Wolves back onto Endangered Species List. What does this mean for Colorado introduction efforts?

[Huntin_GI]

Yesterday, a California judge said wolves shall be added to the ESA list in 44 states. This list does not include Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, not New Mexico.

The way I understood it was that ESA protections and be a thorn in the side of “re-introduction” efforts I.e. Colorado.

Anyone with enough legal insight as to how this change will impact that effort?

California judge restores federal protection for gray wolves in 44 states

A California judge has ruled that the gray wolf should be returned to the Endangered Species list after hunters have decimated the species in recent years.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Carlin59]

Was wondering the same thing. It was mentioned on the local news this morning that it would likely delay the CO reintroduction timeline, but looking forward to hearing more specifics.

 

[DanimalW]

So a judge in California should be able to determine the wolf population in Wisconsin. Makes sense. Every article sites is slaughtering 200+ wolves in 72 hours. Maybe that means there’s a lot more than their estimates. Pisses me off.

 

[wapitibob]

I emailed the usfws last year when wolves were still on the ESL and asked if the Colorado legislation would force them to introduce. They hadn’t gotten a legal opinion at that time.

 

[sneaky]

So a judge in California should be able to determine the wolf population in Wisconsin. Makes sense. Every article sites is slaughtering 200+ wolves in 72 hours. Maybe that means there’s a lot more than their estimates. Pisses me off.

Animal rights group shop for judges and introduce lawsuits in courts where they know they will receive a favorable opinion. Surely you knew that? Why do you think they are always going through the 9th Circuit Court? Colorado will most likely never have the ability to manage wolves in the state. They'll have to deal with 15-20 years of exploding wolf population growth while protected, and by then the state will be firmly blue and management will never be given over to CPW. The agreed upon recovery number for delisting in Idaho was agreed upon by ALL parties at 150 wolves statewide. We're over 1500 confirmed in the state, who knows how many there really are, and they're still filing suits to have them relisted. Colorado is more screwed than they think.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Huntin_GI]

I emailed the usfws last year when wolves were still on the ESL and asked if the Colorado legislation would force them to introduce. They hadn’t gotten a legal opinion at that time.

Almost seems worth following up at this point. Did the person they put you in contact with seem like they would actually know?

 

[cnelk]

My friend asked the CPW the question this morning. This was their reply

“There are far more questions than answers at this point. Our colleagues at the Fish and Wildlife Service are studying the decision and attempting to answer the same questions that we have. One thing is certain. The gray wolf in Colorado is now federally endangered and falls under the jurisdiction of the FWS. How that affects our planning process and statute remains to be seen. But the bottom line is federal authority trumps ours.”

 

[sneaky]

My friend asked the CPW the question this morning. This was their reply

“There are far more questions than answers at this point. Our colleagues at the Fish and Wildlife Service are studying the decision and attempting to answer the same questions that we have. One thing is certain. The gray wolf in Colorado is now federally endangered and falls under the jurisdiction of the FWS. How that affects our planning process and statute remains to be seen. But the bottom line is federal authority trumps ours.”

That was the US Fish and Watersnake Service's way of telling them they're f#$%@!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[def90]

Won't change anything in regards to the CO reintroduction bill. Legal hunting was never a part of the reintroduction.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Won't change anything in regards to the CO reintroduction bill. Legal hunting was never a part of the reintroduction.

We’re a long way away from hunting, that’s not even in the same hemisphere at this point. I think the point being that if they’re federally endangered, it overrules the idiots in boulder and denver who voted for wolf intro. At least that’s how I read it. Go california and your stupid judges!!!!!!

 

[roadrunner]

And a SCOTUS jurist recently commented on how the federal judical branch has become corrupt with partisan politics.

Sounds like it's time for the highest court to start clipping a few wings...

 

[def90]

We’re a long way away from hunting, that’s not even in the same hemisphere at this point. I think the point being that if they’re federally endangered, it overrules the idiots in boulder and denver who voted for wolf intro. At least that’s how I read it. Go california and your stupid judges!!!!!!

How do you figure? The reintroduction bill has nothing to do with protection status. The reintruduction will go ahead as directed and now CPW will have even less input on the issue.

 

[wapitibob]

Almost seems worth following up at this point. Did the person they put you in contact with seem like they would actually know?

Deputy director based in Colorado.

 

[wapitibob]

How do you figure? The reintroduction bill has nothing to do with protection status. The reintruduction will go ahead as directed and now CPW will have even less input on the issue.

Federal law trumps state law. You can’t just go get a truck load of protected species and dump them out on the side of the road.

 

[def90]

Federal law trumps state law. You can’t just go get a truck load of protected species and dump them out on the side of the road.

The law that was passed says that they need to be reintroduced. What issue at the federal level would not allow this to happen? They’ve reintroduced them everywhere else..

 

[MuleyFever]

The law that was passed says that they need to be reintroduced. What issue at the federal level would not allow this to happen? They’ve reintroduced them everywhere else..

Its not that they wont allow it, its that there is a lot more red tape now that will complicate it and probably delay it.

 

[12wander]

So why doesn’t a group like SCI or another appeal the decision in a favorable court system? Play their game.

 

[justin davis]

So why doesn’t a group like SCI or another appeal the decision in a favorable court system? Play their game.

Yea exactly. We need the other side to play their game

 

[sneaky]

Federal law trumps state law. You can’t just go get a truck load of protected species and dump them out on the side of the road.

Man, we really should though. Presidio park in SF, Central Park in NY. They couldn't kill em, they'd have to protect them

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

So why doesn’t a group like SCI or another appeal the decision in a favorable court system? Play their game.

Because hunters are fractured into so many different sub-groups that we can't get together, raise the funds, and throw it back at them. We should use EAJA funds to our advantage just like those enviro groups do. They're playing with house money. Thing is, whoever our side would pick to do this would have a dozen different hunter groups against them because they don't see eye to eye on everything. The antis are WAY more organized than hunters are.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk