61-million-year-old continent found buried beneath Greenland’s ice
Reply
NASA on alert as gigantic asteroid zooms too close to Earth, might turn catastrophic if moves from orbit
Washington officials will vote to remove gray wolf from endangered species list
https://www.aol.com/washington-officials-vote-remove-gray-154308349.html
SYDNEY BORCHERS
July 19, 2024 at 8:43 AM
The gray wolf population in Washington may no longer be considered to be endangered.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) is preparing to take a vote that may result in the removal of gray wolves from the state’s endangered list.
“The status of species listed as endangered, threatened, or sensitive is supposed to be reviewed every five years by WDFW staff through what we call a periodic status review (PSR) process to assess available species information and recommend whether the species’ status warrants its current listing or if a reclassification is recommended,” Staci Lehman, communications manager for the WDFW told Fox News Digital in an email.
RARE GRAY WOLF KILLED DURING HUNT IN MICHIGAN, OFFICIALS LAUNCH INVESTIGATION
Based on the current status of the species, the population could be reclassified to the list of sensitive species and taken off the state’s endangered list.
This reclassification comes after more than a decade of data trends based on a population model developed at the University of Washington, according to a WDFW press release.
An animal is considered to be “state endangered” when it is “seriously threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range within the state,” the WDFW continued.
Sensitive species is defined as “vulnerable or declining and likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of its range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats.”
OHIO REPRESENTATIVES MAKING WAVES TO NAME AN OFFICIAL STATE FISH
The state department extended the public’s comment period regarding the proposal to reclassify wolves to early May and the commission meeting in which a decision on reclassification will be proposed today, Lehman noted.
While the wolf population will be relabeled, the WDFW will continue to manage the wolves, “with a focus on reducing conflict between wolves and livestock, emphasizing proactive nonlethal conflict deterrence, achieving statewide recovery objectives, and supporting wolf expansion into all suitable habitat statewide,” the press release continued.
For the past 14 years, the wolf population in Washington has continued to increase each year — it went up 20% from 2023-2024.
Two hundred and sixty wolves in 42 packs across Washington were reported last year, according to data collected by the WDFW.
For more Lifestyle articles, visit www.foxnews.com/lifestyle.
While the Washington gray wolf population was “virtually eliminated” in the 1930s, there was a significant rebound beginning in 2008.
In April, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to remove gray wolves from the endangered species list, the Associated Press reported.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR LIFESTYLE NEWSLETTER
This would mark the first time in Washington that gray wolves will no longer be classified as endangered since the animal initially received state protection in 1980, according to the WDFW.
“Wolves were first listed as endangered by the Washington Department of Game in 1980 because of their historical occurrence in the state and subsequent extirpation,” the WDFW said.
Original article source: Washington officials will vote to remove gray wolf from endangered species list
There is no justification for trophy hunting
Will Travers of the Born Free Foundation says we should all strive for ethically acceptable ways to deliver effective conservation and sustainable livelihoodsFri 19 Jul 2024 12.31
Your article exposes the schism between trophy hunting advocates and the numerous scientists, conservationists and community representatives who oppose it (Trophy hunter killings spark fierce battle over the future of super tusker elephants, 8 July).
However, it states that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) concluded in 2017 that there is “substantial evidence” that trophy hunting produces positive outcomes for wildlife conservation. I don’t think this is the case.
The Born Free Foundation (an IUCN member) asked the IUCN for its position on trophy hunting in 2020. The acting director general, Dr Grethel Aguilar, confirmed that “while different IUCN constituents have differing views on this issue, as an organisation IUCN has not adopted a policy in favour of or against trophy hunting”.
00:00
02:24
Read More
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.651.0_en.html#goog_474392920
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.651.0_en.html#goog_474392921
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.651.0_en.html#goog_474392922
The IUCN world commission for environmental law and ethics specialist group also concluded that “trophy hunting is not consistent with ‘sustainable use’”, and that “any other view would threaten IUCN’s credibility for providing moral and ethical leadership in conservation policies”.
