im just frustrated, it seems like they are trying to paint a rosy picture that wolves are friendly fluffy doggies and only consume i jured animals, or as with the Wenatchee Pack... only eat animals that have died from other causes. These wolves arent affraid of people and stick around and are now killing animals in peoples yards... wounded or not. Its going to take someones kid getting snatched before something will be done. I dont want to pick a fight with anyone here, just have trouble channeling my frustration... thanks for hearing me out !
Really Scottstyle? I think you are a bit behind the times, I would suggest everyone read the info below and check out the date, 1998! Read it All because you now have the USFWS and WDFW wolves in your backyard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Illusion of the Endangered Wolf and Corrective Actions
The illusion of the endangered wolf has gone on for 26 years. This is in spite of the fact that there is much information available to show that wolves are far from being an endangered species. Other information shows that wolves are not needed in the ecology of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan and that the three states are better off ecologically and economically without wolves. The benefactors of the wolf situation we have are the bureaucrats of the USFWS and the state DNRs as they spend the taxpayer's money on their very counterproductive wolf restoring activities. Support from misguided animal rights, anti hunting, environmental organizations together with not enough people getting informed and involved makes this possible.
Behind the misinformation the endangered wolf is the Endangered Species Act. Just because in 1974 wolves had been eliminated from Wisconsin and Michigan and there were only 500 to a 1,000 in northern Minnesota does not imply that wolves were going to vanish as the passenger pigeon did. There were 50,000 to 60,000 wolves in Canada then as there are today. They cross over into Minnesota and Michigan at will.
To illustrate the current situation, US citizens can to into Ontario and buy a $50 small game license with which they can take an unlimited number of wolves. And that is only a short ways to the north into Canada. Does that sound like wolves are an endangered species? Why aren't people questioning that endangered wolf classification.
How does the USFWS get away with calling wolves an endangered species? To counter the people finding out about all those Canadian wolves, in 1983 the USFWS got congress to amend the Endangered Species Act so Distinct Population Segments could be set up These DPSs are supposed to be distinct and discrete. In no way are the wolves of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan discrete and distinct from the 60,000 Canadian wolves. But a geographical separation such as the Canada-US boundary can also be used for setting up a DPS. These DPSs could then be regarded a completely separate and classified as endangered. So the Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan wolves are being called and endangered DPS and there is nothing we can do about it. Of course in 1983 congress said that these DPSs should be used sparingly, but the USFWS is using them whenever they can get away with it.
Actually a lot can be done to bring about the needed changes. It has to start with people getting informed and taking the actions that our great system allows. So far the USFWS is not being questioned as they need to be. That is the starting point. Has anybody heard of a Minnesota legislator doing this?
It may startle a lot of people, but if there are 3,000, 1,500 or no wolves at all in Minnesota has little effect on North American wolf survival when the huge Canadian wolf wilderness and huge number of wolves that live there are considered. Eventually this will be understood. There is no need to be so careful about how many wolves people kill as they protect their property. It really does not make any difference. This too will be understood. The USFWS and their incredible failed wolf policy has to be thrown out. The states have to be weaned from that wolf restoration money that the USFWS dishes out. So far Wisconsin and Michigan have come with wolf management plans that are based on this continuing for a long time to come. Somehow common sense has to prevail and all this has to be brought to an end.
The only solution that will really do what is required is to have the USFWS completely delist wolves, stop interfering with the way the states manage wolves and stop spending public money on wolf restoration which is not needed. People need to be made aware of the fact that $3,286,000 was spent in 1955 on restoring and propagandizing in favor of wolves by the USFWS. Figures taken from the Oct 29, 1999 Wisconsin Wolf Plan show that from 1979 thru 1998 a total of $,1,547,373 federal and state money was spent on wolves.
The following petitions to do this and the USFWS response illustrates that the people and their US Representatives and Senators will need to change that 1983 amendment to the Endangered Species Act so that Distinct Population Segments cannot be used to force wolves in on states without their people having a choice in that matter.
Presently the way the Endangered Species Act is implemented allows the USFWS to declare a species is an endangered Distinct Population Segment and follow with spending taxpayer money on their bureaucrats to restore it. Further they also have the power to deny petitions to bring this activity to an end. This is a very flagrant conflict of interest which congress must bring to an end. The function of declaring something endangered and the implementing of the restoration has to be split between independent independent organizations. Congress must recognize this problem and correct it.
So please study the following petitions, their supportive materials and the USFWS response. The 90 days for the USFWS response to the April 22, 2000 is still in the future as of this writing.
Your US Senators and Representatives need to become aware of this web site as well as the Abundant Wildlife Society web site at
www.vcn.com/business/AWS/default.html for seeing the need to correct Endangered Species Act excesses.
The wolf delisting petitions, supportive materials and USFWS responses follow.
1st Petition to Dept. of the Interior
PO Box 145
Gilman,WI '54433
Feb 9,1998
Mr. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
U.S. Dept. of the Interior,
Washington, D.C. 20240
Dear Secretary Babbitt,
As set forth in the Act Endangered Species I petition that timber wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan be delisted immediately. When declared endangered in 1974 these wolves were thought to be a separate subspecies. Since then studies of the travels of collared wolves have shown that Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan together with Canadian wolves are all an interconnected population with at least 65,000 members. Surely they never were nor are they now an endangered species. Therefore they should be delisted immediately. Revisions of the Act allow for such changes in listings when mistakes were made in wrongly declaring something to be endangered or threatened. And the USFWS condition of at least 100 wolves in Wisconsin and Michigan for 5 consecutive should be set aside.
This wolf delisting will rightfully return wolf management to each of the three states giving them the ability to make regulations which will give relief :to their citizens where there are too many wolves. As you well know, the Act calls for restoring wolves to their former range where practicable. Common sense dictates it is not practicable to restore wolves to parts of this former range such as downtown Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Madison, Lansing or Detroit. The problems now experienced with wolves in agricultural, deer hunting areas and other smaller cities and towns show that it is also not practicable to restore them there as well.
I enclosed a copy of a Chicago Tribune article for you to see first hand what is going on where wolves have been restored.
Sincerely Yours,
Lawrence Krak
Chicago Tribune Wolf Article
They're telling big bad wolf stories these
days all over Minnesota.
Scary tales of wolfpacks staring people
down, eating dogs in back yards off the
leash like popsicles."One fellow came home from work to find
three wolves eating his dog in the middle of
the road. In the middle of the day. Just a
mile east of town," noted Department of
Natural Resources wildlife specialist Bill
Peterson from his office in Grand Marais.
The operator of a local day-care center
routinely sees wolves hunkering at the edge
of her property, watching kids cavort on the
playground equipment.
"She doesn't know what to do," Peterson
said. "She has to keep an eye on the kids
outside as well as those inside. She doesn't
dare leave them alone."
Another woman was entertaining a neighbor
when they heard a thump at the back door.
She opened the door and found a bloody
splotch on the back porch at the end of her
dog's leash and saw a wolf carting off the
carcass of Fifi.
In northeast Minnesota's primary wolf
range, some parents refuse to let their
younger children stand alone at rural bus
stops.
"But that's not new," said L. David Mech,
co-founder of the International Wolf Center
in Ely, Minn., and arguably the world's
foremost wolf scientist. "People have been
saying things like that for 30 years."
It was Mech (pronounced "Meech") who
began tracking wolves as a federal biologist
more than 30 years ago--and he literally
wrote the book (several books, actually) on
wolfpack behavior. His work contributed to
the end of bounty hunting for timber wolves
and their eventual protection as an
endangered species.
Thanks to the nurturing of federal law--and
the explosion of succulent deer populations
throughout the North Country--wolves have
rebounded admirably. Minnesota scientists
estimate the wolf population at well over
2,000 animals and growing steadily at the
average rate of six pups per reproducing
female.
Furthermore, the animals have spread nicely
into neighboring Wisconsin and Michigan,
with each state now harboring well over
200 wolves.
And they keep on expanding. Wolves
reportedly crossed the ice-clogged Straits
of Mackinac last winter to enter Michigan's
Lower Peninsula. Three radio-tagged packs
thrive in the forests around Tomah in central
Wisconsin. And wolves have been seen
even farther south.
"One radio-collared wolf went from
northeastern Minnesota past Duluth and
wound up 30 miles north of Madison,
Wis.," Mech said last week. "Another went
from northeast Minnesota across Wisconsin
and ended up in Upper Michigan. So they
go pretty much where they want."
This remarkable recovery--a triumph in
wildlife circles--has changed the profile of
wolves in some Minnesota areas.
Approximately 100 farmers annually
complain of livestock depredations. Hunters
are antsy about the volume of deer killed by
wolves. Since an average wolf requires 16
to 20 deer a year, that amounts to nearly
40,000 whitetails.
While this ordinarily might not be a
problem, the last two severely harsh winters
have cut deeply into deer herds in northern
Minnesota, probably reducing them by a
third. Nowadays, with fewer deer and
thinner snow making deer hard to catch,
biologists think wolves simply find it easier
to feast on back-yard pets.
They also wonder if years of protection
might teach adaptive wolves to regard man
benignly, encouraging them to approach
folks who never seem to harm them. And if
these kindly people also provide a lot of
tasty treats on leashes, so much the merrier.
For four years now, wolves in Minnesota,
Wisconsin and Michigan have exceeded
federal population goals. If this continues
one more year, guidelines call for removing
wolves from endangered and threatened
lists--effectively declaring them recovered.
When and if that happens, Minnesota hopes
to have a wolf-management plan in place
that will reduce the the wolf population to a
less threatening level in terms of
depredations.
"By any biological means you choose to
name, this means killing some wolves,"
Mech said. "To manage this population, to
keep it strong while minimizing any negative
impacts upon people, a certain number of
animals must be removed each year."
Not that this hasn't been done for years.
Federal biologists have trapped and killed
problem wolves in Minnesota since 1978.
A record 216 wolves were eliminated in
1997--about a tenth of the Minnesota
population.
"That really isn't much," Mech said. "Studies
have shown we can take up to 30 percent
each year without reducing the population.
In Alaska, where they are actively trying to
reduce wolf numbers, 50 to 75 percent
must be taken each year just to have an
impact."
To prepare for the day when federal wolf
management is formally dropped into
Minnesota's lap, the DNR has begun testing
political winds. A series of 12 public
meetings around the state ended last week
with more than 3,500 people giving their
opinions.
"That's probably a record for public input
on any issue," said Mike DonCarlos, a
DNR wildlife specialist who organized the
meetings. "We've heard from
everyone--farmers, hunters, parents, wolf
advocates, scientists, educators,
animal-rights people, people with every
conceivable interest."
The next step will be to boil down this
mountain of suggestions so a round table of
key organizations can refine them into
concrete proposals. Then the state will
draw a tentative plan.
The political hot potato concerns how
wolves will be managed--whether through
expensive government culling, a limited and
regulated hunting and trapping season, or
simply by letting landowners defend their
properties.
DonCarlos said he hopes the round tables
will recommend comfortable population
levels and decide if management should
differ by region or be uniform statewide.
Meanwhile, even though no human yet has
been molested by healthy wolves in
Minnesota (an 11-year-old camper was
injured by food-seeking wolves in Canada
two years ago), Mech recommends caution.
"Certainly, in an area where a pet has been
eaten, I wouldn't recommend allowing a
toddler to play alone outside," he said.
USFWS and Dept. of Interior 1st Response to 1st Petition
United States Department of the Interior
Read more @
http://home.centurytel.net/PAW/illusion.htm
