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

Tag Archives: wolves

It’s All a Game: New Tags Allow Wolf-Pelt Transport To Canada

Posted on by
6

USFWS Helps to Market Wolf Pelts: ‏

http://fwp.mt.gov/news/newsReleases/fishAndWildlife/nr_0722.html

Fish & Wildlife

Wed Jan 21 10:57:00 MST 2015

With the recent approval from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Montana wolf hunters and trappers who harvest wolves will now obtain internationally recognized pelt tags to allow for the export of wolf pelts directly out of country, usually to Canadian fur auction houses.

Montana’s CITES wolf-pelt tags were obtained under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, an international agreement between governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of CITES-listed wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.

“This is a big change from the past couple of years in terms of hunter and trapper harvest opportunity to sell wolf pelts,” said Brian Giddings, statewide furbearer coordinator for Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks in Helena.

Any hunter or trapper who harvests a wolf taken during the 2014-2015 season—Sept. 6, 2014 through Feb. 28, 2015—can now have it tagged with a CITES pelt tag.

As a condition of CITES approval, however, no prior season harvested wolf can receive a CITES tag, Giddings said.

Additionally, Montana’s wolf CITES tags cannot be used for any other method of mortality such as road-killed, federal Wildlife Services’ control action, landowner/livestock control, or incidental take. Nor can CITES tags be used for wolves taken on Tribal lands.

Hunters and trappers have strict reporting requirements. Upon the harvest of a wolf, hunters and trappers must call 1-877-FWP-WILD—1-877-397-9453—within 24 hours to file a report. Wolf pelts must be tagged within 10 days of harvest.

State tags issued earlier this hunting and trapping season can be replaced with the new wolf CITES tags by contacting the nearest FWP regional office. Once one receives a wolf CITES tag the old state-issued wolf tag can be removed and discarded.

For more information on CITES wolf-pelt tags contact your nearest FWP office.

To learn more about Montana’s wolf hunting season, visit FWP online atfwp.mt.gov. Click “Hunting Guides” and choose Wolf.

Featured Image -- 7624

Let Outdated Attitudes Go Extinct

Posted on by
8
Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson. All Rights Reserved

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson. All Rights Reserved

Some viewpoints need to go extinct, and the hate-speak espoused by Capt. Ron Malast in his opinion piece, “Let Steller sea lions go extinct,” is at the top of the list. So, the Steller sea lion population is starting to re-grow a little after the commercial seal trade, ruthless bounties and constant shooting as “competition” drove them, and just about every other pinniped species, to the brink of extinction.

The eastern pacific population of Steller sea lions may be up to 70,000 individuals now, but the human population of 7.2 billion grows by 350,000 per day. Let that sink in for a minute… 350,000 PER DAY!

350,000 is also the total number of all other great apes alive today—every chimpanzee, bonobo, gorilla and orangutan—combined. Why is that significant? Because scientifically speaking, that’s all we humans really are—just another species of ape, somewhere between chimps and gorillas. Homo sapiens share 98% of our DNA with Pan troglodytes, the chimpanzees.

But while seals and sea lions were evolving into self-sufficient sea mammals, adapting to pelagic life by perfecting the art of holding their breath for up to a half an hour and diving to depths of 600’ or more, human-types were busy developing a profoundly narcissistic sense of entitlement that took root early in Man’s prehistory. This feeling of privilege flourished as our species spread out and usurped every other species’ habitats and resources. From the mightiest bison of the plains to the flattest fish at the bottom of the ocean, we claimed the top of every food chain we could sink our teeth into.

The anthropogenic mass extinction following close on the heels of human’s surging population explosion already saw the end of the Steller sea cow and the Caribbean seal, both hunted to extinction in centuries past. Glibly calling for the extinction of wolves or Steller sea lions to snuff out the competition summons back an outdated attitude that should have long since been dead and buried.

A Response to Pro-Wolf Article by Chris Albert

Posted on by
5
by Rosemary Lowe
Veterinarian, Chris Albert, has written a thoughtful article. While people “can” live with wild non-humans like wolves, etc., thus far, our species’ history does not support the likelihood of our ever changing our Humanist perceptions about wild animals, because this species is, for the most part, afraid of Nature, and wild animals; and perhaps even jealous of them, and their “wildness.” We like to “domesticate” things, and we already have turned much of the Earth into a Domesticated Feed Lot.
Yes, some of us love, admire & try to protect  wild animals.  But, would most even consider what “living with” or “near them” would mean to our convenient- for- humans lifestyle? For instance, most humans will not tolerate, anywhere, a so-called “nuisance wild animal” for long, and we see evidence of that everywhere, with ranching, trapping & hunting.

—Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

—Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

We live outside Santa Fe, on a former over-grazed ranch.The rancher trapped/poisoned coyotes, bobcat, prairie dogs, etc. Now, houses of about an acre and a half are here, and the wildlife here probably do better than before. Many of us in this community of about 5,000  are pleased  having the wildlife around: I have seen coyote in the day time, and there are some bobcat, quail, and an occasional pronghorn around. However, our AHA newsletter often has to remind residents that our covenants reflect an “appreciation”  of wildlife here, because invariably, there are those here who poison coyote, blaming them for every lost cat and dog, and they do not want wild animals near their kids.
People like to think that wildlife are “out there, somewhere,” but in reality, they would not tolerate any perceived inconvenience (or alleged harm) they might cause.
Human society was designed for humans, not nature, so nature must be pushed back, and that means wildlife & wild places.
Most of us on this blog think this is wrong. But, our human activities here and around the word prove that humans will not “co-exist” with wild animals, because we never really did. It was always an adversarial relationship, and it is not getting better, especially now with human population exploding: going on 7+ billion, to 8, 9 or more billion. What will be left for wildlife? Where will they live? Most wild animal populations are in severe decline around the world.
 Will caring humans (not the majority, I’m afraid) make the hard sacrifices necessary to make more room for surviving wildlife, especially in a world now affected by increasing climate change? Is our species capable of shedding our environmentally-destructive Humanist Ideologies in order to save what is left of Nature?
Rosemary Lowe
image
EARTH for Animals

Environmentalists Against Ranching, Trapping and Hunting

We can live with wolves in the wild

Posted on by
5

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/opinion/national-view/3660405-response-we-can-live-wolves-wild

by  Chris Albert

As much as I appreciated Sandy Updyke’s Jan. 14 column headlined, “City people don’t understand wolves” — it was refreshing to read something so thoughtful on this topic — I did have some disagreements.

As a veterinarian, I dispute her claim that foothold traps are “harmless.” Ischemia, or the lack of blood supply, is extremely painful. Depending on how long an animal is caught in a trap and depending on the trap’s tension, a foot may be damaged beyond repair. A rubber band around your finger for long enough would produce the same kind of damage (don’t try it).

Updyke also didn’t address the fear that animals face when exposed and unable to retreat or the sometimes-brutal methods of dispatch. Not to mention the fragmentation that happens to a family when a member of a social species like a wolf is taken. Traps are most certainly not harmless.

As for dogs and wolves, by far the most conflict occurs when hunting dogs are intentionally put in harm’s way. I don’t live in wolf country but have friends with pets who do. There are sensible guidelines that keep dogs safe: Don’t leave dogs outside alone, check an area with lights before sending a dog out and don’t leave out food or other attractants.

I wholeheartedly concurred that wolves are not deities or villains and that their hunting strategy is not pretty. Though why does the latter even matter? I even concur that people need to be able to shoot a wolf if it is imminently harming them or their animal.

That doesn’t seem to be what happens, though. It seems that people filled with hatred and a desire to inflict the most harm possible are turned loose on wolves to maximize destruction.

Wolf advisory boards have precious few advocates for wolves. The impact of killing a single wolf on that wolf’s family rarely if ever is considered by such boards.

We can live with wolves and other large carnivores. We can have them safely in our forests. Why would we want to? Because we will be much richer for it. It’s not only city folk who feel this way; there are plenty of people living where wolves do who want wolves free from hunting and trapping and killed only when it is truly unavoidable.

Chris Albert of Lebanon Junction, Ky., is a doctor of veterinary medicine.

copyrighted Hayden wolf walking

Opinion: High Noon for the Gray Wolf

Posted on by
14

By LYDIA MILLETJAN. 18, 2015

In December 2011, a wild gray wolf set foot in California, the first sighting in almost a century. He’d wandered in from Oregon, looking for a mate. In October 2014, for the first time in almost three-quarters of a century, a gray wolf was seen loping along the forested North Rim of the Grand Canyon, in Arizona. She had walked hundreds of miles, probably from Wyoming or Idaho.

The return of these animals to the homes of their ancestors — however fleeting — was a result of their 40-year protection under the Endangered Species Act.

OR-7, or “Journey,” as schoolchildren named the first wolf, had been born to the Imnaha pack, the first one in Oregon for many decades. When he wandered south, his brother, OR-9, wandered east. Shortly after he crossed into Idaho (where wolves are not protected), he was shot dead. OR-7 lived on, after his repeated incursions into California (where wolves are protected), to sire a litter of pups just north of the state line. He became the subject of a documentary — in California, even a wolf can be a star.

The story of the Grand Canyon wolf, though, may be over: Three days after Christmas, it appears, she was shot and killed in Utah by a man media outlets have called a “coyote hunter.” (A DNA test is pending.)

For almost two centuries, American gray wolves, vilified in fact as well as fiction, were the victims of vicious government extermination programs. By the time the Endangered Species Act was passed, in 1973, only a few hundred of these once-great predators were left in the lower 48 states. After numerous generations of people dedicated to killing wolves on the North American continent, one generation devoted itself to letting wolves live. The animals’ number has now risen to almost 5,500, thanks to their legal protection, but they still occupy less than 5 percent of their ancient home range.

Since 1995, the act has guided efforts to raise wolves in captivity, release them, and follow them in the wild. Twenty years ago this month, the first gray wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park.

But this fragile progress has been undermined. Since 2011, the federal government has moved to remove federal protection for gray wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains (Idaho, Montana and Wyoming) and in the western Great Lakes (Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan), the two population centers. Management of the species was turned over to these states, which responded with a zeal that looks like blood lust.

Relying on the greatly exaggerated excuse that wolves threaten cattle and sheep, the states opened their doors to the killing of wolves. (In some states, bait can be used to lure the animals to their deaths; in Montana, private landowners can each kill 100 wolves each year; in Wisconsin, up to six hunting dogs on a single wolf is considered fair play.) Legions of wolf killers rose to the challenge, and the toll has been devastating: In just three and a half years, at least 3,500 wolves have been mowed down.

There’s been an outcry from conservationists, ecologists and people who simply like wolves, but this has not stopped the killers. Some say wolves are a threat to their livestock investments (despite the existence of generous rancher-compensation programs in all wolf states save Alaska); others invoke fear of wolves; still others appear to revel in killing. Online, you can find pictures of wolf carcasses held up proudly as trophies and men boasting of running over wolves with their cars. Judges have started to step in. In September, a federal court decided that wolf management in Wyoming — which had allowed people to kill as many wolves as they wanted, throughout 84 percent of the state — should be returned to the federal government. In December, also in response to a lawsuit, another federal court reinstated protections for wolves in the western Great Lakes. These decisions should make clear that the states alone simply can’t be entrusted with the future of our wolves.

In Washington, the threats persist. The Fish and Wildlife Service is considering a proposal that would strip federal protection from almost all gray wolves in the lower 48 states, not just the ones in the Rockies and the Midwest. Meanwhile, right-wing Republicans in the new Congress are champing at the bit to remove the wolves from protection under the act — politics trumping science.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/opinion/high-noon-for-the-gray-wolf.html?_r=0

copyrighted Hayden wolf in lodgepoles

Bill in Congress would remove protections for Great Lakes wolves

Posted on by
5

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_27312693/bill-would-remove-protections-wolves-4-states-including

By Steve Karnowski
Associated Press

01/13/2015 12:01:00 AM CST | Updated:  

A gray wolf in an April 2008 photo provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (AP Photo/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gary Kramer, File)

A gray wolf in an April 2008 photo provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (AP Photo/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gary Kramer, File)
Related Stories

Several members of Congress are preparing legislation to take gray wolves in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Wyoming off the endangered list in an attempt to undo court decisions that have blocked the states from allowing wolf hunting and trapping for sport and predator control.

U.S. Rep. Reid Ribble, R-Wis., is leading the effort, his office confirmed Tuesday. Co-sponsors include U.S. Reps. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., Dan Benishek, R-Mich., and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.

“I am pursuing a bipartisan legislative fix that will allow the Great Lakes states to continue the effective work they are doing in managing wolf populations without tying the hands of the Fish and Wildlife Service or undermining the Endangered Species Act,” Ribble said in a statement.

Ribble spokeswoman Katherine Mize said he hasn’t decided exactly when to introduce the bill, but the lawmakers are circulating a draft.

The legislation is in response to a ruling by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., last month that threw out an Obama administration decision to “delist” wolves in the western Great Lakes region, where the combined wolf population is estimated at around 3,700. That followed a similar decision by a different federal judge in September that stripped Wyoming of its wolf management authority and returned that state’s wolves to federal protections under the Endangered Species Act.

Ribble’s bill uses a strategy that succeeded in taking wolves in Idaho and Montana off the endangered list after court challenges by environmentalists blocked those efforts.

Congress took matters into its own hands in 2011 and lifted the federal protections for wolves in those two states, which then allowed hunting and trapping to resume.

“The language we are looking at would be narrow and would address the recent court decision. It would not seek to change the Endangered Species Act, but would be designed to meet the need in our region for responsible stewardship of the wolf population,” Benishek said in a statement.

Peterson, the most senior member of Minnesota’s congressional delegation, said he didn’t know what the prospects are for this legislation, but he said they’re probably better than they were in 2011 given that Republicans now control the Senate. He said he’s working to line up support from other lawmakers.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said in her 111-page ruling that the delisting, which took effect in 2012, was no more valid than the government’s three previous attempts over more than a decade. While wildlife managers in the three western Great Lakes states say their wolf populations are no longer endangered and can sustain limited hunting and trapping, Howell criticized the states’ regulatory plans as inadequate. She also said wolves still need federal protections because they haven’t repopulated all of their historic range.

Peterson said he has asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to appeal her decision and was confident it would be overturned.

Fish and Wildlife spokesman Gavin Shire said no decision has been made on appealing Howell’s December ruling but said the agency did not appeal the Wyoming decision within the 60-day limit. He said the service wasn’t aware of any proposed legislation to delist wolves and couldn’t comment on it.

Under Howell’s ruling, wolves reverted to “threatened” status in Minnesota and “endangered” in Wisconsin and Michigan. Sport hunting and trapping is banned again in all three states, and Wisconsin and Michigan government officials can’t kill wolves for preying on livestock or pets — only to protect human life.

Doug Peterson, president of the Minnesota Farmers Union, said he believes the ruling is already affecting farms and ranches, particularly smaller family farms where the loss of a cow or calf or two puts a big dent in incomes.

“At some point people are going to do what they’re going to do to protect their livestock. That ends up being a problem,” he said.

Idaho game management killing elk after killing wolves

Posted on by
1

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/idaho-game-management-killing-elk-after-killing-wolves/article/367461

By Justin King     Jan 26, 2014 in Environment
Boise – Ranchers in Idaho are asking the state government to help eliminate some of the state’s elk population. The state is halfway through the wolf season, which was said to have been introduced to stop the wolves from attacking elk.

A group from Mayfield claims that Idaho’s Department of Fish and Game has been unable to protect their livelihoods from elk herds which they say10846355_862436173776474_7314160412610807927_n are trampling their fences, crops, and causing other problems. The department currently allows a small group of hunters to participate in “depredation hunts,” in which the hunters are allowed to kill animals while hoping to drive the herds away.

Elk hunters have actively encouraged thinning the wolf population. Some have established co-ops to shoulder the cost of trapping wolves that are eating the prized trophy animals. Wolf trappers are paid up to $500 per kill.

Conservationists unsuccessfully attempted to stop the wolf hunts and predicted an explosion in the elk population if the wolf, an apex predator, was hunted. Tim Preso, an attorney representing the conservationists said of the wolf hunting efforts last week:

There is every reason to believe that this is not going to be a one-off, they have set a goal of inflating the elk population by removing wolves. According to their own plan that’s a multi-year undertaking. So I see every reason to believe that this is going to be a recurring activity.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, almost 900 wolves have been killed since they lost federal protection.

One of the proposed solutions to Mayfield’s problem is to move the herds closer to the areas where wolves roam.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/idaho-game-management-killing-elk-after-killing-wolves/article/367461#ixzz3Oeg1f3Xq

Polarized Wolf/Anti-Wolf groups battle with billboards

Posted on by
5

http://www.spokesman.com/outdoors/stories/2015/jan/11/polarized-wolf-groups-battle-with-billboards/

The Defenders of Wildlife launched a pro-wolf billboard campaign in the Spokane area this month to counter anti-wolf billboards.

2 / 2
Show captions
 By Rich Landers richl@spokesman.com(509) 459-5508

Opposing views of gray wolf recovery in Washington are on display in a Spokane-area battle of the billboards.

The Defenders of Wildlife, a national wildlife advocacy group, has contracted for nine billboard posters that appeared this month. The message responds to a similar outdoor advertising campaign initiated in November by an anti-wolf group called Washington Residents Against Wolves.

Four of the eight WARAW billboards feature photos of a deer, an elk, a calf, a dog and a young girl on a swing with the text: “The Wolf – Who’s Next on Their Menu?”

“What we want is for people to ask very serious questions about the presence of wolves in Washington State before the reality confronts them,” said WARAW spokesman Luke Hedquist in a media release introducing the campaign.

In response, Defenders has put up nine billboards with the headline “Reality Check! What’s More Dangerous?” Four images help answer the question based on average deaths per year in the United States: “Lightning 33. ATVs 413. Elevators 26. Wolves 0.”

“We just want to cut through the myths to the facts,” said Shawn Cantrell, Defenders Northwest director based in Seattle.

Gray wolves remain under state endangered species protections in Washington as they naturally reoccupy their native range in the state.

More: http://www.spokesman.com/outdoors/stories/2015/jan/11/polarized-wolf-groups-battle-with-billboards/

Coyote hunter kills a wolf by mistake near Beaver

Posted on by
7

Courtesy | Arizona Game and Fish Department This wolf was photographed Oct. 27 near the north rim of the Grand Canyon. On Friday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife confirmed through DNA analysis of its feces that it is a female gray wolf from the Northern Rockies that must have migrated 450 miles through Colorado and/or Utah to reach Arizona.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/1999741-155/utah-hunter-kills-wolf-near-beaver

A hunter mistook a gray wolf for a coyote Sunday near Beaver, shooting and killing the protected 70-pound animal, Utah wildlife officials confirmed Monday.

The 3-year-old female wolf had been collared in Cody, Wyo., in January 2014. Wildlife officials and advocacy groups wonder if the dead animal is the same wolf that had been hanging around the North Rim of the Grand Canyon in recent months.

The hunter shot the wolf about five miles east of Beaver on the south end of southwestern Utah’s Tushar Mountains and called Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) law-enforcement officials upon noticing the collar. State conservation officers then contacted the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

“We are still investigating,” DWR director Greg Sheehan said, “but it seems initially that it was a case of mistaken identity.”

Sheehan said the hunter could face citations for killing the animal, federally protected in that part of Utah under the Endangered Species Act. The Fish & Wildlife Service will conduct the probe.

The weekend shooting is the first documented killing of a gray wolf in Utah by a hunter since officials reintroduced the animals into Yellowstone National Park and Idaho in the mid-1990s.

A 3-year-old male wolf was found dead in a leg-hold trap in Box Elder County in 2006. Another collared male wolf was found alive in a trap near Morgan in 2002 and taken back to Yellowstone.

“This is a very sad day for wolf conservation and for Utah,” said Kirk Robinson, executive director of the Salt Lake City-based Western Wildlife Conservancy. “All competent wildlife biologists already know that coyote hunting, including our state bounty program, is ineffective, and therefore a waste of money — and now we see that it is also a threat to other wildlife and to wolf recovery.”

Utah offers a $50 bounty for coyotes under the Mule Deer Preservation Act. In the second year of the program, which concluded June 30, more than 7,000 coyotes were turned in for the monetary reward.

Earlier this month, someone took a picture of what appears to be a wolf crossing Highway 14 east of Cedar City. It is possible, Sheehan said, that the wolf killed Sunday was the same animal spotted in Cedar Canyon and the Grand Canyon.

The Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity says the proximity of Beaver to the North Rim makes it likely that the dead wolf, named Echo in an online naming contest, came from the Grand Canyon area.

“It’s heartbreaking that another far-wandering wolf has been cut down with a fatal gunshot,” the center’s Michael Robinson said in a release. “This female wolf could have helped wolves naturally recover in remote regions of Utah and neighboring states. Federal authorities need to conduct a full investigation into this latest killing, which is part of a disturbing pattern.”

Biologists say the collars on the animal killed Sunday and the Grand Canyon wolf appear to be different.

In August, wildlife officials confirmed a wolf sighting in northeastern Utah’s Uinta Mountains. That animal, believed to be a large male that had been collared near Canada’s border with Idaho, has not been spotted since September. His radio collar was failing at the time and there have been no new sightings of that wolf.

brettp@sltrib.com

Twitter: @BrettPrettyman

Some Sad News: Missing wolf hunters found safe

Posted on by
12

spent 2 nights stuck in snow.

528624c939a88_preview-620

BUTTE – A father and son who were hunting wolves and hadn’t been seen since Saturday morning have been found safe, according to the Beaverhead County Sheriff’s office.

Scott, 56, and Conrad, 33, McDougal were located in a southwest portion of Beaverhead County, approximately 40 miles from Dell Montana. The father and son got stuck in deep snow and spent two nights with their vehicle. Both are in reasonably good condition.

Early Sunday afternoon, Beaverhead Search and Rescue was called to help find the pair. The hunters did not provide relatives information concerning their hunt. Searchers could only identify a starting point based upon the hunters usual activity.

Search members used four-wheel drive trucks and all-terrain vehicles to comb the area outside of Dell, in the area of Sage Creek, until 10 p.m. Sunday.

A helicopter from Lifeflight in Butte assisted as well. Weather was problematic, sheriff Jay Hansen said.

On Monday, 16 searchers planned to work with fixed-wing aircraft and searchers using trucks and ATV’s…

More: http://missoulian.com/news/local/missing-wolf-hunters-found-safe-spent-nights-stuck-in-snow/article_05fa76d0-1196-5949-a29c-1237acad6fad.html