U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - "ARE THEY ON CRACK"? Sorry, I know I should not make that type of comment, but lately I have noticed so many poorly judged decisions by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. So its difficult for me to show them respect.

Why are they making so many poor decisions? - There is more killing of the wildlife animals versus protection of them!

It's highly unlikely that wolves could ever regain a sustainable population until humans greatly lower their population and restore large areas to ecological health (close roads, remove human structures, restore native ecosystems, etc.).  Removal of wolves from listing under the ESA is therefore ludicrous and hopefully won't hold up in court.

As a wildlife rehabilitator, I have had dealings with Fish & Game, and I can say with "almost" certainty that they are not on crack (although I agree that there must be some reason why they rule so unreasonably!) For the most part those Fish & Game members who work in the field are conscientious, caring people who truly understand wildlife and want to see us preserve and protect our ecosystems. The main problem is with the "suits" in high places who owe their positions to anti-environmentalist big shots from the likes of the Bush administration - they have been put in place for the sole purpose of bolstering rancher and property-rights issues, and "WE THE PEOPLE" must get our issues in the forefront and elect officials who reflect our concerns and fears for the future of our precious natural heritage. I desperately hope that environmental groups and legal entities such as Earthjustice, Defenders of Wildlife, etc. can stall the hideous plans in the states of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana until the nation realizes what inhumane, cruel intentions are planned against a vital, sentient being that asks only to be left alone to live out life in peace - isn't that all most of us really want?

While not unexpected, this still breaks my heart.  Partly it's the obscene delight ranchers seem to take killing these creatures.

And it's the number one reason why I am a vegetarian.  Ranchers and wolves simply cannot peacefully coexist.

Yes, Kellyann, it does look that way.

Yesterday's message from Defenders of Wildlife said in part:
<<
Idaho officials want to use aerial gunning to kill wolves in their state. Wyoming agencies have left the door open to the use of traps and poison to eliminate wolves. And officials in both states -- and Montana -- have proposed wolf hunts.
>>

The use of traps, poison and aircraft is human behavior at its basest.  It is already bad enough that aerial hunting of wolves is tolerated in Alaska; it is dreadful that it may be introduced before long in Idaho.

If the animosity of ranchers against wolves is motivated by a sense of affection on their part for their own cattle, well, that is a mitigating circumstance -- though of course there is nothing wholesome about the relationship between a rancher and his cattle to begin with, and ranching is hardly a golden example of good relations between humans and animals.  But ranchers and others are given a great deal of wicked misinformation about wolves and their alleged destructiveness.  An important part of the work of pro-wolf conservationists in the Northern Rockies ought to be to fight aggressively against such misinformation.  And that is very tough work indeed, because prejudices are deeply rooted.

As for hunters, I can think of nothing to mitigate their anti-wolf animosity.

I'm always amazed at the out cry for saving the animals while we condone the killing our unborn children.

Fact: As far as I know, wolves are the only creatures, other than humans, that kill for the pure sport and fun of it.

If they ever reach their sustainable population, whatever that is since they breed like rabbits, please enjoy running for you life the next time you go out to hug a tree.

(This, in the plural, was a chant at a counter protest in San Francisco when a bunch of Christian, anti-abortion jerks came here to march a few years ago, and is my favorite demonstration chant from among decades of demonstrating.)

There's no such thing as an unborn child.  It's called a fetus.  Anyone who uses this term shows their lack of knowledge.

Wolves do not kill for "the pure sport and fun of it," where in the world did you get this idiocy?  Like every animal except humans, wolves kill only to eat and, on rare occasions, to defend themselves.

Humans who refuse to share the planet with other species should go live elsewhere, like the moon.  We could even give them 24 hours of oxygen once they get there.  Wolves have every bit as much right to live as people in general, and in some cases, more so.

To respond to a legitimate post from caniscandida, ranchers are by far the most environmentally destructive force in the western U.S., and they should be totally removed from this region of the country.  Short of that, cattle should be completely removed from OUR public lands and ranchers should be forced to live with all native species, including wolves, coyotes, and mountain lions and should not be allowed to kill them for any reason.  There are many other restrictions that should be placed on cattle and sheep ranching in the west, but these are the ones specifically relevant to this issue.

Appointments by the President.

Appointments by the President should be totally disallowed by legislation to the judicial, legislative or to public regulatory agencies.

Ipso facto, appointments to the Judicial or Legislative branch directly undermines the balance of power desired by the founding fathers.

This means appointments to either the enforcement or trial portions of the judicial branch. The President, no matter what party he is from should not be allowed to select the Attorney General of the US .......state attorney generals should not be political appointees ..... and of course the Supreme Court nominees should not come from the President.

High level judges should be selected by a committee of their peers (national lawyers organization) with representatives of the public on the committee. Congressional approval, though I do not like the idea would be okay for the Supreme Court.

Regulatory agencies should be totally immune from Presidential imput with oversight from Congress.

Bush appointed key members to US Fish and Game, FDA, etc and we have seen the results.

No President should have this power ..... no matter what party they represent.  
 

Selfishness and greed are good .....

Money is more important than life and the rights or others .....

Disgusting monkeys .....

Thanks, Greenneck, that is an excellent comment.  The hunters that I disparaged earlier are not at all like you.  We should all recognize that wiser and more honorable hunters, and other outdoorsfolk such as fishers, do indeed appreciate the great value of having wolves in the several ecosystems of the Northern Rockies.  Grizzlies too, and mountain lions.  This comment of yours is a thorough statement of that wiser attitude.  Thanks very much.

The nature writer (and hunter!) Rick Bass wrote a powerful little book about some of the first wolves reintroduced into the Northern Rockies, "The Ninemile Wolves," back in the early 1990s.  He lives -- still, God willing -- in the Yaak Valley of northwestern Montana.  I wonder how he has involved himself in the latest downturn in the wolves' fortune.

In New Mexico, I wonder what you have observed.  The only wild wolves are recently reintroduced Mexican wolves, in the Gila Mountains in the southwest.  One has heard discouraging reports from the Arizona side of the border, into which the Gila Mountains region spills, to the effect that many ranchers, etc., cannot abide the presence of wolves, and a good number of the reintroduced wolves have been illegally and surreptitiously killed.  But I wonder if the wolves have had better luck in the Land of Enchantment.

The wing nuts are planning a wolf kill fest here in Wisconsin too.  A wolf hunt is being considered in the conservation congress meetings.  

Go to the congress and defend wolves and risk having your car vandalized or worse, the next time you park in a remote area?  

It's a dilemna, considering the video game kids waiting to join the marines who I regularly spot out in the woods firing at whatever they can see with dad's most powerful guns.

The wackos with the infamous "No wolves" bumperstickers will be out in force at the meetings.  They are up in arms at wolves ocasionally killing bear dogs on the hunt.  Or during practice seasson, they let the bear hunters take their dogs out to chase bears before the season to "practice".

 A professional wildlife scientist I know who should know better said, "Well those bear dogs are expensive."  I guess she forgot the beaver and deer overpopulation problems?  

But it illustrates why we can expect little help from the professional wildlife people, they view wildlife as a quantity to be counted, not a spiritual experience to be enjoyed.

In order to further their careers in the GOP wacked government conservation organizations local, state, and federal, the attitude of any sentimentality towards wildlife must be eliminated early on.

These are friends, but they named the otter that swam near the home I rented to them, and then joked, we could get 75 bucks for that pelt, maybe we should trap it.  I didn't say anything.  I got the feeling it wasn't a joke, especially when I spotted a  pelt on the couch, yikes.

Humans... their heatbeat annoys me.  Hehey.