Wolf Solutions Revisited

Howdy Folks, (Note: Sent to Peay’s list minus state agency personnel, identifiable conventional media, and state legislators.)

Greetings from Montana.

Don Peay recently sent out an email to a bunch of us with the Subject line of: “Moving Forward on Solutions for wolves.”

I agree with Don that we need to identify solutions, and put the necessary pieces in place to accomplish those solutions. But, what viable solution are out there?

I see three primary possible solutions to the “wolf problem.” All of these are problematic to one degree or another. And, there may be other viable solutions I’m not aware of. But here are the three current front-runners:

1. Don Peay (SFW) proposes changing the Endangered Species Act to some unknown extent with congressional action. This is a great idea. The problem is that it will be difficult to implement. Difficult? Given the current political climate in D.C., I’d say there’s a slim chance of getting meaningful ESA reform within the next year. The good news is that the political climate in D.C. may change significantly this November. Maybe. Any change in the D.C. political climate will improve the chances of getting ESA reform passed. How much improvement is unknown. Wait and see.

So, the idea of ESA reform is a super idea. Peay should forge ahead with that, with as much support as the rest of us can offer, notwithstanding the long-shot nature of the solution.

2. Bob Fanning (FOTNYEH) has long carried all of his eggs in the basket of an intended federal lawsuit to demonstrate that the entire wolf introduction program has been illegal since the beginning, and to get court orders mandating some sort of roll-back of the status quo. Since Bob has not obtained pro bono legal talent for this litigation, hired counsel would be needed at considerable expense – perhaps somewhere between $100,000 and $250,000.

A win in court by FOTNYEH would be another great solution. Of course, getting federal judges to grant relief in re wolves has not proven to be a highly successful undertaking so far, perhaps because the right arguments haven’t been made. Fanning does have some good arguments to make, and FOTNYEH has preserved standing and a long official record.. Personally, I like the idea of a federal lawsuit to force the feds to admit wrongdoing in re wolves. However, both because of the expense and because of a federal judiciary that seems overly tolerant of wolves, a litigation solution is also another long shot, and this solution could take a lot of time. As with idea #1, we should all support Fanning/FOTNYEH as much as we can in getting the wolf problem solved this way.

3. I play much more successfully in the state legislative arena. With MSSA, I’ve gotten 54 pro-gun and pro-hunting bills through the Montana Legislature, including Montana’s large predator management law and putting the right to hunt into the Montana Constitution. In the 2009 session of the Montana Legislature, Senator Joe Balyeat carried a very staunch anti-wolf bill that I’d written, SB 183 – see the bill text at:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/SB0183.htm

SB 183 didn’t pass in 2009, both because it was so staunch and therefore a difficult sell to the Legislature, and because not enough people turned out to support the bill to make this difficult sell happen.

MSSA has not given up on using state legislative, 10th Amendment action to wrest wolves away from federal control. I think there’s a good chance we can get a refurbished version of SB 183 through the 2011 Montana Legislature. The pilot work done with our federal litigation to validate the Montana Firearms Freedom Act will certainly help with any state/fed contest in court over state/fed wolf control authority (both wolves and federal firearm regulations are exercise of congressional power to “regulate commerce … among the states.”)

So, MSSA will continue to press on the front of corrective action via preemptive state law. We’d be pleased to have whatever support may be offered by any other entities in achieving this goal.

There may well be other, viable ideas out there about “wolf solutions.” If so, I’d be glad to hear of them, and any good ones should be floated among all for consideration.

In the meantime, I don’t see any of the long-term players abandoning wolf solutions they’ve invested in for years (FOTNYEH – litigation; MSSA – legislative action; and SFW – ESA change). I do thoroughly support the idea that none of us should be obstructing any of the other efforts, and that all of us should contribute talent, experience and effort to other active entities as possible.

Finally, let me use this missive to acquaint readers with two other cards MSSA has in play in the wolf contest. For over a year I’ve been stirring the pot about wolf-transmitted diseases to help reframe wolves from Disney creatures into disease-ridden threats to human health. My purpose is to shift public and political sentiment and therefore political will concerning wolves.

And, MSSA is putting together a plan to hold a series of public hearings around Western Montana to take public testimony on the extent to which the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) has or has not met its constitutional and statutory obligation to foster huntable game herds and protect those herds from predators. Recordings of these hearings and summaries of the hearings will be provided to the Montana House Appropriations Committee when they are considering the FWP budget request in the 2011 session. No more FWP black hole for public wolf comment. WE will take the public comment and guarantee that it gets to the decision-makers – those who hold the purse strings.

In summary, there seem to be three viable, strategic ideas to address the wolf problem. All three are long shots, in one way or another. All three should be pursued by those who have the interest and expertise to do so. EVERYONE concerned about wolf impact should aid all three solutions to whatever extent they can. Any other viable ideas for solution should be promoted in this marketplace of ideas.

Best wishes,

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

Oral Arguments On Motion To Dismiss MSSA v. Holder Scheduled

Oral argument has been scheduled in MSSA v. Holder (Montana Shooting Sports Association v. Eric Holder, U.S. Attorney General) concerning the U.S. Motion to Dismiss., for Thursday, July 15th, at 9 AM, by U.S. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah Lynch.

You should remember that MSSA v. Holder is our lawsuit to validate the principles of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.

We don’t know yet which courtroom in the federal courthouse in Missoula will be used. Whatever one is used it would be great for the spectator area to be fully occupied. It should be an interesting day.

Several folks have asked if cameras or video recorders are allowed. I’m told that no recording devices are allowed in a federal courtroom (at least in Missoula).

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com