The quote attributed to the IUCN more accurately reflects the views of the 11 authors of an article entitled The Baby and the Bathwater: Trophy Hunting, Conservation and Rural Livelihoods.
The nine authors, some of whom are members of the IUCN species survival commission’s sustainable use and livelihoods specialist group – which, to be clear, may not represent itself as the IUCN – argue that trophy hunting is a conservation activity, frustrating the UK parliament’s longstanding intention to introduce a prohibition on the import of trophies from threatened species – a commitment reiterated by the new government.
While some IUCN members cleave to trophy hunting – an elitist, colonial anachronism – we should all strive for ethically acceptable ways to deliver effective conservation, sustainable livelihoods and financial benefits for those who live alongside wildlife. I will welcome the day when the UK refuses the import of trophies from threatened species and ends the killing of wild animals – including “super tuskers” – for “fun”.
Will Travers
Co-founder, Born Free Foundation
Sixth human case of bird flu reported in Colorado, CDC says
SC deer hunters, deer tags should be hitting your mailbox soon
Commission OKs new cougar hunting rules
July 19, 2024 Updated Fri., July 19, 2024 at 6:05 p.m.
By Michael Wright michaelw@spokesman.com(509) 459-5508
Washington’s cougar hunting rules have been rewritten.
In a virtual meeting Friday, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission voted to approve a new suite of cougar hunting rules after months of debate.
Under the new rules, the state’s cougar hunting season would run from Sept. 1 to March 31 each year, and harvest would be capped in each individual unit based on population growth. The caps would also include all known cougar kills, including those carried out by wildlife managers in response to conflicts.
The commission also voted to direct Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to reopen the cougar hunting rules for revisions before the 2025-2026 hunting season.
Commissioners began work on the proposal after they received a petition from conservation groups who wanted stricter limits on cougar hunting. The groups argue that the existing rules allowed too many of the big cats to be killed.
The previous structure included two consecutive seasons running from September through December and January through April. Harvest was limited in each unit based on a range of allowable cougar kills, and management removals were not counted toward the total. The counts also ignored certain ages of cougars.
The new rules cap cougar mortality in each predator management unit based on an estimated 13% growth rate and a density of 2.3 cougars per 100 square kilometers. All deaths between April 1 and March 31 would count toward the cap, and all independent aged cougars are counted.
In units that reach the cap before Sept. 1, the cap would be increased to 20% to allow for some hunting opportunity.
Two units have hit their 13% cap this year. Both are in Eastern Washington – one near Chewelah, and the other in hunting districts surrounding Spokane.
Supporters of the changes argued that they would provide needed protection for the predators. Some opponents argued the rules didn’t go far enough in protecting the animals.
Other opponents saw the changes as an erosion of hunting opportunity in the state, and they argued there are plenty of cougars and no need to limit the hunting of them.
Environmetnalists cheered Friday’s vote. Collette Adkins, the carnivore conservation program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement that the vote was “a big win” for cougars.
“I’m glad to see the state finally taking action to rein in unsustainable cougar killing,” Adkins said.
Yellowstone superintendent seeks hunting relief for wolves after another deadly winter
Wyoming and Idaho hunts have had negligible effect, but Montana’s hunt along the park’s northern boundary continues to take a toll on long-running research effort and wolf viewing opportunities.
by Mike KoshmrlJuly 18, 2024
Share this:
FacebookXWhatsAppMessengerEmailShare
The 2023-’24 winter proved the third deadliest for Yellowstone wolves in the decades since Canis lupus was reintroduced to the landscape in 1995. Overall, 13 wolves were shot by legal hunters, caught by trappers, killed by poachers or died of suspected hunting-related injuries.
Like in past winters, the vast majority of wolves that met their fate after straying beyond the protections of Yellowstone National Park did so in Montana, near the park’s northern boundary. Eight wolves were legally hunted or trapped in Montana hunting zones, one was poached and two more died from suspected gunshot wounds. By contrast, one park wolf died each in Wyoming and Idaho hunts.
Altogether, the hunting toll caused the “dissolution” of three of the park’s 11 wolf packs, according to a letter Yellowstone Superintendent Cam Sholly sent to the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission seeking relief.
“These losses represented approximately ten percent of the winter 2023/2024 Yellowstone wolf population,” Sholly wrote in a June 26 letter acquired by WyoFile. “Yellowstone is recognized as the best place in the world to view and study free-ranging wolves, which attracts millions of visitors and generates significant economic activity for the region.”
Yellowstone’s superintendent thanked Montana officials for reinstating quotas in hunting units adjacent to the park two years ago — a move the state agency made after the 2021-’22 hunting season, when a record 25 wolves were shot or trapped outside the park’s boundaries in the three border states.
But Sholly also asked for additional changes that would help Yellowstone “achieve wildlife conservation and economic objectives.” Specifically, he asked Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks to consider breaking up one of its wolf hunting units, 313, into two — and then distributing the current wolf-kill quota of six animals amongst the two new areas. Alternatively, if wolf hunting unit 313 is kept intact, he asked Montana wildlife managers to slash the quota to four wolves to ease the impact on park packs.
The Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission has not formally responded to the three-week-old letter. Writing the park back would have been unusual, because the letter was likely interpreted as a public comment on the agency’s under-review wolf hunting regulations — and the commission’s typical response would be a change to the regulations, Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesperson Greg Lemon said.
Favorable response
Although Fish, Wildlife and Parks’ draft wolf hunting regulations don’t yet reflect any of the changes Sholly sought, Bozeman, Montana-based commissioner Susan Kirby Brooke formally initiated an amendment that grants the park’s main ask: splitting up wolf hunting unit 313 into two, and dividing the six-wolf quota.
The amendment and the overall 2024-’25 Montana wolf hunting regulations are open to public comment through July 25.
Fish, Wildlife and Parks officials responded favorably to Kirby Brooke’s amendment. The change would have “no adverse biological effects,” the agency wrote. “With no change to the overall quota, the department expects that the season complies with legislative direction for population management,” the agency’s statement about the amendment reads.
A daily must-read news update for and by Wyoming.Subscribe for free!
Much of the strife over the effects of Montana’s hunt on Yellowstone’s wolves has stemmed from actions taken by the Montana Legislature. During the 2021 legislative session, lawmakers passed a bill that directed the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission to reduce wolf numbers. That resulted in changes to hunting zones that led to the record number of Yellowstone wolves being killed during the 2021-’22 season.
In the aftermath of that legislation, the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission also passed regulations allowing for baiting and night hunting of wolves. According to Sholly’s letter, the state also lifted a ban on the use of telemetry equipment for wolf hunting around the same time. Typically, a significant portion of Yellowstone wolves wear tracking collars, which means they could potentially be located by hunters who possess very-high frequency receivers.
“The use of these practices run counter to fair chase hunting,” Sholly wrote, “and we request these prohibitions be reinserted into your regulations.”
It’s unclear if those requests will be granted. Montana’s wolf hunting regulations are set to be finalized by the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission at its Aug. 16 meeting. In the meantime, the draft regulations propose keeping the controversial practices intact: baiting wolves is explicitly legal, night hunting on private land is allowed, and there’s no language in the regulations about using telemetry equipment. Kirby Brooke’s amendment also does not address the practices.
2024-6-26 WolfHuntCommentLetterDownload
There’s no legislative mandate, however, so the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission does have the latitude to change those rules, Lemon, agency spokesman, said. But it’s also unclear if those practices have had any effects on wolf populations, he said.
“Certainly, the opportunity to harvest wolves has expanded in the last couple of years,” Lemon said. “But even with those expanded opportunities, the harvest has remained relatively stable.”
Whose wolves?
Lemon disagrees with characterizing Montana’s hunt as being deadly for “Yellowstone wolves.”
“Wolves move across the landscape,” he said. “They spend time in the park and in Montana. The way I look at it, they’re not ‘Yellowstone wolves.’”
Yellowstone bases the characterization on where the wolves roam the overwhelming majority of the time.
“Our rationale for counting these as Yellowstone-based wolves is supported by GPS/VHF radio-collar data that show these packs are within the park at least 96 percent of the year,” Sholly wrote.
There’s evidence that wolves leaving Yellowstone are especially vulnerable to being hunted. Wolves that dwell in the park see scores of people, and that can lead to habituation and brazen behavior.
Data shows that about 85% of all wolves killed in Montana’s two wolf hunting units north of Yellowstone have been from packs that live primarily in the park, Sholly’s letter states.
Montana hunts north of the Yellowstone boundary have not only taken a toll by causing packs to disband. Recent research has found that hunting upsets the natural balance of the social canine. It can even stimulate reproduction.
During Montana’s 2021-’22 wolf hunting season, the long-term alpha female from Yellowstone’s 8-Mile Pack was legally trapped in a border unit. Afterward, three subordinate females became breeders, resulting in 18 pups being produced in a single pack — which grew to as many as 25 wolves, according to Yellowstone’s annual wolf report.
Even on the heels of the 2021-’22 and 2023-’24 winters — the first and third-deadliest hunting seasons for Yellowstone’s wolves to date — park wolf numbers actually grew. At the end of the year, the population was assessed at 124 animals and 11 packs, a notable uptick from recent years.
“Some people will point that out and say, ‘Well, what’s the big deal?’” Yellowstone Wolf Project lead biologist Dan Stahler told WyoFile.
It’s important, he said, because of what the National Park Service is all about. “Our mission in Yellowstone is to protect and preserve natural processes — including natural social dynamics,” Stahler said.
While tensions remain over the effects of Montana’s wolf hunting seasons, there’s been notably less impact on park wolves from hunts in Yellowstone’s other two border states: Idaho and Wyoming.
In the coming 2024 hunting season, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department will allow up to 16 wolves to be killed in hunting units that border the park — that’s three fewer than were allowed in 2023. Very few Yellowstone wolves, however, typically end up killed in the state’s hunt. That’s because of a combination of the whereabouts of Yellowstone packs, the lay of the land and large wilderness complexes abutting the park on the Wyoming side.
“I think on average about one wolf that’s taken during the Wyoming hunt comes from a Yellowstone-based pack,” Stahler said. “It’s proven to be the case that [Wyoming] has relatively low impact on park wolves.”
Heat may have contributed to poultry workers contracting avian flu in Colorado
Usha Vance could become the first vegetarian first lady
Haley BeMillerBrianne Pfannenstiel
USA TODAY NETWORK
0:20
0:47
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.651.0_en.html#goog_572328076
MILWAUKEE — Usha Vance has never been one to clamor for the spotlight.
She stood by her husband’s side as JD Vance received national acclaim for his memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy,” and ran for the U.S. Senate in 2022. He describes her as brilliant, a defender of what she loves, a comforting change from the chaos of his youth.
During the third night of the Republican National Convention, Usha Vance took on a new, loftier task: Introducing her husband, and herself, to the country in a primetime speech.
“That JD and I could meet at all, let alone fall in love and marry, is a testament to this great country,” she said.
The Vances have been thrust into national prominence this week after Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump named Ohio’s junior senator as his running mate. Her national coming out has prompted a largely supportive reception, even as some far-right personalities have circulated racist commentary denigrating her Indian heritage.
Republican delegates who saw Usha Vance introduce her husband during the convention Wednesday praised her performance, even if the applause was, at times, muted — like when she described how her husband adapted to her vegetarian diet.
