Here is our second edition of interesting wildlife news for the year 2013. Please post your wildlife news stories and your comments in the open thread below. 

You can access the previous edition (Jan. 13, 2013) of “Interesting Wildlife News” here.

Young moose hit on SW Montana highway Jan. 2013. Photo about 6 hours after accident. Photo courtesy of Nancy.

Young moose hit on SW Montana highway Jan. 2013. Photo about 6 hours after accident. Photo courtesy of Nancy.

 
avatar
About The Author

Ralph Maughan

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

456 Responses to Have you come across interesting wildlife news? Jan.23, 2013 edition

  1. avatar Harley says:

    Interesting… choice of pictures…

    • avatar Mtn Mamma says:

      I became a wildlife activist the day I saw a full-grown bull moose that had been hit by a Subaru Brat just seconds before. The folks driving the car were stunned and crying, afraid to get out of the car, their windshield shattered and covered with blood. The bull moose was very much alive but had suffered some type of ortho trauma and was unable to stand. One of his beautiful antlers had broken off and was lying in the road. He kept trying to get up and couldnt. I could see fear in his eyes. I was so upset I had to leave and find a ranger. He said that moose are not very smart and will often charge out in front of cars. I assume the moose was put out of its misery but I didnt hang around to find out. This was on the west slope of RMNP and it happened to be my birthday :-(

      • avatar Harley says:

        Seeing something like that first hand just sucks, there’s nothing more to add to that. It’s very difficult to see an animal in misery like that. Bad enough when you come upon road kill but to witness it all first hand just sucks. I’m sorry, that had to be the worst birthday memory ever.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Mtn Mammma,
        I saw something similar coming home from a drive. The traffic started to stop and right in front of me, a deer had been hit on a busy road. It too was trying to stand up but kept spinning in circles unable to get up. His antlers were broken and I could see his eyes and how afraid he was. It was one of the most traumatic things I ever saw. I called the police and was told they were already on the way. To make matters worse I was told its against MA law to bring an injured deer to wildlife care. They killed him, which I suppose was putting him out of his misery. It was one of the worst days in my life matching the sight of a dog who had been hit on a california highway, when I was in the garlic capital of the world. we could do nothing, or we all would have been killed. Those eyes – the dogs and the deers will haunt me forever.

        • avatar Mtn Mamma says:

          Oh my gosh Louise that is so awful. I understand that “MOST” auto/wildlife collisions are accidents but I dont understand how people can kill something and then keep on driving as if nothing happened. I have to admit that my moose situation really did change me. I now stop if (I can do so safely) and move animal carcasses off the road and try to put them in a quite place where they can return to the earth in peace. Usually these are smaller animals and birds (rabbits, skunks, squirrels, various birds and all to often prarie dogs). I once met a Native American man who said that he stops at roadkill and takes a part of the animal (feather,tooth, tail) and in turn leaves a tobacco offering so that the animal did not die in vain. Could be a little gross if you are the squeamish type but it seems a good way to honor the great spirit that connects all beings.

  2. avatar Nancy says:

    Thank you Ralph for posting this picture. Its been a few days since I took it but the pain and heartbreak of seeing this beautiful animal, lying dead next to the highway, is still very fresh in my mind.

    And yes, its an “in your face” look at what happens when someone driving, isn’t aware of their surroundings, in an area alive with wildlife.

    • avatar Harley says:

      Nancy,

      Sometimes it’s unavoidable when an animal dashes out in front of you, no matter how alert you are. And it sucks plain and simple. Hopefully no one was injured from this.
      I can say this because I used to think like you until a critter darted out in front of me…

      • avatar Harley says:

        And to add to that, I personally don’t like the ‘in your face’ approach. I absolutely HATE all the pictures I’ve seen of deer, elk, horses etc ripped apart by wolves to invoke sympathy for the dead animal and anger towards the wolf.

        • avatar Nancy says:

          “Hopefully no one was injured from this”

          • avatar savebears says:

            I believe in the context that Harley posted the message, No one was injured. Of course the moose was killed, but in this context, the moose is not one.

            • avatar Barb Rupers says:

              Well said, Nancy and sb.

              “Hopefully no one was injured from this.”

              “but in this context, the moose is not one.”

          • avatar Harley says:

            Nancy,

            I’ve been told that people here don’t necessarily value an animal life over a human life. With a response like that, you are putting that statement to the test. It’s one thing to run an animal over or even hunt one I suppose, but an ACCIDENT is just that. I would hope no PERSON was injured as large animal vs. vehicle usually does not end up pretty for anyone.

            • avatar Nancy says:

              Harley,

              There are a number of people who post here (Salle, SB, Elk, Robert R, RB just to name a few) that are aware of the “driving” conditions in rural areas. If the road is bare (and even when its not) speed limits are just signs on the side of the road. Too many people pay little, if any, attention to them because law enforcement is probably 100 miles away, at the other end of the county (or parked in their driveway) because the funds aren’t there to support a fulltime deputy.

              This picture, gruesome as it is, points out the huge need for people to slow down and pay attention. Most of us know the stopping distance if you’re going 50 miles an hour verses 80 miles an hour. And if you live in area like this, you know large animals are moving around, especially at night and headlights have a way of blinding any animal, trying to cross a road.

              I value all life Harley and it sickens me to see something like this. You can call it an ACCIDENT but I think more often than not, speed and negligence play a much bigger role.

              • avatar Harley says:

                Nancy,
                It is not a pretty sight. It’s not one I would want to see. I would mourn the loss of the life here as well. But you don’t Know if it was an accident or a bunch of idiots speeding down a seemingly empty road. That’s all I’m saying on it.

              • avatar savebears says:

                We have a lot of wildlife in this area and yes sometimes it does happen, I have had the unfortunate situation happen, when driving the speed limit of hitting deer.

                I remember one time on the way to East Glacier, we slowed down to let a deer cross the hwy and as soon as she crossed, she turned right back around and rammed head into my passenger headlight, it was one of those situations that could not be avoided.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                I think it is carelessness more often than not. I hate to see it too, and they usually are shot by a police officer. What a trauma. Also, their fur seems to absorb light? So they are harder to see until the last minute some times. At dawn and dusk if you are in an area where wildlife are known to roam, it pays to be a little more careful. People aren’t tho – usually wrapped up in their own activities, on the cell phone, not driving according to weather conditions, or God forbid, drunk. Nowadays even humans aren’t safe – lots more hit-and-runs, even of police officers.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Well Ida, if you saw what our insurance rates are in Montana and how a wildlife collision can cause them to rise, you might have a different view, I know what happened when I hit that one deer and it has taken years for my rate to go down.

                It sad to see so many with such a cynical attitude.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                To add my two cents. When driving forested roads, one must always be vigilant, especially at night. Add into the mix, two lane highways with twists, turns, ups and downs probability is working toward collisions with wildlife.

                Cycling, I’m not going 50 mph, but have had many close calls with deer. Going downhill at 30 mph, I’m always looking for deer. Once on a downhill with no shoulder, as a pick-up was passing me, a deer shot across the road right in front of us. I remember the woman on the passenger side putting up her arms in self defense, and I’m lucky the driver did not swerve. Thankfully for all involved, the deer was not hit, but close is not adequate enough to describe the situation.

              • avatar Harley says:

                There was a YouTube video circulating of a motorcyclist who had a collision with a deer. He’s lucky to still be alive. I can’t remember in that case if he was speeding or obeying the signs. He had on a helmet cam and I don’t even think I remember seeing the deer until it was right there.

              • avatar savebears says:

                I was watching a race on TV a couple of years ago, that was held at Watkins Glen and a deer jumped out on the race track,, didn’t turn out well for the deer, it made the rounds to all the news outlets for a while.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                My brother and a friend were motorcycling around Lake Superior. Just prior to crossing from MI into WI a deer shot across the road. That deer was avoided, but not the second. My brother clipped it and road his bike down and his friend went down in avoidance. No serious injuries other than both “Harleys” were totaled and both individuals made the decision to quit riding.

    • avatar Evan D says:

      Looks like the scavengers went for the backstraps first. Odd choice (though I can hardly blame them). Was the belly already taken care of? Curious about the ~6hrs post-accident timeframe too… how was that determined?

      For what it’s worth, I’m with Harley and Jeff E on this. Accidents happen, careful or not. And that magpie is loving life right now, along with the thousands (millions really) of organisms that will benefit from this moose’s misfortune.

      • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

        Evan D,

        I estimated 6 hrs from the events Nancy told me, but if my estimate is wrong, it is wrong by being too short a period.

        There have been a number of accidentally killed wildlife around Nancy’s place lately, such as from vehicle impacts and animals not successfully clearing barbed wire fences.

        • avatar Evan D says:

          Thanks Ralph. The amount of meat gone from the back struck me as strange for just six hours gone. Thought they might have had help. Hard to tell though. As with most things, we’re limited by perspective!

          Does anyone know if MT does CWD sampling from roadkill like this? It’s part of the monitoring efforts for Kentucky, which is also CWD-free so far (knock on wood).

          Hate to find wildlife caught in fences… that has to be a terrible way to go.

          • avatar savebears says:

            Montana has had CWD in some of the game farm populations, but it has not shown up in wild populations, they advise people about it, but I don’t believe they are doing any major testing at this time. I have never had to have an elk or deer tested so far.

            • avatar Evan D says:

              Ugh, game farms. There’s a lot of worry that they are what’s going to bring CWD on in to states that don’t have it in wild populations yet.

              • avatar savebears says:

                If I remember correctly the population they found it in, was imported from Texas, there have been quite a few laws changed since this happened.

              • avatar Evan D says:

                Here we go. Looks like MT FWP is testing road-kills when feasible, and in addition to hunter kills.

                http://fwp.mt.gov/news/newsReleases/hunting/nr_1784.html

              • avatar savebears says:

                Hmm,

                I was not aware they had actively started testing, of course it makes sense. Where I hunt, I have never gone through a check point, I hunt pretty close to my home, so don’t have to take the animals anywhere.

                It is never a bad thing to do the testing in this day and age.

              • avatar Evan D says:

                Agreed! Kentucky DFWR cut way down on check points due to budget & personnel constraints, but have set up monitoring efforts through sample collection from quite a few taxidermists and deer processing businesses around the state to supplement annual targeted and ad-hoc roadkill sampling. Of course, now they’re limited by lab costs and time, but so it goes. Good idea for a bad situation, and the hunting community’s cooperation has been key to it all coming together.

      • avatar Nancy says:

        Evan,

        I came upon the moose just at dawn Monday morning (I took a picture then but it was still not quite light out) on my way home about 6 hours later, I stopped again and took a couple more pictures. (Which is the time frame Ralph was referring to)

        There was a small injury to the back, which I noticed that morning but by mid afternoon, 3 golden eagles and a host of ravens and magpies, had further opened the back, into the ribcage.

        This was a young moose, I would guess between 1 to 2 years old. If you look at the first bloodspot, it appears that the moose was probably dragged out of the road.

        Spoke to somone with our fire dept. this morning and no call went out for the ambulance and he heard nothing on the scanner about an accident or that a moose had been killed.

        I suspect it may of been a situation where the party involved DID NOT want the incident reported. Lapsed insurance, no driver’s license, one too many beers? And, there was a poker run that weekend, lots of pickup trucks pulling trailers. (Even harder to stop if your pulling a trailer)

        I have had my share of close calls with moose, elk, deer and proghorn over the years but because I seldom drive over 50 miles an hour and I’m constantly looking at my surroundings, I have been fortunate enough to see these animals and brake in time.

        Ida is right “I think it is carelessness more often than not”

        Insurance companies will not cover damage to your vehicle if you try and miss an animal and end up in the ditch or so I’ve heard. They want proof in the form of a dead animal and a police report.

        • avatar savebears says:

          Nancy,

          It depends on the insurance company involved, they covered my car, when I hit the deer on the way to east glacier. They inspected the car and saw evidence of the deer hair and covered the accident.

          • avatar Evan D says:

            Nancy, thanks for the follow-up. Bummer it got hit, but at least that’s a lot of hungry birds getting a good meal.

            Savebears, I’ve had a whitetail t-bone the side of a farm truck, late afternoon, driving under 20 on a dirt road. He thought his buddies were headed to the wrong woodline apparently, swerved and plunked the drivers door. In this case, he left a bit wobbly but was eating clover in that same field the next day. Caution and low speed helps, but you’re right, accidents happen.

          • avatar Elk275 says:

            Savebears

            If you hit a deer in Montana and your insurance rates went up call the state auditor. Hitting an animal is covered under comprehensive and an insurance company is prohibited from raising rates due comprehensive claims.

  3. avatar savebears says:

    Heck the last time I hit a wild animal, the Subaru ended up looking worse than the animal!

  4. avatar JEFF E says:

    so this food source is now providing nourishment for multitudes of birds and other animals in the dead of winter.

    they all die by car or…..(fill in the blank)

    • avatar Robert R says:

      Jeff your right it does provide carrion for some but it also creates a hazard for other drivers and and the death of other predators like coyotes, bobcats or foxes and an assortment of birds from magpies to raptors.
      If the state road crews don’t remove the dead animals it becomes a hazard, the state boys do a good job in are area.
      If it wasn’t for them we would loose a lot more eagles.

      • avatar JEFF E says:

        Robert R,
        It provides food for the multitudes. If the County mounties or F&G care about the the situation and /or there is a real danger then the carcass should be dragged further from the road. That seems hit or miss depending on where you are.

        I have been watching a road killed deer for the better part of a month that was dragged away from the road, and there has been a constant stream of visitors utilizing that food source.

        They all die, from one cause or another.

        In fact there was just recently one of our resident daffodils telling me that if it was the time to die it was the time to die.

        It was this moose’s time to die.

          • avatar Nancy says:

            Robert R – I’ve always heard that meat or meat by products are a big no-no in compost piles. But I think some states with high road kill, are composting the bodies and using the compost for highway beautification projects.

        • avatar Ida Lupine says:

          For our resident A$$:

          The amount of animals that are hit in auto accidents is very high – I think someone posted statistics from a Canadian national park, Banff I think, and it is extremely high. So it is much more than other animals could ever hope to keep up with, and we are trying to steal roadkill too. How low can we go. More than naturally occuring, because what animal could compete with 5000 lbs. of steel coming at them at (at least) 60 mph while they are yakkiing mindlessly on a cell phone, or whatever. More people and more autos, expanding highways, less wildlife. Accidents are expensive for insurance rates, and a lot of areas are installing the wildlife overpasse and underpasses, but that is too expensive for some also. An elderly gentleman who hits eight mountain goats perhaps should no longer be driving.

          http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-np/ab/banff/plan/transport-transportation/routes/chap1/sec1.aspx

  5. avatar Robert R says:

    Roadways draw animals this time of year because of the salt in the sand and the warmth of the asphalt keeps some grasses green.

    • avatar savebears says:

      One thing to note from this article, as it pertains to our conversations about wolves and tracking collars:

      ‘The visit took place in October 2011. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks researchers learned about it when they recovered the 4-year-old female grizzly’s radio collar on March 26, 2012, near her den along the Jocko River on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The collar had a device that recorded its location every six hours.

      If you read the article, take note of the map that accompanies the article and the locations recorded.

    • avatar SAP says:

      It’s all about risk management, Robert. Look at towns and camps around Yellowstone in the 1960s: not that many bears around, but an awful lot of conflict.

      Today, people are doing a far better job of preventing conflicts, even though conflicts do continue. Populations of humans and grizzlies have grown dramatically in the last 40-odd years, yet the rate of conflict per capita / per bear is clearly far lower.

      Sure, conflict prevention isn’t cheap. To me, spending money on conflict prevention (along with prompt and effective management of bears with repeat conflicts) is the best of three alternatives. The other two options are:

      1) Large numbers of bears with a very high conflict rate (not sustainable).

      2) Keep grizzly populations very small. Rather than let population viability parameters be the foundation for recovery goals, set goals on the basis of how many bears will fit in YNP or the Bob Marshall Wilderness, where conflicts can be kept to a minimum. (This option would likely keep grizzly populations in a precarious condition, especially if we keep experiencing drought and warm winters).

  6. avatar Immer Treue says:

    35 below! Tough on all critters this am.

  7. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Yakutian ecologists to send a letter to the head of Yakutia asking to protect wolves

    http://yatoday.ru/nature/2959

  8. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Wolf killings are based on the most cynical of premises

    Governments in Russia, Canada and Scandinavia claim they need to protect lesser species and habitats – while continuing their smash and grab raid on natural resources

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/jan/18/wolf-killings-cynical-premise#start-of-comments

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Yes, as in the United States, the governments will make up any kind of story of justify killing wolves.

      If they are going to lie to me, I think I deserve the respect for them to at least expend some effort on their part in creating their lies.

  9. avatar Salle says:

    Wonder if this will be a common event during this coming summer drought and the impact on wildlife is a concern for some I would imagine…

    E. Utah oil rig fire being fought by crack Texas team
    Evacuation continues » Uncertain when Roosevelt area homeowners can return.

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55692571-78/fire-oil-site-minty.html.csp

  10. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    Regarding the graphic photo leading into this installment of Interesting Wildlife News, you’all must surely have heard by now that one of the more colorful bills presently being considered by the wise Wyoming Legislature is to legalize the scavenging of roadkill for personal consumption. It sounds as if the bill will sail thru both houses without much opposition , and even the state Highway department is OK with it. Off the record, they are giddy that somebody else besides their crews will be hauling off the carcasses , maybe ).

    I can only speculate if venison will surreptitiously be making its way into the servings of local restaurants in my town of Cody , since by my estimation we smacked dead over 150 Urban Deer on city streets last year , bludgeoned by motor vehicle.

    In the lovely Nancy photo you will also see that colorful Wyoming character , the Magpie. I have long said that Wyoming needs to change its official State Bird from the Western meadowlark, which is shared with two other states, to the Magpie. The black and white corvid with an occasional flash of local color in its iridescence is much more befitting the demeanor of my home state. We Are Nothing If Not Scavengers here in Wyoming. Squawk!!!

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Well if it should pass CC, there would be no reason to get a hunting license anymore, right? All you’d need to do is re-enforce the grill with one of those “cattle bumpers” on the front of the truck :)

      • avatar savebears says:

        Legal or not, there has been a couple of times I have thrown a fresh road kill deer in the back of the truck and taken it home.

      • avatar rork says:

        I haven’t taken a road killed whitetail home in awhile, but I’ve done it when it was harder to shoot as many as I wanted (easier now). In my area I’d guess over half the dead deer are picked up, at least during cool weather – “stiff competition”. Judgement about how damaged they are is good. There are so many deaders near me, you don’t really need to hunt if you don’t want to. And it means we experience close calls many times per year and have high car insurance rates – another downside of too many. I expect my local area will show far fewer collisions this year in Oct-Nov (half of accidents happen then), and that the data will be useful in estimating the EHD-virus kill.

    • avatar Harley says:

      I think they passed something like that in Illinois just recently! Eeegads…

  11. avatar Louise Kane says:

    http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/publicComments/2013wolfHuntingClosure.html

    anyone not happy about the judges decision about shutting down the buffer zones, you have until tomorrow at 5 to make comments to the FW in Montana. Hope you can write in.

  12. avatar Louise Kane says:

    From Howling for Wolves

    One in four MN gray wolves were killed by hunting and trapping in 2012. It’s staggering and this doesn’t even account for wolf deaths from disease, poaching, and car collisions. The recreational hunt threatens the survival of our gray wolf population, our north woods habitat and many other wildlife species. The situation is now more urgent than ever as the DNR is preparing to reauthorize the wolf hunt this year with higher quotas.

    This year’s legislative session is very short but lawmakers have the power to repeal the hunt. Last year at this time Howling For Wolves didn’t even exist as an organization. We didn’t have the opportunity to organize and make our voices heard. Things are different this time around.

    Please help us by calling, writing, or emailing your legislators to ask them to repeal the wolf hunt. In-person meetings are the best way to make a strong impression and you can do this on the weekends in your home district. Show solidarity by coordinating with a friend and going to each others’ meetings. Minnesota gray wolves need you.

    All legislators must eventually vote on a bill to repeal the wolf hunt. The most likely way that legislation will occur is by hearing a bill in the Environment committees of the House and the Senate. The legislative leaders and committee chairs are influenced by their committee members and many other lawmakers. It is the constituent meetings, phone calls, and letters that pushes these decision-makers to hear an issue.

    Right now the special interest lobbyists for those who want to kill wolves are working behind the scenes again to keep the hunt going. It’s important that all legislators and in particular the House and Senate Environment policy committees know that the people of Minnesota want the wolf hunt repealed. They broke a promise behind locked doors to wait five years before considering a hunt after the wolf was delisted from the Endangered Species List. The hunt was rushed before new state laws that allow for more wolf killing could be implemented and evaluated.

    You can help Minnesota gray wolves right now:

    1) Download our new fact sheet to educate yourself and speak confidently about this issue.

    2) Contact members of the state House and Senate Environment policy committees and let them know how important it is to repeal the hunt (House members, Senate members).

    3) Contact Governor Mark Dayton and let him know you what you think. The DNR Commissioner works for him and the Democratic leaders in the House and Senate will be responsive to his concerns. Click here to email the Governor right now or call 800-657-3717.

    4) Contact your state Senator and state Representative to speak with them about this issue and find out where they stand (find out who represents you). Use the conversation as an opportunity to educate them and tell them what you think.

    So we can coordinate our efforts, please keep us posted when you speak with lawmakers and let us know how it went or how we can help you by emailing us at respond@howlingforwolves.org.

    Because this campaign requires significant resources, please make a donation today to support our continued work.

    The wolf and her pack needs you!

    Howling For Wolves
    Follow Us on Twitter
    Like Us on Facebook

    follow on Twitter | like us on Facebook | forward to a friend
    Copyright © 2013 Howling for Wolves, All rights reserved.
    You are receiving this email because you previously sent a message through HowlingforWolves.org.
    Our mailing address is:
    Howling for Wolves
    PO Box 4099
    Hopkins, MN 55343

  13. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    The Wowser of the Month . Go to the Colorado Wildlife and Parks Department Facebook page and prepare to be floored. A retired parks employee named Steve Chaney got a closeup photo of a female Canadian Lynx and her yearling cub standing on a mountain road at sunset , somewhere in ” southwest Colorado ” ( San Juan Mountains ? ) taken last week. I sent it to Ralph and maybe he can post it here if we hear back from Chaney . It is an extraordinary photo. Might be OK to republish since it is on a government agency public Facebook site . It has been shared 7,000 times already.

    Try this link, FB’ers: https://www.facebook.com/ColoradoParksandWildlife

    • avatar Jeff N. says:

      Cody…..you beat me by 2 minutes. I was probably reading the article as you were posting yours.

    • avatar Sam Parks says:

      Lynx seem to show very little fear of people, it’s no wonder why so many in Colorado have been poached. Here’s a video of another Colorado Lynx at Silverton Ski area (it’s good footage if you can get over the obnoxious snowboarders, or just watch it on mute).

  14. avatar Jeff N. says:

    Pretty cool stuff. I love the comment from the dolt who claims that the lynx was a “plains” animal originally.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/rare-lynx-sighting-in-col_n_2543765.html

  15. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    Followup to story I posted last week about the Boulder Colorado cop who killed the trophy Bull Elk in the unicorparated subdivisions above Boulder on new year’s Day. The popular ” Mapleton Elk”. Boulder County prosecutors have charged two cops with nine charges including three felonies. The heinous taking of this trophy bull was premeditated…the cops conspired well ahead of time to get the bull and explain away the circumstances with false stories. After three weeks investigation, they are having the book thrown at them.

    http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_22401544/boulder-district-attorney-announce-decision-charges-mapleton-elk-shooting

    (quote) “After almost three weeks of investigation and community unrest, two Boulder police officers were arrested Friday on nine charges — including three felonies — in the shooting and disposing of an elk in the Mapleton Hill area after investigators say texts between the officers revealed they planned the trophy kill almost a day in advance of the actual shooting.

    Boulder police officers Sam Carter, 35, and Brent Curnow, 38, turned themselves in to the Boulder County Jail on Friday morning and were booked on suspicion of forgery, tampering with physical evidence, attempting to influence a public official — all felonies — as well as unlawful taking of a trophy elk, conspiracy, a Samson surcharge, killing an elk out of season, unlawful use of an electronic device to unlawfully take wildlife and first degree official misconduct — all misdemeanors. ” ( endquote )

  16. avatar Sam Parks says:

    http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=9483

    “Predator Zone eliminates wolves”

    Finally a story in a major Wyoming newspaper about what we have been talking about here on the wildlife news for some time. The elimination of wolves in the Wyoming predator zone. Wyoming is pushing their luck. At least 121 wolves have been killed since 2012 began. That is, 121 confirmed deaths. The population at that time was 230. Let us pray the courts put Wyoming wolves back on the list ASAP.

    • avatar CodyCoyote says:

      With regards to large predators and carnivores, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department has devolved from being wildlife biologists to mere zookeepers, and mighty poor ones at that …

  17. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Will hunt to kill 3,000 wolves use banned ‘poisons’?

    http://siberiantimes.com/other/others/news/will-hunt-to-kill-3000-wolves-use-banned-poisons/

    Yegor Borisov, head of the region, warned people ‘are worried like never before’ over the wolf threat, stressing: ‘We must have a clear plan of how to fight the wolves’.

    Reports suggest that the republic’s government may appeal to the federal authorities to permit the use of unspecified banned ‘special means to kill the animals, including poisons.’

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Mareks – how close is the region (in the article you posted above) to the region mentioned in the article below:

      http://themoscownews.com/business/20120719/189978897.html

      • avatar Peter Kiermeir says:

        Nancy,
        rough guess = about 5000 miles!

      • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

        Nancy,

        A distance along the route Bryansk (RUS) — Riga (LAT) ~ 893 km

        I’m from Latvia (not far away from Sweden)but we have some Danish pig ranchers – all I can say the locals are not happy because they are producing intolerable stench and residents have headaches

        Organization opposing Danish pig farms to be established in Latvia’s Bauska

        http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/markets_and_companies/?doc=54311

        ” The draft resolution stipulates that construction of pig farms with more than 3,000 pigs and 1,000 piglets be not permitted in Latvia, that local residents be informed about the plans for building new pig farms, and they not be permitted without water and air treatment facilities.”

        So as you see, it’s not on a American – Russian scale, but an article was hilarious (ecology in Russia is top priority)

      • avatar Ida Lupine says:

        Well, there’s the missing link. We’re a bad influence!

    • avatar Louise Kane says:

      God, what is wrong with people?
      Mareks do you live in this area, are some people expressing opposition to these ideas? Is there a foundation or organization concerned individuals can write to? If you have information you want to share here or by e mail, please do so
      Ralph can give you my e mail

      • avatar JB says:

        Louise:

        This is the danger of “over-protecting” wolves–i.e., predator policy swinging on a pendulum. Of course, we’re in no danger of over-protecting wolves here in the US.

        • avatar Peter Kiermeir says:

          Speaking about over-protecting:
          Ranchers decry plan for wolf protection: County backs opposition to federal proposal
          http://ratonrange.com/ranchers-decry-plan-for-wolf-protection-county-backs-opposition-to-federa-p4434-1.htm
          “The proposed plan “gives the wolves more protection than our farmers and ranchers,” said Marietta Shell, a former Colfax County commissioner. “These are predators I do not believe can be managed.”

          • avatar WM says:

            I am guessing this article will go in the “negative” column for those researchers continuing to track public perception of wolves in the media (inches of text or whatever the measurement standard is).

            Another aspect, the locals don’t want wolves in contravention of the federal government’s desire to have them in the Southwest, local ordinances stating opposition and all. How does one reconcile when local and federal interests diverge, yet federal law trumps local (or state).

            In my state of WA (and CO, too)the citizens have said recreational marijuana is legal, although it is in direct opposition to federal law and the continued classification of MJ as a regulated narcotic.

            Two different topics, yet the same in a way, when locals tell the federal government to go piss up a rope.

            • avatar Ida Lupine says:

              Ha! That’s one topic I couldn’t care less about, considering all the problems we have to face in our country right now – legalizing recreational MJ. What a country we are.

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                ++That’s one topic I couldn’t care less about, considering all the problems we have to face in our country right now…++

                Some might make precisely the same observation of wolves.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                WM, you would think so – but the fact that wolves are one subject that dominates politics right now, and delisting them tacked on to a budget rider during a near government shutdown in 2011 makes me think otherwise. They are very important to some.

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                If you are correct, where wolves “dominates politics,” is where the locals don’t want them so much (or federal government intervention) and seek relief in whatever form they can.

                Now, if places like CO, UT, CA, NV, and TX, would take some, and AZ and NM would willingly take some more, then wolves could dominate politics in those areas. As it is, these states, are pretty much glad to be out of the frey for the time-being, and I assure you they are in no rush to join states which have wolves in numbers larger than they want, in places they don’t want them. These aspects are completely lost on some folks on this forum with myopic views about wolves and how important they are in the public view.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                That sounds like the argument by Sen. Kretz, which is pure silliness. Wolves have to be in an area they can reasonably survive in – they can’t take the ferry from the San Juans to the mainland!

                We have to learn to live with wolves. How immoral is it to exterminate another living thing because we don’t like them, or they are inconvenient?

                I’ll always contend that losing livestock is part of doing business. Depredation only amounts to a very small percentage of loss for ranchers. As we can see, drought is causing a lot of loss, and who knows what a continued drought will do. The Southwest’s attitude is just hysteria – but I suppose anything’s worth a try.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                Some might make precisely the same observation of wolves.

                I don’t think you could compare killing another living creature needlessly with the selfish and hedonistic pursuit of getting high and pleasure. Or are we devolving?

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                I still don’t think you get it. Now that we have wolves on the landscape their numbers and range WILL be managed to meet human objectives. So, in effect, by reintroduction we (advocates of wolves) have created yet another human social problem/conflict, in fact, a dilemma. Whether wolves in the NRM are managed at a level of 800 or 3,000 there will still be alot killed each and every year. You just can’t circumvent the inevitable, by then raising this absurd “immorality” of killing living things argument. It is irrational, and well…..absurd.

                It’s now one of, “Well, ya got them in greater numbers and where you don’t want them. Now, what?”

                That conversation is going on in the state capitol of every state that has wolves, or will go on in states to get them in the future. The tension will always be there, and it won’t be centered around supposed “immorality” of killing living things. I guaranteee it. It will be centered around how to deftly get around irrataional views such as yours, but still hold on to your vote. Same will be true of irrational views of the folks on the “anti” wolf side that want absolutely no wolves.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                Now that we have wolves on the landscape their numbers and range WILL be managed to meet human objectives.

                This is immoral. Unless you specify just what ‘objectives’ you mean, but just this statement alone is immoral.

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                This is in response to a couple of your comments in sequence:

                ++We are becoming one-celled organisms that only react to pain and pleasure.++

                Actually, Ida, some of that has been explored before in the investigation of the nature of humans. Ever hear of Jeremy Bentham and his “calculus of pleasure and pain,” and Utilitariansim, from the early 1800’s? Or, Abraham Maslow, the industrial psychologist, who developed a system of “heirarchy of human needs” in the early 1940’s?

                How do we reconcile this (moral/immoral?) command, Ida, from the Bible, Genesis 1:28

                ++And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
                – King James Bible “Authorized Version”, Pure Cambridge Edition
                ++

                Wow! So, what is this thing about having dominion over living things. According to scripture, God said it. I guess that means you can kill whatever it is, if you can use it in some utilitarian way or it gets in your way. And, the morality or immorality of it all seems to have been directed by a higher authority. Damn Europeans and their interpretation of the Bible, as written by some guys in the Middle East. May God forgive me for my blasphemy (an immoral act for sure). And, while I mention this, we should pay attention to the strong belief that criticism of Christian church doctrine is indeed immoral – since the penalty it would appear historically was stoning, or even better, eternal damnation. I will take exception to this since I live in a free society, possibly free from Divine intervention. Worse than that, if one blasphemes Mohammad, Islam and the Quaran in this life, the faithful followers are obligated by their faith to respond, and some do so lethally – isn’t that what much of war in the Middle East is about, and violence against individuals in fatwa edicts? Killing the offender is the usual tactic, maybe along with some family members, for good measure. So much for religious morality across cultures. It would appear some immoral acts, are indeed threatened with very severe conduct. Divine law allows those with power to also invoke non-worldly and worldly sanctions for the immoral. How about that? What better way to seek compliance than scare the crap out of those who would violate Divine laws?

                And, then, there is the “multiply and subdue” part where it seems some cultures, our own included, are smothering the earth and definitely subduing it to the near point of death to earth itself. Is this immoral or not, while following the Divine written word on values?

                Sorry, but your take on “immoral” behavior, underpinned with religion as a touchstone for a standard or as something we just inherently know, doesn’t cut it.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                The things you’re liable, to read in the Bible, “Ain’t Necessarily So”.

            • avatar WM says:

              Ida,

              Define “immoral” and by what standard it would be measured, and by whom?

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                By any standard, this is abuse of power and wrong.

              • avatar savebears says:

                And there in is the problem, every body has a different idea of what is “Moral”

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                You are evading the question. Somebody has to define what constitutes moral and immoral behavior, and then enforce the infractions.

                I am no philosopher, but it seems that the standard for morality is set by those who are in power and govern, or by “divine” law coming from a diety (who in writings defines the rules, and of course for those who are skeptics of organized religions some humans with power and influence over the minds of humans, often through fear and intimidation of the unknown, actually made those rules up, too). Sometimes one derives legitimacy from the other.

                Then, I suppose, there is a third source. We just know what is moral in what is immoral. This, of course, takes us back to sources one and two in the previous paragraph for closer inspection.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                There really aren’t that many versions of morality. Killing is generally seen as wrong througout history and across cultures. Surprise! even for killing animals needlessly.

                Here’s my definition: What society teaches us as right and wrong from childhood, and/or your religious beliefs. Then suddenly one day everything we have been taught from day one no longer applies, in favor of selfishness, money, and greed, and the endless pursuit of meaningless pleasure. Yes, we are doing this – and our leaders can’t expect to be called Mr. Nice Guy in the process – they can’t have it both ways. When wolves and other predators roamed the continent in large numbers may have been different, but that sure isn’t the case today.

                We are becoming one-celled organisms that only react to pain and pleasure.

                As far as irrational goes, there’s not much more irrational (not to mention futile!) than trying to tailor deer and elk herds for our own means and use, and denying them to other predators. The majority of the country wants wildlife – and a compromise could certainly be made for opposing interest by staying away from national park borders, and respecting those animals that science is trying to bring back from the brink of extinction. We can’t even do that.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                how about replacing immoral with irresponsible, unfair, inhumane….are those words less ambiguous

              • avatar savebears says:

                Those are still Judgement Calls Louise.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                I don’t think the word ‘immoral’ is ambiguous – unfair and irresponsible, inhumane are all understatments, immoral applies to deliberately choosing to do something that the majority of people find contrary to decency and ethics – which includes lying as misrepresenting the facts, as well as killing.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Now you did Ida, You threw in Ethics to!

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                I am no philosopher, but it seems that the standard for morality is set by those who are in power and govern, or by “divine” law coming from a diety.

                It may seem so in today’s government, and they don’t have very high standards, obviously. Religion can be a tool to teach it, but what is moral morality exists without either. Not everyone needs threats to conduct themselves ethically. Most basic societies have had standards of behavior to protect its citizens, and what supposedly sets us apart as human beings. Basic morality like not killing your fellow man or creature, not stealing something that isn’t yours, conducting yourself honestly. There’s no measurement, or perhaps this is the smallest unit of measure. Unless we want anarchy where everyone does whatever they want regardless of how it affects others.

              • avatar Evan D says:

                Ida,

                Morality is thoroughly subjective. It IS heavily influenced by an individual’s societal ties and religious upbringing, but that doesn’t negate the subjective (and mutable, in many cases) nature of that individual’s values. Mores & ethics change amongst societies and religions as well, all the time. Some of the keenest minds in human history (eg. Hume, Kant, Kierkegaard, Epicurus, Nietzsche, MLK to name just a few) spent much of their lives pointing that out, and it is still clearly an endless point of discussion. In light of your definition, what society teaches you as a child can be polar opposites of what the next society over teaches theirs… thus holy wars, slavery, capitalism, socialism and kids who want to hug anything that moves vs. kids who want to shoot everything that moves at least once. Along with the infinite ‘gray area’ in between. Seems to me killing is one of the only constants throughout history and across cultures, as unfortunate as that is, with justifications made by the killers and supported or condemned as peoples’ morals lead them. Management of wolves is not immoral “by any standard” or it wouldn’t be taking place. It’s immoral by your standard. Many others agree with you, many don’t. Personally, I love that wolves are back on the landscape, and I’d like to see them as unfettered as possible. But the “as possible” is the key there. Like WM said, they WILL be managed in some manner because they are now on the landscape. Putting energy into denying that is like tearing your hair out because you don’t want to go bald. Finding a way to manage them responsibly, which I don’t believe is currently happening in many states (or countries) is the real battle. At least, that’s what my moral framework says.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                Hogwash. Killing is still killing, thievery is still thievery, lying is still lying, child abuse is still child abuse, animal torture is still animal torture regardless of how times change, what culture, what period in time. Everything else is just rationalization.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                It seems to me that what we really can’t define is what the terms ‘wolf management’ mean, not morals and ethics. If you truly want to ‘manage’ them, my moral code says that not every method is acceptable. Here, the word ‘management’ is being disingenuous. There’s nothing wrong with those who do no harm and who don’t want to kill anything. Those who want to kill need to come up with a damn good reason.

              • avatar savebears says:

                This reminds of the days I went to church when I was a kid, when the Baptists were fighting with the Catholics, Etc.

                Ida, I have kill another human, what does that make me?

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                SB, I’m sorry to bring this up to you. When a soldier is asked to go to war or decides to go, it is different than commiting murder as a civilian. A soldier may think he is doing the most moral thing – ending slavery, ending genocide, self-defense, or survival. I don’t believe killing for religious beliefs is at this level, because that is very subjective.

              • avatar WM says:

                Ida,

                Sorry wrong spot. See my post above at January 25, 2013 at 4:10 pm

              • avatar savebears says:

                Ida,

                Being through what I have been through in my life, I can honestly say it is all subjective.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                I don’t think the Bible or other religious texts is meant to be taken literally – or that it applies to modern times; more of a historical reference. Those passages you mention are from mankind’s beginnings – of course being fruitful would be encouragaed – but there was also polygamy and we certainly frown on that today. “Dominion” I feel also doesn’t mean pillage and plunder until there is nothing left, it comes with responsibility. We’ve really interpreted these things in a self-serving way, even proclaiming ourselves as the highest being – who could argue?

                I don’t even really have one religion – but treating others well, not commiting murder, being honest are basic tenets of all of them, and are values promoted by society as well. Also having reverence for the bounty our planet provides for us is referenced in most of them.

                And don’t even get me started on mankinds laws vs. natural laws. :)

              • avatar JB says:

                Ida:

                I honestly can’t believe that you cannot see that morality is subjective. You’re arguing that it is immoral to kill “a living thing”. There is only one culture that I know of that believes this–Jainism. WM has pointed out that the Christian deity gave his/its followers carte blanche to subdue the earth and the wild things thereon. Although I didn’t pick, pull, or shoot them, today I was responsible for the deaths of lettuce, rice, beans, wheat, corn, avocado, a variety of types of peppers and a chicken (all living things). Does that make me “immoral”? I submit to you that the majority of your fellow Americans don’t think it does. Last week I was responsible for the deaths of a couple of birch and pine trees (also living things) which I didn’t eat–but did use. Does that make me immoral? Again, I submit that the majority of Americans don’t think so.

                Does public opinion change when we’re talking about sentient animals? Yes, slightly? Does it change when sentient animals are killed ‘for no good reason’? You bet–then again, people don’t necessarily agree on what constitutes a ‘good’ reason.

                In any case, to suggest that killing living things (even killing wolves without a good reason) is universally thought of as “immoral” is simply not true. No evidence that I have seen would support this claim.

          • avatar Mark L says:

            From the article Peter posted: “The federal government lives in la-la land,” said rancher James Kneip. “Wolves are mass murderers…they can wipe out a whole herd.”

            Wait, what are WE if we do the same (and for profit)?

            • avatar WM says:

              ++Wait, what are WE if we do the same (and for profit)?…”

              Would they be …controllers of predators which they perceive affect their ability to make a living, while taking a public opportunity to oppose their federal government through an easily identifiable symbol of interfering in what they perceive to be exclusively local issues?

          • avatar jon says:

            I think ranchers lose a lot of support when they support extreme positions like that. Wolves that naturally migrate into New Mexico from other states should be protected. This is how you build the wolf population up in NM, but no, ranchers if they got their way in NM would probably eradicate the wolf. I do think there are some sane and rational ranchers in New Mexico.

      • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

        Louise,

        I’m from Latvia, so Yakutia is closer to Japan than my location

        but one Russian petition I’ve signed yesterday was on change.org

        Главе Якутии Егору Борисову: Наложить вето на охотничий сезон

        • avatar Louise Kane says:

          Thanks Mareks
          and thank you for keeping us informed of the news about wolves in other parts of the world. Sometimes I think US citizens forget we are only one country that is part of a global community.

      • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

        Louise,

        right now I’m trying to organise expose of a planned wolf pack’s shooting on Sunday January 27 by 400 hunters – those guys have a funny mindset

        • avatar WM says:

          ++…those guys have a funny mindset…++

          …or they are just trying to make some money under a government sponsored program, which has an objective of trying to solve (in the government’s mind anyway), a perceived economic problem affecting livestock production in the region, and apparently public safety.

          • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

            WM,

            I was writing about 400 hunters trying to kill one wolf pack in Latvia (not Yakutia) and it was not about depredation, public safety or to get some money from a gov’t program (there’s no such thing in Latvia)

            it was just an expression of collective mass psychosis about wolves as pests who are eating ‘our elk’ … it reminds me of the Crusades or religious fundamentalists screaming about the end of the world

            those 400 hunters killed one wolf and injured 3 more (local hunters have said that will search for them on Monday)

          • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

            problem affecting livestock production in the region
            +++

            there’s no livestock outdoors during winter

            • avatar Peter Kiermer says:

              This extract from the Wolf Action Plan for the Baltic States says a lot (Marek, is this one from 2001 the latest version?)

              “3.1. Hunting
              Hunting is the primary factor limiting the wolf population in Latvia. All other limiting
              factors stem from problems related to hunting such as: lack of natural feed resources, reduced
              population density, fragmentation of population leading to inadequate genetic diversity, etc.
              The deep-rooted belief among hunters, in particular, is that wolf is man’s main competitor
              for wild ungulates. This is the reason why hunters believe wolf should be exterminated. The
              damage inflicted by wolf to animal husbandry is insignificant in Latvia and occurs only in certain
              areas. This loss of livestock could be reduced additionally through awareness raising and
              educational campaigns informing farmers of how to avoid conflicts with wolf.
              Hunting trophies, as skulls and furs, is yet another motive for hunting wolf. During recent
              years the prestige connected with wolf trophies has grown considerably. Generally the Latvian
              and Estonian trophies of wolf presented at exhibitions are of high international standard. From the
              point of view of trophies, it is only the winter fur and skulls from adults, which are of high value.”

              And…..

              “However, statistics in Latvia show an almost unbelievable picture (Fig.
              7). Each year from the 60-s till late 70-s, the number of killed wolves exceeded the estimated
              population size.“

              Read more on:

              http://www.lcie.org/docs/COE/COE%20Action%20Plan%20for%20wolf%20in%20Latvia%202001.pdf

              • avatar JB says:

                Thanks, Mareks. A few very interesting facts for comparison purposes.

                Latvia————–Idaho
                ~25,000 sq mi——~84,000 sq mi
                ~2.2 mil. persons–~1.6 mil. persons
                ~88 people/sq. mi–~19 people/sq.mi
                ~600 wolves——–~1,000 wolves
                ~.024 wolves/sq.mi-~.011 wolves/sq.mi

                Latvia’s ratio of people to wolves/sq. mile: 4400/1

                Idaho’s: 1727/1
                —–

                Yet another indication of Idaho’s political overreaction to the presence of wolves.

              • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

                JB,

                The number of wolves allowed to kill in 2012 / 2013 hunting season – 200 (biologists estimate wolf population at 200-300 at the end of hunting season on 31st March and 500-600 wolves with pups in July )

                The number of lynxes allowed to kill in 2011 / 2012 hunting season – 150 ( biologists estimate lynx population at 300-400 lynxes at the end of hunting season and 600-700 lynxes with kittens in July)

                Right now 70% of adult wolf females are breeding every year (6 pups per litter) – so the policy basically comes to this:

                1) make local wolves to become breeding machines and then

                2) kill every single wolf within 5…6 years time (as director of Hunting department explained to me – ” demand for wolf and lynx hunt is bigger than a risk to damage predator population’s structure”).

                During 1999-2007 the average hunting quota was 130 wolves (43% of population) and not more than 300 wolves when hunting season started in July.

                But during 2008-2012 the average hunting quota was 180 wolves and 200-300 wolves left when hunting season is ending.

                And interesting connection to NRM wolf management plans is that director of Latvia’s Hunting department Janis Ozolins intends to publish scientific paper which shows that wolf and lynx populations in Latvia can endure bigger hunting pressure than usually is referenced in literature (for wolves above 40% and for lynxes above 10%).

                I mean, J.Ozolins intends to show that for a whole generation under very intensive hunting pressure the local wolf population is stable and even slowly increasing – and that sounds like a music to ranchers, politicians and wolf-haters who can fiercely demand wolf harvest bag’s increase.

                However, it is unknown to what extent this picture is distorted due to incoming wolves from neighboring countries like Russia, Belarus (70 out of 201 wolves were killed in border area in 2011-2012 season), Estonia and Lithuania.

              • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

                Peter,

                also it should be remembered that hunting tradition was developed only during Soviet times (before World War 1 only German landlords and Russian officials had hunting rights)

                +

                majority of Latvia’s hunter community is about 60 years of age (and recruitment number is only 200 per year), so within a 10-15 years time hunter community is expected to go through reduction in numbers

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                Mareks you wrote, “And interesting connection to NRM wolf management plans is that director of Latvia’s Hunting department Janis Ozolins intends to publish scientific paper which shows that wolf and lynx populations in Latvia can endure bigger hunting pressure than usually is referenced in literature (for wolves above 40% and for lynxes above 10%).

                I mean, J.Ozolins intends to show that for a whole generation under very intensive hunting pressure the local wolf population is stable and even slowly increasing – and that sounds like a music to ranchers, politicians and wolf-haters who can fiercely demand wolf harvest bag’s increase.”.

                Its quite terrible that scientists articulate the hunting pressure that predators can sustain without qualifying those statements or ignoring the sociality of wolves. As you rightly point out, those statements however taken, in or out of context, are used to gain favor to up the killing quotas of wolves. Very irresponsible and ass backward policy instead of looking forward using new paradigms to evolve policy out of the last century. Its disheartening to say the least.

                I’m sorry to hear some of your wolf/wildlife managers are following such bad models as those implemented in the US.

            • avatar WM says:

              Mareks,

              ++I was writing about 400 hunters trying to kill one wolf pack in Latvia (not Yakutia) and it was not about depredation…++

              It would have been nice to know you switched geographic areas in your post to Latvia, since our previous discussions had been consistently about the Siberian republics and their fast track wolf removal programs just announced.

              As for “no livestock outdoors in winter,” in Latvia please explain. Your country is south of the UK, and influenced by maritime flows, resulting in mild winters. I simply cannot believe you keep livestock indoors, nor can I believe that wolves only eat Latvian livestock in the dead of winter. How about spring calving fpr both domestic and wild ungulates?

              Furthermore, in my post I was, of course, referring to the reindeer in the Siberian republics we have previously been discussing, and the people there who are raising them in order to make a living. It would not make much sense for the local republic governments to spend money on a wolf irradication program that has no purpose from their viewpoint.

              I continue to wonder why, wherever wolves are in the world, there seems to be constant pressure to control their numbers and distribution, even in the 21st Century. Why is that?

              • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

                WM,

                about climate in Latvia you can find out here:
                http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/climate/Latvia.htm

                (you are misinterpreting the average value and not taking into account possible fluctuations – when the wind is blowing from North or NE then temperature usually drops 20 degrees (Celsius) below zero)

                +

                livestock depredation (usually happens to the same owners due to negligence):

                2005 – 9 sheeps, 5 goats, 6 cattle

                2008 – 39 sheeps, 6 goats

                2010 – 5 cattle, 41 sheeps, 2 goats

              • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

                I continue to wonder why, wherever wolves are in the world, there seems to be constant pressure to control their numbers and distribution, even in the 21st Century. Why is that?

                ++++

                a) The large carnivore core population in Europe lives in Romania which is not a wealthy industrial society by any stretch of imagination but somehow 22 million people co-exists with large predators just fine (no wolf-hating histrionics)

                Romania has:

                1) more than 6000 brown bears (grizzlies) in 47 000 sq. km area

                2) more than 2500 wolves in 57 000 sq. km area

                3) ~ 1800 Eurasian lynxes
                the depredation level on sheep herds were ~1.2 %

                2005-2006 Hunting quota / harvest bag in Romania – 250 brown bears, 400 wolves, 150 lynxes, 500 wild cats.

                b) there’s a ban on wolf and lynx hunt in Poland since 1998. And 543 – 687 wolves were living in 117 – 129 packs in 2009. The ungulate populations are growing + compensation for livestock losses. And guess what – no big fuss about wolves anymore.

                So it’s possible to see significant changes in public’s attitude towards wolves during a lifetime.

              • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

                WM,

                Your country is south of the UK
                +++

                Latvia is located ~ at the same latitude as Scotland

                The capital of Latvia is Riga, located at the geographic coordinates of 56°57’N latitude and 24°6’E longitude

                London: 51° 30′ N / 0° 7′ W
                Edinburgh: 55° 57′ N / 3° 11′ W

              • avatar WM says:

                Mareks,

                Thanks for the reply. It looks like I could use a geography lesson on latitude of your country, as respects the UK. :) My error.

                Still, it seems at first glance, the weather your livestock endure, even down to -20C (-4 Farenheit) is about the same as some parts of the West with persistent wind, where our livestock often live unprotected outside (of course a bunch die too, and weather varies by elevation and latitude). I guess alot has to do with duration of cold, and if accompanied by snow/humidity and how long it stays. Just did a comparison of climate using the Koeppen-Geiger classification system, and Latvia is definitely colder than parts of southern West, and included in the same catagory is areas much further to the north and east of Latvia.

                I expect much of your landscape, or Romania to the south of you produces more vegetative biomass than parts of our interior West, which could partly explain higher predator animal densities (in addition to the higher tolerance part). Rainfall where much of our wildlife lives is less than 20 inches, with characteristically very dry summers. Your total precipitation of between 400-600mm is really not that different, but it appears the seasonal distribution gives you more in the summer months when the plants need it most, and humidity from coastal weather influence may keep moisture around longer. Some of our snow in parts of the West does not go thru the solid (ice)>water>vapor stages, but goes directly from ice>vapor in what is called “sublimation,” because of the incredibly low winter humidity. Humidity throughut the year is low. That means the ground does not stay wet, and plants don’t grow as fast or as dense. Ungulates, of course, rely on the vegetation for food, better for them when the vegetation is lush and abundant (winter range too), and if there are lots of ungulates the predator population will follow with higher density. So maybe that explains, in part, why you have more predators at higher density.

                Forget Yellowstone NP. I am coming to Romania to view wildlife!!!

                I was under the impression the Romanian brown bear population was closer to 4,000 (rather than 6,000).

    • avatar Jeff N. says:

      Robert R.,

      You’ve used the word expendable to describe elk in previous posts. Just what do you mean by that? Is your opinion based on the fact that wolves kill elk for food? Is that what makes elk expendable in your eyes? Do you apply that same logic to elk hunters who kill elk? Does “expendable” apply in that regard.

      There is absolutely no logic in your statement.

      I think what you are saying is that you don’t like wolves killing elk because when a wolf kills an “expendable” elk, that’s one less “expendable” elk that you won’t have a chance kill. Either way the result is a dead “expendable” elk.

  18. avatar Immer Treue says:

    Robert,

    I’ll split hairs with you on this one. Target elk #s for the three zones HD 620,621,622 are between 1400 and 1650. Zones 621 and 622 were over 1,900 last count. The collaring project is a management tool to help understand movement for the purpose of establishing/fine tuning quota for hunters.

    Yellowstone wolves number less than a hundred, nor have I seen anywhere where the collared wolves were collared to help establish “quota” numbers for the purpose of hunter harvest.

    Elk expendable? The purpose of the collaring.
    Wolves worshipped? In my opinion, a poor argument.

    • avatar Robert R says:

      This is not about wolves killing elk or even hunters killing elk.
      Would you see people defending collared ungulates world wide as they did for collared wolves that were killed in YNP.
      Do see many defending ungulates in general, not many but the wolf is defended to extremes.
      What does an elk mean to pro wolf advocates other than prey.

      • avatar jon says:

        I believe this is because wolves are a much more persecuted and demonized animal. Elk are an important animal. If there was no elk, wolves would probably starve to death. There are plenty of justifiable reasons for people to defend the wolf. Wolves and coyotes are in a league of their own when it comes to extreme hatred by some hunters and ranchers.

      • avatar jon says:

        What does an elk mean to a hunter other than food? Why do you assume that those who defend the wolf don’t care about elk Robert? Elk are not persecuted nor are they demonized by hunters. Wolves and coyotes most certainly are and this is why people defend the wolf. Just because some may defend the wolf doesn’t mean that they don’t care about elk.

        • avatar Cobra says:

          Jon,
          What does an elk mean to a hunter other than food?
          I see this as the biggest problem, you think that just because we hunt we have no connection to the animals that we hunt.
          I can sit and watch elk, deer, moose, bears and even wolves for hours and never once think about pulling the trigger and have many times done just that. I’ve enjoyed doing this many times through my life and it never gets old.
          Would you care as much about the elk if wolves didn’t need them to survive?
          I don’t think you or many like you will ever get it. The culture that we are raised in are just to far apart.

      • avatar Nancy says:

        Robert R – I’m sure you’ve noticed that if you do defend wildlife here (elk included) why, you must be one of those anti- hunting extremists :)

        I look forward to and love, watching a big herd of elk move across the valley in the spring. To see elk calves frolicking, is a rare treat and there is nothing to compare to hearing the bulls, bugling in the fall.

        • avatar Robert R says:

          Nancy I have never been or never will be one of those anti hunting extremists. I have hunting for 42 years.
          I was making a comparison of the two different animals being collared and that there will never be anyone bitching because a collared elk gets shot but if its a wolf that gets shot it goes global.
          We need predators as much as we need ungulates and both need managed.
          A study is a study and collared is collared.

          • avatar Nancy says:

            “We need predators as much as we need ungulates and both need managed”

            According to who/m Robert R? And for what reasons? Because I live close to (if not in, what’s left of wilderness areas) I have a great appreciation for both. Its all the “politicing/managing” in between, thats screwing it up.

            • avatar Robert R says:

              Nancy
              my initial statement wasn’t a riddle it was a comparison and your last sentence sums it up best.
              Its all the “politicing/managing” in between, that’s screwing it up.

          • avatar Jeff N. says:

            Robert R.,

            If you are so concerned about the real possibility of a collared elk being killed by hunters, by all means start bitching about it. Have at it.

          • avatar JB says:

            “A study is a study and collared is collared.”

            No. Not all studies are created equal. Idaho recently conducted a study on elk that was designed to determine mortality causes. In this case, the research is not negatively impacted when a hunter kills an animal. Other studies–like the Yellowstone wolf study–use collars to determine species movement patterns, home range sizes, interactions, or to meet other objectives. These studies ARE negatively impacted when a collared animal dies. You’re also failing to consider the cost (to the study) of collaring animals of different species.

          • avatar jon says:

            Have you ever seen any one say that they don’t like elk or do you just assume that those who defend the wolf don’t care about the elk? Nobody hates elk. There is a portion of hunters that do infact hate the wolf and that is why people defend it. The only crime that wolves have committed in the eyes of some hunters is that they eat elk and that’s it. This is not a justifiable reason to hate wolves. I’ve never seen one pro-wolf person say that they hate elk or find them less important than some other wild animal, but I constantly see the extreme hatred that is directed toward the wolf by some of the hunting and ranching community.

      • avatar Immer Treue says:

        OK then Robert. You like elk. Don’t shoot them. I like wolves, and I won’t shoot or trap them. What are the wolves supposed to eat? If they came into ZUPS up here, the same moronic mind set that the wolves are killing all the deer, would chime in the wolves are taking all the meat, and they’re not even paying for it!

        The wolves collared were collared for a different reason then the elk. The elk are being collared for the future benefit of hunters, not so the wolves.

  19. avatar Louise Kane says:

    Search for coyote with trap stuck to leg

    Posted: Jan 24, 2013 4:59 PM PST Updated: Jan 24, 2013 4:59 PM PST

    By Sarah Cantey – email
    Source: USMC
    TUCSON, AZ (Tucson News Now) –
    The Tucson Wildlife Center needs help locating a coyote with a steel jaw trap on his leg.

    The coyote was spotted on the northwest side of town near Hardy and La Canada. Wildlife center workers were unable to catch him.

    They say the trap marks are easy to see in the dirt. Call TWC (520) 290-WILD if you see him.

    Copyright 2013 Tucson News Now. All rights reserved.

    http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/20684984/search-for-coyote-with-trap-stuck-to-leg

  20. avatar Louise Kane says:

    Thank you Brooks Fahy and Predator Defense
    Tonight!!!!!

    Wolves on CNN Headline News TODAY! (4pm Eastern time, 7pm Pacific time)

    Set your DVRs! Today, Brooks Fahy, executive director of Predator Defense, will be interviewed on CNN Headline News’ Jane Velez-Mitchell show (4 pm PST/7 pm EST) about the tragic slaughter of wolves currently underway across the country and our new film, “The Imperiled American Wolf.”

    If you haven’t heard, since April 2011 when wolves were delisted from the Endangered Species Act and “management” was relegated to state wildlife agencies, 1,500 wolves have been killed by sport hunters and trappers in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Minnesota and Wisconsin. This “kill tally” does not include the scores of wolves slaughtered by federal and state predator control programs. The states’ methods not only ignore the core biology of how wolves hunt and breed, but the agencies have an inherent conflict of interest–they are funded by hunting license fees.

    Jane Velez-Mitchell’s tagline says she “takes a stand on the biggest topics of the day that people across the country are buzzing about.” Let’s get the country buzzing about this interview and get America’s wolves relisted as endangered species. Please watch the show and share this post.

    And be sure to watch our film, “The Imperiled American Wolf,” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6X9TjBAnvU&list=UUD8GP2q9p2-DBpDbny2y_qQ&index=1

    The Imperiled American Wolf
    http://www.youtube.com
    Wolves were rescued from the brink of extinction over 35 years ago when they gained federal protection under the Endangered Species Act. Today the American w…


    Brooks Fahy
    Executive Director

    PREDATOR DEFENSE
    PO Box 5446
    Eugene, OR 97405
    541-937-4261 Office
    541-520-6003 Cell
    brooks@predatordefense.org
    http://www.predatordefense.org

    Facebook: Predator Defense

  21. avatar Salle says:

    A feel good warm and fizzy story about the recovery of a baby fox that had unusual helpers after being hit by a car…

  22. avatar Salle says:

    Predator zone eliminates wolves

    Wyoming officials wanted wolves removed from much of the state, and their hands-off management method has worked as designed.

    Wolves can be killed in a “predator zone,” which covers 85 percent of the state, by almost any method, at any time, in any number and without a license. The anything-goes rules have had the desired effect: Wyoming Game and Fish Department harvest reports show that 31 of the canines have been killed in the predator zone since October. That’s more than the 20 to 30 animals department biologists estimated roamed the zone last year.

    “It appears the predator zone is reducing wolf numbers there significantly,” said Mark Bruscino, Game and Fish’s large carnivore supervisor. “That’s what the management strategy was designed to do.”

    http://jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=9483

    • avatar Leslie says:

      well, we’ll see how the count goes. Predator zone was part of the 232 count initially.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Leslie,
        its just unreal to me that this state has been able to get their plan passed. 232 wolves
        predator, flex the intent is to rid the state of all wolves except in the park and they are working on that too. God help the wolf that steps one paw out of the park. Someone will be waiting to kill it, just like )OR 16 was killed earlier this week. Its hell for wolves and for all of us that hate seeing this insanity happening, again in 2013. You’d think these states would not be quite as determined in their ignorance to remain ignorant and cruel.

        • avatar Leslie says:

          OR6 was killed in my zone. As you know Louise, the WY plan was refused over and over again as inadequate by USF&W. It was Obama/Salazar that cut the deal with Gov. Mead and WY got the plan that was rejected before.

          As I understand my zone, they are looking to keep wolves down to keep elk up. Has nothing to do with cattle here, although we have one cattleman (richy rich) who has a few taken each year, but I doubt that’s a driving force.

          • avatar Louise Kane says:

            yea Leslie, it kills me the Dems part in this. Its bigger then both parties in my mind and the fix will be that cooler heads in both parties will all need to object. Its sickening.

    • avatar Leslie says:

      Bruscino said “Minnesota, Idaho and Montana also have incredibly liberal hunting provisions in some areas,” he said. “They aren’t that dissimilar from the predator area.”

      He might be right about that.

      • avatar Immer Treue says:

        Bullshit! MN has at least 10 times as many wolves, harvested 400 out of 3000, and the season is OVER! How many fn wolves does Wyoming have? What % have they killed? Bruscino, what an anus.

  23. avatar Salle says:

    FWP launching long-term study of dwindling moose populations

    FWP hasn’t conducted much research on moose since the 1960s, when it did some initial studies in southwest Montana. Since then, biologists have relied mainly upon reports from hunters.

    http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/wildlife/article_116cb090-6683-11e2-ad2f-0019bb2963f4.html

  24. avatar Ida Lupine says:

    The things you’re liable, to read in the Bible, “Ain’t Necessarily So”.

    Exactly! ;)

  25. avatar Salle says:

    Photo of pair of lynx on agency website goes viral

    Photo of pair of lynx on agency website goes viral – The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22441932/photo-2-lynx-agency-website-goes-viral#ixzz2J2Mz4RCZ

    • avatar JEFF E says:

      It has warmed up where I live. Driving home today I seen a pair of coyotes cross the road. Man, their coats are magnificent, and I am sure they were enjoying “the January thaw”.
      very cool.
      Anyone getting any Chinooks this year?

      • avatar savebears says:

        Been pretty warm here the last couple of days, it was over 40 degrees this morning when I got up, don’t know if it is a Chinook, but it was not normal.

        • avatar JEFF E says:

          the January thaw, coupled with the Chinook winds,heading into the snow month of February.

          When I was growing up it happened like clock work, year after year.

          I am curious how many posters here are even familiar with the term “Chinook winds”

          • avatar JEFF E says:

            “Loma Mont. boasts as having the most extreme recorded temperature change in a 24-hour period. On January 15, 1972, the temperature rose from -54 to 49°F (-48 to 9°C), a 103°F (58°C) change in temperature, a dramatic example of the regional Chinook wind in action.”

            I was in San Fransico that year on vacation, where it was snowing. At home it hit -37 for three days stright. The snow depth at Donner Summit was ~30 feet….

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinook_wind

            • avatar WM says:

              Jeff E.,

              Where did you grow up, and where is home now?

              • avatar JEFF E says:

                Eastern Idaho and Idaho

              • avatar JEFF E says:

                another thing, where I grew up, you could count on a week to 10 days in January, just prior to the January thaw, that the temp would be -20 give or take at night,~0 during the day. Remember Loyd Lindsy Young on the Channel 8 weather talking about how this was “normal” for January and predicting when the Chinooks would begin…

              • avatar JEFF E says:

                of course if you really like winter you could live in Stanly….

              • avatar WM says:

                Jeff E.,

                I have ice fished on Palisade and Blackfoot Reservoirs in January with daytime temps in the -5 to -15 degree range. Pressure ridges of broken ice, beneath a foot of snow covering the ice. Water leaks thru and just sits beneath the insulating snow, and does not freeze. It’s a real challenge with snow shoes, when you sink down to the unfrozen layer and it then is exposed to the ultracold temps. Bindings freeze up, and ice collects on the snowshoe platform, making the shoes heavy, and walking difficult. Getting out of the bindings is near impossible, without chipping off the ice with a knife. Then there is the part where you auger the ice fishing holes, and try to simultaneously keep a half dozen fishing holes ice free.

            • avatar Immer Treue says:

              WM,

              A continual problem here in the North. Even once good ice forms, the weight of fallen snow can push the ice down, and any weakness, pressure ridge cracks, beaver runs, springs, drainages,etc can send water percolating up. Hit one of those slush pockets with skis at 15 below, and all of a sudden your skis weigh 20 lbs apiece.

              Breaking through secondary ice is always a rather unnerving situation.

              Went out Winter camping once where I had been before a few years earlier when we had camped on the ice. As I was getting ready to set up camp, I thought perhaps I better put a hole in the ice first. A couple feet of snow, and three feet of ice with a spoon auger. When I broke through the ice water gushed up and flooded the entire area. Same place as we camped in the past, same conditions, but …?? Luckily I augered prior to setting up the tent, which needless to say was pitched on land.

          • avatar JEFF E says:

            by the way, today is the full moon of the wolf….

        • avatar Leslie says:

          well I hope we have no more Chinooks because we have hardly any snow here and it’s been around or above 32 for weeks. We need snow!

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Lucky you Jeff, coyotes I think are such magnificent animals,as wolves. They have very dog-like personalities. I’ve only seen the Eastern Coyotes – except for a few in CA. Our Eastern coyotes often play in the marsh areas and I see them occasionally playing in the wetlands. There is one now (at least one) who lives close by. He is huge. I would say 70 pounds or so. He has the most intense eyes. We live down the end of a dirt road thats pretty deserted. Our dirt road dead ends at the bay. It gets pretty wild here. Howling winds off the ocean/bay like you can’t believe. Its a desolate ice soaked bay, that looks arctic like and drives a god many locals to drink away the winters. Its in stark contrast to the summer tourist-filled sun drenched days. Sometimes we go weeks without seeing anyone on our road but our one next door neighbor. When it snows alot we have been socked in for a week or more before a plow can get to us. Despite my husband and our neighbor the policewoman and my attempts to dig out we are often happily stranded for a good long time venturing out on cross country skis to check out the bay. Back to our friends the coyotes. I walk out every night between 10 and midnight with the dog. I always leash Rue chein for the safety of foxes, coyotes or other wildlife. During our walks it can get a bit eerie. We live near a tidal inlet and the bay freezes over, the wind comes across the bay normally at 60+ miles per hour and there are no lights anywhere. Most nights I hear unidentified animals on the flats. Its pitch black and there is no light, other nights a big moon creates shadows that remind me of the Maurice Sendak Book where the wild things are. If I am lucky, once in a while I see the coyote coming up a path I am following and we come face to face. Usually they study me like “who is that crazy lady with her tongue hanging out and the black wolf on a leash”. I am always mesmerized by what should be a common experience and used to be but is not less and less common. The coyote and I watch each other for a few moments and he trots off looking over his shoulder. I have never ever once been afraid. I am always high as a kite after seeing him. And hoping he doesn’t stop to see anyone else. I’ll be devastated if he is hurt, and other coyotes I’ve fallen in love with have been. i’m hoping I’ll see one tonight but seeing one is like a rare gift and you can’t wish for it. It is just awarded randomly but often enough to make you believe in miracles. anyhow, the long drawn out point is that I agree man those coats are something. How can you not see one of these animals, all wild animals, and not be blown away!

        • avatar Louise Kane says:

          apologies for lack of commas and decent grammar. A long day, too much stress and laziness in posting. May you all see a wonderful wild animal tonight to make you believe in magic again. Good night

          • avatar Harley says:

            Saw a coyote today on my way into work. He looked rather healthy as he trotted across a school playground, over a grassy area and than on towards the park district building. Not a whole lot of ‘wild’ places he could really be living in that I could see from the road.

            • avatar Harley says:

              In some ways it was a relief to see such a healthy animal actually. We have a very scraggly looking fox and to be honest, sometimes I wonder, he’s kinda leggy to be a fox but he has a very fox like tail… Do fox and coyote interbreed?

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                Fox x Coyote

                No

                Chromosome number is different.

              • avatar Harley says:

                Thanks Immer, wasn’t so sure. So… I’m not sure then what I saw! Was it a fox, was it a coyote. Crud.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                Harley,

                Sometimes a tough call at night.
                Generally coyote will appear leggyer, although a slender red fox will appear to have longer legs.

                Pretty much a give away Fox x coyote
                I would say if you are close enough, a red fox has a white tip to its tail. Grey fix increasingly scarcer where red foxes are present is more coyote like in color with black tip to tail, but is quite a bit smaller than the coyotes you have running around.

              • avatar Harley says:

                Ok, let me see if I can bring the mental image to mind. It was either late spring or early summer I think. During the day. My first initial thought was Fox! Cool! But as I think back, this one was slender and leggy. I know we have coyotes in the neighborhood, I’ve heard them and heard of other sightings but I didn’t realize we had foxes so I started to second guess. This one walked across our yard, driveway and street before heading towards where the houses aren’t as close, at the end of our street. We back up to what used to be a golf course but part of it was sold and was supposed to become a new subdivision however, when the housing market tanked, not much has been done over there so there is plenty of places for this little guy to live comfortably, not like the coyote I saw on the way to work yesterday. (holy cow, was that a run on sentence or what? My eight grade English teacher would have put lots of red marks in that one I think lol!) I shouldn’t say there aren’t any available places for that particular coyote, they are so stinkin resourceful I’m sure he or she was very comfortable wherever they were calling home!

          • avatar Ida Lupine says:

            What a nice thing to say. I’ll be on the lookout. Sorry to rant so much yesterday. :)

      • avatar CodyCoyote says:

        Cody WY has been one long chinook for most of this year already.

  26. avatar Louise Kane says:

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/author/exposingthebiggame/

    on bison and more, policies designed to keep wildlife confined to park

  27. avatar Sam Parks says:

    I have it on good authority that in a closed commission meeting today, WY G&F commissioners and others in the department expressed serious concerns that the non-YNP Wyo wolf population is coming dangerously close to the 100/10 breeding pair mark that would trigger relisting and that next year’s hunt (if we get that far) will have to much more restrictive in terms of quotas to keep the numbers above 100/10.

    At least 121 wolves have died in WY since 2012 began (out of a population of 230 + 2012 pups).

    • avatar jon says:

      Wyoming really did itself in listing wolves as predators. I do believe wolves in WY will be relisted. It’s only a matter of time. The wolves in WY killed in the predator zones were killed for absolutely nothing. The bigotry that some have in these rural states for wolves is sickening.

      • avatar CodyCoyote says:

        Even more alarming is the lack of reliable data on Wyoming wolves after the initial hunt but before the 2013 denning season. We now depend on Wyo G&F instead of USFWS for wolf info. Can you say ” Fox running Henhouse” ?

        I’m sure a FOIA for info regarding collaring and tracking since August would come back heavily redacted. It would be desireable to have tight estimates of wolf packs and population numbers before denning but after the hunts. ( like right now).

        The irony is Wyo G&F is probably secretly praying for a great breeding denning and birthing season to spike those non-YNP population numbers back up into the Safe Zone by counting all the new puppies.

    • avatar Leslie says:

      Pretty soon the flex zone will revert to predator zone as well. That predator zone just keeps the count coming and coming. Soon it will surpass the total hunt count.

    • avatar Sam Parks says:

      So the coyote got away but these two jerks end up in the hospital.

      There is a god. And a just god he is.

      • avatar jon says:

        They probably won’t face animal cruelty charges. You have to be a sick puppy to run a coyote over.

      • avatar Nancy says:

        I would imagine these budding psychopaths will also be facing charges from the sod field farmer for destruction of property.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        this time Sam
        the part that is very sad to me is that these “budding sociopaths” as Nancy described them will probably not be referred for a psychiatric assessment as there is most likely no law against the animal abuse part. There is a need for laws that recognize animal cruelty and abuse as such and that refer people like this for help and or imprisonment. A slap on the wrist will do no good. I hope their parents deal with this. How creepy.

        • avatar savebears says:

          Louise,

          You are going to need to convince the state governments that this is actually animal abuse. So far they have resisted that notion.

          Please don’t go off on me, it is simply a fact of life.

        • avatar WM says:

          “budding sociopaths” -really?

          Let’s see, Oklahoma,two 17 year old males, no seat belts, doing quick turns on some guy’s sod farm, rolling a twenty five year old pick-up truck while chasing a coyote, on a week-end night.

          Strikes me more like bored, undeveloped male teenage brains in a rural area doing what they do best – stupid things the teenagers regret if they live through it (especially if parents do their respective jobs).

          Then, of course, it is a farm family, Dad just might say in his admonishing remarks, “Next time just don’t roll the truck, and did you get the damn coyote?”

          • avatar WM says:

            …IF it is a farm family…

            sheesh.

            • avatar WM says:

              By the way, I am off to the Washington Sportsmen’s Show in Puyallup as soon as I finish this post.

              There, I will most likely rub elbows with a bunch of psychopaths checking out the latest vendor offerings for hunting and fishing. Probably some of those nasty, unethical outfitters and guides will be there, too.

              Actually, I am going to see the fly fishing stuff and maybe learn some tying and casting tips. Maybe even look into a turkey hunting trip. Some of your ranters should go sometime, and maybe get a better feeling for who much of the hunting and fishing public really is. I’ll probably see a bunch of families there, with even a few teenaged kids in tow.

          • avatar Ida Lupine says:

            Well, they won’t do that again. These are the stories that make me glad I don’t have kids. Who would want to give birth to animal torturers, even if they do have undeveloped brains. Now they are saying the brain doesn’t fully develop until 25 years of age. Only five years away from 30 – if you aren’t an adult by then, I don’t know what to say. What a world.

            My smiley face was for Sam’s comment.

            • avatar Harley says:

              Ida,

              I do not regret having my 2 kids at all, couldn’t be more proud of them. The way a child is raised is pretty much how they were turn out. I sure as heck was not perfect, I made my own mistakes with them, but I wouldn’t trade them for anything, not even my own horse, which they are very relieved to hear! ;-)

    • avatar Harley says:

      That story reminds me of when I was young and would listen to people my age, mostly guys, talk about shooting at cats with a BB gun or setting them on fire just because they were cats and they didn’t like them.

  28. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    Thought you’all might want to see a comprehensive and quite unretouched photo gallery of where the faux Oil for the Keystone XL Pipeline is emanating from.

    Not…a…pretty…sight.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/photos-destructive-canada-oil-sands-2012-10?op=1v

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Nightmarish! I always think of the transport phase when thinking of Keystone, but the mining phase is atrocious-looking. :(

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Thanks for posting this link CC.

      Spent most of my life (as most of us have) gassing up at the local pump so I can get somewhere….. like jobs or into town for supplies and I’ve always been grateful (but taken for granted) that there’s always been a gas station around so I can accomplish those tasks.

      Looking at these pictures and calculating the billions spent by these companies, in just equipment alone, to fund such “endeavors” while pretty much saying the hell with the land, the air and the wildlife, is sickening and makes me wonder who’s really in charge anymore and gives a sh*t about finding better ways to address over population, of our kind AND the energy crisis we’ve created.

    • avatar Leslie says:

      looks like death incarnate

  29. avatar jon says:

    http://www.noisecreep.com/2013/01/23/dee-snider-ted-nugent-draft-dodger/

    Ted Nugent also supports canned hunting. Infact, he runs his own canned hunting farm in his home state of Michigan.

  30. avatar jon says:

    http://www.trapperman.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3591312/Curly_Sadie_and_some_wyo_coyot#Post3591312

    This is such disgusting behavior and these people take pictures of it and post it online to gloat about it.

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Something doesn’t look ‘quite right’ about it (aside from the obvious). It looks kinda photoshopped, especially the lynx. I hope so anyway!

    • avatar savebears says:

      Jon,

      You are so gullible, it is amazing, those are Photoshop images.

      • avatar JEFF E says:

        SB,
        sunny Jon does not care. He would PS them himself if it gave him a shot at bashing hunters.

        • avatar savebears says:

          All is fair in love and war, as long as he can make hunters look bad..

          • avatar Jeff N. says:

            SB,

            They don’t need Jon to do that. They’ve done a decent job at doing it to themselves. In all seriousness, you can’t deny this.

            • avatar JEFF E says:

              it’s not about what this group or that group does per se, it is about intentionally spreading a complete ration of horseshit that an average second grader could see thru, which is about all sunny Jon does.

            • avatar savebears says:

              Jeff N, for the amount of hunters in this country verses, those that end up in the news, Jon is taking liberties to make me and the rest of us that do it right look bad.

              If I remember right, the last survey said there is about 29 million hunters in the US, so ever if we had 100 reports a week of bad hunters, that is 5200 a year that is not following the law, so lets divide 5200 by 29 million? And see what we come up with?

            • avatar jon says:

              You’re 100% right.

      • avatar jon says:

        sb, where are you getting your info that these are photoshop images? These are real. I don’t have to make hunters look bad sb. They do it all on their own.

        • avatar savebears says:

          Jon,

          They are Photoshopped.

        • avatar Ida Lupine says:

          It looks to me like the scale is off. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these people get a kick out of riling up the environmentalists and pro-wolf people, and make things up to do it. I’m sure this does happen, and we’ve seen evidence of it, but this instance doesn’t look convincing.

    • avatar Harley says:

      Yikes. Scary. I had seen this on the news and read it in the Chicago Sun Times.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      I felt a pinge of guilt (whe I read this story) because I’m thinking wildlife, like coyotes, might be getting alittle too bold in some areas because of habitat loss, having to adapt to new food sources, etc. but then I looked at the rest of the news, same page, for that same area:

      $250 Bond for Man Charges With Beating Woman

      Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com#ixzz2J87ELMIY

      1 Dead, 1 Wounded in Lawndale Shooting

      2 Dead, 1 Wounded in Bridgeport Shooting

      3 Dead, At Least 4 Wounded in Overnight Violence

      and realized they’ve got a hell of a lot more to worry about than a few coyotes looking for a quick meal.

      • avatar Harley says:

        Chicago has had its share of violence. Toughest gun laws around and we are still losing kids to gun violence. Not sure really what the answer is. I know the CPD wanted more men hired but… it’s not happening yet. One of the main reasons I could never live in a city like that. The burbs can be a little bit crowded for my taste.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        I wonder how exaggerated/dramatized that story was. At least the officer did not call for an all out war on coyotes but stated pet owners should keep their pets indoors.

        • avatar Harley says:

          Louise, did you see the glass on that door? I’m thinking this wasn’t an exaggeration. If there is no food, desperate measures are called for.

    • avatar WM says:

      One more data point for peaceful “co-existence” of pets and urban coyotes. And it looked like those two older dogs would have been losers in any exchange against a pack of 4 coyotes.

      Bet this guy’s next purchase is something more substantial than a kid’s BB gun, something in the .25 caliber air rifle catagory, would still likely be legal.

      • avatar Harley says:

        Living near Chicago? I doubt it.

      • avatar JEFF E says:

        http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112190/obama-interview-2013-sit-down-president#

        “Up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time. Not the girls, but oftentimes guests of mine go up there. And I have a profound respect for the traditions of hunting that trace back in this country for generations. And I think those who dismiss that out of hand make a big mistake.”

        http://www.newser.com/story/161721/obama-we-go-skeet-shooting-all-the-time.html

        Why not the girls? A gun is an inanimate object. If you do not know how to use it properly then you probably will not. I started to teach my youngest daughter how to shoot when she was 10. Today at age 12, she understands guns, what they are for and when they should be used. She will carry that forward for the rest of her life. That is one of the biggest problems with this issue is that the basic education is not happening as wit Obama and his daughters.

        • avatar JEFF E says:

          which is doubly sad due to the fact that as he has access to the very best firearms instructors the world has ever known….and is not utilizing them for the most basic firearms instruction.

          • avatar JEFF E says:

            and yes, it has always been my position that ALL citizens should go thru military boot camp, at a minimum.

            When you read such posters as sunny Jon, tell me I am wrong

            • avatar WM says:

              ++and yes, it has always been my position that ALL citizens should go thru military boot camp, at a minimum..++

              At one time in our Country’s history that was almost the case, when the fallout of the 1929 Stock Market Crash and the Great Depression caused millions of young men (and women) to forgo the opportunity to hold jobs. Thus was the beginning of the CCC, with camps all over the West, mostly, all under the administrative wing of the Army. There was much discussion regarding whether they would become full military operations, but in the end FDR’s Adminstration determined the role would be limited to housing and feeding them. It was this semi-state of readiness that made a difference when America had to defend itself from two enemies simultaneously during WWII. Unfortunately, there only a couple of CCC camps for young women (and only the result of Eleanor’s insistence if I recall correctly)

              I have also believed all US citizens should be required to dedicate two years to some kind of public service – military, conservation or public health. For those who are having a tough time finding jobs it would be better than living at home and playing on the computer or watching TV. We need such a program today, and proper respect for firearms wouldn’t hurt as training module.

              • avatar JB says:

                “I have also believed all US citizens should be required to dedicate two years to some kind of public service – military, conservation or public health.”

