New Wolf Bill – a Wolf Hunt Bill, Not a Recover Wildlife Bill - Passed to Derail

[bearpaw]

http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/Outdoorsman_No_43_Mar-May_2011.pdf

New Wolf Bill – a Wolf Hunt Bill, Not a Recover Wildlife Bill – Was Passed to Derail Better Solutions
By George Dovel

On April 15, 2011, President Obama signed H.R. 1473, the spending “compromise” that supposedly cut Congressional spending by nearly $40 billion for the remainder of FY2011, and supposedly turned wolf management over to two states and portions of three other states in the Northern Rocky Mountains. At least that’s what the politicians who were involved have been telling the media and the public for the past few weeks.

CBO and FWS Disagree With Politicians
Yet the Congressional Budget Office said while “Spending Authority” for the next ten years was “cut” by about $37.7 billion, the actual spending cut for FY 2011 was only $352 million – slightly less than one percent of the amount claimed. And retiring FWS Wolf Leader Ed Bangs confirmed in writing that the states selected for wolf delisting will still be required to manage wolves under 2009 FWS criteria and control for at least five more years.

He added that if either Idaho or Montana fail to meet their minimum number of breeding pairs at the end of any one of those five years, or if (someone decides that) changes in Idaho or Montana law or management objectives would significantly increase the threat to the wolf population, FWS will add an additional five years of FWS control to all of the states involved at that time.

Most Congressmen Had no Idea What They Voted For
But most of the members of Congress who voted to pass H.R. 1473, even if they read the 459-page resolution, didn’t have a clue how much FY 2011 spending had been cut or whether it did or did not really turn wolf management over to the five states. The following sentence concerning wolf delisting was the only explanation they were offered in the 459-page resolution and it does not even mention “wolves“ or “delisting”:

“SEC. 1713. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule published on April 2, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 15123 et seq.) without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule.”

Everyone Ignored Flaws in De-listing Document
A second sentence claimed the re-issuance would not be subject to judicial review and also said it did not affect the Wyoming U.S. District Court ruling and judgment issued on Nov. 18, 2010. That court ruled that FWS rejection of Wyoming’s Wolf Plan in the 2009 Delisting was arbitrary and capricious and ordered FWS to make it right.

Another District Court in Montana ruled that the FWS 2009 Delisting Rule was flawed in several respects – including its use of state borders to define population segments of wolves that travel in several states. If members of Congress had actually read the 75,000-word 66-page 2009 Delisting Rule, instead of approving its re-issuance blindly, they would have seen other discrepancies.

For example, it repeatedly states that for five years after delisting, Idaho and Montana must not allow the number of breeding pairs to fall below 10 or the number of wolves to fall below 100 at the end of any year. They also must not allow these numbers to fall below 15 and 150 for any three years in a row – the minimums originally agreed to by both states.

IDFG, OSC and Governor Agreed to Increase Wolves
But elsewhere it states that Idaho later agreed to manage for several times that many wolves. It confirms Ed Bangs’ warning that “changes in Idaho or Montana law or management objectives (that) would significantly increase the threat to the wolf population” can result in re-listing and will result in adding five additional years of FWS supervision for all states.

In Idaho, the recent 80% reduction ordered by Gov. Otter, from his 2008 minimum population of 518-732 wolves back to the 100-150 wolves agreed to by legislators and FWS in 2002, might be considered “a significant increase to the threat to the wolf population.” The FWS 2009 Delisting Rule lists Otter’s name seven times as the author of promises made in writing by the Governor and his two wolf agencies, IDFG and OSC, to dramatically increase the minimum number of wolves in Idaho.

In previous Outdoorsman issues, Dr. Valerious Geist has repeatedly explained and documented the disaster that always occurs when uncontrolled wolf populations are allowed to expand until they create unhealthy wolf-to-prey ratios. Because wolves multiply much faster than the big game animals they eat, once they have driven their primary prey into a “predator pit” from which it cannot recover they turn to alternate large and small prey and pets to survive.

Edwards Bill to Remove Wolves from ESA Listing
In 2010 some members of Congress failed to believe biologists’ claims that ecosystems where wildlife populations are ravaged by malnutrition, disease and cannibalism are “healthy”. Congressman Chet Edwards (D-TX) introduced HR 6028 to remove all gray wolves, which were never actually endangered, from ESA listing.

That legislation would have given all state F&G biologists full authority to properly manage all wildlife in their state. But some biologists in the Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Area viewed it as a threat to their system of wildlife corridors from Mexico to Alaska, where protected large predators will be free to roam, and where the biologists will ultimately control all human activity – including energy development.

Baucus/Tester Bill to De-list Wolves in Two States
They had already convinced Western governors to support their “Wildlands” agenda, and Montana Senators Baucus and Tester prepared a bill to de-list wolves only in Idaho and Montana where wolf plans were approved by FWS. The only stipulation in their bill was that each state must maintain a minimum wolf population within the minimums in its own plan or higher for five years, or wolves in that state would be re-listed by FWS.

Montana’s 2003 wolf plan required managing for at least 100-150 wolves but Idaho’s 2008 Fish and Game wolf plan, cited in the bill as “Idaho’s Wolf Plan”, required Idaho to manage for at least 518-732 wolves for five years after delisting. Although the F&G 2008-2012 plan was illegal, violating several Idaho laws, Gov. Otter sent a November 24, 2008 letter to FWS Director Hall stating that it was Idaho’s Post Delisting Plan and saying he supported managing for five times as many wolves as FWS required.

Otter’s letter referenced a 35-page attachment signed by the Governor’s Office of Species Conservation (OSC) and by IDFG Director Cal Groen, stating that wolves in Idaho were vigorous and healthy. It also specifically asked FWS to consider (implement) the new changes in Idaho’s Wolf Plan (i.e. to manage for five times as many wolves and not allow a hunting season unless a minimum of 20 breeding pairs would remain).

Ignoring Idaho Law Created Serious Problem
If IDFG and Otter had not ignored Idaho Law that required any F&G Plan to be submitted to the next (2009) session of the Legislature for either approval, amendment or rejection, the Tester Bill would not have created such a problem for Idaho. There is no evidence that the Legislature would have approved managing for any more wolves – much less for five times as many!

F&G Refused to Use 10J Plan to Save Lolo Elk
Two months after Groen signed the 11-28-08 document to FWS claiming that wolves in Idaho were vigorous and healthy, he told Idaho legislators about his Research Biologist George Pauley’s long-term finding that wolves were causing a 15% decline in elk numbers each year – compared to a seven percent increase without wolves. Groen also said that wolves were killing a significant number of other wolves in some units – a scenario that occurs when wolves can no longer find enough prey to satisfy their hunger, and invade neighboring packs’ territories in search of food.

Because there was no question that wolves were decimating the famous elk herd in the Lolo Zone, F&G had prepared a 10J plan to kill up to 105 wolves. But instead of asking Wildlife Services to implement the plan, IDFG, OSC and House Resource Committee Chairman Bert Stevenson all assured FWS they would not use the 10J plan they had prepared.

Idaho F&G Commissioners were fully aware that wolves were now the sole cause of rapidly declining elk herds in the Lolo Zone, yet in a public meeting they voted not to use the 10J plan to let Wildlife Services kill the 105 wolves in 2008. Their decision ignored their lawful mandate to preserve, protect and perpetuate all wildlife and gave the wolves several more years to destroy the elk.

And the wolves obliged. By the start of the Lolo Zone wolf hunting season on September 1, 2009 following delisting, Lolo elk herds had declined dramatically and many of the wolves that had not killed each other had moved to other zones where elk were still plentiful.

Hunters Killed Only 13 Wolves in 7-Month Season
Although the 2009-2010 hunter harvest quota for the Lolo Zone was 27 wolves, by the end of the seven-month hunt on March 31, 2010, Lolo hunters had killed only 13 wolves. In May, Wildlife Bureau Chief Jeff Gould claimed there were still 75-100 wolves in about eight packs in the Lolo Zone and authorized four outfitters and their guides to conduct a control action through June 30, 2010 and kill up to 20 additional wolves. But the four Lolo outfitters and their guides were able to kill only two additional wolves by June 30, 2010.

Emergency Wolf Bill Buried by Chairman Stevenson
Meanwhile February 2010 elk counts revealed an 84% decline in Lolo Zone elk numbers since wolves were introduced in 1995. Rep. Dick Harwood introduced HCR 43 in the 2010 Idaho Legislative Session - listing the severe impact uncontrolled wolves were having on big game, livestock, local business and rural residents.

His House Concurrent Resolution encouraged the Idaho Governor to declare a state of emergency and to authorize and require the Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game to use any legal means to reduce wolf numbers to those designated for recovery of the species (150). It would have required IDFG to use the 10J plan to hire Wildlife Services and their pilot-gunner team to kill more Lolo wolves in midwinter when it was relatively easy, instead of allowing the wolves to continue destroying the elk – especially during each successive winter and calving season.

But whether it was because of pressure from Gov. Otter in support of the F&G wolf plan as some Resource Committee members claimed, or a warning from the Attorney General’s Office as Chairman Stevenson later claimed, he refused to allow Harwood’s bill to be discussed or voted on. That is the same tactic that U. S. Senate Committee Chair Barbara Boxer promised to use if the bill to remove all wolves from ESA listing reached her Committee.

Late Effort to Add HR 6028 to Funding Bill Failed
Two of the groups lobbying for passage of that Bill were Utah Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) founded by Don Peay, and Big Game Forever, a subsidiary group he formed to promote legislation giving states control of wolves. Throughout the summer of 2010 Peay issued optimistic reports that Edwards’ proposal would easily pass, but on September 22, 2010, he and Mule Deer Foundation President/CEO Miles Moretti donated $13,500 to “Friends For Harry Reid” in what Peay described as an effort to “add the proposal as a rider on a funding bill.”

The donation got them a meeting with Reid, but it was just a “drop in the bucket” compared to the $25,975,547 Reid spent to get re-elected and he reportedly said he would do nothing until after the Nov. 2nd election. Peay and his group also met with Montana Senators Baucus and Tester who introduced their bill to delist wolves only in Idaho and Montana on Sept. 28th.

On Sept. 29, 2010, Utah Sen. Orren Hatch introduced S 3919 to replace Rep. Edwards’ HR 6028 which automatically died at the end of the two-year session on Sept. 30, 2010.

After the funding bill passed without the Edwards/ Hatch bill or the Tester bill being added as a rider, Peay accused Baucus and Tester of deliberately derailing the Hatch bill instead of working to pass it. Baucus and Tester claimed Peay’s charge was not true and said he was just upset because his backroom deal to sneak the Edwards bill through without being debated was not successful.

More Shenanigans?
In October-December, sportsman and agricultural groups tried unsuccessfully to get the Hatch legislation considered but Baucus and Tester, with a “backroom deal” of their own, got their bill attached to a December funding bill which did not pass. Two days after the Nov. 2nd election, I received a call from Outdoorsman readers who said they received a conference call from Don Peay who was trying to solicit agricultural donations to support a bill to de-list wolves only in Idaho and Montana (Tester bill?).

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and other groups strongly denounced the Tester Bill, claiming it was written by FWS to derail the Hatch bill to remove wolves. Yet now they praise an even worse version of that bill. Meanwhile - Back in Idaho In 2010, with wolves re-listed again by Montana Judge Molloy, and Rep. Harwood’s HCR 43 killed by Resource Committee Chairman Bert Stevenson, the wolf problem in rural Idaho had become critical. The June-August 2010 Outdoorsman described how the elk harvest had declined 2% per year since wolves were introduced, but had declined 23% to a 26-year low in just the 3 years since Otter took office.

It told how, in addition to the statewide loss of $24 million spent each year by elk hunters who stopped coming to Idaho, the rate of unemployment from 2009-2010 in the one-third of counties that depend on hunters as a seasonal source of income increased by a whopping 31-72%!

It also told how, with both deer and elk populations declining rapidly, nearly one-third of the deer and 41% of the elk killed by hunters in 2009 were female breeding stock! That issue described how F&G raised hundreds of thousands of dollars by selling both special weapons permits and chances for rifle hunters to kill off the female breeding stock, and also documented the misuse (theft) of nearly half a million dollars in sportsman excise taxes to fund its nongame (Wildlands) agenda.

I made sure several friends of Gov. Otter received that issue so the facts would not be withheld from him or distorted by his staff or legal advisors. At about the same time (Sept. 16, 2010), Idaho County Commissioners asked Gov. Otter to declare their County a disaster area because of the damage excessive wolf numbers were causing.

On Oct. 18, 2010, Governor Otter ended Idaho’s agreement to manage wolves for FWS. And on Dec. 9, 2010, the F&G Commissioners finally suspended their illegal 2008-2012 Wolf Plan at Otter’s request.

At that F&G Commission meeting, Gov. Otter’s Chief of Staff, David Hensley, announced that negotiations with FWS were ongoing and said when the new Congress came in session there would be a solution to delist wolves in the three NRM (Northern Rocky Mountain) states. Idaho Congressman Simpson was involved and the obvious solution, short of removing all wolves from the ESA, was to simply amend the Tester bill to include Wyoming’s and Idaho’s agreements to manage for 100-150 wolves.

Instead, in three versions of H.R. 1, Tester and Simpson restored the flawed 2009 delisting rule, omitting Wyoming but including portions of Oregon, Washington and Utah. Then Wyoming requested its successful court ruling be included and it was in the new H.R. 1473.
With Tester and Simpson both announcing their bill was intended to overcome the Montana court ruling, it invited a legal challenge of its Constitutionality. That has already happened as this issue goes to the printer.

[Machias]

Yea why worry, we'll be just fine here in WA.