Wolf advocates challenge delisting at Missoula hearing

A small group of protesters gathers outside the federal courthouse in Missoula on Tuesday morning. A hearing before U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy challenging a congressional rider that removed the Rocky Mountain gray wolf from federal protection was under way inside the court

The battle over Rocky Mountain gray wolves has become a constitutional clash between the U.S. Congress and the nation's judicial system.

"This case has very little to do with wolves or the Endangered Species Act," wolf advocates attorney Jay Tutchton told U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy on Tuesday. "It has to do with our constitutional framework and if we're going to use it to protect our individual liberties."

Four environmental groups are challenging a congressional rider authored by U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., and U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, which ordered the Rocky Mountain gray wolf removed from federal protection and blocked judicial review of that action. The measure passed in an April appropriations bill without any committee hearings or debate.

In 2009, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule took wolves off the endangered species list, where they had been protected since 1974. That change put wolves under state management in Montana and Idaho. Those states allowed wolf hunting seasons that year.

Molloy found that rule illegal in a 2010 decision, and ordered wolves back under federal supervision. The rider negated Molloy's decision, and the environmental groups sued to restore it.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that Congress can't tell the courts how to decide a case unless it explicitly changes the law at the heart of the matter.

"Once they've done that, the courts are out of the picture until the next case comes along," Molloy said on Tuesday. But he also directly asked the U.S. Department of Justice attorneys: "What section of the Endangered Species Act was changed?"

Government lawyer Andrea Gelatt said Congress "carved a very narrow hole" in the Endangered Species Act by ordering the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to delist wolves in Montana and Idaho, according to its 2009 rule. That congressional rider didn't take a position on the wolf case, she said. It just told the agency to do its job.

That doesn't give a judge or citizen any idea what was changed or how the rider might affect other animals, the pro-wolf side countered.

"The government is asking us to interpret some kind of mysterious language," pro-wolf attorney Amy Atwood told Molloy. The federal government and Montana state officials don't agree on what the rider did, she said, even though they're on the same side.

Molloy then asked what happened to his opinion that the Fish and Wildlife Service rule was illegal. The Endangered Species Act allowed animals to be delisted by species, subspecies or distinct population segment (such as the wolves in the Rocky Mountains, but not the wolves around the Great Lakes).

Molloy ruled that when the federal government ordered Rocky Mountain gray wolves delisted in Montana and Idaho but not Wyoming, it went below that third threshold.

Both sides agreed the congressional rider didn't change Molloy's ruling, which created another conundrum. The government is challenging Molloy's 2010 decision before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. How could Gelatt say Molloy's ruling was wrong on appeal but correct in Tuesday's hearing, he asked.

And how would anyone in the future oversee wolf management if the rider prohibits further court review?

"What's the necessity of saying we've changed the law but you can't go to court to test if you've changed the law?" Molloy asked. "We're telling the agency to go ahead and do what the court said was illegal."

Gelatt compared the situation to a 2001 fight over where to put a World War II memorial in Washington, D.C. Congress passed a law ordering the memorial be built next to the Washington Monument without further court challenge, and the federal appeals court upheld it.

A decision in this case could affect other lawsuits. If Molloy rules the congressional rider is legal, he may essentially overrule himself and make the 9th Circuit appeal moot. That could affect another case where wolf advocates are challenging the Fish and Wildlife Service's ability to authorize killing endangered species under a "10-J" exemption. Before the wolf was delisted, Montana and Idaho wildlife managers sought 10-J hunts to reduce wolf packs in the Bitterroot Mountains where elk herds were collapsing.

Meanwhile, both Montana and Idaho have scheduled new wolf hunts for this fall. Wyoming authorities are still negotiating with the Fish and Wildlife Service on a plan that would allow its wolves to be delisted. Wolves are also off the Endangered Species List in Washington, Oregon and Utah. About 1,700 wolves live in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, while less than a few dozen are reported to roam the other three states combined.

Neither the wolf advocates nor the federal government got to rebut the other sides' argument in Tuesday's hearing. Both asked Molloy to throw the other side's case out of court. About 35 people attended the hearing.

"We're finished a lot faster than I thought we would be," Molloy told the courtroom. "I'll try to get something out very shortly."

Idaho Wolf seasons set, but drama builds in federal courtroom

ENDANGERED SPECIES — Idaho set its fall gray wolf hunting and trapping seasons last week just two days after a federal judge heard arguments in a lawsuit that once again could undo the planning Idaho and Montana have done to begin taking control over burgeoning wolf numbers that are having a big impact on big-game herds.

 As reporter Rob Chaney put in in a Missoulian story, “The battle over Rocky Mountain gray wolves has become a constitutional clash between the U.S. Congress and the nation's judicial system.”

The judge promised to make a decision quickly.

Wolf Hunting and Trapping Seasons Set

From Idaho Fish and Game

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission Thursday, July 28, adopted wolf hunting and trapping seasons for 2011-2012.

Wolf hunting seasons run from August 30 through December 31 in Island Park and Beaverhead wolf management zones, from August 30 through June 30 in the Lolo and Selway zones, and from August 30 through March 31 in the remaining nine of 13 the state’s wolf management zones.

Hunters may buy two tags per calendar year. Wolf tags cost $11.50, and nonresident wolf tags cost $31.75. The reduced nonresident tag price is retroactive – hunters who already have bought tags at the higher previous price are eligible for a refund. Details of the refund policy are forthcoming.

Harvest limits are set in five zones – the Salmon, Sawtooth, Southern Mountains, Beaverhead and Island Park zones – to preserve connectivity with populations in other states.

Fish and Game will monitor the hunt daily. The seasons will close when the harvest limit for that zone is reached or the season closing date, whichever comes first.

Wolf trapping seasons run from November 15 through March 31 in the Panhandle zone, except for units 2 and 3; in the Lolo zone; in the Dworshak-Elk City zone, except Unit 10A; in the Selway zone; and the Middle Fork zone. All other zones are closed to trapping with the option of opening a trapping season in other zones upon commission review in January.

Trappers may buy up to three tags with a trapping license in addition to two tags purchased for hunting; unused tags from hunting season may also be used to tag trapped wolves.

A mandatory trapping education class is required before buying tags for wolf trapping. Trappers must check their traps at least once every 72 hours.

Hunters and trappers must report killing a wolf within 72 hours, and they must present the skull and hide to an Idaho Fish and Game office within 10 days.

Idaho wolf hunters have more options, targets than Montanan

Idaho wolf hunters have more options and opportunities, as well as more wolves, than Montanans will see this fall.

Multiple tags, electronic calling, baiting and trapping are all OK, according to the Idaho Fish and Game Commission.

All are illegal in Montana.

Idaho also retroactively reduced its nonresident wolf tag price from $186 to $31.75, sending refunds to out-of-staters who bought the higher-priced permit. And Idaho has no quota on how many wolves can be shot, while Montana has limited its season to 220 wolves.

But there's little concern about over-hunting, according to Idaho Fish and Game spokesman Niels Nokkentved.

"In practice, it's pretty speculative," Nokkentved said, "especially if you think of how hard it was to hunt a wolf."

Only 1 percent of the roughly 30,000 Idaho license buyers actually killed a wolf in 2009, and that year's quota of 220 was missed by 32. Montanans killed 72 of the allowed 75 wolves that year, and the season was called off with a month left to run.

This year, Idaho Fish and Game has sold about 4,300 wolf licenses as of the end of July. Its resident tag costs $11.50, and hunters are allowed to buy two per season.

Idaho trappers must also buy a wolf tag in addition to their trapping license. They are allowed to buy three wolf trapping permits in addition to two wolf hunting tags, and may use their hunting tags during the trapping season if they haven't filled them already.

***

Montana's wolf licenses don't go on sale until Aug. 8. The cost is $19 for resident hunters and $350 for nonresidents. Montana allows only one wolf tag per hunter.

Wolf hunting in Montana will follow the same limitations as other big-game animals, according to state Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesman Ron Aasheim. That includes prohibitions on electronic calls, baiting and trapping.

"It was intentional," Aasheim said of the fair-chase format. "We're going to learn how effective the hunter is first."

Montana's wolf management plan assumes a minimum total of 566 animals. The proposed hunting quota of 220, plus the addition of new pups this year, should put next year's population around 425 wolves.

Both states want to remain above 150 wolves and 15 breeding pairs, although the actual federal threshold is 100 and 10, respectively.

"It's not a management number," Nokkentved said. "It's the point where it goes from managing wolves to crisis. Our intent is that we do not get close to that number."

The hunting plans assume the 2011 season goes forward. A lawsuit challenging Congress' removal of wolves from Endangered Species Act protection awaits a decision by U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula. Michael Garrity of Alliance for the Wild Rockies, one of the plaintiffs challenging the government, said there were no updates from Molloy's office as of Monday.

Vietnam to have first international day for tigers

The first international day for tigers will be held in Hanoi on July 31, to raise the awareness of protection of this endangered species.

