Wolf delisting decision won't come today

Wolves in the Northern Rockies won’t be removed from Endangered Species Act protection today and probably not this week.

The Bush Administration wants to remove them again before it leaves office but the process of getting such a major rule through the government during the holidays is daunting. It's especially hard when some issues remain unresolved.

The challenge for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was to decide whether it would delist in Idaho, Montana, eastern Washington, eastern Oregon and northern Utah and leave them endangered in Wyoming. Wyoming’s so-called predatory zone, where wolves could be shot on sight, was a major issue raised by Molloy when he ruled against delisting.

Wyoming was in the process of passing an emergency rule for wolf management Christmas week in an effort to respond to the order by U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy tossing out the delisting last summer. But the rule still would allow wolves to be killed indiscriminately in 90 percent of the state the Powell, Wyo. Tribune reported.

That suggests the Bush Administration would toss Wyoming off the bus if it decided it wanted to delist before the lights go out Jan 20.

The 12 environmental groups will have more welcome ears in the Obama administration and they hope delisting gets delayed. But even it goes forward they will sue and the Obama administration will be forced to begin settlement talks.

Meanwhile the debate over the impact of wolves on game populations remains strong. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game reported earlier this month that Wolf predation on elk effects are mixed. That gives people on both sides of the debate ammunition.

Judging from you last

Judging from you last prediction about this subject I'm guessing it's imminent. Just saying.

Actually you are probably right as I heard that it is expected by IDFG in the third week of January. Did someone say political decision?

What is interesting is that IDFG report doesn't talk much about habitat quality for elk. There are places with high wolf density and high predation and places with high wolf density and lower wolf predation. Does that implicate wolves only or did they leave something out? Why would elk be more susceptible to predation in one are over another? Could it have something to do with habitat?

Another thing I've noticed about IDFG is that they don't say anything in their wolf reports anymore. Just numbers with no details about location or which wolves are involved. I guess they don't like scrutiny.

Settlement talks? The

Settlement talks? The enviros got everything they wanted or so you would think. We have way more wolves than anyone ever envisioned in more places than originally called for and still they want to sue? They will never be satisfied. Not until there are far fewer of us and we are living in grass huts and beating our loin cloths on a rock down at the creek. I say lead by example and we will follow. Population control, grass huts, how did it come to this?

They were just really bored.

----------
This is the latest in a line of signature files here. Complaints will be addressed at the Gulag Servicenter.