Wolves WY v. MT v. ID

[BigFin]

Well, the injunction ordered by Judge Malloy, to temporarily restore ESA protection to wolves,really sucks, but it is not the end. It is merely an injunction that restores ESA protection while the case is decided. Such injunctions are common while cases are being decided.

The Federal court system will have to hear the case in its entirety, meanwhile, the state plans are put on hold and the ESA continues to rule the day.

Two points in the injunction decision will be very relevant in the final decision of the case.

1. Genetic isolation
2. Wyoming?s plan

The genetic isolation issue is taking care of itself in my home state of MT. We have wolves in the NW population moving south and wolves in the Yellowstone population moving north.

Given the emphasis the judge has place on this aspect of the recovery plan, I suspect MT FWP will be doing much to record the DNA of the wolves showing up in these new places. If they aren't, hunter groups will be on them to do so.

The bigger problem is the fact that the MT, ID, and WY plans are all being considered as one. A tactic that the enviros have used from the start. We now know the judge find many problems with the WY plan, even though I like it.

WY should be allowed to develop whatever plan they damn well want. As should MT and ID. Each plan should reflect the perspectives of the citizens of each state.

As much as I don't want to see a divide and conquer approach, I surely don't like the ?treat ?em all as one? approach that causes the plan of one state to sink the plans of all the states.

Don?t be surprised if hunters in MT come together and ask FWP to petition for a delisting ruling solely for MT. The enviros would hate that, as they would lose any grounds based on the judges dislike of the WY plan, and they know that in the last two years, MT has had a lot of genetic mixing, it just has not been documented in a scientific study.

WY is going to have to decide what they are going to do with their plan. I hope they fight the Feds and prevail. Yet, in the interim, I am not enthused about the WY plan causing MT to lose its opportunity to manage the wolves in MT under a plan devised by MT citizens.

The injuction sucks all the way around, but if the USFWS can prevail in the full hearing that they have adequately addressed the genetic isolation issues, the only pending issue will be the WY plan. If so, WY will be on an island, putting them in a very hard spot.

I hope you don't think I am being selfish and unreasonable for taking the position that I want each state to be decided individually. The enviros don't want that, as they know that once the genetic isolation question is solved, they will lose any fight based on the MT plan, and most likely lose on the ID plan.

I support WY, and whatever plan they stick to or change to. But, I want the fight about wolves living in my state, to be based on the plan that was developed in my state, and will be implemented in my state.

Genetic isolation can be fixed, and now that agencies know the courts are looking so closely at such, they can quickly start to monitor genetic diversity. If we need to, we can capture wolves in one area and swap them for wolves in the other area.

If the final case is decided on these two factors, it will just be a matter of time before we prevail.

I am sure the enviros hope the final decision brings up many more points than just the genetics and WY plan problems. If the final decision sticks with those two points, they can be addressed, and if one of the two points is removed in the final decision, the enviros will be worried chitless, which would make me smile.

Happy Hunting!



"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"

 

[huntjock]

Yes, this was definitely a victory for the wolf lovers - and a HUGE setback for the 3 states' ability to manage the (Canadian Grey) wolf. The original guidelines for delisting were met long ago - yet, the wolf lovers have no problem moving WAY beyond the original intent of "reintroduction."

They want *us* to play by the rules but totally ignore them themselves????

I will be in wolf country next week and weekend. That's all I will say.

 

[Zigga]

Couldn't the wackos argue that certain sheep and goat populations suffer from genetic isolation? There are plenty of goat and sheep areas that are isolated and huntable. Why stop with the wolf? Why don't they try to take our sheep and goat hunting too? My point is that there are many species that are genetically isolated, huntable and healthy. I don't understand their logic or the judges. Wolves don't sit around and inbreed for God's sake. DERRRR!

I don't like judges or people that make decisions for others when they know NOTHING about what they are deciding on. Our justice system has a lot to be desired.

 

[scoutdog5]

Zigga, the problem here was not the judge, but the original delisting plan. Genetic Diversity was one of the benchmarks that had to be met before delisting could occur. When the feds elected not to delist, I think in 2003, this was one of the problems they cited.

The law allows the feds to make changes to the original documentation and plan as new evidence and research becomes available, but they must document the changes, and the reasons for them, by essentially amending the plan.

In this case, the feds elected to ignore the genetic diversity requirement when they approved the delisting. They certainly could have done additional research, or done other things to document that the genetic diversity requirement should be removed from the delisting plan. They did not do that. All the judge did was call them on their failure to follow the law. Isn't that what we want judges to do?

This is just one more example of why the Feds seem to lose all these cases when they go to court. Maybe we ought to stop complaining about the enviromentalists and judges, and start hammering on the government to do their #$$#$# job.

Scoutdog

 

[moseleymiddleton]

the probleme is not that wyomings plan is not adequte it is the fact that wolf lovers will wine and moan as long as a wolf can be shot on sight. becouse alaska does not even list them as predators. wyoming is not wimps like motana and idaho and will back down to manage wolves the way anti's want them managed we will manage them the way we want regardless of what antis want. as for genetic diverication. they will make a cross breed wolf with the population of rockey mountain timber wolves have been here for longer than any anti hunter group has reseached. generating a cross between canadian grey wolves and rockey mt. timber wolves.pluse if wolves that are linked to yellowstone wolves are killed by a car as far away as sturgis s.d. and ft. collins c.o they damn sure wont be geneticly isolated. just my two cents



moseley middleton

 

[BigFin]

Mosely:

That is a funny reply. Really. Not sure it is worth two cents, but still really funny.

I like how WY is getting to manage the wolves the "way we want regardless of what antis want." Unless I am missing something, WY is not managing wolves after this injunction, but rather WY is being managed the way the anti's want.

I know, if it were for us pusses in MT, all would be well in the anti-wolf world.

Something tells me you don't speak for the majority of WY guys, most of whom I have met and hunted with are tough bastards, and hard core hunters.

Happy wolf hunting.

"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"

 

[moseleymiddleton]

I am not refering to the hunters in idaho and montana, as i am the goverment who is willing to bend over and take it in the rear just to be able to manage wolves the way the feds want. Becouse i know that there is just as many hunter in those states that will practise the three s's just as quick as wyomingits to control a livestock damaging wolf or any wolf seen as a matter of fact. what i was meaning by a bunch of wusses is the other states becides wy where not willing to but up the money and time to fight the feds to be able to manage wolves the way we want and need to. by saying on federal lands in yellowston and surrounding areas if you want wolvees you can have them but onece they leave that area they are dead becouse we dont want them. In my opinion wy should have sued in the fact that there were wolves in wy way before they introduced them. i know a goverment trapper who says he knows there of a ranch were they have trapped atleast one wolf a year since the early eighties. And the fact that in wyomings laws as a state you cannot introduce non native game in wyoming. hence the reason for no plains game, red stags, or other imported animals from other countrys. I know in elk area 13 the game and fish used to test the elk you killed to see if any red stags had enter mingled from an excape in C.O a few years prior. and the law alows for non native species to be killed on sight. Which is what needs to be done with the canadian grey wolf! The diffrence between a canadian grey wolf and the rockey mt timber wolf is the way that they hunt. Canadian grey wolves pack up in groups of four to sixteen depending on the amount of food available to them. when a rockey mt timber wolve repaom in pairs mainly to maby six if its a hard winter and need the added help when hunting. Prior to the introduction of wolves in wyoming they was an estimated 80 to 150 rockey mt. timber wolves in the state but due to the inaccessabiltiy of many areas in wyoming and yellowstone an accurate count cannot be taken. just to prove this after a hunderd years of exploring yellowstone and its wilderness areas just two years ago there was three new waterfalles decoverd in the park. this is all i have to say for now till i do some more reseach to explain why predators will survive regaudless of hunting.


moseley middleton