Quote Originally Posted by JRedig View Post
How is it that the USFWS (UNITED STATES) can declare a species that predominantly thrives on Canadian soil, threatened?
Damn good question.

The ESA targets populations -which are defined on an ad hoc basis. In this case, they defined the population on the Queen Charlotte Islands, of Canada, as endangered and the population on Vancouver Island, CA as threatened.

As the US has no jurisdiction over either of these distinct populations, I dont understand what the point was.

My underlying worry is that the camel's nose is now under the tent...and the conservation groups that were pushing this will now seek to add SE Alaskan and Washington populations to the list, because their real goal - as it has been all along - is to get the chainsaws out of the woods.

I love forest conservation...but this is NOT the right way to go about it.