“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

Mexican authorities to release Mexican wolves in Sonora

September 14, 2011
By admin


Posted in: News Media
Sep 12, 2011

PHOENIX — The Arizona Game and Fish Department has been informed that Mexican authorities plan to release five Mexican wolves this month at an undisclosed ranch location in northeastern Sonora, Mexico.

While the department does not know the specific date or other details at this time, it has received indications that the wolves being released will be fitted with satellite tracking collars.

Game and Fish is currently considering what, if any, impacts this release might have on Arizona’s Mexican wolf conservation and stakeholders. The department will continue to monitor activities related to the planned release and will continue to inform constituents as information becomes available.

Arizona Game and Fish has been actively involved in the multi-partner effort reintroducing Mexican wolves to portions of their historical range in the east-central portion of the state for many years. In 1998, 11 captive-reared Mexican wolves were released into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area (BRWRA) in eastern Arizona. The current population was assessed to be around 50 animals during 2011 monitoring.

The Mexican wolf is considered endangered in the United States.

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.

Excerpts from the monthly Mexican wolf report

August 9, 2011
By admin

INCIDENTS
During July, IFT personnel investigated seven livestock depredation incidents in the BRWRA and determined that six of the incidents involved Mexican wolves.
On July 3, a livestock producer near Norton Reservoir on the ASNF located a dead domestic sheep ram. WS personnel investigated the carcass and determined the ram was killed by at least two wolves. The incident was assigned to AM795 of the Paradise Pack.
On July 6, a livestock producer located a dead calf in the vicinity of Romero Creek on the GNF. WS personnel investigated the carcass and determined it had been killed by a wolf. The incident was assigned to the Fox Mountain Pack.
On July 9, a livestock producer located a dead yearling heifer in a water tank near Cooney Point on the GNF. WS personnel investigated the carcass and determined it had been killed by a wolf. The incident was assigned to the Middle Fork Pack.
On July 9, a livestock producer located a dead yearling (sex unknown) in the vicinity of the Bursom Road near Cooney Point on the GNF. WS personnel investigated the carcass and determined that it had been killed by a wolf. The incident was assigned to the Middle Fork Pack.
On July 12, a livestock producer found several of his horses that appeared to have been chased through a fence. A colt with the horses suffered injuries to its legs and had to be euthanized as a result of the injuries. The incident was assigned to the Dark Canyon Pack.
On July 17, a livestock producer located a dead calf in the vicinity of Escondido Mountain on the GNF. WS personnel investigated and determined the calf had been killed by a black bear.
On July 18, IFT personnel located a dead yearling on the SCAR. WS personnel investigated the carcass and determined it had been killed by a wolf. The incident was assigned to the Rim Pack.
CAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
On July 13, Project personnel at the Sevilleta Wolf Management Facility captured, evaluated and immunized five ten-week-old pups (mp1215, fp1216, fp1217, fp1218 and fp1219). These pups are the offspring of M968 and F1064. All of the pups were healthy.

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.

BREAKING: Judge Molloy upholds constitutionality of wolf delisting

August 4, 2011
By admin

Posted: Aug 3, 2011 6:13 PM by Dennis Bragg
(MISSOULA)- Wolves will stay off the Endangered Species List, at least for now, after U.S. District Judge upholds the constitutionality of Congressional action taking the wolves off the protected list.
Some environmental groups wanted Molloy to overturn the May decision, saying lawmakers had violated the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
But in an 18-page ruling issued this afternoon, Molloy rejected the plaintiff’s claims for summary judgment and backed the government’s position. That leaves the question of long-term ESA protection for Idaho and Montana wolves in the hands of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Habituated wolves killed outside Idaho Town

August 2, 2011
By admin

4 more wolves killed near north-central Idaho town

by Associated Press

Lewiston Tribune

Posted on August 2, 2011 at 11:38 AM

LEWISTON, Idaho (AP) — State officials say four more wolves have been killed near Elk City.

That brings the total to five wolves killed in an effort to push the animals away from the small mountain town.

The first wolf was shot by Idaho County deputies in late June. Idaho Department of Fish and Game supervisor Dave Cadwallader told the Lewiston Tribune that since then, four wolves have been caught in foot-hold traps set by agents from the federal Wildlife Services Agency. State conservation officers and sheriff’s deputies are checking the traps daily.

Elk City residents have complained for months about frequent wolf sightings and dogs and cattle being attacked by wolves. Cadwallader issued the kill permits to deputies shortly after Congress removed Endangered Species Act protections from Idaho and Montana wolves last May.

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.

Interesting wolf news in the New Mexico area

July 30, 2011
By admin

February

On February 7, WS personnel investigated a dead calf and severely injured cow just outside of the BRWRA near Canovas Creek in New Mexico, close to the Arizona border. The owner euthanized the cow shortly after both animals were discovered. The incident was confirmed as a wolf depredation, and the wolf responsible for the incident was F1105.

On February 8, WS personnel investigated five steers that had been attacked on private land outside of the BRWRA, north of Quemado, New Mexico. One of the steers died as a result of the attack, while the other four sustained severe injuries. WS personnel confirmed this incident as a wolf depredation, and the wolf or wolves responsible were determined to be uncollared animals. The IFT initiated trapping efforts in the area; however, no wolves were captured.

( interestingly enough, FWS never seem to be able to capture or confirm much less investigate uncollared wolves.  Especially based on a ranchers sighting.  This has been an ongoing problem for about 3 years.)

April

F1105 (collared) In April, the IFT documented this wolf traveling alone through the northern portions of the GNF. Last month, the IFT documented this wolf repeatedly traveling near and onto a private elk farm in the northern portions of the GNF, potentially interacting with domestic dogs in the vicinity. The IFT initiated trapping efforts to capture this wolf and perform an inspection regarding its breeding status. F1105 localized in the last part of April in the northern portion of the GNF and efforts to capture the wolf are still ongoing.

May

F1105 (collared) In April, the IFT documented this wolf traveling alone through the northern portions of the GNF. Last month, the IFT documented this wolf repeatedly traveling near and onto a private elk farm in the northern portions of the GNF, potentially interacting with domestic dogs in the vicinity. The IFT initiated trapping efforts to capture this wolf and perform an inspection regarding its breeding status. F1105 localized in the last part of April in the northern portion of the GNF and efforts to capture the wolf are still ongoing.

June/July

On May 6, the IFT responded to a report of an injured or sick wolf observed outside of Reserve, New Mexico. They captured an uncollared wolf, and a FWS veterinarian examined it in the field. The wolf died during transport to a veterinary facility in Arizona. An investigation into the cause of death is pending. INCIDENTS

Morgart’s Pack (collared M1155) Throughout June, the IFT documented this wolf traveling through the central portions of the GNF. The IFT obtained information this month that confirms that M1155 is now traveling with another wolf.

F1105 (collared) In June, the IFT documented this wolf traveling alone through the northern portions of the GNF. Earlier this spring, the IFT implemented capture operations to assist in determining the breeding status of this wolf. During trapping efforts in May, the IFT located a den with five pups. IFT personnel inspected the pups at the den site and collected blood samples for analysis to determine their genetic makeup. Tests indicated the pups were the result of the female breeding with a domestic dog. IFT personnel returned to the den, removed the four pups present, and humanely euthanized them. The IFT has confirmed that this wolf is traveling with a pup-sized canid in June, and efforts to capture this wolf have continued this month.

PROJECT PERSONNEL

The IFT is disappointed to announce that Ellen Heilhecker and Mischa Larisch from the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish will no longer be working on the Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project. Ellen has been with the Project since 2007, and has worked diligently during that time to further Mexican wolf recovery goals in New Mexico. Mischa has been with the Project for just over a year, and has provided a solid field presence working proactively with livestock producers to reduce conflicts on the ground. Many thanks to both of you for your efforts. You will be missed!

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.

Mexican wolf Petition please sign here.

Northern wolf petition please sign.

Archives