Wolf ‘reintroduction’ still rankles
By Mike Satren, Outdoors editor, Coeur d’Alene Press [here]
Clash of worldviews pits rural versus urban
When the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducted its Feb. 21 conference call to brief the media that wolves would be delisted from the Endangered Species Act on March 28, USFWS leaders and Interior officials patted themselves on the back.
“Gray wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains are thriving and no longer require the protection of the Endangered Species Act,” said Interior Deputy Secretary Lynn Scarlett. “The wolf’s recovery in the Northern Rocky Mountains is a conservation success story.”
Many of the rural folks in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming don’t share this rosey view now and they didn’t like it back when the Canadian grey wolves were first turned loose in central Idaho in 1996 and 1997.
They counter that the real conservation success story was much earlier during the 20th century when hunters and fishermen put their tax money where their mouths were. Angry at the severe depletion of herds and flocks caused by the unchecked market hunting of the 19th century, President Theodore Roosevelt - supported by sportsmen - worked to pass laws to implement game regulations throughout the states heralding an era of wildlife abundance.
OneCreek On Wolves and Cougars
The Idaho Statesman ran dueling reader’s opinion pieces about wolves this week. One was by Suzanne Asha Stone of Boise, the wolf conservation specialist for Defenders of Wildlife:
Forty years ago, there were no known wolf packs in the northern Rockies because people had driven them to near extinction in the region. Today, 1,500 wolves roam across Montana, Wyoming and Idaho. Returning wolves to the wild has been a remarkable wildlife achievement, but this is a story whose next chapters are just now being written. The question is: Will this story have a happy ending? … [more]
The other was written by Nate Helm, executive director of Idaho’s chapter of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife.
Yes, it is time - time to remove the population of wolves living in Idaho from the endangered species list. Sportsmen in Idaho and across the West support the Department of Interior’s (DOI) recent proposal to delist wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.
Wolves in Idaho are currently managed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In the case of wolves, the constitutional right given to all states, including Idaho, to manage her wildlife has been superseded by the ESA. The traditional managers of wildlife in Idaho - the citizens of the state, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission, and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game - have had little say. … [more]
Both opinion pieces drew a rash of comments. Most are typical Internet drivel, but one comment stood out head and shoulders above the rest. It was submitted by OneCreek, a pseudonym no doubt. I don’t have any idea who One Creek is, but his comment was so superb that I am posting in its entirety. Please enjoy, and hopefully learn:
Heck - This should have been a “Letter to the Editor”…
I am going to tread dangerously here, and make an assumption that most, if not all of the previous commentary has been penned by those who live and work in cities. Therefore, thoughts and commentary on the subject outside of that which reflects on certain legal perspectives is mostly little more than “abstract”, rather than objective.
I live and work in the North Fork Ranger District of the Salmon-Challis National Forest. Not only do I live in said District, but my property is totally surrounded by the National Forest. Residing here year-around since the year the wolves were established in the area, 1995, perhaps my observations should be of some consideration regarding this debate.
Living here as I do, observation of the natural world around me is secondhand practice. I see things that the casual visitor does not, and for that matter, even the dedicated hunter or the naturalist. By the time their observational talents begin to truly and measurably improve, they must leave for more civilized environs. Conversely, this grand landscape is my constant companion.
What federal wolf delisting means for Oregon’s livestock producers
Here is an example your government at work. What follows is a press release from the Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, with some commentary from Wildlife and People thrown in:
ODFW Press Release, March 21, 2008 [here]
LA GRANDE, Ore.—A radio-collared gray wolf was confirmed in Oregon in January. Credible public reports of wolf sightings continue, and biologists are finding tracks and other wolf sign in northeast Oregon. The de-listing of wolves from the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) in a portion of eastern Oregon is scheduled to take effect on March 28, 2008.
The gray wolf is not endangered. There are thousands of them roaming the West. Despite the best efforts of eco-nazis, the US Government was forced to delist them.
As wolf activity in Oregon increases, the state is ready to take the management reins. Oregon adopted a wolf management plan in 2005 and has been implementing it since.
But not to worry. ODFW HAS listed gray wolves under Oregon State T&E laws, and so will be protecting them from all harm despite the Federal delisting
“Oregonians are in a fortunate position to already have a Wolf Conservation and Management Plan in place, so we’re ready to conserve and manage wolves,” says Russ Morgan, ODFW wolf coordinator. “But there seems to be confusion about how the plan deals with depredation by wolves. We want to set the record straight so livestock producers are clear on what tools are available to them.”
How fortunate are we! But just in case the victims of unrestrained, multiplying, ravenous wolves don’t understand, Russ Morgan of ODFW will be setting them straight.
Wolf-Proof Bus Stop Shelters Go Up In New Mexico Community
by Admin at Wolf Crossing [here]
Finally, a few of the kids from the Reserve School District in New Mexico, will be sheltered from both the weather and from local wildlife while they wait for the bus.
Wolf-Proof Bus Stop Shelter (built from donated funds raised by Louis Oliver and Mimbres Farm Bureau)
In May of 2007 two Catron county Reserve School district school children were followed home from the bus stop by what appeared to be a Mexican wolf although later two sets of wolf tracks were found in the immediate area of the incident.
In a separate incident a 14 year old camper was surrounded by three Mexican wolves while on a hunting trip with his father and family friends. Locations determined the wolves were likely members of the Luna pack. The incident lasted 5-10 minutes and the young man although armed and afraid for his life, chose to wait patiently while the wolves investigated him. Thankfully the incident ended with the wolves moving away, possibly due to the smell and presence of a rifle the young man was carrying. However, these incidents have underscored the need to protect rural children from escalating encounters with Mexican wolves.
This incident among others prompted the Catron County Commission to pass an emergency ordinance directed at protecting children and defenseless persons from mismanagement that is prevalent in the program and growing worse as power struggles become common within the adaptive management oversight committee overseeing the project and the ongoing development of the environmental impact statement that will eventually lead to program expansion.
The Orogrande Slaughter
The pictures in the linked report were taken during 4 separate trips within just an 11-day period from 2-28-2008 through 3-9-2008. The location of the elk predation by wolves was along a small section of road at Orogrande Creek, which empties into the North Fork of the Clearwater River in North Central Idaho. This small section of this huge country is indicative of how severe the predation has been this winter as elk have been trapped by deep snow and are easily killed by wolves.
Warning: the pictures are graphic and gruesome.
The Orogrande Slaughter is [here].
Important Facts about Alaskan Wildlife and Predator Control
Originally posted at Alaskans for Professional Wildlife Management [here] and Wolf Crossing [here]
* Wild game is an important food source for many Alaskans and the goal of predator control is to reduce wolf and bear populations in order to increase the number moose and caribou available to be used as food by people
* In much of Alaska, predators keep moose and caribou populations below what their habitats could support
* There are up to 11,000 wolves, 30,000 grizzly and over 100,000 black bears in Alaska
* Wolves and bears may kill up to 80% of the moose or caribou that die each year
* The goal of predator control is to sustain healthy caribou and moose populations AND healthy wolf and bear populations
* In control areas, predator numbers may be reduced, but are never completely eliminated
* There is no indication that predator control permanently damages wolf or bear populations
* There are only five current wolf control programs in place, covering only 9% of Alaska
* Predator control is not hunting; it is a wildlife management tool only used to reduce excessive predator populations. As a result, the rules of fair chase do not apply
* When properly conducted, predator control programs have successfully increased moose and caribou populations
Pronghorns and Wolves
The Far Left leaning Missoulian published a cheesy science report on pronghorn antelope in Yellowstone [here].
BILLINGS - More gray wolves mean more pronghorn antelope in the Yellowstone area, according to researchers who say the region’s rebounding wolf population is killing and scaring off coyotes that otherwise prey on pronghorn.
The researchers said that during a three-year study, pronghorn fawns were three times more likely to survive in areas dominated by wolves versus those ruled by coyotes. That’s because wolves favor larger prey, such as elk or cattle, and generally leave pronghorn alone.
The findings appear in the latest issue of the journal Ecology.
The “science” reported by the Missoulian here is a little twisted. Yes, wolves generally prefer larger prey, when they can get it. And no, coyotes generally do not predate elk. But the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem is so messed up that strange things happen there.
A super-abundance of wolves has been decimating what used to be a super-abundance of elk. Historically both species were rare in Yellowstone due to anthropogenic predation over thousands of years. Lewis and Clark encountered few of either when they traversed the Yellowstone in the early 1800’s (actually just Clark and a few of the Corps of Discovery–Lewis and the rest went another way).
In the absence of human predation the elk populations rebounded, or as biologists say, irrupted. Then wolves were reintroduced in the 1990’s and their population irrupted. Carnage has ensued.
Today the Yellowstone elk are in serious decline due to wolf predation. The Northern Yellowstone elk herd is at record low population numbers and may be extirpated in the next year or two by a burgeoning number of wolves at record high counts.
Hunters: The State of Idaho needs your HELP!
by Bobby Cupp, Dec 12, 2004
[Note: this dated letter was sent to us recently. We post it out of a spirit of inclusion, but generally we prefer new work. The same could be said for the previous post as well.]
We are faced with a problem in our country that most Hunters, Ranchers and Politicians don’t know how to approach or solve.
For example Hound Hunters have the right to hunt and run their hounds on public or private land, but some are scared to release their hounds because of the threat that wolves may kill them. Therefore this takes away their right to hunt. There have been sightings of wolves in our area, but authorities seem to cover it up for some reason or another.
This affects our rights to pursue Bear, Mtn. Lions, etc. Hunting those predators is legal in our state.
This problem also affects other hunters as a whole. The wolf population is increasing yearly with no attempt to control them. Wolves are affecting our Deer, Elk, Sheep and Moose populations.
No matter what other groups or activists say or print, the public is being misled in so many ways. The activists provide only false and inaccurate numbers that lead people to believe there are fewer wolves so they stay on the endangered species lists.
Wolves and Hunting
By T. R. Mader, Research Director, Abundant Wildlife Society of North America [here]
I’m convinced, based on several years of wolf research, hunters will bear the brunt of wolf recovery/protection regardless of location.
There is no language written in any wolf recovery plan to protect the hunter’s privilege to hunt. Wolves are well known to cause wild game population declines which are so drastic hunting is either eliminated or severely curtailed. And there is no provision for recovery of wild game populations for the purposes of hunting. It simply will not be allowed.
Example: A few years ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) agreed the state should take over the responsibility of wolf management. The DNR felt wolves were impacting their deer populations and wanted to open a short trapping season on the wolf.
The environmentalists sued and won. The USFWS could not give wolf management back to Minnesota in spite of a desire to do so.
The problem with wolf recovery is that most people, especially hunters, have not looked “beyond press releases and into the heart of the wolf issue.”
It must be stated clearly that the wolf is the best tool for shutting down hunting. The anti-hunters know this. Most hunters don’t. Thus, wolf recovery is not opposed by the people who will be impacted most.
In order to understand the impacts wolves have on hunting, let’s look at some biological factors of the wolf and compare some hunting facts.
Wolf Kill Coverup
Guest post by Shane McAfee
I have been an outfitter in Salmon, ID for over 30 years and I have seen the changes!
In 1996 our Unit 28 opening week saw ten hunters harvest nine bull elk (1-7×7, 6-6×6’s and 2- 5×5’s). All mature bulls, all happy hunters! Eleven years later, after the wolves multiplied here, this season (2007) we harvested only one spike bull and four deer out of twenty total hunters. On my first three hunts last year I went 15 days horseback guiding and never saw an elk! Almost all of the hunters never wanted to see Idaho again; and yes, they were very upset!
I wonder what this is doing to the economy of our small towns in Idaho. I hear the same worries from my friends, locals, and pretty much everyone I talk to. I have yet to run into anyone on the trails, dirt roads, paved roads, or on Main street in Salmon that came into our county to see a wolf!
I guess most of the wolf lovers are in New York City watching them on TV, as I have yet to meet one here, much less seen them spend one dollar in our community. I know for a fact that there are hundreds, or possibly thousands, of elk hunters that will not return.
Wow, wolves really do impact the economy of small Idaho towns!
I have talked and pleaded with our Fish & Game Dept. in Salmon, Region 7, to no avail. They say basically nothing can be done. A few wolves have been taken out by the Feds only because of beef kills. Not one wolf that I know of has been taken out because of elk kills.
About 5 years ago, while lion hunting in my area in winter on snowmobile, I found nine dead elk (8 cow elk and 1-6×6 bull) on Silver Creek Road (a 14-mile stretch) all killed within the previous week. All were killed by a pack of about eight wolves, basing my judgment on the tracks around the kills, the way the elk were killed, and the fact I seen plenty of sign that the pack was in the area. Wolf tracks were everywhere, some of the elk were eaten, some not, and most had intestines pulled out. All typical wolf kills that I have seen plenty of.
Not one killed elk was covered by snow or brush as lions tend to do. Almost all had their nose’s pulled off, as usual for wolf kills I have seen. A lion had never pulled a nose off an elk that I had ever found. Lions had never killed over 2 to 3 deer ( hardly ever an elk ) on that 14-mile stretch of Silver Creek Road ever in a course of a winter the 20+ years I have been there! Also, no lion tracks were found by me and my lion hunters over a 2 week period in the area when the elk were found. It was obviously a case of binge killing by the wolf pack that was in there. I would swear to this on a stack of Bibles; the elk were killed by the wolf pack in the area!
On my way out on snowmachines with my hunter/client that day, I ran into Jason H., now the Idaho Fish & Game Wolf biologist in the Salmon office but then a guy doing a “wolf study” under Gary P. (now Idaho Fish & Game Commissioner, Salmon area). I told Jason about the nine dead elk on Silver Creek Road and that in my opinion, they were all killed by the pack of eight wolves in the area. He said he would check the kills, as he was doing the study on the impact of wolves on big game in the area.
A few days later I ran into him on snowmachines again. I asked him if he had seen the elk kills on Silver Creek? He said that he had. I asked him what he had written down in his study reports. He said that he had determined that all nine elk were killed by lions! And that he wrote it down as such in his reports on the wolf study he was doing. I was floored, to say the least, and asked him if he was for the wolves or against them. He told me he was for the introduction of wolves and wanted them in Idaho.
The important thing to note is that if the nine wolf killed elk on Silver Creek Road that week were reported as lion kills, what about the rest of the study in the whole Salmon area that winter?
Today both these guys are pulling good wages and have been working for the Idaho Fish and Game Dept. for years. I hope that they are proud of their study. I just wanted them to know I didn’t forget about that special moment. Believe me I never will.
Thank you for the opportunity to tell my story. Feel free to send it to anyone you please.
Julie Smithson Reviews Undue Burden
No Popcorn Needed
by Julie Kay Smithson [here]
Undue Burden: The Real Cost of Living With Wolves is one documentary that will likely never garner a Cannes Film Festival award, but that is not its intent.
Its makers seek to save lives, restore peace of mind and reintroduce sanity to places like Reserve, New Mexico, the Upper Peninsula (”U.P.”) of Michigan and the vast sterilized landscape of Yellowstone National Park, and its surrounding rangelands, ranches and towns.
The argument that people are “encroaching” on wolf habitat doesn’t fly. Wolves are being captive bred, habituated to people and then loosed upon areas where it’s arguable their ancestors ever lived in the first place.
The evidence of what is happening in parts of rural America targeted for wolf “reintroduction” and “recovery” is etched in the pinched, drawn and stressed faces of those good folks who consented to be interviewed by filmmaker Bruce Hemming. Hemming simply could not stand idly by while rural children faced the fangs and inexorable, relentless threat from wolves — wolves that the juggernaut of federal agents and their partners are literally delivering almost to people’s doorsteps. Documenting such events has been a grueling and exhausting process, but one that must get and keep your attention.
Your children or those of your friends could be the next ones facing this “future.”
Schoolchildren are being watched and followed to their bus stops. They are being watched while they play on rural playgrounds. Shelters are being built for them to be safe from wolves. They and their parents and teachers are suffering post-traumatic stress disorder as they watch their livestock, horses and pets, plus ungulate wildlife, disemboweled and left to suffer horrible death from wolves sport killing. Is this what you think rural living should be?
Order your copy today: You can’t afford to miss this chance to save lives by learning the truth about the wolf “reintroduction” and “recovery” agenda.
Order copies for all your rural friends and family members, because this nightmare will soon be at their doors, if it isn’t already.
Order copies for your local feed store, farm supply, libraries, county commissioners, emergency medical technicians, and veterinarians.
