Budget bill pending before Congress would remove wolves from endangered list

Well, they’ve done it. They’ve reached an agreement to keep language in the upcoming budget bill which would delist wolves everywhere in the Northern Rockies except Wyoming. (Added to clarify what has happened)

While this process doesn’t immediately delist wolves, it cannot be challenged. It is unclear exactly what the language says but presumably wolves in the Northern Rockies will be delisted in all but Wyoming as previous wording has indicated. Previous language mandates the US Fish and Wildlife Service to republish the rule which delisted wolves in 2009. It does not preclude a petition to relist wolves if their populations become endangered again. The delisting rule still holds the states of Idaho and Montana to their management plans but it seems that, with the most recent “wolf disaster declaration” that they don’t intend to allow more than 100 wolves to persist in the state.

Also, the recent settlement agreement, as some have previously indicated, will likely provide political cover to the USFWS to accept Wyoming’s management plan with little or no changes. It seems that wolves are facing dark days ahead.

Here is the previous language, “SEC. 1709. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this division, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule published on April 2, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 15123 et seq.) without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule. Such re-issuance (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review.

Budget bill pending before Congress would remove wolves from endangered list.
Matthew Brown – Associated Press

To clarify, the language has not been passed yet.  It was not included in the short term budget agreement which funds the government for the next several days but, rather, will be included in the long term budget bill which is being written and will be posted for review for three days as House rules require.

162 Responses to “Budget bill pending before Congress would remove wolves from endangered list”

  1. JEFF E Says:

    Looks like Simpson will get a freezer full of steaks and roasts by the end of the week, along with a bucket of water to carry

  2. william huard Says:

    I predict there will be several Democratic Senators that will not allow this to happen. Call 202 224 3121 all week I know i will. President Obama 2024561111
    Focus on the 10 Democrats on the Environment and Natural Resources Committee

    • Immer Treue Says:

      William,
      Environment and Natural Resources Committee. Are you sure this is the committee name. Can’t seem to find it.

  3. william huard Says:

    And Montana should look for a new Dem candidate for Senate because Sluggo is history

    • Elk275 Says:

      There is not a Democratic candidate in the State of Montana that could defeat Dennis Rehberg for US senate in 2012. The latest polls show both Rehberg and Tester even with Tester having the power of the incumbency. I think that Tester will win but it will not be known until late Wednesday afternoon. If you dislike Tester wait until Rehberg is US Senator. The governor is waiting until 2014 when Baccus will likely retire.

      You may dislike Tester but Tester represents the State of Montana and the people of Montana and you are not a registered voter in the state. Let the people of the State of Montana decide who they want to represent them.

      • Elk275 Says:

        I should have said “alternate Democratic”

      • william huard Says:

        So Elk 275-
        You don’t have a problem with the language that will give no remedy or recourse to people that don’t think killing 800 wolves in Idaho ‘management”?

      • Savebears Says:

        Whether I agree or not, he is indeed our senator and there is no other Democrat in the state that will be able to un-seat him, I think Rehberg has a good chance of winning. The only recourse that those who do not live in Montana have is to call their senators. Believe me, if Rehberg wins, you won’t like the aftermath!

        Just because somebody says, let Montana choose their representative, does not mean agreement or disagreement, it simply means you have no say on who gets elected in Montana..

      • JimT Says:

        That’s fine, but it doesn’t mean we don’t work like hell to defeat his proposals in Congress. I assume you agree that is the right of all citizens…

  4. Cody Coyote Says:

    Fine. If throwing the Grey Wolf to the wolves are a part of the Budget deal, then so are federal grazing fees, Ag subsidies, the Wildlife Services budget, below cost timber sales, and about a hundred other things also precious to some Westerners.

    Quid pro quo may be in order.

  5. william huard Says:

    I have a better one. No riders or backroom deals. If it can’t be passed in both houses it doesn’t become law. People really hate these political manuvers. If Reid and Boxer let these riders pass there will be hell to pay

    • Salle Says:

      There already is hell to pay, only we’re the ones footing the bill and suffering all the pain as well.

  6. Salle Says:

    I guess the activists will have to intensify their efforts… perhaps shutting down public land grazing by the owners of the public lands or boycotting everything possible… as in stop feeding the beast. Personally, I am trying to figure out what I can do to thwart this dangerous precedent. What a bunch of absolutely insidious idiots.

    I think the curtain has been pulled all the way back now so that everyone can see the KochBros operating the controls of our governing bodies at all levels now.

    This is why free-market capitalism was never a good idea.

    I’m so pissed… I voted for Tester and now feel that he courted my vote only to stab me in the back with this atrocious disregard for the health of the environment of this state. I hope these fools suffer the worst of the environmental downfall first… when there are no more grazing for their goddamned cattle, among other things. At best they should all contract some horrific terminal disease that is brought on by the pollution they have promoted and promised to their constituents… at the behest of their corporate funders of course. the traitors.

    Isn’t this somehow defined as treasonous?

    I just finished a letter to Tester, what a clod. In fact, I accused him of being a republican masquerading as a democrat. It’s time for civil disobedience on a very large scale… it’s our duty to restore the nation to a more fair-minded country, including in the halls of government.

    • Savebears Says:

      Salle,

      I also campaigned and voted for Tester, because I was so against Burn’s, but I can’t say I am happy right now with most of the things he has done since taking office.

  7. Nancy Says:

    +Prohibits funds to pay the salaries and expenses of the following “czars,” or special presidential advisers who are not required to go through the Senate confirmation process: Obama Care Czar, Climate Change Czar, Global Warming Czar, Green Jobs Czar, Car Czar, Guantanamo Bay Closure Czar, Pay Czar and Fairness Doctrine Czar+

    What the heck is a Car Czar?

    • william huard Says:

      They forgot idiot son czar

    • Salle Says:

      The way the list of riders reads, one is left to wonder if this was all the brainchild of the sixth grade schoolyard bully. The “czar” references are specific to the repugnican contempt for Obama, period. this sort of language is the precursor of the “dumbing down” of the legislative process and the power of the people.

      I think I might actually prefer a government shutdown to this rack of draconian bile…

      I didn’t see Tester’s Sec. 1709 in there though. regardless, I am so disgusted with the Congress that I almost don’t care if his particular spewed bully-faction appeasement isn’t there, the rest is so bad that anyone, whose IQ registers as positive on a number line that is, who reads the list should be inspired to take some form of action.

  8. Nancy Says:

    Not sure why you’re having a problem SB. I’ve brought it up a couple of times.

    • Savebears Says:

      I was able to download and save on my computer, thanks Nancy..

    • Savebears Says:

      Are these the riders that are currently included in the budget bill or are they the ones originally attached and been negotiated on, I would imagine many of them have been dropped.?

      • Salle Says:

        Geeze, I hope some are dropped, and not replaced by other equally bad or worse, riders.

  9. william huard Says:

    How about that Education funding in Texas!!! I can understand why they wouldn’t want that one. These Repubs are dangerous to democracy

    • Salle Says:

      It’s not like they produce any ‘brainiacs”.

      • Salle Says:

        Actually, “produce” is the wrong term… I think “nurture” better suits the comment and the issue.

    • william huard Says:

      That rider must have been introduced by Gohmert Pile!!He should get a toupee with some brains in it. Maybe Steven pearce from NM could borrow it

  10. Salle Says:

    This applies to all the GOP handling of our freedoms and government by the people:

    http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/04/our-lives-are-under-threat-some-most-powerful-and-richest-entities-heres-how-we-can

    The Shock Doctrine is activated in the US and we the people are the only ones who can stop it.

    • Doryfun Says:

      Hey Salle,
      Thanks for that link. I really appreciate Namoi’s insights and articles. I’m also still wading though the Shock Doctrine, as I can only stomach so much of this kind of history at a sitting, so it is a slower process than othr types of reading.
      It is however, quite an eye opener, depressing as the realities are that it also presents. But, it only confirms my original lack of trust in our gov’t having reviewed much of the (alternative) history (not taught in school when I grew up, as the victor writes the history) of our govt’s treatment of native folks. (of course, despite most people thinking that is only ancient history, we still use legal briefs now istead of blankets and guns).

      Naomi basically points out we the common people are the next Indians, in line for the same kinds of treatments.

  11. JB Says:

    So the Republicans are going to hold the federal budget hostage and with each new continuing resolution cut more programs, while slowly eroding protections for the environment?

    Enough is enough. Shut the government down.

    • william huard Says:

      I agree. And as much as it pains me to say I think Obama is a puss

    • Salle Says:

      That’s what they want, but what else can be done to stop them at this juncture? I hope it comes back and bites them in the most sensitive places…

      • jburnham Says:

        In the long run we have stop electing politicians who oppose our agenda or at best offer lukewarm support. A ‘D’ next to the name is meaningless if they give in every time the right wing noise machine kicks into gear. Voting for the lesser of evils isn’t ever going to move the conservation agenda forward.

        The Dems in congress are AWOL when it comes to providing a counterpoint to the anti-ESA, anti-wolf positions of the right. How different would the situation be if there were a handful of representatives willing to take a stand? We need to stop voting Republican lite and start fielding candidates that represent us better.

    • william huard Says:

      What about this fragile recovery and all the lost jobs from the cuts?- then the republithugs would turn around and blame Obama for the economy. It’s like negotiating with terrorists

  12. Phil Says:

    As I have mentioned before, I am not a politician and do not have full understanding of the political world, but I have a couple questions.

    1) Can the budget bill be passed without passing the rider(s)?

    2) In regards to the “Wolf Disaster”, if this bill is for the purpose of law enforcements in killing wolves who are a threat to people, pets, livestock, etc, then who determines if the wolf (wolves) are problematic? What’s to say wolves would not be killed whether they are problematic or not? Isn’t this type of bill already in place for organizations like the WS?

    • Salle Says:

      Question 1. Nope, he signed it, it’s done.

      Question 2. If it’s a wolf, it’s a problem. The agencies are under the directive of the the gov..

      • Merdoch Says:

        Salle, it appears you are giving out wrong information in relation to question 1.

        The short term budget extension DOES NOT contain the anti-wolf provision. That is contained in the full budget for 2011 which has not yet been actually passed by either the Senate or House. (There is still a possibility of at least persuading Congress to improve the details of this provision to be more reasonable.)

      • Salle Says:

        Perhaps I have. I didn’t see it in the OMB Watch document but it does state that it is not comprehensive. All the same, is there much doubt that it will show up. time and again, until these power hungry sharks get their way?

        Sorry if I misinformed anyone but I was under the impression that these riders were attached to the CR with more – much worse – riders to the upcoming CRs/actual budget Bill.

        Whatever is in it, Obama signed the damned thing.

      • Salle Says:

        I have used over 120 minutes calling members of the Senate on this. For those who don’t represent my state, I tell them that one of the senators from my state sponsored/introduced this swill and I am asking them as defacto representatives – since they will be voting on this – to please consider opposing it. To the D’s I made an appeal to call Tester out on it, not just the rider aspect but because it is meant to kill the ESA. I do know that Gillibrand (NY) and Franken (MN) are certainly against it, or so I was told by their office lackeys.

        I think that we will have to go into overdrive with civil disobedience if this goes through. I have nothing left to loose, I lost it all during W’s first year as resident of the oval office. Learn to live without money/credit it gets less painful as time goes by and serves to help starve these bastards… If more people figured out that they have been conditioned to believe that they need more, better, newer… they will give up on working to have those things – junk – that are destroying our freedoms, ie, the corporatocracy.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Welcome to the club Salle! You are now confirmed certifiable😉

        It is obvious that we can’t continue to spend freely as we once were able to. W/ our manufacturing sector being outsourced at an astonishing rate, it’s clear that we are going to have much less tax revenue’s coming in to pay for the social programs AND the military industrial complex.

        Ask yourself, if I was the CEO of a company and had to compete in this new “global economy” would I continue operations in the US? If the answer is yes, well then you won’t be able to compete w/ companies that ship ops overseas and you will go bankrupt. Sorry, but the US is on a downward slide and the environment and wildlife will lose more and more relevance in national politcs…

        I’m not happy about it at all, but it’s just what is occuring and really nothing can be done about it until spending is curtailed greatly. The corporate tax rate needs to be reduced, employee pay and benefits need to be reduced, the military needs to be greatly reduced, etc…

      • MAD Says:

        Salle,
        It’s not necessarily over just because Otter signed it. Every State is required to have an Emergency Mgmt Plan that conforms to the Federal Homeland Security Act, NIMS (Nat. Incident Mgmt System and the National Response Plan. Solely by declaring that the wolves are creating a “Disaster” or and “Emergency” probably does not comply with the Federal or States own statutes. The Idaho definitions for emergency and disaster are contained in Title 46, Chapter 10, section 1002 and 1003

        A savvy environmental lawyer would be able to file a suit in Federal court seeking an injunction on several issues relating to Otter’s new law, even though he is allowed to direct his State agencies to do whatever he wants (not necessarily the case).

      • wolf moderate Says:

        “Then cut the ag subsidies”. Sounds good on paper (or blog), but when you look down deep, the ag subsidies are vital for cheap prices which allow the poor to live at an artificially higher standard then they otherwise would be able to. When ag subsidies are cut, the industry will just raise prices to offset the loss in revenues. The higher food costs won’t hurt the upper class, it will only hurt the poor…

        “oil and gas subsidies.” Americans like artificially low prices on there gasonline. If it weren’t for subsidies, the middle class wouldn’t be able to drive Expeditions, Tahoe’s, etc…Unfortunately only the extremists would ever support pulling subsidies for the oil and gas industry. Couple that with the influence that the industry has in Washington and basically this is a pipe dream…

        “and WS.” Pulling funding for WS would give Otter and friends an argument for there emergency bill on wolves. Also, WS budget is literally a drop in the federal budget.

        “The waste and fraud in the military is staggering. Different groups have assessed the waste and fraud, I am baffled why Obama hasn’t started there”. I completely agree w/ this. The military could be slashed by 50% and we’d still be more than safe. Obama is weak and only interested in being reelected. This is not an issue that he will seriously entertain until there is political incentive. Fortunately, i think the teaparty will start going after Defense Spending w/in the next few months. Bauchman has already started into this…

      • Salle Says:

        MAD,

        Your are talking about the Idawhore governor, I was talking about the CR budget that passed last night, with Obama’s signature. Two different legislative venues.

    • Steve C Says:

      We are spending close to 700 billion dollars a year on the military. If we pulled some troops back into this country and cut some unnecessary weapons development we could easily cut that by 20% and solve our budget problems and thensome without cutting programs people care about.

      • william huard Says:

        Then cut the ag subsidies, oil and gas subsidies, and WS. The waste and fraud in the military is staggering. Different groups have assessed the waste and fraud, I am baffled why Obama hasn’t started there

      • Immer Treue Says:

        Steve,

        You’ve hit the bulls eye. Why do we still have troops in Europe and Japan, other than if they are not stationed there, where would they work when they got back here. We got in a high stakes poker game with the USSR, and won, but at what cost?

      • william huard Says:

        Remember these cuts in the budget have nothing to do with spending, it is the dismantling of social programs and any program where people need help from the government. It is easy for people with trust funds to tell the rest of us it’s our fault we need help from the government. The repubs are making a big mistake going after Medicare, they will lose that fight

      • Ralph Maughan Says:

        Steve C

        The budget cuts are really about policy, not the deficit. They desire redistribution to the rich from the rest of us. Programs people care about don’t count because our corporate funded politicians believe they can sow enough confusion that people won’t vote against those who made the cuts of favorite program, or with “bait-and-switch” Obama, there is not much of a choice — cut all popular program Republicans versus cut most popular programs Obama.

      • Steve C Says:

        I understand that it is all about policy and not the deficit but if you do think about the deficit, it boggles the mind that the average tea party supporters get so worked up over social spending and not military spending (I read a bit more and the actual annual military spending is upwards of 1-1.4 TRILLION when you take into account interest payments on money borrowed for past wars.

  13. Salle Says:

    Why the Right-Wing Bullies Will Hold The Nation Hostage Again and Again

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/04/09-4

    And he’s correct, unfortunately.

  14. Phil Says:

    wolf-moderate: My aunt’s husband has always owned his businesses and has never worked for anyone post his college years. When he lived in Chicago in the 80s and 90s he had a sowing company that made college apparels (University of Miami was very popular back then). He thought of a brilliant (or lack there of) idea to build a second business which operated in similar fashion, but to build it in Mexico where the hourly rate is much lower, and he could save a lot of money. He eventually went out of business three years after opening up operations in Mexico. He and his family moved to Arizong (Gilbert) and opened up a new business. That did not workout either. In December of 09 he moved his family back to Chicago and again opened up a cloting company, but this time the company was specifically geared for military clothing. He is trying to expand his buyers, but is having a tough time at it. The reason why I am mentioning this is because it was not the movement of the company to another country that increased his gross, rather it did more harm then good to himself, employers and family. This was a major issue for GM, and could be a reason as to why they have been going through troubled times (until recently). Just like yourself, I do not agree with moving a company oversees and taking that job away from an American.

  15. jon Says:

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jU-EQnbldhk7m5WQVd1wkRFVllPw?docId=69fa2f62ecce4a62a13345aaa7c3a073

    “”I can’t blame Molloy for the ruling,” said Kieran Suckling of the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the 10 conservation groups favoring the settlement. “It’s a very tortuous situation. We entered into a settlement agreement we didn’t love but thought it was the lesser of two evils.”

    Suckling said the center wouldn’t appeal Molloy’s decision, but planned to work to stop the wolf rider on the in the budget bill pending before Congress. Wetzler said his group would do the same, but was reserved about the possibility of success.

    “Idaho and Montana have long maintained that they can responsibly manage wolf populations,” he said. “They may get the chance to prove that. And we’ll be watching.”

    • Salle Says:

      And I would ask Mr. S whom he thinks he’s kidding. I once had a high level or positive regard for some of these groups and individuals within but now, I’m not so sure I do anymore.

  16. Salle Says:

    I have now spent several hours looking for the text of the CR and have yet to locate anything. Or do I have to wait for the federal register to post it? that won’t be until Monday, at least.

  17. Phil Says:

    WOW! There are a lot of riders that would eliminate environmental and educational purposes. I guess we do not have to care for the education of students and a healthy environment. Let’s just walk around with nothing more then a regular diploma working in high intellectual jobs and watching the development of agricutlures on the small wilderness we have left. Man, we are never gonna surpass Japan.

    • wolf moderate Says:

      The economy of the US is quickly turning to a more service oriented role. Many high tech jobs are being outsourced to India due to the lower costs of labor and benefit packages. Best to get into a “trade” like Plumber, carpenter, electrician, truck driver etc…At least those won’t be outsourced🙂 Keep on truckin’!

      Over 25% of US adults have bachelor’s degrees. Too many people getting degrees that do not contribute to the US GDP. Liberal Arts, African American Studies, etc…Great if people want a degree in these “fields”, but good luck getting a J.O.B.
      http://www.phonydiploma.com/what-percent-of-people-have-a-college-degree.aspx

      • Phil Says:

        wolf moderate: While I do agree with you in that many of our jobs have been outsourced, having a degree in African American Studies, Liberal Arts, etc are great ways to expand your environment outside of just what someone was born into. Yes, there are more jobs in plumbing and carpenting, but these jobs are strictly “regional” (not outside the bubble). How is the United States, or any country for that matter, going to have communications with one another if they do not have individuals who are prepped for working relations between the countries? I am not saying that the Liberal Arts or African American Studies directs communications between countries, but these degrees are similar to the ones that have communication attributes to them.

        And, if everyone gets into the plumbing, electrician, etc jobs, don’t you think there will eventually be a shortage of open positions? With rider bills like these ones, many people will be out of work which will increase the unemployment rate. “Green jobs” were going to boost the employment rate, but that seems like it will not happen.

        A big reason why so many people do not have a form of college degree is because it is extremely difficult to get financial aid where you do not have to pay back the money. Financial Aid comes in two major ways, ones you do not have to pay back (very low income household) and ones you have to payback (loans). While I was attending school for my teaching certification, I was making less then $16,000 a year and was still turned down for financial aid but was accepted for loans. As the article mentioned, it is nearly impossible to get financial aid (money you do not have to pay back) at a Master’s or Graduate level, so students are happy with their bachelor’s degree. I am one of those individuals, but the amount of years I have attended school for a teaching certification and degree in Animal Behavior of Terrestrial Carnivores is no different than that of those who have achieved a Master’s or such. It’s a shame that people can’t be rewarded for their time spent in school.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        It’s called a Pell Grant. What is wrong w/ paying your way through school if that is the career path you want to take? I had the MGIB (Veterans Benefits for Education) and did not take it nearly as seriously as I would have if I was spending my own money on college. If people are going to use loans or pell grants they should be required to maintain a GPA of 2.5 or higher or something. The minimum now is 2.0 and a monkey could get that. kind of along the same lines as “you can give a fish and he’ll eat for a day, but if you teach a man to fish and he’ll eat forever”. Gotta have skin in the game IMO.

        Anywho, this is a derail, so will not get into this subject. Seeya.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        I’ve heard something along the lines that the top 25% of IQ’s in India represent close to the total US population. The US used to be the brain drain for the world. Not so much anymore. Many Chinese students come here for University studies, and now go back to China, whereas they used to remain here.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Should be: “you can give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, but if you teach a man to fish he’ll eat forever”.

      • JB Says:

        Wolf moderate: Great metaphor! The problem is we do not have enough “fish” (jobs) for that strategy to work; and when you continuously defund public education the cost of “fishing lessons” increases dramatically. (Today, a four year program in a public school costs about $80,000 on average, and it is going to go up.) The net result will be that only the men who own fishing boats can afford to send their kids to learn to fish. Sorta defeats the purpose, eh?

        P.S. Where are you fishing? 😉

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Well, The $20k figure is bogus IMO. If people would humble themselves and go to a community/junior college first that saves thousands of dollars. Here in Idaho, Tuition for 12-18 credits is $1428 per semester! The students from the community college can transfer 70 credits to state universities like Boise State.

        Boise State costs about $8k per year. If you include room and board (why would you, school or not you need shelter and food) it would be a bit more.
        I fished at BSU.

        PS: Front page of Idaho Statesman says; “Budget deal includes wolf rider”. Sounds like Simpson was able to get it in…Have you heard anything on this?
        Thanks.

  18. Larry Zuckerman Says:

    The CR that was agreed to among the Senate, House, and Obama in the wee-hours of Saturday has not hit the presses yet, so no one has the hard copy of which riders are still in and which are out. Obama Administration was toting to the press (see LA Times) how he got the EPA riders out of the CR Agreement. Also got the Planned Parenthood crap out of this year’s budget. No one said anything about wolves, timber, Farm Bill, grazing subsidies, wild horses, wildlands policy and other interesting things that have absolutely nothing to do with the budget and the deficit.

    So… everything is speculation enough the Capital presses roll. The wolf rider is in only according to Simpson and Tester, but it might not be too late to get it killed.

    • JimT Says:

      As I think I have opined before, there are EPA and energy environmentalists, and there are species and lands environmentalists, East and West respectively. Obama is an EPA environmentallist, and has shown not to give one hoot about the issues of the West or lands and species in general.

      I think I have said you wouldn’t have heard this massive silence from the Udalls or Boxer without it being directed by the White House and Salazar. Wolves, like women in DC, are chips in this larger game of “keep the Senate in 2012”, ,nothing more to DC and the White House. Regardless of whether or not Tester keeps office, the Senate Dems have too many seats open in 2012 to keep the majority. So, we will lose wolves, damage the ESA severely with this deal, and still have a Republican Congress.

      The historical weakness of the Democratic Party is inner disagreements and lack of unity. The present strength of the Republican Party, however extreme their agenda, is their ability to sublimate reason and truth to the party line. Should Dems echo this? Interesting question as the even bigger debt ceiling battles loom and the Tea Kettle folks have already said they will continue to accomplish radical policy shifts in entitltement, health, education, and the environment programs by holding these programs hostage to agreeing to keep the country solvent.

      You gotta appreciate the irony here. Republicans ruined the economy that has essentially been the linch pin event behind the radical conservatism movement. So, they escape responsibility and accountability and use it as a basis to return to power. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

      • william huard Says:

        JimT-
        I agree with your whole post. People have a short memory. It drives me crazy to hear these Republicans talk about having to pass a budget because the Democrats didn’t do their job last year, when you and I know it was Mcconnell that blocked these attempts. The dems should stand up for their principles and use the broken Senate system against Republicans if they do take a majority. Remember something else- There are vulnerable Republican Senators also, like Brown in Mass. The woman in Az Giffords could definately take the seat in AZ if she keeps improving. Alot can happen. How do you think the Republicans will look trying to turn Medicare into a voucher system and subject Seniors to the Vampires in the Private Insurance market? Think of the hard hitting adds the Dems could run!!! There are NO Republican ideas on HC reform but repeal, so I’m not worried. It is all about messaging, and the Democrats need to step up their messaging

      • william huard Says:

        Salazar is a problem, period

    • Merdoch Says:

      Again, its clear from essentially all sources that the measure IS NOT in the continuing resolution, including Rocky Barker.

      “Simpson’s original wolf provision would reinstate the 2009 decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to delist the gray wolf in Idaho and Montana. But the new language — and the final budget resolution bill — won’t be finished until later this week.”

      http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/04/09/1960733/new-federal-budget-deal-includes.html

      If you look around carefully there really is no source out there claiming the anti-wolf measure was actually in the continuing resolution.

  19. JimT Says:

    Frankly, I think Salazar would be agreeable to leaving if he had a place to go, but he doesn’t…unless he becomes President of some lobbying group for ranchers.

    I agree with you about messaging. The Dems and the left are second in the race to frame the message and the debate. Don’t know why that is…too much attention to facts and reason perhaps?

    • william huard Says:

      I’m sure there are plenty of people on this blog that could tell Salazar were to go! He could go work as a lobbyist for the Oil industry

  20. JimT Says:

    It may not be in the CR, but that is really the secondary document. It is the final budget agreement that rules; and I am hoping the public will get a chance to examine it before it goes to Obama’s desk….

    • Ken Cole Says:

      I understand that the Budget Bill will have a straight up and down vote – that means there will be no committee discussions re: it or parts of it, and there will be NO amendment process.

  21. Salle Says:

    Just for a reference point, check out this analysis… scroll down to the part with the heading “cattle”:

    http://current.com/1ar794c

    It’s a good breakdown of Kockhead Industries and how far their tentacles reach. I am eliminating a majority of these products from my life but it’s almost impossible to do so entirely, unless you go to some remote place where there is no modern human population… if there’s any left on the planet. This is what it’s come to, we have to do something.

  22. White Wolf Says:

    It is especially shameful that Senator Tester, who claims to be a man of esteemed ethics, as stated on his web site, has vowed not to use any riders to legislate environmental issues, yet has no qualms about using the Federal Budget to delist wolves. Testor is also the Chairman of the Sportsman’s Caucus.

    If a wolf delisting bill is such a popular idea then why not allow it due process instead of enforcing it by rider…?

    Previously, why the “exact right language” in both Hr1 ( Sen. Simpson section 1713)and the Senate CR ( Sen. Testor section 1709) to not only delist, but also permanently exempt wolves from protections…?

    http://www.trapshooters.com/cfpages/thread.cfm?threadid=244267&Messages=1#867438

    Unfortunately, there are those who simply don’t want to even entertain the idea of sharing our landscape with the wolf. Although true hunters would not be threatened by his presence, and real men would benefit from his wisdom.

    The wolf debacle is merely one stunning example of our broken and corrupt government at work. Personal agenda, political gain and corporate power have nothing to do with justice. Senator’s Testor and Simpson seem to have forgotten that their sworn duty is to uphold the Constitution…not to abuse their authority OR law while calling it politics.

    I am not exactly certain why Idaho claims to have such an”emergency” concerning wolves. Under the ESA there is already a provision 10(j) that allows for flexibility in dealing with problem wolves. Why then would they not already be permitted to use this provision as it was intended.?

    Last year Gov. Otter exacerbated the situation by not allowing the FWS to do their job. While in February Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana “sent shock waves though Congress ” with his defiance of the ESA by directing wildlife officials to shoot “whole packs that kill livestock, wherever this may occur.”

    Viewed from satellite, it appears that all this wolf hysteria and “hype” is a carefully orchestrated maneuver to take advantage of fear, uncertainty and doubt, while exposing vulnerabilities through which the ultimate goal , wolf delisting, will be achieved….at any cost.

    A totally agree with Cody Coyote concerning federal grazing rights…etc.

    • william huard Says:

      Well said White Wolf-
      As far as Sluggo is concerned and his re -election chances I think he is now doomed. He is pandering politically to a group of people that I’m sure didn’t vote for him the first time around. Does he really think this manuver will help him with Democratic voters?
      It was this exact type of emotional rhetoric that got the wolf extirpated the first time. The real question is whether there are Democratic Senators that will not allow it to happen again.

      • william huard Says:

        It is interesting to re-read Peabrain Peay’s comments, not to mention Brian from Oregon ” I’m thinking a 243 for my new wolf gun” What a puke
        Right under- “Now if we can only get hawks delisted”

      • jon Says:

        Yeah, comments like that really get my going. First it’s wolves, than hawks, what animal is next that they don’t like and want to wipe out? All wildlife is to them are shooting targets.

      • william huard Says:

        These are the types of comments that we should make available to Senators. This is about wolves but the implications are much larger

  23. Phil Says:

    william: Comments from individuals like Brian and Peay’s are absolutely disturbing. I believe people like these would only be happy if all species were delisted and categorized as huntable. I have read the “Now if we can only get hawks delisted.” before, but did not decide to respond because the mindset (I believe) is one that is pure sickening in having the thrill to “kill”.

    • william huard Says:

      Phil-
      Some of these people like Bruce Hemming are Sadists. They enjoy torturing animals

    • White Wolf Says:

      William, I came across the site while researching the ESA, it literally made my DNA cringe to peer inside the mentality that not only drives the misdeed, but also one that will be rewarded as a result if any wolf delisting by rider becomes law. And we all realize that there will be many other attempts to delist and too numerous the “inconvenient” species to be sacrificed upon the alter of politics.

      Wolves are highly symbolic animals. They do not merely cross the physical boundaries of states, they also intersect the cultural, social, and political beliefs contained within each. The point here is that there is an obstinate mindset that will accept nothing but eradication. If delisting wolves is the prime directive, then undermining the ESA is the path of least resistance., and governance by rider the ultimate prize. Government on all levels has forgotten its place. And I do not truly believe that many within its confines really care just what the ripples of consequence will be….the sheer audacity of such arrogance are beyond any words to describe.

      Nature is only desirable as long as it does not impede “progress.” Wolves are not considered wildlife in many Western states, rather inconvenient and expendable predators who rival for man’s conquests, whether cattle, ungulates, or land. The wolf is a constant thorn in the side of those who cling to the concept of domination. And there have been horrific methods employed in hunting this apex species, egregious tortures that seem to somehow appease the darker side of human nature.

      It is man that is the true beast. For all of our human intelligence and capacity for goodness, it is our cavalier indifference and causal malice which belie a deeper issue, bereft of conscience. And I question whether we are truly civilized at all.

      • william huard Says:

        White wolf-
        People that are ignorant do not have the capacity to see the bigger picture. They are lost in their own little selfish mindset that focuses on their needs and their needs only. There are many people that think like you and me. I will not stop fighting for animals like wolves. They bring out the best in some of us. Others would prefer to satisfy the “darker side of human nature” that you described. I don’t think they even understand what drives them to behave and think that way. Some of it is ignorance, some of it is cultural, some of it is politically motivated centered in economic greed, but all of it is irrational. It’s hard to reach people that think that way. They are like a bulldozer stuck in gear with no emergency brake

      • william huard Says:

        Think of how it was for them when the Stanley Young’s of the world and the Government wanted them gone just as much as outfitters and ranchers! Disgusting. I never completely trust the USFWS to handle predators after what they have done to them in the past.

      • Salle Says:

        and “of those who cling to the concept of domination” may I offer this frightening idea:

        Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System

        http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/04/11

        (I just posted this on another thread too but I feel it needs to be seen by all who can still read.)

      • Immer Treue Says:

        Salle,

        With one more year to go, reading this piece confirms all my reasons for ending my “tenure”. For so long my drive was to teach how to think, but the almighty god of standardized tests has all but replaced thought. Standardized tests become nothing more than real estate barometers for towns with”Good Schools.”

  24. Mike Says:

    ++The wolf is a constant thorn in the side of those who cling to the concept of domination. ++

    Well said.

    • White Wolf Says:

      This is the letter I have faxed to Senator Tester….

      Thomas Jefferson said, “Nobody can acquire honor by doing what is wrong.” Martin Luther King said,
      “Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere.” These two quotes encompass values that I firmly believe in, and I had hoped that you did to.

      You claim to be a man of high ethics, as stated on your web site, and also vowed not to legislate environmental issues by rider. Why then do you not have any qualms about using the Federal Budget as a vehicle to delist wolves, insisting that it be enacted as governance by rider…? I also question your conscience in regard to your prior legislative language which was crafted according to extirpation standards only.

      Wolves have absolutely nothing to do with federal spending, just as personal or political agendas have nothing to do with honor. I am extremely disappointed in your lack of character as well as the manner in which the wolf situation is being handled by those who were entrusted with pivotal positions of authority.

      Lawfully, as required by the ESA, the viability of any species is not to be subject to political whim. Yet we continue to abuse law and call it politics. Please remember that you have a sworn duty to uphold the Constitution and any rider or provision that does not allow due process of law undermines the rights of the American people. It will be a hollow victory that will brand you for the remainder of your political career.

      Wolves do not have powerful lobbies or deep pockets, as I am certain you are well aware of as Vice Chairman of the Bipartisan Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus. I understand that there is an obstinate mindset that will not accept anything but eradication, and that the wolf is too often viewed as an inconvenient and expendable predator instead of a member of America’s wildlife. Although I do not understand the need for all the wolf hysteria.

      Yet why did Governor Otter exacerbate the situation by not allowing the FWS to do their job, why has Idaho declared a “wolf emergency” and why was it necessary for Governor Schweitzer to go through the motions of defying the ESA? There is already a provision written into the ESA, Section 10( j ), that allows states the flexibility to handle problem wolves. They are already equipped to enact this provision as it was intended.

      Viewed from satellite, it appears this is a carefully orchestrated maneuver to take advantage of fear, uncertainty and doubt while exposing vulnerabilities through which the ultimate goal of wolf delisting will be achieved…at any cost. I ask you Senator Tester, which species is next…and for whom…?

      If wolves have recovered sufficiently, then allow the proper methods to be enacted. And if wolf delisting is such a popular issue, why then not introduce it as a separate piece of legislation instead of taking a cheap shot at the ESA. Yet if dismantling the ESA is also an objective, then why not at least be honest about it. I was taught that if your really believe in something then stand up for it, and not take the cowards way out.

      • skyrim Says:

        This is a good piece of work WW. If Tester were a man of honor and conscience and were actually allowed to read it, I believe it would cause him to pause, if only briefly. However, if he is like most of these Bozo politicians he pays people to screen anything that may hint of a moral tone or direct criticism. Your letter covers both issues with character and conviction. Thanks from the gallery for your efforts.

  25. Mike Says:

    I’ve made a gazillion calls. It seems to me the Dem Senators on the environment and public works committee aren’t interested in letting this rider remain in the bill, but we’ll see.

    Tester rider set to gut ESA and hurt wolves, act now
    Written by Mike on April 11th, 2011

    For those not in the know, Seantor Tester and Rep. Mike Simpson have included a rider in the budget bill that would permanently end all endangered species protectioins for wolves in the Northern Rockies. Most disturbing of all is that this new tactic could open the door for congressional repeal of ALL ESA protections for all species. Not good, and infuriating that a “Democract” would be the one to do it. You can read more about this issue at Howling for Justice:

    Link

    Capital Switchboard Numbers – give the name of the Senator & you will be transferred to their office. You will then either speak to a staff member, or on the weekend – to voice mail.

    When possible ask to speak to each Senator’s environmental aide. This will give you a better chance to get your message across because you will be talking to someone who is familiar with the issue.

    CAPITAL SWITCHBOARD

    1,866.220.0044
    1.877.851.6437
    1.800.833.6354
    Be polite but express your outrage over the game of chess Congress is playing with wolves’ lives. The delisting language must be stripped out of the final bill
    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
    Washington DC
    522 Hart Senate Office Bldg
    Washington, DC 20510
    Phone: 202-224-3542
    Fax: 202-224-7327
    Toll Free for Nevadans:
    1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343)
    INDIVIDUAL LIST OF SENATORS:
    Boxer, Barbara – (D – CA)
    (202) 224-3553

    http://boxer.senate.gov/en/contact/policycomments.cfm

    =======

    Senator Thomas R. Carper (D-Delaware)
    1-202-224-2441

    http://carper.senate.gov/contact/

    =======

    Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ)
    (202) 224-3224

    http://lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/index1.cfm

    =======

    Cardin, Benjamin L. – (D – MD)
    (202) 224-4524

    http://cardin.senate.gov/contact/

    =======

    Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont)
    Phone (202) 224-5141

    http://sanders.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm

    =======

    Gillibrand, Kirsten E. – (D – NY)
    (202) 224-4451
    Fax (212) 688-7444

    http://gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/

    =======

    Senator Tom Udall (D-New Mexico)
    (202) 224-6621

    http://tomudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

    =======

    Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon)
    Phone: (202)224-3753

    http://merkley.senate.gov/contact/

    =======

    Whitehouse, Sheldon – (D-RI)
    (202) 224-2921
    Fax 202-228-6362

    http://whitehouse.senate.gov/contact/

    =======

    PRESIDENT OBAMA – The Whitehouse
    Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

  26. Alan Says:

    I’m sorry that I voted for Jon Tester. I will not make the same mistake again.

  27. william huard Says:

    White Wolf, Mike
    I am encouraged by all the activism. it does matter. I was told by most people that I spoke with that there has been significant activity on this wolf delisting rider with almost all the support in our favor. There are Senators in the Democratic party that care about this issue, in fact Saunders and Cardin’s offices told me that they were doing everything in their power to strip this language. I too have made a ton of calls, including Obamas 12024561111 number. I was told there have been plenty of calls on this issue as well to Obama. Like many I feel Obama has not represented progressive environmental causes, but remember I think he does not want to be labeled the President who opened the floodgates of selected animal persecution with ESA manipulation through politics.
    White Wolf- I don’t think Sluggo really cares about his reputation, remember he’s a rancher

    • White Wolf Says:

      William, I understand what you are saying, but I never say never and if there is even a remote chance that it might strike a chord…then so be it…and all the better. Unfortunately, what I could not add to my letter here on this site was a picture of a stunning grey wolf whose gaze holds you accountable. It simply states, ” Through the eyes you can see the heart and soul of all creatures…even humans. So be sure to look deep into the eyes of mankind.”

      Even if the words of my letter go unnoticed, I would think that this picture alone would be difficult to ignore.

      • william huard Says:

        Those are spiritual words for sure. He’s got a brain and I think he’s got blood running through those veins, though you never can be quite sure

  28. Cody Coyote Says:

    Latest from Wyoming: apparently a mostly secret compromise wolf plan emanating from Governor Matt Mead’s office has been circulating quietly among certain elected officials statewide. Mead’s new special representative, Steve Ferrell, the former Director of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, has conducted no less than ten behind closed doors meeting with county officials and certain select invited folks in recent weeks. The largest of these meetings was in Cody last Thursday April 7 with the Park County Commissioners—one of whom is the local chapter president of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, Joe Tilden — most of the loca legislators, and about 15-18members of SFW.

    A total of 30 attended the worksession with Ferrell where he laid out the new plan Wyoming is advancing, which creates a larger wolf protection zone in Wyoming but does not get rid of the controversial Predator Status where wolves can be shot on sight without a license in most of the state away from the western mountains and Yellowstone. The new plan also allows for ” dispersion routes” where wolves would be further protected from November to March in Lincoln and Sublette counties in southwest Wyoming on the approaches to Utah and Colorado. These meetings were held before Judge Molloy threw out the conservationist deal with USFWS and before the wolf delist rider was written into the federal budget agreement .

    Ferrell’s ten meetings around the state have barred the press and the public where the plan was touted and explained, but not in the context of official business.

    This was all reported on the tangent in the April 11, 2011 Cody Enterprise in articles by Mark Heinz and an editorial by Richard Reeder ( the latter which was up briefly on the Enterprise web site Monday afternoon but later pulled ).

    ***
    So Wyoming seems to think it has an acceptable plan that allows a larger wolf protection zone but doesn’t scrap the varmint season elsewhere. It’s still a Dual Classification plan with some potential ( iffy) remediation of the genetic dispersion argument that has been a sticking point.

    But I have to say , when a vital meeting to discuss the future of Wyoming wolf management occurs with a representative of the Governor, local legislators, and county officials attending…and a dozen members of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife…but not press or any other agency or stakeholders… it has the undeniable aroma of rotting fish.

    Hmm…….

  29. White Wolf Says:

    Cody Coyote…The stench is unbelievable!

    Signing petitions, making calls to Senators, is not the only thing you can do. Although the situation for our beloved wolves seems dire…it is not over …until it is over. And it is never too late to let your voices be heard. Many times, the only power we have as consumers is to make informed decisions, and the power of the purse. For when we buy anything, we are actually endorsing not only the product, but also the methods corporations use in daily practice. As you already know, this concept has been invaluable in many situations of concern.

    And so inspired with this belief, I made several calls today, namely, to McDonald’s and Burger King. I wanted to find out where they get their potatoes and beef. I do not endorse fast foods, ( I did not feel the need to share this) but I expressed my concerns and explained the situation of how many people feel concerning Idaho , including Idaho potatoes which concerned customer’s feel have wolf blood on them. They weren’t actually able to tell me where they get their potatoes or beef, since their customers are proprietary, but I am certain if there were any question as to any kind of legal issue concerning their product, someone …somewhere would be able to trace it back to the source.

    I urged them to find out since it would be in their best interest, and there will be many more calls coming expressing concern. I also reminded them I was certain that they would want to keep ahead of the fray and provide information to consumers everywhere who have similar concerns.

    It may seem trivial, but if anyone is interested in making a call to their favorite fast food restaurant, make the call even if you don’t eat fast food and at least put the bug in their ear. A steady pressure will remind them that this issue is one of great significance and that you want answers. If it only takes one voice to plant a seed….then many voices can harvest an entire crop.

    Also contact the Idaho Potato Commission and let them know how you feel.

    http://www.idahopotato.com/contact

    Think of the tactics being used by anti-wolf lobbies. Have the courage of your convictions, but do not stoop to their level. Most importantly, do not relent. Now…be creative….think outside the box. You never know, until you try.

    Heart Howls!!

    • Rebecca Edwards Says:

      I couldn’t said it any better. I am going to do what ever possible to protect our wolves and that includes being right there with my camera recording every move that goes on with the wolves and those who think they can get away with murder,If we all stick together and fight this with all that we can dish out WE WILL GET WHAT WE WANT and the wolves will be protected once more,and we will all be there to make sure of it.

  30. White Wolf Says:

    William, yesterday you mentioned that there has been significant activity on the wolf delisting rider with almost all the support in our favor. Other than the appalling addition to Wyoming’s tag on…is there any other news to report…?

  31. william huard Says:

    I have been digging around the USFWS office of Rowan Gould in Wash DC the last few days to try and get a sense of what is going on. It is evident that these backroom deals include only a few select individuals and is a complete trashing of the democratic process. We need to push back, the voters who hate these special interest deals that work contrary to the majority of what people support and care about. Today and tommorrow will be the two critical days if we have any chance of stripping this language- i would focus on democratic leadership- Durbin, Schumer, Kerry, and the Dem Senators on the Committees and the Senators out west like Wyden, Bingaman from NM, Cantwell and Murray from WA. I don’t really have a good feeling about this

  32. White Wolf Says:

    I have just finished calling/ faxing/ emailing all Senators on the Committee, once again. I left them voice mails last night after hours. Their aides tell me today that the Senators have not released a statement concerning the delisting rider, and they are aware of it. I especially stressed the fact that any rider that would not allow further judicial review is unconstitutional…and they should be very concerned about setting that example. And at the very least….wolf delisting demands open and honest debate…not governance by rider. I especially concentrated on those you mentioned William. I also was finally able to get Senator Boxer’s fax number and faxed her the letter I sent to Tester. If Tester has no conscience, I am hoping that somewhere in the Senate….conscience will prevail.

  33. White Wolf Says:

    William, more like your sister! LOL. Worry not.
    I also placed a call to the Idaho Potato Commission, and they actually returned my call a few minutes ago. Very interesting conversation, especially after I mentioned how many people feel strongly enough about what is going on with wolves out there that they are already starting to boycott Idaho potatoes. And to expect the potato to take it on the chin as a result. The woman was wonderful, she said that they hear concerns about many things, and I told her that that’s because Idaho potatoes represent Idaho…and people want to find a way to reach someone who can say “hey….tell these people to get it together!! ” She asked that I send an email with my concerns, and she would forward it to the president of the IPC and he would respond. I am asking everyone to call, and voice your concerns too. Think of the impact we can make when the phone rings off the wall.

    • william huard Says:

      I’m sorry! After I posted the “my brother” comment it dawned on me that that was a mighty daring assumption on my part! You seem like a very caring person and i’m glad we have had the chance to communicate!

  34. White Wolf Says:

    William, no need for apologies….it’s wonderful to connect with you too.

    Does anyone have the exact language of the rider, the Idaho
    Potato Commission specifically requested it.

    • william huard Says:

      White wolf-

      The fourth story down on this blog- The Wolf Delisting Bill Language…..was posted by Ken Cole within the last 24 hours I believe. It’s all there

      • jon Says:

        William, did you see this video yet? Let me know what you think.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Pretty much sums up the debate. The hillbillies want to shoot em’, DOW wants to “luv” them, and everyone else wants both sides to shut up so they can watch American Idol! LOL.

      • william huard Says:

        Jon
        He wasn’t acting when he played the hillbilly redneck. In fact, he looked quite comfortable. These people make me sick. Only people that have no respect for themselves or the law would talk this way. Unfortunately they are not in short supply out west. He is making fun of Wayne Pacelle, who most people with a brainstem is the CEO of the HSUS not DOW, but it was a nice try. He should stick to his job at the slaughterhouse

  35. White Wolf Says:

    William, maybe I’m just about burned out, but I can not seem to find it. I see the previous rider, and the link for Otter’s plan, but the link I clicked on no longer works. says that the story has been pulled or is no longer available.

    Smiles…Can you help me out!

