Ranchy
Well-known member
Colorado Springs Gazette
http://www.gazette.com/opinion/prices_24632___article.html/wolf_wolves.html
Our View - Tuesday
July 10, 2007 - 12:16AM
Fur crying out loud
Re-wilding effort needs to be tamed
The folks of Catron County, New Mexico, have a well-deserved reputation for being "sagebrush rebels" — an almost antiquated term that describes that ornery breed of Westerner that still occasionally bucks under Washington's saddle. So it seemed like an unnecessary provocation when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is overseeing a faltering effort to reintroduce Mexican gray wolves into parts of New Mexico and Arizona, decided to re-release a problem wolf in that particular county.
The lobo was relocated to Catron County because it had been preying on livestock elsewhere. County officials strongly objected and threatened to remove the animal themselves when it was seen stalking livestock on a local ranch. But the agency, in an act of arrogance that fans the flames of sagebrush rebellions, disregarded these entreaties and refused to capture the animal. Just as commissioners feared, the wolf returned to its livestock-eating ways, killing a cow and calf several weekends ago, shortly after its release.
So on Thursday, because the wolf had violated a "three strikes rule" requiring that an animal be permanently removed or destroyed when it demonstrates a pattern of predation, agents of U.S. Fish and Wildlife shot and killed it. It was the latest in a series of setbacks for the program, and yet another reason for locals to question the wisdom of what the government is doing. "If (agency officials) had actually acted upon our first request and removed that wolf, that wolf might still be alive," a frustrated Catron County Manager Bill Aymar told the Associated Press.
This act of stubbornness by USFW, resulting in the unnecessary death of another wolf and further poisoning relations with locals, might serve as a paradigm for everything that's gone wrong with this effort. The program was forced on locals, over their strong objections, leading to deep-seated resentment and resistance. And despite numerous setbacks, suggesting that the effort should be drastically scaled back or ended, federal officials continue to plow ahead — turning the virtue of perseverance into a vice.
The effort to reintroduce wolves into the Northern Rockies, using Yellowstone National Park as a base, has been so successful that those wolves may be on the verge of delisting under the Endangered Species List. But the program down south has struggled to gain similar traction, for reasons that are heatedly debated. The agency has shot three wolves so far this year for livestock kills. Last year, five wolves had to be shot and three permanently removed due to predation. In 2005, one wolf had to be shot and four others permanently removed, for the same reason. The agency estimates that there are about 60 reintroduced wolves in New Mexico and Arizona, not counting any born this spring, far fewer than the 102 wolves that were by now supposed to be living in the wild.
And how "wild" these animals are is debatable. Federal personnel spend a great deal of time and money chasing around the countryside, tracking and baby-sitting the animals, to keep them healthy, out of trouble and alive, raising questions about whether these packs will ever truly be "free" — and about whether such re-wilding experiments are feasible in this part of the modern West.
But rather than re-think the effort, or write it off as a noble but unworkable experiment, wildlife advocates and federal officials soldier on. They now want to expand the territory where the wolves will be permitted to roam and waive the three strikes rule. Some are attempting to "blame the victim" by claiming ranchers are at fault, because they aren't required to remove every cattle carcass from the open range.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat who will need the support of environmentalists in his run for the White House, last week also called for the suspension of the three strikes rule, potentially inflicting even greater hardships on ranchers. Catron County's Aymar accused the governor and others of trying to change the rules in the middle of the game, because the feds had "fumbled" reintroduction. And, indeed, it seems to us that they're doing just that.
There are places and circumstances in the new West where re-wilding may be practical, as the wolf program in the norther Rockies shows. But when it won't work, the where human beings and large predators simply can't coexist, it seems like a form of animal cruelty for the feds to keep forcing things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great article, I think!!!!!! :nod:
http://www.gazette.com/opinion/prices_24632___article.html/wolf_wolves.html
Our View - Tuesday
July 10, 2007 - 12:16AM
Fur crying out loud
Re-wilding effort needs to be tamed
The folks of Catron County, New Mexico, have a well-deserved reputation for being "sagebrush rebels" — an almost antiquated term that describes that ornery breed of Westerner that still occasionally bucks under Washington's saddle. So it seemed like an unnecessary provocation when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is overseeing a faltering effort to reintroduce Mexican gray wolves into parts of New Mexico and Arizona, decided to re-release a problem wolf in that particular county.
The lobo was relocated to Catron County because it had been preying on livestock elsewhere. County officials strongly objected and threatened to remove the animal themselves when it was seen stalking livestock on a local ranch. But the agency, in an act of arrogance that fans the flames of sagebrush rebellions, disregarded these entreaties and refused to capture the animal. Just as commissioners feared, the wolf returned to its livestock-eating ways, killing a cow and calf several weekends ago, shortly after its release.
So on Thursday, because the wolf had violated a "three strikes rule" requiring that an animal be permanently removed or destroyed when it demonstrates a pattern of predation, agents of U.S. Fish and Wildlife shot and killed it. It was the latest in a series of setbacks for the program, and yet another reason for locals to question the wisdom of what the government is doing. "If (agency officials) had actually acted upon our first request and removed that wolf, that wolf might still be alive," a frustrated Catron County Manager Bill Aymar told the Associated Press.
This act of stubbornness by USFW, resulting in the unnecessary death of another wolf and further poisoning relations with locals, might serve as a paradigm for everything that's gone wrong with this effort. The program was forced on locals, over their strong objections, leading to deep-seated resentment and resistance. And despite numerous setbacks, suggesting that the effort should be drastically scaled back or ended, federal officials continue to plow ahead — turning the virtue of perseverance into a vice.
The effort to reintroduce wolves into the Northern Rockies, using Yellowstone National Park as a base, has been so successful that those wolves may be on the verge of delisting under the Endangered Species List. But the program down south has struggled to gain similar traction, for reasons that are heatedly debated. The agency has shot three wolves so far this year for livestock kills. Last year, five wolves had to be shot and three permanently removed due to predation. In 2005, one wolf had to be shot and four others permanently removed, for the same reason. The agency estimates that there are about 60 reintroduced wolves in New Mexico and Arizona, not counting any born this spring, far fewer than the 102 wolves that were by now supposed to be living in the wild.
And how "wild" these animals are is debatable. Federal personnel spend a great deal of time and money chasing around the countryside, tracking and baby-sitting the animals, to keep them healthy, out of trouble and alive, raising questions about whether these packs will ever truly be "free" — and about whether such re-wilding experiments are feasible in this part of the modern West.
But rather than re-think the effort, or write it off as a noble but unworkable experiment, wildlife advocates and federal officials soldier on. They now want to expand the territory where the wolves will be permitted to roam and waive the three strikes rule. Some are attempting to "blame the victim" by claiming ranchers are at fault, because they aren't required to remove every cattle carcass from the open range.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat who will need the support of environmentalists in his run for the White House, last week also called for the suspension of the three strikes rule, potentially inflicting even greater hardships on ranchers. Catron County's Aymar accused the governor and others of trying to change the rules in the middle of the game, because the feds had "fumbled" reintroduction. And, indeed, it seems to us that they're doing just that.
There are places and circumstances in the new West where re-wilding may be practical, as the wolf program in the norther Rockies shows. But when it won't work, the where human beings and large predators simply can't coexist, it seems like a form of animal cruelty for the feds to keep forcing things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great article, I think!!!!!! :nod:
