The state of Idaho is managing wolves without any authority

The 2006 Memorandum of Agreement has EXPIRED.

The State of Idaho and Wildlife Services have been operating outside of the law since relisting has occurred. It appears that the State of Idaho has no management authority over wolves now that they have been re-listed under the ESA. This is evidenced by the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Secretary of Interior and the State of Idaho dated January 5, 2006 which hands over lead management authority over wolves to the State of Idaho. This agreement has expired. In addition, wolves have been relisted, and there is no valid section 10j MOA existing, at least which has been made public, which grants the State of Idaho management authority over wolves.

Update late 9/28. By Ralph Maughan. Today I called Ed Bangs about this. We had a brief conversation. He said that yes the MOA had expired, but the whole thing had been taken care of. He asked me to call Brian Kelly of USFWS in Boise for the “whole spiel.”  Brian Ertz called Kelly’s office a number of times, but Kelly did not answer, nor call back. So we are yet to gain any information.

Update 9/29.  By Ken Cole

I spoke to Brian Kelly, the new state State Supervisor Of Idaho USFWS Office, today about the issue at hand and he confirmed that there is no MOA but that the 2005 10(j) rule covers them and designates Idaho management authority. From the language I found on page 1291 of the 2005 10(j) rule I don’t see anything which does this. Essentially this says that an MOA with the Secretary of the DOI allows the state to manage wolves but the MOA has expired.

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/2005_10j/10jFR01052005.pdf

Response 3–3: The completion of an MOA with the Secretary of the DOI which is consistent with this rule allows a State or Tribe to take the lead in wolf management, to become ‘‘designated agent(s),’’ and to implement all parts of its approved wolf management plan that are consistent with this rule. This includes issuing written authorization for take, and making all decisions regarding implementation of the State or Tribal plan consistent with this rule. Under the MOA process, the Service will annually review the States’ and Tribes’ implementation of their plans to ensure compliance with this rule and to ensure the wolf population remains above recovery levels. States and Tribes also can become ‘‘designated agent(s)’’ and implement all or selected portions of this rule by entering into a cooperative agreement with the Service.

Furthermore, Section 6 of the ESA indicates that the DOI may enter in to a cooperative agreement with the states but management authority rests with, in this case, the USFWS otherwise.

Simply having an approved management plan is not adequate to grant a state lead management authority, an MOA is required.

From the ID Wolf 10j MOA FINAL_10506:

V. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

This agreement is effective through March 2010, unless terminated or wolves are delisted. This agreement may be terminated by either party after 90 days written notice in accordance with the 10(j) rule.

From our reading of the Endangered Species Act, it appears that such an agreement is required before the states can participate in management of an experimental, non-essential endangered species and, without such an agreement, the State of Idaho has no authority to manage wolves now that they are back on the Endangered Species list as section 10(j) animals.

Since relisting has occurred, there have been at least 4 instances whereby the IDFG has issued control orders, without apparent management authority, which have resulted in the death of at least 6 wolves.  There may have been many more because it is hard to get these numbers since the IDFG does not release information about its wolf management very often and hasn’t done so since June of this year.

Recently Governor Otter announced that he would hand back authority to manage wolves back to the USFWS if there wasn’t a new agreement by October 7 of this year. But, is it his to hand back?

Is the State of Idaho and the US Fish and Wildlife Service aware of this? Well, during the last meeting of the IDFG commissioners the subject of the expired MOA came up.  This shows that they are well aware of this lack of authority but there seems to be no attempt at clarifying any interim agreement while a new MOA is being negotiated. In the meantime the IDFG seems to be shooting from the hip and issuing control orders without legal authority.

It should be of concern when the government acts arbitrarily and it should be of concern to reasonable people who believe in the rule of law.

Wyoming not apologetic for thwarting wolf plans

Though Wyoming caused relisting of the wolf twice, they have no plans to change-

The article interestingly enough says that Idaho’s Butch Otter and and Montana’s Brian Schweitzer haven’t bothered to ask Wyoming’s retiring Governor Freudenthal whether Wyoming intends to reconsider.” I’m not sure what to make of that.

Wyoming not apologetic for thwarting wolf plans. Ben Neary Associated Press

Bootlicking and wiggling out of enforcement

I attended the IDFG Commissioner’s “special meeting” on Monday in Idaho Falls where the commissioners discussed how to proceed now that wolves are again protected by the Endangered Species Act.

After the Commission decided to adopt new rules on placement of traps, which requires trappers to keep traps at least 5 feet away from the center line of established trails and at least 300 feet away from established campgrounds, the subject of wolf management was next.

Robyn Thorson, the regional director for the USFWS, was first up and gave the most incredible bootlicking performance I’ve ever seen. She began by profusely apologizing to the Commission for the failure of their rule to delist wolves to live up to the law and then went on to give emphatic support for Idaho’s management plan and the way that Idaho Fish and Game has been managing wolves. She expressed that the USFWS was “deeply disappointed” that they lost in court.

The commissioners wanted to know if there was any way to ease the burden the present 10(j) rule which requires the use of science to show that wolves are having “unacceptable impacts” on ungulate populations and are a major reason that ungulate populations are not meeting the objectives set by the department. The IDFG wants to more easily kill wolves and extrapolate the existing science that they have conducted to zones adjacent to the Lolo Zones that they are concerned about. They also want to know if they have to conduct new science on other zones.

Thorson reminded them that the current 10(j) rule is once again under litigation and that the forthcoming decision on that case would determine the sideboards with which further decisions are made. She said she couldn’t really comment on whether the burden of science could be eased but said that they “would look at everything with the intent of trying to find a path”.

The commissioners then asked the USFWS to participate in the appeal of Molloy’s decision. She responded that the USFWS had made no decision about whether to appeal the decision.

Wayne Wright expressed disappointment that Idaho had not been involved in the decision about the DPS decision when the reintroduction plan was developed. Thorson stated that they would “not let that happen again” and that they wouldn’t do it without collaboration and open comment. She said that, since they have someone in Boise who works specifically on wolves, they could provide the “listening and sharing of information part” and that she hopes “to remedy any past laws in process”.

Randy Budge asked whether the USFWS felt that wolves were in any jeopardy with Idaho and Montana managing wolves in their respective states and the USFWS managing wolves in Wyoming. Thorson responded that the USFWS did not concur with the ruling of the judge and felt that the delisting rule adequately protected wolves. She also suggested that the quickest way for the Service to delist wolves in the Northern Rockies was for Wyoming to change their management plan so that it met their requirements. She didn’t know why Wyoming doesn’t want to come up with a plan but that they don’t and that’s the way it is.

There is much more and you can watch video from the meeting below:

Informative Document about Implications of Molloy’s Decsion

I just got back home from the Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner’s meeting in Idaho Falls. At the meeting an informative document “Gray Wolves in Idaho: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Answers to Idaho Department of Fish and Game Questions” was handed out. Check it out.

USFWS q&a

Federal officials [said to] look for ways to make Mexican wolf recovery a success in the Southwest

A lot of this article is just blue sky exaggeration-

This article’s URL was emailed to me by someone familiar with the Mexican wolf program. Federal officials look for ways to make wolf recovery a success in the Southwest. By Susan Montoya Bryan. LA Times.

My email friend wrote: “I read these stories and I can’t keep a straight face.  Mexican wolves have killed hundreds of cattle in the last decade?  At best they got 52 of the “little buggers” so any talk of hundreds of dead cattle is absurd.  I certainly hope that someone . . . makes a stand on this kind of misinformation.  If any ranchers have gone out of business or plan to in the future I would think they could come up with a believable story rather than a laughable one………..”

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service retakes helm of Mexican wolf management

Lawsuit settlement results in USFWS reclaiming decision-making authority over Mexican wolves-

Folks are now hopeful that the failing effort to restore the Mexican wolf is out of the hands of a committee that had become captive to local anti-wolf interests.
Deal on Mexican Gray Wolf. Associated Press in the New York Times

– – – –  –
NEWS RELEASE

Endangered Mexican Gray Wolves Get a Boost on Road to Recovery

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service retakes helm of Mexican wolf management

Contacts: Eva Sargent, Defenders of Wildlife, (520) 834-6441
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club – Grand Canyon (Arizona) Chapter (602) 999-5790
Matt Kenna, Western Environmental Law Center, (970) 385-6941 x 131
Michael Robinson, Center for Biological Diversity (575) 534-0360
Greta Anderson, Western Watersheds Project (520) 623-1878
Kim Crumbo, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council (928) 638-2304

TUCSON, Ariz. (Nov. 13, 2009) — The Mexican gray wolf recovery effort took a pivotal turn in the right direction today as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reclaimed its decision-making authority over management of this highly endangered animal that roams Arizona and New Mexico’s backcountry.

Settling a lawsuit brought by conservation organizations, the Fish and Wildlife Service reasserted its authority over a multiagency management team and scrapped a controversial wolf “control” rule that required permanently removing a wolf from the wild, either lethally or through capture, after killing three livestock in a year. Conservationists had criticized the rigid policy, known as Standard Operating Procedure 13 or SOP 13, for forcing wolves to be killed or sent to captivity regardless of an individual wolf’s genetic importance, dependent pups or the critically low numbers of wolves in the wild.

Government Has a Suspect in August 2008 Mexican Wolf Killing

Finally, will someone get what they deserve for killing a rare Mexican wolf?

