Opponents of the state's decision to eradicate a wolf pack in order to protect cattle protest outside of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2016, in Olympia, Wash.
Rachel La Corte / AP Images
Wildlife managers are struggling to find and kill the remaining wolves in a northeast Washington pack. The Profanity Peak wolf pack has been in the crosshairs of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife since early August. The state began hunting the pack this summer after officials confirmed at least eight cattle were injured or killed by the wolves.
In the first three weeks of August, wildlife managers shot and killed five adults and one pup from the pack. The department says they are still hunting six wolves, including four pups, in rugged forested terrain. The hunt has garnered national media attention and has been denounced by some environmental and animal rights groups.
Now, another wolf pack near is sounding alarms. According to the Capital Press online, the Smackout pack in the very northeast corner of Washington – along the Idaho border – has killed a calf. Washington’s policy requires four confirmed livestock deaths before lethal control is used.
Severn Bridge photographer Wesley Liikane spotted this Algonquin wolf in the southern reaches of Algonquin Park. The small, reddish coloured wolves are considered a threatened species in Ontario.
Huntsville Forester
By Samantha Beattie
MUSKOKA — The greatest threats to Algonquin wolves are hunting and trapping. So much so, there are fewer than 500 adults remaining in Ontario, prompting the province to acknowledge the species as threatened.
Still, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry has decided to allow hunting and trapping of Algonquin wolves and almost identical coyotes in “large parts of eastern and northern Ontario within the broader range of the Algonquin wolf,” said spokesperson Jolanta Kowalski.
“This approach balances the economic and safety needs of local landowners and farmers with the need to protect this threatened species.”
Normally under the Endangered Species Act, a threatened species and its habitat are automatically protected from harm. For Algonquin wolves and coyotes, the ministry has kept this rule intact in Algonquin Park, the 42 townships surrounding Algonquin Park and, as of this month, Highlands Provincial Park, Queen Elizabeth II Provincial Park and Killarney Provincial Park.
From Sept. 15 to March 31, Algonquin wolves and coyotes roaming everywhere north of Muskoka, other than the above noted areas, are fair game. South of Muskoka, wolves and coyotes can be hunted year round.
“I’m amazed the province wouldn’t take the precautionary approach,” said Hannah Barron, director of the grassroots conservation organization Earthroots. “The government understands full well that it has to protect the full range of wolves to protect populations.”
About half of Algonquin wolves live in Algonquin Park, where hunting and trapping has been banned since 2004.
“The initial ban in 2004 appeared to enhance the ability of wolves to exclude coyotes and minimize hybridization,” said Kowalski, referring to how under more stressful circumstances, wolves and coyotes crossbreed.
The research done in and around Algonquin Park showing wolves to be thriving should be reason enough to extend their protection, said Barron.
“The message the province is sending is that species at risk matter, but only around provincial parks,” Barron said. “This decision is crazy to me because we know wolves travel through places like Muskoka. They need to be protected everywhere.”
The ministry’s decision is an interim approach “to protect the species” while the government looks at how to best accommodate hunters, wolves and the public, said Kowalski.
A public consultation was held between July 22 and Aug. 22. The ministry received 4051 comments about whether or not hunting and trapping of wolves and coyotes should continue.
Don Jenkins
Capital Press
Published on September 26, 2016
Washington wildlife managers say they are continuing to search for the surviving members of the Profanity Peak pack in the Colville National Forest, a hunt now on its eighth week.
Meanwhile, wolves in another northeastern Washington pack last week killed a calf, and a wolf was legally harvested on the Spokane Tribe of Indians reservation, according to the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.
WDFW’s plan to lethally remove the Profanity Peak pack has outraged some environmental and animal-rights groups, overshadowing other wolf activities in Washington this summer.
WDFW began hunting for the Profanity Peak pack on Aug. 4. The department has reported shooting five adults and one pup, though none since Aug. 22.
Two adults and up to four pups remain, according to WDFW. The department says it intends to eliminate the rest of the pack, but the pack is in rugged timberlands and finding the surviving wolves will be challenging.
WDFW has confirmed that the pack has killed or injured eight cattle and probably is responsible for five more attacks on livestock this summer.
WDFW’s policy calls for the state to use lethal control after four confirmed depredations, provided ranchers had taken steps to prevent conflicts between wolves and livestock.
WDFW investigators confirmed Sept. 21 that wolves in the Smackout pack, whose territory straddles Stevens and Pend Oreille counties, killed a calf, the department’s wolf policy coordinator, Donny Martorello, said in an email.
The depredation was the first confirmed attack by the pack this year. The pack fatally injured a calf in October 2015, according to WDFW records.
Also Sept. 21, the Spokane Tribe of Indians reported a wolf had been harvested on the reservation. The tribe also reported in July that a wolf had been harvested.
The tribe allows enrolled members to hunt wolves within the 159,000-acre reservation, with an annual limit of six wolves.
The Spokane tribe reported in 2015 harvesting three wolves in the Huckleberry pack, the only legal shooting of wolves in the state last year, according to WDFW.
Hunting wolves is not allowed in Washington except on tribal lands.
WDFW enlisted the USDA’s Wildlife Services to shoot one wolf from the Huckleberry pack in 2014. The pack was preying on sheep.
Since then, a federal judge has barred Wildlife Services from assisting WDFW with lethal removal, unless the federal agency conducts a more thorough review of the environmental impacts of removing wolves.
Wolves are not federally protected in the eastern one-third of Washington, where attacks on livestock are occurring, but are on the state’s protected species list.
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — A wildlife foundation started by former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and actor Robert Redford is stepping into the fray between state and federal government over the Mexican gray wolf.The Foundation to Protect New Mexico Wildlife announced Sunday it was siding with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's wolf release plan in an ongoing lawsuit, filing an amicus brief with the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
The state of New Mexico was granted a preliminary injunction in June, stopping any wolf releases while the two parties battle over permits and the revamping of a recovery plan.
The state took legal action in April after federal officials released a pair of captive-born pups into a wild wolf den in southwestern New Mexico despite having no permit.
HELENA (AP) — Montana wildlife officials have closed wolf hunting for the season in an area north of Yellowstone National Park after hunters exceeded the quota of wolves that can be killed there.
Ron Aasheim of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks says hunters killed three wolves on Saturday in an area bordering the park that stretches across the southern end of Park, Sweet Grass, and Carbon counties.
That area is one of three wolf management units in the state with hunting limits. The quota for that area is two wolves.
