Event Calendar
May 2012
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * 01 02 03 04 05
06 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 * *
<< (add event) >>


User Blox 4
- Put stuff here

Barack Obama
"Lincoln Sells Out Slaves"
by: Rob Kailey - Sep 13
1 Comments
If You Haven't Seen This
by: Rob Kailey - Apr 28
5 Comments
Impeach the President?
by: Rob Kailey - Mar 16
15 Comments
It's the system, stupid!
by: Jay Stevens - Oct 25
7 Comments

Search




Advanced Search


Rob Kailey is a working schmuck with no ties or affiliations to any governmental or political organizations, save those of sympathy.

Rehberg SOP, as if on cue.

by: Rob Kailey

Tue Feb 15, 2011 at 16:44:54 PM MST


Right on down below there, Matthew Koehler posted up about some Arizona fish-wrap having an issue with Jon Tester and Dennis Rehberg concerning the wildlife management of wolves in the northern Rockies.  The comments are worth a read.  One of the issues I had with the editorial remains consistent throughout my interactions on the InterTubes.  I'm beyond tired of other folk ignoring their own representatives while being so eager to tell me, Democrats and the President  how to deal with mine.  See, I know my representatives, and I know their worth.

Dennis Rehberg has always called a good fight, and then left it to others.  That's what he does, and that's why he's actually 'written' next to nothing in his decade in the House. He's a piggy-backer, the guy who buys the next round (and drinks both, apparently.)

The other night, Rehberg announced that he's running for the Senate against Jon Tester.  This was not a surprise; it hasn't been for a quarter year or more.  What also isn't a surprise is that he would say something so stupid as to call for federal judges to be on the endangered species list.  Yup, that's what he did before the Montana legislature.

But here's the key to this concern.  He did so while attacking the Endangered Species Act.

U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg R-Mont., speaking to the Legislature on Monday, attacked the policies of the Obama administration, defended states' rights and said a federal judge in Montana belongs on the Endangered Species Act for his ruling on wolves. [...] "My job as your congressman to defend the states' rights principle in Washington," he said. That means keeping Washington off people's backs, such as ending federal management of the grey wolf population here in Montana, he said to applause. He blasted "environmental obstructionist" for finding a federal judge in Missoula, Donald Molly (sic), whom he didn't identify by name, who ruled that the wolf had to remain on the Endangered Species list. "When I first heard his decision, like many of you I wanted to take action immediately," Rehberg said. "I asked: how can we put some of these judicial activists on the Endangered Species list?"

In truth, the point goes beyond Rehberg's bravado.  He stated, as promise that he would submit legislation to remove the Grey Wolf from protection of the Endangered Species Act.  And in true Rehberg form, he never had to act at all.  Idaho Representative Mike Simpson (R- kicks puppies) did it for him, as a rider on a the House Republicant budget bill.

The two-sentence provision directs Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to reissue a 2009 rule that took wolves off the endangered list in Montana, Idaho and parts of Oregon, Washington and Utah. The reinstated rule "shall not be subject to judicial review," according to the provision.

It was added to the budget bill by Rep. Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican who chairs the appropriations subcommittee overseeing the Interior Department.

Let me be clear.  Some legislation is necessary to break the gridlock concerning wolf management.  I, for one, would prefer it not come from the Republicant House.  Regardless, this rider is likely to pass, and guess who signed on without ever having to do a damned thing for it.  Rehberg?  Was that your guess?  How clever you are.  That's what he does.  He co-opts the loathsome efforts of others and then hides while touting his bravery.  Meanwhile, he relies on us lefties to attack our own for doing what is up-front and clearly owned by Montana representatives when it's the same damned thing.  Rehberg is vastly more an acolyte of Max Baucus then Jon Tester is or was.

~sigh~

Rob Kailey :: Rehberg SOP, as if on cue.
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Wolf problem solved - (0.00 / 0)

The Governor just settled this debate;

http://billingsgazette.com/new...


Eric (0.00 / 0)
I actually appreciate your efforts to support your side of the aisle.  But here's the deal, and you better listen closely.

You spout one more lie here, as you just did, and I will ban your ass.  I'm not lying.  Regardless of what Schweitzer just did, the debate isn't settled.  Lie one more time. please.  


[ Parent ]
How did you come up with your moronic conclusion? (0.00 / 0)
The debate isn't settled, Schweitzer just got tired of the feds doing nothing and kicked the hornets nest.  

[ Parent ]
Did you read it? (0.00 / 0)

It's open season on wolves - per our Governor - what is there left to debate?

Ban me?

Go right ahead - you like preaching to the choir anyhow -


Defenders of Wildlife: Gov "making it easier for poachers" (0.00 / 0)
From the Helena IR (http://helenair.com/news/article_e9109c18-3a67-11e0-bf79-001cc4c03286.html)

Mike Leahy, Rocky Mountain regional director for Defenders of Wildlife, isn't so sure about the legality. He believes the governor is making it easier for poachers, who could claim the wolves were killing livestock but in reality were just trying to remove wolves from the landscape.

"I appreciate the governor's frustration with the wolf issue, but I think he is doing long-term damage to his legacy as a wildlife manager by telling law enforcement to stand down, and being unnecessarily heavy-handed in eliminating entire wolf populations," Leahy said. "We're still reviewing whether he has the legal authority."


Uhhh (0.00 / 0)
I don't think anybody is convinced of the legality of Schweitzer's edict.  And that was his very point, to force the issue.  I repeat:

Some legislation is necessary to break the gridlock concerning wolf management.

A few of points of note:  Schweitzer wasn't going to attack Fruedenthal, a fellow Democrat.  Matt Mead, on the other hand ...  

The Wyoming Representative's attempt to add Wyoming to the current bill to delist (in the Republican budget bill) was rejected.  Wyoming stands alone here.  Schweitzer knows that.  And he will attack it.

Brian just derailed any attempt by Rehberg to claim primacy in 'solving' the wolf problem.  That will no doubts help Jon Tester, even if the Republicans are somehow able to change the ESA.  I don't find that a bad thing.

Brian's encouragement for ranchers to shoot wolves harassing stock was for those north of I-90.  Let's be clear.  That means the Shields Valley, The Nine-Mile, the Sarpy drainage, and ...  hmmm, not much else.  He knows that this is a remarkably unobtrusive and yet totally OUTRAGEOUS gesture.  I reiterate.  That was kinda the point.


[ Parent ]
The Endangered Species Act... (0.00 / 0)
has worked pretty well since it was passed in 1973. And let's not lose sight of the fact that the ESA has also worked pretty well as a tool to help bring back wolves to the northern Rockies. With wolves in the northern Rockies so close to being officially delisted through the ESA, now is not the time to abandon the provisions of the ESA in order to appease all of the wolf haters and those among us (elected officials included) who just continue to spread hyperbole and outright false information about wolves in order to score political points or "out-anti-wolf" the other candidate.

So while I agree with much of what you've written here about the issue Rob, I do strongly disagree that "Some legislation is necessary to break the gridlock concerning wolf management."  I don't believe that's the case and I don't believe politicians simply legislating animals, fish or plants off the endangered species list is a Gennie we want to let out of the bottle.

I'm certainly willing to wait another year so that we don't undermine the provisions of the ESA. Don't anyone worry, all the wolf-haters in Montana will be able to legally kill wolves via an official hunting season soon enough. And in the meantime, the USFWS will continue to kill wolves (including whipping out entire packs) as part of their "management" strategy.



[ Parent ]
To the side of the politics (0.00 / 0)
I think I should explain my personal view of wolf hunts a bit.  I don't like them at all.

1)  It focuses on raw population, which isn't the problem.  The problem is human/predator conflict.  Winnowing population does nothing to solve that, in part because ...
2)  The wolves taken in hunts aren't always, or even usually, the so-called 'problem' wolves.  It's applying herbivore control thinking to a predator issue.
3)  Wolves, as high functioning social predators, are different than solitary animals.  Taking a wolf from a pack may have no impact on the pack itself, or it could change the entire nature of the pack and it's behavior.  Those behavioral adjustments, for instance the taking of an alpha female, can be very damaging to the pack in the long term and can be passed on to further generations of wolves.
4)  Culling wolves encourages wolves to do what is in their nature to do, which is to roam into areas vacated by the culling.  It's like taking the head of a hydra, and watching as it grows three more.

It doesn't matter whether the hunting is being done by lottery or F&W.  It's only a temporary solution, and then only if 'problem packs' are the ones targeted.

All of this has been put as briefly as I'm able.  Hopefully you will not mistake my discussing the politics of this as being an advocate for either the Governor or current policy regarding wolf control.  


[ Parent ]
pro-wolf (0.00 / 0)
Hopefully you will not mistake my discussing the politics of this as being an advocate for either the Governor or current policy regarding wolf control.

Nope, I've always realized you've been an advocate for wolves, Rob.  


[ Parent ]
agreed (0.00 / 0)
brian has tossed a hot potato out there.... and taken the wind out of rehberg's sails. i think it is all uphill from now on for the tea party. people are catching on to their sheer incompetence at governance. a governor should lead by example- by governing. legal or not -this is a winning strategy. people don't give a damn whether it is legal or not. they are sick of inaction and are in the mood to say to hell with the lawyers.

next up- public option for affordable health insurance.



Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Voting. Useful or not?
Yes!
No!
Maybe, but only if you vote my way.
There are theories that ...
Meh ...

Results

Blog Roll
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Intermountain Energy
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Cowgirl
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Prairie Mary
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox