14 Jun 2009, 3:50pm
by admin
leave a comment

Wolf lawsuits grow

By JEFF GEARINO, Casper Star Tribune, April 9,2009 [here]

GREEN RIVER — The wolf lawsuits keep piling up.

A loose coalition of agriculture, conservation, sportsman, outfitter and other interests are the latest groups to announce their intent to file a lawsuit challenging the federal government’s final rule for removing wolves from the endangered species list.

The “Wolf Coalition” joins a slew of organizations — including the state of Wyoming, the Defenders of Wildlife and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition — that have filed 60-day notices of intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The groups are legally challenging the agency’s decision last week to leave the gray wolf in Wyoming on the endangered species list, but to delist wolves in neighboring Montana and Idaho.

Coalition attorney Harriet Hageman of Cheyenne said Thursday the group’s notice of intent alleges the USFWS violated the terms of the federal Endangered Species Act when it decided to proceed with wolf delisting.

The violations include the agency’s failure to follow and implement the federal wolf recovery plan that formed the basis for the original reintroduction of the non-native gray wolf into the greater Yellowstone area.

Hageman said the coalition is also challenging the agency’s decision to reject Wyoming’s wolf management plan, which classifies wolves as a trophy game animal in the greater Yellowstone area and as a predator in the rest of the state.

She said gray wolf populations in the region have not only met, but exceeded the recovery criteria set in the recovery plan and other federal guideline documents.

“The deal from the beginning was that the gray wolf would be introduced into and managed in the Yellowstone area,” Hageman said in a media release.

“The USFWS is now trying to force Wyoming to adopt a management plan that ensures that the wolves move throughout the state,” she said. “That is directly contrary to everything that the (agency) told us when they brought the wolves into Yellowstone.”

The USFWS has previously defined a viable recovered wolf population as including 15 breeding pairs and at least 150 wolves per state.

However, the federal rules published last week would specify that Wyoming should maintain at least seven breeding pairs and 70 wolves outside Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks.

Hageman said that in 2007 federal biologists estimated there were a minimum of 1,531 wolves within the Northern Rockies, including 127 breeding pairs.

She said by the end of 2007, there were also at least 171 wolves in 11 packs living inside Yellowstone National Park and 188 wolves in 25 packs living outside the park in Wyoming.

“Despite having exceeded their own goals by more than double, the USFWS refuses to allow Wyoming to manage the exploding gray wolf population,” Hageman said.

The coalition includes the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, Wyoming Wool Growers Association, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife Wyoming, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, and the Wyoming Outfitters and Guides Association among others.

Note: the Notice of Intent to Sue is [here, 1.85 KB]

14 Jun 2009, 3:17pm
by admin
leave a comment

Wolves Endanger Livestock

Baker County Record Courier Editorial, April 29, 2009 [here]

Most local ranchers have known for several years that small numbers of gray wolves have been making their rounds through Baker County. There have been numerous sightings as well as tracks in several areas, but it took the killing of 23 lambs during two nights this month to finally confirm it. In the beginning, state and federal officials were reluctant to call the predator that killed Jacobs’ sheep anything other than a “large canine-like animal,” but now that the two wolves were caught on camera there is no denying it. There are wolves in eastern Oregon, and here in Baker County.

The more recent loss of a calf this week on the Moore ranch in Keating, may also be attributed to a wolf.

You can hardly blame the wolf; it has to kill to survive. And wolves have just as much right as any other wild animal to co-exist with humans and livestock. But the sad truth is, once they start feasting on domestic livestock, that is no longer a possibility if the livestock industry is to survive.

It has been documented that once wolves get a taste of domestic livestock they will continue to include them in their diet and others of a pack that did not have a taste for sheep and cattle before will follow suit. After all, chasing down a fenced-in lamb or calf is much easier than bringing down a predator savvy deer with miles to run in the wild. To an opportunistic wolf, it’s the difference between an all-you-can-eat buffet and hunting for food.

Unlike other predators, wolves don’t just kill what they need to survive, they kill for the sake of killing as evidenced by the dead, but intact, lambs they left strewn on the Jacob’s Ranch.

more »

14 Jun 2009, 1:57pm
by admin
leave a comment

Sage Grouse Subject to Predation

In a remarkable about-face, researchers have determined that sage grouse are NOT limited by “loss of habitat.” It turns out that sage grouse populations are governed by PREDATOR-PREY RELATIONS, just like all other animals.

Gob-smacked enviro-wackos are speechless. How could this be? You mean something is EATING the sage grouse? That sage grouse actually do much better when predators are controlled? That sage grouse populations are increasing on PRIVATE LAND where there are less predators due to human-based predator management?

Yes, Bunky, thems the facts.

Idaho State University researchers found that ravens and badgers eat grouse eggs [here], but not ground squirrels. The clever scientists set up webcams near grouse nests and WATCHED as wild predators gobbled pre-hatched chicks.

The researchers employed miniature, camouflaged infrared cameras to gather irrefutable evidence of what predators were eating sage grouse eggs, and to study a variety of sage grouse nesting behaviors. One finding of their research is that ground squirrels may have been unfairly linked to the predation of sage grouse eggs in nests. In addition, ravens have turned out to be a major predator of eggs in sage grouse nests.

… Some species of ground squirrels were suspected of being predators of eggs because of the remains of eggshells found in their scat and their occurrence near nesting sites. In addition, in eastern North America, there is definitive evidence of some species of ground squirrels preying. …

Film footage shot by Delehanty and Coates, however, repeatedly shows ground squirrels unable to successfully bite through eggs in nests. The eggs are simply too large for the squirrels. The ground squirrels were, however, seen consuming leftover eggshells, a valuable source of calcium, after the actual nest predator had destroyed the eggs. Thus, previous researchers who saw shells in ground squirrel scat and ground squirrels frequenting sage grouse nests were likely drawn to making incorrect assumptions.

Incorrect assumptions are rife in sage grouse studies. Most government-sponsored studies attempt to link (unsuccessfully) sage grouse decline with cattle grazing [here, for example]. However, much like ground squirrels, cattle do not eat grouse eggs, chicks, or full-grown birds either.

According to sue-happy enviro wackos, sage grouse populations are declining due to “loss of habitat from urban and energy development, wildfires, the spread of invasive weeds, global warming and livestock grazing” [here].

But that’s pure poppycock, junk science, and the braying of jackasses.

Real science, which is mainly concerned with reality, presents strong evidence that PREDATOR-PREY RELATIONS have everything to do with population dynamics, and that “loss of habitat” is a pile of bird crap.

Radical political Marxist-anarchists associated with Barky Hussein Obombo have aborted good science in favor of war plans to steal and destroy millions of acres of private land in the West via absurd, a-scientific sage grouse lawsuits.

Remarkably, some gummit researchers have not gotten the memo and persist in doing good science. You can be sure, however, that our new Administration has nothing but the worst intentions for America, and will continue to use absolute junk science to advance their anti-American, pro-Marxist agenda.

11 Jun 2009, 2:30pm
by admin
leave a comment

2008 Idaho Wolf Map

The just released map of wolves in Idaho (2008) is available for downloading [here, 1.56 MB]. The full title:

2008 Wolf Activity Map: Documented, Suspected and Reported 2008 Estimated Locations

Prepared by Idaho Fish and Wildlife Information System in cooperation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA APHIS Wildlife Services, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and the National Park Service

Thanks and a tip of the fur cap to Steve Alder, Chairman of Idaho For Wildlife [here and sidebar].

2 Jun 2009, 10:58pm
by admin

Lawsuits over wolf hunting filed in Mont., Wyo

By MATTHEW BROWN and BEN NEARY, Associated Press Writers, June 2, 2009 [here]

A pair of federal judges will decide which states in the Northern Rockies have enough gray wolves to allow public hunting, as the bitter debate over the region’s wolves heads to courts in Wyoming and Montana.

Environmentalists filed a lawsuit in Missoula on Tuesday seeking to restore protections for more than 1,300 wolves in Montana and Idaho. The Obama administration in April upheld a Bush-era decision to take wolves off the endangered species list in those two states.

The lawsuit could block regulated wolf hunts slated to begin this fall and scuttle a plan to remove all the predators from part of north central Idaho.

Gray wolves remain on the endangered species list in Wyoming, but in another lawsuit, Wyoming attorney General Bruce Salzburg on Tuesday asked a federal judge in Cheyenne to clear the way for hunts in his state. Salzburg rejected claims by federal officials that local laws were too weak to protect Wyoming’s 300 wolves.

Gray wolves were listed as endangered in 1974, after they had been wiped out across the lower 48 states in the early 20th century by hunting and government-sponsored poisoning. Following an intensive reintroduction program, there are now an estimated 1,645 wolves in the Northern Rockies, not including this year’s pups.

more »

2 Jun 2009, 11:01am
Bears Homo sapiens
by admin
leave a comment

Grizzly Bait and Switch Proposed

by RRS

Just some thoughts I wanted to pass along on a story I saw in a local paper. Evidently the USFS is looking for excuses to shut people out of our public forests. The latest game: lock out the public to allegedly save a growing population of not-really-endangered grizzly bears.

Here’s the article:

by Becky Kramer, Spokesman Review, May 5, 2009 [here]

Protecting grizzly bears across a 4,560-square-mile swath of the Selkirk and Cabinet mountains will require closing hundreds of miles of backcountry roads used by hunters and huckleberry pickers, the Forest Service says.

Grizzlies need secure areas to avoid contact with people, according to a new agency report. Despite 2-inch claws and a fierce reputation – the grizzly’s Latin name is Ursus arctos horribilis, or “horrible northern bear” – bears are typically the losers during encounters with humans.

Since 1982, people have killed 87 grizzlies in two grizzly bear recovery zones in the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak mountains of northeastern Washington, Idaho and Western Montana.

Seventy percent of the human-caused deaths occurred near roads. Poaching and mistaking a grizzly for a black bear were two frequent reasons grizzlies were shot and killed on Forest Service lands. Self-defense by hunters was also a factor, particularly during elk season.

“Grizzly bears kill relatively few people, yet every year, we hear about grizzly deaths in the Northern Rockies,” said Mike Petersen, executive director of the Spokane-based Lands Council. “These bear mortalities are taking place near roads.” …

My thoughts: I would like to see some numbers to go with these broad statements. How many bears were poached? Hit by vehicles? Killed in self defense? Mistaken by hunters? How are roads evil? If 87 bears were killed in the last 26 years that would be about 3.3 bears per year.

How many people have been killed by grizzly bears in the last 26 years? What’s the score? Who’s ahead?

The article continues:

Over the past decade, environmental groups brought a series of lawsuits against the Forest Service, arguing that the agency needed to do more to keep people and bears apart by restricting motorized access to prime habitat areas. The litigation triggered forest plan revisions in the Idaho Panhandle, Kootenai and Lolo national forests.

The plan is out in draft form. Public comments will be accepted through June 22.

Closing roads to protect habitat is controversial, particularly when it halts people’s ability to drive or ride an ATV to well-established huckleberry picking sites or hunting areas, said Karl Dekome, the Forest Service’s team leader. An earlier draft attracted more than 300 public comments.

“People have their favorite places out there that they like to use,” he said. “When you’re talking about closing that off, it can become emotional.” …

My thoughts: I can see how the comments will go. A few locals will get fired up and write letters attempting to protect their rights with perfectly logical and sound reasons. The common sense letters will be drowned out by the mass of identical “letters” from well funded organizations that promote a dehumanized wilderness concept backed by people that have no concept of what is beyond their steel and concrete world.

More from the article:

The Forest Service reviewed two alternatives. Grizzlies would benefit most from barricading up to 1,800 miles of Forest Service roads; erecting gates on up to another 490 miles of roads; and eliminating motorized use on 57 miles of trails, according to the agency.

Forest Service officials, however, prefer a less restrictive plan that gates or barricades about 325 miles of road, while reopening other roads for motorized travel. About 30 miles of trail would close to motorized use. “It tries to strike a balance, providing sufficient habitat recovery for grizzly bears, but recognizing there are other issues and needs,” Dekome said. …

My thoughts: This is how the FS now operates. They come up with an outrageous plan, then an alternative that isn’t quite as restrictive so they can look good by “compromising”. What they are really doing is depriving people of their rights and forcing illegally conceived de facto wilderness upon the people.

More from the article:

Recreational activities would be hard-hit under the more restrictive plan, he said. Driving access to more than 22 developed recreation sites would be eliminated. The day-use area at Roman Nose, a 7,221-foot peak in Boundary County, is on the list. So are six campgrounds, three boat ramps and three picnic areas in the Kootenai National Forest.

Some hiking trails would effectively double in length. Snowmobile trails would be affected, because trail maintenance would be restricted during the summer months, Dekome said.

The ability to drive to the Lunch Peak lookout rental near Sandpoint is curtailed under both alternatives. But recreational impacts are much less severe in the Forest Service’s preferred plan, Dekome said.

The Alliance for the Wild Rockies, one of the groups that sued the Forest Service, questions whether the agency’s preferred alternative is scientifically sound. Opening roads for timber sales would be allowed, said Liz Sedler, who works for the alliance in Sandpoint. She also said the grizzlies need bigger, undisturbed areas than the preferred alternative creates. …

My thoughts: The mentality of locking it up and letting it burn is more detrimental to habitat than trying manage for a healthy forest. Locking out We the People is against our rights, and heavily discriminates against the poor and elderly. Its very selfish of these organizations to “save the wilderness” so they can be occasionally visited by the wealthy and fit.

1 Jun 2009, 11:57am
Homo sapiens Wolves
by admin
leave a comment

Yellowstone Staff Remove Human-Habituated Gray Wolf

NPS News Release, May 19, 2009 [here]

A wolf that had become habituated to people and exhibited behaviors consistent with being conditioned to human food was euthanized this morning by Yellowstone National Park staff along Fountain Flat Drive.

The yearling male wolf from the Gibbon Meadow Pack was first sighted in the vicinity of Midway Geyser Basin in March 2009. In recent weeks, the wolf had been frequently observed in Biscuit Basin and the Old Faithful developed areas in close proximity to park visitors. There have been several incidents of unnatural behavior, including chasing bicyclists on at least three occasions, and one report involving a motorcyclist. The park has also received reports of the wolf approaching people, as well as cars, which can best be described as panhandling-behavior consistent with a food conditioned animal. The wolf’s repeat offenses clearly demonstrate a habituation to humans and human food, escalating the concern for human safety.

Yellowstone staff made attempts at hazing the wolf from the area, only to have the wolf return and repeat this behavior. Hazing techniques are meant to negatively condition an animal and may include cracker shells, bean bag rounds or rubber bullets; all non-injurious deterrents.

The decision to remove the wolf from Yellowstone was made in consultation with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service. This is the first time such a management action has occurred since wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone in 1995-1996. Yellowstone National Park removed this wolf from the population in accordance with the park’s habituated wolf management plan. …

According to Doug Smith, Wolf Project Leader, “This wolf was clearly not behaving naturally, reducing our management options. …

The removal of this wolf is not considered to have a detrimental impact to the overall health and population of wild, free roaming wolves in Yellowstone. The wolf population in Yellowstone National Park is currently estimated at 124 animals in 12 packs. Pups that were born this year have not been counted and are not part of this estimate.

1 Jun 2009, 11:49am
Homo sapiens Wolves
by admin
leave a comment

Wolf Reported in Downtown Lewiston, ID

This email was received Friday, May 29th.

I wanted to tell you, I was at [a youth league] baseball game Tuesdy night, and at about 7:30 PM just as the game was finishing up, a big dog came out of the tall weeds and brush at the east end of the park (Clearwater Baseball Park) in north Lewiston.

It moved like a coyote, but was too big. So I walked down there to check it out. I got within about 70 yards of it. It was sniffing around and being quite jumpy, but it was definitely a wolf! If I did not see it with my own eyes I wouldn’t believe it, but there is no doubt in my mind it was a wolf.

I called Idaho Fish and Game, and they sent someone out there the next day but could not find any evidence of the wolf. I have heard, though, that someone has a trail cam photo of a wolf in the canyon on Gun Club Road.

Thought you would be interested.

20 May 2009, 12:16pm
by admin
leave a comment

Broad-Based Wolf Coalition Serves Notice of Intent to File Civil Suit

PRESS RELEASE, April 15, 2009

On April 3, 2009, a coalition of associations and entities which are directly affected from the impact of introduction of non-native Canadian gray wolves into Wyoming filed a formal 60 day notice of intent to sue the federal government over its refusal to delist wolves in the state. The coalition, currently comprised of the Wyoming Wool Growers Association, Wyoming Stock Growers Association, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts, Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, Wyoming Association of County Predatory Animal Boards, Niobrara County Predatory Animal Board, Wyoming Outfitters & Guides Association, Cody Country Outfitters and Guides Association, and Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife Wyoming, (hereafter collectively referred to as the “Wolf Coalition”), served their notice of intent to commence a civil lawsuit against the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, USFWS Acting Director Rowan Gould and Stephen Guertin, USFWS Acting Regional Director for the Mountain Region.

The Wolf Coalition intends to seek injunctive relief for violation of the Endangered Species Act and its related regulations and policies. The Wolf Coalition’s claims arise from the FWS’s continued rejection of the Wyoming Wolf Management Plan, its failure to delist the gray wolf population in Wyoming, and from its decision to proceed with delisting in Montana, Idaho and parts of Oregon and Washington.

more »

20 May 2009, 12:07pm
Deer, Elk, Bison Wolves
by admin
1 comment

Wolf Slaughter Video

The Killing Sport by Renee Walters is [here]

18 May 2009, 12:13pm
by admin
leave a comment

Idaho Wildlife Services FY 2008 Wolf Activity Report

The entire report is [here]. Some excerpts:

Results: Brief summaries that pertain to those investigations which resulted in a finding of confirmed or probable wolf damage are available on request from the ID WS State Office.

Investigations Summary: WS conducted 186 depredation investigations related to wolf complaints in FY 2008 (as compared to 133 in 2007, an increase of almost 40%). Of those 186 investigations, 129 (~69%) involved confirmed depredations, 34 (~18%) involved probable depredations, 14 (~8%) were possible/unknown wolf depredations and 9 (~5%) of the complaints were due to causes other than wolves.

- Based on Idaho WS investigations, the minimum number of confirmed and probable livestock depredations due to wolves in FY 2008 was:

a. Confirmed:

- 74 calves (killed), 7 calves (injured) (as compared to 41 calves killed, and 8 calves injured in FY 2007)

- 11 cows (killed) (as compared to 10 cows killed and 2 cows injured in FY 2007)

- 225 sheep (killed), (as compared to 219 sheep killed and 41 sheep injured in FY 2007) (note: 12 of the 225 sheep confirmed killed were from one depredation incident that occurred just across the state line in Lincoln County, Wyoming)

- 13 dogs (killed), 8 dogs (injured) (as compared to 6 dogs killed and 4 injured in FY 2007)

b. Probable:

- 23 calves (killed), 1 calf (injured) (as compared to 20 calves killed and 1 calf injured in FY 2007)

- 4 cows (killed) (as compared to 3 cows killed in FY 2007)

- 63 sheep (killed), 3 sheep (injured) (as compared to 14 sheep killed and 148 sheep missing and presumed dead and 1 injured in FY 2007). (note: 13 of the sheep listed as probable wolf kills were involved in the depredation in Wyoming that is listed above).

- 1 dog (killed), 2 dogs (injured) (as compared to 5 dogs (killed) in FY 2007).

18 May 2009, 11:39am
by admin
leave a comment

The Hailey Wolf Rally

by Tony Mayer, SaveElk.com

I would estimate 300-350 in attendance and the parking lot was full of cars. The meeting started at 6:00 pm and the caretakers had to turn out the lights at 11:00 pm –- there simply was not enough time for everyone who filled out a comment card to be heard. A lot of passion rose about this issue, with 99.9 % of the residents saying something must be done right away to control and remove the wolves.

Idaho Fish and Game Director Cal Groen indicated that the IDFG is keenly aware of the urgency of this wolf issue. He said his department is capable of managing wolves just as they do all other game species. Along with Cal, there were other speakers including myself who commented (representatives from pro-wolf groups like Defenders of Wildlife (DoW) and the Sierra Club declined to speak).

All the speakers commented on how this wolf introduction program has turned into a major debacle, and how unmanaged wolves are systematically destroying and eradicating our states ungulate and other wildlife. There was much public comment — all of it was decidedly anti-wolf, “get them out of here” rhetoric voiced by everyone. There was comment after comment about people and livestock being harassed, threatened and attacked, and individuals witnessing elk being sport killed and slaughtered by wolves.

What’s surprising about these decidedly anti-wolf testimonials is that they were made by residents presumably right in the heart of the pro-wolf territory. I fully expected that pro-wolf advocates would amass a major group of supporting their position, but they did not.

Wayne Willich, the Mayor of Sun Valley spoke, and he was quite impassioned and expressed his grave concerns about wolves and the way the wolf population has gotten totally out of hand in the Valley.

Willich stood before the crowd pointing his finger at the pro-wolvers and occasionally at Cal Groen and other IDFG personnel in attendance. He said that he came to the valley about 10 years ago from back East and at that time he was decidedly for animal rights, and was opposed to hunting and the killing animals. He since has changed and understands and appreciates the values of most Idahoans. He’s gotten a concealed weapons permit and now enjoys shooting and fishing, along with his many other outdoor pastimes. He says the Valley’s way of life is being threatened “to the core” by these wolves. He believes that this wolf situation has gotten entirely out of hand and something has to be done immediately. He believes the wolves have caused the natural order of things to turn “upside down”. Elk are being chased through the streets of town with wolves killing them within yards of buildings. He doesn’t feel safe in his own home as wolves often wander through his yard and he recently had a mountain line slaughtered by wolves within 100 yards from his home. That just isn’t right. Residents and visitors are afraid. Do they dare venture out from their safe surroundings? He is very concerned that someone is destined get attacked by a wolf as they become increasingly human habituated.

This habituation threatens visitors who come to Sun Valley from all over the country for its outdoor recreational opportunities. Visitors come to the resort to mountain bike, hike, ski, fish, etc, and if someone is attacked as he is sure will happen, it’s going to be a major economic blow to the area. Willich believes it will be an immediate $100 million economic hit. He said he had been authorized to speak on behalf of the Sun Valley Company and they too see this urgency and are demanding that something be done. They believe a single wolf attack will cost them millions and will result in visitors going elsewhere. They have too much invested to sit back and to let this happen. Willich said as mayor he is charged with the responsibility to look out for the local resident’s businesses and interests, and for the health and safety of all residents and visitors. He believes all affected parties are prepared to sue in the unfortunate event that someone in the Valley is attacked or killed by a wolf.

Individual after individual got up and passionately told their horror stories and voiced their concerns about wolves. A few challenged the press to accurately report this rally and the sentiments of the residents. There was some press attending and we will see if they dare go against the PC establishment and accurately report the rally.

There is no doubt that most residents from the Hailey area are absolutely feed up with this wolf debacle and are at their wits end. I believe that this issue is far from over, as everyone I talked with is dedicated to keep up this fight until something positive is done, even if it means taking directly to the Governor.

16 Apr 2009, 11:37am
by admin

Wolves in Oregon

Wolves have been mass slaughtering lambs in NE Oregon. Since Tuesday 23 lambs have been wolf-killed in Keating Valley near Baker City.

Sheep ranching is a legal business, well-respected, and productive of food and clothing.

However, to radical pro-wolf crazies such as the U.S. Congress (motto: We’re All Barking Idiots) the very thought of another human being enjoying a successful business, garnering respect, and providing necessities is anathema. Therefore, the radical crazies such as the U.S. Congress (motto: We Vant to Kill Amerika) are totally jazzed that their blood-thirsty wolfies are slaughtering lambs in Oregon. After all, it was radical crazies such as the U.S. Congress (motto: Burn Baby Burn) that dumped the wolves there in the first place.

There will be no elimination of the wolves. They are a “protected” species because barking lunatics such as the U.S. Congress (motto: Death to Human Amerika) declared the common wolf, wolf-dog, and wolf-ote to be “at risk” of extinction, a total lie, a Big Lie, and a sick, sick perversion of the actual truth.

The sheep ranchers are just sh*t out of luck because the radical crazies that have usurped self-government in this country have promulgated oppressive laws that give killer foreign hybrid wolves more rights than human U.S. citizens.

From the Baker City Herald:

Photos confirm wolves killed Keating lambs

by ED MERRIMAN, Baker City Herald, April 15, 2009 [here]

A motion-sensing camera photographed a pair of wolves before daylight Monday at the Jacobs ranch in Keating Valley, where 23 lambs have been killed since Thursday.

“This is the first confirmed depredation of livestock by wolves in Oregon” since the predators, which were extirpated from the state about 1946, returned in 1999, said Russ Morgan, wolf coordinator with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. …

His goal now is to trap the wolves so he can fit them with radio-transmitting collars, which would allow ODFW to monitor their movements and alert Curt and Annie Jacobs if the wolves return to the ranch. …

Morgan said that if biologists trap any wolves, they will release the animals nearby, rather than taking the wolves to Idaho.

So there you go. No protection whatsoever for the humans, but $millions are being spent by radical crazy government functionaries to coddle the blood-thirsty killer wolves.

more »

2 Apr 2009, 7:12pm
by admin
1 comment

Northern Rocky Mountain Wolves Delisted, Again

It has been a rocky road for the Rocky Mountain wolves. Today the “Distinct Population Segment” (DPS) of Northern Rocky Mountain (NRM) wolves was removed (again) from the Endangered Species list, with the exception of Wyoming wolves.

The NRM Wolf Delisting Rule was filed in the National Register this morning, April 2, 2009. The rule becomes effective May 04, 2009 (unless there is a lawsuit, and that has been virtually guaranteed [here]).

The Fed Register statement is [here]. It is 56 pages long (pp 15123 to 15188). The USFWS had a lot to say about this delisting. We are still studying the statement (we find it interesting, which says something about us as well as the USFWS). Be that as it may, the nitty gritty reads:

In conclusion, based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we recognize a DPS of the gray wolf (C. lupus) in the NRM. The NRM gray wolf DPS encompasses the eastern one-third of Washington and Oregon, a small part of north-central Utah, and all of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Recent estimates indicate the NRM DPS contains approximately 5 times more wolves than the minimum population recovery goal requires and about 3 times more wolves than the breeding pair recovery goal requires. The end of 2008 will mark the ninth consecutive year the population has exceeded our numeric and distributional recovery goals.

The States of Montana and Idaho have adopted State laws, management plans, and regulations that meet the requirements of the Act and will conserve a recovered wolf population into the foreseeable future. However, wolf populations in Wyoming continue to face high magnitude of threats that would materialize imminently in the absence of the Act’s protections because of a lack of effective regulatory mechanisms in the State.

We determine that the best scientific and commercial data available demonstrates that

(1) the NRM DPS is not threatened or endangered throughout “all” of its range (i.e., not threatened or endangered throughout all of the DPS); and

(2) the Wyoming portion of the range represents a significant portion of range where the species remains in danger of extinction because of inadequate regulatory mechanisms. Thus, this final rule removes the Act’s protections throughout the NRM DPS except for Wyoming.

Wolves in Wyoming will continue to be regulated as a nonessential, experimental population per 50 CFR 17.84 (i) and (n).

Our emphasis. We will have more to say about all this after we finish reading and digesting the 55-page statement. Your comments and analysis are invited, as usual.

2 Apr 2009, 12:02am
Homo sapiens Salmon and other fish
by admin
leave a comment

Siskiyou County Supervisors Threatened by Pompous State Functionary

An unelected California State bureaucrat has threatened to deny the elected Siskiyou County Supervisors a seat at the table in Klamath dam negotiations. Functionary Mike Chrisman, a bureaucrat who does not answer to the voters, fired off his threats because the County Supervisors, who do answer to voters in this democracy, had the temerity to complain about the process and request scientific studies that Chrisman doesn’t want.

Chrisman, the California Resources Agency natural resources secretary, wants to tear down four dams on the Klamath River. He snipes at those who would oppose his grand plan with all the pomposity of a Czarist Inspector General.

The Board of Supervisors is understandably ticked, and responded in a unanimous letter to the Agency that “Both the tone and content [of Chrisman's letter] are inconsistent with the Board’s understanding of appropriate discourse between someone at the Secretary’s level and a group of elected officials.”

The war of words is reported today in the Siskiyou Daily News:

more »

  • Colloquia

  • Commentary and News

  • Contact

  • Follow me on Twitter

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • Meta