A workshop, games and exhibition with the topic “combating wildlife trading”, including tiger trading, will be held, according to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

In Asia, tigers are being hunted and traded illegally to meet man’s requirements. In Vietnam, tigers are mainly used to make products that are considered as medicines like tiger bone glue and tiger bone alcohol. Their skin and meat are used to make souvenirs or cuddly tigers.

According to statistics by the Education of Nature Vietnam (ENV) in 2010, there are less than 30 tigers in nature in entire Vietnam.

Nick Cox, an expert of the WWF Greater Mekong Sub-region, said that Vietnam is a hot spot in tiger trading from Southeast Asia to China and also for local demands.

As carnivorous animals, tigers help ensure the numbers of bait animal species in control to maintain the balance and stability of the ecological system, Cox explained the significance of protecting tigers. 

Pauline Verheij, manager of the anti-tiger trading program of the TRAFFIC organization, confirmed that there are little evidences about the effect of tiger bones in curing diseases and in all cases, there are replacements that are much cheaper and legal than tiger bones.

According to Verheij, breeding tigers at farms are much costly than hunting them in the nature (around 250 times higher), tigers have become the targets of hunters.

The international day for tiger in Vietnam is jointly held by the WWF, the Biodiversity Preservation Agency and TRAFFIC.

In the brink of distinction of tigers in the nature, Russia held the Summit of countries that have tigers, with the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The leaders of 13 tiger-having countries committed to take action to preserve this species. The goal of these countries is the number of tigers in the nature to double from 3,200 to 6,400 by 2022.

Attending countries in the Tiger Summit included: Russia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Thailand and Vietnam.

Vietnam makes great efforts in tiger conservation 

A children’s painting awards ceremony and an exhibition on combating the trafficking of wild animals were held in Hanoi on July 29 in response to International Tiger Day.  

The celebration is held annually by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Vietnam, Biodiversity Conservation Agency, and the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network, TRAFFIC.

Over the years, Vietnam has exerted significant efforts in tiger conservation by banning tiger hunting and putting the animal on the list of endangered species in need of protection.

However, hunting, illegal trade and illicit transport of this iconic animal are becoming prevalent due to the huge potential for economic profit.

According to the 2010 Report from Education for Nature-Vietnam, the country is on the verge of tiger extinction.

It is estimated that only 3,200 wild tigers survive worldwide, their population having decreased by about 95 percent and their range by 93 percent since 1900. This steep decline is mainly due to heavy poaching and the illegal trade in tiger paraphernalia to supply a thriving black market demand. As well as this, loss of habitat due to deforestation and an increase in the number of animals preying on tigers have also led to their decline.

Vietnam is a significant market for tiger products, as illegal medicines made from tiger bone and tiger wines have become popular, especially among the wealthy, because of their supposed remedial powers. 

The demand for tiger parts in Vietnam has led to animals being smuggled in from elsewhere in the region. In March and June of last year, three tigers sourced from Laos were seized in Vietnam, believed to be intended for further domestic distribution. The country is also a transit point for a range of illegal wildlife products, including tiger products, being smuggled to China from other countries.

“Tigers are integral to maintaining healthy, balanced forest landscapes, yet they remain at high risk of becoming extinct in the wild. Vietnam has lost most of its wild tigers, so it's most important contribution at the moment is to play a part in halting the illegal international tiger trade and domestic consumption of tigers. It's as simple as that,” said Nick Cox, Regional Manager of WWF's species programme.

Vietnam’s Global Tiger Day activities will focus on reducing the demand for tiger products and promoting the conservation of wild tigers. Events include exhibitions, a tiger film, children’s activities, performances and a workshop with officials to discuss progress thus far and the next steps in tiger conservation.

“Tigers have long played an important role in our culture and in our ecosystems. Vietnam sees Global Tiger Day as an opportunity to increase public appreciation for this iconic species and to further discuss real solutions for its long term survival,” said Ms Hoang Thi Thanh Nhan, Deputy Director of Biodiversity Conservation Agency under the Vietnam Environment Administration.

Following the event, international experts from the 13 tiger range countries will attend a workshop in Hanoi from August 2-4 to discuss the implementation of the Global Tiger Recovery Programme (GTRP) which aims to double the number of wild tigers by 2022.

Seminar calls for urgent tiger conservation

“The future of tigers depends on our actions” was the message of a seminar held in Hanoi on July 29 to raise public awareness and support for the conservation of a species on the brink of extinction.

The seminar was jointly held by the Vietnam Environment Administration, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWW) and the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network (TRAFFIC) as a response to International Tiger Day.

Despite having been protected by law as stated in Decree No. 32/2006/ND-CP, tigers in Vietnam are still facing the threats of domestic hunting as well as illegal cross-border trade, the seminar reported.

Vietnam is now home to an estimated less than 30 tigers, which are standing on the edge of extinction.

Vietnam proactively participated in the International Tiger Conservation Forum and developed the National Tiger Recovery Programme, aimed at increasing the number of the large cat species by minimising the threats facing them.

According to Nguyen The Dong, Deputy Head of the Vietnam Environment Administration, in an effort to implement the priorities of the national programme, Vietnam continued to build its law enforcement capacity through training courses and investigations of tiger conservation sites.

The country has enhanced transnational collaboration in combating illegal wildlife hunting and trafficking, Dong said, adding that Vietnam had signed memoranda of understanding on the issue with border provinces of Laos and Combodia.

Since 2001, WWF in Vietnam has focused on tiger conservation in the central Truong Son area and built the capacity of legal investigation and inspection enforcement for local officials. The fund also launched a number of campaigns to reduce the consumption of wildlife products in Hanoi and the central province of Thua Thien Hue.

Landowner Urges Return of Wolf and Lynx to Scotland

The biggest foreign landowner in Scotland called yesterday for the reintroduction of wolves and lynx to add "excitement" to the countryside.

Paul van Vlissingen, a millionaire Dutch businessman, said the Government should consider bringing back large predators in order to boost overseas tourism.

He added that no one had been killed by a wolf in Europe in the past century, and suggested that the animals could be tracked by satellite, and farmers could be compensated if they attacked livestock.

Small conservation groups have called for the return of the European grey wolf, but Mr van Vlissingen is the first prominent landowner to support the idea. He said he would be happy to have them released on his estate in Wester Ross.

The last wolf in Britain was killed in Morayshire in 1743, but the lynx has been missing for the past 1,800 years.

He put forward the idea after publishing the result of a £300,000 privately-funded three-year study by biologists and botanists that showed that traditional culling is having little impact on deer numbers.

Scientists found that the population of 4,000 deer on the 80,000-acre Letterewe estate was controlled by winter weather and competition for food, rather than the annual cull by stalkers.

Mr van Vlissingen said the findings suggested that deer were not being properly managed, and called on the Scottish Executive to fund detailed research into the animals.

One of the aims of deer culling is to reduce grazing pressure to allow native trees to regenerate, but the study, by Prof Tim Clutton-Brock of Cambridge University and Prof Michael Crawley of Imperial College, suggests that common culling levels of 12 to 15 per cent would have to rise to 80 per cent to make a substantial difference to the survival of trees.

Mr van Vlissingen suggested that Scotland could be divided into zones managed for deer, and areas managed for native trees, with deer eliminated from the landscape.

He also proposed the return of the wolf and lynx - which would have a small impact on deer numbers - to help to revive Scotland's flagging tourist industry.

"I think wolves and lynx would fit very well into areas of land managed for deer," he said. "In this century there are no known cases of anybody being eaten by wolves in Europe, and there are thousands of people living among wolves in Canada and Alaska.

"With modern telemetry you can fit them with tags and follow them by satellite technology and if there is damage you can set up a system of compensation.

"Scotland needs to become far more successful than it is at the moment in tourism. Scotland has to create more excitement than the tired old monster of Loch Ness. There is an enormous interest in eco-tourism building up in the world."

Research four years ago found that 36 per cent of people would support the wolf being released in the wild, with 20 per cent undecided. However, the percentage was lower in the Highlands.

Rob Gibson, the Scottish National Party prospective candidate for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross - where sporting estates dominate the countryside - said he would not rule out the idea, but it would have to be looked at very carefully.

Sweden Culls Its Resurgent Wolves

Grey wolves have made a comeback since hunting was banned

Swedish hunters have begun culling wolves for the first time in 45 years after parliament ruled that numbers needed to be reduced again.

More than half the quota of 27 may have died on the first day alone with nine shot dead in Dalarna and up to nine killed in Varmland, Swedish radio says.

Hunters have until 15 February to complete the cull, which will leave Sweden with an estimated 210 wolves.

Some 10,000 hunters were reported to be planning to take part in the hunt.

Hunting in the county of Dalarna was halted as the county's individual quota was nine wolves.

Varmland's quota of nine "may also have been filled", the radio reported later on Saturday.

'Five injured'

In Dalarna, hunters reportedly injured another five wolves. 

Every time a hunter shoots and hits a wolf he has to report it to the county authorities, so they can keep track of the local cull.

Earlier, hunters insisted there were measures in place to prevent them shooting too many.

"There's a lot of regulation, hunters have to check the quota every hour," Gunnar Gloersson, of the Swedish Hunters Association, told Swedish radio.

Nevertheless, the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation was critical of the decision to proceed with the cull, saying it was against EU legislation as the Swedish wolf population had not reached a healthy level.

A formal complaint was to be issued to the EU Commission, Swedish radio said.

The hunt is timed to end before the mating season, which begins in mid-February.

Snow vital

Wolves were hunted to near extinction in southern Scandinavia until a hunting ban was imposed in the 1970s.

Following the species' natural return in Scandinavia, Sweden and Norway worked together to help restore a viable population. When Norway culled some wolves in 2001, saying the population had spread too far, Sweden lodged a protest.

But the Swedish parliament recently decided there should be at most 210 wolves in Sweden.

Michael Schneider of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency says that was the level last year, and since then more than 20 pairs of wolves have had pups.

"We have to remove this increase to keep the population at this level," he said.

Mr Gloersson, of the hunting association, said: "We have a lot of problems with wolves - in reindeer areas, with livestock, and for hunters they kill our valuable dogs."

"Since they came back we have to live with them, but we have to keep their numbers down."

He said the success of the cull would depend on the weather.

"The only easy way to hunt wolves is if we have snow, so the hunters can track them on the snow. If we don't have snow I don't think we'll even be able to reach the quota of 27 wolves," he said.

Wolves: Now At Our Door

The European gray wolf is steadily returning to much of its former range in western Europe.

For centuries a war against wolves was fought across Europe and beyond, to rid the land of what was characterised as a vicious killer of livestock – and a creature that emerged from the wilderness to attack people. But now wolves are making a comeback in western Europe.

They have returned to France, and, according to shepherds, have moved into Albania from Greece. From Sweden they have sought new territories to bolster Norway's small population. Animals from eastern Europe have arrived in Germany. And Spanish and Italian packs are spreading. A Dutch businessman has bought land in Scotland and announced plans to re-introduce wolves to a country where none have been seen since for centuries. And they migrate: one day wolves instead of foxes could be rifling through the bins of Surrey or Kent.

These returns and the "right" of return are a contentious and emotional issue. For some it is an indication of a re-wilding of European landscapes that should be celebrated. Others express anger that a "ruthless killer" is being allowed to return to places that have long been safe from its predations.

In the popular imagination no other wild animal threatened humans in the ways that wolves did – illustrated by the monstrous werewolf, which would prey on man, woman and child. This lupophobia – not just a fear, but a deep hatred – goes back to the time when humans began to live with and depend on flocks of sheep, goats and, later, cattle. Instead of preying on wild animals, a proper thing for carnivores, wolves turned to animals that belonged to and were under the protection of humans. Jesus's characterisation of wicked people as being like ravening wolves threatening sheep would have been easily understood in a pastoral society. The wolf lived with this reputation of evil wildness for centuries.

Only from the mid-20th century did environmentalists challenge the idea that it was right and proper to kill and eradicate wolves. In the 1970s the wolf became listed as an endangered species in North America and some parts of Europe, protected from hunting and other forms of killing. In Europe this was fairly unproblematic – until numbers increased and they began to migrate in search of new territories.

Now there is a new war over wolves: fought between those who champion their return and livestock owners who believe their fragile livelihoods are threatened. This new war is significant in terms of the biopolitics of living with carnivores. Who is it who wants wolves in Europe and why? Who is it who seeks to halt their re-emergence? If it is important – environmentally or culturally significant – to have this powerful carnivore living freely in Europe, then it is essential to debate what living with wolves should or could be.

Scientists comment on wolves' role in local ecology; governments offer compensation for the loss of livestock; advocates promote the rights of wolves to exist; shepherds feel frustrated that they suffer the consequences of living with wolves that seem to be wanted by people from cities who are unlikely to even see them. These parties rarely come together to discuss their views.

The solution is not imposition but dialogue. Conservation projects, however soundly based on science, can never succeed without taking account of the human dimension. Wildlife has to co-exist with humans. Put crudely, scientists often seem frustrated that local people do not understand what they tell them about the realities of wolves; shepherds and other livestock farmers feel resentful that outsiders do not want to listen to their traditional knowledge; and agricultural agencies seem to think that compensation for animals killed is payment enough for wolf predation.

And such concerns cannot be reduced to Canis lupus: the simple, physical wolf. These are deep-rooted attitudes about the wolf in all its social, cultural, historical, political, economic and psychological entanglements with humans.

A French expert has suggested a parliament for wolves, bringing together all interested parties. Only debate will find a way through the rage of those who seek to cull wolves and the passions of those who believe they should be allowed to rediscover their place in European biocultures.