Wyoming Migration Research Elimination (Potentially)

[COHunter33]

Trump’s ‘liquidation plans’ could wipe out Wyoming research group renowned for migration work - WyoFile

Fate of the Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit’s science faculty — Matt Kauffman, Anna Chalfoun and Annika Walters — unclear as president orders deep cuts.

wyofile.com

A real bummer. The Wyoming migration work is truly valuable. Between the public land sale amendment and this latest move, it’s becoming clear this administration is not prioritizing the interests of hunters or wildlife

 

[7RemMag]

I speak for myself I suppose, but I didn’t expect anything less from this administration. Hopefully the checks and balances in place can prevent some of this damage, but time will tell.

 

[Tick]

It is a bummer, but I agree with cutting federal funds. Hopefully a glimpse into the future for the residents that like to remind everyone the states wildlife belong to only them.

 

[7RemMag]

It is a bummer, but I agree with cutting federal funds. Hopefully a glimpse into the future for the residents that like to remind everyone the states wildlife belong to only them.

It seems to me like the funds being cut aren't funds that really should. Is something like this integral to the function of our nation? Probably not. These cuts aren't hitting the inefficient big wig office jockeys at the top, though. Cutting government spending is definitely a frugal move, but a lot of what I'm seeing is a bit like taking a broadaxe when a scalpel would be much more suited. I guess we'll see how all this government spending shakes out 4 years from now.

One can certainly make an argument that given some level of federal money is likely spent on conservation in all 50 states, that some level of "ownership" falls into the hands of the entire nation. That said, as a hunter in your state of residence who pays license fees, you are the "majority" owner of wildlife in your state. The same is true of myself in my chosen state of residence. If one isn't satisfied with the stake that they hold, I guess they should consider making a move if better, more diverse, or a different type of hunting is something they value. That is an individual's own decision to make. That's not really what this is about, though.

It's safe to say this group's research benefitted all mule deer, not just those in Wyoming. It's a net loss for hunters/wildlife if it happens. It certainly doesn't instill much confidence in me for this administration to be looking out for the interests of outdoorsmen and women. Not that I had much hope for that in the first place.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

I don't think the feds should be paying for deer research in Iowa, or yellow belly lizard research in Texas, or Elk research in Wyoming. These are all state issues. Only thing maybe the feds need to be involved with is waterfowl considering they migrate in and out of the country. Yes Elk and deer migrate, but WY and CO (etc) can collaborate on that. Feds are terrible at managing money and wasting resources, states will handle it better and target better where the resources go.

 

[elkhunter505]

I don't think the feds should be paying for deer research in Iowa, or yellow belly lizard research in Texas, or Elk research in Wyoming. These are all state issues. Only thing maybe the feds need to be involved with is waterfowl considering they migrate in and out of the country. Yes Elk and deer migrate, but WY and CO (etc) can collaborate on that. Feds are terrible at managing money and wasting resources, states will handle it better and target better where the resources go.

Most of the time they aren’t. Those professionals in the WYCRU are bringing in state dollars to do that research. The state agencies do not have the research personnel to do it but they have the grant money. The vast majority of the work being done by the Wyoming Migration Initiative and other migration mapping entities is being done by federal scientists and graduate students that are using state funds. In the CRU case, from what I have seen, there are rarely federal funds being used for the projects or students themselves. The federal funds are used for salaries for the scientists and vehicles (rarely used for gas) for the graduate students, research associates, post docs, etc. that are salaried via state or private agency grants. The state funds pay for the research itself and all the collars, etc. Also when they put their money into a CRU, the university does not take overhead cost out of the grant. If they were to use a normal university professor to do that research, the university takes a certain portion off the top (my university is 35% I believe). So if we are to eliminate the CRUs which the Wyoming Migration Initiative is housed within, we are going to essentially cut research funds that the state agency has because they will have no option to keep all their money intact. Removing the CRUs does not help give the states more power, it’s cripples them.

 

[elkhunter505]

There’s plenty of examples of state agencies speaking out about how beneficial these programs are to them. One example is Nebraska in this article.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

Of course it's beneficial to anyone doing anything with federal money. Feds giving me money would be highly beneficial too, doesn't mean they should.

 

[JohnJohnson]

It is a bummer, but I agree with cutting federal funds.

Spending isn't going down though. The funds are just being redirected to the military and DHS budget increases.

 

[elkhunter505]

Spending isn't going down though. The funds are just being redirected to the military and DHS budget increases.

Not even to mention the $200 million that the pentagon spent in September on furniture that could fund 2/3 of the EMA and yet they’re getting a budget increase. Oh and let’s not forget the $45 million Trump wants to spend on a military parade for his birthday. Talk about government waste.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

So spending even more is the answer? Cuts have to be made.

edit: Military and DHS spending isn't necessarily bad, gotta pay for the deportations.

 

[elkhunter505]

So spending even more is the answer? Cuts have to be made.

edit: Military and DHS spending isn't necessarily bad, gotta pay for the deportations.

How about take $5 Billion from the Pentagon who has proved they can waste money like no one else and fund all the programs that benefit our wildlife. Or hell be consistent and actually act like you’re trying to balance the budget and cut across the entire board. Don’t try to just pull the wool over our eyes and say you’re trying to fix the deficit when you are not doing that.

Also your hunting access is being revoked by the military in the militarized zone along the border. So it’s not like the DOD stuff is not affecting hunting.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

How about take $5 Billion from the Pentagon who has proved they can waste money like no one else and fund all the programs that benefit our wildlife. Or hell be consistent and actually act like you’re trying to balance the budget and cut across the entire board. Don’t try to just pull the wool over our eyes and say you’re trying to fix the deficit when you are not doing that.

Also your hunting access is being revoked by the military in the militarized zone along the border. So it’s not like the DOD stuff is not affecting hunting.

Yeah I'm OK with making cuts everywhere and hopefully DOGE will do that and cut cut cut. You like having a military and being able to afford to protect the border though right?

 

[elkhunter505]

Yeah I'm OK with making cuts everywhere and hopefully DOGE will do that and cut cut cut. You like having a military and being able to afford to protect the border though right?

I don’t disagree with those things but clearly they are doing it effectively right now with much less of a budget. And I don’t trust DOGE haven’t from the start. They said $2 trillion in waste and they have found a fraction of that and most of it is not waste, fraud, or abuse, it’s just cutting programs that people care about.

 

[TaperPin]

Yeah I'm OK with making cuts everywhere and hopefully DOGE will do that and cut cut cut. You like having a military and being able to afford to protect the border though right?

When will all these “savings” show up? Someone claims savings, yet has a budget adding trillions to the national debt and giving themselves huge tax cuts while tariffs are the largest tax increase since 1993 to those actually working. Just watching money go down the toilet and leaving more debt for my kids and grand kids gets old.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

When will all these “savings” show up? Someone claims savings, yet has a budget adding trillions to the national debt and giving themselves huge tax cuts while tariffs are the largest tax increase since 1993 to those actually working. Just watching money go down the toilet and leaving more debt for my kids and grand kids gets old.

Imagine if they didn't cut stuff, we'd be spending even more.

 

[TaperPin]

Imagine if they didn't cut stuff, we'd be spending even more.

They haven’t cut anything yet. By law the money appropriated by congress has to be used for its intended purpose. Executive orders don’t change that, and the courts are already reversing many of the idiotic things done for visual effect.

The firehose of chaos doesn’t overcome common sense. It’s taking from people actually working and giving it to the rich.

 

[7RemMag]

They haven’t cut anything yet. By law the money appropriated by congress has to be used for its intended purpose. Executive orders don’t change that, and the courts are already reversing many of the idiotic things done for visual effect.

Are you talking about things like renaming the Gulf of Mexico? I wonder how many taxpayer's dollars went(or will go) towards that.

 

[COHunter33]

It laughable that we are talking about the pentagon’s budget and the wildlife research budget in the same thread. Doge is currently going after the things that cost a penny (like wildlife research) and ignoring the programs that are actually crippling our balance sheet like military spending, Medicaid, and social security. Cutting funding for wildlife research moves the needle approx. 0.0000001%. The administration just wants you to think it is addressing the root cause of our debt and so they are making a big hoopla about it.

 

[7RemMag]

It laughable that we are talking about the pentagon’s budget and the wildlife research budget in the same thread. Doge is currently going after the things that cost a penny (like wildlife research) and ignoring the programs that are actually crippling our balance sheet like military spending, Medicaid, and social security. Cutting funding for wildlife research moves the needle approx. 0.0000001%. The administration just wants you to think it is addressing the root cause of our debt and so they are making a big hoopla about it.

I completely agree. I'm of the opinion that if we quit meddling in third world affairs, we'd be able to cut our military spending AND be safer to boot We could pretty easily get the best of both worlds on that front. At least that's my opinion. It's little more than diversion from the crux of the issue(s).