Exposing the Big Game

Forget Hunters' Feeble Rationalizations and Trust Your Gut Feelings: Making Sport of Killing Is Not Healthy Human Behavior

Exposing the Big Game

Category Archives: Wolves

Federal judge rejects some wolf kills in Wash. state

Posted on by
Reply

528624c939a88_preview-620

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Federal-judge-rejects-some-wolf-kills-in-Wash-state-363161961.html

By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS, Associated Press Published: Dec 21, 2015

Gray wolf (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service photo)

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) – A federal judge has rejected plans by a federal agency to assist in the killing of problem wolves in Washington state.

U.S. District Court Judge Robert Bryan of Tacoma, Washington, issued a summary judgment last Thursday against the low-profile agency, known as Wildlife Services.

Bryan said the agency should have prepared a more in-depth environmental analysis of its agreement with the state of Washington to help kill problem wolves.

Bryan ruled in favor of conservation groups that sued the agency, concluding that an environmental assessment prepared by the agency was flawed.

Wolves were hunted to extinction in Washington at the turn of the last century. But they started migrating from neighboring areas in the early 2000s and there are an estimated 16 wolf packs containing 68 wolves in the state, all in eastern Washington.

Wildlife Services failed to create a full environmental impact statement about the proposal to reduce wolf conflicts in the state, Bryan ruled.

Wildlife Services is a program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture that is responsible for controlling the number of wolves, grizzly bears, coyotes and other wild animals. Officials at the agency didn’t have a response on the ruling.

Environmental groups cheered the ruling.

“It is long past time that we base wildlife management decisions on the best available science, not on antiquated, anti-wolf rhetoric and myth,” said Bethany Cotton of WildEarth Guardians.

Environmental groups contend the environmental assessment failed to address the full ecological impacts of killing wolves in Washington, including impacts on wolves in neighboring states and on other animals, such as grizzly bears and Canada lynx.

Wildlife Services has been involved in the killing of wolves in Washington in the past.

In August 2014, Wildlife Services snipers shot from a helicopter and killed the Huckleberry wolf pack’s alpha female. The death of that pack’s breeding female threatened the future of the entire pack, environmental groups contended.

Wildlife Services also advised the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in the 2012 destruction of the Wedge wolf pack in Eastern Washington. In that case, the state agency killed seven wolves after they preyed on livestock.

At the federal level, the state is split into two separate wolf populations. In the eastern third of the state, wolves are considered part of the large Northern Rocky Mountain population, which was removed from the endangered list in 2011. But in the western two-thirds of the state, wolves are considered part of the Pacific Northwest population, which is much smaller and still listed as endangered.

Great News! Wolves Still Considered Endangered

Posted on by
16

 

WOLVES WIN! Endangered gray wolves will remain protected after some members of Congress failed in their attempt to use the government spending bill to remove Endangered Species Act protections last night. http://ejus.tc/1O6PrRm

 This is incredibly good news for the gray wolf, which is just now starting to make a comeback across the United States where it used to roam freely. We cannot stress enoug…h that all of you who made phone calls, signed our petitions and tweeted at your members of congress are responsible for this major win. The endangered gray wolves thank you!

Oregon’s Delisting of Wolves was a Mistake

Posted on by
1

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/11/delisting_wolves_was_a_mistake.html

By George Wuerthner

The recent decision by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission to delist wolves from the state’s Endangered Species Act protection was based on faulty science and political expediency. The biggest problem is with the department’s criteria for delisting — more than four breeding pairs of wolves for three years in a row— is that it fails to ensure full restoration of the wolf across the state. Many outside scientists, including myself, feel the small population of 80 to perhaps as many as 100 wolves statewide is hardily sufficient to guarantee a robust and speedy restoration of the species.

A hundred or fewer wolves may preclude the extinction of the species, but it does not restore the ecological function of the wolf. And restoring the ecological function of the species should be the prime goal of any conservation effort. Precluding extinction is a very low bar and does not serve the people of Oregon, the wolf or our ecosystems.

I did an analysis of the potential for wolf restoration in Oregon back in the 1990s and concluded that the state could easily support 1,500 to 2,000 wolves. Others have reached similar conclusions. Restoring wolves across the state so that they are functional members of the wildlife community should be the goal of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

If, hypothetically, elk were the species under consideration and were protected under the state’s Endangered Species Act, I can almost guarantee you ODFW would want way more than 100 individuals before they would recommend delisting. They would want to see elk restored across the state.

Wolves are in a sense a “keystone” species that influences ecosystem health. Having a token population of wolves is not the same as having a functioning ecosystem member. Wolves not only eliminate weaker prey individuals but can shift habitat use; for instance they can reduce elk and deer foraging on aspen, willows and other browse species in riparian areas. Wolves can also affect the distribution and numbers of other species. Where wolves are present, there are often fewer coyotes. Coyotes kill the smaller Sierra Nevada red fox that is just hanging on in the Cascades. Restoration of wolves could thus assist the recovery of the red fox.

The rush to delist wolves is driven by false perceptions of wolf impacts on livestock and big game populations. Out of 1.3 million cattle and 195,000 sheep in the state, only 114 domestic livestock have been confirmed killed by wolves since the first wolves appeared in the early 2000s. Comparisons between Montana and Oregon are often made by ODFW. Using Montana, in 2014, the state’s 600 or so wolves killed 35 cattle and six sheep out of a total of 2.5 million cattle and 220,000 sheep respectively, By comparison, non-wolf losses accounted for 89,000 deaths. And though six sheep were killed by wolves, some 7,800 sheep died from other causes, like weather.

Wolves are simply not a threat, or even barely a factor, in the economic viability of the livestock industry.

The idea that hunting will be negatively affected across any significant portion of the state is also unlikely. Between 2009 and 2014, all wildlife management units (WMUs) of northeastern Oregon with established wolf packs had increasing elk populations, and two of the four (Imnaha and Snake River) were above the established management objectives for elk since wolves became established (ODFW data).

A similar situation exists in Montana, where elk numbers grew from an estimated 89,000 animals in 1992 (Montana Elk Plan) to 167,000 elk today (Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 2015). If this is what you get with wolf predation, I think most reasonable hunters would agree we could use more wolves in Oregon!

In the end, ODFW capitulated to mythology and false fears of hunters and ranchers without providing context and did not meet its wildlife responsibilities under the public trust doctrine to work diligently for full restoration of the ecological function of the wolf.

528624c939a88_preview-620

Another gray wolf pack identified in Methow Valley

Posted on by
3

http://methowvalleynews.com/2015/12/03/another-gray-wolf-pack-identified-in-methow-valley/

 

by admin on Dec 3, 2015 • 6:25 pm No Comments

Loup Loup Pack confirmed by wildlife officials

Photo courtesy of DavidMoskowitz A wildlife camera captured this photo of a Loup Loup Pack member.

Photo courtesy of DavidMoskowitz

A wildlife camera captured this photo of a Loup Loup Pack member.

By Ann McCreary

The Methow Valley is now home to two gray wolf packs, with a new pack confirmed to be living in territory that includes Loup Loup Pass.

State and federal wildlife officials last week confirmed the presence of the gray wolf pack and said it will be designated the Loup Loup Pack, reflecting the prominent landmark within the wolves’ range.

Wildlife officials also said last week that they are no longer receiving signals from a GPS radio collar on the breeding female of the Lookout Pack, the valley’s other wolf pack. Officials said they don’t know if the collar malfunctioned, or if the wolf died or was killed.

The female was captured and fitted with a collar last June, but the collar stopped transmitting data Oct. 20, said Scott Fitkin, a biologist with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in the Methow Valley.

“Collars fail. That’s one possibility,” said Fitkin.

The new Loup Loup Pack is believed to include several members, said Scott Becker, wolf specialist for WDFW.

“Right now it looks like at least six individuals,” Becker said Monday (Nov. 30).

For a few years people have reported wolf sightings and evidence of wolves in the area now confirmed to be Loup Loup Pack territory, Becker said.

“We did get some good sighting reports a couple of months ago … and were able to document signs of multiple individuals up there. We put out a few cameras but it wasn’t until the snow started flying that we were able to follow tracks out,” Becker said.

WDFW and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to monitor the new group over the winter and will attempt to capture and fit one of the wolves with a radio collar next summer to monitor the pack, the agencies announced last week.

Annual survey

WDFW conducts an annual wolf pack survey each winter, which confirmed 16 wolf packs in Washington at the end of 2014. Only three packs were confirmed in the North Cascades and the rest in eastern Washington. The Loup Loup Pack brings the number of wolf packs in the North Cascades area to four.

Gray wolves are protected throughout Washington under state law as an endangered species, and will remain protected until the population reaches goals outlined in a state Wolf Conservation and Management Plan.

They are also protected as endangered under federal law in the western two-thirds of the state, which includes the Methow Valley.

Gray wolf packs typically range across a territory of about 300 square miles, Becker said. And they often travel very long distances to find mates and begin new packs.

“With the capability of wolves to disperse and find each other, the wolves that started that [Loup Loup] pack could have come from Montana or British Columbia,” Becker said.

The new pack “is probably ranging from the Methow to Okanogan” valleys, Fitkin said. “It’s not surprising to see a pack establish near the Lookout Pack.”

There is no evidence that the collar on the Lookout Pack female stopped transmitting because the wolf was poached or otherwise harmed, Becker said.

“We have no way of knowing because we don’t have a dead wolf in front of us,” he said.

“We have a 20 percent failure [collar] failure rate,” Becker said. The collars are expected to last about 18 months before their batteries wear out, he said. The collar had been placed on the Lookout Pack female about four months before it stopped transmitting.

The collars are designed to emit a “mortality signal” if the collared animal stops moving, so that wildlife officials can try to locate the animal. The collar on the Lookout female never gave off a mortality signal, Becker said.

“There’s a high probability that that animal is still alive and doing well,” he said.

Uncertain about Lookout Pack

It is unclear how many wolves are now in the Lookout Pack, according to wildlife officials. Fitkin said he conducted a howling survey in the Lookout territory in late summer, and received howling responses from what sounded like “a minimum of three or four pups.”

Becker said wildlife officials might try to collar another Lookout Pack member next summer.

Last winter, the Lookout Pack was believed to have four members — two adults, one pup and one juvenile wolf between one and two years old.

Under the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, wolves can be removed from the state’s endangered species list after 15 successful breeding pairs are documented for three consecutive years among three designated wolf recovery regions in the state.

A successful breeding pair of wolves is defined as an adult male and an adult female with at least two pups surviving to Dec. 31 in a given year.

Because the Lookout Pack had only one surviving pup last year, the Lookout wolves were not considered a successful breeding pair. The remains of one pup were found in an area burned over during the Carlton Complex Fire in July 2014. It was unknown what happened to other pups, if there were any.

Biologists aren’t sure how many wolves are in the Lookout Pack at this time, but estimate two to four adults and an unknown number of pups. If the pack does not have both a breeding male and female this year, it would not qualify as a successful breeding pair, even if there were multiple pups.

The Lookout Pack had up to 10 members in 2008, the year it was confirmed as the first gray wolf pack in Washington in more than 30 years. Over the next year the pack was decimated by poaching, until only the breeding pair and one yearling survived in 2009.

The breeding pair, which had been collared in 2008, had both disappeared by 2011. The Lookout Pack, named for Lookout Mountain, travels through a territory estimated by biologists at about 350 square miles extending roughly from Black Canyon in the south to Little Bridge Creek in the north.

Activists Move to Sue Operator of a Gray Wolf Fur Farm

Posted on by
5
An animal rights group argues a Minnesota woman is violating the Endangered Species Act by raising and skinning the protected predators.

(Photo: Animal Legal Defense Fund)
Dec 7, 2015
by David Kirby

The Animal Legal Defense Fund has threatened to sue a private wildlife operation in Minnesota, alleging that its owner kills and skins federally protected gray wolves and sells the pelts for profit.

On Wednesday, ALDF sent a notice of intent to file suit against Teresa Petter, owner of Fur-Ever Wild, whose website describes it as “a working agricultural farm that celebrates our traditional connections to the land and mother nature.

Fur-Ever Wild, located on 100 acres in Eureka Township, Minnesota, charges visitors to get up close not only with wolves but also cougars, bobcats, otters, beavers, lynx, fishers, martens, and badgers.

ALDF will take Fur-Ever Wild to court in 60 days unless Petter agrees not to kill and skin gray wolves, which are listed under the federal Endangered Species Act as threatened in Minnesota.

The Endangered Species Act prohibits the taking of any endangered or threatened species, defining “take” to mean “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect.” The law, which applies equally to wild and captive animals, allows private parties to file suit to enforce its provisions.

(Photo: Animal Legal Defense Fund)

“Fur-Ever Wild’s wildlife exhibition and fur-harvesting business exploits wolf pups by first using them as an attraction in the company’s petting zoo, then later skinning them for their fur,” Jennifer Robbins, an attorney representing ALDF, wrote in the notice.

“There is broad public support to stop their continual taking of wolves that visitors pay to see…and for whom they donate money or materials believing they are supporting the maintenance of this threatened species,” she wrote in the notice, which was also sent to the Interior Department, which enforces the ESA.

RELATED:  Oregon Wolves Lose Endangered Species Protections

“We got involved in the summer of 2015 after activists notified us of her operations,” said ALDF staff attorney Christopher Berry. “Evidence that we submitted shows that she has skinned wolves in the past.”

Petter has denied killing wolves. In May, she told The Associated Press that the animals were not used for fur unless they “die naturally.”

Reached by phone, Petter told TakePart, “I am not commenting.” When asked why, she replied, “Because someone already burned down one of our buildings.” Asked if the alleged arson was related to the skinning of wolves, Petter said, “Have a nice day” and hung up.

Public records indicate that Fur-Ever Wild has indeed slaughtered wolves for their pelts.

Several license applications Fur-Ever Wild filed with the state “depict the calculated breeding program of protected wolves as the company aimed to acquire a wolf population that could generate consistent replacements for those animals to be killed and skinned for fur,” according to the ALDF notice.

Alaska Confirms Massive Decline in Rare Wolves, Still Plans to Hunt Them

Posted on by
9

Another harvest could do irreversible damage to the wolf population.

Alexander Archipelago wolf. (Photo: Facebook)
Jun 20, 2015
by Samantha Cowan

In 1994, southeast Alaska was home to about 300 Prince of Wales wolves, a subspecies of Alexander Archipelago wolves. By 2013, there were fewer than 250. Last year the population plummeted 60 percent to 89 wolves. New numbers confirm that the rare breed may have dropped to as few as 50.

But the diminishing numbers won’t stop hunters from trapping and killing the wolves, according to the Center for Biological Diversity. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is moving ahead with its 2015–2016 hunting and trapping season on Prince of Wales Island.

“Another open season of trapping and hunting could push these incredibly imperiled wolves over the edge,” Shaye Wolf, a biologist with the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement.

A reported 29 wolves were killed during last year’s hunting season—which accounts for between 33 and 58 percent of the population. Either figure means the species is in danger of being completely wiped out, especially as females were hit particularly hard this season…

More: http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/06/20/alaska-wolves

Oregonion who shot wolf faces criminal charges

Posted on by
2

http://www.capitalpress.com/Oregon/20151116/oregon-man-who-shot-wolf-faces-criminal-charges

Eric Mortenson

Capital Press

Published:November 16, 2015 3:15PM

Courtesy of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
OR 22, a male wolf that separated from the Umatilla River Pack in February, is pictured walking through a Northeast Oregon forest on Jan. 26. A Baker City, Ore., man who reported he shot the wolf now faces criminal charges.
1
1

<!–

–>

Although not a factor in the criminal case, the shooting happened as Oregon wildlife officials were deciding to take wolves off the state endangered species list.

 

A Baker City, Ore., man who told state police and wildlife officials that he’d shot a wolf while hunting coyotes on private property has been charged with killing an endangered species.

Brennon D. Witty, 25, also was charged with hunting with a centerfire rifle without a big game tag, Harney County District Attorney Tim Colahan said Monday. Both charges are Class A misdemeanors, each punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,250 fine. Witty will be arraigned Dec. 2 in Grant County Justice Court, Canyon City.

The shooting happened in Grant County; the neighboring Harney County DA handled it as a courtesy because his Grant County counterpart was acquainted with the hunter’s family and wanted to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The incident happened Oct. 6, when Witty voluntarily notified ODFW and Oregon State Police that he’d shot a wolf while hunting coyotes on private property south of Prairie City. Police recovered a wolf’s body on the property.

Oregon’s action to remove wolves from the state endangered species list has no apparent bearing on the case. Wolves were listed under the state Endangered Species Act at the time of the shooting; the ODFW Commission on Nov. 9 removed wolves from the state list. Regardless, they remained on the federal endangered species list in the western two-thirds of the state.

The wolf was identified as OR-22, a male that has worn a GPS tracking collar since October 2013 and dispersed from the Umatilla Pack in February 2015. He was in Malheur County for awhile, then traveled into Grant County. Wildlife biologists don’t believe he had a mate of pups. Young or sub-dominant wolves often leave their home packs to establish their own territory and find mates.

OR-22 was the third Oregon wolf known to have died since August, when the Sled Springs pair in Northeast Oregon were found dead of unknown cause. The state now has a minimum of 82 wolves.

Conservationists Criticize Precedent Setting State Wolf Delisting

Posted on by
2

from: DOW.org

November 9, 2015

SALEM, Ore. –

The state of Oregon has just stripped wolves of all protections under the state’s endangered species law. Below is the statement that we sent out immediately following the decision in an effort to bring national attention to this important issue.

This premature decision could lead to needless wolf deaths and could slow or halt Oregon’s fragile wolf recovery.

Defenders of Wildlife says the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission’s decision today to remove state endangered species protections for wolves is premature and would likely lead to slowed or stopped wolf recovery in the state. No other species has been removed from the state’s endangered species list with a population of fewer than 100 individuals statewide or when they were still absent from a significant portion of their historic range.

Shawn Cantrell, Defenders of Wildlife’s northwest director, testified at today’s meeting and issued the following statement:

“We are deeply disappointed to see the Fish and Wildlife Commission approve a state delisting of wolves when only the barest minimum requirements have been met. The better and more cautious alternative would have been to downlist wolves from endangered to threatened and not delist them entirely. This would have continued to provide vital state protections for wolves, while also recognizing the progress the state has made to recover wolves in the eastern part of the state. More importantly, it would have left wolves fully protected in the western part of Oregon, where they are only just starting to expand and are in the earliest stages of recovery.

“Unfortunately, the commission decided to prematurely delist wolves without first updating and amending the Oregon Wolf Management Plan, which is overdue for a planned update. It will be critical that any subsequent revision of the plan maintains protocols for using non-lethal conflict avoidance tools, like livestock guarding dogs or fencing, to reduce potential livestock-wolf conflicts.

“Oregon recently has been a real leader emphasizing non-lethal conflict management between livestock and wolves so that wolves can continue their recovery in the state. Given the commission’s decision on delisting today, it will be all the more critical for Oregon to continue to emphasize and promote non-lethal strategies for allowing wolves and livestock to coexist on the same landscapes.

Be a Voice for the Gray Wolf

Posted on by
Reply

81 wolves, still too many wolves for Oregon Fish and Wildlife.
URGENT: Oregon’s wolves need our help, Wolf Advocates!
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission is proposing to remove its small population of 81 gray wolves from its Endangered Species List!
Please email
odfw.commission@state.or.us
Subject: ODFW: Please consider keeping Oregon wolves listed

Be a Voice for the Gray Wolf's photo.
Be a Voice for the Gray Wolf

15 hrs · Edited ·

URGENT: Oregon’s wolves need our help, Wolf Advocates!
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission is proposing to remove its small population of 81 gray wolves from its Endangered Species List! Please email the ODFW Commission BEFORE its Friday, November 9th Commission Meeting in Salem. Info & sample letter below. Please share! Howls of thanks!

Email address: odfw.commission@state.or.us

Subject: ODFW: Please consider keeping Oregon wolves listed

Message: Dear Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioners,

I’m writing the Commission today to request that the ODFW Commission keeps gray wolves listed on Oregon’s Endangered Species List.

The wolf delisting proposal is purely political; the recommendation appears to not consider any scientific data collected from independent biologists (who do not agree with the delisting proposal).

Oregon’s fragile population of a mere 81 wolves cannot currently withstand delisting. It would be disastrous to prematurely yank gray wolves off Oregon’s Endangered Species List.

I’m urging the Commission to conduct a solid, peer-reviewed scientific analysis on the gray wolf population in Oregon before it makes its final decision on the gray wolf delisting. Until such thorough analysis is provided, I’m asking the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioners to keep Oregon wolves protected.

Thank you for considering my heartfelt request.

Sincerely,

Name
Address

———-
ODFW Gray Wolf Delisting Proposal Press Release:
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/news/2015/october/102915.asp

Washington Ranchers want compensation for reduced weight gain, low pregnancy rates caused by wolves.

Posted on by
5

http://www.capitalpress.com/Washington/20151016/wdfw-seeks-panel-to-review-wolf-caused-losses

by Don Jenkins

Capital Press

Published:October 16, 2015 9:11AM

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
A Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife file photo shows a member of the Teanaway wolf pack. Washington wildlife officials are recruiting livestock experts and conservationists to advise the state

<!–

–>

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will form a board to review claims for indirect losses caused by wolves.

Washington wildlife officials are recruiting livestock experts and conservationists to advise the state on compensating ranchers for lost production caused by wolves.

The Department of Fish and Wildlife plans to appoint up to five volunteers to serve on the new committee.

The panel will review WDFW’s approval or denial of claims for reduced weight gain, low pregnancy rates and higher-than-normal losses.

The department will make the final call on payments, but the panel will bring additional expertise and transparency to the process, WDFW wolf policy coordinator Donny Martorello said.

He said WDFW wants a variety of viewpoints represented. “Diversity is important. If it were all like-minded people, we’d need only one person,” he said.

WDFW pays ranchers the market value for livestock killed by wolves. The state’s wolf recovery plan also calls for WDFW to develop a system to compensate ranchers for livestock losses where there is no direct evidence wolves caused the damage.

Martorello said WDFW has not made any payments for indirect losses, but two ranchers have filed claims.

Volunteers will serve staggered one- or two-year terms. The committee may start meeting as early as mid-November and will likely meet about four times a year, according to WDFW.

Committee members will be reimbursed for travel expenses.

Applications and nominations must be submitted in writing and include a description of “experience in collaborating with people who have different values.”

Applications also must include the candidate’s name, telephone number, email address and organization affiliations.

Candidates should explain why they would be an effective board member and report their experience with livestock, natural resource management or wildlife conservation.

People or groups nominating members must include their names and contact information.

Applications and nominations must be postmarked by Oct. 31 and mailed to WDFW Game Division Manager Mick Cope, 600 Capitol Way N., Olympia, WA 98501-1091 or by email to Mick.Cope@dfw.wa.gov.