Endangered Species Act discussion

[Poser]

Certainly, most or all of you have read about the Trump administration’s deregulation of the Nixon era ESA. A survey of social media comments reveals that there are two camps of hunters:

“If Trump did it, it is must be good”

Vs.

“If Trump did it, it must be bad”

Does a survey of Roksliders reveal anymore nuance to the topic? And, what are your thoughts on hunters that take either of the 2 above opinions?

 

[5MilesBack]

Trump obviously was the one in office when they did it........but IMO it has no bearing on Trump at all. It could have been anyone else that also did that. So while Trump will get the credit for it, just like forcing China to change their economic tactics, it should have been done years ago.

 

[mtnbiker208]

I have mixed feelings, I do believe the ESA needed updated. I don't know if this has gone to far or not. I guess we will see. I do live in Idaho and have had to deal with the ESA on different animals and how it affects different activities I do. This affects way more than just hunting.

 

[Marble]

From my understanding it's something that has been getting worked in for a very looking time. I do not know any details on dusty it actually did so I'll wait to hear from a few sources and them chime in.

 

[cuerro viejo]

As a rancher in a Lessor Prairie Chicken area, ESA is kind of scary when you look at the true power of it. The introduction of the blk footed ferret to my area could get really ugly if it had political backing going forward, this ruling atleast makes it a little tougher for over reaching of either species if it comes down to that.

 

[Middleofnowhere]

As a volunteer and non-profit board member of a wildlife conservation org, I am hopeful this will help us with water projects in the desert southwest. Like anything, I’m sure there may be some unintended consequences.

Basically I am going to be cautiously optimistic. I am a “Trump supporter”, but not blind to potentially bad policy.

 

[jfs82]

I haven't dug into it a ton but reading some articles the references to the below ideas worry me. (taken from some articles)

The wording also gives officials permission to dismiss climate change as an irrelevant threat to species’ survival and to consider economic factors when they’re deciding whether to protect a species.

... The Trump administration proposed revisions, including removing the phrase “without reference to economic impact,”

 

[elkduds]

It is another, but far from the last, unilateral (avoiding Congress) blunder in the undoing of habitat and public land protection, which will be the lasting legacy of Trump's domestic "policy." It offers nothing positive to hunters, wildlife, habitat or public land owners like us. Sage grouse will be included in the ESA in January 2021.

 

[Gerard Marcaurele]

The issue I have with the changes is that now there is concern that economics will be a deciding factor. While I don’t believe in wasteful spending, this verbiage opens the door to people that seek to use the land only to maximize profits and care nothing for the land or animals that inhabit it.

 

[elkstabber]

Historically with the old ESA landowners got screwed if an endangered species is found on their property. It would limit what a landowner wanted to do on their own property. Even if they wanted to conduct a prescribed burn (benefiting wildlife) they were restricted by the ESA.

Someday, hopefully, the ESA will reward landowners for having endangered species on their land. The way to do this is through a USDA/NRCS program similar to how EQIP/CRP is being used for quail, etc.

 

[Midwest.Bushlore]

The issue I have with the changes is that now there is concern that economics will be a deciding factor. While I don’t believe in wasteful spending, this verbiage opens the door to people that seek to use the land only to maximize profits and care nothing for the land or animals that inhabit it.

My research leads me to sadly conclude this will be the case. If a saner administration doesn't undo this it will probably result in corporations steamrolling everything in the pursuit of profits.

 

[Okhotnik]

It is another, but far from the last, unilateral (avoiding Congress) blunder in the undoing of habitat and public land protection, which will be the lasting legacy of Trump's domestic "policy." It offers nothing positive to hunters, wildlife, habitat or public land owners like us. Sage grouse will be included in the ESA in January 2021.

Orange man bad

Even bother reading and understanding it?

I thought not

 

[Beendare]

So here's a hypothetical;

If the Dodo bird was still alive but only a few birds left- should humans intervene to keep them alive?

Or is this part of evolution that some species which don't evolve get kicked to the curb- only the strong survive?

..

 

[DWBMontana]

I sure want folk's in Washington taking care of OUR LANDS and WILDLIFE......THEY HAVE DID SUCH A GREAT JOB OF TAKING CARE OF THOSE THAT HAVE DEFENDED OUR WAYS OF LIVE AND FREEDOM, I.E., THE VA, RIGHT?

 

[cuerro viejo]

It is another, but far from the last, unilateral (avoiding Congress) blunder in the undoing of habitat and public land protection, which will be the lasting legacy of Trump's domestic "policy." It offers nothing positive to hunters, wildlife, habitat or public land owners like us. Sage grouse will be included in the ESA in January 2021.

As a public land hunter and landowner that has enrolled couple sections of land into the walk in program (That trump greatly increased funding for) I completely disagree.

Real core high carrying capacity habitat is actually found more so on private land then public by a huge margin. Guess you are pissed he increased funding to a he CRP and WRP program also?

ESA protections are over reaching on private land. Period

 

[mtnrunner260]

The Your Mountain podcast did an episode on this.
I found it very informative and would suggest everyone give it a listen.

 

[Poser]

As a public land hunter and landowner that has enrolled couple sections of land into the walk in program (That trump greatly increased funding for) I completely disagree.

Real core high carrying capacity habitat is actually found more so on private land then public by a huge margin. Guess you are pissed he increased funding to a he CRP and WRP program also?

ESA protections are over reaching on private land. Period

What about migration corridors?

 

[cuerro viejo]

What about migration corridors?

Smart sensible legislation, that worked with land owners, not took away traditional use. But that’s Trumps work so it’s evil and doesn’t do anything for sportsmen’s

It’s the direct opposite of the non sensible spotted owl timber protections from decades ago that basically shut down private land use for years, Good Ol California

 

[cuerro viejo]

under ESA protections the lessor prairie chicken can cause land use changes to protect it, thousands of private land acres shut down , yet the non native Pheasant is the #1 threat to nesting LPC, Logic would be remove the Pheasants, not work to increase populations..... humm yet drought years states reduce pheasant limits to help them rebound.....

 

[MTSasquatch]

Brother, I have spent nearly all of my career as a hunter and wildlife biologist immersed in ESA issues, and I can assure you there is not enough space on this thread to cover the nuance that is that legislation, the regulations it mandates, the policy that regulation is derived from, the management undertaken from that policy, and its overall impact on a listed species and its habitat. The only topic I have seen folks get more worked up over is elk management here in Montana, and that I can promise you is a high bar! Interesting to see folks willing to discuss it though. I think that in itself is a good thing. If folks are willing to educate themselves on the ESA and how it is implemented, that journey will answer nearly any questions or comments one would invariably have on the topic. Great thread start!