Groups question terms of wolf settlement in federal court

Two environmental groups who don’t want to settle the lawsuit over the delisting of gray wolves in Montana and Idaho say they don’t understand how their former partners in the federal court case can now support state wolf management plans that they previously found so inadequate. A court-ordered response from what’s being called “the non-settling parties” that was filed Wednesday morning by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and Friends of the Clearwater lays out their concerns with the proposed settlement that will come before U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy on Thursday in Missoula. Mike Garrity, the Alliance’s executive director, said nothing substantial has changed with wolf management since the case was filed by 14 environmental groups in 2009. The groups claimed the Department of Interior was wrong when it decided wolves could be considered a “recovered” species no longer facing extinction in Montana and Idaho, but not in Wyoming. The nonsettling parties allege in the court documents filed Tuesday that the only new twists in the ongoing saga are the bills in Congress that could permanently remove wolves from Endangered Species Act protections in the northern Rockies. He said the fear of those potential acts of Congress is the real motivation behind the settlement proposal. “Essentially, what has changed is they couldn’t take the heat,” Garrity said. Mike Clark, executive director for the Greater Yellowstone Coalition — one of the larger of the 10 groups pushing for the settlement — readily agreed with that, saying the potential for congressional action to change the Endangered Species Act prompted everyone to take a closer look at settling the case...more

Sometimes elections do make a difference.

R's take over the House and gain in the Senate, bills are introduced, and all of a sudden states can manage wolves after all.