Pretty disturbing

[royden]

Bt - it's been awhile since there was a fire in the house

mt - well said as usual.

Nodog - where to start? at least your honest, next time maybe a little less salt would be in order when you cut to the chase

Personally I think there are very few women who are able to be politicians. There are only a few men who are able to politicians - most of the current ones are unable.

I disagree on emotions and freedom though. Emotions are what get the idea in motion to fix a problem or create a new law. In every law passed someone gains freedom and someone else looses some freedom. Period. That's why laws are passed ... to give someone a little bit of control over someone else's actions.

What SHOULD govern the laws passed is morality.

Personally I believe men are more objective, but also short sighted amont our various other inadquacies (like ability to spell ). I think God was correct (of course) when he said in a marriage the man was to be the head of the house. Why? cause you can't have two leaders. However - before we get carried away - guess what turns the head? The neck. Women are the support and guidance for the men. Without womens different perspective on issues our world would be a very different place; however it takes both views to make everything tick.

To me the best politician would a be a morally honest man in his 50's with a wife and family beside him. His character and traits would be visible in his kids. His wife would be there to steer the boat. Alas that ain't our world yet.

[mtshooter]

Right on the money Royden.

[hopesman]

royden said:

To me the best politician would a be a morally honest man in his 50's with a wife and family beside him. His character and traits would be visible in his kids. His wife would be there to steer the boat. Alas that ain't our world yet.

Unfortunately, this would have to be in a perfect world A morally honest politician will likely never be elected and if they were, they wouldn't last more than one term. Why is this you will ask It is because people in general are not moral, at least not the ones close to those in government. Pressure from all of the lobby and special interest groups plus the idea that you owe me because I voted for you mentality will ALWAYS rule in the political arena. Even the most moral politician cannot survive unless they learn to work in this atmosphere (read into this compromise) Simply stated, we (in the broad sense) are the problem, not the politicians. My two cents worth.

[mtshooter]

We have gotten away from the original post and this really could continue but I wanted all to see where they are at with the Wolf issue.

Returning gray wolves to the Northern Rockies has already cost more than $27 million. Keeping them here will mean spending millions of dollars more.

But with federal officials poised today to announce the removal of wolves from the endangered-species list, there are unresolved questions about how state-run wolf programs - expected next year to cost around $3.3 million to manage more than 1,500 wolves - will be funded in the coming years.

Federal endangered-species funds will cover the bills through September, but after that, the picture is less clear. States will have to look for other federal dollars to pay for wolf management, or consider using donations and perhaps find other, more creative ways to pay the tab.

In Montana, wolf management is expected to cost between $900,000 and $1 million a year. No single source of funding has been identified, so state officials are looking at pooling money from a variety of possible sources.

The balance of the article can be read at the following link:

www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/02/21/news/state/18-wolfstatus.txt

[nodog]

royden said:

Bt - it's been awhile since there was a fire in the house

mt - well said as usual.

Nodog - where to start? at least your honest, next time maybe a little less salt would be in order when you cut to the chase

Personally I think there are very few women who are able to be politicians. There are only a few men who are able to politicians - most of the current ones are unable.

I disagree on emotions and freedom though. Emotions are what get the idea in motion to fix a problem or create a new law. In every law passed someone gains freedom and someone else looses some freedom. Period. That's why laws are passed ... to give someone a little bit of control over someone else's actions.

What SHOULD govern the laws passed is morality.
.

To me the best politician would a be a morally honest man in his 50's with a wife and family beside him. His character and traits would be visible in his kids. His wife would be there to steer the boat. Alas that ain't our world yet.

This man would lead poorly without acute understanding of freedom. A man who knows right from wrong would without that not let others find the reasons why freedom is so precious, he would simply dictate it.

As far as my methods more is read into them then said, it is a human flaw. The moral man referred too would be one who most likely has read the bible. Being a man who has read it 7 times straight through in 3 years I can say that many say a great deal more than the book actually says. I’m also nodog because I am no dog to be led around by the leash in my pants, and just 50 years old. How am I doing?

Married to a woman who's more than bought and paid for me these past 25+ years. Given up all a women holds dear for me and our 5 kids, 3 of them daughters who are exceptional. My first born is Grace and aptly named. She is a gift unearned.

Freedom demands that sins be allowed. Oppresion says no, I will be your master. I will that the wolf be allowed to over run you!

All we really need is some woman to make a fuse about it. ;D

[mtshooter]

U.S. to move gray wolf off endangered species list

By MIKE STARK
Of The Gazette Staff


Calling it a "remarkable conservation success story," the federal government said this morning it plans on removing gray wolves in the Northern Rockies from the endangered species list, 13 years after the animals were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees wolf recovery, said there are more than 1,500 wolves in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, far exceeding initial goals to restore them to the region.

"The wolf population in the Northern Rockies has far exceeded its recovery goal and continues to expand its size and range," Lynn Scarlett, deputy secretary of the Interior Department, said in a statement this morning.

The minimum recovery goal for wolves in the region was set at a minimum of 30 breeding pairs and 300 wolves in the three states for at least three consecutive years. That goal was met in 2002 and the population has continued to expand.

"These wolves have shown an impressive ability to breed and expand - they just needed an opportunity to establish themselves in the Rockies. The (Fish and Wildlife) Service and its partners provided that opportunity, and now it's time to integrate wolves into the states' overall wildlife management efforts," H. Dale Hall, the agency's director, said in a statement.

The official delisting notice is expected to be published in the Federal Register in the next week or so. The rule takes effect 30 days after it's published.

The move means that state wildlife agencies in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho will take over full responsibility for managing the wolves and ensuring there's a sustainable population in each state.

All three states have said they plan to implement wolf hunts. The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission on Wednesday authorized a hunt to begin this fall.

Several environmental groups have vowed to sue over the delisting decision.

[royden]

I read a similar article this morning. I was actually looking for info on the nearby meteor impact area (spokane, Wa, or maybe oregon).

[mtshooter]

There has been a lot on the local news tonight. WY's plan for a season on the wolf is similar to MT, anything in NW WY will have a big game trophy status but anything away from NW WY will be treated as a predator like the coyote.

[smj]

Anybody want to bet on this - once the feds are done with the wolf and it is turned over to the state, the division of wildlife, or DNR, or what ever organization runs your states huntable resources will take over the job - and your hunter dollars will support the wolf.

[mtshooter]

That's it. They are stating that 1 million a year will be needed to "manage" the wolves in MT alone