Skinner,

Would I support reasonable changes to the ESA and NEPA? Sure, but I'm not going to support gutting them. There's a difference. What you would have in mind, probably not, which is likely a total repeal of both. Nothing in your "writing" would suggest you're in favor of keeping NEPA or the ESA intact and reasonable.

No, I do not support raising greater sage grouse in captivity, largely because it doesn't work. Sage grouse aren't Plymouth or Rhode Island Reds. There is mountains of science that show that it doesn't work, its extremely expensive, and likely would do more harm than good. That's another topic that we discussed with Governor Mead (R). He is 100% opposed to the idea and the bill introduced by the Legislature to do that. He is 100% committed to the collaborative process that Wyoming has adopted. The process that has produced results and kept sage grouse off the list. The Wyoming model of dealing with Sage grouse has buy in from industry, landowners, sportsmen, conservationists, and the public in general. Mead understands its about the habitat and collaboration, protecting core habitat and having broad support for sage grouse management. We are the envy of the West in regard to sage grouse management, no question.

Yes, I did know that my group takes money from a foreigner, so what? Wealthy donors contribute to a lot of different groups, causes, etc...not sure what your point is, or if you actually have one.

When was the last time you dove into who Jennifer Fielder, Ken Ivory, Jason Chaffetz, and the rest of the PLT wing-nuts take money from? Some real noble sources of funding there. But, you probably haven't researched or wrote much about that I bet.

As to wolf delisting, if you want to study up on that, you'll realize that the Ag community in Wyoming is why delisting was delayed. Why Jon Tester and Mike Simpson had to introduce legislation to unhitch itself from Wyoming and their unapproved federal plan. The blame isn't with the ESA or the process, the blame is with the State of Wyoming not complying with the FEIS.

I disagree that Federal Laws regarding land management are unjust and give undue power. I like the idea that if the Agencies ignore the laws, OUR REPRESENTATIVES, passed, that groups like BHA and others have the ability to file objections and lawsuits to make them comply.

I also believe that without the threat of objections and lawsuits, there is no system of checks and balances. Further, there is no way to hold the Agencies accountable for ensuring equal consideration is given to ALL resources, for the greatest good, for the most people, for the longest time, without impairment to the productivity of our Federal Lands.

You know...real multiple use.