gray wolf – Cascadia Wildlands

Press Release: 2021 Worst Year for Oregon’s Wolf Population Growth Since Return

kaley — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 18:15:41 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 20, 2022

Contact:
Bethany Cotton, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463

Species’ Recovery Undermined by Poaching, ODFW Killings

EUGENE, OR — Conservationists are concerned about the plateau of Oregon’s wolf population in 2021, largely resulting from poaching and agency killings. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (ODFW) annual wolf population report, released late yesterday, shows Oregon’s wolf population grew by the lowest percentage (just over one percent) since wolves naturally returned to the state. The 2021 minimum population of 175 wolves increased by just two animals from the 2020 minimum count of 173. While 20 packs were identified, just 16 met the criteria of breeding pairs (an adult female and adult male with at least two pups surviving to December 31st of their year of birth), one fewer than at the end of 2020. Eight additional small groups of two to three wolves were identified, though these groups are not considered packs because a pack is defined as four or more wolves traveling together in winter. The percentage of wolves in Oregon in the western management area also did not grow between 2020 and 2021, with just 13% of Oregon’s wolves in the western portion of the state.

Known wolf deaths sharply increased from previous years. Of the 26 confirmed wolf deaths, 21 were caused by humans. Eight wolves were illegally killed in four poisoning incidents. A $50,000 reward remains in place for information leading to a conviction for the poisonings. ODFW also killed eight wolves — nearly the entire Lookout Mountain pack — including several 12-week old pups incapable of predating on livestock, an unprecedented action.

“Nearly three times as many wolves died in Oregon in 2021 than 2020, with fully triple the human-caused mortality,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director with Cascadia Wildlands. “We are deeply concerned about the impact of unprecedented poaching and state sanctioned wolf killings on Oregon’s wolves. State management if failing this keystone species: we need restored federal protections statewide.”

None of the poaching incidents have yet resulted in arrests. Oregon recently hired a new wildlife poaching prosecutor, housed in the state Department of Justice. Conservationists are calling on ODFW and state law enforcement to work closely with the prosecutor to ensure poachers are held accountable for their crimes. At least three additional poachings have occurred thus far in 2022.

“Oregon’s wolf population simply cannot sustain such high levels of human-caused wolf mortality,” said Nick Cady, legal director with Cascadia Wildlands. “The state needs to both seriously prosecute poachers and stop killing wolves to subsidize commercial livestock operations.”

Wolves in Oregon no longer have state Endangered Species Act protections, and are managed under the Oregon Wolf Plan, which designates two management zones based on specific criteria. Oregon’s wolves were likewise without federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for the entirety of 2021. In February 2022, federal ESA protections were restored to wolves in the western two thirds of the state when a federal court threw out the Trump administration’s removal of protections. The court agreed with plaintiffs, including Cascadia Wildlands, that removal of federal protections was not grounded in science.

The one piece of more positive news in the report is that wolves expanded into four new “areas of resident wolf activity” in Jefferson, Klamath, Grant, and Union Counties.

###

Press Release: ODFW Uses Tax Dollars to Kill 3.5 Month Old Wolf Pups

kaley — Thu, 05 Aug 2021 23:31:09 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 2, 2021

Contacts:
Bethany Cotton, Conservation Director, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Samantha Bruegger, Wildlife Coexistence Campaigner, WildEarth Guardians

Outrage: Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife Kills Wolf Puppies

Agency Guns Down Two 3.5 Month Old Wolf Pups from Helicopter Using Public Tax Dollars

Baker County, OR — The Oregon Wildlife Coalition, an alliance of nine wildlife conservation organizations, has learned that the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODFW) needlessly slaughtered two 3 ½ month-old wolf pups from the Lookout Mountain pack by helicopter over the weekend. As allowed by ODFW’s weakened wolf conservation and management plan, the pups were killed to appease the livestock industry, making it clear that Oregon aligns its wolf management with states like Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and Alaska. The killing of defenseless pups underscores how the removal of federal wolf protections allows state agencies hostile to wolf recovery to undermine the decades long species’ recovery efforts. Pups this age are entirely dependent on the older wolves in their packs to bring back food: they do not participate in hunts.

Killing baby wolves, that are far too young to hunt, is as inhumane and as it is unscientific. ODFW has not notified the public of this decision, however the agency did provide comments on the killing to the agricultural publication The Capital Press.

The Oregon Fish & Wildlife Commission is the managing body for the Department, and accountable for the department’s decision, as is Oregon Governor Kate Brown. Commissioners are appointed by the Governor, and future Commission appointments are critical to determining the future of wildlife management decisions. It is also clear, that the state continues to allocate a substantial amount of public funding under “predator control” in its budget; this needs to change.

The Oregon Wildlife Coalition, representing hundreds of thousands of Oregonians, calls on ODFW to immediately cancel the kill permit for the Lookout Mountain pack and on Governor Brown and her Commission to initiate an investigation into how authorization was granted to kill baby wolves incapable of livestock predation.

###

The Oregon Wildlife Coalition is a coalition of wildlife conservation groups working proactively and collaboratively to advocate for policies that are science-based and humane, and reflect the state’s conservation values.

Western Wolf Coalition Challenges Nationwide Wolf Delisting

nsc425 — Fri, 15 Jan 2021 01:06:42 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
January 14, 2021

Contact:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746
Kelly Nokes, Western Environmental Law Center, 575-613-8051
John Mellgren, Western Environmental Law Center, 541-359-0990
Erik Molvar, Western Watersheds Project, 307-399-7910
Lindsay Larris, WildEarth Guardians, 310-923-1465

Today, a coalition of Western wolf advocates challenged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to prematurely strip wolves of federal protections in the contiguous 48 states, in violation of the Endangered Species Act.

The most recent data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and its state partners show an estimated 4,400 wolves inhabit the western Great Lakes states, but only 108 wolves in Washington state (with only 20 outside of eastern Washington), 158 in Oregon (with only 16 outside of northeastern Oregon), and a scant 15 exist in California. Nevada, Utah, and Colorado have had a few wolf sightings over the past three years, but wolves remain functionally absent from their historical habitat in these states.

“Wolves are a keystone species whose presence on landscapes regulates animal populations and improves ecosystem health – something the Service has acknowledged for at least 44 years,” said Kelly Nokes, Western Environmental Law Center attorney. “Allowing people to kill wolves in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana has already stunted recovery in those states. Applying this same death sentence to wolves throughout the contiguous U.S. would nationalize these negative effects, with potentially catastrophic ripple effects on ecosystems where wolves have yet to fully recover.”

In delisting wolves, the Service ignored the science showing they are not recovered in the West. The Service concluded that because in its belief there are sufficient wolves in the Great Lakes states, it does not matter that wolves in the West are not yet recovered. The Endangered Species Act demands more, including restoring the species in the ample suitable habitats afforded by the wild public lands throughout the West. Indeed, wolves are listed as endangered under state laws in Washington and California, and wolves only occupy a small portion of available, suitable habitat in Oregon. Likewise, wolves have only just begun to recolonize their historical, wild, public lands habitat in much of the West, including in Colorado and the southern Rockies.

“From a scientific standpoint, wolves are nowhere near being recovered in the western United States,” said Erik Molvar, a wildlife biologist and executive director with Western Watersheds Project. “The federal government has the obligation to keep wolves protected until robust and secure populations are in place throughout the West, and we intend to ensure that wolves get the legal defense they need against premature delisting.”

“We have seen what happens when ‘management’ of wolves is returned to hostile state wildlife agencies disinterested in maintaining robust, stable, and genetically diverse wolf populations,” said Lindsay Larris, Wildlife Program director at WildEarth Guardians. “Idaho, which allows an individual to kill up to 30 wolves annually, saw the slaughter of nearly 600 wolves and wolf pups in a recent 12-month period and now other states are gearing up to allow wolf hunting and trapping this fall. Returning this type of unscientific and barbaric ‘management’ to states at this early juncture would spell disaster for true gray wolf recovery, plain and simple.”

The conservation groups have long been active on wolf recovery issues in the American West, including working with Western states to develop science-based wolf management plans, mounting cases to rein in rogue federal government wolf-killing programs, promoting recovery efforts in the Southwest for critically imperiled Mexican gray wolves, and working with local governments and landowners to deploy non-lethal tools that prevent wolf-livestock conflicts.

“With only a handful of wolves in California, western Oregon, and western Washington, wolf recovery is still precarious on the west coast,” said John Mellgren, Western Environmental Law Center general counsel. “A rush to delist the species across the entire country runs counter to the Service’s own peer review, and tells West Coast states that wolf recovery in their part of the country does not matter. We look forward to presenting the science to a federal court.”

While the Trump administration may believe it can disregard science to promote purely political listing decisions, the law does not support such a stance. The best available science says gray wolves are not recovered, and the coalition looks forward to having a court hear their science-based arguments for why wolves still need of Endangered Species Act protections to truly recover across the species range.

“In just the last year, we lost an icon to wolf recovery when OR-7 passed away. He and his mate represent the first generation of wolves in western Oregon in nearly a century,” said Joseph Vaile with the conservation group Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center based in southwest Oregon. “Delisting is clearly premature and obviously politically driven. It’s a last-ditch effort by the Trump administration to strip away protections for recovering wildlife.”

“Removing Endangered Species Act protections for any species should be based science, not politics, and the science tells us wolves are not there yet,” said Chris Bachman, Wildlife Program director at The Lands Council. “The gray wolf remains functionally extinct in 85% of its historic range, with 70% of suitable habitat remaining unoccupied across the lower 48 states. Legal protections must remain in place for the gray wolf to allow wider dispersal across a significant portion of its range.”

“Wolves were nearly exterminated from the lower 48. We should be celebrating the species’ ongoing recovery and the incredible success stories of the Endangered Species Act,” said Nick Cady, Legal Director with Cascadia Wildlands. “Instead, wolves have become another victim of the polarization and political game-playing in Washington D.C., and conservation groups are left battling to stem rising calls for active eradication of the species. Conservation of native species formerly enjoyed widespread bipartisan support. The actions of this administration toward wildlife are shameful.”

“The finger on the trigger of wolf slaughter is driven by anti-government fanatics who foment fear, lies and mistrust. The Endangered Species Act makes such hostility to wild nature more difficult, more closely watched,” said Timothy Coleman, director of Kettle Range Conservation Group and former member of the state Wolf Advisory Group. “Eighty-five percent of wolves we know were killed in Washington were in the Kettle River Range where gray wolf was delisted from the Endangered Species Act in 2009, though it remained state listed endangered. Had it remained Endangered Species Act-listed, entire wolf families would not have been repeatedly killed in northeast Washington. Regionally, this has meant wolves are not dispersing to Mount Rainier and Olympia National Park, or other public lands in the Pacific Northwest.”

“California’s wolves are just starting to return home,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director at the Environmental Protection Information Center. “A politically driven delisting puts wolf recovery in jeopardy by stripping protections at the moment they are needed most.”

“We must learn to coexist with gray wolves. These highly intelligent and social animals play a key role in balancing entire ecosystems,” said Kimberly Baker of the Klamath Forest Alliance. “Federal protection is paramount to safeguarding this nation’s rightful heritage.”

The coalition of western wildlife advocates launching this legal challenge includes WildEarth Guardians, Western Watersheds Project, Cascadia Wildlands, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC), The Lands Council, Wildlands Network, Klamath Forest Alliance, and Kettle Range Conservation Group, represented by the Western Environmental Law Center. A separate lawsuit is planned by Earthjustice representing national wildlife groups.

From Exterminated to a Rebounding Population: A Brief History of Wolves in Oregon

nsc425 — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 18:42:02 +0000

By Legal Director Nick Cady

Given the state’s recent move to remove the gray wolf from Oregon’s list of threatened and endangered species, it is worth taking a full look at the history of this species in Oregon to fully put in context the recent decision.

In 1947, the last wolf was killed in Oregon as part of a government bounty program, which was part of a nationwide predator extermination campaign facilitated by federal and state governments. Upon passage of the Endangered Species Act in 1973 under Nixon, the federal government began focusing on recovering many of the species wiped out by extermination campaigns and habitat lost to industrial development.

One of the first critters focused on was the gray wolf. After 66 wolves were reintroduced over two years in central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park, individuals eventually dispersed west into Oregon. In 1999, an initial lone wolf swam the Snake River and was Oregon’s first wolf in over 50 years, but wildlife managers with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) were politically and physically unprepared to handle wolves returning to the state. The lone wolf was darted and shipped back to Idaho. Two more wolves that crossing the Snake were killed, one poached and another run over on I-84.

This series of events began a state-sanctioned process to develop a wolf conservation and management plan in Oregon designed to address the unique relationship between Oregonians and wolves. Development of the plan involved many different stakeholders including conservation groups, livestock interests, the hunting community, county commissioners, and ODFW. A comprehensive plan was finalized in 2005, but the plan left many questions and situations unaddressed, mainly the response to wolf-livestock conflict and its intersection with the state Endangered Species Act, which has a prohibition against killing a listed species.

Wolf from the Walla Walla Pack (Photo Courtesy of ODFW)

The 2005 plan did establish a framework for the path recovery would take in Oregon. Recovery was divided into three phases for each half of the state (western and eastern). In the first phase (Phase I), wolf conservation and management would be focused on wolf recovery. Killing wolves in response to depredations would be a last resort, after all available non-lethal methods for eliminating the conflict had been exhausted. In exchange for these relatively stringent standards, the recovery numbers under Phase I were low: once a side of the state reached four breeding pairs for three consecutive years, wolf conservation and management would transfer into Phase II where the standards on when wolves could be killed were relaxed. A breeding pair was defined as a pair of wolves that had at least two pups that survived the calendar year.

By 2011, Oregon had its first established breeding pair of wolves, the Imnaha pack. This pack’s alpha pair produced OR-7, the famous wolf that journeyed from northeast Oregon to northern California, and the female wolf that helped establish California’s first wolf pack in almost one hundred years. But during 2010-2011, Oregon began experiencing its first wolf-livestock conflicts in northeastern Oregon, and the livestock community began pressuring ODFW to kill wolves to reduce this conflict.

Shasta Pack in California (Photo Courtesy of CDFG)

Although the numbers of wolf-livestock conflicts were limited, especially when compared to other sources of livestock mortality, and have remained incredibly low to date, the issue of wolves was swept up in politics and the rise of the Tea Party across the rural West. Wolves became a symbol of federal government intervention, and Republican representatives in these areas began to be threatened by Tea Party candidates who were running on staunch anti-wolf platforms. In response, these candidates also began banging on the anti-wolf drum. The ultimate result of all this noise making was the legislative, federal delisting of wolves in the Rocky Mountain gray wolf recovery area, which included Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and eastern Oregon and Washington. This was the first time Congress had delisted an endangered species, and marked the beginning of a still ongoing legislative and legal battle over wolves and other imperiled species.

Specifically in Oregon, this meant that federal protections under the Endangered Species Act in the eastern portion of the state had been eliminated, and that the state was permitted to kill wolves. The livestock community and anti-wolf political figures began pushing hard for killing wolves in Oregon. Cascadia and others fervently reminded the state and ODFW that we only had a single breeding pair of wolves in Oregon, and approximately only 12 or 13 wolves total. Despite these protests, ODFW moved to kill the alpha male of the Imnaha pack and one of the pups born that year.ODFW determined that after only a few incidents of wolf-livestock conflict, the Imnaha pack satisfied the wolf plan’s “chronically depredating” standard and needed to be killed.

Folks at Cascadia Wildlands were outraged. We reminded the state the commitments it had made in the plan to make killing wolves a measure of last resort at this early juncture of recovery, and we disagreed with ODFW that a few incidents over the course of two years marked a “chronic” issue. We went to court over the disagreement, preventing the killing of the Imnaha pack, but ultimately settled the suit with both the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association and the ODFW. This settlement defined some of the vague terms used in Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, laid out clearly defined requirements for implementing non-lethal preventative measures, and delineated exactly what the plan meant by “chronically depredating.” Additionally, a compensation program was set up for ranchers that lost livestock to wolves, and a tax credit established to further compensate ranchers for efforts expended on preventative measures. These rules have been highly lauded as the most thorough and successfully wolf conservation and management program in the country.

ODFW began executing the clarified rules with earnest, and over the next few years Oregon saw depredations decrease dramatically and wolf numbers steadily increase. With ODFW and ranchers focusing on preventative measures, ODFW has not had to expend taxpayer dollars to kill a single wolf to date. We now have approximately 15 wolf packs in Oregon, wolves have been initially dispersing into western Oregon, and there are now potentially two new packs in southern Oregon near the California border. At the last official count, there were over 70 confirmed wolves in Oregon. This has been such a promising recovery to date, and has been one of the pride and joys at Cascadia Wildlands — a direct result of our efforts.

However, this year a new conflict over wolves has emerged surrounding the removal of the species from Oregon’s list of threatened and endangered species. When wolves in Oregon first satisfied the four breeding pairs for three consecutive years in 2014, and wolf management in eastern Oregon moved into Phase II, the state began exploring whether or not wolf numbers and recovery warranted removal of the species from the endangered species list.

Livestock interests were pushing the state hard, arguing that the state was required to remove protections for the species under the wolf plan. However, the wolf plan very clearly said that the state was only required to begin exploring the delisting process, to make an early determination over whether delisting was warranted at this time or not. Cascadia Wildlands and our conservation partners began weighing into the process as well, presenting public comments and soliciting scientific input on whether or not delisting was warranted. The “endangered” status of the wolf is critical because it provides the entire framework and backbone of the current wolf conservation and management program and the rules developed under the mutual agreement in 2011. Without this classification, the ODFW could do whatever it wants with regard to wolves, and under similar circumstances in 2011, we witnessed the state try to kill the Imnaha pack when it was the only breeding pack in Oregon.

So Cascadia Wildlands and our allies worked tirelessly to convince the ODFW that delisting was not the right move, particularly with under 80 confirmed wolves in the state. Wolves have just barely begun to get a foothold in western Oregon, and we were concerned that additional mortality associated with management of wolves in Phase II would stagnant recovery and dispersal of the species. At the end of a series of hearings this fall, in which there was an enormous amount of public and scientific testimony, over 90 percent of Oregonians had urged the state to retain endangered species protections for the species. The overwhelming message from the scientific community was that delisting was premature because of the limited numbers and distribution of the species across the state.

Despite the weight of this evidence and the desire of the public, ODFW and its Commission removed the wolf from the list of threatened and endangered species in mid-November. Cascadia Wildlands is again exploring legal options and ways to retain this critical classification for a species still very early in its recovery.

Cascadia Wildlands cannot thank enough our volunteers, members and supporters who wrote letters, talked to elected officials and traveled great distances to publicly testify in support of wolves. This passion gives us our inspiration, and we will continue to fight for this species as it continues on its perilous path to recovery. Stayed tuned for next steps as this struggle is far from over, and please consider donating to support our ongoing efforts.

[maxbutton id=”19″]

Nearly 500,000 More Americans Speak Out Against Federal Plan to Strip Gray Wolves of Protections

bob — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:55:56 +0000

California Wolf Center * Cascadia Wildlands * Center for Biological Diversity * Defenders of Wildlife * Earthjustice * Endangered Species Coalition * Humane Society of the United States * Living with Wolves * National Parks Conservation Association * Natural Resources Defense Council Oregon Wild * Project Coyote * Western Watersheds Project * WildEarth Guardians Wildlands Network * Wolf Conservation Center

For Immediate Release
March 31, 2014

Contact:
Leda Huta, Endangered Species Coalition, (202) 320-6467
Bob Ferris, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Melanie Gade, Defenders of Wildlife, (202) 772-0288
Kierán Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity, (520) 275-5960
Sean Stevens, Oregon Wild, (503) 283-6343 x211
Kari Birdseye, Earthjustice, (415) 217-2098
Maggie Howell, Wolf Conservation Center, (914) 763-2373

Nearly 500,000 More Americans Speak Out Against Federal Plan to Strip Gray Wolves of Protection
Scientific Peer Review Questioning Wolf Proposal Prompts Many to Write Administration

WASHINGTON—More than 460,000 Americans filed official comments calling on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to scrap its controversial proposal to remove federal protections from the gray wolf and instead work to advance wolf recovery in the United States. A scientific peer review released in early February 2014 unanimously concluded that a federal plan to drop protections for most gray wolves was not based on the best available science. These new comments and the results of the scientific peer review follow on the heels of the submission of approximately one million comments in late 2013 requesting that FWS continue to protect gray wolves. These comments represent the highest number of submissions ever to FWS on an endangered species, showing America’s overwhelming support for the charismatic wolf.

“When it comes to taking the wolf off of the endangered species list, Secretary Jewell told the public, ‘It’s about the science. And you do what the science says.’ It’s now time to stand by both her stated commitment to follow science and the will of the American people. She must immediately rescind the wolf delisting rule,” said Leda Huta, Executive Director of the Endangered Species Coalition. “As the top official in charge of wildlife and wild places, Secretary Jewell should ensure that gray wolves have the chance to fully recover wherever there is suitable habitat. Policy decisions about wolves and other wildlife should be based on the best science, not politics.”

“Science should be the lynchpin of every species listing decision and science should be the most significant factor guiding decisions on what ‘recovery’ looks like for our nation’s imperiled plants and animals,” said Defenders of Wildlife President Jamie Rappaport Clark. “The Fish and Wildlife Service should withdraw the delisting proposal for wolves and instead put science first to chart a sustainable recovery path for wolves throughout the U.S.”

“It’s time for the Obama administration to acknowledge what a growing number of Americans and our top scientists see very clearly — America’s gray wolves still need federal protection,” said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. “That’s what the public comment period and scientific peer review is all about – to make sure we get it right when it comes to protecting our most imperiled species. Now the only question is whether the Obama administration will follow the science or the politics.”

There were once up to 2 million gray wolves living in North America, but the animals were driven to near-extinction in the lower 48 states by the early 1900s. After passage of the federal Endangered Species Act in 1973 and protection of the wolf as endangered, federal recovery programs resulted in the rebound of wolf populations in limited parts of the country. Roughly 5,500 wolves currently live in the continental United States — a fraction of the species’ historic numbers.

“Instead of restoring wolves to their rightful places from coast to coast — as it did for bald eagles – the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants to abandon wolf recovery before the job is done,” said Marty Hayden, Earthjustice vice-president for policy and legislation. “More than a million people have now told FWS to go back to work and protect our wolves.”

Last year the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed removing federal Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves across most of the lower 48 states. The Obama administration’s proposal would remove protections for wolves everywhere except Arizona and New Mexico, where the Mexican wolf is struggling to survive with just 84 wolves in the wild. This proposal would abandon protections for wolves in places where recovery remains in its infancy, such as Oregon and Washington, and would prevent wolves from recovering in places where good wolf habitat has been identified, including northern California, the southern Rocky Mountains and the Northeast.

“There are many places in the West—mainly on federal lands—that can and should support wolves,” said Bob Ferris, executive Director of Cascadia Wildlands. “It is disingenuous for the USFWS to leverage human intolerance as a rationale for delisting when that was one of two contributing factors to endangerment. They need to materially address this cause, not use it as an excuse to ignore science and not to do their jobs.”

“Oregon wolves have taken the first tentative steps towards recovery in the last few years,” said Sean Stevens, executive director with Oregon Wild. “If the Obama administration takes away the strong protections of the Endangered Species Act, we pull the rug out from the fragile success story here on the West Coast and leave the fate of wolves in the hands of state agencies in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming who have proven incapable of balanced management.”

The independent scientific peer review released in early February was commissioned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and conducted by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis. The panel of independent scientists concluded unanimously that FWS’s national wolf delisting rule does not currently represent the “best available science.” In light of these findings, FWS’s proposed delisting rule contravenes the Endangered Species Act, which mandates that protection decisions must be based on the best available science. In addition to the nearly half a million comments submitted by the American public in recent weeks, ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee Peter DeFazio (D-OR) released a bipartisan letter co-signed by 73 House members urging Secretary Jewell to continue protections for gray wolves and rescind the proposed delisting rule immediately.

######

[maxbutton id=”6″]

BREAKING NEWS: Peer Reviewers Find Fault with USFWS Science on Wolf Delisting–comment period reopens

bob — Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:43:36 +0000

The US Fish and Wildlife Service just release the following press statement about the independent Peer review (see link at bottom of page):

Service Reopens Comment Period on Wolf Proposal

Independent scientific peer review report available for public review

Following receipt of an independent scientific peer review, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is reopening the comment period on its proposal to list the Mexican wolf as an endangered subspecies and remove the gray wolf from the Endangered Species List. The Service is making that report available for public review, and, beginning Monday, February 10, interested stakeholders will have an additional 45 days to provide information that may be helpful to the Service in making a final determination on the proposal.

The independent scientific peer review was hosted and managed by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS), a highly respected interdisciplinary research center at the University of California – Santa Barbara. At the Service’s request, NCEAS sponsored and conducted a peer review of the science underlying the Service’s proposal.

“Peer review is an important step in our efforts to assure that the final decision on our proposal to delist the wolf is based on the best available scientific and technical information,” said Service Director Dan Ashe. “We thank the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis for conducting a transparent, objective and well-documented process. We are incorporating the peer review report into the public record for the proposed rulemaking, and accordingly, reopening the public comment period to provide the public with the opportunity for input.”

The peer review report is available online, along with instructions on how to provide comment and comprehensive links relating to the proposal, at www.fws.gov/home/wolfrecovery.

The Service intends that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on the best available information. Comments and materials we receive, as well as some of the supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, are available for public inspection at www.regulations.gov under the docket number FWS–HQ–ES–2013–0073.

The Service will post all comments on www.regulations.gov. This generally means the agency will post any personal information provided through the process. The Service is not able to accept email or faxes. Comments must be received by midnight on March 27.

The Federal Register publication of this notice is available online at www.fws.gov/policy/frsystem/default.cfm by clicking on the 2014 Proposed Rules under Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.

The Service expects to make final determination on the proposal by the end of 2014.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service works with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. For more information, visit www.fws.gov, or connect with us through any of these social media channels:

– FWS –

Gray Wolf Peer Review

Nearly a Million Americans Speak Out Against Stripping Federal Protections From Wolves

bob — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 18:23:05 +0000

Animal Welfare Institute * California Wolf Center * Cascadia Wildlands * Center for Biological Diversity * Conservation Northwest * Defenders of Wildlife * Earthjustice * Endangered Species Coalition Environmental Information Protection Center * Environmental Action * International Fund for Animal Welfare * Kansas Wild * Living with Wolves * National Parks Conservation Association * Natural Resources Defense Council * Oregon Wild * Project Coyote * Sierra Club * The Humane Society of the United States * WildEarth Guardians * Wolf Conservation Center

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 17, 2013

Contacts:
Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands (541) 434-1463
Kierán Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity, (520) 275-5960
Leda Huta, Endangered Species Coalition, (202) 320-6467
Melanie Gade, Defenders of Wildlife, (202) 772-0288
Rob Klavins, Oregon Wild, (503)283-6343

Nearly a Million Americans Speak Out Against Stripping Federal Protections From Wolves — Most Public Comments Ever on an Endangered Species Act Decision Federal Proposal Would Halt Wolf Recovery, Allow More Wolf Killing

Washington, DC — Approximately 750,000 Americans stated their opposition to the Obama administration’s proposal to strip endangered species protections from gray wolves in a comment period that closed today. This is the largest number of comments ever submitted on a federal decision involving endangered species and reflects broad dissatisfaction with the Obama administration’s politically driven move to turn wolf management over to states across most of the lower 48.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose removing protections for wolves, and for good reason. Wolves have recovered to just a fraction of their range and are severely threatened by state-sanctioned hunts intended to decimate them,” said Kierán Suckling, executive director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We hope the Obama administration will hear the pleas of hundreds of thousands of citizens and maintain these still critically needed protections for wolves.”

The nearly 1,000,000 comments, being delivered today to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by multiple conservation groups, will bring the total number to well over one million. There were once up to 2 million gray wolves living in North America, but the animals had been driven to near-extinction in the lower 48 states by the early 1900s. After passage of the federal Endangered Species Act in 1973 and protection of the wolf as endangered, federal recovery programs resulted in the rebound of wolf populations in limited parts of the country. Roughly 5,500 wolves currently live in the continental United States – a fraction of the species’ historic numbers.

“How in anybody’s vision of recovery could animals wandering into historic and still viable habitats be stripped of federal protection in the absence of any rigorous, place-based analyses or process?” said Bob Ferris executive director of Cascadia Wildlands. “Recolonization should be encouraged not sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.”

“The North American gray wolf’s recovery in certain areas of the United States is something to celebrate, but an abundance of evidence shows the work is not yet complete,” said International Fund for Animal Welfare president and CEO Azzedine Downes. “I applaud actions to help protect this critical species, and I strongly urge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to not go through with this proposal.”

The Obama administration’s proposal would remove existing protections for wolves everywhere except Arizona and New Mexico, where the Mexican wolf is struggling to survive with an estimated population of just 75 wolves. This proposal would abandon protections for wolves in places where wolf recovery is just in its infancy, such as Oregon and Washington, and would prevent wolves from recovering in other places where good wolf habitat has been identified, including northern California, the southern Rocky Mountains, and the Northeast.

“The restoration of the gray wolf could be one of the great American wildlife conservation success stories if Secretary Jewel would just finish the job.” Leda Huta, executive director of the Endangered Species Coalition. Nicole Paquette, vice president of Wildlife Protection for The Humane Society of the United States said: “Anti-wolf sentiments nearly led to the extermination of America’s wolves, and just when populations are starting to bounce back, the federal government is considering a plan that could place them in jeopardy. Rather than catering to interests from trophy hunters and fear mongering, we hope the federal government rejects this proposal and works towards the recovery of this species.”

“The incredible volume of comments give voice to a sad fact: the delisting proposal is a radical departure from the optimism and courage we need to promote endangered species recovery in this country. The comments show that Americans believe the Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposal falls well short of the conservation ideals this country stood for 40 years ago when the Endangered Species Act was signed.” said Defenders of Wildlife President Jamie Rappaport Clark.

“The national wolf delisting scheme is simply too much, too soon,” said NRDC President Frances Beinecke. “It is a potential death sentence for new populations and prevents wolves from ever reaching areas where they could be a boon for habitat in need of their stabilizing influence. The return of wolves to the continental United States still stands as one of the greatest conservation stories ever written and we stand ready to fight to prevent it from being undone by this short-sighted policy move.”

“Americans are outraged and hundreds of thousands are saying it loudly and clearly; the job of wolf recovery is not done,” said John Horning Executive Director of WildEarth Guardians. “The Fish and Wildlife Service is not only wildlife wrong on the science of wolf recovery but also wildly out of step with the desires of most Americans who want to see federal protections for wolves maintained.” “The number of public comments is a testament to the importance of wolves to our American story. Now is the time we should be pressing in to continue the job of wolf recovery, not abandoning wolves to the same kinds of destructive forces that endangered them in the first place,” said Dan Chu, director of Sierra Club’s Our Wild America Campaign.

“You don’t spend 40 years nursing a species back from the brink of extinction, only to suddenly declare ‘open season’ on them. There are only a few dozen viable packs in an area that used to be home to over a millions wolves. There’s plenty of room in America for wolves, people and an abundance of other species. But If Secretary Jewell allows this plan to go ahead, she’ll be responsible for the destruction of one of the most amazing, intelligent and iconic species in America.” said Drew Hudson, Environmental Action Camilla Fox,

Executive Director, Project Coyote said: “As wolves come under the gun in an upcoming wolf/coyote killing ‘derby’ in Idaho where prizes awarded for the largest killed, it is abundantly clear that the very practices that sent wolves to the brink of extinction still endanger their persistence.”

“Fish and Wildlife Service is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Instead of restoring wolves to their rightful places from coast to coast — as it did for bald eagles — the agency wants to abandon wolf recovery before the job is done,” said Trip Van Noppen, Earthjustice president. “Today hundreds of thousands of citizens told FWS to go back to work and protect our wolves.”

###

[maxbutton id=”1″]

Press Release: Settlement Reached in Wolf Legal Fight

Josh — Sat, 25 May 2013 01:17:08 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 24, 2013

Contact:
Rob Klavins, Wildlife Advocate, Oregon Wild, (503) 283-6343 ext. 210, rk@oregonwild.org
Steve Pedery, Conservation Director, Oregon Wild, (503) 283-6343 ext. 212, sp@oregonwild.org
Nick Cady, Legal Director, Cascadia Wildlands, (314) 482-3746, nick@old.cascwild.org
Josh Laughlin, Campaign Director, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 844-8182 jlaughlin@old.cascwild.org

Salem, Oregon – After seventeen months of grueling negotiations, conservationists, Governor John Kitzhaber, the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODFW), and the livestock industry have reached a compromise settlement agreement that resolves a long-running legal battle over wolf conservation in Oregon.

“Oregonians treasure our state’s wildlife and want to see it protected,” said Dan Kruse, an attorney for Oregon Wild and Cascadia Wildlands. “This settlement will put in place, for the first time, clear standards and public accountability for what must happen before ODFW or livestock interests can kill an endangered wolf, and measures that should reduce conflict between wolves and livestock. I applaud all the parties for coming to this agreement, and in the coming months we will be watching closely to ensure it is faithfully implemented.”

On October 5, 2011, a coalition of conservation organizations filed a legal challenge against the state’s aggressive killing program that targeted endangered gray wolves. The groups believed the state’s actions violated both the state’s Wolf Plan and Endangered Species Act. That same day an appellate commissioner with the Oregon Court of Appeals issued an injunction suspending the state’s ability to kill wolves on behalf of the livestock industry.

The settlement agreement resolves this legal conflict by establishing a new management framework which more clearly outlines steps that must be taken before the state can again consider killing endangered wolves. The agreement emphasizes the employment of responsible livestock husbandry practices and requires thorough use of proactive, non-lethal techniques to preempt conflict between wolves and livestock.

“We went to court because ODFW was breaking its own rules and state endangered species laws,” said Rob Klavins, Oregon Wild’s Wildlife Advocate. “This settlement is far from perfect, but it requires more transparency from the state and responsibility from the livestock industry. Now it’s up to the agency to honor the terms of the agreement and ensure wildlife management lives up to Oregon’s proud conservation values.”

Wolves began returning to Oregon in the late 1990s, after being hunted, trapped and poisoned to extinction in the first half of the twentieth century. In 2005, after wolves begin to return to Oregon the state and stakeholders created a wolf plan that prioritized conservation and non-lethal steps to prevent conflict with livestock as the species recovered in our state. When the plan was followed in 2009, conservationists did not oppose lethal action against wolves in Baker County. However, facing increasingly intense pressure from livestock interests, the state initiated a series of aggressive lethal actions against endangered gray wolves in Oregon. Conservationists believed this effort violated both the spirit and the letter of the Oregon Wolf Plan.

“This agreement gets us back to the wolf plan we thought we had in 2005,” said Nick Cady, Legal Director from Cascadia Wildlands. “Under this agreement killing wolves should be an option of last resort. Ranchers need to do their part to improve animal husbandry and coexist with native wildlife, and ODFW needs to live up to its mission to ensure abundant populations of native wildlife for all Oregonians.”

With support from the conservation community, in 2012 Oregon increased efforts to educate ranchers about the steps that can be taken to reduce the risk of conflict. Simple measures like burying dead cattle, keeping young calves and other vulnerable animals behind fences, and checking cattle more frequently have reduced conflict in Oregon, even as the number of wolves in the state has grown. In 2012, the state’s known wolf population grew from 29 to 46, and only four cows were lost to wolves.

“Oregon has a chance to learn from the mistakes of other states and become a model for how to balance conservation values with demands from the livestock industry,” said Steve Pedery, Conservation Director for Oregon Wild. “In the coming years, we look forward to working in Salem, at the federal level, and on the ground to advance wolf recovery and restore other important native species in our state.”

Wolf recovery remains popular in Oregon. When the state’s wolf plan was developed in 2005, a state poll showed that 70% of Oregonians supported wolf recovery. A public review of Wolf Plan in 2010 generated over 20,000 public comments. Over 90% were in favor of stronger protections for wolves.

While conflict surrounded wolf killing in 2011, other stories inspired hope for Oregon’s fragile recovery. A lone wolf left Northeast Oregon and gained international attention when he became the first wolf in Western Oregon since 1947, and then the first wolf in California in nearly a century. The wolf known to biologists as OR-7 and renamed Journey in an international naming contest is now back in Oregon, and has traveled over 3,000 miles in search of a mate.

“This agreement strengthens wolf protections throughout the state and sets in motion recovery across the rest of Oregon and the region,” said Josh Laughlin, Campaign Director for Cascadia Wildlands. “Wolves in the Pacific West are just beginning their historic recovery and will greatly benefit from this new management framework.”

The settling conservation organizations were represented by attorneys Nick Cady and Daniel Kruse.Click here to read frequently asked questions about the settlement.

###