Search Our Site

Search form


Priscilla Feral Slams the Defenders of Wildlife "Settlement" for Selling Wolves Short

March 23, 2011 | Wolves / Hunting & Wildlife Management

For Immediate Release:

Photo Credit: Gordon Haber

Darien, Connecticut-This week, word got around that Defenders of Wildlife-together With Sierra Club, NRDC and several others-proposed a settlement agreement, negotiated with the Department of Interior. They claim 'anti-wolf sentiment' would grow if they held the line-denoting a political compromise. Yet if this settlement is approved by the Montana court, wolves will be "delisted"; Idaho and Montana will take the cue and kill. Friends of Animals stands in solidarity with the advocacy group WildEarth Guardians in opposing this settlement. We supported the August 2010 federal judge's ruling that put wolves in the Northern Rockies back on the Endangered Species List. We do NOT support the settlement that seeks to stay Judge Molloy's decision and paves the way for wolf delisting.

How could "anti-wolf sentiment" get any worse when Idaho's Gov. Butch Otter thinks "respect" and "hate" for wolves are equivalent? (Interviewed by The Idaho Statesman, Otter once boasted of planning to join a wolf trophy hunt, saying: "You can still hate them and respect their cunning and their place in nature.") For the 1500 wolves roaming Montana, Wyoming and Idaho, state control would be a death sentence. And if the court accepts the settlement, state wildlife agencies will replace federal protections as the dominant policy makers. Friends of Animals president Priscilla Feral called the settlement "revolting," adding: "If that's a settlement, how bad could losing the lawsuit be? At least one could say they objected to the ruling and would get back to wrangling with Congress. They've thrown the wolves to Montana and Idaho." John Horning, Executive Director of WildEarth Guardians, said: "The multitude of species affected when bad legal precedent is set results in a loss for all of us. If wolves are sacrificed for politics, who's next? Grizzly bears? Polar bears? Prairie dogs?" About 250,000 wolves once presided over their lands in what are now the lower 48 states. But ranchers have reviled and tormented them, and hunters want to kill them-and their prey, including elk. By the 1970s, the population was devastated-down to several hundred. Today, after nearly four decades of inconsistent protection under the Endangered Species Act, some 5000 wolves survive in the lower 48 states. Friends of Animals will do what our supporters have come to expect: stand firm for wolves, and the biocommunities of Yellowstone and the Northern Rockies that have bounced back because of them. We support wolves roaming free from Alaska across the northern U.S. border to the southern border and beyond. And to our members and supporters who do NOT support the products of animal agribusiness, thank you for your big-picture awareness. You know that ranchers in Montana and Idaho already are allowed to shoot wolves that kill or "harass" their cattle, sheep or the other animals they breed for profit. Rather than pay to compensate and appease ranchers for losses by predation, you help us to erode the competition over land at its cause.


from reading this, it doesnt make sense for defenders of wildlife to agree to delisting, mostly because all there paperwork they mail out says they protect the wolfs. i wonder if the day will ever come when people learn to just leave these animals alone. ive been around them for years, they dont bother anyone,some people need to go get a life and stop trying to get there rocks off killing these animals, there more afraid of us than we are of them. i just hope the old saying what comes around, goes around is true, and the wolf gets his justice some day.

I do not support the settlement agreement which paves the way for wolf delisting. These are magnificent animals of nature and we need to leave them alone. I have no idea how anyone can justify slaughtering these animals.

DUSTIN, IT WAS EARTHJUSTICE. i asked them twice to explain it in English because it made no sense. they eventually said the same thing for the third time but trying very hard to be vague but in a less obvious way. they said the coalition was backed into a corner and all decided to go separate ways-- so then ETHICALLY they could no longer represent this situation and are going to Washington instead. it still makes no sense to me why they couldn't represent those who still wanted to fight. i just get the feeling they are not telling me something, mostly cuz i was pulling teeth to get any answer. haven't emailed back yet, i want to word it right. hope this helps.............

The time is upon us, and the conditions have set the dictate...words must now be replaced by deeds, inaction by action, pacifism by aggression. Just as Paul Watson left Greenpeace when the latter lost it's backbone to pursue a more direct course to protect the whales of this planet, so must we now plot a course of direct interception to stop those who would kill the wolves, OUR wolves, for whatever reason, regardless of their political leaning or place in the social structure of our political system. Just because you hold office, does not make you exempt from the will of the people. And the day of reckoning for the special interest groups who believe that this is their land to do with it what they will, is upon us, and Justice, however brutal she becomes, will prevail.

I would encourage everyone to contact your representatives in Washington D.C. and let them know you do not support this betrayal by DOW, NRDC and the others. The hearing is today in Montana before Judge Molloy. Even if the judge denies this the battle to save wolves will continue. Also please put your financial support to the groups that refused to settle, Friends of the Clearwater, WWP, Alliance for the Wild Rockies ... And thank you Friends of Animals for standing with those of us who continue the fight. We will never give up. Someday, maybe that fact will get through to those who hate wolves simply because they are wolves. I would also encourage everyone to give up eating beef, or any meat for that matter.

i am trying to get a straight answer out of them but they sent me a paste of the very thing i was confused about, didnt even read it!!!!! now i know why.........this stinks and thanks so much for the real truth. i will remember this a loooooooooooooong time.

Hi @marahd, Who did you try to call, and what did you ask (out of curiosity)? If you are referencing Defender's "explanation" of things, I think it's intentionally vague. How is giving up on the wolves defensible?

What ever man does to a voiceless animal will have to Answer to God on Judgment Day. REMEMBER THE 10 COMMANDMENTS " THOU SHALT NOT KILL " GOD WILL INTERVENE WHEN IT COMES TO HIS NEWBORNS>>> his precious babies that he has made to make the ecosystem better and to have his creatures roam freely so lets all remember. WE SERVE AN AWESOME GOD that will intervene .....

Thanks for the information! I do hope somehow that there will be a miracle happen for the wolves. People are so uneducated where they are concerned!! We need to teach more of Nature in our schools so that adults grow up and are aware of the true nature of the wild!



Add new comment