|
|
|  |
Wolflines is a bulletin of Defenders of Wildlife designed to serve wolf organizations and advocates. Bulletins are for informational purposes only and do not necessarily represent the positions of all organizations mentioned. © Defenders of Wildlife 2000
Wolves In, Kleckner Out! Victory for Wolves and Wildlife: Appeals Court Rules Yellowstone Wolves Can Stay in Park The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver today unanimously overturned a lower court's 1997 ruling that the 1995 and 1996 Yellowstone wolf reintroductions were illegal. The district court's ruling had called for removal of all the wolves and their offspring, an action that pleased the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), which was behind the lawsuit, but that Defenders of Wildlife called a virtual death sentence. Today AFBF President Dean Kleckner, who called for removing the wolves, lost his job in an election. "Discerning no conflict between the challenged experimental population rules and the Endangered Species Act, we reverse the district court's order and judgment," the 10th Circuit said (97-8127 et al.). Defenders of Wildlife and other conservationists were represented in the case by Brian O'Neill, a Defenders board member, and Rick Duncan, of Faegre & Benson in Minneapolis. "It's a new day for wolves in more ways than one. The Yellowstone wolves have been given a new lease on life and so has the principle that science -- not politics -- should guide wildlife restoration efforts in America," said Rodger Schlickeisen, President of Defenders of Wildlife. "It's been two long years since the district court's ruling because of the obstinacy of the AFBF and Kleckner, but ironically he lost his job on the same day the Farm Bureau lost the suit." Highlights from the Decision p. 17-18 "The Farm Bureaus and the Urbigkits argue, and the district court agreed, that this possibility establishes an overlap of wolf 'populations,' or the overlap of the experimental areas and 'the current range' of naturally occurring wolf populations in contravention of the requirement in Section 10(j)(1) that experimental populations of an endangered species must be wholly separate geographically from nonexperimental populations of the same species. We do not accept that contention." p. 19-21 "The Farm Bureuas further argue the reintroduction program creates law enforcement problems by characterizing naturally occurring individual wolves that wander into the experimental population as 'experimental' rather than 'endangered.' ... We therefore defer to the Department's interpretation of the phrase 'wholly separate geographically from nonexperimental populations,' so long as its interpretation does not conflict with the plain language of the Endangered Species Act. We perceive no conflict." p. 22-24 "... thus reflecting the paramount objective of the Endangered Species Act to conserve and recover species, not just individual animals. This broader objective is further evidenced by the well-established fact individual animals can and do lose ESA protection simply by moving about the landscape." ... "Nor are we convinced the challenged rules present complicated law enforcement obstacles ... For these reasons, we hold the Department's interpretation of the 'geographic separation' provision reflects the goals of the ESA 'to protect natural populations' and 'to avoid potentially complicated problems of law enforcement.'" p. 24-25 "Plaintiffs' argument the Agencies failed to release Canadian wolves outside the 'current range' of naturally occurring wolves is similarly flawed since Plaintiffs rigidly define "current range' as it is used in Section 10(j) to be that territory occupied by an individual wolf. The plain language of the statute does not support their interpretation." p. 25-26 "The district court determined, at the behest of the Farm Bureaus and Predator Project, that the Department must accord full endangered species protection to any naturally occurring wolf found within the experimental areas ... We believe this holding unncessarily limits the administrative discretion and flexibility Congress intentionally incorporated into Section 10(j), ignores biological reality, and miscontrues the larger purpose of the Endangered Species Act." p.39 (the sweetest part of all)-- "After setting aside the final wolf reintroduction rules as unlawful, the district court ordered Agencies to remove all Canadian wolves and their progeny from both experimental population areas ... Because we uphold the challenged wolf reintroduction rules as lawful under the ESA and NEPA, we need not address the propriety of the district court's remedy. We REVERSE the order and judgement of the district court, VACATE the district court's stay order, and REMAND with instructions (i.e., their decision -- WJSIII) to the district court to enter an order upholding the challenged wolf reintroduction rules." Defenders Challenges Farm Bureau to Drop Anti-environmental Policies & to Focus on Problems of Family Farmers Houston, TX At a press conference Monday, January 10 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Houston, Defenders of Wildlife, accompanied by Rami, an "ambassador wolf," decried the anti-environmental, anti-family-farm policies of the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF). In conjunction with the AFBF's annual convention being held nearby at the George R. Brown Convention Center, Defenders once again called on the AFBF leadership to drop out of the legal proceedings that could result in the removal and death of all gray wolves in and around Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho. Defenders urged the AFBF to instead focus on the issues affecting the American family farmer. "The real problems of ranchers and farmers don't have anything to do with the introduction of wolves in Yellowstone or in the Southwest," said Defenders President Rodger Schlickeisen in presenting Rami, a female gray wolf from Mission:Wolf, the Colorado-based wolf refuge and education center. "Farmers' real problems don't have anything to do with endangered species, wetlands or environmentalists. Yet the Farm Bureau has been one of the most anti-environmental lobbies in the nation and has tried to block reintroduction of wolves everywhere it has been proposed, continually issuing dire and misleading warnings of the threats posed by wolves." Full press release: http://www.defenders.org/releases/pr2000/pr011000.html International Wolf Center Presents "Beyond 2000: Realities of Global Wolf Restoration" "Beyond 2000: Realities of Global Wolf Restoration" offers the chance to participate in a discussion of global importance with experts and enthusiasts from different continents and different perspectives. The Internaional Wolf Center and University College at the University of Minnesota Duluth are proud to present this unique opportunity to meet the world's leaders in wolf recovery and management. You are invited to participate, learn and meet others who care about the fate of this magnificent species. For more information and for up-to-date information regarding registration, schedules, facilities and local arrangements, see the conference website www.d.umn.edu/wolf2000 Show Your Support for Target Stores! Target Stores, which recently provided support for The International Wolf Center's upcoming conference, Beyond 2000: the Realities of Global Wolf Restoration, was targeted for a boycott by members of the New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau, an affilitate of the American Farm Bureau Federation. Ironically, Target's conference support wasn't even designated for wolf restoration activities but was given to help bring researchers to the conference to participate in the sharing and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Next time you go shopping, consider supporting companies that provide support for scientific endeavors. Defenders Compensates Nearly $50,000 from Wolf, Grizzly Funds in 1999 Defenders of Wildlife continues to buy tolerance for wolves and grizzly bears by paying out almost $50,000 to compensate ranchers for livestock losses from wolf and grizzly activity in 1999. Defenders notes that some ranchers have returned compensation checks citing support for wildlife recovery efforts. "We're replacing ‘shoot, shovel and shut up' with ‘prevent and pay,'" said Hank Fischer, Defenders Northern Rockies representative, who initiated the wolf compensation program in 1987. "It's important to note that we're developing ways to prevent predation and that we step in to alleviate financial concerns when predation does occur." Defenders contends that ranchers have welcomed initiatives to prevent predation before it becomes an issue and have been working with Defenders on developing measures to ward off wolves and grizzlies from livestock areas. These methods include installing electric fences, setting up light and sound displays as scare devices and using guard dogs. Defenders' Wolf Restoration Fund also provided horseback riders to monitor cattle-grazing allotments near a rendezvous site for the Sheep Mountain wolf pack in the greater Yellowstone ecosystem and hay for an Idaho cattle rancher so he could feed his cattle on private land rather than have them graze on public land near the Moyer Basin wolf pack. "You can have both wild predators and successful livestock operations; it doesn't have to be one or the other," said Fischer. "Our compensation programs are multi-faceted in that they are pre-emptive in nature, they provide a level of insurance to ranchers in recovery areas, and they serve to reduce illegal killing of wolves and grizzlies. It can be a win-win situation for everyone involved." DEFENDERS COMPENSATION PROGRAM BY THE NUMBERS
Wolf total 1987 through 1999: 108 ranchers paid $105,746.77
GRIZZLY BEARS:
Grizzly bear total 1997 through 1999: 53 ranchers paid $35,394
Wolves in Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Appear to
Be Stabilizing
The number of wolves in and around Yellowstone Park grew by only a
small fraction in 1999 -- a change from several previous years of
exponential growth. According to Doug Smith, wolf recovery leader for the
National Park Service in Yellowstone, biologists estimate there were
between 115 and 120 wolves in the greater Yellowstone ecosystem (GYE) as
of December 31. Although the wolf population may in fact be a bit higher
than 120 because of uncollared sub-adult and adult wolves, the number of
packs has fallen to eight -- two below the recovery goal. Smith emphasizes
that like elk, there is a carrying capacity for wolves. Despite the
popular misconception that the wolf population will continue to grow
exponentially, there is a ceiling to that growth. Smith expects wolf
numbers in and near the park to level off at about the current numbers,
though other packs could establish themselves away from the core recovery
area, loosely defined as the park and immediately adjacent public lands.
1101 14th Street, N.W., Suite 1400 Washington, DC 20005 Copyright © Defenders of Wildlife, 1999-2000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