                Agreed–though there will always be some exceptions (e.g., those with physical and/or mental disabilities that preclude such service). I would add that this type of “real world” experience would also be appreciated by employers.

              • avatar JEFF E says:

                CCC, is where my Father in law started,as an example, and went on to serve in the in the Sea-Bees, and then be a contributing member of society throughout his life.

                as a contrast I would bet, if I was a betting man, is that the only thing sunny Jon has contributed is 10 dollars to the local coffee shop for a grande Latte, so that he and other dead weights can pontificate on how others should live there lives.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Of course with my background, I highly believe that anyone that is physically or mentally capable, should have to do a certain amount of time after graduation from HS devoted to some type of public service.

        • avatar WM says:

          ++…the biggest problems with this issue is that the basic{gun
          } education is not happening as wit Obama and his daughters.++

          Exactly. He doesn’t want to rile up some of his supporters.

          I went to the WA Sportsmen’s Show in Puyallup (40 miles S of Seattle), yesterday. It is held at the largest fairgrounds in the state, and the parking lots were jammed full, with lots of families going to see vendor exhibits, many of which include hunting. Even in very Blue Western WA, hunting and gun sports like skeet, seems to be alive and well. That would be contrary to what some here believe is the case.

          I stopped by the WDFW booth and talked to a biologist about wolves. She smiled/smirked, and said she stays away from the topic as much as she can. Her comment was indicative that it had come up frequently with visitors the last few days. The other guy in the booth just rolled his eyes, when I said I thought the staff had not been honest with the Commission when it prepared it’s very complex wolf management plan, that already seems to be having its limits tested a little more than a year into implementation.

          I also spoke with an OR outiffter who said WA must have been sold a real pig in a polk by adopting a plan that envisioned 15 documented breeding pairs before delisting could occur. He just said, “Do you fkn know how many wolves that really means on the ground for them to count that many? You guys are crazy!”

          And, then he said, our OR plan is at least reasonable, but we will never know how many wolves there really are, versus how many OR wildlife officials say there are – probably twice as many. (This outfitter does elk hunts units just to the south of Enterprise).

          • avatar Ida Lupine says:

            I would say the OR outfitter’s opinion would be a little biased.

          • avatar JEFF E says:

            (This outfitter does elk hunts units just to the south of Enterprise).

            which (((just maybe)) gives him a biased perspective…

            • avatar WM says:

              I expect he would be biased and the first to admit it. The reason this guy was at the show was to book hunts for the coming elk/deer seasons. Perception of wolf presence and impacts (actual or otherwise) by his potential future clients would affect his ability to do so, and thus the way he makes his living, and probably has for the past 20-30 years.

              • avatar Nancy says:

                And who exactly is pushing that “perception” of wolf presence and impacts?

                I know its been tough on hunters in this area because they actually have to go look for an elk these days (they’re not just standing around, waiting to get shot at like the good ole days) but I didn’t think that was the case yet in OR.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Well, I know I can say, even before wolves were on the landscape, I have never had an easy elk hunt, they have all be damn hard work.

          • avatar WM says:

            Sorry,

            ++…that envisioned 15 documented breeding pairs FOR 3 CONSECUTIVE YEARS before delisting could occur…++

            By the way, I was surprised how informed he was on both the OR and WA plans as well as what was going on in ID and MT. This guy ways bright and knew his stuff.

            • avatar jon says:

              WM, there are some anti-wolf bills being introduced real soon in Washington state. If these anti-wolf bills were passed by the WA senate and house, would liberal governor Jay Inslee sign them into law?

              • avatar WM says:

                jon,

                It is interesting you would call these bills “anti-wolf.” The only one I know of is the one that proposes to move them around the state quickly, sort of spreading the bounty for quicker repopulation and eventual delisting. It is consistent with the spirit of the wolf management plan, which is hardly “anti.” But, the sponsor from up where wolves presently are (Wedge Pack country in Stevens County) can’t seem to get the urban corridor types in Western WA to join up. I expect he will have some more fun with it during the session, and who knows it might even get a Ag. Committee hearing in the House.

                Inslee is an unknown quantity. He once represented Eastern WA (Yakima area as a US Represtative). He claims to represent all of WA, including the Eastern side of the state, and he ran for governor with a blue collar spin to his campaign. If a wolf bill is reasonable and it passes the Legis., why wouldn’t he sign it?

                Maybe Conservation NW and its fairly broad base of supporters will come up with something that is edible, but not necessarily pleasantly palatable for all.

              • avatar jon says:

                WM, here you go. This is for Washington state.

                Senate Bill 5193 – This bill would list wolves as a game species so that as recovery levels are met, immediate steps can be taken to manage the population at a sustainable level without jeopardizing cattlemen interests. Proper management is best for all wild species, and wolves are no exception.

                Senate Bill 5187 – This measure proposes a change to state law that would give individuals the authority to kill an animal predator that is threatening human safety or causing property damage. I believe that we should have the fundamental human right to defend our lives, families, property, pets and livelihoods.

                Senate Bill 5188 – would authorize county commissioners to use lethal force against wolves if an imminent threat to commercial livestock is declared. I think our local governments need to be empowered with the authority to address specific localized threats.

                Do you think any of these bills have a chance at getting passed and signed by Governor Inslee?

              • avatar jon says:

                Democrat Kevin Ranker is going to drop a bill that would require ranchers to comply with proven wolf deterrents before they could graze on public lands.

              • avatar WM says:

                jon,

                You don’t say where you got these bill summaries, and it appears based on what I could tell from the actual reading of SB. 5187, this proposal was to legislatively cure an administrative part of the wolf management plan that would not have allowed property owners to defend against a wolf attack of their livestock or pet. If I recall correctly this issue has been an area of tension in EVERY state where wolves are. If a wolf was in the process of attacking my dog, (horse, cattle or llamas if I had them) I wouldn’t want to have to defend myself incurring legal costs to prove my innocence. Another part of this stupid shit WA wolf plan, crafted by a staff.

                Seems to me that is reasonable and nobody should object to that, especially if state government speaks thru a statute. I wouldn’t call it “anti-wolf,” but rather just common sense.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Oh come on WM, you know when it comes to killing wolves, nothing is common sense, even if in the act of killing a persons dog or cow, etc. The wolf is only doing what comes naturally!

              • avatar JB says:

                “Proper management is best for all wild species, and wolves are no exception.”

                Not to intrude on your argument, but I find these types of statements extremely annoying. Few people would object to “proper management”, the problem is there is there is little agreement as to what constitutes “proper” in this instance.

  31. avatar jon says:

    http://www.postbulletin.com/sports/outdoors/john-weiss-dog-owners-trappers-await-a-compromise/article_72dd2fb3-8469-568c-bc44-9e0f241c7be9.html

    “The Minnesota Trappers Association, however, is fighting the idea of new regulations, Waalkens said. “The MTA could care less about killing my dog,” he said. He read that one pro-trapping legislator said hunters just have to accept a few dead dogs.”

  32. avatar Harley says:

    Well, for the first time ever outside of this blog and others I saw my first evidence of SSS. It was a sticker on a HUGE pickup truck. In the burbs!

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Harley – a HUGE pickup truck stopped just beyond my fence, on the road last evening. My dogs notified me.

      Looked out and it appeared to be someone crouching next to the back bumper. Got the binoculars out and realized it was someone who’d decided it was a good place to “SSS” Stop-Shit-Shove off” :)

      • avatar savebears says:

        Nancy,

        It happens, and don’t ask me how I know, but coming home from town the other day……………..My wife told me I had to stop RIGHT NOW!

  33. avatar jon says:

    http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2013/s3669184.htm

    Very sad. I hope african lions can be saved before it’s too late.

  34. avatar Robert R says:

    I have always contended that more stream damage occurs during the winter than high water. This is hard on wildlife because there is little or no warning when an ice jam will break.

    http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/recreation/gallatin-river-ice-jam-breaks/youtube_fc76717e-89d5-5363-80c8-c6ed13975ebe.html

    • avatar JB says:

      Robert:

      More damage is done to ecosystems when we artificially attempt to control such flooding. After decades of flow control via damming Columbus has finally started to remove dams on the Olentangy.

      • avatar Robert R says:

        JB

        Not many understand rivers and why they do what they do. The hydrolic power of water is unforgiving.
        A river system needs high water to scour it and keep high water channels open for the river to spread out so the water is not contained to one channel. A river needs its flood plain.
        With dams built, levies and dikes built to keep people from being flooded out the river is contained and always goes to the weakest point and causes more damage in the end.
        What has happened on our river without repeated high water is the high water channels have been choked off with willows and cottonwood trees forcing the river to re- channel its self and over the years it don’t have the deep pools any more.
        Man can contain a river but he cannot control it.

  35. avatar Nancy says:

    http://www.dw.de:80/germany-marks-the-liberation-of-auschwitz/a-16538289

    NOT wildlife news… but a landmark to keep in mind, as our species continues to explain away or exploit, the destruction of other species.

    • avatar JB says:

      Nancy:

      I’ve been commenting here for almost 5 years now, and I’ve had to say this many times–there simply is no comparing the purposeful, systematic extermination of Jews with our (sometimes inhumane) attempts to control wildlife populations. I honestly think you lose more converts than you gain by making this comparison.

      • avatar savebears says:

        Sticking with Wildlife issues, seems to escape some.

      • avatar Nancy says:

        JB- wasn’t trying to “gain” any converts here by posting this link. It was just a reminder of what our species is capable of, when we look the other way.

      • avatar Harley says:

        JB, I know SB wants us to keep this on topic but…. aren’t you a Wings fan? I do believe the Hawks came out on top this evening!

        Ok, sorry, we now return you to your regularly scheduled Wildlife News!

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Not the nearly same – but a similar mindset. When times our tough, those in power seem to encourage a blaming of an “other” – so that the people pay less attention to what is really going on.

      • avatar Immer Treue says:

        I think loose connections have been made in the past. All we have to look at are dodos, and passenger pigeons to name two, that we exterminated in a relatively short time.

        Sometimes the analogy is sloppy, yet look at what we are capable of doing to our own and others. Look back at our History.

        • avatar savebears says:

          I am not sorry to say, anyone that can equate the mass murder of 6+ million Jewish people and another 14 million others to the death of wild animals, needs to step back and rethink their position in this world.

          There is no comparison.

          • avatar Ida Lupine says:

            No, I agree with Nancy that it shows what we are capable of at our worst – Manifest Destiny towards the Native Americans and wildlife, and slavery are others. It’s not the same, but similar. I think I mangled the response I posted above. If we treat our own kind the way we have, animals don’t have a prayer.

            I do think that there are those who legitimately want to manage wildlife, but there are others who are all too happy to exterminate them for their own reasons that have nothing to do with science. All of this “let them kill wolves until they get it out of their system” really proves the point in my opinion.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            No comparison? I don’t know. Look at what we did to the bison, as a part of the extermination campaign against the Plains Indians. Throw in small pox laden blankets… Human History is ripe with exterminations of people and animals.

            And I dwell on my position in this world daily.

            As a species, we are capable of unbelievable wonderful, altruistic deeds, to both our species and others, as well as the reciprocal.

            • avatar savebears says:

              Immer,

              You said the key word, it was an extermination campaign against the Native Americans, the bison was a tool, not the target.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                Once again, a quote from Stephen Jay Gould. “social Darwinism a fallacious equation of organic evolution with progress… With unfortunate consequences… This discredited theory … Remains a primary component of our global arrogance-our belief in dominion over, rather than fellowship with, more than a million other species that inhabit the planet.”

            • avatar WM says:

              Immer,

              About those “…..smallpox laden blankets” supposedly distributed by the Army.

              Seems a plagurist, and liar, professor Churchill at U of Colorado was a source of some of those allegations. The link is to an investigation done by a group of history professors at U of Michigan. And, by the way Churchill was fired for his poor scholarly efforts, among other things. This guy was a turd.

              http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.009?rgn=main;view=fulltext

              • avatar Mark L says:

                Seige of Fort Pitt?
                There IS a history of this happening, just a question of how often.

              • avatar WM says:

                Sorry, I confused two inquiries into Churchill’s scholarship infractions (I think there may have been more). The U of C did an extensive disciplinary investigation of Churchill, which resulted in a report, and his ultimate termination. Several history professors were among the investigators. The paper I linked to was done by one author, but was peer reviewed, and of course cites numerous other authors with research conclusions contrary to Churchill. Sorry for the error.

              • avatar WM says:

                ++Seige of Fort Pitt?++

                Was that not the British in 1763, and possibly an act of early germ warfare? And, is there not some question of its effect, or even that there is some question whether it was intentional, given that smallpox was already rampant from other vectors, like other Indian sources?

                http://www.umass.edu/legal/derrico/amherst/lord_jeff.html

                Don’t you just love revisionist history a couple hundred years after?

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                WM,

                Learn something new everyday.

                Easy to jump over facts when so many succumbed to small pox, measles etc.

                Thanks for the correction.

                I guess they’re still getting even for tobacco, or is that another historical error? :-)

    • avatar Kathleen says:

      Thanks, Nancy. You are not the first–nor will you be the last–to see the parallels:

      “Eternal Treblinka: Our treatment of animals and the holocaust” http://www.powerfulbook.com/

      And this, from Israeli newspaper Haaretz:

      “But perhaps the difference lies in the horrors of the past and the horrors of the present. Between the Holocaust that happened in the past and the holocaust that is taking place now. Perhaps it is easier to digest a memory than to digest a reality that it is still possible to change. I have no doubt that I lost a lot of outraged readers already in the previous paragraph: How is it possible to compare the Holocaust of the Jews at all, The Holocaust with a capital T, to what is happening in the valley of death of the helpless animals at our mercy?”
      Full text is here http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/stop-the-animal-holocaust-1.463332

      • avatar topher says:

        I wouldn’t read that crap if you paid me.

        • avatar Leslie says:

          The general term is ‘scapegoat’. Scapegoats have been many things throughout history–human or animal or otherwise. I don’t think all predator killing has that element to it, not at all. But those who have that mentality, and a mean-spiritedness to them, can kill Jews, or wolves, or Native Americans and get worked up around it. Don’t forget, just like bounties were placed on wolves, bears, etc., there were bounties placed on California Indians–$5/scalp.

          I think the mentality that allows people to hurt animals or people is that they see them as ‘other’ without any consciousness or feelings, just a ‘thing’.

          I’ve been reading about the Black Death in the 1300’s. The Jews were blamed afterwards and a lot of extermination and killing started. But also the beginnings of wolf hatred began at that time,the Little Red Riding hood syndrome, for wolves were eating the piles of carcasses outside the city.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            Throw in some good old fashioned religion, Catholicism prior to and after the Reformation leading to Christianity now, to add an accelerant to the hate and search for that “scapegoat”.

            Sorry to drag religion into this.

            • avatar Leslie says:

              From my reading, after the Black Death of 1350, wolves became a target and had a bounty on them. they had already been losing habitat to farms and fields, but previous mythology surrounding wolves held them in fairly high esteem (think Romulus and Remus). But the Black Death killed 1/3 of Europe’s population, and talking religion, it made people really wonder about their God. Thus, the reformation and eventually the Renaissance were born.

            • avatar Kathleen says:

              “The Roman Church, which dominated medieval life in Europe, exploited the sinister image of wolves in order to create a sense of real devils prowling in a real world. During the years of the Inquisition, the Church sought to smother social and political unrest and to maintain secular control by flushing out “werewolves” in the community and putting them to death. In so doing it deepened fears about the wolf, in whatever form.” ~Barry Lopez, Of Wolves and Men

          • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

            Scavengers are rarely loved because after past wars and plagues they have been to surviving humans seen as so closely associated with the human deaths. Indeed, they were, and they are, but in cause and effects terms, they are not the cause.

  36. avatar jon says:

    http://main.aol.com/2013/01/22/kevin-dean-parrish-dog-in-oven_n_2533651.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000058

    The man who did this should be thrown in jail for life. Oregon has the right idea. Keep track of animal abusers like you do with sex offenders.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      timz,

      I think to a wolf, the habitat looks better to the east than the west. I imagine more Oregon wolves have migrated to Idaho than toward the Cascades, wolf OR-7 to the contrary notwithstanding (that was fun to write ;-) )

      • avatar timz says:

        Your probably right, it’s too bad the wolf didn’t know if he stayed put in Oregon it would not have been shot.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      “State lawmakers have since stepped in with a proposal to prohibit commissioners from creating such buffers around either Yellowstone or Glacier National Parks”

      Home Boys – 1 Those non-native, “”Golly, they’re huge, compared to what lived here before” Wolves – 0.

