WOLVES (Please Read)
11-12-2008, 02:15 PM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 349
WOLVES (Please Read)
http://www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp
Please go to the website above to post comments about getting the Western Gray Wolf off the Endangered Species Act. Type in keyword "Western Gray Wolf Recovery". Click on "Send a comment or submission". Government type is "Federal" and I believe Agency is "Dept. of the Interior".
We need everyones help on this one. In your comment talk about how the wolves have had a great comeback and are great for the habitat, but are at a higher number than we need. Their recovery has been quick with numerous packs in ID, MT, WY and now starting in OR and WA. Stress how if the wolves are not managed that a loss of revenue from tag sales, licience sales, outdoor equipment, hunting equipment, gas, etc will be lost in all states with unmanaged wolves. State how predators can help habitat and manage wildlife if their numbers(wolves) are managed also. Please do not go way negative in your comments. We need to get the wolves delisted as soon as we can. Pres. Bush is trying to get this done before Obama gets in office. Your comments have to be in before 11:59pm EST on Nov.28. Pass this on to everyone you know and don't let them set on their butts. We need to get our word out there. Thanks from the people out WEST.
Please go to the website above to post comments about getting the Western Gray Wolf off the Endangered Species Act. Type in keyword "Western Gray Wolf Recovery". Click on "Send a comment or submission". Government type is "Federal" and I believe Agency is "Dept. of the Interior".
We need everyones help on this one. In your comment talk about how the wolves have had a great comeback and are great for the habitat, but are at a higher number than we need. Their recovery has been quick with numerous packs in ID, MT, WY and now starting in OR and WA. Stress how if the wolves are not managed that a loss of revenue from tag sales, licience sales, outdoor equipment, hunting equipment, gas, etc will be lost in all states with unmanaged wolves. State how predators can help habitat and manage wildlife if their numbers(wolves) are managed also. Please do not go way negative in your comments. We need to get the wolves delisted as soon as we can. Pres. Bush is trying to get this done before Obama gets in office. Your comments have to be in before 11:59pm EST on Nov.28. Pass this on to everyone you know and don't let them set on their butts. We need to get our word out there. Thanks from the people out WEST.
11-13-2008, 03:53 PM
#5
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 349
RE: WOLVES (Please Read)
Found this on bowsite.com for those that are interested.
From:[/b] saveelk........
....... Date: [/b]12-Nov-08[/b]
Private Reply
[blockquote]
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator 585 Shepard Way Helena, Montana 59601
Comment -- Canadian Wolf Delisting and Designating the Northern Rocky Mountain Population of Wolf as a Distinct Population Segment
Dear Sirs,
The SaveElk Coalition is a group of concerned Idaho Sportsman asserting the rights and prerogatives of hunters in Idaho. Most all of our members (currently numbering in excess of 800) were initially opposed to the initial "introduction" of the non-native Canadian Wolves into Idaho; however concurrently we recognize that regardless of our earlier objections we recognize that these wolves are here to stay and we support the immediacy for wolves to be removed from protection as an endangered species, and for the immediate classification as a big game animal and for the immediate transfer of management of this species to the state of Idaho.
It is our position that the population of these Canadian wolves has exploded within our state multiplying at an annual rate of 20 to 25% since the original introduction. Current estimates far exceed 1000 wolves. This population is 6,666 times the original agreed upon 150 maximum wolf population levels that was acknowledged and accepted in our state wolf management plan, which was widely publicized, acknowledged and accepted by all parties involved including pro-wolf, anti-wolf and general citizenry. This was the basis and plan that was finally approved by the USF&W Service and the Federal Government as a condition of wolf delisting. Continued lacks of wolf management and unregulated and unconstrained wolf growth is significantly harming and reducing our state ungulate herds, with wolves have totally eradicated elk herds in certain isolated parts of our state. Continued listing of wolves will cause irrefutable harm to our states residents in lost hunting opportunities and in lost tag revenues, with the resulting loss of commerce that many citizens depend on for their livelihood. The argument that wolf sightseeing will offset this loss in commerce is absolutely wrong and totally misguided. A significant part of our state commerce depends on maintaining vibrant, healthy big game herds which are being significantly harmed by the unregulated growth of these wolves. Further livestock growers are experiencing continued harassment and herd losses from wolf depredation with many entities being driven out of business.
Further, this wolf introduction has never adequately addressed the issues of wolf transportation and transmission of disease and parasites that may affect people, domestic animals and other wildlife. It is commonly known that wolves are susceptible and transmit several diseases.
Finally, it is our testimony that the introduction of the non-native Canadian Grey wolves into the Northern Rockies has eradicated the already-existing native “Timber Wolf” that was living here; making the release of the Canadian wolves into our state a violation of the Endangered Species Act.
Genetic diversity. We wish to object to the Genetic Diversity and Connectivity argument used as a reason for the Federal Judge to disallow the delisting of wolves in our state. We assert that this specific condition were not required under the original EIS and was not a requirement for the eventual delisting of wolves under the Endangered Species Act. The argument that "genetic diversity" and "genetic connectivity" of wolf populations must be assured before wolves may be delisted in the northern Rocky Mountains is unreasonable, lacks any reasonable scientific basis or fact, and is contrary to the practiced behavior of wolves.
This topic is misconstrued and does not consider the extreme territorial behavior of these transplanted wolves and the fact that packs establish territories and kill off any intruders from other packs. Further, those involved in animal husbandry acknowledge that genetic diversity is not any sort of prime requirement for the establishment of healthy animal populations. In fact most believe the opposite to establish healthy genetics. Many animal breeders actually concentrate bloodlines in order to produce desirable traits in offspring, without any species degradation. This practice has been practiced since the beginning of modern man as we know it.
In addition, scientific testimony was presented in the lawsuit in federal court to reverse the previous delisting effort to document that some populations of wolves begun in isolated location(s) with only one male and one female, and with no additional injection of genetic material, are thriving - that lack of genetic diversity is no handicap to species survival whatsoever.
Further, the Canadian wolves that were released in Montana by the USFWS were drawn from several different parts of Canada, giving that released population a genetic diversity base far exceeding that necessary for a healthy population.
Actual practice and historic observation inform us that the only genetic diversity issue of any real consequence whatsoever is that there be both males and females. Once that diversity threshold is achieved, all rational genetic diversity needs have been met.
Those who advocate genetic diversity have offered no proof that genetic diversity among wolves is either desirable or necessary. If genetic diversity is so important, why has it taken wolf advocates over a decade to discover and articulate it? Why was argument for genetic diversity not made when the Endangered Species Act was crafted, or when the several state wolf management plans were devised? If the argument of genetic diversity has been apparent to the wolf advocates for a decade but they have deliberately not raised it until the 11th hour could that long silence be a type of fraud?
Genetic diversity is a thin, ruse argument. It is grasping at straws. Anyone who claims merit in that argument is either agenda-driven or using the argument as a façade. We also assert that there currently exists sufficient "genetic diversity" and "genetic connectivity" of Northern Rockies wolf populations to pass any rational, unbiased test. We assert that wolf advocates had years to raise these issues, but either slept on their rights or committed fraud though deliberate silence.
Genetic connectivity. This argument is also a ruse. First, wolves’ social makeup is strongly antagonistic to genetic connectivity. Wolves regularly and reliably kill other wolves, with other genetic makeup, that stray into the area claimed by a pack. So, wolves actively resist genetic connectivity, no matter how much nature-loving environmental activist’s wish it was otherwise.
Second, without need for genetic diversity, as discussed above, there is simply no need for genetic connectivity.
Third, there is already a potential for genetic connectivity that is probably an order of magnitude greater than anything that might be required for a genetically-stable population. For example, a few years ago a wolf collared and released in Montana was found as road-kill in Texas. This wolf had traveled an incredible distance.
There are three populations of wolves discussed in the Northern Rockies; the population migrating from Canada in northwestern Montana, the population introduced into the Yellowstone Park area, and the introduced population in central Idaho. There are documented wolf packs west of Missoula, both north and south of Interstate 90; an area that is roughly equidistant from the three general populations mentioned proceeding. It is axiomatic to presume that the wolves west of Missoula came from one of the other three surrounding wolf population centers. Ergo, if wolves can reach the center of the existing population triangle, wolves are then quite capable of reaching any part of the triangle from any other part of the triangle. To say otherwise is to defy rational thought.
If there is inadequate intermingling of wolf genetics (according to some), it is mostly because wolves kill strange wolves at the first opportunity. Perhaps the advocates of genetic connectivity ought to be assigned the task to force the mating of wolves strange to each other (sorry, no protective clothing or protective devices allowed). Let's get on the record just how well wolves tolerate that.
Wolf advocates have long known the terms of delisting. Those objecting to delisting had years to raise new issues concerning delisting, but they never did. They cannot claim ignorance of pending delisting. There have been multiple opportunities to raise new issues in comment on state management plans, listing and delisting, yet genetic diversity and genetic connectivity have never before been central to the wolf advocates' position.
Disease and parasites. Precious little attention has been paid to the diseases and parasites for which wolves may be vectors. Wolves are certainly hosts to or potential vectors for many dangerous diseases and parasites that affect other wild animals, livestock and humans, e.g. distemper, rabies, anthrax, brucellosis, echinococcus granulosis, and others. Because wolves are so highly mobile, their role as vectors is a huge liability to other species also subject to the diseases and parasites they may carry. Therefore, the potential exists for wolves to have a vast and incalculable negative impact upon other species, domestic, wild, and of course, humans. The liability associated with far-ranging wolves as disease and parasite vectors argues strongly for wolf delisting and comprehensive wolf management.
Eradication of native wolves. In her book Yellowstone Wolves, Kat Ubrikit makes a compelling case that a separate subspecies of wolves inhabited the greater Yellowstone area, including Montana and Wyoming, than the subspecies of Canadian wolf released by the FWS. This subspecies looks different, has different social structure, and hunts differently. There is a history of far too many documented sightings of this native subspecies for there to be any rational doubt that it existed prior to the release of Canadian wolves. Facing the near-certainty that this native subspecies existed and inhabited Montana and Wyoming, and then the release of the Canadian subspecies was an overt violation of the Endangered Species Act.
For the above reasons and arguments regardless of ones position on the legality of the illegality under the ESA for introducing the Canadian Grey wolves into Idaho, we acknowledge that they are here to stay and we highly support and encourage the immediate delisting and transferring of management of wolves to the state of Idaho. We believe that this is the only prudent way to allow our state to manage this species to guarantee their long term viability within our state.
Sincerely,
Tony Mayer Co-Founder, SaveElk Coalition
[/blockquote]
From:[/b] saveelk........
....... Date: [/b]12-Nov-08[/b] Private Reply
[blockquote]
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator 585 Shepard Way Helena, Montana 59601
Comment -- Canadian Wolf Delisting and Designating the Northern Rocky Mountain Population of Wolf as a Distinct Population Segment
Dear Sirs,
The SaveElk Coalition is a group of concerned Idaho Sportsman asserting the rights and prerogatives of hunters in Idaho. Most all of our members (currently numbering in excess of 800) were initially opposed to the initial "introduction" of the non-native Canadian Wolves into Idaho; however concurrently we recognize that regardless of our earlier objections we recognize that these wolves are here to stay and we support the immediacy for wolves to be removed from protection as an endangered species, and for the immediate classification as a big game animal and for the immediate transfer of management of this species to the state of Idaho.
It is our position that the population of these Canadian wolves has exploded within our state multiplying at an annual rate of 20 to 25% since the original introduction. Current estimates far exceed 1000 wolves. This population is 6,666 times the original agreed upon 150 maximum wolf population levels that was acknowledged and accepted in our state wolf management plan, which was widely publicized, acknowledged and accepted by all parties involved including pro-wolf, anti-wolf and general citizenry. This was the basis and plan that was finally approved by the USF&W Service and the Federal Government as a condition of wolf delisting. Continued lacks of wolf management and unregulated and unconstrained wolf growth is significantly harming and reducing our state ungulate herds, with wolves have totally eradicated elk herds in certain isolated parts of our state. Continued listing of wolves will cause irrefutable harm to our states residents in lost hunting opportunities and in lost tag revenues, with the resulting loss of commerce that many citizens depend on for their livelihood. The argument that wolf sightseeing will offset this loss in commerce is absolutely wrong and totally misguided. A significant part of our state commerce depends on maintaining vibrant, healthy big game herds which are being significantly harmed by the unregulated growth of these wolves. Further livestock growers are experiencing continued harassment and herd losses from wolf depredation with many entities being driven out of business.
Further, this wolf introduction has never adequately addressed the issues of wolf transportation and transmission of disease and parasites that may affect people, domestic animals and other wildlife. It is commonly known that wolves are susceptible and transmit several diseases.
Finally, it is our testimony that the introduction of the non-native Canadian Grey wolves into the Northern Rockies has eradicated the already-existing native “Timber Wolf” that was living here; making the release of the Canadian wolves into our state a violation of the Endangered Species Act.
Genetic diversity. We wish to object to the Genetic Diversity and Connectivity argument used as a reason for the Federal Judge to disallow the delisting of wolves in our state. We assert that this specific condition were not required under the original EIS and was not a requirement for the eventual delisting of wolves under the Endangered Species Act. The argument that "genetic diversity" and "genetic connectivity" of wolf populations must be assured before wolves may be delisted in the northern Rocky Mountains is unreasonable, lacks any reasonable scientific basis or fact, and is contrary to the practiced behavior of wolves.
This topic is misconstrued and does not consider the extreme territorial behavior of these transplanted wolves and the fact that packs establish territories and kill off any intruders from other packs. Further, those involved in animal husbandry acknowledge that genetic diversity is not any sort of prime requirement for the establishment of healthy animal populations. In fact most believe the opposite to establish healthy genetics. Many animal breeders actually concentrate bloodlines in order to produce desirable traits in offspring, without any species degradation. This practice has been practiced since the beginning of modern man as we know it.
In addition, scientific testimony was presented in the lawsuit in federal court to reverse the previous delisting effort to document that some populations of wolves begun in isolated location(s) with only one male and one female, and with no additional injection of genetic material, are thriving - that lack of genetic diversity is no handicap to species survival whatsoever.
Further, the Canadian wolves that were released in Montana by the USFWS were drawn from several different parts of Canada, giving that released population a genetic diversity base far exceeding that necessary for a healthy population.
Actual practice and historic observation inform us that the only genetic diversity issue of any real consequence whatsoever is that there be both males and females. Once that diversity threshold is achieved, all rational genetic diversity needs have been met.
Those who advocate genetic diversity have offered no proof that genetic diversity among wolves is either desirable or necessary. If genetic diversity is so important, why has it taken wolf advocates over a decade to discover and articulate it? Why was argument for genetic diversity not made when the Endangered Species Act was crafted, or when the several state wolf management plans were devised? If the argument of genetic diversity has been apparent to the wolf advocates for a decade but they have deliberately not raised it until the 11th hour could that long silence be a type of fraud?
Genetic diversity is a thin, ruse argument. It is grasping at straws. Anyone who claims merit in that argument is either agenda-driven or using the argument as a façade. We also assert that there currently exists sufficient "genetic diversity" and "genetic connectivity" of Northern Rockies wolf populations to pass any rational, unbiased test. We assert that wolf advocates had years to raise these issues, but either slept on their rights or committed fraud though deliberate silence.
Genetic connectivity. This argument is also a ruse. First, wolves’ social makeup is strongly antagonistic to genetic connectivity. Wolves regularly and reliably kill other wolves, with other genetic makeup, that stray into the area claimed by a pack. So, wolves actively resist genetic connectivity, no matter how much nature-loving environmental activist’s wish it was otherwise.
Second, without need for genetic diversity, as discussed above, there is simply no need for genetic connectivity.
Third, there is already a potential for genetic connectivity that is probably an order of magnitude greater than anything that might be required for a genetically-stable population. For example, a few years ago a wolf collared and released in Montana was found as road-kill in Texas. This wolf had traveled an incredible distance.
There are three populations of wolves discussed in the Northern Rockies; the population migrating from Canada in northwestern Montana, the population introduced into the Yellowstone Park area, and the introduced population in central Idaho. There are documented wolf packs west of Missoula, both north and south of Interstate 90; an area that is roughly equidistant from the three general populations mentioned proceeding. It is axiomatic to presume that the wolves west of Missoula came from one of the other three surrounding wolf population centers. Ergo, if wolves can reach the center of the existing population triangle, wolves are then quite capable of reaching any part of the triangle from any other part of the triangle. To say otherwise is to defy rational thought.
If there is inadequate intermingling of wolf genetics (according to some), it is mostly because wolves kill strange wolves at the first opportunity. Perhaps the advocates of genetic connectivity ought to be assigned the task to force the mating of wolves strange to each other (sorry, no protective clothing or protective devices allowed). Let's get on the record just how well wolves tolerate that.
Wolf advocates have long known the terms of delisting. Those objecting to delisting had years to raise new issues concerning delisting, but they never did. They cannot claim ignorance of pending delisting. There have been multiple opportunities to raise new issues in comment on state management plans, listing and delisting, yet genetic diversity and genetic connectivity have never before been central to the wolf advocates' position.
Disease and parasites. Precious little attention has been paid to the diseases and parasites for which wolves may be vectors. Wolves are certainly hosts to or potential vectors for many dangerous diseases and parasites that affect other wild animals, livestock and humans, e.g. distemper, rabies, anthrax, brucellosis, echinococcus granulosis, and others. Because wolves are so highly mobile, their role as vectors is a huge liability to other species also subject to the diseases and parasites they may carry. Therefore, the potential exists for wolves to have a vast and incalculable negative impact upon other species, domestic, wild, and of course, humans. The liability associated with far-ranging wolves as disease and parasite vectors argues strongly for wolf delisting and comprehensive wolf management.
Eradication of native wolves. In her book Yellowstone Wolves, Kat Ubrikit makes a compelling case that a separate subspecies of wolves inhabited the greater Yellowstone area, including Montana and Wyoming, than the subspecies of Canadian wolf released by the FWS. This subspecies looks different, has different social structure, and hunts differently. There is a history of far too many documented sightings of this native subspecies for there to be any rational doubt that it existed prior to the release of Canadian wolves. Facing the near-certainty that this native subspecies existed and inhabited Montana and Wyoming, and then the release of the Canadian subspecies was an overt violation of the Endangered Species Act.
For the above reasons and arguments regardless of ones position on the legality of the illegality under the ESA for introducing the Canadian Grey wolves into Idaho, we acknowledge that they are here to stay and we highly support and encourage the immediate delisting and transferring of management of wolves to the state of Idaho. We believe that this is the only prudent way to allow our state to manage this species to guarantee their long term viability within our state.
Sincerely,
Tony Mayer Co-Founder, SaveElk Coalition
[/blockquote]
11-13-2008, 09:27 PM
#6
Spike
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: springfield, oregon
Posts: 66
RE: WOLVES (Please Read)
Blacktail, I hear ya. I live in Springfield and hunt over east. If the wolves explode like the cougars have, they're gonna start destroying big game herds. I sent a comment on the site. thanks for the link.
11-14-2008, 05:32 AM
#7
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,876
RE: WOLVES (Please Read)
Soon enough we'll be paid to kill them.
My way of thinking is if the numbers are stabilized the only people who'll be effected are hunters. I'm for letting the rest of the world enjoy the puppy love.
When they kill enough of the pets and horses of the rich and famous life will be good for the hunter. I've never been paid to hunt. Would tickle me to death.
My way of thinking is if the numbers are stabilized the only people who'll be effected are hunters. I'm for letting the rest of the world enjoy the puppy love.
When they kill enough of the pets and horses of the rich and famous life will be good for the hunter. I've never been paid to hunt. Would tickle me to death.
