Wolves are not the only large carnivores incorporated into the strategy to REWILD NORTH AMERICA.
As a result of multiple lawsuits filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been forced to draft a Jaguar Recovery Plan for the Southwest United States.
Here’s an article explaining how this happened:
Endangered U.S. Jaguars to Get Critical Habitat, Recovery Plan
TUCSON, Arizona, January 12, 2010 (ENS) – After years of neglect and indifference, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced today that it will designate critical habitat for endangered jaguars in the United States and develop a jaguar recovery plan. The Service will propose areas for critical habitat designation by January 2011, according to an announcement in the Federal Register.
The reconsideration of the Bush-era policy was required by a court order in the last of three lawsuits brought since 2004 by the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit organization based in Tucson.
“With critical habitat designation and a recovery plan, jaguars will have a chance to roam once again through the southwestern lands they’ve inhabited since time immemorial,” said Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity.
[Click here to read the rest of the article.]
The Center for Biological Diversity charges that the current 2012 proposed USFWS Jaguar Recovery Plan which recommends setting aside 838,232 acres in Arizona and New Mexico as core Jaguar Recovery areas, does not go far enough to protect critical habitat for the big cats. The CBD has submitted an alternate proposal and is preparing to file another round of lawsuits should the USFWS fail to incorporate millions of additional acreage in Arizona and New Mexico into the final Jaguar Recovery Plan.
The 2012 USFWS proposed “Rule” for Jaguar Recovery can be viewed here.
The much more extensive Center for Biological Diversity’s proposed Jaguar Recovery Plan can be viewed here. Be sure to scroll down to view the CBC’s Jaguar Recovery Habitat map showing just how much of each state (roughly 50-60%) the REWILDERS want to see preserved as core areas for Jaguars.
But don’t take your eyes off wolves. Due to their ability to re-populate diverse habitats rapidly, the Grey Wolf remains the primary “keystone species” pushing CONTINENTAL SCALE REWILDING. On Oct. 3, 2012, the California Department of Fish and Game voted unanimously to place grey wolves under immediate State protection pending the development of a wolf recovery plan for the northern portion of California and the Sierra Nevada range.
“California needs a road map for recovering wolves,” said Noah Greenwald, a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity. “Wolf populations in neighboring states will continue to expand, and more wolves will almost certainly show up in California. These wolves will need protection when they arrive.”
Click here to read the full CBD press release.
My next post will outline the concepts and values defining “responsible stewardship” as compared to the reckless endangerment and anti-human agenda of the Rewilding proponents. I’m also working on a multi-media presentation for schools, community groups and other parties who may be interested in sharing this information. Stay tuned.
6 thoughts on “REWILDING ARIZONA – 2012 Jaguar Recovery Plan”
Beautiful animals, until one eats you! However, the sacrament (whoever is eaten) must be sacrificed for this restoration, just ask the four dead in Bengazi, but wait until these “enlightened ones” figure how to restore T-Rex!
There are advocates for Pleistocene REWILDING, but I don’t think anyone is looking as far back as the Jurassic, at least not yet anyway.
Under the supervision of a professional wildlife biologist I researched the citations in the Federal Register digging down for the primary data-the original records underlying the critical habitat proposal. Scientifically speaking, the “habitat” models for Arizona and New Mexico are all built on fatally flawed datasets, so the models are also fatally flawed. The predominant flaw is the data used is predominantly unreliable. The data sets used for modeling habitat are riddled with unverifiable reports; inaccurate reports; unfounded assumptions; unscientific speculation; unacknowledged omissions; and contamination by numerous jaguars of foreign origin that were imported and released for sport hunting by at least three different jaguar hunting guides between 1919 and 1975, yet speculatively all presumed to be “naturally occurring” and almost entirely ignored in the cited “scientific” literature. Our research is documented here – http://www.sacpaaz.org/comments-on-proposed-jaguar-critical-habitat/
Excellent info Cindy, thank you.
Of course the facts really don’t matter to the REWILDING proponents. As you pointed out, what they call “science” is really just their opinions. Dr. Charles Kay pointed out that there’s nothing wrong with people making “value judgments”. The environmentalists cross the line when they cloak their value judgments in scientific terms. Good job calling them on that.
What we have to do is blow up the whole myth of “native” vs. “non-native” species. That is the driving terminology behind the REWILIDING movement. The horse is a good example. While the Spanish brought the first modern horses to the New World, the fossil record of North America is extremely rich with ancient horse bones. Granted, they were a much smaller variety, but certainly of the same species.
Another good example are “native” Americans, more accurately referred to as “First Nations” people. Most anthropologists would argue that the first humans to colonize America came across the Bering Sea land bridge some 12,000 yrs ago. That makes the Navaho and Apache an “invasive species” just like the Europeans who came later. And by the way, humans are all the same species, so to make a distinction between varieties in order to determine who belongs here or not is patently unscientific and racist.
This is why I cringe when I hear people call them “Canadian” wolves, as if that really matters. It doesn’t.
Choosing to promote one species over another is an arbitrary decision based on value judgments. Unless we frame the argument in terms of contrasting “worldviews” we won’t get anywhere. Winners and losers are not determined by science, but by who can generate the most votes. At this point, we’re losing in the court of public opinion, and it’s not even close. Until more people experience the consequences of REWILDING, i.e. higher food prices, higher unemployment, increased spread of disease, and the destruction of the economy and private property rights…it just won’t matter to them.
They just found “another 20 million acres”. It’s a miracle!