Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for December, 2010


In March of 2010, just outside of Chignik Lake, Alaska, a 32 year old schoolteacher was killed by an unknown wild animal while jogging just a mile away from her own home. The consensus among state troopers, news articles, and local villagers was that there was a 99% chance that a wolf or wolves had been the culprits of this unforeseen attack.  The schoolteacher, Candice Berner, had been dragged a small distance from where the attack occurred and paw prints, presumably wolf, had been found around her body. In addition, however, a few snowmobilers spotted human footprints in the vicinity where Berner had been attacked.  Autopsy results concluded only that her body had been assaulted by animals, but could not determine whether this occurred prior to death or not.  

Certainly there are factors that could give weight to the theory that the attack was indeed initiated by one or more wolves. There were paw prints found at the scene of the attack which appeared to be in the shape of wolf prints; witnesses stated that the only wild animal seen in the days prior to Berner’s death were wolves; and Berner had been running prior to her attack and wolves are known to have an instinctual nature to chase their prey.

While the facts listed above are truthful in nature, there are other factors not considered that might suggest that a wolf did not attack Berner.  Historically wolves do not attack humans for the simple reason that humans are higher up on the food chain and tend to pose the larger threat to the wolf. There are arguments that wolves find the taste of human flesh less appealing because it is not part of their routine diet. When a wolf attacks animal prey, it cannot finish the entire carcass and tends to leave portions of the body to the wilderness. When the wolf does leave however, it is followed quickly by other carnivorous opportunists who quickly dive in to clean up what the wolf has left behind. Berner’s body showed animal assault wounds, but the coroner could not determine if animals were the cause of death.

Giving the state troopers and eye witnesses the benefit of the doubt, there are compelling factors as to why this could have been a wolf attack, however it is imperative to note that even if a wolf is the cause, the attack is absolutely and undeniably a rare occurrence in the United States.

To call a spade a spade, humans have imposed on nature’s habitat for years and prolonged exposure of wolves to humans over time has increased the likelihood of an incident. Berner could have been more of a target because she was small in stature. To the wolf, Berner would have appeared vulnerable and weak because of her size and because she was alone. As if that were not enough to entice the wolf, she would have appeared to be offering them a chance to chase their prey.   Wolves experience a higher likelihood of failure in catching prey if they are larger, healthy, and standing their ground face to face. The wolf’s success rate in catching food is extremely low and increased hunger can lead to desperation and deviation from normal eating patterns. If any wolves involved were younger, less experienced, and unable to find plentiful, easy prey, Berner may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and unaware of her surroundings.   

While there will likely never be any definitive proof to explain what really happened to Candice Berner that day, it is a safe bet that while humankind continues to tread with little or no care into the wilderness it will be met with animosity and defensiveness. The moral to this tale is to be cognizant and respectful of the beauty the wilderness holds and humans will find that cohabitation is possible.

**Please follow additional articles by myself, Indianapolis Wildlife Advocacy Examiner at http://www.examiner.com/wildlife-advocacy-in-indianapolis/michael-heath

Read Full Post »


By Stella Davis

Current-Argus Staff Writer

CARLSBAD — After several months of talks and mounds of paper work, a male Mexican gray wolf from the Living Desert Zoo & Gardens State Park was flown earlier this month to a facility in Mexico where it will be paired with a female of the same species.

The wolf, sent to Centro Encologico de Sonora in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, is one of six Mexican gray wolf brothers housed at the park that came from the Wild Canid Research and Survival Center in Eureka, Mo.

The endangered wolves are placed in institutions by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums through the Mexican Wolf Species Survival Plan, said Holly Payne, park general curator.

The six wolves have been fostered at the park since 2005 and have not been bred, Payne said.

“The AZA Species Survival Plan contacted us and said the facility in Mexico has a single female that is genetically important and since our six brothers also are important genetic-wise, they recommended breeding one of our males with the female in Mexico,” Payne explained. “But before we could do that, we had to go through a lot of red tape and complete a lot of paperwork. For us, this is the first time we have sent one of our animals to another country. The transfer of the wolf was a huge collaborative effort with a lot of people and agencies involved.”

In addition to the park, agencies involved in the transfer include LightHawk – a nonprofit organization that aids animal conservation

efforts by donating flights and pilots – Association of Zoos and Aquariums Mexican Wolf Species Survival Plan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA and the Mexican government.

The wolf was flown from Chandler Aviation, the fixed based operator at the Cavern City Air Terminal, to Hermosillo by LightHawk.

“They did a wonderful job of getting the wolf comfortable for the flight to Mexico,” Payne said. “Their mission is to champion environmental protection through the unique perspective of flight.”

According to the AZA Mexican Wolf Species Survival Plan, the Mexican gray wolf or “lobo” is the rarest, southernmost and most genetically distinct sub-species of gray wolf found in North America. Adult wolves typically weigh 50-80 pounds, are about 5 feet in total length and have a richly colored coat of buff, brown, gray, red, white and black.

The Mexican gray wolf breeding program began in the late 1970s with the capture of five wolves from the wild. Later, in the mid 1990s, a few additional wolves were confirmed to have been pure Mexican wolves as well. With careful breeding and husbandry management, the population increased.

The government predator control programs from the 1890s through the 1960s targeted the wolf for extermination to protect ranchers from livestock losses. Professional trappers and chemical poisons have eliminated the Mexican gray wolf from its former range in the southwest U.S. and Mexico.

There always has been controversy with ranchers over the Mexican gray wolf and the release of some Mexican gray wolves into the wild had met with strong objection from the ranching communities in the release areas. Some wolves that were reintroduced into the wild have been reportedly killed after their release because of alleged livestock losses in their roaming areas.

Thanks to Argus Staff Writer Stella Davis for providing this information.  This article can be seen through the link below.

http://www.currentargus.com/ci_16955253

Read Full Post »


What you can do if you oppose Utah state senator Allen Christensen wolf killing bill?

Wolves urgently need your help. Please send the following alert to as many people as you can. Use your organization’s email list if you can! Do it right away, then act on it yourself! The organization Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife has a bill before the Utah legislature that would require the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources to prevent wolf packs from becoming established in the Utah portion of the Rocky Mountain gray wolf recovery area. This part of the recovery area is where dispersing wolves from the Yellowstone country have been entering Utah, some of them traveling on to Colorado. If this bill passes, any wolves entering Utah in this area will be subject to capture and return or death. This egregious bill, identified as S.B. 36 first substitute, would supplant the Utah Wolf Management Plan – a plan which would at least tolerate up to two breeding pairs producing at least two surviving offspring for two consecutive years. I know, this plan is really lame, but it is better than what the bill would require. Furthermore, it was created through a public process that began with and ended with the Utah legislature – a process that involved 13 representatives of a diverse group of stakeholders, including ranchers and sportsmen, working for a year and a half. Even then, the ranching and hunting interests on the working group violated the mutually agreed-upon protocols in order to ensure that the resulting plan is really weak. Not satisfied with that, now they want to lord over the rest of us to ensure that there are never any wild wolves in Utah. At bottom this is a moral issue: We must stand up for wolves and wild nature and for ourselves. Here’s what you can do, but please do it quickly as this bill is on a fast track – do it NOW if you can: If you are a Utah resident, go to the following web-site and click on ‘Senate’ and ‘House’ to find your senator and your representative, then contact each and let him or her know in no ambiguous terms that you want this bill to fail. This will be particularly important for those of you who live in the Republican-dominated rural parts of the state: http://www.le.state.ut.us/ If you live outside Utah and you want to exert influence on this, you might contact the Utah Office of Tourism and express your displeasure over this bill and tell them that, if it passes, it will make you less interested in vacationing and recreating in Utah: http://travel.utah.gov/contactus.html If you would like to be added to the Utah Wolf Forum list serve to receive periodic updates on this and other wolf-related issues, contact lynx@xmission.com and state your request. It is our policy that you also briefly state your reason.

Sincerely, Kirk Robinson, PhD, Director of Western Wildlife Conservancy Allison Jones, M.S., Conservation biologist with Wild Utah Project

*Thanks to “Howling for Justice” for providing this information. (http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/utah-senator-to-wolves-do-not-enter-utah-on-pain-of-death-alert-take-action/)

Read Full Post »


Thanks to Marc Cooke, Wildlife Advocate, for providing this information. 

Northern Idaho Wolf Alliance (NIWA)
December 5, 2010

SOME REPRESENTATIVES HAVE JOINED THE ATTACK ON WOLVES AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

Pardon us for a seeming redundancy, but a bill, HR 6028, has been introduced in the House of Representatives to delist wolves from the Endangered Species List (ESL). This is companion legislation to the Senate bill (S. 3864) we wrote to you about a few days ago. If anything, it is worse than the Senate version because it delists ALL wolves, including the remnant 47 Mexican wolves in the Southwest.

A few days ago, Interior Salazar Secretary assured 3 western governors that the Obama administration would help get the bills passed in the next two weeks.

This bill would circumvent the Endangered Species Act (ESA), & remove wolves from its protection.

It would set a dangerous precedent, by, for the first time, removing an animal from the ESL for political, not scientific reasons. No animal that hunters, ranchers and anti-wildlife forces dislike would ever be safe again.

The immediate consequences would be wolf-hunting seasons in Idaho, Montana, & Wyoming, as well as wolf exterminations by the US Wildlife Service. Almost half of the wolves recently brought back from extinction would be killed, thus reducing them to a remnant, token population, unable to fulfill their biological role in our forests and subjecting them to their possible second extinction.

We are asking you to take 3 actions:
       1. Contact pro-environmental Congressmen on the House Committee on Natural Resources, listed below, and ask them to oppose this legislation.

    2. Forward it to people who care about wolves.

    3. Network with local pro-wildlife organizations & ask them to get on board in this effort (big ones like Defenders of Wildlife, NRDC, etc are already working on it)

Here are important talking points:
ï Rather than decimating livestock, wolves are responsible for less than 1% of depredation.
ï Rather than reducing elk populations, elk numbers have increased since wolf re-introduction to over one million in the Northern Rockies.
ï Scientific studies show that wolves have positive effects on forest health.
ï This bill would set a dangerous precedent, subjecting other species in the future to political rather than scientific scrutiny to delist them.

Thank you for your efforts. Together, we can successfully defend the wolves.

        Nancy Taylor, Co-Chair
        Ann Sydow, Co-Chair  & Newsletter Editor
        Ken Fischman, Vice-Chair
       

You can: (1) Call, (2) FAX, or (3) click on the Representativesí email

Committee on Natural Resources:

Rahall, Nick – (D – WV), Chair
(304) 522 6425 Huntington office
(304) 529 5716 fax
eMail – http://www.rahall.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=91&sectiontree=91
 
Hinchey, Maurice – (D – NY)
(845) 331 4466 Kingston office
(202) 226 0774 fax
 
DeFazio, Peter – (D – OR)
(541) 465 6732 Eugene office
(541) 465 6458 fax
eMail – https://forms.house.gov/defazio/IMA/contact.html
 
Grijalva, Raul M. – (D – AZ)
(520) 622 6788 Tucson office
(520) 622 0198 fax
eMail – http://grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=49&sectiontree=2,49
 
Miller, George – (D- CA)
(925) 602 1880 Concord office
(925) 674 0983 fax
eMail – https://georgemiller.house.gov/contact/email-me.shtml
 
 
 
Committee on Natural Resources, Sub-Committee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife
 
Bordallo, Madeleine Z. (D – Guam), Chair
(202) 225 1188 Washington, D.C. office
(202) 226 0341 fax
eMail – http://www.house.gov/bordallo/contact.shtml

Read Full Post »


PLEASE CONTACT CONGRESS NOW!

On December 4, the AZ Game and Fish Commission decided to ignore the overwhelming majority of Arizona’s voters that support the Mexican wolf reintroduction. 

Instead, the Commission voted 4-1 to support Congressional actions to delist the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act, making it clear that state control is their top priority, not Mexican gray wolf recovery. 

Please contact your members of Congress to ensure the Mexican wolf remains a protected species!   Please follow the link below providing by “Lobos of the Southwest.”


http://www.mexicanwolves.org/index.php/news/299/51/Update-Arizona-s-Game-and-Fish-Commission-supports-Congressional-efforts-to-delist-gray-wolves

Read Full Post »


Lynne Stone is the director of the Boulder-White Clouds Council and is an ardent advocate for wolves. This interview was conducted in September of 2009.

What do you know about the social structure of wolves?
Wolves are different from our other wildlife in Idaho in that they are pack animals. They have a very tight family structure. The pack is run by the breeding pair – also called the Alpha female and the Alpha male – and then the other members of the pack, say, the two and three year olds, help take care of the pups that are born in April. Also the yearlings help. 

Either the males or the females that are the leaders make the decisions about going out on a hunt and which prey to go after; and the rest of the pack follows in line. If one of the pack members ends up being injured, the pack will gather around and they will howl. They will bring them food. I have been around when there has been trapping and collaring going on, and I’ve heard the other pack members up in the timber just a little ways away howling for the wolf that is caught in the trap. And when the wolf is killed, there is a tremendous sorrow, and the howling that takes place then is really a howl of remorse and loss.

So, a lot different from black bears, a lot different from mountain lions, where the male in both of those animals is very much of a threat to the young. The wolves love the puppies, and they all like taking care of them and playing with them.

So, they are intelligent?
Wolves are so smart and intelligent and charismatic. You can’t help – I can’t help – but apply human traits to wolves, whether they are looking sad or curious. They are very curious about the world that is going on around them, and they might be attracted if you are hiking and you have your dog; they might come and sit and try and figure out what this very strange looking wolf is with this human.

And they are attracted to sounds. Sometimes we see wolves just sitting along highway 75 watching the traffic, just looking one way, looking the other way, and they have no idea what stir they cause in the world. They just want to have a life and live in this beautiful place where we have all this room for them and all this wildlife for them.

You are pretty passionate about wolves.
I am. I’m passionate about a lot of wildlife, but wolves right now are the ones that need the most help, the most outreach through education to the public, to help dismiss some of the myths around wolves. I’ve been around wolves a lot in the last four years living around Stanley. I mostly hike by myself and camp by myself. My dog is always with me. I respect the wolves. I try not to intrude where they have a den,or what is called a rendezvous site, where they are raising their pups. But sometimes I have just walked right in on them or – a couple of times they’ve walked right in on me – and we’re both just, ‘Whoa, and I usually go, who are you?’ If it’s like a Phantom Hill or Basin Butte pack, I’m familiar enough with those that I can try to figure out which one it is in the pack.

But shouldn’t you fear wolves?
I have absolutely no fear at all of wolves. If I see a black bear, that gets my attention. If I’m hiking in somewhere, and I see a bear, I might weigh on whether I want to keep going; the same way if I see mountain lion tracks. But with wolves, it doesn’t deter me from hiking. If I do hear a lot of howling, or I hear the pups howling with them, I’d like to give them a wide berth. I don’t want to disturb them at that time. But if wolves are on a kill, and you have your dog with you, it probably would be a good idea to not let your dog run out towards the wolves.

If you are in wolf country, which is becoming almost everywhere in Idaho or anywhere there is wildlife, your dog should be under voice control; and if you can’t keep him or her under control, then they should be on a leash, or you should go somewhere else and hike. But dogs are a problem chasing fawns and elk calves and birds. You should be aware when you are in the back country with your dog.

I have absolutely no fear at all of wolves. If I see a black bear, that gets my attention… But with wolves, it doesn’t deter me from hiking.

There have been a few cases where dogs have been killed by wolves. Usually those are hounds that are pursuing either mountain lions or black bears; and nine times out of ten the people who have those hounds know full well they are going into where the wolves are, and that is a risk you take when the pursuer becomes pursued and killed.

People used to complain about trying to save chinook salmon and sockeye salmon; and there were rallies against trying to do that. Well, now nobody talks about salmon anymore, because the wolves came in, in ’95 and ’96, and all the focus is on these big bad wolves. So, if we had grizzly bears, I think the wolves would just get off the hook immediately. So bring in the bears! Tell them to come on over.

What are your thoughts on a hunt?
I think it’s very poorly planned, and it’s all based on politics and not on science. Minnesota has over 3,000 wolves and has no plans to have a wolf hunt for at least 5 years; and when they do, there is going to be citizen input from all interests. The only people they listened to were the outfitters and the hunters. 

They have been itching to go kill wolves, and finally they have opened up this 7 month long hunting season. We don’t hunt any big game animal in Idaho for 7 months, but that is what we’re going to do with wolves in the Sawtooth zone, which goes all the way down to the backyard of Boise, and also in the Lolo up north. We’re going to be having wolves killed clear up until March 31st, pregnant females who are almost ready to den and have puppies. And wolves congregate towards the den sites. Most of them are very well known, and there is nothing to stop entire wolf packs from being killed in late March. This is absurd.

It’s criminal and I hope that Judge Don Malloy will rule to stop delisting before we get into this winter wolf hunting season and late spring.

The wolf hunt that Fish and Game is proposing is for 255 wolves. It is likely that more will be shot and not reported. You can have one wolf tag and take one wolf, but if you read the anti-wolf blogs, it’s all over the place that you can shoot as many as you want, you can only tag one. Of course, it’s illegal to shoot more than one, but there is not a whole lot of law enforcement out in this country, it’s so big.

Right now wolves are delisted from the Endangered Species Act, and they have almost no protection. The hunt now comes on top of the fact that a government agency called Wildlife Services has shot dozens and dozens of wolves this summer for conflicts with sheep and cattle. Also ranchers are given kill-on-sight permits.

We have twelve men right in Stanley who have shoot-on-sight for the Basin Butte wolves, up to three wolves, so ranchers no longer have to do anything to protect their livestock from predators including wolves, because the rules have all been relaxed and again, it’s politics.

And actually, I’m more concerned about Wildlife Services which has telemetry for the radio collared wolves, has airplanes and also has access to helicopters. They are much more efficient at killing wolves, including entire packs, than hunters will ever be. And then ranchers, because they don’t have to do anything to protect their animals – sheep are especially vulnerable and sheep are all over the mountains of Idaho, and when sheep get killed, then wolves die.

Shooting a wolf has got to be like shooting a dog, and they look about the same when they are lying there dead.

So we have these three things. We’ve got Wildlife Services killing wolves and ranchers and then hunters. Most of the wolves are going to be killed in the upcoming rifle season for deer and elk, and then wolves will be extremely vulnerable in the winter months when there is snow. A lot of wolves, if the hunt keeps going and isn’t stopped, will be shot off of snowmobiles, right like where we’re standing right here. I see a lot of wolves right in these mountains, and there is a lot of snowmobiling, and it might be illegal but that’s not going to stop it from happening.

I thought the number was 220.
It’s 220 plus 35 for the tribe, so the total number is 255; and Wildlife Services will probably kill 150 wolves this summer and fall. They are well on their way to that; plus another 100 will die of other causes, being poached, run over on the highway. So we well could lose over half of the wolves in Idaho by next spring. 

If that happens, we’re not going to have sustainability, we’re not going to have the genetic diversity. We need this genetic diversity. Right now there is a kill order out for the Steel Mountain pack and that Alpha male is from Yellowstone. He is one of the few wolves that made it from Wyoming to come clear over into the Smokey Mountains and because of sheep operations that have not been responsible for taking care of their sheep in the rugged mountains, we’re going to lose a whole pack including this male that is very valuable to the genetic diversity of Idaho wolves.

Is there any good that will come from the hunt?
I think there are two things. The wolves will become much more afraid of people. A lot of them will die before they ever get that chance to become afraid, especially the pups and the yearlings, because they’re not very smart. And number two, maybe it will satisfy this blood lust that these hunters – they just can’t wait to go out and get themselves a wolf. Maybe once they go out and they hunt, and they have a chance to maybe even shoot at one, even if it’s a pup, maybe sometime in the bar talk they can go, yeah I went wolf hunting and I shot at a wolf.

It’s like people I know who have gone and shot a moose. They said I never want to do that again. It’s like shooting a horse. Shooting a wolf has got to be like shooting a dog and they look about the same when they are lying there dead. And to shoot a young one and have the rest of the pack howling and upset, I just think most people, it’s going to be an experience that stays with them, and they could be sorry.

We’re not going to be overrun by wolves in Idaho. They are territorial. They live short, hard lives. In Yellowstone in the first ten years of all the collared wolves, the average age they lived was 3.4 years. The Basin Butte wolves – of the five pups that were born in 2006, four out of those five are now dead, and all of them have been shot.

No other species in the state is being managed as intensely and with such violence, killing and trapping them and shooting them from airplanes and helicopters.

So, here we’re living next to Stanley. Sawtooth National Recreation Area; it’s supposed to be a recreation area where wildlife has precedence over grazing. What a joke. What a joke. Cattle are king here, in case you haven’t noticed, and that will cause these wolves like Basin Butte to keep getting killed over and over and over again. They’ve already shot two over in Iron Creek this summer. They killed eight last year, Wildlife Services did, because ranchers just refused to try and learn to live with wolves.

So, for me, the bigger problem for wolves is not the hunting season. It’s Wildlife Services and it’s the livestock industry. They are much more efficient at killing wolves than hunters are going to be.

Why does Idaho need wolves? Why do people in Idaho need to see wolves?
They are the most interesting, intelligent, charismatic animal on the planet as far as I’m concerned, and we have 66% of the state that is public land. It belongs to all of us. We have record numbers of Rocky Mountain elk. We’ve got plenty of mule deer. Our wolves tend to eat mostly elk. In fact, right now there are depredation hunts going on in Idaho around ranches because the elk are eating the livestock feed and in the fields. So we’ve got plenty of country, we’ve got lots of wildlife.

Wolves are territorial. There’s only going to be one wolf pack around Stanley, there’s going to be one in the Sawtooth valley, there’s going to be one over in the Big Wood River valley around Ketchum, which is right now the Phantom Hill wolf. They are going to keep their numbers in check and through injury and being hit and being poached and getting sick – these are all things that canines in the wild have to deal with. We just lost all six pups of the Soldier Mountain pack. There are only three wolves left in that pack.

We’re just not going to be overrun. Most of the wolves that I have tracked through being a volunteer in the last four years are dead. In four years, they are all gone. I only have one left, the alpha female of the Basin Butte pack. Four of her daughters and sons have been killed, and I’ve seen that happen, and it is really hard, and it is because of the cattle grazing here.

If other animals are managed, why shouldn’t wolves be managed as well?
Wolves are definitely being managed, and they are being managed in a very heavy handed manner right now by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. There are kill orders out all over Idaho for entire packs right here where we are standing. Basin Butte wolves and Sawtooth National Recreation area, they’ve killed two of them this summer. Three more are going to go down if Fish and Game has their way. No other species in the state is being managed as intensely and with such violence, killing and trapping them and shooting them from airplanes and helicopters. And when they do this, they don’t even know if it’s the wolf that ate the lamb. It doesn’t matter. They just go out and start shooting. So they are already being managed.

In Minnesota, 3,000 wolves. No hunting season. In Idaho, maybe 1,000 wolves, and the number is every day diminishing because of this heavy control we have, because of the poaching that is going on. And now we have this hunting season that is completely not based on science at all. And Fish and Game is going, suddenly there are not as many elk in the Sawtooth zone as we thought there were. Yesterday morning I saw 30 elk right by lower Stanley, and there were 12 calves with those elk. I saw a 5-point bull out highway 21 yesterday morning with several cows and calves.

Why are we killing these beautiful animals when we could be making money on them?

There are elk everywhere I go. There are 100 head out by Cape Horn, but yet they are using this as an excuse that our numbers are down. Yet Fish and Game has said for years, we don’t have winter range for elk. We don’t want elk wintering in the Sawtooth valley and Stanley. It’s one of the coldest places on earth. Elk shouldn’t be here in the winter. So now the wolves and the long hunting seasons have trimmed out the elk around Stanley, and now we’re going to trim out the wolves. Doesn’t make sense to me. It’s based on politics. It’s the Fish and Game commissioners, it’s the legislature, it’s Governor Otter. It’s not based on science at all.

Do you think there’s an economic advantage to having wolves in Idaho?
We’re sitting here in central Idaho with a lot of small towns that are struggling. Around Yellowstone, small towns are thriving, because people come to the Lamar Valley to see the wolves, the famous wolves. People come from all over the world to see the wolves. We could have that in Stanley and in Challis and Salmon and Ketchum. When the Phantom Hill wolves came into Sun Valley in March, hundreds of people got to see them. I spent all day talking to people about the wolves, answering questions and recruited other people to come and do that.

If the Phantoms can survive the hunting season – which will start October 1st and go to the end of the year – if they come down into Elkhorn and Sun Valley again like they did last winter, we can have people from all over the world come to see these beautiful black wolves – and to educate people. We should be capitalizing on the fact that we have these wolves in little places like Lowman and Banks and Idaho City.

But instead, people like me have to go out and make the wolves afraid of people so that they won’t get shot. And it hurts me when I do that, when I see beautiful wolves, and they are just playing or they are hunting a squirrel as they often do, and I take out my .243, and I start blasting and screaming at them to get them to run, because the next person who comes along could shoot them. And now they legally can shoot them.

We’re doing this so backwards. If this was I think almost any place else – if it was Oregon, or it was Washington, some place with a different idea of how we manage wildlife. Why are we killing these beautiful animals when we could be making money on them? And selling T-Shirts and coffee cups and putting bumper stickers on. And now, if you do that, you are likely to get your car vandalized. Or you are likely to get beaten up, if you have a wolf t-shirt on. Boy, we took a wrong turn somewhere here!

Wolves are great. They belong here. We just have to keep working to try to change the attitude. It’s probably not going to happen in my lifetime. It might happen in my son’s or my grandson’s lifetime, that people finally appreciate predators, including wolves.

**THANK YOU TO “WOLVES IN IDAHO” FOR PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION.  This interview can also be seen through the link below.

http://idahoptv.org/OUTDOORS/shows/wolvesinidaho/Lstone.cfm

Read Full Post »


**ONE OF OUR MOST  POWERFUL WOLF ALLIES FROM BOULDER-WHITE CLOUDS IS DIRECTOR  LYNNE STONE, AN IDAHO RESIDENT WHO HAS DEDICATED HER LIFE TO THE PROTECTION OF WILDERNESS AND WOLVES. 

ORIGINAL BILL

S.1983
Title: Endangered Species Conservation Act
Sponsor: Sen Williams, Harrison A., Jr. [NJ] (introduced 6/12/1973) Cosponsors (8)
Related Bills: H.R.37
Latest Major Action: 12/28/1973 Public law 93-205.SUMMARY AS OF:
12/28/1973–Public Law. (There is 1 other summary)

(LATEST SUMMARY)

Endangered Species Act – States that the purposes of this Act are to conserve the ecosystems upon which endangered species depend, and to conserve those species.

Sets forth the procedure by which the Secretaries of Interior and Commerce shall determine if a species or subspecies of fish or wildlife shall be regarded as an endangered species. Lists the following factors to be considered in determining if a species or subspecies is threatened with extinction: (1) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, sporting, scientific, or education purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.

Provides that the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a list by scientific and common name or names of species and subspecies determined to be endangered. Provides that the Secretary may, from time to time, by regulation, revise such list.

Provides that the Secretary shall utilize the land acquisition and other authorities of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, as amended, the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as appropriate, to carry out a program in the United States of conserving those species of fish and wildlife that he lists as endangered species pursuant to this Act.

Provides that, in carrying out the program authorized by this Act, the Secretary shall cooperate to the maximum extent practicable with the several States. States that such cooperation shall include consultation before the acquisition of any land for the purpose of conserving any endangered species. Authorizes the Secretary to provide financial assistance to States for cooperative programs to protect endangered and threatened species, and specifies requirements of such programs. Allows the Federal share of such financial assistance to be two-thirds.

Provides that any State law or regulation which applies to the importation or exportation of, or interstate or foreign commerce in, endangered or threatened species is void to the extent that it is inconsistent with this Act.

Authorizes an appropriation, for such State conservation programs, of $10,000,000 through fiscal year 1977.

Provides for a review of and cooperation with other Federal agency programs within the scope of this Act.

Authorizes the use of counterpart funds in foreign countries, where those countries are agreeable, to provide assistance in the development and management of programs which the Secretary finds to be important to endangered species.

Directs the Secretary to encourage foreign countries to develop adequate programs for the protection of endangered species, to encourage the development of bilateral and multilateral agreements for the protection of endangered species and to encourage foreign persons who take fish or wildlife or or animals for importation to use such practices as will encourage appropriate conservation practices designed to enhance such fish or wildlife and their habitat.

Directs the President to designate appropriate agencies to act as the Management Authority and the Scientific Authority pursuant to the Convention on Nature Preservation and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere.

Provides that it is unlawful for any person to: (1) import into or export from the United States, or (2) take within the United States, the territorial sea of the United States, upon the high seas, or (3) ship, carry, or receive by any means; any species or subspecies which is listed as an endangered species.

Allows exceptions from the prohibitions contained in this Act for fish and wildlife held in captivity or in a controlled environment, if purposes for holding are not contrary to this Act.

Makes it unlawful for any person to engage in business as an importer or exporter of fish or wildlife (other than shellfish and fishery products which (1) are not listed pursuant to this Act as endangered species or threatened species, and (2) are imported for purposes of human or animal consumption or taken in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States or on the high seas for recreational purposes) or plants without first having obtained permission from the Secretary.

States that if any person enters into a contract with respect to a species of fish or wildlife or plant before the date of the publication in the Federal Register of notice of consideration of that species as an endangered species and the subsequent listing of that species as an endangered species will cause undue economic hardship to such person under the contract, the Secretary, in order to minimize such hardship, may exempt such person from the application of this Act to the extent the Secretary deems appropriate if such person applies to him for such exemption.

Provides that the provisions of this Act shall not apply with respect to the taking of any endangered species or threatened species, or the importation of any such species taken pursuant to this section, by any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who is an Alaskan Native who resides in Alaska.

Sets forth civil and criminal penalties for violations of the provisions of this Act. Authorizes the seizure and forfeiture of fish, wildlife, plants, or equipment possessed in violation of this Act. Allows private suits for injunctive enforcement of this Act.

Authorizes the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, together with any other interested agencies, to review plant species which are or may become endangered or threatened and to prescribe possible regulatory programs.

Specifies appropriations for fiscal years 1974-76 to carry out this Act.

=======

HUNTING StatisticsIn Wyoming there are currently 120,00 elk…..50% above State objectives

In Idaho there are currently 100,00 elk…..Slightly below objective but 23 of the 29 hunting districts are at or above objectives.

Success Rates in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming
Montana: 22 %
Idaho: 20%
Wyoming: 43%

In Montana there are currently 160,000 elk… 14% above State objectives

-The imaginary problem of perceived decreased hunting opportunities is due in part to liberal hunting quotas.

-Wolves prey on the old, sick and weak animals first.

-Wolves are apex predators vital to our ecosystem. They influence forest health by decreasing ungulate browsing pressure. Wolf kills provide food for many other species. Wolves are the best friend of pronghorn antelope fawns, because wolves control the coyote population, who feed on the fawns. Wolves keep ungulate herds healthy by culling the weak, sick and old.Wolves are not killing all the elk in the Northern Rockies. The elk population in Montana stands at 150,000, Idaho 101,000 and Wyoming 120,000 That’s 371,000 elk in the tri-state region. More than enough elk, probably too many elk, since fish and game agencies favor high ungulate numbers to please their customers, the hunters. Wolves, bears, mountain lions and other predators are considered a nuisance and their numbers are controlled.
-Wolf depredation on livestock is a red herring. Wolves were responsible for just 97 cattle losses in Montana in 2009 out 2.6 million cattle. The main cause of cow deaths are disease, weather, theft and reproductive issues. Coyotes are the primary cattle predator but all predation is low compared to non-predation. Most ranchers in the Northern Rockies do not practice sound animal husbandry practices and rely on Wildlife Services to kill predators for them.
-Wolves are the least dangerous of all large North American carnivores. They are shy and will stay as far away from people as they can. Deer kill many more people in car accidents every year, in this country, than wolves have in a century.
-Wolves need the protection of the ESA. Could it be any plainer, when so many special interest groups are clamoring for wolves’ blood? Their hysterical claims are not backed by science but myth and innuendo. Wolves are the ultimate scapegoats.
=======
– Hide quoted text –
LIVESTOCK and RANCHING Talking points

in 2009 Montana lost 97 cattle to depredation.
There are 2.6 million cattle in Montana

Other reasons for cattle deaths and amount.
Digestive problems: 1,600
Respiratory Problems: 1,300
Birthing Problems: 1,100
Misc health problems: 3,200
Harsh weather: 600
Poisoning: 800

Ranchers are not for the most part proactive when living with wolves. They leave their investment free to roam unsupervised both on public and private lands.
There are options such as:
Guard dogs
Mules and donkeys
Electric fence
Fladry
Range riders
Good animal husbandry.
##############################

#############################################################################################################################################################

ESA Senator Contact List

United States Senate


Senators of the 111th Congress

Akaka, Daniel K. – (D – HI) Class I
141 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6361
Web Form: akaka.senate.gov/email-senator-akaka.cfm

Alexander, Lamar – (R – TN) Class II
455 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4944
Web Form: alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Barrasso, John – (R – WY) Class I
307 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6441
Web Form: barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs...

Baucus, Max – (D – MT) Class II
511 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2651
Web Form: baucus.senate.gov/contact/emailForm.cfm?subj=issue

Bayh, Evan – (D – IN) Class III
131 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5623
Web Form: bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/

Begich, Mark – (D – AK) Class II
144 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3004
Web Form: begich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=EmailSenator

Bennet, Michael F. – (D – CO) Class III
702 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5852
Web Form: bennet.senate.gov/contact/

Bennett, Robert F. – (R – UT) Class III
431 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5444
Web Form: bennett.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Bingaman, Jeff – (D – NM) Class I
703 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5521
Web Form: bingaman.senate.gov/contact/

Bond, Christopher S. – (R – MO) Class III
274 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5721
Web Form: bond.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.Con...

Boxer, Barbara – (D – CA) Class III
112 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3553
Web Form: boxer.senate.gov/en/contact/

Brown, Scott P. – (R – MA) Class I
317 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4543
Web Form: scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/emailscottbrown

Brown, Sherrod – (D – OH) Class I
713 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2315
Web Form: brown.senate.gov/contact/

Brownback, Sam – (R – KS) Class III
303 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6521
Web Form: brownback.senate.gov/public/contact/emailsam.cfm

Bunning, Jim – (R – KY) Class III
316 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4343
Web Form: bunning.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Co...

Burr, Richard – (R – NC) Class III
217 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3154
Web Form: burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Conta...

Cantwell, Maria – (D – WA) Class I
511 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3441
Web Form: cantwell.senate.gov/contact/

Cardin, Benjamin L. – (D – MD) Class I
509 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4524
Web Form: cardin.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Carper, Thomas R. – (D – DE) Class I
513 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2441
Web Form: carper.senate.gov/contact/

Casey, Robert P., Jr. – (D – PA) Class I
393 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6324
Web Form: casey.senate.gov/contact/

Chambliss, Saxby – (R – GA) Class II
416 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3521
Web Form: chambliss.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Coburn, Tom – (R – OK) Class III
172 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5754
Web Form: coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactsenatorcoburn?p...

Cochran, Thad – (R – MS) Class II
113 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5054
Web Form: cochran.senate.gov/email.html

Collins, Susan M. – (R – ME) Class II
413 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2523
Web Form: collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=Contact...

Conrad, Kent – (D – ND) Class I
530 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2043
Web Form: conrad.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm

Coons, Christopher A. – (D – DE) Class II
383 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5042

Corker, Bob – (R – TN) Class I
185 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3344
Web Form: corker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe

Cornyn, John – (R – TX) Class II
517 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2934
Web Form: cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm

Crapo, Mike – (R – ID) Class III
239 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6142
Web Form: crapo.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

DeMint, Jim – (R – SC) Class III
340 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6121
Web Form: demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactInformation

Dodd, Christopher J. – (D – CT) Class III
448 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2823
Web Form: dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3130

Dorgan, Byron L. – (D – ND) Class III
322 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2551
Web Form: dorgan.senate.gov/contact/contact_form.cfm

Durbin, Richard J. – (D – IL) Class II
309 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2152
Web Form: durbin.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Ensign, John – (R – NV) Class I
119 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6244
Web Form: ensign.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

Enzi, Michael B. – (R – WY) Class II
379A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3424
Web Form: enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInform...

Feingold, Russell D. – (D – WI) Class III
506 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5323
Web Form: feingold.senate.gov/contact_opinion.html

Feinstein, Dianne – (D – CA) Class I
331 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3841
Web Form: feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactU...

Franken, Al – (D – MN) Class II
320 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5641
Web Form: franken.senate.gov/?p=contact

Gillibrand, Kirsten E. – (D – NY) Class I
478 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4451
Web Form: gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/

Graham, Lindsey – (R – SC) Class II
290 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5972
Web Form: lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Em...

Grassley, Chuck – (R – IA) Class III
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3744
Web Form: grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Gregg, Judd – (R – NH) Class III
201 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3324
Web Form: gregg.senate.gov/contact/

Hagan, Kay R. – (D – NC) Class II
521 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6342
Web Form: hagan.senate.gov/?p=contact

Harkin, Tom – (D – IA) Class II
731 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3254
Web Form: harkin.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Hatch, Orrin G. – (R – UT) Class I
104 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5251
Web Form: hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Cont...

Hutchison, Kay Bailey – (R – TX) Class I
284 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5922
Web Form: hutchison.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Inhofe, James M. – (R – OK) Class II
453 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4721
Web Form: inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

Inouye, Daniel K. – (D – HI) Class III
722 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3934
Web Form: inouye.senate.gov/Contact/Email-Form.cfm

Isakson, Johnny – (R – GA) Class III
120 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3643
Web Form: isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Johanns, Mike – (R – NE) Class II
404 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4224
Web Form: johanns.senate.gov/public/?p=ContactSenatorJohanns

Johnson, Tim – (D – SD) Class II
136 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5842
Web Form: johnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

Kerry, John F. – (D – MA) Class II
218 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2742
Web Form: kerry.senate.gov/contact/

Kirk, Mark – (R – IL) Class III
387 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2854

Klobuchar, Amy – (D – MN) Class I
302 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3244
Web Form: klobuchar.senate.gov/emailamy.cfm

Kohl, Herb – (D – WI) Class I
330 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5653
Web Form: kohl.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Kyl, Jon – (R – AZ) Class I
730 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4521
Web Form: kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Landrieu, Mary L. – (D – LA) Class II
328 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5824
Web Form: landrieu.senate.gov/about/contact.cfm

Lautenberg, Frank R. – (D – NJ) Class II
324 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
Web Form: lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/routing.cfm

Leahy, Patrick J. – (D – VT) Class III
433 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4242
Web Form: leahy.senate.gov/contact/

LeMieux, George S. – (R – FL) Class III
356 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3041
Web Form: lemieux.senate.gov/public/?p=EmailSenatorLeMieux

Levin, Carl – (D – MI) Class II
269 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6221
Web Form: levin.senate.gov/contact/

Lieberman, Joseph I. – (ID – CT) Class I
706 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4041
Web Form: lieberman.senate.gov/index.cfm/contact/email-me-about-an-...

Lincoln, Blanche L. – (D – AR) Class III
355 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4843
Web Form: lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Lugar, Richard G. – (R – IN) Class I
306 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4814
Web Form: lugar.senate.gov/contact/

Manchin, Joe, III – (D – WV) Class I
311 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3954
Web Form: manchin.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm

McCain, John – (R – AZ) Class III
241 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2235
Web Form: mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

McCaskill, Claire – (D – MO) Class I
717 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6154
Web Form: mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=contact

McConnell, Mitch – (R – KY) Class II
361A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2541
Web Form: www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=contact

Menendez, Robert – (D – NJ) Class I
528 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4744
Web Form: menendez.senate.gov/contact/

Merkley, Jeff – (D – OR) Class II
107 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3753
Web Form: merkley.senate.gov/contact/

Mikulski, Barbara A. – (D – MD) Class III
503 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4654
Web Form: mikulski.senate.gov/contact/

Murkowski, Lisa – (R – AK) Class III
709 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6665
Web Form: murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

Murray, Patty – (D – WA) Class III
173 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2621
Web Form: murray.senate.gov/email/index.cfm

Nelson, Ben – (D – NE) Class I
720 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6551
Web Form: bennelson.senate.gov/contact-me.cfm

Nelson, Bill – (D – FL) Class I
716 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5274
Web Form: billnelson.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Pryor, Mark L. – (D – AR) Class II
255 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2353
Web Form: pryor.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe

Reed, Jack – (D – RI) Class II
728 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4642
Web Form: reed.senate.gov/contact/contact-share.cfm

Reid, Harry – (D – NV) Class III
522 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3542
Web Form: reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Risch, James E. – (R – ID) Class II
483 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2752
Web Form: risch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Roberts, Pat – (R – KS) Class II
109 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4774
Web Form: www.roberts.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=EmailPat

Rockefeller, John D., IV – (D – WV) Class II
531 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6472
Web Form: rockefeller.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Sanders, Bernard – (I – VT) Class I
332 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5141
Web Form: sanders.senate.gov/contact/

Schumer, Charles E. – (D – NY) Class III
313 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6542
Web Form: schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm

Sessions, Jeff – (R – AL) Class II
335 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4124
Web Form: sessions.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Constitue...

Shaheen, Jeanne – (D – NH) Class II
520 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2841
Web Form: shaheen.senate.gov/contact/

Shelby, Richard C. – (R – AL) Class III
304 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5744
Web Form: shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactSenatorShelby

Snowe, Olympia J. – (R – ME) Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
Web Form: snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenat...

Specter, Arlen – (D – PA) Class III
711 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4254
Web Form: specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Co...

Stabenow, Debbie – (D – MI) Class I
133 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4822
Web Form: stabenow.senate.gov/email.cfm

Tester, Jon – (D – MT) Class I
724 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2644
Web Form: tester.senate.gov/Contact/index.cfm

Thune, John – (R – SD) Class III
493 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2321
Web Form: thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Email

Udall, Mark – (D – CO) Class II
317 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5941
Web Form: markudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

Udall, Tom – (D – NM) Class II
110 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6621
Web Form: tomudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

Vitter, David – (R – LA) Class III
516 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4623
Web Form: vitter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

Voinovich, George V. – (R – OH) Class III
524 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3353
Web Form: voinovich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact....

Warner, Mark R. – (D – VA) Class II
459A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2023

Webb, Jim – (D – VA) Class I
248 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4024
Web Form: webb.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Whitehouse, Sheldon – (D – RI) Class I
502 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2921
Web Form: whitehouse.senate.gov/contact/

Wicker, Roger F. – (R – MS) Class I
555 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6253
Web Form: wicker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.EMa...

Wyden, Ron – (D – OR) Class III
223 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5244
Web Form: wyden.senate.gov/contact/###########################################################################################################################################################################################

ESA Senator Cut and Paste Letter


Dear Senator

Just days after a Federal Judge Donald Molloy issued his ruling returning Gray Wolves to the protection afforded under the 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA) there is a House Bill being introduced meant to exclude Gray Wolves from this protection permanently.

House Bill 6028 and Senate Bills S 3825, S 3864 and S3919 would set a precedence that would begin to water down and undermine one of the most historic act’s our elected body has ever achieved. The Endangered Species Act or ESA as it is called. Individuals that had the courage and foresight to protect for future American generations all native living things. To bring balance back to a ecosystem that was torn out of kilter before man had a better understanding on the role living plants and creatures play daily. (Trophic Cascades)
House Bill 6028 being introduced by ( R ) Texas, Chet Edwards is not in the best interest of the majority of average Americans. This bills language would amend the ESA” SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON TREATMENT OF GRAY WOLF AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES OR THREATENED SPECIES.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
‘(4) The Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) shall not be treated as an endangered species or threatened species for purposes of this Act.’

Make no mistake. This HB6028 and Senate Bills 3825, S3864 and S 3919 are being introduced for “Special Interest” groups. These groups believe they are more deserving then the average American citizen. Let me take a moment and share some facts from the 2001, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service , Federal Aid Survey.
In the United States there are 11 million “Big Game Hunters”. There are 66 million “Wildlife Watchers” in the United States. There is also supporting information that the overall numbers of hunters are declining within the United States. While the numbers of Americans that enjoy Watching Nature are increasing.
Ranchers and Livestock industry weigh heavily into encouraging the proposed change to the ESA. The Agricultural Industry is constantly making statements or attempting to influence our elected officials via “Special Interest Lobbyist” that wolves are a constant threat to their Ranchers and other Agricultural businesses. Nothing could be further from the truth!

In the yearly inter agency wolf report for 2009, written by USFWS, which covers the Northern Rockies, the report stated in part: ….”wolf depredation results in a comparatively small proportion of all livestock losses”. Vultures killed more cows then wolves that year. Coyotes and domestic dogs were in the number one and two position. Even so all predators are responsible for a tiny blip of livestock losses.(NASS 2006).
In a report released from USDA Cattle Death Loss. 104.5 million cattle produced, wolves killed less then 4.400 cattle.

I firmly believe there is an irrational hatred being focused on wolves. Therefore, I would request that you NOT SUPPORT House Bill 6028 or Senate Bills S 3825, S 3864 and S 3919 or any form of amendment made to weaken the Endangered Species Act.

Sincerely,###########################################################################################################################################################################################

Pre-Written Letter Regarding Anti-Wolf Bills


This letter is for you to send to your senators and representatives regarding the multiple anti-wolf/anti-wildlife bills that will exclude gray wolves from being listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. We encourage you to personalize the message before you send it.

Don’t forget to add your name at the bottom and the name of your senator or representative at the top in the spaces provided!

—————

To:
Find a list of your senators at: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Find a list of your representatives at:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml

Message:
Dear _________,

Gray wolves were once eradicated from the lower 48 states. Today, they are making a slow recovery and inhabit about 5% of their original range. If given time wolves can make a full recovery, however some political powers don’t want to see this happen. Several bills have been submitted, or are in the process of being developed, that will prohibit listing gray wolves as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Some of these bills are limited to the Northern Rockies, where wolves are almost (but not yet) recovered, while others cover the entire country. As a concerned citizen and someone who values all wildlife, I ask you NOT to support any of these bills.

Wolves are a keystone species and are important to our local ecosystems. They encourage healthy biodiversity and improve the overall health of their habitats. When wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, researchers notice an incredible change in the environment. Wolves prevented the elk from over grazing, which was harming the park and the animals living there. If given the chance, wolves can do the same for the rest of the country. However, if wolf-hating states are given control over wolves while they are still recovering, all of the positive impacts wolves have had on their environments will be lost. States, like Montana and Idaho, plan to keep their wolf populations at an unhealthy and unstably low number in hopes of artificially boosting already overpopulated ungulate herds. Wyoming and Utah, on the other hand, have a “no wolves allowed” management approach. Wolves will not survive under either of these brutal conditions.

If these bills are passed, wolves will not be the only victims. Passing these bills will give way to farther crippling of the Endangered Species Act. Any endangered species that inconveniences someone with power will be the next to lose their vital protections.

Please do not support any anti-wolf and anti-wildlife bills than plan to rewrite wolves out of the Endangered Species Act. Wolves still need to be protected in order to survive in this country.

Thank you for your time,###########################################################################################################################################################################################

Eniromental & Public Works Committee (Review ESA)


Read Full Post »


LAS CRUCES — Twelve Democratic members of Congress, including New Mexico Rep. Martin Heinrich, have sent a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar calling for changes to the federally run Mexican gray wolf recovery project aimed at bolstering the wild lobo population.
       
The letter calls for five key recommendations. They include the release of 22 wolves — eight in Arizona and 14 in New Mexico — that are considered eligible for release under the program’s rules; and the retrieval of telemetry receivers loaned to private parties that alert ranchers and property owners when wolves are nearby.
       
Some conservationists believe the telemetry receivers can be used to locate and kill Mexican gray wolves. Thirty-five wolves have been killed illegally since the program was launched in 1998 with the release of wolves into a national forest in southeast Arizona.
       
In the Dec. 1 letter to Salazar, the members of Congress call for reforms “before it becomes too late and this unique and vital animal can no longer be saved from extinction.”
       
They add: “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service persists in pursuing failed policies and repudiated management practices, while delaying positive change, even as the sole Mexican wolf population in the wild continues a five-year decline.”

Along with Heinrich, the letter was signed by Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, four representatives from northern California, and others from Tennessee, New York, Georgia, Indiana and Colorado.
 …      
       
The letter also asks Fish and Wildlife to release a completed draft environmental assessment that could lead to a new policy allowing captive wolves to be released directly into New Mexico. Under current rules, wolves new to the wild can only be released initially into Arizona, with New Mexico reserved for the relocation of previously captured wolves.
       
In addition, the letter urges the agency to assemble a scientific team that would produce a new draft recovery plan by next month establishing a formal goal for the wild lobo population.
  
To read the full article, published in the Albuquerque Journal on December 4, 2010, click here (Non-subscribers can scroll down and use the Trial Access Pass button).   

Please write a letter to the editor praising these legislators for their informed and courageous stance at a time when other members of Congress are pushing legislation to strip Mexican wolves of endangered species protections!!

And please send a quick email to let Congressmen Heinrich and Grijalva, and the other signers know how much you appreciate their support for lobos:
Congressman Raul Grijalva
Congressman Martin Heinrich
Congressman Dennis Kucinich
Congresswoman Barbara Lee
Congressman Jared Polis
Congressman Andre Carson
Congressman Sam Farr
Congressman Pete Stark
Congresswoman Nita Lowey
Congressman Mike Honda
Congressman John Lewis
Congressman Steve Cohen

Please, it is critical that you follow the link below and write to these Congressman!  Thanks to www.mexicanwolves.org for providing this information.

http://www.mexicanwolves.org/index.php/news/298/51/New-in-the-Press-Changes-Sought-to-Mexican-Gray-Wolf-Plan

Read Full Post »


Western Watersheds Project states, “According to a November 29 article in the Washington Post, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar made a back-room pledge to Western governors yesterday that the administration will back congressional efforts to strip gray wolves of their endangered species status.

Salazar also issued a public statement yesterday that he supported legislative delisting for gray wolves. The Endangered Species Act requires that decisions on delisting be based on the best available science, and never before has a species been taken off the endangered species list by an act of Congress that would amend the act.

This hugely disappointing idea coming from an administration that has made promises to base decisions on science violates the integrity of the Endangered Species Act by setting a destructive precedent for removing endangered species protections from any animal that faces political opposition.

Supporters of wolves and other wildlife need to flood the White House and their U.S. Senators with protests against the Secretary’s plan to use Congress for an end-run around the Endangered Species Act. 

Please, call or write right away and tell everyone you know to do the same. None of our wildlife is safe if the Obama administration is willing to let political considerations trump science and law.”  This is urgent, please visit the site below and contact your U.S. Senator and the White House immediately!

http://hosted.verticalresponse.com/435877/c56b3aa028/1454001502/ee35a54549/

Read Full Post »