Weekly Poll

Should Wyoming bring its wolf plan in line with surrounding states?
 

Weather

Today's Front Page

Advertisement

Sports

Advertisement

Family

Advertisement

Business Directory

Advertisement
Advertisement

Home
Wolf delisting draws mixed response Print E-mail
Written by Gib Mathers    Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Friday’s decision by the Secretary of the Interior to uphold the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to remove gray wolves from the Endangered Species List in Montana, Idaho and the western Great Lakes region, but not Wyoming, has garnered mixed reactions from politicians and conservation groups.

In Wyoming, wolves will remain under federal protection, because Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Wyoming’s management plan is not adequate.

Wyoming did not demonstrate to the Fish and Wildlife Service that it could adequately manage wolf populations, said Yellowstone Wolf Project leader Doug Smith.

Until the state can demonstrate that it can maintain the wolf population, Smith said wolves will remain under federal protection in Wyoming.

One Wyoming Legislature bill would have eliminated the predator zone in which wolves could be shot on sight.

But that bill was killed.

“I think they shot themselves in the foot by doing that,” Smith said.

“If Wyoming had eliminated the predator zone, I think the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would have included Wyoming in (Friday’s) delisting proposal,” said Melanie Stein, Sierra Club associate regional representative in Jackson.

“We believe that Wyoming’s wolf management plan is overly aggressive and will not sustain wolf populations in the future,” Stein said.

“Wyoming exceeded by leaps and bounds the number of wolves in the original recovery goals,” said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., in a prepared statement. “It’s time to let the states, all the states, have their shot at managing the wolves.”

“Wyoming’s wolf management plan was rebuked by a federal judge last year, yet the state continues to tout it as a viable option. Today’s news sends a clear message to Wyoming that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service doesn’t think Wyoming’s wolf management plan goes far enough to protect wolves,” Stein said.

The Wyoming Legislature adjourned Thursday, so there is not a whole lot Wyoming lawmakers can do at this point, said House Speaker Colin Simpson, R-Cody.

The Wyoming Attorney General said Wyoming’s dual status is legally defensable because science said it would work, Simpson said.

Wyoming litigation with the federal government could be around the corner.

“I would think the state will file suit,” Simpson said.

Same old, same old, said Gov. Dave Freudenthal.  

“Unfortunately, the Obama administration adopted the exact same approach as the Bush administration,”

Freudenthal said in a prepared statement. “We are evaluating our options going forward. The more things change, the more they stay the same.”

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo. had a similar reaction.

“Delisting the wolf in Montana and Idaho, but not Wyoming, simply does not make sense. Wolves don’t check for state boundaries,” said Barrasso in a prepared statement. “(Friday’s) announcement makes clear that ‘change’ has not come to Washington. Wyoming has honored its commitments to recover the wolf. It’s time Washington did the same.”

Conservation groups say plan is flawed

Although the Sierra Club wants states to manage wolves, Stein said she believes current state wolf management plans will reduce the population.

“But we only want state management when we have a connected Northern Rockies wolf population that is sustainable over the long-term,” Stein said.

“The Interior Department’s decision to let stand a flawed wolf delisting proposal conceived by the Bush administration fails to ensure thriving wolf populations in the Northern Rockies and should be challenged in court,” said a prepared statement by the Greater Yellowstone Coalition in Bozeman, Mont.

Comments
Add New
CBear (68.167.253.xxx) 2009-03-10 13:13:56

The contemplated delisting proposal which Stein wrongly attributes to the Bush
Administration was in fact contemplated when the wolves were reintroduced during
the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. Unfortunately, wolf advocate groups like to distort
truth and muddle things up, un furtherance of getting more wolves than was
agreed with the states.
Author: Grizzly Wars: The Public Fight Over the Gr
David Knibb (4.243.37.xxx) 2009-03-16 13:02:09

Last week's decision by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to affirm the delisting
of wolves raises a question that goes beyond wolves, and specifically to grizzly
bears.
Both involve a disputed reading of the Endangered Species Act about
whether the US Fish and Wildlife Service has authority to delist parts of a
population that has been listed as endangered or threatened throughout its
range. The federal government started doing this during the Bush
administration.
At least three federal courts have ruled that the Fish and
Wildlife Service lacks this authority to make partial delistings. Yet this is
exactly what the federal government has done in the case of wolves by delisting
only the populations in the western Great Lakes and part of the Northern
Rockies. It also did this with grizzly bears, which it only delisted in
Yellowstone.
This is more than a dispute about legislative language.
Environmentalists contend that partial delistings, which draw a line around the
healthy parts of a population and declare victory, actually leave the rest of a
population even more imperiled. How much harder, for example, will it be for
wolves to disperse from their core range in the Northern Rockies into Oregon or
Washington when they now can be legally shot in Idaho?
Secretary
Salazar's announcement on wolf delisting doesn't mention this issue, and I'm not
sure that he's fully aware of it. But I predict it will keep coming up, probably
as early as in the lawsuits that will challenge his decision
David Knibb,
Author: Grizzly Wars: The Public Fight Over the Great Bear
Write comment
Name:
Email:
 
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."

 
< Prev   Next >
© 2010 Powell Tribune
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.