COLORADO’S ECONOMY, elk population, conservation funding, hunting industry and resident taxpayer dollars are in the crosshairs. An environmental extremist-driven ballot initiative aims to force an introduction of wolves onto the Colorado landscape even though Colorado Parks and Wildlife confirmed a natural migrating, active pack in the northwest part of the state.
“Ballot box biology is reckless. In this particular case, it totally undermines the authority of Colorado’s wildlife professionals who have said time and time again over several decades that a forced wolf introduction is a bad idea,” said Kyle Weaver, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation president and CEO. “As an organization, RMEF pledges to do all in our power to educate voters about the significant, real-life, detrimental impacts of such an effort.”
RMEF first warned about the initiative proposal three years ago. Since then, environmental extremists have raised more than $1 million, the lion’s share of it from out-of-state donors, to gather and deliver 215,000 (of nearly six million residents) petition signatures to the Colorado secretary of state. Staffers later deemed 76,037 or 35.3 percent of projected signatures as invalid but approved the measure for the 2020 ballot by a projected margin of 1.8 percent.
Colorado is home to the largest elk herd in North America, yet researchers in the southwest part of the state are trying to figure out why elk recruitment is ailing.
RMEF has a long history in Colorado. Since 1987, RMEF and its partners completed 782 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects with a combined value of more than $177.7 million. These projects protected or enhanced 468,068 acres of habitat and opened or improved public access to 122,107 acres. There are also more than 17,000 RMEF members and 28 chapters in the state.
“Proponents are offering zero funding for wolf management, livestock or pet depredation, deterrent measures, research or other costs. Yet they expect Colorado taxpayers and hunters to foot a bill that will be millions upon millions of dollars. As outdoorsmen and women who care about wildlife and our wild landscapes, we must unite and fight against this measure,” added Weaver.
story by Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
A U.S. FEDERAL district court in Washington, D.C. has dismissed a case challenging the removal of the Louisiana black bear from the federal threatened and endangered species list. Plaintiffs sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) over the 2016 delisting, and Safari Club International (SCI) successfully intervened to defend the USFWS’s science-based decision. The court relied on SCI’s arguments in dismissing the suit.
The recovery of the Louisiana black bear is a conservation success story. Louisiana black bears are one of 16 subspecies of the American black bear found throughout North America, but they are the only subspecies to have been listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The bears were listed as “threatened” in 1992 due to a reduced population and concerns regarding the loss of suitable habitat, which had declined by more than 80% across their historical range which includes the Pineywoods of East Texas.
Considerable resources have been dedicated to restoring habitat, and more than 600,000 acres of habitat has been protected. By 2016, the population met the criteria in the species’ recovery plan and the USFWS removed the bears from the threatened species list and returned management of the species back to the State of Louisiana. Suitable habitat for the bears has expanded by over 400% and previously isolated populations are now interconnected, which will help the bears to thrive. Independent research funded by the USFWS found an almost 100% probability of the bear populations sustainably existing for the next 100 years.
In 2018, the delisting of the Louisiana black bear was challenged in court by multiple organizations and individuals. SCI was the only organization that intervened to defend the USFWS’s decision to delist the bears. In dismissing the suit, the court relied on arguments that only SCI put forward. The court ruled that the plaintiffs had not shown that delisting the bears caused any demonstrable decline in their population and that plaintiffs failed to prove any injury to their interests from potential development in the Atchafalaya Basin.
This case is a prime example of SCI’s value as a partner to the USFWS and state fish and wildlife agencies. SCI is honored and excited to have successfully defended science-based decision-making and played a key role in keeping the ESA from being further weaponized as a tool for anti-hunters. SCI will work with local SCI chapters, partner organizations, and the State to move towards reopening bear hunting in Louisiana. Although the State is unlikely to schedule a hunt in the near future, delisting is an important first step in implementing a hunt as a management technique.
As the bear population continues to grow, minimizing human-bear conflicts will be a necessary component of successful management. Regulated bear harvests have been utilized throughout North America to effectively manage bear populations. While long-term sustainability of the population is the agency’s first priority, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries hopes to provide bear hunting opportunities in Louisiana in the future, in accordance with their state bear management plan.
“After basing its decision completely on SCI’s arguments, a U.S. federal district court delivered a victory for conservation and hunters. SCI is proud to have stepped in to defend the Fish and Wildlife Service’s science-based decision to delist the Louisiana black bear as a threatened species under the ESA. The ESA was created to recover populations from the brink of extinction, and the Louisiana black bear is now a resounding success story. SCI celebrates this impressive victory for wildlife and science-based conservation,” said SCI CEO Laird Hamberlin.
by Safari Club International
Email us at [email protected]