The U.S. Forest Service appears poised to approve the use of helicopters in the Frank Church-River of No Return wilderness to dart wolves for research.
You can imagine this proposal is controversial on several levels. Wolf lovers see the Idaho Department of Fish and Game proposal to land up to 20 times in two weeks during the winter of 2010 to tag 12 wolves, as a stalking horse for future efforts to kill wolves in the wilderness to reduce their impact on elk.
Wilderness advocates see the proposal as an attack on the wilderness imperative to keep motorized use out of wilderness. The Wilderness Act of 1964 requires managers to use the least intrusive tools necessary for management and requires them to explore all alternatives first.
That’s what the Forest Service told Fish and Game and the Idaho Legislature in 2006. You can imagine it didn’t go over very well with the Legislature.
But Fish and Game went back and tried to the research on foot and on horseback. The Forest Service said if the agency was going to meet the Wilderness Act it would have to show that the helicopter was the “minimal tool necessary.” Fish and Game says it has done that.
What really irritated Craig Gerhrke, of the Wilderness Society is that last winter Fish and biologists darted a wolf and landed in the wilderness without permission. The Forest Service wrote a letter telling them they weren’t supposed to do it and then began the process for formal approval.
Fish and Game officials say the state doesn’t need federal approval to do what it needs to do to manage its wildlife within its borders. This legal position has not held up in federal courts
But the state seeks to work together with the Forest Service instead of fight it. Sources say the agency is ready to approve their limited proposal.
But wilderness advocates not only challenge the helicopters in wilderness, they challenge the radio collars that are the foundation of wolf and wildlife management across the West.
“We should not be using motors there except for emergencies, nor putting collars on wildlife there,” said Jerry Jayne, a board member of the Idaho Environmental Council.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
What are they afraid of?
Are they afraid we might learn something about wolves?
Are they afraid we might find out there are more wolves than what was estimated?
Why is it wrong to study wolves in an open ecosystem (instead of basing "science" on the closed ecosystem on Isle Royale)??
What's the big deal? Are not airplanes mechanical? (There are airstrips all over the wilderness - but apparently their "noise" is not disturbing to wildlife?)
If a helicopter lands in the wilderness and no one is around to hear it - did it affect where the wolf poops in the woods?
Don't worry tho - WWP is poised to sue!
http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005129237
Last question - when will someone actually publish the truth about the so called "wolf tourism" money that was supposed to pour in? (Instead of the usual BS about Yellowstone.)
We have had wolves running around our village for going on 4 years now - no one comes to "watch wolves". Heard them howling again this morning, they didn't seem to be too bothered by snowmobiles either.
Nothing to fear but fear itself?
I don't understand the WS preoccupation with wolves or wilderness ... it is hand and glove. If research says we need more data, what is wrong with that or how many helicopter landings there are in the wilderness?
I would rather have hard, raw data than the mindless speculation that silence is not protected that seems so prevalent. Creatures in the universe are a natural occurrence -- just as are bloggers in cyberspace or environmentalists perceiving to safeguard public lands, at any cost.
Which is more important? None of the above. Everything and everyone in its own place, space, and time. Enough said.
Helicopters in Frank
The truth is the management of the Forest Service has no integrity. They are good buddies with ID F#G and don't want to "hurt" their relationship. The analysis is only a rationalization and justification. Where is the accountablity?
Finally--a lasting job for Sarah Palin.
----------
Like a midair collision with a tugboat
in camo
"as a stalking horse"
Rocky, Good writing uses words your audience understands.
Definition of "stalking horse":A stalking horse is a person who tests a concept with someone or mounts a challenge against them on behalf of an anonymous third party. -wiki
stalking-horse (stôkng-hôrs)n.
1. Something used to cover one's true purpose; a decoy.
2. A sham candidate put forward to conceal the candidacy of another or to divide the opposition. -freedictionary
Notice the hyphen.
****
So if that's the best word Rocky, and using the definition, are you implying F&G is doing this as a disquise for someone? What are you talking about?
***
Good point by Jayne on the wolves should not have collars in TRUE wilderness.
What wilderness? Where? Huh???
----------
Like a midair collision with a tugboat
This isn't a wolf issue. It's a Wilderness issue
Some people want to say this is a wolf issue and bring all the arguments about wolves, but that is not the issue.
The issue is whether government employees are going to be able to do things the easy way, high tech way, in Wilderness areas, when the purpose of Wilderness is just the opposite.
Then there is the issue of freedom. Elk, bears, cougars, deer, bighorn, wolves . . . none of these should be darted and collared by airplanes in designated Wilderness areas. I don't think they should be collared at all. Where is the freedom of the wilderness when every move of the animals is being tracked? What if you were tracked in the Wilderness by big brother? Would the mountains and big forests somehow mean you were free? I don't think so.
Wilderness study
Do you know how many years of research has already been done in the Frank?
Wiles and Hornocker studying cougars back when it was the primitive area. See:
http://www.uihome.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=42866
The Taylor ranch research station is where the college kids study flora and fauna. Talked to a group about 20 years ago that were studying big horns.
Wilderness is the best place to study wild things. Where else should they be studied?
school's out
studying is one thing--using electronics within the wilderness area is another.
A mechanical bicycle is prohibted but an emf transmitor is okay? AND some day that will fall off the animal or otherwise be disconnected from the animal and then you got plastic garbage in the environmetalist utopia.
If it's darted like a wolf, it's a wolf issue. NEXT.
----------
Like a midair collision with a tugboat
You're moronic or something, MM. We do that to learn to care...
for them and you'd leave them to die without a chance.
Use your brain and get with the preservation effort.
----------
Like a midair collision with a tugboat
Mostly Mike is correct. This is a Wilderness issue...
and operating helicopters to collar 'wildlife' of any species there is anathema to the priciples of wilderness management. And doing so doesn't serve Idaho Fish and Game either, or the hunters, fishermen, and citizens who value wilderness.
Wilderness = 50+ airstrips
And its not an "anathema" to have thousands of airplanes buzzing a wilderness?
Let's pay 100 people to tear the joint up and take weeks at it.
----------
Like a midair collision with a tugboat