Howl for Wolves' Full Return to California
- por: Center for Biological Diversity
- destinatário: Charlton H. Bonham, Director California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Following decades of extermination programs at the behest of hunters and the livestock industry, wolves are finally starting to return to California after an 87-year absence. But irrational fears and dirty politics still abound -- which is why the state's new wolf conservation plan must be fiercely protective of wolves for as long as possible, lest the state backslide into the ways of last century.
To its credit, the draft wolf plan recently released by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife does emphasize nonlethal strategies to prevent livestock conflicts, as well as the importance of outreach and education to promote coexistence with wolves.
That's why it's disturbing to read, in the same plan, proposals to strip wolves of all state Endangered Species Act protections when they reach just 50-75 animals; to obtain authority to kill wolves even while they are on the state endangered species list; and to kill bears, coyotes and eventually wolves to boost elk and deer numbers.
This is not yet the plan that will achieve the full recovery that the department's own scientists have shown is possible -- with nearly 500 wolves able to be supported in Northern California alone, and more in the central Sierra Nevada.
Urge the department to protect wolves until they fully recover. And if you can, join the Center's West Coast Wolf Organizer Amaroq Weiss at one of three public meetings in Yreka (Jan. 21), Long Beach (Jan. 26) and Sacramento (Feb. 1).
To its credit, the draft wolf plan recently released by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife does emphasize nonlethal strategies to prevent livestock conflicts, as well as the importance of outreach and education to promote coexistence with wolves.
That's why it's disturbing to read, in the same plan, proposals to strip wolves of all state Endangered Species Act protections when they reach just 50-75 animals; to obtain authority to kill wolves even while they are on the state endangered species list; and to kill bears, coyotes and eventually wolves to boost elk and deer numbers.
This is not yet the plan that will achieve the full recovery that the department's own scientists have shown is possible -- with nearly 500 wolves able to be supported in Northern California alone, and more in the central Sierra Nevada.
Urge the department to protect wolves until they fully recover. And if you can, join the Center's West Coast Wolf Organizer Amaroq Weiss at one of three public meetings in Yreka (Jan. 21), Long Beach (Jan. 26) and Sacramento (Feb. 1).
Mr. Bonham,
I am writing to comment on the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Draft Wolf Conservation Plan. While there are many parts of this plan that I support, it simply doesn't go far enough to ensure wolves will actually recover in California, and I'm dismayed at the proposal to strip protections when the wolf population reaches a mere 50-75 animals.
Specifically, I support the plan's strong emphasis on nonlethal strategies and tools to deter livestock conflicts, the inclusion of biological and ecological information to help the public better understand wolves, and that there are neither population caps nor limits on where wolves will be able to establish territories.
That said, the plan also includes strategies and actions not supported by science and which are counter to what the vast majority of Californians want: to see wolves fully recovered here. I do not support the department's proposals to:
-- Seek authority to kill wolves as a management tool; -- Consider stripping wolves of state Endangered Species Act protections when there are as few as 50-75 individuals; and -- Suggest killing of bears, coyotes and eventually wolves to conserve elk and deer.
The best science shows that nonlethal management strategies work much better over the long haul than simply killing wolves, which harms pack social structure and can increase livestock conflicts. Your department's analysis of suitable habitat also shows that Northern California alone could support 371-497 wolves, and more could exist in the central Sierra Nevada. So the proposal to consider delisting at 50-75 wolves seems based entirely on political expediency. The chief driver of deer and elk populations is whether they have healthy landscapes -- so scapegoating wolves, bears and coyotes to conserve these ungulates is also based on politics.
These types of "conservation" policies reflect a flawed perspective that killing and reducing protections for wolves will somehow conserve them. This is at odds with those parts of the plan which emphasize the importance of outreach and education to help people tolerate and coexist with wolves. This view has also been debunked by research in other parts of the country showing that, where protections for wolves have been reduced and killing of wolves has been state-sanctioned, human tolerance for wolves has declined.
[Your comment will be added here]
Assembly Bill 2402, passed into California law in 2012, requires your department to use "ecosystem based management" and the best science in its stewardship of wildlife. And polls conducted as recently as 2013 show that the vast majority of Californians understand that wolves are an essential part of healthy ecosystems and want to see them fully protected until they're recovered here. So please -- don't allow the Wolf Conservation Plan to be influenced by those who would have wolves perpetually clinging to existence, with little or no protection. After an 87-year absence following decades of extermination programs, these magnificent animals deserve better -- and so does California.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
assinar petiçãoassinar petiçãoI am writing to comment on the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Draft Wolf Conservation Plan. While there are many parts of this plan that I support, it simply doesn't go far enough to ensure wolves will actually recover in California, and I'm dismayed at the proposal to strip protections when the wolf population reaches a mere 50-75 animals.
Specifically, I support the plan's strong emphasis on nonlethal strategies and tools to deter livestock conflicts, the inclusion of biological and ecological information to help the public better understand wolves, and that there are neither population caps nor limits on where wolves will be able to establish territories.
That said, the plan also includes strategies and actions not supported by science and which are counter to what the vast majority of Californians want: to see wolves fully recovered here. I do not support the department's proposals to:
-- Seek authority to kill wolves as a management tool; -- Consider stripping wolves of state Endangered Species Act protections when there are as few as 50-75 individuals; and -- Suggest killing of bears, coyotes and eventually wolves to conserve elk and deer.
The best science shows that nonlethal management strategies work much better over the long haul than simply killing wolves, which harms pack social structure and can increase livestock conflicts. Your department's analysis of suitable habitat also shows that Northern California alone could support 371-497 wolves, and more could exist in the central Sierra Nevada. So the proposal to consider delisting at 50-75 wolves seems based entirely on political expediency. The chief driver of deer and elk populations is whether they have healthy landscapes -- so scapegoating wolves, bears and coyotes to conserve these ungulates is also based on politics.
These types of "conservation" policies reflect a flawed perspective that killing and reducing protections for wolves will somehow conserve them. This is at odds with those parts of the plan which emphasize the importance of outreach and education to help people tolerate and coexist with wolves. This view has also been debunked by research in other parts of the country showing that, where protections for wolves have been reduced and killing of wolves has been state-sanctioned, human tolerance for wolves has declined.
[Your comment will be added here]
Assembly Bill 2402, passed into California law in 2012, requires your department to use "ecosystem based management" and the best science in its stewardship of wildlife. And polls conducted as recently as 2013 show that the vast majority of Californians understand that wolves are an essential part of healthy ecosystems and want to see them fully protected until they're recovered here. So please -- don't allow the Wolf Conservation Plan to be influenced by those who would have wolves perpetually clinging to existence, with little or no protection. After an 87-year absence following decades of extermination programs, these magnificent animals deserve better -- and so does California.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Ver mais petições:
O seu JavaScript está desativado. Sem ele, nosso site pode não funcionar corretamente.
ao assinar, você aceita o termos de serviço da Care2 Você pode gerenciar suas assinaturas de e-mail a qualquer momento.
Está tendo algum problema?? Avise-nos.