ODFW not allowing Public Comment

Comments

1. 

   December 2, 2017 Log in to Reply

   mm

   Just now scanning the Draft Update Plan, I really don’t want to make many comments here yet.

   However, remember that it is a Draft report to the Commission from the ODFW Staff. Any Updated Plan the Commission releases by law must undergo public scrutiny.

   Unlike California’s Wolf Plan, Oregon appears to be making sure they USE all the science available in decisionmaking. CA has clearly stated that they won’t depend upon science, but will largely use social tolerance and habitat carrying capacity (by te way, they have just released their updated Elk information and management Final Public Draft, an important document as up to 1/2 of Northern Rockies Elk tags are purchased by California residents- Thus that state supports western fish and wildlife agencies. More on this elsewhhere)

   Since the science is showing some information conflicting with previous presumptions, this is good. I recognize much of the work, and we have to remember that there is big money and local public opinion in farming and ranching areas remaining against wolves.
   The European invasion of North America , and of Oregon in this case only happened beginning about 180 years ago, and this group looks at everything other than human as commodity to be bought and sold. Nature interferes with that worldview.
   Again, though, the Draft Plan desires a “stakeholder” group, and we can recognize from Washington’s WAG that this has both benefits and some drawbacks. Both still plan for lethal removal under certain circumstances, and this has been abused significantly in the recent past.

   Oregon’s Plan appears to have a lot of language related to avoidance of use of USDA APHIS WIldlife Services, replacing it with “Master Hunters and Trappers” trained by ODFW. (To digress into politics: OR Senators tend to have good voting records on wolves and wildlands,, and the problem of Representatives is an issue upon which ALL must vote every two years in their local districts. Wolves do NOT even register on public discussion in the media, and it is thus there and moreso in early education in rural schools, that relationship-building with the wolf and wildlife must be strongly increased!)
   As you also know, states engage in strong efforts to collar as many wolves as possible; There are now some judicial restraints in place concerning this on federal wilderness land arising from Idaho’s disingenuous and draconian wolf policies.

   So, before working on the Drafts, I REALLY want to offer readers something of value:
   we ALL must consider that the path to general public acceptance of relationship and care for Wolf and native life MUST begin early in life.
   Gradeschool teachers tend to be more eager to reconnect the young, than almost any other group. Some parents will resist and target teaching that is too overtly counter to their personal political and utilitarian attitudes toward life (But one can phrase educational tools in ways that emphasize truth and science, and here it should be mentioned that alternative North American cultural ways can offer IMPORTANT grounding for children – Oregon is not so crazily involuted as are some states in some attitudes I’ll describe as cultural).

   Those readers with questions about how to approach this issue need to explore the avenues to getting understanding, relationship, and tolerance for Wolf into the early school curriculum. Some introduction needs to occur quite early, and the best time to introduce more complete information tends to be by 4th and 5th grade – age 9 and 10. This assertion is backed by developmental understanding. of the human.
   Remember, cultivating understanding, knowledge, love, respect, tolerance, is the most important work, for there is NO future for wolf, wildlife, tolerance, or consequently, life itself, unless this culture can be changed and shaken from its total selfish orientation. By doing this, we do not argue or compete with, but ADD what is MOST important, and which has most been lost.

   Readers please also try to use these skills when entering public discussion about Wolf. Thank you.

2. 

   December 2, 2017 Log in to Reply

   mm

   I said below that OR looks in the Draft Plan to wanting to exit the use of USDA Wildlife Services – they get a LOT of grief from people for using this agency.
   Western Environmental Law Center has this petition to ODFW Director to cease using WS:
   http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/protect-gray-wolves-from?source=s.fwd&r_by=4849030

   They also have one to USFWS to change the Mexican Wolf Extinction Plan here:
   http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/mexican-wolves-in-extreme?source=s.fwd&r_by=4849030

   The Mexican Wolf Plan makers KNOW that it won’t work, but AZ and NM and cattle lobby are the ones the Plan is meant to satisfy.
   The ONLY way to change is to keep on pounding at their door with the fact that I-40 CANNOT be the limit, and 320 cannot be the total population.
   I’ve repeatedly commented to the agencies, as have many scientists, on the specifics – but the public has to OVERWHELM them.
   Grand Canyon Wolf Recovery and Lobos of the Southwest and many other area orgs and people continue this work, and so must every Wolf Advocate use EVERY opportunity.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.