A Letter to the Idaho Legislature Regarding Wolf Management
by John L. Runft
Dear Legislators,
The current late hour “delisting” by the Bush administration is, I suggest, simply one more round in the efforts of the USFWS and the wolf proponents (now nominal opponents to the USFWS) to keep the states off balance and in the game. If not foreclosed by the incoming Obama administration, the lawsuits of the proponents will serve to delay and transmogrify “delisting” into the inevitable unfunded federal mandate to be serviced and paid for by the state.
In 2002, the Idaho Legislature promulgated the Idaho Wolf Conservation and Management Plan [here] as a good faith, practical compromise, even though it was contrary to the established policy of the State of Idaho laid down by the legislature by House Joint Resolution 5 in 2001. This policy to “remove” the reintroduced wolves is explicitly reiterated and acknowledged on page 4 in the Executive Summary of the cited 2002 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. This Plan is still the law of Idaho.
Already the Feds have convinced the Idaho Fish and Game to raise the management level of wolves from 150 to 500 in order to appease the Fed plan to “delist.” This increase is contrary to the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. The Plan on page 18, section entitled “Wolf Population Objectives,” provides that “wolf numbers and distribution within the state will be managed per the chart on page 5 [table 1] (which provides for 15 packs)” and further states that “establishment of specific population sizes to be maintained is not realistic.”
The “delisting” of the wolves has been siren song that has been constantly sung and whispered in the ears of the Idaho legislators and the IDF&G for two decades now, all to this end: Nothing. Shouldn’t the members of the legislature finally feel hornswagled? Duped?
Also attached [here] is a copy of the “Memorandum of Agreement” (”MOA”) between the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor Of Idaho dated January 5, 2006. In Section VII (interestingly there are two section VIIs) of the “MOA” dealing with “FUNDING,” it is made clear that Idaho cannot depend on continued federal support in its efforts to assist in managing the wolves.
The “MOA” provides that the purpose of the rule promulgated under ESA § 10(j) is “to grant those states with approved management plans an opportunity to assume many of the management responsibilities currently performed by the service.” An opportunity? Look at the duties listed for the state — all of the expensive grunt work while the feds continue to control and direct the program. Not only does this violate every conceivable tenet of federalism, it is a fraud on the Idaho taxpayers.
Idaho voters and taxpayers were promised that the state would manage and control what it would be paying for. Thus, Idaho has fallen into the trap of agreeing to provide services under (not “manage”) and pay for a federal program, controlled and directed by the federal government. In fact the “MOA” refers to the State as “the designated agent” of the FWS.
Surely now all can finally see that delisting will never happen –- in any form as originally conceived. With this next step (re-delisting), the Feds seek to entice Idaho through its the Fish and Game Department into a greater “step and fetch it” roll, (now 500 wolves, more personnel on the ground and a larger department) while acknowledging that the assistance of the State is really needed. Federal budget problems will be brought up soon enough acknowledging in fact that there are insufficient federal funds to manage the wolf “reintroduction” and the “problem” will fall into the state’s lap and expense under federal control and direction.
Some legislators have balked at facing up to the Feds, rescinding the Wolf Management Plan, and refusing to cooperate or participate with the Feds (a “boycott”) because the Feds have threatened to name the Indian Tribes as the designated agents of the FWS. Those legislators need to reexamine this so called “threat.” The entire wolf management is fast spiraling into a crisis. Hunting will not cure the wolves’ fecundity. Alaska relies on helicopter control, which might not work in Idaho terrain. Poison is the only other remedy, and it is outlawed. There is not enough federal money allocated to properly control and manage the wolves. As the “MOA” states, the numbers of wolves reached “the biological requirements for wolf recovery in 2002″ and their numbers keep expanding. Let the tribes have the problem and save Idaho the blame and expense.
This is a federal disaster and the State has a final opportunity to extricate itself from it. I submit that the only remaining sensible and courageous course of action in light of the events that have transpired is the boycotting of any cooperation with the federal government regarding wolf management until Idaho can have true, complete control of the management of all its wildlife, including wolves.
Best regards,
John L. Runft
Runft & Steele Law Offices, PLLC
Boise, Idaho
by Maury J.
by George
The first (and only) delisting proclamation was published by USFWS/DOI in the Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2008 [here].
That was a week before the IDFG plan was passed by the IDFG Commission and therefore was not and could not have been “approved” by the USFWS as a condition of the first (and only) delisting published thus far. The “Information Quality Act Disclaimer” of March 7, 2008 [here] was simply acknowledgement of the receipt of the plan and included its standard disclaimer statement. I am not aware of any document indicating that USFWS approved the IDFG Wolf Management Plan or even recognized anything but receiving it until the July 2008 Court decision.
However, it was of course recognized in the Dec. 11, 2008 re-listing notification published in the Federal Register thanks to the recent letter jointly signed by IDFG and the Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation. Like the change to managing for 500+ wolves, that letter was submitted without authorization by the Idaho Legislature.
by John R.
Let me add that, since the 2002 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan is the law of Idaho, the IDFG 2008 plan to maintain a wolf population number (500 wolves) different than managing to a minimum of 150 wolves (15 packs) is contrary to the 2002 Plan. The 2002 Plan on page 18, entitled “Wolf Population Objectives,” provides that “wolf numbers and distribution within the state will be managed per the chart on page 5 [table 1] (which provides for 15 packs)” and further states that “establishment of specific population sizes to be maintained is not realistic.” See also paragraph 3 on page 4 in the Executive Summary, entitled “Population Objectives,” where this same statement is made.
Thus, not only is the IDFG mandated under the 2002 Plan to manage to a minimum of 15 packs, it is affirmatively directed NOT to select some population size above that number to “maintain.” The concept and direction in the 2002 Plan is to manage to a minimum of 150 wolves, not to set some greater population number to “maintain.” Words in statutes have meaning. The word “unrealistic” = “unreasonable.” Unreasonable acts by an agency are ultra vires and are without power or effect.
The IDFG blatantly ignored this direction from the legislature. Consequently, the IDFG is making policy without the authority to do so. By directly negotiating this policy with the Feds, despite the legislature’s statutory direction to the contrary, the IDFG’s objective is to place the legislature in a position where it will be forced to go along with these conditions for “delisting” achieved by this ultra vires policy-making by the IDFG.
by Marshall S.
We are all agreed that the Canadian Grey Wolf is a cancer that is threatening to destroy our ungulate game herds and livestock producers. The wolf is the tool that the environmental extremists/socialists/Marxists are using to achieve federal/centralized control over our state’s sovereignty, individual freedoms, land use, and property rights. Only by fighting for our 10th Amendment right of sovereignty will we be able to manage Idaho’s wildlife and natural resources without federal interference in the name of the ESA or EPA. I understand that OK and LA already have resolutions before their legislatures to enforce the 10th Amendment. Idaho should do the same.
by George
In my opinion, too many Idaho state officials are bad-mouthing Wyoming and making bold assertions of fact without even reading either the state laws or what was published in the Federal Register. If everyone would go back to the Feb. 27, 2008 Federal Register at:
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/delist_02202008/73FR10514.pdf
and just do a word search for “breeding pairs,” reading each sentence where those two words exist, I think they would have a different perspective of the delisting.
John has already pointed out that Judge Molloy’s decision concerning genetic connectivity was ludicrous and FWS gave reasons why Wyoming’s plan was perfectly acceptable and could maintain 15 breeding pairs as easily as the other two states. I get upset when legislators who weren’t even around during the long painful process that resulted amending the proposed Idaho Wolf Plan in 2002, claim to have all the answers and don’t even know the questions. They remind me of a bunch of quail (representing Idaho) chattering and running around under a hawthorne bush scared to death of a goshawk (representing the Feds) perched in a tree. How can we ever restore state sovereignty with people like this representing our interests? If Idaho recognized that 200 wolves were way too many in 2001, how can anyone justify agreeing to manage several times that many?
by John
The wolf introduction to the lower states is one of the worst mistakes ever made. The reintroduction of these wolves is going to be the down fall of our wildlife and could seriously infect more than wildlife. I’m talking about Hydatid Disease Tapeworms. This is not the only disease the wolves have introduced to Idaho and other states.
Take a look at this article from Outdoorsman author George Dovel, Two-Thirds of Idaho Wolf Carcasses Examined Have Thousands of Hydatid Disease Tapeworms (Dovel, 2009) [here]. I think this article and the supporting information really says it all. By not acting in fixing this problem soon, it might doom us all. You had better pray this outbreak does not spread to the human population and the drinking water we consume.
I for one am one upset, pissed off Idahoan that wants our state government officials to stand up and take some action. If they fail in this request, they not only risk my family, but those downstream from us and your own.
Please go to see House Bill 148 in the Wyoming Legislature. That is the solution for all of the states. If all three states would adopt that bill, then the feds would have no recourse but to accept the obvious fact: they have violated the Final Rule for introduction. The link to the Bill is:
http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2009/Introduced/HB0148.pdf