Aasheim says he does not know whether the hunters were separate or together when they killed the wolves. He says they properly reported the kills within 24 hours and the area was closed to further hunting Sunday afternoon.
“This is not a biological issue. It is a political issue…we want wolves gone.” ~ Statements made at the Sen. Tom Tiffany/Rep. Adam Jarchow Sept. 15 Great Lakes Wolf Summit
The actions and legislation of this U.S. Congress make me realize that hunters think that wilderness is a federally financed shooting range with roads leading across it from all directions, dogs fighting bears and wolves, forests emptied using steel-jaw traps, and living animals lined up for target practice.
Until the 90 percent of us who do not kill wildlife realize that “hunting” has morphed from a way to gather food to a recreational slaughterhouse romp through various seasons and species, with heads on walls, dog-fighting and power games, we will continue to allow the very essence of wilderness and the life of this planet to be shredded.
Our resulting suffering will be great. The death of pollinators, ocean life, bird life, natural predators, and the wild animals that have quietly balanced the world for us is bringing forth illnesses like lyme disease, chronic wasting disease, white-nosed bat fungus, brain worms in moose, and even the plague.
The killers want it all for themselves. For 52 years, since 1964, the Wilderness Act has protected millions of acres of public lands untrammeled from man’s schemes. Hunters and trappers, through the SHARE Act, want to gut the Wilderness Act and open up millions of formerly pristine wilderness acres to trapping, hunting, lead shot, shooting ranges (no liability for hunters), and roads.
The SHARE Act, described in a Madravenspeak column in February 2016, is too toxic to have passed as a stand-alone bill. So it has been snuck in as a rider to the equally toxic Senate Bill 2012, the “energy modernization bill.” Also added to the giant bill is de-listing Great Lakes and Wyoming wolves permanently from the Endangered Species Act.
SB 2012 has passed the U.S. House of Representatives.
I called Michael Robinson, a conservation advocate who focuses on the protection and recovery of top predators at the Center for Biological Diversity. He said that Senate Bill 2012 has not passed the Senate with the amendment to de-list Great Lakes and Wyoming gray wolves and the SHARE Act.
Not yet. U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson’s aide, who described this bill at the Sept. 15 Great Lakes Wolf Summit, urged hunters to contact senators and Russ Feingold and push them to pass it. The bill's advocates think President Obama will sign this large bill, which also would exacerbate climate change.
If passed with the Energy Modernization Bill, the SHARE Act, according to the Animal Welfare Institute "will have substantial adverse impacts on wildlife, conservation efforts, and public health and safety.”
The institute describes just some of the provisions of the bill:
• “Remove federal protections from wolves in Wyoming and in the Great Lakes region, thereby subjecting these imperiled animals to hunting and trapping.
• Promote the controversial practice of hunting and chasing after deer with hounds (also known as “deer-dogging”) in certain national forests.
• Take the unprecedented step of defining trapping as a form of hunting. This would open up more federal lands to the setting of steel-jaw leg-hold traps and other body-gripping traps that pose grave risks to public safety, wildlife, and even companion animals.
• Compel the National Park Service to allow private hunters to shoot bison in Grand Canyon National Park as part of its management plan.
• Prevent the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture from regulating lead — a potent and dangerous neurotoxin — in fishing tackle and ammunition. An estimated 10-20 million animals die from lead poisoning each year in the United States after ingesting lead shot, bullet fragments, and sport fishing waste.
• Declare that millions of acres of public lands are automatically open to hunting and trapping without any scrutiny. Public land managers seeking to disallow these activities in order to protect wildlife, habitat and the public would face huge bureaucratic hurdles.
• Halt the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's efforts to protect elephants from poaching and to curb the demand for ivory.
• Weaken existing law to make it easier to shoot, over bait, otherwise protected migratory birds.
• Block the Department of Interior from implementing policies to protect predators in Alaska from rampant killing on national wildlife refuges and national preserves.
• Allow the importation of polar bear carcasses. This provision rewards hunters who raced to kill polar bears for trophies before their listing under the Endangered Species Act. Granting waivers such as this sets a dangerous precedent and signals to trophy hunters that they can flout the law.”
The provision that would de-list gray wolves in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and Wyoming is designed to keep wolves barred forever from protection by the Endangered Species Act (effectually gutting the law and not allowing science to protect endangered species). It also seeks to ban judicial intervention. The judiciary is supposed to be a third branch of government, acting as a check and balance on the executive and legislative branches. It would be stunning if it can be legislated out of its constitutional role.
Bob Welch, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, Safari Club International, and the Bear Hunters of Wisconsin spoke at Sen. Tom Tiffany and Rep. Adam Jarchow's Great Lakes Wolf Summit Sept. 15. Kurt Thiede, new deputy secretary of the DNR, also spoke, saying the DNR favors 350 wolves in Wisconsin, a number calculated in 1999: “a population to hunt and trap.” The DNR wants nature reduced to a token wolf population, but is fine with a 9,000 goat concentrated animal farm operation.
“There is just one hope of repulsing the tyrannical ambition of civilization to conquer every niche on the whole earth. That hope is the organization of spirited people who will fight for the freedom of the wilderness.” ~ Bob Marshall, forester and co-founder of The Wilderness Society
Fight back for wolves now. Contact Ron Johnson 202-224-5323, who has sponsored this legislation, Russ Feingold (info@russfeingold.com), and Tammy Baldwin www.tammybaldwin.com/contact/ or 608-663-6300. Press them to remove the “SHARE Act” and the de-listing wolves from SB 2012 or to vote against the bill. Call President Obama and ask him to veto this bill if these riders are not removed: White House comments: 202-456-1111, Switchboard: 202-456-1414.
Also, please sign this petition to the president to veto SB 2012 if the rider de-listing wolves and the SHARE Act is not removed. The petition must be signed by 100,000 citizens in 30 days to get to the president's desk. https://wh.gov/iMaZZ
Pay no attention to the politicians who call for killing wolves rather than considering and testing alternatives. Instead, listen to your heart, and to the call of the wild.
Several Wisconsin legislators, (Sen. Tom Tiffany and Rep. Adam Jarchow), and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, are calling for the delisting of the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act. Tiffany and Jarchow hosted a “Great Lakes Wolf Summit,” Sept. 15 in Cumberland.
Apparently, they hope we will buy into the myth of the wolf as an evil, killing machine, likely to prey on both cattle and humans.
