6 Jan 2009, 1:15pm
by admin

Declaration of Douglas W. Smith

In this and the next three posts we give selected excerpts from the testimony of wildlife biologists, experts in wolf biology. The testimonies were solicited for the record in the lawsuit brought by enviro groups seeking to enjoin the delisting (removal from the Endangered Species List) of Rocky Mountain wolves. The Plaintiffs prevailed last July when U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy granted a preliminary injunction, throwing out the delisting of gray wolves in the Northern Rockies and ordering them put back on the Endangered Species list [here].

Judge Molloy set himself up as a wolf expert and disregarded the testimony of the actual experts. We post what they had to say in order to reveal just how egregious and unsound Judge Molloy’s decision was.


I received a B.S degree in Wildlife Biology from the University of Idaho in 1985, a M.S. Degree in Biology from Michigan Technological University in 1988, and a Ph.D. in Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology from the University of Nevada, Reno in 1997. I am an employee of the National Park Service (NPS) and have been with the Yellowstone National Park (YNP) wolf program since its inception. I was hired specifically to reintroduce, manage, and study wolves in YNP. From 1994-1999, I monitored wolves in the greater Yellowstone area (GYA). After 1999 the USFWS or States tracked and managed wolves external to YNP. I began work on the Yellowstone Wolf Project as the Project Biologist; in 1997 I assumed duties of Project Leader, a position I have held continuously since that time. …

Overall the annual survival rate is 66% for pups, 71% for yearlings, and 82% for adults, which is within the bounds of a healthy sustainable population. It is generally recognized that populations with a mortality rate (the inverse of survival rate) of <30% are sustainable and not in danger of extinction. The NRM population is within those bounds. …

Further, about 70% of the mortality for the NRM population –- prior to delisting — was due to anthropogenic causes, and the leading cause was, and has long been, legal killing due to conflicts with livestock. Therefore, the population has already experienced significant mortality, yet it did not jeopardize the viability or continued growth of the population (the NRM population has grown each year 1995-2007). …

The YNP wolf population is not as isolated, nor is it as small, and migration is not one way making modeled results valid only for this restrictive scenario, a rather unlikely outcome given data since 2004. …

Further, the paper indicated the current excellent genetic condition of the population, genetic diversity equal to large, wild populations of wolves in northern Canada and low levels of inbreeding. In fact we showed that wolves choose very carefully their mates and avoid breeding with close relatives (e.g., inbreeding avoidance) which should act to preserve genetic diversity well into the future…

Documented genetic affects in the Scandinavian wolf population due to isolation and small population size do not resemble YNP (Liberg et al. 2005. Severe inbreeding in a wild wolf (Canis lupus) population. Biology Letters). The level of isolation to Scandinavian wolf population is much greater than to GYA wolves, and the Scandinavian population was and is much smaller than the GYA population which exceeds 450 not 170 as stated in the lawsuit. …

Also, the Scandinavian population began with just 2-3 wolves, while the GYA population began with 41, again not comparable and the genetic impacts and conclusions between these two scenarios are entirely different. …

Further our population is not totally isolated. We have documented at least 2 wolves moving into the GYA (both from Idaho), one that moved from the GYA to near Boise, Idaho that bred, another that dispersed from YNP to near Denver, CO, another from YNP that dispersed to near Morgan, UT, and finally one other that made it to near Helena, MT. Also, and it is worth stressing again, these are known movements, most wolves are not radio collared. This clearly indicates that wolves have the capability to move around between recovery areas enabling connectivity and reducing isolation; a situation not at all similar to the Scandinavian situation. …

[W]e found that YNP wolves kill each other at a high rate (this is the leading cause of mortality for YNP wolves) and that they nearly always adjust to the removal of lost pack members. In fact in one extreme case in October 2007 both breeding wolves (e.g., alphas) were killed by a neighboring pack and the remaining wolves survived and appear to be breeding (e.g., denning) in 2008. …

Delisting of wolves will not affect the protection level or management of wolves and therefore not affect wolf viewing in any way. …

Specifically, research led by me directly evaluated the mortality and survival rate of NRM wolves and on both counts we did not find the population in danger of extinction or was it negatively affected by federal management actions. This finding, along with continued annual population growth in all three recovery areas, clearly indicates that the federal mandate of a restored population has been achieved and that threats to the population have been removed. …

Further, I have published with coauthors on the genetic viability of the Yellowstone National Park wolf population, a population contended to be genetically isolated, and found genetic diversity to be high and inbreeding low. Further, my tracking of wolves in the greater Yellowstone area since the inception of the program indicates a level of wolf movement consistent with the idea that greater Yellowstone wolves are connected with wolves from the other NRM population. …

I fully support delisting of the NRM wolf population as I believe the population is biologically viable, and this is the correct action given policy and statements made to the public throughout this entire process. The goal has been achieved, and as promised, it is time to move on. …

6 Jan 2009, 2:40pm
by Jack

Listing wolves again under the ESA as the result of the decision of Judge Molloy was a miscarriage of justice. Judge Molloy totally disregarded all scientific evidence and testimony from wolf authorities. He demonstrated incompetence as a federal judge. I feel he should retire from the bench. This is not the first incompetent decision he has made, either. Wolves are more than fully recovered under the USFWS’s own wolf recovery plan. They have been recovered for more that 10 years now. In the meantime we will continue to loose valuable ungulate populations as a result of the increasing wolf population. Wolves in YNP have reduced the biological diversity within the park in violation of YNP’s own mandate and policy. SHAME ON YOU JUDGE MOLLOY. PLEASE RETIRE, JUDGE MOLLOY. FIND ANOTHER JOB WITH NO DECISION RESPONSIBILITY. YOU ARE NOT A FAIR AND BALANCED JUDGE.

8 Jan 2009, 10:21am
by Mary M.

I agree that this is a miscarriage of justice by Judge Molloy. The fraudulent “pro-environment” movement has proven itself to be pathologically blind to the harm it inflicts not only on innocent humans, but also on the landscape and its species diversity as well.

Their latest twisted mantra seems to be that any destruction of abundance and diversity on the natural landscape they engineer (by fraudulent and unscientific inference that all man’s activities are bad -but theirs) are “ok” because the results of their actions are “natural”. They seem to have had to play down the “saving nature” aspect a bit because their unscientific false notion (opinion? agenda?) of “saving nature from all man’s activities” because it is so scientifically false. As Mike D. says - a destroyed forest is not “saved.”

The destruction of the values they say they are saving or returning to natural is unprecedented as are their corrupt methods. SW Arizona/New Mexico is considered by some real scientists to have some of the most corrupt, destructive and politically driven “science.” This is highly developed with pathways to corrupted judges for “environmental” lawsuits, universities and governmental agencies corrupted by decades of infiltration by the fraudulent “savers of nature,” and a thoroughly entrenched notion advocated to urban masses (”Black P.R.”) that the real and biologically proven successful stewards of the landscape are “bad.” Though these family ranchers and forest harvest cultures here are in all honesty highly observant and developed in their proper stewardship this “poisons the well” (another PR/perception control term) dis-enabling this scientifically proven boon to nature.

A recent continuation of this predatory psychopathy which has permeated this area is reported on in the winter issue of “RANGE” magazine in an article titled “UNMASKED!” of the incredible fiasco of the complete and uncaring destruction native fish of the Verde River, AZ. The article sharply points out the problem which exists for the historical landscape-based cultures here as well as the natural abundance they support by their activities.

As real science looks to significant impacts to discover cause of changes in nature, it seems very likely that removal of human activity from the Verde riparian area to “save” the native fish killed off the native fish in one of the top native fisheries, formerly 80+ % natives. Losses of populations of natives were seen to occur on vast reaches of Arizona’s rivers, in one renowned fisheries biologist’s observation, upon forced removal of cattle and their positive impact to native fishes (and other species) in riparian areas.

His scientific evaluation of existing fisheries science showed the standard for fish studies/surveys was so poor that no conclusions about what helped the native warm water species here could be drawn. Indeed a university study in Colorado on southwest fisheries “science” came to the same conclusion due to lack of baseline studies, poor methodology, and lack of sufficient monitoring and follow-up studies.

With this background of no information the USFS, with no science, rolled over and peed on itself when the so called “environmentalists” demanded that cattle be removed from access to hundreds of miles of Arizona and New Mexican rivers.

Back to the Verde, the obvious thing to try to restore the native populations that died out within a year after cattle were removed was to attempt to restore the native fish by returning the cattle and the favorable conditions they maintained for the natives.

This restoration attempt was thwarted by an anti-human/cattle government “biologist” (part of the enviro NGO’s not so secret infiltration of government agencies and local governments strategy). He was also on the board of directors of an anti-human/cattle “environmental” organization.

Well, he must have considered the threat that actual scientific documentation (aka restoration by cattle) posed to his anti-human/cattle agenda was sufficient to continue to sacrifice with ongoing native-fish-destroying fraud the very fish he and his accomplices claimed to be “saving” from conditions which actually cause these fish to thrive. His desperate solution to keep the unwarranted suppression of human activity on the river in place was to secretly go above the heads of all involved and relate “something” to likely uninformed “higher-ups” to suppress the eventuality of real science interfering with the pathologically destructive agenda. This resulted in enabling him to insert a pre-pathologically agendized response team into the area resulting in removal of real and distinguished scientists from the program.

I see glimmerings of hopeful corrections in the situation. This kind of destructive fraud with wolves or fish cannot be allowed to continue. Agency and “environmental” NGO members owe it to themselves to consider saving nature and humanity from these fakirs. The anti-human/cattle/nature agendas are psychopathic in essence and thoughtful right-minded individuals should not participate, but resist, by truly informing themselves and others. Often agency “higher-ups” have not a clue except for the misinformation constantly fed to them by the fraud ridden “environmental” NGO’s through their ever present perception-control apparatus.

Judges, as well, need to search their soul and resist the fraud and hurtful psychopathy rampant in the so called “green” or “environmental” movement. Websites such as this are a great resource and access to the real world.

There seems to be big push after big push by these destructive ones to lock in their faulty psychopathic agenda. Now even the magazine “Mother Earth News” is extolling the virtues of the very organizations of these fraudulent and morally degenerate “elite” (i.e. The Wildlands Program, and the Nature Conservancy) whose agenda is to exterminate all human rural activity, inadvertently or not, thereby delivering all resources to their international corporate funders, and puppeteers. This is the power of this psychopathic disinformation and perception control.

This is largely promoted locally by demonizing and dehumanizing campaigns directed at innocent rural families and their activities.

One wonders how dehumanized those at the top of this destructive pyramid of endless resource acquisition/control fraudulently portrayed as “environmentalism” actually are, and note that dehumanizing others dehumanizes oneself.



web site

leave a comment

  • Colloquia

  • Commentary and News

  • Contact

  • Follow me on Twitter

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • Meta