Wolf lawsuit against US Fish and Wildlife

[3325]

Environmental groups, over 10 of them, have filed a lawsuit against the US Fish and Wildlife Service because US F&W said wolves do not need Endangered Species Act protection in Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. This was expected.

The environmental groups also took the opportunity to quote the recent high profile wolf incident in Wyoming saying, "The torturing and killing of the wolf in the Pinedale bar is a perfect example of why the state of Wyoming has inadequate regulatory mechanisms to protect and conserve wolves."

We hashed that incident out on a five-page thread here that's now locked, probably because it started going off into the weeds with comparisons to other moral issues. So, let's not start talking about that incident again from the standpoint of the rightness or wrongness, or the seriousness or frivolity of it from an ethical standpoint. This is not an attempt to restart a conversation on the morality of what happened. It is intended to be a stark reminder that we often inadvertently give people ammunition to use against us.

I want legal wolf hunting. I support the protected zone, the trophy zone, and the predator zone. I want Wyoming to manage her own wolves. And I don't want the "SMOKE A PACK A DAY" bumper sticker crowd to do anything that hurts Wyoming's ability to do that.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Now to find just the right judge that’ll act on emotion, not science.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Well this lawsuit was coming no matter what. It sucks, I hope the states can fight it… feds meddling in state game management agencies is dumb, so is ballot box biology and “re-wilding” for that matter

 

[ScreamingPotato]

What's your point, OP, that people shouldn't break game laws? I think we all already agree there.

 

[3325]

What's your point, OP, that people shouldn't break game laws? I think we all already agree there.

That breaking game laws has a negative impact and negative consequences reaching far beyond local hunters and the local wildlife population. That breaking game laws results in more than the penalty for the law, it results in anti-hunters and environmental extremists using said broken laws as points of contention in legal actions.

Someone once said, "All politics is local." That's a lie.

 

[mtwarden]

Well the judge shopping should be slowed somewhat if what I read sometime back is true.

My hope is they have a much harder time trying to relist them than we had getting them unlisted.

Oh yeah, stupid people can definitely hurt the cause to keep wolves under state management.

 

[JohnJohnson]

What's your point, OP, that people shouldn't break game laws? I think we all already agree there.

Not to rehash the thread but the "agreement" was pretty reluctant from a good 30-40% of the people replying. Those responses fell into three camps.

"He did a dumb thing but I won't shed a tear over a wolf. He already got fined so move on."
"I don't see any issue because he didn't physically torture it."
"We can't judge him because ABORTION and THE HOLOCAUST!"

And I'm really not kidding on that last one. The lesson, if there is one, is that blowing this stuff off because of dislike of wolves or pseudo-intellectual moral relativism might not be a sustainable attitude to have on the topic.

 

[HighUintas]

My wife called it. She told me many times last year that Idaho's wolf hunting management is ridiculous and it will only end up in the wolf being relisted through a lawsuit. They should be managed the same as other big game but a bit more aggressively if needed. I don't think I ever had a rebuttal for it. It makes sense.

The groups filing lawsuits should not be given any more ammunition than they already have.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

Not to rehash the thread but the "agreement" was pretty reluctant from a good 30-40% of the people replying. Those responses fell into three camps.

"He did a dumb thing but I won't shed a tear over a wolf. He already got fined so move on."
"I don't see any issue because he didn't physically torture it."
"We can't judge him because ABORTION and THE HOLOCAUST!"

And I'm really not kidding on that last one. The lesson, if there is one, is that blowing this stuff off because of dislike of wolves or pseudo-intellectual moral relativism might not be a sustainable attitude to have on the topic.

I don't disagree even though I think one of those comments is mine, lol, but he'd already been punished so just beating a dead horse. I don't think a single person in that thread said what he did was OK though. Wyoming will likely respond by loosening things to allow for a more stiff penalty which is appropriate.

As for the last paragraph, if we overreact to stuff like this it only gives the antis more credibility to their point of view. For example, it'll be really difficult for someone to argue against a trapping ban, or catching hogs with dogs, if they're calling what that drunk bar hopping doofus did rises to the level of torture.

Edit: They're coming for the wolves anyway, they're coming for the trapping anyway. These lawsuits are all happening anyway. If we concede that torturing is happening when it's not then we're helping them.

 

[Customweld]

Edit: They're coming for the wolves anyway, they're coming for the trapping anyway. These lawsuits are all happening anyway. If we concede that torturing is happening when it's not then we're helping them.

Exactly. It wouldn’t matter if there were 60k wolves in Idaho and Montana. It will never be enough because it isn’t about the animals. It’s the power and leverage to remove humans from any sort of game management. If they don’t get their way with wolves, it’ll be grizzlies and wolverines.
These groups make the rules up as they go and are continually moving the goalposts. There will never be any compromise with them. Sue and settle is their motive. They keep chipping away at the corners and we lose a little each time.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Exactly. It wouldn’t matter if there were 60k wolves in Idaho and Montana. It will never be enough because it isn’t about the animals. It’s the power and leverage to remove humans from any sort of game management. If they don’t get their way with wolves, it’ll be grizzlies and wolverines.
These groups make the rules up as they go and are continually moving the goalposts. There will never be any compromise with them. Sue and settle is their motive. They keep chipping away at the corners and we lose a little each time.

This is the terrifying truth… if you can’t see the forest for the trees, I’m sorry. There is no reasoning with these people.

 

[Ross]

The wolf debacle continues, as noted it will never end. We were foolish in 1996 to ever allow them and agree to the established number that was far surpassed before the crazy judge chosen kept nixing the ability to manage them once the agreed number was reached. Now we have the Colorado craziness/madness, and wolves in Wa and Or and Mn/Wi and then all the wolves in Canada and AK. They are far far from endangered and the crazies know it, just a way to play the system in place. Reading about it just pisses me off!

 

[HighUintas]

Exactly. It wouldn’t matter if there were 60k wolves in Idaho and Montana. It will never be enough because it isn’t about the animals. It’s the power and leverage to remove humans from any sort of game management. If they don’t get their way with wolves, it’ll be grizzlies and wolverines.
These groups make the rules up as they go and are continually moving the goalposts. There will never be any compromise with them. Sue and settle is their motive. They keep chipping away at the corners and we lose a little each time.

Nope. A lot of those folks' motivation for wolves is to decrease public land grazing. Some ranchers will give up certain leases due to wolf conflict and they swoop in and grab it. Some of the people in those orgs are hunters

 

[wapitibob]

Wolves are Congressionally delisted in MT and ID due to the Simpson/Tester rider, and it has been tested in court. I don't believe this suit will impact those two states. WY pulled out of the coalition and went at it on their own. No idea what it means for them.

 

[Axlrod]

The wolf debacle continues, as noted it will never end. We were foolish in 1996 to ever allow them and agree to the established number that was far surpassed before the crazy judge chosen kept nixing the ability to manage them once the agreed number was reached. Now we have the Colorado craziness/madness, and wolves in Wa and Or and Mn/Wi and then all the wolves in Canada and AK. They are far far from endangered and the crazies know it, just a way to play the system in place. Reading about it just pisses me off!

At least in MT "we didn't allow them" It was forced upon us. Every "meeting" they had in this state, there was an overwhelming turnout of people against it. Turns out they had their minds made up. You are right, after they dumped them here, everything they agreed to was now a moving target.

 

[MTtrout]

There is no difference between one’s actions that hurts us vs someone seeing a billboard or social media and falls pray to the anti/pro wolf. They both are numb to the understanding of nature and what’s at stake

 

[Renegade14]

There is no difference between one’s actions that hurts us vs someone seeing a billboard or social media and falls pray to the anti/pro wolf. They both are numb to the understanding of nature and what’s at stake

Then at what point do we and conservation groups that support hunters put up our own billboards and advertisements to counter it? If people are numb to the understanding, we should put the same effort into educating them about why we need hunting as we do arguing online about what someone did with a wolf. $FW, MDF, RMEF, DU, and others have the funds but don't do anything to educate the general public about why we actively manage wildlife the way we do.

 

[3325]

The groups filing lawsuits should not be given any more ammunition than they already have.

Agreed. That's my main point. They will use it to the max.

Link: https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/0...iSpAWAJfksvheLwUMryQLF7ped1yQpISy1nn9_7ZTdRbc

 

[Idaboy]

Then at what point do we and conservation groups that support hunters put up our own billboards and advertisements to counter it? If people are numb to the understanding, we should put the same effort into educating them about why we need hunting as we do arguing online about what someone did with a wolf. $FW, MDF, RMEF, DU, and others have the funds but don't do anything to educate the general public about why we actively manage wildlife the way we do.

 

[mtwarden]

We have three billboards on the way into town- one is anti trapping board, one is to relist the wolves, the third is from F4WM stating wolves need managed- need more of that.