Welcome back to California, gray wolf!

Editorial

This still image from video taken earlier this month and released by the California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife shows evidence of five gray wolf pups and two adults in Northern California. The state’s last known wolf was killed in 1924.
(Associated Press)

 

By The Times Editorial Board

 

Well, hello there, Shasta Pack.

California had been expecting a return of gray wolves since a lone male with a radio collar named OR7 wandered in from Oregon four years ago, and then wandered back. But the discovery of seven other wolves in southern Siskiyou County this month — two adults and five pups that show every intention of staying — caught the state by surprise and a little underprepared.

It's been more than 90 years since California had a single wild wolf residing in the state, let alone a pack, thanks to a shameful government-sponsored eradication effort that also did in the state's grizzly bears.

The return of the northern gray wolf is a welcome sign of nature's ability — and man's — to change and adapt. People once prided themselves on shoving nature aside to make way for civilization; now, more of us pride ourselves on having the brains to undo our mistakes. The gray wolf's remarkable success has cheered wildlife biologists: Not only have its numbers increased, but it has expanded its territory by finding its niche in a much-changed environment. That means, barring further stupid actions by mankind, it should be able to thrive on its own and play a helpful environmental role as a natural predator.

The gray wolf joins a list of environmental successes. The quick return of healthier fish populations in California's coastal waters after catch limits for fishing boats were established. The cleanup of polluted rivers nationwide. Significant progress toward reducing air pollution in the L.A. area. The environment can show remarkable resilience when policy makers move swiftly and decisively.

Of course, not all such efforts have been successful. Species in general are more likely to be disappearing today than to be staging comebacks. And at this point, it's hard to know whether we will do enough, quickly enough, to prevent disaster from the environmental worry that eclipses all others: climate change.

Today, though, is for celebrating. California finally has its own gray wolf pack, not by reintroduction into a hostile environment, but by natural expansion into wild territory.

For now, the California wolves are protected by federal law from hunters, who face a $10,000 fine for any violations. But still, the state has been moving too slowly on a comprehensive wolf-management plan, which it's known would be needed ever since OR7 came and went, including a compensation system for ranchers who might lose livestock to wolves. Wildlife officials need to speed up their game to protect this little pack that represents so many big hopes.


 source

#Wolves of the Day

  Hudson Bay Wolves by Hudson Bay Wolf 226    

WDFW draws a line against Huckleberry wolf pack

Don Jenkins

Capital Press

Published: August 22, 2015 

Don Jenkins/Capital Press Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife wolf policy coordinator Donny Martorello talks to the media Aug. 4 at the Teanaway Community Forest in Central Washington about wolf management. Martorello said Aug. 21 that WDFW will lethally remove wolves in the Huckleberry pack in northeastern Washington if the pack's northern group is responsible for another depredation.

 

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife says the Huckleberry wolfpack will be thinned if there's one more depredation.

One more depredation by a troublesome pack in northeast Washington will lead to the lethal removal of wolves, a Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife official said Friday.

Seriously injuring a sheep dog this month in Stevens County will count as a strike against the Huckleberry pack, which killed at least 26 sheep last summer belonging to the dog’s owner, rancher Dave Dashiell.

Donny Martorello, WDFW’s wolf policy coordinator, said Dashiell has tried everything possible — lights, alarms, dogs, fences and more human presence — to deter wolves. “If we get a second depredation there will be a recognition that we have put those things on the landscape and that the depredations are continuing,” Martorello said.

Martorello and other WDFW officials outlined in a conference call with the department’s wolf advisory group non-lethal efforts to protect livestock from the Huckleberry pack, which has split into north and south groups.

The red line drawn by WDFW applies only to the north group, which was blamed for injuring the dog. If the south group attacks livestock or guard dogs, “I think we would take a pause and review everything we know,” Martorello said in an interview.

Stevens County Cattlemen’s Association President Justin Hedrick said WDFW was being too lenient, considering the pack’s record.

Because of last summer’s depredations, WDFW authorized shooting up to four wolves. One female wolf was killed before WDFW suspended the operation because the sheep were no longer in the pack’s territory. “I don’t understand why there’s a reset button,” Hedrick said during the conference call. “Why would you wait for two (depredations) when this pack has already been eligible for lethal removal?”

Martorello said WDFW was trying to apply its policies in a case that pushed the department into new territory. WDFW generally will consider lethal removal after four depredations involving a pack. The Huckleberry pack has been involved in more than four depredations, but the incidents were separated by months.

Shawn Cantrell, Defenders of Wildlife’s Northwest director, said lethal removal may be the right move if there’s another depredation, but WDFW should have waited to make that decision. “I would like them to allow for more flexibility. The circumstances are hard to predict,” he said. “I’m pleased the department is continuing to invest in non-lethal measures to prevent a second depredation. I think that’s what everybody wants.”

Dashiell estimated he lost more than 200 sheep to wolves last year. He said Friday that he’s lost about seven sheep this year, though WDFW has not confirmed any were killed by wolves. Three sheep were attacked by cougars, WDFW concluded.

Dashiell said he moved most of his sheep to a feedlot outside the county and is spending more than $10,000 a month on hay. The sheep dog was guarding a small flock near his house. He said he’s ready to sell his herd and that the area is heading toward becoming a wolf sanctuary without a livestock industry. “I don’t want to be the first domino to fall, but that’s looking like how it is,” Dashiell said. “It’s just pretty ugly, is how it is.”

Elsewhere in Washington this summer, wolves in the Dirty Shirt pack, also in Stevens County, have killed three cows and one calf. The Teanaway pack in Kittitas County killed a yearling Angus.

source

#Wolf of the Day

  Red wolf by Ricky Floyd

     

State of Alaska Announces Hunt of Dwindling Island Wolf Population (TY @Wulalowe)

For Immediate Release, August 21, 2015 Contacts:   Larry Edwards, (907) 747-7557, ledwards@greenpeace.org Rebecca Noblin, (907) 274-1110, rnoblin@biologicaldiversity.org       State of Alaska Announces Hunt of Dwindling Island Wolf Population  ANCHORAGE, Alaska— The state of Alaska announced today that it plans to allow a wolf hunt on Prince of Wales Island, despite recent evidence that the Alexander Archipelago wolf population on the island is in danger of extinction. Last month environmental groups asked the state to close the hunting and trapping season in response to a June report by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game showing alarmingly low levels of wolves the island. Instead of canceling the hunt, the state is allowing the harvest of nine wolves. “Alexander Archipelago wolves on Prince of Wales have been pushed to their limit and we must stop hunting them,” said Larry Edwards, Greenpeace forest campaigner in Sitka. “Opening the season is the opposite of letting this population recover, let alone sustaining it. Today’s action could lead to its demise.” According to the state, the newly announced quota of nine wolves is 20 percent of the pre-2014/2015 season population estimate of 89 wolves “plus a reduction for any other human-caused mortality that may occur.” The quota does not account for the 29 wolves reported killed last year, a demonstrated high level of poaching, or the fact that females make up only 25 percent of the dwindling population. Even if they can reproduce at their reduced numbers, the risk of inbreeding is high. “Wolves on Prince of Wales have been hammered by old-growth logging that has destroyed huge swaths of their habitat and created an ever-growing road system that allows more and more hunter access to the wolves,” said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska director of the Center for Biological Diversity. “Thanks to decades of unsustainable logging, Alexander Archipelago wolves are on the precipice, and the state of Alaska is about to kick them over the edge.” Alexander Archipelago wolves are a subspecies of gray wolves that dens in the roots of old-growth trees in the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2014 found that protecting Alexander Archipelago wolves under the Endangered Species Act “may be warranted.” The Service will decide whether to list the wolves under the Act by the end of this year. The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 900,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

    source  

North Woods Living: Tips for ‘Coexisting with Your Wild Neighbors’

by Rachel Tilseth. the founder of the Wolves of Douglas County, Wisconsin

on August 22, 2015 

Living in the north woods near wild animals can be a wonderful experience. There is nothing that can match sighting a

Life in the Northwoods photography by Michael Crowley

bobcat with kits, a doe with a new fawn, snowy owls, bear, swans, and porcupines.  If you have chosen to live in a north woods rural area, here are a few tips for living along side wildlife or better yet, methods for coexisting with your wild neighbors. After all, these wild creatures you have chosen to live among were here first. Living along side wildlife requires respecting their habitat and teaching them how to respect yours as well.

In the news this week in rural norther Wisconsin.

Bill Lea photograph

Bears have been coming to close, Grantsburg Village Board and Wisconsin DNR took the first steps toward formulating a plan.  It is unfortunate that this plan calls for lethal methods as a way to solve the problem between wildlife and humans. Has there been any measures taken to prevent these bears from coming into the village limits?

There are non lethal methods that north wood’s residents can use to deter wild animals..

• Keeping your pets safe.

First of all, do not leave pets or their food outside. Leaving pets and their food outside will attract wild animals.  Keep your pets leashed or in a fenced area while out-of-doors, Do not leave pets unattended out-of-doors for long periods of time.

• Don’t feed wildlife.

Industrious wild bear (photographer unknown)

Wildlife can fend for themselves and know where to find their own food. Do you need to feed wild birds? Why do you feed wild birds? Bird feeders are for humans more than wild birds. Humans feed wild birds for the pleasure of viewing them. But these viewing backyard bird feeders attract more than wild birds.  Wild bears enjoy an easy meal off of a backyard bird feeder. Deer, raccoon, and squirrel will also find the backyard bird feeder tempting. Feeding wild birds can result in wild animals becoming habituated to humans. When wild animals become habituated to humans it can have disastrous effects. Imagine stepping outside to feed the birds and you encounter a sow with cubs. Everyone knows how this encounter could turn out.

Other concerns for  do not feed the birds including it may delay migration or changing birds habits.

• Wild animals are attracted to garbage and gardens.

it is recommended to keep your garbage out of sight and smell of wild animals.. keep your garbage cans in a locked bear proof shed. If you have a garden just fence it in or even use an electrical fence. Even garden compost will attract wild animals.

• What to do when you encounter wild animals in your backyard.

Assuming you have done all of the above methods to keep wild animals away from your home and family.  The next step is to teach wild animals, bear, coyote, bobcat, cougar, and wolves to fear you, Wild animals have a natural fear of humans. If you live where these wild animals do, then teach them to fear you. This is the best way to keep them out of your backyard.

Photograph of a wild coyote by Ron Niebrugge

Always keep a safe distance between you and any wild animal that has wondered onto your property. Use a loud device as a deterrent, such as a blow-horn, or fire crackers to scare these unwanted intruders away. Never throw these devices at or on the animal. The idea is to deter not to harm them.
Another wild animal deterrent called hazing which will teach them to fear you. Again, it is recommended to keep a safe distance away from any wild animal you encounter.  Hazing method involves making yourself larger than the wild animal by waving your arms and shouting at the wild animal saying, “go away coyote!”

Other methods of hazing you can use are pepper sprays and a blow-horn is a very good deterrent to keep on hand. You may need to use these deterrents several times to make the unwanted wild animal get the message. Wild animals have a natural fear of humans and you may need to remind them of this natural fear.

There may be times when a wild animal could be dangerous. If the wild animals appears skinny and unhealthy or stumbles this could be a sign of Rabies. In this case stay away from the wild animal. Call local law enforcement. While you wait for them to arrive keep tabs on the whereabouts of the infected animals from a safe distance.

In summary, wild animals have a natural fear of humans. Living along side of wildlife requires keeping space between their habitat and yours.   In other words, educate yourself on how to safely live with your wild neighbors.

Feature photograph is by Michael Crowley of Life in the Northwoods

source 

#Wolf of the Day

  Wolves at Wolf Park IN by Max Goldberg

   

Persecution of wolves must end

By Sadie Parr and Chris Genovali, 
Edmonton Journal  
August 21, 2015

 

 

Grey wolves face lethal threats from every angle in Alberta, including aerial gunning from helicopters, choking neck snares and strychnine baits, write Sadie Parr and Chris Genovali.

Photograph by: Shawn Bond , National Post/file

Wolf Awareness has erected a double-sided billboard along Highway 2 between Calgary and Red Deer alerting visitors and residents alike to Alberta’s misguided war on grey wolves. The billboard highlights the dire situation wolves are facing and heightens awareness about preserving this ecologically influential species.

Grey wolves here are exposed to lethal threats from every angle. Alberta’s liberal hunting and trapping regulations, as well as unregulated private bounties, assure that the devastation of wolf families occurs nearly year-round.

Under the pretext of protecting caribou in habitat that is 95 per cent disturbed by oil and gas development, more than 800 wolves in the Little Smoky area were strangled by snares, gunned down from helicopters and poisoned with strychnine over a seven-year period. Many biologists and wildlife experts consider these killing methods as inhumane and unethical. Notably, caribou are endangered not because of wolves, but because the province has knowingly allowed industry to destroy essential caribou habitat for decades.

Snares intended for wolves “accidentally” killed at least 676 other animals, including two caribou.
A review of trapping as a wildlife management technique by Dr. Gilbert Proulx and co-authors — Humaneness and Selectivity of Killing Neck Snares Used to Capture Canids in Canada — was recently published in the Journal of Canadian Wildlife Management and Biology. The authors reveal that Canadian snares are considered inefficient at killing and can cause tremendous pain and enduring suffering.

Big Lakes is one example of numerous bounty programs hosted across the province, providing $300 for evidence of each dead wolf since 2010. Other bounties offer $500. Dwight Rodtka, a retired problem wildlife specialist with Alberta Agriculture, reported: “The Municipal District of Big Lakes has claimed 647 wolves in their bounty program in less than five years. During the previous winter, 62 wolves were registered through Alberta Fish and Wildlife by registered trappers in the Sundre and Rocky districts alone. Another 19 wolves were registered as killed by hunters in these areas. These are bare minimums.”

In those districts alone, the combined mortalities are equivalent to 10 or more wolf packs being destroyed or facing the trauma of having individual wolves taken from their family and purposeful way of living.

Alberta is the only province that still uses strychnine to kill wolves and coyotes. It is past time to ban these dangerous toxin, as other countries have done. Knowing how many animals in addition to wolves died because of strychnine poisoning in the Little Smoky area is impossible because the bodies could not be accounted for.

Strychnine has long been judged by the Canadian Council on Animal Care as an inhumane way to kill animals and therefore inappropriate for euthanasia. Animals poisoned with strychnine die traumatically from asphyxiation caused by paralysis of the respiratory muscles. Considering that euthanasia implies death without signs of panic, pain or distress, minimum time to loss of consciousness, and minimal undesirable physiological and psychological effects on the animal, death through poisoning with strychnine does not comply with CCAC guidelines.

Raincoast Conservation Foundation large carnivore experts Dr. Heather Bryan and Dr. Paul Paquet, along with colleagues at the University of Calgary and Bar-Ilan University, Israel, have authored a seminal scientific paper, published in the British journal Functional Ecology, which suggests wolves that are heavily hunted or subjected to intensive lethal control experience significant social and physiological stress. The scientists used tufts of hair to measure hormone levels in wolves subject to different hunting pressures in Canada.

Although the long-term effects of chronically elevated stress and reproductive hormones are unknown, there are potential implications for wildlife health, welfare, long-term survival, and behaviour. The effects of stress are often subtle, but the ensuing harm can be acute, chronic and permanent, sometimes spanning generations.

Ignored in all the killing is the evidence that exploited wolf populations lead to smaller and unstable packs, smaller territories and potentially more prey killed per capita by these inexperienced wolf packs. All of this can and does increase conflicts with humans, who see wolves as competitors for livestock as well as wild game.

Wolves are now recognized globally as a predator that plays a key role in the top down regulation of ecosystems, yet they still struggle to find safety in most parts of Alberta. Will the province’s new leaders have the vision to right the wrongs being done to this highly persecuted species? The opportunity and choice to do things differently still remains.

Sadie Parr is executive director of Wolf Awareness Inc., and Chris Genovali is executive director of Raincoast Conservation Foundation

 source

Wolves are back in CA after nearly 100 Years; what brought them back?

Not since 1920 have gray wolves been seen and documented in California. The family of gray wolves was located in Siskiyou County near Mt. Shasta in northern California. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife website put out a statement about the return of the gray wolves in California.

“Wild wolves historically inhabited California, but were extirpated. Aside from these wolves and the famous wolf OR7 who entered California in December 2011, the last confirmed wolf in the state was here in 1924. OR7 has not been in California for more than a year and is currently the breeding male of the Rogue Pack in southern Oregon.”

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife approved a measure that would list the gray wolves as endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act in 2014. This measure seems to be redundant since gray wolves were already on the endangered list in California under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. Jamie Rappaport, president of Defenders of Wildlife, spoke about the gray wolves in California.

“The presence of an entire pack indicates that gray wolves are back for good, and according to polls and last year’s listing under the California Endangered Species Act, Californians are ready to welcome them home. We have been given a second chance to restore this iconic species to a landscape they had been missing from for nearly 100 years. We must seize this opportunity to forge new partnerships to help wolves live in harmony with people and livestock in their California home.”

Not everyone is happy that gray wolves have returned to California. Gray wolves are predators, and ranchers are concerned that their livestock could be in jeopardy if the gray wolf population increases in northern California. Prior to 1920, ranchers and hunters made it very difficult for the gray wolves to survive in California. Because they were a danger to livestock, ranchers would place bounties on the wolves. Hunters in the area also damaged the wolves’ feeding patterns by hunting so many deer that the wolves found it difficult to find enough food to survive. Both of these conditions are why the gray wolves have been absent from California for the last 95 years. Due to protection as an endangered species, the wolves and their habitats have become more protected which have allowed their numbers to increase in size and move back to their native areas.

source

For North woods WI residents concerned about hunting dogs trespassing on your property

Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin

 

North woods Wisconsin residents if you are concerned with hound hunting dogs trespassing on your private property. Here is what you need to do. It is not a WI DNR call. It is a call to your local law enforcement. 

Hound hunting trespass is the number one issue for north woods residents. Call your local law enforcement when hounds trespass on your private property. 

Also, if you can do so safety, catch the trespassing hound hunting dogs and take them to your local dog shelter. Some shelters in the north woods are charging a fee to hound hunters. Charging a finders fee hopefully will deter hound handlers from allowing dogs to run unsupervised through the north woods private property. For more information on this contact us at wolvesdouglasco@gmail.com 

~Rachel (the founder of the Wolves of Douglas County Wisconsin)

‪#‎BanCruelSports‬ ‪#‎BanHounding‬

 
Photograph John E. Marriott http://www.wildernessprints.com/

Source: FB Wolf News Forum