text:
Is compromising with the lawless in the best interest of wolves, wildlife, or the ESA?

By Ken Cole, Ralph Maughan, and Brian Ertz.

Ever since wolves were relisted as an Endangered Species by Judge Molloy of Montana there has been a persistent drone of editorial opinion, political grandstanding, and accusations made about and against wolf/Endangered Species Act (ESA) advocates.

Just recently, a piece was written that claimed wolf advocates “blew it” by fighting too long and too hard to protect the integrity of the ESA via fighting to keep protections for wolves. It went on to say that wolf advocates should have made an offer to settle rather than fight for the integrity of the ESA and now they are responsible for giving their opponents ammunition to threaten the integrity of the ESA.

The fact of the matter is that wolf advocate plaintiffs have been in settlement discussions with defendants, sadly enough, even after the court victory re-instating protections for wolves. It’s been wolf-opponents such as representatives of the state of Idaho that have declined to participate, refusing to even send anyone to these discussions. So who’s being too strident and why?

Furthermore, any settlement agreement must be reviewed by the public which means that it is an action that could be litigated by any number of groups for various reasons.

You can read about what is publicly known about the discussions here:

Montana Says Settlement Possible In Wolf Lawsuit.

And here:

Federal officials deny Montana request to hold a ‘conservation hunt’ for endangered wolves.
Canadian Business Online.  Be sure to read both pages.

Wolf conservationists have been also accused of “moving the goal posts” by demanding that all the delisting criteria for the program be met. Instead the claim has been the only required goal was reaching a minimum 300 wolves among all three states, but even this number was dictated by the government. It wasn’t set by some deal conservationists made.

These criteria are detailed in the USFWS wolf recovery plan which requires, in part, that wolves achieve at least 10 breeding pairs in each of the three states and that each of the three states produce wolf management plans that are acceptable to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).  The first goal laid out as the minimum requirement for “recovery” was met early on but Wyoming stands apart from the other two states by demanding that their plan allow anyone, for any reason, to kill any wolf by any means in any part of 80% of the state outside the National Parks and wilderness areas in the northwest corner of the state.

Yes, the wildlife management agencies of Idaho and Montana have committed to maintaining wolves at levels higher than 100 wolves in their states, but these commitments are hardly secure. . . far from it. The state management plans were not written by these wildlife management agencies. They were written by the legislatures of their respective states. The Idaho and Montana legislature have made it clear they are not shy about demanding the state wildlife agencies manage only for the minimum population levels that they committed to in their plans. Just such an effort was made in the last Idaho legislative session. It was put on hold because the wolf delisting was still being litigated. Such a resolution could be made more powerful by being turned into a bill, which would likely pass now that wolves have been relisted. Legislators have made a point of saying as much in private conversations with wolf advocates and they are on record in the 2001 HOUSE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 5 demanding that “wolf recovery efforts in Idaho be discontinued immediately, and wolves be removed by whatever means necessary.” It’s not a matter of if they’ll do it, but when.

We are told that wolf advocates made a “deal” that wolves would be delisted once the minimum population goals of 10 breeding pairs for three consecutive years in each state was met. Not so. What group set this number or made a deal? Where is it written? “Deals” such as this could conceivably been made by certain unrepresentative individuals, but the ESA and NEPA are clear, and ,under these laws, decisions such as these have to be made using the best available science. They cannot be made based on a whim and the political flavor of the day. Currently the best available science indicates that thousands of individuals are required to maintain genetic and population viability.

Wolf advocates have been accused of not compromising on wolf management issues, but many forget the biggest compromise made by wolf advocates and many, many others made since. That compromise, seen as a mistake by some and not by others, was the reintroduction itself. There were wolves in the Northern Rockies before the reintroduction. These wolves had full protection under the ESA. There were not classified as an “experimental and non-essential population.” They could have slowly reestablished populations in Idaho, and eventually Yellowstone, on their own but with much less genetic diversity and over a longer period of time. That also means that they could not have been killed for any reason other than protection of human life. Most wolf advocates compromised on this issue by allowing the USFWS to reintroduce wolves to central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park as an experimental, non-essential population.

Furthermore, at the time of the reintroduction, as Peter Steinhart wrote in his 1995 book The Company of Wolves, even Republican Idaho Senator James McClure, seeing the writing on the wall, supported reintroduction because it would allow ranchers the ability to kill wolves in defense of livestock.

“….Senator James McClure of Idaho introduced a bill calling for the removal of wolves from the endangered-species list, and subsequent reintroduction into Yellowstone. In effect, he was conceding that wolves were inevitable, and that the ranchers would be wise to compromise in order to protect their ability to deal with depredations. Congress, however, rejected McClure’s bill as an attempt to circumvent the Endangered Species Act, and instead called for the preparation of an environmental impact statement for wolf reintroduction into Yellowstone National Park. That amounted to tentative approval of reintroduction.”

Since the reintroduction over 1,200 compromises have been begrudgingly made in the three states to avenge livestock depredation by wolves.

Wolf advocates also compromised by giving support to monetary compensation for livestock losses in hopes that it would gain tolerance. After originally supporting it, in our opinion, this turned out to be a farce — it never accomplished its original goal of gaining tolerance amongst those who were compensated. Worse, it created a moral hazard which allowed ranchers to continue feeling a sense of entitlement without changing any of their behavior.

While both sides have endured threats over this issue wolf advocates have also endured threats to their physical well being from those with a different opinion brandishing weapons and have been physically assaulted. They have been investigated by the FBI for trying to document the actions of Wildlife Services. They have been made to jump through hoops just to have simple questions answered about what is happening on the ground.

Anti-wolf forces have perpetuated myths about “vicious Canadian wolves” when not a single wolf scientist believes such as sub-species of wolf exists.  They make wild claims about 200 pound wolves when they are really only around 100 pounds.

Wildlife Services, the agency which conducts livestock depredation investigations for the various states and conducts wolf controls by various means including gunning them down from helicopters, has been lawless with regard to Freedom of Information Act requests made by many groups and has not responded to or fulfilled its duty to provide the public with information about its management activities or spending.

The Idaho Fish and Game, as well, has issued a directive to its employees that they should not discuss any wolf management activities over email, but rather over the phone. Furthermore, they can’t even see fit to update their monthly wolf news update page. Right now, it hasn’t been updated since June.

Yes, wolf advocates are worried, but that worry is well founded. We are worried that the states will move forward with their goals of reducing wolf populations to the minimum they define in their legislative management plans if wolves are again delisted under their plans. We are worried that a strident faction in Congress will gut the ESA using a “midnight amendment,” but that does not mean that wolf advocates should gut the ESA themselves nor hunker down and apologize for winning in U.S. court. The ruling by Judge Molloy was not decided on a technicality as Cal Groen, Director of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and others would have you believe, it was won on a simple reading of one of the most popular environmental laws ever. The USFWS acted arbitrarily when they used state lines to delist wolves rather than biologically meaningful lines and the judge saw that.

It’s not as if we have been dealing with a rational opposition when you consider all of these facts. In fact, the future of wolf recovery is not secure even without legislative intervention.  The blatant disdain for wolves by those who will direct how the agencies maintain a secure future for wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, among other states is obvious to those who are paying attention.

So, I ask you, who hasn’t compromised? And who isn’t following agreements to manage wildlife using the best available science? Should the country let the recent bills submitted by Danny Rehberg, Mike Crapo, and Jim Risch, Max Baucus, Jon Tester and rank outsiders like Chet Edwards of Texas dictate how the ESA is implemented thus gutting the ESA? Have the advocates of the ESA lost because they refuse to gut the ESA themselves?

About The Author

Ken Cole

Ken Cole is a 5th generation Idahoan, an avid fly fisherman, wildlife enthusiast, and photographer. He is the interim Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. We do not accept unsolicited “guest” authors or advertising.

83 Responses to Who's not willing to compromise on wolves?

  1. avatar timz says:

    Well said gents……..

  2. avatar JerryBlack says:

    This ‘closed door attempt” to gut the ESA was confirmed by the livestock industry’s Harvard Law lobbyist at the recent Rehberg dog and pony show in Hamilton.

  3. avatar JerryBlack says:

    Yes, well said…….I happen to be one of those “wolf advocates that have endured threats to their physical well being”.

  4. avatar Cody Coyote says:

    … you are not alone, Jerry.

  5. avatar Virginia says:

    Ralph – you need to send a copy of this article to the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and other major newspapers – your excellent rationale will resonate with those of us and other people who are castigated in this country for having an opinion that wolves should be allowed to thrive, that the ESA should be strengthened, not weakened, and that wildlife belongs to all Americans, not just those who live in the West.

  6. avatar nabeki says:

    Excellent! Thank you for laying it out so perfectly Ken, Ralph and Brian!

    The threats are real for wolf advocates. Here’s two out of the thousands I’ve received on Howling for Justice. One directed at me, the other at Jerry.

    Wednesday, February 17, 2010 3:50 PM
    I would like to see nebeki name and state where she is from so we can send her death threats.

    Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:22 PM
    Hey jerry b cry a little more ill make sure the next one shot is dedcated to you :). KILL EM ALL ONE PACK AT A TIME.

    • avatar Brian Ertz says:

      an implicit (if not too often explicit) reverence for violence is at the core of the anti-wolfers’ rationale …

    • avatar jon says:

      Threats of physical violence to wolf advocates seem to be the norm for anti-wolfers.

      • avatar Save bears says:

        I, as a hunter have experienced more than my share of death threats from the pro wildlife crowd as well, I don’t think extremism is confined to one side of the issue..

      • avatar Save bears says:

        And to word it very strongly, I don’t condone it from either side!

      • avatar Craig says:

        Maybe you all should go back and read the 100s of threats to the first guy in Idaho who killed a Wolf LEGALLY! You are know better, you are just on the other side of the fence! You only bring it up when it favors you!
        You guys hold yourself to a higher standerd but fall at the first sign of weekness in another and cast stones and become just as bad or worse as your apponents at threats,name calling, slander!
        You are no differnt just opposite views, the same kind of mediocre people who will make no differnce just bitch about the consequences but want change with know inconvience to there simple lives. Ralph and others I would say do somthing more than the rest of you, therefore I hold their opinions with just and truth and a point of validation of someone who is trying to do something to change things!
        The bitching and moaning and everthing else is like listening to what Peris Hilton just got arrested for!

        Just my opinion, just 1 simple grain of sand in the ol’ salt shaker!

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        Good reply Craig. I have friend who wrote the article on wolves for Field and Stream, I saw him this mornimg, he interviewed the person who shot the first wolf. The pro wolf people threaten him so much that his children had to stay at a safe house and he started carrying a pistol. His car and other propery was damaged. He turned the situation around and built a web site publishing all of the threats and their e mail. If a phone message was left the phone number and a transcript of the message was published on the web site. Pro Wolf people are the same a anti wolf people, they are not effective, they are losers.

      • avatar nabeki says:

        More than a decade ago I attended a “Road-less Initiative” hearing in Montana. We had the chance to speak “on the record” and voice our opinion in support of the measure. At the back of the room there was a hostile group that decided they would disrupt the meeting by shouting people down, when they stood at the podium to speak. I was very nervous but decided I was not going to let this group intimidate me. They booed and hissed at everyone who spoke in favor of the “road-less plan”, yet were too cowardly to come down and speak their minds “ON THE RECORD”.

        This is a standard tactic that goes on in Montana around any environmental issue. It’s not just used to intimidate wolf supporters but anyone they deem to be “greenies”.

        There was a radio station in the Flathead called KGEZ run by John Stokes. He labeled environmentalists “Green Nazis” and called the environmental movement “the Fourth Reich”.

        “Radio Station Owner to Burn 12-foot Green Swastika to Protest Earth Day Marxists” April 17, 2002….

        He’s no longer on the air but it’s no secret this is SOP when it comes to wolves or any issue the antis feel threatened by.

        And it’s not just Montana either, does Ron Gillette ring a bell?

      • avatar Save bears says:

        After many interactions with John Stokes, both in Washington when he tried to form his own country and then again in Montana with his radio station, all I can say, is he was one of the biggest assholes I have ever met in my over 50 years of life, now he is one I would threaten!!!! Talk about an anti social and anti everything person, he personifies the definition of jerk!

      • avatar JerryBlack says:

        Craig…..your comment:”You are no differnt just opposite views, the same kind of mediocre people who will make no differnce just bitch about the consequences but want change with know inconvience to there simple lives.”
        Could you be more specific? I do agree that there are some on here that obviously don’t have a life other than commenting on this blog, but there are others that are doing a hell of a lot of work that you don’t hear about because they don’t have time, or choose not to get on here and impress people with academic credentials, hunting stories, or their life history.
        Tell me about some of the advocacy you’re engaged in and next time you’re at a wolf hearing, meeting, seminar etc…please identify yourself to those of us who “aren’t making a difference.”

  7. avatar Rita K. Sharpe says:

    Ralph,I agree with Virginia. You should send copies of this article to the major newspapers.

  8. avatar Elk275 says:

    Save Bears

    ++I, as a hunter have experienced more than my share of death threats from the pro wildlife crowd as well, I don’t think extremism is confined to one side of the issue..++

    Tell me exactly how you have had death threats from the pro wildlife crowd. I have never had any problems from the anti hunting crowd. I just want to be proactive, one never knows in this day and age.

    • avatar Save bears says:

      Back in 98-99 I ran a very popular hunting website focused on archery, on Dec 12th, 1999 I received a phone call telling me that I would be dead if I were ever caught by myself in the woods, two days later, I had a car sitting in my driveway at 11:30 at night(not an easy task where I live), I didn’t take it very serious until the car showed up in my driveway.

      I have also been threatened when working with RMEF on Fence Pull’s days we took to get rid of old barb wire that inhibits wildlife movement and the most recent one was in Billings this year, when I was doing an education seminar at one of the Great Rockies Sports shows.

      Take care, you never know who you will run into, in the woods or at a sports show…people are radical more often than you would expect…

      • avatar Save bears says:

        But to be fair, I have also been threatened by ranchers when I worked with FWP an was in the field talking to them about Bison, so the gambit runs BOTH ways…

  9. avatar Craig says:

    Like I posted Save Bears it goes both ways all the time! You have to know how to work both sides of the fence depending which side you steped on. There is no happy medium you will piss one side off 100% of the time, but you better be able to deal with it at that moment and at the same time stand for what you believe right or wrong in your opponents eyes!

  10. avatar Craig says:

    Then you now know what it felt like to be the first guy who LEGALLY shot a Wolf in Idahoi! THE OTHER SIDE DOES ALL THE SAME CRAZY SHIT but 1000 times worse and makes you guys look like IDIOTDS! Look at Peta ect do you understand? You have more Ron Gillettes on the other side than us!

    • avatar Ken Cole says:

      Well Craig, I don’t condone threats or violence and what happened to the guy who shot the first wolf in Idaho wasn’t right. That being said, I am totally unaware of anyone who has actually followed through on any of those threats from those who advocate wolf recovery. Maybe I’m ignorant about it but I’ve never made a threat to anyone.

      There is a reason I don’t post photos of myself to this site and that is because I’ve read my name on other blogs. I’ve also read the threatening emails Brian has received and he has had the lug nuts loosened on his car after a meeting.

      I was also on the phone with Lynne Stone while Ron was waving a gun around. She was scared to death and that was before the assault.

      I haven’t made a big deal of this before because I don’t want it to distract from the issues. I don’t want it to here either and maybe it was a mistake to put it in the article.

      I would be more interested to see the discussion about the other issues rather than that one. While it is important, because this issue is getting totally out of hand and I worry that the violence will escalate, I do think that it is a distraction in many ways.

      The fact of the matter here is that the legislature calls the shots and the ESA calls for the recovery of species not just a token population. As I read in an email I did obtain from a USFWS FOIA, recovery and viability are two entirely different things. I don’t think that the states’ plans even provide for viability over the long term let alone maintain a “recovered” status for wolves. That’s what I want and 300 wolves across the three states doesn’t cut it. In fact, 450 doesn’t cut it either and that is exactly where we are headed under the current state plans. It’s not realistic to think otherwise.

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        ++That’s what I want and 300 wolves across the three states doesn’t cut it. In fact, 450 doesn’t cut it either and that is exactly where we are headed under the current state plans. It’s not realistic to think otherwise.++

        This year the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks eliminated 1000 cow elk permits in the Gravelly and Snowcrest Mountains because of Wolves, and that does not cut it with the local and non resident hunters. There are going to be more reductions in hunting opportunity because of increased wolf popuations and that is a fact. The West Fork of the Bitteroot has gone from 2000 elk to 750 elk and all cow hunting has been eliminated because of wolves.

      • avatar timz says:

        So are you saying the wolves killed all the elk hunters were going to kill? Bummer for the hunters.

      • avatar JB says:

        “This year the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks eliminated 1000 cow elk permits in the Gravelly and Snowcrest Mountains because of Wolves…”

        For the millionth time, this single-cause understanding of elk population dynamics is a VAST OVERSIMPLIFICATION of what is going on. Statements like this only contribute to the tension between sides by making positions irreconcilable (i.e. it is either wolves or elk). As Ralph has pointed out many times, more elk means more food for wolves, so big-game hunters and wolf-advocates have something in common.

      • avatar Craig says:

        Ken, what would you say in an honest opinion for both sides would be a good number not leaning either way? You know as well as I, it’s not possible to have a happy medium because both sides are of very differnt opinions!

      • avatar SEAK Mossback says:

        There are certainly those here who will tell you that wolves and other predators are neither here nor there as an influence on ungulate populations — its always habitat. Unfortunately, that’s not the case everywhere. Predator-prey theory generally holds that there are two states of equilibrium, (1) high numbers of both predator and prey or (2) low numbers of both predator and prey (termed by some as a predator pit). One can always hope that elk and wolf populations will respond like Midwest whitetails and wolves (very consistent high dynamic equilibrium). That would be great, but there are factors that point toward greater risk of low equilibrium in the NRM, the main one being the presence of so many other formidable natural predators (i.e. mountain lions, black bears and grizzly bears). An additional factor is the extent that wolves can maintain at low numbers of elk by switching to other species. On one island here where deer were abundant until 40 years ago, but now practically non-existent, wolves are still quite commonly seen according to friends who guide, commercially fish and have surveyed salmon streams there. During spawning season, wolves eat lots of salmon and a graduate student found that black bears (averaging 4 to 5 per square mile) are a substantial part of their diet at other times. Between the black bears and wolves, the deer are unlikely to return to a significant density that could provide much hunting opportunity. It’s not a major problem because people in the area have so many other great protein sources right at hand, and black bear guiding (with a non-resident harvest of about 180 bears/year) has become a major revenue source. Low dynamic equilibrium also persists in wolf-moose-bear systems throughout much of the interior. It makes hunting a bit more difficult but also keeps the competition down and I have friends who have still done very well in those low-density areas — one just returned from taking a big bull very near a road for the second year in a row in an area that attracts few other hunters.

        However, I sense that the Rockies with so many more people and avid hunters are clearly different. There, a substantially lower prey population doesn’t simply mean that hunters have to look harder but quickly translates to reduced legal opportunity by requiring a low-odds draw for a license or greatly curtailed season. Extended periods in a predator pit are probably just not going to cut it (as Elk275 said), outside of national parks, and it would be difficult for even wolf proponents to argue that such a condition contributes toward that all-important total number of wolves in the DPS. That puts a lot of pressure on wildlife agencies to monitor prey populations not just for numbers and trends but evidence of top-down versus bottom-up population regulation. A popular alternative that’s evident already will be to just generally keep heavy pressure on wolves. Ideally, wolf seasons and limits would be tailored accurately to address both prey population status and particular livestock issues, with a light hand where there are few problems. Logistical and informational issues with managing wolves, other predators and prey as well as budgets and politics all present challenges to that approach . . . . but it is one ideal (although impossible prior to delisting).

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        Seak Mossback

        You said it better than I did, it will be a cold day in hell when hunters in Montana are going to see reduce hunting opportunities because of wolves. I stopped at a bar and grill in the Madison Valley Sunday night, there were several tables of bow hunters and the talk was gut shot them. I am afraid that it is happening now.

        Side Note: I have been watching the Chilean Miner’s rescue on the Internet; it the best thing on TV tonight, what brave men. I love good news

      • avatar JB says:

        “…it will be a cold day in hell when hunters in Montana are going to see reduce hunting opportunities because of wolves.”

        Right. So what you are saying is that, under state control, hunters will push for measures such that wolves not be allowed to have any impact on any ungulate population anywhere in Montana. As I said (above), this position is irreconcilable with what wolf advocates want. Statement like this are conversation-enders. They leave only one response: see you in the courts.

      • avatar SAP says:

        get in your time machine and let’s go back to 2004: over-the-counter antlerless permits in the Gravellies were an effort to finally get some elk killed there. The herds were over objective, with no one killing cow elk to speak of. In my opinion, the network of roads and motor trails up there led a lot of people to unproductively road hunt there, with the elk just pulling back into a few wild places where they were invulnerable. Couple that with mild weather, and you get a big, growing elk herd.

        I am looking at the 2010 regulations

        and for the five hunting districts that span the Gravelly, Snowcrest, and Centennial Mountains (HDs 323,324,325,327, and 330), the first 15 days of the season allows hunters to take antlerless elk or brow-tine bull with a general elk license. That’s two weeks out of five weeks for hunting cow elk with an otc license.

        That tells me that these herds are getting closer to objective, and that winter weather late in the season could make elk vulnerable to overkilling if everyone with a general tag can kill a cow.

        Also, I don’t have the numbers and history at my fingertips, but Wildlife Services kills a lot of wolves in the Gravellies. Few packs make it more than two years there, and to hear locals tell it, those wolves eat beef six months out of the year.

        I guess I have trouble with the idea that regulations and harvest levels designed to REDUCE elk numbers should somehow stay at that level forever. The Gardiner late hunt is a great example — not much of a hunt, just waiting for the Park elk to step over the line. I never heard that that hunt was a social program to provide easy elk meat for people who couldn’t get out in the hills for some reason.

      • avatar SAP says:

        PS regarding what you overhear at bars in the Madison Valley: folks have been talking like that since 1997 when the first wolves came out of the Park. It’s just kind of a tradition now, sort of like hating the Yankees if you live in Boston.

        A lot of those people, the wolves (or bears, or whatever) would have to come into the tavern to a) cause them a real problem, since they are either at the bar, at home, or traveling between the two, and b) for those people to have an opportunity to “gut shoot ’em!”

  11. avatar timz says:

    “Maybe you all should go back and read the 100s of threats to the first guy in Idaho who killed a Wolf LEGALLY! You are know better, you are just on the other side of the fence!”

    Perhaps he should have refrained from having his picture pasted all over the press with his shit-eatin grin in his camoflouge clothes, with his big rifle and his dead wolf at his feet.

    • avatar jon says:

      It is quite normal and should have been expected that that guy Robert Milleage would be called out for his actions and that is killing a wolf for sport. No one should have just assumed there was not going to be any outrage or backlash against people killing wolves for sport. Pro wolf advocates are not perfect by any means, but most of the time they have to defend themselves when being faced with threats of violence from anti wolfers. Legal or not, wildlife was still killed for sport. If anything, people speaking up about this guy’s actions tells the others that they aren’t going to stand for this disgusting and unacceptable behavior and that is killing wolves for sport and than taking a picture of yourself smiling while standing over the dead animal showing off your superiority. The Ron Gillettes are on the anti wolf side. The pro wolf advocates are the ones that are trying to protect wolves. People spoke up about what this guy did and vented their anger for what he have done. Robert Milleage should be ashamed of his actions, but I am certain he is not.

      • avatar Ken Cole says:

        Jon, outrage and backlash are much different than threats and intimidation. Let’s steer this discussion away from this and center on the real issues.

    • avatar Craig says:

      Yeah, that’s the media for ya! You really think he sought them out? Ya think Brett Favre told the press he sent pictures of his Junk to a bunch of women? Pull yer head out, the media is an evil force only looking for a story right or wrong!

  12. avatar SEAK Mossback says:

    This was well laid out. Thank you. It’s a sad state of affairs that there is nobody credible even from all of the governmental parties willing to negotiate on the other side, except possibly the State of Montana.

    However, this may seem like a stupid question, but what really could you negotiate? Can you negotiate the Endangered Species Act? — I thought it could only be litigated. It seems to me that the nine legal arguments that NRDC lined up to derail delisting this time cannot be rolled away from the tracks by negotiation and would still be available to the Center for Biological Diversity or HSUS, both of which are still piling rocks in front of the derailed Great Lakes wolf delisting train that at least some groups agree was headed in a favorable direction. Some will point to USFWS ineptness or lack of foresight in Great Lakes wolf delisting, but it really doesn’t matter — the more they are seen as trying and failing in a place with thousands of well-distributed wolves and very protective state plans, the more people wonder and question the ESA. By itself, perpetual delay in delisting the Great Lakes population wouldn’t be much of a problem (Minnesotans mostly just grumble among themselves) except that it’s amplified by all the noise and commotion in the Rockies. I remember being able to point to ESA de-listings, but it just occurred to me that they were all shortly thereafter re-listed through the courts. Delisting Great Lakes wolves, if it were possible, would probably do little to buy patience or tolerance among western wolf opponents but would certainly be a great political stroke nationally in defense of the ESA, at a time when it may be needed. Or perhaps there are still too many large rocks lying by the tracks, whether through design of the ESA or lack of diligence by USFWS in clearing them?

    • avatar Alan says:

      “….what really could you negotiate?”
      Seems to me you could negotiate dropping the lawsuits. “If you do x,y and z we will drop our lawsuit. In exchange we will do A,B and C and you will drop your appeal.”
      Problem is only Montana is negotiating.
      Meantime, can anyone give me a reason, living in Montana, that I should bother going to the polls in November? “More tolerance for bison,” and, “DOL is ill equipped to manage bison,” Brian Schweitzer promised. Four years later nothing has changed. Rehburg is trying to gut the ESA, while his opponent feels that Yellowstone should be run like a big ranch.
      I am so turned off by politics. When Obama was elected I thought, “Finally! A return to sanity! An Interior Secretary who will care about the land! Environmental decisions based on science! No guns in National Parks!” Scheesh! I’m done! Who cares who gets elected, doesn’t much matter!

    • avatar Brian Ertz says:

      there’s no real incentive for the states to settle. keeping the issue contentious gives politicians the opportunity to grandstand while at the same time advancing the saliency of their policy-objective of gutting the ESA and otherwise maintaining “control” of a politically charged such that they can cheaply project the suggestion of responsiveness to their constituency while gutting tangible functions of government like school-funding, etc…

      it’ll be interesting to see how threatening any of this is or how much grandstanding takes place after the election.

      it’s all about walking through the process … comment … endure the personal and political intimidation ~ and hope that at the end of the day, wolves are granted a fair shake …

      you may remember during the development of Idaho’s wolf recovery plan developed by IDFG and several anti-wolf interest groups, wolf advocates were denied a draft copy of the state’s management plan throughout the process ~ female members of the “stakeholders group” were made to ‘sit-close’ up next to oh-so-manly managers to get a peak at a copy of the plan in its development.

      during this “steakholder” process, some of the less confrontational wolf advocates prostrated themselves before the IDFG all but begging for the department to incorporate a boutique wolf zone into the management plan … a, let’s say ‘generous’, position of compromise considering it constituted these groups’ willingness to abandon any meaningful ecological asset/consideration ~ let alone biological consideration ~ in the rest of the state to secure a little boutique wolf zone in central Idaho.

      Rather than secure these groups’ willingness not to contest the plan ~Idaho smacked down this idea, insisting on a hunt in every last inch of wolf territory in the state, denying wolf-advocates even this menial table-scrap, and then used wolf-advocates to claim its plan was developed via a stakeholder process with representatives from all sides ~ despite the fact that wolf advocates formally and publicly contested the plan.

      In my estimation, given my short experience with this issue ~ the state, the IDFG Commission, and many of the politicians at the IDFG have NEVER given wolf advocates the least bit of any indication that they are acting in good-faith … yet, wolf advocates continue to take back to the table … wolf advocates have NEVER been unwilling to compromise, offer solutions and listen to offers in good-faith.

      regardless, pieces like this from people who clearly either have no idea what is actually taking place among the parties (or are just willing to suggestively lie through their teeth to push just yet another anti-wolf-party-line mutilation of the truth) is absurd, and irresponsible – if one were to commit to maintain even the most moderate level of honesty with how this process has unfolded.

      wolf and wildlife advocates should not be intimidated by these folk and their collective tactics that have disavowed even the most moderate reverence for intellectual honesty.

  13. avatar Elk275 says:

    ++Perhaps he should have refrained from having his picture pasted all over the press with his shit-eatin grin in his camoflouge clothes, with his big rifle and his dead wolf at his feet.++

    The lady from the local paper who he was familar with ask to take his pictue. Within 4 hours that picture was all over the world. He never thought that could happen, the picture was only going to be in the local paper, but the local paper sent out a press release with the picture all over the US. I would have made the same mistake and so would have many others.

    • avatar timz says:

      Bullshit, I read interviews with him after the fact. He was very proud of his 15 minutes of fame.

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        What he did was legal and he had a right to be proud, whether you like it or not. What he did was legal.

      • avatar timz says:

        And as far as I know know one has wronged him either

      • avatar Daniel Berg says:

        I think it’s counterproductive to attack a hunter who legally killed a wolf during hunting season, regardless of how proud he is of the kill. Someone who threatens to kill every wolf he can illegally and brags about the slim chances of being caught is much more deserving of negative attention.

      • avatar jon says:

        DB, sb brought this up a few times and I happen to agree with him on this and that is those that claim they are going to kill a wolf using sss or whatever are probably not the ones that will be killing wolves. Although Toby Bridges are one of these types, he would be extremely stupid to follow through on this internet threats. I have no doubt that some may be killed, but it will do nothing to help the wolf hater’s cause. They just are releasing their anger because they are losing control big time. These poachers who do infact kill wolves, karma will get them sometime down the line.

    • avatar jon says:

      Elk, I don’t think Robert knew what was going to happen after his picture was posted in the paper. With issues like this wolf one, people all over the world are watching closely and when they see something wrong that is going on, they will speak up and express their anger toward those wrong doers.

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        Jon, he is not a wrong doer what he did was legal. I can find no wrong doing, maybe you feel that it was not right but it was legal, therefore no wrong doing.

  14. avatar Rita K. Sharpe says:

    Craig how does anyone actually know how many nuts are on either side.It’s was not right that the man ,who shot the first wolf last year,got threatenening calls.No one should be threatened.He allowed himself to be photographed and he spoke to the reporters. Regional people weren’t the only ones reading or hearing about it .I read and heard about it here in the mid-west.It was and still is a sensitive subject .There are enough Ron Gillettes,on both sides.No one side can say they are innocent.

  15. avatar timz says:

    “I think it’s counterproductive to attack a hunter who legally killed a wolf during hunting season”

    As I think it’s counterproductive to post your face all over as the proud first wolf killer and than cry because your being harrassed for it. And as an aside I don’t really care what you think.

  16. avatar Ken Cole says:

    Okay, I’m not going to remove any comments, but please, for the third time, I ask people to drop the issue of threats, violence and Millage and get back to discussing what I think is the real issue here.

    All that other crap is a distraction.

  17. avatar nabeki says:

    I was spammed in February 2010 by several hunting sites that sent me over three thousand nasty comments in one day. THREE THOUSAND. Luckily Word-press has an excellent filter and none got through…still when someone threatens to kill you, a person that doesn’t even know you, it’s pretty shocking and scary. And all because I believe wolves have the right to exist without being persecuted and scapegoated. I fear the mood is more like 1910 then 2010.

    I have NEVER been to a hearing or meeting in Montana or Idaho where pro-wolf people shouted anyone down. BUT I have been to many hearings and meetings that the antis threatened, booed, yelled and generally acted hostile. That’s the reason most pro-wolf people don’t show up for those meetings because they are intimidated. It’s a fact and anyone that lives here who is pro-wolf has experienced this first hand. Why do you think Rehberg held his “listening sessions” in Hamilton, Dillon and Kalispell, stacking the panels with as many anti-wolf orgs and people as he could? He created a ready made hostile environment. Toby Bridges was invited to sit on the Kalispell panel. You can’t get more blatant then that.

    Comparing a few nasty comments made to Millage, to the relentless anti-wolf, anti-environmentalist mood in the Northern Rockies, is like comparing David to Goliath.

  18. avatar nabeki says:

    Ooops…I didn’t see Ralph and Ken’s comments before i posted my little story. Well nuff said.

  19. avatar SEAK Mossback says:

    Wow! I guess there isn’t much substantive left to discuss on this issue. I have no similar stories but will ask again: What is the point of “settlement talks” in the realm of the ESA, other than trying to appear reasonable?

    • avatar JB says:

      Great question! I don’t know that I have a satisfactory answer. I think one of the fundamental issues with delisting that has arisen in the case of wolves revolves around the call for decisions to be made based upon the best available science. What makes this phrase so problematic is that agencies are otherwise shown a wide degree of deference by the courts. This deference is, in part, an acknowledgment that agencies are influenced by politics (via directives of the executive branch). Granting agencies deference ensures that different administrations can exercise different prerogatives over time. However, in the case of the ESA, those different prerogatives suggest that agency decisions were (at least in part) driven by politics (which, of course, they were/are) rather than the best available science [if the latter were the case, we would expect consistency in decisions over time, which we do not get]. Of course, science cannot be used to make policy decisions without some sort of explicit directive (e.g. biodiversity concerns “trump” all other interests). At best, what we hope for is that listing decisions are informed by the best available science.

      Regardless, holding “settlement talks” to come to some sort of compromise would likely be viewed by the courts as subverting the ESA’s mandate that listing decisions be based upon the best available science–that is, any decision that resulted from such talks would be seen as being based on political pragmatism rather than science.

      • avatar SEAK Mossback says:

        JB –
        Thanks much, you’ve answered my question.

      • avatar JimT says:

        Thanks for the very cogent reply, JB.

        Of course, if folks like Baucus are successful, they could amend the ESA to include political calculations as well as criteria for listing. I shudder to think what would happen to the ESA and candidate species then.

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        This is what the majority of voters in Montana want and he represents the voters of Montana. I want the state to be able to manage all of their wildlife without outside influence.

      • avatar SEAK Mossback says:

        I think JB’s thoughtful answer really shows how ridiculous it is to personally blame the groups that have sued to enforce the ESA, either for suing or not settling out of court. It should be presumed that any determination will always be fully litigated and the ultimate say on delisting determined from a judicial bench. It does necessarily put the agencies, the other player, in a tough position on some issues that have huge practical and political consequences — sometimes made worse by political pressure applied down the chain by an administration like the prior one.

        Also, the “best available science” is not 100% clear-cut. It may require several thousand wolves in the NRM, as stated above, to achieve 100% certainty of indefinite genetic viability, at least according to some population models, but on the other hand there may not be the habitat or prey base to support it. Then you can get into “pragmatic solutions” like supplementation to boost the total number toward a theoretical numerical goal, that can actually be detrimental to long-term population survival — like continually using hatchery production to boost a salmon population that’s limited by its habitat and would be best left alone to adapt as best it can to that habitat.

        I’m not sure exactly what level of probability the ESA requires for delisting, but if it’s too high (far above the recent population in the 3-state area) it could end up being a problem in several ways. The Isle Royale population has done amazingly well for decades from a tiny founding population, although it clearly has serious issues as far as probability of long-term viability. On the other hand, can you even justify the original listing of Great Lakes wolves based on population level when there were several hundred left even at the low point (and those well-connected with a much larger Canadian population) after decades of persecution and severe winters in the early 70s that wiped out much of their prey? All of those negatives have been reversed for decades with major area expansion, and yet it still cannot be delisted.

        I agree things have gotten ugly in the NRM in terms of the states either refusing to play or moving quickly toward rolling back the population. However, anyone looking for hope that delisting and state management could eventually occur and remain in place certainly won’t find it in the Great Lakes area. On one hand, leadership in the NRM states has not appeared rational enough to exercise the restraint and patience required to get to delisting (although some here have convincingly argued that their actions have been very rational in political terms), while on the other hand . . . . where is a successful model showing it will make any material difference?

      • avatar JB says:

        Thanks, SEAK. I appreciate being able to have a thoughtful conversation about these issues, rather than getting caught in the trap of ideological tit-for-tat (which I certainly am not immune from!). I have had several conversations with Ed Bangs about this issue over the years and I think there is some reasons to believe that wolves would be “safer” off of the endangered species list. On the other hand, it seems that every time one of these western politicians opens his mouth (are there any women involved in politics in the West?), he provides ample evidence of just how tenuous wolf recovery is in the West.

        – – – – –

        Elk: Management responsibilities are already essentially being carried out at the state level (due to 10(j)). I have stated elsewhere that I have great faith in the state F&G agencies to devise sustainable management plans for wolves; unfortunately, I have little faith in state politicians (and that includes wildlife boards/commissions) to allow state management agencies to implement plans that provide for sustainable management.

        Re: outside influence–If states committed to maintaining populations that were sufficient to support wolves without the cooperation of the other states, then I would have no problem with state-driven management. However, if they are going to be allowed to reduce populations such that each state is not viable by itself, then regional coordination (i.e., outside influence) is required.

      • avatar JimT says:

        They have legal control over wildlife, but also have extensive responsibilities under FEDERAL law to ensure the health of ALL species,not just game animals who are fun to hunt and kill and make money for the state, ELK 275. You live in a combination of Federal and state governments, and I think it works pretty damn well for the most part. As much as you might like to see it, the Sagebrush Rebellion ain’t happenin’ anytime in the near or distance future. This effort by Baucus and others is akin to spot zoning where sweetheart deals are given to certain developers or homeowners at the expense of others who are no different legally. This is a very bad idea and eserves to be killed in committee.

      • avatar JimT says:

        SEAK Mossback (one of the most interesting handles I have come across, by the way),

        You make several good points. Let me add one more. Often what concerns environmentalists most when a listing or delisting is in play is the aftermath of de-listing. What happens if the habitat suddenly changes? If disease (in this case, distemper, mange) decimates populations? Is there a way to quickly re-institute listing? Is this something that should be done in the original listing decision, an “emergency trigger”, if you will.? How long should monitoring go on to ensure viable populations?

        The behaviors of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, both by private groups as well as the state officials, has shown wolf advocates that we must be very very vigilant in any delisting decision. Currently, the states have shown they regard this as a wedge to conduct additional hunts, ramp us WService killings, introduce disgusting and painful ways to kill such as poison, gas and traps.

        They have been their own worst enemies with their extreme behaviors. They are providing more and more evidence to resist delisting at all costs.Siimply put, they have shown they can’t be trusted to fulfill their legal obligations under the law, choosing to try an ill-advised attempt to write special exemptions into the law that will, in all likelihood, cause political and legal havoc in ESA proceedings for decades to come.

      • avatar Elk275 says:

        Jim T and et al

        What would happen if Baccus and other Western senators put a rider on a bill exempting wolves from the ESA.

        Are the wolf people going to court and would there be grounds for any court action or would that be the end of it. As far as sweet deals in zoning they happen all the time, money talks.

      • avatar Save bears says:

        I seriously doubt the bill(s) will stand on their own, but I have a strong feeling, they will be attached to an important bill that the President will have to sign and then it will get through, such as the firearms bill did, they may be shady in congress, but they are pretty smart when they have pet bills to get passed.. These various bills are really no different than the pork that gets attached to bills all the time

  20. avatar JimT says:

    Authors of the piece,

    I would like to ask your permission to forward it on to a few folks in the nationals that would be interested in an excellent summary of the information…

    • avatar Ken Cole says:

      I’ve revamped a few things in the article to make it more understandable by people who haven’t been following the issue. I may add a couple more things but I have a meeting in 10 minutes.

      • avatar JimT says:

        Oh, these folks know the issues, Ken. I find it is useful to remind them of how folks on the front lines feel and think from time to time…:*) and they appreciate it, even if they don’t always say they respect the effort of grassroots folks.

  21. avatar JimT says:

    Thanks Ralph et al.

    From the DOW website…

    “””””Over in northeast Oregon, a two-year-old male wolf was illegally killed by an as-yet unidentified poacher. The wolf was one of four adults in the Wenaha pack—the smaller of Oregon’s two confirmed wolf packs—that had been collared in August by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (click here to see a photo taken at the time of collaring). FWS officials have not disclosed details about the killing and continue to investigate.””””””

  22. avatar Virginia says:

    For those who choose to respond to this story with negative and uncivil comments about wolves, I would like to remind you that in the introduction to this blog is an invitation to all who read and write here to “Join with Us to Restore and Protect Wolves.” It also promotes the Wolf Recovery Foundation, supported by a wildlife conservation group, the Western Watersheds Project. There is a lengthy explanation of the history of the 1995 Wolf Reintroduction and their fate. Yes, there is also a disclaimer that this is not a pro-hunting or an anti-hunting blog. So, if some of you have forgotten the purpose of Ralph’s blog when you post these disparaging and negative remarks about wolves, it might be a good idea to read again the posts on the upper left hand corner of the blog when you first enter it. Just a reminder.

    • avatar Craig says:

      That’s a nice thought Virginia but this blog is read heavily by many Hunting forums as well as the Fish and Game. Just like many pro wolf people read all the hunting forums.
      If it’s on the net it’s open range for everyone, get over it. Ralph knows this and it’s a way to get his message out to the mass population pro or anti!

      • avatar Virginia says:

        My nice thought goes out to those who only post anti-wolf messages and are never heard from again regarding any other wildlife issues. I definitely disagree that this blog is just a way for Ralph to “get his message out to the mass population pro or anti” – nope, don’t see it at all.

      • avatar JimT says:

        Theoretically, yes, though there are restrictions of the use of people’s words even on the Internet. But that doesn’t mean that civility, restraint, and good manners are to be abandoned when you log on. Strong disagreements, absolutely. Name calling, threatening….should be first self-edited, and then blocked if that doesn’t work.

        Even Arizona is re-considering open range laws…;*)

  23. avatar jburnham says:

    Nice article. It’s good to see an articulate defense of the pro-wolf postion.

  24. avatar JerryBlack says:

    JimT Says:
    October 12, 2010 at 10:34 AM
    Oh, these folks know the issues, Ken. I find it is useful to remind them of how folks on the front lines feel and think from time to time…:*) and they appreciate it, even if they don’t always say they respect the effort of grassroots folks.

    Okay, Jim……name ONE from Defenders that “appreciates it” and doesn’t disrespect grassroots efforts and the people behind the efforts.

  25. avatar JimT says:

    Bob Irvin in the DC office.

  26. avatar JimT says:

    Jerry, what’s your beef with Defenders?

    • avatar JerryBlack says:

      JimT…… happy to talk about this anytime.
      I’m sure you have the resources to acquire my phone#.
      Also, you can always get my phone and or email from Ralph.

  27. avatar Marc Cooke says:

    The amount of fund raising on behalf of wolves is disproportionate to what is spent defending wolves. Why is DOW focusing on Oregon??? The fights not in Oregon the fights in Montana! If Montana falls so will the others. Although, I have total admiration and respect for the local people on the ground in Oregon. The truth is they have twenty wolves. In defending and bringing attention to wolves I and several of my close friends attend many wolf meetings at County, State and Federal level. I have seen a DOW Representative at one!

    • avatar Craig says:

      That is a great question Marc! Is it Hunters pay more to protect Wolfs than the tree huggers who bitch about everything and don’t contribute?

  28. avatar Virginia says:

    Ralph, Brian and Ken – your article about the government disdain for wolves is on Counterpunch today! I hope that means some of those people on the coasts and mid-America will be reading this excellent article.

October 2010

"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this:


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
We departed Friendship and drove Highway 1 heading northeast to Bar Harbor.  The drive along the way is filled with great scenery as you drive through the quaint town of Camden and on past lobster pound after lobster pound and past a variety of scenic harbors.

We arrived at Acadia National Park only to find the visitor’s centers closed and a bit of road work going on. No problem, we stopped at the information board to study the roads to ensure we didn’t get caught with one of the 5 bridges which RVs might not fit under (depending on your rig height).  We hoped we would be guided/directed by park rangers when we arrived at the entrance station. But there is not an entrance station in the northern part of the park (its further along as you drive south on the loop road) and the information board was sorely lacking in “information”. Luckily, some volunteer worker saw us and came over and explained to us how to best get to the campground with an RV (stay out of the park and use Route 3).

The campground is a national park campground but it is not inside the park so anytime you want to enter the park you have to drive a distance to get back around to the correct direction of the one way road and to one of the few places where you can enter the park onto the Loop Rd.  If we ever returned then we would probably stay at one of the RV parks to the north of the park. It would save time and trouble with visiting the park and Bar Harbor. One of the main reasons we like to stay in a national park is not only for the beauty of the campgrounds but also for the convenience of access to hiking trails and everything the park has to offer. Blackwoods does not provide that kind of convenience but it does have beauty!

Blackwoods Campground is in the town of Otter Creek and there is a lovely little market just outside of the campground which sells a few dry food items, fresh cooked food, bakery items, fresh coffee, and firewood (which was pretty green).  We soon discovered that this early in the season almost all firewood sellers were selling green wood as most campfires in the campground were smoke instead of flames. We made due and still managed to have a few campfires…I mean campsmokes!

Campground: Blackwoods Campground
Location: Otter Creek, Maine
Site: A55
Cost: $15 (50% off of the regular price with the National Parks pass)
Services: dry camp
Comments: A very wooded campground that is a lovely setting and within a short walking distance to Otter Cove on the Loop Rd.  It is very treed so don’t expect your solar panels to generate much power nor to receive satellite TV. We visited the park towards the middle/end of May and it poured rain almost every day and was cold, very cold. It was a damp cold that chilled you to your bone. But we still enjoyed ourselves and made the best of a wet situation.

There is a very short path to the ocean, aptly called Ocean Path, from the campground that takes maybe 10 minutes where you can enjoy some beautiful views. We just happened to have 5 minutes of sunshine when we were there. We will take it!!

There is another trail called Quarry Trail which winds down to Otter Cove along Loop Rd. It is a bit longer than Ocean Path but still not very long.

There is also a trail that goes up to Cadillac Mountain which we would have hiked had it not been for the downpour of rain constantly.  Maybe next time?

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-45
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-128.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.17 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


text:
Fish frys available on Fridays!  Come enjoy a round of golf.

Timber Ridge Golf Course

The Timber Ridge Golf Course opened in 2011 with the goal of providing a professional golfing experience to Rochester golfers of all skill levels. If you don’t have your own clubs, no problem. Timber Ridge offers club rentals for reasonable rates so you can get what you need to enjoy a round.
The Course
You can enjoy the natural beauty of upstate New York throughout each of the 18 professionally maintained holes at Timber Ridge, and the course is easy to walk or navigate with a cart.
Tee Times

We know how great it is to have your perfect tee time scheduled in ahead of time, so we offer tee time scheduling up to two weeks in advance. Contact us today for more information or for a list of available tee times on the date you’d like to visit.

Rates & Fees

Timber Ridge Golf Club offers a General Public rates Monday through Saturday.

  • 18 holes with a cart for $35
  • 9 holes with a cart for $25.

Senior golfers age 55 Monday through Friday.

  • 18 holes with a cart for $25
  • 9 holes with a cart for just $20

Golf Leagues

  • Timber Ridge also offers Golf League play for 9 holes, $16 for walking and $21 for riding.

Golf Shop

You’ll find a fully stocked pro shop at Timber Ridge Golf Club, complete with:

  • Professional balls
  • Golf Gloves
  • Golf Clothing
  • and much more


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
... a quick trip! ...

This is my quick trip to Bandung on 2010
the 1st thing is to attend one of my good friend's wedding,
Sazkia and Rino
Here's the bride and the grooom!

The bride is exciteddd!! hihihihi
she's look pretty :)
well, she's so different. I used to see her in casual way hehehe.

