Rex Rammell Says Decision To Run Bigger Than Idaho Elk Problems

By Tom Remington

In a telephone conversation I had today with Dr. Rex Rammell of Idaho, he said that his decision to run for the U.S. Senate was bigger than last year’s elk problems and was in no way a grudge match with former Idaho governor Jim Risch.

Dr. Rammell, former owner of the Chief Joseph ranch near Rexburg, Idaho, has decided to run for the U.S. Senate. A seat that could become vacated by the current Senator Larry Craig. Craig promises to make an announcement by the end of this summer.

Last summer, elk from Rammell’s ranch escaped that led to a series of events that bordered on the absurd and left most of us scratching our heads and asking questions. The governor at that time was Jim Risch. He ordered Rammell’s elk to be shot on site, stating fears of the spread of disease and the dumbing down of elk genes. All claims were unfounded.

In the process, Rammell lost several of his elk to slaughter. He had two charges filed against him. One was an obstruction charge for when he sat on one of his dead elk Idaho Fish and Game had shot and refused to move. The other was a charge of assault, which was later reduced to battery and subsequently dismissed as was the first charge of obstruction.

Rammell has file a million-dollar plus lawsuit against the state of Idaho and Jim Risch for the loss of his property. That lawsuit is still pending and Rammell said his lawyer was deciding how to proceed.

What makes Rammell’s decision to run for federal office interesting, is the fact that Jim Risch expressed that he is interested in vying for the same seat if vacated by Craig. Both Rammell and Risch are registered republicans and should both decide to run, they would face each other in a primary vote next May.

During today’s conversation, I asked Dr. Rammell if his decision to run was prompted by a grudge match between the two of them. He told me that he didn’t even know that Risch was interested in running for the same seat until after he had made his announcement to run.

Rammell faces the challenge of being the underdog but he doesn’t look at it that way. He sincerely believes that if he can get the voters of Idaho to look beyond last year’s elk issues and focus on issues that are important, he can win the election.

I asked Dr. Rammell if he thought he could lose the label of “bad actor” or “bad boy” the press, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the Department of Agriculture and even some members of the Idaho Elk Breeders Association that he was a member of, had put on him.

His answer was an interesting one. “I’ll gladly accept that label as a bad boy so long as people know I’m a bad boy when it comes to big government, excessive taxes and out of control spending.” Rammell went on to explain that he was sure that in the day, people thought George Washington was a bad boy.

Although Rammell and Risch are both republicans, he eagerly awaits debate on the issues saying that once people get beyond the elk issue and look at how the two candidates stack up on key issues, they will find big differences. Differences that Rammell bets his victory on. “Once people see where I stand compared to where Jim Risch stands, I believe I can win,” he said.

On other issues, I talked with Dr. Rammell about the Endangered Species Act. I asked him if he thought it was time to challenge the constitutionality of the ESA in the courts. His answer may surprise some. He said that he was not opposed to the Endangered Species Act. He believes that there needs to be some form of legislation in place that will protect species from extinction. The problem, he says, is that use of the ESA has gone too far. It is being used for environmental purposes not associated with protecting a species.

In relation to the ESA, Rammell said that wolves are not an endangered species. They weren’t when they were reintroduced into the Yellowstone area, which he says was a mistake. “There are and were plenty of wolves in Canada. The species was not in any danger,” he said.

Rammell is a strong supporter of the right of people to keep and bear arms. He said he would avidly fight for citizens to protect that right. When I asked him about whether citizens should be able to arm themselves for protection in state and national parks, he hedged. He said that although he believed that citizens should have the right to protection, he did believe that there are some places where guns were not appropriate. He cited some public buildings and said that probably most parks should not have guns in them. He said there has been some talk about banning guns from National Forests. He said he is dead set against that. The forests should be open to everyone for all purposes.

We then moved on to addressing overgrown game populations in National Parks. I used examples like the Rocky Mountain National Park and Theodore Roosevelt National Park as examples of elk populations being too large and in need of being culled.

When I asked him about proposals by park officials to spend millions of tax payer dollars to hire sharpshooters, when hunters would be willing to pay a fee and do the job saving millions, this is how he responded.

“I’m not sure I would use hunters this way. I am a hunter and have hunted since boyhood. I support hunting and believe in providing as many opportunities as we can. I would support capturing any excess elk or other species and transporting them to places where hunters can have equal opportunities to harvest them.”

Dr. Rammell wanted to make a statement addressed to hunters and outdoor sportsmen. He said he fully supports the right of people to hunt and would fight hard for every sportsmen. To clarify he shared something that surprised me. He told me that he began his elk ranch as a capital venture and part of that was to offer hunts for people interested in this kind of hunt. He said there are people who can’t go through the rigors of hiking through rough terrain to elk hunt but he knew there was a clientèle for his business. What he did say that surprised me was that he would not choose to hunt on a ranch like he operated but would not oppose someone who did.

If elected, Rammell promised readers that he would viciously fight for their right to hunt and have access to the mountains and forest for that. He would also fight in the same manner to protect the right of hunters to keep and bear arms.

Tom Remington