Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar Sets Gray Wolves Up for Slaughter

[Mari333]

Source: alternet

On May 4, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar took a big step backwards in the history of wildlife conservation in America. With the stroke of a pen, he moved an iconic native species, the gray wolf, from under the protections of the Endangered Species Act, and placed them squarely in the crosshairs of wolf opponents across the Northern Rockies.

Secretary Salazar's decision to allow the Bush administration's last-minute delisting rule for wolves in the Northern Rockies to take effect risks a tremendous loss for the 30-year legacy of recovering wild wolves in the region.

The rule, effective as of May 4th, allows the majority of the region's estimated 1,600 wolves to be killed, jeopardizing the future of wolves in the Northern Rockies. The rule takes effect even as new pups are being born to wolf packs throughout the region, making them easy targets for those who would wish them harm.

All the reasons why this delisting plan was a bad idea when the Bush administration proposed it in January 2009 still stand today. The rule allows all but 300 of the 1,300 wolves in Idaho and Montana to be killed. It also eliminates protections for wolves in northern Utah and eastern portions of Washington and Oregon.

Read more: http://www.alternet.org/environment/139823/secretary_of_the_interior_ken_salazar_sets_gray_wolves_up_for_slaughter/

[virgogal]

1. Madness! In another 10 years they will be put back on the ES list.

[Tansy_Gold]

18. I don't give them that long. 10 months maybe. n/t

[truedelphi]

33. So around the same time that the inflation resulting from criminally complicit

Bernanke, Geithner, Rubin & Summers kicks in, both the average American person and this wolf will be done.

If only these wolves owned enough stock in Goldman Sachs, then Obama would see that his friends not only took care of them, they'd be offered seats with the other wolves At AIG.

[XemaSab]

2. Species are not meant to be on the endangered species list forever

Once they meet the numbers set forth in the original recovery plan, they are delisted.

That's how it works.

[Mari333]

3. pfft

as far as I am concerned there arent ENOUGH wolves.




“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”. Mahatma Gandhi

[BrklynLiberal]

22. Ditto.

[villager]

4. Nice rationalization there, but real "recovery" would mean intact ecosystems

to live in, a steady supply of prey animals, etc.

In other words, if you're serious about managing "recovery" for animals at the top of the food chain, you cede a lot of territory to wilderness.

Not ranchers.

In the world of the biosphere, that's how it works.

[Mari333]

6. fcking ranchers. nt

[XemaSab]

8. It's not a rationalization

It's how the law works.

Aleutian Canada Geese, Bald Eagles, Brown Pelicans, Peregrine Falcons, American alligators, and grizzly bears were all formerly listed as endangered but have been downgraded or delisted through all or part of their ranges due to species recovery.

The act was not created to protect species forever.

If a species has recovered, it should be delisted so agency resources can concentrate on recovery of additional species.

[villager]

25. And of course the law is never wrong, and never designed to protect special interests

like, oh, ranching, in this instance?

Glad you have such faith in the system!

I, alas, don't.

[XemaSab]

27. When the species was originally listed

the USFWS cooked up a number at which the species would be considered "recovered."

Wolf populations have exceeded that number.

If you're looking for a president to blame for the number they came up with, blame Nixon.

[villager]

29. I think "cooked up a number" gets it exactly right.

Why you are defending that cooked up number -- and defending a rancher putting wolves in peril -- is utterly beyond me.

And as far as I know, Salazar isn't a Nixon appointment.

[XemaSab]

35. How many wolves do you think there should be in the lower 48?

:shrug:

How many wolves do you think there should be before we can say "Okay, the species is no longer endangered?"

:shrug:

In 1987 when the wolf was listed, there was one pack and a few individual wolves in the lower 48. Today there are hundreds. I think that's a success story. Why don't you?

And FWIW, I am suggesting you blame Nixon because he was the president when the Act was written.

[villager]

46. It's not a "sucess story" because of the habitat loss...

It will be a "success story" when we stop managing wild places for welfare ranchers, and instead, for the critters that belong there.

Why are you supportive of the murder of wolves, btw?

[roody]

50. Just because they are not endangered doesn't mean I should

go out and kill them.

[No Elephants]

39. Because succeeding administrations were powerless to change the number? Come on.

I really don't know what the right number of these wolves is. Maybe it's 10; maybe it's 10,000. I have no clue. I'll leave that to people with knowledge in this area. However, I can recognize a claim that is either silly or disingenuous, or both.

[XemaSab]

44. The people who had knowledge in this area

were the same people who came up with the number of wolves that would constitute recovery.

That number has been met and exceeded, therefore, the wolf is being delisted.

[NYC_SKP]

23. You're mistaken, this is more complicated than it seems.

We've disrupted the once intact (though always transforming) ecosystems.

Salazar is not opening up more territory for ranching, despite some of the kneejerk replies here.

Species management sometimes means limiting populations, it's always been true.

[villager]

24. exactly right -- the idea that the species is "recovered"

shows a profound misunderstanding of what an "ecosystem" really is...

[babylonsister]

32. Thanks. We know that. Or some of us. nt

[BrklynLiberal]

10. I am sure that sometime down the line, there will some alien species that will say

the same thing about mankind on this planet.

[XemaSab]

12. I'm all in favor of delisting humans

I think 6.8 billion counts as fully recovered. :hide:

[blindpig]

43. You and they ought to know better.

A population of 300 is inadequate for species survival. Rule of thumb says ya need 500 breeding adults to maintain genetic variability over the medium term. Given wolf social structure I'd guesstimate that the current numbers about meet that, culling down to 300 puts them back in the soup.

This is political and has little to do with good science.

[Muttocracy]

49. Since you mentioned science, where are you getting your numbers?

[Muttocracy]

47. Yes - and then other species in more desperate shape can get help

[FreepFryer]

5. What justification is being offered for this? Seems like a bad idea to me... *n/t*

[Mithreal]

7. The Secretary of the Interior is a rancher. nt

[Muttocracy]

48. Because that's how the Endangered Species List works - and many less flashy species

are in MUCH greater danger than wolves at this point.

[BrklynLiberal]

9. A stomach-turning decision!!!!!

Should we remind the President the the cute little pup his girls love is descended from wolves?
Man learned to hunt and socialize from watching wolves....
This is a horrendous, tragic event.

[Mithreal]

11. SoI Salazar has a history of letting prejudice guide him. nt

[Mithreal]

13. Seems a lil premature to say science is back. nt

[madrchsod]

14. the "change we can believe in" is`t working.....

lets face it--money talks and we can shut the fuck up.

[No Elephants]

40. Warren Buffet has the same number of votes as you do. Never shut up. Our problem is

not that we don't have money. It's that we're too passive as it is.

On edit. Well, okay, having money and activating is better than activating alone. But just giving up is the worst.

[mvd]

15. Decision sounds premature. From the article:

"Secretary Salazar should not have allowed this rule to take effect without engaging in a clear and transparent public consultation process."

Never did like this nomination.

[Mari333]

16. Ken Salazar is a total asshole

1. Mr. Salazar has done little to halt oil and gas drilling on Colorado’s Roan Plateau. Yes, he has protested. Yes, he has “discouraged” the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from opening the area to drilling. But this falls far short of what is needed. Salazar has failed to introduce or support federal legislation to protect this area from destruction and protect the local people from the toxic effects of the drilling. This is a crying shame. The Roan is one of the most incredible places in my home state. That it will be industrialized is nothing short of a calamity.

2. Mr. Salazar strongly supported former Interior Secretary Gale Norton when George W. Bush nominated her to the post. Norton, a former lobbyist for the lead-paint industry, is the source of all the problems Interior faces today. Those problems include Interior employees having sex with oil company executives in exchange for oil and gas leases. And worse. This was a decidedly poor judgment call on Salazar’s part (he also strongly supported Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General, as Time magazine recently recalled, “even escorting Gonzales into the U.S. Senate on the first day of his nomination hearings.”)

3. Mr. Salazar has consistently supported the interests of the oil and gas industry above the need for conservation and alternative energy sources. He maintains very strong industry ties. He voted (like Obama) for the appalling 2005 energy bill. He voted to end the offshore drilling moratorium; he voted against the repeal of tax breaks for Exxon-Mobil and voted against increasing Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

4. Mr. Salazar has consistently supported corporate welfare for the ranching community to the detriment of the environment. He has, again and again, pushed rancher subsidies. He has fought endangered species protection. As Colorado attorney general, he threatened to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for even thinking about listing the black-tailed prairie dog as endangered.



http://coloradoindependent.com/18141/nine-reasons-not-to-trust-ken-salazar-as-secretary-of-the-interior

[dixiegrrrrl]

19. Itis imformation and links like this that make DU so informative.

As for the specific issue of Salazar...
More of that "CHANGE" stuff, huh?

[quiller4]

34. When the report is accurate - this one isn't.

[Mari333]

37. link? proof? nt

[Vidar]

26. Another Bush lite cabinet member.

[alarimer]

17. This will bring about open season on wolves.

I know that they have met the standards for recovery but with most other species (like bald eagles, etc) there is no irrational prejudice against them. No one is killing bald eagles out of a misplaced fear. But with wolves that is a real danger. We will return to the bad old days of wholesale slaughter. That is my fear; whether it comes to pass.

And it also strikes me that Salazar is not objective in this. He is rancher and probably harbors that irrational prejudice as well. Ranchers think wolves kill livestock but there is not a whole lot of evidence that they do much damage. But that is only the excuse they use to destroy them.

[XemaSab]

28. You think people aren't out plugging bald eagles?

Think again.

[Thothmes]

36. If they are, they are committing a Federal level felony.

[XemaSab]

45. This is true

but it happens anyways.

[Doremus]

20. This news makes me nauseous.

Words fail.

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[SpartanDem]

21. the wolves have reach their target number

and now they're being taken off the list so I'm not sure I understand what the issue is with doing this

Excerpts from NY Timed article from March 6:

The delisting allows Montana and Idaho to assume complete management of the animal, which will include a hunting season in both states. The move also delists wolves in the western Great Lakes and parts of Oregon, Utah and Washington.

In 2007, Gov. C. L. Otter of Idaho said he favored reducing the number of wolves there to 100 from more than 800. He also said he would be the first to buy a wolf hunting license.

Officially, however, Idaho has agreed in its state plan to maintain a population of 500 wolves. Montana has agreed to keep 400 wolves. If the number of animals falls below 150 total and 15 breeding pairs for three years in a row, the wolf will be relisted in that state.

While state wolf management plans in Idaho and Montana assure protection, federal officials say, the one in Wyoming falls short, so the wolf will remain listed there. Yet in most of Wyoming, the wolf is designated as a predator and could be shot on sight if it were to be delisted. Controversy erupted last year when people chased wolves down on snowmobiles and killed them from planes

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/science/earth/07wolves.html?em

[Psephos]

30. A moment when we can see whether the pledge to keep politics and science separate was sincere n/t

[Kaleko]

31. Kicking this in utter frustration.

[glitch]

38. K & R in disgust nt

[Wednesdays]

41. K&R

:kick:

[Wednesdays]

42. K&R

:kick: