Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar is facing a battle from wildlife conservationists, who have filed a law suit to protect recently de-listed Northern Rockies gray wolves from facing certain slaughter in legally sanctioned hunts to begin this fall.
In March, 2009, Salazar upheld the recommendation of the discredited Bush-phase U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove gray wolves, living in the states of Idaho, Montana, and regions of Washington, Oregon, and Utah, from protection under the .jpg)
Endangered Species Act. The Secretary needed no further proof of recovery than the say-so of the FWS and jumped at the chance to remove gray wolves from protection, regardless of the alarm by wildlife organizations at the lack of management plans to sustain wolf populations after being stripped of ESA protection.
“The recovery of the gray wolf throughout significant portions of its historic range is one of the great success stories of the Endangered Species Act,” Salazar said in a March conference call from Washington, D.C.
But that “success story” will be short lived--if many government officials, landowners, and ranchers--have their way.
Idaho Governor, C.L. “Butch” Otter has bragged about wanting to get the first wolf hunting tag in the state so he can go out and kill a wolf. Otter said, “the fish and game population is really counting on a robust population of trophy animals to maintain that part of our economy.”
Suzann Stone, Northern Rockies representative for Defenders of Wildlife,said “nothing about this rule has changed since it was rejected and deemed unlawful in a federal court in July of 2008. It still fails to adequately address biological concerns about the lack of genetic exchange among wolf populations in the Northern Rockies and it still fails to address the concerns with the states’ wolf managemnt plans and regulations that undermine a sustainable wolf population by killing too many wolves.”
According to a statement by Frances Beinecke, President of the Natural Resources Defence Council, “this is the worst possible moment to tear away their ESA protection and sacrifice hundreds of these noble creatures to hunters. And that’s why 230 scientists have asked the Interior Department not to go down this path.”
Beineke emphasizes the reintroduction of wolves in the Northern Rockies, after they had been almost wiped out in the continental United States was “shaping up to be one of America’s greatest conservation success stories. But now it threatens to devolve into massacre.”
“Wolves are a fully recovered species that is thriving in Idaho. That’s a fact, and it is heartening to see that Secretary Salazar recognizes it,” said Governor Otter, who urged the delisting action when he met with Secretary Salazar earlier this year at the National Governors Association conference in Washington, DC.
Accordingly, there were extensive discussions on this issue with other members of Congress from the West, including Rep. John Salazar, a fellow "Blue Dog Democrat" and western Colorado cattle rancher. C.L. “Butch” Otter has supported the Salazars' position many times on issues relating to ranching and livestock.
As a Colorado rancher, landowner, and member of the Cattlemen’s Association, Secretary Salazar comes from the old school generation, where wolves are only seen as vicious animals that prey on live stock. They are not looked upon as an integral check-and-balance component of the natural world. We need a Secretary of Interior, who can make wildlife decisions based on science, not politics. That was a commitment made by President Obama, which does not translate into Ken Salazar’s premature and reckless de-listing of a species that will soon be targeted for a bloodbath.
What is the point of spending decades of time and millions of dollars to restore healthy populations of an endangered animal, only to have it decimated from thousands down to genetically unsustainable hundreds?
Would they do that to bald eagles or black-footed ferrets?
***
Defenders of Wildlife is represented in this litigation by Earthjustice, along with plaintiffs Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, The Humane Society of the United States, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Friends of the Clearwater, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands Project, Western Watersheds Project, Wildlands Project, and Hells Canyon Preservation Council.
Copyright Jean Williams 2009
.
Comments
I hate this. I've been researching this issue for my biology class all year, and it seems like in the beginning, wolves were respected and thrived all throughout the north-west. Then people started settling in states like Oregon, Wyoming, Idaho, etc. bring their sheep and cattle with them. Once wolves started doing what came naturally to them and attacking these stupid defenseless animals, they were hunted down and killed. In the years between 1883 and 1942 more than 100,000 gray wolves were killed in Montana. The Grey Wolf became non-existent in Oregon. We chased them away, into Canada. Finally, ~70 years later, we start to reintroduce wolves back in to the United States. And they thrive, they fall right back into the nitch that they were forced out of all those years ago. The elk populations are under control, as well as the deer populations...and now that they've done what we wanted them to do...we want to wipe them back out. This is disgusting. It's so stupid.
We should just leave them where they are and let them do what they will. And if that means killing a few more sheep or whatever, so be it. If the ranchers don't like it than they should move to some other state. Wolves belong in Oregon and the surrounding states, no matter what anyone says. I don't think there should be ANY legal hunting of wolves in ANY state yet. They haven't had enough time to really establish their population. If we gave them a few more years, then we might be able to give it more thought. But as of now, I don't think there should even be a discussion about it. Ranchers will just need to find another way to defend their livestock, there are many scare tactics that they could try.
Mercedes, you've painted just one side of the picture. Wolves are doing fine, their population has been large enough to downlist for several years. But people in Wyoming don't like having wolves torturing to death their livestock, wildlife and pets anymore than you would. The population is growing at 20% a year, there is a limit to its expansion.
The point is not that wolves have finally recovered. The point is, now that they have, it is going to be open season. Every male, female, and pup will have a target on their back!
The governor of Idaho is chomping at the bit to be the first to "bag a wolf". Every rancher is cleaning up their rifles, as they gleefully get ready for the big hunt. The attitude toward this necessary species has not changed in red-neck world. It won't be long before they will be on the brink again. Build up the population just to have the sport of wiping it out. Where is the responsible rational in that, Mr. Wyoming Wildlife Biologist?
It is part of most every wolf recovery management plan to compensate ranchers for any lose of livestock.
Yes..."Blue Dog Democrat" is code for "secretly a Republican.
Mercedes,
You sum up the issue very well. Don't listen to those who claim wolves "torture livestock." It is torture to place your livestock in areas where you know they make tempting targets. Moreover, Cattle and sheep grazing in the west provides no public benefit and depends on huge tax payer subsidies. You are right to say the ranchers need to find better ways to manage their livestock, not ask for more handouts and mindless killing.
The problem that most city dwellers do not realize the wolves are not staying in the wilderness - they have occupied all the available prime habitat and are moving into rural towns. We have had wolves in our town for the last 2 winters killing our pets. We get no compensation (not that money would ever replace a beloved companion animal!) We are not a ranching community, just very rural. I suppose until you have a wolf in your yard killing your dog in front of you, you will not know the true problem that many rural residents endure - as the news doesn't write our stories of depredation. Nope - the so called "news" is lazy, they would rather cite lies from DoW than do the actual research. Idaho's wolf management plan is online and easy to access, yet the same old lies are still repeated over and over in the media. I don't see anywhere in the State plan that calls for wolves to be wiped out. Genetic connectivity has been proved. Wolves belong in the wilderness - not in our towns!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!