New Mexico Sportsmen/Trappers Need to Fight Back!

Once again wolves are the reason for this controversy and trapping ban that will take effect on November 1st, 2010 in New Mexico. The New Mexico Game Commission, The Wild Earth Guardians and The Center for Biological Diversity are claiming that the Mexican Gray Wolf is being unintentionally or (cruely) trapped by trappers.

Animal rights groups like the The Wild Earth Guardians and The Center for Biological Diversity are leading this ban and issued a formal request in June 2010 to stop all trapping in New Mexico. Saying that trapping is “The bone-crushing retort of a steel-jawed leghold trap is still legal on a part of the Mexican wolf’s habitat. These horrific restraints cause unbearable pain, but they also injure and maim. Some wolves even chew off their limbs to get free.” ”Traps are nasty, cruel devices. Mexican wolves, bobcats, coyotes, and foxes captured in body-gripping traps endure physiological trauma, dehydration, and exposure to extreme weather. Lobos that have been trapped and then released may sustain tissue damage and other injuries that can reduce their survivability, or increase the likelihood of their preying on domestic livestock because they are easier prey than the native wildlife, their natural preference.”

Click here for the full Wild Earth Guardians’ story. Click here for the full Center of Biological Diversity story.

Here’s what the New Mexico Game Commission issued about the trapping ban.

“Commencing November 1, 2010, for a minimum of six months, it shall be illegal to place, set or maintain any steel trap, conibear trap, foothold trap or snare anywhere within the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area in New Mexico, public land which is comprised of the Gila and Apache National Forest, unless otherwise allowed by statute. The prohibition shall remain in place until the State Game Commission takes action based upon a Department study to assess the risks to Mexican gray wolves due to trapping and a determination if some methods of trapping could be allowed that pose minimal risk of injury to the Mexican gray wolf.”

On November 30th, 2007, Mexican Gray Wolves were spotted stalking children at Glenwood Playground in New Mexico. This of course has made parents very scared for their children’s lives and now kids in certain areas must sit in giant chicken coop like boxes while waiting for the school bus, to protect them from the wolves. There have also been many reports of parents giving their kids guns when they go out to play for protection against the wolves. View the full story here. Cattle, pets and horses are also continually falling prey to the Mexican Gray Wolf in New Mexico with reports of as many as 1500 cattle being killed by wolves.

Here’s what Larry Lightner has to say about the trapping ban. “Now, this is just my opinion, but it is also an opinion shared by many others, and it is this; the banning of leg-hold traps is NOT about the wolf. What it is really about is those folks who want a permanent ban on trapping and hunting of any kind, anywhere — the wolf is just a vehicle for them to git it done.”

Larry writes for the ’Glenwood Gazette’ out of Southern New Mexico and Arizona and ‘The Real Agenda’: Click here for the full story.

Here’s another article regarding this wolf controversy. Click here.

This ban is nothing more than a ploy to get all trapping/hunting eventually banned in the state of New Mexico which means us sportsmen keep losing more of our rights. It’s up to us sportsmen to take a stand and voice our opinions. Sportsmen please contact The New Mexico Game Commission and voice your disapproval of this ban and help us fight for our rights. – Hunters Against PETA

Here’s New Mexico’s Game Commission/Department contact info:

Commission Mailing addresses:
Jim McClintic
Chairman
PO Box 21027
Albuquerque, NM 87154
jmsconst@comcast.net

Sandy Buffett
Vice-Chair
320 Aztec St Suite B
Santa Fe, NM 87501
sandyNMGC@gmail.com

Tom Arvas
7905 Spain NE
Albuquerque, NM 87109
tomarvas@hotmail.com

M.H. “Dutch” Salmon
PO Box 878
Silver City, NM 88062
dutch@high-lonesomebooks.com

Gary Fonay
5333 North Baggett
Hobbs, NM 88242
GWFonay@aol.com

Kent Salazar
1621 Vassar Drive SE
Albuquerque, NM 87106
kentsala@aol.com

Thomas “Dick” Salopek
975 Holcomb Road
Las Cruces, NM 88007
dicksalopek@hotmail.com

Game Department addresses:
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish
Wildlife Management Division
1 Wildlife Way
Santa Fe, NM 87507
nmdeptofgameandfish@state.nm.us

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Arizona Sportsmen Need to Protect Their Rights by Voting “YES” to Prop 109

This article is for all sportsmen in AZ and something that all sportsmen across America need to pay close attention to. Proposition 109 would guarantee Arizonans the right to “hunt, fish and harvest wildlife lawfully.” It would prohibit any law or rule that unreasonably restricts hunting or fishing using traditional means. So as you can see Prop 109 is very important to sportsmen’s rights. It’s very important that this bill gets passed not only in AZ but for sportsmen all across America.

The Humane Society is leading the fight in opposition to this bill. If you don’t know this already the Humane Society is the world’s largest anti-hunting organization and if given the power they would shut down all forms of hunting and fishing immediately without question or concern.

Then there are people such as Sandy Bahr director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter, who is saying hunting and fishing should remain privileges, just like being able to drive a car. Bahr said amending the constitution would change the way officials can manage hunting and fishing and how citizens can change things via initiative. Here’s what else she has to say about hunting: “You’re putting it on par with things like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms, all of those very important fundamental rights,” Bahr said. “We find that pretty outrageous.”

If voters approve Proposition 109, Arizona would become the 11th state to make hunting and fishing a constitutional right.

Hunting and fishing are our constitutional rights. It’s been a right and freedom in America since explorers first landed in America. They should remain our rights forever as we see fit and should never change. Hunting and fishing is a God given right and is an American right. It’s who we are and what we stand for. This is still a free country right?

Groups like the Humane Society, PETA and the Defenders of Wildlife are going to keep pushing their anti-hunting agenda as long as they’re around and still in business.

It’s up to us sportsmen to put a stop to their anti-hunting/fishing agenda. We must ban together, voice our opinions and all stand up for something we all love and believe in.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Hunters in AZ vote “YES” to Prop 109

Some hunters may or may not agree with Arizona’s Prop 109. However we want to encourage and make all hunters aware that whether or not you agree or disagree with some of the laws and rules in Prop 109 you must do your part and vote “YES”. It all boils down to our freedoms to continue to hunt and fish the way we see fit. We can’t allow animal rights groups to dictate to us how and when we can hunt and fish.

Think about this for a moment. Do you really want groups like The Humane Society, PETA and the Defenders of Wildlife deciding the rules and regulations regarding our hunting and fishing? Animal rights groups are the reason that these new rules and laws protecting wildlife get started. They start with simple ideas like to quit using steel-jawed traps, hound hunting of bears and bear baiting. These methods of hunting and trapping have been common hunting practices in America for generations. After these hunting methods are outlawed then they choose the next method of hunting to try and ban, and it goes on and on.

The Humane Society is really pushing their members to vote “NO” on Prop 109.

Here’s what the Humane Society has to say regarding this: “If approved, Prop 109 could repeal the voter-approved ballot measure on trapping, legalize canned hunting, and protect outrageous practices like hound hunting of bears or even bear baiting, if someone decided to start engaging in that activity. And we could forget about any attempt to restrict the use of lead shot that is killing highly endangered California condors, since a requirement to use nontoxic shot would “unreasonably restrict hunting.”

“They don’t like that we succeeded in convincing Arizona voters to outlaw cockfighting and extreme confinement of veal calves and breeding pigs on factory farms by ballot initiative. And they especially don’t like that we succeeded in persuading the electorate to ban the use of cruel and inhumane steel-jawed leg hold traps on public lands—since that was a restriction on the taking of wildlife.”

Click here for the full Humane Society article: http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2010/10/arizona-prop-109.html

The Humane Society has spent over $250,000 on this issue, so as you can see this is very important to them.

Here’s what Sen. John McCain had to say regarding this issue: “Hunters are true conservationists and stewards of wildlands.” “Protecting the right of hunters in Arizona means a highly effective way to preserve wildlife populations and land management.”

Sandy Froman, the former president of the NRA is trying to defend sportsmen’s rights in AZ and is working with Sen. McCain on this issue. She had this to say: “Prop 109′s opponents, led by the anti-hunting Humane Society of the United States, are trying to mislead Arizona voters by throwing around terms such as – quote – power grab by the Legislature,” Froman said. “They’ve chosen this line of attack not because it’s in any way true but in an attempt to appeal to people’s current dissatisfaction with government.”

Click here for the full article: http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/102210_mccain_prop109

Hunters Against PETA is urging all Arizona sportsmen to vote “YES” on Prop 109 to defend your rights to hunt. If animal rights groups succeed in AZ then it adds power to their cause and affects all sportsmen across America.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Utah and Montana Fire Back At Wolves

These articles were pulled directly from Standard.net.

Utah Article

“SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Wildlife Board has taken a stand supporting federal legislation that would take the gray wolf population off the endangered species list, a move that angers some wildlife advocates.

On Tuesday, the board voted unanimously to support both a U.S. House and Senate version of legislation that reverses a recent federal court decision ordering protection for the gray wolf, an animal with few confirmed sightings in the Utah wilds since 2002.

Part of the debate over how to manage the wolves is connected to state legislation passed in the 2010 session and sponsored by Sen. Allen Christensen, R-North Ogden.

The Wildlife Board believes if federal lawmakers de-list wolves from the Endangered Species Act, Christensen’s legislation will kick into gear a 2005 state management plan that has been dormant since it was written. The plan, partially supervised by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, would allow a limited population growth for the wolves.

The Salt Lake City hearing on the board letter supporting federal legislation had its tension, which often happens over the wolf issues.

“There is no neutral zone, everyone is either for them or against them,” said Bill Fenimore, a Farmington member of the board who acknowledged the long-standing heat in the room surrounding the topic.

The gray wolf, not officially seen in Utah for years, has been sighted six times in 2010, state officials said. Two of those confirmed sightings were in the northern area of Utah that was an unprotected area for the wolf until the August court case.

“We want wolves to return to Utah,” said Bob Brister of the Utah Environmental Congress.

Brister and others at the meeting worry how the wolf-management plan would be carried out.

Wildlife advocates say the federal ruling to renew Endangered Species Act protection buys time to create a plan that ensures the wolf population doesn’t dwindle again in the northern Rockies.

“Wolves are growing exponentially; (the population) grows worse, not better,” said Don Peay, representing a multi-state group called BigGame Forever.

Peay and others believe wolves deplete big game or livestock and remain a threat.

The board also supported a second letter to the Utah congressional delegation, one signed by leaders in nine groups and three state agencies, which expresses a similar view to supporters of the move to override the court ruling.

The federal legislation that does that is co-sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.”

Montana Article

“KALISPELL, Mont. — Rep. Denny Rehberg, who manages a ranch outside Billings, Mont., knows quite literally what it means to have the wolf at the door: Several years ago, a single wolf got into his pasture and killed 51 prized cashmere goats.

“‘Shoot, shovel and shut up’ is a joke in Montana,” said Rehberg, referring to a longstanding reference among landowners across the West — perhaps only half in jest — to the best way to deal with a federally protected endangered species like the gray wolf.

The reintroduction of the wolf in the northern Rocky Mountains has been so contentious that Rehberg, a Republican, is joining a group of congressmen preparing an unusual move to aim their weapons at the Endangered Species Act itself.

Bills introduced in Congress over the last few weeks would either remove the act’s protection of wolves in the Northwest or, as proposed by Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, prohibit any listing at all of the once nearly extinct predator. Biologists say that outcome could jeopardize recovery efforts in the Southwest and Midwest and in fledgling new populations in Washington and Oregon.

The 1973 act, the nation’s landmark species protection law, has rarely been amended, and conservationists say the bills mark a significant shift in the enduring contest between mining, timber and ranching interests and the plants and animals often squeezed out by human expansion.

“Heretofore there’s been fairly strong bipartisan support of the sort of Noah’s Ark notion that if we’re serious about our moral commitment to share the planet with our fellow inhabitants, we don’t start throwing identified species off the ark,” said Douglas Honnold of the public interest legal organization Earthjustice, which has been fighting to expand wolf protections in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.

“I think to a large degree it would really be unprecedented,” said Andrew Wetzler of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If passed, any of these bills will rip the heart out of the Endangered Species Act and set a terrible precedent for wildlife management generally.”

Government officials in Montana and Idaho say that after 15 years of trying to follow the letter of the law in restoring wolves around Yellowstone National Park, they have been rewarded with a large and growing wolf population that threatens livestock and game animals like elk, as well as hunters and hikers in the backcountry.

“They’re everywhere. There’s a problem that’s got to be controlled, and now’s the time to do it,” Ed Jonas, a rancher from Rollins, Mont., said at a meeting Rehberg convened here and in two other towns last week.

“Two times in the last two weeks, I’ve been out there in the middle of the night with a rifle because my coon hound was chasing something. You don’t sleep well anymore because you don’t know when you wake up if you’re going to have all live animals,” he said.

The original target was 300 wolves spread across the three states. Officials now estimate there are more than 1,700 wolves; conservationists say about 2,000 are necessary for full recovery.

“It’s not that we want to gut the Endangered Species Act. It’s not that we want to destroy a species. It’s that we want some finality,” Rehberg said at the Kalispell meeting. “We met the threshold, and now the courts have changed the goal lines. That’s the problem.”

The act’s protections were lifted in Montana and Idaho in 2007, clearing the way for the states’ first legal hunts last year. Restrictions were kept in place in Wyoming, where officials have held out for the right to shoot wolves on sight outside a narrow protected area near Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks.

Wyoming’s intransigence proved to be the undoing of the progress that had been made in the two neighboring states; U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy ruled in August that the government couldn’t continue to call the wolves endangered in Wyoming but recovered in Montana and Idaho.

The wolves were relisted, this year’s hunts were canceled, wolf populations have continued to increase, and ranchers and elk hunters say they have reached the end of their rope.

“We held up our part of the bargain. But the rules keep changing,” said Jon Hanian, spokesman for Idaho Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter, a Republican. “People are expressing their frustration, and it’s at a boiling point.”

Similar disputes have been ongoing in the Midwest over protection of wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, and in the Southwest, where federal biologists are attempting to bolster the population of Mexican gray wolves in Arizona and New Mexico.

In Oregon, Rehberg’s “shoot, shovel and shut up” dictum has come into play: A $7,500 private reward has been offered for information about the Sept. 30 shooting of a radio-collared wolf in the Umatilla National Forest.

On Sept. 22, Idaho Republican Sens. Michael D. Crapo and Jim Risch introduced legislation to delist wolves through most of the northern Rockies.

Edwards’ bill goes a step further, removing wolves from the act’s purview across the country.

On Sept. 28, Montana’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Max Baucus and Jon Tester, introduced their bill to delist wolves in Idaho and Montana and place the animals under state management plans that, as currently written, could take wolf populations down as low as the original target of 300 animals.

“This bill provides a common-sense solution that will put wolves in Montana back in Montana’s control,” Baucus said in a statement. “The debate has gone on long enough.”

Only twice before have special provisions been carved out of the Endangered Species Act, beginning with a 1978 amendment passed as a result of the controversy over the snail darter blocking a Tennessee Valley Authority dam.

It allows a Cabinet-level committee known as the “God Squad” to deliberate especially problematic listings. The committee was convened in the 1991 controversy over the northern spotted owl in the Pacific Northwest and cleared the way for some timber sales within the owl’s habitat.

In neither case was there a wholesale exemption from the act for a species.”

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Idaho Says They Won’t Protect Wolves Anymore

This article was pulled directly from the Idaho Reporter.com.

Idaho wildlife officials will leave it to the federal government to manage wolves in the state. Gov. Butch Otter sent U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar a letter Monday saying that the state won’t manage wolves as a designated agent of the federal government.

“While some herald the introduction of wolves and the current population as a biological triumph, history will show that this program as a tragic example of oppressive, ham-handed ‘conservation’ at its worst,” Otter said in his letter to Salazar. “Starting today, at least the state will no longer be complicit.”

State and federal officials, including Otter and Salazar, have communicated regularly since an August federal court decision put wolves in Idaho and Montana back on the endangered species list. That ruling ended Idaho’s public wolf hunt. Otter said that without the wolf hunt, there is no reason for Idaho to be involved in managing wolves.

With the governor’s decision, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) will no longer monitor wolf populations, investigate illegal wolf killings, or run a program helping livestock producers whose animals are killed by wolves. It’s unclear if or how federal agencies will step in to manage wolves. Officials with the governor’s office and IDFG said they haven’t heard a response, and the Interior Department has not responded to phone calls from IdahoReporter.com.

“We don’t know how this is going to shake out,” said IDFG spokesman Ed Mitchell. “It starts right now.”

Otter said he didn’t want money from hunting and fishing licenses to pay for monitoring wolves while a public hunt is barred. He also said the Idaho is still working with the feds on a path to ultimately delisting wolves.

Mitchell said the agency spent $1.7 million on wolves during its last fiscal year. Approximately $500,000 came from license fees, with the rest coming from federal funding sources. Two IDFG biologists who focused on wolves will now turn their attention to ungulates, including elk, moose, and deer, that can be prey to wolves.

