First we had guns in the national parks and now the administration backs more hunting in the wildlife refuges. What will the NRA say?
"WASHINGTON (CN) - A federal judge backed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's findings that expanding hunting in 60 national wildlife refuges will not have a significant impact on the environment.
The ruling strikes down a motion for summary judgment filed by Fund for Animals and other environmental groups, which argued that the Service "violated the National Environmental Policy Act ... when it failed to consider the cumulative impact of the 1997 to 2005 opening and expansion of hunting on 60 national wildlife refuges."
U.S. District Judge James Gwin found that when the Fish and Wildlife Service expanded hunting across the refuges through nine final rules, it was not arbitrary or capricious and did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act."
Ummm, maybe I'm obtuse, but can you please point out where this has anything to do with the "Administration"? As far as I can tell it was a federal judge that did this.
And I'm guessing that the NRA will applaud this, as they should, even though their not actually a hunting organization.
I think your just a bit confused young grasshopper!!! In fact now that I've looked at your avatar I'm sure you are, it must be time to take another pill, make sure you chase it with that Kool-Aid.
__________________
Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't~ Thomas Jefferson~ Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held it's ground~Unknown~Just because your offended doesn't mean your right~Unknown.
Ummm, maybe I'm obtuse, but can you please point out where this has anything to do with the "Administration"? As far as I can tell it was a federal judge that did this.
Well, the Fish and Wildlife Service's actions were what the suit was about. A federal agency.
" In 2007, acting deputy director of the Fish and Wildlife Service Kenneth Stansell began investigating the issue, asking local refuge authorities to consider the impact hunting would have on their areas.
"Each refuge was also asked to consider the 'past, present, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an impact on the species being hunted, other refuge resources, and other wildlife-dependent refuge activities,'" the judge wrote.
The Service found that the expanded hunting would not have a significant impact, but more litigation in 2008 caused the Service to hire a private contractor to conduct another assessment, which yielded the same result.
"Plaintiffs say the environmental assessments are substantively flawed ... because they do not meaningfully grapple with the cumulative impact of hunting across the entire refuge system, including regional, flyway, and national level impacts," Gwin wrote.
The groups claimed that the local analyses failed to address the cumulative impact of increased hunting on non-hunting visitors, migratory birds and endangered species. Gwin rejected their claims, finding that the Service's methods complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.
"The Fish and Wildlife Service, in finding that opening or expanding hunting across the refuge system would not significantly impact on the environment, adequately analyzed the direct, indirect, and cumulative impact of hunting across a wide range of components of the environment," Gwin wrote. "
Well, the Fish and Wildlife Service's actions were what the suit was about. A federal agency.
" In 2007, acting deputy director of the Fish and Wildlife Service Kenneth Stansell began investigating the issue, asking local refuge authorities to consider the impact hunting would have on their areas.
"Each refuge was also asked to consider the 'past, present, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable actions that may have an impact on the species being hunted, other refuge resources, and other wildlife-dependent refuge activities,'" the judge wrote.
The Service found that the expanded hunting would not have a significant impact, but more litigation in 2008 caused the Service to hire a private contractor to conduct another assessment, which yielded the same result.
"Plaintiffs say the environmental assessments are substantively flawed ... because they do not meaningfully grapple with the cumulative impact of hunting across the entire refuge system, including regional, flyway, and national level impacts," Gwin wrote.
The groups claimed that the local analyses failed to address the cumulative impact of increased hunting on non-hunting visitors, migratory birds and endangered species. Gwin rejected their claims, finding that the Service's methods complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.
"The Fish and Wildlife Service, in finding that opening or expanding hunting across the refuge system would not significantly impact on the environment, adequately analyzed the direct, indirect, and cumulative impact of hunting across a wide range of components of the environment," Gwin wrote. "
So this was something that was initiated by the Bush administration?
__________________
Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't~ Thomas Jefferson~ Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held it's ground~Unknown~Just because your offended doesn't mean your right~Unknown.
What did the "present administration" do to continue this? My bet is it was overlooked. There's nothing pro-gun or pro-hunting about bho. 'Course we can't let the facts get in the way of giving credit where none is due, right b.o.?
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt
A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2
The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats
OK so maybe, Obama was actually telling the truth when he said he wasn't anti-hunting.
Now that we've addressed the administration part of the drivel lets look at the NRA.
It's obvious you just wanted to take a snipe at the NRA. But if your going to do that don't you think it should at least make sense? As stated above the NRA isn't even a hunting organization. Next time you try to snipe them would you please at least try to be relevant?
__________________
Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't~ Thomas Jefferson~ Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held it's ground~Unknown~Just because your offended doesn't mean your right~Unknown.
Oh, you guys leave Beau alone, he's just trying to fit in and act like a hunter..
Pssst. Does PETA ring a bell?
Ahh, I don't get here enough to know such things, thanks for the heads up
__________________
Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't~ Thomas Jefferson~ Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held it's ground~Unknown~Just because your offended doesn't mean your right~Unknown.
More Hunting OK'd in Wildlife Refuges