The truth: 1) there is no record of a confirmed wolf attack on a human in Wisconsin, 2) old age, birthing complications, disease and bad weather kill far more livestock than does any predator, according to “The Hidden Life of Wolves” by Jim Dutcher.
Gray wolves, also known as “timber wolves,” are members of the dog family. Wisconsin is one of about a dozen states in the country with a wild gray wolf population. Before Wisconsin was settled, in the 1830s, an estimated 3,000 to 5,000 wolves lived throughout the state. By the 1930s, wolves were nearly erased from the lower 48 states, “as a result of one of the most effective eradication campaigns in modern history,” wrote Judge Beryl A. Howell in a federal court decision that returned the gray wolf to protected status in Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota (HSUS v. Jewell; United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 2014).
Wolves began a recovery in the 1970s, under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. Wisconsin had approximately 866 to 897 gray wolves in the winter of 2015-2016, according to the Timber Wolf Information Network website, citing the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Dutcher writes that wild wolves have injured no one in the lower 48 states in the decades since their reintroduction, and that wolf tourism brings about $35 million a year into Yellowstone National Park and surrounding communities.
Alternatives to killing wolves, in order to protect cattle, include the use of electric fences, sound and lights, and guard animals. Traditional methods, such as fluttering flags and increased human vigilance, also may be used.
Many Native American cultures hold special reverence for wolves. Wisconsin tribes protested wolf hunts during the time wolves were delisted from protection in 2011. In the words of one Native American: “Wolves are like me; misunderstood, beautiful and wild, never able to be tamed, the epitome of freedom. All we want is to be accepted and loved for who we are.”
Pay no attention to the politicians who call for killing wolves rather than considering and testing alternatives. Instead, listen to your heart, and to the call of the wild.
And tell your congressperson to oppose Senate Bill 2281, which requires the delisting of gray wolves in the western Great Lakes and Wyoming. You can find the contact information on http://www.senate.gov/ and http://www.house.gov/ websites.
Mark Silverman is president of the Wisconsin Animal Protection Society.
Dear Editor: "There's 'antis' (people against delisting the wolf) out there that are going to writing letters as we speak," Sen. Tom Tiffany, R-Hazelhurst, said.
Recently a group of anti-wolf Wisconsin politicians and out-of-state anti-wolf zealots convened in Cumberland, Wisconsin, for what they described as a “summit” about gray wolves in the Great Lakes. This “summit” was essentially a campaign event for two vulnerable state legislators, Tiffany and Rep. Adam Jarchow, R-Balsam Lake. It was also a venue for the same old, tired, fear-mongering propaganda and “Little Red Riding Hood is fact” fairy tales.
The stated goal of this event was to convince Congress to usurp the federal court system and pass legislation that not only forces the removal of the gray wolf in the Great Lakes from Endangered Species Act protections but also blocks the constitutional right of American citizens to challenge the law in court. This is not only an assault on the judicial process but also an assault on the right of every American to challenge our government in a court of law.
States like Wisconsin seek to return the gray wolf to state “management,” with the goal of pushing the species down to a token number and relegating them to small and isolated pockets within the state. Part of that “management” includes allowing packs of hounds to be used against wolves in what amounts to legal dog fighting.
It must be made clear that any politician, state or federal, who supports “state management” of this species must also support legal dog fighting, because that is part of Wisconsin’s wolf “management” as written in law. As long as this provision and the goal of killing off the population to “350 or less” remains part of state “management” plans, we “antis,” as Tiffany labels us, will never back down.
One of the federal government's marquee programs to save an endangered species is facing extinction, as lawmakers reconsider the genetic history of the red wolf.
A decision by federal officials to delist the species would, by all accounts, amount to a death sentence for a wolf that once roamed the Southeast. Today, there are just 29 red wolves left in the wild -- a number that would be even lower were it not for exhaustive federal efforts and millions in taxpayer spending. But the question now is: Was the red wolf ever actually a distinct species?
"This is a case of well-intentioned biologists going back several decades, trying to bring back a species they believe existed," says Gary Mowad, a former deputy chief of law enforcement for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "But it turns out now the science clearly indicates red wolves from the very beginning were nothing more than a hybrid between a coyote and a gray wolf. This animal is not an endangered species. This animal is a hybrid and should be delisted immediately."
Supporters are expected to fight, although the latest science is not on their side.
"The red wolves history will always be challenged," says the Red Wolf Coalition's executive director, Kim Wheeler. "All canids are a soup, there is nothing pure about any canid on this landscape, so to make the assumption or point out or specifically say that the red wolf is something that it's not, is ludicrous.
Since the red wolf was given government protection in 1967, U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologists spent almost 50 years and some $35 million trying to save it from extinction. The recovery program involves 44 zoos and almost 2 million acres of private land and federal refuge. But after trapping, captive breeding and releasing 132 wolves, the program is worse off today than when it started, with only 2 breeding pairs left in the wild.
"They're spending about $1.5 million a year. The federal government has had 30 years to make this experiment work, and it has failed," says Jett Ferebee, a North Carolina landowner spearheading the effort to delist the wolf. "Recent DNA analysis has shown it's merely a hybrid. It is 75 percent coyote, and 25 percent gray wolf."
After the red wolf was declared extinct in the wild in 1980, the USFWS attempted to save the species by trapping what it considered to be 400 pure red wolves in the bayous of Louisiana and East Texas based on what they "looked" like, not genetics.
Even Curtis Carly, the original FWS red wolf coordinator, said in 1979 the original 400 wolves "could not even be positively identified" because the species was "on the brink of extinction."
Biologists then used skull measurements, weight, and markings to cull the 400 down to 12 "pure" pairs to begin the captive breeding program at Point Defiance Zoo in Tacoma, Wash. According to records, the dozen produced 81 hybrids in the first 10 years, and 216 between 1977 and 2002. Over that period, the agency released 132 red wolves into two national wildlife refuges in North Carolina.
"They absolutely invented a species and called it endangered," says program critic Scott Griffin, from the group Citizens Science. “Fish and wildlife knew this was a hybrid from the beginning."
Faced with doubts, when wildlife officials inquired, the U.S. Solicitor General warned the agency in 1977 that hybrids are "not" protected by the Endangered Species Act.
"Extending the protections of the ESA to hybrids ...would not promote the purpose of Congress in enacting the ESA," Solicitor General Donald Berry wrote in an Aug. 2, 1977, opinion.