The governor’s decision was called reckless by Keith Allred, the Democratic challenger in the November election. Allred, who also panned the August court decision protecting wolves, said Idaho should manages its wolf population.

“Idaho needs to control its own destiny, and in an Allred administration we’d take control of this issue, not avoid it,” Allred said in a news release.

Defenders of Wildlife, one of the environmental groups that brought the lawsuit ending Idaho’s wolf hunt, also criticized Otter. “Refusing to allow state agencies to participate in wolf management or to investigate, or enforce against, illegal killings of wolves is political showmanship, not the statesmanship that one expects from a governor,” Defenders President Rodger Schlickeisen said in a news release.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Stop The Wolves, Please Take Action

To all Sportsmen,

As you know there’s been a lot of talk and controversy surrounding the wolf issue lately. Wolves are a very serious threat to the future of our big game herds and hunting here in the west and soon to be many states in America. We must fight this problem tooth and nail and we must make our senators and congressmen fight this serious problem as well.

Recently there’s been a few anti-wolf bills that have been submitted by a few senators that will stop wolves from spreading through the western states and wiping out our big game herds.

We’re urging everyone to contact your state’s senators and congressman by PHONE or EMAIL and tell them to get behind these bills that I’m going to discuss below.

House bill (6028) was submitted by Texas Senator. Chet Edwards and would make it impossible for the federal government to protect wolves by taking them off of the Endangered Species List and keeping them off.

Another bill (3919) that was submitted by Utah Senator. Orrin Hatch would also take wolves off of the endangered species list and keep them off.

I had the pleasure of listening to Utah Senator. Orrin Hatch and Utah Congressman. Jim Matheson on Monday, Oct 11th regarding this issue and these men are going to do whatever it takes to protect our big game herds and heritage in America.

Here’s some disturbing numbers and the negative impact wolves have had on our big game herds here in the west:

Big Game Population Statistics
Lolo Elk Herd, Idaho
Before Wolf Introduction: 20,000
After Wolf Introduction: 1,700

Yellowstone Elk Herd
Before Wolf Introduction: 20,000
After Wolf Introduction: 6,500

Jackson, WY Shiras Moose
Before Wolf Introduction: 1,200
After Wolf Introduction: 120

Gallitan Valley Elk Herd
Before Wolf Introduction: 1,500
After Wolf Introduction: 200

Also don’t be fooled, worldwide wolf abundance-wolves are NOT endangered.
Canada
50,000 wolves

Alaska
11,000 wolves

Europe and Asian
60,000 to 100,000 wolves (estimated)

Here’s a directory that has phone numbers and web form contact info for all of the congressmen and senators for your state. It’s easy to use just pick your state and hit search.

Click on this link to contact your state’s representatives: http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html

Contact your Senators and Congressmen and urge them to join the fight and to get behind bills 6028 and 3919.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

New Wolf Poll Please Vote

New Poll Being Conducted by the Bozeman Chronicle out of Montana

Tuesday, October 5th, 2010

“Do you agree with recently proposed legislation that would remove the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act?”

Sportsmen please vote “YES” to help get wolves off of the Endangered Species List.

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/opinions/poll_60d42232-cf43-11df-a90d-001cc4c002e0.html

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Author Chip Ward Defends Wolves

Chip Ward who is an author out of Utah recently wrote an article that has been published nationwide by numerous news sources. In his article he states all of the benefits of the wolf reintroduction. However he left out all the facts stating all the damage and havoc wolves have caused in Yellowstone and more importantly outside of Yellowstone since they were reintroduced back into Yellowstone 15 years ago.

After reading Chip’s article it’s easy to see whose side he is on. Here’s what Chip has to say about hunters: “Worse yet, from the hunting point of view, elk behavior has changed dramatically.  Instead of camping out on stream banks and overeating, they roam far more and in smaller numbers, browsing in brushy areas where there is more protective cover.  Surviving elk are healthier, but leaner, warier, far more dispersed, and significantly harder to hunt.  This further dismays those who had become accustomed to easy hunting and bigger animals.”

Does Chip not know that there’s no hunting in Yellowstone National Park?

If hunting were allowed in Yellowstone Park of course it would be easy, animals in Yellowstone are like animals in a petting zoo. In my 15 years of hunting experience though I’ve never heard of or experienced such a thing as “easy hunting” or an easy elk hunt for that matter.

Chip we urge you to write an article about the benefits of wolves not living in Yellowstone. Cause there aren’t any.

After all, wasn’t the original plan for wolves to be reintroduced only in Yellowstone National Park? Why is it then that they’ve been allowed to survive and thrive once they’ve left Yellowstone Park?

If wolves are actually a “scientific” benefit to Yellowstone National Park; great lets keep them there, only in Yellowstone. We at Hunters Against PETA will not stop until all wolves outside of Yellowstone National Park are dealt with.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Idaho and the Fight Against the Wolves

This article was pulled directly from MagicValley.com which is a news source out of  Twin Falls, Idaho:

“Idaho joined Montana and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar this week in appealing a U.S. District Court ruling relisting wolves as endangered species in the Intermountain West.

Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter and Attorney General Lawrence Wasden led the pack Thursday to ask the 9thU.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy’s Aug. 5 decision that restored federal protections to wolves in Idaho and Montana.

Going at it from a different angle, U.S. Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch, both R-Idaho, introduced a bill Wednesday to remove the wolves from the endangered species list altogether.

Under the Endangered Species Act, wolves are managed as a single population. If a population spans more than one state, Molloy ruled, protection cannot be removed on a state-by-state basis. In this case, Salazar had tried to delist wolves in Idaho and Montana, but not Wyoming.

“We’re seeing a troubling pattern of behavior here, with Judge Molloy consistently ruling in support of federal control over our land, our resources and our way of life in the West,” Otter said in a press release, referring to another of the judge’s decisions this week that upheld federal control over regulating firearms.

However, Garrick Dutcher of Ketchum-based Living With Wolves called Idaho’s appeal just an 11th-hour election-year stunt, and claims by Otter of livestock carnage overstated, saying attacks on livestock have fallen this year.

“This is not a state sovereignty issue,” Dutcher said. “Sadly, the waste of taxpayer funds to pursue this appeal is not about wildlife management and reality; it is about politics.”

Bob Clark, associate regional organizer of the Sierra Club wolf program, said his group — which fought delisting in court — isn’t saying state fish and game departments aren’t capable of managing wolves. And it respects the states’ right to appeal.

“The courts are used by both sides,” Clark said. “But delisting wolves along political boundaries doesn’t meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, which demands decisions based not upon emotion or politics but on the best-available science as recently upheld by Salazar,” he continued, referring to the Interior secretary’s Wednesday move to issue rules to protect scientific integrity.

Meanwhile, the clock’s still ticking on an ultimatum by Otter to stop monitoring, providing law enforcement support or investigating wolf deaths in Idaho.

Otter told Salazar that he’d negotiate a new agreement for the state to manage wolves until this Thursday. But if an agreement isn’t struck by then, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game will cease to carry out its wolf management responsibilities.”

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com

Congressman Bobby Rush Wants a Ban on Lead Ammo

With the recent of push of trying to ban lead fishing tackle, Congressman Bobby Rush decided to add to it by introducing a legislation that would ban all traditional lead ammo.

Bobby Rush is a U.S. Representative out of Illinois and is famous for introducing the anti-gun legislation H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act).

This House Resolution 5820 would amend the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) by removing the exemption included in the law for traditional ammunition.  It was that specific exemption that forced the EPA to deny the ammunition portion of a petition filed by several groups seeking to ban both traditional ammunition and fishing tackle.

At the same time Bobby Rush introduced this bill that would ban lead ammo and fishing tackle another bill was introduced (S. 3850) that would protect all lead fishing tackle. This bill was introduced on September 28 by Senator Blanche Lincoln (D- AR).

 ”If the petition is accepted as presented, all lead in all fishing tackle would be banned, which would substantially increase the cost of recreational fishing and negatively impact angler participation across the country,” said American Sport fishing Association (ASA) Vice President Gordon Robertson.  ”Senator Lincoln’s legislation will help to ensure that future regulations on fishing tackle are established in response to scientific data instead of unjustified petitions.”

All sportsmen should oppose the 5820 legislation by voicing your opinions to your state’s U.S. Representative. This bill will raise the prices of ammo and fishing tackle 3 to 5 times higher and will have devistating effects on the hunting and fishing industry.

Sportsmen should also contact their U.S. Senators immediately and ask that they join Sen. Lincoln in sponsoring this legislation (S. 3850) so it will go through protecting our rights.

http://www.HuntersAgainstPETA.com