Tuesday, April 30, 2013

It all depends on how one defines "protected"

It's been a mixed week for wolf-related news, what with Secretary Salazar's parting shot to delist wolves nationally. Thanks, Cowboy Ken! Heckuva job, Kenny.


In the southwest, the media has been interpreting this story this way:

Feds plan to keep Mexican gray wolves protected

Federal authorities intend to remove endangered species protections for all gray wolves in the Lower 48 states, carving out an a exception for a small pocket of about 75 Mexican wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico, according to a draft document obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

That is, what is bad for wolves nationally might be OK for the little island of Mexican grays.  "Small pocket" is right, and we're pretty sure that's where the ranchers keep the US FWS.

And an awful lot depends on how you define "protected."

Like, does that mean letting Wildlife Services agents shoot them? Or ranchers bait and harass wolves until the government removes them? Or backroom deals to be made that would limit their recovery and reintroduction from their native range in Mexico? Is this how the feds define protection?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.  

No comments: