Majority say species still deserves protection

October 9, 2016 by Eric Tegethoff, Oregon News Service

PORTLAND, Ore. – A majority of Oregonians believe hunting wolves is no way to manage them and that the species still deserves endangered species protections, according to a new poll conducted by Mason Dixon Polling and Research.

More than 70 percent of Oregon voters who responded said nonlethal prevention methods should be attempted before officials are allowed to kill wolves.

Two-thirds said wolves don’t pose such an economic threat to the cattle industry that killing them is required.

Arron Robertson, communications coordinator for the conservation group Oregon Wild, said proposed changes to the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission’s wolf conservation plan could make it easier to kill wolves.

“What are the conditions in which the agency essentially deputizes hunters to go out and do wildlife management?” he asked. “And what we found in this poll was that Oregonians disapproved of the kind of management tools that the agency was proposing.”

Respondents to the poll spanned the political spectrum, and 30 percent came from rural Oregon.

The poll was conducted at the end of September. As of the end of 2015, the commission said there were about 110 wolves in Oregon.

According to the poll, 63 percent disagree with the state’s removal of endangered species protections for Oregon’s wolves.

Robertson’s group, along with the Center for Biological Diversity and Cascadia Wildlands, are challenging this decision in court, saying the science behind the decision is flawed.

“There were a number of scientists that commented that the science wasn’t rigorous enough and they had a number of concerns and those concerns were never addressed because there was no revision,” Robertson stressed. “So the decision, which was based on a report that was never peer-reviewed, was in violation of Oregon law.”

Last Friday, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission held a meeting open to the public in La Grande on proposed changes to the state’s wolf management plan, and will hold another meeting on Dec. 2 in Salem.

---

Source

 

Advertisement

Dokument för nedladdning

http://www.rovdjur.se/viewNavMenu.do?menuID=46

2013-09-19

I regeringens proposition om en ”hållbar rovdjurspolitik” framställs minimala rovdjursstammar och jakt på tusentals rovdjur som en lösning på landsbygdens negativa utveckling. Men faktum är att rovdjur är ett förhållandevis litet bekymmer för människor på landsbygden. Det visar en Sifo-undersökning som Svenska Rovdjursföreningen beställt. Endast sex procent av landsbygdsborna uppgav att rovdjur påverkade deras vardag negativt.

Svenska Rovdjursföreningen har via Sifo frågat människor boende på landsbygden om vilka faktorer som påverkar deras vardag mest negativt. Åtta olika alternativ presenterades och det gick att kryssa i flera av dem. Störst var missnöjet med kollektivtrafiken och mobil/bredbandstäckningen, som listades som negativa faktorer av 39 respektive 38 procent av de tillfrågade. Förekomst av rovdjur var det minsta bekymret. Endast sex procent uppgav förekomst av björn, järv, lo eller varg som en negativ faktor.

–  Att alla människor på landsbygden skulle lida svårt av rovdjuren är en myt som sprids av jägarkåren, säger Ann Dahlerus, generalsekreterare i Svenska Rovdjursföreningen. De politiker som låter rovdjursfrågan skymma sikten för landsbygdens verkliga utmaningar gör majoriteten av sina väljare en stor otjänst.

Dubbelt så många män som kvinnor upplever att de blir negativt påverkade av rovdjur. Lågutbildade anser sig vara mer negativt påverkade än snittet. Äldre påverkas mer än yngre.

– I landets mest glesbefolkade områden är det främst äldre män med låg utbildning som bor kvar. Där skyller man ofta avfolkningen på varg men det finns inget som helst stöd i statistiken för att den negativa utvecklingen beror på vargen. Flyttlassen började rulla från glesbygden långt innan vargen
etablerade sig där.

Sverigedemokrater, 12 procent, är de som anser sig påverkas mest negativt av rovdjur, medan endast 1 procent av vänsterpartisterna anser att rovdjur är ett problem. I övrigt är skillnaden mellan partierna liten, mellan 3 och 8 procent.

– Det är förhållandesvis få som någonsin sett en varg och forskning visar att det som påverkar människors mest är vad andra tycker, även om de inte heller har någon egen erfarenhet av varg. Stämningen på orten där man bor spelar alltså en stor roll för hur man upplever förekomsten av rovdjur, säger Ann Dahlerus.

För frågor:
Ann Dahlerus, generalsekreterare
08-441 41 17
0768-500 653

Ta del av hela undersökningen nedan

Sifo-2013.pdf

Share this:

E&E News, July 17, 2013

Poll finds voter support for wolf protections
By Phil Taylor

A majority of voters support allowing wolves to recolonize suitable habitat in the southern Rocky Mountains, California and the Northeast where protections for the predators will soon be lifted, according to a new poll commissioned by the Center for Biological Diversity.

In addition, 47 percent of voters oppose the Interior Department’s proposal to remove Endangered Species Act protections for the animals, compared to 31 percent who support the proposal.

The poll, conducted earlier this month by Democratic-affiliated Public Policy Polling, came one month after the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed delisting wolves in nearly all the lower 48 states, arguing that wolf populations are robust in the northern Rockies and Great Lakes (Greenwire, June 7).

The poll surveyed 1,378 registered voters and had a margin of error of 2.7 points.

“The Obama administration’s plan to strip endangered species protections for wolves clearly doesn’t have the support of most Americans,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species program director at CBD. “The fact is that wolves are wildly popular, and most Americans want to see more wolves in more places.”

An estimated 6,500 wolves currently roam about 5 percent of their historic range, CBD said.

When told that wolves once numbered 2 million in North America, half of the poll respondents said wolves have not yet recovered, while 33 percent said they have recovered.

A full 70 percent agreed that “wolves are a vital part of America’s wilderness and natural heritage.”

The Fish and Wildlife proposal to delist the species everywhere except parts of Arizona and New Mexico is expected to draw a lawsuit from environmental groups.

While the iconic predator has yet to reoccupy suitable habitat in the southern Rockies, the Pacific Northwest and California, wolves “no longer face the threat of extinction” and don’t need federal protections,” FWS Director Dan Ashe said last month.

“We have a vibrant, robust wolf population,” he said.

In the past two years, the species was removed from the endangered species list in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, where wolves number nearly 1,700, and Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, where there are more than 4,000 of the animals.

The decision to delist in most of the remaining lower 48 was strongly supported by Republican lawmakers, Western states, agricultural groups and sportsmen.

Wolves have been found to play a beneficial role in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem, where they keep game species in check and allow the regrowth of important plants and trees. But they also prey on animals like elk, which are important to hunters, and livestock.

Copyright © 2013 E&E Publishing, LLC

.

This article originally appeared here.