Federal government reassumes Idaho wolf management role-
Though doubtful in the short run, hopefully this will lead to fewer livestock losses, fewer government-killed wolves and less controversy, as it was before Idaho took over wolf management.
Service to Resume Lead for Wolf Management in Idaho as a Result of Governor’s Announcement. USFWS news release. Oct. 21, 2010.
In Wyoming, I can’t fault the continued federal management very much. Livestock losses are now almost nil (except sheep). Glad Butch Otter threw in the towel. He was just stirring up social conflict.
Comments
8 responses to “U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service takes over wolf management in Idaho”
Sounds like a press release from the cattle growers. They sound more like an agency in charge of protecting cows than an agency in charge of protecting wolves.
Todd,
I am guessing USFWS doesn’t have much public leeway to write a different news release right now with the election coming.
It is going to be a fiscally conservative Congress. Maybe folks should have letters ready about cutting Wildlife Service’s budget to reduce that grave government deficit.
It will be the social services of the Feds that will take the heaviest hits because they are traditionally seen as Democratic programs. Things that are favored by traditionally conservative supporters..mining, timber, ranching…will be exempted.
Basically, the Obama administration wasted two years of potentially putting a stamp on the Interior and Ag. Departments…
I have to say, it seems like everyone who is against the wolf hunts doesn’t own a ranch. The wolves were a good idea until Fish and Wildlife found out that wolves are carnivores.
Gosh Erin,
I don’t think Fish and Wildlife just recently found that wolves were carnivores. I thought everyone knew that wolves were exclusively meat eaters — carnivores — for thousands of years? !
Erin:
There are many people who are supportive of hunting wolves but are not entirely comfortable with delisting them just yet. The issue is far more complex (for many of us) then your post implies.
Of course it is! I love animals too, and don’t want to kill them unless it has to be done. But the fact that ranchers still have to make a living is still there. They don’t have to be entirely killed off, but we sometimes have to think of the consequences for us first, right?
Of course, Mr. Maughan. But I suppose we must make allowances for 13 year olds like me and for the Fish and Wildlife, right?