Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Salazar Upholds Bush-era Decision to Delist Gray Wolves
WASHINGTON, DC - Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today affirmed the decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove gray wolves from the list of threatened and endangered species in the western Great Lakes and the northern Rocky Mountain states of Idaho and Montana and parts of Washington, Oregon and Utah. Wolves will remain a protected species in Wyoming.
"Today is a truly disappointing day for Americans who care deeply about the Northern Rockies wolf population and for the integrity of the Endangered Species Act. We are outraged and disappointed that Secretary Salazar has chosen to push the same, terrible Bush administration plan for wolf delisting just six weeks into President Obama's administration," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president for Defenders of Wildlife. (Photo: National Geographic) "The recovery of the gray wolf throughout significant
portions of its historic range is one of the great success stories of
the Endangered Species Act," Salazar said. "When it was listed as
endangered in 1974, the wolf had almost disappeared from the
continental United States. Today, we have more than 5,500 wolves,
including more than 1,600 in the Rockies."
"The successful recovery of this species is a stunning example of how the Act can work to keep imperiled animals from sliding into extinction," he said. "The recovery of the wolf has not been the work of the federal government alone. It has been a long and active partnership including states, tribes, landowners, academic researchers, sportsmen and other conservation groups, the Canadian government and many other partners."
Environmentalists immediately said they will mount a legal challenge to Salazar's decision.
"Today is a truly disappointing day for Americans who care deeply about the Northern Rockies wolf population and for the integrity of the Endangered Species Act. We are outraged and disappointed that Secretary Salazar has chosen to push the same, terrible Bush administration plan for wolf delisting just six weeks into President Obama's administration," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president for Defenders of Wildlife.
"We all expected more from the Obama administration, but Defenders of Wildlife will now move to sue Secretary Salazar as quickly as possible," he said.
Suzanne Stone, northern Rockies representative for Defenders of Wildlife, said, "Nothing about this rule has changed since it was rejected and deemed unlawful in a federal court in July of 2008. It still fails to adequately address biological concerns about the lack of genetic exchange among wolf populations in the northern Rockies and it still fails to address the concerns with the states' wolf management plans and regulations that undermine a sustainable wolf population by killing too many wolves."
But Idaho Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter, a Republican, and all four members of Idaho's congressional delegation praised Salazar's decision.
"Wolves are a fully recovered species that is thriving in Idaho. That's a fact, and it is heartening to see that Secretary Salazar recognizes it," said Governor Otter, who urged today's action when he met with Secretary Salazar last month at the National Governors Association conference in Washington, DC.
"We know that well-intentioned but narrowly focused interest groups will challenge this decision, but we in Idaho are determined to continue our policy of responsibly managing wolves for a viable, sustainable population that can co-exist with our ungulate herds, our livestock and our people," the governor said.
"Secretary Salazar is to be commended for his common-sense decision that now allows Idaho's wolf management plan to be fully implemented," said Senator Mike Crapo, a Republican. "Idaho's plan reflects the biological reality on the ground and sets the stage for a much more collaborative approach to wolf management in the future."
"As contentious as this planning has been at times, the effort involving the federal government, the State of Idaho, the tribes, the livestock industry and conservationists has been affirmed by the Secretary and reflects yet again the power of collaboration in successfully recovering species," Crapo said.
"As Idaho Governor in 2006 I strongly pushed for the delisting of wolves in our state," said Senator Jim Risch, a Republican. "Those efforts included conference calls with the Deputy Secretary of the Interior and meetings with the Montana Governor and other Interior officials urging that delisting."
"My belief was then, and it is affirmed today, that wolves in Idaho are fully recovered and can be managed in a sustainable and responsible way within our borders," said Risch. "I greatly appreciate Secretary Salazar's decision and am confident that it will stand in the face of any litigation it may face."
"Over the last month I have lobbied Secretary Salazar to act quickly on this issue. I'm pleased today to see the Department of Interior do just that, and to see the administration acknowledge that states should be in control," said Congressman Walt Minnick, a Democrat. "I've had extensive discussions on this issue with other members of Congress from the West, including Rep. John Salazar, a fellow Blue Dog Democrat and western Colorado cattle rancher who happens to be the secretary's brother. They all recognize the need for local collaboration and local control, and were instrumental in helping move the delisting forward."
The Fish and Wildlife Service originally announced the decision to delist the wolf in January, but the new administration decided to review the decision as part of an overall regulatory review when it came into office. The Service will now send the delisting regulation to the Federal Register for publication.
The Service decided to delist the wolf in Idaho and Montana because they have approved state wolf management plans in place that will ensure the conservation of the species in the future.
At the same time, the Service determined wolves in Wyoming would still be listed under the Act because Wyoming's current state law and wolf management plan are not sufficient to conserve its portion of northern Rocky Mountain wolf population.
Gray wolves were previously listed as endangered in the lower 48 states, except in Minnesota where they were listed as threatened. The Service oversees three separate recovery programs for the gray wolf; each has its own recovery plan and recovery goals based on the unique characteristics of wolf populations in each geographic area.
Wolves in other parts of the 48 states, including the Southwest wolf population, remain endangered and are not affected by the actions taken today.
20 Comments so far
Show AllSupport Protect America's Wildlife Act (PAW).
By the end of this winter Palin is expected to have reigned over the aerial slaughter of hundreds of wolves.
Idaho and Montana also wish to aerial hunt wolves.
For the past decade New Mexico and the Feds have been unable or unwilling to capture the shooters of a large portion of a handful of reintroduced wolves attemptng to be restablished.
What a (non) surprise.
Once again
blame the meat eaters.
Take away the poison that is the livestock industry, and everything from water and agricultural land to clean air will benefit.
The only losers are selfish and stupid humans who want to behave like carnivores without actually having the naturally born tools to do it.
Without knives and guns they wouldnt even be able to hunt an ailing sparrow.
Real carnivores dont have that problem.
""When it was listed as endangered in 1974, the wolf had almost disappeared from the continental United States. Today, we have more than 5,500 wolves, including more than 1,600 in the Rockies."
5,500 wolves is the limit? How many people are the limit?
""Secretary Salazar is to be commended for his common-sense decision that now allows Idaho's wolf management plan to be fully implemented," said Senator Mike Crapo, a Republican."
A win for Republicans and Blue Dog Republican Lite Democrats is a loss for those who won the election.
I believe it should be the states that manage the wolves in their boundaries, not the omnipotent feds. The people have more power at the state level, which means we as a collective can decide rather than who ever the president appoints to his cabinet.
I agree with ezeflyer, how can we decide 5,500 wolves are enough, but what about people? A reason why I want more wilderness protection in Montana is to limit the amount of people that will want to go to this state because of the low population (compared to the rest of the states) and vast open lands: they will have less choice.
I also just love when those ferocious wolves kill those innocent little cows raised on ranches that are out in the middle of the woods, the ranchers cry wolf and beg and complain that the government needs to come in and kill them because the wolves are losing them money and property. So my tax dollars go to shooting animals that know no difference between a cow and deer. So they get shot because some dumb ass decides to raise animals where wolves, cougars, and bears naturally roam. Don't even get me started on the number of hunters in this state complaining about the lack of deer and elk they didn't get to kill because those damn wolves are killing every single one of them...
However I am not against delisting of the wolves. Biologists who worked with the recovery process in Montana spoke how funds could now be used for other animals.
fun 11:07 ---- delisting and transfering funds would be OK if it did not result in a great amount of new wolf slaughter.
Also for the wolves protection the Feds are better than the Alaska, Mont., Wy. and Idaho state governments.
despicable! despicable! despicable!
5000+ wolves in some 35 years.
not even a drop in the bucket..........as the human population spins wildly out of control and off the charts taking up more and more of nature's animal habitat as it simultaneously pollutes air land river and sea. those 5000+ wolves have a sorry chance. i would really like to hang palin and salazar's carcasses on a rancher's fence.
i wrote to 'cites' about this, the first time it came around........
they never replied..............bastards.
It's time for the silent minority that knows in their heart and gut what is right, to start speaking out loud and clear. For far too long, the public discourse has been hijacked by vested interests, and 'public' policy is nothing but a case of bending over backward to satisfy these special interests, often involving some form of subsidy from the public purse. Also, certain things that are taken as a given - such as ranchers' rights, priority for hunting and recreation, and so on - so even a small step in the direction of a habitat restoration has to face so much obstacles.
Bill Moyers had this conversation on "The American Dream" and apparently it seems to strike a chord in so many people. Here's what Andrew J. Bacevich had to say on the Dream:
"I think core of my vision would be that we find ways to preserve that which is best about the past — the American inheritance. The American inheritance is an environmental inheritance a wonderful beautiful rich country and we've not treated that country kindly and we need to try to restore it and pass it on to future generations."
Although a beautifully sentimental image, it's not quite accurate - because this 'inheritance' does not acknowledge the way it came about, or the pain inflicted on the native population - both human as well as animal. The American Dream need not be from the past alone - may be it could also be about a future that would be fart better than the past?
Aerial hunting? "If i had a rocket launcher...." ---Bruce Cockburn
So what is their logic here? Save a species hunt them to the brink then save them again then repeat. That is just stupid.
Others here have suggested hunting the people responsible for this. I couldn't agree more. There is only one herd on this planet that needs to be thinned out and that is humans.
Yeah, I was reading about Idaho and Montana's wolf recovery programs. Paying a bounty for wolf scalps and ears, poisoning, and aerial gunning.
We've squeezed the lands down to almost nothing where the denizens of the wild can live. Then, even in the reserves, if a wolf or a grizzly crosses the line, it is shot. I guess we have to teach them to read to survive.
Apparently, anything that inconveniences humanity, or interferes with the bottom line must die. It is the American Way!
Many thousands of Americans have fought the delisting and supported the wolf recovery program for years. Now brought to an end by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen in the new Obamanation of "change."
I've been up close to wolves --
what amazing creatures --
I've also been up close to Salazar --
sorry I didn't spit when I had the chance
GOD FORBID THESE RANCHERS SHOULD LOSE A NICKEL.AND REMEMBER THEY GRAZE ON PUBLIC LAND .WHAT BS MAYBE WE SHOULD SHOOT THESE IDIOTS FROM HELICOPTERS .BRING BACK THE WOLVES BRING BACK THE BUFFALO BRING BACK THE REAL HUMAN BEINGS.
MITAKUYE OYASIN
ALL MY RELATIONS
I confess i have no technical knowledge of this subject, but I do believe the wolves should remain free. They are really amazing, wonderful animals. Native Americans had lots of respect for wolves, in no small part because of their exalted lupine family values.
the western world, on the other hand, with its insistent contempt for all that is natural, have always portrayed these noble creatures as wicked, mean, and nasty.
even looking into the eyes of that tiny picture in this story makes me feel like this is a being i can trust.
Obama and Salazar can kiss my ass.
Sounds like a good idea, but I don't believe the ass is a protected species either. It is likely to be shot from the air, so be careful.
You can adopt a wild horse or ass.
The federal government has a number of asses for sale!
"dubs_dingleberries March 7th, 2009 5:43 pm
I've been up close to wolves --
what amazing creatures --
I've also been up close to Salazar --
sorry I didn't spit when I had the chance"
I THINK you'd have a greater chance, depending on the distance between you and him, with throwing shoes. I doubt you can you spit as far as you can throw shoes. Maybe steel-capped kind, but then that might get you arrested for an attempted assault with a potentially dangerous "weapon", so maybe better off not using steel-capped footwear; for throwing at him.
Anyway, they should not legalise shooting or killing or harming of wolves. People don't eat wolves, so hunting them is not a question of feeding oneself; and when it comes to protecting cattle or other raised animals, farm animals, whatever, there are probably ways this can be done without harming the wolves.
A lot of people like to destroy much or all that's good in this world and this barbarity needs to stop. Wild animals should be protected, and innocent human beings should be protected, instead of only having laws on paper saying that people are to be protected. Paper is not good enough; the barbarity and greed must really stop.
I hold human life of innocent people above the lives of other animals, and am not against hunting for food as long as the exploitation isn't exaggerated. But I still believe we must protect wildlife and simply wilderness, Nature; all of it. Exploitation of Nature should only be done in environmentally sane ways. Exploitation of human resources, i.e., people, should only be done in just or fair ways, such that the exploitation is not a mostly one-way-benefactor situation. For fairness, both parties must benefit and with neither abusively benefiting compared to the other.
People who feel they have to kill other animals for the sake of sport should really grow up and learn to think in comprehensively sane and intelligent terms. Hunting is not really a sport; it's an activity and a challenge, although some people hunt in ways that make the activity little challenge. But hunting is not a sport in any case.
Want to do sports? Try cross-country skiing, bicycling, swimming, playing tennis or squash, or badmitton (spelling?) or ping-pong on a table, or team sports like volleyball, soccer, etcetera; and etcetera. Hiking is a good physical activity, but I wouldn't consider it really a sport. It's a great activity though. The only problem with it is doing it safely; there are too many lunatics and some occasionally attack people in wilderness areas. As long as we're safe from such people, then hiking is great to do.
There's plenty to do to be happy, and no need to be destructive with Nature. When wild animals are of herd kind and they become so numerous that they starve their populations, then some hunting for population control and with the meats obtained used for food, this is understandable, I guess. But hunting is often not for such purposes. A lot of people do it on the basis of thinking it's a sport. We can appreciate being in wilderness without killing or harming animals, or being destructive with Nature in any other terms.
Too many people are of destructive character and it illustrates that they are not really happy persons. They don't know how to be happy in real terms and perhaps never experienced real happiness in their entire lives; maybe having grown up too spoiled. They're intellectually and spiritually spoiled anyway. Their destructive ways are rotten; spoiled rotten.
Too many politicians are brats. They're dimwits, etcetera.
Trophy hunters will be happy. They can shoot an alpha wolf with a radio collar on it from a safe distance or from a helicopter with the latest high tech weaponry and feel like real he men as they mount it's pelt on the wall or floor, there to shed, gather dust, scare kids and give them allergies.
Shooting them with a camera is clean, but there is something primal and macho about blood and gore that you can't get from pictures and videos. That explains why almost all trophy hunters are Republican, they love killing and profiting from it.
That killing the best trophy with the best breeding DNA will impact the few remaining numbers of the species doesn't bother the trophy hunter because he (and now she) thinks that if he doesn't do it someone else will. So he may as well be the one to test his shooting skills in a canned hunt and "harvest" the wolf as if it was a bunch of wheat.
Besides he paid a lot for the privilege of endangering a species so he'd better get his money's worth before they're all gone.
Ah, yes. Chasing a wolf with a helicopter, buzzing it every time it tries to rest, heading it off and keeping it in a meadow until it finally falls, exhausted. Then you hover over it and blast it with a semi-automatic weapon. When you are sure it is dead, the chopper lands nearby and you have your photo taken with your kill.
Great hunter! Great sportsman! Works with Polar Bears and Grizzlies, too, if you have the money.
Thank God I am in my seventies. With luck I'll be dead before the great extinction. If you want to see where we are going, find a copy of "Soylent Green" and watch it.