USFWS Says Wolf Recovery Is A Success Because Wolves Live…WTF???

NatureColdWarriors_3wolves

April 16, 2014

This takes the cake. In a ridiculous statement (and a foreshadowing of the way their decision on delisting wolves nationally is going to go) the USFWS said:

Gray wolf’s success means it lives

Posted: 04/12/2014 06:32:01 AM EDT

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s update on the status of gray wolves in the West, which it released last week, amounted to an implicit plug for its proposal to lift federal protections for the creature across the lower 48 states.

Wolf restoration has been an “amazing success,” the service said, and “by every biological measure the (Northern Rocky Mountains) wolf is recovered and remains secure under state management.”

The evidence: The number of breeding pairs and individual wolves remains comfortably above the agency’s minimum targets.

In fact, the service does have reason to crow, given what appears to be a reasonably stable wolf population in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming (with a smattering in eastern Washington and Oregon as well.)

Critics of delisting maintain that a sustainable wolf population should be larger than the current 1,691, and don’t trust the states to uphold their part of the recovery bargain.

We have more faith in state wildlife officials — and meanwhile trust Fish & Wildlife to intervene, as it promises, “if relisting is  ever warranted.”

Read more: http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/editorial/ci_25553138/gray-wolfs-success-means-it-lives#ixzz2z7APn7kv

===

Have they even glanced at the 1,521,113 comments submitted concerning their disgusting National Wolf Delisting proposal? Have they heard of Idaho’s plan to kill most of their wolves? Do they care one whit about the thousands of wolves who’ve been killed since their delisting in 2009?  Is this the “amazing success” they’re talking about? That “by every biological measure the (Northern Rocky Mountains) wolf is recovered and remains secured under state management“? Are they saying this with a straight face? Are they joking?

hunted-the-war-against-wolves-eij

The material point is they’ve already made up their minds wolves will be delisted nationally, no matter what the public thinks because it’s not about what the American people want. It’s about what their customers want, you know the ranchers, hunters and politicians they serve.

===

The Unsavory Truth Behind the Move to Take Wolves Off the Endangered List

The feds have dismissed three scientists from a wolf panel for, guess what, raising concerns about wolf delisting.

April 16, 2014 / By Tracy Ross

Just weeks after calling for the removal of gray wolves from the Endangered Species List, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is now under fire for allegations that it intentionally excluded three prominent scientists—whose views diverged from the Service’s on delisting—from an upcoming peer review process.

In June, Fish and Wildlife called to delist gray wolves across the Lower 48 states, leaving an exception for the struggling Mexican wolf in the Southwest. Agency director Dan Ashe told the media that the gray wolf had recovered to the point that it could thrive and even enlarge its territory without federal oversight. Several wolf advocates and some members of Congress disagreed. Once wolves are delisted, their management will fall to individual states.

But in order for the delisting process to continue, federal law requires that a team of scientists evaluate the basis for the motion. As such, Fish and Wildlife hired a private contractor to select and oversee the peer review panel. According to Fish and Wildlife spokesman Gavin Shire, the agency isn’t supposed to know who the panelists are. But the Associated Press revealed that the contractor chosen to assemble the panel had provided a list of candidates that redacted their names but included their professional resumes. Armed with this information, the Service found three esteemed wolf biologists, who—and this is the key part—had expressed concern with the gray wolf delisting plan. They also, along with 16 other prominent scientists, had signed a letter expressing this concern. Shortly thereafter, Fish and Wildlife effectively “delisted” the three scientists from the panel.

The three are identified as Dr. John Vucetich, Dr. Robert Wayne, and Dr. Roland Kays. All have published extensively on the wolf and are considered preeminent experts. Yet the Center for Biological Diversity’s Bret Hartl reports that the Service rescinded their invitations because, in the agency’s words, they have an “unacceptable affiliation with an advocacy position.”

READ MORE: http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/08/16/wolves-endangered-species-list-delist-panel-scientists?fb_comment_id=fbc_386534721476207_1937752_388683194594693#f5dbc27245f234

===

Top Photo: Courtesy Nature: Cold Warriors

Bottom Photo: Courtesy Earth Island Journal

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: USFWS, national wolf delisting, absurd comments, irresponsible management, wolves are NOT recovered, stand up for wolves, Dr. John Vucetich, Dr. Robert Wayne, Dr. Roland Kays, Center For Biological Diversity

Action Alert: Comment On USFWS Wolf Delisting Proposal Today…Deadline @ 11:59 PM Tonight!!

Remote camera pictures of the Minam wolf pack in Eagle Cap Wilderness of Wallowa County. Photos taken Dec. 14, 2012. Photo courtesy of ODFW

Minam Wolf Pack in Eagle Cap Wilderness, Wallowa County, Orgeon

UPDATE: March 29, 2014

1,392,985 comments received by the deadline. Good work everyone!!