Invite a group to your home to view this one-hour riveting time of truth. Tell them it isn’t pretty, but it is true. Prepare to be riveted to your seat, unable to deny the truth you watch. They, like you, need to know the truth about wolves and those siccing them and other large predators upon rural America.
This is the best twenty-five dollars (postage paid) you will spend this year. Don’t delay; order several copies today! CLICK HERE
Caution: Contains graphic photos that may not be suitable for young children.
Undue Burden: The real cost of living with wolves
There is brand new documentary film about the plight of Americans beset by government-dumped wolves, Undue Burden. It tells the story of regular, law-abiding citizens powerless to halt government-protected wolves from killing their livestock and pets, stalking their children, and destroying the livability of their communities and private properties.
Undue Burden is a shocking, gritty, graphic, and real. Not a Hollywood production, Undue Burden is short on glitter, long on honesty. The folks interviewed are just like you and me, shy in front of the camera, but they convey a story of oppression and hurt that is medieval and absolutely unconscionable in our modern society.
The villains are the radical anti-humanist urban eco-elite and a despicable US Fish and Wildlife Service. They are not interviewed, refusing all offers and requests to present their twisted side.
The victims sit in plain dress in their own homes and tell a harrowing tale of a government gone mad with malice and greed.
Numerous wolves are filmed, and it is readily apparent that the animals are not pure wolves but hybridized wolf-dogs, though just as vicious and deadly as the real thing. The wolf-dogs kill for sport. They are human-habituated. They do not fear man; instead they stalk to kill men, women, and especially children. They also sport-kill elk, and are extirpating local herds.
No one in America should have to endure attacks by killer wolf-dogs in their yards, at their school bus stops, in their school playgrounds. Children as young as 3 years old are suffering nightmares and other symptoms of clinical Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The role of government should be to protect the citizenry from deadly predators, not to breed and release killers in our midst.
Undue Burden tells the story of real people, nice people, our neighbors, suffering relentless depredations at the hands of an insane, belligerent, and hate-filled Federal government.
It is a very powerful documentary, and must viewing for everyone who cares about this country, about wildlife, and about our fellow human beings.
Undue Burden was written, produced, and directed by Mr. Bruce Hemming, a hunter, fisherman, and rural resident of North Dakota. The documentary is filmed largely in New Mexico. Mr. Hemming did his homework, and found historical records of over 100 people killed by wolves in the U.S. His anger leaks in here and there, but it is more than justified.
Undue Burden may be purchased [here]. A DVD costs $25, a small amount to defray the costs of production. Additional donations are welcome.
Pictures tell a thousand words. No writer can express the emotion and reality of the situation better than this film does. Undue Burden is a very important documentary. Get a copy and show it to your friends.
Wolves Are Targeting Humans As Prey
by Valerius Geist, PhD., Professional Biologist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, the University of Calgary
Note: The following essay was originally sent to the Saskatoon Star Phoenix on Feb. 9th, but they have not printed it as yet. However, it was posted at Wolf Crossing today [here].
I am one of two scientists asked by the Carnegie family to independently investigate the death of Kenton, their son. The coroner’s inquest into this matter was narrowly focused on who killed Kenton Carnegie, to which the correct answer is: a wolf pack. It did not address wider policy issues such as conservation legislation, for the tragedy would almost certainly not have happened in British Columbia despite that province’s share of wolf attacks on humans, nor failures in scholarship that led to the wide and dogmatic acceptance of the view that wolves are not dangerous to humans. That myth has killed at least three persons in North America in the past decade, two of which were highly educated young people. Nor did it dwell on what circumstances lead to the habituation of wolves to humans, one of which is scarcity of natural prey, which could be due to risen wolf populations. In short, there is more to the story than has been addressed by the court or the press.
Nobody involved in the tragedy, including the wolf specialist working on behalf of the coroner’s office, noticed that the habituated wolves had been targeting humans. However, students of urban coyotes described a stepwise progression of behavior, which is shown by coyotes that are targeting children in urban parks. This pattern of increasing familiarization with potential prey is identical in wolves and coyotes. In short, the situation at Camp North Landing was a disaster waiting to happen. Ironically, while biologists studying coyotes affirmed that coyotes targeted humans as prey, wolf biologists denied that wolves were dangerous to people.
The view that – in the absence of rabies - wolves do not attack people has taken so solid a grip in current times, that even after an exploratory attack by two wolves on two camp personnel at Camp North Landing, the threat posed by wolves was not fully recognized. A captive pack of wolves destroyed their new keeper, a biologist with a master’s degree, within three days, a tragedy traceable to the belief that wolves do not attack people. A similar fate befell a lady keeping a pack of wolf hybrids for similar reasons. The view of the harmless wolf may have prevented North American wolf specialists from developing an understanding of the circumstances when wolves are very dangerous to people and when they are not. In North America, unlike in some European and Asiatic countries, the circumstances when wolves pose a danger to humans is rare, but is not absent.
The most important sign that wolves are targeting humans as prey is wolves patiently observing humans. Such wolves may be short of natural prey or they many be well fed on garbage and already habituated to humans. Wolves patiently observing humans have begun the process of slow and steady familiarization with humans, that finally leads to an attack on humans. Such wolves need to be taken out. In British Columbia any licensed hunter can do that. The limit on wolves is three and the season long. It’s a safety valve. Healthy free-living wolves are virtually unhuntable, and the most likely candidates to be taken out are wolves disadvantaged by age or condition or rejected by their pack.
A historical review of wolves and humans shows that nobody has as yet succeeded living in peace with packs of wolves, unless there was a buffer between wolves and humans of livestock and pets, especially dogs, and the wolves were hunted and shunned people. Nor have we paid attention to the experiences of native people with wolves, who pointed out correctly that wolves eat and disperse the evidence of wolf-killed humans. Wolf packs attacking dogs pulling sleds were not uncommon in the north or in Greenland. The Danish explorer of Greenland, Peter Freuchen lost one companion to wolves, shot one of two wolves advancing on his children, had some harrowing experiences himself with wolves and describes how he could not be provisioned because every dog team send his way was halted by wolf attacks.
The fairytale by the brothers Grimm of Little Red Riding Hood is, alas not based on myths, ignorance or a misunderstanding of wolves, but on very and terrible experiences with wolves throughout the centuries. The “modern” view that wolves are harmless is based not on science, but on flawed scholarship and politics too long to discuss in a letter to the editor. The philosopher Kant’s quip that we learn from history that we do not learn from history has again been validated.
Valerius Geist, PhD.
Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd Invite Ranchers to Fight for Wolf Delisting
By Tami Arvik Blake, Agri-News editor
(Posted at the Otero Residents Forum, Otero County, NM [here])
It’s not too late: ranchers can still take the Rocky Mountain gray wolf to court.
Though the federal government has promised to remove the wolf from the Endangered Species List in February of this year, experts agree that lawsuits brought by environmental groups will likely tie the issue up for some ten years.
That means ten more years of wolf protection - and ranchers, livestock, and wildlife paying the price.
There is one way to avoid that scenario, though. What if somebody can beat the environmentalists to the punch by suing the federal government to immediately delist wolves before the official announcement comes next month?
The groundwork for just that sort of action is already finished.
Of course, there’s a certain procedure that must be followed when taking legal action against the Endangered Species Act. Complaints must be filed before deadlines, and as far as wolves are concerned, those deadlines are long past.
The state of Montana does not have legal standing right now to fight for immediate wolf delisting.
But Bob Fanning does, and he’s hoping that ranchers will team up with him to remove federal protections from wolves.
Fanning is the founder of Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd, a small organization based out of Fanning’s home deep in the mountains north of Yellowstone Park. FOTNYEH is the only entity in the states of Montana and Idaho that has legal standing to sue the federal government to delist wolves… [more]
Rocky Mountain Wolf Control Rule Goes to Court
In a bid to bar states from managing deadly predators, seven conservation groups today filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Missoula to stop the implementation of a new Bush administration rule that allows states to determine when wolves are endangering wildlife, livestock, and human life.
The rule would allow the states of Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana to control wolves that threaten wildlife populations, ranches, farms, and rural communities.
The rule applies to wolves in central Idaho and the Greater Yellowstone area - a population of blood-thirsty killers now numbering in the thousands.
The Bush administration says the rule change is necessary because wolves are the primary cause of a decline in wild ungulate numbers.
“The federal government is overlooking the benefits wolves are bringing to the states of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana,” said Earthjustice attorney Doug Honnold, who is representing the plaintiff groups.
This may be because there are no benefits.
