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


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:


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?


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.”



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

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

17 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. I couldnt agree more. USFWS isnt doing its job, plain and simple. The states plan to kill off as many wolves as possible, meanwhile a federal agency licks the boots of wealthy politicians and ranchers. Be ashamed of your cowardly sniveling selves, boys, your day of reckoning will come.


    • agencies do the licking, politicians do the receiving …… we all know what


  2. This is unbearable. What can we do?


  3. They are idiots! They say whatever they want to mislead the public!


  4. This has me scratching my head too – I think it is just to satisfy a public that doesn’t know.


  5. And the fate of these and other wonderful animals are in the hands of these ….”brilliant minds”


  6. Typical bureaucratic crap. What better way to cloud the real issue than a stupid statement that the mere idiocy detracts from the real issue. Most people will read that as there are more wolves than we need so lets just kill them wholesale. Once again a great example of our tax dollars at work.


  7. I hope everyone emails Obamer on how his BLM cant stop a civil militia but his USFWS is saying the exact same thing Matt Meads saying in one of the worst states out there for wolves , if Obamer tried he couldn’t get any redder


  8. I knew the comments we left for USFWS would go nowhere. It’s was a publicity stunt hoping gullible, optimistic people would fall for it. I’m not advising to put yourself on the NSA watch list, but it’s the only thing that will shake up USFWS. We have to stop playing nice and polite.


  9. Reblogged this on Exposing the Big Game.


  10. I can’t wait to send this huge lie onto many large animal activist groups. Ones who have legitimate/accurate studies done by legitimate scientists, biologist, conservationists, etc.


  11. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition also is saying that wolf recovery ia a success. Here is my response to Chris Colligan, the Wildlife Program Manager at the Greater Yellowstone Coalition:
    Hi Chris,

    The statistics that you present about the number of wolves currently existing in the Northern Rockies is questionable.
    If you are using information presented by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, it is faulty.
    Mt. FW & P officials told me that they determine the number of wolves by counting wolf prints in various locations.
    The wolf prints could have been made by the same wolf or by a wolf that is now deceased.
    Check back to the count in 2010 and you will see that Montana had little more than 300 wolves.
    After aggressive hunting, trapping, and poaching there are few wolves left outside of the Yellowstone Area.
    As your population of wolves decline with age, will there be enough packs to carry on?
    Hunters use unethical means to lure your wolves out of the park so that they can be killed.
    (ie: mechanical sounds of a wolf pup in distress or a dead deer carcass)

    It concerns me that you would present information about a healthy number of wolves in Montana when the actual population is in jeopardy.

    Toni A. Stark
    Stevensville, Montana


  12. Reblogged this on Birdpond's Blog and commented:
    Re-blogging from Howling for Justice –


  13. Let’s see allowing hunters, but not scientists who oppose to voice their opinion of this action. Can’t have any potential ‘advocates’ on the committee, they might say something bad about this clearly briliant flawless idea. Yep, that sounds really scientific…
    …Heavy handed sarcasm.

    So they think that just because the wolves haven’t been wiped out yet that the states are responsible and the wolves can survive repeated slaughter? What planet are they on and from what rock have they crawled out from under? This is more than just a numbers issue.


  14. I detest the USFWS and the Obama administration. If they won’t listen to the voices of the majority, it’s time for a change in strategy. This kind of wretched, misguided, barbaric, and politically driven wildlife “management” cannot be allowed to stand. Never thought I’d see the day when a Dem administration would dismantle the ESA and actively seek to drive gray wolves to the brink of extinction. Grizzlies are next, folks. It’s become crystal clear that both parties now only serve their corporate masters. The question is: Are we going to let them continue to get away with it?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: