BEST LAID PLANS

nancy@wolfwatcher.org

UNTIL POLITICS GOT IN THE WAY

Nancy Warren

USED BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE; DEVELOPED THROUGH CONSENSUS OF DIVERSE STAKEHOLDERS – ALL SIDES OF THE ISSUE; STRONG PUBLIC SUPPORT; WITH AN EMPHASIS ON EDUCATION

A bill to authorize the removal, capture, or lethal control of a gray wolf that is killing, wounding, or biting livestock under certain circumstances; and to promulgate rules.

PA 290 Approved by the Governor on October 6, 2008

MICHIGAN LEGISLATION

A bill to authorize the removal, capture, or lethal control of a gray wolf that is killing, wounding, or biting a dog EVEN ON PUBLIC LANDS; and to promulgate rules

BECAME EFFECTIVE UPON DELISTING

PA 318 Approved by the Governor on December 17, 2008

JANUARY 2012

WISCONSIN ACT 169 SIGNED INTO LAW APRIL 2012 ESTABLISHED A WOLF HUNTING SEASON THAT INCLUDED AN EXCEPTIONALLY LONG SEASON AND THE USE OF DOGS MINNESOTA FOLLOWED WITH A MORE CONSERVATIVE HUNT (NO

DOGS)

UNLIKE WISCONSIN OR MINNESOTA MICHIGAN IS A “REFERENDUM” STATE

Citizens can challenge a new law by gathering signatures (5% total votes cast in last Governor’s election- about161,000) Referendum cannot be exercised if law contains an appropriation Petition must be filed within 90 days of final adjournment of legislature

OR

Citizen Petition to Initiate Legislation (8% total votes cast in last Governor’s election-about 258,088) Legislators have 40 days to enact or reject the proposed law If not enacted, must go before voters as a ballot proposal

MICHIGAN LAGGED BEHIND IN ESTABLISHING A HUNTING SEASON (possibly due to pending referendum) BUT POLITICIANS CONTINUED TO WITTLE AT THE PLAN - PA 487 DECEMBER 27, 2012 ALLOWS FOR PAYMENT OF MISSING LIVESTOCK

Meanwhile, Legislation designating the wolf as a game animal was introduced DNR WILDLIFE CHIEF COMMENT ON PROPOSED WOLF LEGISLATION

“INSTEAD OF ‘SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT’ WE MIGHT WANT SOME SUBSTUTE TERM. THE SCIENCE WILL BE DEBATABLE. WOULD IT BE BETTER TO USE TERM LIKE ‘PROFESSIONAL’ OR SOME SUCH?”

ANYONE OPPOSED TO THE WOLF HUNT MUST BE ANTI-HUNTING

WE NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE LEGISLATURE THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP THE ANTI-HUNTING COMMUNITY FROM HAVING TOO MUCH TIME TO SET UP A REFERENDUM, WE NEED TO PASS THIS LAW THIS YEAR (DECEMBER 2012)

Public Act 520 Signed into law December 28, 2012 (last days of legislative session)

Designated the wolf a game animal and authorized a hunting season

The word “scientific” was Removed from the language of the bill.

The legislature finds that “The sound management of wolf populations…”

ALTHOUGH TOLD, NEITHER DNR WILDLIFE CHIEF NOR LEGISLATIVE LIASION SHARED WITH LEGISLATORS OR NRC THAT:

One producer accounted for 96 of 147 livestock

losses over the three year period used

He failed to utilize good animal husbandry practices

That WS and DNR biologists provided over 2500 hrs

of support to this producer

Michigan's wolf hunt: How half truths, falsehoods

and one farmer distorted reasons for historic hunt

Debate continues around science behind wolf hunt

John Koski, Part 1: Tour the farm with more wolf attacks than anyone in Michigan's Upper Peninsula

MDNR official (Adam Bump) says he misspoke when talking about Michigan wolves

Cattle farmer John Koski, divisive symbol in Michigan wolf hunt, to plead in animal neglect case

IT TOOK THE MEDIA TO EXPOSE

The State Constitution affords individuals to challenge new laws enacted by legislature through the veto referendum process. A coalition of organizations supported the effort. 253,000+ signatures were gathered from every county IN LESS THAN 70 DAYS!

Signatures were certified suspending the hunt. Repeal of PA 520 will appear on the November 2014 ballot for voters to decide.

BUT

PUBLIC ACT 21 SIGNED INTO LAW MAY 8, 2013

GRANTS NRC THE AUTHORITY TO DESIGNATE ANY SPECIES (except mourning doves) A GAME ANIMAL

NRC A POLITICALLY APPOINTED BODY WITH NO SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND ACTED QUICKLY

NRC DECSIONS CANNOT BE CHALLENENGED THROUGH THE VETO REFERENDUM PROCESS

RENDERS THE REFERENDUM INITIATIVE FOR PA 520 MEANINGLESS PUBLIC ACT 21 ALLOWED THE 2013 WOLF HUNT TO MOVE FORWARD

NEARLY 230,000 SIGNATURES WERE COLLECTED

IF CERTIFIED BOTH REFERENDUMS WILL APPEAR ON THE NOVEMBER 2014 BALLOT

BOTH LAWS NEED TO BE REJECTED BY VOTERS OR THE OTHER BECOMES EFFECTIVE

REPEAL WILL NOT IMPEDE ANYONE’S RIGHT TO

HUNT, TRAP OR FISH.

REPEAL WILL NOT AFFECT ANY SPECIES

PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS GAME OR ANY METHODS CURRENTLY ALLOWED REPEAL WILL NOT PREVENT LEGISLATORS FROM DESIGNATING SPECIES AS GAME IN THE FUTURE

REPEAL DOES NOT IMPACT DNR’S ABILITY TO

MANAGE PROBLEM WOLVES OR USE OF LETHAL AND/OR NON-LETHAL METHODS

REPEAL ONLY REMOVES THE DESIGNATION OF THE

WOLF AS A GAME ANIMAL IN MICHIGAN AND REMOVES THE AUTHORITY OF NRC TO DESIGNATE SPECIES AS GAME.

How many wolf hunt questions can be squeezed onto the November ballot?

“PROTECT THE RIGHTS TO HUNT, FISH AND TRAP IN MICHIGAN”

A ballot committee “Citizens for Professional Wildlife

Management” has begun a drive for a citizen-initiated

law called the “Scientific Fish & Wildlife Conservation

Act”

It is a mirror image of Public Act 21 except it also

includes an unnecessary appropriation of $1 million

dollars related to Asian Carp. The purpose of the

appropriation is to prevent challenge through the veto

referendum process.

Allows for free licenses for military personnel

IF ENOUGH SIGNATURES ARE COLLECTED, THE ACT

GOES DIRECTLY TO LEGISLATORS FOR PASSAGE. IT

DOESN’T REQUIRE THE GOVERNOR’S SIGNATURE

FOR PASSAGE AND DOES NOT GO TO THE VOTERS

UNLESS LEGISLATORS FAIL TO ACT.

WOLF HUNTS ARE BEING DRIVEN BY POLITICS NOT SCIENCE

Wisconsin's proposed wolf reduction worries scientists Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism (10/14/13)

WI DNR removed University of Wisconsin Researchers from all Wildlife Advisory Committees, including the Wolf Committee

Dr. Rolf Peterson "Wolf hunting by the public is not about solving problems, for the most part. It’s about people’s desire to kill wolves for whatever reason that might be“

Michigan Radio December 2012

Does wolf hunt reduce livestock losses? Maybe not, lawmakers are told - Dr. Adrian Treves "We do not have any experimental studies of that question ... So the strict scientific answer is, We don't know.“ Minnesota Legislative Hearing

MICHIGAN’S WOLF MANAGEMENT COUNCIL TOP DOWN PROCESS DECISIONS MADE IN LANSING THEN ATTEMPT MADE TO JUSTIFY NO CONSENSUS NO WORKING THROUGH SOLUTIONS

IS THERE A WAY TO DISCUSS WOLF MANAGEMENT WITHOUT POLITICS GETTING IN THE WAY??

DNR funding must be reformed if non - hunters are to have any say (There is public support for revisions to Pittman-Robertson funding)

Hunters Pitted against Non-Hunters Not a hunter rights or gun issue

But, politicians fear their NRA rating

EDUCATION TIPS TO AVOID CONFLICT (Warn about feeding bears but not wolves)

POSITIVE ASPECTS OF WOLVES

COUNTER MISINFORMATION THROUGH NETWORKING (Everyone’s responsibility)

PROMOTE ECOTOURISM International Wolf Center adds about $5.5 million directly or indirectly annually to the local economy

PARTNER WITH NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT WE CAN USE TO COUNTER MISINFORMATION DATA SHOULD BE READILY AVAILABLE & POSTED TO THE WEB MOST FOIA REQUESTS SHOULD BE UNNECESSARY REFER TO PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER WHEN ANY ONE INTEREST GROUP PULLS TOO HARD THE WOLF WILL FALL

POLITICALLY BASED MANAGEMENT DOES LITTLE TO PROTECT THE ECOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF WOLVES AND DOES NOT INCREASE TOLERANCE.

RATHER, IT RELIES ON FEAR,

DISTORTIONS AND EMBELLISHED STORIES THUS GIVING THE FALSE IMPRESSION THAT THE HUNTING OF WOLVES IS NEEDED TO KEEP THE PUBLIC SAFE

THANK YOU

www.wolfwatcher.org