See the news release below. Ralph Maughan

– – – – – – –
For more information, contact:

Rob Edward, WildEarth Guardians, (303) 573-4898 x 762 redward@wildearthguardians.org
Greta Anderson, Western Watersheds Project, (520) 623-1878 greta@westernwatersheds.org
Dave Parsons, The Rewilding Institute, (505) 275-1944 pbc@cybermesa.com

Government Has Suspect in August 2008 Mexican Wolf Killing

SANTE FE, N.M. – The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has concluded an investigation into the illegal killing of an endangered Mexican gray wolf and presented the results to the U.S. Attorney’s office.  Law enforcement officials report that the suspect in the killing is a ranch caretaker in southern New Mexico.

Endangered Species Act 35th anniversary and wolves

Today is the 35th anniversary of the ESA. Michael J. Robinson wrote the essay below for this forum-

Thirty five years ago today, on December 28, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon signed into law the Endangered Species Act, intended not just to stave off extinction, but more broadly to conserve the ecosystems on which endangered species depend.

Natural ecosystems can exhibit a tremendous resilience as plants and animals adapt to new opportunities and threats to their survival and reproduction. The Endangered Species Act itself displays some of the dynamic resilience of ecosystems.

As the Bush administration attempts for a fourth time to remove from the endangered species list one of the first creatures placed on the list – the gray wolf – it is worth noting that the federal agency that originally brought wolves to the brink of extinction, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, with a stroke of a pen thirty-five years ago was charged with protecting them. Its old habits have been hard to change.

Conservationists Request Feds Replace Photo of Mexican Wolf

‘Poster Wolf’ Was One of 18 Rare Mexican Wolves Killed Through Capture; Altogether, More Than 2,900 Gray Wolves Killed-

Conservation groups are fed up with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service continuing to use the photo of a particular Mexican wolf as their “poster wolf,” after they trapped and accidentally killed her back in 2005.

They are also angry that government wolf management is becoming more and more lethal even though the wolf population has stopped growing in size and is showing signs of collapse inside Yellowstone Park.  Ralph Maughan

News Release-

SILVER CITY, N.M.­ Sixteen conservation and animal welfare organizations today asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to replace the photograph of the “poster wolf” of the Mexican gray wolf program – prominently displayed on the federal agency’s website, http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/, and in a oversized blowup poster at the agency’s Washington, D.C., headquarters – because the wolf was trapped and inadvertently killed in 2005. (Click here to read letter to the Fish and Wildlife Service).

“Brunhilda,” alpha female of the Francisco Pack of Mexican gray wolves. Photo by George Andrejko.

The wolf was one of at least 2,911 gray wolves killed as a result of Fish and Wildlife Service actions since 1996, most in the northern Rocky Mountains and upper Midwest, but also including 29 highly imperiled Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest (see attached charts).

Judge Orders Pygmy Rabbit Endangered Species Consideration

This is pretty amazing because federal judge Edward Lodge of Idaho rarely rules in favor of conservation groups. Once again this shows how compromised the Bush/Kempthorne USFWS is.

News Release

For more information

Katie Fite, Western Watersheds Project, (208) 871-5738
Todd Tucci, Advocates for the West, (208) 342-7024
Duane Short, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, (307) 742-7978 or (270) 366-3415
Josh Pollock, Center for Native Ecosystems, (303) 546-0214
Bill Marlett, Oregon Natural Desert Association, (541) 330-2638
Mark Salvo, Sagebrush Sea Campaign, (503) 757-4221

BOISE, ID – Wednesday September 26 Federal District Judge Edward Lodge of the District of Idaho struck down a decision from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that the agency lacked sufficient scientific information to warrant Endangered Species Act listing consideration. The judge ordered the Fish and Wildlife Service to reconsider this small sagebrush mammal for listing and to issue a new 90-day finding.

“Under this decision, the FWS can no longer ignore the plummeting pygmy rabbit populations”, said Todd Tucci, attorney with Advocates for the West. “The Service must put politics aside, and let science dictate the outcome of its review.”

The pygmy rabbit weighs about a pound and a half and can fit in the palm of a hand. This unique rabbit climbs high into the branches of sagebrush to browse on the leaves, making it the only arboreal rabbit in North America. Pygmy rabbits require areas of tall, old sagebrush, typically found in valley bottoms.

“The BLM in 2007 is still relentlessly mowing, chopping, burning and herbiciding pygmy rabbit habitats, said Katie Fite of Western Watersheds Project. “Remnant thick and old growth sagebrush is being destroyed in BLM and Forest Service projects dubbed ‘hazardous fuels reduction’ or wildlife habitat projects. In reality, these are the same as the old livestock forage projects that have already obliterated so much of the Sagebrush Sea.”

“Sagebrush dependent wildlife, from pygmy rabbits to sage grouse, are under siege from the dual forces of livestock grazing and cheatgrass-driven fires, turning thousands of acres of the West into a barren moonscape,” said Bill Marlett, Executive Director of the Oregon Natural Desert Association.