cantgetdrawn
Active Member
- Messages
- 162
The deadline to make comments is Sept. 23rd. Here is the website to make comments.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R2-ES-2013-0056-6056
I went to mexicanwolves.org and just changed some of their bullet points making the opposite arguments and adding some bs in for good measure
I OPPOSE expanding the area in which direct releases of Mexican wolves can occur.
1) New wolves should not be released in the existing management area nor in new areas outside of this existing area. Doing so will cause conflicts and further waste taxpayer money on what has become a failed experiment.
2) The USFWS should take it's time to complete a comprehensive plan to manage these wolves granting more weight to the opinions of those most affected by these wolves as opposed to people who live hundreds or thousands miles away from the management area.
3) The proposed expanded provisions for ?take? (killing, trapping, and removals) of these wolves should be approved for wolves who create conflicts with the human population, livestock and pets.
4) The USFWS should FURTHER RESTRICT boundaries to the wolves? movement so as not to create conflict with human populations. In addition, these boundaries help insure the genetic uniqueness of this subspecies. Breeding with hybrids rumored to be throughout the state or even northern timber wolves would destroy the Lobo as a unique subspecies. If such interbreeding occurs it would be hard to argue that these wolves are endangered.
5) The USFWS should keep the designation of the Mexican gray wolves as nonessential. The ecosystem did not collapse in the absence of these wolves and the fact that after 2 decades they cannot reach target population numbers is evidence that the environment is no longer suited for a large number of these wolves. Most of the scientific study proponents of wolf reintroduction commission start with mistaken assumption that these wolves are vital and therefore the conclusion reached are incorrect.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R2-ES-2013-0056-6056
I went to mexicanwolves.org and just changed some of their bullet points making the opposite arguments and adding some bs in for good measure
I OPPOSE expanding the area in which direct releases of Mexican wolves can occur.
1) New wolves should not be released in the existing management area nor in new areas outside of this existing area. Doing so will cause conflicts and further waste taxpayer money on what has become a failed experiment.
2) The USFWS should take it's time to complete a comprehensive plan to manage these wolves granting more weight to the opinions of those most affected by these wolves as opposed to people who live hundreds or thousands miles away from the management area.
3) The proposed expanded provisions for ?take? (killing, trapping, and removals) of these wolves should be approved for wolves who create conflicts with the human population, livestock and pets.
4) The USFWS should FURTHER RESTRICT boundaries to the wolves? movement so as not to create conflict with human populations. In addition, these boundaries help insure the genetic uniqueness of this subspecies. Breeding with hybrids rumored to be throughout the state or even northern timber wolves would destroy the Lobo as a unique subspecies. If such interbreeding occurs it would be hard to argue that these wolves are endangered.
5) The USFWS should keep the designation of the Mexican gray wolves as nonessential. The ecosystem did not collapse in the absence of these wolves and the fact that after 2 decades they cannot reach target population numbers is evidence that the environment is no longer suited for a large number of these wolves. Most of the scientific study proponents of wolf reintroduction commission start with mistaken assumption that these wolves are vital and therefore the conclusion reached are incorrect.
