heard, are once again thriving in Yellowstone. The 66 trapped in Canada and released in Yellowstone and the Idaho wilderness in 1995-96 have generated more than 1,700 wolves. To the delight of scientists and tourists — and the dismay of many ranchers — more than 200 wolf packs exist in the area today. Courts and government agencies are still sorting out how the wolves should be managed. But one thing is abundantly clear: The reintroduction has succeeded in ways that extend far beyond the health of the wolves themselves. It has reshaped an entire ecosystem. When we exterminated wolves from Yellowstone in the early 1900s, we de-watered the land. That's right; no wolves eventually meant fewer streams, creeks, marshes and springs across western landscapes like Yellowstone where wolves had once thrived. The chain of effects went roughly like this: No wolves meant that many more elk crowded onto inviting river and stream banks. A growing population of fat elk, in no danger of being turned into prey, gnawed down willow and aspen seedlings before they could mature. As the willows declined, so did beavers, which used the trees for food and building material. When beavers build dams and make ponds, they create wetland habitats for countless bugs, amphibians, fish, birds and plants, as well as slowing the flow of water and distributing it over broad areas. The consequences of their decline rippled across the land. Meanwhile, as the land dried up, Yellowstone's overgrazed riverbanks eroded. Spawning beds for fish silted over. Amphibians lost precious shade. Yellowstone's web of life was fraying...more

The above is from the LA Times. While doing my searches, I found this even more vitriolic version of the article: The Big Bad Wolf Makes Good: The Yellowstone Success Story and Those Who Want to Kill It

Wolf Restoration is a Challenge to West’s Old Guard

The passion, the anger, and the frustration exhibited by hunters (and ranchers ) is not so much about wolf predation itself. It’s really about control. For decades hunters and ranchers have enjoyed a predator free environment. Hunters have always been the ones who controlled wildlife and state wildlife agencies. The outrage expressed by many hunters and ranchers is a reaction to what is perceived as the audacity of other people in society to assume, much less assert, they should have a voice in wildlife management issues. For decades hunters have considered elk and deer their “property”. You can see this attitude displayed in their angry comments. “We paid for managing wildlife and by gosh, we are the only ones who should have a say in how all wildlife is managed.” The overriding attitude is one of possession. Wolves are killing “our” elk and deer. The deer and elk by all rights exist for us. The debate over wolf management challenges those assumptions. Just as judges who ordered an end to segregation in the South, shaking up and eventually tumbling a hundred years of racism, hunters (and ranchers) are fearful they are losing their control over wildlife. That’s the context which the wolf debate is framed, and if one doesn’t understand this, the passion, anger, and outrage doesn’t make sense...more

ONDA Reaches Agreement To Retire 3000-Acre Grazing Permit

The Oregon Natural Desert Association announced Tuesday it’s reached an agreement with a rancher to retire a nearly 3000-acre federal grazing permit outside of Bend. The Bend based environmental group purchased the grazing permit not to graze cattle, but rather to let it sit. They say grazing damages the sage steppe ecosystem and the species that live there. The Oregon Natural Desert Association likes to see grazing permits retired, but Executive Director Brent Fenty says the option is rarely available. In most cases the law requires that the permits be reissued if they’re given up. But Fenty says this particular allotment is governed by a land management plan that allows for voluntary grazing permit retirement. Brent Fenty: “So in this case the Bureau of Land Management had recognized that there were a number of conflicts between livestock grazing and environmental and social values on that allotment so it was one a number of allotments in the area that they were willing to allow the permit to be retired”. Fenty says the permit will stay retired for the duration of the management plan or about 10 years. After that, he says he’d like the BLM to retire the permit for good. OPB

Grazing Takes a Hit With Protection of Public Lands

Climate change. Severe wildfires. Invasive species. A booming human population. The Bureau of Land Management identifies these as four key threats to Western public lands. Stick conventional and renewable energy development, endangered species protection, and recreation in the mix, and there’s less room each year for a past widespread use of public lands: livestock grazing. Since passage of the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act, the number of livestock grazing public lands each year has dropped—the BLM issued permits for 22 million animal unit months in 1941, but that was down to 12.5 million in 2009 (only 8.6 million of which were actually used)—though it’s unclear how much of the decline is due to economic factors versus increased regulation and competition on public lands. Either way, twice this month federal courts stymied ranchers seeking regulatory leeway for grazing...more

Wild horses versus wildlife

But aren’t wild horses wildlife? Wild horse managers often point out that a more correct classification of mustangs would be “feral horses.” Many believe wild horse herds to be nothing more than once-domesticated horses turned out by ranchers throughout the 1900s. However, DNA testing has proved some isolated herds in the Western U.S. possess fairly pure bloodlines tracing back to the 1800s and earlier. While these horses may be linked to the Spanish barbary horse, treasured by Asians and Europeans centuries ago, arguments are often made that no horse is ‘native’ to America. Today, the przewalski horse, native to Mongolia, is considered the only truly ‘wild’ horse that has never been consistently domesticated. All horses in the world are thought to be descendents of the 54 million-year-old pliohippus, which roamed North America until the last ice age. Whether it is more desirable to have elk, mule deer, wolves, horses, or cattle roaming freely in the great American West is a subject of everyday debate amongst ranchers, politicians and plain old folks sitting around the barbershop. Elk hunting tags bring Wyoming money. Wolves probably attract some tourists with money. Cattle grazing permits make money for the BLM. Mustangs, on the other hand, cost the government money. Competition between the wild horse and cattle for forage is of concern to politicians and even more grating on ranchers. Biologists point to the fact that most horse herds live in arid areas that cattle don’t fully utilize due to a lack of available water. Horses are better suited for these climates, ranging up to nine times as far from water sources as beef-on-the-hoof. Horses are also more efficient digesters of nutrients, allowing them to survive in areas of poor forage where cattle will starve...more

U.S. v. WILLIAMS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
LINDA L. WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-1541.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Filed September 27, 2010.
Before TACHA, LUCERO, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT^{[ 1 ]}

MICHAEL R. MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
Linda L. Williams appeals from the district court's order affirming her conviction following a trial before a magistrate judge for damaging property of the National Forest Service. She argues that the testimony of a Forest Service police officer identifying her as the person seen on a surveillance video destroying a trailhead sign should not have been admitted at trial. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Williams owns two unpatented mining claims comprising forty acres in the Uncompahgre National Forest in Ouray County, Colorado.^{[ 2 ]} Over the course of several years, Williams and the Forest Service clashed over Williams's resistance to inspections of her mining claims and her repeated attempts to block public access to the area, a popular hiking destination, including placing a locked gate on an access road and threatening to set "booby-trap[s]," ROA, Vol. 5 at 97. Williams also clashed with a private group that restores trails in the area, threatening a citizen's arrest of some of its members who were monitoring vandalism to trailhead signs. Ultimately, Williams was arrested and charged in a thirteen-count complaint with a variety of offenses, including damaging a trailhead sign. During a jury trial conducted by a magistrate judge, Forest Service police officer Jon Closson testified that he had interacted with Williams about six times over the past three years. He indicated that in April 2004, he installed a surveillance camera to monitor a newly erected wooden sign at a trail near Williams's mining claims. When he returned to the site several days later, he found the sign "smashed almost in half." Id. at 106...more

In Wyoming, we brand ornaments

Gray smoke poured off a round piece of pine Monday morning while Rancher Jerry Geer watched the three parts of his brand sear wet wood. It took two swoops over a “G” combined with the slice of lodge pole pine to make a Christmas ornament with a uniquely Wyoming flair. Before long, that Quarter Circle G Quarter Circle brand will hang on the Capitol Christmas tree. “I am really proud to be able to send that to Washington,” Geer said, pointing at the smoldering ornament. “I think that Wyoming is still an agriculture state and a ranching state. I think it is a great idea to send branded ornaments.” The brand, originally registered to Geer’s grandfather in 1919, will be on display on the Capitol lawn for the holidays. It will be among 6,000 ornaments that will need to accompany the 60-foot tree from Wyoming to Washington, D.C. The 8-inch disc of pine will get a loop of lace and some berries to finish it as an ornament for the national Christmas tree. Each pine ornament will have a Wyoming brand on one side and a brand of the Wyoming bucking horse on the back...more

Song Of The Day

Couldn't get File Factory to work this morning. Hope they fix the problem soon.

Arent Fox Asks US Supreme Court to Limit Judiciary’s Power to Take Private Property

The Montana Farm Bureau Federation is represented by Arent Fox LLP as amicus curiae before the United States Supreme Court. Cato Institute has joined the Montana Farm Bureau Federation on this brief. The amicus are asking the US Supreme Court to review and reverse a decision by Montana’s highest court that threatens to destroy the rights Montana ranchers and farmers have owned and enjoyed for more than a century in their land abutting and underlying the state’s rivers and streams.

“The Montana Supreme Court’s decision effectively converts title in hundreds of miles of riverbeds to the state, having profound effect on all who own land neighboring the affected rivers and who depend on their existing water rights for their livelihood,” reads Arent Fox’s brief, urging the US Supreme Court to overturn the Montana judiciary’s ruling.

In the case PPL Montana, Inc. v. State of Montana, the Montana Supreme Court ignored US Supreme Court precedent to rule that the entirety of three Montana rivers — the Clark Fork, Missouri, and Madison Rivers — were navigable at the time of statehood, and thus belonged to the state of Montana under the “equal footing” doctrine. “Its broad holding eradicates settled property rights Montanans have enjoyed for over a century,” argues Arent Fox.

The amicus brief argues Montana’s highest court deviated from US Supreme Court precedent by failing to properly analyze long stretches of nonnavigable river, including a 17-mile stretch of the Missouri River containing Montana’s famous Great Falls. In doing so, the conversion of property rights held by Montanans for more than 100 years was a taking by Montana’s judicial branch.

“In other words, Montana wants to avoid its Fifth Amendment obligations to pay compensation for taking the Petitioner’s property by applying this new ‘navigability’ standard to redefine ownership of the riverbeds,” writes the Arent Fox team. “Doing so violates Supreme Court precedent and merits reversal.”

Press Release

Enviro Groups Ignored Gulf Before BP Disaster

Since the fiery sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig last spring, environmentalists have scolded federal regulators for neglecting problems with offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. They were right. But environmental groups ignored the Gulf, too. Focused on climate change and watch-dogging drilling in Alaskan waters, environmentalists were wary of upsetting a détente that blocked oil production on both coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico. They had ceded the drilling zone off Alabama, Louisiana and Texas as hostile territory. "The Gulf of Mexico was pretty much written off as a sacrifice zone," said Kieran Suckling, head of one of the country's most aggressive environmental litigants, the Center for Biological Diversity. "The focus was put on more pristine areas." That focus can be seen in the number of lawsuits filed by environmentalists and others under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. In the eight years that George W. Bush was president, they filed suit against federal agencies more than 1,000 times. By contrast, the Forest Service was sued 388 times under NEPA during the same period, spurring the agency's leaders to complain of "paralysis by analysis" and ask Congress for new exemptions to the law. The 126 NEPA lawsuits filed against the Bureau of Land Management had oil and gas producers complaining that environmentalists were "locking up the land." Environmental groups said they had to go to court to preserve uses of public land other than drilling, logging and mining. Since the spill, the Center for Biological Diversity alone has filed seven environmental lawsuits, and the number of people working on Gulf drilling legal issues there has risen from zero to six. The BP spill has spawned more than 300 civil lawsuits in the four Gulf states(Greenwire, July 7). That kind of legal scrutiny, Suckling said, will inevitably slow down and limit oil production in the Gulf...more

Water Use in Southwest Heads for a Day of Reckoning

A once-unthinkable day is looming on the Colorado River. Barring a sudden end to the Southwest’s 11-year drought, the distribution of the river’s dwindling bounty is likely to be reordered as early as next year because the flow of water cannot keep pace with the region’s demands. For the first time, federal estimates issued in August indicate that Lake Mead, the heart of the lower Colorado basin’s water system — irrigating lettuce, onions and wheat in reclaimed corners of the Sonoran Desert, and lawns and golf courses from Las Vegas to Los Angeles — could drop below a crucial demarcation line of 1,075 feet. If it does, that will set in motion a temporary distribution plan approved in 2007 by the seven states with claims to the river and by the federal Bureau of Reclamation, and water deliveries to Arizona and Nevada would be reduced. This could mean more dry lawns, shorter showers and fallow fields in those states, although conservation efforts might help them adjust to the cutbacks. California, which has first call on the Colorado River flows in the lower basin, would not be affected. The reservoir is now less than 15 inches above the all-time low of 1,083.2 feet set in 1956. But back then, while the demand from California farmland was similar, if not greater, the population was far smaller. Perhaps 9.5 million people in the three states in the lower Colorado River basin depended on the supply in the late 1950s; today more than 28 million people do...more