Federal court judge, Donald Molloy, has set June 15, 2010 as the date in which he will hear arguments from both sides in the gray wolf lawsuit initiated by EarthJustice, et. al. Last year the laundry list of environmental groups sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seeking an emergency injunction to stop the removal of the gray wolf from federal protection. An emergency injunction would have put a halt to wolf hunts scheduled to take place in Idaho and Montana. That injunction was not granted and the wolf hunts ensued.
It’s really anybody’s guess as to what Judge Molloy will rule. Science is not followed, precedence is cherry picked and perhaps we would not be having another lawsuit at this level had the USFWS gotten its act together and appealed the first ruling when Judge Molloy blocked the fed’s attempt at delisting.
In short, Molloy will do pretty much as he darn well pleases, as has been the case in past wolf court cases. The courts have shown American citizens that federal promises mean nothing; that actions such as this one to introduce wolves into the Northern Rocky Mountains resembles nothing remotely similar to the plans and promises laid out by the USFWS.
Here are a few reminders of the “helter-skelter” kind of court justice we have seen as it pertains to wolves:
1. In July of 2008, the United States Ninth District Court of Appeals voted unanimously that judges needed to base their wildlife decisions on science. That all sounded well-intentioned by what did it really mean?
2. Shortly after Barack Obama was elected President, he announced that he wanted to “restore the scientific process to its rightful place at the heart of the Endangered Species Act”. And that too sounded well-intentioned and only time would tell just what was on his mind. Just last November we quickly learned that President Obama meant that he would use he and his cronies’ “science” to decide matters pertaining to science, such as climate change.
3. So forget science when it comes to Molloy’s ruling. But we knew that from before. In 2008, when Molloy granted a temporary injunction to place the wolf back under federal protection, his 40-page ruling showed us that he was a willing and eager participant to play the moving-the-goal-post game. Environmentalists created some new science never discussed or considered as an integral part of wolf introduction and Molloy took the bait claiming that in order to have full “recovery” of a wolf species there had to be proof of genetic exchange – in other words interbreeding between distinct packs.
4. Let’s also not forget Judge Molloy’s ruling on grizzly bears. Judge Molloy basically and completely disregarded the science presented in court by the USFWS concerning grizzly bears and opted to use his own version of science, presumably to better fit his agenda – we can only assume.
5. While Judge Molloy and his band of merry environmentalists where doing their best at making a mockery of the Endangered Species Act and wildlife science in general, Judge Paul Friedman was attempting to redefine the Endangered Species Act himself.
In an attempt by the USFWS to delist the gray wolf in parts of the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment, Judge Paul Friedman’s ruling essentially stated that the USFWS did not have the authority under the Endangered Species Act to create a Distinct Population Segment for the purpose of delisting a species. He remanded the case back to the USFWS telling them to prove to him they have that authority.
For many of us, this ruling also told us that if the USFWS does not have authority to create a Distinct Population Segment in order to delist a species, it also doesn’t have the authority to create any DPS, including all those that were created to this point, i.e. Northern Rocky Mountains DPS, Southwest DPS and Western Great Lakes DPS.
6. It does, however, become even more complicated, not that it really matters to the judges. Because of Judge Friedman’s ruling, the USFWS turned back the hands of time and reestablished old wolf protection boundaries. (See this article and maps.)
This is only a small sampling of the complicated mess the courts have created when it comes to wolves and the Endangered Species Act.
Judge Molloy will hear arguments on June 15 and at some point in time after the hearing will decide whether wolves should be returned to ESA protection or remain as they are. We can’t rule out that the judge may order some kind of modifications to the states’ wolf management plans. We just don’t know.
Molloy, during his ruling on the emergency injunction, indicated that he might entertain the notion, as being presented by the environmentalists, that the USFWS cannot delist wolves in Idaho and Montana and not delist them in Wyoming. Referring back to Judge Friedman’s ruling, this in fact may be the case if the USFWS cannot prove to the courts that they have the authority to create boundaries of any kind in order to create Distinct Population Segments, whether for listing or delisting. If the USFWS doesn’t have their act together (I’m not holding my breath), there is a good possibility Molloy could rule in favor or relisting. If that happens, this could open up a giant can of worms as it would pertain to all future listings of threatened or endangered species of every kind.
While we can all speculate about what might happen and/or why things should be, the judge is going to do what the judge is going to do.
Tom Remington
