3 states head to court to keep control over wolves
Environmental
Three states are defending their ability to sustain a gray wolf population in the Northern Rockies, asking to be heard in a federal lawsuit that seeks to return the wolves to the endangered species list.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided to remove the gray wolf from the list in March, saying the species had recovered from near-extermination in the region. That transferred wolf management to Idaho, Wyoming and Montana, which are planning what would be the first public hunts in decades.
The lawsuit filed last week by 12 environmental and animal rights groups seeks to block the hunts, but the three states that filed paperwork with the court Monday and Tuesday hope to fend off the litigation so the hunts can proceed.
Officials from the states said Tuesday that they can be trusted to sustain wolves without federal oversight. The hunts, they said, are needed in part to control wolf packs that have been killing an increasing number of livestock.
"People have supported wolf recovery on the belief that being successful would mean a return of state authority over the animal," said Bob Lane, chief legal counsel for Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks.
At least 39 wolves already have been killed in the region since federal protection was lifted. Those deaths came under more relaxed rules for ranchers responding to livestock conflicts and a shoot-on-site designation for the predator across most of Wyoming.
An estimated 1,500 wolves now roam the three states. Federal biologists say that is much more than needed to sustain the species, but critics say only a larger population could prevent inbreeding and offset the impact of hunting.
Related listings
-
Justices Reject Exxon's Appeal In Cleanup Case
Environmental 04/22/2008The U.S. Supreme Court let stand a $112 million punitive damage award against Exxon Mobil over radioactive contamination at an industrial site in Louisiana. The world's largest oil company had unsuccessfully argued that the award exceeded constitutio...
-
Erin Brockovich leads class action against Alcoa
Environmental 03/01/2008American anti-pollution campaigner Erin Brockovich has announced that at least two American law firms are prepared to pursue Alcoa in the United States on behalf of residents who live near its alumina refineries south of Perth, at Wagerup, Pinjarra a...
-
Court rejects California limits on ship emissions
Environmental 02/29/2008[##_1L|1396189939.jpg|width="120" height="88" alt=""|_##]A federal appeals court Wednesday rejected a state regulation that reduced emissions from ships, dealing a blow to California's attempt to combat one of the major sources of smog-forming pollut...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.