Quote:
Originally posted by fabsroman
The more I read about this, the stupider it gets. It seems as though Montana, Wyoming, and Wisconsin (not sure about this state, but there was a third state) were told in 2003 that they could manage the wolves if they came up with a management plan and it was approved by USFWS. Montana and Wisconsin came up with acceptable plans. However, Wyoming did not because they wanted ranchers to be able to shoot wolves on sight as nuisance animals and USFWS wanted wolves only to be shot if they actually posed a threat. Wyoming actually sued USFWS because it thought its plan was legitimate. It appears that Wyoming actually lacked standing (i.e., the right to sue) because USFWS had not actually rejected the plan. Wyoming lost the trial and lost again on appeal.
What kills me is why Wyoming wouldn't have agreed to whatever USFWS wanted initially. The killing of some wolves would have been better than none at all. Now, this casued a big disaster for Montana and Wisconsin because all three plans needed to be approved before any could be put into effect. Hence, Wyoming ham strung Montana and Wisconsin on a stupid issue. Take what you can get and then ask for more later if the wolves continue to pose a problem. Sheer stupidity.
Okay, it is getting late and I have to prepare a little more for my case tomorrow. I'll read these other cases tomorrow and see if I can shed any more light on this. So far though, it doesn't seem to be the Court's doing that this never gets going. Seems as though a state organization or federal organization keeps on dropping the ball.
|
Fabs this is the case that I was referring to earlier. The way the Laws (Federal) are written that protect the wolves have built in procedures that do allow stated to submit management plans to the USFWS so the wolves can be managed. I don't think it will allow an all out hunting season but if the states that have reintroed wolves for a while and the population is gettin large enough that the wolves are spreading off federal land out onto ranches and becoming a problem the states have to get together and get thier plans approved, then they can manage the wolves that "become a problem" in otherwords as long as a person can come up with a justification the wolves can be shot leagally.
Some states as in the case you sited above get screwed because of other states not getting their act together. I think If you look into a little further Idaho was one of the states that originally held up the approval. Now they may or may not have their act together now and just have to wait out the approval process, but I know when I was out in Montana last two years I hear many mentions of Idaho holding up the process.
BTW I am almost certain that as of sometime late 2005 the Grey Wolf had been moved from the endangered list to threatened