| Big Game Hunting > Wolves |
| Time for Delisting in Washinton! |
| << < (13/14) > >> |
| WDFW-SUX:
SSS |
| wolfbait:
(In the settlement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed that it erred in not offering a public comment period, as required by law.) Do ya really think that they didn't know, SH_T. The USFW are riding this dyin horse to death. Its just like bangs said this will be tied up in court till the end of forever. |
| wolfbait:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wolves/bangs.html Bringing Wolves Home: Ed Bangs Wolf Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service "Wolves are a top-line predator. They have a major influence..." NOVA: I understand you helped direct the program that reintroduced wolves to the United States, after years of extinction. Where did you get the wolves? EB: Well, we needed wolves that knew how to make a living in an area like Yellowstone National Park. And so we began to think about where to get wolves that would know what an elk is, how to find one, and how to kill one—and where to get wolves that are used to living in cold mountainous terrain. All you have to do is look north of the border and you find that next to Banff National Park in Alberta, and a little bit farther north in British Columbia, you have such wolves. So we contacted the governments of Alberta and British Columbia and asked if they had any wolves to spare. And they said, "We think so, but first we'd like you to come up and tag some wolves and do some preliminary looking to make sure we've got enough." So we did that and sure enough, there were a lot of wolves. The first year, 1995, we got 29 wolves from Alberta, and shipped them into Yellowstone and Central Idaho, and the next year, 1996, we went up to British Columbia and I think we took 37 wolves and brought them down. Biologists are trying to write a wolf-recovery plan for Washington. (Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were( brought in,) the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population. For example, 100 sightings were reported in 1981, and last year there were 200, ranging as far south as Mount St. Helens, Almak said. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. … ug=1528536 Friday, April 17, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM |
| wolfbait:
So, they had already brought wolves into the Rockies once before. Bet we never heard about that. It was suspect that wolves had been planted there but no one could prove it. I am reading a book that tells of the parks service planting wolves in the yellowstone around 1968. A dandy book, Playing God in Yellowstone. The Destruction of America's First National Park. By Alston Chase. Quite the eye opened Monday, July 14, 1997 - Page updated at 12:00 AM Norm Dicks Puts Gray-Wolf Study On The Fast Track -- Reintroduction Wasn't Priority For Agencies By Jim Simon Hank Fischer, who heads the wolf program for Defenders of Wildlife, shares concerns about how spending priorities for endangered-species recovery are set. Like many critics, he worries that the federal government spends far more energy deciding what animals and plants to list as endangered rather than on actual recovery. But he notes that wolves already are repopulating the North Cascades, with or without government help. The Olympic Peninsula presents what he considers a low-cost opportunity to place wolves back in an area where they were systematically wiped out by settlers and the federal government more than 60 years ago. "What we're looking at is a specific opportunity in a specific location," Fischer said. "In this business, there are biological opportunities and political opportunities. You have to find where the two things merge." Study money for wolf restoration still must survive a final budget agreement between the House and Senate. Washington Republican Sen. Slade Gorton, who chairs the Interior Appropriation Committee, is publicly noncommittal on the project. His aides say Gorton has heard lots of complaints from residents and local officials on the Olympic Peninsula, who argue wolves could threaten livestock and scare away tourists. Federal studies will look at questions on whether there is an adequate prey base of elk and deer on which the wolves can survive and whether there is enough suitable habitat to accommodate them. If the studies pan out and local opposition is quieted, Dicks has envisioned airlifting wolves from British Columbia and Alaska within the next few years. There is, of course, nothing unusual about a congressman hopscotching the priorities of federal scientists. Of the $39 million budgeted nationwide this year for plant and animal-recovery programs, about one-third of that was earmarked for specific projects by Congress. Vicki Finn, an assistant manager in the Fish and Wildlife Services Western regional office, said the big money is reserved for the "glamorous" creatures - wolves, bears, California condors - that stir the public's imagination. "You won't see any member of Congress pulling in an appropriation for Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly," Finn said, referring to a Southern California insect that made the news recently when its endangered designation forced changes in the design of a new hospital. Copyright (c) 1997 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19970714&slug=2549520 |
| bearpaw:
Good reading....keep digging wolfbait.... |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |