WASHINGTON — The Obama administration backed away — for now — from its plan to lift federal protections for gray wolves throughout the continental United States after an independent report on Friday faulted the science behind the proposal.
The study by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis found that U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s proposal to delist the animal from the Endangered Species Act is “not well supported by the available science,” according to a statement from the University of California-Santa Barbara, which houses the center.
The proposal “was strongly dependent on a single publication, which was found to be preliminary and not widely accepted by the scientific community,” according to the statement.
The authors — who at the administration’s request did a peer review of the science behind the wolf plan — said additional research is needed before the administration can decide whether to delist the species or keep it on Endangered Species Act.
The Fish & Wildlife Service turned to the California center for an objective scientific analysis after encountering a barrage of criticism from conservationists and scientists whose research was used in writing new wolf rules. The government had no role in picking the scientists who did the study.
In response to the findings, the Fish & Wildlife Service decided to once again seek public input before issuing final wolf rules. The previous public comment period ended in December and the administration planned to issue a final rule this year.
Reopening public comments is a sign that the administration is rethinking its position.
“Peer review is an important step in our efforts to assure that the final decision on our proposal to delist the wolf is based on the best available scientific and technical information,” Fish & Wildlife Director Dan Ashe said in a statement. “We are incorporating the peer review report into the public record for the proposed rulemaking, and accordingly, reopening the public comment period.”
Exposing the Big Game 
Reblogged this on Mungai and the Goa Constrictor.
Wooohooowooooooo!
Thank goodness. But we have to keep fighting for them.
And the fight must go on a little longer…
The worst thing about this is that they “needed”scientific proof…when just observing the devestation to the Lamar pack,after losing “06,demonstrates that the wolf is far more complicated emotionaly,than the fools hunting them.
the wolf is far more complicated emotionaly,than the fools hunting them.
LOL, is that just the worst? But the fools are at the top of the food chain, unfortunately.
I think the Western states have gotten what they wanted, and should back off now too.
you got that right
Yes, they ruined Famous Lamar Pack. Stupid governments! Obama didn’t study about the wolves and wildlifes… Probably he never learned about social science either… The reason the high school must have social science classes for all the students but very short only half semester in 9 th grade, other learning to drive in classes half semester too.
It could be a sign that they are rethinking it could also be a sign that they did not get the kind of support through public comments they wanted and are now hoping to get more comments in support of the delisting
The USFWS is broken and corrupt when it comes to wolves
Louise Kane louise@kaneproductions.net 508-237-8326
From: Exposing the Big Game Reply-To: Exposing the Big Game Date: Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:17 PM To: louise kane Subject: [New post] A Federal Reprieve for Wolves
WordPress.com Exposing the Big Game posted: “WASHINGTON — The Obama administration backed away — for now — from its plan to lift federal protections for gray wolves throughout the continental United States after an independent report on Friday faulted the science behind the proposal. The study”
That’s what I was thinking Louise. This just means we have to comment again. Meanwhile they will look for “peers” to agree with the one assessment they have.
One more comment period is just an effing delay for Secretary Tool. She knows what the public thinks–now she’s giving the NRA a chance to have a poparity contest. She is so much garbage. My kids and hers went to lower school together. Someplace along the way she sold her soul and made a deal with the devil.
We should respect all creatures great & small. They all have a purpose on this delicate planet.
Let’s all pray that this is not just another smoke screen just to keep the public quiet for a while. Hopefully they will NOT de-list wolves and it will apply to ALL states. Therefore not allowing states out west to make their own wolf hunting rules. Leave the balance of nature alone. We have already done more than enough damage through our own ignorance let’s not continue to do more!
We need to protect the wolves from all hunters.
We need to fight for the wolves they can’t defend them selfs they have every right to live like any other animals!!!
The Obama administration is a total game of smoke and mirrors. Don’t believe a thing.
How much proof does USFWS need to prove that wolves should not be delisted? What we have is political management of a species, particularly in MT-WY-ID-WI. Wyoming has them classified as varmints in most of the state. Montana’s new rules allow ranchers to shoot any wolf they see as “threatening”, which means any wolf they see, and proposes to have year around trapping. Idaho is having wolf and coyote contests for cash and has hired a hunter to kill a couple of packs deep in a wilderness area arguing that it is in defense of elk herds. The Governor of ID wants to set aside 2 million dollars to drive down the wolf population to marginal, delisting levels. Wisconsin is using dogs. MT-WY-ID-WI are obviously marginalizing this apex predator which is not good ecology for trophic cascade of effects; with hunters (sports killing) and ranchers and these state wildlife agencies having unhealthy effects on ecology. We are rapidly getting back to the 1800’s in wolf massacring states. Wolf management–they do not generally need management, should be out of the states’ hands. The states mentioned are way too hostile, and controlled by historic hostile elements. They are promoting two myths despite contrary evidence: Wolves do not kill too many elk and their impact on cattle is less than 0.002%. These states are run by rancher and hunter folklore, myths and lies and their ilk in the state wildlife agencies and legislatures, with so far the only exception being OR and somewhat WA. OR is the model wolf management state, allowing the killing of only chronic offenders, not general wolf killing, and requiring that nonlethal management be in place and tried. The throwback (1800’s) wolf massacre states are mismanaging wolves. If the states, particularly the ones mentioned, were forced to live with wolves for a number years and focus on nonlethal management, per the Oregon model, they might get use to the idea and wolves would have a chance, but not at the present time.
If ranchers would do better management of herds with regard to wolves and other predators they could actually make more money per one study referenced below. Killing wolves in general, driving down the population, rather than dealing with chronic, specific offenders, probably does more harm than good. We should also all be aware that many ranchers having wolf problems are grazing on public land and crying wolf. There are 772 permits to graze on national forest lands in MT and 3776 permits to graze on BLM land. Ranchers encroach on wildlife in a huge way but feel entitled to do so as they have a history with the US government of doing so. Also, the number of cattle killed by wolves is greatly exaggerated, 65 out of 5.2 million in 2012 and less in 2013 in Montana, which is 0.002% for which the rancher is reimbursed. Oregon has the most sensible wolf policy: Nonlethal means have to be in place, at least two, and tried, and then only chronic offenders are dealt with in a lethal way. We can live with wolves and true wilderness. But it seems that most ranchers are viscerally anti-wolf and that sportsmen and state wildlife agencies in some states, like MT, want to farm elk in the wilderness and eliminate or marginalize predators and thereby ruin true wilderness of which wolves are a vital part. Older wolves teach the young, most often to stay away from man, and we kill the teachers, leaving juveniles unschooled.
References:
http://go.takepart.com/ct/17484010:18777977085:m:1:486146059:338CF0EAB26947FBBBA126412C80AD2E:r:www.takepart.com/article/2014/01/31/getting-ranchers-tolerate-wolves–its-too-late:2014-02-03
Click to access Oregon_Wolf_Conservation_and_Management_Plan_2010.pdf
Montana Department of Livestock, Livestock Loss Board
So does this mean that these fools can’t hunt the wolf for now? GOD, I hope that’s true! Because I’d love nothing better then to rub their smug faces in wolf poo!
Unfortunately this doesn’t change things as far as the states that currently hunt wolves, it just temporarily keeps wolves out of the hands of states that want to start their own hunts.
Wolves have every right to live their lives unmolested. Hunters nearly killed them all before, if wolves are de-listed (and in some states they already have been) their populations will be decimated and future generations will not get to experience the awesomeness that is the wolf. Wolves are sacred animals, they’re intelligent, and they don’t kill for “fun”, unlike human hunters. We need to keep vigilant in our efforts to keep the wolf protected.