Saturday

The Obama administration's proposal to remove the gray wolf from the federal endangered species list is prompting howls of protest from environmentalists and congressional Democrats and has given ranchers, hunters and Republican lawmakers reason to cheer.

Other Americans can also weigh in. People have until Dec. 17 to tell the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service what they think about the proposed rule to lift federal protections for the gray wolf in much of the continental United States.

The Mexican wolf, found only in the Southwest, would remain on the list, meaning it will be illegal under federal law to kill or harm the animals. There are about 75 Mexican wolves.

The wildlife agency will issue a final rule next year after reviewing public input. As of late Thursday, it had received 194,188 comments dating back to June 13, when the administration announced the gray and Mexican wolf proposals. A majority of the comments oppose de-listing.

The administration de-listed 1,674 gray wolves thought to be living in the Northern Rocky Mountains last year and 4,432 animals in the western Great Lakes region in 2011. Officials justified the decisions by saying both wolf populations had exceeded the "minimum recovery goals" of 300 for three consecutive years.


This year's proposal would de-list the wolves in Oregon and Washington -- home to about 46 and 51 animals respectively -- and 40 other states where the wolves could potentially move to if their numbers increase in the territory they now inhabit.

Critics oppose federal de-listing because that leaves it up to the states to decide how to manage wolves living within their boundaries. They say states have ramped up hunting quotas and fear that the gray wolf's slow and fragile recovery could be overturned.

Gray wolves in the contiguous states have been under federal protection since 1967.

Estimates put the gray wolf population at about 2 million throughout North America in the 1500s, before the Europeans arrived. As of December 2012, when the animals were last counted, there were an estimated 6,100 in the lower 48 states, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.


The species is not listed as endangered in Alaska, home to 7,000-11,000 of the animals. Canada has at least 40,000 gray wolves, which are also known as timber wolves.

In a notable move, the federal government re-introduced 66 gray wolves in the Yellowstone National Park in 1995-96. At the end of last year, there were 83 wolves in Yellowstone, clustered in 10 packs, according to the National Park Service.

Environmentalists fear that de-listing the species would, in effect, give the green light for people to once again indiscriminately slaughter an icon of wild America.

The gray wolf had almost vanished from the continental U.S. by the 1940s. People trapped and shot adults, burned pups alive and did brutal things like wiring the jaws shut before releasing captured animals to ensure they starve to death in the wild, said Amaroq Weiss, a biologist, attorney and wolf expert at the Center for Biological Diversity, headquartered in Tucson, Ariz.


Gray wolves are found in parts of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Oregon and Washington state.

States like Colorado, which have plenty of forest land and elk and other hoofed animals that gray wolves prey upon, have no known populations. In 2011, a radio-collared male from Oregon crossed into California and wandered for 4,000 miles -- likely looking for a mate -- before returning home.

Conservationists say administration officials proposed de-listing in response to political pressure. "They want to wash their hands off the wolves. They don't want to deal with the politics anymore," Weiss said. "They're saying that the purpose of the Endangered Species Act is simply to prevent an animal from becoming extinct. And that's not correct. The purpose of the Endangered Species Act is to recover species that are endangered or threatened and to also protect the habitats on which they depend."

Three de-listing proposals failed in the previous decade after environmentalists successfully sued. Critics are prepared to go to court again if the current proposal is adopted.

Oregon Democratic Rep. Pete DeFazio, the ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, agrees with the conservationists. He and 55 other lawmakers wrote to Fish and Wildlife Director Dan Ashe in March, urging him to keep the gray wolf on the endangered list.


"I really feel that we want to try and reestablish the gray wolf across most of its historic range. We are way far away from that," he said in a recent interview. "I've been involved with (gray wolves) for a couple of decades. I have yet to see a wolf in the wild. I hope someday to do that."

The administration said science, not politics, was behind the de-listing proposal. In a blog posting on June 13, Ashe said the recovering wolf population is "one of the spectacular successes of the Endangered Species Act."

"For one reason, and one reason only, we are proposing to remove the gray wolf from the list ... they are no longer in danger of extinction now or in the foreseeable future," he wrote.

Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973.

In the proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, the administration disputed claims that the gray wolf lived throughout the lower 48 in the past. Recent studies show the animal lived pretty much where it's found now, the government argued. Acknowledging that the species "has undergone significant range contraction in portions of its historical range," the administration said the "species continues to be widespread and, as a whole, is stable."

Terry Fankhauser, executive vice president of the Colorado Cattlemen's Association, said it's time to de-list the gray wolf because new statistics show the species has "recovered amazingly."

He said he wants Colorado to remain free of permanent wolf residents. The 4,000 ranchers who belong to his group worry that the wolves could kill their livestock if the animals make it into the state, he said.

Conservationists should accept that wolves will never be as abundant as they were centuries ago, when there were fewer people and more prey animals, he said.

"There's a responsibility . . . not to live in the past, but to recognize the current ecological balance of things and manage populations accordingly," Fankhauser said.

Last month, 75 lawmakers -- most of them Republicans -- led by House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., wrote to Ashe to endorse the plan to de-list the gray wolf and urge him to reconsider the decision to list the Mexican wolf as as "subspecies," which entitles the animal to further federal protection.

Allowing the Mexican wolf population to grow would hurt ranchers in Arizona, New Mexico and other Southwestern states, they wrote.
SOURCE
VIDEO

Responses to "Obama proposal to stop protecting gray wolf fuels controversy (Video)"

  1. ALL OF OUR WOLVES SHOULD BE ON THE ENDANGERED LIST & KEPT THERE. THEY'RE GOING TO ALL BE KILLED OFF. THEN WE WONT BE PROTECTED FROM OTHERS-LIKE BEARS OR WHAT A WOLF CAN KEEP CHASED AWAY.WHAT IF ALL THE SKUNKS ARE KILLED? THEY ARE USELESS ! DO LOTS OF HARM.WHAT ANIMALS WOULD BE AROUND TO CLEAN UP THE OLD ROTTING CARCASSES? OUR OWN DOGS CAME FROM WOLVES.HOW CAN ANY HUMAN KILL OUR 1ST DOGS? OUR DOGS ANCESTORS?GOD MADE WOLF FOR OUR COMPANION.NOT FOR TARGET PRACTICE.I LIVED 6 MILES BACK IN THE WOODS. NO NEIGHBORS, FOR 5YRS.WOLVES NEVER BOTHERED US,OUR DOGS OR CATS.DIDNT SEE ONE. SAW BEAR,DEER FOX,SKUNKS,PORQUPINES& OWLS.SAW TRACKS FROM WOLVES 2MI AWAY,NEVER WAS BLESSED TO SPOT A WOLF. GOD SAID DO NOT KILL.THESE WOLVES ARE HIS CREATION. THEY BELONG TO HIM. JUST LEAVE ALL WILDLIFE ALONE.

  2. Anonymous says:

    il faut protéger les LOUPS ils étaient là avant nous les hommes font plus de dégats que les animaux le plus grand prédateur et l'homme

  3. Anonymous says:

    SCREW THE RANCHERS! WOLVES WERE HERE LONG BEFORE THEM!!!!!! SO WHAT IF SOME OF THEIR COWS GET KILLED, THEY MAKE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR, ITS NOT GOING TO HURT THEM!

  4. Anonymous says:

    The wolves should be on any list that will protect them. They are here for a reason to help balance nature. The government gets to decide if there are enough of them???? Next it will be humans. Oh yeah that's right we send them off into other countries business and get them killed.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Killing off the wolves would be entirely wrong. Its sad that human beings human beings have developed no compassion for living things.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Reading this just got me all the more ticked off. All of us who love the wolf, it's grace and beauty need to stand up and protect them to no end! The wolf to me is right up on the list as the bald eagle. The eagle -protected as so the wolf should be. They both stand for America in my eyes. Don't let the wolf be slaughtered, they need to live as they were ment to be. I am for the wolves to live a peaceful life, not to be killed by traps, snares, and guns. " America" - Land of the free, home of the brave. Why can't that pertain to animals as well. Protect nautres beauty!

  7. Anonymous says:

    Don't even think about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You keep on breaking down and tearing up their environment.
    So they end up in yours... Protect them!
    They have a right to live , like you.
    We are all angels of God's decent. Leave them ALONE!!!!!

  8. Anonymous says:

    I believe the wolves need more protection but I also believe conscientious ranchers need some type of compensation to help their livelihood in order to protect both sides from cruelty and greed to rule this problem . I've seen videos of programs that are working great to keep hungry wolves from preying on ranchers herds when applied properly .

  9. Anonymous says:

    Keep the wolves safe!!! They are beautiful and very necessary to the order of things in nature. Ranchers should keep their herds safe, keep the area secure, they do not kill except for food. and it is wrong to kill them, they were here first, and we want to keep them as close to natural territory as possible. They are a part of our history!!!.

  10. Unknown says:

    I think a few political people are over populated .... I say no more than 150 of them ... so can we go open season with them!.. oh and the whole human population has gotten out of control so put a bounty on us?! ... don't be foolish... save the wolves!

  11. Anonymous says:

    Stop interfering with the ecosystem! What is the difference between using dogs to hunt wolves and dog fighting? How are these dogs going to interact with society?

  12. Anonymous says:

    Leave the wolves on the endangered list and protect them.

  13. Anonymous says:

    We shall protect these beautifull creature. They're part of us in a way. They make the balance in the circle of life. I was believing and supporting Obama 'till now. With rhis pretty controversial decision from his government, I now believe he's just a jerk. Not as honest as he pretend to be. Not at all definding our rights at all, as he petend to. Wolfes as I said are part of us, of our country. So they shall all have the right to live freely as we North-American do.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Why stop at saving the wolf. Why not save the green bean it is a life form. I mean there must be a abundance of wolves if there is a certain amount of quota on them, and yes they are just like dogs have 1-2 litters of pups a year. Just think how many there would be in a couple more years be less deer, elk, and other prey. After they are gone and cows become locked in barns then the packs will start hunting other game. Some one breaks down at side of road changing tire then wolves attack they always like a weak prey, and with out man made weapons humans are the weakest prey. We cant run fast to escape like most other prey.

  15. Unknown says:

    Anonymous at the 2:30PM mark is ignorant of the the bell curve as it is applied to populations and their inter-dependence upon one another. In fact, I'd go so far as to say, he/she needs to learn biology before he/she opens his/her mouth ever again where animals are concerned, as these remarks are mirrored within the redneck, backwoods humans who don't know dink and don't care to learn.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Wow there are a lot of comments here in all caps... can't states manage their own wildlife effectively? Also I don't think removing them from the federal do not kill list while they stay on the local states' do not kill list is an extermination order, I would need more information to really make an informed decision as to this law

  17. Black Wolf says:

    ALL wolves should be protected by the federal Government

  18. Anonymous says:

    Leave the wolves on the endangered list.....They are beautiful dogs and they need to be protected always from harmful humans,,,

  19. Unknown says:

    When the most powerful country in the world has it's legislation written by a bunch of gun happy redneck retards, then what hope is there for any of the endangered species in the world? The Federal Government should be renamed The Feral Government. You're a sorry excuse for intelligence.

  20. This is a shameful world that we live in. So they want people to kill, wire up them up, burn their pups, and brutally murder them all over again, boy you must feel so proud. Wolves have EVERY RIGHT to do on the endangered list. Look at all the breeds that have gone extinct, oh wait that's right you can't because they are all DEAD! Most humans are more than disturbing creatures. They hunt an animal who is probably trying to find food for it's young or even itself and they go and kill it like its some damn trophy. I wish it was legal to kill humans. Hey yeah! The world is over populated by the race of humans. Why do you make a law where humans can be killed for trophy reasons! Yeah sounds gross right? Well guess what you're doing the same damn thing to those wolves!! So rethink what you're doing and keep them on the endangered list!!

  21. Patrice Johnson says:

    Do not delist the gray wolf. The population is too sparse. For healthy deer, elk, and caribou populations, the wolf is key for the ecosystem. Repaying for livestock loss is a successful alternative to eliminating an important species for our planet.

  22. Anonymous says:

    The government is doing the same thing to the Wolves, Bison and Grizzly as they did to the Native Americans and look how that ended up!

  23. Anonymous says:

    Hollllly crap wolfaboos. They are not on the endangered list for a reason: Because they AREN'T endangered.


    You guys are scaring me with your capslock rages.

  24. Anonymous says:

    I don't think removing them from the endangered species list is necessarily a bad thing. Wolves should still be protected and their populations regulated, but very limited hunting should be allowable in areas with growing populations. And we definitely don't want to throw Ranchers under the bus. Sure, some of them might make millions, but I guarantee that others are struggling to make a livelihood. If everyone would stop freaking out and going to extremes, I think we could find a compromise.

Write a comment

Stats

Archives

Pages