Berry is now a vice president at Defenders of Wildlife, which is suing the federal government to protect the red wolf hybrids. Backed by other conservation groups like the Red Wolf Coalition and the Southeast Environmental Law Center, the USFWS moved forward. But once in the wild, the wolves quickly bred with coyotes, producing an especially hardy "super hybrid" that multiplied faster than the conservationists could contain.
USFWS tried trapping and sterilizing the hybrids to stop their proliferation. It also went den hunting, euthanizing hybrid newborns using water buckets and hammers to kill the offspring. While considered inhumane, some animal rights advocates support the technique, sacrificing the coyote as a means of saving the wolf.
"It's very difficult, we've often been asked, 'Why can't they just let those animals live?'" said Wheeler. "So then, we have more hybrid genetics on the landscape. You really have to stay focused on what the goals of this program are."
The use of steel leg-hold traps was also controversial. In California, the Animal Welfare Institute is suing to stop their use, while in North Carolina it is suing FWS for failing to use the traps to stop hybridization.
"Consistent mismanagement by the FWS has led to a rapid decline in North Carolina's red wolf population, down from 130 just two years ago to fewer than 45 today," according to another plaintiff, Defenders of Wildlife. "Never before has the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service so directly turned its back on an endangered species recovery effort."
Under fire, USFWS contracted with one of the world's top geneticists, Dr. Robert Wayne, at UCLA, to test the red wolf population. In 1991, he concluded: "Genetic characterization of these same animals with whole mitochondrial DNA genome restriction analysis found that they exhibited either coyote (84 percent) or gray wolf (16 percent) DNA and that morphological and genetic classifications often did not correspond." In other words, a red wolf may have looked like a red wolf, but genetically it was a hybrid.
Further analysis by Wayne, published in "Science Advances" supports his earlier opinion.
"The red wolf, which lives in the Southern U.S. ...are in fact coyote and gray wolf hybrids," Wayne told the Los Angeles Times in July. “We found that the red wolves are about 75 percent coyote ancestry. There is no evidence for distinct red wolf species.”
Nevertheless, Wayne and his colleagues argue the red wolf deserves protection.
“We maintain that the ESA could be interpreted in a modern evolutionary framework, devaluing the Victorian typological concept in exchange for a more dynamic view that allows for natural selection," Wayne said.
Others claim the red wolf is not technically a hybrid. John Vucetich, a professor at Michigan Tech University, told Congress the species contains an "admixture" of genomic material from different wolves and doesn't deserve to be delisted, an opinion shared by Steve Guertin, FWS’ deputy director of policy.
“We believe there is enough scientific evidence that the red wolf has been treated as and will continue to be treated as a separate species," Guertin told a congressional panel Wednesday. "That’s based on genetics, behavioral, taxonomic and other criteria."
Because of the lack of scientific consensus, and the hybridization, the FWS is transferring any remaining red wolves from private lands into the captive breeding program, where just 29 breeding pairs remain. "We need everyone's help to ensure this species is around for future generations," Cindy Dohner, the service's Southeastern regional director, told reporters in a conference call last week. As to the wolves true genetic history, she said it was "uncertain."
Wheeler and other supporters are not giving up.
"It is a unique species, the Fish and Wildlife [Service] has not strayed from that, and that's where we stand moving forward," Wheeler said.
As controversial as it is, there is a precedent for allowing refusing to recognize hybrids. In 1981, only five Dusty Seaside Sparrows remained, all of them male. Biologists proposed mating them to a close relative. Even though future generations would have shared 98 percent of the same genetic material, FWS refused to protect hybrids and the Dusky Seaside Sparrow became extinct.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife / Submitted photo
OR-25, a yearling male in the Imnaha Pack, after being radio collared on May 20, 2014. The wolf passed through Central Oregon earlier this year. Since May he has been frequenting an area in northern Klamath County.
Oregon prepares to update wolf management plan
By Hilary Corrigan / The Bulletin
Oregon violated its own Endangered Species Act and failed to follow its rules when it removed gray wolves from the endangered list late last year, conservation groups argue in a lawsuit.
The Tuesday filing comes as the state prepares to update its wolf management plan — last updated in 2010 — and as some federal legislators question protection levels for wolves and seek more state control over wolf management.
Cascadia Wildlands, Center for Biological Diversity and Oregon Wild challenged the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission at the state Court of Appeals late last year soon after the commission decided to remove wolves from the state endangered listing across Oregon. A state law soon followed, underscoring the delisting. State Fish and Wildlife then sought to deem the conservation groups’ legal challenge as moot and an appellate commissioner dismissed it. But a July court ruling reinstated the groups’ challenge, calling the issues presented for review “complex matters of public importance.”
The commission had delisted the wolf after finding the species was not in danger of extinction in a significant part of its range and that existing programs could protect the wolves and their habitat, among other factors. The commission had found that the wolf population was projected to increase; that wolves showed up over a large geographic area in Oregon; and that the state’s wolf management plan ensures their protection regardless of endangered status.
But wolves are still in danger of extinction through much of their range in Oregon and should not have been delisted, said Amaroq Weiss, West Coast wolf organizer for the Center for Biological Diversity.
In its Tuesday brief, the conservation groups argued that wolves occupy only 8 percent of their natural range in Oregon and are absent from 92 percent of it. The Fish and Wildlife Commission must consider whether wolves were endangered in a significant part of their range in Oregon, not just parts of the range that are now suitable habitat — meaning the agency must consider an animal’s historic range, including areas affected by human development, when either listing or delisting a species, the groups said. The groups also argued that the commission’s decision lacked required independent scientific review; and that the related legislation violates the separation of government branches’ powers and is nonbinding.
Michelle Dennehy, a Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman, had no comment on the conservation groups’ court filing. The state may file a reply next month.
Oregon has both federal and state protection levels and management for wolves. Last year’s commission decision removed state endangered status for wolves across all of Oregon. Federal Endangered Species Act protection still covers wolves in the state west of highways 395, 78 and 95 that serve as a boundary for federal and state designations. Those roads reach from north of Pendleton to Burns and then veer southeast to the southern end of the state. Wolves in that eastern third of Oregon have been removed from the federal endangered listing. The state’s wolf management plan covers those wolves and the state contends the plan protects them like state endangered-status would.
The commission will discuss updating the plan Oct. 7 in La Grande. Department staff could present a draft updated plan at a December commission meeting and the commission could approve it next year.
“It really guides the whole program. It’s important,” Dennehy said. The plan details actions to take in response to wolf conflicts with livestock and criteria to count wolves and to collar them for tracking and research, among other issues.
Meanwhile, ongoing efforts both in Congress and at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seek to delist wolves across the lower 48 states.
A House Committee on Natural Resources’ subcommittee hearing Wednesday reviewed the status of the federal government’s wolf management and recovery efforts. Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, complained of mismanagement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and called for Oregon and other Western states to control their own areas’ wolf management efforts. Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., responded that gray wolves are only starting to return to their old ground in the Northwest and objected to removing federal protections where they’re still listed.
Tom Paterson, owner of Spur Ranch Cattle Co. in Luna, New Mexico, said that he has lost several cows to wolves so far this year. He noted the difficulty in confirming that a wolf killed an animal and in finding some of the dead animals, estimating that wolves kill many more.
John Vucetich, a professor at Michigan Technological University’s School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science, pointed out that wolves once inhabited most of the lower 48 states, but were wiped out to a remaining few hundred in northern Minnesota and now have a total population of about 5,500.
“There’s still much work to do,” Vucetich said. But concerns like conflicts with livestock and the effects on elk hunting and perceived threats to public safety — while challenging — are also “very, very manageable issues,” he said.
Norway’s recent decision to destroy 70% of its tiny endangered population of wolves shocked conservationists worldwide and saw 35,000 sign a local petition. But in a region dominated by sheep farming support for the cull runs deep
Norway has a population of just 68 wolves and conservationists say most off the injuries to sheep are caused by roaming wolves from Swedish packs. Photograph: Roger Strandli Berghagen
Elisabeth Ulven and Tone Sutterud in Oslo
Conservation groups worldwide were astonished to hear of the recent, unprecedented decision to destroy 70% of the Norway’s tiny and endangered population of 68 wolves, the biggest cull for almost a century.
But not everyone in Norway is behind the plan. The wildlife protection group Predator Alliance Norway, for example, has campaign posters that talk of wolves as essential for nature, and a tourist attraction for Norway.
Nothing unusual about that, given it’s a wildlife group, except that the group is based in Trysil, the heartland of the territory where most of the wolf culling announced by Norwegian authorities last week will take place.
Predator Alliance Norway is an anomaly in this area, a land inhabited by the most fervent advocates of culling – many of them farmers and hunters. Here, you pass cars with large stickers pronouncing “Real Men Shoot Wolves” to show support for six local poachers who were imprisoned for illegal hunting last year.
Lars-Erik Lie, a 46-year-old mental health worker who founded the group in 2010, told the Guardian: “I got so upset and saddened by the locals’ thirst for wolf blood, and wanted to show that not all villagers are in favour of wiping out this beautiful animal.
“Many locals think there should be room for both predators and livestock, but they have kept their mouths shut out of fear for repercussions.” Lie has himself been the target of threats.
Culling could undermine the viability of the entire Norwegian wolf population, say conservationists. Photograph: Roger Strandli Berghagen
At the heart of the matter is the conflict between sheep farmers and conservationists. Norway is a large sheep farming nation, unique in letting most of its 2 million sheep roam free all summer without herding, fencing and with little supervision.
As a result, 120,000 sheep are lost each year, and 20,000 of these deaths are attributed to predators, judging by state compensation payouts, which are based on documentation and assessment by the authorities. Beyond that, 900 cadavers found annually are confirmed to have been killed by predators. The wolf accounts for 8% of kills.
Wolves, bears, lynx, wolverines and golden eagles are Norway’s native top predators.
In 1846, the authorities issued bounties to hunt them down, resulting in all species being virtually extinct by the mid-20th century, The wolf was given protected status in 1973, a watershed in wildlife management for the acknowledgement of its part in Norwegian fauna and in need of protection. The first wolf returned in 1980, though the first breeding entirely on Norwegian soil did not take place until 1997.
In the meantime, a new breed of sheep had invaded the land. “The breed of sheep vastly favoured by Norwegian farmers is unsuited to roam around the rugged terrain of the country,” said Silje Ask Lundberg, from Friends of the Earth Norway.
The sheep is favoured for its size and large proportion of meat, but is a bad climber and has poor herding and flight instincts, unlike the old short-tail land race, considered the original Norwegian sheep race, prevalent on the west coast, where ironically there are no wolves.
Just across the mountain from Lie’s house in Trysil, is the territory of the Slettåsen pack, which has been marked out for a complete cull even though the wolves live within a designated wolf zone.
The framework for predator management has been set by parliament, with local predator management boards setting hunting and culling quotas when population targets have been achieved.
“The lack of a scientific and professional approach is obvious,” said Lie. In January his organisation filed a complaint that the board votes in representatives with vested interests, such as farmers, whereas green party members have been excluded.
Lars-Erik Lie of Predator Alliance Norway. Photograph: Arve Herman Tangen
At his office in Oslo, Sverre Lundemo of WWF Norway is also puzzled. “It seems strange that we should punish the wolf for following its natural instincts, particularly within specially designated zones where the wolf supposedly has priority over livestock,” he says.
“The Slettåsen pack is very stable and of genetic importance. Scandinavian wolves are subject to inbreeding and poaching, and this makes the small population more vulnerable to random events. Culling these individuals can undermine the viability of the entire Norwegian wolf population.”
According to Lundemo, the decision for culling appears to be based on politics as much as on science. The WWF have examined the case document that formed the base of the decision. “This a questionable decision on many levels. The case documents don’t substantiate why these three particular territories were singled out for culling,” said Lundemo.
Despite the population within the wolf zone having almost doubled since last year, attacks on livestock have almost halved. “Most of the injuries are inflicted by roaming young wolves from Swedish packs,” said Lundemo.
Sweden has stricter regulations for sheep farmers, refusing to compensate farmers who don’t protect livestock properly. As a member of the EU, Sweden had a planned licenced cull of 10 % of their wolf population of 400 in 2014 reduced following pressure.
Friends of the Earth advocate more suitable breeds of sheep, or cattle, and better fences and herding. WWF is exploring the option to challenge the decision legally before the wolf hunt sets in on 1 January 2017.
Back in Trysil, the Predator Alliance is gaining momentum. The group has submitted a 35,000-signature petition for protecting the wolf to the prime minister, Erna Solberg. “We humans have become greedy, behaving like nature is there for our taking,” said Lie. “When you have a population as small as the one we have in Norway now, you have to draw the line.”
WARNING: Some readers may find some details disturbing
By Daniel MacEachern, CBC News
Posted: Sep 18, 2016
Baby, a 13-year-old German shepherd, was killed by a wolf in Labrador City this week. (Submitted)
A dog owner in Labrador City is warning others to respect wildlife after his German shepherd was savaged by wolves.
"Baby," Mike O'Neill's 13-year-old dog, was killed outside his cabin on Smokey Mountain about five minutes outside of town.
"I got back Wednesday night and the door was open, and there was no sign of the dog," he said. It wasn't unusual for Baby to push open the door herself to go outside, he said. It was unusual for her not to return, but he thought Baby — being a friendly dog — may have been picked up by someone thinking she was a stray.
But when he went search for her the next morning, he didn't have to go very far — just about 130 feet down the beach in front his cabin.
"I found the dog's head, and just the head," he said. "I was shocked, and my first thought was actually, 'Who would do this?'"
Baby, Mike O'Neill's 13-year-old German shepherd, is seen here with children of a co-worker of his. (Submitted)
But as he walked back along the beach, he noticed claw marks in the sand, bigger than Baby's, and called police, who contacted provincial Wildlife officials.
"We came up and really looked around and did find evidence that it was indeed a wolf attack," he said. Baby was an 85-pound dog, he said, so he'd never really worried about other animals in the woods. He'd spotted the occasional wolf, but very rarely, and he never thought one would attack a full-grown dog.
O'Neil said it took a little time for the loss of his dog to sink in.
"I've got a very empty cabin right now," he said. "My dog Baby had a very good life. … I've never owned a leash since I owned her. Having her on a leash in a cabin in the woods wouldn't have saved her."
He said people need to remember where they live.
"This is Labrador," he said. "There is wildlife around. … It's indigenous to the region. I'm not even angry at the wolves. Why would I be angry at a wolf for being a wolf? I'm deeply saddened over the loss of my dog, but I think we have to respect the country that we live in, and we have to be aware that if you do see a wolf, these are wild animals."
The state Department of Fish and Wildlife authorized the slaughter of the entire Profanity Peak wolf pack in Ferry County.
The family of wolves were among those listed as endangered and included six adults and six wolf pups. This drastic measure is Fish and Wildlife’s solution to the alleged killings of rancher cows that were grazing on public land in Washington.
It appears that Fish and Wildlife views cows as more valuable than endangered wolves, and that Fish and Wildlife serves more to support ranchers in protecting their assets grazing on taxpayers’ land.
We know that wolves are extremely important to the ecosystem and the protection of our environment via their role in hunting less-healthy wild prey, and that wolves are vital to biodiversity, including proper grass and shrub growth, a fact not attributed to the role of cows grazing Washington’s public land.
Another important fact not often brought up is that humans do not — again, do not — require the consumption of cows to maintain optimal health. Decades ago, nutritional experts of the American Dietetic Association confirmed that people can be healthy on a vegetarian, or even a vegan, diet.
To value cattle over the lives of a small family of endangered wolves begs numerous ethical and moral questions, especially in light of the public’s love and admiration of wolves and what they represent in nature.
To randomly kill this family of wolves, with impunity, significantly tarnishes Fish and Wildlife’s public relations, especially since this is a pattern of behavior demonstrated over the past years that often generated heated debates in Olympia.
Perhaps the most despicable aspect of these kills is that Fish and Wildlife tracks the family of wolves to aerial shoot them by following their GPS radio collars. Fish and Wildlife portrays an attitude as though wolves are “things” whose numbers have to be kept in check, ignoring that each wolf is an individual. He or she has a unique personality and vested interest in living his or her life, and has an active family and social life.
Yes, wolves are wild beings, but like any canine, they have the intelligence, curiosity, playfulness and joy in living that the arrogant Fish and Wildlife Department repeatedly disregards.
We need new leadership and compassionate stewardship in the Department of Fish and Wildlife, with leaders who implement policies that protect wolves and look out for their interests and are not puppets for good ol’ boy ranchers.
— Linda E. Troup of Poulsbo retired from the U.S. Navy as department head of the Ambulatory Procedure Unit and senior nurse officer for maxillofacial surgery at Naval Medical Center — San Diego. She is a long-time animal welfare proponent and has written for San Diego Animal Advocates magazine.
Wolves are listed as “critically endangered” on the 2015 Norwegian list of endangered animals Scanpix-Sweden/AFP photo
OSLO: Norway was accused of authorising the “mass slaughter” of its endangered wolf population on Friday after announcing that 47 of the predators would be killed by hunters.
The move, which follows previous efforts to control the population, was hailed by farmers but condemned by outraged environmental groups.
Only 65-68 wolves were registered last winter in Norway, according to the specialised body Rovdata, but their numbers will have increased after the birth of an unknown number of pups in April and May.
At least another 25 wolves were observed in the border region with neighbouring Sweden last winter.
“This is pure mass slaughter,” blasted Nina Jensen, the head of the Norwegian branch of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).
“We haven’t seen anything like this in almost 100 years, when the policy at the time was to exterminate all the big predators,” she added.
Farmers complain regularly about wolves attacking their sheep.
“We find the reason (for the killing) justified and intelligent, especially the potential damage that these wolf packs represent to farming,” Erling Aas-Eng, a regional official for a farming association, told broadcaster NRK.
Without setting an exact overall number of wolves allowed, the Norwegian parliament agreed in early June to limit the number of litters to between four and six per year, including at least three for the Norwegian wolf population and the rest in the cross-border packs.
The Norwegian wolf population currently has seven packs with one reproductive couple, which is “above the national population target” since each pack can be expected to deliver a new litter every year, the Norwegian environmental agency said.
Wolves are listed as “critically endangered” on the 2015 Norwegian list of endangered animals.
Norway was accused of authorising the "mass slaughter" of its endangered wolf population on Thursday after announcing that 47 of the predators would be killed by hunters.
The move, which follows previous efforts to control the population, was hailed by farmers but condemned by outraged environmental groups.
Only 65-68 wolves were registered last winter in Norway, according to the specialised body Rovdata, but their numbers will have increased after the birth of an unknown number of pups in April and May.
At least another 25 wolves were observed in the border region with neighbouring Sweden last winter.
"This is pure mass slaughter," blasted Nina Jensen, the head of the Norwegian branch of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). "We haven't seen anything like this in almost 100 years, when the policy at the time was to exterminate all the big predators," she added.
Farmers complain regularly about wolves attacking their sheep.
"We find the reason (for the killing) justified and intelligent, especially the potential damage that these wolf packs represent to farming," Erling Aas-Eng, a regional official for a farming association, told broadcaster NRK.
