Reader generated wildlife news-

It is time to create a new page of “Reader Generated Wildlife News.” Do not post copyrighted material.

Here is the link to the “old” wildlife news page that began on Nov. 25, 2018. From there you can access links to the many older pages of wildlife news readers created.

Please post your wildlife news in the comments below

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, and he is President of the Western Watersheds Project.

245 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Feb. 14, 2019 edition

  1. avatar Mike Todd says:

    I would like to see someone write an article on grazing on federal lands…specifically – please note, articulate, emphasize, and make it clear to all that there is no such thing as grazing “rights.” It is a privilege to graze your livestock on public lands, and if you do not adhere to the specifications of your lease agreement, you can be removed. What landlord would allow a tenant to trash his rental unit and not suffer some consequences?

  2. Protect The Wolves™ Seeks Native Americans as well as Tribes, Native American Founded Organizations to Join Us Please.

    Protect The Wolves™ will be filing an intervention in support of WWP argument against the USDA.

    Our Phone conference yesterday with Erik Molvar of Western Watersheds Project and our Attorney Adam Carlesco who will be writing our Intervention in support of Western Watersheds Project, instead of an Amicus Brief, that way any tribes that sign on will additionally become full-fledged plaintiffs, as well all can raise claims independent of CBD, WWP, and WEG.

    It was a great call. Erik is always thankful for having research and tools offered that they do not have available to them.

    We owe Erik a Huge Thank you for his help in submitting our Regulation Change Petition, as well as Our Proposed “Sacred Resource Protection Zone” to Wyoming Game and Fish Meetings.

    Protect The Wolves™ is seeking Tribes from any location, Native Americans as well as Native American Founded Organizations from all over Turtle Island to sign on to Our Intervention .

    The USDA in their 1998 FONSI did not mention consulting with tribes or Native Americans period. It is past time that the Government begins to protect the Religious beliefs of all Native Americans which includes things like Wolves and Grizzly’s and Bison to name a few that Traditional Native Americans hold as Sacred.

    Please Share this article along with our phone number (530) 377-3031 to any and all that would like to sign on to Our Intervention.

    We thank you for your spreading the Word 😉

    ~Patricia and Roger

    Protect The Wolves™


  3. As Wolf Depredation on Domestic Livestock escalates, throughout the World with the Wolves successful re-introduction populations spread, the contentious anger between Livestock Producers and Conservationists does also grow. My published research Blog at http://WWW.FENCEFLAGWOLFTRAINING.COM is a tangible suggestion, with minimal cost, to mitigate the anger on both sides of the fence!
    Donald J. Kaleta

  4. avatar Rob Edward says:

    Durango Herald: Don’t believe anti-wolf hype – let science guide us

  5. avatar Yvette says:

    Happy Valentine’s Day, Everyone

  6. avatar Yvette says:

    A different view of the border than what you’ll hear from the orange alien.

    It’s nine years old but still informative and worth the watch.

  7. We posted an Article here, it didnt get posted.
    – – – –
    It did. Thank you. (RM-ed.)

  8. avatar Immer Treue says:

    16 minute presentation by Doug Smith. Always interesting to listen to. This talk is just a bit different.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      So much of what Doug Smith says rings true out here in the west.

      The human species is so self absorbed anymore, they can no longer see the trees, let alone the wildlife and wilderness areas (still out there) for the need (or greed)

      The norm is to sustain/adhere to a world that has become more and more demanding and less and less aware of our impact on other species who share the planet.

  9. avatar Ed Loosli says:

    “Wolves may keep cows off some Washington State Fish and Wildlife land” By DON JENKINS Capital Press

    Washington State Fish and Wildlife may prohibit cattle from some department grazing lands to avoid conflicts with wolves, according to an internal review of grazing policies.

  10. avatar Nancy says:

    “A new, highly complex and destabilized ‘domain of risk’ is emerging – which includes the risk of the collapse of key social and economic systems, at local and potentially even global levels,” warns the paper from the Institute for Public Policy Research. “This new risk domain affects virtually all areas of policy and politics, and it is doubtful that societies around the world are adequately prepared to manage this risk.”

  11. avatar Rob Edward says:

    Dave Mattson penned a most prosaic evisceration of the paradigm that allows grizzlies (indeed, all wildlife)to be cast as errant moral actors. He uses the incident involving the death of outfitter Mark Uptain in September 2018 in the Teton Wilderness as a contemporary example of the twisted logic humans impose on other species. Definitely a read worth saving for later reference.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      Yes. We should take more responsibility for our own safety, because only we have every means at our own hands. To dismiss carrying bear spray because it was inconvenient, or to not be proficient with a weapon is certainly not wise. (not that I do either, but hey, I know my limitations.)

      Nor is leaving a carcass overnight when the temp was 73 degrees – I guarantee that every carnivore and scavenger was aware of it – and to have F&W say that it was not the motivator for the bears is not very honest.

      A terrible tragedy for all involved, and one that should not continue to be perpetuated by authorities, it does not help people.

  12. avatar Elk375 says:

    Nearly 40 years ago, I was a hunting guide in Montana and Alaska. I do not want to Monday morning quarterback but this incident would have had a different outcome if I would have been the guide — MAYBE.

    They tied the horses up and went to looking for the elk. After finding the elk the guide started to field dress the animal. I would have not tied my horses up but lead them behind me while searching for the wounded or dead elk. Upon finding the elk I would have tied the horses around the carcass. The horses/mules would have smelled the bear and started fussing. The guide would/should have realized that something was wrong and been able to either use pepper spray or started shooting. The outcome would have been different if the horses were tied up around the elk.

    Due to the nature of their defensive instincts mules would have been a better choice. Mules fight with their hoofs where as horses flee. When I was guiding in Alaska I always tied my four horses in four direction around the camp.

    Here are my questions that I have not read about.

    On the day they shot the elk did they have pack animals and how many. The guide has been criticized for allowing the hunter to shot an elk late in the afternoon. If they had pack animals, I see nothing wrong with shooting an elk late in the afternoon. It takes me about an hour to open an elk up, quarter it and load it on horses if the client stays out of the way and helping when requested. Some years ago I was the client in British Columbia and shot a bull moose late in the afternoon. It took the guide and myself about one and half hours to field dress the moose, load it on the horses and be on our way.

    After the guide was killed, the client returned to the horses and rode until he could find cell service and call. In order to do that he would have had to put the bridle on, mount the horse and ride away. Very few hunting clients can bridle a horse, mount it and ride off. Then if there was other horses was he able to ride off with out taking the other horses.

    Upon returning the following day the guide had bear spray and a 10MM Glock. The guide should have had a rifle. Marlin makes a perfect guide’s rifle, a 1895 Marlin 45-70 which is used by most guides in the north county. I have one and if I was to guide again that is what I would use.

    This was a sad and tragic incident for both the guide and the bears but it is time to move on.

  13. avatar Nancy says:

    For those interested in the Trio Bald Eagles live webcam. Star is back this year with Valor I & II.

    History on this unusual trio:

  14. avatar Nancy says:

    You keep hoping the human beings that encourage this destruction of other living beings, will get a clue and wake up….

  15. avatar idaursine says:

    Aren’t things like this awful? I’m sure it’s the same all over the country. Apparently, the roads have been flooding like this for at least a decade – so why can’t the road be fixed or culverts put in or another non-lethal solution, especially after a decade? Probably the towns can’t afford anything but cheap killing and nobody wants taxes raised!

    Why is killing always the only go-to option? Apparently the city has sent out a letter of apology, which is adding insult to injury :(:

  16. avatar idaursine says:

    Here’s the tragicomic letter. Apparently, the only thing protecting them from complete flooding is an 100 year-old land bridge! It seems improvements are overdue?

  17. avatar rork says:

    If you search “south carolina coyote bounty” there are many articles to choose from about proposed $75 coyote bounties. As usual, you will not find any reporters asking any biologists if that would have any significant effect. You will see politicians and others saying bad things yotes do and saying there is a simple solution (even if it has never worked).
    “there is always a well-known solution to every human problem – neat, plausible, and wrong” Mencken, 1920.

  18. avatar idaursine says:

    I know this isn’t the West (just west of Boston), but it is just too typical.

    “McArthur said the city plans to draft a long-term plan to fix the culvert underneath Singletary Lane, which could avert problems caused by beaver dams.”

    Taking ten years to fix it is long-term. It’s illegal to relocate wildlife in MA, in case they are killed trying to return, but you can kill them outright. Perhaps if the problem had been addressed earlier, the beavers would not have chosen the location?

    Kill first, fix later I guess. It’s all just a little “Who’s On First” for me. 🙁

    • avatar idaursine says:

      And further, would anyone simply call the ASPCA/SPCA ‘an animal rights group’? It’s the oldest of animal welfare groups in the US, started in England in 1824. Advocating humane treatment of other creatures is something of value.

  19. avatar Judy Hoy says:

    Why haven’t I read anything about the birth defects on wild grazing animals, with some of the same on birds and other vertebrates? Don’t hunters who harvest big game animals, like white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk and moose ever look at their mouth for underbite or overbite. Or on male animals, don’t they see on some male there is no scrotum or on many the left half of the scrotum is directly forward of the right half, rather than being bilateral (side by side). Since a large number of hunters and guides are male, it would seem to me that such birth defects on the harvested animals would be obvious. Also, if underbite, overbite or male reproductive malformations or malformations of the hooves or legs are observed, are those things ever reported to the game department in the state where the animal is harvested?

    • avatar ma'iingan says:

      Don’t hunters who harvest big game animals, like white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk and moose ever look at their mouth for underbite or overbite.

      Hmmm. Pretty tough to determine underbite or overbite in ruminants, since they don’t have any upper incisors.

  20. avatar idaursine says:

    ^^Having driven across Nevada to California myself, I love Nevada. But I hope this little one keeps on movin’, because someone will try to shoot her. 🙁

  21. avatar Ed Loosli says:

    “Another school of thought about what causes chronic wasting disease in deer”…Research led by
    Dr. Frank Bastian, a pathologist at Louisiana State University.

    • avatar rork says:

      No scientists are buying Bastian’s research. But journalists cover it – they are selling advertisements. Some folks who don’t follow science much are thinking it might be real. There are some truly terrible articles about Bastian’s work. The one you point at is just in the pretty bad range. Most hunters can’t judge science very well. There’s been a flurry of PA articles recently that prove that, where the hunters are against culling in counties with CWD and are quoted. The politicians are not exactly epidemiologists either and will grandstand and fight the biologists. Example:

      There are some interesting experiments lately about pieces of DNA binding to Prnp proteins though, that are fairly controversial.
      There’s also been news about work on vaccines, some positive, but some papers where it’s been tried in ungulates and not worked. I have some hope though.

      • avatar idaursine says:

        I’m glad you said that, all of it – the article did seem to be more concerned about the hunting perspective than environmental.

        I’d like to see more preventive measures beforehand, more than catch-up after the disease(s) takes hold.

    • avatar rork says:
      That is the newest review I can find that the public can download. It’s a pretty tough read for me, and I’d need to reread certain section or the primary references (of which there are a zillion) to really know what’s going on in some paragraphs. It discusses IND24, and drug that slows missfolding of CWD type PrP protein, giving hope that a better drug can be constructed. It only reviews a narrow part of the field, about how prions replicate – no vaccine discussion. All of the experimental results from studies of PrP strains would not make a lick of sense under Bastian’s theory I think. Prusiner himself was the editor, but that doesn’t alarm me (nobel prize winner along with others, 1997, for their prion work).

    • avatar idaursine says:

      Interesting article. These are the things that worry me about ‘overmanaging’ wildlife. Of course, where I’m no expert my opinion means crap, but here, the experts did not anticipate the rapid advance of climate change and explosion of ticks – just were concerned about moose population expanding too much. And gotta keep those hunters happy, I suppose.

      Some of the pictures I have seen are shockingly bad, of moose laden with ticks. Can’t something like a tick collar or treatment be given when research collaring these poor animals? I also wonder if the decreasing ranges and confinement to smaller and smaller habitat area that they cannot really escape from contributes.

      • avatar Mat-ters says:

        The fluctuations seen in Maine with regards to ticks are unequivocally NORMAL! What is seen in places like Idaho and Yellowstone (GYA) where wolves have wiped out the moose and in MN where a population of moose were also whipped out and another halved are a result of mis-management of predators.

        • avatar Hiker says:

          Like an insane monkey beating his drum incessantly. On and on about the moose in Yellowstone wiped out by wolves. What lies! The moose population dropped BEFORE wolves were there! How many times do we need to say this?

          Just when we think matters (not anymore)is gone he posts more idiocy.

          • avatar Judy Hoy says:

            Hiker, I totally agree with you regarding the moose in YNP. The wolves were also blamed for causing a 13 calf per 100 cow ratio for elk in YNP in those born in spring of 1995, prior to when the wolves were even released. A very interesting study, (Smith, B.L., E.S. Williams, K.C. McFarland, T.L. McDonald, G. Wang, and T.D. Moore. 2006. Neonatal mortality of elk in Wyoming: environmental, population, and predator effects. U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Technical Publication, BTP-R6007-2006, Washington, D.C.)indicated that something very bad happened to the elk calves that caused them to be unhealthy and easy for predators to eat after 1995. There were no wolves where the study was done. Most importantly, it took only 12 days for elk calves to join the nurse herd, where they were protected, in the three year time period of the study prior to 1995. It took 4 times that, 49 days, for the elk calves that survived their health issues and the predators to join the protection of the nurse herd in the three year time period after 1995. Check it out. Whatever happened to the elk calves likely happened to the moose calves. I know from observation that the bighorn sheep and bison in YNP after 1995 had obvious birth defects and still do. I helped with three studies on the same birth defects on deer in western Montana that began in spring of 1995. The wolves here in Montana and in YNP had birth defects too. The declines in ruminant survival were far more likely to be due to the adverse health effects the newborns had at birth beginning in 1995. Do any of you who blame wolves for everything, like Mat-ters, and who falsely accuse other animals of killing off the wild ruminants, even know how a wild ruminant should look? They definitely should not have an underbite. That is not a good adaptation for biting off sufficient foliage to maintain weight and health and reproduce viable young.

            • avatar Mat-ters says:

              Judy, As I challenged hiker to come up with a biologist that says wolves weren’t the major cause of the annihilation of moose in the GYA…. I’m challenging you. There is nothing I would like more than to get them on record saying so! The vague reference to a minor fluctuating variable in a park propaganda web page does not constitute someone going on the record saying so!


              • avatar Mat-ters says:

                BTW, a 13 calf per 100 cows after a bad winter is certainly NORMAL. BUT, a 6 calf per 100 cows ratio after a GOOD winter is not! Those that pamper predators for reasons OUTSIDE being good for all wildlife need to be held accountable! Why do you hate game animals?

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  What is normal? Is normal life without predators? I think not.

                  Somehow these animals survived thousands (millions?) of years WITH predators before we came along. Then hunters almost wiped them out!

                  The only hate I see is for the truth.

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  What is normal? Is normal life where wolves are protected to no end? I think NOT!

                  Somehow predators, man and prey survived thousands of years with the killing of predators! Then predator chulo’s abused poorly written laws creating abnormal predator pits and wasting huge amounts of tax dollars.

                  The haters I see are trying to hide the truth.

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  Long before humans were on this planet (200,000 YA), predators and prey were coexisting. What you describe as humans killing predators has really only existed for a short time on this continent.
                  What you call poorly written laws, I call one of the most important acts we have.
                  Try, just once, to take a step back from your negative stance and see it from a different perspective. Let’s protect what’s left for the future instead of taking just for ourselves right now.

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  Give it up Hiker! You have no place in history long or short to point to where MAN lived around wolves and does or did not need to kill them! NONE!

                  “killing predators has really only existed for a short time on this continent” as has killing of predators WHERE-EVER man has lived…. to this day!

              • avatar Hiker says:

                Already answered this one. Check out the Yellowstone site and reference at the bottom of the moose info.

                As long as you post your lies, mad matters, I will answer.

                It is well known that moose declined in YNP before wolves were on the ground. The dates and studies don’t lie.

                • avatar rork says:

                  can be very interesting but is nearly overwhelming. You can compare places where I fish and have not noticed any decline (Unit 19) and there are about as many moose as they think the land can support, to other places father west (Unit 6) where there’s been decline, in an area that full of moose when I was young. Way, Way up north they have more moose than they want – gotta take care of the caribou.

                • avatar Judy Hoy says:

                  That is correct, Hiker, the moose and the elk declined in YNP before the wolves were released. For some reason that is always ignored.

                  Mat-ters, If you can go onto my website, there are a lot of photos of wild and domestic grazing animals, other mammals and of birds, all with the same common birth defects, underbite and to a lesser extent, overbite. Rodents, ungulates and other mammals have a high prevalence of male reproductive malformations (astronomically high now on some species of wild ruminant). Canines, like dogs and wolves have the same birth defects, but because they don’t eat thousands of pounds of foliage a year, the prevalence of those birth defects on canines are not as high as on mammals and birds that eat plants. Since humans eat both meat and plants the prevalence of the same facial malformations, underbite and overbite and similar male reproductive malformations are quite high, but those birth defects are not well documented on human newborns in most states.

                  What I don’t understand is why everyone argues about what is or is not responsible for moose or other wild ruminant declines, but no one seems to be concerned about the same birth defects happening on multiple newborn vertebrate species, including human newborns. I doubt if it is because you can’t see an underbite or an overbite on a human child or on a wild or domestic ruminant or a bird for that matter. So why ignore the giant monster in the room, the birth defects and adverse health issues at birth that cause the young ones to die and actually cause the declines in the populations, except for humans, of course. Most of the newborn humans with birth defects or health issues like premature birth or heart defects that cause mortality in wild animals, are saved at an extremely high cost to their parents and taxpayers, so the mortality is not high enough to cause population declines.

              • avatar Judy Hoy says:

                Mat-ters, as I said, we studied the birth defects and health issues that correlated in timing with declines in those wild ruminants. We did not have accident-killed moose to study. However, hunter-killed moose that were examined had a significant prevalence of the same birth defects as the other ruminants. Almost no biologist that I have talked to that works for a state or federal agency will admit that wild ruminants have the birth defects we reported in our peer reviewed studies. In Montana, I believe there were three different reasons for the moose declines, depending on the area of the state in which the moose lived. None of the reasons were birth defects and mortality causing health issues before or just after birth.

                • avatar rork says:

                  Astronomically. Can we get some links to published studies?

                  I can see you saying you think homeopathic salts work on animals, so your credibility is approximately zero with me right now.

                • avatar Judy Hoy says:

                  Rork, after I accidentally found that the underdeveloped facial bones grew to normal when a newborn deer fawn was given the homeopathic cell salt, Calc. Phos., I gave other wild and domestic ungulates with underbite or overbite the same cell salt with the same result. I then told others and they made the faces on their domestic ungulates grow to normal. It is not my fault that you forgot to send a memo to the newborns telling them that homeopathic cell salts don’t work and anyone who says they do are lying. I am sure that they don’t care who is lying, as long as they can bite off foliage normally or if they are a bird, that they can pick up food and survive.

                  Here are the links to our three studies on the birth defects on wild and domestic critters and the third was also concerning human newborns. The Calc. Phos. 30X also stimulates their underdeveloped facial bones to grow to normal, if the child has underdeveloped facial bones. Homeopathic cell salts are simply an electrolyte that stimulates the cells to uptake the minerals they need to function – like grow to their normal genetically programmed size. If animals have broken bone/s the bone/s heal in half the usual time if one tablet of Calc. Phos. 30X is taken or given at least twice a day during healing. It took three weeks for a broken bone on an older lady’s leg to completely heal. If you don’t want to take or use cell salts, don’t, but don’t say things you can’t prove about people who do. That is not nice.

                  Hoy JA, Hoy RD, Seba D, Kerstetter TH (2002) Genital Abnormalities in White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in West- central Montana: Pesticide Exposure as a Possible Cause. J Environ Biol 23:189-97.

                  Hoy JA, Haas GT, Hoy RD, Hallock P (2011) Observations of Brachygnathia Superior in Wild Ruminants in Western Montana, USA. Wildl Biol Pract 7(2): 15-29.

                  Hoy J, Swanson N and Seneff S. The High Cost of Pesticides: Human and Animal Diseases. Poult Fish Wildl Sci. 2015; 3:132. doi:10.4172/2375-446X.1000132

                  These studies show that there is a high prevalence of the birth defects and health issues on newborns that I mentioned.

                  Now you give me a link to a study that proves that the cell salts are not electrolytes and that they do not stimulate the underdeveloped bones to grow to normal and cause broken bones to heal much faster than normal. If you can’t do that then the critters and I are not the liars.

              • avatar Hiker says:

                Give what up? speaking the truth? Countering your lies and propaganda? You have no answer to the fact that wolves have hunted these animals for longer then humans have existed and yet their prey are still around. Somehow they survived without us to fix things.
                But early EuroAmerican hunters almost wiped out elk and bison. Bison only exist now as a remnant population thanks to YNP. In fact, even today hunters often take the biggest, strongest animals. Isn’t that counter to survival of the fittest?

  22. avatar WM says:

    WA Colville Tribe announces year-long wolf season, eliminates 3 wolf season limit per tribal hunter, and more open reservation hunting and trapping areas:

    • avatar Ed Loosli says:

      Sheep herders have already killed two grizzly bears and who knows how many more grizzlies and wolves have been killed that we will never know about?…It is time that the “Experimental Sheep Station” on the Idaho/Montana is permanently closed and the land returned to native wildlife.

    • avatar Hiker says:

      How is livestock grazing good for wildlife? All that grass that wildlife would love to eat gobbled up for profit. I wonder what grazed there before? Read early explorer accounts of that region, it was teeming with wildlife, now diminished.

  23. avatar idaursine says:

    I’m shocked. Hunters agreeing to give up some hunting permits to save moose in Maine; Idaho’s sheep industry willing to leave some areas not grazed for study?

    The only thing I will say is that probably ranching and grazing is better for the land than a housing development, because wildlife will fare no better in that scenario either with residents complaining about bears and others, and probably housing developments moving further into wild areas is worse for wildfires too.

  24. avatar Yvette says:

    The Colville Tribe is at it again.

    Think you can’t do anything because of their sovereignty? Boycotts work. The Colvilles have a casino, a store, and a museum. There are probably more businesses but I’ve been to the store and the museum.

    Boycott and encourage others to boycott. Put the word on the streets. And to all Natives: Spread the word throughout Indian Country. Tribes don’t like bad publicity. And they do respond to negative reactions from other tribes.

    • avatar Hiker says:

      Thanks for the update.

      • avatar Ed Loosli says:

        In looking at the article that Yvette posted – in my opinion Washington State has set an incredibly low bar for determining when wolves have increased enough to warrant not being considered Endangered… 18 breeding pairs in the whole State of Washington should not be considered a healthy/safe level for any species. It looks like the livestock industry is alive and well in Washington State – and Washington D.C.

        • avatar WM says:

          Ed, I think the numbers are much more complicated than you suggest in your post. WA does not count wolves on reservations in its calculation. It does indirectly rely on inter-connectedness of migrant wolves from northeastern OR, ID and importantly British Columbia Canada for genetic inputs and potential in or out migration. If I recall, however, the state said it wanted an independent population on its own, not relying on those sources – I forget the exact Plan language.

          Washington will do fine with its minimum number. And, it was scientifically derived. And, the Spokane tribe also has had a wolf hunting season. Whe the Yakama’s get theirs, and the wolves start feeding on the largest elk herd in the state, they will have a wolf season, too. And, as for Yvette’s boycott advocacy, I expect those tribes who have casinos (and their gambler patrons) could give a rip.

  25. avatar idaursine says:

    It is. And anyone could have seen that there will be no limits on killing wildlife once they are delisted, especially wolves and species that people have totally irrational ideas and fears about.

    There’s one comment from someone who says that wolves disrupt the breeding cycles of deer and elk! Who are these people to question nature’s design? (But it’s a-okay for people to go on wild killing sprees of deer and elk, I guess). Just smh.

    Do not allow the same thing to happen to grizzlies, because it will be the same. And who in the world hunts skunks at night?

    • avatar Judy Hoy says:

      Louise and idaursine, you have moved the discussion into my back yard. Sanders County is just north of Ravalli County and Missoula County from where as a wildlife rehabber, I have gotten injured and orphaned mammals and birds to care for in the last 50 years. I have even gotten a couple of young birds from Sanders County. I go to Sanders County to look at wildlife and have seen several bighorn sheep with an underbite in Sanders County. I am sure that the birth defects, premature births and other health issues we have documented on hundreds of wild and domestic ungulates here in Ravalli County and from Missoula County do not stop at the border of Sanders County. I will never understand why some people insist on blaming other animals for what we humans are doing.

      And Rork, I think I forgot to mention that I have necropsied over 500 wild and domestic animals, to document and photograph the adverse health issues, including internal birth defects and tumors (very likely cancer but can’t afford to have them all tested – cancer or not, tumors usually kill wildlife). I have also measured over 1200 game animals for our studies and I have cared for and released over 6000 injured or orphaned animals (that doesn’t count the ones that didn’t make it). I don’t know on what you base what you said about homeopathic cell salts, because you didn’t say.

      • avatar rork says:

        Judy: do you know what 30X even means? When I pee while swimming in Lake Superior, the concentration exceeds that for a hundred years. Maybe you have a quantum entanglement theory for how it could possibly work, or a double-blind clinical trial.

        • avatar Judy Hoy says:

          It is extremely difficult to do a double blind study on wild critters. Homeopathic cell salts are electrolytes that cause a crystal-like structure to form in the liquid in which it is placed. The crystal-like structure has a negative charge. I have observed many times that is takes approximately (by visual observation of the almost dead critter’s behavior) 20 minutes for the crystal-like structures to get distributed throughout the body by the blood, lymph system, etc. after the cell salts and regular saline electrolytes are administered to an extremely malnourished and dehydrated animal. It is no longer unconscious as evidenced by having its eyes open and blinking. Then in about 25 more minutes, after the cells have a chance to uptake the crystal-like structures, resulting in the cells having a negative electrical charge inside and consequently being able to efficiently uptake the minerals all the cells need to work, the animal stands up and begins to walk around. After giving more saline electrolytes, and about 1 hour and 5 or 10 minutes after first giving the electrolyte combination of the cell salts and liquid saline electrolytes (like Ringers Lactate) or other liquid electrolyte, the animal can be given a small amount of food. If the homeopathic cell salts are not given with the liquid saline electrolytes, the animal often dies and it takes up to three hours before it can be fed without killing it, especially true of raptors. Regarding where you pee, all your pee does is contaminate whatever you pee in. If something drinks it or is fed it, it would not cause their cells to more efficiently uptake minerals, so I don’t see your point. My website showing before and after photos is I don’t care whether you believe me or not. The many people who have “fixed” their animal, children or themselves with the Calc. Phos. 30X and/or Bioplasma do believe it works, especially those who have had their broken bones heal in just three weeks, half the time that their doctors said they would, or those who made their child’s face grow to normal or their pets or livestock’s faces grow to normal. All those with that didn’t have it used on them still have an underbite or an overbite, or too 6 weeks or more for their broken bones to heal.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Ida -folks hunt skunks all the time, just part of their ignorant makeup (and its passed on to their offspring) to want to rid the world of what THEY perceive as “pests”

      • avatar Mat-ters says:

        “perceive” until your dog needs a tomato juice bath. Nancy, what a hateful post!

        • avatar Immer Treue says:

          You’re and idiot. And tomato juice doesn’t work. The only one who’s hateful is you.

          • avatar Judy Hoy says:

            Now children, don’t argue or you will have to be sent to your rooms. Mat-ters, what was hateful about Nancy’s post, the army of skunk haters all trying to shoot one small skunk for no reason? Or was it because she reposted their disgusting video? Immer Treue is correct, tomato juice doesn’t work as an anti-dote for skunk spray. What does work is a quart of 3 percent hydrogen peroxide, 1/4 cup of baking soda and a teaspoon of liquid soap. Mix these ingredients in a bucket or pan right before using. Rub this liquid all over the fur of the sprayed cat or dog. Or rub it on a human’s skin and hair if a human is sprayed. Rinse the cat or dog with clean tap water. The sprayed human can just take a bath or shower. Put the human’s clothes in a large pan or a bucket and pour some of the anti-skunk solution on the clothes and fill with enough water to cover the clothes. Let stand a few minutes, ring out the clothes, rinse and ring out the water and hang the clothes out to dry. I know this works because as a wildlife rehabber, I have been sprayed several time by my baby skunk patients, until they learn that I am mom. Skunks are an important animal in the environment, deserve to live out their life, just as much as any other animal and usually, if they are not directly attacked, they will not spray. People who kill skunks for no reason except that they happen to see it (like those in the video) are very bad for biodiversity. With so many people, there is hardly any room for other animals to live their lives anymore and that is disturbing on a number of levels.

            • avatar Nancy says:

              🙂 Thanks for the tip, Judy!

            • avatar Mat-ters says:

              Judy, using a 35 gallon rubbermaid cargo container 3qts of tomato juice box of used baking soda and rub dog down and slow rinse with hose …. 2 nights in an outdoor dog kennel/garage/shed and your back in business….. works great! Testimony’s are I once, my brother twice…. the “idiot” name caller speaks in a pompous tone so loud it echo’s in her diminished alma. Either way skunks are vermin…. and should be kept at bay from out pets and children


              • avatar Hiker says:

                To a skunk, you are vermin. You and any filled with such hate. Can’t you find it in a small part of your shriveled heart to give wild things some respect?

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  Hiker, this urban block (where I live) (sq mi) has a population of ~15 dogs, ~dozen children, dozens of visiting grand children etc, ~15 homes, 20 out buildings and hundreds of potential hiding places for vermin like skunks. As has always been the case, it is immoral to allow animals that display habituation attributes (skunks and raccoons) to “co-exist” where they are most certain to cause issues. Those such as yourself that perpetuate the constant and continuous & unmitigated inter-species strife that WILL exist in their(your) make believe bogus utopia are the ones that have the lower leg on the moral scale. This block and its ecosystem has little to NO habitat that leads to a “co-existing” utopia with some and certain animals.

                  In contrast, my properties up north offer that habitat where their co-existence is possible and does exist. HERE, where homes and cottages are miles and miles apart is what and where you want everyone to believe that evil sportsman is killing and perusing every skunk. That is simply not true and an irrefutable testament your bogus heartless “wild things respect” nonsense!!

                  SHAME on you for trying to imposing your heartless bogus visions of utopia on both the people and pets in some urban places.

                  SHAME on you for trying to besmirch and slander sportsman in any way possible.

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  YOU are the one who called skunks vermin. YOU are also the one who always blames wolves and uses phrases like “predator pit”. I see all the time hunters shooting things just because they can. I hear about the coyote killing contests.
                  I am not the one who “besmirch and slander sportsman in any way possible.” Many of them do that for themselves already. But not all, I know many hunters who are respectful.

                  BTW, I am sorry you live in such a horrible place where there is no habitat for wild things. But maybe that’s good, with your attitude if you lived amongst wildlife who knows what would die. I just hope you or any like you are never my neighbor. In my backyard I see Quail, Hawks, Gophers, Squirrels, Foxes, Coyotes, Bobcats, Roadrunners, and many others.

                  Also, I never said that “you want everyone to believe that evil sportsman is killing and perusing every skunk.” (didn’t you mean pursuing?) I was merely responding to what you posted about skunks. Based on your statements it seemed that YOU hated them. I extended that to any who think like you.

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  “BTW, I am sorry you live in such a horrible place where there is no habitat for wild things.”

                  Shame, shame shame! You never seem to get it, do ya?! Plenty of habitat for all wildlife including raccoons, skunks and ground hogs. Especially those that remain wild. BUT, the ones that spray dogs, undermine roads and building structures & strip cornfields are vermin. YOUR unwillingness to except that fact is the problem NOT those that shoot the skunk that makes its den in the timbers of a sandbox or the groundhog that has dug its den under the elderly neighbor’s garage or having to trap the raccoons that have stripped the 1st 40 yards of the neighbors cornfield along the river bottom! Your over protection of those animals like the ones you listed and under protection of animals like deer elk and ducks defines you! A better case can be made that you “game farm” vermin VS hunters who help maintain population goals of game animals on public lands…which those here at times call “game farming”! Shame! Your acceptance to setting vermin up for failure makes it clear to me that you push for unmanaged vermin NOT because you care about them …it’s because of your hate for sportsman and ranchers.

                • avatar Immer Treue says:

                  You’re an idiot.

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  In other words Matters (less and less each day), animals exist to serve you. If they interfere with what YOU what they should be actively managed (removed). Talk about utopian ideas! To judge from your posts you want the world to adjust to what YOU think is right. As long as YOU get your elk or deer that’s all that matters to Matters!

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  “YOU, YOU, YOU”…… Couldn’t be farther from the truth! Hiker, what the heck do I have to do with the neighbors raccoon problem? What I wouldn’t give to make YOU pay for the damage he has to put up with! OR make YOU repair Ms Burmister’s sinking/sloping and garage slab! OR BETTER YET pay the 15% of the road repair budget for our Township due to undermined roads by vermin! iMMER couldn’t have SAID IT BETTER…Y”BOTH”AI’s “wink”.

                  Reminds me of how ilk like you “saved” the wild horses! NOW, we are paying more than 100 MILLION every year to coddle your animal loving sickness! WITH NO END IN SITE! Your morals are off kilter and in line with the 100 million the left loves to give “planned parenthood” every year to kill babies! THE laughable answer to the horse problem….more fricking horses that don’t fart! AND IMMER says I’m the Idiot!

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  I smell something burning. I think you blew a gasket. Did I touch a nerve? With a reaction like that and your general defensive attitude I think I’m closer to the truth than you could admit. Especially to yourself!
                  Don’t know how you brought in wild horses, beaver, and abortion in a discussion about skunks!
                  Why don’t you just admit that you and people like you have little room in your life for wild things that are outside your CONTROL.
                  The funny thing is that I AGREE with you about so many things. I AGREE that habituation must be avoided. I AGREE that there is value to hunting, especially for food.
                  But I disagree about how you view certain wild animals. To you if they cause any problems they must be dealt with (eliminated). That’s the real shame here.

                • avatar Mat-ters says:

                  Hiker, Just finished Larry Elders book “Dear Father Dear Son”? And have more that I’m stacking up…. wasting my time here is a little entertaining & certainly more entertaining than Michelle Obummer’s book was. BUT, I have more books on the stack now then when I started my hiatus!

                  Again with me getting “hot”….. thanks for the chuckle…

                • avatar Hiker says:

                  Part of me will miss your idiotic ramblings. Read on.

              • avatar Judy Hoy says:

                Mat-ters, I would rather not spend 2 nights outside in a kennel/garage/shed and my husband doesn’t like skunk smell. Therefore, I like the concoction I posted that immediately eliminates the odor chemically. Also, we like to drink tomato juice so don’t want to waste three quarts, when the other remedy works better/faster.

                I have known a lot of people in my life time and I have known quite a few skunks. I have never considered any of the skunks or any other wild animal to be vermin. I have no further comment on vermin or I will have to be sent to my room.

        • avatar Hiker says:

          Yes, perceive. Do you honestly believe that all skunks are always pests? If that’s not hate I don’t know what is.

  26. avatar idaursine says:

    And the bill re [the taxpayers?] reimbursing trappers is laughably bold. That one I hope will never fly, except into the trash bin.

    • avatar Judy Hoy says:

      I agree, killing wolves won’t save the caribou because the caribou newborns likely have the same birth defects/adverse health issues as the other wild grazing animals in North America. I talk to Canadian moose biologists quite often. I haven’t heard anything about birth defects on newborns of the caribou in Canada nor have I ever directly observed a dead caribou, but the moose, deer, Dall sheep, bighorn sheep, bison, etc. and domestic ungulates in Canada have had and many are still born with the same external birth defects, underbite, overbite and male reproductive malformations, as those in the U.S. and in Mexico. Premature birth and other mortality causing issues in newborns of a species can quite quickly cause population declines, for which the predators, especially wolves, are always blamed. It would be far better to determine what is causing the high prevalence of birth defects, premature births and other adverse health issues and do something about that.

      • avatar Immer Treue says:

        With Caribou, it’s got nothing to do with birth defects and everything to do with habitat degradation, in particular the woodland caribou.

        • avatar Judy Hoy says:

          Immer, something you should consider before saying, “With Caribou, it’s got nothing to do with birth defects and everything to do with habitat degradation, in particular the woodland caribou.” Habitat degradation, and consequently less food and more stress, especially in winter when the caribou are pregnant, results in more severe birth defects and thus less viable young born in the spring. Whatever is causing the birth defects, disrupts the mother’s ability to digest the food she is able to find and eat. Malnourishment results in mineral deficiencies, causing thyroid hormone disruption in her fetus. The majority of the birth defects and other health issues I listed in previous posts are caused by thyroid hormone disruption. Everything is connected.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            Everything may be connected, but with the woodland caribou, a denizen of old growth low productivity forests, when those areas are compromised by logging, seismic lines, roads, via the extractive industries, etc those forests are then opened to new growth, an influx of deer and moose, which bring along more predation. The caribou become secondary prey, and these island populations are constricted and the caribou lose. The connectivity is man’s rapacious need for resources at the expense of other living creatures

  27. avatar idaursine says:

    It’s just that, with skunks being nocturnal (I think I have rarely seen them), someone would really have to go out of their way to seek them?

    Nothing is safe from human killing, and this reminds me of the targeting of squirrels. Don’t tell me that skunks also are the ‘gateway animal’ for children to be taught how to kill!

    The odor is strong, but not that bad, and not a reason to wipe them out, of the many human complaints about ‘inconvenient’ wildlife.

  28. avatar idaursine says:

    A skunk is an innocent, small creature who poses no threat to, or harm to anyone. Only a bully would want to harm one, and it is nothing to brag about. I only got a few seconds into that video to know that I didn’t want to watch it, a bunch of yahoos go at it.

    As far as vermin goes, I’d consider drug dealers and traffickers of all sorts to be in that category.

  29. avatar idaursine says:

    Man fined nearly $12K for ‘accidentally’ shooting grizzly bear from the road in 2017:

  30. avatar Nancy says:

    “You always think the right thing is going to be done and these really critical bills are going to make it through with ease, but it is Wyoming, and that’s not always the case,” Robertson said”

    But it is Wyoming, is right. I applaud Mike Yin for his efforts.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      Wow. You’re right – I applaud his efforts and hope he keeps trying.

      It’s never the case in Wyoming, though. I don’t even know what to say, that this kind of behavior is accepted.

  31. avatar Carrie says:

    Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae or M.ovi for short the respiratory disease that has been killing wild sheep has been found in not only domestic goats sheep and Cattle but also moose Caribou muskox whitetail deer and Antelope. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has found it in Moose and Caribou that have never been habituated and the CDC is also following this disease.

  32. avatar rork says:
    There are many similar. 2 large males from near Wawa, where I am familiar with moose and wolves, both of which are large.
    “These large males, all around 90 lbs., will almost certainly know what to do when they encounter a moose.”
    Namely if it’s young or old, test it. If it’s a prime male, maybe not too much, especially since they are not starting with very big packs. That might be a problem, but the overpopulation of moose might mean there’s enough 12+ year olds to keep wolves fed for awhile. Its famous that allot of the adults killed there are old.
    I’ve never seen caribou or whitetails near Wawa. It’s a little too far south, and too far north, and it gets lake effect snow from Superior.

  33. avatar timz says:

    this elephant must not of liked baths or getting hit with a stick

  34. avatar idaursine says:

    Thank goodness that for the most part, Isle Royale is out of the jurisdiction of most wolf haters. MYOB, to lob their own words back at them.

    I may visit Isle Royale on a vacation, and forget about the Western states – a lot easier to get to, and sounds quite peaceful.

    • avatar Immer Treue says:

      Late August to early Spetmenber. Typically nicer weather, and mosquitoes fading. You need reservations, in particular to get across Superior. It’s one of, if not the least visited NP’s in the country

    • avatar idaursine says:

      “Acting Interior Secretary David Bernhardt was expected to announce the proposal during a Wednesday speech before a wildlife conference in Denver, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Spokesman Gavin Shire said in an interview with the AP.”

      One of his first orders of business? But isn’t it always the way with wolf persecution – you’d never know it wasn’t 1819, or 1919 in these states. Colorado, for such a liberal state, is very unfriendly to wildlife, wolves in particular.

      • avatar WM says:

        Colorado is not “unfriendly to wildlife.” In fact, my experience has been to the contrary. But they would prefer, regarding wolves, to have their neighbors fight their respective battles to keep them from repopulating. There are a lot of high meadows with long histories of federal grazing (sheep and cattle). Valley bottoms are mostly private land. Even a proposal to reintroduce wolves to Rocky Mountain National Park fell flat on its face a few years back – too small, no local support for it outside the Park. Let’s not forget the state with the largest elk population in the entire US is Colorado, by quite a bit.

        The liberals of Colorado to which you refer are mostly along the Front Range Corridor that runs from north to south along Interstate-25 in a very narrow strip. Of course, most of the elk, cows, horses, burros and sheep are not along that strip, except the stock in feedlots for finishing.

        • avatar WM says:

          Also largest migratory muledeer herd in the world.

        • avatar idaursine says:

          Well to me, that is unfriendly to wildlife, except for the wildlife they want(to keep for themselves?).

          Wolves should be on a landscape as iconic as Colorado. A big disappointment. At least in WY, ID and MT – you know where they stand.

  35. avatar idaursine says:

    Oh definitely reignite, because there is still prime habitat where wolves have not been reintroduced. Why don’t they just give it up?

    • avatar Ed-L says:

      From the F4WM.ORG website:

      “Our Efficiency is Unmatched
      F4WM has removed 415+ wolves with just over $225,000 membership and sponsor dollars, with zero tax funding. That’s less than $550 per wolf, solely funded by Sportsmen and concerned citizens. Without the F4WM program, the US Dept of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services, would have to be employed through the Idaho Wolf Control Board to remove the same wolves.” Is this legal as a tax-exempt 501(c)3)organization??

      • avatar WM says:

        Why would it not be legal? Probably no worse (and costs the taxpayer less) than a wolf advocate chaining him/herself around the neck to an entrance door of an agency, or with linked hands under plastic pipe blocking a road, and requiring law enforcement or EMT’s to remove the constraining devices while maintaining safety of the individuals. Of course, some of that stuff done by 501c3 organizations is definitely illegal- and costly.

        IDFG is probably applauding the reimbursement (and I do believe it is characterized as that “reimbursement” cost of private, but legal wolf control). The important regulatory part for the state of ID is that they maintain the minimum wolf population and genetic diversity above their duly adopted and federally approved Wolf Plan document. That part does not seem to be a minimum number or distribution problem. On the other hand, achieving ungulate objectives in various hunting units is.

        • avatar Nancy says:

          “The important regulatory part for the state of ID is that they maintain the minimum wolf population and genetic diversity above their duly adopted and federally approved Wolf Plan document”

          How do they even know what the wolf population is if they haven’t done a survey in over 3 years?

          Between legal take (hunting/trapping) illegal take (poaching- SSS) and now this “bounty” the anti-wolf mob is hell bent on exterminating wolves once again.

        • avatar idaursine says:

          It’s a bounty, government funding of wildlife killing. Let the trappers pay their own way.

  36. avatar timz says:

    “This is it. Trump has declared a nationwide war on wolves.” This is laughable, I’d wager Trump knows or cares anything about wolves.
    Let’s not forget this little fact:
    “One of the first acts of the Obama administration was to delist wolves in the Northern Rockies. Incredible harm and sadness has come from this completely shocking and disturbing decision, a Democrat who promised to set a new tone in Washington, turned his back on the ESA and wolves.”
    Not defending Trump or any other politician but let’s get real.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      Yes, Trump is just the latest. But, since the Democrats want to obstruct Trump in every way possible, I am not as worried. Under the Obama administration, I think most of the Democrats supported him in all things.

      I was thrilled to see Elizabeth Warren involved in the ethics investigation of the latest bad Interior Secretary candidate. I don’t like that he hasn’t even been confirmed and vetted, and yet is making important decisions for the country. Devious, to me.

  37. avatar Ed-L says:

    Thank you timz for reminding us that Pres. Obama’s Interior Dept. was also poor regarding the protection of rare species including wolves, grizzlies and bison…And now we have Democratic Minnesota Senator and presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar, who has actually co-sponsored a bill to REMOVE the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act list in Wyoming and the Great Lakes region. She will not getting my vote!

    • avatar timz says:

      Ed are you from MN? I grew up there so my first wolves “up north” when I was a youngster. Al Franken when he was in the senate also pushed for de-listing.

      • avatar rork says:

        If any place should get delisted it is MN. Wolves have come to neighboring states thanks to them. Federal protections there don’t make much sense to me. The problem is we lack a plan and perhaps the will to have wolves again in lots of other places. MN is not the problem. No wolves in Maine seems ridiculous to me.

        • avatar Immer Treue says:

          I think one of the delisting problems is the rush to hunt/trap immediately post delisting. This Dennis Simon email from the MN DNR captures this rush very handily.

          It’s an email sent by Dennis Simon, chief of the Wildlife Management Section, to several fellow DNR managers last April 23. In a few short sentences it seems to show that DNR (a) felt it had leeway to start the seasons this year or later, (b) recognized there was public opposition to starting too soon, but (c) was feeling pressure from hunters and farmers to get on with killing wolves.

          Dated last April 23, and with emphasis added, the memo says:

          All things being equal I would prefer that we delay the season until we can establish a license, complete the population survey, and draft a population model even if we have to estimate harvest effort and success initially. I believe that this deliberate and conservative approach would be more palatable to those who are uncomfortable with a wolf season in the first place and DNR will have broader support when we do have a season.

          However, after giving it considerable thought over the weekend, I have come to the conclusion that we owe it to our primary clients, hunters and trappers, and to livestock producers as secondary clients, to do what we can to establish a legitimate harvest opportunity now that the wolf is under our management authority.

          We have been clear that a season will be conservative to start and data collected will inform our future management options and our model. We can always work deliberately toward establishing the wolf as a unique harvest species through future legislation. I am supporting a limited season, both hunting and trapping, this fall under current authority. This will require a reallocation of wildlife resources to do it correctly and I am prepared to do that.

          His first paragraph voices discretion, then he counters that with owing it to primary clients, hunters and trappers, and secondarily to farmers and ranchers.
          As far as a conservative season, 413 wolves were taken that first year.

          I believe I have somewhat addressed the topic before, but how does one manage wolves? Is it strictly by number? This can’t be done as with antlered animals, because sexual differention for wolves in the field is all but impossible. Stats Bear this out as male/female take was almost exactly 50/50.

          Killing wolves in wilderness areas such as the BWCA does absolutely nothing in regard to livestock depredations. No livestock, no bus stops, etc out there.

          Primary clients- hunters and trappers, ergo license fees, the commodification of wolf killing.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            Sorry, this was April 23, 2012.

            • avatar idaursine says:

              Thanks for posting, Immer.

              “but (c) was feeling pressure from hunters and farmers to get on with killing wolves.”

              You see? This is not the kind of attitude people are comfortable with after a recovery delisting.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      I think under the Obama administration, there was too much attempt at compromise.

      Didn’t work with wolves, hasn’t worked with sage grouse (still waiting, instead of word kept we got a lawsuit instead) and I hope the grizzlies won’t be the next to be compromised. 🙁

      No delisting will pass both houses (I hope, anyway), and they missed their chance for another sneaky bill rider during the gov’t shutdown.

      Haven’t there been a number of court decisions stopping delisting in the remainder of the country due to certain obligations not being met? Trumpeting propaganda at ‘a wildlife conference’ is getting a little old now.

  38. avatar idaursine says:

    The wolves have recovered, so we can start shootin’ ’em again!

    I don’t know if I follow that logic.

    But perhaps if there would not be a predictable, knee-jerk, automatic hunt after their delisting, or a shoot on sight when one is seen in any state, a delisting would not be so opposed? But you won’t ever see a guarantee of no hunting after a delisting, I would bet money.

    I don’t know about you, but an estimated 5,000 wolves in the entire lower 48 isn’t that much of a recovery, if you ask me. And the latest killings of five mountain lions in Colorado shows, if not unfriendly, then an antiquated view of wildlife in a liberal voting state. Wildlife must not be a priority for voters in CO (but we certainly know what is!). 🙁

    From the Denver Post:

    “Now more than 5,000 of the animals live in the contiguous U.S. Most are in the Western Great Lakes and Northern Rockies regions. Protections for the Northern Rockies population were lifted in 2011 and hundreds are now killed annually by hunters.”

    • avatar rork says:

      Hunting is not automatic. Voters in Michigan twice passed referendums to have no wolf hunts. It can be done, at least in theory. Since we lack methods to insure good representative governments (in all 50 states, not just here) our government can contradict the will of the majority of voters. It has become a shameless tradition here lately.
      PS: No hunting does not imply no killing.
      There are 3000-7000 cougars in Colorado. That’s not too shabby.

      • avatar idaursine says:

        There has never been a case where hunting has not followed a delisting, to my fairly recent knowledge. Sometimes hunting even ignores the 5-year watch and wait period required by the ESA, or is planned for even before a delisting. That to me is automatic, or at least knee-jerk.

        If Colorado does have a healthy mountain lion population, casual killing doesn’t necessarily have to follow. It is ethical to try to do the best to relocate and try non-lethal measures before destroying another living thing.

        We’ve got so many that a few killed won’t matter really isn’t the best management. Voters need to try harder if they truly want to protect wildlife.

        • avatar Ed-L says:

          idaursine – rork is correct that “hunting is not automatic”. America’s symbol, the bald eagle is a prime example. It was one of the first animals placed on the Endangered Species List and then when it recovered was removed from the ESA list in 2007. However, other laws were first put in place to fully protect the balk eagle from any hunting. What the US needs now are similar laws to our bird protection laws and the Marine Mammal Protection Act which says that these animals are fully protected from hunting no matter their status as endangered or not. We need a “Land Mammal Protection Act” that protects listed mammals from hunting or trapping, whether they are Endangered or not… Because, they manage their own population sizes and do not need to be “managed” by humans or they are managed by wild predators themselves, I suggest that the following mammals should be placed under the “Land Mammal Protection Act”: wolves, mt. lions, bob-cats, grizzly bears, coyotes, fishers, lynx, wolverines, prairie dogs, wild bison – and more.

          • avatar idaursine says:

            That’s just it – any laws to protect wolves and coyotes do not exist yet – and because of the irrational beliefs about them, probably never will. So it’s best to keep them on the Endangered list until then.

            Yes, I still say that hunting is automatic after a delisting of wolves and grizzlies. I was referring to wolves and coyotes, grizzlies, not the bald eagle. There’s a different mindset entirely for wolves.

            • avatar says:

              Yes I agree, “There’s a different mindset entirely for wolves.” and thus until they and other rare mammals are protected by some sort of “Land Mammal Protection Act”, wolves, grizzlies and other Endangered mammals should definitely remain on the Endangered Species list. And, other persecuted mammals should be added to the ESA list, including prairie dogs, fishers, wild mink, bob-cats, lynx, wolverines, wild bison.

          • avatar idaursine says:

            WY is already planning a hunt for grizzlies, who were placed *back* on the Endangered list after taking it to court. They had planned hunting all the while waiting when grizzlies were originally delisted, and when they were finally delisted – the three states set a hunt in motion immediately – automatically.

            In the back and forth delisting of wolves, a hunt was held in the time between the court case(s), I think back during the Obama administration.

  39. avatar idaursine says:

    The other thing I worry about is that once there’s a delisting, any thought of ‘controlled management’ flies right out the window.

    It seems to me that female wolves are especially targeted, because they could be pregnant? I don’t think by the book, hunting is allowed during breeding season, but there seems to be a very small window where there is no hunting. There’s also poaching and ‘mistakes’ and ‘mistaken identity’ and not much of a deterrent to this.

  40. avatar idaursine says:

    I was looking for season info, and here’s some about the upcoming season setting meeting for wildlife In Idaho.

    Also, just look at the video of the cutthroat trout swimming up a fish ladder, which I didn’t expect to see. Awesome.

    I do hope this ‘vermin’ attitude towards our wildlife will change some day.

  41. avatar idaursine says:

    Sorry, here’s the link:

  42. avatar Immer Treue says:

    CWD found for first time in central Minnesota. Looks as though the genie is out of the bottle

    • avatar WM says:

      Very disturbing. Probably the best up to date authoritative source on distribution in North America here, and maybe there is even wider distribution but not yet reported:

      • avatar Ed-L says:

        Thanks WM,
        If I am reading the maps correctly, the State of Idaho is reporting NO active CWD anywhere in the state, even though is it prevalent directly across the open border with Western Wyoming. My guess is that this is because local politics has trumped science in Idaho’s CWD reporting.
        Why anyone would still be eating wild elk or deer is beyond me for it is only a matter of time before CWD jumps species.

        • avatar rork says:

          “for it is only a matter of time before CWD jumps species” is an irresponsible opinion, supported by almost no published research, with plenty of evidence against it. What I’m saying is that the prevalence of CWD in humans is likely to be remain tiny, according to what scientists actually know now. Recently some expert was quoted as saying “just a matter of time” but he was not quoted giving reasons that this would be true. Fear of deer eating may lead to reduced hunting in high prevalence CWD areas, when we really need scorched earth.
          I made deer brats. They are fantastic.

            • avatar rork says:

              I’m quite aware of that story.
              First, it is indisputable that journalists are very bad at science in general, and are horrible about prions in particular. Next, the date in the first link was July 19, 2017. What is the hold up? I do not announce results over a year before my paper is ready – in fact people would suspect I’m a charlatan if I acted that way. I have invented cold-fusion by the way. You can make a link to this comment.
              Assays to detect CWD are extremely tricky. We want you to have performed appropriate negative controls. Because if you have not done your best to estimate the chances of your positive result being false, it is not science. Small point: I’ve not seen it said what genotype the Macaques had at PRNP. I doubt the journalist asked.
              I can be wrong and people will be found with CWD caused diseases next month. My prior on that is low, based on many published papers.

              • avatar Nancy says:

                “I can be wrong and people will be found with CWD caused diseases next month. My prior on that is low, based on many published papers”

                And I’m thinking we humans just don’t have much of an arsenal of information on hand or… just flat out ignore it, especially when it comes to how we’ve managed to F**k up many ecosystems these days, by ignoring all the many warnings signs.

                • avatar rork says:

                  This is not as complicated as ecosystems (which are beyond comprehensive modelling). I have pointed to the very elegant studies before, and it’s been replicated by several groups. Give mice a deer PRNP gene and challenge them with deer prion – voila, they get the disease. Give them the human gene instead, they don’t. There are various other controls. Pubmed literature search to find articles is easy.

                • avatar rork says:

                  I should have added the caveats, that this does not prove humans can’t get it. Deer get it easy, so that deerized mice get it is no surprise. Humanized mice may just be very hard to transmit it to. They don’t live very long either.

                • avatar Immer Treue says:

                  Laboratory controlled experiment of possible spread of CWD by coyotes. Crows already known to spread CWD prion. Transgenic mice mentioned by rork used in study.


      • avatar idaursine says:

        Now, this leads to the question of whether or not this kind of disease affects carnivores too, or will eventually, or are they immune?

        I don’t know that we’ve ever heard of it in carnivores, or just that we aren’t aware?

        • avatar Ed-L says:

          idaursine: It appears that so far carnivores like wolves seem to be immune to CWD… In fact, some wolf scientists think that wolves are so sensitive to diseases within their prey, that they can spot a diseased elk or deer before it shows any signs of sickness to the human eye…This is just another reason we should let wolves alone, so they can cull the diseased elk and deer in our midst before we even know they are sick.

        • avatar Ed-L says:

          It amazes me that so much press these days is devoted to “Climate Change”, when it is only a result of the world’s real driving cause of most of environmental problems — Over-Population. In America our expanding population is mostly caused (80%) by immigration (both legal and illegal), in the poorer countries it is caused by extremely high birth rates. Unless we achieve a world with Zero-Population Growth”, even if Climate Change were solved today, we would still have urban sprawl, deforestation, converting natural lands for cultivation, draining of wetlands, loss of rare species, etc, etc, etc.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            Zero population growth is such a nasty term for so many people. One becomes labeled as anti people for even mentioning the term, when all it means is each set of parents with two children, achieve ZPG.

          • avatar Judy Hoy says:

            Ed-L, I agree with everything you said, but I would add that the highly excessive use of Roundup and other pesticides (umbrella term) which were never actually tested for effects on plants and animals, especially non target species is greatly contributing to climate change. The deadly effects of rain and snow containing pesticides falling on all forests weakens the trees, causing them to be more susceptible to disease and insects, resulting in billions of dead trees, if not trillions. Every tree that dies is less carbon dioxide taken from the air. Of course, the huge and growing people population, using more and more pesticides is not helping at all, which is back to your very good comment.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Cold but beautiful! Thanks for posting the article, Jeff E.

      16 degrees here in southwest Montana (had minus 3 when I got up this morning) Definitely NOT average temps, going into the 2nd week of March!

  43. avatar idaursine says:

    Ha! Got an ironic chuckle from this one; let’s hope this is a trend that continues:

    +1 to Ed-L’s and Judy’s last comments too.

  44. avatar Nancy says:

    400 hundred pound wolf??!!!

    Kidding but made ya look, right? 🙂 And it really is all about the camera angle if you want that great shot with a 90 lb. dead wolf that appears more like 200 lbs.

    Yuki was not full wolf but a hybrid with a high percentage of wolf in his background. And IMHO, the idiots who breed these hybrids, should be taken out and horsewhipped.

    Interesting that his “humans” abandoned him because he was getting to big. But at 12 years old? Can’t imagine he was still “growing” More than likely they no longer wanted him around (he was deemed terminally ill at the shelter) and the hope was some sanctuary would spare, what was left of his life.

    Not a bad thing but why are there so many sanctuaries (catering to abandoned, exotic wildlife) out there these days? Perhaps because laws are so damn lax, on breeding, importing and purchasing these living, breathing beings (who often don’t adapt well to captivity) in the first place.

    Good read:
    The Lizard King/Christy

    • avatar rork says:

      I agree that I don’t like people having rights to keep wild(ish) animals. Maybe there’s a tiny gray area where someone wants to do something like domesticate a new animal (perhaps you are familiar with russian fox experiments), but I don’t like that either. Maybe I’m OK with kids detaining small animals (lizard, hedgehog) for a few hours. I’ve experienced it. Maybe instead the adults should have taught me how it is wrong though. St. Jacque (Cousteau) would have made me get approval first.

    • avatar Mat-ters says:

      “The DNR’s detailed field research has shown that wolf predation has consistently accounted for about two-thirds of the calf mortality….” The math above in this thread where someone talks about how ZPG “zero population growth” is sustained by “each set of parents with two children” may be true but reality says it is really NPG “negative population growth”. Why, because there is a percentage of adults that never have children…. close to 20 percent!

      One must take a step back and look objectively at what comes from our experts… some of which have the same biases as some that post here….when looking at things like the decline of moose in the two regions of MN one must wonder what is really behind the “ZPG”…. Ticks don’t kill baby moose!….

      Maybe, one must wonder if some believe in ZPG that is really NPG?????

      • avatar Immer Treue says:

        You’re remain an idiot.

        • avatar Mat-ters says:

          “You’re don’t remain”… You remain the best advocate for the annular direction of your comment.

          • avatar WM says:

            I understood Immer to mean “You remain an idiot.” The message seems quite clear to me.

            By the way, do you actually know the meaning of the term “annular” even in a medical context?

            • avatar Mat-ters says:

              Haa yes, WM you can change the context to anything you would like it to mean for your sh[ts and giggles…. But, I’m thinking we both know the actual context describing “direction”, for only a nincompoop would think it to be anything else. (wink)

  45. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    in the EU there are 13 000 – 14 000 wolves and from 2021 there will be funds available to compensate all livestock depredation, to finance herd protection and guarding dogs up to 100% of costs.

  46. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    New Research: Most Snow Leopard Population Studies Are Biased

    Existing snow leopard population assessment studies tend to be conducted in the best habitats and cover areas that are too small to be representative of larger landscapes. This leads to inflated population estimates.

    some nice photos as well

    • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

      Unveiling the Ghost of the Mountain:
      Snow Leopard Ecology and Behaviour

      In this study, snow leopards were found to have killed more wild prey than livestock,
      despite livestock number being at least an order of magnitude higher

      Snow leopards were crepuscular and facultative nocturnal, their activity peaks
      changed seasonally, occurring during dusk in the cold season and dawn during the warm
      season. Activity patterns of snow leopards appear to be driven by a combination of needs
      facilitating hunting (cover and visibility) and thermoregulation whereas no support was
      found for the common explanation that large carnivores mirror the activity of their prey.
      The critical assumption in abundance estimates based on capture – recapture calculations,
      that individuals are correctly identified, was severely violated in a test using known
      individuals. In our test the classifiers overestimated the number of individuals in the
      sample, which could have serious consequences for a threatened species.

  47. avatar idaursine says:

    “Government officials said their goal was to protect wolves from extinction, not return them to everywhere they were once found.”

    Just so unbelievably lame. They must think people are stupid. Again, (heavy sigh), nobody expects that they be returned everywhere, just that there is much habitat yet where they can go. (No, this doesn’t mean downtown LA, as I heard one wolf-oppose say.)

    “In a statement, the Center for Biological Diversity blasted the proposal for lacking transparency, noting that, though there would be a standard 60-day public comment period, no public hearings were scheduled and there was little information on the peer-review process that went into crafting the document. Michael Robinson, senior conservation advocate with the organization said that, if approved, the proposal would mean open season on wolves.”

  48. avatar MAD says:

    Typical double-speak from politicians. The rules that were set up as a compromise so the sage grouse wouldn’t be listed are now being weakened even more. What a joke that these agencies that are supposed to provide good stewardship of natural resources – they’ve become puppets to industries and corrupt politicians. I’m not faulting the low-level, local govt workers who are usually hard working and honest. It’s the higher-up policy makers who are at fault

  49. avatar Immer Treue says:

    It’s Black or White Wolves Must Die to Save Canada Caribou,


    B.C. Approves 314 Cutbacks I Critical Caribou Habitat

    Geographically, I’m pretty far removed from this area, but this type of “debate” has been going on for close to two decades if not longer. Not only does it destroy caribou habitat, but opens the area to new colonization: moose; deer and accompanying predation. Caribou become secondary prey, but because there are so few of them, the double whammy of Habitat destruction and increased predation. Then the debate begins if you want to save caribou, why would you oppose a wolf cull?

  50. avatar rork says:
    Moose population still growing (slowly, we think) in western upper Michigan. That doesn’t mean I don’t expect decline in the future, or halts in the decline elsewhere (without treatments like knocking down deer). Western upper MI is perhaps less impacted by various factors thought to lead to moose decline. Deer can barely live in some of that country or not at all, and it’s still pretty cool in summer. There’s a ton of snow that many people don’t know about. Lake Superior sees to all this. There were great satellite shots of great lakes ice from Mar 8, btw.

  51. avatar rork says:
    The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agency’s approved a statement saying that the overwhelming evidence is that prions cause CWD, in an attempt to get the story straight out in the wilds that are US science journalism.

  52. avatar idaursine says:

    “The chairman of the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee, Arizona Democrat Rep. Raul Grijalva, said the changes would benefit former clients of Acting Interior Secretary David Bernhardt. Bernhardt worked as an oil and gas industry lobbyist before joining the Trump administration. Grijalva said in a statement that the administration’s decision represented “a smash-and-grab-job on our environment.””

    This is what you get when you naively make assumptions about ‘unprecedented collaboration’ to save this bird. You are lied to. Easing restrictions? There were never any to begin with, were they?

    And I hope that the “Acting Secretary” and his conflicts of interest are challenged by somebody, anybody.

  53. avatar idaursine says:

    Or I should say prematurely make assumptions about unprecedented collaboration.

    Those ‘overly restrictive’ plans were never actually put into effect because the Western states took it to court I believe?


  54. avatar Judy Hoy says:

    Here is a new study done at the South Dakota State University, concerning Imidacoprid, an insecticide also called a neonicotinoid and what exposure does to female white-tailed deer and their developing young. Neonics kill birds, beneficial insects, like bees, butterflies and lot of others, and according to this study, apparently kills and maims the young of large grazing animals. Since it has such a serious affect on females, fetuses and young of a large mammal, it likely has adverse effects on human fetuses and newborns. One of the birth defects it caused on the study white-tailed deer is also high in prevalence on other wild grazing animals, including pronghorn antelope, mule deer, bighorn sheep, mountain goat and all other commonly observed wild ruminants that are found in Montana(except for woodland caribou – no caribou were observed at all). Underbite on individuals was also observed on all wild ruminants in Wyoming, Idaho and other western states, but prevalence in states other than Montana is unknown.
    (2019) 9:4534 | 1

  55. avatar Nancy says:

    Can click on the link for the story but always interesting to read the variety of comments, regarding the article posted.

    Kind of like here on TWN 🙂

  56. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    news from Colorado

    Federal government quietly establishes wolf conservation area that includes Grand County

    Throughout Grand County, few local officials were aware of the existence of the wolf conservation area. Local government officials said they were still searching for any correspondence they had received from the federal government regarding the establishment of the conservation area as of Monday afternoon.

    “We have a history of wolves entering Colorado throughout this area,” explained Martin Lowney, state director for APHIS’s Wildlife Services in Colorado. “That is why they created this wolf conservation area. They are going the extra mile to protect any wolves that do enter Colorado.”

    Jennifer Strickland, spokesperson for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages endangered species for the federal government, said the conservation area matches an easily defined area where wolves have been observed in previous years. It includes all of Grand, Jackson, Gilpin and Boulder counties and portions of Moffat, Routt, Eagle, Summit, Clear Creek, Jefferson, Adams and Larimer counties.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      “Federal employees, and the general public, are already restricted from killing, trapping or harming wolves in Colorado due to their designation as an endangered species.”

      But if they are delisted in the lower 48, all bets are off. When did this happen, anyway?

      But how convenient to blow a little smoke out there about wolves being protected, so that delisting and recover will be easier to sell to the public. And there are no documented wolves in Colorado (at least that haven’t already been shot) that I am aware of?

      There are so many twists and turns in this article I can’t keep track.

      I did like the line though that “local officials were still searching for any correspondence they had received from the federal government regarding the establishment of the conservation area as of Monday afternoon.” (see below)

      “Throughout Grand County, few local officials were aware of the existence of the wolf conservation area. Local government officials said they were still searching for any correspondence they had received from the federal government regarding the establishment of the conservation area as of Monday afternoon.”

      Thanks for posting this, Mareks.

      • avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

        “When did this happen, anyway?”

        The wolf conservation area formally went into effect in November 2016.

        Colorado has a migratory wolf plan, essentially stating that until a management plan can be enacted, they are protected.

        • avatar idaursine says:

          Huh. I wonder how it will work if there is a national delisting, if the states are not ready for a delisting and do not have a management plan in place. I know Oregon is working fast and furiously. 🙁

      • avatar idaursine says:

        ^^or no documented pack(s) being tracked. “Observations” only do not count?

  57. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Is Wolf Reintroduction Right for Colorado?


    Pathways 2019: Human Dimensions of Wildlife Conference and Training, hosted by Colorado State University and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be held from September 22nd-26th, 2019

    Mike Phillips

    Turner Endangered Species Fund

    Jeremy Bruskotter

    Ohio State University

    Terry Fankhauser

    Colorado Cattleman’s Association

    John Vucetich

    Michigan Technological University
    Suzanne Stone

    Defenders of Wildlife

    John Duffield

    University of Montana

    Richard Knight

    Colorado State University

    Martin Nie

    University of Montana

  58. avatar idaursine says:

    And then there’s this.

    So it’s confusing. The state is against reintroduction, but seems to be saying that they would tolerate natural migration? Still, with no documented wolves (that are alive), they cannot be considered recovered. UT is the same story. And I’d love to see them in the Northeast Kingdom of New England at the border of Canada. It’s not very straightforward to push for a delisting.

    “Colorado still has a policy that it will take care of any wolf that wanders into the state on its own. The issue is intentionally releasing them.”

    This sentence was not very thorough then. To wildlife advocates, it sounds like eliminating them.

    • avatar idaursine says:

      ????? Wow!

      • avatar Judy Hoy says:

        Wow is right. But what is not so great is the passed and signed bill taking so much money from the EPA, right when the EPA needs to address the birth defects on the wildlife and the disappearance of the insects, which so many other species need for food. We, of course, need many beneficial insects for pollination and the other $57 billion a year in services to our economy that insects provide. Wildlife watching and hunting provide a huge amount of money to people also, so loosing birds, amphibians, reptiles and mammals will not be good either.

  59. avatar Amy B. says:

    New Disease Strikes Ducks and Geese in Colorado

    Wildlife officials in Denver, Colorado announced Thursday that a new strain of bacterial infection has struck the local duck and goose populations around the city.

  60. avatar rork says:
    is about restoration efforts on upper Michigan’s Menominee river, which is an incredible place. Slowly it gets done.
    Menominee is “wild rice people”, and maybe you’ve heard wild rice called manoomin (food-that-grows-on-the-water). It is holy stuff. Menominee is now also the name for one of our endemic medium-sized whitefish that are pretty tasty.

  61. avatar rork says:
    It’s this “association of fish and wildlife agencies” group, and they can speak their minds pretty much free of politics and what pesky consumers (like hunters) think, cause it is not in their official capacity, and somewhat anonymous. The ox has been taken off their tongues.
    It’s their best practice guide for CWD and it is harsh. No movement of deer. No movement of deer semen even. I liked it allot. When hunters disagree with me (and they constantly do about CWD – they are horrible at epidemiology mostly), I can point to this. You can too. Emoji.

  62. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Is the gray wolf still endangered? Depends who you ask.

    The government says wolves are thriving in the lower 48, but some scientists say they still face threats from hunting and habitat fragmentation.

  63. avatar Mareks Vilkins says:

    Wolves living in proximity to humans

    Summary of a first enquiry on wolf behaviour
    near humans in Europe

    Answers were received from all 31 contacted countries, with 28 having resident wolf packs. All those 28 countries reported that at least some of their packs had established their territory close to or even including settlements, and had reports of wolves approaching habitations. 14 countries also had reports of wolves approaching people. Often these were exceptional cases, or witness reports that could not be independently verified.
    Aggressive behaviour towards humans was reported from 12 countries. The vast majority of such behaviour was assessed by the contacts to originate either from rabid wolves, or wolves that had to defend themselves. Only one contact from Spain reported the occurrence of unprovoked attacks of wolves on humans, the last of which had occurred in 1975. In no case was confirmed aggression towards humans directly related to the observation of wolves repeatedly showing up in/near settlements or repeatedly approaching humans

  64. avatar idaursine says:

    “If the Colorado River reservoirs keep going down and down and down, then two sectors will feel the brunt of the pain: the environment and people in poverty. Those are the two that always, globally, when there is water stress, feel the pain disproportionately,” Eklund said. “We’re trying, with this contingency plan, to go a different route that allows us to manage our water and the river system so that it stays healthy longer. It allows us to keep away from that acute crisis that, if history is any guide, would hit hardest on the environment and people in poverty.”

  65. avatar idaursine says:

    ^^It’s almost like an “and so it begins” moment, with the realization of the effects of climate change.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


February 2019
« Jan   Mar »


‎"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: