Molloy denies wolf settlement

Says that the agreement is illegal

Today Montana District Court Judge Donald Molloy denied the settlement agreement put forth by 10 of the 14 environmental groups who sued to keep wolves protected under the Endangered Species Act.  The settling parties had asked the judge to set aside his previous ruling which found that the USFWS 2009 delisting rule was illegal because it split the distinct population segment (DPS) of wolves in the Northern Rockies and left them listed in Wyoming.  The Endangered Species Act does not allow the USFWS to partially delist a DPS.

“[The] District Court is still constrained by the “rule of law.” No matter how useful a course of conduct might be to achieve a certain end, no matter how beneficial or noble the end, the limit of power granted to the District Court must abide by the responsibilities that flow from past political decisions made by the Congress. The law cannot be ignored to accommodate a partial settlement. The rule of law does not afford the District Court the power to decide a legal issue but then at the behest of some of the litigants to reverse course and permit what the Congress has forbidden because some of those interested have sensibly, or for other reasons, decided to lay a dispute to rest.”

Order Denying Indicative Relief Motion

Western Watersheds Project stands firm. Does not join wolf settlement.

The groups that settled have not gained the assurance of anything-

Today’s announcement that a number of plaintiffs in the wolf delisting case are seeking a settlement with the Department of Interior they hope Judge Molloy will approve does represent a difference in strategy how to proceed in the current political environment.

Three groups, the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Western Watersheds and Friends of the Clearwater are standing firm.

Western Watershed’s Executive Director, Jon Marvel, today told me the reasons for the group’s firm stance.

Western Watersheds stresses that this settlement is only with the Department of Interior.  No one, including Senator Jon Tester of Montana, has indicated that in response to the settlement they will withdraw or modify any legislation they have introduced to delist the wolves by law, nor do Secretary of Interior Salazar or President Obama make any promise or even say they oppose such legislation, much less veto it if it passes.

There is nothing in return from this settlement except the promise to keep the scant number of wolves in Utah, Oregon and Washington on the endangered species list.

Western Watersheds believes that having won the case in the first place, the groups should not then ask that the judge approve the violation of the law and his own decision (delisting the NRM wolf by state boundaries).

Some groups settle on wolf delisting lawsuit; others don’t

Groups pursue different strategies for a variety of reasons-

I suppose there might be different statements from some of the groups. I think the differences were based on differing perceptions of what the future holds in terms of legislation and the worthiness of the Administration’s position of protecting the existing population of wolves.

Personally, I think the idea that there needs to be 5000 wolves is wrong as well as politically unpopular. The existing wolf population of about 1600 is robust and genetically healthy, but both could change.

Settlement offer splits wolves’ supporters; law firm withdraws.  By Eve Byron. Helena Independent Record.

Text of Judge Molloy’s latest wolf decision

Molloy says an “experimental” (10)j wolf population most likely does not exist-

Here is the actual text of the judge’s latest wolf decision.  I think he is also saying a valid 10j population has not existed for some time, although he did not resurrect the argument that the original 10j reintroduction was not proper.  Molloy’s order on experimental wolves

I think he may have cut the Gordian Knot. It is unclear still to me what the effects of this will be — who actually won. Strictly speaking, the government won (I mean on paper).

9th Circuit makes it easier for citizens to temporarily stop a gov’t project

Court of Appeals limits scope of Supreme Court decision and overturns Judge Molloy-

A couple years ago in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council the U. S. Supreme Court continued its trend toward make it harder to temporarily stop government actions before irreparable harm was done. Applying this viewpoint, Montana federal district Judge Molloy let a timber sale begin and many trees were cut while conservationists were seeking an injunction on the sale so that their arguments could be heard.  This made it so if they won, they would not win because the project they sought to halt was completed.  Fortunately, in my view, the 9th Circuit overturned Molloy. This will allow  citizens to more easily get an injunction if they have strong arguments.

The precedent is not simple, but it does strengthen the hand of those opposing government projects from having their cases made moot by letting government build a powerline or whatever while the powerline, etc. is being litigated.

Appeals Court Rejects U.S. Request for Rehearing in Mont. Timber Case. By Lawrence Hurley of Greenwire. New York Times.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy to take “Senior status”

Senior status Reduces Judge Molloy’s caseload

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy of Montana has announced that he will take “Senior status”.

District Judge Molloy to step aside – Wyoming Tribune

“Senior status” means retirement from active service. Senior judges continue to hear cases, usually with a reduced case load. The announcement, however, said Molloy intends to maintain a “substantial” case load.

It also frees him to sit, by invitation, on the circuit court.

Judge Molloy’s stepping down from his seat will open a vacancy in the Montana federal district court.  Vacancies are filled by appointment from the president, almost always selected by the highest politically ranked congressperson of the president’s party from the state in which the vacancy occurs.

Feds, States and others file appeal on wolf ruling

Federal Government appeals the wolf ruling-

I missed this one but it is important. Everyone knew that the states and many other groups would appeal Judge Molloy’s ruling on wolves but no one was sure whether the Federal Government would appeal the ruling too. Now that question has been answered.

State and others file appeal on wolf ruling.
By Eve Byron – Helena Independent Record

Who is Judge Don Molloy?

Best known for ruling on the wolf, judge is concerned about the disappearance of concern for the common good-

This is a interesting and lengthy bio of Montana’s best known federal judge.

Who is Judge Don Molloy? By Daniel Person. Bozeman Chronicle Staff Writer

I certainly agree with the Judge on his greatest concern. It seems to me that today it is my ideology and political party first, my community and country last.

Judge Molloy blocks 3 timber sales in grizzly country

Issues restraining order on sales in the Cabinet-Yaak where 45 bears live-

Good news for this struggling, but now finally increasing, grizzly population up against the Montana-Idaho-B.C. border.

Story in the Missoulian. By Rob Chaney.

Wolf delisting hearing stalled after attorney faints in courtroom

85 protesters show up at courthouse-

Wolf delisting hearing stalled after attorney faints in courtroom. KBZK.com

Crowds expected Tuesday as wolves return to court in Missoula

Tomorrow is the big day before Judge Molloy-

“”People simplify things,”[Ed] Bangs said. “They’ll say 300 wolves is not enough for recovery, but that’s not the recovery goal. That’s bogus. Or they’ll say the Service promised there’d never be more than 300 wolves. That’s not true either.” Rest of the story in the Missoulian.

Judge Molloy blocks mine beneath Cabinet Mountains Wilderness

Is this a final victory in 23 year fight against the mine?

It probably isn’t because Judge Molloy both ruled for and against conservationists on their variety of claims, but it does send the Forest Service’s decision to approve the mine back to square one.

Molloy blocks mine beneath Cabinet Mountains Wilderness. By Michael Jamison. Missoulian

Info on the fight against the Rock Creek Mine.

3/30/2010. More on the ruling. Court Blocks Mine in Montana’s Cabinet Mountains Wilderness. ENS

9th Circuit overturns Molloy’s grazing decision on Antelope Basin

Good news for a pretty, but cattle hammered basin on the Idaho/Montana border-

Although those who only think about wolves suppose Federal Judge Molloy surely sides with conservation groups, he didn’t on this decision. Fortunately the 9th Circuit overturned his approval of a bad Forest Service grazing plan.

Here is the story in the Montana Standard, but the most informative one is in the Courthouse News Service. Court Orders Review of Montana Grazing Plan. By Elizabeth Banicki.

Antelope Basin in a wet year. July 1, 1995. Copyright Ralph Maughan

Wolf lawsuit briefs keep coming into Judge Molloy’s office

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has now filed their brief-

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, conservation groups file briefs in wolf lawsuit. By Rob Chaney. Missoulian

Conservation groups filed their brief (set of or arguments) on Dec. 31. There are other briefs that have been filed as ” friend of the court” (amicus curiae) briefs. These are third party arguments — groups that are neither plaintiff nor defendant.

Judge Molloy rejects feds request to reconsider his relisting of the Yellowstone area grizzly bear

So feds, live with it and start protecting the bear’s habitat better-

link fixed! Judge keeps Yellowstone grizzly on threatened list. AP

Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team — raise GYE grizzly mortality limits?

IGBC has hard time understanding Judge Molloy ruled against them not because of grizzly mortality, but lack of food for grizzly in the area-

Perhaps the bear population could withstand more deaths; and, hey why not acquiesce with what is already happening? Bear bureaucrats could call that “adaptive management.” However, Judge Molloy didn’t relist the greater Yellowstone grizzly because too many bears were being killed. Oh well, here’s the story . . .

Link fixed! Grizzly group [IGBC] eyes raising bear death limits. Conservationists contest idea that more bruins could die without hurting regional population. By Cory Hatch. Jackson Hole News and Guide.

And grizzly conservation groups need to push not so much on holding down the mortality limits as enlarging the great bear’s primary conservation area.

Bear Committee turns into jays; scolds Judge Molloy

Results of the Yellowstone Grizzly Coordinating Committee meeting Jackson, WY-

I think we see the real reason they are upset that the judge relisted the grizzly bear in this statement:

“Fremont County [Wyoming] Commissioner Pat Hickerson echoed Schwartz and several other commissioners when he said grizzly bears have begun to expand into areas where their presence is incompatible with activities such as producing livestock.” [emphasis mine]. Once again, it’s the local noblemen who are upset.

Story on “the scolds” By Corey Hatch, Jackson Hole Daily.

State and federal bear offcials to meet and discuss Molloy’s ruling adding griz back to list

Meeting on how to respond to the relisting of Yellowstone area griz set for Oct. 28-9-

Hopefully they will do more than complain and say the judge was wrong.

Story. Associated Press.

Servheen: Grizzlies in more danger on threatened species list

Greater Yellowstone Coalition’s attorney calls Servheen’s statement to the court “absurd”-

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is asking judge Molloy to reverse his decision to put the Yellowstone area grizzly back on the threatened species list. The coordinator of the federal grizzly recovery program, Chris Servheen, controversial long-time coordinator of the Yellowstone grizzly record program, argued that relisting bears would somehow hurt them. This seems silly on the surface. I’d like to read his declaration to see how he makes this argument.

Servheen: Grizzlies in more danger on threatened species list. Matthew Brown. AP

Wyoming Game and Fish: Grizzly Bears doing well

State game agency says grizzlies will find something else to eat even though whitebark pine are mostly dead-

State: Bears doing well. By Cory Hatch. Jackson Hole Daily.

“Game and Fish officials acknowledged that mountain pine beetle activity continues at relatively high levels and many whitebark pine trees have died. But they said bears usually find alternative foods such as deer and elk meat.”

WY G&F fails to note that grizzly bears in the area are already the most carnivorous in North America. They are right, however, there really are other foods, of course. The local landed noblemen will probably object to grizzlies eating the livestock.

Idaho Mountain Express’ news story on the wolf hunt

The Mountain Express is central Idaho’s major weekly newspaper. It is published in the Wood River Valley, where a fair number of fairly rich people live amongst the larger population. This makes the area a target for “populist conservatives” who think that wealth means liberalism.

At any rate, here is their local look at the hunt. As judge deliberates, wolf hunt begins. Hunting opens in Sawtooths; 11,000 tags sold in Idaho. By Jon Duval. Express Staff Writer

Wolf hunts are on as judge eyes request to stop

Judge ponders rather than rule. Idaho wolf hunt begins Sept. 1; Montana Sept 15-

Idaho’s first wolf hunt will begin as scheduled tomorrow. Judge Molloy heard the arguments and said he’d decide as quickly as he could, but he did not issue an injunction.

Wolf hunts are on as judge eyes request to stop. By Matthew Brown. AP in the Idaho Statesman.

Big hearing on plea for injunction of Idaho and Montana wolf hunts is this morning in Missoula courtroom

Judge Molloy could allow hunts to procede or stop them despite the on-going sale of tags-

I’ve also wondered if some middle ground ruling is possible, given the intense emotion on both sides of the issue. I’d like to see a new delisting rule crafted. The content of the current rules bothers me more than the wolf hunt because as always the real threat to the long term viability of the wolf recovery are the cattle and sheep industries and their captive federal agency, Wildlife Services, that goes around killing wildlife some influential people think are problems.

Story in the Missoulian. By John Miller, AP.

If the hunt is canceled Idaho wolf tags sold (over 10,000) will have to be refunded. There will probably be some illegal or vigilante action this time. Hopefully folks will obey the law. It’s doubtful, however, that enough wolves would be killed illegally to make any biological difference to the states’ wolf population.

Idaho Fish and Game Talking Points for Federal Court Decision on Wolves

This was leaked to me. It is what any Idaho Fish and Game employee is supposed to tell the public or the media if the ask about Judge Molloy’s decision. RM

– – – – –

Talking Points for Federal Court Decision on Wolves

Federal District Judge Molloy issued a preliminary injunction against wolf delisting on July 18, which reinstated federal ESA protections for the northern Rocky Mountain gray wolf pending final resolution of the case.

• Idaho plans for wolf hunting seasons are on hold at this point and wolf hunting tags will not be issued by Idaho Department of Fish and Game. We do not know how long it may take for this case to wind its way through the court system. State and federal parties are reviewing legal options. The Commission and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game are extremely disappointed with the ruling and the resulting delay of state management.

• The judge did provide positive support for Idaho’s management approach. He found Idaho’s depredation control law to provide a similar standard to federal regulations and he found that Idaho management would not threaten the continued existence of the wolf in Idaho.

• The key basis of the preliminary injunction against delisting is lack of evidence of genetic exchange between wolf subpopulations, a recovery parameter established by the USFWS in the 1990s.

• The Fish and Game Commission has done everything within its power to get wolves delisted. The judge found that the Commission’s wolf management plan provided adequate protections for wolves. The factors preventing delisting-the genetic viability of wolves in Yellowstone and the judge’s concerns with the Wyoming management plan-are out of Idaho’s control. Idaho will work with the state and federal parties to address those concerns and reinstate delisting as soon as possible.

• The federal 10(j) of January 2008 is the controlling federal rule for wolves. As allowed under the federal 10(j), states and tribes with approved wolf management plans may manage wolves to ensure the health of wild elk and deer herds and to protect private property. The federal 10(j) rule allows individuals on private or public land to kill a wolf that is in the act of attacking their stock animals or dogs, except land north of Interstate 90 in Idaho, or land administered by the National Park Service, and provided there is no evidence of intentional baiting, feeding or deliberate attractants of wolves.

• At the end of 2007, there were an estimated 732 wolves in Idaho and the population has been growing about 20% per year.

NTY Editorial – A Stay of Execution for the Wolves

A Stay of Execution for the Wolves. The New York Times.

The Times writes: “This deep-set hostility has only a little to do with ranching. It is really driven by the competition between human hunters and wolves for the same game animals: elk and deer. And underneath it all is a false myth — the wolf as a kind of ferocious coward and an indiscriminate killer — that says less about the true nature of wolves than it does about human fear.”

Anti-wolf defendents can’t decide whether to appeal injunction

Foes of wolf protections discuss strategy. No decision yet on whether to appeal district judge’s ruling. By  Associated Press.

If they appeal, the temporary injunction could remain in place for 15 months or longer while the appeal being considered.

Trophic Cascade: Case For Wolves, Part 2

Trophic Cascade: Keeping the Carnivore; Saving the Forest. (Second of Two Parts). By Deb Donahue. Wyomingfile.com

Folks certainly liked the first part judging from the comments. I didn’t know there would be a second part. RM.

– – – – –

Donahue is a lawyer and public lands law expert

– – – – –

In case you missed it, here is part I.

Opinion Bill Schneider: A Wolf Plan that Works

A Wolf Plan that Works. “It seems as if most people in the New West would prefer to see the wolf controversy resolved, and agencies could quickly do this. Will it happen?” By Bill Schneider. New West.

– – – –

Interesting. I don’t necessary agree. RM.

Here is an article on the same subject from today’s Casper Star Tribune. Breeding controversy. By Chris Merrill.

[Idaho] Livestock leaders object to wolf relisting

Livestock leaders object to wolf relisting. Patricia R. McCoy. Capital Press

This article in a prominent ag newspaper says, among other things, that the Idaho Wolf Plan Plan went through 17 drafts and that the members worked hard and negotiated in good faith. Now those who didn’t like the product have litigated (bad bad!).

They don’t say the Idaho wolf plan was solely the product of the Idaho livestock industry with a couple of other token members. It doesn’t matter if it took them 100 drafts before they got their anti-wolf plan just right.

The members were: Jack Lavin, co-chair; Stan Boyd, co-chair; Ted Hoffman; Dr. Jim Peek, Bob Loucks
Cameron Wheeler, Laird Noh.

Except for Lavin (a Forest Service ex-bureaucrat) and Dr. Jim Peek (excellent), they were all anti-wolf, livestock people with Stan Boyd perhaps the most pervasive livestock lobbyist in Idaho.

USFWS reinstates rules following Molloy’s injunction

This news release was issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today (July 22) in the wake of Judge Malloy’s decision returning the wolf in the Northern Rockies to the endangered species protections of various kinds (from experimental, non-essential to endangered, depending on the area).

Those wolves in extreme northern Idaho and NW Montana now have the most protection. None of Wyoming is a wolf free kill zone anymore.

RM

Here is the news release-

Various stories on the big wolf lawsuit injunction

Of course, media coverage has been intense. Here are a number of stories that hopefully provide a variety of viewpoints.

Regional stories and editorials-

Wyoming-

Judge orders wolf relisting. Casper Star Tribune.
Judge restores wolf protection. Jackson Hole News and Guide

Idaho-

Wolves again have federal protection. By Rocky Barker. Idaho Statesman.
Back to square one with wolves. By Nate Poppino. Times-News

Montana-

Molloy restores ESA protection for wolves. By Matthew Brown, Associated Press and the Missoulian
Wolf Protections Restored in Northern Rockies, Hunting Halted. By Peter Metcalf. New West.

National-

Judge Returns Gray Wolves to Endangered List. By Felicity Barringer. New York Times.
Gray wolves get back their endangered species status, for now. Los Angeles Times.

Other-

Federal Judge Orders Endangered Species Act Protections Reinstated for Grey Wolves – At Least For Now. The Questionable Authority. By Mike Dunford.

District Judge Reverses Gray Wolf Delisting Throughout Northern Rockies. News release from Defenders of Wildlife.
The long road to victory for wolves. By Louisa Willcox. NRDC

Rocky Barker: Will judge Molloy issue a split decision on wolves?

Will judge Molloy issue a split decision on wolves? Barker’s blog is in the Idaho Statesman.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the outcome.

The big hearing today: Judge asked to rein in wolf killing in Northern Rockies

Judge asked to rein in wolf killing in Northern Rockies by Matthew Brown. Associated Press.

May 29 editorial added. 428 Wolves. The New York Times weighs in.

May 30. Wyoming’s wolf zones in question. By Cory Hatch and The AP, Jackson Hole News and Guide.

We predicted Wyoming’s “all wolves are vermin” zone would be a problem as well as the fact that the state legislature is required to indirectly assess the size of the vermin zone every year.

Rocky Barker: Judge appears to tip his hand in wolf lawsuit

Judge appears to tip his hand in wolf lawsuit. Letters from the West. Idaho Statesman.

Barker speculates that the death of wolf 253 could play a key role in the great delisting lawsuit. In way of correction or perhaps addition, there were many stories about 253 before and after the piece by Louisa Willcox. I think there may even be more to come.