Arizona’s Navajo County band wolf releases
May 9th, 2008 by admin
| New county ordinance bans wolf release with little hope of enforcement By: Donna Rescorla, The White Mountain Independent 05/09/2008 HOLBROOK - The Navajo County Board of Supervisors passed a new ordinance - that has little chance of enforcement - for the message it sends. An ordinance prohibiting the release of wolves and specifying criminal penalties for violations was proposed by Board Chairman J.R. DeSpain at the May 6 supervisors meeting. ”I want to give you some background,” he said, holding up a copy of the Pioneer newspaper. “They reported that in New Mexico cages were built for the children who were waiting to catch the bus because of the fear of being attacked by wolves. ”It’s pretty ironic to have to cage kids to protect them from wildlife. This ordinance is in conflict with the federal program to release to the wild, but we are the Board of Supervisors for Navajo County and have the right to protect our citizens.” He said the new habitat proposed by federal Fish and Wildlife would open up all of Arizona for the release program. ”I’m a rancher from the Winslow area, and I want to go on record as being with you,” Jim O’Haco said. “I’m against enlarging the wolf areas in central Arizona. Wolves are killers, predators. That’s why the old timers got rid of them. ”I know of one way to get rid of them now. I heard there was a big hybrid wolf population.” DeSpain said he knew, for a fact, that looking at the hybrids was a number one priority. The animals would be caught and checked for DNA and if they weren’t in the breed, they would be obliterated. O’Haco said he wanted to talk with the Navajo Nation since a lot of Navajos are sheep producers. Supervisor Jesse Thompson said he and Supervisor Percy Deal would like to help him set up a meeting with the Hopi Tribe or the Navajo Nation, adding, “I know there is some concern there.” ”Before I make a motion, I have a few comments,” Supervisor Jerry Brownlow said. “Navajo County has been a registered cooperator along with Greenlee County. Greenlee County has waded in and asked Navajo County for help. I know they needed some input on how the program affects those who live here. ”There might be room in Gila County or on the Blue (for the wolves) but they bring us too many problems. As Mr. O’Haco said, there is a good reason the wolves are not here. In Cedar Hills we had to hire an agency to get rid of packs of wild dogs.” DeSpain said he would like to make one addition. When the program first started, he said, it cost $25 million and Fish and Wildlife never budgeted for payment to ranchers for slaughtered animals. They did have success in Yellowstone and some in Oregon but not here. When Supervisor Percy Deal asked whether Apache County had a similar ordinance, DeSpain said they didn’t, adding that Navajo County is “aiming in the direction of public safety.” Deal said if Navajo County had the ordinance without Apache or Coconino having one, the wolves could be released near the county’s border. ”This has no enforcement,” he said. Deal also questioned what was being done with the White Mountain Apache Tribe whose land would most likely be the place for a release. ”I’d like to say I agree with the things that have been said,” Supervisor David Tenney said. “They spend about $1 million per wolf to release them. That’s ridiculous. I’ve talked with people who say they see the wolves with collars already around houses. ”I don’t know if we can stop this, but at least they need to let us know what’s going on.” Brownlow said both the White Mountain and San Carlos Apaches had meetings and now the San Carlos Apaches have asked the wolves be removed from their land. Asked what was meant by the ordinance’s “importation” prohibition, DeSpain said that, “up until now, if the wolves weren’t in the Blue, they would be captured and brought back. Now they just stay. We can’t insist that they don’t get across the border. We (as humans) are in their food chain.” The ordinance was passed with the short title “Navajo County Predatory Animal Ordinance.” It would apply within the unincorporated area of the county with the exception of land under the jurisdiction of a federally recognized tribal government. Predatory animals are defined as wolves such as the Mexican wolf, bears such as the grizzly bear and wild cats such as a jaguar but excluding domestic feral cats that have been spayed and returned to the wild. Each offense would be punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to $300 for each offense in the case of an individual and up to $1,000 for each offense in the case of an enterprise. * Reach the reporter at lupre2@yahoo.com |
I first found out about this article at the westernerblog today. obviously I share the citizens concerns. What disturbed me was the comments by at least one local citizen, Lakeside, I think. Hs doesn’t have a clue about your situation with the wolf reintroduction. you can read the comments below the article and maybe leave one yourself at the papers website.
Keep up the good work.
I first found out about this article at the westernerblog today. Obviously I share the citizens concerns. What disturbed me most was the comments by at least one local citizen, Lakeside, I think. He doesn’t have a clue about your situation with the wolf reintroduction. you can read the comments below the article and maybe leave one yourself at the papers website.
Keep up the good work.
Dear Admin — they ban wolf releases, not band them. Just a typo correction.
Speaking of which, it would be a good thing if NM and AZ county governments banded together on this issue. Catron Co Supervisors (Commissioners?) should use the telephones in their offices to call the Commissioners (Supervisors?) other similarly affected counties and open up an information exchange.
Perhaps guest speakers could be arranged for, so that other counties could get the straight scoop, in public forums, without it having to be filtered through our negligent media.
And the various Native American tribal councils (boards?) should also be brought into the discussion. Their interests are not materially different, and they might be amenable to a peer-to-peer dialog.
[…] posted on Wolf Crossing [here] […]