I recently read ("Bighorn sheep wrangled, transported to new home," Jan. 8) that the state has the money for such a complicated and expensive operation as moving bighorn sheep from Antelope Island to central Utah because Phil Douglas, a manager for the Division of Wildlife Resources, "just felt that there was suitable habitat in that area."
Really? The Utah DWR just felt it would be really cool to start another herd of sheep in another part of the state, so consider it done? Even though the annals of wildlife management are fraught with stories of failed animal relocation? Is it possible that our Legislature, drunk upon the fumes of surplus money, has given the DWR more money than it knows what to do with?
Seeing a bighorn sheep in person is not first on my bucket list, but it warms my heart to know that our state has money to satisfy each nutty wish on its own bucket list. Or, to mention just one really crazy idea, they could return surplus money to the taxpayers. I wonder if any of our legislators even care about this state of affairs?
- Join the discussion: Is feminism misunderstood?
- Dan Liljenquist: The economic impact of...
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the...
- In our opinion: Federal contracting executive...
- My view: Utah's Constitution requires state...
- Perceptions of Obama and his policies at home...
- Capitalism and the common good: Fairness,...
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'?
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 114
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 79
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 51
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'? 47
- Join the discussion: Is feminism... 38
- Capitalism and the common good:... 37
- My view: A global warming solution to... 36
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the... 36