Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Montana’s gray wolves already face opponents in federal court and Congress. Soon, the state Legislature may enter the fray as well.
State Sen. Joe Balyeat, R-Bozeman, plans to reintroduce a wolf management bill he fielded in 2009. It would declare that the United States government “lacks authority to impose wolves on Montana,” cancel any existing partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to manage wolves, and demand that “the United States agree in writing to unfettered state management of wolves with no further assertion of federal authority.”
“The wolf issue is decided in court all the time anyway,” Balyeat said in a telephone interview on Friday. “The animal rights people are taking it to court with the judge of their choosing and the issues of their choosing. We’re giving away the home-court advantage. Why not do it on an issue of our choosing and a judge of our choosing? The state’s rights issue is the most winnable issue we have on wolves.”


http://missoulian.com/news/local/articl ... 002e0.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Works for me.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Did you hear that the, not sure of the correct name, Gun Bill failed and they are appealing to the next judge up the chain? It was the one that said the Government had no business with weapons that are made/sold/purchased in the State of Montana. I will try and find the info for ya if you wish. I got a detailed letter/manila envelope with the judgement...etc.

I could see this working in state parks. But could they really make it work in MT national parks? I'm not so sure. The Feds might claim it's federal property, and therefore not subject to state law. I'm not sure how viable such a claim would be, but it could make for some protracted lawsuits.

SuperHornet wrote:I could see this working in state parks. But could they really make it work in MT national parks? I'm not so sure. The Feds might claim it's federal property, and therefore not subject to state law. I'm not sure how viable such a claim would be, but it could make for some protracted lawsuits.

Who gives two shits about the national parks. I think this is more for the State Lands.

grizzaholic wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I could see this working in state parks. But could they really make it work in MT national parks? I'm not so sure. The Feds might claim it's federal property, and therefore not subject to state law. I'm not sure how viable such a claim would be, but it could make for some protracted lawsuits.

Who gives two shits about the national parks. I think this is more for the State Lands.

Some people might give ONE.

SuperHornet wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Who gives two shits about the national parks. I think this is more for the State Lands.

Some people might give ONE.

No one wants to clear out the wolves or whatever out of the parks. Just on a shoot-on-sight basis.

Just sent $100 to the Sierra Club in your name, grizzy.

Cap'n Cat wrote:Just sent $100 to the Sierra Club in your name, grizzy.

And go fuck yourself Cappy.

And just a FYI...if you send it in my name...you will be hearing from my lawyer. I may joke around here but if you did what you said you did I am dead fucking serious on this issue.

grizzaholic wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:Just sent $100 to the Sierra Club in your name, grizzy.

And go fuck yourself Cappy.

And just a FYI...if you send it in my name...you will be hearing from my lawyer. I may joke around here but if you did what you said you did I am dead fucking serious on this issue.

Does the phrase: Bat-shit crazy mean anything to anybody

Firstly: Grizza you take yourself way too seriously
Secondly: You're not smart enough to be that serious about anything - try to relax a little bit

Guy's turned into the biggest loser on the board. Gonna send $100 more just for laughs.

Seek meds, g. Soon.

Chizzang wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
And go fuck yourself Cappy.

And just a FYI...if you send it in my name...you will be hearing from my lawyer. I may joke around here but if you did what you said you did I am dead fucking serious on this issue.

Does the phrase: Bat-shit crazy mean anything to anybody

Firstly: Grizza you take yourself way too seriously
Secondly: You're not smart enough to be that serious about anything - try to relax a little bit

Cap'n Cat wrote:Guy's turned into the biggest loser on the board. Gonna send $100 more just for laughs.

Seek meds, g. Soon.

Says the guy who does nothing but rag on everyone else on every issue ever presented.

grizzaholic wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:Guy's turned into the biggest loser on the board. Gonna send $100 more just for laughs.

Seek meds, g. Soon.

Says the guy who does nothing but rag on everyone else on every issue ever presented.

And 99.9% of it in jest, son. It's a message board. Grow up!

The real joke here is Cap'n having $200 of disposable income.

CitadelGrad wrote:The real joke here is Cap'n having $200 of disposable income.

I sold all my wolf paintings to grizzaholic.

http://missoulian.com/news/local/articl ... 002e0.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wildlife advocates agreed with the U.S. Department of Interior on Friday to take gray wolves off the endangered species list in Montana and Idaho, potentially returning the carnivore to state management and public hunting.

grizzaholic wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:Just sent $100 to the Sierra Club in your name, grizzy.

And go **** yourself Cappy.

And just a FYI...if you send it in my name...you will be hearing from my lawyer. I may joke around here but if you did what you said you did I am dead **** serious on this issue.

Send me his name Cap'n, maybe we can get him a Patron membership in Save the Wolves.