Where do wolves stand?

Also, a discussion about wolf delisting

Here is an article that reasonably sums up where wolves are in the political landscape. Contrary to what I’ve read in other articles, it appears that Carter Niemeyer supports delisting only conditionally. He will likely be marginalized for it.

Niemeyer said that while he agrees wolves should be off the endangered species list, Simpson’s path to get there is inadvisable. “It sets a terrible precedent to delist them outside the normal delisting procedures,” he said. He worries that if the ESA is bypassed, slow and cumbersome as it may be, the results could open a Pandora’s box.

“Reasonable people need to prevail right now, otherwise we’re going to get a political fix that is going to be unacceptable.”

As debate rages, Wood River Valley sees less of predators.
By Ariel Hansen – Magic Valley Times-News

This mirrors my sentiment but I would add that I don’t think that the states or the USFWS have been negotiating in good faith. The states, particularly Idaho and Wyoming, and increasingly Montana, have a toxic view towards wolves. With the new draft legislation it appears that they don’t want to even consider managing wolves using science and rational thought. The legislatures seem to perpetuate every anti-wolf myth and made up tale that the anti side can come up with. The USFWS, despite contrary assertions by the extreme anti-wolf crowd, hasn’t budged from it’s stance that a sustainable wolf population only requires 10-15 breeding pairs per state even though those estimates were made at a time when understanding of wolves and population ecology was in its infancy. Now the science indicates that a much higher population is required.

Read the rest of this entry »

Final Draft of Idaho Wolf Legislation

Legislation rescinds the 2002 Wolf Management Plan and calls for $500 per head bounty on wolves.

The draft bill appears to have been written by Runft & Steele Law Offices, PLLC in Boise, Idaho and was distributed to a group of politically connected people.

The bill is radical and shows that anti-wolf forces will seek eradication of wolves in Idaho if national legislation to remove all protections from wolves is or isn’t successful. Obviously eradication of wolves in Idaho is far more important than educational funding which, as you know is being cut. Of course the funding for the bounty program, if the bill is passed unchanged, “will be paid by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game from its General Operating Budget”.

There are several more provisions in the bill which remove all protections for wolves and rescinds all cooperation with federal agencies.

The bill is available for download and pasted below. Read the rest of this entry »

Larry Craig lobbies on wolf legislation

Hired by “Sportsmen” for Fish and Wildlife

Could Larry Craig be a closet wolf lover?

Could Larry Craig be a closet wolf lover? This one doesn't seem to be pleased by his advances 😉

Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, a group who is turning out to be more for livestock than for wildlife, has hired former Senator Larry Craig to lobby for legislation which would remove protections from all wolves nationwide.  This would leave the doors open for states like Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming to eradicate as many wolves as they please.

It amazes me that this manly man hunting group would hire a coward who is too scared to admit that he is gay.  It highlights the hypocrisy of these groups who use hyperbole and fear against wolves and any other predator that they fear.

Maybe a little hyperbole and satire is in order 😉

Clarification and a note about the danger of satire:  Larry Craig feeds the homophobia present in this society by hiding his sexual preference. While homophobia is no laughing matter, it should be noted that Larry proudly fought against the rights of people to love who they choose to love.  I find that particularly disgusting and in particular need of satire of the ruthless variety.

-Ken

Larry Craig lobbies on wolf legislation.
By John Miller – Associated Press

Four New Wolf Delisting Bills Introduced

They’re all bad for Idaho wolves

Yesterday Orrin Hatch, Max Baucus, and Jon Tester introduced bills into the Senate, and Denny Rehberg introduced two bills into the House. All of them would delist wolves but there are three approaches taken.

S.249 and HR 509 would delist all wolves nationwide and prevent them from ever receiving protection under the Endangered Species Act, while S.321 and HR 509 would delist wolves only in Montana and Idaho.

The Baucus/Tester bill would make the 2009 delisting rule law, and has changed from last year’s version which would have placed minimum threshold of 518 wolves identified in the IDFG plan into effect. This bill contains no such language so essentially Idaho can reduce wolf populations to 100 or so wolves as defined in the Idaho Legislature’s plan. The Montana plan calls for managing wolves for a population of at least 342 wolves.

The Rehberg bill, HR 510, would simply delist wolves in Montana and Idaho but would not require the states to follow their own management plans leaving the door open for wolf eradication if directed by the legislatures of each state.

Baucus Tester S. 321 Wolf Bill

Hatch S. 249 Wolf Bill

Rehberg HR 509 Wolf Bill

Rehberg HR 510 Wolf Bill