Montana Federal District Judge Molloy to be holding hearings on whether to scrap the "NON-ESSENTIAL DESIGNATION on Gray Wolves in the Northern Rockies...........Gutting this provision that currently allows FWS to kill wolves that are proven to be livestock killers would make it illegal for wolves to be killed under the endangered species act.................Judge Molloy feels that the 1995 introduced wolves are now fully integrated into the pre-introduction wolf population and therefore the non-essential status should no longer be applicable..............Anotherwards, the Wolves of the Rockies are not an experimental temporay population...............they are part of the fabric of life of the region(as they were for millenia) and that the Endagngered Species Act which currently protects wolves is the prevailing law as it relates to their status in the USA

Judge's ruling could threaten state's ability to kill wolves

A federal judge in Montana is asking parties to a lawsuit over gray wolves if the animals should lose their experimental, nonessential designation and revert to a fully endangered or threatened designation.

Such a move could torpedo Idaho's request to kill wolves in the Lolo Zone.

The order, issued this afternoon by District Court Judge Donald Molloy of Missoula, Mont., stems from a lawsuit filed in 2008 by environmental groups over new rules issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service making it easier for states to kill wolves for the purpose of protecting deer, elk and moose herds. States like Idaho can petition the federal wildlife agency for permission to kill wolves if they are found to be harming wild ungulate herds. The petitions are allowed under the designation of wolves in Idaho and parts of Montana as an experimental nonessential population.

Wolves were reintroduced to the Northern Rockies in 1995 and 1996 under that designation, known as 10(j). To qualify as an experimental population, the wolves must be "wholly separate geographically from nonexperimental populations of the same species."

Molloy said that was the case at the time of reintroduction. However, he wrote the federal government documented in another lawsuit that wolves in the Northern Rockies are now breeding with wolves from Canada and a portion of Montana where they are not designated as an experimental population.

Molloy issued an eight-page order to show cause asking parties to the case to file briefs showing why the case "should not be dismissed as moot due to the absence of a population meeting the statutory requirements for 10(j) status."

If the case is dismissed and wolves in Idaho lose their experimental designation the state could lose its ability to kill wolves for preying on deer and elk herds or for preying on livestock.

Molloy set a briefing deadline of Feb. 22.

In a previous ruling last summer, Molloy restored federal protection for wolves in Idaho and Montana following their return to state management in 2009. In a stunning move, Judge Molloy is asking parties in the 10j lawsuit, if  reintroduced wolves experimental, non-essential designation should be vacated?

The 10j rule was a concession to ranchers that allows reintroduced wolves to be killed for livestock depredation. Since 1995 hundreds of wolves have been gunned down by Wildlife Services under the 1oj. In 2008 the 10j rule was re-written to include "prey declines" as a reason to kill wolves, hence a lawsuit was brought challenging those changes.

Judge Molloy is asking if the non-essential, experimental designation for reintroduced wolves still holds true, since they have been breeding with wolves in Northwest Montana. who dispersed on their own from Canada and are not governed by the 10j. At this point there is really no way to tell the two populations apart?

From the Lewiston Tribune Online:
"Judge's ruling could threaten state's ability to kill wolves January 28, 2011, 5:43 pm A federal judge in Montana is asking parties to a lawsuit over gray wolves if the animals should lose their experimental, nonessential designation and revert to a fully endangered or threatened designation. Such a move could torpedo Idaho's request to kill wolves in the Lolo Zone. The order, issued this afternoon by District Court Judge Donald Molloy of Missoula, Mont., stems from a lawsuit filed in 2008 by environmental groups over new rules issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service making it easier for states to kill wolves for the purpose of protecting deer, elk and moose herds. States like Idaho can petition the federal wildlife agency for permission to kill wolves if they are found to be harming wild ungulate herds. The petitions are allowed under the designation of wolves in Idaho and parts of Montana as an experimental nonessential population.

Wolves were reintroduced to the Northern Rockies in 1995 and 1996 under that designation, known as 10(j). To qualify as an experimental population, the wolves must be "wholly separate geographically from nonexperimental populations of the same species."

Molloy said that was the case at the time of reintroduction. However, he wrote the federal government documented in another lawsuit that wolves in the Northern Rockies are now breeding with wolves from Canada and a portion of Montana where they are not designated as an experimental population.
Molloy issued an eight-page order to show cause asking parties to the case to file briefs showing why the case "should not be dismissed as moot due to the absence of a population meeting the statutory requirements for 10(j) status."
 If the 10j is vacated, all wolves in the Northern Rockies would be  fully protected by the ESA. making it much more difficult to kil them.
Briefs on both sides are due by February 22, 2o11.
 I'm sure this is going to stir up a firestorm but it's long overdue. The 10j rule is moot.
======