States Should Boycott the USFWS
By John L. Runft
To: Idaho State Rep. Lenore Barrett
Dear Lenore,
I send this to you as a follow up to our recent discussion about the wolf situation in Idaho with respect to the up-coming legislative session. This link is to an article that discusses (and contains a link to) the very recent opinion of Judge Freidman in the D.C. District Court that basically holds that delisting by DPS (Distinct Population Segments) is not provided in the ESA. The logical consequence of this ruling is that delisting must be nationwide for all wolves south of Canada - something that will never happen (e.g. the Red Wolf in N.M.). This opinion in conjunction with the recent decision of Judge Malloy in the Montana District Court literally forecloses delisting. Delisting of the wolves has been siren song that has been constantly sung and whispered in the ears of the Idaho legislators and the IDF&G for two decades now all to this end: Nothing. Shouldn’t the members of the legislature feel hornswagled? Duped?
Idaho promulgated a Wolf Management Plan (attached) as a good faith compromise based on this schmoozing and misrepresentation by the feds even though it was contrary to the policy established by the legislature by House Joint Resolution 5 in 2001 (referenced in the attached Executive Summary of the Wolf Management Plan).
Also attached is a copy of the “Memorandum of Agreement” (”MOA”) between the Sect. Of the Interior and the Governor Of Idaho dated January 5, 2006. In Section VII (interestingly there are two section VIIs) of the “MOA” dealing with “FUNDING,” it is made clear that Idaho cannot depend on continued federal support in its efforts to assist in managing the wolves. The “MOA” provides that the purpose of the rule promulgated under ESA § 10(j) is ” to grant those states with approved management plans an opportunity to assume many of the management responsibilities currently performed by the service.” An “opportunity?” Look at the duties listed for the state - all of the expensive grunt work while the feds continue to control and direct the program. Not only does this violate every conceivable tenet of federalism, it is a fraud on the Idaho taxpayers. Idaho voters and taxpayers were promised that the state would manage and control what it would be paying for. Thus, Idaho has fallen into the trap of agreeing to provide services under (not “manage”) and pay for a federal program, controlled and directed by the federal government. In fact the “MOA” refers to the State as “the designated agent” of the FWS.
Now all can finally see that delisting will never happen. Next step? The feds will seek to entice the Fish and Game Department into a greater “step and fetch it ” roll, (more personnel on the ground and a larger department) while acknowledging that the assistance of the state is really needed (federal budget problems will be brought up for the first time - acknowledging in fact that the wolf management is out of control - and entice the state with assuming the role (at state expense) of exterminating problem wolves (under federal control and direction).
Some legislators have balked at facing up to the feds and rescinding the Wolf Management Plan and refusing to cooperate or participate with the feds (a “boycott”), because the feds have threatened to designate the Indian Tribes as the designated agents of the FWS. These legislators need to reexamine this so called “threat.” The entire wolf management is fast spiraling into a crisis. There is not enough federal money allocated to properly control and manage the wolves. As the “MOA” states, the numbers of wolves reached “the biological requirements for wolf recovery in 2002″ and their numbers keep expanding. Let the tribes have the problem and save Idaho the blame and expense. This is a federal disaster and the State has a final opportunity to extricate itself from it. I would be pleased to meet with any group of legislators to discuss the only remaining sensible and courageous course of action in light of the events that have transpired. - boycott.
Best regards,
John L. Runft
Runft & Steel Law Offices, PLLC
Boise, Idaho
If I am nothing, I am consistent: The “Endangered Species Act” belongs in the nearest shredder. Far from “saving” or “recovering” anything, it has instead served its non-public purpose well. It has gutted resource providing and extraction by other than mega/global corporate megoliths. No more is there a healthy American commercial fishing industry, timber industry, ranching industry, farming industry, or mining industry run by your Average Joe property owners. Nope. Instead there is the spectre of whichever current “poster species” has been pulled from the magic hat of U.S. Fish & Wildlife “Service” (oh, but that word “Service” does have a different meaning out here in farm country, but maybe that’s how USFWS meant it…), being “re” introduced in places IT NEVER WAS.