Senator Craig's Mating Call May Help Wolves

Around this shop, we’ve been tapping our feet for a long time . . . waiting for wolf-hating senators to leave office. We had no idea this meant “come hither.”

Apparently, Senator Larry Craig‘s mating call seems to have gotten him into trouble, according to the New York Times. Apparently, family values and wolves don’t mix. Recall Helen Chenowith?

Advertisements

30 responses to “Senator Craig's Mating Call May Help Wolves

  1. The costs are outlined by category in the link i provided if you bothered to read it. Not paper work costs by any means. You mis-spoke about the earthjustice lawsuits. “142 of these now in progress” The suits outlined on their site are up to 6 years old. You make it sound like they have 142 suits currently in the courts. The 2007 ones are a mere handful. Show me some numbers about how much the government loses on each hiker. When you do business on public lands you should accept dealing with wildlife. This is my last response on this thread since you refuse to respond with any actual evidence to back up your points.

  2. First I do not believe that ranching is causing any deficit. Again, I can tell you first hand of my experiece helping my uncle with his paper work. For many many years the only expense incurred by BLM and NFS was sending the bills, and depositing the checks. Since most grazing permits have been in force for years I would imagine they have pretty much the same expenses for all of them.
    The loss is a paperwork loss, covering the beauracracy itself.
    As I posted earlier, NFS is crying because they are not getting subsidy money appropriated by congress for the loss they incurred from timbering, and they have had to spend the money put into a fund by the timber companies themselves for fighting fires even though there is no more timbering to replenish it.
    Do you have a breakdown by state/county of the income from grazing fees and the cost of allowing grazing with the same breakdown?
    If you want commercial rates chagrged for grazing on public land, do you want commercial rates charged for recreation on public land. If you want commercial rates charged, do you think the rancher should be able to charge commercial rates for feed eaten by wildlife? Presently they charge nothing.

  3. By the way, I skimmed through your list of the evil enviro lawsuits. The majority of them seem to deal with public health issues (limiting the release of pollution and chemicals). Where is the evil in fighting that? Do you support the rights of companies to dump and emit whatever they want without legal challenge?

  4. Any thoughts on the 500 million dollar defecit caused by public lands ranching? Any thoughts on wyoming creating disease risks with feed lots? Sometimes lawsuits are the only choice when the deck is so heavily stacked in favor of big business. Unlike our politicians, our judges havent been bought.

  5. Enviros don’t need lobbyists, they file lawsuits by the dozen. Take a look at all 142 of these now in progress. If you think this isn’t costing the American taxpayer a bundle think again.
    http://www.earthjustice.org/our_work/cases/index.html

  6. What lawsuit wants to prevent brucellosis vaccinations? If wyoming stopped feeding elk and keeping them artificially close together many of the brucellosis problems would vanish.

    Seems like charging more for (not eliminating… STOP putting words in my mouth) PUBLIC LANDS RANCHING (not all ranching… again STOP putting words in my mouth) would save the federal government close to half a billion dollars a year. (Federal income from ranchers on public lands was 6 million in 2000, federal spending was 466 million) I highly doubt it costs the government a half billion dollars a year to accomodate hikers. Prove me wrong. By the way, have you had any luck finding numbers proving “enviro” lobbyists spend more money in washington than ranching, energy companies, mining companies etc.? BACK UP YOUR POINTS WITH NUMBERS!! We have gotten so far off topic…

    http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/fs_fiscal_costs.htm

  7. Steve, you said they dropped from 20 million to 5,000, so it appeared to me you were refering to a single population. Why would you refer to the entire natioanl population estimate before the white man came and then claim it was reduced to one population in one state, they are two different things.
    Ranchers pay taxes….far more in comparison because property owners in states with lots of public land have to pay more to make up for no taxes from those lands.
    I’m sure that ranchers do lobby to keep grazing fees reasonable, but somebody must be lobbying to keep recreationalists from having to pay anything at all. Ranchers provide a lot of extras, to say nothing of keeping our country fed with a reasonably priced source of meat/protein. Again what benefit do hikers provide? Do you feel all uses of the public lands should be priced at what private enterprise would charge? Including playing?
    Most grazing permits are so long standing that the main expense to the government is figuring and sending the bill, and depositing the check. They do not build parking lots, build trails, etc. The rancher builds water supplies, fences, etc. If you think eliminating grazing is going to mean a reduction in personel/costs you are kidding your self. There was a very telling article not long ago about NFS complaining that they do not have enough money to fight fires. Becasue they had always had the subsidy allocating for timbering to use to fight fires and congress reduced that when they reduced timbering.
    As a matter of fact Wyoming is working at immunizing, testing, and eliminating infected elk despite a barrage of lawsuits from enviros. It really seems that environmentalists are determined to keep brucellosis alive and well.
    Who do you think they are going to look to for money if you succeed in eliminating ranching?

  8. Backcountry users pay TAXES and park entrance fees. I am not debating the existance of grazing permits (once again you are trying to mess with my words… pretty sad). I am saying that ranchers buy influence to keep those costs artificially low (at a cost to you and I). Also, what is being done about eliminating brucellosis from the elk population? Why arent elk hazed tortured and killed for mingling with cattle? And there are very few genetically pure bison left…

  9. Did I say there were 20,000,000 in yellowstone? I think you are a bit confused…

  10. Buffs will never be extinct. There were NEVER ever 20,000, 000 in Yellowstone. 5000 is too many for the limited area in Yellowstone. There are I believe in the neighborhood of 300,000 buffalo in the US, hardly endangered. They cannot be allowed to graze all over the place as long as they are diseased. Buffalo proponents need to put their time, money, and effort into eradicating brucellosis from them.
    Grazing permits date back to the settling of the west, they are not a new use devised by ranchers. Ranchers pay more than jsut the grazing fee to use the land. They build reservoirs for wildlife and livestock, they also trade use of their fields in winter to keep wildlife alive all in addition to the cash.
    On the other hand back country users pay nothing for building trails and evidently won’t help build them either, they pay nothing for the trailheads, They pack in weeds from area to area on their boots, they leave their bodily waste behind. What do they contribute except their own enjoyment?

  11. “thousands of head of livestock”
    thats a whopper even for you Marion.

  12. It IS ranchers buy influence to keep grazing fees artificially low at a cost of millons to taxpayers. For every dollar “enviros” cost ranchers I am sure they get it back and thensome from the taxpayers. Why do you make statements that you can’t back up with solid numbers? And why is it that you never respond to my points? What overpopulation of bison are you talking about? Are you talking about the 5000 (down from an estimated 20+ million)? I mentioned (with numbers to back me up) multiple anti-environment industries who throw MILLIONS around washington whom environmental groups use their limited resources to fight. Any thoughts on the non ranching industries? Any thoughts on people like ted stevens getting gifts in exchange for political influence? Without the “enviros” to ensure species are protected who will? Why single out species and allow them to go extinct because you think they are worthless? Should we have allowed the bald eagle to go extinct?

  13. I cannot track all of the pacs, etc that manage to provide money to politicains, but let’s look at the results.
    It was NOT rancher influence that trucked wolves into the northern Rockies to kill the thousands of head of livestock, most of which is not compensated for.
    It was Not rancher influence that jerked grazing permits to benefit overpopulation of buffalo.
    It is NOT farmer influence that put many acres of wheat fields oout of production to protect mice. It was NOT farmer influence that forbid folks to have a cat that got outside in order to protect mice. It was NOT farmer influence that stopped building a dam in Arkansas that would have benefitted rice farmers, but not an extinct woodpecker.
    All of these things however are paid for by the individual families that own the livestock or crops destroyed by these policies. Meanwhile the enviros are patting themselves on the back for saving mice, wolves, etc, when in fact all they do is file lawsuits making others pay the cost.

  14. Environmental groups spend on a lot more than on wolves as well. The amount they spend really doesnt even compare to the amounts that the many industries spend lobbying for their causes (and I don’t see defenders of wildlife giving ted stevens free home remodeling). I want you to show me some numbers like i did for you to prove to me that environmental groups throw more money around in washington than the mining, energy, ranching, farming industries. You don’t show numbers because you can’t. You are just blowing hot air. Do you actually believe all of the crap you spread around here? Also, the money that environmental groups spend is donated by people around this nation who believe in a cause, it does not come from greedy corporations and industries trying to curry favor and buy votes to increase their bottom lines.

  15. Thank you for the info. I haven’t had time to go over it closely, but it certainly is helpful as another election looms. It has long been my contention that booting lobbiests and instituting term limits would go a long ways toward cleaning things up in DC.
    Agriculture lobbiests are lobbying for many things other than grazing rights. Grazing permits have been considered a part of a ranch for many years and figures into the value of a ranch. None the less grazing permits are being vacated with little or no notice to appease environmental groups. That can leave a rancher in a desperate situation.
    Then of course there was the importing of wolves to prey on cattle. I do not for one minute beleive there was a single biologist who actually beleived that wolves would not be a serious problem to ranchers in the areas where they were introduced.
    All of these things make me beleive that however they do it environmentalists manage to buy a lot more influence in congress than ranchers. Various PACs would seem to be one way they have the money to spread around.

  16. The livestock industry has thus far spent >1.1 million lobbying this year for the record so they clearly have the money to fight the evil environmental groups, marion.

  17. I almost actually agreed with you. Unfortunately I kept reading…

    Marion, here is a good site where you can search for any lobbyist and how much they spent in 2007 so far. Defenders spent 377000. Exxon Mobile spent 6.4 million over the same period. Seems kind of one sided to me… If you separate it by industry, environmental lobbies dont even appear on the list. How can you be so brainwashed?

    http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/index.asp

  18. I agree that politicains become corrupt to varying degrees when they have too much power for too long. Term limits are the only answer. There is so much slime, especially among long time congressmen that they cannot help be tainted.
    Far too many suffer because of the dreams that environmentalists have pushed onto them. The ESA and some other environmental programs have been the greatest assault on our constitutional private property rights this country has ever known. They have tons of tax free money to buy elections of politicians they want, and get rid of those that will not do as they are told.

  19. Wendy Keefover-Ring

    What this country needs is campaign finance reform. Too bad McCain got off this wagon. Representative government often isn’t. There’s little accountability and the people and the environment suffer as a consequence.

  20. It seems to me that every politician, democrat or republican, is corrupt to a certain extent. It seems that republican corruption is far more destructive against the american people in the long run…

  21. Wendy Keefover-Ring

    Just to clarify, Hilary Clinton returned campaign funds she had received from Norman Hsu, who was on the lamb. Hsu had an arrest warrant pending in California because of fraudulent acts. He hasn’t yet had his day in court, so Hsu is not a “convicted felon”.

    Senator Larry Craig not only touched the cop’s shoe, he tapped his toe like Thumper, and reached under the stall–presumably to hold hands. Unlike David Vitter of Louisiana, a family values conservative whose named appeared on an infamous escort service list, and unlike Ted Stevens of Alaska, who got a free and fancy remodel on his house for benefiting a large corporation, the GOP vigorously targeted Craig, making the party look intolerant of gays.

    Nevertheless, a senator trolling a public restroom for sex, whether straight or gay, has a huge “ick” factor.

    The hypocrisy of being anti-gay, anti-same sex marriage while engaging in homosexual acts is hypocritical. Ted Haggard, the Colorado Springs evangelical preacher, learned this lesson the hard way.

    Idaho seems to have a particular penchant for electing family values oriented senators and who engage in extra-marital affairs. Helen Chenowith of “Can Helen not Salmon!” fame had a 6-year liaison with her business partner. She was outed by her business partner’s wife after Chenowith made disparaging remarks against Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

    Don’t let your Dogma get run over by your Karma, as the saying goes.

  22. There is a very good summary of Craig’s pitiful record over at wolves.wordpress.com if anyone hasnt seen it.

  23. First of all, I don’t live on the ‘net, so I don’t see things right away. Second, I stated my opinion that this will have little effect on any efforts to reign in the enviro movement. I don’t know anything about Risch, but I hope he is also concerned about the power over our lives that enviros have taken.
    It is too bad that getting his foot under the stall and touching a cop’s shoe created such a fuss. I suspect he pleaded guilty to prevent a scandal, becaue there isn’t much doubt but what he could have fought it.
    I have not seen it mentioned anywhere, but how do you guys feel about a convicted felon being a big fund raiser for Hillary and the dems? I guess it is fine as long as they “give the money to charity” when they are caught? Wonder if there is a list of the charities that actually get any money.

  24. Marion, where are you? You always get pretty quiet when you are wrong… Him being forced to leave his positions of power will have a positive effect for the environment whether you want to admit it or not.

  25. Marion,
    Maybe you can secure an invitation to the good senators annual labor day weenie roast and discuss his public record with him.

  26. Craig’s powerful position in the Senate did a whole lot of damage for a long time. He was very shrewd, very effective for his industry constituency ~ thus very destructive to the natural world. late july, after the arrest, but before the guilty plea ~ i got this footage of him helping direct ID gov. butch otter in the correct terminology to use for logging. it’d be nice if we lived in a world that brought him and other politicians as much shame for this, and any other number of earth destroying riders he snuck through appropriations.

    it is wonderful to see a part of that apparatus dismantled, many of them have been falling off lately.

  27. People like him are the predators I worry about, Marion. Its all about the environmental lawyers isnt it. We all know that huge industries and corporations have no power in influencing environmental policy!!!! I LOVE it when one of these holier than thou corrupt politicians goes down in a hail of shame. Hopefully ted stevens will be next…

  28. This is hilarious! I wish Craig’s ultimate ouster would change the politics of Idaho, but I don’t have much hope. But, still, this was some sweet news!

    I’m new to this website, and just started reading the postings here. Now, my question is, why does anyone bother responding to Marion?

  29. First of all, do you know exactly what he did? I keep hearing touching the foot of the guy in the next stall.
    Second, I don’t think that he is going to have any effect on the wolves one way or the other. While he may express a lot of rhetoric about the wolves, he really has no influence. The environmental lawyers have that. The feds are killing wolves pretty aggresively, I am guessing to try to keep the damage and resulting publicity down a little. Certainly they seem to be killing more than are showing up on their internet site.