Posts Tagged ‘US Fish and Wildlife Service’

Mar05

Press Release: 52 Members of Congress Urge Continued Federal Protections for Wolves in Lower 48 States

For immediate release, March 5, 2013

Contacts:
Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity, (503) 484-7495
Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463

PORTLAND, Ore.— In an effort championed by Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), 52 House members sent a letter today to the director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service urging an about-face on the agency’s anticipated proposal to remove federal protections for wolves across most of the lower 48 United States.

“We are grateful that these 52 representatives are standing strong for continued federal protections for wolves,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “With wolves only just beginning to recover in the Pacific Northwest, California, southern Rocky Mountains and Northeast, now’s not the time for the Fish and Wildlife Service to turn its back on wolf recovery.”

An estimated 2 million wolves once roamed freely across North America, including most of the United States. But bounties, a federal extermination program and human settlement drove the species to near extinction in most of the lower 48. While protected by the Endangered Species Act, wolf populations in the northern Rocky Mountains and the Western Great Lakes states increased; but these regions amount to a mere 5 percent of the wolf’s original range, and in other regions wolves are only just beginning to return.

“The job of wolf recovery is far from over and the members of Congress who have written to the Service are asking that science, not politics, guide federal wolf management,” said Josh Laughlin of Cascadia Wildlands. “Maintaining federal protections is critical in allowing wolves to assume their valuable ecological role across the American landscape.”

Since the original wolf recovery plans were written in the 1980s, scientists have learned much more about wolves’ behavior, ecology and needs. Research has shown that returning wolves to ecosystems sets off a chain of events that benefits many species, including songbirds and beavers that gain from a return of streamside vegetation, which thrives in the absence of browsing elk that must move more often to avoid wolves. And pronghorn and foxes are aided by wolves’ control of coyote populations. Protecting ecosystems upon which species depend is a specific goal of the Endangered Species Act — all the more reason for expanded, rather than diminished, wolf recovery efforts.

Bowing to political pressure from wolf opponents, the Service has no plans for wolf recovery in areas beyond those regions it has deemed recovered (the northern Rockies and western Great Lakes). In states where federal delisting has occurred, there are insufficient protections from local pressures to hunt or “control” wolves back to the brink of extinction. In the 18 months since federal delisting began in 2011, more than 1,700 of the 5,000-6,000 recovered wolves in the lower 48 have been killed.

Conservation organizations are hopeful that Interior Secretary nominee Sally Jewell will be a stronger advocate for wolves than outgoing Secretary Ken Salazar, who never called for comprehensive gray wolf recovery across the country.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 500,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Cascadia Wildlands is a Eugene, Oregon-based nonprofit conservation organization that educates, agitates and inspires a movement to protect and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems.
    

                                                                  ###

 

Posted by Josh in Bring Back Wolves, California Wolves, Campaign News Updates, Home Page Hot Topic, News, Northern Rockies Wolves, Oregon Wolves, Press Room, Restoring Wolves and Other Species, Uncategorized, Washington Wolves

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

Jan14

Identifying and Dealing with the Anti-wolf Forces (PG-13)

(This a PG-13 rated article.  We purposely omitted profanity laced posts, death threats, and pictures of blood and gore because we feel that the evidence of bigotry is obvious and the need for action compelling.)

By Bob Ferris

"Cartoon" from Save Western Wildlife's Facebook page

In late December an “event page” on facebook was attacked.  The page was celebrating a prayer vigil for wolves that was to be held in Salem, Oregon.  And the attackers swooped down electronically the day after the event and filled the page with bloody pictures of wolf kills and fetal deer purported to have been “aborted” by wolves.  The action was disturbing and eerily like the protests held by the Westboro Baptist Church, where they show up where they are not wanted and act in the most offensive and inappropriate manner possible.  
 
The Westboro mob is classified as a hate group and rightfully so.  They—like the anti-wolf folks—are generally overflowing with unbridled faith, strongly held opinions and self-righteousness and somewhat bereft of relevant education, understanding, or any form of tolerance or compassion.  Both groups are classic bigots in that they hold unfounded and yet deep beliefs and will not let facts or reason dissuade them from dishing out broadsides of vitriol towards the object of their scorn whether it be homosexuals, people of color, members of other religions or wolves.   
 
Is Wolf Hatred Gateway Bigotry?
Do I go too far in linking bigotry against wolves with the same attitudes against individuals and sectors of the human population?  I don’t think so.  Studies have conclusively linked animal abuse to child abuse, domestic violence and even serial killing.  The experts assert that these acts are all parts of the same dangerous syndrome.  I strongly suspect that bigotry is a related syndrome and behaves the same way.  And I have seen enough human-directed bigotry—mainly racial, anti-Semitic and life-style directed—on the facebook pages of these anti-wolf actors and their compatriots to think that, once started, predator bigotry translates quite easily across the wildlife-to-human spectrum.   
 
Science is Not a Religion and Opinions are not Facts
 
“Now that the offices of the Babylonian Pope almost completely rules this planet through his many countless satellite corporations he doesn't need to keep building his American Army for world conquest. Now that he believes he is finally close to the completion of his 12th Crusade in 2000 years where he attains Mount Moriah, removes that filthy Dome of the Rock Mosque, and rebuilds Solomon's Third Temple to rule this Worldly system from. He can cull his American herds. thats you and me Bob, and our children. Thats his sciences you're pushing, all nice and pretty, why everyone should just love saving the Mother, returning Mother to her once Pristine wild natural Garden of Eden, the counterfeit eden. Where all the non believing atheist and real Bible believing heretics starve to death. It's just brilliant. Do you get the hint? Do you see what's been going on while you had your head stuck in those bushes observing how some nature works? The rest of the story Bob. This world has a rest of the story. What the hell do you think all of those papal serving 30th through 33rd degree initiated Masonic political hacks have been doing all of these years? You want us to believe in his garbage nature worship?”
 
(Skinny Moose Blog January 7, 2013)—The above is a post from Greg Farber in response to statement about public land ownership, wolves and science.  Mr. Farber is a plumber and wolf hater who posts regularly on the Skinny Moose Blog and elsewhere under various aliases such as Rattler Rider and Sawtooth Rider.  Because of rants like the one above Mr. Farber has been banned from posting on The Wildlife News.  
 
 
Wolf-haters—like climate change deniers—are people of faith rather than reason.  Are these generalizations justified?  All I can say are the trends are strong and consistent.  For example, they tend to believe and frequently promote ideas such as reducing environmental protections and waiting for trickle-down economics to work because they have been told these actions will improve their financial conditions, though studies and experience indicate exactly the opposite.  
 
They also strongly subscribe to the notion that more guns in the US will make them safer and more secure when numbers and a simple scanning of current events indicate that a well-armed US is decidedly less safe.  Across the board these brave souls generally responded to the recent tragedy in Connecticut with calls to arm teachers and reminders to their compatriots to stock up on certain weapons before it was too late.  
 
Moreover, they seem to have some sort of intellectual equivalent to a semi-permeable membrane that only allows them to believe reports and studies that indicate that wolves are devastating deer, elk and moose populations as well as reducing their personal safety.  In all of this they tend to select which “experts” to believe based on the how well those experts agree with their preconceived ideas just as they would select a preacher based on their perception of god and various religious tenets.  As a result, the wolf-haters end up being deeply devoted to a rag-tag group of fringe commentators or contrarian scientists and everyone who disagrees with them or their champions is either stupid, on drugs, or blinded by the “green” or “liberal” media.  
 
 
What the anti-wolf crowd cannot win via honest and fact-based debate is achieved through insult, bullying and threat.  They are emboldened in this approach by the successes they achieve when rolling out their tortured arguments on like-minded forums such as the Skinny Moose site where they are thick as fleas.  In contrast, where they are largely absent are from forums occupied by working wildlife biologists such as The Wildlife Society, Society for Conservation Biology, and Wildlife Professionals discussion groups on LinkedIn.  I suspect that their absence has to do with past responses they have received from folks with grounding in science and tendencies toward respectful and analytical debate.
 
The Raiders and Their Colleagues
 
There were a handful of folks who aggressively invaded the facebook event page, which was eventually taken down.  The core perpetrators were Scott Rockholm, Chandie Morse Bartell, and Bill Kelly.  These are names known to people working on wolves who have suffered through venomous dialogues with these anti-wolf zealots who can selectively quote chapter and verse from flawed reports or irrelevant studies, but like what we classically envision as Bible-thumpers do so with self-interest at the forefront and little understanding of actual meaning or context.
 
 
Scott Rockholm is the producer/director of the documentary/fantasy film called Yellowstone is Dead.  Scott is a native Californian who now lives in Sand Point, Idaho.  He runs the Rockholm Media Group and also is the President and CEO of Save Western Wildlife (see below) which purports to be about saving wildlife in the West as well as the Western culture and lifestyle.  SWW claims to be a non-profit and is registered in Idaho but has not developed a website and has not apparently posted their tax information with the IRS.  And just how far out there do you have to be to have David Allen feel obligated to distance himself from you?
Chandie Morse Bartell is a prolific anti-wolf poster who has a degree in elementary education, taught young children in Potlatch, Idaho and boasts that her third grade teacher in Idaho had them sing Dixie after they did the Pledge of Allegiance each morning.  She is clearly carrying on that legacy of intolerance and anti-federal sentiment that she learned so many years ago.  And nowhere is that illustrated more strongly than in her nearly constant stream of anti-wolf and pro-gun comments on her facebook page and on a multitude of electronic forums in the Rockies.  Her facebook page is a who's who of the anti-wolf crowd including No Wolves and the apply named Antiwolf Nut as well as Tony Mayer convicted elk poacher and anti-wolf activist of saveelk.com fame.  
 
“If us pushing that wolf back over to be shot in idaho works.. we willc ontinue to push many more back for the shooters. hell we will even pay for the ammo. ha ha ha ha.”—Bill Kelly
 
Bill Kelly claims to have been educated by Mafia Wars which rings true when you read the above quote in reference to a collared wolf that migrated from Oregon where is was legally protected to Idaho where it is not.  His suggestion of “pushing” Oregon wolves to Idaho for slaughter probably makes sense in Mafia Wars where laws and illegalities are likely encouraged.  
 
When we take the time to understand the philosophies and motivations of the above exhibited on their facebook pages and elsewhere, the underlying themes are of hate and intolerance.  We also find that they are mostly high school educated or hold undergraduate degrees in fields little relevant to understanding the complex mechanisms of predator-prey relationships, trophic cascades, gene-flow, experimental design and the subtleties of concepts such as niches, hyper-volumes, biological potential, carrying capacity, and compensatory versus additive predation. In fact, they tend to hold those educated in the field in low regard calling them "eggspurts."   They also all seem to be friends with Robert T. Fanning—the failed anti-wolf gubernatorial candidate in Montana and driver behind the wolf hate group, The Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd and they are all white (i.e., Caucasian).
 
Save Western Wildlife  
 

 

The above comment stream–again a PG-13 selection–was taken from the Save Western Wildlife facebook page and these were in response to a news story on wolves that were illegally killed in Wyoming. Save Western Wildlife (SWW) was founded in 2010.  The three founders were Scott Rockholm, Frederic C. Rockholm Jr. and Todd Fross.  Scott and Frederic are brothers originally from California now living in Sand Point, Idaho and Mr. Fross is a trapper and the ranch manager of the Broken Anvil Ranch in Lander, Wyoming.  The sole actions of this organization seem to be Scott Rockholm’s public advocacy/attacks on various policies and people and the dialogs on the SWW facebook page.  The tenor and content of the discussions on the SWW facebook page are disturbing as the site seems to attract the worst of the anti-wolf, anti-science and anti-government camps.  Regular posters range from biblical stewardship advocate and former USFS employee Steve Busch to a whole host of posters who seem only capable of typing phrases that all translate to “kill all wolves.”  The irony of a biblical stewardship advocate condemning conservation biology as a green religion is sweet on some level, but viewing the number of people drawn to this site who define themselves, in part, by the weapons they carry or the animals they kill or hate should be deeply sobering.

 
Koch Brothers Jump Into the Fray
 

 
 
As if the above was not enough, the California Chapter of Americans for Prosperity —a Koch Brothers founded and funded astro-turf front group—recently released a laughably deceptive anti-wolf video.  In this piece Chapter Executive Director and Fox News darling, David Spady, dons a trendy ski cap and flannel shirt  in a transparent effort to exude an “everyman” appeal.  And then in his manufactured casualness he spews scripted misinformation at a machinegun pace.
 
I am sure that some creative college student will design a drinking game around this video where sips are taken whenever Mr. Spady utters an untruth, makes a mistake or constructs an illogical statement in this propaganda piece.  I would argue against this approach, because the exposure is dangerously high.  
 
Certainly there are the obvious factual faux pas like claiming that cattle actually help reduce the impacts of climate change or that grazing does not impact water quality, wildlife and erosion rates.  The mistakes are interesting too from confusing Oregon State University with University of Oregon and talking about something called “greenhouse warming” to claiming that the environmental community wants to recover wolves so that they eat cattle and curtail global warming.  What?
 
The tortured illogic is entertaining as well particularly the argument about “trespassing” wolves.  Trespassing is a human construct and all wildlife species are allowed to go where they go.  Characterizing it as a threat to private landowners is expressly designed to push the buttons of the property rights crowd but is logically problematic as wolves in California are likely to focus their activities on large areas of public lands and tend to avoid settled areas.  When searches are made for suitable wolf habitat, areas with people and roads are ruled out.  It is also interesting given the shared roots of AFP and the Tea Party that AFP would carry the water for the heavily subsidized livestock industry.  
 
The Hunting Community Must Police Itself to Survive
 
Roughly 6% of the US population over 16 years of age hunts.  While that percentage rises sharply in rural areas where they sometimes close high schools on the opening day of deer season, it still means that 94% of the eligible population in the US does not hunt.  In my mind that means that hunters—including myself—need to be very cautious that our “brand” is not compromised by yahoos like those profiled above who seem to shoot everything and think that Fair Chase and other hunter’s ethics do not apply to them or where predators are involved.  Perhaps—if their goal is to continue to enjoy permission and support from the 94% non-hunters—legitimate hunting groups might want to work harder on mechanisms that focus on the quality of new hunters recruited rather than quantity.  
 
In truth, while these “slob hunters” and thrill killers bolster hunter numbers they likely do more harm than good.   On a related note, hunters also need to deal with the very real issue of poachers and poaching—which may or may not be related to these outliers and their utter contempt for science, Fair Chase, wildlife agency employees and laws.  This situation is somewhat similar to issues that surround the martial arts field where the vast majority of practitioners enter martial arts training for the defensive reasons or because of the spiritual aspects of the discipline and there are those that gravitate towards martial arts because they want to be able hurt others.  These anti-wolf folks have much in common with the latter example.
 
There Remain Ethical and Appreciative Hunters
 
After plowing through the ignorance and intolerance of the above group and their allies, it was refreshing to see a piece where the hunter involved appreciated his encounter with a competing predator and his first thought was not one of how he could blast it into the next county.  Nor was he jumping forward to have himself photographed with his prey and speculating about which taxidermist to use or what wall space remained open.  Regardless of how one feels about hunting, having this type of hunter in the field seems much preferable to one driven by hate.  
 
With the Wolf the Federal Government Must Play Parent
 
Excerpt from Endangered Species Act:
 
To be considered for listing, the species must meet one of five criteria (section 4(a)(1)):
 
1. There is the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range.
2. An over utilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.
3. The species is declining due to disease or predation.
4. There is an inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
5. There are other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. (Underlinging added)
 
I once met with a group of Japanese environmental activists visiting the US to gain insights.  One of the concepts that was most difficult for them to understand was the interplay between state and federal governments.  The analogy that finally worked with them and their interpreter was describing the federal government as a “backstop.”  They were clearly baseball fans and got the analogy quickly.  In retrospect I should have said parent rather than backstop because the federal government needs to be proactive rather than passive.  
 
In short, the federal government has to act like the adult in the room.  And with the wolf that means honestly addressing the damage that has been done by these folks and others who have worked diligently to sink the wolf recovery program under a mountain of myths and unfounded fear.  These are hate groups and they need to be treated as such.  Moreover, the damage they have done through their actions must be properly addressed and treated like any other habitat challenge.  Yes it is difficult and these individuals and groups are dogged in their pursuit of a wolf-free world, but these anti-wolf efforts are “manmade factors” that materially affect the continued existence of the wolf. 
While there can be debate about the appropriate legal mechanism to solve this serious issue it seems obvious that it needs to be federal or perhaps even international in nature; state performance on this issue has been largely inadequate as they seem more victims of the phenomenon than correctors.  The state wildlife agencies are also driven by wildlife commissioners that often have political rather than scientific agendas which makes it unlikely that continued wolf recovery becomes a state priority .  One promising approach that we are seeing in the European Union (EU) is something known as “favourable conservation status” which is applied to species of “community interest.”  In the EU wolves fall under this classification and the status requires that the species are looked at across boundaries and that analyses such as minimum population viability analyses are undertaken and that those studies drive management.  
 
We at Cascadia Wildlands are interested in this approach and are hosting a panel at the Public Interest Environmental Law Conference here in Eugene at the end of February to explore this concept and also others to address the future status of wolves.  Our own legal fellow Tamara Schiff will present a paper and hopefully some of the concepts introduced will help the US Fish and Wildlife as they complete their own examination of the future of wolves in the West.  We know that no approach will ultimately be successful unless it includes aggressive and concrete steps to address the propaganda campaign that has been waged against wolves.
 
Looking to Get Informed and Take Action? 
 
Additional Reading on Federal Wolf Reclassification and Organized Anti-Wolf Propaganda:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current Actions:
 
Sign petition to US Fish and Wildlife Service—Maintain Federal Protections for Wolves
 
Future Actions:
 
Get connected and watch this site and our e-news for announcements on federal wolf reclassification proposal

Posted by bob in Blog, Bring Back Wolves, California Wolves, Home Page Hot Topic, Northern Rockies Wolves, Oregon Wolves, Restoring Wolves and Other Species, Uncategorized, Washington Wolves

98 Comments

Keep Reading →

Dec21

Press Release: Anniversary of OR-7′s Arrival in California Inspires New Wolf Alliance

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 21, 2012
 
CONTACT:
Amaroq Weiss, California Wolf Center, 707-779-9613
Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands, 541-844-8182
Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity, 503-484-7495
John Motsinger, Defenders of Wildlife, 202-772-0288
Joseph Vaile, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, 541-488-5789
Rob Klavins, Oregon Wild, 503-551-1717 (media only)
 
SACRAMENTO, Calif.- Twenty-five wildlife conservation, education and protection organizations in California, Oregon and Washington today announced the formation of an alliance committed to recovering wolves across the region. The Pacific Wolf Coalition envisions populations of wolves restored across their historic habitats in numbers that will allow them to re-establish their critical role in nature and ensure their long-term survival. The announcement of the Pacific Wolf Coalition coincides with the one-year anniversary of the first wolf, OR-7, in California in nearly 90 years.  
 

OR-11 from NE Oregon's Walla Walla Pack (ODFW)

Wolves are making a comeback in the Pacific West.  Here, as elsewhere in the lower 48, wolves were driven to regional extinction decades ago. The Pacific Wolf Coalition's mission is to ensure wolf recovery in the West. "The Pacific Wolf Coalition formed to unify efforts to restore wolf populations here in our region and to demonstrate that wolves and people can coexist," said Josh Laughlin with Cascadia Wildlands. "Working together we can give wolves a fighting chance to naturally return to their native lands in the western states."
 
Just one year ago – on Dec. 28, 2011 – a young, male wolf from northeast Oregon's Imnaha Pack loped across the state line into California, where he has continued to make his home, exploring seven northern counties in his search for a mate and territory of his own.  
 
"This wolf's journey is our own,” said Amaroq Weiss of the California Wolf Center. "His arrival in California restores a native species to our state, itself a remarkable event. His continued presence for an entire year, roaming landscapes his ancestors once called home, indicates we still have good wolf habitat here. Californians have literally been handed the makings of a conservation success story for our state and for the Pacific West region. We are very much celebrating this anniversary."
 
Over the past 13 years, wolves from Idaho and British Columbia have naturally dispersed into Oregon and Washington, forming these states' first-known wolf packs in decades. Today there are six confirmed and two probable packs in Oregon, and eight confirmed and four probable packs in Washington, with three of those packs residing in the Cascade Mountains. Journey's trek into California links the third state of the Pacific West into an envisioned region-wide wolf recovery success story, and is a source of great hope and inspiration.
 
"The return of wolves to the northern Rockies has been a remarkable success story, and now we have a chance to write an exciting new chapter in the Pacific West,” said Pamela Flick with Defenders of Wildlife. “We look forward to using our decades of experience to forge new partnerships with landowners that will allow people and wolves to coexist."
 
OR-7 is still capturing headlines with his ongoing travels, despite being caught on camera only once while in California. The GPS collar he's wearing tells wildlife agency staff where he has been, and the agency periodically releases that information to the public.  
 
"We've made tremendous strides in wolf recovery thanks in large part to our nation's landmark environmental laws. However, recovery remains tenuous," said Rob Klavins with Oregon Wild. "To make sure there are enough wolves to play their irreplaceable role on the Pacific Northwest landscape, they need to retain the basic protections afforded by the Endangered Species Act."
 
The Pacific Wolf Coalition has also come together under less celebratory circumstances. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the federal agency charged under the federal Endangered Species Act with wolf recovery, is poised to announce a proposal that could end federal protections for wolves in the Pacific West and elsewhere across the country. The Pacific Wolf Coalition supports continued federal protections for wolves here in the western states and in other regions across the country where they haven't recovered.
 
"Residents and visitors alike love the Pacific West for its natural wild beauty and the wildlife that lives here. Restoring native species is crucial to that wild beauty, and wolves are no exception. Protections should remain in place to allow these animals to recover," said Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity.
As wolves return to the Pacific West states of California, Oregon and Washington, the member organizations of the Pacific Wolf Coalition believe they do so on a vastly different social, political and ecological landscape than other parts of the country.
 
"We have unique opportunities and challenges here in the West," said Joseph Vaile with Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center. "The Pacific Wolf Coalition is working together to raise awareness and increase public understanding about wolves and the important role they play in nature, and ensure that wolves will be conserved in our region over the long term."
                                                                                                                     
                                                           – # # # -
 
The Pacific Wolf Coalition includes the following member organizations:
Big Wildlife – California Wilderness Coalition – California Wolf Center – Cascadia Wildlands – Center for Biological Diversity – Defenders of Wildlife – Earthjustice – Endangered Species Coalition – Environmental Protection Information Center – Gifford Pinchot Task Force – Hells Canyon Preservation Council – Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center – National Parks Conservation Association – Natural Resources Defense Council – Northeast Oregon Ecosystems – Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club – Oregon Wild – Predator Defense – Resource Media – The Larch Company – Training Resources for the Environmental Community – Western Environmental Law Center – Western Watersheds Project – Wilburforce Foundation – Wolf Haven International
 

Posted by Josh in Bring Back Wolves, California Wolves, Campaign News Updates, Campaigns, Home Page Hot Topic, News, Oregon Wolves, Press Room, Restoring Wolves and Other Species, Uncategorized, Washington Wolves

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

Nov16

USFWS Catch 22: Embrace Flawed and Dated Science or Do the Right Thing for Wolves

By Bob Ferris
 
Catch-22 (Logic)
 
A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation in which an individual cannot or is incapable of avoiding a problem because of contradictory constraints or rules.  Wikipedia
 
In Joseph Heller’s classic book Catch 22 the protagonist was caught between the horns of a dilemma.  He, Captain John Yossarian, was a B-25 bombardier attempting to get out of his service in World War II on the grounds that he was crazy, but if he wanted to leave he was not technically crazy.  Wolf Recovery in the United States is often not that different from a war, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, like Captain Yossarian, is not to blame for wanting to get out.  However, in order for the US Fish and Wildlife Service to remove itself from wolf recovery and avoid the controversy, they must demonstrate that the wolf is recovered.  There would be no grounds for controversy, if the wolf has truly recovered.  Nevertheless, the US Fish and Wildlife Service is attempting to make this claim, a claim that is not technically or morally defensible and full of Catch 22’s.
 
Catch 22s you ask? Take the Northern Rockies wolf program, for example.  This recovery plan was originally constructed around the concept of recovering a subspecies of wolves.  The recovery area and therefore the recovery goals were predicated on the historic range of this particular subspecies of wolf.   Subsequent morphometric (species determinations derived from skull or body part measurements) and genetic analyses have clouded this once crystal-clear picture from a classic taxonomic tome.  What’s more, the population goals were determined prior to the wide-spread acceptance and use of minimum viable population analyses (MVPs) in looking at recovery goals.  MVPs or population habitat viability analyses (PHVAs) are now commonly used to estimate needed populations.
 
So, if the US FWS is arguing that they have recovered this “subspecies,” then they need to take steps to protect and recover the other subspecies in the Pacific Northwest and the Southern Rockies.  But if they quietly sweep the subspecies argument under the rug and make a “Canus soupus” argument (i.e., wolves are wolves), common sense as well as science would argue that recovery goals would have to be adjusted to reflect the greatly enlarged recovery area, not just the Northern Rockies.  Regardless, nowhere in these scenarios is there a scientific justification for the USFWS to step away from wolf recovery in the Western US.  In short, they like Heller’s Yossarian cannot simply opt out of an unpleasant situation, because they no longer want to be there.
 
Continued federal involvement also makes sense because the threats that led to endangerment—as evidenced by behavior in the Northern Rockies states—has not diminished or been corrected.  Then there is the mobile nature of the wolf and wolf packs which frequently cross state and international borders and spend a good portion of their time on the matrix of federal public lands that dominate the western landscape.  Both these conditions are strong arguments for continued federal oversight and protections.  Add to these two arguments the fact that recovery of the wolf in the West is really a federal public lands issue (please see Oregon, California, and Washington map)
 
But there is another argument here that is rarely raised and that is the question of responsibility and past sins.  The US FWS—through their precursor the Biological Survey—was the agency largely responsible for endangering the wolf in the first place.  Their agents did not stop until wolves were truly and nearly annihilated in the lower 48 states.  This historic exuberance by the agency should be mirrored in recovery.  Brave and innovative wolves are trying diligently to restore themselves to their former haunts in the Pacific Northwest and Southern Rockies and their efforts need to be supported by like courage and adherence to the best available science by the US FWS.  The mission is not yet accomplished.  
 
For all of the above reasons and more, we ask that wolf supporters in the US and elsewhere join with us to send a clear message to the US FWS that the wolf recovery job in the West is not finished.  Federal protections must remain in place and wolves expanding into western Washington and Oregon as well as northern California need and deserve federal protection.  And we feel the same way for wolves recolonizing Colorado and Utah.  Therefore we ask that wolf supporters sign a petition to that effect here.  
 
Thank you.  Working together we can fully recover the wolf in Cascadia and other promising areas.  Pioneering wolves like OR-7, also known as Journey, should not become immediate targets because the road to recovery difficult and political expediency trumps science and compassion.  Let's work for wolves and keeping it wild.
 

 

Posted by bob in Blog, Home Page Hot Topic, Uncategorized

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

Aug14

Twenty-four Conservation Groups Call on Obama to Maintain Federal Protections for Wolves in the Northwest

For Immediate Release, August 14, 2012

Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity, (503) 484-7495
Jasmine Minbashian, Conservation Northwest, (360) 671-9950 x29
John Motsinger, Defenders of Wildlife, (202) 772-0288
Rob Klavins, Oregon Wild, (503) 283-6343 x210
Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 844-8182

PORTLAND, Ore.—Twenty-four conservation organizations sent a letter to President Barack Obama today asking for continued Endangered Species Act protection for wolves in the Pacific Northwest. The groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Northwest, Oregon Wild, Defenders of Wildlife, Cascadia Wildlands, Sierra Club, NRDC, and others, sent the letter as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service moves toward a final decision on whether wolves in the Northwest and other areas will retain protection.

“Wolves are only just beginning to recover in the Pacific Northwest and need the continued protections of the Endangered Species Act,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Wolves once roamed across most of the Pacific Northwest, but today they occupy just a fraction of their former range.”

There are now about 100 wolves dispersed among five Oregon packs and eight in Washington. All but two of these packs — the Lookout and Teanaway packs — lost federal protection along with the northern Rocky Mountains population, delisted by an act of Congress. The conservation groups are asking the administration to retain protection for these two packs and to develop a recovery plan for wolves in the Pacific Northwest, including in western Washington and Oregon and parts of California.

“Wolves called the Pacific Northwest home for 10,000 years,” said Jasmine Minbashian of Conservation Northwest. “The fact that they are returning to the Cascades on their own is a good sign, but if we want them to survive and fully recover they will need our help.”

The need for continued protection of wolves in the Pacific Northwest was driven home when the Lookout Pack — the first breeding pack to be confirmed in Washington in more than 70 years — was decimated by poaching. The poachers were fortunately caught and prosecuted under the Endangered Species Act. Additional incidents at this stage could seriously jeopardize the prospects for wolf recovery in the Cascades.

"The return of wolves to the West is one of our generation's greatest conservation success stories," said Rob Klavins of Oregon Wild. "The journey of OR-7 captured imaginations around the world and wouldn't have been possible without the critical protections of the Endangered Species Act. If recovery is to take root here, it's important for wolves not to be prematurely stripped of those basic protections."

Last winter, California saw its first wolf in more than 80 years when the wolf known as OR-7 migrated from Oregon. Scientists have identified extensive habitat for wolves in the Cascade and Olympic mountains, Northern California and the Sierra Nevada.

“Wolves have made an incredible comeback in the Rockies, but that doesn’t mean it’s time to give up on wolf recovery in the West,” said Pamela Flick, California program coordinator with Defenders of Wildlife. “Californians deserve the chance to see wolves returned to their former habitat in our state too, and maintaining federal protections across the Pacific Northwest is the best way to make sure that happens.”

Since wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho research has shown that by forcing elk to move more, wolves have allowed streamside vegetation to recover, benefitting songbirds and beavers. Studies also show that wolves provide benefits to scavenging animals such as weasels, eagles, wolverines and bears, and help increase numbers of foxes and pronghorns by controlling coyotes, which wolves regard as competitors. Thousands of visitors to the park have been thrilled to see wolves in their natural habitat.

“The gray wolf is the quintessential keystone animal that has been part of shaping the North American landscape for hundreds of thousands of years,” said Josh Laughlin, campaign director with Cascadia Wildlands. “Research shows that wolves benefit a plethora of other wildlife species and are a significant tourist draw for states where they have recovered.”

Background
Gray wolves are currently listed under the Endangered species Act throughout the lower 48, with the exception of the northern Rocky Mountains and the western Great Lakes populations. The Fish and Wildlife Service is now proposing to remove protections for the lower 48 population, but has stated it will consider protection for any existing distinct populations of wolves, including, potentially, in the Pacific Northwest and northeastern United States. The results of the agency’s status review and reclassification finding are expected to be finalized and announced in early 2013.

The Lookout and Teanaway packs are distinct from other U.S. wolves. They are related to coastal wolves of British Columbia, which have unique ecological, morphological, behavioral and genetic characteristics. Wolves in the Cascades are observed to be slightly smaller than others and have brownish coats similar to their coastal ancestors; in addition, some are known to eat salmon.

Wolves do sometimes depredate livestock. To deal with this problem, both Washington and Oregon have compensation programs and are working with ranchers to help them reduce risk to their livestock. California is in the initial stages of developing similar programs.

Posted by Josh in Bring Back Wolves, Campaign News Updates, Home Page Hot Topic, News, Press Room, Restoring Wolves and Other Species

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

Jul02

Press Release: State of Oregon Suspends 10 State Forest Timber Sales in Marbled Murrelet Habitat

Marbled murrelet (USFWS)

For immediate release
July 2, 2012
 
Contact:
Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 844-8182      
Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity, (503) 484-7495      
Bob Sallinger, Portland Audubon Society, (503) 380-9728      
Tanya Sanerib, Crag Law Center, (503) 525-2722      
 
State of Oregon Suspends 10 State Forest Timber Sales in Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Simultaneously, Conservation Groups File Injunction Request to Safeguard the Threatened Seabird During Lawsuit
 
PORTLAND, Ore.— The State of Oregon has suspended operations on 10 timber sales in marbled murrelet habitat one month after Cascadia Wildlands, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Audubon Society of Portland filed a lawsuit alleging the state’s logging practices in the Tillamook, Clatsop, and Elliott State Forests are illegally “taking” the imperiled seabird in violation of the Endangered Species Act.  To prevent additional murrelet habitat from being lost while the case works its way through the court system, the conservation groups filed an injunction request in federal court to halt sales and logging in the occupied murrelet habitat pending the outcome of the lawsuit.
      
The State agreed to suspend three timber sales and to hold off on auctioning three others to give the Court time to consider the preliminary injunction motion. Plaintiffs have also recognized the State has taken things a step further by removing at least four additional timber sales in murrelet habitat from the auction block that were scheduled to be sold in the near future.   
 
“We are pleased that the state has suspended clearcutting in murrelet habitat on its own accord while this portion of the case proceeds,” said Francis Eatherington, conservation director with Cascadia Wildlands. “We hope that Governor Kitzhaber will permanently abandon these illegal timber sales, prevent any others like them in the future, and begin acting within the law in managing our state forests.”
 
The Endangered Species Act prohibits actions that “take” threatened species. Take is broadly defined to include actions that kill, harm or injure protected species, including destruction of habitat. The injunction request presents evidence that logging in the three state forests is harming marbled murrelets by destroying their nesting habitat. The logging operations were either already underway or ready for auction.
 
“Oregon's irresponsible logging is driving the marbled murrelet to extinction,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity.  "We're asking the court to stop the worst of the state’s timber sales, and encouraging Governor Kitzhaber to initiate the development of scientifically-supported management plans for our coastal state forests.”
 
The injunction motion requests a halt to 11 timber sales, constituting 840 acres of proposed logging in the three forests as well as a halt to any future logging in occupied murrelet habitat pending the outcome of the case. The injunction is necessary because significant amounts of murrelet habitat could be lost while the case works its way through the court system.
 
“The suspension of the timber sales is an important interim measure while the litigation proceeds,” said Bob Sallinger, conservation director for the Audubon Society of Portland. “However it is important for the public to realize that these and other sales in murrelet habitat are still at real risk of proceeding in the near future.”
 
The most recent status review of marbled murrelets by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found the birds have been declining at a rate of approximately 4 percent per year and that this decline likely relates to continued loss of habitat, primarily on state and private lands.
 
 Oregon recently abandoned its decade-long attempt to develop habitat conservation plans (HCPs) for the three forests that would have given it a federal permit for limited impacts to marbled murrelets in exchange for habitat protection measures designed to enhance the bird's conservation. Rather than improving habitat protections, the state turned its back on murrelets and other listed species altogether by walking away from the HCP process. The lawsuit seeks to force the state to develop a plan that will protect murrelets and the mature forests on which the birds and other species depend.
 
The conservation organizations are represented by outside counsel Daniel Kruse of Eugene, Tanya Sanerib and Chris Winter of the Crag Law Center, Nick Cady of Cascadia Wildlands, Scott Jerger of Field Jerger LLP, and Susan Jane Brown of the Western Environmental Law Center.
 
                                                                   ###
 
A copy of the preliminary injunction memo and motion can be found here, and more case background can be found here.

 

Posted by bob in Campaign News Updates, Featured Case: Marbled Murrelet, Home Page Hot Topic, News, Oregon Campaigns, Press Room, Save the Elliott Rainforest, Uncategorized

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

Jun06

Wolf: Recent Updates

May 2, 2012: The wolf found dead in early March in Union County is confirmed a poaching by Oregon State Police and ODFW. The investigation of the crime continues.
 
March 14, 2012: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds the district court ruling and allows the delisting of gray wolves in the Rocky Mountain states of Montana and Idaho (wolves are still listed in Wyoming due to the state's egregious management plan). Gray wolf hunting resumes.
 
March 7, 2012: Bill to overturn the ban on killing Oregon's endangered gray wolves is defeated in Salem. The Register-Guard earlier opined on the subject, opposing the extreme legislation. Cascadia Wildlands and allies spent considerable time in Salem educating policy makers and testifying against this the reckless legislation.
 
February 2, 2012: Oregon Cattlemen's Association brings a bill to the state legislature to overturn the recently issued injunction that prohibits killing Oregon's endangered gray wolves.
 
December 30, 2011: OR-7, or Journey, makes his way into California from Oregon, becoming the first wolf to return to the state in nearly 80 years.
 
December 28, 2011: Oregon's four known wolf packs, the Imnaha, Wenaha, Walla Walla and Snake River packs, all reproduced in 2011. Oregon currently has approximately 29 confirmed wolves in the state according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
 
December 12, 2011: Dispersing Imnaha Pack wolf, known as OR-7 or Journey, travels 730 miles to southwest Oregon looking for love and a home.
 
November 14, 2011: Oregon Court of Appeals extends ban on killing endangered Oregon wolves.
 
November 1, 2011: Imnaha Pack disperser located in the Umpqua National Forest. This marks the first confirmed wolf in the Oregon Cascades in over 60 years.
 
October 5, 2011: Oregon Court of Appeals grants emergency stay of execution of two Imnaha Pack wolves.
 
October 5, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands and allies file a legal challenge in state court to immediately halt the state killing of two of the remaining four Imnaha Pack wolves and send Governor Kitzhaber and key legislators a memo on our lawsuit.
 
September 26, 2011: At least two pups documented in Walla Walla Pack by ODFW.
 
September 23, 2011: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife issues a kill order for the alpha male (pack leader) and a yearling in the Imnaha Pack after a confirmed livestock depredation near Joseph, OR, deeming the situation as "chronic."
 
June 6, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands and allies send a letter to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife about the recent lethal control of two Imnaha Pack wolves, kill order for up to two more wolves, and the issuance of 24 "caught in the act" kill permits to private landowners. The groups also issue a press release to draw attention to the heavy-handed response to the recovering wolf population in Oregon.
 
May 18, 2011: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife kills second Imnaha Pack wolf in the past three days after attributing recent livestock depredations in Wallowa County to the pack.
 
May 3, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands and allies file a legal challenge against US Fish and Wildlife Service's order to kill two Imnaha pack wolves. The kill order is issued after a May 1 calf death in Wallowa County is confirmed as a wolf kill.
 
April 14, 2011: Congress legislatively delists gray wolves in the northern Rockies from the Endangered Species Act as part of a rider attached to the federal budget bill. In addition to removing federal protections in Montana and Idaho, the unprecedented action also strips protections for wolves in eastern Oregon, eastern Washington and northern Utah. The delisting will likely mean sport hunting for wolves in Montana and Idaho this fall.
 
March 30, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands presents testimony in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee in the Oregon Legislature on a number of bills affecting Oregon's recovering gray wolf population. Following the hearing, the Oregonian runs an op-ed submitted by Cascadia, and the Register-Guard opines on the efforts to strip protections for wolves in Oregon.
 
March 18, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands and eight co-plaintiffs settle our legal challenge to the Obama administration's Northern Rocky Mountains gray wolf delisting from the Endangered Species Act.
 
March 1, 2011: Cascadia Wildlands delivers a memo to all 90 Oregon legislators describing anti-wolf bills that have been introduced into the 76th session in Salem.
 
March 1, 2011: Yearling female from Oregon's Imnaha pack found dead. The cause of the death of the February 25-collared wolf is unclear.
 
December 2010: Idaho and Montana senators propose to legislate delisting of gray wolves in the Rockies.
 
October 8, 2010: Conservation groups offer $7,500 reward for information leading to the prosecution of the person/s responsible for killing an endangered gray wolf from the Wenaha Pack in eastern Oregon.
 
August 5, 2010: Federal district court judge Donald Malloy in Missoula rules in favor of Cascadia Wildlands' lawsuit challenging the government's delisting of the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act in the northern Rocky Mountains. Cascadia was one of 13 co-plaintiffs and was represented by Earthjustice in the case.
 
July 8, 2010: Cascadia Wildlands and allies file a lawsuit and halt the hunt of members of Oregon's Imnaha wolf pack.
 
Fall-Winter 2009: Over 250 gray wolves are killed in Montana and Idaho during sport hunts after wolves are delisted by the Obama administration.
 
September 8, 2009: Federal district court judge Donald Malloy in Missoula rules against Cascadia Wildlands' request for a Preliminary Injunction but suggested in his ruling that we are likely to succeed on the merits of the lawsuit. The lawsuit will likely be heard in early 2010.
 
September 5, 2009: Two wolves in Baker County's Keating Valley are killed after repeated depredations of livestock. The two wolves, which are apparently not part of an organized pack, represent approximately 20% of the known wolves in Oregon today.
 
June 2, 2009: Cascadia Wildlands and 12 conservation partners represented by Earthjustice legally challenge the removal of Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in Idaho, Montana, and eastern Oregon and Washington.
 
April 2, 2009: The Obama administration's US Fish and Wildlife Service removes gray wolves from the Endangered Species Act, finalizing an effort initiated by the Bush administration. Idaho and Montana begin to plan a wolf hunting season.
 
July 18, 2008: Federal District Court Judge Donald Malloy issues a preliminary injunction halting the gray wolf delisting in the Northern Rocky Mountains. This is not a ruling on the merits of the case, rather a placeholder while attorneys argue the claims. Read the injunction opinion for more information.
 
April 28, 2008: Following up on its February 27 notice of intent to sue, Cascadia Wildlands and 11 co-plaintiffs file a lawsuit and preliminary injunction request to halt killing of gray wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Since the delisting occurred in March, dozens of wolves have been killed by sport hunters.
 
February 27, 2008: Represented by Earthjustice, the Cascadia Wildlands and 11 co-plaintiffs file a 60-day notice of intent to sue the US Fish and Wildlife Service over the removal of the Northern Rocky Mountains population of the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act. The delisting will turn over management of the species to states in the inter-mountain West. Montana, Idaho and Wyoming all have management plans in place that would permit rampant killing of wolves.
 

Posted by bob in Bring Back Wolves

0 Comments

Keep Reading →

we like it wild. Follow us Facebook Twiter RSS