      Yep, we LOVE our wildlife to death in Montana :)

  37. avatar Leslie says:

    Probably posted, but I just got this as an email. Montana proposes 3 new bills to make wolf killing easier esp. around the Park.

    Links are here. http://wolfwatcher.org/news/all-news/montana-proposes-three-new-bills-aimed-at-wolves/

  38. avatar Leslie says:

    Count ticks up in predator zone. 2013 so far 6 wolves killed

  39. avatar Louise Kane says:

    http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/golden-eagles-caught-in-snare-traps-in-montana-die/article_09d14c2e-69ad-11e2-a5a2-001a4bcf887a.html

    More of those nasty despicable snares killing – this time 3 golden eagles.

    “In all the years we’ve been doing this, I don’t recall any time where we’ve had three incidences with eagles in snares in as many days,” he said. “That throws up a red flag that there’s something else going on out there.”

    That statement is so bizarre….what do they think is going on out there. Snares and traps are set all over the place.

    • avatar Elk275 says:

      One snare was near Ringling, Montana, and the others near Big Timber, Montana. Chances are they were set on private land. Thre is very little federal land in those areas.

      I am wonder exactly how an eagle gets caught in a snare. Most snares are not baited but set on an animals run way. It will be interesting to see what really happened. Power lines kill many times over what snares will ever kill.

      • avatar Robert R says:

        Elk
        I think there is something fishy about these snares. They would have had to of been baited because of how and where snares are placed.
        As said in the article most of the time they get caught in leg hold traps. We have taken two out of leg hold traps and on both occasions called the fish and game and was told if nothing was broken to just release the bird.
        Kind of ironic because I just watched a show with fish and game that snared a grizzly. There was no harm to the bears leg and the set really interesting.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Its irresponsible to say that one problem is worse then another….the cumulative impact is what needs to be assessed. How much stress do we expect other organisms to sustain before there is a systems collapse. Many scientists argue that the loss of apex predators is one of the biggest threats facing the earth. I would counter that major overhauls are needed to prevent ever increasing extinctions and wildlife population crashes. There are thousands of species threatened or endangered, the one species that is not is human.

        We know there is not widespread support of snaring and trapping. We know they are purchased and set by the tens of thousands.

        Its the cumulative effect of these impacts that are hard to quantify. How many snares, traps, hunters, poisons, baits, ingestion of lead ammo and other manmade booby traps do wildlife have to avoid to stay alive. What effect does all this have earth and its seemingly endless capacity to sustain life.
        Think about how crazy it is to be arguing whether 150 of an organism is enough to sustain genetic diversity, to be fighting with wildlife managers to allow one female wolf (out of 58) to remain in the wild to raise her pups or whether or not to use poison and cyanide on wildlife. Some of these questions are insulting, crude and unreal considering its 2013. Why aren’t we asking what can we do to maintain the largest and richest biodiversity on earth? Instead of what can we do to get populations of organisms down to their minimal viable populations to satisfy special interests. Its overwhelmingly sad and insanely stupid. Unreal to me that people graduate from institutions and are paid to defend these archaic, outrageous positions.

    • avatar Rancher Bob says:

      Louise
      “Snares and traps are set all over the place.” Do you have any facts or data to prove that statement, personal experiences to prove such? You continue to claim traps are everywhere. I live in Montana and could take you out and show you 1000’s of square miles where there are no traps or snares. Savebears and Elk could also show you areas with no traps so save your nightmares for the shrink. Try to stay with the facts the sky is falling cry is getting old fast. The 70 pound coyote comment was more believable.

      • avatar savebears says:

        15 years of roaming the wilds in Montana, I have yet to run across a trap, go figure.

        • avatar Kathleen says:

          “15 years of roaming the wilds in Montana, I have yet to run across a trap, go figure.”

          Thirteen years of roaming the wilds in Montana and I’ve literally come upon three. No telling how many I’ve passed in close proximity without realizing their presence. And two neighborhood dogs were caught in footholds a couple miles up behind a locked gate, so there’s five traps in my roaming area. Snares are cheap and sold by the dozen–it stands to reason that they are out there in large numbers.

        • avatar Louise Kane says:

          well 3 golden eagles just found some snares to worry about. Go figure

        • avatar Jeff N. says:

          But you’ve seen 30 wolverines in 2012….amazing.

        • avatar Jeff N. says:

          SB,

          You’ve seen zero traps in 15 years but you saw 30 wolverines in 2012…that is amazing.

          • avatar savebears says:

            Jeff,

            Perhaps it is because I don’t hang out where trappers trap, but I do roam where wolverines live.

          • avatar jon says:

            Amazing indeed. I can smell BS. What are the odds that you see one of the most elusive creatures ever numerous times and not one single trap in 15 years?

            • avatar savebears says:

              What the hell is it with you people, I am not calling anyone names, I am not telling you, that you are full of shit, Jon, you have said, you have never been out here, but you are such an expert?

              Jeff, why am I full of shit, because I have experienced something you have not, remember, I used to work for FWP and have done extensive work in areas that humans do not frequently visit, I live in an area that people don’t frequently visit.

              • avatar Jeff N. says:

                I didn’t call you a name….I said you are full of shit. You claim to be an employee of FWP (or former one) who has been roaming the woods, doing research, for up to fifteen years. You claim to have never seen a trap but you’ve seen 30 wolverines in 2012. You went to DC to speak about your research regarding the wolverine, and why, based on your data, it should not be listed as threatened. But when pressed about your research data on why the wolverine should not be listed as threatened, you generalized about climate change, minimized other’s research, and claimed that you had observed 30 in the last year, thus making you a wolverine expert. And that’s just what you’ve claimed in the last few weeks.

                I stand by my statement that you are full of shit. If I were to choose a name to call you it would be a “phony”.

              • avatar Elk275 says:

                I just returned from the local brew pub, running into a lady who I had not seen in 5 years as she was at Colorado State University getting her Ph.D in wildlife biology. There were a number of skiers there and the conversation turned to wildlife and then to wolverines. Several people including myself had spent considerable time in Alaska. The bartender saw three wolverines in one day skiing at Mt Alyeska. The first two were a male/female together and later that afternoon a single wolverine. Go skiing and see three wolverines in one day at a major resort that is worth the cost of the lift ticket plus some.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Jeff,

                I have never claimed to be an expert on Wolverines, actually my specialty is Bison.

                You calling me a phoney has no bearing on what I do, what I have experienced or what I know.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Also Jeff, I didn’t say they shouldn’t be listed because of my research, I said, that listing the wolverine was a political move because we don’t have the research to prove they warrant listing.

                I never said I was against listing wolverines, just that I feel we need to do an intensive study to warrant the listing.

                As far as calling me a phoney, don’t worry, you are not the first one to do that, my superiors at FWP did that as well when I wouldn’t change the facts to fit their agenda.

              • avatar Robert R says:

                SB I don’t get it either. Insted of having a discusion there has to be name calling and inappropriate language. Some need to realize what they are saying and that kids could be reading what is said.

              • avatar jon says:

                sb, I know you don’t work for FWP anymore, but maybe you can help them out with their wolverine studies to see how many wolverines there actually are in Montana. You have probably seen more wolverines than all of FWP’s wildlife experts put together.

              • avatar jon says:

                sb, what are your thoughts on the bill in Montana that would basically classify bison as vermin and could be shot on sight on private land? Do you support or oppose this bill?

              • avatar jon says:

                Has anyone mentioned to you before that you should think about changing your name to savebison? Bison aren’t doing as good as bears are if you look at population numbers.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Jon,

                Most of the time when we saw wolverines I was with various FWP employees.

                I am opposed to the bill about bison and have been talking as well as writing letters every since I read the text of the bill.

                When I change my name it will be to my given name as I posted a while back.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Also Jon,

                The numbers I reported, some of them could be duplicate sightings of the same animals, as many of the areas we were in, we were at more than one time during the season.

              • avatar savebears says:

                By the way Jon, there are quite a few more bison right now than grizzly bears, and I am not saying I am happy with the numbers when you consider their historical numbers. I am, and have always been in favor of areas that will allow bison outside of the park.

            • avatar JEFF E says:

              bs like when you say where you live, J W

      • avatar Nancy says:

        RB – interesting what you can find on the internet:

        “DISTRICT 3 REPORT

        Trapping season is here. I am planning on trapping as hard as my wife will let me this season. I hope you will get the chance to chase your animal of choice as well.

        It was great to see so many people in Lewistown at rendezvous.

        There have been many trapping education classes offered in District 3. If you were planning on chasing a wolf, hopefully you got signed up to take a class.

        The class is heavy on ethics, so be aware of your surroundings, and pay close attention if you plan on trying your hand at wolf trapping this season. — Tater”

        http://www.trapperpredatorcaller.com/article-index/montana-trappers-association-december-2012-report

        “Along with about 2000 other folks, I took the wolf trapping course offered by F&G. They stressed the importance of ethical considerations in harvesting a wolf with traps. All you folks out there that are going to do this must be sure to use the grey matter between your ears.

        This issue is highly contested and watched closely by the anti people. If they cannot find an incident then I am sure that they will try to fabricate one.

        If we give them any excuse to deter or stop trapping in any form, you can be assured that they will do whatever it takes.

        Remember that those people are not limited by either a sense of ethics or the consideration of the truth. Do not give them any excuse. Think before placing your wolf traps”

        Oh… my… gosh, a site like this, actually worried about the “grey matter between the ears” of their own membership, with regard to their yearly take – trapping/harvesting other living, breathing beings?

        Priceless……….

        • avatar Immer Treue says:

          “Remember that those people are not limited by either a sense of ethics or the consideration of the truth. Do not give them any excuse. Think before placing your wolf traps”

          Pot calling kettle black with an appeal to use the old grey matter. If ethics is absent from the anti-trapping folks, why this appeal to trappers? Might their be a few of them out there where ethics is nothing more than a shoulder shrug?

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Rancher Bob,

        the sky is falling comment is BS. nancy just posted something about 2000 people taking the trapping course, do you think these trappers will stick to one trap each, ok so if they do then that would be 2000 traps. How many people don’t take the class and how many set multiple traps. Its unconscionable. I challenge you to come up with one legitimate reason to defend trapping and snaring. Its disgusting, and the idea of a few thousand traps set in wilderness makes me sick. I’ll call Montana to find out how many licenses were issued and see if they have the statistics. How many is too many? 1 animal stuck in those devices is to many, and snares. Come on….choking an animal to death like that….creepy and indefensible.

        http://www.bornfreeusa.org/facts.php?p=53&more=1

        • avatar jon says:

          If trappers truly had ethics, they wouldn’t be trapping in the first place. The fact that a lot of these animals are trapped for their pelts only so trappers can make a little money is sickening and exploiting wildlife in the worst possible way.

          • avatar savebears says:

            A little money, I know trappers that are making over 100K a year Jon, that is not a little money.

            • avatar savebears says:

              And I will add, if the demand was not there, they wouldn’t be doing it, so blame the public that purchases fur, if not for them, there would not be a trapping industry.

        • avatar Rancher Bob says:

          Louise
          “I challenge you to come up with one legitimate reason to defend trapping and snaring.”
          Wow it seems that trapping was how wolves were caught so that they could be moved to Yellowstone and Idaho. Trapping is a tool used for many purposes, even removing mice in my shop, that’s two.
          Seems your biggest problem is where you get your information, bornfree. Maybe you should try getting to know a few trappers before making your conclusions.
          Lastly even if there are a million traps out in Montana they are not all over the place as you believe.

          • avatar Louise Kane says:

            Oh for God’s sake Rancher Bob, we are not talking about trapping wolves for relocation.

            • avatar Rancher Bob says:

              Louise
              Those wolves that were trapped for relocation were trapped by trappers that normally trap wolves and kill them. They were just every day normal trappers who trap. Without that skill who would have given you a chance to see wolves in Yellowstone?
              You continue to cry we need science based management, but most the time you demand management based on things that don’t keep you up at night or make you sick.
              Montana hunted wolves two years without meeting it’s wolf taken numbers, so we started using another tool trapping. We will continue to increase the tools we use until we meet our objectives, because we don’t live in a park we live in Montana. What make you sick really doesn’t matter to anyone but you.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                No Rancher Bob you are wrong, this slaughter of wolves, since the delisting, makes many people angry and sick. You keep telling yourself that killing off all the wolves in Montana but 100 -150 is defensible. Its just not, and what science do you depend on to justify these tools that you think are merited to kill wolves? The science and research that illustrates the interdependence that wolves rely on in their packs and their sociality that is never accounted for in management plans. The healthy elk and ungulate populations in Montana despite the presence of wolves, the fact that wolves kill less livestock then other carnivores or that livestock deaths are minimal from wolves? Neither of the two conservation groups participating in the wolf recovery plan approved of it. The objectives you defend so staunchly are a sorry excuse for “sound management” and were a result of political compromise and maneuvering. The addition of trapping to Montana’s wolf hunt was implemented at the urging, pushing, and anti predator sentiment from the same people can’t seem to understand the importance of predators on the landscape and won’t be satisfied until there are only 150 wolves left in each state. Its terrible, indefensible policy. what “tools” would not be off limits RB? How many wolves can your state support? 150 exactly? You are very wrong that this does not matter to anyone but me.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                and proposing that wolves need the kind of management they are getting in Montana is going to turn your state into a park – a big empty park where nothing but ungulates and livestock are tolerated until they are killed too.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Louise,

                You need to take this up with USFWS, they are the ones that set the rule on the wolves. I can’t say I agree, but as long as Montana sticks to the rules, the wolves will remain delisted.

              • avatar Rancher Bob says:

                Louise
                Once again you show how little you know about Montana or wolves.
                Good night.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                yeah RB and once again your comments illustrate how stuck in past predator policy is and how so little has changed since wolves were exterminated the first time around. and here come the comments…wolves will always be in Montana, we intend to manage them so they are a healthy robust population. yeah yeah yeah

            • avatar Nancy says:

              *One morning Paw brought one of our Victor single-spring varmit traps up from the celler. He was going to settle the cruelty arguement with Mother once and for all. Carefully, while Mother watched, knitting, our old man squeezed the spring and spread the trap flat on the dinner table. He latched the bait pan to the release trigger and drew back. The trap was ready.

              Okay, Lorrie, now watch this” Paw clenched his big right hand into a fist and smashed it down on the pan. The trap sprang shut. Grinning, he held up his caught right hand and the trap, its tether chain dangling. “See?” he said. “See that goddamnit? I told you Lorrie, it hardly hurts a-tall. I hardly feel it. See?” Triumphantly he looked at me, at Will, at Paul. “Aint’t this what I been telling you boys all along?” Impressed we looked at mother to see what she would say.

              Smiling her ironic smile, needles clicking in her fingers, she said ” You’re not finished, Joe.”

              “What’s that mean?”

              She paused. “Now we want to see you gnaw your hand off.”

              —-The Fool’s Progress: An Honest Novel/Edward Abbey

            • avatar Ida Lupine says:

              We need to set up buffer zones around the parks. This is serious, a a serious danger – and not a power struggle between one side and the other. At the very least, the Gardiner boundary needs to have one, and Montana should give in on this this as a sign of good faith. Instead they are trying to rush through legislation to usurp the power of their F&W department instead?

              • avatar jon says:

                I don’t think this will ever happen, but the next best thing is Montana fwp keeping the quotas very very low near the park and to completely ban trapping anywhere near the park.

          • avatar jon says:

            RB, I know there are very justifiable reasons to oppose trapping. I did some digging on the trappers in Montana and one prominent trapper in Montana admits to trappers causing pain to wildlife and he doesn’t apologize for it.

  40. avatar Salle says:

    Beijing, USA? Actually, it’s SLC.

    Toxic fog hits Utah: Pregnant women and children urged to stay indoors as pollution goes ‘off the charts’ in freezing weather

    Health emergency declared Utah where pollution is now the worst in America
    The greater Salt Lake region had up to 130 micrograms of soot per cubic meter – more than three times the federal clean-air limit
    More than 100 Utah doctors are calling for immediate action

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2267488/Toxic-fog-hits-Utah-Pregnant-women-children-urged-stay-indoors-pollution-goes-charts.html#ixzz2JO0RANyd

    Yikes, I’ve seen SLC like this in the past as well as other places.

    • avatar CodyCoyote says:

      The US city with the most persistent air pollution yearround ? ( drum roll , please ) :

      Bakersfield CA

    • avatar Leslie says:

      was just there for Sundance and boy was it quite an inversion coming in and out on the plane.

      • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

        The northern Utah valleys’ air pollution is pushing those who can afford it, and conventions, up into the mountains above the toxic gunk. They go on the interstate right from the SLC airport up to Park City in the mountains.

        It think the high levels of air pollution are a commentary on the culture and the politics of the place. Granted these valleys naturally trap fog, and the winter air in northern Utah has never been really clean since Anglos settled there, but I grew up mostly there, remember the gray, unchanging winters, but not the bad pollution. I have always paid attention to such things, and this is a remarkable deterioration.

  41. avatar Salle says:

    Owyhee County welfare ranchers’ heads explode…

    Owyhee County braces for grazing reductions

    http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/01/28/2430177/owyhee-county-braces-for-grazing.html

    • avatar Evan D says:

      So, Gov. Otter’s idea is to let cattle remain on the range in present numbers as long as they’re kept away from water? In the Owyhee desert… I’m sure that will pan out. Worst case scenario (from the non-rancher POV anyway) is 100’s of miles of barbwire installed on public land & sensitive habitat. Then again, I’ve put up enough fence to know stretching that much is far from a ranch hand’s dream…

      If grazing leases on the degraded ranges are going to continue to be allowed it would make sense to have a rotational grazing-type framework in play, hopefully with reduced head counts and specific, ENFORCED mitigation requirements for the participating ranchers. Also, world peace and candy for every child.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Out rotating photo on our “Grazing and Livestock” page was taken in Owyhee County where the story agonizes about what the small number of ranchers are being required to do.

      http://www.thewildlifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/livestock_feature2.jpg

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      That’s how we’ve done things for decades,” Aasheim said. “We could have gone with an emergency closure instead, but we’re not in the business of making enemies.”

      So they do have the ability to make an emergency closure. I wondered about that. So I don’t understand why there was all the flack about a comment period. But I guess we have an entirely new set of rules.

      All you can do is sit back and watch in horror at what’s going on with our wildlife and environment these days.

  42. avatar Salle says:

    Biologists study gray owl numbers in Jackson Hole

    (Apparently there’s only one that anyone knows of currently.)

    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/biologists-study-gray-owl-numbers-in-jackson-hole/article_27665532-99f5-5f09-af9c-ffa5edda9822.html

  43. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    AN interesting article about the recently concluded US Fish adn Wildlife Service study of bird and mammal deaths nationwide.

    -of note, domestic cats ( whether cared for or feral ) kill many times more birds than previously thought…3.7 billion. Upwards of 20 million rodents as well. And that Washington D.C. has over 300 metropolitan feral cat colonies alone.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/29/cats-wild-birds-mammals-study/1873871/

    My Siamese Flamepoint asleep on his padded stool in the corner presently is an indoor-outdoor cat that I took in off the street 9 years ago. He’d been living on his own for 5 years. I still allow him to hunt when he chooses to, which is not nearly as often these days, His choice of prey being common brown noisy invasive birds and many mice, but rarely anything else. In return, I get to stay in better touch with the animal kingdom of urban Cody. I learn a lot from that unique cat. Feral cats ? – no love from me.

    • avatar TC says:

      Cody – how, after reading the article, can you still not get it? Your cat has no business being outdoors killing wildlife – there is no way you can guarantee me or anyone else he preys only on invasive species. Your cat may as well be feral, and in my mind, should be treated as such by your neighbors.

      “I learn a lot from that unique cat”. And wild animals die to amuse the cat. How special. You’re smarter than this…

  44. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    Correction: should be cats kill upwards of 20 Billion small mammals, not million , in above post.

  45. avatar WM says:

    South Dakota legislators draft bill to seek delisting of its occasional wolves? Whooa, now this would be a radical scorched earth political statement, if passed.

    A bill filed Tuesday with the state legislature would characterize wolves in South Dakota as predators or varmints and allow people to shoot them provided the federal government lifts their protected status.

    http://www.bhpioneer.com/local_news/article_25e27dd0-657e-11e2-a055-001a4bcf887a.html

    • avatar jon says:

      The republicans and their war on wildlife continues.

      • avatar Ida Lupine says:

        Sadly, the Democrats aren’t innocent parties either. They opened the door in exchange for a senate majority – and the result is that the evils will never be returned to the jar ever again.

        • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

          Ida Lupine,

          Yes the Democrats did. It is hard to find find a lot of praiseworthy things to say about the majority party. Nevertheless, the views of the minority on wildlife (and to me many other things), make the tarnished majority shine by comparison.l

          • avatar savebears says:

            Ralph,

            Neither party is a shining example of good stewardship. just about the time one does something that looks good, the other does something that cancels it out.

            When it comes down to it, anyone depending on a certain party to do the right thing these days, is going to be holding their breath a long time.

  46. avatar Louise Kane says:

    http://enews.earthlink.net/article/us?guid=20130129/0c53258e-ca29-48d3-8ae0-5937191e1504

    couple saves fawn with maggot infested wounds and raises it on their farm. DNR tries to take it away and euthanize it, as its against the law to have a deer. Unreal

    • avatar Louise Kane says:

      no good deed goes unpunished

      • avatar jon says:

        I saw this story on the news this morning. I think they did the right thing even though it’s common knowledge that it’s illegal to raise wild animals. I think they let it go on purpose so it wouldn’t have gotten killed by the DNR.

    • avatar Evan D says:

      These seem like good-hearted folks who meant well. Other side of the coin… Allowing people to “rescue” and/or keep wildlife without proper training, oversight and liability (thus the permits), especially deer in this whitetail-crazed part of the country, seems like a great way to lose a handle on the intended outcomes of state management plans. The laws weren’t established as an F You to kindhearted folks who love animals… they are there to address concerns about diseases carried to & from the wild population, and to protect the state’s public trust wildlife as much as possible from (often well-meaning) interference, outright harassment and bad precedent that would negatively impact the broader population. I’m sure that’s not a comprehensive list. That’s why they need to be enforced. It’s unfortunate that a police officer would try to use ignorance of the law, then blatant disregard as his response. Hope the outraged stop to think on a bigger scale.

      • avatar WM says:

        Evan,

        You make a valid and compelling argument. However, it strikes me Indiana DNR is making a huge PR mistake by continuing to prosecute this nit of a matter. The better path, in my view, is to let it drop, especially since the deer has “disappeare,” and their appears to be a ground swell in support of theser do-good folks, whose heart is pure. DNR can otherwise expect some backlash I doubt they want.

        Were I and Indiana resident, I would be pissed my tax money was being spent on such a petty matter in these still difficult tax resource times. But then some bureacrats never know when to quit (except the next noted coffee break).

        • avatar Ida Lupine says:

          Well said, WM. People who harm animals, disobey or plead ignorance of the law usually only get a slap on the wrist, so the reverse should also apply.

        • avatar Louise Kane says:

          Evan,
          I think the DNR could have used some discretion here as in most of these cases. WM is right what a stupid thing to waste the taxpayers money on. They could have the fawn tested for disease and let it drop. These people did nto go out looking to take a wild animal out of the wild. The laws need some flexibility to accomodate situations like these.

          • avatar Evan D says:

            WM, Louise,

            Very true, this isn’t something that should have been such a big deal, and it is a damn shame that Hoosiers’ tax money will be spent on it. Reading more about it (http://www.indystar.com/comments/article/20130129/NEWS/301290318/Indiana-couple-faces-possibility-jail-time-after-rescuing-injured-deer ) shows it to be ridiculously overblown on both sides. Indiana DNR stepped in it for sure. Can’t help but think that the Counceller’s made some poor decisions over nearly 2 years, especially in ignoring the release order that seems to have come long before charges were pressed. And who believes they would’ve been sent to jail or hammered on fines? Surely not prior to thumbing their noses at the CO’s? It’s hard for me to believe that in contacting numerous rehab programs, zoos, etc. they weren’t made aware of the illegality of keeping a deer before IN-DNR got involved. Guessing their attachment and the attention from all “Dani’s” friends made that decision easier. Of course, most of us are aware how much of a death sentence human habituation of wildlife usually becomes. Ridiculous all around. Testing for disease on state dime to mitigate defiance bad precedent, “what’s right in God’s eyes”, bringing a law suit, media induced firestorm*grumblegrumblegrumble…* :-D Ridiculous, all around.

            • avatar Ida Lupine says:

              I say thank God for people like them. Treating wounds and releasing doesn’t make habituation.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                me too Ida, some humane people out there. God forbid someone might actually be permitted to save a life instead of take one.

              • avatar Ida Lupine says:

                Really. The penalty seems to be harsher for saving this poor animal’s life than it would be for poaching. Interestingly, it said Mrs. Counceller is an RN.

  47. avatar Louise Kane says:

    Posted in my box from Oliver Starr related to a Project Coyote petition.

    anyone caring about OR 7 or coyotes might want to sign and make a phone call. numbers listed. The image of the dead coyotes lined up after a contest makes me want to throw up. Please share. These contests are epidemic. The laws need to change and in order to do that people need to be exposed, be moved and make their voices heard.

    Please be moved, take a look at that image and make a call!

    Oliver Starr 8:31pm Jan 29
    Folks if you love wolves please take some time and sign and share this petition as widely as possible: http://www.change.org/petitions/ca-dept-of-fish-wildlife-f-g-commission-stop-coyote-killing-contest# . California’s only wolf, OR7 is in terrible danger due to a coyote killing contest being held right where he’s being sighted.

    There’s a change.org petition up that has the potential to make a difference. Please sign it and share it as much as you can. Most petitions fail because they aren’t specific enough. This one can save one very important wolf and lots of very important coyotes.

    Other things you can do include the following:
    Please help us stop this Modoc County event by contacting and lodging a complaint with the contacts listed below and sharing this post.

    1. California Dept of Fish and Wildlife. (707) 445-6493
    Neil Manji, Regional Manager Email: askregion1@dfg.ca.gov
    2. N. California BLM office to make sure this contest does not take place on public lands call Phone: 916-978-4400 (the following email form is quirky at best)http://www.blm.gov/ca/forms/feedback/index.php?fo=1 –
    3. U.S. Forest Service at http://www.fs.fed.us/contactus
    4. Governor Jerry Brown
    http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php
    5. Congressman Tom McClintockhttps://mcclintockforms.house.gov/forms/contact-form.shtml
    CA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife & F&G Commission: Stop Coyote Killing Contest
    http://www.change.org
    Please join Project Coyote and a coalition of organizations in calling on the California Department …

    View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.

  48. avatar Ralph Maughan says:


    I want folks to know that this thread will be superseded at the end of the day. Wow! the number of comments just keeps increasing.

    It seems that when there are about 500 comments, a significant number of people begin to have technical problems.

  49. avatar Atlas says:

    hey I have a question has a rancher ever tried to get a grazing allotment for bison on public land? I mean they are considered livestock in montana, right?

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Atlas,

      Yes. I don’t know how often, but I know of one case. There were bison on a public grazing allotment in Idaho for a few years (Centennial Mountains).

      Bison that are enclosed and/or owned are livestock in Montana and elsewhere. There are many bison in Montana and elsewhere too. The controversy is over free ranging bison that are not owned by a person or group — bison as wildlife. For some reason these light up a mean streak in ranchers, and all kinds of dangers (most preposterous IMO) are claimed.

    • avatar Rancher Bob says:

      Atlas
      I’ll take a stab at this one. Bison don’t have much respect for your average fence or corals for that matter. Your average bison fence is more expensive and less wildlife friendly than your average cow fence. We’re talking more than $5.00 a foot for fence that’s the main draw back of grazing land you don’t own.

  50. avatar Louise Kane says:

    How could the North Carolina Legislature and Fish and Game promote this? 10 of a 100 red wolves killed when night hunting of coyotes was pushed for. The inability of wildlife agencies to move beyond the current mode of promoting, defending and allowing predator killing is a tragedy.

    “USFWS Reports High Death Rate for Endangered Red Wolves Since Beginning of Coyote Night Hunt
    Tuesday, January 22, 2013
    In November 2012, the Animal Welfare Institute and several other organizations sued and obtained a preliminary injunction against spotlight hunting of coyotes at night in the five-county area of eastern North Carolina inhabited by the world’s only wild population of red wolves (Canis rufus), which are frequently mistaken for coyotes due to similarity in appearance.

    Data obtained from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service records indicates that ten red wolves (out of total population of around 100) were killed by suspected gunshot in 2012. This is higher than the average rate of red wolf gunshot mortality documented between 2004 and 2011 (seven per year). Nine of the 10 deaths in 2012 occurred after the temporary rule went into effect in August, and at least three of these deaths were reported by hunters who thought they were shooting at a coyote when in fact it was a red wolf.

    These reports indicate that mistaken identity between coyotes and red wolves is common and restrictions must be placed on coyote hunting. Unfortunately, an identical permanent rule that would allow spotlight hunting of coyotes at night in North Carolina could still go into effect if it is not blocked by the state legislature this month. AWI and others notified the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission that it is in violation of the federal Endangered Species Act by allowing spotlight hunting of coyotes, and the groups will file a federal enforcement action unless the Commission takes steps to protect the wolves.”

  51. avatar Louise Kane says:

    Has anyone seen the daily coyote blog and videos. A woman has a pet coyote that she raised after her boyfriend brought an orphaned coyote pup home. His name is Charlie. The first video if Charlie eating with cats the second is Charlie kissing the cows and the third is a run on of Charlie playing with the dog. a beautiful gentle soul this coyote

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIEifRz3554
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjnJWZfH1jA
    http://vimeo.com/7493544

    • avatar Robert R says:

      Harboring and raising wildlife is ilegal and wrong and not amusing at all.
      Once a wild animal always wild and something will go wrong and someone or something will pay the price.

      • avatar JB says:

        Robert:

        I’m not a fan of people raising wildlife (especially med.-large carnivores) as pets. However, your statement is factually inaccurate. There are a variety of ways in which it is legal to raise certain types of wild animals, though the conditions vary greatly from state to state. Growing up, at least three neighborhood families raised orphaned raccoons, and I’ve known others that have raised squirrels, chipmunks, turtles and nursed injured birds. Despite your assertion, something does not always “go wrong”, which is why people still do it.

        • avatar Ida Lupine says:

          I don’t think people should keep wildlife as pets – but there’s nothing wrong with helping an injured animal if they are still capable of being helped. I’d call a wildlife rehabilitation group or Audubon first, to get their advice. But people shouldn’t deny their natural impulses to help if it is possible to do so.

          Wildlife sightings for me yesterday a small herd of healthy looking deer and flock of turkeys. :)

          I was thinking about Ralph’s question about why herbivores aren’t kept as pets as often as carnivores such as dogs and cats – horses being an exception because of riding and work. I think maybe we don’t allow ourselves to get close to animals that have ‘utilitarian’ purposes. There isn’t much cuter though than a lamb, calf, fawn or piglet. I sometimes take walks through farmland and it is very nice.

    • avatar Kathleen says:

      I recall when this blog made a splash with its debut 5-6 years ago. The coyote was orphaned because the woman’s boyfriend was a Wildlife Svcs. trapper who killed the pup’s parents; it appears that all traces of that beginning have been removed from her website–guess he didn’t fit into the narrative. She had the pup castrated and kept him on a leash. Here’s a news story from early on:
      http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-12-22-daily-coyote_N.htm

      “Her boyfriend Mike, a government trapper with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, whose job it was to kill coyotes in order to protect livestock, found Charlie orphaned in his den hole, so young he was still blind. For some inexplicable reason, Mike was compelled to take Charlie to Stockton, and after much deliberation, Stockton decided to care for Charlie.” http://www.peoplepets.com/people/pets/article/0,,20493323,00.html

      • avatar jon says:

        That is just sad that a lot of innocent coyotes are killed in order to supposedly protect livestock. Some people have no compassion for animals. It sickens a lot of people. To go in there and basically wipe out a whole den of coyotes, you have to have no compassion for animals what so ever.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Hi Kathleen,

        There was mention that her boyfriend was a wildlife services trapper and thats how she obtained the pup. For some unexplained reason, he pup was spared or lived. I don’t know all the history only that she was faced with the decision to let the pup die or live. The coyote is quite amazing, not sure about the people but that is some coyote. I think a spider once said that about a famous pig, one time!

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Spreading misinformation like this is dangerous. I hope people realize that you may be able to pick up diseases from many animals, even your own pet. Another reason to keep pets indoors, ticks are rampant. And other people, which is much more likely. I am very careful now that it is flu season -

Calendar

January 2013
S M T W T F S
« Dec   Feb »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: