Posted on 01/02/2005 5:48:05 AM PST by Probus
CHEYENNE -- Testimony of a U.S. Interior Department official before a Wyoming legislative committee nearly a year ago demonstrates that rejection of the state's wolf management plan was based on legal and political reasons, not science, says a brief filed by Wyoming Attorney General Pat Crank.
Paul Hoffman, deputy assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks, testified before the Legislature's Joint Interim Committee on Travel, Recreation and Wildlife on Jan. 15, 2004, in Laramie. But his testimony was not included in the Interior Department's administrative record filed in federal court in Cheyenne.
Two days before Hoffman spoke to the committee, Steven Williams, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, notified the state that the federal agency was not prepared to propose removing federal protection from the gray wolf in Wyoming, Idaho and part of Montana -- largely because Wyoming's state law and management plan did not insure the wolf population would be sustained.
The Interior Department in 1996 reintroduced the gray wolf into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho under the Endangered Species Act. The wolves multiplied past expectations in Wyoming, Idaho and Montana.
Wyoming's dual wolf management plan called for the wolves to remain protected in the national parks and adjacent wilderness areas, but to be treated as predatory animals throughout the rest of the state.
The Interior Department and the Fish and Wildlife Service rejected Wyoming's plan on Nov. 4, 2003.
In April 2004, the state filed a lawsuit in federal court in Cheyenne challenging that decision. Subsequently, the state filed motions to compel the federal agency to produce documents that explained the reasoning behind the decision to reject the plan.
The state contends that Hoffman's remarks confirm the state's position that the wolf management plan was adequate from a scientific perspective but that the agency was swayed by political and legal considerations to reject it.
The Interior Department opposes the state's motion that the court consider Hoffman's testimony, on grounds the deputy made his remarks two days after Wyoming received Williams' letter. Because of the timing, Hoffman's remarks are irrelevant to the state's lawsuit, the department argues.
In its reply, the state said the transcript of Hoffman's remarks is relevant because it explains the "real" rationale for Williams' letter received two days earlier.
"The very purpose for Hoffman's appearance was to explain the decision that is at issue in this case," said the state's reply brief.
Hoffman, the reply said, is not just any federal official.
"Wyoming is not seeking to admit the testimony of some underling who does not happen to agree with the government's 'official' decision," the state brief said. "Hoffman is the person in charge of decision-making processes within the Department of Interior. He was sent to Wyoming by the Department of Interior."
Shoot/Shovel/Shut-up.
Yep, but it would be nice to do it legal like. THEY (yes, the big they) force this crap down our throats and we have to gag and pretend we like it.
They are individuals, when it comes down to it. Many of "them" are corrupt, or have family members who are criminals, or otherwise embarassing. It is up to "us" to make sure "they" hear the message we have to send "them" loud and clear, through every contact they have with the community they live in.
"They" can't insulate all of "them," or even most of "them," from the consequences.
BTTT!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.