Saturday, January 2, 2016
By Rick Lamplugh
Wolf image public domain via Pixabay |
Meanwhile, wolves did what comes naturally: dispersed
in search of mates and territory. Wolves returned to their home in a
state where they had not walked in ninety years. In other wolf states
they dispersed into new areas.
And we humans also did what comes naturally: we let our
wide-ranging beliefs about these essential predators bring out our best
and worst. In one state, pro-wolf and anti-wolf groups met regularly to
try and find common ground. In another state, a poacher in his truck
chased an innocent wolf down, shot it, turned himself in, and was fined a
measly $100 for killing an endangered animal.
Here is a wolf-state-by-wolf-state report on the
triumphs and tragedies of 2015. As well as a glimpse into what 2016 may
hold in store for wolves and their advocates.
California
Pups from California's Shasta pack. (CDFW) |
In May and July, trail cameras in Siskiyou County
recorded images of two adult wolves and five pups. California’s first
wolf pack was named the Shasta Pack. Their scat was analyzed, and DNA
revealed that the Shasta pack’s breeding female was born into Oregon’s
Imnaha Pack, that state’s first wolf pack.
Any wolf that enters California is protected under both
state and federal Endangered Species Acts. The California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will encourage the use of non-lethal methods
to minimize livestock losses from wolves. This welcoming of wolves was,
for Patricia Herman, founder of California-based Protect the Wolves
advocacy group, “…our biggest success after fighting for so long with so
many states to stop killing them. When we found a state that actually
welcomed the idea of wolves it was a dream come true.”
The gray wolf is native to California. Records from
1750 to 1850 show that wolves roamed California’s Coastal Range from San
Diego to Sacramento. From 1850-1900, they were spotted in Shasta County
and in the central Sierra Nevada.
California has plenty of room for more wolves. The
Klamath-Siskiyou and Modoc Plateau regions in northern California and
southwestern Oregon could support up to 470 wolves, according to a study
conducted by the Conservation Biology Institute and reported by the
California Wolf Center.
CDFW is preparing for the return of wolves by
developing a wolf management plan. “But the plan steps far outside the
bounds of credible research and into the world of special
interest-driven politics when it calls for authorizing the state to kill
wolves when the population reaches as few as 50 to 75 animals,” says
Amaroq Weiss of the Center for Biological Diversity. The deadline to
comment on California’s plan is February 15, 2016.
Oregon
Wolf from Oregon's Wenaha pack. (ODFW) |
By early 2015 Oregon had 81 wolves in nine packs, most
in eastern Oregon. OR-7’s Rogue pack lives in the southwestern part of
the state. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) confirmed
that two new wolves were spotted traveling in territory near the Rogue
pack.
Oregon’s response to the return of wolves has been
positive. “Oregon has been the only state in the nation with a
meaningful wolf population that did not kill them despite having the
authority to do so,” said Rob Klavins of Oregon Wild.
But that may change. In November, ODFW stripped
Oregon’s wolves of state endangered species protection. Wolves remain
fully protected in the western two-thirds of state under the federal
Endangered Species Act. In Northeast Oregon, where most of the wolves
live, ranchers can still only shoot a wolf caught in the act of
wounding, biting, killing, or chasing livestock. The state still makes
non-lethal deterrence the first choice for resolving conflicts between
ranchers and wolves.
To delist wolves, ODFW had to show that wolves were not
in danger of extinction or population failure. The agency claims it did
that. Klavins says ODFW did not. “They ignored substantive critiques
from world-renowned scientists while justifying delisting based on a few
sentences (in some cases cherry-picked) from a small number of selected
experts of varying levels of credibility. They ignored over 20,000
public comments and overwhelming public testimony in favor of continued
protections. They ignored troubling conflicts of interest and likely
violated important legal requirements. The agency was dishonest with
conservation stakeholders. Governor Brown was silent.”
On December 30, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands, and
the Center for Biological Diversity filed a legal challenge to the
removal of protection from gray wolves under Oregon's Endangered Species
Act.
Washington
Pups from Washington's Diamond pack. (WDFW trail cam) |
By early 2015, Washington had at least 68 wolves in 16
confirmed packs in the eastern and central portions of the state. Though
Congress stripped wolves of federal Endangered Species Act
protections in the eastern third of the state, all wolves remain
protected under Washington’s ESA.
But, as elsewhere, protection hasn’t stopped the
killing. According to the Seattle Times, at least half a dozen
Washington wolves have been killed by poachers since 2012. This includes
a Whitman County poacher fined a measly $100 last September. Another
wolf was struck and killed on Interstate 90. State sharpshooters in
helicopters shot and killed seven wolves in one pack in 2012 for preying
on livestock.
The Western Environmental Law Center (WELC) went to
court to stop such state-sponsored killing. WELC sued Wildlife Services,
a federal extermination program under the USDA, challenging its
authority to kill wolves in Washington. In late December the Seattle
Times reported that a federal judge ruled that killing wolves “to reduce
predation on livestock is not only highly controversial, but highly
uncertain to work as intended, given the ongoing scientific dispute
about the policy. Therefore, the agency must complete a full
environmental-impact statement before engaging further in “lethal
removal” of wolves…”
As of early December, north-central Washington has a
new wolf pack. The Loup Loup pack was identified after numerous reports
of wolf sightings prompted wildlife officials to investigate the Methow
Valley. Biologists tracked up to six animals traveling together. Because
this pack is in western Washington, the animals are protected under the
federal ESA. Officials plan to outfit at least one wolf with a radio
collar.
Wolves have also been spotted in the North Cascades,
where they have been moving back and forth across the Canadian border.
Scientists have identified more wild landscape in Washington that wolves
could occupy, including on the Olympic Peninsula.
Idaho
Idaho wolf. (IDFG) |
The most recent official count found 770 wolves
surviving in Idaho at the end of 2014. In that same year, hunters killed
256 wolves, wildlife agents killed 67, and 19 other wolves died at the
hands of humans.
And 2015 looks to be as deadly. Wildlife Services has
removed 70 wolves and as of early December 120 wolves have been shot or
trapped, according to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. And 145
more could still die.
The cost of hunting licenses reveals how Idaho values
wolves. A wolf tag costs $11.50, while a turkey tag costs $19.75. A tag
to take an elk costs $30.75. Hunters may buy up to five wolf hunting
tags per year and use electronic calls to attract wolves.
A group of hunters with the misleading name Idaho for Wildlife
was planning a January 2016 wolf and coyote killing derby on public
lands near Salmon, Idaho. The contest included a $1,000 prize for
whoever kills the most wolves and another $1,000 to the killer of the
most coyotes. But in mid-November the group canceled the derby after
being challenged in the courts by the Western Environmental Law Center,
representing WildEarth Guardians, Cascadia Wildlands, and the
Boulder-White Clouds Council. Four other groups—Defenders of Wildlife,
the Center for Biological Diversity, Western Watersheds Project, and
Project Coyote—also sued the Bureau of Land Management, contending the
permit opposes the federal government's wolf-reintroduction efforts.
Both lawsuits continue since the derby organizer has
said that the derby would be held in January—but on private ranches in
the Salmon area and on U.S. Forest Service land that doesn't require a
permit.
In early-August, conservation groups won another
victory for Idaho wolves. Earthjustice, representing Ralph Maughan,
Defenders of Wildlife, Western Watersheds Project, Wilderness Watch, and
the Center for Biological Diversity, had filed a federal lawsuit to
halt the killing of wolves in Idaho’s Frank Church River of No Return
Wilderness. Idaho wanted to kill 60% of the wolves in this federally
protected area managed by the USFS. But the USFS has told Earthjustice
that Idaho will kill no wolves in the area in the winter of 2015-2016.
Montana
Wolf from Montana's Smart Creek pack. (MFWP) |
The number of gray wolves in Montana continues to fall
under state management. The verified population at the end of 2014
(latest data) was 554, as compared to 627 wolves at the end of 2013,
according to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). In 2011, the year
wolves were stripped of ESA protection, there were 653 wolves in
Montana.
In 2014, 308 wolves died; 301 at the hands of humans.
Wildlife managers, including Wildlife Services, killed 57 of those
wolves. Hunters killed 206 during the state’s expanded 2014-15 hunting
season. A wolf-hunting license costs $19 for residents, and 20,383 wolf
licenses were sold in 2014. The combined maximum hunting and trapping
bag limit is five wolves per person.
Conservation groups saved some wolves from hunters. In
July of 2015 The Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission reduced from three
to two the number of wolves that can be killed each year in two hunting
districts near the north border of Yellowstone National Park. These
districts are two of the three more tightly controlled wolf-hunting
districts in the state. The third is near Glacier National Park, which
already had a quota of two wolves. This quota reduction represents
ongoing success: In 2014 wolf advocates were able to get the quota in
those two units adjoining Yellowstone reduced from four to three wolves.
Also in 2015 MFWP brought together groups that want to
protect wolves (for example, Wolves of the Rockies, Bear Creek Council,
Natural Resources Defense Council, and Montana Audobon Society) and
groups that want to shoot wolves (Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Montana
Bowhunters’ Association, and Montana Stockgrowers' Association). The
groups discussed, among other issues, whether non-hunting conservation
groups and hunter conservation groups can find common ground. “This is a
promising move forward in working together for the betterment of
wildlife management and is open to the public to attend,” said Kim Bean,
vice-president of Wolves of the Rockies.
Wyoming
Wolf from Yellowstone's Lamar Canyon pack. (Mary Strickroth) |
At the end of 2014 (most recent count), Wyoming had 229 wolves in the
state with an additional 104 in Yellowstone National Park for a total of
333 wolves.
In 2014 Earthjustice, representing Defenders of
Wildlife, the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the
Center for Biological Diversity, fought in court to keep Endangered
Species Act protections for wolves in Wyoming. The coalition won and
stopped the killing of Wyoming's wolves. The federal government and the
state of Wyoming have appealed. “Wyoming appears determined to defend
its uniquely hostile approach to wolf management,” said Tim Preso,
managing attorney for Earthjustice.
History supports Preso’s statement. The federal
government turned wolf management over to Wyoming in 2012. Most of the
state was designated a predator zone, where anyone could kill any wolf,
at any time, and for any reason. In less than two years, more than 200
wolves were slaughtered, according to Jamie Rappaport Clark, president
of Defenders of Wildlife. Among the early victims of Wyoming's killing
spree was 06, the famous alpha female of Yellowstone’s Lamar Canyon
pack.
The return of ESA protection has not stopped the
killing. KierĂ¡n Suckling, executive director of the Center for
Biological Diversity, reported in late-October that 55 wolves have been
killed in Wyoming—mostly by Wildlife Services—and that is the largest
government-funded wolf killing in eight years.
In mid-November, two U.S. senators (Republicans from
Wyoming and Wisconsin) vowed to push to strip federal protection from
gray wolves in Wyoming and the Great Lakes states—and to prohibit courts
from intervening in those states on the embattled predator's behalf.
The Great Lakes States
Wolf photo by USFWS |
In June, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
estimated that 3,722 wolves live in the three Great Lakes states,
Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. About sixty percent of those wolves
roam Minnesota. The remainder is split almost evenly between Michigan
and Wisconsin.
In December of 2014, all of those wolves came back
under the protection of the federal Endangered Species Act. Relisting
was a huge victory for wolf advocates, but fighting to keep them listed,
says Rachel Tilseth, of Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin, has been
the biggest challenge of 2015. She told Wisconsin Public Radio, "Can
states be trusted to manage wolves? I think not, and many other
scientists agree that individual states cannot be trusted.”
In November two groups of scientists wrote letters about whether the gray wolf should be delisted as an endangered species.
First came a letter signed by 26 wildlife scientists
urging the federal government to strip ESA protection from gray wolves
in the western Great Lakes region. The scientists sent the letter to
U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and Dan Ashe, director of USFWS.
Among those writing the letter were David Mech, a wolf specialist with
the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Minnesota. The
scientists say that the integrity of the ESA is undercut if species
aren't removed when they've scientifically recovered. They believe that
the combined population in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin represents
recovery.
Less than a week later a group of 70 scientists and
scholars wrote an open letter disagreeing with their colleagues. These
scientists said that removing ESA protection from wolves in Michigan,
Minnesota, and Wisconsin could be justified if and when the USFWS “uses
the best available science that justifies delisting," But, they added,
”Currently, it does not.”
"Quite simply, wolves still fit the legal definition of
endangerment in the Great Lakes region and nationwide," said the
scientists, including John Vucetich and Rolf Peterson of Michigan
Technological University, leaders of a long-standing study of wolves at
Isle Royale National Park in Lake Superior.
The Associated Press reported that in the rebuttal
letter, the scientists said public tolerance of wolves has risen
substantially since they were given protection. Any suggestions that
patience is wearing thin are spread by "special interest groups that are
vocal, but small in number."
Michigan
Michigan wolf (MDNR) |
Michigan has about 630 wolves and all were believed to
reside in the Upper Peninsula. In September, the website Michigan Live
reported that the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
confirmed that a second gray wolf has reached the Lower Peninsula.
Genetic testing of male wolf scat found that this dispserser may have
originated in northeast Ontario. Though wolves have moved into the Lower
Peninsula, there’s not yet evidence of a breeding population.
Meanwhile, in Isle Royale National Park, the wolf
population has fallen to three, including one deformed from inbreeding.
In 2014, park officials hoped that new wolves would come to the island
across ice bridges, but that didn’t happen. "There is now a good chance
that it is too late to conduct genetic rescue," John Vucetich told UPI.
Vucetich and Rolf Peterson suggest that fewer and smaller ice bridges as
well as development on the mainland may hinder repopulation.
Minnesota
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources said in August that the
state’s wolf population estimate has not varied “significantly” over the
last three years. The latest survey estimates that 2,221 wolves live in
374 packs within northern and central Minnesota. That estimate is down
from the previous winter’s estimate of 2,423 wolves.
Wisconsin
In June, wildlife officials announced that the state's
wolf population is close to an all-time high. Preliminary surveys
conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) place
current wolf numbers between 746 and 771, about a 13 percent increase
from last year’s 660.
In August, WDNR reported that a pack of three to four
wolves resides in the Wisconsin Dells area, according to WiscNews.
Except for one other location in the state’s southwest, this is the
farthest south that wolves have migrated in Wisconsin.
A Look Ahead to 2016
Here’s how some of the advocates contacted for this report see 2016 shaping up.
Wolf photo public domain via Pixabay |
“Sadly, our wolf, wildlife, and environmental issues will play out in
the political arena based largely on special interest and politics, not
on science, conservation, or preservation,” says Dr. Robin Chriss of
Chriss Wildlife Consulting. “We need to be there in solidarity as wolf
advocates, to be a voice. If not, we will lose a lot in 2016.”
“Corporate ranchers and farmers,” says Patricia Herman
of Protect the Wolves, “don’t want to learn to coexist with wolves. They
just want to continue to take more and more land, until there is no
room for wildlife anywhere.”
“Keeping the Great Lakes wolves under federal
protection,” says Rachel Tilseth of Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin,
“is and will be the biggest challenge of 2016.”
For Oregon Wild’s Rob Klavins, 2016 looks scary.
“Anti-wolf interests and their political allies have brought anti-wolf
legislation every year since wolf recovery began. They've promised to do
so again, and wolves have lost some of their champions in recent
years.”
Kim Bean from Wolves of the Rockies believes the attack
on the ESA will continue and “wolves will most likely be delisted
nationally.” This leaves the states to manage wolves without any federal
help. “We as advocates,” advises Bean, “need to stand and fight even
harder, and will need the help of an empathetic public to do so. We need
one loud and powerful voice.”
More than 220 Five-Star Reviews
Amazon Best Seller
Amazon Best Seller
No comments:
Post a Comment