|
|
|  |
1. WOLVES: Farm Bureau Receives 100,000
E-mails Supporting Wolves
The results are in! In a dramatic display of public support for wolf
restoration, concerned citizens sent 100,000 e-mail messages to Farm
Bureau President Dean Kleckner protesting that group’s law suit
threatening recovery of endangered gray wolves to the Northern Rockies.
The Farm Bureau’s lawsuit would force the "removal" of wolves from
Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho. "Removal," however, would
mean a death sentence for these endangered wolves as there is no place
else for these magnificent animals to go.
Defenders of Wildlife will fight for the wolves all the way to the
Supreme Court, if necessary. On July 29, Brian O'Neill, litigating the
case for Defenders, gave a persuasive oral argument in front of a packed
Denver courthouse. O’Neill argued convincingly for keeping wolves in
Yellowstone. A decision by the three appeals court judges is expected
soon, but Defenders remains optimistic about the fate of the wolves. Stay
tuned for further news.
Wolves were eliminated from the Northern Rockies by
the 1930s, victims of an aggressive government-sponsored predator-control
program and a society that believed wolves have no value. Today, wolves
are listed as "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
throughout their former range in the continental United States except for
Minnesota, where they are listed as "threatened." With more than 2000
wolves, Minnesota is the only state other than Alaska that can boast a
major wolf population.
The first wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park and
central Idaho in January 1995 after a more than 60-year absence. To help
ensure the success of wolf restoration efforts, Defenders manages a Wolf
Compensation Trust, supported soley by private donations, which
compensates ranchers in the Northern Rockies, and the American Southwest,
at market value for all verified livestock losses to wolves. In total,
Defenders has paid over $80,000 to over 85 ranchers since the program’s
inception in 1987.
Despite the success of wolf reintroduction in the Northern Rockies, a
U.S. District Court judge ruled in December 1997 that the Yellowstone and
Idaho wolf reintroductions were technically illegal and called for the
"removal" of the wolves.
At the heart of the decision is the interpretation of Section 10(j) of
the ESA which allows the reintroduction of a species using a special
designation called "experimental." This designation allows management
flexibility that is not normally permitted under the ESA such as allowing
private landowners to lawfully shoot a reintroduced wolf caught in the act
of killing livestock on a rancher’s land. This flexibility was essential
to garner the necessary support of local land owners and other interests
without detracting from the overall conservation goals of the recovery
effort.
Under the special rule, any endangered wolf that wandered south from
Canada into central Idaho was regarded as "experimental." The trial judge,
however, ruled that individual wolves (estimated at 2-5 animals) wandering
into the recovery areas from Montana or Canada should have endangered
status, thus violating Section 10(j) of the ESA. Instead of remanding the
issue back to the Department of Interior, the judge took the unprecedented
step of ordering the removal of the reintroduced wolves.
2. ALASKA: Alaska Legislature Re-Authorize
Airborne Wolf Control
Alaska lawmakers voted by a single vote to ignore the Alaskan citizens
and their Governor and repeal a key element of a 1996 citizen-enacted
initiative which banned airborne wolf shooting in Alaska. On September 24
during a special session, the state legislature overrode a veto by
Alaska’s Governor Tony Knowles and enacted controversial legislation (SB
74) which would expand the circumstances under which state officials could
use aircraft for wolf control.
An Alaska-based coalition, including Defenders of Wildlife, has worked
hard to mobilize Alaska citizens and other concerned individuals to defeat
the effort to overturn the Governor’s veto. Coalition efforts included a
targeted state media campaign, grassroots action, and direct appeals to
specific swing votes to sustain Governor Knowles’ veto. While losing by a
single vote is a great disappointment, the coalition was able to defeat
legislative efforts to repeal the entire initiative and allow private
citizens to hunt wolves with aircraft.
Three years ago, nearly 60 percent of Alaskan voters approved a hard
fought ballot initiative that repealed a state regulation allowing private
citizens with a $15 trapping license to fly over wolf habitat, land the
plane near a wolf pack and open fire on the animals as long as the hunter
moved at least 100 yards from the plane. That initiative also restricted
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game from using aircraft in
state-sponsored wolf control programs
Earlier this year, both Houses of the Alaska State Legislature passed
legislation (SB 74) that would repeal the second element of the 1996
initiative and authorize unrestricted airborne wolf control by state
wildlife officials. Late in the process the bill was broadened to apply to
not only wolves but also brown bears.
On July 9, Alaska Governor Tony Knowles vetoed SB 74 on July 9, saying,
"There is no evidence these changes are needed ... The public has not
asked for it; on the contrary, this bill defies public sentiment." Prior
to the Governor’s action Defenders transmitted over 13,000 petitions from
Defenders members urging him to veto the ill advised legislation.
With a relatively healthy wolf population of 7,000 - 10,000 animals,
Alaska is the only state where wolves are neither endangered nor
threatened. Ironically, as efforts in the lower 48 states are underway to
restore wolf populations long absent from their former range, the Alaska
legislature continues to push for scientifically unsound and unnecessary
state wolf control programs.
3. CONGRESS: House and Senate Continues
Sneak Attacks on Environment
Special interests and their allies in Congress are mounting a sneak
attack on our nation’s environmental laws. At issue are legislative
provisions that would prevent long-waited recovery of threatened grizzly
bears in Montana and Idaho, preserve subsidies for big oil companies, and
allow mining companies to dump more toxic waste on federal lands. More
than 50 such controversial "riders" that have been buried in must-pass
government spending bills. Each year, Congress must pass spending bills by
September 30 for the next fiscal year or risk a government shutdown. In
recent years, powerful special interests have used these backdoor attacks
on the environment using these budget bills. Through this strategy, they
avoid the public scrutiny that accompanies congressional hearings,
committee approval, and subject-specific votes in the House and Senate.
Conservation organizations are working hard to expose through the media
this sneak attack on our environmental laws, and to persuade the President
to veto any spending bills containing anti- environmental riders. For a
list of all anti-environmental riders currently attached to spending bills
click here
4. HABITAT: Congress May Increase
Conservation Funding
Right now, Congress and President Clinton are weighing landmark
conservation legislation that could save America’s most valuable but
unprotected ancient forests, wildlife habitat and other natural and
historic resources. For the past several decades, more than $12 billion
has been legally set aside in federal revenue from offshore oil drilling
to permanently protect these national treasures through the Land and Water
Conservation Fund (LWCF). But special interests have blocked spending the
money on its legally mandated conservation purpose.
Earlier this month, 12 conservation organizations, including Defenders
released a report, entitled "Saving America’s Geography of Hope: Why
Congress Must Protect Our Land & Ocean Legacy." The timely publication
takes an in-depth look at the different legislative proposals to protect
our remaining natural areas. It also profiles 43 special places in 19
states which are in immediate need of help and how they would be protected
if a strong conservation funding bill were enacted. The report is
available online at http://www.pirg.org/enviro/hope.html
To date, the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF) has helped preserve such American treasures as Alaska’s Denali
National Park, the Appalachian Trail, and Cape Cod National Seashore. But
sprawl, uncontrolled development and wealthy special interests threaten
our remaining unprotected special places.
Congress is currently considering two key proposals to fund a variety
of programs benefitting our natural and historical heritage, marine
ecosystems and wildlife -- the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA)
introduced in the House by Rep. Don Young (H.R. 701) and in the Senate by
Sen. Frank Murkowski (S. 25) and the Permanent Protection of America’s
Resources 2000 Act (Resources 2000) introduced in the House by Rep. George
Miller (H.R. 798) and in the Senate by Sen. Barbara Boxer (S. 446).
Both bills provide a much needed source of permanent annual funding for
LWCF and wildlife protection programs. However, the bills are marked by
significant differences. While Resources 2000 would provide for a greater
level of funding for a broader array of conservation programs, CARA
includes unacceptable provisions which create incentives for more offshore
oil drilling by giving more funding to states that produce the more
offshore oil and gas. That bill also includes serious restrictions on the
ability to use funds to purchase land and critical wildlife habitat.
5. BEARS: Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Imperiled
Florida Black Bear
Defenders of Wildlife filed a law suit in August charging that the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had illegally for failed to list the
imperiled Florida black bear under the Endangered Species Act. This
followed a decision by FWS in December of last year to not list the bear
as a threatened species despite FWS’ admission that without further
assistance as many as four of the smaller populations could be lost.
Listed as threatened by the State of Florida since 1974, the bear has been
denied federal protection since it was first petitioned in 1992.
At the turn of the century, up to 12,000 black bears roamed Florida,
from the Keys to the panhandle. Today as few as 1500 of this distinct
subspecies of the American black bear survive in Florida’s swamps and
forested areas. Habitat loss, habitat fragmentation and roadkills, all by-
products of Florida’s rapidly growing human population, now threaten the
survival of Florida’s bear. If you live in Florida and would like to
receive more information about how to help protect the imperiled Florida
black bear, click
here.
6. WOLVES II: Yellowstone Welcomes Wolf
Pups
As many as 57 new pups have joined the ranks of the recovering wolf
population in and around Yellowstone National Park. The first wolves were
reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in January
of 1995. Since then, from an initial population of 66 wolves - 35 released
in Idaho and 31 released in Yellowstone the population today stands at
nearly 340 wolves (including the new pups). The Northern Rockies wolf
recovery program is the most successful of its kind.
7. DID YOU KNOW?: Polar Bears The polar
bear’s pure white to cream color blends in perfectly with its snow and ice
covered surroundings in the high Arctic. Well, almost perfectly. The black
nose of a polar bear can be seen from six miles away through binoculars on
a clear day. When stalking seals the polar bear has been known to cover
its nose with a paw to keep from being seen. (Source: Wildlife Fact File)
8. THE PRESIDENT’S CORNER: Imperiled Swift
Fox Reintroduction (Recent Commentary on wildlife and habitat issues)
"It is very encouraging to know that these small creatures will once
again be a part of Montana's diverse natural heritage, as they roam the
prairies where they belong. The recovery of rare species nationwide will
depend on innovative partnerships such as this."
For more information Click here
|
