January 31, 2015

HSUS Will “Accept” a “Threatened” Classification for Wolves

This is the leading paragraph in a news story found in the Star Tribune:

Animal protection and environmental advocates in Minnesota and nationally have informed federal regulators that they would accept a reduced level of protection for wolves in order to avert a congressional effort to remove all protections for the species.

<<<Read More>>>

I do understand that these are words of the reporter and author of the article and not directly those of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) or any other environmentalist group. However, the question I would like to ask is who in the hell does the HSUS think they are that they can TELL federal regulators what they will and will not accept? Who died and left them in charge of all things environmental.

The message I would have for HSUS I will not put to print…thank you.

Isn’t it just a bit too late? This move is an obvious sign that the environmentalists are running scared envisioning an act of Congress that would spoil their party. Too bad and too late! You pushed and you pushed and you pushed. Always demanding and taking more. NEVER GIVING! Now it is time to pay the fiddler.

I am not an advocate of managing wildlife with politics but I am hoping that Congress comes down hard on this issue and not only prevents wolves from any longer being needlessly protected but takes away their gravy train of lawsuits. Color me vindictive.

Perhaps the chickens are headed toward the roost in the hen house.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInEmailShare

AZ and NM Want Their Wolves Included in Ribble Bill for Delisting

As I understand things, a bill that is planned to go before the U.S. House of Representatives that would effectively remove gray wolves in Wisconsin, Michigan, Wyoming and Minnesota from protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), is being crafted as I write. According to some sources, once that bill is ready it will be presented to the House.

There now appears to be a movement underway in Arizona and New Mexico where groups seeking control of wolves in the Southwest want their Congressional representatives to get in on the action and get Mexican wolves in those states included on this bill.

Below is a copy of a letter sent to Rep. Steve Pearce from the Catron County Commission seeking action.

RE: Addition of “Mexican Gray Wolf” to be included with the “Gray Wolf’s” removal from the Endangered Species List Congressman Pearce,

The Catron County Commission requests that you add the “Mexican Gray Wolf” (Canis Lupus Baileyi) into the legislation U.S. Representative Reed Ribble, R-Wis. is preparing to remove the “Gray Wolf” off the Endangered Species List in four States.

U.S. Representative Ribble is leading the effort and the co-sponsors include U.S. Representatives Collin Peterson, D-Minn., Dan Benishek, R-Mich., and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.

There has already been severe collateral damage to the citizens of Catron County, County Government and the State of New Mexico in recovery of Mexican Gray Wolves on settled landscapes by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (See attachment A1 Dr. Geist)

Now, with the new 10j rule, Mexican Wolf Recovery will be expanded up to I-40 (eventually beyond) in New Mexico-Arizona and South to the Mexican border. This expansion will take in vast settled landscapes and will have major negative effects on the citizens, pets, businesses, livestock, and wildlife.

All the Mexican wolves that have been released into the Gila Wilderness have moved and gone into areas of human activity. The last wolf pack, the Coronado Pack was released last July, 2014 into the Gila Wilderness. The wolves left the Wilderness recently, entered private property attacking and injuring two dogs. The wolves were hazed back into the Gila Wilderness by the USFWS and the chance of them remaining is questionable.

Congressman Pearce, by taking the Mexican Wolf off the Endangered Species List it will save rural families from losing their homes, businesses and private property rights.

Attached are documents to show the negative effects and collateral damage to achieve Mexican Wolf Recovery on settled landscapes .

Respectfully Submitted,
Glyn Griffin,
Catron County Commission Chair

Attachment A1

Dr. Geist addresses the issue of wolf recovery on settled landscapes

Wolves cannot be kept in settled landscapes, because of the impossibility of keeping wolves and dogs apart, and the destruction of the wolf genome by creeping hybridization. While I whole-heatedly agree that there should be no keeping of wolves and wolf hybrids as pets, the sheer size of the “wolf-dog” industry as well as past releases of wolf hybrids will insure further erosion of the genome of free-ranging wolves. Secondly, how is officialdom to know of wolf hybrids unless wolf numbers are strictly and closely regulated so that plenty of specimens are available for testing. Thirdly, from my experience identifying wolves or dogs from photos sent my way I have serious doubts that European wolf specialists can currently distinguish wolf from dog. Unless limits are set early to wolf numbers – and I see no hint of that – wolf populations will expand to destroy the populations of deer and turn to livestock and humans.

Do the authors of this manifesto really think that they can significantly keep wolves and dogs apart by minimizing the number of free-ranging dogs? Even if they have some success in doing so, are they not aware that lone wolves themselves seek out dogs? Do they really think that lone wolf females in heat will desist from visiting suburbs and farms looking for a mate? Do they think that chained farm dogs will not copulate with a female wolf in heat at night? Has nobody had the experience of holding a young very large male dog in training while they come in contact with am estrus female canid? I had a Bouvier de Flandre on the leash while we came across a small wolf track in the snow – and the Bouvier went wild! He then weighed only about a hundred pounds. I had my hands full! An amorous male wolf threatened my wife when he approached an estrus hunting dog in an enclosure. No neighborhood male dog had been that bold! In short, given wolves with a desire to mate and they will intrude deep into human habitation. There is no way to effectively segregate wolves from dogs in settled landscapes. Moreover, as this is written, there is now way to protect wildlife from marauding packs of dogs either.

As I have said before, all efforts to make wolves compatible with settle landscapes are a waste of time and energy. All marauding canids in settle landscape need to be removed. This raises the question of how to conserve wolves as a species. What we know for certain is that they need to be kept away from people and dogs. In the first instance that means that wolves and other large predators need to be kept where the public has no entry. And such areas need to be large. The very first step is to negotiate internationally for keeping large predators on military and atomic reserves. I doubt that national parks are suitable because the tourist lobby will balk. Secondly, means and ways need to be found to control closely wolf populations in such reserves to insure that the predators do not run out of prey, and leave the reserves for settled landscapes. Well-fed wolves will cause the least problems. Severe trapping and predator control in 20th century North America kept wolves out of settled landscapes, eliminated agricultural losses and disease transmission, retained their genetic integrity, while attacks on humans were unheard of.

Wolf conservation as proposed here (i.e. Europe) is not serious.

Sincerely, Val Geist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science

The Courts v. Congress

What a mess the Courts have made as it may pertain to Endangered Species Act (ESA) rulings. Court interpretations of the ESA have essentially rendered the Act a useless instrument to deal scientifically with specie issues. Because of out of control Courts, it has literally taken an act of Congress to effect some sort of sanity back into reality…..or not.

In the latest issue of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM) newsletter, Gerry Lavigne, a former Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) biologist, now works with SAM as a science adviser, wrote an article titled, Trojan Lynx.

In that article he writes: “To make matters worse, the USFWS lumped all 14 states into one recovery area, or “Distinct Population Segment” (DPS). Biologically, there are four distinct and separate lynx populations in the lower 48 states. Each of these four lynx populations extend into Canada….

“Recovery and removal of the lynx from the endangered species list depends on all four subpopulations attaining some as yet undetermined recovery standards simultaneously. What are the chances? How the USFWS chose to define the listing appears corrupt, and lacking biological integrity.

Lynx canadensis  Canada Lynx

The yellow-shaded areas show the historic range of Canada lynx throughout North America.

I’m not sure I agree totally with Lavigne’s assessment but that has little bearing on the bigger issue at hand. There was corruption all around during the Canada lynx listing process, and so we know that the choice to list the lynx was all based in political corruption and animal rights activism. Little can be done to reverse that act as history has shown government agencies and their pal environmentalists are not held accountable for any of their corrupt actions.

At this juncture, it matters not whether the USFWS listed lynx as “threatened” in one recovery area, 4 or 4,000, the Courts have decided, twice that I am aware of, that the USFWS doesn’t have authority to do that. Yesterday I explained this in an examination of Judge Beryl Howell’s recent gray wolf nonsense ruling.

Lavigne states that the only way the lynx can be taken off the list of protected species is when all lynx in all of the Lower 48 States are recovered – and we don’t know what the recovery criteria is because the USFWS has, of yet, to make that determination. (Sanity would suggest that in order to declare something “threatened” there must be some kind of data to show that and at the same time to have knowledge of what it will take to declare a species recovered. Otherwise how can such an act come about other than through corruption? But we don’t deal in normal things.)

At the present moment I think Lavigne is correct, according to the Courts. Judge Howell’s and Judge Friedman’s rulings both said that the USFWS doesn’t have authority to create a DPS for the purpose of delisting a species. And yet reality shows that they have authority to create a DPS for the purpose of listing a species. This cannot be and makes no sense at all. A complete one way street as I see it.

I almost never support the USFWS because they are agenda oriented, biased, corrupt and inept, but I do believe that part of the USFWS’s decision in listing the lynx originally as one segment in the Lower 48 States, their belief was, from past events, that they could chunk out a separate population segment and declare lynx (or any other species) within that segment recovered. The Courts have said no way.

Even though the USFWS has provided the Friedman Court an explanation of where they get authority within the ESA to create DPS and delist, and the Obama Administration drafted and entered into the Federal Register their definitions of historic range, current range and “significant portion of its range” evidently the Courts don’t want anything to do with that stuff.

The Courts have created a legal mess, destroying the ESA and rendering the functioning of the USFWS as nothing more than a government agency trying to work with both hands tied behind their backs. This all brings the solution back to Congress. As with what happened in Montana and Idaho, because the Courts are so ignorant of wildlife issues, and corrupt due to activism, then the Legislature has to do what legislatures do and that’s write more laws. When a corrupt Congress decides that the corrupt courts can’t interpret laws as they were corruptly written, then the lawmakers simply write new corrupt laws even if if means circumventing the corrupt rule of law. Make sense to you?

Lavigne asks what the chances are that lynx will be recovered simultaneously throughout 14 states. The answer is never and that is the reason why the Courts rule in favor of the environmentalists because animal protection, in their perverted minds, must be continual, and that includes no hunting, trapping and fishing. Go ahead. Keep denying it.

Feds Plan Wolf Releases Outside Approved Areas

Press Release from Wolf Crossing:

Call to Action:

Please be aware Fish and Wildlife Service are issuing themselves a permit to release Mexican wolves in Vermejo park in Northern NM. We believe this to be in violation of NEPA and the APA not to mention all the lip service FWS ever gave the general public during the past years rule change NEPA process.

Wolves at the park would be out of the Mexican wolf experimental population area, making them fully endangered. This was our worst fear, that a large landowner could provide a staging ground for releases into areas not approved under 10-J experimental rulemaking, but land that could still qualifying for recovery habitat of the animal.

Why did this happen? FWS simply gave themselves permission for a categorical exclusion. Legally a CE is limited in it’s analyzed impacts, for it to qualify there has to be no change to ongoing process. definition of CE can be found here. http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/docuce.asp Clearly this is a big change, wolves in N. NM and S. Colorado outside the current recovery area, with full status is a MAJOR FEDERAL ACTION that doesn’t meet the requirements for a Categorical Exclusion. FWS may be trying to tier the CE off the Mexican wolf NEPA analysis just concluded and the new rule issued Jan 15, with only the barest mention of deeded land deals in the Draft and Final EIS, with no analysis of impacts, regardless, it is illegal.

The current rule and final decision, is already under scrutiny by several organizations both producer and environmentalist, as the final decision was based on an agreement rather than any of the alternatives vetted by the public in the NEPA process, it too is illegal. FWS made a backdoor deal on a new alternative the public had no chance to comment on, during public meetings or comment periods and now they pursue an entirely new plan.

Clearly FWS is acting outside the parameters of the ESA behaving lawlessly and trying to release Mexican wolves outside the Mexican wolf experimental population area and recovery area. This could allow them to spread onto ranch-lands north of I-40. This will make Mexican wolves fully endangered up in this area which means no control of problem animals and no removals even with depredation problems.

Make your comments and donate funds to the legal battles. Folks we have to do something this time, talk to your organization and insist they communicate with the members on the implications of this new plan and the legal strategy that is being embarked upon.

Comments on the permit, can be made here. Cite the permit number in your comments.
Comments on this permit are due by February 17.

