one of us
| Quote:
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:45 p.m. ET July 16, 2004FOREST LAKE, Minn. - The gray wolf, which once nearly disappeared in the lower 48 states, is making such a comeback that the Interior Department wants to lift federal protection for the animal in the eastern two-thirds of the country.
Interior Secretary Gale Norton on Friday announced a proposed rule that would lift protection under the Endangered Species Act for gray wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, where there are significant populations, as well as in at least 20 other states. The proposal calls for states to assume management of the gray wolf populations in those states.
The rule change would include New England, where conservationists fear that loss of federal protection would hurt attempts to develop future wolf populations through migrations from Canada.
Norton made the announcement at a wildlife science center at Forest Lake, Minn., before traveling to a wildlife sanctuary in Wisconsin, where the wolves have been on the rebound as well. Minnesota has the largest gray wolf � also known as timber wolf � population in the United States outside of Alaska where the animal has never been in need of protection.
Norton said Friday marked the start of a four-month public comment period on the rule. Public meetings will be held across the region, and Norton said to expect her department to issue its final rule late this year or early next year. She added that she expects environmental groups will sue to block the change.
'Dramatic' recovery cited
The proposal calls for taking the gray wolf, which was close to extinction in the lower 48 states in the 1950s, out from under the Endangered Species Act umbrella in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan where the wolf population has grown from a handful to more than 3,200 animals.
�The recovery of wolves has been dramatic,� Norton said in remarks prepared for the announcement. The Endangered Species Act is managed by Interior�s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Assuming the change is made final, the wolves in the �eastern population segment� � an area from Maine to the Dakotas � would be removed from the endangered species list.
�We believe this population of gray wolves no longer needs to come under the Endangered Species Act,� said Norton. The proposal calls for states to assume management of the gray wolf populations in those states.
- Rest of the article here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5451181
|
| | | Posts: 580 | Location: Mesa, AZ | Registered: 11 May 2001 | 
IP
|
|
one of us
| I sure wish we had some wolves here in ND, I have never seen one in the wild and I think they are one of the most majestic wild animals in this country. Its proven that they will kill and drive yotes out of their territory also and lord knows we have too many of them around here. We also have an overpopulation of deer in most parts of the state, this year they are even allowing residents to get a 4th liscense. |
| | |
one of us
| Noth Dakota.....yeah, they'll probably visit you from Canada soon. |
| | |
one of us
| Gotta love how they give states in the East the right to manage something they don't even have, while the Western State's cannot manage the problem they DO have. Good to see the Easterners give us the shaft, but then protect themselves from the problem. |
| | | Posts: 99 | Location: USA | Registered: 27 April 2001 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| I dunno, yotes kill a ton of smaller game up to and including young deer but from what I have read, wolves preffer to take out larger game, which we have plenty of and they have a MUCH larger territorial range, so you might have 10 wolves in an area that could support 30 or more yotes. Also when a rancher looses an animal to yotes hes sol but there are funds available to reimburse losses due to wolf, which from what I have read of the yellowstone reintroduction, seem to be much lower than they planned/expected. |
| | |
one of us
| As a stockgrower , I'd sure rather have yotes than wolves .
Yotes might take a few baby calves, but wolves could take the calf , the cow , and maybe the bull too if they felt like it .
And MGC , Minnesota alone has many times more wolves than all the Western states put together...... |
| | |
one of us
| De-listing anywhere is a step in the right direction. If wolves are delisted here then the precident is set for the west.
Jeff |
| | | Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| "for gray wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, where there are significant populations, as well as in at least 20 other states. The proposal calls for states to assume management of the gray wolf populations in those states."
I understand the Wolf population in those 3 states is extreme. I was refering to the other 20 states in the Delisting pact, States that most likley will not have a wolf problem. All these states seem to be East of the Mississippi and are in favor of the wolf reintroduction to the West. I don't think the Feds will give the same right to control wolves in my state.
The adverse impact of the wolf on the states of Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, and soon to be Colorado and Utah, will not be addressed until it is too late for many hunters and ranchers. The only good thing the wolf has brought me is I don't have to dehorn my stock cows anymore. |
| | | Posts: 99 | Location: USA | Registered: 27 April 2001 |
IP
|
|
