October 2, 2003

By Jim Beers

jimbeers7@earthlink.net

Bob,

You have mentioned the essence of the extremists' strategy for wolves.

While the wolves get established and multiply at a high rate -- as they populate new territory and enjoy complete protection -- we argue about payments to ranchers and how the Congress will make things better with "better science."

While a few wolves get shot in NM, the Federal government spends thousands of scarce dollars to investigate and generate sympathy.

Then we see where the AZ F&G and their FWS "partners" will ask Counties to sit on a wolf panel -- creating the illusion of "inclusiveness" -- while the problem worsens.

All the while the wolves multiply and expand their range.

Like the coyote, they will go everywhere, killing dogs and endangering young and old humans -- while we opine about how dogs have no value or the parents of harmed kids "didn't belong there" or "didn't behave right."

All the while the wolves (smart canines) will evolve behavior to den where no one imagines today, start eating things no one mentions today, and (like unhunted cougars or bears) behaving around people in ways that all the experts deny today.

And Defenders Of Wildlife profit from this.

FWS profits from this.

The Wildlands Project uses it to dispossess vast rural areas.

State agencies will still "work with" their FWS partners and give them more allegiance than their own Governor or their residents.

Politicians will continue to get urban support and environmental campaign help for key help whenever some agency or court seems to not toe the line.

And still the wolves multiply and spread.

I have to believe someday it will dawn on Americans how wrong all this ESA business has been.

Without chemical controls, and with all the legal ropes on aerial hunting and control methods -- it will be fascinating to see the inevitable backlash go about bringing the wolf business back under control.

I know we have to fight these day-to-day issues, but the real problem is the ESA -- and until that is rectified, things are not going to get better, just steadily worse.

Jim Beers

----- Original Message -----

From: Bob Fanning

October 2, 2003

Environmental and Animal rights extremists sue to block delisting wolves

Chris Smith, Chief of Staff, Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks quoted in the press, regarding delisting of the wolf, "This is going to be tied up in political and legal knots for many years to come."

This lawsuit is designed to buy time for wolf populations to grow exponentially, disperse and expand their range, and impose an extremist agenda to end hunting and ranching.

The States of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho dealt in good faith with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Assistant Secretary of Interior, Craig Manson, who promised delisting of the wolf by January 1, 2003.

Now, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will aid and abet the extreme left, which intends to destroy industries in the West, choking off all forms of cash flow to the rural west, facilitating the confiscation of land.

State and county revenues will implode when the aforementioned industries collapse.

Ranch land and ranch assets held as collateral in our banks, upon foreclosure will strain our banking system and create a credit crisis that will be felt by every citizen of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.

The biological science is completely monopolized by those who seek to impose this extreme agenda on the West.

Those scientists who dissent are assured that they will never work again. Sincerely, Robert T. Fanning, Jr., Chairman, "Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd, Inc." P.O. Box 142, Pray, Montana 59065 406-333-4121

Original article/press release that prompted above comments:

Groups Move to Keep Wolf Recovery On Track; Defenders of Wildlife Lead Plaintiff in Challenge

October 1, 2003

Contact: Brad DeVries, 202-772-0237, William Lutz, 202-772-0269, both of the Defenders of Wildlife; web: http://www.defenders.org

Washington, D.C. /U.S. Newswire/ -- Defenders of Wildlife and 16 other organizations today filed suit to block Bush Administration plans to change the endangered status of wolves in the U.S., lessening protections in most regions, and sharply limiting the areas where wolves will be protected during recovery.

The groups say that plans to change the wolf's status from "endangered" to "threatened" are premature, and noted that several state governments which are scheduled to take over management of the species under the Bush plan have declared their intent to initiate aggressive wolf killing programs.

"It saddens us to have to take this step, especially when we've made such a tremendous start toward real, sustainable wolf recovery," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife. "But Secretary Norton is backing away from wolf protection before the job is finished and is jeopardizing all the progress her agency has made so far."

A March 18, 2003, FWS decision downlists the wolf from "endangered" to "threatened" throughout the Rockies and the Pacific Northwest, even though only three of nine states in the region with vast areas of suitable habitat have seen recovery efforts. The rule also downlists wolves to threatened throughout the Great Lakes and Northeast. The rule would sharply limit wolf recovery in the West to Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, and preclude wolf recovery in northern California, Oregon, Washington, northern Colorado, Utah, and the Northeastern United States.

The Bush Administration's plan would ultimately hand over management of gray wolf recovery to various state governments, even though many of those states have made it clear that they intend to encourage large-scale wolf killing as soon as they have the authority to do so. For example, Idaho's legislature recently passed a resolution calling for elimination of wolves from the state "by any means necessary," and Wyoming intends to permit the shooting of wolves on sight anywhere outside of national park lands. Minnesota continues to offer a bounty for killing wolves.

"Even though poll after poll shows that the citizens of Idaho, Wyoming, and other states with wolves want this important species protected, many of these state governments are in the grip of anti-wolf hysteria. Rather than working for a consensus that helps wolves, ranchers and citizens, Secretary Norton can't wait to hand off wolf management to those who would kill them instead," Schlickeisen said.

Parties to Defenders of Wildlife, et al. v. Norton are: Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, American Lands Alliance, Animal Protection Institute, Center for Biological Diversity, Forest Watch, Hells Canyon Preservation Council, Help Our Wolves Live ("HOWL"), The Humane Society of the United States, Klamath Forest Alliance, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility ("PEER"), Minnesota Wolf Alliance, Oregon Natural Resources Council, RESTORE: The North Woods, Sinapu, and the Wildlands Project.

Defenders of Wildlife is one of the nation's most progressive advocates for wildlife and habitat, and was named as one of America's Top 100 Charities by Worth magazine. With more than 430,000 members and supporters, Defenders is an effective voice for wildlife and habitat. To learn more about Defenders of Wildlife, please visit http://www.defenders.org.