Delisting Could Be Elusive
New Wolf Plan May Be Dead On Delivery
By Brodie Farquhar, 12-24-06
 | |
|
Casper Star Tribune's Whitney Royster has a trio of stories about the new wolf plan proposed by the feds:
Feds explain shift on wolf plan;
New wolf plan a "deal breaker" for ag and
Montana, Idaho keep "eye on the prize."
What seems to be going on, is that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, under pressure from the Bush administration, has tweaked the boundaries of how wolves are treated in Wyoming: left alone in the national parks and contiguous wilderness areas; trophy animals whose hunting is governed by Wyoming Game & Fish (expanded out to Cody and Meeteesee); and predator status through the rest of the state, meaning wolves can be shot, poisoned or trapped by anyone, anywhere, anytime.
The ag community, according to Jim Magagna of the Wyoming Stock Growers, doesn't like the proposed deal because it would expose ranchers close to the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem to predation pressure from grizzlies AND wolves.
The conservation community isn't thrilled by the plan, because they haven't been invited to the table and because too many wolves would be exposed to predator-control efforts that could easily drop the number of wolves below recovery levels. Wolves follow migrating elk herds each winter, and those migrations would expose too many wolves to predator-control efforts, say conservationists.
Wisely, the Casper Star Tribune editorial board (I don't agree with everything they say) has recommended that all interested parties be at the table on wolf issues. Alarmingly, the CST board notes that Rep. Pat Childers, R-Cody has urged USFW slap some duct-tape over the mouth of wolf expert Ed Bangs.
I'm not sure this is going to change anything. Wolf recovery in Wyoming is going to be so problematic, even under this tweaked plan, that it is a lead-pipe cinch that the issue will wind up in federal court, where the odds are better than even that the fed/Wyoming plan will lose. Meanwhile, wolf numbers continue to grow, which will make state control efforts of the wolf population ever more difficult and expensive.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
My concern is that FWS is getting concerned about the amount of money that is being spent on this project, and they want to shift the cost from 300 million taxpayers in the US to the half million people living in the state of Wyoming. That way Bangs and all of the "researchers" can keep their jobs and research grants for such stuff as global warming causing the wolves to kill bull elk, and they have no responsibility for the outcome.
This is all spin by environmentalists who had no intention whatsoever of honoring their word of 300 wolves. 3000 won't be enough for them. There are already over 5000 between the Rockies and Great Lakes as it is.
Just like the statement about all of the "illegal killing", this is meant to increase funds for environmental organizations that are going to "save the wolf". If there were illegal killings, how did the numbers explode so rapidly and so much beyond what the "experts" predicted?
Believe it or not, we in this state did far more to maintain wilderness than all of the do-gooders who are raking in millions of taxpayer dollars to try to force others to sacrifice their living and well being for the greedy people who are entertained by watching a wolf eat an animal while it is still living.
Do yuo have any idea of the total cost for maintaining a wolf? Would you be willing to pay it yourself?