John Cornyn Introduces Endangered Species Act Settlement Reform Act
by Cole Shooter Yesterday
Texas U.S. Senator John Cornyn has introduced legislation to prevent abuse of Endangered Species Act litigation.
Cornyn introduced the Endangered Species Act Settlement Reform Act, which will give impacted local parties a say in the settlement of litigation between special interest groups and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
“ESA litigation abuse has shut out those folks most affected by the kind of closed-door settlements we’ve seen,” said Cornyn. “My bill opens up the process to give job creators and local officials a say.”
Cornyn says that the bill adds protection for American citizens from the regulatory impact of closed-door litigation settlements between special interest groups and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
In 2011, two environmental groups settled multi-district litigation with the FWS that resulted in a “work plan” for the agency to make endangered species list determinations for hundreds of species, and the settlement also required taxpayers to pay the plaintiffs’ litigation fees.
The suits were brought against the FWS because it failed to meet certain statutory deadlines after being flooded with requests to list hundreds of species.
Cornyn’s office says that Closed-Door ESA settlements not only threaten unwarranted regulation, but give plaintiffs undue leverage over local land owners, businesses, and elected officials in the conservation process
Bills and Legislation
John Cornyn Introduces Endangered Species Act Settlement Reform Act
Judge: Wolf rule’s a howler While upholding the new law, Molloy gives basis for fresh appeal
Judge: Wolf rule’s a howler
While upholding the new law, Molloy gives basis for fresh appeal
Judge: Wolf rule’s a howler
Judge Donald Molloy
Posted: Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:00 am
Judge: Wolf rule’s a howler By ERIC BARKER of the Tribune The Lewiston Tribune | 7 comments
Federal Judge Donald Molloy held his nose and upheld a congressional rider Wednesday that removed Endangered Species Act protections from wolves in Idaho and Montana.
The ruling will allow wolf hunting seasons set to begin next month to proceed as planned.
Molloy, of Missoula, Mont., previously ruled against two federal rules that delisted wolves and scolded Congress Wednesday, saying the so-called wolf rider attached to a federal spending bill last May undermined and disrespected the rule of law.
“Inserting environmental policy changes into appropriations bills may be politically expedient, but it transgresses the process envisioned by the Constitution by avoiding the very debate on issues of political importance said to provide legitimacy,” he wrote.
He said he believes the rider is unconstitutional, but noted he is bound by precedent to the contrary that was set by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That court found similar moves by Congress did not violate the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
“If I were not constrained by what I believe is binding precedent from the Ninth Circuit, and on-point precedent from other circuits, I would hold Section 1713 (the wolf rider) is unconstitutional because it violates the Separation of Powers doctrine articulated by the Supreme Court.”
As Congress debated a spending bill last spring, Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., attached the rider that ordered the secretary of interior to reissue a 2009 wolf delisting rule that Molloy found in violation of the ESA. It passed both houses and was signed into law by President Barack Obama.
A handful of environmental groups sued, claiming Congress does not have the power to interfere with pending litigation unless it changes the underlying law on which the litigation is based. The rider does not explicitly amend or even mention the ESA.
Attorneys from the Justice Department argued the rider ordered the rule to be reissued “without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation,” and that phrase implicitly amended the part of the ESA that Molloy had previously found to stand in the way of wolf delisting.
Molloy said he was bound to adhere to precedent from the 9th Circuit that said such language is enough to amend underlying law and avoid a separation of powers conflict. However, he wrote that he does not agree with the precedent.
“In my view, the Ninth Circuit’s deference to Congress threatens the Separation of Powers; nonspecific magic words should not sweep aside constitutional concerns.”
Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center For Biological Diversity, one of the groups that challenged the rider, called the ruling extraordinary.
“I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said. “He is not only intimating the wolf rider is unconstitutional and the 9th Circuit is wrong but he is laying out a road map on how to appeal his own ruling and take it all the way to the Supreme Court. He does everything but buy us a bus ticket to Washington, D.C.”
Suckling said the center and other groups have not yet decided if they will appeal.
Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner Fred Trevey of Lewiston called the ruling good news. The commission approved wolf hunting rules last week that do not include a statewide limit on the number of wolves that can be killed.
“It allows us to go forward with the decisions we have made and that is encouraging,” he said.
—
Barker may be contacted at ebarker@lmtribune.com or at (208) 848-2273.
Crapo: Wolf Agreement a Positive Step Cooperation preferred over court actions but legislative fix still needed
Contact: Susan Wheeler Friday, March 18, 2011 Washington, D.C. – Today’s partial settlement of a court case over wolf management could benefit Idaho by returning the species to state management, and Idaho Senator Mike Crapo noted that cooperation should trump court action and bring surer solutions to issues raised under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Crapo is a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which holds jurisdiction over the ESA, and has been part of a group in Congress advocating legislative solutions to return wolves to state management control.
“Idahoans have gone beyond what is required to ensure that wolves are removed from federal management,” Crapo said. “Our Governor, Department of Fish and Game, the Congressional Delegation, the Nez Perce Tribe, ranchers, outdoor enthusiasts and others have all worked hard to make this particular recovery program successful. We have recovered the species. It is time to get to common ground and avoid further court actions and allow the Endangered Species Act to work as it was intended.
“While I appreciate the Secretary’s leadership and the hard work that has been put into this settlement, I remain concerned about doing this administratively. The only way to solve this problem is through a legislative delisting of the wolf. I will continue working with my colleagues, the Administration and others in order to make that happen and ensure Idaho is treated fairly,” Crapo added.
# # #
The Real Wolf Solution Is Simple Delist Nationwide, Delist NOW.
See the email messages below and see attached documents, it’s obvious everyone needs to stand firm on wolves:
• There is only one reason wolf groups want to deal, because they fear congress will delist wolves.
• With wolves on the ESA wolf groups will find ways to take wolves to court across the country.
• Wolf groups have made their intent known for wolf recovery throughout the United States.
• How many distinct wolf populations will be invented?
• How many states will be forced to have wolves introduced?
• Some wolf groups have not signed onto the current wolf “Deal” for Idaho/Montana.
• In 5 years any group can file suit to force more wolves into Idaho/Montana.
• There’s only one good way to settle wolf lawsuits once and for all, that’s by removing wolves from the ESA.
• Go to this page where you can easily send email to congress: http://capwiz.com/biggameforever/home/
• Tell congress to return wildlife management to the states, please support passage of: Hatch/Rehberg Bills S. 249 and H.R. 509 Best Regards, Dale www.GrayWolfNews.com
Here is the specific language of the American Big Game and
Livestock Protection Act: S. 249 and H.R. 509
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled,
Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
`(j) Exemption of Gray Wolf- This Act shall not apply to any gray wolf (Canis lupus).’.
What Does this Bill Do?
1. Returns wolves to state wildlife protections in all 50 states.
2. Acknowledges the role of states, sportsmen and ranchers in wolf restoration.
3. Ends wasteful litigation of non-endangered wolf populations.
4. Restores the supremacy of State wildlife management vs. Federal wildlife management.
5. Allows states to restore wildlife herds in peril.
6. Prevents the spread of unnecessary destruction of wildlife.
7. Protects our hunting and ranching heritage.
8. Protects our hunting and livestock industries.
9. Protects rural jobs and economies.
10. Focuses limited resources on habitat conservation and wildlife populations in peril rather than litigation
and attorneys.
11. Protects the ESA from abuses and overreaching.
Lawmakers: Urge Congress to remove gray wolf from endangered list
Facts about the Mexican gray wolf:
– Subspecies of gray wolf.
– Reintroduced in Arizona in 1998.
– About 50 now live in the forest of eastern Arizona and western New Mexico.
– Packs range from three to five wolves.
– Average litter is four pups, with a 50 percent mortality rate.
Posted: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 8:00 pm | Updated: 7:42 pm, Wed Feb 16, 2011.
Lawmakers: Urge Congress to remove gray wolf from endangered list By Tara Alatorre, Cronkite News Service East Valley Tribune | 0 comments
A group GOP lawmakers wants to send a postcard of sorts urging Congress to remove the endangered species designation for the gray wolf, including a subspecies reintroduced in Arizona in 1998.
Pointing to complaints that gray wolves in Montana and other states have decimated moose and elk herds, a memorial authored by Rep. Jerry Weiers, R-Glendale, says Arizona would benefit from having complete oversight of recovery efforts for the Mexican gray wolf.
The House Committee on Energy and Natural Resources endorsed the measure Monday on a 7-2 vote, with Rep. Daniel Patterson, D-Tucson, and Rep. Bruce Wheeler, D-Tucson, dissenting.
Facing extinction, the gray wolf became protected under the Endangered Species Act in the 1970s. It was reintroduced to the northern Rockies and parts of the Southwest, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had great success restoring wolves in the Rockies, with a population of 1,700 at last count well beyond the goal of 300.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife has proposed de-listing the northern Rockies population of wolves, but that’s been blocked by court rulings. A candidate for U.S. Senate in Montana has proposed having Congress de-list all gray wolves, including the subspecies in Arizona.
Weiers’ memorial, which has more than 40 GOP primary and co-sponsors, calls the reintroduction of Mexican gray wolves in Arizona a failure because litigation by wildlife advocates has blocked federal officials from removing wolves that prey on livestock.
The Mexican gray wolf was reintroduced into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area, which includes east-central Arizona and west-central New Mexico. Around 50 Mexican gray wolves now live in the area, sometimes drawing ire of cattle ranchers.
Patrick Bray, a lobbyist for the Arizona Cattlemen’s Association, said ranchers here can empathize with concerns raised in Montana. He called the wolves “devastating” to livestock.
“We are in the business of keeping cattle alive,” Bray told the committee.
Suzanne Gilstrap, a representative of Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife, said wolves should be managed like other animals before they begin to kill other wildlife.
“We don’t want to see what happened in the northern Rockies happen to our state,” Giltrap said.
Although the Arizona Game and Fish Commission hasn’t endorsed the memorial, it does support the national movement to remove gray wolves from the endangered species list.
“It isn’t necessarily because we felt the wolf was recovered,” Lynda Lambert, a Game and Fish Department spokeswoman, said in a phone interview. “There has been a lot of gridlock, and we feel it would be more beneficial if they were de-listed.”
In voting against the measure, Patterson said he’s concerned that removing gray wolves from the endangered species list would decimate Mexican gray wolves.
“We know there is no state law that would provide protection,”he said.
Wheeler said he doubted the livestock industry’s claims that 50 wolves could decimate enough cattle to cause a significant economic impact.
“How can 50 gray wolves threaten the existence of other livestock in Arizona?” he said.
Sandy Bahr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter, said removing protection from the Mexican gray wolf doesn’t make sense.
“This animal still teeters on the brink of extinction,” Bahr told the committee. “Basically it is signing their death warrant.”
Wolf Delisting, and the scumbags holding back a solution. Wyoming and the rest of us thrown under the bus.
Yesterday’s development in wolf delisting: Some of you may of heard that wolf delisting language was included in the House C.R. to keep the government funded. Unfortunately, the language in the C.R. is not the good development it appears to be. See Rehberg press rele…ase below. Unfortunately the language that is included is the administration’s language that is being pushed by Tester and Baucus. The language leaves most of the country squarely in the cross hairs of unmanaged wolves’. It leaves the door open to relisting in Idaho and Montana. Does nothing to stop the wave of spreading destruction anywhere else. Doesn’t delist most wolf states. Does nothing to restore state management. Doesn’t end the endless cycle of wasteful litigation. Keeps the spigot of EAJA funding for enviro litigants alive diverting millions of dollars from our children’s and grandchildren’s future into lawyers and environmental endowment funds. For all these reasons, the C.R. Approach could never be “The American Big Game and Livestock Protection Act” as H.R. 509 and S. 249 are so appropriately named. Dan Ashe convinced Simpson from Idaho to break ranks with the 48 Senators and Congressmen that are working on the right solution. 2 Senators recognize the need for a fix, but are pushing a watered down non-solution that has no support. Why are we such a nation of ambulance chasers sometimes? Why are some officials afraid of obvious solutions to stop the hemorrhaging once and for all? This is a $100 Million a year problem that is only getting worse, bigger, deeper and more widespread. Last year a very similar approach was used by the anti-wolf management folks. They make it appear to be a compromise, but ultimately they divide the ranks and then kill the watered down solution as well. The folks who are pushing this want no wolf management, not even under the watered down scenario. We all need to call Simpson today and tell him he is falling for politics of divide and conquer. Tell him you do not support the CR that the ONLY solution is H.R. 509. DC office 202-225-5531 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 202-225-5531 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Boise office 208-334-1953 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 208-334-1953 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Email: simpson.house.gov Ryan Benson, {Doctor of Juris Prudence. , Harvard University}
Game and Fish asks Congress to delist the Mexican Wolf
Posted: Saturday, January 29, 2011 5:00 am | Updated: 4:39 pm, Fri Jan 28, 2011.
Karen Warnick – The Independent | 6 comments
Posted: Saturday, January 29, 2011 5:00 am | Updated: 4:39 pm, Fri Jan 28, 2011.
Game and Fish asks Congress to delist the Mexican Wolf Karen Warnick – The Independent | 6 comments
ARIZONA — In a letter sent to Senators John McCain and Jon Kyle and Congressman Trent Franks, the Arizona Game and Fish Commission stated, “…it is beyond time to try a different approach to Mexican wolf conservation.”
At a lengthy public session on Dec. 4, the Commission voted four to one to support Congressional actions to de-list the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Commission wants the burden of the program to fall to the States, Tribes and willing supporters such as wildlife organizations, hunters, and ranchers.
“The vote reflects the fact that we do not want to get out of the wolf conservation business; rather, we want to get in deeper but more affordably, efficiently and effectively,” stated the letter.
Citing several examples of the failure of the current program run by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Commission is concerned that, “Arizona cannot afford to continue investing significant time and money in wolf conservation only to arrive at a day when, as has occurred in the Northern Rockies and Western Great Lakes, special interest groups with public lands agendas much broader than wolf conservation refuse to accept as recovered even a population of wolves that is several times larger than required by an approved Recovery Plan they helped develop.”
One of the major problems with the current program is the costly litigation that has kept the program in the courts. A statement on the Game and Fish Web site about the letter and the wolf problems says, “Continuous litigation has usurped the role of the Secretary of Interior and leaves wildlife management decisions to the judiciary. It fosters a litigation-driven bureaucratic process that has driven up the cost of conservation and made Mexican wolf conservation unaffordable for the state, jeopardizing the entire future of the species in Arizona.”
Others problems with the current process include the lack of an update to the 1982 Wolf Recovery Plan, a lapsed Memorandum of Understanding between the USFWS and other government stakeholders, including the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, the dismissal of the 2003-05 Recovery Team which Arizona was a primary partner in, and the failure to release plans for a new team, among others.
“Congressional de-listing is not a step that we advocate lightly but the Mexican wolf was included in the 1976 Federal listing of the gray wolf as endangered and there is still no indication the ESA-driven approach to recovery will ever be successful,” states the letter. “In fact, there is ample evidence to the contrary. USFWS has not been able to revise the Recovery Plan in 28 years; how can anyone possibly hope it can achieve Mexican wolf recovery in our lifetimes under the current procedural morass that constrains it?”
Springerville resident Jack Husted is a member of the Commission. He believes that Arizona can run the program more effectively and cheaply. “We would still get federal money for the program but not be bound by federal guidelines.”
Husted also said that the best available science has not produced a determination of how many wolves in the wild would mean recovery. “We need to have the freedom and flexibility to assess the wolves born in the wild, not the ones bred in captivity.”
The Commission is strongly committed to wolf conservation and will invite all stakeholders and the public to the process to participate in seeking solutions.
Navajo County Supervisor Jerry Brownlow is a member of the now unofficial Adaptive Management Oversight Committee (AMOC) and has been involved in the wolf recovery program for years. “It’s typical of the federal government bureaucracy to initiate a program and expect the states to pay for it.”
Arizona has contributed over $5 million dollars to the federal program since 2003.
“…the Department (Game and Fish) has been the primary glue holding the interagency Arizona-New Mexico wolf reintroduction project together at the agency oversight and field levels,” says the letter to legislators. “We have tried everything possible, short of legal action or Congressional intervention, to remedy the gridlock resulting, in large part, from litigation. The USFWS has been unable to respond as necessary to resolve the most obvious significant problems, perhaps largely because of legal and policy issues…”
The Commission is hoping that action by Arizona legislators will move this effort through Congress.
“The Game and Fish Commission recognizes that is both unfortunate and ironic that successful Mexican wolf conservation may hinge on removing it from the Congressional act intended to help restore it. While the ESA has proven beneficial to a number of species, most notably the bald eagle, in the case of the wolf, it has created an impasse that could lead to the demise of a species in the wild through an ineffective conservation program.”
Reach the reporter at kwarnick@wmicentral.com
Montana lawmakers to address issue of wolves
Posted: Jan 11, 2011 8:31 AM by Beth Saboe (Missoula)
Updated: Jan 11, 2011 2:28 PM
ShareShare Rating: 12345 0.0 (0 votes)
Montana lawmakers will hear a proposal on Tuesday that would seek federal legislation to remove gray wolves from the Endangered Species List.
Speaker of the House Mike Milburn (R-Cascade) is sponsoring the joint resolution.
The bill states that the wolf is fully recovered, that Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has already proved it can manage wolves, and calls for a public hunt to maintain a viable population.
The language of HJ-1 states that, “any delay in the delisting of the gray wolf will exacerbate these negative biological and social impacts and erode the broad base of public support Montana has developed for its management of the gray wolf.”
Milburn further states in the proposal that the Montana Legislature, “urges Congress to quickly pass federal legislation that will result in the immediate removal of the gray wolf from the endangered species list in Montana and ensure the ability of the state to continue its successful management of the species.
The hearing on the bill will take place at 3 p.m. on Tuesday in Room 152.
Click here to read the full text of the proposal (new window, PDF).
AZ agency backs end to US wolf protection
The Arizona Game and Fish Commission wants federal protection of the Mexican wolf stripped as a way to “break through the gridlock” in the wolf- reintroduction program.
The commission voted 4-1 Saturday to support a bill pushed by a group of congressional Republicans that would delist the Mexican wolf as an endangered species, along with all other gray wolves living in the Northern Rockies and elsewhere in this country.
Full Story below
http://azstarnet.com/news/science/environment/article_0c328ee9-7775-5185-a07e-e888f9461048.html