Last wolf meeting, 300+

[elkaholic]

Well here we go towards the next chapter. 300+ people turned out in Enterprise last night to voice their opinions on wolves in Oregon (or not). I am told there was a change in format and with the exception of about 15 people everyone else stayed in the main room and submitted comments. Every person except one (Hells Canyon Preservation)spoke against re-establishing or building a wolf population in Oregon. Meeting got over about 10:30. A lot of the people were disappointed that no commissioners attended. Director Ball did attend.

The February Commission meeting on this topic should be lively. Did you'all let ODFW know your thoughts? :smile:

[skein]

I sure did.

Talked to the guide I hunted with up in Canada, and he said, "No matter what, you don't want wolves down there. They are hard, hard, hard on the other animals."

Did you hear about Wolf#2 in Yellowstone? He died. Another pack killed him. These are not nice animals.

Skein

[Gun Rod Bow]

I urge everyone concerened, and that should be everyone to submit a comment to ODFW. It can be done on line at

ODFW.Comments@state.or.us

Type in Wolf Comments in the subject box.

PLEASE CONSIDER THAT ONCE THEY ARE HERE, IT IS TOO LATE!

GRB

[TheRogue]

A lot of the people were disappointed that no commissioners attended. Director Ball did attend.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">This shouldn't be surprising....why spend the travel dollars, when you know what the crowd is going to say?? Even though that crowd is made up of the people who will be most affected by the decisions made!! :whazzup: :shocked: :whazzup:

[elkaholic]

Skein, I agree with you, they are not cuddly grass eating animals. They are the kings of their territory and whether it be your personal dog or a rival canine they eliminate competition.

GRB, Again, right on, when we accept just one, the game is lost. The key word is accept. They will prosper here just like they did in those other areas because the food source is not adapted to dealing with this animal. Food source being broadly defined to include domestic animals.

TR, I understand you point but if the decision makers set up a meeting schedule and attend every one except yours, it appears to send a message. There is a commissioner not that far away. Look at this picture, in Salem and Portland there was more than one commissioner there. In Enterprise where the people who will have to live day to day with the critter, there are none. I'm sure they appreciated Director Ball, had he not went it would have really looked bad. I think people want an audience with decision makers, not comment takers. Just my thoughts. :smile:

Shark, Good point, mostly you hear that it is mandated by the Endangered Species Act - end of story. I don't beleive that is the whole story. This is kind of like the spotted owl deal. This species bring about changes in society which are wanted by some of the masterminds who devised this plan. Get it established and like noxious weeds it will spread naturally. There is language in the EIS for the recovery area that gives the USFWS the power to retrieve every wolf found outside the experimental area, they knew they would leave. I do believe the nieve citizen would love to see or hear a wolf at sundown from their rosey cabin. Heck, I might have said yes, go ahead and have 50 wolves in Yellowstone so I could go see one someday. But if you told me the next 10 years impact and said I would be dealing with them as a result of that introduction, I would of voted HELL NO!!!! :shocked:

My biggest concern is some of the commissioners have been less than open about listening to Oregonians the last 30 days. Here is one reason why. This was in a Utah paper last week -

While too early to speculate on the specifics of the plan, Commission Chairman John Esler says it will accommodate wolves.
"We don't want wolves to come here, but if one has gone to the trouble to get here, we'll let it stay. . . . It's a little like how [the United States] treats Cubans."

Now, does that scare the ________ out of you. :whazzup:

[bigshark]

I have trouble in understanding the reason for wanting the wolf back. Understanding is a wrong word here, I don't know what the positive effects would be. Just so we could say we have some? Thin out animals of another type so the herds would be healthier? Isn't someone saying something about why and what the benefits will be? If they are not, it seems to me there might not be any and again somebody had nothing better to do than start trouble.

[skein]

You know how you sometimes stumble on something you read or saw a long time ago but had forgotten? I was looking in the October 2000 issue of Bugle (Rocky Mt Elk Mag) and there was a whole section devoted to wolves and their impact on areas where they've been reintroduced, like Yellowstone, etc. I haven't finished re-reading it, but it's pretty well done. I feel like I'm better informed than I was when I first read it, and with all the current discussions, I'm also reading it from a different perspective.

If any of you guys who are following the wolf debate have old issues of Bugle around, dig it out and take a look. Very interesting and pretty objective.

No wonder we don't ever throw our old hunting magazines out.

Skein

[GutshotApe]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by elkaholic:
[TR, I understand you point but if the decision makers set up a meeting schedule and attend every one except yours, it appears to send a message. There is a commissioner not that far away. Look at this picture, in Salem and Portland there was more than one commissioner there. In Enterprise where the people who will have to live day to day with the critter, there are none. I'm sure they appreciated Director Ball, had he not went it would have really looked bad. I think people want an audience with decision makers, not comment takers. Just my thoughts. :smile:

My biggest concern is some of the commissioners have been less than open about listening to Oregonians the last 30 days.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Elkaholic -

I believe the nearest commissioner to Enterprise lives in Pendleton, not exactly a hop skip & jump away.

Many people have the idea that the commissioners are full-time, full-salaried ODFW employees who should attend all ODFW meetings held anywhere, anytime.

In reality, the commissioners are volunteers who receive no ODFW salary. They have regular jobs and families and their commission time is in addition to (taken from) their other activities. There are 12 monthly commission meetings, many of which are 2-day affairs plus many other committee and legislative meetings & hearings they attend throughout the year. So, don't be too hard on them if no commissioner drives 3 hrs Pendleton to Enterprise to attend a wolf meeting on a weeknight, and then drive back - especially when the commissioners are given a rundown of the meeting (who was there, who said what) by ODFW staff afterwards.

In my opinion, if one wants to be really "heard" by the commissioners, the best way is to do it with a well written, respectful letter [img]graemlins/program.gif[/img] clearly outlining the issue and preferred course of action ON ONE PAGE. Send individual letters (not form letters) to the commissioners at their home addresses. Do something or include something in the letter to make it stand out (i.e. a photo, or a personal anecdote, etc.). If possible, follow the letter up with personal testimony when the issue comes before the commission for action.

[elkaholic]

Thanks for your thoughts GSA. I have to agree that anybody prefers a respectful letter or face to face discussion, even if they are miles apart philosophically. I also respect those Commissioners time. Maybe it was explained to the crowd why someone couldn't attend, such as another meeting, family commitment, etc. :smile:

Looks like this process will drag on quite awhile with 2900+ comments to sift through so far. More and more info coming out each day.

Take Care