EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:57 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:11 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
The Former, Wolf Expert whom, the ARA were so proud of because his plan was for wolf recovery to to work, is now being ridiculed by former supporters for suggesting wolf numbers need to be culled to maintain healthy packs and ecosystems.


http://tinyurl.com/22dk9t

Conservation Groups Challenge Federal Wolf-Killing Rule


January 28, 2008

MISSOULA, Mont.- Conservation groups are fighting a Bush administration plan that would allow the states of Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana to kill half of the Rocky Mountain wolf population, including by shooting wolves from the air, while they are still protected under the Endangered Species Act. In an effort to bar states from aerial gunning and other state-sponsored killing of wolves, seven conservation groups filed a suit in federal district court today to stop the implementation of the rule.

The new rule lowers the bar for wolf killing when a state determines that wolves may be having some impact on populations of elk, deer, or other wild ungulates. The Bush Administration says the rule change is necessary because the previous standard required states to show that wolves are the primary cause of a decline in wild ungulate numbers. That threshold has provenimpossible to meet because nearly all elk herds in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana are above population objectives, and wolves have never been determined to have primarily caused a population decline.
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2008/0 ... wolves.txt

Groups sue over wolves
By EVE BYRON - Independent Record - 01/29/08
FWP photo - Three adult wolves, part of a larger pack, are pictured.
Seven conservation groups made good on a threat last week to file a lawsuit challenging a temporary federal rule that would loosen restrictions on when gray wolves can be shot in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.

The legal documents filed in U.S. District Court in Missoula Monday morning ask that the new federal rule, also published Monday, be overturned, according to Louisa Willcox with the Natural Resources Defense Council. The case has been assigned to Chief Judge Donald Molloy.

“The fundamental issue is that we’re so close to wolf recovery in the Northern Rockies and close to a success story. But the Bush Administration seems intent on reversing that,” Willcox said. “We’re spitting distance from recovery and now we’ll be moving in the wrong direction.”




Anyone see where these two articles are not taking into consideration that the wolf needs balance in order to protect themselves and the ecosystems??? To begin with, these orgs are NOT CONSERVATIONIST ORGS but PRESERVATIONIST ORGS that would not have offered RECOVERY program to begin with but they supported it because it cut hunters out of hunting in certain designated areas where ungulates could get cut down by tooth & claw rather then arrows & bullets..

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:37 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21390
Location: Southeastern US
:-s #-o

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:54 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:38 am
Posts: 16153
Location: Florida
I thought I read somewhere that the wolves were removed from the endangered species list. Am I remembering that incorrectly??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:54 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Here you go AL.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... olves.html

Thriving Gray Wolf May Come Off U.S. Endangered List

Click here to find out more!
William Campbell
for National Geographic Today
January 22, 2003

By late spring or early summer, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service may propose removing the western population of gray wolf from the endangered species list.

The population has made a comeback in the Northern Rockies, which represents a significant achievement for the wolf—and for conservation. But the delisting proposal has sparked debate among federal and state agencies, and private environmental groups about whether the wolf should indeed roam free of the endangered designation.


http://tinyurl.com/2txgcg


U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service News
Release
January 29, 2007

Interior Department Announces Delisting of Western Great Lakes Wolves; Proposed Delisting of Northern Rocky Mountain Wolves

News Releases Home Page

Search the News Releases
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Home



Contacts

David Eisenhauer, 202-208-5634
Georgia Parham 812-334-4261 ext. 203
Sharon Rose 303-236-4580

Separate Actions Part of Larger Recovery Effort



Deputy Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett today announced that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is removing the western Great Lakes population of gray wolves from the federal list of threatened and endangered species and proposing to remove the northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolves from the list. The two separate actions are being taken in recognition of the success of gray wolf recovery efforts under the Endangered Species Act.



"Wolves have recovered in the western Great Lakes because efforts to save them from extinction have been a model of cooperation, flexibility, and hard work," Scarlett said. "This same spirit of collaboration has helped gray wolves in the Northern Rockies exceed their recovery goals to the point where they are biologically ready to be delisted. States, tribes, conservation groups, federal agencies and citizens of both regions can be proud of their roles in saving this icon of wilderness."

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:09 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:38 am
Posts: 16153
Location: Florida
Thanks Donnie, I sometimes get confused with all the reading as things change so frequently and depending on who is saying it. Sometimes it's hard to keep it all straight for prolonged periods of time. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:23 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
animallover wrote:
Thanks Donnie, I sometimes get confused with all the reading as things change so frequently and depending on who is saying it. Sometimes it's hard to keep it all straight for prolonged periods of time. :wink:



Yet the National Geographic article expected that action to take place in January of 2003 while numbers expanded even more over the years. Then in Jan 2007 the de-listing took place and a year later the pack still grows and the choice has to be made to offer a cull to protect health of wolves and the entire ecosystem.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:27 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
[color=#FF0000]The Former, Wolf Expert whom, the ARA were so proud of because his plan was for wolf recovery to to work, is now being ridiculed by former supporters for suggesting wolf numbers need to be culled to maintain healthy packs and ecosystems.

Anyone see where these two articles are not taking into consideration that the wolf needs balance in order to protect themselves and the ecosystems??? To begin with, these orgs are NOT CONSERVATIONIST ORGS but PRESERVATIONIST ORGS


Didn't you call them ARA's up above? Anytime anyone fights for the life of an animal they're automatically lumped into an ARA pile around here.

Along with the NRDC, other plaintiffs in the case include the Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, The Humane Society of the United States, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, and Friends of the Clearwater. They’re being represented by Earthjustice.


Last edited by Grace on Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:28 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie
Quote:
Anyone see where these two articles are not taking into consideration that the wolf needs balance in order to protect themselves and the ecosystems???


And in answer to that NO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:40 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie
Quote:
The Former, Wolf Expert whom, the ARA were so proud of because his plan was for wolf recovery to to work, is now being ridiculed by former supporters for suggesting wolf numbers need to be culled to maintain healthy packs and ecosystems.


Perhaps you'd like to expound on this a bit more. Is there disease running rampant that the article failed to mention? And what harm is happening to the ecosystem?

The new rule lowers the bar for wolf killing when a state determines that wolves may be having some impact on populations of elk, deer, or other wild ungulates. The Bush Administration says the rule change is necessary because the previous standard required states to show that wolves are the primary cause of a decline in wild ungulate numbers. That threshold has provenimpossible to meet because nearly all elk herds in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana are above population objectives, and wolves have never been determined to have primarily caused a population decline.

Today's action will allow the states to kill all but 600 of the approximately 1,500 wolves in the region. The rule applies to wolves in central Idaho and the Greater Yellowstone area – descendents of the roughly 60 wolves that were reintroduced to those regions in 1995 and 1996.


I'd like to hear your reasons, Donnie, for support of slaughtering half that herd. Not just blathering about ecosystems and imagined health issues.


"This is a giant step backward. There is absolutely no reason to begin a wholesale slaughter of the region's wolves," said Suzanne Stone, northern Rockies wolf conservation specialist for Defenders of Wildlife. "Yet that is exactly what the federal government is willing to allow the states to do: wipe out hundreds of the wolves our nation has worked so hard to recover."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:45 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Grace wrote:
Donnie
Quote:
The Former, Wolf Expert whom, the ARA were so proud of because his plan was for wolf recovery to to work, is now being ridiculed by former supporters for suggesting wolf numbers need to be culled to maintain healthy packs and ecosystems.


Perhaps you'd like to expound on this a bit more. Is there disease running rampant that the article failed to mention? And what harm is happening to the ecosystem?

The new rule lowers the bar for wolf killing when a state determines that wolves may be having some impact on populations of elk, deer, or other wild ungulates. The Bush Administration says the rule change is necessary because the previous standard required states to show that wolves are the primary cause of a decline in wild ungulate numbers. That threshold has provenimpossible to meet because nearly all elk herds in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana are above population objectives, and wolves have never been determined to have primarily caused a population decline.

Today's action will allow the states to kill all but 600 of the approximately 1,500 wolves in the region. The rule applies to wolves in central Idaho and the Greater Yellowstone area – descendents of the roughly 60 wolves that were reintroduced to those regions in 1995 and 1996.


I'd like to hear your reasons, Donnie, for support of slaughtering half that herd. Not just blathering about ecosystems and imagined health issues.


"This is a giant step backward. There is absolutely no reason to begin a wholesale slaughter of the region's wolves," said Suzanne Stone, northern Rockies wolf conservation specialist for Defenders of Wildlife. "Yet that is exactly what the federal government is willing to allow the states to do: wipe out hundreds of the wolves our nation has worked so hard to recover."




Unlike the others here Grace , I do not bother to offer reasoned responses to you because it is a wasted effort.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:48 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
In other words, you're blowing air out your pie hole with nothing to back it up. No answer is answer enough. ARA's? Disease? Ecosystems?? :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:12 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Grace wrote:
In other words, you're blowing air out your pie hole with nothing to back it up. No answer is answer enough. ARA's? Disease? Ecosystems?? :roll:



No Grace. What I stated is you are not worth the effort because you refuse to weigh the truth. Dr. Mech is the creator of the recovery program that worked rather well and he understands the ecosystem well enough to note that a cull is now needed.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:21 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Grace wrote:
In other words, you're blowing air out your pie hole with nothing to back it up. No answer is answer enough. ARA's? Disease? Ecosystems?? :roll:



No Grace. What I stated is you are not worth the effort because you refuse to weigh the truth. Dr. Mech is the creator of the recovery program that worked rather well and he understands the ecosystem well enough to note that a cull is now needed.



Does Dr. Mech work for the Bush Administration? I see no mention of him in your links, not to mention any of his comments re: ecosystem vis a vis the wolf cull.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:23 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
It is only my humble opinion , but I believe more research should be made before re-introducing species. It may be found that old entrenched beliefs re sustainable numbers , may have to be amended due to the change in numbers of prey animals etc. due to climate change.
As I say, I am no expert by any means. I don't know how the wolves in Scotland are faring. If I find out, I'll let you know.

I am not familiar with Mr. M's work or research, but it must be very difficult to assess all the factors involved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:33 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
jhawk wrote:
It is only my humble opinion , but I believe more research should be made before re-introducing species. It may be found that old entrenched beliefs re sustainable numbers , may have to be amended due to the change in numbers of prey animals etc. due to climate change.
As I say, I am no expert by any means. I don't know how the wolves in Scotland are faring. If I find out, I'll let you know.

I am not familiar with Mr. M's work or research, but it must be very difficult to assess all the factors involved.



Hello JHawk. Dr. Mech is one of the top wolf experts in the world and is the main reason they had a recovery program in the lower 48 states, that was successful. He now calls for a wolf cull because he understands that the issue is not recovery but health of packs and the entire ecosystem.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group