===

UPDATE: March 27, 2014

Today is the last day to comment.!! The deadline is 11:59 PM ET. Please speak for the wolves. This rule, would stop wolf recovery in its tracks, it must be revoked! Your voices could make all the difference!

PLEASE COMMENT!!!

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073

===

Photo: Minam Wolf Pack ODFW

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: USFWS, national wolf delisting rule proposal, Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Interior, Dan Ashe, wolf persecution,  please comment, deadline March 27

Action Alert: Comment On USFWS Wolf Delisting Proposal Before March 27th Deadline!!!

A subadult Wenaha wolf stretches in the snow in front of a remote camera in the Wenaha Wildlife Management Unit on April 13, 2013. Photo courtesy of ODFW 1

“A subadult Wenaha wolf stretches in the snow…..April 13, 2013. Photo courtesy of ODFW”

UPDATE: March 27, 2014

Today is the last day to comment. The deadline is 11:59 PM ET. Please speak for the wolves. This rule, that would stop wolf recovery in its tracks, must be revoked! Your voices could make all the difference!

===

March 26, 2014

Have you commented yet?

PLEASE COMMENT!!!

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073

===

Photo: Subadult Wenaha wolf ODFW

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: USFWS, national wolf delisting rule proposal, Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Interior, Dan Ashe, wolf persecution,  please comment, deadline March 27

#KEEPWOLVESLISTED TWEETSTORM – Tuesday, March 25 @ 2pm PST/9pm GST

KEEPWOLVESLISTED

UPDATE: March 25 – Thanks to all who participated!!

===

ERIPE LUPUS

 
#KEEPWOLVESLISTED TWEETSTORM
FINAL TWEETSTORM FOR #KEEPWOLVESLISTED
MARCH 25. 2014 
2 PM PST/ 9 PM GMT
PLEASE REMEMBER THAT RETWEETS  ( RT ) DO NOT HELP US!
JUST STEAL THE TWEET, 
DO NOT RETWEET . PLEASE 

http://keepwolveslisted.blogspot.co.uk/p/keepwolveslisted.html

===

Please participate if you have a Twitter account!  Spread the word! This is our last chance to protest against the horrible USFWS national wolf delisting proposal.

If you haven’t commented yet please do. Click HERE to comment.

===

Photo: Courtesy ERIPE LUPUS

Posted in: Action Alerts, Activism, Wolf Wars

Tags: TWEETSTORM, #KEEPWOLVESLISTED, March 25 @ 2pm PST,  USFWS, national wolf delisting proposal, fight for the wolves

Support Rep. DeFazio’s Efforts To Stop The National Wolf Delisting Rule

Imnaha Pack 5 wolf pups 2013 Oregon

“Five wolf pups from the Imnaha pack were photographed by a remote camera on July 7, 2013. The pups were approximately 2.5 months old in this photo. Photo courtesy of ODFW.”

Every day there is bad, very bad or really bad news about wolves. But “Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee Peter DeFazio” is speaking out for wolves. He wants the national wolf delisting rule revoked.

Rep. DeFazio D -Oregon and 73 other House members, who oppose the national wolf delisting rule, are urging Secretary of the Interior, Sally Jewell, to keep wolves protected under the ESA and to “rescind the proposed rule immediately”.

Thanks to Rep. DeFazio and the 73 House members who joined him. We must stop this rule.

Please comment by March 27, 2014 on the proposed national wolf delisting by clicking HERE!

===

Natural Resources

Committee – Democrats
Ranking Member – Peter DeFazio

Press Release

Mar 19, 2014

DeFazio Leads 73 Members on Bipartisan Letter Urging Secretary Jewell to Maintain Critical Gray Wolf Protections

For Immediate Release: March 19, 2014

Contact: Jen Gilbreath (Resources), 202-225-4081

DeFazio Leads 73 Members on Bipartisan Letter Urging Secretary Jewell to Maintain Critical Gray Wolf Protections

Washington, D.C. – Today, Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee Peter DeFazio (D-OR) released a bipartisan letter co-signed by 73 House members urging Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell to continue critical protections for endangered gray wolves. The letter comes on the heels of an independent peer review that found the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) failed to use the “best available science” when it drafted a  proposed rule that would remove Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for gray wolves in the lower 48 states.

In the letter, the members write, “Because it is not based on the best available science, the proposed rule undermines decades of conservation work done to protect the gray wolf, and sets a bad precedent for future ESA delistings. Further, it would stifle gray wolf recovery at a time when conservation gains are only nascent in the Pacific Northwest, and recovery has yet to begin in California, Colorado, Utah, and the Northeast, where scientists have identified a significant amount of suitable habitat that would support wolf populations.”

The members ask Secretary Jewell and the Service to rescind the proposed rule immediately. In February, the Service released a long overdue peer review from an independent, objective panel of top experts in the fields of ecology, taxonomy, and genetics. These scientists were tasked with evaluating the proposed delisting and the science behind it. The reviewers unanimously found the Service did not use the “best available science” when they decided to remove the gray wolf from protections under the ESA. The reviewers said that the Service accepted unproven science uncritically while they disregarded conflicting data outright.

 “I’ve long said that ESA decisions should be based on science, not politics, and the experts who have reviewed the so-called science behind the proposed rule have spoken. The peer review leaves no option but for the Service to rescind the proposed rule and continue federal protections that are essential to the long-term survival and recovery of gray wolves. Continued protection under the Endangered Species Act is the only way that gray wolves will ever return to a significant portion of their range, and reclaim their place as a keystone species of American landscapes. I hope Secretary Jewell agrees,” said DeFazio

The Service’s proposed rule has generated over 1 million comments since 2013. DeFazio recently led a CREDO Mobile petition to urge the Service to rescind the rule that generated over 115,000 signatures.

A copy of the letter is below and attached.

===

March 19, 2014

 The Honorable Sally Jewell Secretary U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20240

Dear Secretary Jewell:

Last week the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) released its peer review report for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) proposed rule to remove Endangered Species Act (ESA) protection for all gray wolves other than a small experimental population of Mexican wolves being reintroduced in Arizona and New Mexico. The findings of this independent scientific review validate concerns raised by Congress and the scientific community over the Service’s failure to use the best available science to support the gray wolf delisting proposal.  Specifically, the expert panelists noted explicitly that the rule does not currently represent the best available science, that there is not currently sufficient scientific basis for recognizing a separate “eastern wolf” as asserted in the rule, and that the rule presents no evidence excluding the gray wolf from an historic range in the eastern United States.

The Service’s claim in the proposed rule that the gray wolf has recovered and should no longer be listed as endangered hinged on the purported existence of a distinct eastern wolf. The peer review report found that the existing scientific literature provides absolutely no basis for this conclusion. Therefore, we are again asking you to direct the Service to rescind the proposed rule. As you said when speaking at the Children, Conservation, and the Future of the Great Outdoors event last June, deciding whether or not to remove ESA protection from the gray wolf “is about science, and you do what the science says.”

While we are troubled by the certainty with which the Service proceeded in this instance, even in the face of clear scientific disagreement, we are pleased that the agency finally heeded our calls for an independent peer review of the rule.  Still, we have serious concerns regarding the initial attempts to exclude top wolf experts from this process, and the resurrection of a long-dormant government journal to “publish” the study (written by four FWS employees) used to justify the rule. These actions cast doubt on Service Director Dan Ashe’s recent statement that his agency has no “desire to wring our hands and walk away from wolves.”[1]

Because it is not based on the best available science, the proposed rule undermines decades of conservation work done to protect the gray wolf, and sets a bad precedent for future ESA delistings. Further, it would stifle gray wolf recovery at a time when conservation gains are only nascent in the Pacific Northwest, and recovery has yet to begin in California, Colorado, Utah, and the Northeast, where scientists have identified a significant amount of suitable habitat that would support wolf populations.

The ESA does not charge the Service with restoring only as much of the endangered species as it deems politically convenient. In fact, the purposes of the Act “are to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved [and] to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species.”[2] The Service should rescind the proposed rule immediately, and continue to review the taxonomic history of wolves in the eastern United States, and other factors related to the status of endangered gray wolf populations and their associated ecosystems before removing federal protection.

Sally Jewell Letter Signatures 2http://democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/press-release/defazio-leads-73-members-bipartisan-letter-urging-secretary-jewell-maintain-critical

===

Please contact Representative DeFazio and thank him for leading the charge to stop national wolf delisting. Ask what you can do to help.

Rep. Peter Defazio

Washington DC Office

2134 Rayburn Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

phone: 202-225-6416 hours: M-F 9-5:30pm

===

Contact Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Interior

1. Ask the proposed national wolf delisting rule be revoked immediately!

2. Explain wolves are being persecuted and killed in 6 state wolf hunts AND by Wildlife Services and poachers.

3. Wolves inhabit just 5% of their historic range.

4. If wolves lose their ESA protections it will stop wolf recovery in its tracks.

5. The proposed wolf delisting rule is NOT based on the best available science but driven by the political agenda of ranching and hunting interests.

Phone: (202) 208-3100

E-Mail: feedback@ios.doi.gov

Web: Feedback form

Mailing Address:

Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, N.W. Washington DC 20240

===

Photo: Courtesy ODFW

Posted in: Activism, Wolf Wars

Tags: stop national wolf delisting, Rep. Peter DeFazio, Secretary of the Interior, Sally Jewell, Dan Ashe, USFWS, gray wolves in danger, comment on wolf delisting

Embarrassing Press Coverage Continues For USFWS National Wolf Delisting Push…..

Wolf Pups Snoozing

Wolf Pups Snoozing

February 26, 2014

USFWS  continues to take heat over their politically transparent push to nationally delist gray wolves. They’ve never looked more inept or disingenuous as they attempt to twist the ESA into silly putty to suit their agenda.

PLEASE COMMENT!!!

Deadline Midnight March 27, 2014

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073

===

Feds’ postponement of wolf delisting follows embarrassing scientific review

 February 26, 2014 Earth Journal
By Ron Meador | 02/25/14
It’s too soon to tell, I guess, whether this month’s decision to take more public comment on federal wolf protections will change the policy eventually adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

But if you’re inclined to believe, or even just to hope, that sound science still has a role in such decisions — well, this embarrassing episode may be worth a closer look. The picture you’ll see is not pretty.

It’s probably fair to say that wolves are by far the biggest headache that Fish and Wildlife has been handed under the Endangered Species Act. Wolves have had ESA protections for four decades now, and for more than half that time the service has been working actively to shed its responsibilities for these worshipped and detested predators, battling an assortment of national groups at every turn.

What looked like maybe the last of those turns came in June, when FWS announced its plan to end protection of gray wolves throughout the remainder of the lower 48 where authority hadn’t already been turned back to the states.

However, such delisting decisions are legally required to be rooted in the “best available science,” and here the service had a problem: Its primary foundation for this delisting was a single paper laying out a fairly controversial re-classification of wolf species.

One species or two?

That paper, by Steven M. Chambers and three others, came down squarely in favor of seeing North American gray wolves as being of two types:

  • Those that have been recovering in the western U.S., with two populations sufficiently robust to justify their delisting in a zone of the northern Rockies and the region covering Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.
  • Others of a separate “eastern” species that supposedly was native to but is now essentially extinct in 29 states west of the Mississippi.

Plenty of other wolf biologists and animal geneticists think that question is far from settled — and more than a few actually think it has been settled in the opposite direction of Chambers’ conclusion, with all gray wolves belonging to just one species.

The science of these things is complex and technical, as you might expect, rooted in DNA mapping and requiring judgments as to whether DNA differences detected among wolves are permanent or temporary, results of evolutionary divergence or interbreeding convergence, and so on.

But if the differences at the molecular level are tiny, at the policy level they could hardly be larger.

The gray wolf has Endangered Species Act protection until FWS can prove it’s no longer needed; “eastern gray wolves,” if they exist, have never been protected and presumably never will be, since virtually all of the territory that would be considered their natural range has been wolfless for a long, long time.

In another policy decision that has brought sharp criticism recently, FWS has chosen to define the “natural and historic range” of a threatened species as whatever territory it occupied at the time of being listed for protection — not its historic territory. Some critics see this as an effort to rewrite the ESA by recasting its most important definition.

In-house research project

There were some other problems with the Chambers paper, too:

  • Chambers is an FWS employee. So are his three collaborators. Their work was published in an FWS journal,  “North American Fauna” without peer review. (The paper can be found here.)
  • In forming a peer review panel after publication, a private contractor hired by FWS first selected and then de-selected three national wolf experts who had signed a letter to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell expressing doubts about the service’s move toward delisting. (Among the three was John Vucetich, known to MinnPost readers as director of the Isle Royale study of wolf/moose population dynamics.)

FWS claimed at the time that it had no role in the picking and unpicking, but a reporter for MSN News turned up an email in which the three were told by the contractor that, “I understand how frustrating it must be, but we have to go with what the service wants.”

The only way out of the ensuing embarrassment was to halt that review and arrange for a second, this one to be undertaken by five scientists chosen without the service’s knowledge or involvement, and their work was released earlier this month.

It happens that one of the five, Robert Wayne of UCLA, was also among the three bounced from the first panel. But as the panel’s report puts it:

[W]e did not avoid selecting reviewers who had previously made known their personal (as opposed to scientific) opinions on the issue. This distinction is important; it is entirely possible for a scientist to have a strong opinion on policy or a proposed action, but also for that scientist to make an impartial assessment on (for instance) the precise genetics or taxonomic techniques and data that were used.

In any case, the five were assigned to give no thought to the policy aspects of the delisting proposed by FWS but to consider only its scientific basis for making them. And its conclusions are rather stark:

  • There was unanimity among the panelists that, although there was much good scientific work in the Proposed Rule, the rule is heavily dependent upon the analysis of Chambers et al.

  • There was unanimity among the panelists that Chambers et al was not universally accepted and that the issue was “not settled.” The issues raised by Chambers et al could be definitively answered relatively soon

  • There was unanimity among the panel that the rule does not currently represent the “best available science.”

  • READ MORE: http://www.minnpost.com/earth-journal/2014/02/feds-postponement-wolf-delisting-follows-embarrassing-scientific-review

===

Photo: wolf-pups_mythwallpaper-com

Posted in: Wolf Wars, Endangered Species Act

Tags gray wolf, shaky science, USFWS, national wolf delisting proposal, please comment, March 27, 2014 deadline, wolf persecution

Mexican Gray Wolf Numbers Increase But Still A Long Way To Go…..

Two Middle Fork pups in the summer of 2011 photo courtesy of the Mexican wolf interagency field team

“Two Middle Fork pups in the summer of 2011″ USFWS

The number of Mexican gray wolves has increased to 83. That’s up from 75 last year but the feds have much more to do,  to make good on their promises to recover this critically endangered wolf.

Wolf population growing, but not enough to please advocates

PHOENIX – The number of Mexican gray wolves roaming eastern Arizona and western New Mexico increased by eight to 83 wolves in the past year, according to a recent survey by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Noting that the population has increased for four straight years, federal and state officials said in a news release that the recovery program has saved the Mexican gray wolf from extinction. However, wildlife advocates said that the effort hasn’t gone far enough to ensure the species’ genetic diversity.

“I’m happy we have seen an increase in population for four years in a row,” said Michael Robinson, a conservation advocate for the Tucson-based Center of Biological Diversity. “What’s worrisome is the number of breeding pairs.”

A group of seven wolves was released in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area in 1998, starting the reintroduction program. Since then, the U.S. Wildlife and Fish Service has been managing and keeping track of the wolf population while also introducing captive wolves into the wild.

Robinson said there isn’t enough genetic variability among the wild wolves because officials haven’t released enough captive wolves.

“The original genetic diversity has not been maximized, and this means smaller litter sizes and lower pup survival rates,” he said.

Read More: http://cronkitenewsonline.com/2014/02/wolf-population-growing-but-not-enough-to-please-advocates/

This was the situation just 3 1/2 years ago:

Mexican Gray Wolves On The Brink!

http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/mexican-gray-wolves-on-the-brink/

===

Photo: Courtesy USFWS

Posted in: Mexican Gray Wolf

Tags: Mexican gray wolf, critically endangered, inbreeding, more releases needed. expand wolves’ range, USFWS

USFWS Using Jedi Mind Tricks In Place Of Science

Yoda Lucusfilm Huff Post

Confused you are?  Worried you are?

Is Yoda working for USFWS, have they hired him to play Jedi mind tricks on us? Don’t they know we’ve all seen Star Wars?

Does USFWS believe Yoda can hypnotize us? We’re not “weak-minded fools” falling for the BS they routinely dish out about wolves!

We’re on to you USFWS and your wolf hating friends in high places. You’d like nothing better than to see wolves gone from the lower 48 as you plan to remove the grizzly bear’s protections. C’mon, stop pretending your wolf delisting nonsense is based on science.  Isn’t your real goal a predator free landscape for Agribusiness?

Recently USFWS made a mockery of the so-called independent peer review of their national wolf delisting proposal.

August 2013

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today announced that it will put on hold the scientific peer review of its proposal to remove protections for gray wolves across the country while it reviews its own actions leading to the disqualification of three scientists from the review panel.

Last week it was revealed that three scientists were excluded from the peer review because they signed a letter calling into question some of the science behind the proposal to delist the gray wolf. While the Service initially claimed that it had not asked for the three scientists to be removed, emails between the contractor supervising the peer review process and the scientists themselves confirmed that the Service had in fact done exactly that.”..….Center For Biological Diversity

Of course this fiasco was a bump in the road for USFWS in their inexorable march toward national wolf delisting They’ve now extended the public comment period from September 11 to October 28, 2013  AND scheduled  3 public hearings on the national wolf delisting .  I guess they believe it will placate us into thinking they actually care what we think.

The public hearing schedule.

• September 30, 2013, from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., in Washington, DC.
• October 2, 2013, from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., in Sacramento, California.
• October 4, 2013, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., in Albuquerque, New Mexico

What we must do is keep exposing their half-truths and manipulations. We must keep  pressure on them. The American people overwhelming support  wolves and want to keep them protected.

New Poll: Americans Love Wolves and Want Them to Stay Protected

A new national poll shows that just one in three Americans support the Obama administration’s plan to drop Endangered Species protections for wolves across most of the U.S.

The poll’s findings demonstrate that a majority of voters understand and support what our leading wolf researchers are telling us — that wolves have not recovered and should be returned to hundreds of thousands of acres of prime but uninhabited wolf territory in places like California, the Northwest, southern Rockies and Northeast.

The poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe wolves are a “vital part of America’s wilderness and natural heritage,” and should be allowed to play their role in nature. Such views are supported by decades of research showing that wolves create a cascade of changes that benefit a wide range of species, including songbirds, fishes, foxes, pronghorn and many others.

With such strong support for wolves, particularly among Obama voters, it defies reason that the president is moving forward with stripping protections”……Huffington Post

Why is the USFWS and Obama administration pushing a national wolf delisting when the American people are clearly against it? The answer is crystal clear, the AG industry, ranchers and hunting groups have undue influence over wildlife policy.  Clearly USFWS is tone deaf when it comes to wolves and average Americans and only seem to listen to certain “stakeholders”, namely ones that represent cows and hunting.

Please comment by the deadline of  October 28, 2013. Don’t let them get away with stripping wolves of their ESA protections, leaving wolves at the total mercy of the states. We’ve all seen the result of  that in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming with Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan not far behind.  Thousands of wolves have been slaughtered since 2009 and  if Federal protections are removed the states won’t even be required to keep token populations of wolves.  It will be extermination, part 2 and they are well on their way toward that goal right now.

This is the wolf’s last stand in the lower 48, The dream of expanding the range of canis lupus will die in America and never raise it’s head again, if we don’t act.  I’m sorry to be so blunt. but this is where the rubber meets the road and if you’re not willing to get actively involved NOW,  then we’ll have nobody to blame but ourselves.

As proof the USFWS  lacks sincerity concerning wolves, one only has to re-visit the 2009 delisting of gray wolves by the Obama administration. Prior to 2009, for more than a decade, the USFWS refused to accept Wyoming’s “wolf  management plan”, which included a “predator zone” where wolves could be killed on sight by any means, even poison,  anytime of the day or night,  encompassing over 80% of the state. (Sadly that is now a reality)  To get around this problem the USFWS delisted  only Montana and Idaho wolves in 2009, leaving Wyoming wolves protected. A lawsuit was filed by environmental groups challenging the delisting but the first wolf hunts since the 1940′s went forward. Over 500 wolves died in the Northern Rockies that year, due to hunting, poaching and Wildlife Service killings.  In August  2010 Judge Donald Molloy finally ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and wolves in the Northern Rockies were returned to the Endangered Species List, the wolf hunts cancelled. Judge Molloy was having none of USFWS attempt to cut Wyoming out of the equation,  so they could delist wolves in Montana and Idaho. He wrote:

“The northern Rocky Mountain DPS must be listed, or delisted, as a distinct  population and protected accordingly.”

Read his full decision here.

As you can see the USFWS has been trying to delist wolves for a very long time.  After Judge Molloy’s decision the USFWS changed their position on Wyoming’s “wolf plan” and accepted the egregious “predator zone” plan.  Apparently they will go to any lengths to see wolves stripped of their protections and given over to hostile state game agencies where wolves are already being decimated.

===

COMMENT:

Removing the Gray Wolf from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Maintaining Protections for the Mexican Wolf by Listing It as Endangered

http://www.regulations.gov/#%21docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073

===

SIGN SIERRA CLUB PETITION TO STOP DELISTING

11th Hour for Wolves

signatures: 37,088

Target: Sally Jewell

====

FWS blasted for attempt to remove protections from gray wolves

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/357879#ixzz2eQSOrAc2

===

romeo-sweet-romeo john hyde

Romeo Sweet Romeo – In Memory Of  The Thousands Of Fallen wolves

===

Top Photo: Courtesy Huffington Post

Bottom Photo: Courtesy John Hyde

Posted in: Wolf Wars, Activism, Wolf Warriors

Tags: USFWS, Obama Administration, Stop national wolf delisting, take action, gray wolves, wolf persecution. Romeo

Proposed Removal of Gray Wolves’ Endangered Status a Case Study in the Politicization of Science by James William Gibson

NatureColdWarriors_Alpha male  Credit Courtesy of Jeff Turner River Road Films Ltd

The lengths USFWS has gone, to justify the delisting of wolves across the lower forty-eight,  is truly mind-blowing. Did someone drop a couple hits of LSD and come up with “the fairytale proposal”? 

car1 crackeddotcom

“Okay, Frank. Are you absolutely, completely, 100 percent positive you didn’t dose my coffee this morning? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure I just took an off ramp into the Metaverse here. I’m just sayin’…”…cracked.com

Thank you Bill and Earth Island Journal for trying to make sense of this mishegas!

===

Proposed Removal of Gray Wolves’ Endangered Status a Case Study in the Politicization of Science

by James William Gibson – June 17, 2013

US Fish and Wildlife Service relies on taxonomical shenanigans to appease wolf haters

The US Fish and Wildlife Service’s recent announcement that it is beginning the process for removing gray wolves across the country from the protection of the Endangered Species Act surprised no one. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s mid-1990s reintroduction of gray wolves — a species virtually extirpated in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries — into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho marked a triumph for conservationists and ranks as one of the most striking fulfillments of the Endangered Species Act. But as I have reported here and here, the wolves quickly met enemies.

Photo by US Fish and Wildlife ServicesThe Fish and Wildlife Service is making a rather bizarre claim that the agency wasn’t really serious when, back in 1978, it listed gray wolves as endangered across its historical range.

By the early 2000s a loose coalition of hunters’ groups, outfitters, and ranchers — along with the many disaffected men embracing militia groups, local “sovereignty” and states rights, particularly rights to use public lands without federal regulation — coalesced around the idea that wolves represented icons of the hated federal government. The wolves, they all-but-screamed, constituted lethal threats to deer and elk, livestock, and ultimately, people. The long, bitter wolf war reached its climax in the summer of 2011, when Congress took the unprecedented act of removing the wolf populations of the Northern Rockies from the endangered species list. In May 2011, the Fish and Wildlife Service, weary of the many problems involved in wolf management (or, rather, public relations management), delisted gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes states, where some 4,400 wolves resided.   Idaho, Montana and Wyoming subsequently initiated hunts and the use of government marksmen to reduce wolf numbers from around 1,700 to a much lower level.

The FWS’s proposed delisting of gray wolves across the country is simply the continuation of the agency’s long retreat in the face of wolf hater intimidation. Still, it’s important to understand how the FWS legitimizes its abandonment of wolves. A close examination of the FWS’ proposed rule change is a case study in the politicization of science. The FWS report excels at cherry picking, choosing certain scientific studies while rejecting others. It’s also an excellent example of bureaucratic hand-waving, simply dismissing long established facts whenever they become inconvenient. The final result is like a weird game of scientific Twister: The FWS bends itself into all sorts of contortions to conform to a political agenda.

Repetitive and often inconsistent, the 215-page proposed rule makes two stunning claims.  First, the FWS says “new information on C. lupus taxonomy” published in 2012 reveals that the gray wolves (C. lupus) do not constitute “either an entire species nor an entire single subspecies.” Simply put, C. lupus “does not represent a valid species under the [Endangered Species] Act”  — and thus cannot be listed as endangered. Having decided that gray wolves are not a valid species, the FWS then deconstructs the category, saying all wolves formerly called gray actually belong to one of three subspecies of wolves and one new species.

The FWS then makes the rather bizarre claims that the agency wasn’t really serious when, back in 1978, it listed gray wolves as endangered across an historical range covering most of the lower 48 states (except Minnesota, where it was listed as “threatened”). Rather, the agency now claims, the 1978 reclassification “was undertaken to ‘most conveniently’ handle a listing that needed to be revised because of changes in our understanding of gray wolf taxonomy, and in recognition of the fact that individual wolves sometimes cross subspecies [geographic] boundaries.” Now, the FWS argues, “this generalized approach to the listing … was misread by some publics as an expression of a larger wolf recovery not required by the Act and never intended by the Service.” Evidently the FWS never really had wolf recovery as a goal.

In place of this unintended “larger wolf recovery,” the FWS in its newly proposed rule lists three subspecies and alludes to one new wolf species, each with a limited population size and a clearly limited range.  Conceptually, deconstructing the gray wolf category constitutes a containment strategy, a way to scientifically legitimize small, remnant wolf populations restricted to finite ranges; wide-ranging wolf dispersal is eliminated as a possibility. This containment appeases politicians, government administrators, businesses, ranchers  and hunters — all those who fear disruption from  wolf recovery.

What the FWS used to call the gray wolves living in Northern Rocky Mountains, — a “Distinct Population Segment” in biology nomenclature —  is now conceptualized as the wolf subspecies,  C. l. occidentalis.  Wolves classified as occidentalis , according to the FWS, “currently occupy nearly the entire historical range of the species.” In what I can only call an act of scientific chutzpah, the FWS therefore argues that these wolves are considered fully recovered. And since they are fully recovered and are occupying their historical range, then any occidentalis  that disperse to Washington, Oregon or Colorado are classified as a non-native species. Although individual states might choose to list them as endangered—Washington and Oregon have done this — they will not qualify as a federally protected Distinct Population Segment of gray wolves. That’s because the FWS no longer considers gray wolves to be a valid species. Nice circular logic, that.

The FWS is also playing this same shell game in the Western Great Lakes states of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Wolves living there formerly were classified as a Distinct Population Segment of gray wolves.  It used to be that if any of these wolves migrated outside these states — say to North and South Dakota — then they received protection by the Endangered Species Act. Now, under the proposed rule change, the wolves in the Western Great Lakes are classified as Canis Iupus nubilus. Although the FWS acknowledges that C. I. nubilus does not occupy all of its historical range — a vast area that once included the Southern Rocky Mountains, the Colorado Plateau, and the coastal ranges of the Pacific Northwest — the agency still makes the case that the subspecies is present in sufficient numbers in the Western Great Lakes and Canada to be considered fully recovered. So it shouldn’t be protected by the ESA, either.

Interestingly, although the FWS considers eastern Canada to be part of the range of C. l. nubilus, it now argues that no wolves of this subspecies ever settled south of Quebec, in New England and upstate New York.  Instead, the FWS says an entirely different wolf species, Canis lycaon, once lived there. No population estimates of Canis lycaon are given; nor does the FWS name areas where packs have been sighted. The FWS does not even propose listing at the present, saying “we must first address outstanding science and policy questions.” It’s not at all clear if real wolves belonging to Canis lycaon exist. But if the Northeast is classified as belonging to the historical range of Canis lycaon, then any gray wolves (C. l. nubilus) that migrate into the region will not be protected by the ESA.  Once again, the FWS proposes creating a new species in order to remove protection for another one.

 (If you’re having problem tracking all of these different species and subspecies, don’t feel bad. All of the taxonomical shenanigans seem designed to confuse the public.)

Click HERE to read more:

===

We have until September 11, 2013 to comment on this outrageous insult to our intelligence. Don’t be  bamboozled by the USFWS word-games, this is wolf persecution pure and simple.

Speak out firmly against this. America loves wolves but sadly their recovery has been hijacked by a small group of well-funded-wolf-hating-zealots. Don’t let them get away with this!

HOWL FOR THE WOLVES…use the link below to flood the site with your comments!!

Removing the Gray Wolf from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Maintaining Protections for the Mexican Wolf by Listing It as Endangered

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073

===

Snail Mail:

Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–ES–2013–0073
Division of Policy and Directives Management
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM
Arlington, Virginia 22203

===

Top Photo: Nature Cold Warriors Credit  Courtesy of Jeff Turner River Road Films Ltd

2nd Photo: Courtesy crackeddotcom

3rd Photo: USFWS

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: USFWS, Who’s On First, Politics Trump Science, Earth Island Journal, James William Gibson, Wolf Persecution

Environmentalists Aren’t Taking Proposed “Blanket Wolf Delisting” Lying Down….

Cold Warriors alpha male

Alpha Male Delta Pack (Watch Cold Warriors, Nature Channel)

March 27, 2013

If the wolf haters think advocates are looking the other way while they systematically dismantle wolf recovery across the US, they better think twice. As I stated in my previous post the anti-wolf brigade is going in for the kill, they want wolves delisted across the lower 48, which would effectively stop wolf recovery in its tracks. Wolves already face daunting odds dispersing outside the “kill zone” of the hostile wolf states. Even with federal protection they usually end up dead, shot by hunters who almost always claim ” I thought it was a coyote” excuse.

Wolf killed in Kansas first in more than a century

Male wolf killed by coyote hunters

Posted: February 2, 2013 – 6:32pm

http://cjonline.com/news/2013-02-02/wolf-killed-kansas-first-more-century

===

Wolf Confirmed Killed in Mid-MO

Wolf Killed in Missouri

warning graphic photo

Mar 20, 2013 8:14 PM

A bow hunter killed the animal near the Franklin Island Conservation Area last year. On Wednesday, the state’s Conservation Department confirmed it was a wolf and not a coyote.

http://www.abc17news.com/news.php?id=9349

===

 The same fate was shared by the amazing little Mill Creek Pack wolf, 314f. who traveled 1000 miles from her home in Montana,  to a lonely hillside in Colorado, aptly called  “No Name Ridge”, where her bones were found. Two years later it was announced she was poisoned by the deadly compound 1080, one of the horrific poisons Wildlife Services uses in its arsenal to kill our wildlife.

The Amazing Journey and Sad End of Wolf 314F

May 31, 2012

http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/the-amazing-journey-and-sad-end-of-wolf-314f-2/

===

Can you imagine the carnage if wolves were systematically delisted across the lower 48? They can’t catch a break now,  when they’re  federally protected.  The USFWS has no reason to take this action against wolves. Wolf recovery is not even close to being accomplished and in fact it’s going in reverse due to USFWS removing their federal protections and turning them over to hostile state management. The pressure to delist is coming from the rabid wolf haters, who believe “the only good wolf is a dead wolf”. Where is the science in that USFWS? I won’t hold my breath waiting for an answer.

===

Environmentalists band together to defend gray wolves

A U.S. Fish and Wildlife report last year proposed dropping wolves from the endangered list in most areas where they’re known not to live, triggering an outcry.

CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — Western environmental groups say they’re alarmed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering a plan to end federal protections for gray wolves in vast areas where the animals no longer exist.

The groups say ending federal protections would keep wolves from expanding their range back into states that could support them, including Colorado and California.

“As a matter of principle, I just think it’s wrong,” said Jay Tutchton, a Colorado lawyer with the group WildEarth Guardians.

Tutchton’s group has sued over recent action to end federal protections for wolves in Wyoming. Wolves in most of the “Cowboy State” are classified as unprotected predators and scores have been killed since federal protections ended last fall.

“The Endangered Species Act was designed to protect species, including in places where they no longer reside,” Tutchton said. “You were supposed to try to recover them, not throw in the towel.”

The Fish and Wildlife Service could announce as soon as this spring whether it will propose a blanket delisting of wolves in most of the lower 48 states. Wolves in the Northern Rockies and around the Great Lakes, where reintroduced populations are well-established, are already off the Endangered Species List.

Read More

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/26/western-environmentalists-gray-wolf-delisting/2023379/

===

URGENT!! TAKE ACTION: Frenzy To Delist Wolves Across Lower Forty Eight Intensifies….

http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/urgent-take-action-frenzy-to-delist-wolves-across-lower-forty-eight-intensifies/

===

Top Photo: Courtesy The Nature Channel (Cold Warriors)

Middle Photo: Courtesy ABC 17 HD News

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: USFWS, push to delist nationwide, protect wolves, brutal state management, environmentalists fight back

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,971 other followers

%d bloggers like this: