Founder Please Help

J

juliusvatalaro

Guest
Brian, please use your influence on the many members of this fine web site and plead with them to email the President and congress to pass The American Big Game and Livestock protection Act (S-249) It takes literally a few seconds to send the email to the president and members of congress. Go to


www.capwiz.com/biggameforever/home/ hit the "Take Action" button and you are there.



This is the most important piece of legislation in our lives to make a difference.

Julius
 
Wow, that was alot easier than I thought! Didnt have to search for addresses to send to or anything.
 
We are missing a lot of "done" here!!

Where are all of the regulars here??

No brainer, get in line & get er "done"
 
done
("For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:8-9")
 
done! I would have thought Brian would have responded by now with some sort of comment! :)

JUST DO IT!

muleyman
 
Done!

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never has and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson
 
DONE

------------------------------------------------------
"So... Now you got a little taste of what I do...pretty dang exciting, eh?"
 
DONE!

Plus... I plan to email the link to all of our clients to do the same.

Robb Wiley
Non Typical Outfitters
 
I did it also......but the reason MOST people won't is the fact that, email and online petitions and surveys are USELESS! They have NO credibility with anyone......especially the Government!

But hey, it's free!


"whackin' a surly bartender ain't much of a crime"
 
nickman---What you said is true in some cases, but if you send an email to your individual representatives like this link allowed, it can be very useful. My Congressman already sent a standard email back stating I would be hearing from him directly because he reads ALL his emails and personally responds to them. I have also had very good luck doing the same thing on various issues with both of my Senators. I would agree though that the "add your name on" type of petition is pretty much useless because they are not personal from each person and just get tossed in file 13!!!
 
>I did it also......but the reason
>MOST people won't is the
>fact that, email and online
>petitions and surveys are USELESS!
>They have NO credibility with
>anyone......especially the Government!
>
> But hey, it's free!
>
>
>"whackin' a surly bartender ain't much
>of a crime"


I hope you are right because the other side (defenders of wildlife) is using the same email approach and they claim to have 67,000 + responses so far. We have some work to do. I'm a little surprised at the lack of response from hunters on this site and even more so from some of the other hunting sites. It's time to put up or shut up.
 
Sierra is spot on...If you don't take four minutes to at least TRY.. Your not a hunter!

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FIGHT HUNTERS FACE TODAY!! WAKE UP...

Robb Wiley
Non Typical Outfitters
 
Done,I wish Everyone would take the time and Fill out petition.Even if its not in your state yet,it will be soon,And we need to stop it!!!!!
 
C'mon....we have over a thousand hard-heads that always opinion here......give me the "done"
 
Been there,done that.It's not looking good for us so far.Probably won't pass the senate.And who knows what Obama will do with it if it makes it that far.Too bad hunters can't band together like the anti's can.We're too busy arguing about what method of take we use and how we do it.
 
Done already. Too many hunters are sitting on their hands.

Tell everyone to get involved!

Zeke
 
Done...but I had to set the facts straight first. Feel free to copy and paste my appropriate reply:

I write to express my concerns with H.R. 509 and S.249, the American Big Game and Livestock Protection Act. These bills have nothing to do with the current issue with Gray wolf populations in the United States.

The states of Montana and Idaho have fulfilled their commitments to recover wolf populations. However, Wyoming has failed to do so under both the EIS and also the Wolf Recovery Plan. Wolf populations now far exceed long established and agreed upon recovery criteria, with the exception of Wyoming having an acceptable plan. Excessive wolf densities combined with severe winters, poor management plans, and the commericialization of public wildlife are having significant impacts. Notwithstanding these facts, the commitments to delist by the federal government pursuant to national wolf restoration plans have not been fulfilled by the State of Wyoming, as mentioned above. Wasteful litigation by the State of Wyoming exploiting technicalities under the ESA have stopped all efforts by the Bush and Obama Administrations to delist wolf populations. This abuse by Wyoming should not be used to impede the usefulness of the ESA under these acts.

H.R. 509 and S.249 will not fulfill these commitments to return America's wolf populations to state wildlife protections. The hundreds of millions of dollars of annual damage resulting from unmanaged wolf populations is now being borne by family ranchers, small businesses and economies of the West and Midwest, but the reality is that the State of Wyoming is responsible for this.

This legislation is supported by a growing number of sponsors in Congress, at least 32 state fish and wildlife agencies and by state and national wildlife groups, including Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, Big Game Forever, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Mule Deer Foundation, Safari Club International, Congressional Sportsmen Foundation, National Rifle Association, U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife, Arizona Elk Society, Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society, American Farm Bureau, National Cattleman's Beef Association, American Sheep Industry Association and the Public Lands Council.

Just because this legislation is being supported by the 32 groups listed above, as well as uninformed members of congress, doesnt mean that the legislation is appropriate, warranted, and needed. Frankly, it is not.

I strongly urge you to vote against the bill, read the wolf recovery plan, the EIS, and recognize the real issue here. There is already legislation as well as a functioning mechanism in place to address the wolf issue. Wyoming is legally obligated to have an accepted plan. Wyomings compliance with the requirement of an accepted plan will accomplish delisting and give wolf management to each state. No meaningless, costly or additional legislation is required, simply compliance by Wyoming.

With the economic, as well as domestic and foreign policy issues that are facing the United States, I find it inappropriate for congress to support bills that further complicate the wolf issue. In particular when this legislation is not needed.
 
BuzzH---There will be no copying and pasting what you wrote to send anywhere because I think you are completely out of line blaming this lack of wolf delisting on the State of Wyoming. They have stood their ground, and rightly so, by not capitulating to the Feds because they feel they should be able to regulate those animals outside the agreed upon ecosystem. The animals are now as far as 300 miles from that area that the "experts" said they would stay in. It is all the bunnyhuggers who are preventing this delisting by going to the court system every time something is going to occur to get a handle on the problem. It's very similar to the Feds not doing the job on illegal immigration and now they're suing the State of Arizona for trying to do the job. The Feds need to get out of the way and let the people govern themselves because everything they touch turns to chit!!!
 
TOPGUN,

I'm positive you've no clue what you're talking about.

I've been more than just a bit involved in this issue since the early 90's.

Wyoming has failed miserably to comply with the Wolf Recovery Plan and the EIS that the tri-states agreed to prior to reintroduction. Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho all signed off on the plan, part of that agreement was having an accepted wolf plan in place from each state before delisting and control was given to the tri-states.

Failing to uphold something you agreed to is not "standing your ground".

There is no doubt, none, that Wyoming has stopped delisting. Acutally, Wyoming has REVERSED delisting and the legal hunts in Montana and Idaho that happened in 2009/2010.

Read Molloys ruling from 2009....educate yourself and quit drinking the SFW kool-aid.
 
What makes you the know it all on this situation? You have your opinion on the situation and I completely disagree, which is my right. The states agreed to have individual plans so the wolves could be delisted, but the Feds are demanding that Wyoming change theirs and do what the Feds want, which is BS!!! I've read Malloy's ruling and it was an easy out for him to stop the delisting, thus cancelling the hunts, by blaming it on Wyoming! The states out there agreed to ecosystem boundaries and limits on the maximum number of wolves that would be allowed within that area. The numbers far surpassed the goal years ago and the wolves are way out past where the agreed upon area was drawn up. Cripes, we now have them way over in the Bighorns where I hunt, a couple have been found way down in Colorado, one was hit on I-90 out near Sturgis, SD. Hells bells, they'll be in Central Park if the antis have their way and let them keep expanding their range!!! The people of Wyoming don't want them all over and should be able to keep them within the agreed upon area. The rulings won't allow them to do that and that's why they are in court fighting it. Don't tell me that the people of Wyoming should kiss the Feds and bunnyhungers azzes to keep them all happy. It won't matter who agrees to what because there will continue to be lawsuits brought into the courts by these loonies to keep ANY wolf or grizzly from being harmed. That's my opinion and you can like it or not because it's not going to change.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-11 AT 10:55PM (MST)[p]The facts are what they are, its not opinion.

WY, MT and ID all agreed to the EIS and Wolf Recovery Plan. That plan required they ALL must have acceptable plans in place before delisting and state control was granted.

You are right, there was an agreement for 30 breeding pairs in the EIS. It was later amended to EITHER 300 wolves OR 30 breeding pairs...mainly because pack sizes were bigger than expected. This was a great deal for the states as it lowered the total number of packs required to trigger delisting.

The states also agreed to have plans in place that were suitable to the USFWS...Wyoming failed to meet the requirement. Wyoming is still failing to meet the requirment.

You seem to want the States to only comply with parts of the WRP and EIS...thats now how it works. The state of Wyoming along with ID and MT signed a contract that they were obligated to comply with. That simple...and Wyoming is not meeting their legal obligations.

In Molloys initial ruling, he stated that wolves were recovered and that the hunts in MT and ID would not adversely impact the wolf populations in either state. He ruled that MT and ID had acceptable plans, and allowed the hunt. In that ruling he also warned both states that if WY failed to come up with an acceptable plan he'd rule to relist wolves if a lawsuit was filed.

Apparantly Wyoming thought he was kidding. He had NO CHOICE but to rule based on what WY, ID, and MT all agreed to in the EIS and Wolf Recovery Plan.

Thats not opinion thats fact...and Wyoming has stopped delisting and in particular has stripped MT and ID of state management of wolves.

Thanks to Wyoming for nothing.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 06:50AM (MST)[p]Maybe you'd be best to stop spouting off and read before you type! I said I know exactly what was in Malloy's ruling and I'm not disagreeing why he did what he did and that it stopped the hunts in the other affected states. The states each agreed to come up with a plan that was acceptable to the Feds. The Feds will not agree to the Wyoming plan because it would allow wolves outside the agreed upon boundaries to be dealt with as the individual state sees fit. That's where the other two states dropped the ball when they capitulated to the Feds requirements to begin with! Montana and Idaho should be allowed to do exactly what Wyoming is demanding and it wouldn't harm the overall program whatsoever because they have no problem with the wolves that stay in the agreed upon ecosystem! Wolves should be eliminated in whatever way necessary when they roam hundreds of miles outside the boundary. Take a look at the attached picture taken last September. That is a wolf track along a fence out in the Big Horns that I was helping a rancher with that elk had torn down and it is half a state away from where the wolves were supposed to be kept in check! A Federal Officer came in and killed several in the pack after they had killed over 200 sheep and calves two years ago. The ranchers were told the Government would take care of it and get all of them. Yea, right!!! Idaho and Montana are going to realize that they are going to have the same problem as the wolves expand out even further up there and the Feds will tell them they can't do anything about it. Nope, the bunnyhuggers would raise a stink if one of "their" cuddly little animals got wasted while it was killing domestic stock! What I'm saying is this is strictly another matter of states rights and the Socialist Federal Government stepping in and trampling on those rights. They ought to come up with a workable plan to keep all the illegals out of the country and let the states control the friggin animal populations within their boundaries!!! They can't do that either and now are suing Arizona and basically telling those citizens they can't control trash within that state! The bills now in the House and Senate are trying to regain those individual state rights to control animals just like Arizona is now having to waste taxpayer money fighting the Feds to control illegals!

40852010_trip_010.jpg
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 12:45PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 12:44?PM (MST)

TOPGUN,

I respect your argument with Buzz, he is a piece of work!! You are SO right about the fight being more about states being able to manage their own back yards. Most hunters feel the same way! Even a lot of hunters in Idaho and Montana...

Buzz on the other hand should be ashamed to even call himself a hunter. I believe he wears WOLF LOVER PANTIES TO BED AT NIGHT.... He could have the ability with his knowledge to HELP but he insists of driving wedges between hunters...

Let hope that every hunter on this site has the guts to get involved in this fight. Because weather they are willing to admit it or not this wolf issue is coming to their back door.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 12:41PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 12:37?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 12:32?PM (MST)

Wolf GPS tracking collar 3000 miles 7 months

854326452700_640x480.jpg
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-11 AT 01:07PM (MST)[p]Cool map! It looks like that one was at the back door of a lot of folks in a very short amount of time!!! Was that the female they found dead up in the mountains west of Denver? It looks like it from the way the red line ends up there. Anyway, that one animal hit all five states out in that area and really put on the miles in a hurry!!!
 
The antis (Defenders of Wildlife) 68,974, MM 90. I hope the non-MM hunters make up the difference, but it doesn't look promising.
 
Don't assume that just because people didn't get on here and type "Done" that they didn't do it. I did this days ago and am only responding now.
 
Not trying to throw fuel on a fire, as we are all on the same page to a certain degree. But last time I checked, Idaho has wolves pretty much everywhere.....So no worry for them to expand cause they have already done it. Judgements aside and all the political jockeying, bottom line is things were managed at the state level successfully because 2 states got their stuff together and maybe sacraficed and conceeded a few things for the better of the whole. In my mind Wyoming showed their arrogance and stiffened their spine and now look what we have.....absolutely nothing! So it will take another decade to get all things to the table and put pride aside. Until then, we get to enjoy declining herd numbers, continuing, continuing. I am a Wyoming supporter, but not on this issue. Looks like States have the same issue that we on MM have.
 
I'm certainly not assuming that, but it's still a relatively low response from those that chose to state so. The important thing is that it gets done, not that you post Done on this thread.
 
At least someone is listening for those that doubt that. I received calls from a staff member of my Rep. Adrian Smith as well as my Senator Mike Johanns tonight. Also e-mails from both. A few questions on my concerns, interests and the standard that they agreed. We'll see how they vote but still nice to see they at least listened.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom