CountryWolf07
03-16-2005, 08:49 AM
Thought you guys would be interested.. especially the people who's fascinated with wolves.. such as me.. Amy.. and few others... :)
Court Decision Disrupts Federal Wolf Recovery Plan
On January 31, a U.S. District Court overturned a 2003 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rule that had been the framework for gray wolf recovery planning in the United States. The overturned 2003 rule established three large gray wolf recovery regions - Eastern, Western, and Southwestern - and reclassified the wolf from "endangered" to "threatened" in major portions of the Eastern and Western regions. The three regions were crafted in a manner that would have enabled the Service to declare wolves recovered in an entire region on the basis of wolf populations in a relatively small portion of a region. Thus, gray wolves in the Eastern region encompassing the upper Midwest and New England could be declared recovered on the basis of wolf populations in the upper Midwest alone. In its 36-page written opinion, the Court suggested that this approach to "recovery" subverts the intent of the Endangered Species Act to restore listed species to a significant portion of their historic range.
The most significant implication of the Court's decision could be the eventual establishment of new wolf populations in portions of the wolf's historical range that currently lack wolves. The Court's decision does not necessarily require the Fish and Wildlife Service to proactively restore wolves to places like the Pacific Northwest and New England. However, if wolves make it to these areas on their own, the Court's decision appears to require the Service to manage these animals as "endangered" species covered by the full protections of the Endangered Species Act.
In the meantime, the Court's decision moves current wolf populations in the Eastern and Western regions one step back from "delisting" - the process by which the Fish and Wildlife Service removes a species, subspecies, or population from the endangered species list. In 2004, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to delist wolves in the Eastern region, and the agency had recently been working toward a proposal to delist wolves in the Western region as well. Because the Court's decision overturns the basis the Service would have used to declare these populations ready for removal from the list, the Court's decision postpones the possibility that these wolves will be delisted until the Service comes up with an approach that is consistent with the Court's reading of the Endangered Species Act.
In contrast to the far-reaching implications the Court's decision may have over the long term, the immediate consequences are very limited. In fact, the decision does not immediately affect the classification and management of the vast majority of wolves in the Eastern and Western regions. In the Western region, the large populations of wolves in the central Idaho and Yellowstone areas will continue to be managed as "nonessential experimental" because that designation was established prior to, and separate from, the 2003 rule. Similarly, in the Eastern region, the approximately 3000 wolves in Minnesota will continue to be classified as threatened because that designation was established prior to the 2003 rule.
The Court's decision will have an immediate impact in Michigan and Wisconsin where wolves are once again classified as endangered. Prior to the Court's decision, if a wolf killed a domestic animal in these states, wildlife managers had significant flexibility to kill the offending wolf. Following the Court's decision, if a wolf kills a domestic animal, wildlife managers will only be able to use lethal control in exceptional circumstances. In lieu of lethal control, Michigan and Wisconsin wildlife managers will likely resort to trapping and relocation of problem wolves. (The significant wolf population in northwest Montana has also reverted to endangered status but managers there had significant freedom to use lethal control prior to the 2003 rule and will thus retain that freedom.)
The legal implications of the Court's decision are complex and still unfolding and the decision will likely be appealed. Monitor the News and Events section of www.wolf.org for continuing updates.
http://www.wolf.org/wolves/news/images/iwcmap.gif
Court Decision Disrupts Federal Wolf Recovery Plan
On January 31, a U.S. District Court overturned a 2003 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rule that had been the framework for gray wolf recovery planning in the United States. The overturned 2003 rule established three large gray wolf recovery regions - Eastern, Western, and Southwestern - and reclassified the wolf from "endangered" to "threatened" in major portions of the Eastern and Western regions. The three regions were crafted in a manner that would have enabled the Service to declare wolves recovered in an entire region on the basis of wolf populations in a relatively small portion of a region. Thus, gray wolves in the Eastern region encompassing the upper Midwest and New England could be declared recovered on the basis of wolf populations in the upper Midwest alone. In its 36-page written opinion, the Court suggested that this approach to "recovery" subverts the intent of the Endangered Species Act to restore listed species to a significant portion of their historic range.
The most significant implication of the Court's decision could be the eventual establishment of new wolf populations in portions of the wolf's historical range that currently lack wolves. The Court's decision does not necessarily require the Fish and Wildlife Service to proactively restore wolves to places like the Pacific Northwest and New England. However, if wolves make it to these areas on their own, the Court's decision appears to require the Service to manage these animals as "endangered" species covered by the full protections of the Endangered Species Act.
In the meantime, the Court's decision moves current wolf populations in the Eastern and Western regions one step back from "delisting" - the process by which the Fish and Wildlife Service removes a species, subspecies, or population from the endangered species list. In 2004, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to delist wolves in the Eastern region, and the agency had recently been working toward a proposal to delist wolves in the Western region as well. Because the Court's decision overturns the basis the Service would have used to declare these populations ready for removal from the list, the Court's decision postpones the possibility that these wolves will be delisted until the Service comes up with an approach that is consistent with the Court's reading of the Endangered Species Act.
In contrast to the far-reaching implications the Court's decision may have over the long term, the immediate consequences are very limited. In fact, the decision does not immediately affect the classification and management of the vast majority of wolves in the Eastern and Western regions. In the Western region, the large populations of wolves in the central Idaho and Yellowstone areas will continue to be managed as "nonessential experimental" because that designation was established prior to, and separate from, the 2003 rule. Similarly, in the Eastern region, the approximately 3000 wolves in Minnesota will continue to be classified as threatened because that designation was established prior to the 2003 rule.
The Court's decision will have an immediate impact in Michigan and Wisconsin where wolves are once again classified as endangered. Prior to the Court's decision, if a wolf killed a domestic animal in these states, wildlife managers had significant flexibility to kill the offending wolf. Following the Court's decision, if a wolf kills a domestic animal, wildlife managers will only be able to use lethal control in exceptional circumstances. In lieu of lethal control, Michigan and Wisconsin wildlife managers will likely resort to trapping and relocation of problem wolves. (The significant wolf population in northwest Montana has also reverted to endangered status but managers there had significant freedom to use lethal control prior to the 2003 rule and will thus retain that freedom.)
The legal implications of the Court's decision are complex and still unfolding and the decision will likely be appealed. Monitor the News and Events section of www.wolf.org for continuing updates.
http://www.wolf.org/wolves/news/images/iwcmap.gif