The wedding place
they do the party in the garden :)

It's a green wedding
Sazkia and Rino gives the guest a plant for souvenir hehehe.
i pick some and bring it to my home
that plan is still grow till now :)

Me and Fitry
Me:tie-dye see through outer-Mom's, blue mini dress-vintage, strappy studded sandals-Bata

After attend the party,
as usuall, I always looking seafood hihihi.
so here we gooooo!!
i'm sorry, i forgot the place name :(
Enjoy the Scallop!

And then Crab with Padang Sauce
hot, spicy and nyam-nyam :)

In the middle of the street, I see this sign
it's funny. The Cafe called Cafe Bali, but they serving Sundanesse Food :)

at the night, we go to Cihampelas Walk
we try Cup & Cino
the choco pancake is great :)
double pancake with choco ice cream, choco sauce and wafer
and sip of warm cappuccino. hmmm...
After that, i meet my friend, Ghaida
She's a blogger too
visit her blog in here :)

Ghaida and her husband, Apin
Me and Ghaida
we met first time from the blog and became a friend till now :)

What a great quick trip!!

Update : now Sazkia and Rino are waiting their first child.
hope everythings going well yaww :)

  1. hihihi pasti kamu makan sea food HDL deeehhh :p thank you for coming, deaaarr! mwah...

  2. @SazQ's CV aaaah aku lupa nama daerahnya hihihihihi. pokoke lumayan maknyusss :)

to top


text:
Utilities > System Utilities > KeyText 2000

KeyText 2000 3.20

Keyboard macro program with multiple clipboard and Windows automation features.

Windows AllPlatform :
USD $29.95Price :
2.67 MBFile Size :
ScreenshotScreenshot :
Popularity: 4/10Popularity :
Click Here for SupportTechnical Support :
5/19/2004Date Added :
5-Star Rating Rating :
Share Your OpinionUser Reviews :
KeyText 2000 was fully tested by TopShareware Labs. It does not contain any kind of malware, adware and viruses.
Keyboard macro and Windows automation. Stores boilerplate texts for typing/pasting into any application with a hotkey press or abbreviation. Wizards help you script button clicks, mouse actions, run programs, start emails and more. The scheduler runs them at set times, or when a certain window appears: let KeyText fill in password and other dialogs for you. Regular expressionfeatures. Eliminate those repetitive tasks! Windows Vista/7/8/10 compatible.

Download KeyText 2000

  • TrayDay
    Date in the Windows tray with pop-up calendar; shows Julian Day and week numbers
[ More downloads from MJMSoft Design Ltd. ]
Bookmark and Share

Audio : Games : Desktop : Business : Internet : Multimedia : Software Developer : Utilities : Web Developer : Screensavers

© 2002-2020 TopShareware.com. Legal Disclaimer | Privacy Policy


text:
April 15, 2020

Inspirational Music

With no end in sight for this forced time away from rehearsals, the members of VOICES Chorale NJ are missing singing together. Until they can perform again, they will be sharing music from their previous concerts online to stay connected with their audiences, each other, and the sounds of choral music. This performance of “Can We Sing the Darkness to Light” by Kyle Pederson, performed in December 2019, features accompanist Akiko Hosaki at the piano and music director Dr. David A. McConnell conducting. This piece is available above, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvgapCKmtHk, or by visiting voiceschoralenj.org.


text:
September 30, 2020

Featuring a Strong Group of Seniors, Juniors, PHS Football Aims to Get Back on Winning Track

READY TO POUNCE: Princeton High football player Dylan Angelucci patrols the field in a 2019 game. Senior Angelucci should be seeing action at safety and wide receiver this fall for PHS. The Tigers open their 2020 campaign by playing at Robbinsville on October 2. (Photo by Frank Wojciechowski)

By Bill Alden

While the Princeton High football team couldn’t do any contact drills during its first week of practice due to COVID-19 restrictions, it still made good progress.

“We went an entire week essentially without any equipment, the kids were so excited to be out there and the coaches were excited that I don’t think we paid it too much mind,” said PHS head coach Charlie Gallagher.

“We had a lot of learning to do. I am harking back on the fact that football is definitely an intricate, complicated game. There are a lot of moving parts and there is a lot of teaching that needs to take place. We didn’t get to do any of that teaching in the summer time. That week was actually pretty invaluable.”

Despite COVID-19 concerns and coming off a 0-8 season, PHS boasts good numbers this year with a roster of more than 40 players.

“I am pleasantly surprised; we are really happy with the senior and the junior class, those kids are very committed,” said Gallagher.

“With the seniors and juniors we have, we are going to be able to rest some guys. We have 12 seniors and I think 11 of them are going to see significant time. We also have 12 or 13 juniors and six of those guys are going to see significant time and then we have two sophomores in the mix who are going to be playing and starting. We are going to spread the wealth a little bit. I don’t think we have had as many potential starters ever, even going back to 2014 when we had a group of 15 guys who started. I could put my finger on 20 guys that could start at a position.”

In Gallagher’s view, junior quarterback Jaxon Petrone has the potential to have a big season after being sidelined last fall due to injury.

“Jaxon looks fantastic; he has a very good arm and he is showcasing it right now,” said Gallagher.

“Obviously the big thing is being able to get the wide receivers underneath those balls to catch them. We are working on that and we think we have a couple of solid guys that can make contributions and get the ball down the field.”

The PHS receiving corps will feature senior Dylan Angelucci, senior Mike Wargo, junior Everaldo Servil, and junior Jaiden Johnson.

“We have four guys that we are looking at, Dylan and Mike are guys that played last year for us,” said Gallagher.

“We are really high on Everaldo, who got a lot of playing time last year. He is fast and he is a gutsy kid. The other one is a real surprising young man, Jaiden Johnson, who is moving from soccer to football. There was a conversation about maybe playing some football and he came out and is a delight. There is a little bit of a learning curve with him. He is a good athlete so we want to try and give him the ball but at the same time we want to make sure that he knows what he is doing.”

Senior Michael Spadea is poised to do some big things at tight end for the Tigers.

“He had a one-handed grab the other day, it was beautiful, it was stretched out,” said Gallagher.

“He is a tall, lanky kid and is very strong. He was probably the most committed guy in the off season as far as the weight room. He found a weight room somewhere and returned bigger and better than ever.”

The Tigers feature a big group at running back in junior Lehehmoo Pwee, junior Moses Santizo, junior Alan Loarca, senior Richie Valme, and senior Jose Espinosa.

“Pwee is a really solid young man and our starting fullback is going to be Moses,” said Gallagher.

“We are happy with those guys. We have a little bit of depth. Alan played for us as a freshman and didn’t come out his sophomore year but he is coming back out as a junior. We are really happy with him. We also have another senior who we are happy to get back in Richie. Jose Espinosa has really worked hard in the offseason. We had him at line last year but he was committed to being a running back and he is now one of our fullbacks.”

The offensive line is looking like a strength for PHS with a battle-tested group that includes junior Giancarlo Momo, senior Leo Alexandroff, senior Diego Alvarez Garcia, senior Manuel Vasquez, junior Jason Ling, and senior Andreas Lambros.

“Both of our tackles, Momo and Alexandroff, are back; they  are really good,” said Gallagher.

They are guys who played last year and just really talented kids and great kids. They know the game of football. We have three guards, Diego, Manuel, and Jason. Jason was a running back and we are moving him to the line. He is going to be really talented for us. Our center is Andreas.”

On the defensive line, junior Wes Henri will augment a unit that has a number of players doing double duty.

“Momo and Leo will be our tackles,” said Gallagher. “We have a newcomer, Wes, who is a wrestler; he was a heavyweight from the past year. He is a big, strong kid and I hope he wreaks havoc in the middle of the field. The wrestlers know leverage. He is super strong, I would be a little nervous if I was a center and I saw him lined up. He is going to be a talented player for us, I am glad he came out for us. At defensive end, we have two good guys in Spadea and Richie. They will play at defensive end and at outside linebacker.”

Santizo and Espinosa will be playing at middle linebacker along with sophomore Faysal Al-Qassab.

“Our inside guys are Santizo, Espinosa, and Faysal,” said Gallagher.

“Faysal is a good football player, he came from Georgia a couple of years ago. He is working hard so we are going to try to find a spot for him.”

The defensive backfield will feature senior Dora Servil, senior Dylan Angelucci, sophomore Risshabh Bhardwaj, and junior Johnson.

“In the secondary, we have got four guys,” said Gallagher. “We have Dora and Dylan back there. We have another sophomore, Risshabh, who is going to be our free safety. We are happy with him. Our last guy is Jaiden, he is probably going to play some corner for us.”

In order to get back on the winning track, PHS will need to be more productive on both sides of the ball.

“As far as success, in the end you want to see yourself in the win column,” said Gallagher.

“At the same time, we are going to rely heavily on the seniors to build the program and get some excitement back. We have to score a lot more points than we did last year. I think our defense is going to be very stingy. We have some really good athletes. The key will be how quickly they can pick up the offense and defense.”

Gallagher acknowledges that not being allowed to have scrimmages this fall will make it harder for the players to be at their sharpest.

“The things you look for in scrimmages are no turnovers, ball security is huge,” said Gallagher.

“We really haven’t been knocked around to where the ball can get jarred. Another thing is penalties, with false starts and all of that stuff. Tackling is going to be an issue. We do tackling everyday but it is form tackling. It is not tackling to the ground. All of that kind of stuff will be a concern.”

PHS hopes to hit the ground running as it starts the 2020 season on October 2 by playing at Robbinsville, who is coming off a 9-1 campaign.

“We open up with a familiar team in Robbinsville, they have made some jumps,” said Gallagher.

“Coach [Andrew] Patterson has got a formula over there, they don’t really break from that. It is a certain offense and a certain defense that they run and they have been doing it for many years. Last year was kind of a pinnacle for them, they run it extremely efficiently. Every game for us is going to be a dogfight. Robbinsville is a great opener to get our feet wet a little bit.”


text:
Members Groups

Retired Members

As UNISON Member when you reach retirement age, do not give up your membership you can become a Retired Member.
Our Branch has a retired members group that has meetings on a regular basis. You can enjoy social events and outings, keep up to date with UNISON campaigns and support issues of concern for older people. We have a retired members secretary Joan Beswick who can be contacted via the branch.

At regional level there is a Regional Retired Members Committee from which there are reps on the National Retired Members Committee, National Conference, Regional Committee, Regional Council, Regional Welfare and Women’s Forum. Each year there is a Retired Members’ Conference to which or branch sends a delegate.

UNISON retired members enjoy all the benefits of UNISON membership including: Legal advice Welfare support Special discounts and offers on a wide range of financial and other services, such as house & contents insurance from UIA, car insurance from Frizzell and special interest rates with Britannia for savings accounts and mortgages. 10% reduction on holidays at Croyde Bay on the North Devon Coast.

In order to become a Life Retired Member, please contact your Branch for an application form. The cost is a one-off fee of £15.

Trafford UNISON offers support for for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender members (LGBT).

Workers face prejudice and discrimination when seeking work and once they are in a job. Every trade unionist has a responsibility to challenge this discrimination. It is part of UNISON’s core agenda for workers’ rights.

UNISON is an organisation that does not allow homophobia, biphobia or transphobia and actively campaigns for laws to be changed with regards to the provision of services to LGBT people.

In addition UNISON national office produces a quarterly Out in Unison Newsletter on LGBT equality in UNISON.

The LGBT Convenor can offer individual support for those members who are experiencing a workplace problem or need general support on an LGBT issue see the contact details below.

Disabled members

UNISON’s priorities on disability are led by the union’s own disabled members. We help disabled members by fighting discrimination and campaigning and organising at workplace, regional and national levels.

Young Members

Unison has a large group of young members. If you are a Unison member & under 27 years of age you are automatically entitled to participate as a young member.

Unison encourages young members to get involved in every level. Regional young members can get together to plan an organise campaigns and discuss experiences.

We currently have a vacancy for a young members officer.

To find information about young people within Unison, click the link below

More than two thirds of Unison’s members are women and as such we campaign for workplace equality and for the rights of women out in the community.

We support campaigns that improve women’s lives and as a union we support women with issues such as maternity rights, equal pay as well as providing information and legal advice.

At Trafford UNISON we have our own Women’s officer Robina Sheikh and she can be contacted via the branch.

For more information about women’s groups with Unison please click on the link below.


text:
Coming Soon…

Handcrafted pendants by my sister, Bethanne! I'm so very excited that I'm finally going to be able to offer her lovelies in my shop… very, very soon!

Her pendants are each meticulously hand-drawn in color pencils on shrink plastic—they're so lightweight and elegant. I know you're going to enjoy using them in your new creations!

Stay tuned!

Share this post

  1. very lovely . Nice to see an old material used in new and artistic ways.

  2. Yay! I've enjoyed seeing her work in your creations. What a talented family!

  3. I'm so looking forward to grab one! :-D


text:
The Best CBD Supplements from JustCBD

CBD Frequently Asked Questions

As preferred as marijuana is, CBD or cannabidiol appears to be the product on everybody’s lips nowadays. CBD is a cannabinoid which, unlike THC, does not make you high or offer you any type of undesirable adverse effects. It’s ended up being a prominent choice to medical marijuana as a result of its legal availability as well as the variety of methods to use it.

CBD is not a medicine or medical treatment. Like other herbal supplements, lots of individuals take an everyday dosage of CBD to maintain their system in check.

CBD remains in high need with several customers purchasing all type of CBD Oils, Edibles, Vape Cartridges, as well as various other related items. But due to its close relationship to cannabis, lots of customers are perplexed concerning what CBD is, what it does, exactly how to utilize it, and also where to obtain it. Right here’s a CBD frequently asked questions guide to aid you with all of the common questions people have when it concerns cannabidiol.

What is CBD Short For?

CBD is the term utilized for cannabidiol, a normally taking place chemical substance (also referred to as a cannabinoid) discovered in marijuana plants. Lots of cannabinoids are found in these plants, such as THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), CBG (cannabigerol), and CBN (cannabinol). CBD has actually ended up being specifically preferred for its use in different all-natural supplements.

While CBD is a product of these plants, you’ll normally locate it extracted from hemp plants as well as made use of in items such as oils, topicals, edibles, and extra. Several stores promoting CBD sell these cannabidiol-infused products which can be made use of for a variety of purposes. CBD can also be found in cannabis, although the two must not be confused.

Is CBD the Same as Cannabis?

There’s a great deal of confusion when it involves CBD as well as marijuana, specifically as the two are closely associated. CBD is just one of over a hundred cannabinoids which can be located in cannabis plants, consisting of cannabis plants. Nevertheless, whereas marijuana is primarily recognized for its psychoactive impacts, CBD generates none of these.

Is CBD the Like Marijuana

It’s the THC in marijuana that makes customers high when they take in the plant. CBD, on the various other hand, is non-psychoactive and does not make users high. While several cannabis pressures include CBD, CBD products are normally drawn out from hemp plants which have high degrees of CBD with low degrees of THC. Legal, hemp-based items consist of much less than 0.3% THC, suggesting they won’t offer you any one of the effects you ‘d typically expect from cannabis.

How Should You Utilize CBD?

There are various methods of CBD usage which you can use securely and also properly. Each of these has its advantages as well as some are better for certain purposes. You can select to use it whichever method you such as as well as may also want to evaluate out numerous approaches to see which is finest for you.

CBD Oil/Tincture– CBD Oil Tincture is one of the most typical method of usage, especially as it’s quick, simple, and discreet. Each container of CBD Oil Tincture includes a dropper which you utilize to measure out your dose as well as use it under your tongue. Hold it under your tongue for around a min or two and your body will certainly absorb the cannabidiol right into your system. You can likewise add CBD Oil to foods as well as drinks, although taking it sublingually (under the tongue) acts on your body a lot quicker.

CBD Edibles– There are various type of CBD-infused foods which make it very easy to consume CBD These generally been available in small servings that make it very easy to get the right dosage of CBD All you require to do with CBD Edibles is consume the quantity you require. They may not reach your system as quick as other techniques as they require to be digested. They do provide a pleasurable method of usage that’s easy and likewise fast. Instances of CBD Edibles include CBD Gummies, CBD Healthy Protein Bars, CBD Dried Fruit, as well as CBD Honey Sticks.

CBD Topicals– CBD Topicals are topical products you can apply to the skin which are infused with CBD. Your skin will certainly absorb the cannabidiol, where it communicates with cannabinoid receptors. CBD Topicals be available in various forms, such as CBD Discomfort Lotion and also CBD Bathroom Bombs which permit you to absorb CBD throughout your entire body. While you can take in the CBD from CBD Topicals fast, they will not reach your bloodstream or your mind which makes them extra restricted than various other CBD items.

CBD Vapes– If you have a vape pen or vape battery, you can utilize CBD-infused vape products such as CBD Vape Cartridges and also CBD Vape Oils. These been available in all sort of tasty flavors- you simply need to apply them to your vaporizer, warmth them up, and inhale the vapor. Vaping is delightful, healthy, and absorbs cannabidiol right into your system rapidly.

How Must CBD Shop Utilize CBD.

CBD Separate– CBD Isolate is cannabidiol that’s been refined into highly-concentrated CBD powder. You can make use of CBD Separate in various ways, such as including it to foods as well as drinks, and even a percentage includes a high amount of CBD. # Best Selling CBD Beauty & Personal Care from Just CBD StoreIt’s a distinct and functional CBD item which suits those who desire a lot of concentrated CBD at an economical cost.

What are the Side Effects of CBD?

Equally as with any kind of type of supplement, users might worry about the potential drawbacks and also adverse effects of CBD. Nonetheless, unlike compounds such as THC, CBD is very safe to use without danger of injury to your health. Many research studies find that humans can make use of CBD with no negative effects, although some small negative effects are often reported.

You might experience negative effects such as looseness of the bowels, wooziness, queasiness, and adjustments in mood and cravings. These results still seem relatively unusual, and also most individuals can utilize CBD without any disadvantages whatsoever.

Is CBD Addictive?

Users might likewise bother with whether CBD has any type of addicting top qualities. However, CBD is also risk-free to make use of without any danger of addiction. CBD has no literally addictive top qualities, suggesting you can make use of as much as you desire as routinely as you want without fretting about coming to be addicted.

When you stop taking CBD, you won’t experience any withdrawal impacts, even if you have actually been taking it for a long time. Along with the absence of hazardous results, this makes CBD a really risk-free natural supplement for individuals.

Can You Overdose on CBD?

It’s additionally difficult to overdose on CBD. Whereas some substances, including some drugs, can trigger fatal overdoses, and THC can trigger extreme discomfort when utilized in high amounts, it’s completely safe to make use of any kind of quantity of CBD without stressing over overdosing.

Can You Overdose on CBD.

Lots of researches have even shown that high doses of CBD can be taken with no harmful results. In a study on using CBD for social anxiousness released topics a dosage of 600mg of CBD without any type of side effects. Other researches have actually discovered that you can also take high doses daily without any concern.

Is CBD Safe to Utilize for Kid?

With no unsafe negative effects, no risk of dependency, as well as no possibility of an overdose, CBD is a very safe material to make use of for people. A record by the World Health and wellness Organization even specifies that CBD has no public health and wellness threats and no potential for abuse. Yet while much of the research study on CBD has been done on grownups, moms and dads might wonder whether it’s risk-free for their children to eat CBD.

CBD is risk-free for kids just as it is for grownups. You may likewise want to take into consideration the method of application- oils or edibles will function better for kids than vaping CBD.