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/01/15/2015-00551/endangered-and-threatened-species-permit-applications#h-16

Permit TE-091551

Applicant: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—Mexican Wolf Recovery Program, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Applicant requests a renewal to a current permit for research and recovery purposes to conduct the following activities for Mexican gray wolf (Canis lupis baileyi) within Arizona and New Mexico: Capture, including, but not limited to, leg-hold traps, helicopter or ground darting and net-gunning, and captive capture methods; handle; possession; administration of health care; propagation; radio collar or other marking techniques; release; obtain and preserve blood, tissue, semen, ova, and other samples that are considered parts of wolves (scat is not considered a part of a wolf and can be collected without a permit); translocate; transport between approved Mexican wolf captive management facilities in the United States and Mexico, to approved release sites, and to and from the Vermejo Park Ranch; purposeful lethal take (lethal control is limited to Mexican wolves within the MWEPA in Arizona and New Mexico); hazing via less-than-lethal projectiles; injurious harassment; research; and any other USFWS-approved husbandry practice or management action for Mexican wolves.

Historic Range: All Or Nothing? Intellectual Bankruptcy?

CognitiveDissonanceIt is more and more obvious with each passing day that the United States has eagerly, and yet unknowingly, moved into a Totalitarian socialist government and existence of servitude. Much of this occurred the result of intellectual bankruptcy at all levels. If you at all get it, this might appear to you as obvious in Court rulings about endangered species…and then again, maybe not.

The latest in this seeming Kabuki theater is one ruling and explanation of a Washington, D.C. judge, Beryl Howell, who essentially ruled that the United States, under the Obama-administrated Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) cannot remove any species from federal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) unless that species is fully recovered throughout all of its historic range. In other words, the USFWS does not have authority because of the ESA to manage species through the confines of the ESA by declaring a species recovered within a designated region, most often called a Distinct Population Segment (DPS).

In Judge Howell’s Memorandum of Opinion in the Humane Society of the United States v. Sally Jewell, Judge Howell states, “The FWS’s interpretation is unreasonable on two levels. First, the structure, history, and purpose of the ESA do not permit the designation of a DPS for the purpose of delisting the vertebrates that are members of the DPS. Second, the ESA does not allow the designation of a DPS made up of vertebrates already protected under the ESA at a more general taxonomic level.”

This statement must be understood in its entirety in order that one can see the intellectual bankruptcy of such a statement. This statement says that the USFWS’s interpretation of the ESA is unreasonable because that department cannot create or designate a DPS for the purpose of delisting a species. Let me better explain for those who might not be able to fully understand. In the specific case in discussion, Judge Howell contends that gray wolves were listed as an endangered species in 1973 throughout all of the Lower 48 states – with the exception of Minnesota, where the wolf was listed as threatened.

The USFWS, after determining that wolves in a broad area of the Western Great Lakes had fully recovered, drew some boundaries and declared wolves within that boundary as no longer protected by the ESA.

Howell is not the first judge to rule this way. I have written about it before. Another Washington, D.C. based, intellectually bankrupt judge ruled pretty much identically as Howell did. My explanatory response to Judge Howell’s ruling can be found at this link.

At this link location you’ll be provided links to responses by the USFWS to Judge Friedman’s demand for an explanation as to why the USFWS has authority to create DPSs.

What Judge Howell is driving at is that because the USFWS cannot designate a segment as an area of recovered species, the only way that such a designation can be done is once wolves (or any other species) are fully recovered throughout its entire historic range. Howell reinforces this claim by saying, “The FWS’s interpretation of the ESA as authorizing the simultaneous designation and delisting of DPSs—or the designation of a DPS solely for the purpose of delisting—directly conflicts with the structure of the ESA and, consequently, this interpretation is entitled to no deference …. The ESA is remarkably clear: the FWS must identify “species” that are “threatened” or “endangered,” afford them the protections necessary to help them “recover,” and then re-evaluate the listed entities once such “species” are recovered.

Hopefully you have come to understand exactly what both Judges, Friedman and Howell, are saying, because I’m going to spoil their party. There are two things to consider but the major one is this: After the Endangered Species Act of 1973 was signed into law by the crooked Richard Nixon, wolves were designated as “Endangered” under the authority of the ESA. I know of nobody who disputes that event. My logical, and I think rational (sorry if you don’t see it that way) question is this: If, according to Friedman and Howell, the United States Government, under its own created law (ESA), cannot designate an area to delist a portion of a species’ historic range as recovered, then how did the United State Government have authority to designate the listing initially in the Lower 48 states?

Supposedly under this brand new law, the U.S. carved out an area, defined by the borders of the United States, and designated wolves endangered within those borders. How could they do this? In addition, at the same time, they carved out another area, separated by the borders defining the State of Minnesota, and declared wolves there “Threatened”. How could they do that?

But it gets worse. Because a group of people, which included not only the USFWS but also some of the very same activist, animal protectionist groups suing the U.S. Government to stop delisting wolves, wanted wolves introduced into the Greater Yellowstone National Park region, the U.S. Government carved out three areas where wolves would be introduced and protected with different protections than the rest of the country. How in God’s name, according to Friedman and Howell, could the USFWS do that?

Then the same USFWS and the same animal rights, environmental, totalitarians, headed for the Southwest. Once again they carved out and set boundaries and protected a fake hybrid species of wild dog they wished to call a Mexican wolf. Why was the USFWS able to do this? Friedman and Howell say that the ESA doesn’t provide authority to do that.

These hypocritical wolf lovers, carved out borders in the Southeast and created a Frankenstein wolf – red wolf- and introduced it into the landscape. How could the USFWS do that if the ESA doesn’t provide authority?

This same thing happened in the Western Great Lakes and all we hear about everyday are more and more environmental groups seeking to carve out borders and introduce wolves…wolves in everybody’s back yard.

And on and on it goes but only now, now that wolves are a damned menace, destroying wildlife wherever it goes and posing threats to humans for safety and health, do these people want an end to carving out populations for delisting. The cognitive dissonance is amazing. What was acceptable to get their damned wolves infesting this nation is no longer acceptable to bring them under control.

The second issue, which I will touch on only briefly, has to do with the determination of historic range and significant portion of a species range. Historic range and currently feasible range should be determined as different. Whether we like it or not, what once was historic range can no longer be acceptable to support a species that may have once roamed that area.

Once that has been determined, because the ESA uses as criteria in determining if a species deserves ESA protection, we must decide if the species under question is “threatened” or “endangered” throughout a significant portion of that range.

Section 3 – (6) of the Endangered Species Act defines “Endangered Species” as: “(6) The term “endangered species” means any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range…

The Obama-administered USFWS placed into the Federal Register what it deemed to be the definition of “significant portion of its range.” This determination attempts to separate the differences between historic range and range.

Determination of “significant” is not so cut and dry and leaves far too much wiggle room. “…we determine that a portion of the range of a species is “significant” if the species is not currently endangered or threatened throughout all of its range, but the portion’s contribution to the viability of the species is so important that, without the members in that portion, the species would be in danger of extinction, or likely to become so in the foreseeable future, throughout all of its range.”

Making determinations would be easier if definitions actually meant something. To many, the use of “endangered or threatened throughout all or a significant portion of its range” has not at all been followed in listing of species for protection. The gray wolf is a prime example. Wolves live by the thousands all over the globe and only an idiot would think of them as being in danger of extinction. But that doesn’t bode well for those eager for other people to be forced to live with the animals.

It is my contention that the USFWS was wrong when it initially declared wolves endangered throughout all of the Lower 48 states because the determination was made utilizing historic range, with absolutely no determination as to whether wolves could conceivably exist in all of the Lower 48 States or that we would want them too.

According to statements made in the past by Ed Bangs and others, bent on protecting the wolves, they said that circumstances and “best available science” changes all the time and that the USFWS is forced, under the ESA, to recover wolves and they must make changes according to those influences. Perhaps then, it is time for these same ESA administrators to practice what they preach and begin making changes.

But this will be impossible to do provided this country gives jobs to judges that are clueless, intellectually deprived, make interpretations far outside anything historic or reasonable and to make statements like, “[The Courts] must lean forward from the bench to let an agency know, in no uncertain terms, that enough is enough.”

That door swings both ways.

The Fuss Over Maine’s “Endangered” Lynx: What About the Whitetail Deer?

While agenda-driven environmentalists, who couldn’t recognize an honest scientific process if it lifted it’s leg and peed on their shoes, fret and stew over the Canada lynx in northern regions of Maine, the whitetail deer is moving toward extirpation. For those who pay attention at all to history, the Canada lynx was called the “deer wolf.” Note: Post normal science and history would tell us that, like the fairy tale of Little Red Riding Hood, early settlers calling the Canada lynx the deer wolf was probably also a myth to scare children through abuse. Anything to protect a predator at the cost of the destruction of other species.

There’s not much sense in trying to sugar coat the fact that in northern Maine, the whitetail deer is struggling to persist. Excuses are abundant: severe winters, deer are at their northern range (although further north in portions of Canada there’s not necessarily the same struggle), loss of habitat, the pope is Catholic, etc.

And yet, as the deer population there in Maine struggles, other species that compete with, threaten and prey upon the deer are overprotected – black bear, bobcat, Canada lynx and coyote/wolf hybrids. Because the whitetail deer has historically been the species of focus for most hunters, why then are we protecting everything that wants to destroy the deer? Maybe I just answered my own question, if you follow.

Now that the totalitarians have taken complete control of the Canada lynx, there’s little now that Maine’s wildlife managers can do to mitigate the loss of deer due to loup cervier, the deer wolf. The same act of wildlife management extortion, via the Endangered Species Act, has further severely restricted trapping and so what now will become of coyotes and bobcats? I suspect increased predation on whitetail deer.

For now, Maine is off the hook as far as putting an end to bear hunting but don’t take that to the bank. So long as Maine Guides control what the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife does with the implementation of bear hunts, I don’t expect any real effort to reduce bear numbers in areas where the deer are struggling. This is where, as a matter of convenience, anyone can play any one of a number of those excuse cards that explain why the deer are disappearing. I’ll bet this is a good chance to get a grant to study global warming in Maine and it’s affects on deer. Line up!

Nobody else will make notice that the deer are, more than likely, feeling the effects of hydatid cysts on lungs and other organs, that reduces their ability to evade predators.

Maine biologists reported, albeit inaccurately and incompletely, that moose examined in portions of Aroostook County had, what officials called, “lung worms.” What the moose had were hydatid cysts, the result of ingestion of Echinococcus granulosus eggs found in the scat of wild canines. Ingestion of these eggs by humans can be fatal. The more the coyote/wolf hybrid is protected the greater the chance of infecting wild ungulate populations in Maine (deer, moose) and putting humans at risk.

Because the cysts were found in moose, the likelihood of finding similar cysts in deer grows. The last thing Maine’s deer herd needs is another enemy. Wintering deer can struggle to exist under normal circumstances but if moose and deer struggle to breathe due to cysts on the lungs, liver, brain and muscle tissue, odds of surviving the onslaught of predators goes down.

Over the past several months, all focus has been on defeating an anti human, bear referendum and now it has shifted to Canada lynx. The deer still suffers while managers hope and pray for some global warming. The question I have is what will then become the excuse for disappearing deer herd when Maine’s climate becomes like Virginia’s?

NorthernMaineDeerHarvestLynx

20 Years of Wolves: UNHappy Birthday!

Montana and Idaho were only allowed to manage wolves after Congress stepped in and passed legislation that delisted the gray wolf in these two states in 2011. Now several members of Congress are preparing similar legislation to delist wolves in Wyoming, Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. The ESA desperately needs to be reformed. Congress should not have to check and balance the executive branch by delisting species because agencies fail to do their jobs, or unwarranted court decisions override state laws.<<<Read More>>>

ITP For Canada Lynx in Maine “Not Needed”

V. Paul Reynolds’ weekly article in the Sun Journal states: “The hard facts suggest that there is no need for either this state-mandated trapping hiatus or even federal protection of the Canada lynx, in Maine at least.

The state-mandated trapping hiatus is action taken by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) after two Canada lynx were “incidentally” trapped and killed shortly after the signing of the Incidental Take Permit (ITP).

I would suppose the take away lesson here might be that people should be careful what they wish for. Or, as the old saying goes, better the devil that you know than the devil you don’t. And hind site is always 20/20.

Having said all that, were things all that bad BEFORE the negotiated ITP? Maine was regulated by trapping in Canada lynx territories under a consent agreement from a previous court ruling. That ruling stated that Maine would abide by this agreement until such time as the state had negotiated an ITP that would help in protecting it from lawsuits from accidentally “taking” a lynx. And so, how did that work out?

Reynolds says an ITP isn’t needed but says so in that the lynx population in Maine is sufficiently high enough – perhaps too high – that the animal doesn’t need the kinds of protections being thrust upon it and the draconian limitations put on outdoor sportsmen. But that is rational talk. We can’t have none of that.

The Courts don’t help. When we thought some sort of progress was being made in dealing with endangered species, once again we find an ignorant and agenda-driven judge who ruled on gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes region saying that wolves cannot be taken off the Endangered Species Act list of protected animals until wolves have fully recovered throughout all of its historic range. So, substitute Canada lynx where the word wolf is found and you see why Canada lynx in Maine will likely not be “delisted” until lynx are prevalent across all of the historic range in the Lower 48 states – and that will never happened.

We are now back to a point of asking ourselves why a state should even bother to work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service about issues such as the Canada lynx? Everyone makes all these claims about how we need to avoid lawsuits because they cost so much money. How much money do you think it cost the state of Maine and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to hammer out a faulty agreement, the result of which has effectively shut down trapping in the state of Maine? Perhaps Maine should have been more aggressive to fight against the original proposal to list the Canada lynx as a threatened species. We’re supposed to learn from history.

Maybe Maine doesn’t need an Incidental Take Permit. Maybe it never should have taken the time to get one. Maybe we sportsmen should never have pressured MDIFW to get a permit, thinking it would somehow bring trapping back to “normal.” There were even those who believed an ITP would restore snaring. All utter nonsense – some of which could easily have been predicted and others not.

Maine received word recently that the Feds are going to look into the status of the lynx in Maine and then make a decision to either, do nothing, increase protections or decrease protections. Any bets? Mostly Kabuki Theater. If the USFWS doesn’t have the resources to draft a lynx recovery plan, why should we think they have the resources to effectively evaluate the realities of lynx in Maine? If the USFWS decides to decrease lynx protections, lawsuits will follow, and as usual USFWS will not appeal them because they know they can’t win an appeal and/or they don’t want to win.

And, if the USFWS should even take steps to delist the lynx, 15 years from now, as that is how long the process will take, lawsuits will prevent this action. This has been the modus operandi over the past 40 years with endangered species, to such a point that now the push back has resulted in acts of Congress to effect any change from such nonsense.

It would appear that if this is how the environmentalists want to conduct business then states and sportsmen who believe in responsible, scientific wildlife management will have to take up the same reins as the environmentalists and demand Congressional action to do what the Endangered Species Act fails miserably in doing.

V. Paul Reynolds is correct. Maine doesn’t need an ITP and it doesn’t need the Feds, forced by environmentalists, destroying all things normal and endangering other species by falsely listing the Canada lynx in Maine as a threatened species. But the process will not accomplish what is needed. Maine might as well start now and start banging on their Congressional representatives’ doors demanding action to resolve this issue.

Legal Options for U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance and WGL Wolves

Columbus, OH –(Ammoland.com)-On Dec. 20, a federal district court judge in Washington D.C. struck down the delisting of wolves in the western Great Lakes region, and returned them to federal protection under the Endangered Species Act.

This move was not based upon the population of wolves—which have clearly recovered in the area—but instead, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled that until wolves are re-established in their historical range (which would apparently include New York City, Washington D.C., Seattle, etc.) they cannot be considered recovered in Michigan, Minnesota or Wisconsin, no matter how large the wolf populations in those three states.<<<Read More>>>

WolfEatingFace

U.S. FWS to Review Lynx Status in Maine

At the end of the review, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will decide whether to maintain the lynx’s current status as a “threatened” species, to bump it up to “endangered” or to remove the cats from the endangered species list. The finding will then inform the agency’s next step as it creates a recovery plan for lynx.

“I believe that, at the very least, they should keep the status quo or even up-list it” to endangered, DeJoy said. “I can’t imagine that the feds will de-list the lynx. There just aren’t enough of them.”<<<Read More>>>