Emergency Wolf Rule in Wyoming Shot Down by Federal Judge Mark Wilcox / Wyoming Business Report / October 7, 2014 Despite emergency actions by several state agencies, a U.S. District Court judge in Washington D.C. relieved Wyoming of its governance over gray wolves, remanding control of the species to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. After the species was reintroduced to Yellowstone in the 1990s, it was carefully monitored and protected under the Endangered Species Act. When it recovered sufficiently, states started regaining control, with Wyoming being the last to wrestle control away from federal agencies in 2012. The attorney who brought suit against Wyoming’s management of wolves said the accepted plan had only minor “cosmetic” changes slapped on to “extreme” management laws. “Delisting of wolves in Wyoming … will turn wolf management over to a legal system in Wyoming that is the most hostile to wolves in the Northern Rockies — which is a subject of serious concern,” argued Tim Preso, managing attorney for Earthjustice, an environmental group that claims to have an average case load of 300, of which they win only about 50 per year. However, rather than citing mismanagement of the species as the reason for returning control to the federal government, Judge Amy Berman Jackson overturned Wyoming’s control on what Wyoming leaders are calling a technicality – that there was no legal framework binding the state to maintain the amount of wolves it said it would maintain. “The court concludes that it was arbitrary and capricious for the [Fish and Wildlife] Service to rely on the state’s nonbinding promises to maintain a particular number of wolves when the availability of that specific numerical buffer was such a critical aspect of the delisting decision,” Jackson wrote in her opinion. Gov. Matt Mead within 24 hours of that decision to revoke Wyoming’s license to kill gray wolves had signed an emergency rule “establishing that Wyoming’s commitment under its management plan is legally enforceable.” “Now that Wyoming has resolved the court’s concern, I hope the court will amend its ruling and allow Wyoming’s continued management of gray wolves,” Mead said in a statement at the time. To hopefully accommodate a quick and tidy resolution to the matter, Wyoming, joined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and pro-hunting groups urged quick action prior to the start of wolf hunting season Oct. 1. They got it, but the sidestep became a misstep with activists saying the rule wasn’t enough. In a Sept. 30 hearing, Jackson agreed, sticking to her original decision to remand wolf control to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Mead’s tone changed to one of disappointment from one of optimism that the change could be averted following the ruling. “Wyoming has been successful in its management of gray wolves,” Mead said in a release. “There were more wolves in Wyoming at the end of 2013 than in 2012. Wyoming has managed wolves well above the minimum and buffer population numbers.” He then used the situation as a political spear. “Overturning the USFW delisting decision on a technicality highlights Wyoming’s concerns with the Endangered Species Act,” Mead said. The state has also been battling to keep sage grouse, among other species, from becoming listed under the act, saying the change would hamper oil and gas development. Other state politicians have also traded barbs on the issue. “Ever since the federal government decided to reintroduce wolves into Wyoming, our state has had to fight for the right to manage these predators which are regularly a problem for outfitters, ranchers and game populations,” said U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi. “This isn’t a new issue. It’s gone back and forth for decades.” Enzi went on to say that those closest to the problem know better how to manage it, saying he’d challenge people who think wolves need more federal protection “to spend a day in the field with ranchers and outfitters to see the impact of wolves up close and personal.” Despite disappointment, Mead’s office will now work with the attorney general and the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to examine the best way to re-establish Wyoming’s management of wolves, meaning a swift resolution is probably no longer on the table. The department, in the meantime, has vowed to pay back hunters for the wolf licenses they had already purchased ahead of the season. Hunter perspective Many hunters buy wolf tags speculatively on the off chance they can “bag” a wolf during other hunts. Taylor Engum of East Fork Outfitters in Shoshoni, one of only three hunters listed as a wolf outfitter through the Wyoming Outfitters and Guides Association, said he advises his clients to buy wolf tags on ungulate hunts, but has never booked an actual wolf-hunting party. The hunts, he said, would be too unlikely to find success even if anyone did book them. “[Wolves are] hard to hunt – they’re a smart animal; they adapt” Engum said. “They know when they’re being hunted, when they’re being pressured.” And that pressure, he said, can even lead the animals to instinctively have more pups. “It wouldn’t matter if they made the whole state a predator area where you can kill as many as you want because those wolves are just going to breed more. The wolves will handle their own population.” Engum resents that a federal judge can take local control away from what he called “exceptional leadership” at the state level that are “doing their job to manage wolves” at an appropriate level. “This is what they do every day to manage our wildlife in the state of Wyoming,” Engum said. “It’s got as much to do with the judge in D.C. as the man on the moon.” He blamed environmental lobbyists for the problem. “That’s the only way these environmental groups can seem to get anything changed,” Engum said. “Sneaking it in the backdoor through some judge that they hand pick that they think will push it through.” In conclusion, Engum said Wyoming leadership should be left in charge of Wyoming wildlife. “Our state leadership and our state Game and Fish – they know how to handle these critters and should be left to do their jobs,” he said. Rancher perspective The State Game and Fish also said in a release suspending wolf take that the wolf population had been handled fine. “The Game and Fish Department believes in our sound management of wolves over the last two years,” said Scott Talbott, director of Wyoming Game and Fish. The suspension puts ranchers back in the difficult spot of not being able to protect their own cattle, said Jim Magagna, executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association. “It takes us right back to where they were before they were delisted,” said Jim Magagna, executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association. While wolves are entirely protected inside Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Park, they were part of a trophy hunt area just outside the parks’ boundaries. Environmentalists criticized hunting being allowed so close to the core of the packs. “There’s a lot of hostile territory that a wolf has to get through in order to move from Yellowstone to other core wolf population areas in the Northern Rockies,” Preso, the Earthjustice attorney said. He mainly criticized Wyoming’s predator area, which allows anyone to shoot wolves on sight, saying wolf mortality will rise too high under the system. Ranchers, on the other hand, have long stood by the rule that they should be able to protect their cattle from predators like wolves. Now, Magagna said the task has returned from a simple aim-and-shoot to an involved and expensive process involving authorities. Before Wyoming took control of wolf management, ranchers had to report the wolf predation to the Fish and Wildlife services, who would investigate the rancher’s claims before authorizing removal of the problem wolf or wolves. That system is back in effect, but Magagna said it may be too slow. “It’s a process that works, but it doesn’t work quickly,” he said. He added that if the process takes long, something looking likely after the U.S. district judge stuck to her non-guns, there could be major impact on ranchers’ livestock. He said it would have been worse regardless if the remand had occurred in high summer when grazing lands are more in the high country that wolves frequent. To Magagna, the ruling is an affront to trust in Wyoming’s government. “My first reaction is that … the state government’s word that we’ll do things is not adequate under the Endangered Species Act,” he said. “That speaks poorly for the federal-state relationship. It gives me an uneasy feeling as far as how far ‘the feds’ trust us.”
Posted on: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 01:58:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015