Without setting an exact overall number of wolves allowed, the Norwegian parliament agreed in early June to limit the number of litters to between four and six per year, including at least three for the Norwegian wolf population and the rest in the cross-border packs.
The Norwegian wolf population currently has seven packs with one reproductive couple, which is "above the national population target" since each pack can be expected to deliver a new litter every year, the Norwegian
environmental agency said.
Wolves are listed as "critically endangered" on the 2015 Norwegian list of endangered animals.
CUMBERLAND — Politicians, farmers and hunters dominated a Great Lakes summit on wolves, expressing hope that the animals will soon come off the federal endangered species list.
Participants at the meeting Thursday in the northwestern Wisconsin community of Cumberland talked about solutions to wolf problems, including attacks against domestic animals, in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan.
The summit was organized by two northern Wisconsin Republican lawmakers, Sen. Tom Tiffany, of Hazelhurst, and Rep. Adam Jarchow, of Balsam Lake, who hope control of the wolf population returns to state governments. As long as wolves are considered endangered, killing them is illegal unless it’s for personal protection.
The Humane Society of the United States called the event one-sided, USA Today Network-Wisconsin reported.
Others argued that wolves have a place in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
“A few wolves are OK,” said Don Peay, founder of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife and a speaker at the summit. “They’re part of the system.”
Peay and most others at the summit wanted to manage the wolf population by killing some off. Roughly 4,000 wolves roam the Great Lakes region.
Complaints of attacks on domestic animals have been rising with the wolf population, said David Ruid, wildlife biologist in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, who helps manage complaints of wolf attacks on farms and ranches.
Ruid said the wolves aren’t affecting the cattle industry’s bottom line, but they are causing great hardship for farmers who live within their territory.
“These things are occurring on the local family farm,” Ruid said.
It’s not just fatal attacks on livestock that’s a problem, either, because wolves will harass animals, which can cause livestock to damage fences or slow their eating because they’re on guard, he added.
Congress will likely debate the proposed law after the November election, according to legislative staff at the office of Sen. Ron Johnson, who introduced the bill.
The following is a summary of Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project (Project)
activities in the Mexican Wolf Experimental Population Area (MWEPA) in Arizona, including the Fort Apache Indian Reservation (FAIR), San Carlos Apache Reservation (SCAR), and New Mexico. Additional Project information can be obtained by calling (928) 339-4329 or toll free at (888) 459-9653, or by visiting the Arizona Game and Fish Department website at www.azgfd.gov/wolf
Past updates may be viewed on either website, or interested parties may sign up
to receive this update electronically.
This update is a public document and information in it can be used for any purpose. The Project is a multi-agency cooperative effort among the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), USDA Forest Service (USFS), USDA-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (USDA-APHIS WS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the White Mountain Apache Tribe (WMAT).
Please report any wolf sightings or suspected livestock depredations to: (928) 339-4329 or toll free at (888) 459-9653. To report incidents of take or harassment of wolves, please call the AGFD 24-hour dispatch (Operation Game Thief) at (800) 352-0700.
Overall Mexican Wolf Recovery Program Monthly Update
The USFWS presented information on the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program to a closed session of the White Mountain Apache Tribal Council on July 28, 2016.
The USFWS attended the annual Mexican Wolf Species Survival Plan meeting held August 1-4 at Chico Hot Springs in Pray, MT. The meeting was also combined, for the first time, with the Red Wolf Program's Species Survival Plan meeting.
The USFWS held the 4th Mexican wolf recovery planning workshop in Albuquerque, NM August 22 and 23, 2016. The workshop was attended by staff from the states of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah, the Mexican government agencies CONANP (National Commission of Natural Protected Areas) and SEMARNAT (Secretariat of Environmental and Natural Resources) and independent scientists from both countries. The workshop focused on review of a habitat model across the border region and input parameters for the Vortex model, which will be used to evaluate extinction risk of various recovery scenarios.
Numbering System: Mexican wolves are given an identification number recorded in an official studbook that tracks their history. Capital letters (M = Male, F = Female) preceding the number indicate adult animals 24 months or older. Lower case letters (m = male, f = female) indicate wolves younger than 24 months or pups. The capital letter “A” preceding the letter and number indicate breeding wolves.
Definitions: A “wolf pack” is defined as two or more wolves that maintain an established territory. In the event that one of the two alpha (dominant) wolves dies, the remaining alpha wolf, regardless of pack size, retains the pack status. The packs referenced in this update contain at least one wolf with a radio telemetry collar attached to it. The Interagency Field Team (IFT) recognizes that wolves without radio telemetry collars may also form packs. If the IFT confirms that wolves are associating with each other and are resident within the same home range, they will be referenced as a pack.
CURRENT POPULATION STATUS
Population monitoring requires year round effort documenting births, deaths, survival, total numbers, and distribution all culminating in the end of the year population counts. Currently, there are 19 packs and 4 single wolves, which include 47 wolves with functioning radio collars that are used by the IFT to collect this data.
IN ARIZONA:
Bear Wallow Pack (collared M1338, F1335 and fp1548) In August, the Bear Wallow Pack was located within their traditional territory in the east central portion of the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest (ASNF). A female pup, fp1548, in the Bear Wallow Pack was captured, collared and released in the month of August. This confirmed that Bear Wallow did produce pups, with a minimum count of one.
Bluestem Pack (collared M1382, F1443 and f1488) In August, the Bluestem Pack continued to use their traditional territory in the east central portion of the ASNF. Wolves F1443, f1488 and M1382 were consistently located together near the Bluestem den.
Buckalou Pack (collared F1405) In August, F1405 continued to travel between Arizona and New Mexico in both the Gila and Apache National Forests. . Elk Horn Pack (collared AF1294, AM1342 and mp1474) In August, the Elk Horn Pack was located within their traditional territory in the north eastern portion of the ASNF. The IFT documented rendezvous behavior by this pack during the month of August. The Elk Horn Pack has periodically used a food cache set up by the IFT to supplement the pack due to the two pups cross-fostered into the pack’s litter in April. A male pup, mp1474, with the Elk Horn Pack was captured, collared and released in the month of August. This pup was not one of the two pups cross-fostered into the Elk Horn Pack in April.
Hawks Nest Pack (collared AM1038) In August, the Hawks Nest Pack was located within their traditional territory in the north central portion of the ASNF.
Hoodoo Pack (collared AM1290, AF1333, m1441, fp1549 and fp1550) In August, the Hoodoo Pack remained in the north central portion of the ASNF. The IFT documented rendezvous behavior by the Hoodoo Pack this month. The Hoodoo Pack has continued to utilize the food cache put in place for them to prevent potential depredation issues in the area. Two female pups, fp1549 and fp1550, with the Hoodoo Pack were caught, collared and released.
Marble Pack (collared AM1330) AM1330 was not heard or located during the month of August. The Marble Pack consists of one collared wolf.
Maverick Pack (collared AF1291) In August, the Maverick Pack was located within their traditional territory both on the FAIR and ASNF. Pup tracks were documented in Maverick territory during the month of August.
Panther Creek Pack (collared F1339 and M1394) In August, the Panther Creek Pack was been located in the east central portion of the ASNF. The Panther Creek Pack continued to show denning behavior and utilize the food cache that the IFT has maintained for them to supplement the pack due to the two pups cross-fostered into the Panther Creek Pack in April.
Single collared M1398 During August, M1398 was not located.
ON THE FAIR:
Diamond Pack (collared AM1249, m1447) In August, the Diamond Pack was located in the eastern portion of the FAIR, the northwest portion of the ASNF, and non-public land in Arizona. m1454 was found dead in Arizona, on non-Tribal land; the incident is under investigation. Pups were documented traveling with the pack.
Tsay-o-Ah Pack (collared AM1343, AF1283, f1445) In August, Tsay-o-Ah was located in the eastern portion of the FAIR. f1445 traveled into ASNF occasionally. f1445 was documented traveling with M1347.
Single collared M1347 During August, M1347 was located on the eastern portion of the FAIR and the east central portion of the ASNF. M1347 was documented traveling with f1445.
IN NEW MEXICO:
Dark Canyon Pack (collared AM992, and f1444) During August, the IFT located this pack within its traditional territory in the west central portion of the Gila National Forest (GNF). AM992 was documented back in its traditional territory.
Iron Creek Pack (collared AM1240 and AF1278) During August, the Iron Creek Pack continued to utilize their territory in the northern portion of the Gila Wilderness and the southern portion of the GNF. A diversionary food cache is being maintained for the Iron Creek Pack to mitigate potential wolf-livestock conflicts.
Luna Pack (collared AM1158, and F1487) During August, the Luna Pack remained in their traditional territory in the north central portion of the GNF. The IFT is maintaining a diversionary and supplemental food cache in efforts to reduce potential for further livestock depredations.
Mangas Pack (collared M1296, F1439) During August, the Mangas Pack was located within their territory in north western portions of the GNF in New Mexico.
Prieto Pack (collared M1386, AF1251, AM1387, m1455, and f1456) During August, the Prieto Pack was located within their traditional territory in the north central portion of the GNF.
San Mateo Pack (collared AM1345 and AF1399) During August, the IFT documented AM1345 and AF1399 traveling together within their territory in the north central portion of the GNF and has continued to show denning behavior. A diversionary food cache is being maintained for the San Mateo Pack to reduce potential wolf-livestock conflicts.
SBP Pack (collared AM1284 and AF1392) In August the SBP Pack continued to use their traditional territory in the north central portion of the GNF. AM1284 was not located during August.
Willow Springs Pack (collared F1397) In August, the IFT documented the Willow Springs Pack within their traditional territory in the north central portion of the GNF.
Single collared M1293 During August, M1293 was located within the Gila Wilderness in New Mexico.
Single collared AM1155 During August, AM1155 was documented traveling within New Mexico.
MORTALITIES
In August, m1454 of the Diamond Pack was located dead in Arizona. The incident is under investigation.
INCIDENTS
During August there were seven livestock depredation reports and no nuisance reports. Five of the seven depredation reports were confirmed wolf kills.
On August 2, Wildlife Services investigated a dead calf in Apache County, Arizona. The investigation determined the calf was a confirmed wolf kill.
On August 9, Wildlife Services investigated a dead cow in Catron County, New Mexico. The investigation determined the cow was a confirmed wolf kill.
On August 12, Wildlife Services investigated a dead calf in Apache County, Arizona. The investigation determined the calf was a confirmed wolf kill.
On August 23, Wildlife Services investigated a dead calf in Apache County, Arizona. The investigation determined the calf was a confirmed wolf kill.
On August 25, Wildlife Services investigated a dead cow in Apache County, Arizona. The investigation determined the cow had died from unknown cause.
On August 25, Wildlife Services investigated a dead calf in Apache County Arizona. The investigation determined the calf was a confirmed wolf kill.
On August 31, Wildlife Services investigated a dead yearling cow in Apache County, Arizona. The investigation determined the yearling cow had died from unknown causes.
COMMUNICATION AND COORDINATION
On August 4, AGFD gave a presentation on the Mexican wolf reintroduction at the 2016 Southwest Wings Festival in Sierra Vista.
On August 10 and 11, WMAT presented at the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society – Southwest Region Conference on the Navajo Reservation.
On August 11, the USFWS gave a presentation on the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program to the University of New Mexico's continuing education program.
On August 16, WMAT presented at a community meeting in Cibecue, AZ.
On August 30, the USFWS gave a presentation on the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program to the Rio Rancho Rotary.
PROJECT PERSONNEL
In August, WMAT Mexican Wolf Tribal Youth Conservation Interns: Hanna Kindelay, Tiexieria Clitso, Rosel Ethelbah, Marissa Gregg, and Hyram Lee concluded their internship. Thanks for all of your dedication and work!
In August, Steven Nagy began as a volunteer/intern with the USFWS. Welcome to the program Steven!
REWARDS OFFERED
The USFWS is offering a reward of up to $10,000; the AGFD Operation Game Thief is offering a reward of up to $1,000; and the NMDGF is offering a reward of up to $1,000 for information leading to the conviction of the individual(s) responsible for the shooting deaths of Mexican wolves. A variety of non-governmental organizations and private individuals have pledged an additional $46,000 for a total reward amount of up to $58,000, depending on the information provided.
Individuals with information they believe may be helpful are urged to call one of the following agencies: USFWS special agents in Mesa, Arizona, at (480) 967-7900, in Alpine, Arizona, at (928) 339-4232, or in Albuquerque, New Mexico, at (505) 346-7828; the WMAT at (928) 338-1023 or (928) 338-4385; AGFD Operation Game Thief at (800) 352-0700; or NMDGF Operation Game Thief at (800) 432-4263. Killing a Mexican wolf is a violation of the Federal Endangered Species Act and can result in criminal penalties of up to $50,000, and/or not more than one year in jail, and/or a civil penalty of up to $25,000.
