Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Wolf Current Events’ Category


Looking back:  December 2012

“Montana and Wyoming hunts ruin Park’s study of how many elk wolves eat, wolf movements, pack territories-

While the official stance of Yellowstone Park is that the three state wolf hunt that has been going on along the Park’s boundaries has not jeopardized the Park’s wolf population (now down to 81 wolves), it certainly killed the Park’s wolf project’s  research on wolf habits such as how many and where wolves eat elk, bison, deer, and the like.  Not only that, but the loss of the 3 GPS collars which  tracked wolf movements 24/7 makes it so it cannot be known if the wolves have killed what they eat or whether they find a carcass (or steal it from lion, bear, coyotes, etc.).

Other Yellowstone wolves killed in the wolf hunt while on a foray outside the Park had regular (standard) collars.  Uncollared wolves were killed too, and most of these carcasses probably gave no indication they were basically Park wolves. The number in this category is not known, but it is a reasonable assumption that the true Park wolf population today is actually less than 81.

Science Insider has a detailed article on what the death of the 3 GPS-collared wolves means. Hunters Kill Another Radio-Collared Yellowstone National Park Wolf.  by Virginia Morell. Ms. Morell interviewed Dr. Douglas Smith, the head of the Park’s wolf project.

Most of the Wyoming wolf hunt units have closed now and Montana will not allow wolf trapping along the Park boundary when their first wolf trapping season begins Friday, Dec. 15. The wolf hunt goes on in Idaho where it is almost endless, but not many wolves migrate directly out of the Park into Idaho because the expansive Madsion Plateau sits in the way to Idaho.  It has almost no prey … little habitat for ungulates.”

**Special thanks to Dr. Ralph Maughan, professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guide.

Read Full Post »


Monday, October 21st, 2013

WELCOMING WOLVES BACK TO CALIFORNIA – A RANCHER’S PERSPECTIVE

“My husband and I live on the Bar C R ranch in Petaluma, CA where we run 300 mother cows using predator friendly ranching methods. I am also an advisory board member of Project Coyote – a coalition of educators, scientists and predator-friendly ranchers who promote coexistence between people and wildlife. As someone who understands the importance and benefits that predators provide to both ranch lands and entire eco systems, I want to see the wolf recover in California.

Last week I spoke at a rally in Sacramento in support of maintaining federal protections for wolves under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)- and against a proposal put forth by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to delist wolves from the ESA. To delist wolves would be wrong in so many ways; these important canids are keystone species and necessary for the balance and health of wild creatures and wild places.  To delist would be unscientific, counter-productive, and financially wasteful.

As important apex predators, wolves need and deserve protection across their historical range. And as they try to expand into their former range, they run the gauntlet of misinformed management that results in their needless death. Wolves are unaware that they are crossing political boundaries where they will face ever-changing policies ranging from excessive killing to nearly full protection. If they are not consistently protected with sound conservation strategies now, how will delisting improve their peril?

Many management tools and techniques have proven successful in preventing attacks on livestock. Ranchers who use non-lethal methods report lower losses from predation than those who use lethal methods. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well as USDA Wildlife Services and State Fish and Game departments can promote and improve non-lethal methods.

Unfortunately, old traditions—even bad ones—die hard, and some ranchers will continue to engage in their war on wildlife, however real or imagined the threats might be. Delisting wolves sends ranchers the message that it is unnecessary for them to have systems in place to help prevent wolves from attacking their livestock in the first place.

Why are Wildlife Services, State Fish and Game department and hunters allowed a functional open season on wolves? They are ready and willing to kill any wolf that is considered a problem. The truth is, the wolf really isn’t the problem- rather it’s lack of coordinated management where wolves cross from a protected area to a kill zone: lack of effective management that provides good healthy habitat with sufficient game populations that together deter wolves from killing livestock and; lack of cost-effective management that should promote and implement non-lethal control measures.

In the last two centuries, we have shot, gassed, poisoned, trapped, and snared: bison, prairie dogs, badgers, grizzly bears, coyotes, wolves, foxes, bobcats and more, all because they pose some sort of threat to livestock.

Meanwhile, the American public has started to see that these animals we are killing actually play a valuable role in our ecosystem, and maybe the slash- and- burn way we are ‘controlling’ wildlife isn’t sustainable. We overharvest the natural prey for predators like wolves; we take away their habitat and replace it with domestic livestock with little protection. We create the very problem that wolves are being killed for.

Ranchers should welcome the wolves back into California, not only for the ecological benefits they bring but because wolves were in California long before our sheep and cattle, and if we force the public to choose, they might decide that wolves are a more valuable resource than our livestock. If we devoted just half the money, time and energy towards learning to coexist with wolves as we have towards our war against them, livestock producers could save countless lives on both sides of the fence, while also building a new reputation as an ecologically responsible industry that has learned from its mistakes. We all would win.  And then and only then might you might consider delisting the wolf from the endangered species list.”

**Special thanks to Keli Hendricks, a predator friendly cattle rancher from Petaluma, California who serves on the Advisory board of Project Coyote, for providing this information!  http://www.sandiegolovesgreen.com/welcoming-wolves-back-to-california-a-ranchers-perspective/

Read Full Post »


MALAMUTE
Photo courtesy of ARTHUR MOURATIDIS/for the Missoulian
Layne Spence pauses as he describes to the Missoulian the moments leading up to the death of his Malamute Little Dave, 2, while skiing at Lee Creek near Lolo Pass on Sunday. Spence reported that a hunter carrying an assault rifle allegedly shot Little Dave, one of his three Malamutes, multiple times as the group was cross-country skiing, claiming he thought the canine was a wolf.
“Layne Spence’s pet malamute, Little Dave.

Here’s the Great Falls Tribune article in its entirety:

Written by John S. Adams

Tribune Capital Bureau

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201311200500/NEWS01/311200023

HELENA –  Layne Spence went out into the woods west of Missoula on a Sunday afternoon to do what he loves to do best: recreate in Montana’s outdoors with his three beloved malamutes.

Spence, an avid outdoorsman, drove to the Lolo National Forest’s Lee Creek campground, an area the agency touts on its website for its “winter recreation opportunities such as cross-country skiing and snowmobiling.”

The area also is popular with hunters and trappers.

Spence parked his truck, turned on his dogs’ lighted collars, clipped into his cross-country skis and set off down the snow-covered forest road.

Within minutes of starting out on his trek with his dogs Rex, Frank and Little Dave, Spence said he heard a gunshot from up ahead. Spence said he looked up from road just as Little Dave’s hind leg was struck by a bullet. Spence said a man, dressed mostly in camouflage, was standing on the road approximately 30 yards ahead of him and was aiming a semiautomatic assault rifle in his direction.

Merriam-Webster defines an assault rifle as “any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.”

“I started screaming at the top of my lungs, ‘No! No! Stop! Stop! You’re shooting my dog!,” Spence recalled, his voice still hoarse from yelling three days after the alleged incident.

Spence, a licensed emergency medical responder, said even though his dog was gravely wounded, he thought he had a chance to save him after the first shot. Even with a missing leg, Little Dave could live a full and happy life, Spence said later.

“I started running toward Little Dave, screaming the whole time and then I heard this ‘tat, tat, tat’ five or six more times,” Spence said. “Then Little Dave’s head just tilted over and he was dead.”

As Spence huddled over the body of his dead pet, the unidentified shooter approached him and told Spence he thought the dog was a wolf. According to Spence, the man asked if there was anything he could do. Spence he was distraught and screamed at the man to leave him alone.

“I was sitting there screaming, I was covered in blood, and I was trying to find my dog’s leg,” Spence recalled.

Spence said any responsible wolf hunter should have known his domestic dogs aren’t wolves. Spence said Little Dave bears a resemblance to the Ewok characters from the “Star Wars” films.

Local law enforcement authorities, state wildlife officials and U.S. Forest Service officials announced Tuesday that they spoke to the hunter involved in the incident.

According to a joint statement issued by the Missoula County Sheriff’s Office, the hunter broke no criminal or wildlife laws in the incident. Authorities said they are withholding the man’s name for his own safety.

“Based on the statements provided by both parties, it was determined that there was no malicious or purposeful intent to cause harm or injury to a domesticated animal on behalf of the hunter,” the statement read. “The Missoula County Attorney’s Office concurs with the Missoula County Sheriff’s Office that the facts of the incident do not fit the elements of any criminal statutes contained in Montana law …”

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks said the circumstances do not “constitute any egregious violation of Montana hunting regulations.”

“The incident was not enforceable by their agency because it involved a domesticated animal, rather than a game animal,” the statement read.

Debate ignites

Although authorities say no laws were broken, widespread news of the incident has outraged many outdoor enthusiasts and sparked debate over who is responsible for the safety of the nonhunting public and their pets on public lands during open hunting seasons.

Wolf hunting and trapping is legal in Montana, and so far 85 wolves have been killed during Montana’s 2013-2014 hunting and trapping season.

Hunters can hunt wolves with guns from Sept. 15 to March 15, and trapping runs from Dec. 15 to Feb. 28. Wolf hunters are only required to wear “hunter orange” during the five-week general rifle season. After Dec. 1, they can hunt until mid-March without wearing orange.

Matthew Koehler, executive director of the Missoula-based WildWest Institute, said as an environmentalist and a big-game hunter, he is deeply troubled by the reported actions of the hunter who allegedly shot Spence’s dog.

Koehler said state wildlife and law enforcement officials appear to be applying a different set of rules for wolf hunters than other big-game hunters.

“The first rule for any ethical hunter is to know your target,” Koehler said. “If FWP or law enforcement found out a hunter mistakenly shot a bull elk when the regulations only allowed the taking of antlerless elk, they would fine the hunter and perhaps even take away his license. It blows me away that in this case, authorities are apparently saying it’s OK for wolf hunters to shoot people’s pets on public lands and there are no consequences for those actions.”

Jerry Black is an anti-wolf hunting advocate who said Montana’s liberal wolf hunting laws put unreasonable onus on unarmed citizens to protect themselves and their pets from injury or death while recreating on public lands.

“What’s screwed up is this tragic incident shows that we as citizens out walking with our dogs, or out there hiking, fishing or skiing on public lands, it’s now our responsibility to not get shot,” Black said. “For six months out of the year, we’re under siege by wolf hunters who say it’s our responsibility to wear blaze orange.”

Changes coming?

Spence said he believes the man who shot Little Dave should lose his hunting privileges and have his guns taken away.

Spence said  the hunter violated hunting regulations, including shooting from a public roadway.

According to the 2013-2014 Montana wolf-hunting regulations, “it is illegal for anyone to hunt or attempt to hunt any wolf from, on or across any public highway or the shoulder, berm, barrow pit or right-of-way of any public highway …”

“I don’t want anything bad to happen to the guy. I just want an apology,” Spence said. “He has to be held accountable. I’m lucky to be alive. He was shooting right at me.”

Spence said he believes there needs to be stiff penalties on the books for hunters who endanger nonhunters or their pets through irresponsible actions. He said he hopes if anything good comes from the death of Little Dave, it will prevent future incidents like this from occurring.

“It could have happened to anyone. I could have had a child out there with me,” Spence said. “People need to be aware. I don’t want this to happen to anybody else.”

One state lawmaker is already talking about taking action in the 2015 Legislature.

Rep. Ellie Boldman Hill, D-Missoula, said on her Facebook page that she is considering proposing legislation making what happened on Sunday a crime. Hill is up for re-election in 2014.

Spence said he’s not opposed to hunting and has hunted in the past. However, Spence said he believes the use of a semiautomatic rifles should not be allowed for hunting.

Semiautomatic rifles are legal in Montana and no special permit is required to own them or hunt with them.

“Everybody has their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but irresponsibility and those kinds of weapons that allow you to fire off a bunch of rounds with a few quick squeezes of the trigger should be banned,” Spence said. “Assault weapons are not hunting rifles.””

**Special thanks to “Exposing the Big Game, http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2013/11/21/new-article-outdoorsman-seeks-action-after-pet-malamute-shot-killed-by-wolf-hunter/) for providing this information!

Read Full Post »


Red Wolf

Photo courtesy of Ryan Nordsven – U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
This young red wolf was born on St. Vincent Island, Fla., where the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service keeps a breeding pair. It was fitted with a radio collar in preparation for release to the wolf recovery area in North Carolina.

“Wolves have a terrible public relations problem that dates back many centuries.

In old fables, they’re constantly up to no good, stalking Little Red Riding Hood and blowing down the houses of the Three Little Pigs. Their storied reputation might explain why people are quick to put a price on their heads for killing livestock or simply showing their faces.

But recently in North Carolina, wildlife biologists flipped the script. They are offering a bounty of sorts for information leading to the capture of whoever who shot to death two rare red wolves.

That species of wolf is one of the world’s most endangered wild canids — a group that includes jackals, coyotes and dogs. The $21,000 reward was raised by animal rights organizations after the dead wolves were found Oct. 28 and Oct. 30 on the flat plains of Washington County, on the central Carolina coast.

Accelerometers pinging in the wolves’ tracking collars informed U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials that the animals’ hearts had stopped beating and led them to the dead bodies. The wolves were among 66 that authorities have tracked since they were old enough to wear collars.

The animals are monitored as part of the government’s Red Wolf Recovery Program, to reestablish them in the Southeast after federally sanctioned bounties nearly wiped them out.

Today, only 90 to 100 live in the wild, and each death is a major blow to the federal government’s effort to restore red wolves in their native habitat.

Authorities said the dead wolves were of breeding age, making their demise especially upsetting since there are too few adults to produce enough litters to reestablish the species.

“When we lose an animal, that obviously has an impact on a very small population,” said David Rabon, recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife program. While there are 90 wolves in the wild, that doesn’t mean 45 of them have coupled. “About 13 pairs are breeding,” Rabon said.

Red wolves were once a lot more common in the Southeast, biologists say. Their numbers were reduced by predator control programs that put prices on the heads of native wolves as people encroached on their range. By the 1960s, they were on the brink of surviving only in zoos and museums.

The Fish and Wildlife Service listed the wolves as endangered in 1967 and frantically attempted to rebuild the population. Seventeen remaining red wolves were captured by biologists, and most went into a program that preserves their gene pool and breeds them.

With no more red wolves in the wild, they were declared extinct in the Southeast in 1980. It took seven years to breed enough of them to start a restoration program on theAlligator River National Wildlife Refuge in North Carolina’s rural northeast.

About 100 wolves roam an expanded range that includes three wildlife refuges on nearly 2 million acres. An additional 200 red wolves are in breeding, part of a Species Survival Plan in locations across the United States.

There is another species in North America: the gray wolf, or Canis lupus, with an even more fearsome and, many say, unearned reputation. In an ongoing battle with encroaching ranchers, gray wolves killed more than 250 sheep and about 90 cattle last year in Idaho alone.

In response, hunters in the state killed 330 wolves in 2012, and about 200 in 2011, according to the Agriculture Department.

Red wolves, or Canis rufus, are slimmer and slightly smaller than their gray cousins. They are sometimes mistaken for coyotes, which is problematic because that more plentiful group isn’t native to North Carolina and can be shot any day but Sunday, Rabon said.

Coyotes bow to bigger red wolves. If a red wolf wants a coyote’s territory, it takes it. Adult red wolves weigh up to 80 pounds, stand about 26 inches tall and measure four feet long, from nose to tail. But calling them red is a bit of an overstatement. The wolves “are mostly brown and buff colored with some black along their backs,” according to a Fish and Wildlife description.

Rabon doesn’t know why anyone would want to kill them. There are few documented cases of a healthy wolf or coyote attacking a person, he said.

“We have documented less than a dozen cases where a red wolf took livestock in 27 years,” Rabon said. Most of the time the culprit is man’s best friend — a dog. Or coyotes.

Red wolves eat white-tail deer, rabbits, rats, mice and the invasive nutria, also known as the invasive swamp rat from South America.

On the coastal Carolina plain where the wolves were reintroduced, there are no livestock to protect. The land is planted with corn, soy, wheat, cotton and pine grown on plantations, Rabon said.

Six red wolves were killed this year by gunfire, three were hit by vehicles, and one died by some other circumstance, perhaps caught in a trap, Rabon said. In the three previous years, 21 were shot.

Rabon said the motive could be the fearsome reputation of wolves, spread through fables or stories of gray-wolf hunting packs out West that are strong and smart enough to bring down enormous prey such as bison.

The bounty raised by several organizations, including the Humane Society of the United States, the North Carolina Wildlife Federation and the Center for Biological Diversity, reflects the outrage over the killings.

In a statement, Fish and Wildlife officials hoping to bring them back extolled the red wolf’s good looks. “As their name suggests, red wolves are known for the characteristic reddish color of their fur most apparent behind the ears and along the neck and legs.”

**Special thanks to “The Charlotte Observer” for providing this information!  (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/11/13/4462716/a-wolf-bounty-not-in-nc-in-a-switch.html#.UoWNf0Yo7IV)

Read Full Post »


Photo courtesy of PhotoBucketSnow Gray Wolf

“HOUGHTON — This month Isle Royale National Park will hold a series of public meetings to discuss the status of wolf management on the island. During the meetings, the Natural Resources team will present information about the history of wolves on Isle Royale, climate change implications, and current and future status. The presentation will be followed by an opportunity for the public to discuss natural resources, ecology, climate change, and wildlife management as well as ask questions and provide comments to park staff.*

“Isle Royale has a long-standing history of broad ecosystem management,” commented Park Superintendent Phyllis Green. “I hope the public takes this opportunity to become more informed on the natural resources of the island.”

The first of these meetings will be held from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. this Tuesday, Nov. 12, at the Franklin Square Inn, 820 Shelden Ave., Houghton. The presentation will begin at 3:30 p.m. followed by an open house.

Additional public meetings will be held as follows:

Public Meeting 2: Chelsea, Michigan
Date: Thursday, Nov. 14,  2013
Location: Chelsea Depot, 125 Jackson Street
Time: 3 p.m. -5 p.m. (Presentation at 3:30 p.m. followed by open house)

Public Meeting 3: St. Paul, Minnesota
Date: Tuesday, Nov. 19,  2013
Location: TBA.
Time: 3 p.m. – 5 p.m. (Presentation at 3:30 p.m. followed by open house)

Public Meeting 4: Duluth, Minnesota
Date: Wednesday, Nov. 20, 2013
Location: Environmental Protection Agency Mid-Continent Ecology Division Laboratory, 6201 Congdon Boulevard
Time: 3 p.m. – 5 p.m. (Presentation at 3:30 p.m. followed by open house)

* Editor’s Note:  According to Rolf Peterson, co-director of the Isle Royale Wolf-Moose Study, the National Park Service (NPS) is considering three options: (1) do nothing, even if wolves go extinct; (2) allow wolves to go extinct (if that is what they do), and then introduce a new wolf population; or (3) conserve Isle Royale wolves with an action known as genetic rescue by bringing some wolves to the island to mitigate inbreeding. See “Message from Rolf Peterson: Public input needed on future of Isle Royale wolves,” posted on Keweenaw Now Oct. 11, 2013.”

**Special thanks to “Keweenaw Now” for providing this information!  (http://keweenawnow.blogspot.com/2013/11/isle-royale-national-park-to-hold.html)

Read Full Post »


Utah Wolf

Photo provided by “Standard Examiner” (http://www.standard.net/stories/2013/10/15/wolf-funding-audit-brings-out-political-divide)

By Antone Clark, Standard-Examiner correspondent

 Tue, 10/15/2013 – 1:54pm

“SALT LAKE CITY — A state audit of how funding was appropriated for a program to keep Canadian wolves out of the state raised some concerns about performance standards, but did little to solve the political divide the issue has generated.

State auditors released a seven-page review of legislative funding efforts to delist wolves in Utah on Tuesday, even as state officials claim the effort has been a success. A wildlife conservancy executive said the results have come in spite of state efforts, not because of them.

The findings of the audit, which covered four years and approximately $800,000 in state funds, were relatively minor. The audit recommended the Division of Wildlife resources amend its existing contract with Big Game Forever to include a more current plan for how the delisting effort will be carried out, replace the up-front contract payment with payments based on agreed upon performance standards and include the original requirement of maintaining accounting records available for state review.

The Legislature appropriated $300,000 on the issue in 2013, and another $300,000 is appropriated for the 2013-2014 fiscal year with BGF, a group claiming the wolf population in the northwest is growing and thinning the herds of elk and moose.

Big Game Forever is a political action group that spun off Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. The group’s website claims that before wolves were introduced in Idaho the population of elk was 20,000. Now that population is 1,700.

The same trend is shown in Yellowstone Park, where the population of elk was also estimated to be at approximately 20,000 before wolves were introduced in the park. It said the elk herd is now down to 6,500.

“One of the things not brought out in the audit are the results of the money we spent. It’s been unbelievably successful,” Michael Styler, executive director for the Department of Natural Resources, said of the program. “The money we have spent has been well spent. The results are far more than I dream we could have accomplished with that.”

Kirk Robinson, executive director of Western Wildlife Conservancy, has a different take on state spending to delist wolves. He said there is no evidence that BGF’s efforts or state funding has had any direct impact on keeping the wolves out of Utah. He said there is actually evidence the big game group lobbied against the effort to delist wolves, before they took the contract with the state’s Division of Wildlife Resources.

Sen. Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake, has been outspoken against the program and said the Legislature appropriated money for a cause the DWR didn’t ask to have funded. He worried the state doesn’t have enough accountability for how non-profits handle state funds.

House Speaker Rebecca Lockhart, R-Provo, asked Styler if the DWR has asked for funding and was told no and said it would have been inappropriate to push for funding, not included in the governor’s budget.

Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said the state appropriates money to non-profits all the time.

“The bottom line here is this is a political issue. A lot of people don’t want the wolves delisted and a lot of people want the wolves delisted. That’s a political discussion we need to debate,” Niederhauser said.”

**Special thanks to Antone Clark, Standard-Examiner correspondent, for providing this information!

 

Read Full Post »


Wolf Bite

Noah Graham, 16, of Solway, Minn., demonstrates how he reached back and fought off a wolf that had clamped down on his head at a campground near Lake Winnibigoshish. (Photo credit:  Monte Draper, Bemidji Pioneer via AP)

“Tests results show that a wolf that bit a 16-year-old boy’s head at a northern Minnesota campground had severe deformities as well as brain damage, which likely explains the reason for the “unprecedented” freak attack, wildlife specialists said Thursday.

DNA tests results also confirmed that the gray wolf that was trapped and killed two days after the late-night attack is in fact the same wolf that bit the teen. The wolf tested negative for rabies.

All of that is a relief for the family of Noah Graham, the Solway, Minn., teen who was bit last month while lying on the ground, but not inside a tent, at a Chippewa National Forest campground near Lake Winnibigoshish. “We all felt 98 percent sure that was the animal,” Noah’s father, Scott Graham, said Thursday after Department of Natural Resources officials called him with the test results. “My concern was that the wolf was diseased and Noah could contract something. But that wasn’t the case.”

The rare encounter last month was Minnesota’s first documented wild wolf attack on a human that resulted in a significant injury.

The day before the attack, the wolf had been seen in and around the campground, said Dan Stark, the DNR’s large carnivore specialist. “It bit into a tent. Punctured an air mattress. It was standing on a picnic table — things you wouldn’t expect a wild wolf to do. He was never aggressive, and he never approached anybody.

“So why did it bite somebody? Whether it actually knew what it was biting into is probably unlikely. It was biting something on the ground, and it happened to bite into somebody’s head,” Stark said.

Results from the wolf necropsy conducted by the University of Minnesota Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory show the wolf, estimated to be 1½ years old, suffered from a severe facial deformity, dental abnormalities and brain damage caused by infection. Anibal Armien, university pathologist and veterinarian, said it’s likely the wolf experienced a traumatic injury as a pup and those injuries developed into abnormalities that caused the brain damage.

Those deformities and abnormalities likely hampered its ability to effectively capture wild prey, said Michelle Carstensen, DNR wildlife health program supervisor. The wolf’s stomach contained only fish spines and scales.

The wolf’s problems also likely predisposed it to be less wary of people and human activities than what’s normally observed in healthy wild wolves, Carstensen said.

That “strongly explains” why the animal was behaving the way it was and why it was searching for food around the campground, Stark said. “It’s surprising that a wolf in this condition survived to this point given its reduced ability to survive in the wild.”

Attacking a human is “definitely abnormal and unusual,” Stark said. “Occasionally … we get nuisance complaints of wolves in people’s yards and interactions with pets, but rarely is there any aggression toward people. This kind of thing is unprecedented.”

Stark said there have been two other attacks by wolves in Minnesota but neither resulted in injury. One happened to a logger in the 1970s, and the other was to a rabbit hunter a decade later.

The Solway teen suffered multiple puncture wounds and a laceration to his head that required staples. He also received rabies shots.

“He’s pretty healed up,” his father said while walking through the woods partridge hunting with his two young daughters. “I don’t think [the attack] is going to curb any of our camping or hunting.”

But Noah Graham may find himself looking over his shoulder every now and then when he walks in the woods, his father said.

The teen often walked through the woods in the early morning darkness to his deer stand. “He never used a flashlight,” his father said. “But I don’t think he’ll do that anymore. He’ll probably use a flashlight.”

** Special thanks to Mary Lynn Smith, Star Tribune, for providing this information! (http://www.startribune.com/local/225392642.html)

Read Full Post »


Wolf-OR7-DFG-Shinn

Photo credit owned by Richard Shinn.

 

Public Hearing – California

“Our best chance to stop this reckless plan from going through will be by showing up in droves at these public hearings and speaking out on behalf of wolves! Even if you would prefer not to testify, your presence will make a huge difference and will show how strongly Americans support wolves! Join us as we gather before the hearing to learn about the proposals, rally with fellow supporters and get tips on how to testify. Then we’ll head to the hearing together and ensure that FWS hears our voices loud and clear!

Wednesday, October 2nd Clarion Inn, Comstock Room 1401 Arden Way Sacramento, CA 95815 Pre-hearing event starts at 3:30 pm

RSVP for the Pre-Hearing Event >

Need a ride to the event? Use the password “defenders” to log in to the event at eRideShare.

Want help writing your testimony? Check out our talking points to get the basics on the flaws in this proposal to delist gray wolves across most of the U.S. Talking Points on the Gray Wolf Delisting Proposal >

Learn more about how public hearings work and what these events are usually like. What to Expect at the Hearing >
Training Call Monday, September 30th 7:30 to 8:30 pm PT Join Defenders’ staff and fellow wolf supporters for a brief training session in preparation for the hearing. Learn about the ins and outs of a Fish and Wildlife Service public hearing, and how to prepare effective written and oral testimony to present to key decision makers.  During the call participants will:

  • Learn how to craft a compelling and personal testimony;
  • Learn about the rules and details of the hearing;
  • Find out about the activities we have planned for the hearings; and
  • Be able to ask questions about the hearing”

**Special thanks to “Defenders of Wildlife” for providing this information!

Read Full Post »


My first tattoo; the howling wolf!

Public Hearing – New Mexico

“This is the ONLY public hearing that will also address the Fish and Wildlife Service’s woefully inadequate proposed rule changes for critically endangered Mexican gray wolves, a subspecies of the gray wolf. Please be sure to study both sets of talking points so that we can better ensure a future for both types of America’s wolves.

Our best chance to secure a future for Mexican gray wolves and stop the reckless delisting of gray wolves will be by showing up in droves at these public hearings and speaking out on behalf of wolves! Even if you would prefer not to testify, your presence will make a huge difference and will show how strongly Americans support wolves! Join us as we gather before the hearing to learn about the proposals, rally with fellow supporters and get tips on how to testify. Then we’ll head to the hearing together and ensure that FWS hears our voices loud and clear!

When:  Friday, October 4th

Where: Embassy Suites, Sierra Ballroom 1000 Woodward Place NE Albuquerque, NM 87102

Pre-hearing event starts at 3:30 pm

RSVP for the Pre-Hearing Event >

Need a ride? Use the password “defenders” to log in to the event at eRideShare.

Want help with your testimony? Check out the talking points below Talking Points on the Gray Wolf Delisting Proposal > Talking Points on the Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Proposal >

Learn more about how public hearings work and what these events are usually like >

 

Training Call Tuesday, October 1st 7:30 – 8:30 pm MT Join Defenders staff and fellow wolf supporters for a brief training session in preparation for the hearing. Learn about the ins and outs of a Fish and Wildlife Service public hearing, and how to prepare effective written and oral testimony to present to key decision makers.  During the call participants will:

  • Learn how to craft a compelling and personal testimony;
  • Learn about the rules and details of the hearing;
  • Find out about the activities we have planned for the hearings; and
  • Be able to ask questions about the hearing”

**Special thanks to “Defenders of Wildlife” https://www.defenders.org/national-wolf-emergency/public-hearing-new-mexico, for providing this information!

Read Full Post »


wolves isyle royale

A pack of gray wolves on Isle Royale National Park in northern Michigan in 2006. (Photo provided by John Vucetich / Michigan Technological University)

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130924/POLITICS02/309240094#ixzz2g32jxr2b

“Opponents of Michigan’s upcoming wolf hunt say data used to justify the program are skewed by events at one cattle farm in Ontonagon County.

In November, as many as 1,200 hunters will take to three designated areas in the Upper Peninsula for the first sanctioned wolf hunt in roughly half a century. State officials approved the controversial hunt after wolf-livestock incidents increased in recent years. Licenses will go on sale at noon Saturday.

But members of Keep Michigan Wolves Protected, a group that has lobbied against the hunt, say the statistics are bolstered by a single cattle farm near Matchwood owned by John Koski. According to the organization:

■ 73 percent of the 78 wolf-livestock incidents in Area B of the designated wolf hunt zones involved cattle from Koski’s farm between 2010 and 2013.

■ 80 percent of all livestock killed in Area B during that period were from Koski’s farm.

■ 64 percent of all cattle killed by wolves in the Upper Peninsula since 2013 came from Koski’s farm.

Jill Fritz of Keep Michigan Wolves Protected said the statistics paint an inaccurate picture of how bad the wolf situation is in the Upper Peninsula. Koski’s failure to take even basic steps to protect his animals makes that situation look worse, she said.

“(Koski) has basically set up a smorgasbord for predators on his farm — leaving carcasses around, not putting up fencing,” she said. “He’s basically putting out a welcome mat for predators of all kinds.”

Gray wolves had been on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s endangered species list for almost four decades before they were removed in early 2012. During that span, the population in Michigan grew from a handful to 658.

Gov. Rick Snyder signed Public Act 520 that allowed a wolf hunt — something many state residents felt was necessary to contain the growing wolf population.

Koski could not be reached for comment Tuesday. Michigan Department of Natural Resources officials confirmed there are steps the farmer could take to potentially decrease the number of wolf attacks on his property, but he has done nothing considered illegal.

Brian Roell, a DNR wildlife biologist, said taking Koski’s farm out of the equation would not alter the need for the hunt.

“We’ve had 13 total farms, just since 2010, that have had depredation, just in that management area alone,” he said. The areas designated for the hunt were based on “places where they were having (wolf-livestock) conflict, not the severity of the conflict.””

 jlynch@detroitnews.com
(313) 222-2034

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »