Wolf Lawsuit

[BigHornRam]

This isn't a good sign........

Federal Defendants move for a two-week extension of time to file a brief opposing Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. Federal Defendants assert additional time is necessary for them to prepare their brief, compile expert witness and agency program declarations, and obtain internal departmental review of their brief. Federal Defendants also assert an extension of time will allow the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming to intervene in the action and participate in briefing on the motion for preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs oppose the motion.

Federal Defendants claim eleven days is insufficient to prepare a response to a motion for preliminary injunction. Federal Defendants, however, have been aware of Plaintiffs’ concerns about the delisting of the grey wolf since at least February 27, 2008, when Plaintiffs provided Federal Defendants with sixty-days notice of their claims pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. In this notice, Plaintiffs thoroughly explained the factual and legal bases for each of their challenges to the delisting. As a result of this notice, Federal Defendants have been aware of Plaintiffs’ claims for at least two-months—more than enough time to prepare a response to Plaintiffs’ assertions.

Federal Defendants also observe Plaintiffs will not be prejudiced if the Court grants an extension of time because the majority of wolves that have been killed since delisting would have died even if the grey wolf remained a listed species. This assertion is neither compelling nor comforting.

Additionally, Federal Defendants appear to agree that ten wolves have been killed in the month since delisting that probably would not have been killed absent delisting. The Court is unwilling to risk more deaths by delaying its decision on Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction beyond what is necessary.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Federal Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time (dkt #6) is DENIED.

Dated this 7th day of May, 2008.

Donald W. Molloy, District Judge

United States District Court

 

[1_pointer]

I'm not too worried... I'm not surprised either, the states allowing the killing of the wolves made it way too easy for the plaintiff's to show 'harm' and get the injunction.

 

[BigHornRam]

Never underestimate the feds ability to screw this one up Pointer. The fact that they are looking for additional time to prepare a response to this suit, and that it was quickly denied by Molloy is a good indicator of what's ahead.

 

[BuzzH]

I'm with Pointer, I'm not worried at all.

WTF do the feds need another 2 weeks for? They've had years to prepare...I would have denied them too.

They've been aware of what may happen ever since 1993...

 

[Nemont]

WTF do the feds need another 2 weeks for? They've had years to prepare...I would have denied them too.

They've been aware of what may happen ever since 1993...

The attorneys needed another two weeks of billable hours. Remember justice isn't served until the lawyers are paid.

Nemont

 

[Oak]

I'm not too worried... I'm not surprised either, the states allowing the killing of the wolves made it way too easy for the plaintiff's to show 'harm' and get the injunction.

Yep, I think the guys that went out and started blasting wolves the minute they were delisted didn't help much. They had to wait 13 years....couldn't wait another 2 months? Pretty stupid.

 

[sreekers]

Yep, I think the guys that went out and started blasting wolves the minute they were delisted didn't help much. They had to wait 13 years....couldn't wait another 2 months? Pretty stupid.

Agreed. Last I heard the kill count in the shoot on sight zone here was up to 32. That will be used as evidence that they will all be dead according to their numbers.

 

[BuzzH]

That has always been the main reason why I've never been in favor of WY's wolf plan.

Wyomings plan has the potential to really screw things up. Dual classification is not a good idea.

 

[BigHornRam]

"WTF do the feds need another 2 weeks for?"
I hear two of their lawyers are on maternity leave, one is taking time off for stress related issues, and one is in the middle of a sex change opperation........

Earth Justice lawyers vs Bush Administration lawyers.........who do you think is going to win this one?

 

[BigHornRam]

Court Date Thursday

Sreekers, looks like your Wyoming wolf kill numbers are more than a little off.......

By BEN NEARY
Associated Press writer
Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:07 AM MDT

CHEYENNE -- A federal judge this week will hear a request from environmental groups to restore federal management over wolves in the Northern Rockies.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy has scheduled a hearing for Thursday in Missoula, Mont. Environmental groups have asked him to force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to resume management of the estimated 1,500 wolves in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho.

If the judge grants the request, the federal wildlife agency could take over wolf management until the judge ultimately decides the groups' lawsuit.

The federal government transferred responsibility for wolf management to the states this spring. In their lawsuit, the environmental groups charge that the states' management plans will not ensure wolves are not again eradicated from the region.

The federal government reintroduced wolves in the region in the 1990s. Scores of wolves have been killed since the states took over management this spring.

"Obviously, what we're trying to do is get some breathing room between the proposed state management plans, or hunting plans, and a chance for the judge to hear our case on the question of delisting," said Franz Camenzind, a biologist and head of the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance -- one of the organizations challenging the delisting decision.

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission last week adopted a wolf hunting season that calls for killing 518 of the animals this year. The state estimates its wolf population will reach roughly 1,000 animals by this summer.

In Wyoming, wolves are classified as predators in most of the state and may be shot on sight. The state also proposes to allow licensed hunters to kill 25 wolves in the northwest corner of the state this fall and is accepting comments on that proposal.

Montana also plans hunts for the animals.

All three states are fighting the environmental groups' request for the injunction. The states maintain that wolf hunting is necessary because wolves are killing increasing numbers of game animals and also frequently preying on livestock.

However, Camenzind said the states can't be trusted. He said Idaho's planned wolf hunting season is exactly the type of situation his and the other groups are trying to avoid.

Camenzind said the Idaho game commission "essentially signed a death warrant for one-third of all the wolves in the Northern Rockies population."

"We feel that just goes against good conservation, good biology, good management," Camenzind said of the planned Idaho hunt.

Doug Honnold, a lawyer in Bozeman, Mont., represents the environmental groups.

"We're trying to get an injunction, obviously, to stop the level of wolf killing that would be authorized under state management," Honnold said. "There are not sufficient safeguards under state laws to avoid a substantial reduction in the numbers and distribution of wolves in the Northern Rockies."

Eric Keszler, spokesman for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, said as of Friday that 16 wolves have been killed in the state's designated predator area since the state took over management of wolves this spring. He said the state is investigating the illegal poaching of another wolf in Wyoming's trophy management area.

Keszler said Wyoming believes it should manage wolves because it's a state responsibility, the same as managing other wildlife.

"Wyoming can manage wolves in a way that makes sense for Wyoming much better than the federal government can," he said. "There's lots of wolves throughout the recovery area, as you know, five times as many as were in the original recovery goals. It doesn't make sense to keep them on the endangered species list, in light of all that."

Keszler said that when the federal government set about to restore the wolf population, it called for establishing a total of about 300 animals, including 30 breeding pairs, in the Northern Rockies.

Wyoming Deputy Attorney General Jay Jerde will argue for the state against the groups' request for the injunction.

"We spent a great deal of time and effort to come up with a wolf statute and a wolf plan to protect the gray wolf in Wyoming, and protect the wolf population as we go forward and the wolf is delisted," Jerde said. "There is no factual or legal basis in our opinion for the injunction to be issued."

Several other groups have intervened in the lawsuit. In addition to the three states, stockgrowers' associations from Montana and Wyoming and pro-hunting groups have entered the case.

 

[sreekers]

BHR, I was quoting how many I had heard had allready been killed in the "Predator" area classification. That was not official, and could easily be wrong. As far as the numbers that the state planned to have in their quota, I had no idea. Idaho's does seem pretty high, but i don't know what the turn over from pups produced to numbers killed naturally and hunted. As far as Wyoming goes the dual classification was probably not the best plan for the time. For the extreme left wing groups who are filing the suit it obviously is not going to work, and they will fight it as long as they have money.

 

[JoseCuervo]

And, killing the wolves is all about $$$$$....

Idaho Sets Goal To Reduce Wolf Population By Half
WOLVES WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENT

By Don Wimberly

Boise, ID May 25, 2008 3:13 p.m.


Idaho's wolf population could be cut roughly in half this fall if hunters are as successful as state officials hope they’ll be.

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission has now set the rules and quotas for the first wolf hunt since gray wolves were taken off the endangered species list earlier this year.

Fish and Game Director Cal Groen says the wolf population in Idaho has grown to five times the federal management standards. He says the department will manage wolves responsibly.

Cal Groen: “This is extremely important to our economy, to our hunters, to our other wildlife species and to outfitter industry.”

Groen says wolves are killing off deer and elk populations in some areas of the state. But regulating Idaho’s wolf population through hunting may be delayed.

This week, a federal judge in Montana is expected to rule on a request filed by environmental groups to block state wolf management plans in Idaho and Montana.

If Idaho's plan to hunt wolves goes forward, about 430 tags would be released to hunters. And hunts would begin in the backcountry in mid-September. The rest of the state's season would open up October first and finish at the end of December.

 

[BigHornRam]

U.S. District Court: Groups ask to shield wolves
By TRISTAN SCOTT of the Missoulian



Conservationists who oppose the removal of wolves from under federal protection - and who call the delisting unlawful - sought an emergency injunction Thursday to stop the animals' killing.

Last month, a coalition of 11 environmental groups sued the U.S. Department of the Interior in an effort to keep gray wolves in the Northern Rockies region on the endangered species list.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director H. Dale Hall announced the delisting decision in February, and it took effect March 28, divesting the gray wolf of its Endangered Species Act protections.


Without those protections, environmentalists say, the gray wolf population will never reach sustainable levels and is likely to enter a long-term decline.

At a hearing in Missoula on Thursday, the coalition's attorney, Doug L. Honnold of Earthjustice, tried to convince U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy to extend federal protections until the lawsuit is resolved.

About 17 lawyers representing as many state agencies and nonprofit policy groups defended the management plan, which requires states to maintain a minimum of 300 wolves. Agency officials say they are committed to maintaining at least 450 wolves and that the actual population likely will be about 1,000.

The region's wolf population is increasing by about 24 percent annually, according to wildlife officials.

But environmentalists say state officials and ranchers have already killed 77 wolves since the delisting, at a rate of more than one wolf per day, and that the states' wolf management scheme represents a return to many of the policies that resulted in wolves' eradication from the Western landscape.

“We hope Judge Molloy's decision will give the wolves a necessary reprieve while this issue gets sorted out,” said Louisa Wilcox, head of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Livingston office.

Although an estimated 1,500 gray wolves live in the northern Rockies, where they were nearly exterminated by the 1930s, environmentalists argue that Montana, Idaho and Wyoming - states that have taken over wolf management from the Fish and Wildlife Service - have not achieved the wolf recovery objectives outlined in the Endangered Species Act.

Wolf numbers will be further decimated by legalized hunting and loosened restrictions on when wolves can be killed to protect game herds, Wilcox said.

The three states have each committed to maintain between 100 and 150 wolves, and plan to open wolf-hunting seasons in the fall. Montana has regulated wolves as a big-game species, but some wolves in Wyoming and Idaho are classified as predatory and can be killed year-round.

“There are aspects of these state management plans that say anyone, anywhere can kill a wolf, even if they are not threatening livestock,” Wilcox said. “We could then witness a slaughter of over a thousand wolves, executed as we have seen in recent weeks, on the backs of snowmobiles, as well as by trappers and aerial gunners.”

Wilcox also said the notion that 300 wolves comprises an adequate population is “the science of the past,” and maintains that between 2,000 and 5,000 wolves are needed to avoid inbreeding and maintain a healthy, genetically diverse population.

“There is no scientific evidence that there has been any kind of genetic exchange between Yellowstone wolves and wolves in western Montana and the Glacier area,” Wilcox said. “Those wolves are breeding with siblings.”

Although wolves have been known to disperse from the Yellowstone area into Idaho, they typically do not migrate to Yellowstone from other areas, like Glacier National Park and Idaho, Wilcox said.

“It's not just about numbers, it's about conductivity,” she said.

Attorneys for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services said a population of 300 would contain enough successfully reproducing packs to fully achieve the recovery objectives for the gray wolf. No wolf population of that size and distribution has gone extinct in recent history, unless it was deliberately eradicated, attorneys said.

James Knight, an ecologist at Montana State University and expert for the defense, said in a court declaration that wolf killings will not cause a serious population decline. Instead, he argues that the wolf population's natural growth will surpass kill rates and that state management plans will not threaten population levels during the litigation process.

“I have come to the conclusion that current wolf populations have very little chance of being significantly reduced by humans if wolves remain under the control of current state management plans during current legal disputes over their classification as an endangered species,” Knight said.

Molloy must now decide whether to issue the injunction, or order that the states' plans and laws to manage wolves are adequate.

Defendants in the case include numerous cattlemen associations in Montana and Wyoming and big-game hunting proponents, including Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the National Rifle Association, Friends of the Yellowstone Elk Herd and Safari Club International.

Among the plaintiffs in the case are the Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Humane Society of the United States, Center for Biological Diversity, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Friends of the Clearwater and Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

Gray wolves were among the first species to be listed by the secretary of the Interior as endangered when, alarmed by the pace of species' decline, Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act in 1973.

“The wolf has been restored here. Why reverse that success?” Wilcox said. “Why put into place the same killing mechanisms that got the wolf placed under the Endangered Species Act in the first place?”

Reporter Tristan Scott can be reached at 523-5264 or at [email protected]

 

[BigHornRam]

I'm Putting Some Coors on Ice For SS

Here's a FOTNYEH guy that was at the hearing taunting the wolf huggers on Ralph's site.............

Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd Says:
May 29, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Doug Honnold is a formidable advocate who opened strong in the first half hour but had no case at the end.
The court room looked like an eighth grade dance; girls on the left side of the room boys on the right.

I hold solid on my prediction …no temporary injunction.

The left and it’s stakeholders were part of the 100 wolves in 3 recovery area for 3 years process from the onset.
Too late now.

Ms Williams for the State of Montana ,Siedman {NRA, SCI} Lee {SFW } and Bloomquist{MSGA , Mt. FBF and FOTNYEH } were absolutely brilliant.

Honnold choked after they made their arguments.

 

[ELKCHSR]

The region's wolf population is increasing by about 24 percent annually, according to wildlife officials

That’s a huge jump in the population of any thing per year...

Wolf numbers will be further decimated by legalized hunting

They (those bringing up this allegation) should have to prove where legalized hunting has ever put any thing at risk, what a poor argument by the attorneys...

2,000 and 5,000 wolves are needed to avoid inbreeding and maintain a healthy, genetically diverse population

I suppose this would be a better number than what has been proposed, but I wonder where they came up with it

Why not say 10,000 wolves would be better or maybe even a few hundred K had to be maintained

The argument is easy, just like any thing lawyers argue about, start with high numbers and agree on some thing in between

“The wolf has been restored here. Why reverse that success?” Wilcox said. “Why put into place the same killing mechanisms that got the wolf placed under the Endangered Species Act in the first place?”

This is about as weak of an argument as this attorney seems to come up with

This isn't the mechanism that eradicated the wolves in the first place

Cause:

Hunting... Yes...

Controlled hunting... No...

 

[shoots-straight]

Big Horn, I hope Molloy, does the right thing, if he doesn't, I certainly join you in the conspiracy theory stuff.

 

[BigHornRam]

Fanning's having some fun on Ralph's site......

check it out......

http://wolves.wordpress.com/2008/05...in-wolf-killing-in-northern-rockies/#comments