- Dec 23:
- Ruling on Great Lakes wolf protections might have national impact, experts say
- Dec 20:
- Great Lakes wolves ordered returned to endangered list
- Dec 19:
- Judge overturns Obama administration on Great Lakes wolves
- Dec 13:
- Loss of livestock from wolves has declined in Wisconsin
- Oct 23:
- Hunters killing Wisconsin wolves quicker this year
Several members of Congress are preparing legislation to take gray wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Wyoming off the endangered list in an attempt to undo court decisions that have blocked the states from allowing wolf hunting and trapping for sport and predator control.
U.S. Rep. Reid Ribble, R-Wis., is leading the effort, his office confirmed Tuesday. Co-sponsors include U.S. Reps. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., Dan Benishek, R-Mich., and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.
“I am pursuing a bipartisan legislative fix that will allow the Great Lakes states to continue the effective work they are doing in managing wolf populations without tying the hands of the Fish and Wildlife Service or undermining the Endangered Species Act,” Ribble said in a statement.
Ribble spokeswoman Katherine Mize said he hasn’t decided exactly when to introduce the bill, but the lawmakers are circulating a draft.
The legislation is in response to a ruling by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., last month that threw out an Obama administration decision to “delist” wolves in the western Great Lakes region, where the combined wolf population is estimated at around 3,700. That followed a similar decision by a different federal judge in September that stripped Wyoming of its wolf management authority and returned that state’s wolves to federal protections under the Endangered Species Act.
Ribble’s bill uses a strategy that succeeded in taking wolves in Idaho and Montana off the endangered list after court challenges by environmentalists blocked those efforts.
Congress took matters into its own hands in 2011 and lifted the federal protections for wolves in those two states, which then allowed hunting and trapping to resume.
“The language we are looking at would be narrow and would address the recent court decision. It would not seek to change the Endangered Species Act, but would be designed to meet the need in our region for responsible stewardship of the wolf population,” Benishek said in a statement.
Peterson, the most senior member of Minnesota’s congressional delegation, said he didn’t know what the prospects are for this legislation, but he said they’re probably better than they were in 2011 given that Republicans now control the Senate. He said he’s working to line up support from other lawmakers.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said in her 111-page ruling that the delisting, which took effect in 2012, was no more valid than the government’s three previous attempts over more than a decade. While wildlife managers in the three western Great Lakes states say their wolf populations are no longer endangered and can sustain limited hunting and trapping, Howell criticized the states’ regulatory plans as inadequate. She also said wolves still need federal protections because they haven’t repopulated all of their historic range.
Peterson said he has asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to appeal her decision and was confident it would be overturned.
Fish and Wildlife spokesman Gavin Shire said no decision has been made on appealing Howell’s December ruling but said the agency did not appeal the Wyoming decision within the 60-day limit. He said the service wasn’t aware of any proposed legislation to delist wolves and couldn’t comment on it.
Under Howell’s ruling, wolves reverted to “threatened” status in Minnesota and “endangered” in Wisconsin and Michigan. Sport hunting and trapping is banned again in all three states, and Wisconsin and Michigan government officials can’t kill wolves for preying on livestock or pets — only to protect human life.
Doug Peterson, president of the Minnesota Farmers Union, said he believes the ruling is already affecting farms and ranches, particularly smaller family farms where the loss of a cow or calf or two puts a big dent in incomes.
“At some point people are going to do what they’re going to do to protect their livestock. That ends up being a problem,” he said.
Exposing the Big Game 
Do the right thing, keep wolves protected! Youse science don’t listen to the jack pine savages in the northern parts of these states.
Political Wolf Jihad Mismanagement, The Rider Strategy
Jon Tester (D) Senator MT and Mike Simpson (R) Representative ID April 2011 opened a Pandora’;s Box when they attached a rider to a defense appropriation bill in 2011 to delist wolves in MT and ID. Now Midwestern politicians and WY are trying the same thing again to circumvent federal court rulings in September in WY and last month in the Midwest putting wolves back on the endangered list because of state mismanagement and in effect scolding USFWS for not doing its job of protecting wolves from traditional enemies of wolves, hunters and ranchers and bedfellows in state wildlife agencies. It amounts to political management of a wildlife species not scientific management. A rider is a stinky, shenanigans way of sneakily pushing through parochial legislation that would not likely stand the full light of open scrutiny.Tester likes this tactic. He and other politicians used it recently on a smorgasbord of land bills attached as riders to another defense appropriations bill (2015). Wolves do not need to be managed by hunting and trapping seasons, a wolf jihad strategy by the ignorant wolf haters that is counter productive. Wolves will fill up available niches and manage themselves and they are good for the wilderness that is still available, whereas hunters and ranchers are not. Wolves should not be in the hands of state management, especially in MT, WY, ID and the Midwest, states that have killed hundreds into the thousands since delisting. Wolves will manage their own populations in general and hunting and trapping are asinine management strategies, really just excuses for killing and catering to a minority of mistaken selfish and barbaric, retrograde interests.
Political Management of Wolves and other Wildlife, Dirty Politics
Regarding the delisting of wolves and undermining of the ESA, spring of 2011, and another currently (January 2015) proposed rider by Midwestern politicians and WY politically delisting wolves, rider attached to a must pass appropriation bill, with backroom dark politics involved. It is pointed out that we (wolf conservationists) expect this from republicans but it is extremely disappointing to see from democrats. So, what are we to do? What is the lesser evil? Generally, we currently have trouble with republicans, especially the likes of red state governors and republican state legislatures. It is really not a surprise from blue dog democrats such as Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana. They are first of all blue dog, pork barrel politicians playing to a very red, colloquial population. Furthermore, Tester is a farmer, and Baucus was a rancher, then (2011 senator now ambassador). Baucus, I heard, lost a dog to wolves. Wyoming and ID are deep red as is MT. We, wolf conservationists are disappointed in Obama, Dan Ashe of USFWS, Sally Jewell of Interior. Sarah Palin as governor of Alaska (R) was having wolves shot from helicopters to support ungulate populations (colloquial mythology). How would things be with McCain-Palin, or Romney-Ryan? I have seen repeatedly references to the “Obama administration’s” proposals for delisting wolves we would have and will see much worse from republicans who essentially conduct a war on wildlife, wilderness and public lands. Much, much worse! So, we cannot just vote against all these democrats:That would be to cut our nose off to spite them. Answer, we have to, to the extent we can, hold our senators and representatives accountable and let them know how we feel about what they did. Politicians are generally sleazy and will wheel and deal and “:get things done” often without principle. How do you know a politician or lawyer is lying? Their lips are moving. We must keep an eye on them. We should promote the abolishment of the rider congressional tool. It is a way to get things done without public and media scrutiny, a sneaky and sleazy congressional tool of backroom politics. It is generally republicans trying to undermine ESA and EPA and manage threatened or endangered wildlife, especially the predators at the state level which usually results in political management and management by conservative state wildlife agencies and hunters and trappers. State management is a republican mantra whether we are talking wildlife, public lands, national forests or impact of extraction industries; and this mantra is essentially anti-conservation.
If congress is allowed to get away with stripping Americans of their right to judicial challenges on wildlife issues, they can and will do the same thing on any other issue where the public challenges the government in the courts and the government doesn’t like the outcome of the ruling. It is no longer about just the wolves. It is about our civil rights and freedom as Americans.
The issue here is that people poaching wolves aren’t punished sufficiently to send a message. It is sad that those who died are not given justice.