Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Wolves need our help NOW!
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
timberghost
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 1316 | TRs | Pics
timberghost
Member
PostThu Dec 19, 2019 10:28 am 
Some people have a misconception that wolves only kill sick or wounded too. https://www.facebook.com/100006163352245/posts/2464536503761771/?d=n

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Dec 19, 2019 11:33 am 
^ requires a Facebook account to view, unfortunately.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RichP
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 5628 | TRs | Pics
Location: here
RichP
Member
PostFri Dec 27, 2019 8:19 am 
Seen on a hike yesterday.
Some good sized wolf tracks. I see them almost every time I'm out.
Some good sized wolf tracks. I see them almost every time I'm out.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
timberghost
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 1316 | TRs | Pics
timberghost
Member
PostFri Dec 27, 2019 6:53 pm 
Looks like a large wolf track. Did it appear there were more than one wolf? My friend saw one solo wolf up the Teanaway

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Sculpin
Member
PostSat Dec 28, 2019 11:11 am 
Ski wrote:
federal LAW says the cows have every right to be there grazing on federal lands.
I tried to find that in the statutes. I really did! I looked at the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. I looked at a string of documents from the 1970s that modified the Taylor Act. I went to the Cornell Law School site to read more about the laws. And then finally I canvassed Wikipedia. Nowhere did I see a right established for private grazers to use public land. All the documents basically put restrictions on grazing and leave the "multiple use" decisions to the federal land managers. Instead what I found is that all the range damage - trashed streams and denuded slopes - has occurred in violation of the law. And the grazing fees, around $1.35/pair/month, are way below what is implicitly stipulated by law. I did my homework and came up empty. What documents did you use to determine that cows have a RIGHT to be on public land? huh.gif

Between every two pines is a doorway to the new world. - John Muir
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostSat Dec 28, 2019 1:19 pm 
-> 202 224 3121 <- I'm sure that one of the aides to your Congressman or Senator will be happy to look it up for you.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostSat Dec 28, 2019 1:21 pm 
and Happy New Year! wink.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RichP
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 5628 | TRs | Pics
Location: here
RichP
Member
PostSun Dec 29, 2019 9:48 pm 
timberghost wrote:
Looks like a large wolf track. Did it appear there were more than one wolf?
It was a solo wolf tracking some elk. I see so many prints in Idaho that I'm getting a bit nervous on my solo outings.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostMon Dec 30, 2019 8:24 am 
Sculpin wrote:
And the grazing fees, around $1.35/pair/month, are way below what is implicitly stipulated by law.
What law would that be, and what is your source of info? Grazing allotments are contracts. Contracts are a form of law. Then we have Forest Plans which define what activities are allowed on specific areas of National Forest. You can comment on Forest Plans when they come up for review and amendments. Forest Plans are supposed to be revised every 10 years, but that usually doesn't happen because it is a complicated, long, involved process.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Sculpin
Member
PostMon Dec 30, 2019 9:27 am 
treeswarper wrote:
What law would that be, and what is your source of info?
The Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 is still the governing document: "1905. Grazing fees; economic value of use of land; fair market value components; annual percentage change limitation For the grazing years 1979 through 1985, the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior shall charge the fee for domestic livestock grazing on the public rangelands which Congress finds represents the economic value of the use of the land to the user, and under which Congress finds fair market value for public grazing equals the $1.23 base established by the 1966 Western Livestock Grazing Survey multiplied by the result of the Forage Value Index (computed annually from data supplied by the Economic Research Service) added to the Combined Index (Beef Cattle Price Index minus the Price Paid Index) and divided by 100: Provided, That the annual increase or decrease in such fee for any given year shall be limited to not more than plus or minus 25 per centum of the previous year's fee. Two things of note here. The law requires that the fee represent "the economic value of the use of the land to the user," and that the price of grazing has gone from $1.23 to $1.35 between 1968 and 2019. Let me fill in the blank for you: the economic value of just releasing your cow/calf pair on public land in the spring and then rounding them up in the fall with a few hundred extra pounds of beef is far more than $1.35/month, and so the law is being violated. The reason for this is that the decision-making boards are made up of wealthy ranchers.

Between every two pines is a doorway to the new world. - John Muir
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostMon Dec 30, 2019 1:49 pm 
Sculpin, one doesn't just turn their cows out and then pick them up in the fall. There are water improvements to maintain and fences to fix and maintain. Salt blocks distributed. Cows have to be checked on--doctored, moved. It isn't as easy as you want to think it is. With careful placement of salt blocks and water troughs, and moving cows around, much of the damage you worry about can be avoided. My uncle had an allotment and cows and he probably could have qualified for food stamps! He worked in the orchards to supplement his ranching income. If the law is being broken, perhaps you should alert the agencies.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Dec 30, 2019 2:10 pm 
treeswarper wrote:
If the law is being broken, perhaps you should alert the agencies.
^ It's your civic duty to report any violations of the law to the authorities!

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostSun Jan 12, 2020 2:11 pm 
Friday January 10, 2020 13:57 PST WDFW GRAY WOLF UPDATE A new update on wolf activities is available on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s website: https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/at-risk/species-recovery/gray-wolf/updates -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Jan 13, 2020 3:34 pm 
Monday January 13, 2020 14:12 PST WDFW GRAY WOLF UPDATE A new update on wolf activities is available on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s website: https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/at-risk/species-recovery/gray-wolf/updates -WDFW- ===========================================================
WDFDW, in their Wolf Update of Jan. 10, 2020 wrote:
Jan 10, 2020 On Jan. 10, a King County Superior Court judge dismissed two of three claims against the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in a case filed in August 2019. Judge John McHale agreed with the State’s arguments that State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) claims should be dismissed, citing Washington Supreme Court case law, Washington statutes, and Washington Administrative Codes. “Rather than a court room where there are winners and losers, our preference is to work through these decisions in a collaborative process. This decision lets us continue to do that,” said Donny Martorello, wolf policy lead for WDFW. In the litigation, petitioners John Huskinson, Genevieve Jaquez-Schumacher, and Kettle Range Conservation Group director Tim Coleman asserted three claims. The two dismissed claims argued violations of SEPA. The petitioners’ SEPA claims alleged that the Department was required to conduct a threshold environmental determination and a supplemental environmental impact statement before issuing the 2017 wolf-livestock interaction protocol and the lethal removal authorizations challenged in the case. The remaining claim of the petitioners is expected to be addressed at a hearing at a later date. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Jan 13, 2020 3:39 pm 
Maybe John, Genevieve, and Tim can go find real jobs now and live normal lives.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Wolves need our help NOW!
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum