Big Game Hunting > Wolves
Gray Wolf News "The latest in the Wolf Wars"
villageidiot:
The lookout pack. Not sure of exact date since camera dates aren't right but is within the last week. Would report to Gamies but lost all respect when they said "I will put this in my bigfoot sightings file" , this was a direct quote from US forest service Bio. in 2007 GMU 242 Were at least 2 big tracks and a couple smaller ones.
denali:
http://methowvalleynews.com/2014/01/09/sharp-divisions-remain-in-debate-over-removing-wolves-from-federal-protection/
more push to get WA wolves listed as a distinct population. :bash:
denali:
A pack of eight wolf-advocacy organizations are bristling at a federal animal-control agency’s attempt to license itself to shoot troublesome wolves in Washington, a move that WDFW is welcoming.
Wildlife Services, a branch of the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, filed an environmental assessment in mid-December that would allow itself to work with not only the state but also tribes on all things wolf in the federally delisted area of Washington, but Cascadia Wildands, Center for Biological Diversity, Western Environmental Law Center, Project Coyote, Predator Defense, WildEarth Guardians, Kettle Range Conservation Group and The Lands Council say it must file an environmental impact statement instead.
“The less-detailed assessment already completed contains significant gaps and fails to address specific issues that will significantly affect wolves and the human environment. The document prepared by Wildlife Services failed to provide data to support some of its core assertions, including whether killing wolves actually reduces wolf-caused losses of livestock. It also failed to address the ecological effects of killing wolves in Washington, including impacts on wolf populations in neighboring states and on nontarget animals — from federally protected species such as grizzly bears and Canada lynx to wolverines, which are now proposed for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act,” says the group in a press release.
In recent years Wildlife Services has been the target of scrutiny by predator advocates and others as well as an ongoing investigation by the Sacramento Bee, which revealed that, in a sense, it’s looking for new markets for its services.
WDFW Game Division manager Dave Ware says that although Wildlife Services isn’t funded to operate in the state, it can work in Washington on a cost-reimbursement basis. An agent did assist WDFW during 2012′s Wedge wolf operation, but only on nonlethal measures as without the environmental assessment, Wildlife Services is not permitted to take lethal action on protected species such as wolves.
But it can remove nonlisted animals. A Wildlife Services sharpshooter was hired to take out diseased members of the Tieton bighorn herd for the state this past year, just like in 2010 with the Umtanum herd of sheep. Both were efforts to keep pneumonia from spreading to other herds.
Ware says that his agency has been talking with Wildlife Services for several years about potential wolf work, but that Wildlife Services realized it hadn’t done an environmental assessment to assist on the often controversial lethal removal front.
“So this EA would allow them to do more work with us,” including nonlethal and lethal, Ware says.
But Wildlife Services would not be flying around in their infamous yellow plane with the dead-wolf stickers and taking action anywhere they wished. Lethal removals would only happen by WDFW’s direction (or the tribes) and in the federally delisted area of the state, Ware says. WDFW has also taken more of a nonlethal stance on wolves since seven members of the Wedge Pack were taken out for repeated livestock depredations.
Ware says that WDFW is “absolutely welcoming” the assistance and hopes to have Wildlife Services on board by this summer.
(Somewhat ironically, his boss recently wrote to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that “the state of Washington no longer needs federal oversight to recover and manage wolves,” but here it appears to actually want a certain kind of federal help managing them.)
The head of another wolf-advocacy group which did not join the press release calling for Wildlife Services to fill out a full-on EIS nonetheless still called for maximum scrutiny of the proposal.
timberfaller:
Word of warning about the Methow Valley News, Its as liberal as any of the wet side's papers :yike:
Liberalism is a disease!
The big city wacko's and greenie's :tree1: have pretty much taken over the Methow Valley :bash: And the "greenest" USFS will be found there also!
I miss the valley, I DON'T miss what it has turned into!!
denali:
https://newhouse.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-newhouse-introduces-legislation-remove-gray-wolf-endangered-species
April 23, 2015
Press Release
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-WA) introduced H.R. 1985, the Pacific Northwest Gray Wolf Management Act of 2015 to remove the gray wolf from the “List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and return management authority for the species back to the individual Pacific Northwest states. Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) and Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) joined Rep. Newhouse to introduce this legislation as original co-sponsors:
“This is a commonsense bill that would allow states to provide a more flexible management program and move forward with the implementation of the gray wolf delisting efforts, which are long overdue,” said Rep. Newhouse. “States are fully qualified to manage gray wolf populations responsibly and are better equipped to meet the needs of local communities, ranchers, livestock, and wildlife populations. Delisting the gray wolf under ESA would allow state wildlife officials to manage wolf populations more effectively.”
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version