Thanks for keeping hunters current on the situation out West...I know we are all getting tired of hearing about wolves...but these groups hope to wear us down through lawsuit after lawsuit, we have to continue to stand together as hunters and support one another, or they'll pick us apart piece by piece...

Unfortunately a re-wording of the ESA is about as likely as Obama lifting all requirements for carrying concealed weapons across the country. What congress needs to do is investigate the fact that when listed, the entire region was considered a single population. For the reintroduction they classified those wolves as an experimental population, in essence creating seperate populations within a range that they are arguing is a contiguous population for re-listing. Depends on which facts the judge feels like pointing too.

"The Endangered Species Act does not allow the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to list only part of a "species" as endangered, or to protect a listed distinct population segment only in part as the Final Rule here does,"

Here's a crazy idea. Maybe the entire species needs to be delisted. And then each state agency can decide how to best handle the wolf populations in their state.

I believe this judge was just applying his interpretation of law, not trying to make law from the bench. I've heard this judge is prone to be anti government, anything from the government like Fish and Wildlife, or Forest Service fire retardent, he doesn't like, kind of Libertarian.

I for one am going to call my congessman and Senators both. I'll be polite and state my veiw. If anyone knows of an organisation that is politicaly active and participatory please say so here. I feel strongly that science, both states divisions of wildlife, the federal Fish and Wildlife, as well as the Obama administration are all aligned together on this issue.

It's an issue that should break our way, hopefully before next fall.

Wyoming is full of hunters and outdoorsmen and the State Game and Fish agency is also very capable.
Problem is that the legislature decided to get involved to score political points by "fighting the feds" and wrote a wolf management plan by politicians that designates wolves as varmints in most of the state that can be shot on sight. Other states have classified wolves just like mt. lions or bears and have a limited hunt of them as a trophy game animal. All Wyoming has to do is quit playing politics and put out a plan to manage wolves just like any other predator. They could even set a plan with a pretty heavy harvest like idaho or montana. Instead the Wyoming legislature have decided to make a political point.
The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation decided to fight a hunter-sponsored initiative in Montana because they did not want wildlife management at the ballot box (they said). But we see no consistency out of David Allen. He seems to be in this to score political points in a cultural war, when he should be trying to get solid wildlife management principles into action.
Otherwise RMEF would be asking the Wyoming legislature to butt out of wildlife management, and the whole wolf hunt would be back on.

actually, the practical solution is for both MT and ID to lower the fine for killing an "endangered" wolves to $1.00 and require all violators to self-report. when the quota of 175-225 wolves in each state is illegally taken, then raise the fine to $1,000. that way they remain protected under the ESA, but for all practical purposes can managed.

If you want to get rid of them all, that'd solve the problem. The wolves will have been gunned down by the end of the week.

If you want them dead faster than that, with no repercussions, just duct tape them to a chair.

The NYPD will come shoot them. The mayor and the top brass will then investigate and claim that it was a justifiable shooting. They do basically the same thing with any other shooting by an officer that occurs in the city.

buckhunter wrote:

"Ship the wolves to Central Park then tell the New Yorkers there is nothing you can do because the wolves are endangered in Wyoming. Makes about as much sense."

If that's the law, that's the law. This points out the great weakness in having a central unit (Congress) passing "universal" laws for the country when various areas are so distinct and different. This is why the founders of our nation enumerated certain powers to the Federal Government and reserved everything else for the states. A healthy wolf population is Montana is different that a wolf population in Maryland!

It seems that the other side might have a new tactic.

Rock Rat next fall will be to late it is already to late.

It would be easy to fix the ESA with a simple amendment, but that isn't likely. Even if Obama supported the bill, it would be a political hot potato. I like ENO's idea of delisting the wolf. I looks like the science would support delisting, and that would still allow states to protect the wolf in regions where populations are low.

What a joke, sounds like an activist judge Obama likely appointed.

I thought Wyoming was full of hunters and outdoorsmen??

Legislation from the bench at its finest!

You can always find a Whack Job Judge and someone to support an agenda, just like the Psychiatrist and a Judge who went along with the idea it’s perfectly ok and beneficial for an adult to have sex with a minor. GO FIGURE!

Had a neighbor who had a wolf for a pet and as it got older, the more wild and troublesome it got

Orca's and wolves look so beautiful, you would love to have Namu in your swimming pool and Wolfy as a lap dog, so cute are they yet they are natures most brutal and terrifying killer!

The Judge decision I find very dangerous!

Should I now sue New York to allow me to hunt moose here in Ny even though we barley have a population since they can be hunted in the Vermont so they must be part of the same moose community. These judges make no sense