Archive for May, 2013
In the News: U.S. Sued Over Policy on Killing Endangered Wildlife
Posted in Wolf Current Events, Wolf Preservation Efforts on May 30, 2013| 6 Comments »
Minnesota Court of Appeals Dismisses Petition Challenging Wolf Hunting and Trapping
Posted in Wolf Current Events on May 29, 2013| 2 Comments »
Minnesota Court of Appeals Dismisses Petition Challenging Wolf Hunting and Trapping
“ST. PAUL, MN (May 28, 2013) – The Minnesota Court of Appeals today dismissed the petition challenging wolf hunting and trapping on the basis of standing, not on the basis of the merits of the case. The Court found that the petitioners (Center for Biological Diversity, Howling For Wolves) did not adequately persuade the Court that sufficient standing was held to challenge the rulemaking process implemented by the MN DNR for the inaugural wolf hunting and trapping season.
“It’s hard to put into words our disappointment and sense of injustice over this decision.” said Dr. Hackett, founder of Howling For Wolves. “Minnesotans have a legitimate concern about the care and management of our wolves and all our natural resources. The public’s input should not be disregarded just because it’s convenient for the DNR.”
Since 1995, the MN DNR has authorized 200 of the 202 hunting rules using the expedited emergency rulemaking process that bypasses any opportunities for public input. Hackett states, “When the public is cut out of the process for public agency decisions and rulemaking, then bad stuff can happen, like the agency becomes hostage to special interests with special demands.”
The requirement that the DNR have a formal public comment was the law prior to the start of the inaugural 2012 wolf hunting season. But the DNR only offered an online survey where the actual rule which would have described to the public the methods allowed to kill wolves, was not published. Nearly 80% of respondents to the informal DNR online survey opposed the wolf hunt. But this response was ignored by the DNR.
A recent Lake Research Partners poll found that 79% of respondents agreed that the wolf is a valuable asset to Minnesota and one that should be protected for future generations. The majority (66%) also opposed trapping and snaring wolves for sport.
Howling For Wolves is analyzing the Court’s decision and considering its options. Despite today’s legal news, Howling For Wolves has plans and opportunities going forward to forge a peaceful existence for the wolf in Minnesota.
Howling For Wolves was created to be a voice for wild wolves and those who are concerned with their survival. We aim to educate the public about our wolf population and the advocacy that is necessary to keep wild wolves in a self-sustaining existence. For more information and resources: www.howlingforwolves.org
Maureen Hackett, M.D., the founder of Howling For Wolves, is a physician, a triple board certified forensic psychiatrist, and a former United State Air Force officer. In 2003, Hackett was instrumental in the passage of Minnesota law providing for tobacco-free state hospital grounds.”
**Special thanks to Contact: Maureen Hackett, MD 612-250-5915
hackett@howlingforwolves.org, for providing this information!
Arizona endangered wolves still on the brink
Posted in Wolf Current Events, Wolf Preservation Efforts on May 26, 2013| 5 Comments »
Wolf-relocation project struggles as lobos fall prey to guns and cars…
By Brandon Loomis The Republic | azcentral.com, Sat May 25, 2013 11:25 PM
“ALPINE — A brown-streaked wolf — named Ernesta by her admiring captors — bounded from a crate and onto Arizona soil. She carries in her womb the newest hopes for a rare native species that is struggling to regain a footing in the Southwest.
Her government-sponsored April 25 relocation with her mate, from New Mexico’s Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge to a mountain south of Alpine, was the first in the state for a captive-bred pair of Mexican gray wolves in more than four years.
The last time a new canine couple sniffed freedom in these mountains, in fall 2008, they didn’t last the winter. Someone shot the female almost immediately, and the male disappeared by February.
“It’s a tough life for wolves in the wild,” Endangered Wolf Center animal-care director Regina Mossotti said after watching the latest pair bolt from their crates last month in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests. The Missouri non-profit center is part of a breeding program and has nurtured both of the transplanted wolves at times. Mossotti felt a special kinship with the female she helped raise, and she was a little anxious.
“It’s like seeing a child graduate from high school and go off into the world,” Mossotti said.
There is reason to worry.
Fifteen years after America reintroduced lobos to the Southwest, only 75 ran wild at the end of 2012. Officials celebrated that record high as a small victory, but it’s a tenth of what scientists on a 2005 panel proposed as a recovery goal. Humans have killed dozens of reintroduced wolves, mostly through illegal shootings and vehicle collisions.
As of 2011, the federal, state and tribal agencies involved estimated they had spent about $26 million studying, breeding and restoring Mexican wolves over about 20 years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service paid the biggest share, nearly $17 million. The Arizona Game and Fish Department paid $2.5 million and used another $3 million in federal funds.
Wolf advocates fear the animals’ extinction unless the government increases the frequency of the releases, adopts a population goal and extends the wolf a welcome mat beyond the current recovery area in far eastern Arizona and western New Mexico — perhaps to the Grand Canyon’s North Rim. Those are long-sought wishes that have languished as ranchers and hunters pushed back and the government stuck with a plan that limits wolves to the Blue Mountains.
“The Mexican wolf’s fate really hangs in the balance between the promise that we’ve long heard of scientific management and the reality that we’ve long experienced of politicized management,” said Michael Robinson, New Mexico-based wolf advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity.
Conflict in cattle country
John Hand has raised cattle across the state line in Catron County, N.M., since 1953. He said the Fish and Wildlife Service made a mistake bringing wolves back. It’s ranch country, he said, and the unavoidable conflicts mean the restoration is “doomed to fail.”
Wildlife agents confirmed wolves killed 18 cattle and one mule last year. The previous year’s toll was 20 cattle, a horse and a sheep. An interagency compensation fund helps offset losses.
Although wolves enjoy federal protection as an endangered species, their status here as an experimental population gives ranchers a right to defend cattle. They can legally shoot wolves that are attacking their stock on private land, and can report them to government officials for potential agency-directed trapping or killing after repeated offenses on public lands.
“I don’t want them on (our ranch),” Hand said. “If they come here, it’s not something we’ll tolerate. We’d probably shoot them. Our neighbor shot one not too long ago.”
That means Ernesta and family are endangered in more than just the legal sense.
Since she was relocated near Alpine, Ernesta, also known as F1126, is thought to have whelped an unknown number of pups and nursed them in a wooden denning box inside a fenced enclosure with a 473-foot perimeter. There the animals are getting acclimated and nervously accepting road-kill offerings until early June, when biologists will swing open the gates and leave the wolves to the forest. The pair are the 93rd and 94th captive-reared Mexican wolves released by federal biologists.
If they avoid bullets, bumpers, snakes, lightning and every other hazard that has prematurely killed 92 lobos since their 1998 reintroduction, they will form what biologists are calling the Coronado Pack. They also must avoid killing livestock and keep their distance from homes, or they could face the management actions that have killed another 12.
It’s a big “if” for the Mexican gray wolf, a subspecies of gray wolves that has not rebounded from the brink the way its larger cousins did in the northern Rockies after they were reintroduced in the 1990s. Canadian transplants there have produced thousands of offspring in the Yellowstone and central Idaho wildernesses.
Arizona lacks the vast, roadless forests of the north. Yellowstone National Park alone is half the size of the Mexican wolf’s currently designated recovery zone.
Another difference, according to Mexican wolf recovery coordinator Sherry Barrett, is that the northern wolves were transplanted from the wild and not from captivity. Biologists and veterinarians try to minimize human contact in captivity, but the animals are comparatively naive when released.
The Southwestern lobos also are smaller than their cousins — about 60 to 80 pounds — and are not impervious to elk hooves and antlers.
Then there’s the shooting.
“All of these wolves are relatively accessible,” Barrett said. “Whether it’s malicious or mistaken identity, we do experience regular mortality.”
Illegal shootings — 46 so far and four prosecutions — are an echo of an eradication program earlier in the 20th century, when ranchers and government trackers shot and poisoned Mexican gray wolves almost to extinction.
By the early 1980s, the species was down to seven genetically distinct animals to start a captive breeding program.
From those, dozens of wildlife centers have bred and maintained up to 300 at a time in captivity (currently 258). Attitudes toward wolves softened as ecologists stressed predators’ role in maintaining natural ecosystems, and former Arizona governor and U.S. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt oversaw the wolf’s initial return during the Clinton administration.
A controversial return
The return was controversial, especially in the small towns most affected. Travis Udall, an Eagar school superintendent and a hunter, said wolves have struck the deer population and sometimes have struck fear in people.
“We’ve had a couple wolves follow us when we were hunting,” Udall said. “They say it’s curiosity, but it’s kind of unnerving.”
The recovery program generates hard feelings, he said. Locals feel imposed upon in a way they might not if wolves were left to recover or fade on their own.
“It feels forced,” he said.
Arizona has at times been a wary partner in the restoration. The Arizona Game and Fish Department in March said it wanted to hold the line at 100 wild Mexican wolves and remove endangered-species protections. A 1980s plan mentioned 100 as a first target, but wolf allies say that’s only because 100 seemed such a lofty goal from zero.
Managing for both hunters and animals can be tricky, and each release is made in consultation with the state.
“Wolves like to hunt elk and deer,” Game and Fish field team leader Chris Bagnoli said, “but so do people. So we want to make sure we have a good balance of all uses of the landscape.”
It would help, he said, if the program were permitted to spread beyond the Blue Mountains to dilute the local effects. But he said he believes the wolves are slowly breeding success. Their numbers grew by 15 in the last year. “I think we’re progressing,” he said.
Many conservationists hope that a new recovery plan will include two new wolf zones: one north of the Grand Canyon and one in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico. These would help disperse wolves to reduce in-breeding — which reduces litter sizes — and protect against extinction during disease outbreaks.
“All of the science done to date points to the fact that there’s good habitat for wolves and good prey in northern New Mexico, southern Colorado and the Grand Canyon eco-region,” said Eva Sargent, Southwest program director for the non-profit Defenders of Wildlife. “The (Fish and Wildlife) Service really needs to be paving the way for all of that to happen. But instead of paving the way, I can tell you that the recovery team hasn’t met since 2011.”
That year, Utah’s governor and wildlife chief learned that the Fish and Wildlife Service was considering adding southern Utah to the wolf-recovery zone. Utah’s forests could offer spillover habitat for wolves released around the Grand Canyon. They wrote a letter to Washington in protest.
No detailed recovery plan
The program is operating under a 1982 plan that didn’t spell out conditions to meet before removing Endangered Species Act protections. The Fish and Wildlife Service had said it would produce a detailed plan last year, but it hasn’t. Barrett declined to say when it would be completed, and said discussions about potential recovery zones are internal.
The wild population needs more new blood like Ernesta and her pups, Sargent said. But without a science-based plan, the creature faces “extinction by bureaucratic delay.”
Barrett and Arizona officials say there are reasons not to rush releases, especially in family groups. First, the wolves must be monitored together to ensure that they bond and that they are wary of humans. They are conditioned against cattle predation with a nauseating substance fed to them in ground beef. There also has to be a promising, unoccupied range available for a new pack, and by rule the government can only release captive-bred wolves on the Arizona side of the recovery zone.
“We’re learning as we go,” Barrett said.
“It has been very, very slow,” said Phil Hedrick, an Arizona State University conservation biologist and geneticist. He twice served on Mexican wolf recovery planning teams that the Fish and Wildlife Service shut down without writing guidelines or population goals. He fears federal and state biologists have missed their window of opportunity for maximizing genetic diversity.
“The reasons why the numbers haven’t gone up are based on the killing,” Hedrick said, “and lack of active management.”
His last participation was in 2005, when he and other scientists recommended 750 wolves in three distinct populations. After that meeting, silence. The Bush administration never codified that plan and never explained why.
In the meantime, the Coronado Pack is getting the best start possible.
In New Mexico, a veterinarian vaccinated the parents and poured alcohol on their foot pads to help them cool down after a wall of 22 volunteers and agency workers closed in and spooked them into a box where they could be pinned by steel bars and blindfolded for safe transport.
In Arizona, they emerged into daylight just down a gravel road from the ignition point of the massive 2011 Wallow Fire. The largest wildfire in state history torched trees but recharged grass and shrub growth that should feed lots of elk and deer. The elements of a good life are all there.
Now it’s on Ernesta to live or die.”
**Special thanks to By Brandon Loomis The Republic | azcentral.com, for providing this information!
Activists say wolf-killer is baiting the animals
Posted in Wolf Current Events on May 11, 2013| 3 Comments »
This 2013 photo provided by Horsefeathers Photography shows a black wolf wearing a VHF radio collar that identifies it as Wolf “831F,” a member of the Yellowstone National Park ’s Canyon pack, in Swan Lake, Mont. Big game outfitter William Hoppe shot and killed this female wolf near where 13 sheep were killed in April. Leaders of a wolf advocacy group said Hoppe is intentionally luring the animals by leaving dead sheep carcasses in a pile. Photo: Horsefeathers Photography, Brad Orsted
May 8, 2013
“BOZEMAN, Mont. (AP) — A big game outfitter who shot and killed a collared wolf from Yellowstone National Park is intentionally luring the animals by leaving dead sheep carcasses in a pile, leaders of a wolf advocacy group said.
“Make no mistake about that, it’s definitely intentional baiting,” Marc Cooke, president of Wolves of the Rockies, told The Associated Press on Wednesday.
William Hoppe shot and killed a 2-year old, female wolf Sunday near where 13 sheep were killed in April. He notified Fish, Wildlife and Parks warden Chris Kerin that he killed the wolf using one of his two shoot-on-sight permits the agency issued after the sheep were killed, the Bozeman Daily Chronicle (http://bit.ly/17LAEJ5) reported Wednesday. The permits are valid for 45 days and only allow wolves to be shot on the property where the sheep were killed.
In mid-April, Hoppe, an outspoken opponent of wolves, bought about 30 sheep and started raising them on his property along the Yellowstone River near Gardiner.
On April 24, he awakened to find that two wolves had killed five ewes and eight lambs.
Hoppe “deliberately put the sheep on his property … knowing that the wolves would kill them,” Cooke charged.
Hoppe told the Chronicle he was going to move the rest of the sheep closer to his house and that he had disposed of the dead sheep in a bone pile in the area where they were killed.
“This man needs to be held accountable for baiting,” said Kim Beam, vice president of Wolves of the Rockies. She said the issue would be raised at Thursday’s Fish, Wildlife and Parks commission meeting in Helena, where commissioners will consider the 2013 wolf hunting season.
Animals such as wolves and grizzly bears can smell carcasses a mile away and sometimes further, said Doug Smith, a Yellowstone National Park wolf biologist. He said the wolf that was killed Sunday may have been attracted by the decaying meat.
Smith said information from the wolf’s radio collar indicated that she was not involved in killing Hoppe’s sheep.
Hoppe is a former president of the Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd. In January, he opposed the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission’s decision to close wolf hunting around Yellowstone National Park. He argues wolves are driving down the elk population in the area.
He did not return a phone call seeking comment.”
Special thanks to http://www.chron.com/default/article/Activists-say-wolf-killer-is-baiting-the-animals-4498538.php for providing this information!
Second wolf confirmed rabid in interior Alaska
Posted in Wolf Current Events on May 3, 2013| Leave a Comment »
“ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A second interior Alaska wolf has tested positive for rabies, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game announced Thursday.
A trapper captured the wolf March 15 near Chandalar Lake near the foothills of the Brooks range about 185 miles north of Fairbanks, the same general location as a rabid wolf shot last month. The trapper killed the wolf, skinned it and fed raw meat from the carcass to his dog team, said spokeswoman Cathie Harms. The five dogs are in quarantine in Fairbanks.
The dogs had been vaccinated for rabies but will be given booster shots, the department said.
Rabies, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is a viral disease that can infect mammals, including humans. It’s usually transmitted through bites but can also spread by coming into contact with infected nerve tissue such as brains or spinal cords.
The rabies virus infects the central nervous system and can cause death, according to the CDC.
Rabies is regularly detected in Arctic foxes along Alaska’s west and north coasts but had not been found south of the Brooks Range since statehood in 1959, the department said.
“We’re still trying to get a clearer picture of the current situation, especially in wolves in the Chandalar Lake area,” Dr. Kimberlee Beckmen, a department veterinarian, said in the announcement. “We’d really like to hear from the people who have seen wolves or other wildlife acting abnormally in that area. Abnormal behavior can also be caused by diseases other than rabies, such as distemper, so a test of brain tissue is required for a definitive diagnosis of the disease.”
Both rabid wolves exhibited abnormal behavior when they were killed.
Wolves normally are shy, but a trapper who shot the wolf last month said the animal had closely approached him.
The trapper, a man who lives near Palmer, took the animal home with him and cut himself while skinning it. Worried that the animal may have been infected, he sent the head in for testing and discarded the rest of the carcass in a wooded area.
When the department confirmed rabies, which can be spread to other animals that eat nerve tissue such as brains or spinal cords, the carcass was retrieved. The carcass had been scavenged, but the spinal cord had not been disturbed, officials said.
The wolf caught in a leg trap March 15 was alive when the trapper approached but appeared dull and unaware, the department said.
The trapper killed the animal, skinned it and fed the raw meat to his dogs.
Beckman said they should not have been fed the carcass.
“It’s very dangerous to feed raw carcasses of wildlife, especially carnivores, to pets,” Beckmen said. “Pets can not only become infected, they can then transmit diseases and parasites to their owners, rabies, tularemia and echinococcus being the most serious.”
Echinococcus is a bacterial infection, Harms said.
Rabies had not been diagnosed in the region in 54 years of statehood, but archived territorial reports document cases of rabies in fox and dogs in interior Alaska, the department said.
Beckmen said she’s looking for more samples from the heads of wolves, wolverines, foxes or coyotes killed near the Chandalar Lakes or Fortymile River areas.
Rabies has been detected over the winter along the north and west coasts and more cases are expected in the arctic fox and red fox populations. Village dogs, the department said, are vulnerable to infection from foxes.
Alaska health officials warn trappers and hunters to wear gloves when skinning animals, wash wounds with soap and water, wash knives after cutting off heads and avoid cutting into brains or spinal cords.”
Special thanks to DAN JOLING, Associated Press, for providing the information in this post!



