Latest news with #CaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Lifestyle
- Yahoo
Letters to the Editor: California's wolves present a complicated problem for ranchers and plenty of opinions
To the editor: The call by California ranchers to kill endangered wolves in response to livestock losses is concerning and counterproductive ('Killing wolves remains a crime in California. But a rebellion is brewing,' May 30). Lethal measures undermine years of conservation progress made for a species still in recovery. Wolves play a crucial role in maintaining healthy ecosystems. The resurgence of wolves in California signifies a positive step toward ecological balance after their near eradication. Protections under the California Endangered Species Act are in place to ensure the species' continued recovery and to promote coexistence strategies. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Wolf-Livestock Compensation Program, which not only compensates for direct losses but also supports nonlethal deterrent measures, should be expanded and at least partly funded by those that profit off our public lands, such as the Cattlemen's Assn. and corporations such as Tyson, JBS and Cargill. Other Western states allow killing wolves indiscriminately. California must set the example where nature is the priority, not industries that disproportionately contribute to climate change and degrade ecosystems. Judie Mancuso, Laguna BeachThis writer is founder and president of animal advocacy nonprofit Social Compassion in Legislation. .. To the editor: I am an environmentally concerned citizen, but it just seems the aggressive wolves in Northern California need to have their fear of human beings restored. Common sense tells me that the ranchers should be allowed to clip a few here and there. Mike Sovich, Glendale .. To the editor: This article made me wonder why cattlemen don't put several donkeys into their herd of cattle. Donkeys can bond with the cattle, and they are smart and capable of helping keep wolves from attacking them. It would be a natural way to reduce or eliminate the threat. Deborah Sheflin, Norco .. To the editor: The most prolific cattle killers are not the wolves, as the article states, but the barbaric industry that slaughters tens of millions of these gentle beings annually just so we can buy cheap burgers. When a wolf pack kills what is now easy prey, it's so an endangered species can survive. If we hadn't decimated the habitat that supported a healthy wildlife population, then this conflict wouldn't exist. Tim Viselli, La Cañada Flintridge .. To the editor: Wolves, a native species, roamed these lands for hundreds of thousands of years and are returning after a brief human-caused interruption. Ranchers raise cattle, a nonnative species, on public lands under inexpensive grazing permits subsidized by taxpayers. Even with wolves, the ranchers have a great deal. Thomas Bliss, Los Angeles This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
03-06-2025
- Lifestyle
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: California's wolves present a complicated problem for ranchers and plenty of opinions
To the editor: The call by California ranchers to kill endangered wolves in response to livestock losses is concerning and counterproductive ('Killing wolves remains a crime in California. But a rebellion is brewing,' May 30). Lethal measures undermine years of conservation progress made for a species still in recovery. Wolves play a crucial role in maintaining healthy ecosystems. The resurgence of wolves in California signifies a positive step toward ecological balance after their near eradication. Protections under the California Endangered Species Act are in place to ensure the species' continued recovery and to promote coexistence strategies. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Wolf-Livestock Compensation Program, which not only compensates for direct losses but also supports nonlethal deterrent measures, should be expanded and at least partly funded by those that profit off our public lands, such as the Cattlemen's Assn. and corporations such as Tyson, JBS and Cargill. Other Western states allow killing wolves indiscriminately. California must set the example where nature is the priority, not industries that disproportionately contribute to climate change and degrade ecosystems. Judie Mancuso, Laguna BeachThis writer is founder and president of animal advocacy nonprofit Social Compassion in Legislation. .. To the editor: I am an environmentally concerned citizen, but it just seems the aggressive wolves in Northern California need to have their fear of human beings restored. Common sense tells me that the ranchers should be allowed to clip a few here and there. Mike Sovich, Glendale .. To the editor: This article made me wonder why cattlemen don't put several donkeys into their herd of cattle. Donkeys can bond with the cattle, and they are smart and capable of helping keep wolves from attacking them. It would be a natural way to reduce or eliminate the threat. Deborah Sheflin, Norco .. To the editor: The most prolific cattle killers are not the wolves, as the article states, but the barbaric industry that slaughters tens of millions of these gentle beings annually just so we can buy cheap burgers. When a wolf pack kills what is now easy prey, it's so an endangered species can survive. If we hadn't decimated the habitat that supported a healthy wildlife population, then this conflict wouldn't exist. Tim Viselli, La Cañada Flintridge .. To the editor: Wolves, a native species, roamed these lands for hundreds of thousands of years and are returning after a brief human-caused interruption. Ranchers raise cattle, a nonnative species, on public lands under inexpensive grazing permits subsidized by taxpayers. Even with wolves, the ranchers have a great deal. Thomas Bliss, Los Angeles
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
In rural California, gray wolves are a growing threat demanding attention
The return of gray wolves to rural California may be viewed by some as an ecological milestone, but for families in these regions, it has ushered in a troubling new reality: the erosion of a basic sense of safety. Parents who once let their children roam freely on family ranches are now keeping them close, concerned about the growing presence of wolves. Everyday routines, like walking to the school bus stop or playing outside, are being reevaluated as safety concerns take priority. Opinion These concerns are grounded in fact: California is now home to seven confirmed gray wolf packs spread across Plumas, Lassen, Shasta, Tehama, Siskiyou and Tulare counties, with additional groups in Modoc and Sierra counties and individual wolves dispersing from these packs or nearby states. As the population grows, reports of livestock attacks have increased, with some wolves killing cattle without consuming them — signs of territorial behavior rather than hunger. According to the most recent data available, in less than six months — from last October to March 16 — 32 confirmed livestock kills have been reported. While the economic toll is significant, the emotional strain on ranching families is deeper, driven by a growing sense of helplessness as wolves have been recorded approaching homes and attacking livestock in daylight. Though no human attacks have occurred, residents worry it's only a matter of time. California law offers little protection to our communities. Under the California Endangered Species Act, wolves cannot be lethally removed unless there is an immediate threat to human life, leaving local officials unable to respond to escalating risk. 'We can't protect our community or their livestock,' said Modoc County Sheriff Tex Dowdy. 'Our hands are tied by state law.' Rural sheriffs currently lack the authority to act, even when wolves exhibit bold or habituated behavior. Unlike mountain lions, which may be removed if deemed an imminent threat, no such authority exists for managing wolves in California, despite their growing impact on rural life. With Modoc, Plumas and Sierra counties declaring local emergencies due to gray wolves, the need for a responsive framework is urgent. Local authorities must be empowered to act with clear legal tools to address dangerous or habituated behavior before a preventable tragedy occurs. Simultaneously, the state should fund non-lethal mitigation strategies like specialized fencing, range riders and advanced livestock protection systems to ease the financial burden on ranchers while reducing conflict. Education and training programs will help communities co-habitate with wolves, protecting families and property without resorting to lethal force. Other Western states have taken more pragmatic paths. In Idaho and Montana, gray wolf populations have continued to grow alongside comprehensive strategies that blend conservation and community protection. These states have embraced tools that help ranchers prevent conflict without defaulting to lethal force, while also allowing local authorities to act swiftly when wolves display aggressive or habituated behavior. California must follow suit, adopting a more grounded, responsive approach that reflects the lived realities of rural residents who are being asked to coexist without adequate support or protection. The return of the gray wolf should not redefine rural life through fear or loss. California must adopt a balanced, practical approach to wolf management that protects ecosystems and rural communities. This includes empowering local authorities to address dangerous behavior, investing in non-lethal deterrents like fencing and range riders, supporting education and training for safe coexistence, and implementing a statewide conflict mitigation plan for consistent, science-based responses. With these tools, California can restore the gray wolf while safeguarding the lives and livelihoods of those who call rural California home. Modoc County Supervisor Geri Byrne represents District 5 and chairs the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC). Sierra County Supervisor Lee Adams represents District 1 and is an RCRC delegate.
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- General
- Yahoo
California's growing wolf population triggers new management phase
SAN FRANCISCO (KRON) — The rising number of wolves in California has prompted the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to shift to 'Phase 2' of its wolf-management plan, the agency announced Wednesday. The new phase allows the CDFW to consider issuing permits for 'less-than-lethal harassment,' like firing guns or nonlethal munitions to scare off wolf packs hunting livestock. Any permit system would have to follow laws set in the California Endangered Species Act and Federal Endangered Species Act. 'Really Stupid Park': SF commuters use Great Highway park-naming contest to vent The new phase also prompts the CDFW to create an online tool for tracking GPS-collared wolves in the state. The CDFW will also publish its first annual report outlining the conservation and management of California wolves from 2015 to 2024. These changes are expected to occur in the coming weeks and months. 'This tool will greatly facilitate CDFW's efforts, as guided by the Conservation Plan, to provide timely information regarding wolf activity in the vicinity of livestock production,' the CDFW said. '… In the first part of 2025, CDFW has been able to collar and release 12 gray wolves in Northern California. There are now more satellite-collared wolves in California than ever before, which is expected to improve understanding and management of the species in the state.' Wolves naturally reentered California from Oregon in 2011. Wolf populations were wiped out in the region in the early 1900s and were reintroduced in Idaho in 1995 and 1996. By 2008, descendants of wolves reintroduced in Idaho began to recolonize Northeast Oregon, and ultimately Northern California. There are currently seven confirmed wolf packs in California: The Beyem Seyo pack, Diamond pack, Harvey pack, Ice Cave pack, Lassen pack, Whaleback pack and Yowlumni pack. These packs mostly inhabit Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta and Tehama counties. However, the Yowlumni pack is found in the southern Sierra Nevada. The success of these packs prompted CDFW officials to enact Phase 2 of the state's wolf conservation plan. 'Five of the seven packs met CDFW's definition of a 'breeding pair' in 2024, meaning two adults and two or more pups surviving until the end of the year,' the CDFW said. 'Because CDFW has documented at least four breeding pairs for two consecutive years, California is now in 'Phase 2' of wolf management, as specified by the state's 2016 Conservation Plan for Gray Wolves in California.' Chevron to cut 600 jobs at former HQ in San Ramon The CDFW said that it is actively monitoring and tracking gray wolves in the state, investigating wolf deaths and wolf-related livestock attacks, and working to reduce conflicts between humans and gray wolves. In the last five years, CDFW officers have conducted eight investigations into gray wolf deaths. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
USA Today
07-02-2025
- General
- USA Today
California Delta smelt controversy ranges from lawsuits to Trump executive orders
California Delta smelt controversy ranges from lawsuits to Trump executive orders Show Caption Hide Caption Trump administration pulls funding for endangered CA fish Donald Trump has criticized conservation efforts concerning the delta smelt as hampering California firefighting capabilities. Fox - Ktvu For a small fish found only in the San Francisco Estuary, the Delta smelt has caused much controversy over the years, ranging from lawsuits to executive orders. What is the history of the Delta smelt? In 1993, the smelt was listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act and the California Endangered Species Act, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife website. The slender fish, which ranges from 2 inches to more than 4 inches long, was upgraded to endangered in 2009. The smelt used to be the most abundant fish in the estuary and numbered in the millions before state and federal projects began exporting large quantities of Delta water to San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and Southern California water agencies, according to a 2021 Stockton Record article. The Delta smelt has declined to the point of near-extinction in the wild due to several factors, including big changes to the Delta ecosystem resulting from water exports, the impact of invasive species, and drought, according to the 2021 article. The fish is also capable of shutting down massively powerful water pumps near Tracy that suck water out of the Delta and into the south San Joaquin Valley and Southern California, according to a 2002 Stockton Record article. The state and federal water-export pumps on the Delta are routinely slowed or stopped when the smelt or adolescent Chinook salmon get near the pumps, which can kill the fish. Lawsuits resulted between water agencies and environmental groups over the shutdowns. How is Trump getting involved with the smelt? More recently, President Donald Trump's administration is planning to cut funding for a breeding program created to ensure the fish's survival, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Last month, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation informed UC Davis scientists they would not renew financing to maintain a refuge population of smelt for reintroduction and research in Contra Costa County, according to the publication. The funding is set to end on Feb. 28, but no reason was given. The news is not unprecedented. On Jan. 20, Trump issued an executive order titled "Putting People Over Fish: Stopping Radical Environmentalism to Provide Water to Southern California." The order mandated water from Northern California's Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, one of the state's primary water sources, to be redirected south. It's seen as an attempt to change the smelt's environmental protections, and it criticizes the state's efforts to battle the raging and deadly wildfires that wreaked havoc across greater Los Angeles. The executive order comes after Trump initially promised in 2016 to redirect California's water runoff south to help farmers and growers in the Central Valley. In 2020, then-President Trump issued a federal memorandum to redirect millions of gallons of water. However, California Gov. Gavin Newsom successfully sued in federal court to limit the flow from the Delta. Trump vs Newsom feud Trump criticized Newsom over the smelt in a Jan. 8 Truth Social post. "Governor Gavin Newscum refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water, from excess rain and snow melt from the North, to flow daily into many parts of California, including the areas that are currently burning in a virtually apocalyptic way," Trump said. "He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt by giving it less water (it didn't work!), but didn't care about the people of California." Brian Sobel, a longtime political analyst based in the San Francisco Bay Area, said Trump is using the executive order to argue that California politics, especially around water, is dysfunctional. The debate dates back to when Ronald Reagan was governor before he became president. Fresno State University Political Science Professor Tom Holyoke, who specializes in western water policy, explained to USA Today last month that scientists believe pumping water out of the Delta is mainly responsible for the smelt's near extinction. As a result, Holyoke said the Endangered Species Act requires the government to do everything possible to stop the species from going extinct. Since the Delta smelt, a food source for larger fish including salmon and sea bass as well as sea lions is near extinction, the government has been pumping less water out to save the fish for about 20 years, Holyoke added. Dan Bacher and Audrey Cooper contributed to this report. Wes Woods II covers West County for the Ventura County Star. Reach him at 805-437-0262 or @JournoWes.
