BuzzH
Well-known member
State girding for fight on wolf plan
Regardless of whether the state or federal government makes concessions, a court battle is inevitable over Wyoming’s wolf plan, Sen. Grant Larson said Tuesday.
As a high-level meeting in Cheyenne failed to ease the standoff between state officials and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Larson said even if either side were to compromise, a suit would follow from “radical environmental groups.” Larson said he expected the court fight to drag on for as long as five years, delaying removal of the wolf from the endangered species list.
If the Fish and Wildlife Service abruptly changed course and approved Wyoming’s wolf management plan, “radical environmental groups would file suit the next day, just as they’ve done with the grizzly bear and everything else,” Larson said.
Larson, R, SD-17, Jackson, made his remarks as Fish and Wildlife Service Director Steve Williams met for two hours behind closed doors with Gov. Dave Freudenthal and a cadre of state officials, including Sen. Delaine Roberts, R, SD-16, Etna.
Last month Williams rejected a wolf management plan the state spent more than two years drafting and which Freudenthal signed into law. The Fish and Wildlife director said the plan, which would have classified wolves as predators in much of the state and allowed them to be shot at will in those areas, did not offer adequate protection for the species.
Larson said the problem runs deeper than the predator classification. He said the federal agency has changed its requirements, particularly for wolf pack distribution, and given conflicting recommendations since the process began. “They’ve changed positions in the middle of the stream,” he said.
The key to the predator classification, Larson said, isn’t how many wolves are allowed to be shot, but who reimburses ranchers for lost livestock. If wolves are not considered predators and a wolf kills a calf, Game and Fish picks up the tab, Larson said.
“I don’t see the Fish and Wildlife Service stepping up to pay for all that,” he said.
Fish and Wildlife reintroduced the gray wolf to the mountain West in 1995, and the species has flourished under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. The rapid recovery prompted Fish and Wildlife to ask the states of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming to draft management plans in preparation for delisting. There are an estimated 754 wolves in the three states, including 235 in Wyoming and 301 in the greater Yellowstone area, according to the agency.
Fish and Wildlife has approved the Montana and Idaho management plans, which do not classify wolves as predators.
In a letter dated Oct. 1, 2001, Williams notified the Wyoming Game and Fish Department that predator classification would not be acceptable. Game and Fish biologists had recommended that the species be managed as trophy game, but the politically appointed Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, which oversees the department, voted to proceed with a predator classification.
Under Wyoming’s plan, wolves would be protected within national parks and hunted as trophy game in adjacent wilderness areas. In all other regions they would be classified as predators.
After Tuesday’s meeting with Williams, Gov. Freudenthal said he was “less optimistic” that litigation could be avoided. “While the meeting was cordial enough, it lacked the substance I was looking for,” he said.
In his State of the State address Monday, Freudenthal said he did not favor “delisting at any price.” The federal agency rejected Wyoming’s plan not on its scientific merits but on a “vaguely defined legal risk analysis,” he said.
Afterward, when asked about Williams’ initial letter from 2002, Freudenthal said the agency had made subsequent representations to him that the Wyoming plan was sufficient. The governor said he was prepared to go to court on the strength of his convictions.
Larson said it would be preferable for the state to file a suit in federal court in Wyoming, rather than risk litigation in Washington, D.C. He cited the Dec. 16 ruling by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington that struck down the Bush administration’s snowmobile plan.
Sullivan’s court is “where the radical environmental groups are going to file [a suit],” Larson said. “You can count on it.”
Regardless of whether the state or federal government makes concessions, a court battle is inevitable over Wyoming’s wolf plan, Sen. Grant Larson said Tuesday.
As a high-level meeting in Cheyenne failed to ease the standoff between state officials and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Larson said even if either side were to compromise, a suit would follow from “radical environmental groups.” Larson said he expected the court fight to drag on for as long as five years, delaying removal of the wolf from the endangered species list.
If the Fish and Wildlife Service abruptly changed course and approved Wyoming’s wolf management plan, “radical environmental groups would file suit the next day, just as they’ve done with the grizzly bear and everything else,” Larson said.
Larson, R, SD-17, Jackson, made his remarks as Fish and Wildlife Service Director Steve Williams met for two hours behind closed doors with Gov. Dave Freudenthal and a cadre of state officials, including Sen. Delaine Roberts, R, SD-16, Etna.
Last month Williams rejected a wolf management plan the state spent more than two years drafting and which Freudenthal signed into law. The Fish and Wildlife director said the plan, which would have classified wolves as predators in much of the state and allowed them to be shot at will in those areas, did not offer adequate protection for the species.
Larson said the problem runs deeper than the predator classification. He said the federal agency has changed its requirements, particularly for wolf pack distribution, and given conflicting recommendations since the process began. “They’ve changed positions in the middle of the stream,” he said.
The key to the predator classification, Larson said, isn’t how many wolves are allowed to be shot, but who reimburses ranchers for lost livestock. If wolves are not considered predators and a wolf kills a calf, Game and Fish picks up the tab, Larson said.
“I don’t see the Fish and Wildlife Service stepping up to pay for all that,” he said.
Fish and Wildlife reintroduced the gray wolf to the mountain West in 1995, and the species has flourished under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. The rapid recovery prompted Fish and Wildlife to ask the states of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming to draft management plans in preparation for delisting. There are an estimated 754 wolves in the three states, including 235 in Wyoming and 301 in the greater Yellowstone area, according to the agency.
Fish and Wildlife has approved the Montana and Idaho management plans, which do not classify wolves as predators.
In a letter dated Oct. 1, 2001, Williams notified the Wyoming Game and Fish Department that predator classification would not be acceptable. Game and Fish biologists had recommended that the species be managed as trophy game, but the politically appointed Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, which oversees the department, voted to proceed with a predator classification.
Under Wyoming’s plan, wolves would be protected within national parks and hunted as trophy game in adjacent wilderness areas. In all other regions they would be classified as predators.
After Tuesday’s meeting with Williams, Gov. Freudenthal said he was “less optimistic” that litigation could be avoided. “While the meeting was cordial enough, it lacked the substance I was looking for,” he said.
In his State of the State address Monday, Freudenthal said he did not favor “delisting at any price.” The federal agency rejected Wyoming’s plan not on its scientific merits but on a “vaguely defined legal risk analysis,” he said.
Afterward, when asked about Williams’ initial letter from 2002, Freudenthal said the agency had made subsequent representations to him that the Wyoming plan was sufficient. The governor said he was prepared to go to court on the strength of his convictions.
Larson said it would be preferable for the state to file a suit in federal court in Wyoming, rather than risk litigation in Washington, D.C. He cited the Dec. 16 ruling by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington that struck down the Bush administration’s snowmobile plan.
Sullivan’s court is “where the radical environmental groups are going to file [a suit],” Larson said. “You can count on it.”
