By Will Houston
The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 during its meeting today to take no action on a proposed letter to the state that would support listing gray wolves under the California Endangered Species Act.
Only one gray wolf sighting has been confirmed in the state since 1924 after the population was driven out by humans, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The male wolf — named OR-7 or “Journey” — first entered California in February 2011 after leaving its pack in northeastern Oregon. The wolf is currently residing in southern Oregon, where it has supposedly found a mate, according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Third District Supervisor Mark Lovelace — who cast the dissenting vote — said that the letter would be given to the state before the Fish and Game Commission makes a possible decision on the listing at its June 4 meeting in Fortuna.
“The core issue is not whether wolves are good or bad,” he said. “One of the main things discussed is to initiate a planning process early, identify habitats, to work proactively to address potential conflicts. Get ahead of it before it becomes a truly emergent situation where we see regulations thrown together quickly.”
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service currently lists the wolf as an endangered species, but is considering a delisting due to increasing populations from recovery programs.
Several members of the public said that the county should not support reintroducing a species known to cause problems. Local rancher John Rice spoke out against the letter, saying that gray wolf populations in other states are a danger to livestock and have reduced populations of other forms of wildlife.
“First of all, if you make it an endangered species, you can’t even shoot that wolf if it’s eating your dog, your cattle,” Rice said. “If a wolf population is established in northwestern California, it could be devastating as they move into the ranching community. This is a serious thing for agriculture people.”
Others, like Environmental Protection Information Center Director of Development Natalynne DeLapp, argued that the listing would help address those very issues.
“Wolves are highly adaptable,” she said “They can restore the ecosystem’s balance. If we create the proper management structures, I know we can find solutions.”
With the federal government discussing a delisting of the large canine and the current discussions within the state, 2nd District Supervisor Estelle Fennell said the letter may be a premature response.
“There is a scientific debate of listing the gray wolf in California,” Fennell said. “The question is does one wolf make a population? We’re at the stage now that there is not an immediate issue.”
On a map created by the Fish and Wildlife Department showing the historical records of gray wolf sightings in California, Lovelace said that there is no record of gray wolves ever being in Humboldt County.
First District Supervisor and board Chairman Rex Bohn said he was “absolutely opposed” to the letter.
“I think the only way I would support this letter is to change the word ‘support’ to ‘oppose,'” he said. “I think we’re pooping on our neighbors over in Modoc and Trinity counties if we tell them how to run their own backyards. We’re listing an animal that is reappearing, not disappearing.”
With one week before the June 3 state primary election, 5th District Supervisor and candidate Ryan Sundberg implied that Lovelace had put the item on the agenda as a political move.
“I maybe thought this was put on for political reasons to make us look bad,” Sundberg said. “Maybe I still do. I wouldn’t be comfortable with sending this.”
The state Fish and Game Commission is scheduled to discuss listing the gray wolf at the River Lodge Conference Center in Fortuna at 8:30 a.m. on June 4.
Earlier in the meeting, the board voted to implement last week’s decision to award the Willow Creek waste franchise to Eel River Disposal and Resource Recovery after being ordered to do so by the state Superior Court in April. In the decision at its May 20 meeting, the board voted 3-2 — with Sundberg and 4th District Supervisor Virginia Bass dissenting — to award the franchise to the company after a two-year lawsuit.
The lawsuit — filed by Eel River Disposal — claimed that the county violated state regulations on competitive bidding processes by awarding the Willow Creek waste franchise to Tom’s Trash in 2011, rather than the lowest bidder, which was determined to be Eel River Disposal by the county Public Works Department. After an appellate court review, the county was ordered to award the franchise to Eel River Disposal or make findings that using the competitive bidding process would negatively affect the health, safety and well-being of the community.
With the board receiving over 600 signatures and over 100 letters from the Willow Creek community in support of keeping Tom’s Trash, Lovelace said he recognized the broad community support for the company, but that the board has an obligation.
“Last Tuesday’s decision was one of the harder decisions I’ve had to make up here,” Lovelace said. “Our hands are bound by the law at times. If there is a benefit that comes out of this, Tom’s Trash sets a very, very high bar that Eel River Disposal is going to have to meet.”
The new 10-year contract was approved after a brief discussion in a 4-1 vote with Sundberg dissenting.