Abuse of Equal Access to Justice Funds

Ag and hunting groups Intervene in anti trapping lawsuit aimed at faking protection of Mexican wolves..

June 19, 2012
By admin

News Release For Immediate Release / June 18, 2012

For further information, contact:
Caren Cowan, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association, 505.247.0584

Industry Groups Intervene in Trapping Lawsuit
To protect the businesses and livelihoods of their memberships, groups representing hunters, fisherman, agriculture, trappers, and rural communities and economies have intervened in a lawsuit filed by the WildEarth Guardians against the New Mexico Department of Game & Fish.
The New Mexico Trappers Association, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association, New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc., New Mexico Federal Lands Council, New Mexico Council of Outfitters & Guides, New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau, Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties for Stable Economic Growth and United Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife, Inc., joined the lawsuit which would prohibit trapping in the southwestern New Mexico, in the Mexican Grey Wolf Recovery Area. The New Mexico Houndsmen as well as the Northern and the Southern New Mexico Chapters of the Safari Club assisted with funding. The Safari Club International also filed an Amicus Brief in support of the state.
“The big difference between our memberships and the WildEarth Guardians is that our members have everything to lose in this situation, and environmentalists have nothing at stake. If residents of southwestern New Mexico lose the ability to trap, they lose their ability to make a living ranching, hunting, trapping or outfitting – not to mention generations of tradition,” said New Mexico Cattle Growers Association President Rex Wilson, Carrizozo. “No environmentalists’ family businesses or lifelong investments are at risk in this situation.”
The WildEarth Guardians’ lawsuit claims that by allowing trapping of viable furbearer populations in the wolf recovery area, the NMDGF is allowing harm to the non-essential, experimental Mexican Grey Wolf, despite the fact that trapping the species is not allowed, Wilson explained. The federal reintroduction program for the Mexican Grey Wolf began in 1994.
“To date, millions of our tax dollars have been spent to reintroduce this predator, which is still struggling in the wild almost 20 years later,” said David Reese, United Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife President, Belen. “The WildEarth Guardians are trying to use trapping as an excuse for the failure of the reintroduction program, which has been a monumental waste of time and resources since the beginning.”
Rural southwestern New Mexico’s economy is based on ranching, hunting, guiding and outfitting, all of which would be threatened if the lawsuit was successful. “Ranchers must have the ability to protect their livestock to stay in business,” said Bebo Lee, New Mexico Federal Lands Council President, Alamogordo. “Dealing with wolves on their operations has been hard enough on these ranchers – it’s too much to ask that they sacrifice even more of their herds to other predators.”
Hunting and trapping have a long history in New Mexico, as a family tradition, as a tool for wildlife management and in many cases, a successful livelihood. Despite the impacts of the wolf reintroduction program to the deer and elk herds in the Gila National Forest, guiding and outfitting is a big business, with a big impact on rural counties.
“The survival of our members’ businesses, and their ability to feed their families, depend on healthy wildlife populations, and that means balanced management which includes predator control,” said Marc Kincaid, New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc. President, Hope. “Aside from the potential financial impacts to our members and the small-town businesses they help support, it’s just irresponsible to put wildlife management in the hands of environmentalists and animal rights groups in Santa Fe whose only concerns are filing lawsuits and limiting land use.”
“This lawsuit has the potential to alter science based game management everywhere. The suit is designed to take game management out of the hands of states and move it to the courts. WildEarth now chastises the New Mexico Game Department for using sportsmen’s dollars, not tax dollars, to defend New Mexicans and New Mexico’s wildlife against a frivolous lawsuit. In court documents they seek to deny participation of an international conservation group, the Safari Club International in the litigation process. It seems to be alright for the “guardians” to squander millions of sportsmen’s and taxpayer dollars to advance their spiritual beliefs through court actions but, the very people that have paid the bills for wildlife recovery and management over the last century, can’t play in their “sand box”; how ludicrous is that?” asked Tom McDowell President NMTA, Corrales. “Western states are dealing with the devastating impacts of forests being managed by the courts and anti-consumptive use groups. New Mexico and Arizona saw the largest fires in history in 2011 and we just set two more records in the past few weeks. If WildEarth were to prevail with its current action, New Mexicans can say goodbye to their wildlife too.”

Caren Cowan
Executive Director
New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association
POB 7517
Albuquerque NM 87194
505.247.0584 phone
505.842.1766 fax
nmcga@nmagriculture.org

You can join NMCGA online at www.nmagriculture.org.

4 out of 5 Mexican wolves released in Sonora Mexico are Dead.

January 23, 2012
By admin

I translated this with Google translate so it isn’t the best version. Original link.

Mourning national conservation
Bastien Hole Marielena | Opinion
18.01.2012 | Creation Time: 1:57:07 | Last Modified: 1:58:16

I write these lines still dry mouth, sensitive and irreversible after the events to which I refer Wednesday and that first I could not believe. Hence, retain the information so far. And I find it inexplicable that raised far from the huge scandal that correspond to one of the most serious environmental crimes that have suffered recently, the facts have been hidden, as is the case of the killing, by running over one and poisoning other 3 copies of the 5 family of Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) that were recently released into Sonora territory. Of course that is already a criminal complaint filed with the Specialized Unit for Investigation of Crimes against the Environment and planned Special Laws of the Attorney General’s Office (PGR), and that the preliminary investigation is including timely follow-up, however, is to draw attention, once again, that the event is being handled at such a low profile, and both from the environmental authorities (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources-National Commission of Natural Protected Areas, Wildlife Department) as Naturalia, A. C., the civic organization that promoted, and that gives me the impression that while once and it had to be, also precipitated the reintroduction of the specimens to the wild, in an effort to cap a great first effort returning them to their habitat , even a small part of the wider region that historically belonged to, being as they are, a species extinct in the wild, as only small groups are in captivity, both in the United States and here in our country, not being in total over 400 individuals with the stakes are the survival of the smallest subspecies of gray wolf that tried to eradicate the middle of last century, everything, because the wolf has always been the villain of the story.

I worry that in the little information I could RECAVA unofficially, no man assures me it has been carried out the rescue of the alpha female, now alone at the mercy of the infamous who killed his family because they keep it that way, with everything and be monitored by carrying a telemetry collar would be sentenced to certain death because what happened happened and how it happened, and because being wolf needs a group … is said to bring a male think, but …

Should be strengthened first formal commitment to serious and ranchers in the area to fully convince them of the benefits from the presence of wolves on their land, because by then I was told that 4 ranch owners with which they spoke to locate within his farm at 5 great-an adult couple and three young children, said only one contributor to open this historic release. Hence observe rainfall … who or what or whom and for what … are outstanding responses to prevent further devastating sacrifices of these poor animals originally bred parents carefully selected to avoid inbreeding … possible care later in their development with extensive care and love to get a couple conform to soon give puppies … and once all integrated, with a view to removing them from re-education of humans and to teach them to hunt and survive in the wild, an issue that took more than two decades, said to be easy, but that effort was completed in less than sings a rooster, since Oct. 11 when the animals got loose, and by December had ended. In addition, I have to tell you that while he prepared for this family, in a property located in Nuevo Leon and prepared expressly for the purpose, was to locate the place, seeking to have enough length, adequate vegetation and especially appropriate prey and was far from any human community and their livestock herds to avoid conflict, which was of no avail because even prevented the possibility of that attack on the animals, say some bad experiences across the border, apparently never felt so likely to happen in Mexico. Pride ¿? A saber.

I say that the prosecutor is in charge of the case by the PGR has many years of experience, but more than that commitment to the field. I know of José Ricardo Rodriguez Soria, but I hope his background sooner quickly find the true ecocidal, which no mercy will surely be imposed the maximum penalty provided by law for such a dramatic event, as well as a high financial penalty, punishment can include up to 9 years in prison. Otherwise, I am aware that for his part, Dr. Hernando Guerrero, head of the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection, is very attentive to the issue, closing clip, but still, we also hope that accurate information is released and that for the next release will not save so much reserve, but rather the opposite, so that animals are protected by society, which ultimately are the ones through tax fund any program officer, and therefore MUST NOT HIDE WE MINIMIZE ANY DATA OR LESS IMPORTANT AS A RELEASE even had to be announced with fanfare by President Felipe Calderon himself. Yes … at that level. Or less, punctuated by the Secretary Juan Rafael Elvira. This magnitude deserved the reintroduction of wolves, which in itself would have been basic to protect them.

In another case … how ignorant of the singer Emmanuel!, Supposedly very interested in the ecological and acomedido to nag about it. Someone could inform me what Holbox town belongs, and that the whale shark is a fish, the largest planet by the way, and not a marine mammal as recently noted in an interview with Joaquin Lopez Doriga my dear, who for also gave a color with the atrocities of that, and …

Term referring to another goal for zoos capital, with the arrival of a pair of giant pandas, on Monday, France, where they remain for 10 years. And us stateless? Pepe Fed Bernal trip to China and our pundits spending his last years in singleness.

As always, I say goodbye leaving my email available to what is offered: producciones_serengueti@yahoo.com

Young Family Held Hostage by Mexican Grey Wolf

December 19, 2011
By admin

Here’s The Moos…. For Immediate Release / December 17, 2011
From the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association
P.O. Box 7517 / Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194

For further information, contact: Caren Cowan
505.263.2015 phone / nmcga@nmagriculture.org email

Young Family Held Hostage by Mexican Grey Wolf
Crystal Diamond, who lives on the family ranch near Beaverhead, spent 24 hours indoors with her two daughters, ages two and three, with a collared Mexican Grey Wolf on her front porch and in her yard, before the wolf was controlled by Wildlife Serivces personnel. (Crystal has written a detailed timeline of events, see below.)
“There is no excuse for putting a young woman and her two small children in such a dangerous situation,” said Rex Wilson, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association (NMCGA) President, Carrizozo. “Our citizens should be able to rely on their government for protection, not be held captive in their homes by a government sponsored predator. As a father and taxpayer, I am outraged.”
According to Diamond, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) personnel were aware that the wolf was in the area, but made the decision not to stay and monitor the situation, Wilson said. “These people knew the wolf was there, knew that its presence placed families, livestock and pets that could be in danger, yet chose to go home. Crystal was fortunate that a neighbor came by and helped her with this situation, which easily could have turned into a tragedy.”
The NMCGA has long opposed the wolf reintroduction program for many reasons, not the least of which is the burden placed on residents of southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona. The New Mexico Game Commission has withdrawn New Mexico’s participation in any facet of the program. Arizona’s Game Commission opposes any new wolf releases until proper recovery planning and environmental impact statements are complete. The rumor is that the White Mountain Apache Tribe has withdrawn their participation, as well.
“The economy of southwestern New Mexico has been decimated, ranching, hunting and outfitting businesses are struggling to survive, people can no longer feel safe in their own homes, and for what?,” Wilson asked. “There is still not a viable population of the Mexican Grey Wolf, and timetable for establishing one. We need to put an end to this huge waste of time, money and effort now.”
-30-

Collared Wolf at Beaverhead
Crystal Diamond’s Encounter

Tuesday December 13, 2011
I returned home to Beaverhead after being gone for several days with my 2 young daughters, Cayden (age 3) and Reece (age 2). My husband was away from home and scheduled to return Thursday. On the drive back I had passed my father-in-law who informed me that a wolf had been sighted at our Beaverhead Headquarters earlier that morning in the horse corrals & harassing our peacocks. The wolf had been chased away.

Arriving at Beaverhead, I drove up to the main headquarters to speak with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) representatives already there. They stated that they were aware of the wolf sighting and would return in the morning. I drove directly to my home, reversing my truck up to the front porch. I unloaded both of my children from their car seats and placed them on the front porch which runs the entire length of my house. I began unloading groceries and luggage from the bed of my truck walking in and out of the house with the front door wide open. The dogs played rambunctiously around my vehicle and around the yard. I gave little attention to the commotion of the dogs and continued to unload my truck. My daughters were still outside when I walked back out my open front door to see my neighbor speeding up my driveway hollering out his window. He yelled for me to take the girls inside while pointing to the dogs who were roughhousing with a collared wolf no farther than 35 feet from my 2 year old daughter. I grabbed my girls and ran inside slamming the door behind us. My neighbor asked for a rifle to haze the wolf and took off running in its direction. Within minutes I heard a gunshot. I waited about 15 minutes before locking the children in the house and walking up over the hillside to locate my neighbor. I was yelling for him as loud as I could. Topping out over the hill approximately 100 yards from the house – I saw the wolf stopped and staring about 50 yards in front of me. Screaming, I ran as fast as I could back to the house. Apparently, as my neighbor ran up over the hill to haze the wolf she had circled back around, beating him back to the house. It was soon completely dark & we were unable to see any further than the glow of my porch lights. My neighbor instructed me to remain inside the house with my children and dogs and not to open the door at anytime during the night.

My overhead porch light, two motion lights, and a brightly lit holiday porch decoration were left on. Most of the inside lights were on, including our Christmas tree in the front window. Music played as the girls ran around the house up until bath time at 6:30 p.m. I had just placed them in the tub and walked directly to the recliner in the living room just feet from the front window. I was on the telephone when I looked over my shoulder to see the wolf staring back at me . . . her nose pressed against the window pane. I jumped up and stepped away from the window. She remained at the window watching me for just the few seconds before I ran out of the living room into the bathroom where my children were. I called my husband on his cell phone who at this time was on his way home. Throughout the evening my male border collie whimpered at the front door aggressively trying to get out. Both dogs paced the house on high alert all night. At my husband’s request, my neighbor returned to my house. He sat on my front porch with nothing but a blanket, camera, & gun in freezing temperatures until midnight when my husband returned home. At that time, they noted all the tracks on and around the front porch and attempted to preserve several tracks by placing bowls and cans over the prints. Preserving all the tracks would be impossible, as fresh snowfall began to cover the ground.

Wednesday December 14, 2011
Our neighbor returned to our house around 7:30am. Together with my husband, they went to take photographs of the wolf tracks they’d tried to preserve the night before. New wolf tracks in fresh snow were everywhere – all around the children’s play yard in the back of the house, leading up to and on the front porch, in the front yard, and in the driveway. Based of the location of tracks, they determined the wolf spent most of the night within 50 yards of the house.

USFWS, Catron County wolf investigator, and Catron County Commissioner all arrived around 8:00am. Using tracking devises, the wolf was determined to be with a quarter mile of the house. I was assured that the wolf would be removed.

Pressure from heavier-than-normal vehicle traffic and people on the ground, had pushed her as far as two miles from our house throughout the day.

Later that evening, the wolf was returning to our home and was put down by Wildlife Services. She was euthanized on private property 150 yards from my house. I was notified by Wildlife Service Officers that the wolf had been removed and would no longer pose a threat to me or my children. Words cannot express my overwhelming sense relief when I received the news.

My daughters and I had literally been held prisoner in our own home for over 24 hours. It’s difficult to describe the terror of a predator so fearless and eager to get in my home. My responsibility as a mother is to keep my children safe at all times. For a period of time, that God- Given Right was stripped away. The thought of “what might have been” consumes my every thought.

Thank you to USFWS for resolving this issue in a quick and effective manner. Thanks for the swift action of Wildlife Services and the professionalism of their officers. And most of all, thank you to a neighbor who placed the safety of my children above his own. Without his watchful eye, the events of my story may have very easily had an unforgivably tragic ending.

“Crying Wolf…?”

September 27, 2011
By admin

Folks, I’m not crying wolf here! As we have been focused on the economic plight of our country, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has quietly and behind closed doors, started laying out a plan to increase the Mexican gray wolf populations in Arizona and the Southwest, with an eye towards increasing “recovery” numbers.

Keep in mind “we” have been working on recovering this species for the last 13 years. The total cost to date is more than $24 Million and rising! Our Arizona Game and Fish Department has invested over $5 Million in the process already. With all this time, money and manpower invested, what’s the result – an estimated population in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area (BRWRA) of 50 wolves.

The goal for the BRWRA was for 100 animals, a number by all accounts that has been elusive. For the record, there are varying reports that the estimated population of 50 doesn’t include any wolves that are on the White Mountain and San Carlos Apache Reservations. We don’t know how many wolves exist there. So, with that framework in mind, what is the USFWS up to? You will recall that recent Congressional actions delisting the gray wolf in the Northern Rockies failed to include provisions for delisting of the Mexican gray wolf, the argument being that Arizona had not yet reached its recovery goal of 100 wolves. In response to continuing pressure from enviro-litigants USFWS is now accelerating the “recovery” process while the wolf advocates cheer them on.

At a recent USFWS meeting in New Mexico, those that were invited learned the USFWS is considering the adoption of a new Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Plan. Word is that this plan would “significantly” increase the recovery numbers for the Mexican gray wolf in the four state area of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado. This information is very alarming given the fact that the original recovery plan published in March 1998 called for a goal of 100 wolves on the BRWRA which consists of the entire Apache and Gila National Forests in east-central Arizona and west-central New Mexico.

Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife (AZSFW) has learned that USFWS is discussing the possibility of increasing the population to 750 wolves (three meta populations of 250 wolves each) over a four-state area. This includes Arizona,New Mexico and southern portions of Colorado and Utah. This likely means expansion of wolves across much of Arizona! This action coupled with impending release of wolves in Mexico is extremely disturbing, as not only will this likely decimate our Arizona elk and deer populations, it will also impact all recreational users, and likely further complicate the access to our public lands.

The current population of wolves in Arizona are considered experimental under what’s called a 10j rule. This status allows for management of the animals as intended under the original release agreement. If wolves released in Mexico, just happen to cross into the United States, that 10j status is thrown out the window, and the Endangered Species Act will likely trump the prior agreement and open the door for the enviro-litigants to gain traction on wolf proliferation.

AZSFW asked for a seat at the table with USFWS to participate in Mexican gray wolf recovery plan discussions, and they were turned down. USFWS does not want Arizona sportsmen and women to have a voice in this process, so we need to make our voice heard in other ways!

AZSFWC does not believe Arizona’s prey base can sustain this kind of wolf impact. While the locations have not been identified, there is speculation that in addition to the BRWRA, other potential geographic locations might include areas around the Grand Canyon and another in the southern portions of Utah/Colorado. This means, among other things, that an already-declining prized mule deer herd on the Arizona Strip could be put in further peril. And deer on the Kaibab, though rebounding due the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of sportsmen-generated conservation dollars, will be impacted as well.

If you are not concerned, you should be. In 1971, three thousand (3,000) mule deer permits were issued on the Arizona Strip. In 2010, only 180 permits were issued. Why? The declining mule deer population could not support more permits. Adding more wolves to the equation will only further jeopardize the any rebound of this herd. And enviro-litigants will not stop at 750 wolves. You only have to look at recent actions of the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club and others, to realize that increasing Mexican gray wolf populations from 100 to 750 will ultimately not satisfy their desire for more and more wolves.

Consider the following facts:
• Idaho, Montana and Wyoming ultimately exceeded their recovery goals of 300 wolves (current estimates show 1,700 wolves distributed among these three states)
• USFWS delisted the wolf in the states of Idaho and Montana under the Bush administration and again under the Obama administration
• The Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies passed a resolution calling for wolf delisting
• Congress passed legislation officially delisting the wolf in the Northern Rockies
So in spite of these actions and the successful recovery of the gray wolf, the enviro-litigants continue to challenge the actions in the courts – most recently challenging the constitutionality of Congressional action to delist the gray wolf.

Enviro-litigant actions demonstrate that there objective is not just to save the wolf. The wolf recovery has been very successful in the Northern Rockies and the Great Lakes Region and moderately successful in Arizona/New Mexico. It is a business model for these organizations and they have netted millions of dollars. Their real objective is far more reaching – ultimately they want to stop mixed use (including hunting and public access) on our public lands.

What can you do? Contact our Arizona Congressional Delegation and let them know you are outraged that USFWS is now considering increasing wolf recovery numbers in Arizona. Let them know that they have failed to include Arizona’s strongest voice for wildlife, sportsmen and women out of the process! Finally, let them know you are concerned that years of conservation and wildlife habitat work, not too mention the thousands of dollars spent by sportsmen and women are on the verge of being “thrown to the wolves”.

Be candid, respectful and tactful, but let Senators and Congressmen/woman know how you feel about what is going on here!

Follow this link to let your voice be heard:

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Jim Unmacht, President, Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation

Extremists file another EAJA funded lawsuit. Lawsuit Launched to Protect Mexican Gray Wolves From Leghold Traps

August 18, 2011
By admin

For Immediate Release, August 17, 2011
Contact: Michael Robinson, (575) 534-0360
Lawsuit Launched to Protect Mexican Gray Wolves From Leghold Traps
New Mexico Officials Approved Traps, Ignoring Injured and Killed Wolves
SILVER CITY, N.M.— The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a formal notice of intent to sue the New Mexico State Game Commission and New Mexico Department of Game and Fish over the commission’s recent vote to resume recreational trapping in the Gila National Forest, where federally protected, endangered Mexican gray wolves live. Besides being listed under the Endangered Species Act, the wolves are also listed as endangered under state law.
“With only 50 animals and just two breeding pairs surviving in the wild, Mexican wolves can’t afford more losses to these cruel leghold traps,” said the Center’s Michael Robinson. “Responsible hunters know their targets, but trapping is indiscriminate. And while hunters aim for a clean and quick kill, trapped wolves can suffer debilitating and even fatal injuries while struggling to get free.”
A recent report disclosed that, since wolf reintroduction began in 1998, five Mexican wolves have sustained injuries — including some requiring foot and leg amputations — and two other wolves have died as a result of trapping by private parties in the Gila National Forest. This does not include wolves trapped by federal officials on behalf of the livestock industry, which has not occurred since 2007 and is not at issue in today’s notice.
Recreational trapping in the Gila National Forest was halted by the game commission in November 2010 to protect endangered wolves. But on July 21, upon recommendation of the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, the game commission voted to allow trapping in the Gila to resume, while misrepresenting the report documenting the five wolf injuries and two fatalities to trapping as somehow providing justification.
The Endangered Species Act was signed into law in 1973 to conserve imperiled species and their ecosystems; it specifically bans trapping of endangered animals. Yet the Game Commission and Department’s recent decision authorizes trapping that is known to capture protected wolves, causing illegal “take” (harassment, harm or killing) to occur.
While the 1998 federal rule authorizing reintroduction of Mexican gray wolves allowed some “accidental” trapping of wolves, trapping a wolf within its known range “will not be considered unavoidable, accidental, or unintentional take, unless due care was exercised to avoid taking a wolf.” In allowing trapping again, the game commission has not exercised due care.

Judge: Wolf rule’s a howler While upholding the new law, Molloy gives basis for fresh appeal

August 4, 2011
By admin

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.

The endangered species tax

August 1, 2011
By admin

by Hugh Holub on Jul. 29, 2011, under endangered species act, politics

http://tucsoncitizen.com/view-from-baja-arizona/2011/07/29/the-endangered-species-tax/

The Endangered Species Act commits us to saving not only every species…but every sub-species and every distinct population segment of a species or a sub-species.
Sounds like a popular idea in concept.
But does anyone realize how much this is costing our economy?
We have in effect an Endangered Species tax in this country.
The Endangered Species Tax is expressed in two ways.
The first way is virtually every federal project that involves disturbing the environment has to go through an Endangered Species Act review.
US Fish and Wildlife gets a chance to extort money from other federal agencies in exchange for approving other federal project activity.
Take for example the $50 million US Fish and Wildlife got from Department of Homeland Security to study bats because the Border Patrol drives around federal lands and they might run over a protected lizard.
Or take the millions of dollars being transfered from the Central Arizona Project to restoire native fish in Arizona becvause in theory exotic fish from the CAP canals could swim up the Ssanta Cruz River and eat native fish.
Whatever Congress appropriates to to US Fish and Wildlife, that agency controls vastly more money through “inter-agency agreements” with other federal agencies where Fish and Wildlife extorted money from thos other agencies in exchange for allowing their projects to go forward.
Congress needs to dig into all the inter-agency agreements between US Fish and Wildlife and other federal agencies and find out just how munch money Fish and Wildlife really controls. I’ll bet that will surprise a lot of people.
And then Congress needs to stop US Fish and Wildlife from hijacking other federal agency funds.
The second Endangered Species Tax is the cost added to every project in the country that is added to get federal approval for that project.
These costs turn up in habitat protection plans and other mitigation measures that projects are subjected to by the federal government and environmental groups who sue to block these projects.
Want to build a solar energy project? You will probably have to fork over money to protect the desert tortoise.
Want to build a natural gas pipeline? You will have to fork over money to protect mice. El Paso Natural Gas got hit for $22 million to get approval to build a gas pipeline through Nevada.
Want to drill for oil or natural gas in West Texas? You will add millions to your cost to protect sage lizards.
I’ll bet that we have at least a 10 percent cost added to virtually every project in the country that disturbs land in some way because we have prioritized protecting darned never everything that grows or walks or crawls in this country.
Somwhere along the way people need to have a say as to how much money we’re going to divert from our economy to protect what.
If there is no genetic difference between the wolves that live in Montana or Michigan or eastern Arizona…why are we spending money to have wolves in eastern Arizona?
If there are lots of jaguars in Mexico and all the way to Brazil….why are we going to spend millions to have jaguars in southern Arizona?
If there are 27 sub-species of squirrels….why are we spending money to protect one sub-species on one mountain top in Arizona?
There are a lot of good questions that need to be asked about how the Endangered Species Act really works and how much money it is costing to protect plants and critters that may not even really be endangered at all.
The Endangered Species Act really is not about protecting plants and animals any more.
It has been twisted into a tool to block virtually any project that disturbs the land.
Radical environmental groups that really want to destroy the American economy have turned the ESA into their weapon of choice to strangle America.
And taxpayers are paying for killing the country.
We have been bamboozled into a costly guilt trip via the Endangered Species Act and our priorities are seriously skewed when on one hand we really want to secure our border and we have people fighting finishing the border fence because that will interfere with jaguar migration.
Let’s find out how much we are spending via federal inter-agency agreements and cost additions to projects in the country and see if we are really getting our money’s worth.
And of course radical environmentalists will argue money is no object in protecting endangered species.
That is your money and the more of it siphoned away to protect sage lizards in West Texas, the less you will have for Social Security and Medicare.

Environmentalists renew pressure for trapping ban in Mexican gray wolf recovery area

July 30, 2011
By admin
  • SUSAN MONTOYA BRYAN  Associated Press
  • First Posted: July 30, 2011 – 9:01 am
    Last Updated: July 30, 2011 – 9:01 am

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — Now that state game officials have cleared the way for furbearer trapping to resume in southwestern New Mexico, environmentalists want the federal government to do more to protect the Mexican gray wolf.

WildEarth Guardians this week asked forest and wildlife officials to reconsider a petition that seeks an end to trapping throughout the wolf’s range in southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona.

The federal government has been trying to reintroduce the animals to the region since 1998.

Supporters of the program contend that trapping presents a threat to wolf recovery.

The Fish and Wildlife Service says that since 2002, there have been 14 incidents involving wolves caught in traps.

Regional spokesman Tom Buckley says the agency plans to monitor the situation now that New Mexico’s ban has been lifted.

NM Game Commission votes to end trapping ban By SUSAN MONTOYA BRYAN

July 15, 2011
By admin

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OKPT4G2.htm

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.

State game commissioners approved a recommendation from wildlife managers to end a trapping ban in southwestern New Mexico, where federal officials have been working to reintroduce the Mexican gray wolf.

The commission voted unanimously Thursday in favor of the state Game and Fish Department’s proposal during a meeting in Clayton.

The vote disappointed conservationists, who had sent thousands of emails and letters to the commissioners in recent weeks to support keeping the ban in place.

Regulated furbearer trapping on the Gila and Apache national forests was banned last summer by former Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson, a supporter of the wolf reintroduction effort.

The commission extended the ban last fall, giving researchers more time to study the risks of trapping and snaring to wolves.

The researchers are done with their work but a report summarizing their findings has yet to be made public, and conservation groups have accused the Game and Fish Department of colluding with trapping and livestock groups to influence the commission’s decision-making process.

Despite a public records request, the conservationists claim the agency has refused to provide information related to meetings the department allegedly held with industry groups on the trapping issue.

Interior Announces Proposed Settlement of Gray Wolf Lawsuit 03/18/2011

March 22, 2011
By admin

 Contact: Kendra Barkoff, DOI (202) 208 6416 Chris Tollefson, FWS (202) 247-7417 WASHINGTON, DC -

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reached an agreement with the majority of plaintiffs, including Defenders of Wildlife, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, and eight other conservation organizations, to settle ongoing litigation over a Federal District Court’s 2010 decision to reinstate Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for gray wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains.

If approved by the court, the settlement offers a path for the Service to return management of the recovered wolf populations in Idaho and Montana to the States while the Service considers options for delisting gray wolves across the Rocky Mountain region, where population levels have returned to biologically recovered levels. “For too long, management of wolves in this country has been caught up in controversy and litigation instead of rooted in science where it belongs. This proposed settlement provides a path forward to recognize the successful recovery of the gray wolf in the northern Rocky Mountains and to return its management to States and Tribes,” said Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes. “I am pleased that the negotiations resulted in this important agreement,” said Acting Service Director Rowan Gould. “The proposed settlement has the potential to return management of wolves in Montana and Idaho to the states and tribes and will also enable the Fish and Wildlife Service to use our limited resources to address other species in need of recovery actions.” Under the terms of the settlement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed to address the delisting of wolves in the region in the future as a distinct population segment, rather than on a state-by-state basis. The parties are requesting that the court allow the 2009 delisting to be reinstated in Montana and Idaho on an interim basis, in accordance with approved state management plans, until a full delisting can be completed for the northern Rocky Mountain wolf population. The parties are agreeing that they allow these steps to move forward, up to and including a potential delisting of Rocky Mountain wolves, without resorting to further litigation. “I want to recognize the great work of Deputy Secretary Hayes, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the entire negotiating team, and all those who worked with us to find a common-sense way forward,” said Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. Separate negotiations are ongoing between the Service and the State of Wyoming in an effort to reach agreement on a management plan for wolves in that state. If a mutually acceptable management plan for wolves in Wyoming can be developed, then the Service will be able to proceed with delisting proceedings addressing wolves throughout the northern Rocky Mountains. The delisting provided for under this agreement does not extend to the small wolf populations in eastern Oregon and Washington, or to Utah, where there are not believed to be any resident wolves. FWS intends to address the longer term status of wolves in Oregon, Washington, and Utah when it issues a new rule addressing status of wolves across the Northern Rocky Mountain region. FWS will work with state officials in Oregon, Washington and Utah in the meantime to address any wolf management issues and retains the option to consider reclassifying wolves from “endangered” to “threatened” in those states in order to provide more management flexibility. The Service and the plaintiffs have agreed to take other actions that will clarify implementation of the ESA and ensure that a recovered wolf population continues to be sustainably managed under approved state management plans. Additional terms of the proposed agreement are available here. The ESA provides a critical safety net for America’s native fish, wildlife and plants. This landmark conservation law has prevented the extinction of hundreds of imperiled species across the nation and promoted the recovery of many others. Additional background information on the settlement is available here.

Mexican wolf Petition please sign here.

Northern wolf petition please sign.

Archives