There have also been researches performed on using CBD for youngsters. For instance, a medical test on utilizing CBD for Dravet syndrome discovered that kids could take a dose of 20mg of CBD per kg of body weight each day with no damaging negative effects. A comparable research on utilizing CBD for youngsters with Lennox-gastaut disorder additionally discovered that children could securely take a high dose of CBD daily.

Can You Use CBD for Animals?

CBD can be used securely for adults of all ages. What concerning CBD for family pets?

Although CBD products can operate in the same way for various other animals, it’s ideal not to provide your animals CBD products developed for human intake. These may be harder for them to ingest or consume and also they may likewise need a reduced dose.

Can You Make Use Of CBD for Animals

The very best method to offer CBD to your pets is with Pet dog CBD Products. These are particularly designed for intake by cats as well as pets, making it easy to carry out cannabidiol to your animals. JustPets Pet cat Deals with come in 2 various tastes which your pet cats will enjoy, with each reward providing a healthy and balanced dose of cannabidiol. JustPets Pet dog Deals with come in Poultry Meatballs, Poultry Biscuits, Liver Meatballs, and also Steak Bites, making them optimal for any kind of dog.

Is It Lawful to Buy CBD in the United States?

You can legitimately utilize and also acquire CBD throughout the USA according to federal laws. There’s commonly complication when it involves the validity of CBD, especially due to its connection to cannabis. CBD is totally legal supplying it meets certain problems.

This consists of CBD items made with hemp removes as opposed to marijuana removes. There are now numerous of these available on the market, so you’ll have no problem finding and also getting legal CBD

There are also cannabis-based CBD products available in lawful marijuana states. Clinical marijuana users are likewise able to use CBD items with cannabis extracts.

Where Can You Acquire CBD?

You can buy legal, hemp-based CBD items in several stores now. They can be discovered in hemp shops, health stores, drug stores, and also also specialist CBD shops. If you desire a hassle-free way to obtain high-grade CBD, it’s best to order CBD online.

JustCBDStore gives a large range of CBD items to fit every user. Every one of these are legal to make use of as well as lab-tested to guarantee their top quality and also pureness. CBD Products from need to do is make an on-line order as well as you can have all the CBD you require to be supplied directly to you.

Where Can Just CBD Store Purchase CBD.

All sort of CBD items are available, so whether you prefer CBD Tinctures, CBD Edibles, CBD Topicals or something else, there’s something to fit your requirements.

Just How Much CBD Should You Use?

Given that CBD has no dangerous impacts and you can not overdose on CBD, you can use as much CBD as you desire. In the passion of protecting your CBD and still getting a healthy dose, you might desire to utilize it conservatively.

Generally, an everyday dose of 15-25mg of CBD is suggested if you just wish to use it as an informal day-to-day supplement. This suffices for a lot of customers to obtain a healthy daily serving, as well as some researches also recommend that 25mg of CBD can assist with particular concerns.

If you require extra, you can experiment with your dose as well as take as much as you feel you need. Studies have revealed that high doses can be taken with no problem. Studies on making use of CBD for epilepsy found that youngsters profited from a dose of 20mg of CBD per kg of body weight per day whereas a study on CBD for social stress and anxiety discovered that a single 600mg of CBD was effective and also secure for adults.

While it’s not a clinical product, CBD is a risk-free as well as all-natural supplement which numerous customers discover helpful for all kinds of purposes. If you desire to try out CBD for on your own, you can buy CBD items from JustCBDStore.

Instances of CBD Edibles consist of CBD Gummies, CBD Protein Bars, CBD Dried Fruit, as well as CBD Honey Sticks.

CBD Topicals come in numerous forms, such as CBD Discomfort Cream as well as CBD Bath Bombs which enable you to soak up CBD throughout your entire body. While you can absorb the CBD from CBD Topicals quickly, they will not reach your bloodstream or your brain which makes them extra limited than other CBD products.

CBD Isolate– CBD Isolate is cannabidiol that’s been fine-tuned right into highly-concentrated CBD powder. Researches on utilizing CBD for epilepsy discovered that children benefited from a dosage of 20mg of CBD per kg of body weight per day whereas a research study on CBD for social anxiousness discovered that a solitary 600mg of CBD was secure and effective for adults.


text:
web analytics

The Mayor’s Neighborhood Investment Plan

A few weeks ago, Mayor Ballard started a pitch known as the Neighborhood Investment Plan.  The plan calls for large investment in bike lanes, greenways, and sidewalks, as well as a similar amount devoted to more standard street projects.  I will remain neutral on the economics and politics behind the plan (and to be honest, those subjects are simply not my forte).  Instead, I’ll touch on some of the highlights of the potential improvements.  First, here is a look at the projects by township:

Some of the bigger individual projects in the proposal include:

    • Bike Lanes over the White River on Kessler Boulevard.  Bridges are sadly more often not barriers for cycling so it will be good to see this issue remedied.  Sidewalks may also be added in sections that desperately needs them near Meridian Street and the Monon Trail.
    • Bike Lanes on East 46th Street and Arlington Avenue.  These have likely been in the city’s short term plans for a while now.
    • Eagle Creek Greenway finally gets constructed.
    • Completion of the Fall Creek Trail from Meridian to 10th Street, and a new Pogue’s Run Trail.
    • A good amount of new sidewalks in Warren Township.

Unfortunately this plan gives even more fuel to the fire that the city has long favored the northside. The plans for southern Marion County are smaller in scope, and there are no new separated greenways or bike lanes.

I’m of the opinion that the city needs to make investments in its infrastructure, so in general I support this plan.  However, I can’t help but be a little concerned about the other parts of the map labeled “traffic” “intersection” and “street”.  One of the places labeled “street” is scheduled to be widened,  East 82nd Street past Hague Road.  I hope the city takes a look at these plans and figures out if they really want to encourage even more drivers on these roads, or if they can look for other alternatives first.  Road widening seems less like neighborhood investment and more like the status quo, which hasn’t done the city much good to date.

Regardless of whether or not the Mayor’s plan gets the green light, I do hope we find a way to continue the momentum for better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure in the city.  These improvements too important for the long-term future of the city to be jettisoned by political disagreements.

13 Responses to “ “The Mayor’s Neighborhood Investment Plan”

  1. Paul K. Ogden says:

    Kessler Boulevard passing over the White River, where you have a hill, high speeds and even a bend in the road at the tope of the hill is one of the most dangerous areas of the city to ride a bicycle. I’ve ridden it many times and have taken my life into my hands each time. Putting a bike lane in there does not help that and it might make it more hazardous by narrowing already narrow traffic lanes. That part of the city is in desperate need for a biking/walking path separated from traffic. That’s the only way you’re going to make biking in that area safe.

    • Matt says:

      Total agreement. I applaud Indy’s recent enthusiasm for installing bike lanes, but we’ve got to start recognizing situations where a bike lane simply does not encourage anyone other than a young, risk-seeking male to ride their bike. Heavily traveled 40mph+ arterials are one of those places. If you want mom and the kids to get out and ride, you’ve got to spend the money, turn some dirt, and get the lane separated from traffic.

      That said, it’s an encouraging plan! We’ve got some nice momentum building.

    • Jon Brewer says:

      Paul, I know we have plenty of disagreements both here and on IndyStar, but with this I think you are absolutely spot on.

      This is the perfect arterial for bikes to get west toward Eagle Creek, however traffic combined with the slope of the hill makes it very scary for anyone who’s not a hardened road cyclist.

      I’m not sure of the solution, however, as both sides of Kessler are the huge lots of Sunset Ln. An alternative route might be a pedestrian/bike bridge a little north from Illinois/Riverview directly into Holliday Park. From there, bike lanes along 64th to Grandview to get back to Fox Hill/Kessler. Thoughts?

  2. ahow628 says:

    Seems like there should be some abandoned road or railroad pylons in the White River up in that area somewhere.

  3. Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Kevin. Absolutely, the capital improvements plan favors the north side over the south side. When I wrote the Emerson Avenue improvement article last year, people chalked it up to three major factors: 1) frequent lower population density, at least in Franklin and Decatur (the obvious one); 2) a consequential lower degree of wear and tear; 3) a SIGNIFICANTLY lower degree of neighborhood organization and push for direct accountability. Southsiders are much more likely to favor low government intervention, even when it comes to some pretty abysmal provision of city services. Huge swathes of the south side don’t have street lights at any point beyond major intersections; virtually no one seems to care.

    What will be interesting to me is if these sidewalk improvements recognize errors from the past and decide to build 1) on both sides of the street; and 2) they separate the sidewalks from the street with a planting strip. While I’ve always thought #1 is a more critical consideration than #2, I have noticed up here that even in the outer suburbs of Detroit (a very auto-dependent city as we all know), about 80% of the arterial and collector streets still have sidewalks, and about 95% of those sidewalks are separated from the curb with a grassy buffer, sometimes over 15′ wide.

    • Paul Lambie says:

      It would be great if the City had in fact learned from its previous mistakes, as you say. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that the DPW has even yet acknowledged those past designs as mistakes. I don’t know if the DPW even agrees that having sidewalks separated from streets by tree lawns, grass buffers, or whatever one might call them is superior to the curb adjacent sidewalks they typically build.

      The vast array of reasons to design sidewalks that way are clearly spelled out in the Multi Modal Design Guidelines document that the City paid for several years ago, but that’s just a DMD/MPO planning document, and those are irrelevant to what DPW does.

  4. Chris Barnett says:

    You’d think it would be possible to convince DMD based on one thing: tree lawns provide snow/ice storage and the possibility that the melt won’t all enter the storm sewers…some of it will infiltrate instead of running off.

  5. Ben M says:

    I’d love to see some maps just like these simply showing the current existence or non-existence of sidewalks and curbs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *