News Brief
Feds Delist Wolves in Idaho, Montana
By Courtney Lowery, 1-14-09
 |
|
 | |
| Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks photo. | |
|
The gray wolf in Montana and Idaho is once again on its way off the endangered species list, but wolves in Wyoming will stay, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced today.
Wolves in the Great Lakes are also taken off the list. Deputy Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett said in a release: “Wolves have recovered in the Great Lakes and the northern Rocky Mountains because of the hard work, cooperation and flexibility shown by States, tribes, conservation groups, federal agencies and citizens of both regions. We can all be proud of our various roles in saving this icon of the American wilderness.”
The delisting will go into effect 30 days after the rules published in the Federal Register—which should be in the next two weeks.
The Rocky Mountain gray wolf was delisted in February of last year, but lawsuits filed this summer forced it back on the list, then off, then finally, the wolves were ordered to be relisted in October.
The agency has already approved state management plans in Montana and Idaho, but not in Wyoming, so the wolves there will remain in the list. According to the release: “… gray wolves found within the borders of Wyoming will continue to be protected by the Act due to a lack of adequate regulatory mechanisms ensuring their protection under state law.”
Montana and Idaho’s plans call for keeping the populations at than 15 breeding pairs and 150 wolves in each state with a target population at 400 animals in Montana and 500 in Idaho. The agency estimates that right now, there are 100 breeding pairs and 1,500 wolves in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming.
Montana Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg praised the move, saying in a statement today, “Montanans who have eagerly awaited the return of wolf management authority to the state had been dealt another blow when a lawsuit by a group with an extreme agenda obstructed the decision to delist the wolf. As a rancher, I have seen first-hand the impact that the inflexible, federal management of wolves can have on our state’s livestock producers. I am pleased by this decision to recognize the success of the wolf population recovery in Montana and look forward to working with Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks as they take over management.”
The Montana Stockgrower’s Association, which had supported the FWS and the state in the lawsuits this summer, released this statement from president Tom Hougen: “While it is unfortunate that Wyoming is not included is this delisting decision, Montana can now take an active role in managing wolves across the entire state in an effort to reduce the troubling increase in livestock depredations currently plaguing our industry.”
But Defenders of Wildlife called the move, characterized the move as “a last-ditch effort by the Bush administration to undermine environmental protections” and its president, Rodger Schlickeisen said this:
“This blatantly political maneuver is hardly surprising. The Bush administration has been trying to strip Endangered Species Act protections from the Northern Rockies wolf since the day it took office – no matter the dire consequences of prematurely delisting wolves prematurely and without adequate state protections in place. The Bush administration is forcing the future of wolves in the region to play out in the courts by finalizing a delisting rule in its last hours in office. We intend to challenge this poorly constructed decision in court as soon as the law allows. It is outrageous that the Bush administration has chosen to create this unnecessary legal problem for the new Obama administration to deal with as it takes office.”
And indeed, Rowan Gould, acting director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, tells the Associated Press’ Matthew Brown that the President-elect’s administration may reverse the decision. Also from Brown’s story: “Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said the matter would be reviewed but offered no other details.. Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said the matter would be reviewed but offered no other details.”
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
This is just a last-minute gift from Bush to his conservative cronies--no relation to the real issue of adequate breeding pairs of wolves.
Under Obama we will have real wildlife science used for policy decisions (as it should be), instead of ex-lobbyists for the timber and ranching industry calling the shots.
President Obama will reverse this delisting decision within a month of his inauguration.
Yes we can!
-Jon Cheever
The Big Three auto makers will be saved no matter the affiliation of the President. Bush would save them to save managers, owners, and stock holders. Obama will save them for the union jobs of the labor force, pension fund stockholders, and rust belt jobs because of their electoral votes as high populated states.
I have no idea how we can have any modicum of success as a nation if we are governed by the extremes of either side, with the rules changing every 4 or 8 years with regime change. We have no working resource policy in this country because one side is seen as exploiters, and the other side sues to block any and all actions and activity because the visualize themselves as saviors. This one foot in an ice bucket and the other in the fire, being the right answer because the temperature average is perfect, does not bode well for governance.
The old Russian saying along the lines of "I don't hate the wolf. I hate that he eats my mare." is the crux of the whole deal. Nobody in Bozeman has a wolf eating their mare. But people living at the edge of public land do have mares eaten. They, too, don't hate the wolf. They hate a government that lets the wolf eat their mare, and then they have to produce the evidence, make the calls, drive the drives, all at personal expense, to gain some sort of compensation for their not being able to protect their livestock in a reasonable and usual way. Few hate wolves. But this is a country of people and laws and representative government, and if that government becomes enforcer of the tyranny of a disconnected, urban majority, then we become less than what we claim to be.
Wasted words. Let the lawsuits begin. The environmental stimulus package: lawyers getting paid by the tattered remains of the foundations and trust funds until they can collect from the taxpayers, as is their desire. s.o.s. a. d.
Defender's of Wildlife is doing some good work retiring grazing allotments. I wish they would focus on that instead of opposing every effort to recognize that wolves are a recovered species.
But I'm afraid he isn't. This is a real test for Obama. It's very symbolic. I don't think he understands the West, and doesn't realize how the cattle establishment grinds our faces in the muck.
Remember in early December, FWS put out a statement that they would have a plan submitted early enough in December for the plan to be in the National Register before December 20, that it had to be on for 30 days before January 20 to take effect? I don't think 6 days will cut it. Obama can toss it Tuesday afternoon if he wishes...it may never even get put on the register. If it does it is only to allow enviro groups to file lawsutis for the "expense" awards.
FWS didn't want them delisted, they sell too many books, get too many research grants, etc to actually try to delist the wolves. I don't believe their "new" plan even addressed the genetic exchange issue, and that was the biggy in the last suit. This is a farce.
The genetic exchange issue was why the recent court case against delisting was successful. USFWS forgot to cross that t. In their original recovery plans, they said genetic exchange was necessary for the wolf population's long term survival. Despite later science to the contrary (i.e. Isle Royale) and testimony to that effect from scientists involved in the reintroduction, USFWS either needed to demonstrate that genetic exchange was occuring or change that portion of their recovery plan. Judge Molloy ruled that Wyoming's management in particular would prevent genetic exchange from occuring, so the feds are hoping it'll stick just for Montana and Idaho.
Every wolf needs a gps and collar and chip in its head. Only then can the law be obeyed. I have collars for my dogs, and when they are bad, knowingly and by choice, they meet Thomas Alva Edison momentarily. Once or twice, and all you have to do is tone them, give them the electronic audible warning, and they comply with vigor. With gps shock collars, you can keep track of the wolves, who they are hanging with, what they are doing, and remind them to be good, wild wolves (sure), and if they are going to be too close to a wolf they should not breed, you just give them a few volts and discourage the relationship. Too bad we can't do that with teenage daughters and sons, as well. It is the way we are societally heading, and the left certainly wants to keep people from having any freedom to live without Mother Government approving of every action they might make or take. Wolf management is no more than an example of future human controls by the very same thoughtful forward thinkers.
My observation is that having a US District Court judge as the arbiter of science, the man or woman making scientific decisions, having all the skills needed to manage wildlife, is a frigging joke and travesty. That person has to determine if the law has been followed. No more or no less. The ins and outs of genetic diversity, and how it happens, should best be left to science, and not be a basis for eternal litigation by obfuscation experts judge shopping for favoritism.
I just am amazed at the direction of Congress. All the Democrats ran against Bush the Warmonger, and we have heard not a word about war so far. The entire emphasis of the Congress is global warming, ESA, Wilderness, solar dildos, absolute lefty social crap. Holy shit, the economy is shedding jobs like a mangy wolf sheds hair, 30,000 announced today as Circuit City goes Chapt 7., Bank of America is teetering, Toyota losing money, the retail end of America going down in flames, record cold is using energy at huge rates, endowments for universities are deflating like Madoff balloons, and wolf delisting is the major problem in the USA? No wonder the economy is a mess, the wars not won. The whole of the majority has their heads up their collective keisters, and it has taken only weeks to prove they are liars, phonies, and just another crop of self serving wind bags out to make names and fortunes for themselves.
On the political page of my local newspaper, today, are three stories about Oregon's Democrat Governor Taxngougeme suing the Feds. One because he doesn't like a BLM timber management plan because they cut trees; two is over the FERC approval of siting an offloading dock on the lower Columbia River for LNG (evidently he doesn't want a fossil fuel anything built); and three, he is joining a lawsuit against the Feds over the ESA and its administrative changes. Not one action to bring a new job, stop a fiscal leak, drive the process forward to restart the economy, help more kids get a better education. Ranted against the Bush government, ranted against Republicans, railed against job losses, banking losses, poor educational showing, and then spends his time and energy suing the Feds over things environmental. The left does not have their eye on the ball. It will be a short term rule if they don't find a way to focus on the economy.
The left is acting like a bunch of school yard bullies that just found out the principal is out of town for the week.
They don't seem to care about priorities, just that they get to push people around.
FWS has not the slightest intention of delisting wolves. One part of their rule, not released here is the fact they intend to haul more wolves into the southwest.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Mexican_Gray_Wolf_011409.html
I think they have written every book possible about wolves here, except of course the impact on elk and moose, and that is unimportant. I wonder if Doug Smith is still doing his research into why the wolves were killing so many bull elk, how many years that research was to run and how much money was involved.
It's not about wolves. It's about continued domination by the cattle industry and poverty for the rest of us.
By your thinking a thief desrves special compensation for putting up with anyone who resists his stealing.
You're one talk about stealing, Marion.
Yeah.
About as far right as one can get and remain uncommitted.
These sentamental liberals think they are saving the wolf by stopping hunting, and nothing could be further from the truth. Hunting with a great deal of regulating has never deciamated andy hunted spiecies for the hunters are great conservationist.
But we hunters are compleatley fed up on this wolf thing. Every persson I have talked to say that will -olf they see. It will only work if we let it.
You're not paying attention, Kyle. Go back and read Skinner's post.
CONTROL.
Wolves, guns, Joe the plumber, Sarah Palin, whatever they can use to work the liberal masses into an emotional lather.
If micro managing wolves is to be the bailiwick and emphasis of Congress, we are in for a long, hard recession. Add to that the lefty desire to redistribute wealth, tilt the climate change windmill, and find a way to provide adequate health care to a nation whose major health problems are eating more calories than they expend, using carcinogens for personal stimulus or depression, the almost universal shunning of physical exercise, and the vagaries of genetic predisposition to some diseases, is costly and unrealistic. There is a law of diminishing returns, and medicine needs to recognize and understand that, and pass that on to politicians. As it now stands, half the lifetime medical expenses for the average person accrue in the last six months of their lives. Why not not pay for care, and give them the money to do with what ever they want. Now there is a stimulus package.
That we even have the time, money, and government to be concerned about the number, genetic diversity, health, and generational succession of wolves is a glaring portrait of a country with more wealth than sense. That those people have elected our new leadership might lead some to wonder if we will survive, let alone the wolves.
God help us all.
Concern for our environment clearly must be subverted to our Box Store bimbettes' consumerism; and/or the pandering required by our livestock subsidists...
What I am saying is the streets run in two directions, and the Wolf issue is not black and white nor cut and dried. But I do totally resent the incendiary remarks that cast wide scorching aspersions on " envronmentalists" and " greenies" without also turning the flames on hunters and ranchers who are not willing to cede any ground and work towards a consensus solution set instead of heaving their verbal Molotovs at the slightest provocation.
If I saw a perrenial offensive large dog near my animals or my neighbor's horses, He would be dead. But then we have a leash law in our community, so I would be legally within my rights.
Tom: just how would you suggest someone shoot safely at a dog attacking a horse in the city limits surrounded by buildings in a neighborhood and business district alongside a busy through street? Besides the fact that it would be illegal ( discharging firearm in city limits). The dog killed the horse in a triangle bounded by a middle school , an elementary school , and a Holiday Inn just two blocks east of Cody's central business district. And even though it was witnessed by several people, including the 19 year old owner of the 4 year old Pit Bull-Shephard cross, the entire incident was over in a matter of moments. It is entirely up to the municipal judge to decide the fate of the dog , who has a long rap sheet. My bet is he will order the dog destroyed and restitution paid for the horse, which was purchased a few years ago for $ 1800.
The wolf benefit is pure entertainment for a few.
But you on the other hand seem to think that a lone wolf attack on a rancher somewhere in the hinterlands who loses a cow is somehow an attack on every rancher everywhere in the West simultaneously and a threat to the entire industry collectively . And further that all environmentalists and all of your so-called " greenies" need to be treated as a single giant leper colony without respect to individuals worth , actions, or record. You condemn them all with one smear of the broad tar brush
And what I am really waiting to hear from you and the rancher community is that they are willing to show some progress and new thinking and new policy , instead of trying to eke out a living using 19th century methods that didn't work very well then and were wasteful of resources, and they certainly do not work well now two centuries down the road. Ranchers refuse to change, but they stubbornly want to set policy for all of us. And hold us back. But we have moved on . Really . It's well past the time they catch up to modern times , or get out of the business. Hanging on to a mythology or a long withered heritage of faux economics is not very sensible.
By the way , under today's rules, ranchers seem to get more than adequately compensated coming and going for their wolf losses...like getting paid for seven calves when only one was killed ? And the " free" services of Wildlife Services and other wildlife agencies to hunt down and eradicate problem wolves. Frankly , I am sick and tired of paying rranchers for every little speed bump and minor distress they put in a claim for , or get a healthy subsidy for, because nobody subsidizes me in my profession. It's time we all were at the mercy of the so-called Free Market on a level field. I'm willing to bet the livestock producers of Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho wouldn't last three years if you neutralized their incentives, subsidies, and privilege offsets and instead made them pay for all their materials and resources out of their own pockets instead of the public dole.
I bet you are one of those who insist the elk in Yellowstoen are just hiding in the trees instead of being disguised as wolf poop.
your last ''response" is well below the threshhold of qualifying for a dignified response. And please don't do my thinking for me . Thank you.
My question is: do carnivores with a sweet tooth like diabetics more so than other prey?
New reports just announced that President Obama is putting a hold on the wolf delisting. As expected, the last minute attack on endangered species by Bush will be reversed.
It's going to be great having intelligent adults in charge of our government for a change.
-Jon Cheever
=================================
Feds rescind rule dropping wolves as 'endangered'
Seattle Times
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
With a new administration in charge, federal regulators Wednesday promised a second look at a recent decision to drop gray wolves in the Great Lakes and Northern Rocky Mountains from the endangered list.
The Interior Department said it was withdrawing at least temporarily a rule announced last week changing the wolf's status in both regions. The rule never formally took effect.
It was among many regulatory changes the Bush administration pushed through in its final days. President Barack Obama ordered a review of those 11th-hour measures after taking office Tuesday.
Opponents said they hoped Obama's Interior Department would retain the endangered classification for wolves in the Northern Rockies, where the population numbers about 1,500.
That region's wolf segment includes all of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, the eastern one-third of Washington and Oregon, and a small part of north-central Utah.
"Wolves are a success story in the region but their numbers simply haven't reached a level yet where they can be said to have recovered," said Andrew Wetzler, endangered species coordinator for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Some advocates see in the review an opportunity to expand the wolf's modern-day range.
The predators historically were found across most of the United States. Vast swaths of public land in Colorado, California, Utah, Oregon and other states could support wolves if given the chance, said Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity.
"We're not looking to restore wolves to every bit of land where wolves once set foot," he said, "but certainly we have to look at the public lands at a minimum as potential wolf recovery areas."
Right-wingers, take note: We moderates are actually trying to talk some sense and effect some kind of compromise. Continue to lambast us and dismiss as "greenies" and you contribute to the perpetuation of the extremist views which polarize our country and render all progress unattainable.
Fact is, ranchers are a bunch of selfish, anachronistic whiners and wolf-lovers are a bunch of quixotic hippie freaks. Delist the wolves, manage them properly, hunt them, AND protect them. In short, ensure their success as a viable member of the ecosystem. That is the only way to restore them to a permanent part of the landscape, which they have as much of a right to inhabit as we do. If we lose a few cattle, so be it. If we have to kill a few wolves, so be it. This is called compromising and it's something all you extremists seem utterly incapable of doing!
new to the forums, and i'm glad to meet everyone!
I'm sorry, people, but I can't help myself! You're just too darn easy to mess with when you're that far to one side.
I object to your dig at Los Angeles plumbers. I was raised in a Los Angeles plumbing family--my dad was a Los Angeles plumber, my granddad was a Los Angeles plumber, and my great granddad was a Los Angeles plumber. That's right--four generations of Los Angeles plumbers.
Plumbers, particularly Los Angeles plumbers, are sensitive to the ongoing battle between Montana ranchers and wolves. From our plumbing perspective we think that wolves and ranchers can coexist. It's similar to plumbers in different unions competing for the same customers--it's better if we cooperate instead of attacking each other. Then everyone wins.
Please, Marius--you can learn a lot about wolf/rancher coexistence from our experience as Los Angeles plumbers. Slandering our profession and experience is uncalled for.
-Jon "the plumber" Cheever
I was only trying to make a difference between those who leave in a city and those spending their everyday life in the middle of the nature.
Thank you for your objection and your arguments!
- Marius
Theres a site covering all the information about the hunting seasons that will be opened up this year:
http://huntwolves.com
Sign me up!