Also, a discussion about wolf delisting
Here is an article that reasonably sums up where wolves are in the political landscape. Contrary to what I’ve read in other articles, it appears that Carter Niemeyer supports delisting only conditionally. He will likely be marginalized for it.
Niemeyer said that while he agrees wolves should be off the endangered species list, Simpson’s path to get there is inadvisable. “It sets a terrible precedent to delist them outside the normal delisting procedures,” he said. He worries that if the ESA is bypassed, slow and cumbersome as it may be, the results could open a Pandora’s box.
“Reasonable people need to prevail right now, otherwise we’re going to get a political fix that is going to be unacceptable.”
As debate rages, Wood River Valley sees less of predators.
By Ariel Hansen – Magic Valley Times-News
This mirrors my sentiment but I would add that I don’t think that the states or the USFWS have been negotiating in good faith. The states, particularly Idaho and Wyoming, and increasingly Montana, have a toxic view towards wolves. With the new draft legislation it appears that they don’t want to even consider managing wolves using science and rational thought. The legislatures seem to perpetuate every anti-wolf myth and made up tale that the anti side can come up with. The USFWS, despite contrary assertions by the extreme anti-wolf crowd, hasn’t budged from it’s stance that a sustainable wolf population only requires 10-15 breeding pairs per state even though those estimates were made at a time when understanding of wolves and population ecology was in its infancy. Now the science indicates that a much higher population is required.
While wolves are presently at levels where they could maintain a sustainable population and remain viable over the long term, the states have demonstrated that they will seek to at least drastically reduce their populations to the lowest numbers that they reach under their plans. But, as the draft legislation in Idaho and the U.S. Congress demonstrates, wolf foes are willing to go much farther. They seem to be comfortable with extermination of wolves all over again.
To support delisting under present conditions by wolf restoration supporters would be malpractice. There simply is not a rational or scientifically sound regulatory framework for wolf management in place right now despite the obvious path for constructing one. That is a requirement for delisting of any species and it just doesn’t exist right now.
The states and the USFWS refuse to take this path because of political expediency. The Department of Interior and the President have signaled their support for the easy way out which leaves wolves at risk of being beaten down to unsustainable levels once again because the radical anti-wolf agenda has perpetuated every possible myth they can.
Even the USFWS is cowering in their offices and their agents are standing down, leaving poached wolves uninvestigated across the three states. They don’t even have a wolf project leader in place.
Meanwhile, those who seek a rational way out of this mess are characterized as the radicals. Those who seek to uphold the law and simply ask that a rational, scientifically based management framework that values wolves as an integral and important species be established are characterized as extremists.
Don’t stand down. Ask for a more rationale plan to prevail. Contact your local and national representatives and tell them to support a rational plan and oppose the legislative efforts to delist wolves.