Free: Contests & Raffles.
So here's my question and I'm not implying anything but the second to the last sentence says "wolves were delisted in Eastern WA. earlier this year from Federal Protection and are still protected under State Law" Is this statement correct.KillBilly or somebody else familiar with the wolf status?
Quote from: PlateauNDN on December 09, 2011, 11:37:52 AMSo here's my question and I'm not implying anything but the second to the last sentence says "wolves were delisted in Eastern WA. earlier this year from Federal Protection and are still protected under State Law" Is this statement correct.KillBilly or somebody else familiar with the wolf status?Yes it is in fact correct. The feds de-listed but the imposed it's own ESA on the state.
To clarify, the area where the wolves were reportedly killed, would still be federally protected. The division is in the okanogan valley tonasket, omak, etc. The reported area is west of that which is still federally protected.
Quote from: bearpaw on December 09, 2011, 12:06:51 PMTo clarify, the area where the wolves were reportedly killed, would still be federally protected. The division is in the okanogan valley tonasket, omak, etc. The reported area is west of that which is still federally protected.So 300 GMU areas are not Federally protected only State?
Quote from: PlateauNDN on December 09, 2011, 02:12:16 PMQuote from: bearpaw on December 09, 2011, 12:06:51 PMTo clarify, the area where the wolves were reportedly killed, would still be federally protected. The division is in the okanogan valley tonasket, omak, etc. The reported area is west of that which is still federally protected.So 300 GMU areas are not Federally protected only State?Region 3 is federally protected. I think the eastern 1/3 of the state wolves are NOT federally listed as being endangered. So that would be region 1 and maybe a small part of region 2.
I've hylighted it on a map for quick reference.