Wolf Meeting Thoughts

First off, if you ever have a chance to go to a wolf meeting, do so, just for the amazing uneducated dialogue that takes place. I could have watched FOX news and been more educated.


This meeting was simply on the proposed changes for the Wyoming Wolf Management plan, since it was shot down by Judge Molloy in Montana earlier this year. Basically there were four main issues in the judges ruling to overturn Wyoming's management plan. They included: Genetic Connectivity, Minimum Population Commitment, The Trophy Game Management Area, and Depredation Control. This new Emergency Plan is supposed to be a way to address these issues a little bit better, and wishfully thinking, allow Wyoming to regain control of it's gray wolf population.

Bill Rudd basically walked through the word changes, and described them as simply a firmer commitment to maintaining the number of packs, in case something catastrophic happens withing the Parks. They also threw in a new little blurb about the genetic connectivity issue:
To the extent practicable, the Commission is committed to managing the gray wolves in Wyoming so that genetic diversity and connectivity issues do not threaten the gray wolf population. This will be accomplished by encouraging the incorporation of effective migrants into the gray wolf population. Conservation measures will include, but are not limited to, working with other states to promote natural dispersal into and within the WTGMA (Wolf Trophy Game Management Area) and, if necessary, by relocation and translocation. You know, I passed many a college biology test by simply being able to bullshit through what I thought the professor wanted to hear. This is a fine example of that. There is no plan here, no groundbreaking revelations, just a desperate attempt to blow smoke up the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's collective skirt.

There is also some new wording on Lethal Take Permits. Chapter 21, Section 3(a) Chapter 21, Section 3(a) defines "chronic wolf depredation" as "a geographic area limited to a specific parcel of private land or a specific grazing allotment described on the permit within the Wolf Trophy Game Management Area where gray wolves have repeatedly (twice or more within a two month period immediately preceding the date on which the owner applies for a lethal take permit) harassed, injured, maimed or killed livestock or domesticated animals." Wolves taken under the authority of a lethal take permit shall be reported to the Department representative specified on the permit within 23 hours. Lethal take permits shall expire on December 31 of the year issued. However, lethal take permits shall be immediately suspended or cancelled if the Department determines further lethal control may result in the number of wolves in the WTGMA decreasing below 15 breeding pairs or 150 wolves, or below 7 breeding pairs outside the national parks and parkway. In addition, lethal take permits shall be immediately suspended or cancelled if the Department determines further lethal control may result in the re listing of gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act. In either of these circumstances, non-lethal control actions shall be initiated to mitigate continued harassment, injury, maiming or killing of livestock or domesticated animals. Whew! My fingers hurt after that, and what exactly does all that say? Basically if you are Joe Shmoe rancher, and you have evidence of wolves killing animals, you can apply for this permit that will allow you to shoot them on sight. After you kill your two wolves, you can reapply for another permit. Now, there is also a state law, pertaining to all predators, that allows for Joe Schmoe rancher to blast an animal in the act, or even thinking of the act "as a reasonable person would suspect" of hurting their livestock. Add on top of all that, the control measures that the Feds and State will be doing, and it is open season.

Predator status is still a go, one of the main hang ups with a lot of people, myself included. Outside of the WTGMA, people would still be allowed to blast any wolf they saw, for any reason, unless the number of packs falls below 15, where the Feds would step back in and take control. With the changes to the law, you would no longer be required to turn over a pelt and skull, only report your name and address, the date of the kill, the sex of the wolf, and a location. And, this makes me laugh quite hard. The Department may also seek the person's cooperation in obtaining any additional information relevant to wolf management, as warranted. If someone is out shooting wolves for pleasure, what do you think his response is going to be on management? This is not rocket science people!

A fairly large issue was brought up, concerning the word "predator". That, as already stated, is a major hang up with the judge in Montana. So why not remove that word? I have my own theories on that, but the way it has been pushed through is simple. The state has to have this plan into the USFWS by November 28th. The Wyoming Commission does not meet until November 17th and 18th, and the State Legislature does not meet until February 14th. The word predator is in law, and can only be repealed by Legislature. Now, a Representative from the Wyoming Government was there, and he said, something to the effect of "Well you people have already been liberal with your Plan under the law, why don't you just remove it and call it good." No one wants to remove that particular word, it is what has held Wyoming up this whole time. If that word were removed, this would go through.

So, what does this mean, long and short? It means victory for people who would like to keep wolf management in the hands of the Federal Government. Wyoming has had it's chance to change the laws, remove predator status, and be cooperative, and they have blown it. They have made their bed, now it is time for them to sleep in it. As for what it means for Wyoming? I doubt we will be re-gaining control in a timely manner. The wording in this emergency plan does not address the issues of litigation proposed by Molloy, and, in fact, adds to the issues in certain places.

Public comments are due in the office of the Wyoming Game and Fish by November 10th. Your comment must be in their hands on this date.
The address to write to is:

Wolf Plan Comments
Attn: Bea Pepper
Wyoming Game and Fish Department
5400 Bishop Blvd
Cheyenne, WY 82006

The next planned meeting in Cody is December 16th.

Yellowstone Winter Use Plan

A new winter use plan for Yellowstone and Grand Teton parks would provide for limited, guided snowmobile and snowcoach travel, including over Sylvan Pass, this winter.The two parks are seeking public comment through Nov. 17 on the proposal, which was released Monday and replaces a previous plan that was rejected by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., in September.The 2008-09 winter season is scheduled to open Dec. 15.


“Neither snowmobiles nor snowcoaches can be allowed in the parks this winter without (adopting) a new plan and new regulation,” Yellowstone spokesman Al Nash said Monday.The preferred alternative would allow up to 318 commercially guided, Best Available Technology (BAT) snowmobiles, and up to 78 snowcoaches per day in Yellowstone.The preferred alternative would also provide for motorized oversnow travel over Sylvan Pass and Yellowstone's East Entrance road, as agreed to this summer by the Sylvan Pass Study Group.Daily snowmobile limits in the new plan are slightly above last winter's average of 294 snowmobiles per day, but well below the 720 per day allowed the past four winters, and lower than the 540 snowmobiles a day that would have been allowed this winter under the plan rejected by the judge.The daily snowcoach limit is the same as allowed during the past four years.“I'm happy the Park Service and Department of the Interior are taking action to keep the park open for this coming winter season,” state Rep. Colin Simpson of Cody said Monday. He serves on the study group that worked to keep the east gate open in winter. The initial NPS decision was to close it for safety and financial reasons.“Regardless of the numbers they're using, something needs to be done to keep (the parks) open,” Simpson added. “They have used a number that was upheld in the 2004 EA, and I'm sure since it's survived judicial scrutiny once, it could do so again.”He added that he is pleased the agencies “are honoring the agreement on Sylvan Pass, which is the right thing to do.”In Grand Teton and the Rockefeller Parkway, grooming and motorized oversnow travel on the Continental Divide Snowmobile Trail between Moran Junction and Flagg Ranch would be discontinued.However, those interested in through travel on the CDST could transport their snowmobiles on trailers between these locations, Nash said.A total of 25 snowmobiles per day would be allowed to travel on the Grassy Lake Road, with no BAT or guiding requirement.In addition, 25 unguided BAT snowmobiles per day also would be allowed on Jackson Lake for ice fishing.The plan would be in effect for up to three winters in Yellowstone.“Park managers believe an approach including both snowmobile and snowcoach access reduces impacts of both to acceptable levels,” Nash said. “This environmental assessment addresses the impact concerns raised by the recent ruling of the U.S. District Court.”The Winter Use Plan's Environmental Assessment (EA) and an electronic form to submit comments can be found at http://parkplanning.nps.gov.Written comments, due by Nov. 17, may be submitted through this Web site.Nash said a proposed rule to implement the preferred alternative in the new plan will be published within a few days in the Federal Register, and also will be open for a 15-day public comment period.Once comments are analyzed, the Park Service will make a decision on the proposed plan, Nash said.If the preferred alternative is selected, the Regional Director of the Intermountain Region of the Park Service will sign a Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) containing details of his decision.A final rule would have to be published in the Federal Register to implement the FONSI and provide for motorized oversnow travel in the parks this winter.The Park Service expects to have a decision on winter use prior by the Dec. 15 start of the winter season.Document requests also may be made by sending an e-mail to yell_winter_use@nps.gov or calling (307) 344-2019.(Carole Cloudwalker can be reached at carole@codyenterprise.com.)

So It Begins... All Over Again....

(Media-Newswire.com) - Oct. 24, 2008 -- A major conference early next month, sponsored by the Stroock Forum at the University of Wyoming, will focus on managing water in the Upper Green River in Pinedale.

The 2008 Stroock Forum, "Water Management on the Upper Green River," will be at the Rendezvous Pointe Senior Center, located at 425 E. Magnolia in Pinedale, from 1-5 p.m. Friday Nov. 14, and from 8 a.m.-1 p.m. Saturday, Nov. 15. The event is free and open to the public.

To register for the conference, visit the Web site at www.uwyo.edu/STROOCKFORUM/ or call the office of the Stroock Professor at ( 307 ) 766-2571.

The conference will feature experts discussing topics ranging from climate change to groundwater quality to thirsty downstream states, and how these topics affect the Upper Green River basin and the people who live there.

The UW conference is sponsored by UW's Stroock Forum on Wyoming Lands and People, founded by Tom Stroock of Casper. He is a former Wyoming legislative leader and former ambassador to Guatemala under President George Herbert Walker Bush.

Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal will give an introductory talk on the enduring significance of watershed management issues in the basin. The public will have an opportunity to discuss management options with each other and with the conference's experts.

Wyoming's state climatologist, state geologist and state engineer will be among the speakers addressing issues such as climate change, energy development, water rights and water values.

Steve Gray, the state climatologist, will discuss climate change and its potential impacts on water management. Ron Surdam, state geologist, will discuss the continued pressures of energy development area residents can expect and then the quantity and quality of groundwater in the area. KJ Reddy, UW School of Energy Resources associate director for academics, will present specific problems of energy development and groundwater.

He will be followed by a discussion of changes in the glaciers feeding the surface water supply of the Green River, featuring Charles Love, Western Wyoming Community College geology professor.

Mike Purcell, Wyoming Water Development Commission ( WWDC ) director, closes the first day session presenting issues that surround new water storage.

Wyoming State Engineer Pat Tyrrell opens the Saturday session talking about Colorado River challenges that affect the Green River Basin. An economist who has studied the values of water as it is now managed on the Upper Green River, Ernie Niemi of ECONorthwest in Oregon, will then discuss his research work and the issues raised by those findings.

Two panels will close the event. One panel will discuss the needs and pressures experienced by a variety of Green River users, and the other on-ground water management initiatives and its potential.

Another Pinedale event, scheduled in coordination with the conference, will let residents review and give their opinions on studies the WWDC has done on a variety of water storage possibilities in the Green River Basin.

The WWDC will host an open house at 5 p.m., also at Rendezvous Pointe, Friday, Nov. 14, for the public to learn about studies the commission has funded regarding potential dam and storage sites in the Green River Basin.

The water development studies reviewed at the agency open house will include a look at not only a proposal for a dam on the main stem of the Green River near the Warren Bridge ( which drew considerable public attention last winter ), but also a number of other proposals for smaller storage facilities located along tributaries.

The WWDC will host similar open houses with introductory talks at other locations in the Green River Basin earlier in the week. Meetings are scheduled at Western Wyoming College in Rock Springs at 6 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. 12; and at Kemmerer's public library, at 6 p.m. Thursday, Nov. 13.


I will write a little bit more about this later on, it was just too important to delay any longer.

Concerning Grizzle Bears... from the Casper Star Tribune

By The Associated Press:


JACKSON -- Biologists estimate that 39 grizzly bears have died in northwestern Wyoming this year.

Seventeen bears were shot by hunters and enough male grizzly bears have died to exceed a 15 percent mortality threshold for management review.

Under that provision, if the mortality rate for male grizzly bears exceeds 15 percent for three years in a row, state agencies would review their management policies for grizzly bears.

Such a review could result in putting grizzlies back on the Endangered Species List.

If another female grizzly is killed by a hunter this year, female bear deaths would pass a 9 percent threshold that would trigger a similar review after two consecutive years.

The thresholds were last surpassed in 2000. The grizzly death counts aren't exact numbers.

When someone other than a wildlife manager reports a grizzly bear death, researchers count it as three toward the thresholds because roughly two-thirds of citizen-caused grizzly deaths go unreported, said study team leader and U.S. Geological Survey researcher Chuck Schwartz.

"We know that there are bears that die in the ecosystem that we don't hear about," he said.

Schwartz said the numbers were being released while large numbers of hunters head for the woods for the general hunting season, two to four weeks before grizzlies begin hibernation.

"We wanted to get the word out before a large number of hunters hit the field so we don't end up with a bunch more dead bears on the ground," he said. "We want to emphasize to the public that you have to be careful out there. We don't want to reconsider delisting the bear."

Researchers estimate that the Greater Yellowstone's grizzly population is higher than last year: 596 bears, up from 571. Schwartz and his team made the estimate based on 84 new cubs observed with 44 females.

Researchers estimate that the population continues to grow about 4 percent annually.

Louisa Willcox, a wildlife advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said she was shocked about this year's bear deaths so far.

"It's very, very disturbing and should give us all pause," she said.

Fresh From the Casper Star Tribune.. This topic will continue to come up.

By BEN NEARY
Associated Press writer

Saturday, October 25, 2008 1:05 PM MDT

CHEYENNE -- In a move that sparked sharp criticism from environmental groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Friday announced that it once again is proposing a plan that could end federal protections for gray wolves in Montana and Idaho while leaving them in place in Wyoming.

The federal agency's push comes after U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy of Montana last week signed an order reinstating federal protections for the wolves in all three states. Ruling in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of environmental groups, the judge this summer barred the Fish and Wildlife Service from turning wolf management over to the states.

Molloy ruled that Wyoming's management plan in particular wouldn't give wolves adequate protection. Wyoming has proposed that wolves be classified as predators that could be shot on sight in much of the state.

Friday's announcement by the Fish and Wildlife Service says the agency will take public comments until Nov. 28 on the same proposed wolf delisting rule the agency released early last year. The agency says there are now more than 1,400 wolves in the three states.

Bruce Salzburg, Wyoming attorney general, said Friday the FWS's proposed 2007 rule would allow removing federal protections for wolves only in Montana and Idaho. The rule would also allow lifting federal protections for wolves in Wyoming, but only if the federal agency ruled that Wyoming's management plan was adequate.

The FWS found Wyoming's management plan acceptable before the environmental groups mounted their legal challenge. But the agency won't comment now on whether it still believes Wyoming's plan is acceptable now that Molloy has ruled it is not.

Salzburg said he sees little doubt the federal agency is ready to leave Wyoming behind.

"I expect they will look to the judge's decision and determine that Wyoming's regulatory mechanisms are inadequate, and go forward with an attempt to delist in the other two states," Salzburg said.

Salzburg said Wyoming ultimately intends to address Molloy's concerns by modifying the state's wolf management plan and regulations. However, the Wyoming Legislature doesn't convene until January, so there's no way the state could adopt new regulations that the federal agency might find acceptable and have them considered in the federal government's current delisting proposal.

Jamie Rappaport Clark is executive vice president of Defenders of Wildlife, one of the groups that sued over the wolf delisting. She's also a former director of the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Clinton. She said Friday her group is concerned about the agency's current approach.

"It's a hasty action that undermines the serious work and cooperation among all the stakeholders that's necessary before proposing any new rule," Clark said. "They just took the rule back. They're in essence rushing to ram this flawed rule through the current administration. And it's not giving the Fish and Wildlife Service time to address the serious concerns expressed earlier this year by the federal court in Missoula."

Salzburg, asked if it appears to him that the Fish and Wildlife Service is trying to resolve the issue before the end of the Bush administration, responded that he had no idea what's on the minds of agency officials.

Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Montana, said Friday that there are people in his agency who would like to see the wolf delisting process wrapped up by the end of the Bush administration. He said it's possible the agency will make a decision before then, but denied that desire is driving the agency to act quickly on the delisting process.

"This timing is set by the litigation and all that kind of stuff," Bangs said. "A lot of people are going to try to use this as a political deal."

Bangs said his agency hasn't decided whether Wyoming's management plan is inadequate, or if the state should be left behind in this round of the wolf delisting process.

"We're not putting any time line on it," he said. "The only thing I'm putting on it is we're going to take whatever time we need to do a good job and just use the best science."

Jenny Harbine is an attorney for Earthjustice, the law firm that represented the environmental coalition in challenging the delisting process.

"This is disappointing to say the least," Harbine said Friday. "We are very close to achieving a sustainable wolf population in the Northern Rockies. And we hope that the potential for a recovery success is not short-circuited by a premature delisting proposal."

Harbine said she has concerns about the legality and biological sufficiency of any plan that calls for delisting wolves in Montana and Idaho while leaving them under federal protection in Wyoming.

"The service has to treat this population as what it is, which is a single population of wolves," Harbine said. "Each recovery area is dependent on the others to maintain biological health. The legal reason is simply that the service is not permitted to treat portions of a population in isolation for the purpose of delisting. It cannot take a piecemeal approach to delisting."

Drill, drill, DRILL!!!

Clark, Wyoming. Not too many people know of it, but could it have the potential to become the next Pinedale. If Windsor Energy Corporation has it's way, yes. From Missoula, Montana, Windsor is wanting to drill a new gas well near Clark, inside the National Forest boundary, on Line Creek. Line Creek, ok, that rings a bell. Yes, Line Creek, where, not too many years ago, another gas well leaked untold amounts of waste into the soil, causing damage that can only be speculated upon. October 14ththis story broke out, and thankfully, Greater Yellowstone Coalition (GYC) and Powder River Basin Resource Council (PRBRC) jumped upon it. These two groups are willing to prepare comments on behalf of the community, but in a great act of limiting the voice of dissent, the commissioners decided that consultants will gather public input. Horse hockey! By using consultants, they will get the comments of the developers. With zombie-like fervor, they will chant, "Drill, Drill, DRILL!!!" The Clarks Fork District of the Shoshone Forest wants public comment. Do it! This is the only way to get our voices heard! Those who do nothing, have no right to bitch later on. Write the district, the head office, Senators, Congressmen, and the GYC and PRBRC. Let them know what is on our minds. Drilling is a battle cry. It is the new ship, buccaneers, the developers. Loot! Cash! Development. This firm is from Missoula. Most high level jobs will go to Montanans. Look at the jobs locals will get, or any other benefits. Most riggers are from Back East. Few locals will get a piece of their pie. Let's look at the aesthetic value as well, one that the developers have a hard time with. There is no monetary figure for it. I really enjoy the fact that I can drive into Clark, and be alone. Throw on hiking boots, take off, and I am alone. That is worth preserving in a day when more and more of us work tedious jobs, and value down time in wild places. Development will ruin that. I already know the argument. There will be only one well! Yes, but because of a thing called presidence with one well, it will be easier for more to come in. You are anti-progress! This is not progress, this is the exact opposite. We value Wyoming, and especially Cody, for aesthetic reasons. Looking north to the Beartooths from Cody, I can see blue sky. Keep it that way. Imagine what 200 trucks, rigs, and all the associated traffic would do. Now, ask yourself, could I live with myself if I did nothing? I know my answer. Do you know yours?



For more information about this project, contact Marty Sharp of the Forest Circus, at (307) 527-6921