Turnabout: Idaho senators support Snake River protection bill

Larry Craig said to drop his opposition to protecting the Snake River in Wyoming-

Idaho Senator Mike Crapo, and especially idaho Senator Larry Craig, have dropped their opposition to the bill by Wyoming’s two U. S. senators to protect the Snake River and its headwaters tributaries as parts of the national Wild and Scenic Rivers system.

The Snake River rises in Wyoming, but runs through Idaho where much of it is diverted for irrigation.

The Snake River protection plan has advanced, but over the wishes of Idaho’s Larry Craig (who will be retired in a couple months, but could yet cause problems in the U.S. Senate).

Crapo too has opposed the protection of the Snake River. One reason for the change may be Crapo’s desire to advance his “Owyhee Initiative” in Idaho, which would designae a number of canyon areas as Wilderness and give preferments and advantages to Owyhee area ranchers. Both the Snake River Bill and the Owyhee Initiative are expected to be in a massive omnibus public land bill to be taken up in the likely “lame duck” session of Congress after the Nov. 4 election.

Story in the Jackson Hole News and Guide. Idaho Senators Now Support Snake River bill. By Noah Brenner

Posted in politics, public lands, wilderness roadless. Tags: , , , , . Comments Off on Turnabout: Idaho senators support Snake River protection bill

Idaho conservation politics: Minnick and Sali disagree on climate change

Representative Sali says no human caused climate change-

Democrat Walt Minnick is challenging one-term Republican U.S. Representative in Idaho’s first congressional district. Polls show the race to be close.

Rocky Barker has a report this morning on a clear difference (there are many differences, but this applies to the topics commonly discussed on this forum).

Minnick and Sali disagree on climate change. By Rocky Barker. Idaho Statesman.

Years earlier Minnick won some fame and notoriety in Idaho when as CEO of a timber-related company, he argued that it was not necessary for the timber industry to be awarded “below-cost” timber sales on public lands from the taxpayers in order to make a profit.