Arizona Republic (Original) Posted August 17, 2016 by the Editorial Board
Editorial: Don't buy Arizona politicians' attempts to "help" Mexican gray wolves. They are anything but helpful.
Beware of politicians in wolves’ clothing.
Two congressional efforts to seize control of the Mexican gray wolf reintroduction program may pretend to be wolf-friendly. They aren’t.
The first is being pushed by Arizona Republican Rep. Paul Gosar and New Mexico Republican Rep. Steve Pearce. Both previously have sought to kick the Mexican gray wolf off the endangered-species list.
Now, they are behind an amendment to the Interior Department appropriations bill that would defund the federal wolf-recovery effort. Pearce says states could do a better job.
Wolves are worse off? Not true
The federal reintroduction effort began in the late 1990s and has included state involvement. It raised the population of Mexican gray wolves in the wild from zero to 97 at last count.
Gosar says the endangered species of wolf “is no better off today than it was 20 years ago,” according to a story by The Arizona Republic’s Brandon Loomis.
Not true. The species is 97 times better off. And that’s because of a federally run effort that is guided by the federal Endangered Species Act, which established species diversity as a national value.
Gosar also said, “The wolf is going to die unless something changes.” In his view, that needed change is state control.
The history of the Mexican gray wolf recovery effort says just the opposite.
Opposition continues from special interests
Built from a population of captive-bred wolves, Mexican gray wolves now in the wild represent a success story. They have adapted well, reproduced and learned to hunt their natural prey.
A few wolves have also preyed on the cattle that graze the public land in Arizona and New Mexico where wolves have been reintroduced. Because of that, wolves were killed and captured under management practices that favored public-land ranchers.
That happened despite programs that reimburse ranchers for any cattle taken by wolves.
Meanwhile, some hunters see the wolves as competition because the lobos' natural prey consists of deer and elk, species humans like to pursue for sport.
The opposition to wolves continues to come from these special interests, which are used to getting their own way in state legislatures and state game agencies.
Ranchers and hunters have legitimate concerns, but those concerns do not outweigh the larger national goals outlined in the Endangered Species Act.
What happened when states got their way
Yet, in the U.S. Senate, Arizona’s Republican Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain are pushing an effort that would give states greater influence in decision making about wolf recovery and cap the number of wolves allowed in the wild.
This, too, is more about empowering those who oppose wolves than helping recovery.
Flake told The Republic’s Loomis that the goal of recovery should be a plan that reflects the will of the states, and cannot be reversed by a federal judge.
This is a step backward.
States were given a significant role in management decisions by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2003. The resulting practices, largely shaped to satisfy ranchers, led to so many wolves being killed or removed that environmentalists sued.
Only after environmentalists won a court settlement did wolf numbers begin to climb, reaching 110 by 2014. Last winter, illegal shootings and disappearances reduced the population.
Clearly, wolves need more protection, not less. They need federal protection that is guided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reflect the national values outlined in the Endangered Species Act.
Those values go beyond a few interest groups in one or two states. This is about our nation’s shared natural heritage.
Mexican gray wolves are part of that shared natural heritage, and efforts to restore them to the wild represent a clearly articulated national value.