    • william huard Says:

      White Wolf
      As you go on the Wildlife news, to the right is a selection “Top Posts”. The item “Wolf delisting Language in 2011 Budget Bill”. Section 1713 is the rider itself and that one paragraph is the language. It is short and sweet and OMINOUS. This has been a bad day, tommorrow will be better I am sure of it

  36. White Wolf Says:

    Soft…sweet. and ominous…indeed. Thank you William. I was not even looking in the right place. Have a peaceful night. I await a brighter tomorrow! Blessings to everyone.

  37. White Wolf Says:

    Any news today…?

  38. Immer Treue Says:

    Budget cuts affect Minnesota wolf management.

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/119712379.html

    • bret Says:

      Why is this a Federal budget issue ?
      Perhaps we could allow Minnesota to manage wolves and free the Federal government the time and expense.

      • WM Says:

        MN (and more recently WI and MI) have been trying to get the Great Lakes DPS wolves off the ESA for more than a decade, which would wean them off the federal budget for management costs. They would operate under their approved plans with state appropriated funds for whatever control measures were required for problem wolves.

        They have been met by wave after wave of litigation by wolf advocates pursuing every angle to keep them on the list, especially Humane Society of the US (HSUS) which wants no wolves managed or killed under any circumstances. At least two active petitions are before FWS for delisting, AND, notwithstanding the Great Lakes DPS designation (similar to the NRM DPS that Judge Molloy just ruled cannot be broken up for delisting purposes) Minnesota believes it can get delisting independent of WI and MI, and the GL DPS, because of the way the MN wolves were originally listed under the ESA. This is another interesting complexity because virtually all of the source wolves for WI and MI come from MN in-migration.

        Common sense left the building long ago on managing GL (and NRM) wolves under the ESA. It is good the law is getting a closer look. Whether contemplated changes currently under consideration are the right ones is yet another matter.

  39. White Wolf Says:

    According to the article:

    “Landwehr wrote to Minnesota’s congressional delegation Tuesday, asking that funding either be restored or that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service efforts to have the wolf taken off the Endangered Species List be approved so the state can assume responsibility for dealing with problem wolves.”

    There is already a provision written into the ESA itself, Section 10 ( j ) that allows states to handle problem wolves….so what is up with this…?

    Just more fuel for the fire….

    • wolf moderate Says:

      10 (J) does not include the Minnesota and Michigan.

    • Savebears Says:

      There is no 10(j) in Minnesota or Michigan…the 10(j) only applies to wolves in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming south of I-90, another one of those “Political” boundaries that are not suppose to be..

  40. White Wolf Says:

    Any more news from the Senate…?

  41. White Wolf Says:

    why not…?

    • wolf moderate Says:

      10 (J) was included to gain support for wolf reintroduction to Central Idaho and the GYE. Could be off a little, but I think that’s the jist of it…

      • White Wolf Says:

        This is odd. Now I need to check it out further.

        http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/wildlife/recoprog/sect10j.htm

      • WM Says:

        White wolf,

        It appears, based on your posts, you are a relative newcomer to the topic of wolves in the NRM and Great Lakes. You are finding very quickly this topic has many layers of complexity. The legal complexity has many facets, in terms of the application of various provisions of the ESA to Northern Rocky Mountain wolf reintroduction under Section 10(j) for this “non-essential experimental population,” which was done with assurances to states that they would have “flexibility” of management during and after delisting.

        Then, there is the science of wolf recovery, for a species that has shown to be very resilient in the Northern Rockies, with the capability of rapid reproduction and range expansion, on a landscape which is becoming more and more dominated with higher human densities and greater stakeholder expectations from many different resource user groups.

        Then there is the minefield of competing local and national values, passions and expectations, reflected in the political fight which is now playing out.

        You found a good forum for learning quickly, with many willing (and mostly accurate and passionate) teachers who will likely put you straight, as the previous dialog demonstrates. Sometimes you have to sift through the chaff to get to grains of wisdom, however.

      • howlcolorado Says:

        That’s not entirely true.

        10(j) was an existing provision in the ESA to allow the USFWS to reintroduce species which had previously become extinct, which it was believed that canis lupus irremotus had – and use animals from a different, healthy population to recreate the extinct population.

        The key elements of 10(j) are that the newly reintroduced species be labeled as an experimental non-essential population. All that basically means is that the wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains are not considered essential for the continued survival of the wolf species as a whole – i.e. there are other native wolf populations elsewhere geographically that would allow the species to continue. The experimental part is self explanatory. But it does require that the Secretary provide authorization for the reintroduction.

        The limitations of the reintroduction under 10(j) are specifically related to geographically-determined already existing populations of the same species. There were some that argued that irremotus was still present at least in Montana, however the courts decided that a single animal didn’t constitute a population. And others… as you will read below.

        Where you are correct, however, is that 10(j) was actually modified by the USFWS in … 95? … someone correct me if I remember poorly to allow more management options for wolves. That I believe was done specifically to quell concerns of people in Idaho and others.

        If you are specifically interested in the actual text of 10(j)… here it is:

        (j) EXPERIMENTAL POPULATIONS.—(1) For purposes of this subsection, the term “experimental population” means any population (including any offspring arising solely therefrom) authorized by the Secretary for release under paragraph (2), but only when,

        and at such times as, the population is wholly separate geographically from nonexperimental populations of the same species.

        (2)(A) The Secretary may authorize the release (and the related transportation) of any population (including eggs, propagules, or individuals) of an endangered species or a threatened species outside the current range of such species if the Secretary determines that such release will further the conservation of such species.

        (B) Before authorizing the release of any population under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall by regulation identify the population and determine, on the basis of the best available information, whether or not such population is essential to the continued existence of an endangered species or a threatened species.

        (C) For the purposes of this Act, each member of an experimental population shall be treated as a threatened species; except that—

        (i) solely for purposes of section 7 (other than subsection (a)(1) thereof), an experimental population determined under subparagraph (B) to be not essential to the continued existence of a species shall be treated, except when it occurs in an area within the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System, as a species proposed to be listed under section 4; and

        (ii) critical habitat shall not be designated under this Act for any experimental population determined under subparagraph (B) to be not essential to the continued existence of a species.

        (3) The Secretary, with respect to populations of endangered species or threatened species that the Secretary authorized, before the date of the enactment of this subsection, for release in geographical areas separate from the other populations of such species, shall determine by regulation which of such populations are an experimental population for the purposes of this subsection and whether or not each is essential to the continued existence of an endangered species or a threatened species.

    • Savebears Says:

      Wolves in Minnesota and Michigan enjoy full protection of the ESA as do the wolves in Northern Montana and Idaho, that is the way the reintroduction rule was wrote, the reintroduction rules out west are different than the rules in the Midwest.

      Probably need to brush up on this topic White Wolf..

      • wolf moderate Says:

        http://www.fws.gov/pdfs/Wolf10jQ&A.pdf

        The following link is an excellent source of information. I’ve used it several times while writing papers. Lots to read here!

        http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/

      • howlcolorado Says:

        One thing that many people do NOT realize is that 10(j) does work along specific geographic borders.

        If a wolf from Canada migrates down and ends up in say Minnesota or Michigan, it’s a wolf covered 100 percent by the ESA and has full federal protections. Same is true for a wolf that moves from Yellowstone National Park to Colorado. as soon as they enter Colorado, they are 100 percent protected.

        Should be noted that Wisconsin (I think) lists wolves as a threatened species, not an endangered species. So wolves that bounce between wisconsin and minnesota are getting different protections depending specifically on their location.

        However, the point is… if a fully protected, 100 percent non-reintroduced wolf wanders happily all the way from Canada down the Rocky Mountains (and this has happened many times they believe) and hooked up with a pack in central Idaho or in Montana or whatever, they immediately become part of the Experimental Non-essential population. And are covered by all the rules and protections those specific wolves get. Wolf protections are not related to what type of wolf they are, it’s entirely tied to where they are.

        The legal battles surrounding the reintroduction were, in hindsight, just crazy. #9 I believe it was, was shot by a man who just saw the two wolves hanging out together – his friend supposedly telling him not to shoot – and his defense in court was to challenge the legality of the reintroduction. He lost. He went to prison. But that’s just one example of the how the reintroduction was considered illegal and challenged on the basis of 10(j)

      • Savebears Says:

        The biggest problem I find with the ruling Molloy handed down last August was based on the political boundary argument, but yet, we still maintain a political boundary when it comes to wolves in the NRM.

        I-90 is in fact a political boundary, experimental south fully protected north, he ruled that you can’t delist based on a boundary, but yet we still have wolves being treated and managed differently for the exact same reason…

      • howlcolorado Says:

        Applying any type of boundaries to wild animals is just nuts.

        I mean, people called occidentalis “Canadian wolves” … both nubilus and occidentalis are found in Canada and America so I think they could fairly be call “North American Grey Wolves” …

        Just like the biologists do.

        But people on all sides anthropomorphise animals by applying negative and positive emotions to what the animals do, applying boundaries to those animals and assuming they somehow know where they are supposed to or not supposed to go. That was clear when they put no kind of real buffer around Yellowstone for the hunting.

  42. White Wolf Says:

    Thanks for the information.

    A very good book to recommend is “Beyond Wolves; The Politics of Wolf Recovery And Management ” by Martin A. Nie.

  43. Larry Zuckerman Says:

    What 10(j) does for any species listed under ESA, not just wolves, is to provide Exemptions from the Section 9 Take prohibitions under ESA.

    It not only applies to wolves, but could apply to other creatures, especially those that need to be manipulated for reintroductions via live-trapping and transport (forms of non-lethal take). So… Northern Rockies DPS wolves south of I-90 Idaho were captured, transported and released into Yellowstone and Central Idaho (into the Frank Church River-Of-No-Return Wilderness along the Salmon River downstream of Salmon, North Fork, and Shoup, Idaho at the end of the Salmon River Road at Corn Creek Boat Ramp).

    10(j) was also used by the FWS to reintroduce Mexican wolves into the Southwest. Again, they are considered non-essential, experimental mostly to get around the Section 9 Take (includes harm, harass, not just kill) prohibitions of the ESA for listed species.

    Bull trout were reintroduced into the Clackamas River in Oregon under a 10(j) Rule Exemption to Section 9 Take. Other examples are: black-footed ferrets, Southern sea otters, and Colorado pikeminnows (used to be squawfish). Sonoran pronghorn antelope were proposed for reintroduction into SW AZ under a 10(j) rule.

    FWS seems to like this route, especially to get along better with states where species are being manipulated or reintroduced… and to appease landowners concerned about third-party lawsuits for Take and designated critical habitat that they perceive as interfering with their land use and livelihoods such as farming, ranching, logging, and real estate development.

    Again, the geographic boundaries of the 10(j) rules are really important, thus Molloy’s decision against the FWS for delisting MT & ID wolves, but not WY’s. When a wolf leave the 10(j) area, then it becomes a fully protected wolf, like in OR, UT, NV, or CO. Molloy is questioning the 10(j) status of wolves in the Northern Rockies DPS of gray wolves because the fully protected wolves that wandered on their own from Canada into Western Montana and Northern Idaho (north of I-90) are now, by the full admission of the Department of Justice attorneys and FWS, migrating, mixing, and interbreeding with the “experimental” wolves. Therefore, they are no longer separated and no longer conform to the geographic separation required under the existing 10(j) language.

    There are other ways to reintroduce listed species, but as others have said, 10(j) makes it much more palatable to states, tribes, and private landowners since it excludes designated critical habitat and leaves lots of wiggle room for “Take” (included FWS sanctioned hunts of wolves by Idaho and MT).

    Another part of ESA, Section 4(d) allows additional exemptions from ESA Take of listed species – this is the part that APHIS-Wildlife Services uses in WY, ID, and MT to kill “problem” wolves that are reportedly feeding on livestock or dogs. 4(d) also exists in the Great Lakes for the Minnesota wolves and again, so-called problem wolves can be killed or even moved to another place.

    In the case of the anadromous Pacific salmon and steelhead, which are heavily dependent on hatcheries, fish barges, fish ladders, re-establishment of historic runs once streams are reconnected, streamside egg incubators and other human intervention, the Take (which also includes some incidental lethal take) is allowed under ESA through Section 4 permits granted by the NMFS for states to run hatcheries, stock, capture brood stock, and even run controlled fisheries for harvesting hatchery fish. However, this only applies to threatened fish and this type of exemption from Sec 9 Take is prohibited for endangered species, like the Snake River sockeye salmon (no fishing seasons).

    Incidental take (sometimes quite substantial and not really incidental to a proposed action, project, or program) is one other way of getting around Section 9 Take with so-called “Incidental Take Statements” (ITS) under Section 7 ESA consultations. They are really “Incidental Take Exemptions” from Section 9, and according to several Federal court decisions are supposed to be (but rarely) quantified for the cumulative amount of Take (all take, legal or not, lethal or not, under other sections like 10(j), 4(d), treaties), the extent of Take (so in a river – how far downstream, even if beyond the footprint of a project or beyond the agency’s management boundaries), and for how long (duration of Take).

    Another way to get around Sec 9 Take in ESA, particularly used by private landowners, including corporations like timber and logging companies like Plum Creek is Section 10 Habitat Conservation Plans along with Safe Harbor Agreements and No Surprise rules. In this part, the private party and the Services (NMFS and/or FWS) come up with a mitigation and restoration plan that minimizes Take, but then allows some incidental take or adverse modification to designated critical habitat.

    Hope this helps and doesn’t further confuse. Anyway, there is lots of Take of protected species out there, both lethal and non-lethal.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      Do you recall the changes they made in 95 to that specific aspect? I think it was the addition of Harm and harrass, but I don’t remember.

      • Larry Zuckerman Says:

        http://walter.arizona.edu/society/policy/esa/ESA1-2.asp
        Definition of Take

        In the language of the Endangered Species Act itself, the term “take” means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct” (Sec. 3(18)). However, because the definition of “harm” has been interpreted quite broadly through both regulations and court decisions, the interpretation of “take” is also broad. While a wide variety of activities have been ruled as “takes,” probably the most important idea is that destruction of critical habitat is included in the definition. According to Baldwin (1995):

        “Take” is defined as killing a listed species but also includes “harm,” which is defined in regulation as including “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 C.F.R. § 17.2). [see also Babbitt v. Sweet Home, 1995]

        Baldwin further notes that the concept of “harm” includes, but is not limited to habitat that has been designated as critical.

        Certainly when I worked for the NMFS as an endangered species consulting fishery biologist, NMFS was working under the expanded definition of Section 9 Take to also include critical habitat. Some law enforcement investigations were based on this definition – so finding a body was not necessary for enforcement.

        We also had the broader interpretation that Take included behavioral changes, but significant behavioral changes – such as scaring a spawning Chinook salmon away from it redd site vs stepping into a stream and scaring a Chinook salmon by accident, knowing once you left, it might just return to that reach and particular microhabitat.

        In my experience over several years, the interpretation and enforcement of Take, especially non-lethal take, is somewhat arbitrary and up to the interpretation of those agency personnel involved – I would not say it is set in stone and evenly applied across the board.

        Worse, both FWS and NMFS have repeatedly violated specific court orders that determined that they had to not only quantify (quantity, extent, and duration) take (lethal and non-lethal), but also needed to keep some pretty strict accounting of all forms of take previous to the issuance of a new Incidental Take Exclusion or Incidental Take Statement.

        In other words, with the gray wolves, the FWS needs to account for all the different forms of lethal and non-lethal take allowed (including USDA Wildlife Services) plus illegal take like poaching and incidental take like roadkills and permitted trapping for other species before issuing any additional take north of Interstate-90 in Montana and Idaho. But they don’t… their wolves!


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: