Congressional move that lifted wolf protections in N. Rockies challenged as unconstitutional

Source: Associated Press

Congressional move that lifted wolf protections in N. Rockies challenged as unconstitutional
By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, May 5, 12:43 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com.nyud.net:8090/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/Wires/Online/2011-05-05/AP/Images/Gray%20Wolves.JPEG-0b4ba.jpg

BILLINGS, Mont. — Four environmental groups are going to court to put gray wolves back on the endangered species list.

The groups filed two lawsuits Thursday in federal court in Montana, as control over more than 1,300 wolves was turned over to state authorities in Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Washington and Utah.

A federal budget bill rider in April mandated the lifting of wolf protections.

Western lawmakers say they wanted to go around a federal judge who blocked prior efforts to hunt the animals. But environmentalists say that violated the separation of powers required under the Constitution.




Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/congressional_move_that_lifted_wolf_protections_in_n_rockies_challenged_as_unconstitutional/2011/05/05/AFLcsHzF_story.html?wprss=rss_national

Tester is an a**hole.

Just a reader until today, my first post.

Actually, the entire Montana delegation supports the state taking over management of wolves, like other wildlife. So does the large majority of residents, myself included. The problems between people and wolves are many and increasing, but it is hard to explain to urbanites who lack the benefit of proximity/contact experience.

Last week some snow caters returning from the high country in N.W. Montana told of the decimation of white tail deer currently happening in the deep snow, blood everywhere... A rancher friend recently told of 8 of his 50 cattle being killed by wolves last year...Our small town has hundreds of auto/deer accidents more per year than before wolves drove the deer into town...Vitrually all hunters report less and spookier game in every range, growing progressively worse...Last year, two hunters were chased off their elk kills by wolves that came so close that even shooting around them was ineffective, they lost their elk and game wardens said they were lucky.....These (example) stories are legion and known by everyone here to be true.

It seems that city dwellers could imagine a pack on vicious dogs and get some idea of what we face in wolves. But even that would be understated, these pack hunters/killers are top predators and will kill or eat anything they desire. They operate as a unit skilled from birth and are extremely effective.

I just don't understand why wolves are more important than every other living animal in the wild (and domestic?) in some people's opinion. However, we know that the entire U.S. was the range of wolves when Europeans landed, so if you must, advocate for wolves in your own area. Then we can have a discussion where all are correctly informed.

"I just don't understand why wolves are more important than every other living animal in the wild..."

Illustrating support for the survival of one species necessarily denies support for "every other living animal in the wild"? Precisely how does that follow?

Guess you ignored the rest of my post, but I (and the state) am not advocating elimination of wolves, just common sense management. Unregulated they have become a growing menace, and if not logically addressed will take more and more game, domestic livestock, and pets. This is a large and growing financial burden that will become a threat to not just property and all other animal life, but in progression, people.

What do you suggest as a method to manage wolves if not the agency that manages all other wildlife?

I was deeply depressed to hear that the rider had been attached and passed...Having seen the wording I too thought it was unconstitutional...how can Congress pass a bill that says that the bill itself can't be challenged in court...??

and Defenders of Wildlife. Help them out if you can.

There is a big market for free range meat. How do you keep the wolves away from the animals (live stock) and still keep them free range?

Possible solutions:
1) kill wolves
2) no more free range meat
3) only allow free range ranching in areas with no non-human predators (I am not sure where this would be)

What are some other solutions?

endangered wolves in the act of livestock predation, AFAIK.

The wolves might eat the dogs instead of the cattle, but the dog lover in me doesn't really like that. I guess wolves have to eat something.

Defenders of Wildlife is another great organization that takes a few approaches to help the wolves. They participate in the lawsuits, but they also work with willing ranchers to use natural deterrents to keep the wolves from livestock. They will use sounds of other wolf packs, red ribbons, and guard dogs and educate the ranchers (and sheepherders) on their use. They have also run a compensation program to help ranchers who lose livestock.
I give to Sierra Club and to Defenders of Wildlife because this is the one endangered species issue that drives me nearly to violence. I refuse to eat beef because I don't want a dime to go to the ranchers. (Really the stupid cows need to go and bison need to be restored anyway). I hope to find some sort of travel guide to businesses that are "wolf-friendly" out west or I simply won't go to avoid giving a dime to the cowards out there who still hate the wolves.
My final action that everyone can do is this...wear a t-shirt with a wolf on it. I hear there is a rumor that everytime someone wears a t-shirt with a wolf on it, somewhere a cowboy wets himself. I'm hoping mythbusters will test this someday.

I have been thinking of going veggie again because of the ethical issues involved in the meat industry.

Another major frustration I have, besides the fact that we could restore the bison and have plenty of healthier meat to eat and a healthier ecosystem (but it's harder to put a fence around them and ensure you get all the $$), but the ranchers want to live whereever they choose and the rest of us apparently are just supposed to deal with their choices. (Well guess what ranchers, the rest of us have to move sometimes to go where the jobs are, so be a grownup and get with the program.)
So we get people who want to grow cows in the desert and divert all the water from the rivers to support them (research the Klamath Basin a bit) so we lose a productive salmon fishery also. Yet here in the midwest, as the subsidies flow to the crazies the cost of the product drops, midwest farmers sell their land to developers and another sprawled subdivision springs up.
So the result is, we lose agricultural land, subsidize farming on marginal land, and avoid mass transit so people have to drive cars and cover more land...
All because people here don't want an ordered society where we make collective decisions on land use. It's too "big government", but it's not too much "big government" to have them listen to our phone calls or monitor what I'm posting on this forum.
Also, see my other posts, there are other options than killing wolves. Although I did forget the one someone posted in reply, we could eat a lot less meat. The amount of water (besides land) it takes to raise one dumb cow is atrocious.

Unfortunately many/most ranchers hate wolves to their very core and will continue to fight to kill my brethren until all wolves are dead. I've tried to show those that I have known that wolves are good, but to them wolves are evil and they never listen to the truth. :banghead:
It always pisses me off to no end.:grr:

Luckily this is a win for us, at least for now, but there is still much that needs to be done.


May Odin's wolves , Geri and Freki, haunt the dreams of the people that hunt wolves.
And for all the pols that want to make it easier to destroy wolves, may they be eaten by Fenrir so that he can turn them into the sh*ts they really are. :evilgrin: