How much would you give up to save wild horses?
 

Please, for once, answer a poll truthfully.

You big talkers on the environment, put your money where your mouth is. This is the choice ranchers and farmers and fishermen face. I'm honest. If the Wyoming ranchers came and gave me a case sure to generate a seven figure fee to go after the wild horses, it'd be martini time.

Watch. All the people who have been ganging up on poke will be too scared to vote in this poll. I predict poke will be too gracious to vote in it.

I employ someone to come over to my house and vote in CG polls. She comes over about 4-5 times a week and votes for me.

You will have to wait until tomorrow for her to vote on my behalf. Sorry.

This is a ridiculous poll. It's not about the mustangs, but the cattle and the truly endangered species.

Based on our conversation about the wolf, the question should be: If you were a rancher, how likely would you tolerate a loss of a cow once every two years, for which you'd be compensated, in order to allow the wolf to return from the brink?

To the extent ranchers aren't being fully compensated for their losses, that should be fixed.

The best question would be: How much would you be willing to contribute to a fund to compensate ranchers for cattle losses from wolves?

And this poll is irrelevant to the agreement we reached earlier: it's not about the money at all. It's about federal control of what they view as a local issue.

Levin responded with Levity. If he truly wants to ruin himself financially, he should do so immediately.

Of course I did; this is a ridiculous poll that proves nothing.

I'd be willing to donate a few hundred bucks to the wolf compensation fund. And just b/c I'm not willing to ruin myself financially for the wolf does not mean I'm a hypocrite or lack empathy for the ranchers. I think the ranchers should be fully compensated, but I don't think I alone should have to do it. As of now, the wolf compensation fund is well funded, but it sounds like they need to up the payment to ranchers (although they try to pay market rate, it appears). So SU's whole point with this poll is ridiculous and self-serving.

The real question is whether I'd tolerate some sparse cattle loss for the sake of the wolf if I were a rancher. The answer is absolutely I KNOW I WOULD.

SU? Self-serving? Bite your tongue!

So vote that you'd pay $10,000 a year. You'd be lying, but go ahead.

In many cases it's financial ruin they face.

I'm sure you would too, but if you were a rancher your definiton of sparse would be pretty damn different than the one you have now, and I KNOW THAT IS TRUE.