It is time for a new page of reader generated wildlife news. Please use “comment” at the bottom to post your news. Do not post entire articles unless you have our permission, or post copyrighted materials unless you own the copyright. Here is the link to the most recent (July 2) “old” news.

Gunlock State Park, southern Utah. "Help keep Gunlock State Park, the Lake and its Shoreline, litter free."

Gunlock State Park, southern Utah. “Please Help keep Gunlock State Park, the Lake and its Shoreline, litter free.”


About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University. He was a Western Watersheds Project Board Member off and on for many years, and was also its President for several years. For a long time he produced Ralph Maughan's Wolf Report. He was a founder of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He and Jackie Johnson Maughan wrote three editions of "Hiking Idaho." He also wrote "Beyond the Tetons" and "Backpacking Wyoming's Teton and Washakie Wilderness." He created and is the administrator of The Wildlife News.

563 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife related news? July 25, 2014 edition

  1. MJ says:

    Dan Ashe was recently quoted by H. Ronald Pulliam of Defenders of Wildlife as saying that he sees a “giant clash” between those who favor conservation and those who favor economic development and that he believes that conservationists “must accept a world with fewer wolves, salmon, and spotted owls.”

    This has caused some talk among conservationists, and several open letters have emerged.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I knew it. These are the ‘hard choices and sacrifices’ the Administration said we are expected to make. I knew it wouldn’t have to be anything that humans would have to sacrifice directly – we’ll keep on driving big cars, building homes, drilling for oil and natural gas, put up a few wind and solar farms to keep up appearances, etc. as we always have done. 2016 can’t come soon enough for a new Administration.

      • MJ says:

        This is scary. I heard a comment recently by a Congress person, that when the Polar Bears have the right to vote that only then will he care about the effect of fossil fuels.

        That is exactly the problem.

    • Louise Kane says:

      its a shitty policy position from one who is head of an agency entrusted with administering the nation’s wildlife policy.

  2. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Is there some study about wolf dispersal routes – I mean, is there some pattern / ecological corridors or is it more like a random stuff?

    • Nancy says:

      An interesting read Mareks:

      This study has more to do with established territories & scenting but I seem to recall reading about a wolf in the northwest part of Montana who appeared to be following the same route as another wolf, years before.

    • Immer Treue says:

      I read a book over twenty years ago that dealt with cognitive mapping by wolves. They have their known territory boundaries, but they do take shortcuts to get from one place to another. Sort of like a compass in their nose…

      I saw a presentation last year by MN DNR that also supported the idea of corridor movement. A wolf would disperse for a while, only to return to old territory using same dispersal corridor. I’ll see if I can find this. One of the few benefits of radio collaring wolves with GPS collars.

  3. Mareks Vilkins says:

    to continue from the previous thread:

    Those of you that are keen to ban traps, hunting, and lethal control might pause and consider for a moment what pragmatic people who do not share your morals or values will do when faced with ‘problem’ animals and unhelpful laws. I think many hold Europe on a pedestal for being forward-thinking with its legislation, not understanding that the bans that are put in place are often ignored completely–or worse–foster a bit of creative ‘self-help’, that has ramifications for other species–in the case Shivik describes, an endangered species.

    Return to your regularly scheduled programming.


    the whole “European thing” is not so simple even with Dr. Shivik thrown into it.

    1)what relates to endangered species then European Union is ruled by The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats + The Birds Directive + The Habitats Directive

    however, member states (like Baltic states) can get exemption and hunt endangered species like wolf, lynx, grizzly and wolverine if they can show that those populations are sustainably managed (through the monitoring of relevant species)

    2) then recently European Commission launched the EU Platform on Coexistence between People and Large Carnivores to facilitate constructive dialogue among key stakeholders including farmers, conservationists, landowners and hunters, and it aims at finding commonly agreed solutions to conflicts arising from people living and working in close proximity to these large animals.

    3) then we can look closely into the wolf issue in the Baltic states

    EU policy, like in the USA, is heavily influenced by profits and election politics – so if wildlife managers in Baltic states would be smart they would see accession to the EU as the window of opportunity to acquire strategic long-term protection for Large Carnivores (against the hunter agenda who are feeding ungulates THROUGHOUT the year, culling ungulates less than allowed by quotas, in Latvia killing wolves and lynxes with a vengeance (43% of wolf population is killed annualy for the last 15 years) + the last 15 years only twice had severe winters + intensive logging/clearcuts provide forage for the ungulates)

    Hunters in Latvia make ~1% of general population, their average age is ~55 years, income from the rent of State Forests (50% of the total forest area) is ~1.5M euro

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

    2005 – 9 sheeps, 5 goats, 6 cattle
    2008 – 39 sheeps, 6 goats
    2010 – 5 cattle, 41 sheeps, 2 goats + injured 6 cattle/calves , 29 sheep
    2011 – 242 (of them 176 sheep + 25 dogs)
    2012 – 170 (of them 163 sheep)
    2013 (till 1 Oct) – 174 (of them 152 sheep)

    Average price of one sheep is ~140 euro

    But one can compare that with:

    a) in 2013 there were 660 car collusions with ungulates ( 2 dead, 40 injured)

    b) replanting costs for State Forests ~ 6 million euro (because ungulates are grazing seedlings/saplings)

    c) damages/costs of wild ungulates to farmers run into millions euro annually


    Hunters boosted the wild boar population from 12K in 90-ties to 74K and it just happens that right now we are fighting African swine fever & Classical swine fever.

    Russia is implementing pork/meat import ban from the whole EU and LV, LT pork farms are burning their stocks + the veterinary costs + laboratory costs + prevention/ administrative costs etc etc

    When from 2004 (when the Baltic states accessed the EU) it would be ok if wildlife managers allowed wolves to control ungulate (wild boar included) numbers + would ban ungulate feeding –> wild boars would not spread African swine fever all around

    I mean, corrupt decision making process is far more detrimental to wildlife management than the ban on trapping

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I mean, corrupt decision making process is far more detrimental to wildlife management than the ban on trapping.

      You may be right, Mareks. 🙁

    • JB says:

      Thanks for the lesson in European policy, Mareks. Shivik’s point–as I read it–is that you can write all of the policy you want, but if the population (of people) being regulated and the folks who want the regulation are largely separated from a geographic perspective, then the laws and regulations created will be ignored.

      Smoking bans are a great example. When I lived in Minneapolis, localized smoking bans in bars and restaurants went into effect. What the bans instantly changed behavior in restaurants. Why? The, smokers were outnumbered by the non-smokers and they overlapped in space. However, many bars simply ignored the ban. Why–the people who disagreed with it were spatially segregated from those who wanted it.

      There’s a lesson here for righteous, if they’re will to listen.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        I’ve forgot one more crucial fact:

        the average size of hunting district is ~25 or 9.8 sq.mi

        the average number of hunters per hunting club ~ 15

        and everyone of those 15 hunters wants to kill some ungulate every time he goes into forest – so they immediately start to scream when they see wolf/lynx tracks in their hunting district

        and they don’t care about ungulate costs to farmers – as they say “if we want any wildlife in forests then we must accept the costs”

        but that soundtrack changes immediately when wolf kills some sheep – then they demand that government have to increase wolf quota (when already 43% of wolf popullation is killed annually)

        I mean, forget about costs and ecology – we want to preserve existing trend – to maximize ungulate numbers and to kill wolf and lynx.
        Everyone else be damned.

        • Amre says:

          Just like with hunters in the northern rockies. I think its an age old thing. Hunters don’t like other predators competing for “their” “game”. They want it all to themselves, and they think they have the right to shoot an ungulate whenever they want to, and if a natural predator (like wolves, bears, cougars, lynx, etc) is also in that area they feel they must be eliminated so that the deer and elk will graze in meadows lazily like domestic cows rather than acting like wild animals.

          So really, it all comes down to self-entitelment.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Well, that may be a good example – eventually, smoking now has become pretty much socially unacceptable, pariahs hovering around outside door entrances now and annoying people, even in the dead of winter like beggars. I usually make my distaste known by avoiding them, making a snide remark, or covering my nose with my hand as I walk through.

        But what is sad is the number of young people who have taken up this dangerous habit. Doesn’t speak well of their intelligence, and whose hands we are leaving our country and valuable decisions to be made.

    • rork says:

      In just my little state (Michigan) we have over 50000 car/deer crashes and about 8 human deaths per year (that we know of – why grandma ran off the road into the tree and died we often don’t know, and just suspect deer helped). The costs are big.
      (Maybe more about JB’s yesterday post, but related:)
      In the early 90’s I was near farmers who would gut-shoot deer with lights at night, there’d be over a dozen carcasses at the nearest watering spot. Our huge overpopulation and bad laws were to blame more than the farmers.
      Finally: Here’s one big problem I have with people admitting they are against most hunting or trapping lately – they are making it harder to make progress. For example, the pro-wolf-hunt folks are saying any antis are all liberal nuts who are against all hunting and even gun ownership – this is thanks to a few people with fairly extreme views who are so uncaring about making some progress (rather than their utopia) that they say what they are thinking OUT LOUD. By Alfred Wallace’s pancreas, learn to hold your cards a bit closer please.

      • Nancy says:

        “By Alfred Wallace’s pancreas, learn to hold your cards a bit closer please”

        An interesting human being, rork 🙂

        “It then occurred to me that these causes or their equivalents are continually acting in the case of animals also; and as animals usually breed much more quickly than does mankind, the destruction every year from these causes must be enormous in order to keep down the numbers of each species, since evidently they do not increase regularly from year to year, as otherwise the world would long ago have been crowded with those that breed most quickly”

        And Lord knows, we can’t have that 🙂

        “Historians of science have noted that, while Darwin considered the ideas in Wallace’s paper to be essentially the same as his own, there were differences.[87] Darwin emphasised competition between individuals of the same species to survive and reproduce, whereas Wallace emphasised environmental pressures on varieties and species forcing them to become adapted to their local conditions, leading populations in different locations to diverge”

        I stopped holding my “cards” a bit closer when I moved to Montana (20 years ago) and realized most western states are just big game farms, where wildlife is being managed (manipulated) by a handful of “stakeholders” – Ranching, Hunting, Trapping and it would appear, Poaching too 🙂

      • MJ says:

        Rork, if I understand you correctly you are talking about what level of compromise will promote the most amount of progess, and that extremes just polarize people?

        That’s a hard one, because I think it needs to use “common sense”. Not a lot of agreement on what that is.

        People don’t change overnight, they change gradually, but the NRA and trophy hunting trends now are so extreme that compromise can just mean you are losing ground slower not faster, and still losing the animals and the battle. They are not there for us to have a free-for-all at their expense because someone thinks that’s fun.

        • Louise Kane says:

          but the NRA and trophy hunting trends now are so extreme that compromise can just mean you are losing ground slower not faster, and still losing the animals and the battle. They are not there for us to have a free-for-all at their expense because someone thinks that’s fun.

    • Louise Kane says:

      “Livestock depredation (usually happens to the same owners due to negligence):”

      This is the case or was in Michigan also most of the depredations were on one farm where the sorry farmer allowed the poor donkey he had been given to die from abuse. The state cited the depredations as if they were examples of an out of control wolf population instead of wolves being drawn to one farm through unsavory, negligent practices. they aere damn near baited to the farm.

  4. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Harvard historian: strategy of climate science denial groups ‘extremely successful’

    Professor Naomi Oreskes says actions of climate denialists are laying the foundations for the government interventions they fear the most

  5. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Put a price on nature? We must stop this neoliberal road to ruin

    The failure of the markets hasn’t stopped the rise of the gobbledygook-filled Nature Capital Agenda. We can

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Sorry, did I say nature? We don’t call it that any more. It is now called natural capital. Ecological processes are called ecosystem services because, of course, they exist only to serve us. Hills, forests, rivers: these are terribly out-dated terms. They are now called green infrastructure. Biodiversity and habitats? Not at all à la mode my dear. We now call them asset classes in an ecosystems market. I am not making any of this up. These are the names we now give to the natural world.

      Ha! He forgot ‘stakeholders’. 🙂

  6. Ida Lupines says:

    Oh speaking of this gentleman, I read this the other day by him. And you thought ‘a significant portion of its range’ was bad, this is where we must have gotten the idea (we Yanks are rarely original):

  7. Rich says:

    “Raising beef for the American dinner table does far more damage to the environment than producing pork, poultry, eggs or dairy, a new study says.

    Compared with the other animal proteins, beef produces five times more heat-trapping gases per calorie, puts out six times as much water-polluting nitrogen, takes 11 times more water for irrigation and uses 28 times the land, according to the study, published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.”

  8. Gary Humbard says:

    Although I do not agree with Rocky Mountain Elk Foundations policy on predator management, this organization has protected a significant amount of wildlife habitat in the US.

    Their perspective on why wolf hunting is necessary too.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I just hope humans can manage themselves as well. Anything goes, with no restraint whatsoever. It’s being dishonest. I don’t know why they keep showing wolf kills, because it doesn’t phase me in the slightest. It’s nature, and I know what the remains of human kills are too – in a slaughterhouse, wildlife in the wild, and in a war zone. Nobody beats humans at killing.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        faze, sorry.

        “Everything’s coming together – the elk are moving, they’re migrating, the wolves are following them – and we’re gonna ruin it.”

    • MJ says:

      The issue that many people have with this kind of presentation is that RMEF is not accurate in it’s “statistics”. They are criticized widely for misinterpreting the numbers so that it appears elk and prey are being decimated, (their words) by 80%, when elk and deer are actually getting smarter, moving to areas safer and away from hunters. Wolves are the natural predator, and the studies from wildlife biologists (many studies) show that elk and deer are healthier and only slightly decrease in numbers. The slower and sicker are thinned. Disease is more difficult to spread when they are moving more, so they are spreading less disease to other species. They are not overgrazing, and the bears and other species benefit. This is nature’s balance. Their populations increased with the loss of wolves,.. etc etc and the whole ecosystem actually suffered. We then have irate ranchers who want the overpopulated deer and elk killed by the state. And there are car accidents when overpopulated animals migrate.

      The wolves are interfering with recreational hunting, not the ecosystem. Agree with Ida that the images of wolves killing prey are not in context. They kill to survive, not fun, not for profit and they leave the ecosystem healthier for their presence.

      If anyone has access to the TV news there are some images of children in Palestine, and remains of flight 17 shot down in the Ukraine. When it comes to unnecessary voiolence we win.

    • MJ says:

      My issue with statements that money raised from hunting preserves animals or wildlife habitat is that there is a very important blurring of the line between preserving a real ecosystem and preserving hunting grounds with animals bred to be killed.

      The recently failed Sportsmen’s Act attempted to turn even more public land meant for refuge into hunting grounds, which drives out families, hikers and other non-violent wildlife supporters. Pets are shot etc. The only reason this failed was because there was an attempt to add addendums expanding open carry regs (including the DC area) and a number of NRA agendas.

      We are losing our sanity and our memory of what wildlife means.

  9. Ida Lupine says:

    Sometimes we need to step back a little and laugh:

    • Louise Kane says:

      Thanks for posting Jeff
      I am glad they are far from Idaho

      • WyoWolfFan says:

        They may be far from Idaho but the comments are just as disgusting as what you read in Idaho. I’m paraphrasing here. “Introduce them to city parks,” “They are killing all the game and livestock,” “The liberals are ruining are way of life.”

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I wish they wouldn’t report on OR-7 because of these idiots.

        • Yvette says:

          I had already seen the pictures, but had to go read a few comments after seeing your post.

          Sheez, extraordinarily immature people. I cannot figure out what it is about the wolf that stirs people to insanity, and that drives me insane.

          • Louise Kane says:

            “I cannot figure out what it is about the wolf that stirs people to insanity”
            I think about this a lot, its vexing for sure. But I don’t think its just wolves that are the target of such bias, although there is certainly a disproportionate amount of hate directed at them, its all predators. There has been much discussion here about this and how Ignorance, cultural bias, and dissatisfaction with ones social and economic status are factors, but I think one of the most over-loooked factors is the serious level of institutional dysfunction in managing them . When wildlife agencies, state or federal, allow wolves and other predators to be treated and classified as “vermin”, allow social pack animals like wolves and coyotes to be hunted randomly without regard for their sociality and the negative consequences to the pack, or create open seasons on predators without regard for their breeding and mating seasons even, they send a bad message. These animals don’t deserve basic protections. Wildlife agencies also do little to dissuade their clients (hunters) from treating predators as vile competition for game. They send out hit teams to eradicate whole packs of animals to elevate elk in areas where elk would not normally thrive and in wilderness areas where wolves should be protected under the wilderness act, they promote the notion that trophy hunting is a form of “management” despite evidence that trophy hunting is non selective, and is argued to have no management value, and that it has been proven to decreases tolerance for wolves. The failure of wildlife agencies to treat wolves respectfully and to allow trophy hunters and the ranching and livestock industries to kill wolves has gone a long way in perpetuating and legitimizing the archaic and destructive stereotypes that plague wolves and other predators even today in 2014.

  10. Jerry Black says:

    “Marine Birds Disappearing”

    • Nancy says:

      This is good news Harley. Especially if you watched them from the time they were just eggs 🙂

      Had a close encounter with raptors yesterday. Noticed a hawk on the side of the road while heading into town. Though it might of just caught a gopher or mouse but it was still there 2 hours later (and the left wing didn’t look right) Another hawk was sitting with it.

      I turned around and went back, parked on the shoulder (opposite side of the road) and started walking over to the hawk to see what the damage might be. Could hear the other hawk screaming and then out of no where, the other hawk hit the top of my head and flew off.

      That was enough of a warning (my head was still buzzing and hour later 🙂 I went to a friend’s house and called my vet, who in turn, called a fellow who studies raptors. He called and said he would check it out AND… bring along a bicycle helmet.

      Waiting to hear if he was able to help the hawk.

  11. Elk375 says:

    July 25, 2014


    Wolf Stamp Hearings Set for August 14

    Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks will conduct hearings on Aug. 14 at several locations on proposed new rules to establish a voluntary wolf management stamp for anyone to make a donation to Montana’s wolf management program.

    The proposed rules would direct FWP to make available for sale a $20 wolf stamp and would define how the voluntary donations would be allocated to wolf management activities.

    The hearings are set for 6 p.m. on Aug. 14, at the following FWP locations:

    •Helena: Headquarters; 1420 E. 6th Ave.
    •Bozeman: Region 3 HQ; 1400 S. 19th Ave.
    •Billings: Region 5 HQ; 2300 Lake Elmo Dr.
    •Glasgow: Region 6 HQ; 54078 U.S. Highway 2 West
    •Great Falls: Region 4 HQ; 4600 Giant Springs Road
    •Kalispell: Region 1 HQ; 490 N. Meridian Road
    •Miles City: Region 7 HQ; 352 I-94Business Loop
    •Missoula: Region 2 HQ; 3201 Spurgin Road

    Under the new rules, money received from the sale of wolf management stamps would be considered a donation and must first be used to pay for the cost of administering the stamp program. The remainder would be required to be equally distributed for livestock loss reduction program grants, wolf monitoring, habitat projects, scientific research, public education and outreach, and law enforcement.

    The public comment deadline has been extended to Aug 22. Comment via the FWP website at Click Public Notices. Or write to: Wolf Stamp Comments; Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks;Communication Education Division; P.O. Box 200701, Helena, MT 59620-0701. Email comments to; or Fax to 406-444-4952.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Thanks for posting

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thanks Elk.

      I don’t want my money going to support private landowners destroying 100 wolves (in 25 wolf increments) per year for ‘perceived threats’ though. They are on their own.

      • Elk375 says:


        ++Under the new rules, money received from the sale of wolf management stamps would be considered a donation and must first be used to pay for the cost of administering the stamp program.++

        It is going to cost a minimum of $10,000 to run this program, wages, phone, office space and supplies. At $10 a stamp it is going to take 1000 people to get beyond the administrative cost. I bet they do not even sell a 1000.

        • JB says:


          I’ll take that bet. Pint of Moose Drool work for you?

          I’ll be in Montana (again) the first week of October (probably staying at Mammoth hotel). We won’t be able to cash in on the bet by then, but I’ll buy you a beer anyway?

          • Elk375 says:

            I will take you up on that offer.

            • JB says:

              Great. I’ll see if I can track down your email from Ralph, or just email me. I don’t like posting it directly, but you can find it here:

              • Elk375 says:

                MY cell number is 406 580-2627

              • SAP says:

                If I can get over that way, I’ll buy you both a pizza at the K-Bar in Gardiner. I may be in the Absaroka backcountry then, though.

                Not to turn Ralph into a bookmaker, but I’ll buy Elk a 6-pack if they don’t sell at least 5,000 wolf stamps (contingent on the proposal getting to the point where the stamps are actually available for sale to anyone, anywhere).

              • JB says:

                Thanks, Elk.

                SAP, let me know if you’ll be around—Friday or Saturday would be best. Gardiner or the park will work.

            • Jerry Black says:

              I’ll go along with Elk on this based on what ranchers and hunters think of the idea……have any of you,besides ELK, even bothered to get their opinion? He knows that the last thing these groups want is “out-of-staters” having a say in the way wildlife is managed in their state. Most have no respect for MFWP to begin with.
              JB…sure wish you’d spend some time outside the “park” in places like Wisdom, Ovando, Phillipsburg, Polaris, etc so you could actually get a feel for the way the ranchers and hunters think….you’re missing out.

              • SAP says:

                Jerry, are you saying the stamp won’t sell because ranchers and hunters don’t like it? Or are you saying they’ll manage to kibosh the entire idea before anyone gets a chance to buy the wolf stamp?

                Before you tell me to go talk to hunters and ranchers, I live in rural southwest Montana (35 miles from town), I hunt, and I interact with my ranching and hunting neighbors all the time.

                I think the wolf stamp, if it makes it to the point of being available for sale, will sell quite a bit. Estimate the in-state minimum for Bozeman, Billings, Helena, and Missoula at maybe 300 per city x 4 = 1,200. That would be my minimum estimate for wolf advocates in state who want to buy in to having a voice in management.

                Then factor in the reach of big conservation groups if they elect to promote the stamp. NRDC, Defenders, NWF, GYC . . . I’d say if they tell their out-of-state supporters that this is a good idea (and they may not — they may calculate that they’d rather have the money come directly into their respective organizations), you could easily count on another 5,000.

                Sure, I get it that many hunters don’t want to give wolf advocates a chance to “buy in” and have a say over what FWP does. That’s almost the same as wishing for a time machine, though — the demographics have changed, and they’re not going to be able to keep non-hunters from buying in forever.

                And if hunters do mount a serious effort to keep non-hunters from having a seat at the table, they need to stop complaining that they’re the only ones supporting conservation.

              • Immer Treue says:

                “And if hunters do mount a serious effort to keep non-hunters from having a seat at the table, they need to stop complaining that they’re the only ones supporting conservation.”


              • JB says:


                I’d love to spend some more time in rural Montana. Got any ideas for funding?

                Spent some time talking to a rancher at the NACCB (in Missoula) a few weeks back. Have also spent considerable time with a variety of data from the US, NRMs and Great Lakes recently, so I’ve got a pretty good handle on opinion in these groups.

                But I don’t think anyone expects ranchers to buy these stamps (which is fortunate, as there aren’t very many of them, relative to wolf-lovers). So, unless they’re able to kill the stamp in the legislature, there reticence to purchase wolf stamps doesn’t concern me.

        • Immer Treue says:

          I will also take the bet. Libation of choice.

      • Gary Humbard says:

        Ida, first, even though 100 wolves per year are allowed to be killed by landowners if pets or livestock are threatened, during the past 5 years only 10 wolves per year have been killed by lanowners.

        I strongly believe that its time to show the state agencies that we conservationists are willing to put our money where our mouth is. Although some of the aspects of the stamp may not be what each of us want, the overall benefits of buying wolf stamps far outweigh the negatives and that is why I will support it with a $300 monthly donation.

        • Jerry Black says:

          Gary….I don’t know where in Montana you live, but you might want to spend time in the Blackfoot, Swan, Madison, Big Hole, etc valleys and talk to ranchers and hunters to get their thoughts about this stamp….To begin with, they have no respect for MFWP and likewise for “out-of -staters” that want to influence wildlife management……I agree with ELK that less than 1000 will be sold and wait till the state legislature takes this up, look out!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      It’s things like this that make me thank God I never brought any little monsters like this into the world. 🙁

  12. Kathleen says:

    Some dude over at AmmoLand has his knickers in a twist about conservation biology:

    Excerpt: “If wolves, wolverines, coyotes and grizzly bears are to be reintroduced into the “rewilding” mix, there may not be enough wild prey to feed these types of keystone predators. Of course, if there are not enough animals for the predators to eat, you can bet the number of hunting tags issued will plummet. And what will these predators eat once all the accessible wildlife are gone? Trash? Pets? Kids? … Remember, under the theology of “conservation biology,” wildlife comes first. Fido is expendable.

    Sadly, it is clear that with a pseudo-academic theology such as “conservation biology,” there is little room for traditional activities such as logging, ranching, mining, farming, hunting, fishing, transportation, homebuilding and nation building….

    • Immer Treue says:

      He forgot berry picking. I was out three hours this afternoon picking wild blueberries and raspberries, in wolf and black bear country. Amazing, I did not bring a gun, nor was I attacked or eaten by one of the local wolves.

      As of this time, I have heard no news of any of the hundreds of berry pickers falling prey to the menagerie of predators who call this part of N Minnesota home.

      • Kathleen says:

        “He forgot berry picking. I was out three hours this afternoon picking wild blueberries and raspberries, in wolf and black bear country. Amazing, I did not bring a gun, nor was I attacked or eaten by one of the local wolves.”

        Your comment reminded me at once of HD Thoreau writing in Walden about people too timid to live life fully: “…they would not go a-huckleberrying without a medicine chest.” Or a gun.

        “…if a man is alive, there is always danger that he may die, though the danger must be allowed to be less in proportion as he is dead-and-alive to begin with. A man sits as many risks as he runs.” ~from Ch. 6, Visitors

    • Louise Kane says:

      well he has one thing right Fido is expendable
      if you let your dog loose in areas where wildlife live its your fault alone if he gets chomped. One of my pet peeves is that wildlife are killed to protect domesticated pets, dogs and cats alike. and don’t get me started on cats. What state will be the first progressive to outlaw outdoor cats, to require licenses like dogs and to fine owners for letting their cats loose.

    • Yvette says:

      This is good news. I think as more people learn about these killing contests there will be more people that work to get the laws changed.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Drawing on the same extensive evidence employed by Gilens in his landmark book “Affluence and “Influence,” Gilens and Page analyze 1,779 policy outcomes over a period of more than 20 years. They conclude that “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.” ugg is right

  13. Mike says:

    More gun nonsense in national parks. Wounded grizzly roaming glacier:

    • MJ says:

      Reminds me of footage of a moose shot by a snowmobile rider on a trail, the moose was trying to get away.

  14. Yvette says:

    You can provide public comment on a Montana bobcat fur farm if so inclined. August 29th is the deadline.

    • MJ says:

      You can provide public comment on a Montana bobcat fur farm if so inclined. August 29th is the deadline.

      That one is horrible thank you for getting that out there Yvette. A symptom of the utter lack of respect that is becoming policy.

      What are the chances that an org will say that breeding them for the fur trade is conservation too? “We wouldn’t have bobcats at all if it wasn’t for us conservationists breeding and skinning them!” Can already see that publicity campaign. Yuk.

      • JB says:

        C’mon, MJ. Hunting supports conservation by PROTECTING HABITAT–both through the direct purchase of lands and through the indirect management of private lands for wildlife (here in Ohio, the number 1 motivation of private woodlot management is wildlife, usually hunting). Fur farming doesn’t contribute to conservation in any meaningful way–so I can’t see anyone making that argument (not seriously anyway).

        • MJ says:

          JB there is sarcasm in my statement, but the point is that most of what is being spun as conservation now is a cruel mistreatment of animals for a profit industry that has spun completely out of control. This is why so many animal lovers are completely repulsed. If we were discussing legitimate subsistence hunting, most people would not be this upset even if they don’t hunt, even if they are vegan or vegetarian.

          I disagree strongly with the implication that conserving habitat for raising species bred to be hunted constitutes conservation of an ecosystem or is remotely achieving what is in the best interest of any animal. This is a slightly wilder version of canned hunting, and still contributes to a complete derangement of an ecosystem where the real apex predator keeps nature in check. It is an expensive playground for hunters at the expense of a majority who don’t view wildlife as game and are offended by it.

          The Sportsmen’s Act brought the point home with the even further expansion of hunting on public grounds, driving out traditional campers, hikers, and others who love to watch wildlife in a happy, peaceful and safe environment. Pets would not be safe there. This is complete bullying by the NRA and hunting organizations. It only failed due to attempts to add extremely lax gun regs, including open carry in Washington DC (where the buildings are kept low for security reasons). The lobbies are out of control. Ethics are out of control.

          I do compare this atmosphere to passing off a fur farm as conservation.

          • Louise Kane says:

            MJ I think you are right that the sportsman heritage act only failed because of the attempts to introduce the lax gun regs. Each year they reintroduce a new version of this awful act. What really gets me is democrats zeal to sign onto this atrocious piece of corrupted legislation. It’s not a surprising move from Republicans but the Dems are shameless now. They seek gun control to protect humans but don’t recognize or care about the use of violence against wildlife and the correlation

    • Nancy says:

      This is disgusting – factory farming wildlife so some human can flaunt their wealth.

      “Prices are increasing for bobcat pelts, as well as marten, Walrath said. Other articles, including mink and beaver, are flat. Beaver pelts are difficult to prepare, cutting into the price margin and driving up costs”

      Read more:–year-high-trappers/article_88215b5f-f5b6-5850-81b3-59c7c4bca0df.html#ixzz38fX3trvs

    • Immer Treue says:

      Just received my F&T Fur Harvesters Trading Post. 140 pages packed with trapping gear. I fear trapping will not go away anytime soon

    • Nancy says:

      “That’s why hunting prairie dogs is so valuable: it gives you repeated situational training in a live environment, which helps you build a muscle memory bank of instinctive marksmanship habits.

      You get to practice proper breathing, trigger engagement and shooting mechanics with live targets in a realistic hunting situation. And if it’s anything like a recent trip to the grass-clothed plains of Wyoming, the targets are so numerous it’s like the adult version of Whac-a-Mole. Instead of padded mallets you’ve got an AR-15 and 20-round PMAGs in each back pocket”

      Thanks for posting this MJ. Not easy to get into the site – they ask to track your physical address before allowing access but hey, got the same nutjobs out here, and then those that come from all over to practice “breathing techniques and trigger engagement” on populations of ground squirrels.

      What a bunch of sick F**ks!

      • Ida Lupines says:

        How can anybody care about people like this. And I use the term loosely.

      • Jay says:

        Ironically, these are the type of degenerates that accuse wolves of killing for sport and thus provides them the incentive to go out and practice their breathing and trigger control on them.

      • MJ says:

        Thank you Nancy, Ida and Jay, +1

      • Louise Kane says:

        what’s really disturbing is that wildlife agencies ignore these activities and that its legal!

    • Immer Treue says:

      I believe Louise posted this story a week or two ago. This is the quote that “tripped my trigger.”

      “While those are all great ways to amass invaluable time behind the trigger, there’s simply no replacement for shooting at live animals in a real world situation.”

      There is something amiss in the cognitive pathways of this individual.

      • JB says:


        Actually, he’s got the cognitive side right–if you want to get better at shooting, trying to hit something that moves quick and often is going to be more of a challenge.

        I think what is missing is the emotional side–in particular, empathy for another living creature. Unfortunately, history suggests that our species is notoriously good at turning off empathy (or reasoning our way around it) when the situation suits us. 🙁

        • Immer Treue says:


          Empathy aside, putting this in print for the “world” (small as it may be for this article)is asinine, and thoughtless. One might add that what would make it yet more real, in a real world situation, is if said targets could shoot back. But that might make me sound as if I have something against humans.

          I’ve sat in on one two many of the conversations of prairie dog “hunters”.
          No comments about improving marksmanship, but plenty of vaporizing their targets.

        • Jay says:

          If you’ve ever watched prairie dogs, or ground squirrels, they really don’t move that much. They pop up out of their holes and stand motionless for lengthy periods of time, so it really isn’t that much different from shooting a target. This is about killing, not getting better at shooting.

    • Kathleen says:

      Though this isn’t a new phenomenon (google “Seekers of the Red Mist” or “red mist society”), this article really does show how delusional these morons are, rolling over the prairie outfitted like the para-military to go after a gentle, social, 2 pound animal. One of the worst neighbors we’ve ever had (thankfully I can say this in the past tense) used to pull his pick-up around back, sit in the bed with his gun, and wait for ground squirrels to pop up.

  15. Ida Lupines says:

    On the anthropocentric climate change and human overpopulation front:

  16. Nancy says:

    Not wildlife news but maybe politicians would get their heads out of their asses if they had to do this for a month:

  17. Ida Lupines says:

    Dan Ashe says ‘get used to it’; Sally Jewell says ‘get over it’:

    • Mike says:

      “Ashe, whose cellphone ring tone is a duck quack, has a wood duck — his favorite animal — mounted in his office at Interior Department headquarters.

      “It reminds me every day why I’m here,” he said.”

      How inspiring. A dead duck, staring off with glassy eyes reminds Ashe why he’s in charge of the nation’s rare wildlife.

      Keep up the good work, guys.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        🙂 They don’t seem to be able to distinguish between dead animals and living animals, do they.

      • JB says:

        Support for wildlife conservation in Congress has reached an all-time low, Ashe said, likening the political storm to a “hurricane” that the service can only wait out.

        … Congress this year will see the retirement of environmental champions Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.), James Moran (D-Va.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.), author of the Endangered Species Act.

        “The most important thing which seems to be missing in Congress today is the ability to forge relationships with people you don’t agree with,” Ashe said.”

        Something that’s hard to accomplish when every time you open your mouth you’re insulting them. Something to ponder. 😉

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Actually this article wasn’t the worst light I’ve seen Dan Ashe portrayed in. That’s about the best I can do. I don’t like the air of giving in attitude because we can’t stem the tide of humanity and all its needs.

          The other side could be a bit more cooperative too – but they never get taken to task for what they do, only the environmentalists and pro-wildlife side. We’re told to shut up so we don’t piss them off any further.

          Sorry, no can do.

          • Yvette says:

            Everything cycles. Politics cycle, and the deeper division, obstruction, and partisan divide that has immobilized work from the politicians will probably ease with the next administration. I have no idea who will be the next President, but I think once the Black guy is gone they’ll start working together much better than they have since 2008.

            I’m no fan of Obama, and his administration has been hell for environmental and conservation. Whoever the next President is and whoever S(he) appoints to head the agencies may be worse…or not. They work for special interests with big money attached, IMO. I pretty much have no say in the goings on of this country and I definitely have no one representing me from the sorry lot of politicians in my state. The best I can do is work on the things that matter to me in the best way I see fit. Try to be reasonable, put one foot in front of the other every day, and be happy. Beyond that, I don’t count. The things I’ve seen happen in American politics since 2008 has gotten me to the point of utter disgust with nearly all politicians.

            • Elk375 says:

              Plus one Yvette.

            • Ida Lupines says:

              Yes. I do the same.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                For me, it’s hard to blame it all on race. Race in itself doesn’t make our President competent, incapable of wrong-doing, or a good leader. I voted for him the first time around, but have been terribly disappointed on his environmental policies and wildlife, and voted the Green party the second time around. The Democrats have done a lot of damage to long-standing, hard-won environmental policies.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            Oh, yawn. I’m sick to death of hearing about racism.

            • JEFF E says:

              this is not about racism Ida, but about a fundamental lack of understanding what the issues are and who the players are; much like having a conversation with you.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                I could say there’s too much of that in today’s world, and I’m far from the worst example. I just said I was sick of the fingerpointing and nitpicking, instead of actually getting anything done – and our President has given up and has gone back to fundraising and playing golf, according to recent articles.

                So don’t bother having a conversation with me, you won’t be missed.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Though not a golfer myself, I’ve come to believe many a deal are cut on the golf course. Nothing strange about Obama playing golf. Just more nitpicking. Here’s a list.


              • Ida Lupines says:

                You’re very patient, Immer. More than me!

                Again, have a good night all –

              • JEFF E says:

                Ida, you are an idiot

              • Ida Lupines says:

                It is about an element of racism, where broad assumptions are made about a person by the color of their skin and their name!

                But, fundamental lack of understanding seems to be the way of the world today. Why are we surprised when we vote for these people?

                I have no use for Democrats or Republicans.

                Insult me all you want, I wish you had some idea of how little other people’s opinions mean to me. Whatever.

          • Jeff N. says:

            That is priceless.

            • Ida Lupines says:

              You want more priceless? I’m sick to death of hearing about birth control, gay marriage – some of these things have been decided over 50 years ago. When will it end? There are laws in place. Finger pointing and j’accuse!ing the opposition is getting tired.

              • Nancy says:

                “I’m sick to death of hearing about birth control, gay marriage”

                Ida – you must come west then! All they talk about out here in Montana is that GD Muslim in the White House, government intervention and the weather 🙂

              • Immer Treue says:

                Old news, I know, and the motives are gray: drugs and money, or gay, but one must remember Mathew Shepard.

                What is most telling is the funeral.
                “Tensions were so high that Shepard’s father wore a bulletproof vest under his suit when he spoke at his son’s funeral service.

                “The saddest part of this whole case was at Matthew’s funeral, when they, these people, refused to let Matthew be buried with dignity,” said Rerucha. “I never saw people that could hate so much.”

                This intolerance/hate is still among us.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                As the wolves prove, you cannot change people’s minds about their intolerance, at least in every case. But you can make laws to protect people’s rights – race, religion, sexual preference, gender.

                I’m done with trying to see the wolf-haters’ point of view. I’ve tried that, and it hasn’t worked. They just take advantage, and there’s no working with them.

                Would we like to have wolves in our backyard? The wolves were already here, the ancestors of these people took their backyards by force when they came here. So if anyone needs to go, it’s them.

              • Jeff N. says:


                I was referring to the video clip.

            • Louise Kane says:

              assuming you are speaking to the video where the specially elected rep thinks he is speaking to foreign heads of state!
              wow that is a career changer….
              how do you recover from that!

              • Nancy says:

                “wow that is a career changer….
                how do you recover from that!”

                You write a book or get your own news channel, Louise 🙂


              • Mareks Vilkins says:

                you will appreciate this one:


                Just briefly, what’s irrationality? And then, conversely, what’s rationality?
                Well, a perfect example of extreme irrationality is what we’ve just been talking about. What Orwell called double-think. The ability to have two contradictory ideas in your mind at the same time and to believe both of them. That’s the peak of irrationality. And that virtually defines the elite intellectual community.
                Now let’s take concrete examples of fundamentalist irrationality, I’ll give you a real example. Actually it’s an example I knew about five years ago, but I didn’t publish it ’cause it sounded so crazy it couldn’t be true. It turns out to be true. It’s now verified. In January 2003, immediately before the invasion of Iraq, George Bush was trying to round up international support for the invasion, and he met the French president, president Chirac. And in this meeting with Chirac, he started ranting about a passage from Ezekiel, the book of Ezekiel, a very obscure passage that nobody understands. It’s a passage about Gog and Magog, nobody knows if they’re people or places or whatever they are. But Gog and Magog are supposed to come from the North to attack Israel, and then we get off into ultra-fanatic Christian Evangelical madness. There’s a whole big story about how Gog and Magog come down to attack Israel, there’s a battle in Armageddon, everybody gets slaughtered, and the souls who are saved rise to Heaven.
                OK, some kind of story like that. Reagan apparently believed it. When his handlers didn’t control him enough and he was kind of off by himself, he’d start raving about this stuff. For him, Gog and Magog were Russia. For Bush, Gog and Magog were Iraq. So he told this to Chirac, and Chirac hadn’t a clue what he was talking about. So he approached the French Foreign Office, the Elysée, and said: ”Do you know what this madman is raving about?”. And they didn’t know either. So they approached a pretty well-known Belgian theologian who wrote sort of a disposition on this passage and the way it’s interpreted and whatever it might mean and so on. OK, how do I know? Well, I know because that Belgian theologian [inaudible] sent me a copy of it, with a background of the story. I never published it because this just sounded too off the wall.
                Finally, I was talking to an Australian academic, researcher, and I mentioned it to him. He decided to look into it. It turns out to be correct. In fact the story appears in the biographies of Chirac and in other evidence. So yeah, that actually happened. So here’s the world in the hands of a raving lunatic who, you know, is talking about Gog and Magog and Armageddon and the souls rising to Heaven. And the world survived. Well, OK, that’s, that’s not a small thing in the United States. I don’t know what the percentage is, but it’s maybe 25, 30 percent of the population. Yeah, that’s pretty serious irrationality.

              • Louise Kane says:

                oh God Nancy
                a news channel
                shiver me timbers

        • Louise Kane says:

          don’t you think there is a bit of the self fulfilling prophecy going on lately but with a bizarre twist

          politicians ignore their constituents and push for extremist wildlife policies that focus on killing and lethal management and then claim that their is no support for good policy…..Look at Michigan as an example or MN and the extremist actions taken by local legislators to protect the minority desire to hunt and kill wolves….

        • MJ says:

          oh no.

    • Amre says:

      They seem quite anti wildlife for people who are suppose to protect it…

  18. Ida Lupines says:

    No, Immer, there is nothing strange about playing golf in and of itself. It’s a ubiquitous pastime and the US has more golf courses than any other country in the world (environmentally unsound and terribly wasteful, but that’s another topic.) I don’t hate golf, not a golfer either, but have liked fun practice at the driving range.

    The point is, our President appears to have given up – part of it is the obstructionist Congress, part of it you have to wonder about.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Got midterms coming up. He does what presidents do, and he is doing some stumping for elections. Two party system has it’s merits in checks and balances… But it’s been more than obvious Mitch McConnell’s remarks about their “job” to make Obama a one term president.

      Back to the race thing, it would have been very easy to borrow a line from Blazing Saddles when Obama was elected.

  19. WM says:

    Not wildlife news, but evidence of a further political decline which will affect the interests and types of decision-makers to elected office in the coming years. The fallout of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision from 2010 is just now about to take full effect.

    This SCOTUS decision is letting corporations and other groups contribute to election propaganda campaigns unfettered by past monetary restrictions. So, whoever has the money gets to spin the story in the media. Damned pathetic in a democracy, now run by a Conservative high court. Can anyone tell me (us?) why corporations should have more rights than humans, especially when corporations do things under common law that would put a human behind bars or paying fines for bad conduct?

    • JB says:

      To add to WM’s point, check out this analysis:

    • Louise Kane says:

      I think Citizen’s United and the McCutcheon decisions are possibly the biggest threat this country has faced perhaps ever. To add to your post WM, what’s really bizarre is that if a corporation attempts to limit its liability and is found to have co-mingled funds, even only a teensy amount, then the corporation can not avoid liability to other entities as they are said to have “pierced the corporate veil”. Esssntially that means that a corporation can’t hide behind a statutory creation when it does not follow the rules set our that distinguish between a corporation and personhood. Thats a gross simplification. The point being that our entire legal system recgonizes the differences between corporations and individuals yet the SC has given corporations person status.

      “So, whoever has the money gets to spin the story in the media. Damned pathetic in a democracy, now run by a Conservative high court.”

      There is so little time spent on real issues its all about the spin and as you pointed out who can buy the most spin.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      Oxfam: 85 richest people as wealthy as poorest half of the world

      Just 90 companies caused two-thirds of man-made global warming emissions

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        about alternative to the mess created by corporations:

        GAR: In Boulder, Colorado, there is a major city effort to take over a large electric utility, which up to this point has been run by a private energy corporation. It’s part of an effort to move away from polluting forms of energy and toward solar and other renewables. So far, the successes have been hard fought. Activists in Boulder realized corporate regulation was hopeless, so they’ve helped their city fight for ownership of the utility. They recently won by a large majority in a second referendum and, as a result, are continuing to move away from fossil fuels.

        People in Boulder have recognized that attempting to regulate corporations while leaving ownership in their hands also leaves the power in the hands of that institution. But making their utility municipal—which is a form of democratization—gives decision-making power back to the community.

        There are literally hundreds of experiments going on at different levels that point to changes in ownership as a way to build new institutions—institutions that emerge from a more locally minded set of values. The Cleveland model is proliferating all over the country—there’s an effort like it in Atlanta, three in the Washington DC area, one in Pittsburgh, one in Cincinnati, a new one in the Bronx. Most people don’t realize that 25 percent of American electricity is provided by municipal ownership or co-ops, and much of it in the traditionally conservative South.

        SCOTT: How many people and how much capital are involved in cooperative institutions?

        GAR: There are around 130 million Americans who are members of co ops. The credit union sector, which is part of the co op sector, has more or as much capital as any one of the big five New York banks. The nonprofit sector is about 10 percent of the economy. And you can add in employee stock ownership plans, municipal enterprise, and community land trusts.

        At a slightly larger level, twenty states have introduced legislation to create publicly owned banks. The Bank of North Dakota, for example, which has been a state owned bank for about one hundred years, puts the public in control of investing, and has been very popular among residents.

        All of this is part of a larger movement toward democratically controlled and owned pieces of the economy, which is slowly building new institutions and infusing them with a different culture, ethic, and environmental concern.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Good God – this was in one of the comments that someone posted. How can anyone consider this ‘conservation’. It is just destruction:

      One important note: Lions are thin-skinned animals, and you want a bullet that will get in there, open up and really wreck the vitals. The toughest bullets are not called for and may well be dangerous. I shot my best lion with a .375 H&H, but I was using a tough, extra-heavy 350-grain bullet. It didn’t open up, and we had to follow up farther than should have been necessary.

  20. Mareks Vilkins says:

    “Yes, from the evolutionary point of view dreams are very important. Man is an artifact designed for space conditions – The evolution from land to space is equivalent to the evolution from water onto land and will involve biologic alterations quite as drastic.

    You got water creatures looking up at the land – can they conceive what it’s like to live up there? Hardly. The fear of falling means nothing to a fish. The key to what space is like is to be found in dreams.

    One of the big barriers to getting into space is weight. But we have at hand the model of a much lighter body, the dream or astral body which is almost, probably not completely, weightless.
    Of course very little research is going in this direction at the present time.

    You see, man is designed for a purpose. This is the flaw in all utopias – no purpose.”

    Fast Frames, Slow Draw – William Burroughs interviewed by Duncan Fallowell

    Kansas, 1982

  21. Nancy says:


    “Experts in the United States have also warned about corn production prospects because of a growing bug resistance to genetically modified corn. Researchers in Iowa found significant damage from rootworms in corn fields last year”

  22. Mareks Vilkins says:

    “I read a lot of horror. I especially like medical horror. Have you read Brain? It’s by the guy that wrote Coma. Titles are very important. I like those ones in the Reader’s Digest – “Thank God For My Heart Attack” and “My Eyes Have A Cold Nose” by some writer who went blind.

    Flies are dangerous, they can lay eggs in your ear, then the larvae hatch eat into the brain and kill people. If you are ever in the South Seas and see a tiny blue octopus on the beach, don’t pick it up – they bite and everyone who’s been bitten by the blue ring octopus has been dead within the hour. There’s no antidote.
    I’m going to do a book of things you mustn’t do, if it’s 16 below zero and there’s a slight wind, say 30 mph, that makes it the equivalent of 60 below. Several people round here in the winter popped out to collect their mail and a little wind came up and they were killed like that.

    [But now the temperature is in the 80s in the heart of America and the crickets whir like a Lancashire mill. Burroughs is slowly dancing along the perimeter of his property, waving the long pink-handled cattle prod.]

    It packs 5000 volts. Enough to make the trespasser apologize. It works best if there’s a little water around – perhaps you should spit on’em first.”

    • Nancy says:


      Love to read! Just finished Life and Death of the Salt Marsh/Teal Off the beaten path? look for Black Hills/Simmons.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        yes Nancy, I am off the beaten path 🙂

        I am interested in bog/peat ecology but wasn’t aware of the salt marshes – thanks for that one!

        • Nancy says:

          One link to where the book is still available Mareks

          • Louise Kane says:

            That Teal book, its an excellent book…

            • Nancy says:

              It was written 45 years ago Louise. Have you seen anything recent on the Salt Marshes? Given the development along the eastern coast, I can’t imagine they have faired well.

              • Louise Kane says:

                Yes I remember this book well. I had a very interesting and progressive environmental science professor in undergrad that loved this book along with Lester Brown’s worldwatch and they were required reading. Anyhow, brown marsh die off is wreaking havoc on marshes up and down the coast there are multiple theories but one of the newer ones resonates especially in the context of so many discussions here about predators. The theory is that a decline in natural salt water predators (killed by overfishing) is causing the marsh die offs. even if people don’t subscribe to Ripple’s Trophic Cascade work its hard to ignore the interconnectedness of natural systems and even harder to understand those that do.

              • Louise Kane says:

                PS Nancy luckily the two or three towns that we live near, and the one town I live in is not as impacted. It’s much less crowded on the lwoer Cape in the summers and the National Seashore and its tens of miles of undeveloped land provides a buffer to nitrogen loading and pollutants. Perhaps the marsh is more resilient because of the relative isolation and less visitors and homes? its hard to tell. I am grateful though that the marshes near us seem very healthy. I have though seen huge numbers of crabs in the last two years. A friend and I walk the dogs daily and last year we wondered why we were seeing thousands of crabs. It looked like some strange migration in the spring.

  23. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Why I want to save the leopard that killed my dog

    Relocation is a common wildlife management strategy for dealing with any animals viewed as nuisance, be they snakes or tigers. Vidya Athreya, a wildlife biologist studying leopards in farmlands near Pune, Maharashtra, says the strategy causes more problems than it fixes.

    In the sugarcane fields of Junnar, an average of four humans were attacked a year. Post-relocation, attacks rose to an annual average of 17, and several of whom died. Vidya found trapping leopards from the sugarcane areas and releasing them in forests had made the problem worse.

    A similar strategy was followed in Sanjay Gandhi National Park, Mumbai. In the early 2000s, media reports of leopards mauling and killing people were as frequent as Bollywood celebrity gossip. Today, forest officials in Junnar and Mumbai practice minimal trapping, work with communities to address their fears, and encourage them to live with leopards.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I think that India has a better acceptance of these issues than we do and a respect for life of all kinds and mankind’s place in it. I’m sure we will be able to find exeptions, but generally speaking. And they are not a rich country.

      • Peter Kiermeir says:

        The trouble with Leopards in India is that most of the suitable habitat is already occupied. India has a very healthy leopard population. Good on one side. But lack of habitat causes countless human/catconflicts annually. And it makes no sense to relocate a Problem-Leopard into a territory already occupied by another leo. This only means: more trouble!

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I feel that we should let India decide on how best to handle their wildlife conflicts. A lot of the problems are the result of outside imperialism.

          • Peter Kiermeir says:

            Indeed, India is doing quite well with wildlife (especially tiger) conservation issues despite many problem areas – not all of these induced by colonialism or outside imperialism.
            They struggle to create more tiger protection areas and to form wildlife corridors between these areas. Nowadays, they are even re-locating villages when they are conflicting with national parks! (Imagine such an attempt in the US: Move a rural community for the benefit of wolves and bears!). Habitat loss being the main problem for wildlife in this heavily overpopulated area. That´s what I tried to outline with the Leopard example above. There´s simply no vacant territory where a Leopard can be re-located to. To leave India alone with it´s conservation issues would be the wrong if not fatal signal. Tiger tourism is urgently needed to bring a stable income to the communities surrounding the National Parks, and – to a certain extent – to prevent poaching and to raise acceptance for the Tiger. Many Agencies and NGO´s from outside India work closely together with government and local authorities on wildlife conservation issues – if only to raise funds through donations or sale of merchandise. The authorities not shy to accept assistance or advice from outside (Imagine the Idaho Governor accepting advice from outside on wolf conservation – funny idea isn´t it?) More on the wildlife conservation scene in India e.g. here

            • Ida Lupines says:

              Yes. Thank you! Can you imagine the howls of protest if anything interfered with human interests in the West?

              I think tiger tourism would be wonderful. I’m glad that NGOs work together with India, but I meant outside interest in hunting expeditions ‘for conservation and to protect people’.

    • Louise Kane says:

      This was an amazing story
      sad about the GSD but the writer recognized that the leopard should not have to pay the price
      strangely enough she let her other female GSD out and it too was attacked
      wonder why she did that?

  24. WM says:

    A toy drone flies over a wildfire in CA, and apparently created a bit of a temporary problem for fire fighting aircraft.

    Can’t wait for technology and capitalist innovation to next produce an electromagnetic seeking shoulder fired toy missile launcher to eliminate them. It will happen, in time, and then there will have to be rules to regulate them too.

  25. Gary Humbard says:

    Shocking but Wildlife Services actually spending our tax money wisely.

    Wolverine memo regarding listing decision. As you can see there is a lot of information that is used when deciding a species listing status.

  26. monty says:

    Thanks Peter about “tiger good news”. I love the big cats. My son who tracks cougars–without dogs–in the dense forests of west side Oregon ( previous 6 years)has located about 80 deer, one young black bear and 3 elk killed by cougars. In May of this year he found two adult bull elk that had been killed, about two weeks apart, by a medium size cougar. Each bull elk probably out weighed the cat by 500 pounds. The cougar is a pretty formidable predator! Thanks to a sane wildlife policy, Oregon has a reasonable cougar population.

  27. Louise Kane says:

    one last post
    and thank you for bearing with the multiple posts

    on seeing this I thought of my Dad who defined the term local color. A big heart but a commercial fisherman’s potty mouth at times. sometimes I would cringe waiting for the inventive explicatives that could be directed at dawdling tourists, people that treated animals badly, bicycle riders that possibly got in his way when he was still driving at 80 while hogging the road wondering why everyone was honking at him, and at his card games, and at too many republican candidates to count. the term POS came to mind with the vision of that special grimace deserved for people that treated animals badly. a quiet unrelenting hard look of disgust

    • Yvette says:

      I felt rather proud that someone like Ted, gawd-awful-music-maker, Nugent considers me in the same league as coyotes! 😉

  28. Ida Lupines says:

    The salt marsh/beach area I walk at seems to be fine – teeming with birds and other creatures – crustaceans, fish and insects like dragonflies and butterflies. There’s an island that is a migration stopover too – teeming with birds. It’s an Audubon protected sanctuary. The road and any homes get pretty beat up by hurricanes, and they are thinking of rebuilding the little causeway to the island, and letting the water flow beneath it again.

  29. Nancy says:

    On the other hand………..

  30. Ralph Maughan says:

    Here is a real stomach turner.

    “Oregon hunting guide pleads guilty to injuring wild cats for easy kill.” By Laura Zuckerman. Reuters.

    • Kathleen says:

      Here’s the cesspool of an outfitter he worked for:

      “… he offers clients the realistic opportunity of killing two lions on the same trip – one in each state. And, although these are six-day hunts, most of his clients fill their tags out in less time, so it’s possible to kill two cats and stick to a reasonable hunt schedule.”

      Here’s how they ran their scam

      • Ida Lupines says:

        This is the kind of hunting mindset that is appalling. Time was when you weren’t always successful, or you took as much time as you needed to be successful because you had to – but now people want a guaranteed animal in the shortest amount of time possible.

        We don’t have the kind of world anymore where people can hunt as they did in the past, culturally or not. Those who came before us have ruined it with their greed.

        • Immer Treue says:


          “This is the kind of hunting mindset that is appalling. Time was when you weren’t always successful, or you took as much time as you needed to be successful because you had to – but now people want a guaranteed animal in the shortest amount of time possible.”

          Part of the problem in MN. After the Winters of 95/96 and 96/97 deer population took an enormous hit, followed by a very mild Winter and a Series of warmer than usual winters in which the deer population recovered and hunters reaped a bountiful harvest.

          Well, we’ve just had two long tough Winters. Deer numbers are down, and a vocal Minority of MDHA puts the target on wolves.
          Memories are Short!

        • Louise Kane says:

          its also about technology, increased effort and take, loss of habitat, etc and wildlife agencies that manage wildlife for hunting and not as cogs in an ecological wheel or as individuals that are sentient beings. Nor do they consider factors like sociality, pack structure, and other factors that impact some predator’s abilities to survive. They certainly do not consider non hunters and even woe to squelch some scientists from researching especially when their research does not jibe with their management plans. Wildlife management is in desperate need of reform

      • Elk375 says:


        Where did you find that esoteric publication “The Hunting Report”? You must spend hours using an internet search engine.

    • Yvette says:

      Likely driven by applying for-profit principles to hunting and killing animals.

    • JB says:

      Yet another outfitter…are any of these guys legit?

    • Amre says:

      Reminds me of that other outfitter who operated in Colorado and Utah who also injured cougars and bobcats for easier kills. Their both disgusting.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Seems like there are more stories lately about violations related to trophy hunting and the desire to kill wild animals for sport. These seem like caustic, offensive industries and behaviors that people are vocal in their opposition to no matter how trophy hunters try and sugar coat the “sport.

  31. Ida Lupines says:

    Today, the House passed H.R. 4315 the Endangered Species “Transparency and Reasonableness” Act by a vote of 233 to 190. “Modernizing” it?

    • Amre says:

      Its not threatening to put people out of business. At least it weaken protections given to species listed under the ESA. But legislators like Hastings are really threatening the ESA.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      It is about what we can expect from rancher reform of the ESA. “Modernizing” the Act is all about preventing citizens from getting species listed and protecting the rancher’s bottom line.

  32. Ralph Maughan says:

    This article pretty much expands on what we have written about beaver and cattle in the West.

    “How beavers can save the American West. Their dams provide innumerable ecological benefits. So why haven’t they been restored to their natural habitats?” by Chip Ward

    As drought sweeps the land, we should look at what the greedy ranchers and their cows have done to West, including the infrastructure they have created to divert the streams and turn the mountain springs into cow wallow mudholes.

  33. Yvette says:

    Todd, the Grimm Reaper has struck again.

    1,717 attacks on livestock since wolves were reintroduced? Do those numbers jive?

    Who needs to go into the Frank Church when you have Wildlife Services and wolf tags for 11 bucks?

    • Ida Lupines says:

      The war on wolves is now employing guerilla tactics. 🙁

      • Ida Lupines says:

        “The traps were set near the depredation sites,” he said. “The wolves were returning to the sites when they were killed.”

        Translation: “We baited them.”

        It’s like Idaho is going to keep on killing to break down any resistance so that wolf supporters will give up. 🙁

  34. JB says:

    I’ve seen lots of blather on this forum recently about how ‘all politicians are corrupt’ and ‘nobody cares about wildlife’ etc. Here’s a really simple demonstration of why party still matters:

    • Ida Lupines says:

      *eyeroll* JB, the eternal optimist.

      I don’t think people are making it that black-and-white. You can always find one or two, but generally they are corrupt, and today, party doesn’t really matter. You can hear about corruption and scandals daily in the news. It makes Nixon’s Watergate scandal look mild. A lot of it isn’t the fault of the Obama Administration, such as the IRS, Veteran’s Affairs.

      All you need to do is take a look at the list of who voted to delist wolves, and that says it all, to me. I’ve changed my mind about when party is important depending on the political climate, and now isn’t one of those times. Where are our environmental leaders and thinkers today? Nowhere.

      If anyone can say people care about wildlife today, they would have to be on the optimistic side. People may care, but they care about other things more. And they don’t do anything about it.

      The only ‘blather’ you are hearing is from inside the halls of Congress…oh wait, they aren’t there, they’ve left for another vacay, it’s just an empty echo!

    • Nancy says:

      JB – can you please break down this amended paragraph?

      “2)The term “best scientific and commercial data available” includes all such data submitted by a State, tribal, or county government”

      • JB says:


        This provision would force the FWS/NMFS to consider any and all data submitted by a state, tribe or even county government when making a listing status evaluation. I believe that currently such information *can* be considered, but isn’t necessarily considered if better (i.e., peer reviewed) science is available.

        • Nancy says:

          Thanks JB and aren’t we already getting a little “taste” of the gutting, when it comes to Sage Grouse protections?

  35. Ida Lupines says:

    The Secretary shall make publicly available on the Internet the best scientific and commercial data available that are the basis for each regulation, including each proposed regulation, promulgated under subsection (a)(1), except that, at the request of a Governor, State agency, or legislature of a State, the Secretary shall not make available under this paragraph information regarding which the State has determined public disclosure is prohibited by a law or regulation of that State, including any law or regulation requiring the protection of personal information; and except that within 30 days after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall execute an agreement with the Secretary of Defense that prevents the disclosure of classified information pertaining to Department of Defense personnel, facilities, lands, or waters.

  36. Harley says:

    While it’s ‘not the coyote’s fault’, something should still be done about this situation.

    • Nancy says:

      “something should still be done about this situation”

      But what should be done Harley? That part of CA (Los Angeles and surrounding cities)are already experiencing HUGE problems when it comes to feral cats and dogs (google it)

      So the sounds this guy heard – “the screams of something dying” – were perhaps nature (coyotes?) taking care of manmade problems?

      Did you notice how “boarded up” the property was around this guy’s home – he’s obviously more worried about feral humans and then, got a little taste of nature’s night life beyond his borders 🙂

      • aves says:

        All that should happen is for people to follow the recommendations in the article: don’t leave food out, don’t leave small children or pets unattended (which protects them from people too), etc.

        His claim of encountering “a pack of at least 15 coyotes” seems absurd. Either he can’t count or is exaggerating to attract attention.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          It does seem a tad exaggerated. It doesn’t have to be an animal making those screams – maybe it was gang warfare.

          • MAD says:

            Well, first it was a pack of 15 that confronted him, and then when chubby and his equally chubby dog ran to the house, there were only 5 on the video. I guess 10 of the coyotes stopped off at the Taco Bell to get a few Doritos locos tacos.

            And, this guy has video cameras on his house for a reason – and it’s not to view wildlife on four legs.

      • Harley says:

        Not sure what should be done Nancy. Removal of the animals would be first on my list though. But lets assume for a moment that this really played out the way the guy said it did. Wouldn’t that concern any of you here? I’ve said this before, if people choose to live in a suburb as opposed to the great out doors, it shouldn’t be held against them when they get a tad bit alarmed at a problem on this scale. I don’t know about you all here but that was a LOT of coyotes caught on camera.

        • Nancy says:

          An interesting video from a couple of years ago in Burbank. From the comments, packs have been around that area for awhile.

          The pack this guy saw no doubt was made up of pups and their parents. And were they actually chasing him or just curious? I’d be curious if I came across this guy and his dog at 3 am in what the coyotes probably consider their “turf” Removing these coyotes would just invite another pack to move in. I’d call a town meeting, show the video and educate people – don’t leave trash, pets or kids outside after dark.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Sounds as if an awful lot of dying going on, to an uninformed ear.

            • Harley says:

              Noisy things aren’t they? lol

              • Nancy says:

                They can be Harley. When they “sing” in the middle of the night, they have my little dog awake and growling.

                Which brings up the point that many dogs are more than aware when wildlife is or has been, around. Too many pet owners probably don’t clue into that fact, especially in suburbia.

                Many a morning my two dogs have rushed the door, whining and growling. I look around the fenced yard first, before letting them out and I stand with them while they do their business because I know I’ve got wild “neighbors” around 🙂

                I’m surrounded by creeks, willows, pastures and forested areas which is not the case where you live or out in Burbank CA but fact is (and been discussed here before) our species continues to encroach on what use to be wild areas.

                But I guess it depends on your comfort level and what you find acceptable, when it comes to “managing” other species we continue to displace… often…with a frightening and sick amount of “glee”

          • Harley says:

            LOL! My son went out for a smoke one morning, it was probably around 2 am. Saw a coyote just ambling along down our road and it stopped just at the edge of our driveway, it’s not a long driveway, about a car length. Scared the heck out of him! I don’t think it would have hurt him, he was just next to the garage door, an easy sprint to the house, which apparently is what he did! I chuckle still at the thought of it. We also had a Lot more coyotes in our immediate vicinity when we lived on a small farmette just over the Wisconsin Illinois boarder. They had a den by the creek which wasn’t that far from the house. Ended up losing a friendly little stray cat to the coyotes. We had inherited the cat when we moved into the house. That however was a different scenario in my mind because we were out in farm country. I certainly wasn’t about to begrudge the coyotes their home, there was plenty of space to go around. Suburbia however, offers a lot of complications. I don’t know Nancy. Negative coyote human interactions are on the rise. One woman saved her neighbor’s dog, who had been let out in the back yard to do his business. A fenced back yard I believe but I’m not sure, could be wrong with that one. And the owner was outside. And it wasn’t night. And we don’t have a drought in this area so slightly different than the scenario in Cali. Just not sure what the answer is but I respect the right of homeowners to feel safe in their own backyard. What do you tell someone who is doing everything right and still looses their dog or their child is attacked?


            • Harley says:

              Not implying that a child has been killed!! Just wanted to correct that. I know they’ve been attacked but have not heard of a death. Dogs however, I’ve known a few people who have lost their pets and they aren’t careless. 🙁

            • Nancy says:

              Oh and coming from your neck of the woods Harley?


              As Ida commented recently “we are a bizarre species”

              And, should we recall Chips Ahoy cookies, to prevent further attacks?

              • Harley says:

                I don’t know, those cookies can be pretty deadly….

                Yeah, we’ve had a front row view of just how bad society has become. I’ve gotten to the point that I don’t want to really go into Chicago anymore. Maybe I’ll move to Burbank… heh heh! Nah, I’ve heard Cali isn’t all its cracked up to be. Besides, I’d miss the snow. However, with Illinois going to hell in a hand basket, I do believe it’s time to consider another state.

        • Louise Kane says:

          I only counted 4 coyotes on camera. Some people are so fearful of wild animals they may perceive their presence alone as threatening. why move these animals when they have not done anything, perhaps the man’s rendition is a bit of hysteria and reactive to curiosity. it would seem ve unlikely for a coyotes weighing 35 pounds to attack a 130 pound dog on a leash with a human at the other end of a leash. Perhaps the coyotes were wondering what that doggie was eating to make him so big and why the creature at the end of leash was screaming and acting crazy!

          interesting to note the more enlightened comments at the end of these articles.

          • Amre says:

            People should stop thinking everything is theirs and stop expecting wildlife to make way for them.

      • Immer Treue says:

        “So the sounds this guy heard – “the screams of something dying” – were perhaps nature (coyotes?) taking care of manmade problems?”

        Not saying something wasn’t dying, but he may have heard a couple of cats going at it.

        • Immer Treue says:

          Two cats…

          Hear this in the middle of the night and it will wake you up.

          • Nancy says:

            Foxes sound pretty obnoxious too when its mating season 🙂

            • Ida Lupines says:

              It’s amazing – when I first moved to my area it did sound like a person screaming. But now I like hearing it.

              • Harley says:

                We hear foxes on occasion here too and the first time was unnerving but I’m with you Ida, I kinda like hearing them. We also have a Great Horned Owl I’ve had the pleasure of hearing. I have heard coyotes before but it always seemed as if they were a great distance away, not right in our small subdivision. My neighbor has seen them when he leaves for work at around 5 am.

                Don’t get me wrong. I fully appreciate the wild life around me. The chipmunks… we could use a few of those! And I don’t like the mice invading my home. They can frolick outside all the want to but crossing my threshold is declaring war… I just get concerned when the incidents between aggressive wildlife and people are on the rise. While I know we eroding their habitat one subdivision at a time, my concern will always be, well really more for the children really. Of course, it’s just as bad when a little one gets chewed on by someone’s pet because the owner was too stupid to take the proper care of their pet. Also, thanks to some of the things read hear, I find I’m more aware of the ‘stray’ cats roaming our neighborhood. That’s another issue that needs to be addressed but wow, it’s a big problem. I know some people who will routinely trap strays and take them in to a free clinic to get them spayed or neutered but most animal shelters are full and won’t take them so… back into the neighborhood they go.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                I have heard coyotes before but it always seemed as if they were a great distance away, not right in our small subdivision.

                It does, doesn’t it? You can imagine what it must have been like years ago, when calls really travelled. I get the same feeling hearing sea lions.

  37. Ida Lupines says:

    “Beyond the immediate death of the pup, officials are also concerned that the dog attack may result in an infectious disease, such as distemper — an incurable virus that domestic pets have been known to carry — spreading throughout the Hawaiian monk seal population.”

  38. Gary Humbard says:

    Bison being quarantined so they can be ultimatley be relocated to Indian reservations, wildlife refuges or national grasslands instead of being slaughtered.

    Despecable fur farms that regard wild animals as a crop! The only good cage for a wild animal is an empty one.

  39. Ida Lupines says:

    Other than walling off cities and towns to prevent any wildlife at all from entering – let’s put this in perspective. There are millions of dogs and cats in the US, and millions of unwanted dogs and cats destroyed every year. The dog breeding industry I have problems with, because it just adds to the amount of domesticated animals. They do have their own diseases such as distemper which can be a danger to wildlife, owners don’t clean up after their dogs, which spreads disease; there are vaccines available if owners will use them. (Some owners go so far as putting dog waste into plastic bags, and leaving it there. This I can’t wrap my head around!) Cats abandoned or let roam is a threat to birds and small wildlife.

    Again, people need to realize there are just some things we cannot do – like leaving trash outside with abandon, and not watching our animals when they are outside. This happened recently in a Boston suburb, where the owners were quite puzzled as to how a wild coyote could end up in their fenced in lot to take their terrier, and how ‘defiant’ the coyote looked as he carried the dog away. I’m sorry they lost their pet, but that is just anthropomorphizing.

    We can’t seem to realize that all these threats to birds are cumulative – windows, habitat encroachment, wires, wind farms. Defenders of wind farms seem to think they are in isolation, and don’t want to think about bird deaths increasing the more wind farms are in existence. We certainly have idiosyncratic thought processes.

    My bird feeder has been mysteriously knocked down to the ground a few times lately. I was hoping for a black bear, but the culprit (caught in the act!) was a cute little raccoon.

    But I digress. Wildlife corridors are thought to be a government conspiracy theory by some.

  40. WM says:

    Hadn’t heard much about Cliven Bundy and his rogue cattle on BLM land recently.

    Well, it ain’t over yet, but some of us wish it would be. Now Bundy believes Divine Inspiration is involved, as well, telling it all to a small crowd in St. George, UT. But, he wondered why “no blacks or browns” showed to his dismay. Actually, there are only a handful in this rapidly growing all white Mormon town in the SW corner of UT.

    I wonder why the feds just didn’t nab him while he was away from the ranch, unless he has a cadre of armed bodyguard groupies.

    • Louise Kane says:

      maybe the feds hope reason would prevail and if they let him rant long enough everyone will distance themselves….
      I think if thats the case they underestimate the depth of discontent that drives the disillusioned, crazies

      maybe the blacks and browns decided to forgo the possibility of a good ol fashioned public lynching at poor ol misunderstood Bundy’s “event”

  41. Ida Lupines says:

    Several ranchers told me then that they could tolerate wolves and move toward more non-lethal controls if they were paid for their trouble. Providing wolf supporters with a place where they have a chance to see and hear Idaho wolves would go a long way toward building acceptance of the wolf killing that Idaho believes is necessary elsewhere.

    Experts tell me this must be done on a landscape scale, as it is in Yellowstone. Fish and Game won’t have to end wolf hunting in the area where it decides to allow wolves, but it will have to manage a higher number of wolves. Inherently, that will mean fewer elk.

    Workable? I think yes. Does it mean fewer elk? I don’t think it has to, if they and hunting are ‘managed’ properly?

    Thanks, timz.

  42. Yvette says:

    More wildlife sensational news coming from California. I sure don’t like the silly sensational reporting. I think it just adds more apprehension for people.

    The gait looks feline. What do you guys think?–abc-news-topstories.html

  43. Nancy says:

    Saw this video earlier Yvette and old pit bull came to mind but I’m leaning more towards an old African lion (female) when you look at the gait, tail and head. Given the fact that there is a thriving trade in exotic animals in this country, its certainly a possibility. Probably belongs to some wacked out drug lord that forgot to close the gates…..

    The Zebras sold on this site, I’d be willing to bet, end up at exotic game hunting farms in THIS country.

    And hey, when the “mighty hunter” can kill one right here, why travel all the way to Africa for that trophy head?

    • Nancy says:

      Often the topics on the Wildlife News, involve invasive species and their impact on this country but Holy Cow! (pun intended 🙂 Its obvious the message isn’t being recognized given the auctions in exotic (invasive species) From the same website:

    • Yvette says:

      Yeah, I thought it was definitely feline with the gait, and possibly a female African lion for the same reasons you stated. It seemed to me to be a bit small for an African lion, though.

      I’ve not looked into it other than reading a couple of article here and there, as it gets to be too mind blowing and distressing the ways humans will earn money. But, Texas is huge for the canned hunts of exotic species. It is much more profitable for ranchers to raise exotics so they can be shot than it is for them to raise livestock.

  44. Immer Treue says:

    Perhaps not “empirical” evidence that wolves have a greater impact on the “old, sick, and weak, but does lend support to the Mech Fritts 1986 study that suggested depredation rates would go down following a severe winter, as the natural prey base is weakened and more prone to predation.

    Dan Stark of the MNDNR alluded to severe winter rather than wolf hunting, during his testimony in February, was more responsible for lower livestock depredation numbers.

    I also have, in Isle Royale wolf/moose study, ten years of collected data that also lends enormous credibility that if moose can survive that first couple years, they are much less prone to predation until the infirmities of older age begin to set in.

    This does not mean wolves won’t kill healthy prey, but supports the weakened prey as their primary food source.

  45. Immer Treue says:

    More evidence of incidental take.

    • Nancy says:

      Heartwarming to watch the effort that went into freeing this bear Immer of some DF’s wolf snare but depressing to hear that she should be tattooed, so her story would be known if (when?) she was “harvested”

  46. Ida Lupines says:

    I had no idea this kind of thing went on, but am not really surprised. Exotic animal trade, drugging animals for canned hunts, drugging elephants, we are a bizarre species:

  47. Leslie says:

    Emma Marris (Rambuctious Garden author) has a fund raising page

    She wants to write a book about wolves, the wild, and the 21st century.

    I finally read RG and was very unimpressed with her lack of real knowledge about ecosystems. She started with an idea, and her book was written like a thesis argument that was supportive of designer landscapes vs. the ‘old, outdated’ natural ecosystem model.

    Regardless, I am flabbergasted that she is now taking on a ‘research’ project about wolves. With her love of man-made landscapes, I wonder if she’ll come to the conclusion about wolves, as she quotes a wolf tracker on this page, “not sure there is a place for the wolf except in the back of beyond. They are Pleistocene beasts.”

    Hmmm, what kind of wolf tracker is that?

    • Louise Kane says:

      what a ridiculous quote

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Oh no! I haven’t read this woman’s book either, but the excerpts I have heard about here make it seem like it isn’t a concept I can follow. She sounds like a protégé of Dr. Charles Kay. Humans are Pleistocene beasts too. What kind of background does she have that would give her any credibility.

      Here’s a couple of examples of our highly evolved species (those skilled Paleolithic Cro-Magnons hunters from France) I was appalled to see being promoted across the internet (this must be a variation on prairie dog target practice):

      • Leslie says:

        Ida, I do suggest you read the book for this reason: There is a growing contingency of ‘environmentalists’ and people of Emma’s generation that think like her.

        I just finished reading Gardeners of Eden by Dan Daggert. I found out about his book on a blog by a young ‘environmentalist’ who extolls it. And Daggert speaks at Bioneer conferences, which are also attended by younger people.

        His book is highly critical of what he calls the “Leave it alone” philosophy. In this book he proposes cattle be used to restore landscapes by bunching them and moving them along, like bison or elk might have. Yet he never talks about restoring wildlife to these areas instead of using a bunch of cows. He also sounds just like Marris in claiming that Native Americans ‘gardened’ their landscapes intensively through fire, bison drives, etc. and so there never was real wilderness here and that people are essential to a healthy landscape. That idea alone really irks me. I believe that people can help restore a landscape they damaged to a healthier one, but people are certainly not essential here.

        I think we should read this because a lot of young people are pushing these kinds of ideas of ‘designer landscapes’–growing up with so much technology and thinking technology and/or human know-how can solve everything.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I believe that people can help restore a landscape they damaged to a healthier one, but people are certainly not essential here.

          Thanks Leslie, I will read it. It’s certainly ok in cityscapes to restore a little green, but the same doesn’t apply to wilderness areas. It is just plain arrogance and willful naivete (we can do it! What could possibly go wrong?), especially since we dominate so much of the planet already, and have shown over and over how badly we do not take care of anything but our own needs.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Perhaps Ted Lyons can give her a few pointers.

  48. Ida Lupines says:

    Setting up a straw man of “pristine” wilderness to knock down, Marris suggests that many conservationists believe there are vast tracts of “wilderness” where the footprint of human activity does not exist.

    This is from George’s review of Rambunctious Garden. I have to say I love the title, but I have noticed a trend where people create their own premise and support it. For example, I don’t think anyone thinks preservation of wilderness means pristine and pre-human state! I think that we just want to prevent further degradation. I may read it after all, tho.

    Here’s an article she wrote for Nature about the wolves of Isle Royale:

    My opinion of manmade landscapes and parks is that they’re better than nothin’, but by no means are they a substitute for wilderness. They do reach a need in many people to connect with nature and seeing the soothing color of green. It’s like saying a zoo would be an acceptable future compromise for animals in the wild.

    Frederick Law Olmstead’s work is genius of incorporating elements of nature like waterfalls and large rocks, or adding them and making it look like they were there all along, into design is to me truly ahead of his time.

  49. Yvette says:

    I’m interested in the opinion of others regarding the ESA and how it effects water allocations in the West. CA is in the worst drought of its history and some want to blame the ESA because of species like the Delta smelt.

    This article doesn’t mention salmon, but I know in the past there has been problems over water allocations in the Klamath River between farmers, tribes with fishing rights, and conservationists.

    Farmers are digging deeper wells to use groundwater. This sounds like a big problem. A recent study that used NASA weather satellite data showed the groundwater in the CO R. basin to be depleted much more than they had anticipated.

    The Central Valley produces so much of our food, but it was only possible because of irrigation. Technology has allowed us to sow crops in the desert, but there is always going to be a price to pay at some point. I think nature’s bill collector has come to get her payment.

    We all will suffer if this drought doesn’t break this winter. But, how should we address the needs of animals listed on the ESA when we’re faced with this severity of a natural event? How do policy makers set priorities? Should there be a temporary lift of the ESA protections? Would the payoff be worth it, and would it even make a difference?

    • Nancy says:

      “Using pesticides for purposes other than their registered use is illegal and puts people, animals and the environment at risk of exposure”

      Except of course when addressing the following:

      The “gray (acceptable) areas” by our species.

  50. JB says:

    Not sure how many folks have been following the Toledo water crises? It’s big news around here.

    “The amount of phosphorus going into the lake has risen every year since the mid-1990s. “We’re right back to where we were in the ’70s,” Reutter said.

    Almost a year ago, one township just east of Toledo told its 2,000 residents not to drink or use the water coming from their taps. That was believed to be the first time a city has banned residents from using the water because of toxins from algae in the lake.

    Researchers largely blame the algae’s resurgence on manure and chemical fertilizer from farms that wash into the lake along with sewage treatment plants. Leaky septic tanks and stormwater drains have contributed, too. Combined, they flush huge amounts of phosphorus into the lake.”

    • Yvette says:

      This is a timely post with the the other TWN article on the nfew documentary, ‘Cowspiracy’.

      There are multiple factors contributing to the nutrient loads in watersheds across America. The failing infrastructure and no money appropriated to address it. (where do we get it?)

      The combined factors contributing to the failure to protect water quality is a huge issue. It must be tackled by coordinated efforts by state, federal, and tribal agencies, plus university researchers. It isn’t a task for the faint hearted, and livestock and other agriculture practices have to be addressed.

    • WM says:

      The Clean Water Act of 1972 and it subsequent amendments were to fix this. Somewhere in writing all the complex federal regulations (and apparently lack of enforcement), dealing with co-operative federalism with states and tribes, and the economics of water pollution control, the real import of the Act has been lost. Whatever happened to the goal “zero discharge” of pollutants? And, phosphorus pollution, indeed, can be controlled to a large degree, economically.

      It’s not just Toledo’s water supply. This story from a day ago. A dead zone in the sea greater in size than the state of Connecticut – 5,000 square miles of DEAD ZONE.

      Runoff from the Mississippi River system into the Gulf of Mexico:

      • JB says:

        We’ve had several stories about the phosphorus issue on our local public raido here in Ohio over the past few days. It’s really not “new” news; pretty much everyone who has been paying attention has known about for some time. Last year they shut down are biggest fresh water lake (beside Erie) to swimmers. Scientists know the problem is phosphorus and they know it comes from fertilizer and run-off from larger livestock operations. But, of course, many (though not all) of the farmers refuse to do anything, and our republican-dominated government thinks regulation is a four letter word.

        WM is right. Fixing the problem isn’t that hard. It requires site-specific application of fertilizer that’s timed appropriately (seasonally) and in some cases, put directly in the ground (to avoid runoff).

  51. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Not enough, that there are those monster wolves from Canada! Florida gladesmen suffer from monster Panthers, created to save the species! Well, it´s summer, still no signs of the chupacabra or the bigfoot?

    • Mark L says:

      from the article
      “The latest blow came in 2012, when officials banned swamp buggies and other off-road vehicles. Today, Spaulding is relegated to a souped-up golf cart that can be taken only on approved trails. Although he moved here because it was one of the last blank spots on the map, it’s now regulated like a tourist attraction. This, he says, is due to the panther.

      “All my life I’ve been able to ride wherever I want, and now I have to ride the same trail every evening,” he says. “I like panthers, and I like seeing their tracks, but I don’t like that they’re doing this to me.”

      Hmm…sounds like a repeat of other issues here. Damn gubmint!

      • Ida Lupines says:

        So he is saying that it is ok to let another species go extinct in order not to cramp his style? This goes for the same attitude about mountain caribou, wolves, and others.

      • Louise Kane says:

        you should hear the howls of protest here in Cape Cod when people are restricted from barrier beach off road vehicle use because piping plovers are nesting. someone came up with a piping plover tastes like chicken bummper sticker

        going to the beach by boat, kayak or truck is a a historical activity here and I love that area also
        but shutting it down to protect wildlife is ok with me. If it was permanent that would be ok too. I’d miss it but we have other places to go….

        people are amazingly selfish everywhere not just in the west

  52. Louise Kane says:

    this from the same audubon society that promotes liberal killing of predators everywhere

    interesting incongruent indignation
    i guess killing predators is ok birds not so much

  53. Louise Kane says:

    for the record
    I oppose both

    • Ida Lupines says:

      People really need to be more respectful of and care for the National Parks. I hope they can get this thing out of there, and that it hasn’t done any damage. These hot springs are really beautiful, I don’t know if the amazing color is from copper or something else.

      I remember seeing a rusty lawn chair in one, and wondering how anyone could be so thoughtless of such a beautiful spring. 🙁

  54. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Three bears killed in Whistler over four-day period
    “One of the worst seasons I’ve ever seen,’ says Get Bear Smart’s Sylvia Dolson”
    “A bear that conservation officers were forced to kill last week was so habituated to humans that it walked up to people in the village and smelled their hands.”

  55. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Sick of this market-driven world? You should be

    The self-serving con of neoliberalism is that it has eroded the human values the market was supposed to emancipate

    Jump to comments (1877)

    Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy.

    These shifts have been accompanied, Verhaeghe writes, by a spectacular rise in certain psychiatric conditions: self-harm, eating disorders, depression and personality disorders.

    Of the personality disorders, the most common are performance anxiety and social phobia: both of which reflect a fear of other people, who are perceived as both evaluators and competitors – the only roles for society that market fundamentalism admits. Depression and loneliness plague us.

    The infantilising diktats of the workplace destroy our self-respect. Those who end up at the bottom of the pile are assailed by guilt and shame. The self-attribution fallacy cuts both ways: just as we congratulate ourselves for our success, we blame ourselves for our failure, even if we have little to do with it.

  56. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Edelman formally declares it will not accept climate denial campaigns

    Statement by America’s biggest public relations firm may be the industry’s first official position on climate denial

  57. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Man bitten three times by adder left in serious but stable condition

    The 44-year-old … was bitten by an adder that he had picked up


    I don’t have a death-wish, I just pick up a viper, man – you see?

  58. Ida Lupines says:

    Here’s a good one. Lowering CO2? We can’t even stop selling leaded fuel! And another ‘it’s not going to happen overnight’.

    The American-owned corporation’s scheme to sustain profits for its tetraethyl lead fuel additive, which involved millions of dollars in illicit payments between 2002 and 2008, helped to delay the phase-out of leaded gasoline.

  59. Yvette says:

    It sounds like they are sparring pretty good over wolf hunting in Michigan.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Keep Michigan Wolves Protected collected enough signatures TWICE to have a vote. Michigan citizens expressed a big desire to vote on this issue and to protect wolves. Caspersen used some really sleazy tactics to derail the first citizen’s initiative and now the Republican controlled legislature is about to ignore two citizen’s referendums after their own very sleazy campaign which included tactics like paying signature collectors and mis representing their position. If the legislature does pass this law I hope that Keep Michigan Wolves does litigate. This is the first state thats really gone to bat for wolves with an informed and supportive constituency. Its too bad special interests are prevailing here again

      • Yvette says:

        It’s definitely one to watch. It also enlightens us a bit to motivation on why the state FG departments promote wolf hunts.

        I suspect far too much of our wildlife management goals are set based on keeping ungulate populations inflated so hunters can hunt, and ranchers can dominate the landscape. No big revelation.

        • rork says:

          People (and legislators) might vote based on deer fear here, but ranchers aren’t a big deal. I think for many though, being pro-hunt is cause 1) fear of wolves, and thinking that hunting would help (they think no sport hunt means there’s no management of any kind and chaos will result – they also might think wolf density can become overwhelming, cause they haven’t paid attention), 2) it angers anti-hunt folks, who are believed to all be liberal idiots – it’s perceived as a Dem/Rep battle and that’s reason enough, who cares what the likely outcomes might be. If HSUS supports it, you must oppose.

          • Louise Kane says:

            Thats a great summary but what surprises me is just how educated so many in Michigan are about wolves and how they have stepped up to the plate to protect them and understand that a hunt is not necessary and that the facts have been skewed by special interests. I think the wolf hunters are wearing down the supporters. Its discouraging to got through two campaigns and collect that many signatures and even then you can’t win a fair battle…. This is one of the reasons its so important for Michigan citizens to retain the right to vote on this, to show the country that the loud, obnoxious, predator haters do not always win by default or by cheating.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I wish we’d stay out of other people’s countries, I really do. It’s the new colonialism. This is good news, and Mexico has a population of wolves now too.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Ida, This was a law suit brought by indigenous people and honey manufacturers in Mexioo that won a lawsuit to prevent planting of GMO crops.
        are you referring to Monsanto planting GMO crops in Mexico in keeping out of other countries
        ? am confused about the comment

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Yes, I am referring to Monsanto staying out of other people’s countries – India, Mexico, Poland, everywhere where the GMOs are not wanted and where traditional farming methods are favored.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            here’s another such incident in Poland:


            And we know how GMOs have been received by India:


            • Ida Lupines says:

              And of course, cheers for the beautiful Hawaiian islands, who as we know have had their native flora and fauna threatened or made extinct by invasive species, and want to protect the islands:


              • rork says:

                “The large papaya industry, with around 200 farms on Big Island, would be exempt from the bill”. Folks bitching about GMOs in general, without saying which genes in which plant, should read up about how papaya trick worked and who did it (not Monsanto, though just cause they invent a trick doesn’t make it bad or good), and why simple tricks like that aren’t so simple anymore (the testing burden is now enormous). It’s a great story.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Well yes, the papaya has been threatened by disease, so any research to combat it is admirable. Oranges in Florida too.

                However, taking over land for open-air laboratories that contain poisonous substances whose effects haven’t been thoroughly studied is irresponsible, especially when they test pesticides, much like using them in wildlife refuges. No wonder bees, beneficial insects, and birds are harmed, and these companies do not care. It’s DDT all over again, and the arrogance is astounding.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Yes, I am aware of what the lawsuit is about, thank you.

        • JEFF E says:

          “? am confused about the comment”

          Now that made me laugh out loud!

          • Louise Kane says:

            you are confused about the difference between wit and meanness of spirit more often than not….you’ve got a nasty streak in you thats unparalleled here

            • JEFF E says:

              with the sole exception of yourself

              • Louise Kane says:

                please direct me to one post where i have responded to someone by calling them an idiot, stupid, queer or its equivalent, or hot flash all terms you use with regularity. you are mean and often chime in just to be derisive or shitty. there is a big difference between directing a derisive comment directly at someone whose opinion you don’t share or value and making comments against an activity or class of actions or group of are very confused about that, as your comments suggest. i had not been seeing the posts for awhile this summer and remember revisiting and one of the first posts i saw was you stating that someone here was truly an idiot. Mean. its too bad because I often agree with many of your posts yet I cringe when I see your name on a post for fear of seeing something really shitty.

              • JEFF E says:

                I donT believ I have ever called anony queer, have no reason too. after that if you, hot flash, dont like my posts, don’t read them.

              • JEFF E says:

                While you ar about the most foul mouthed individuale that regularly posts here.

              • Louise Kane says:

                at least you made my point

              • JEFF E says:

                you had a point. thats a first

              • Nancy says:

                Hey Jeff E – you are one of my favorite commenters here so okay to recommend you chill out?

              • JEFF E says:

                Ok to recommend.
                hot flash wanted to pick a fight and got it.

              • Louise Kane says:

                Nancy thanks for trying…
                the personal attacks are really old

      • Yvette says:

        Good luck. We don’t even have an accurate count of the number of military bases we have spread across the world.

        If there is a dime to be made or a resource to be extracted you can bet we’ll have a military base or presence nearby. It’s not a new colonialism. It’s the same old colonialism that began dominating the world centuries ago. To hell with the Indigenous people, flora and fauna.

        • Barb Rupers says:

          Indigenous people brought to mind this definition from The Devil’s Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce: ABORIGINIES, n. Persons of little worth found cumbering the soil of a newly discovered country. They soon cease to cumber; they fertilize

    • rork says:

      Science in that article was very thin. My interpretation was that glyphosate resistance via genetic modification was problematic not because of glyphoste use concerns, but rather mostly because increased GMO pollen in honey means it’s hard to sell the honey in Europe (and whether that policy is based in science is dubious). That’s why it is “incompatible” with the honey industry. If the glyphosate resistance had been achieved by old-fashioned breeding, it wouldn’t be a problem.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        It would if were found to cause harm. These links aren’t meant to carry the weight of a study (another straw man attempt), just an overview of concerns for discussion, which get conveniently sidestepped. If you want the science, go look for it yourself, and then use it to convince us why we need these things.

        The people of the big Island of Hawaii have a right to their own territory and how it is farmed, whether or not the ‘science’ exists to support GMOs. They have a right to a choice, even if GMOs are found to be safe. If they don’t want them, that’s the bottom line.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Or I should say that it is up to the companies to provide the studies that prove to people not only that these products are safe, but why we need them in the first place.

          “Science!” sound a lot like a religous edict from on high.

          One thing I found amusing was someone quoted in one of the Hawaii links said that research into drought resistant grass for ranching would suffer (why is it the same problem everywhere?) They sure picked the wrong place to study the effects of drought in a place that gets between 50 – 100 inches of rainfall a year!

        • rork says:

          I’m certainly not disputing Hawaii’s or Europe’s right to decide – what kinda talk is that.
          It’s about whether it makes sense or not. And yeah, I do know a bit about the science, which is why you can expect me to supply it or question it occasionally, to decrease our risk of echo-chamber thinking, which is a serious danger for folks concerned about the environment.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            Ok, fair enough. BTW, the papaya is not native to the islands. Whaddaya think of that?

            • rork says:

              I think it’s a farm crop, and that it’s grown for food.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Just as I thought. An invasive is an invasive, except when it isn’t. Wipe out the mute swans, but keep the papayas. Great.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Perhaps I should compare apples to apples tho – Autumn Olive might someday become a food crop also, it contains 18 times as much lycopene as tomatoes.

                So the definition of invasive species is one that has no monetary or other benefit to humans – if it does, it stays; if it doesn’t, it goes.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Have you ever read Jared Diamond’s “Guns, Germs, and Steel?

              • Ida Lupines says:

                No Immer, right now I’m reading Flight Behavior by Barbara Kingsolver as a TWN reader’s suggestion. I have a long list or reading material.

              • Mark L says:

                Immer Treue, why the reference to Diamond’s G G and S? Just curious.

              • Kathleen says:

                Just as a side note to this conversation, and because I am excited by plant talk :-), just because a plant is non-native doesn’t make it invasive. It’s invasive if it grows wildly and spreads aggressively and displaces native plants that can’t compete. Hence, the hated leafy spurge is a non-native invasive from Eurasia that disrupts ecosystems here in the West. But tulips, which are non-native and grown all over the U.S., are not invasive. I’ve never heard of papayas escaping cultivation and taking over natural areas, so would suspect it’s simply a non-native crop. On the other hand, kahili ginger, native to the Himalayas, escaped ornamental cultivation and is a huge problem on the Big Island–very invasive, driving out natives. We saw it being eradicated at HI Volcanoes Nat’l Park a couple of years ago.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Mark L,

                Main rationale was for plant domestication and movement on the east/ west longitudinal axis through Eurasia. We did not have that in North and South America. If I remember correctly from GSG, many of the food plants on what we depend had no natural origin in the Western Hemisphere. Ergo, they are non-native, and have been introduced.

              • rork says:

                I’m OK with people keeping mute swans as domestics, just like we permit chickens, though I’d want more safeguards to keep them from going wild. If papayas act like autumn olive then I’ll declare them invasive, and start killing them in the wild too.

                Thanks Kathleen.

  60. Louise Kane says:

    can’t imagine how the USFWS expects to pass red face test on their proposed rules….what is wrong with this agency

    recovery of Mexican wolves has been hindered by poaching and killing by the agency itself. less than 100 individuals is outrageous. Allowing livestock owners to kill these wves for the loss of a cow is just mind boggling

  61. Louise Kane says:

    or I should have said even threats to cows…..
    jeez what a fckd up proposal

    • Nancy says:

      “Every 15 or 20 years, it seems, the canyon forces us to undergo a kind of national character exam. If we cannot muster the resources and the resolve to preserve this, perhaps our greatest natural treasure, what, if anything, are we willing to protect?”

      Good question aves.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      How many homes, shops, hotels and golf courses do we need? It’s boring. I don’t know why we can’t be happy with these natural wonders as they are. Oh yes I do – $$$$.

    • Kathleen says:

      Save the Confluence – Dine’ (Navajo) people opposed to The Escalade development (see the “about” section)


  62. Louise Kane says:

    the question always comes up here about why people vote against their best interests….

  63. Ida Lupines says:

    My last visit to Hawaii was the Big Island and Volcanoes Park. To me, the difference between invasives and non-natives gets a little sketchy, because introduced plants often do take a lot of space and water because they are not suited to the growing conditions where they have been introduced. The ones we don’t like becomes invasives, the ones we do like still take up a lot of space to grow, and displace native plants. Today gardeners are encouraged to grow more native flowers, especially in our drier parts of the country.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      The flower I most remember is the Plumeria. I don’t think that’s native either! 🙂

      • Ida Lupines says:

        And a Guava tree, huge and gnarled brances, fruit with an incredible fragrance – like from the Garden of Eden. Native? I don’t think so.

    • Kathleen says:

      Well, non-native invasives like leafy spurge and knapweed take over because they *are* so well suited to the climate…it’s just that none of their natural predators came with them so they have no controls. The non-native cultivars that you get from garden centers do usually require more care and water, but aren’t likely to be invasive. Hawai’i is really an interesting case study–even their state tree, the kukui, is non-native! Check out this page–pretty amazing. I didn’t know about the plumeria, truly a stunning flower.

  64. aves says:

    Behing Wildlife Services Montana Kill Report:

  65. Immer Treue says:

    Midwest hunting dog carnage has begun.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Why do they call it an attack when the hunters took their dogs and went seeking the wolves? They wanted this, and now they have it.

      • Immer Treue says:

        This was Michigan. Hounding of wolves is not allowed in Michigan. I’d wager a large chunk of gold they did not go out seeking wolves.

        • Louise Kane says:

          The wolves are probably still protecting their less than 6 month old pups
          hounding of any animals is obnoxious and destructive. Its is definitely not fair chase

          • Immer Treue says:

            You are probably correct. Based upon a comment from one of Nancy’s or Ida’s quoted articles, there is really not much of a need for this type of training.

    • Yvette says:

      The timing is suspicious. It seems they are serious about keeping the MI people from voting on whether or not to hunt wolves.

      • Immer Treue says:

        I think it’s just the usual time for running dogs through their training.

        • Yvette says:

          Oh, I see. I don’t know anything about hunting dogs. The exposure to the anti-wolf and predator groups has tuned me into a skeptic.

          • Immer Treue says:

            From the article:
            “July 8 marked the beginning of the dog training season, when attacks by wolves on hounds typically begin. There had been no hound attacks prior to this week’s incidents.

            Coincidentally, as I drive through northwestern Wisconsin, about second week in July, I noticed quite a few pickups with dog boxes in the beds. I doubt they were all for sled dogs. Training season is on.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I don’t see the distinction. It really isn’t an attack if the owners take the dogs out and find wolves, but pre-voting propaganda. It’s so over the top it is nauseating, and I hope voters aren’t stupid enough to believe it (although one never knows.)

      I’m glad that some forward thinking (and rich) people set aside land in the UP they will never,/b> be able to hunt in.

    • Nancy says:

      From an article last year:

      “Crippen has just topped a knoll and sees flashes of movement, frightening four to five gray wolves that cornered and killed one of his Bluetick purebreds while hunting bear”

      The man raises expensive dogs to hunt down and harass bears so he can shoot them and then whines when wildlife turns the table. Huh.

      • rork says:

        For those not reading these articles (they aren’t that great), the same man has managed to get his dogs killed 2 years in a row. Whether he learned anything yet wasn’t clear. There was another article on mlive where a 5th dog was reported killed too – but I can’t really recommend it except for anthropologists who might obtain data from the 500 comments.

      • Immer Treue says:

        “The man raises expensive dogs to hunt down and harass bears so he can shoot them and then whines when wildlife turns the table. Huh.”
        When I first became interested in the cyber world of wolf controversy, your comment was along the lines of what I wrote. My sentiments have not changed. There is now an “equalizer” in the woods.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Mabie said most wolf-hounding chases differ little from a bird dog pointing grouse or pheasants.

          “Putting one hound on a track is no problem,” he said. “The dog will run that wolf and bark at it until the wolf sits down, and then the dog runs circles around it, barking. If it were a bird dog with a beeper collar, the beeper would go off and you’d move in to flush the bird. The hound basically goes to point on the wolf.”

          Really? A wolf is just going to sit there while the dog runs circles around it?

        • Nancy says:

          What a great way of putting it, Immer – equalizer.

        • Louise Kane says:

          only problem is that the people crying for “management” then find even more justification to kill and manage the “equalizer” . The wolves can’t win even when they do

          • Immer Treue says:

            Reminds me of a story about the Chicago Bears great linebacker Dick Butkus in a game against the Minnesota Vikings. There was no hope for the Bears to win, and with seconds remaining, Butkus called a time out. One of his teammates yelled, “Dick, why in the hell did you do that?” To which Butkus replied, “I want one more crack at Tinglehoff.”

            I don’t know. Wolves were never extirpated from MN. From MN, they moved into WI and MI. Perhaps as the human population increase races to its own Armageddon, this is the wolves last chance to symbolize what yet remains wild, call that metaphorical time out, and without trying to anthropomorphize, get in that one last “crack”.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Nancy, it’s all about having their own personal game farm. The animals aren’t supposed to do anything until hunting season actually starts, those are the rules.

  66. Louise Kane says:

    anyone wanting to comment on the proposed wolf and predator derby in Salmon, this is the solicitation

  67. Louise Kane says:

    carnage being the key word here

  68. Louise Kane says:

    company involved in one of Canada’s biggest environmental catastrophes says press on with new projects
    this is the same company that designed the pebble mine dams….

  69. Ida Lupines says:

    Any non-native plant has the potential to become an invasive species, some obviously more aggressive than others. Tulips and bulbs naturalize, and also displace other plants, and sometimes require more care, water and pesticides (non-native roses).

    Some food crops are closely controlled, but if they were to be neglected or abandoned – you’d soon see invasive qualities, some more than others. The native vegetation doesn’t always return once they are removed. It’s just more convenient-think (like doublespeak); the plants we like, and the ones we don’t – a variation on the ‘cute’ factor rork mentions. And we still allow importation of exotic snakes because to stop it would ‘hurt someone’s livelihood’ which when no longer a novelty, have been dumped off in the Everglades and are ruining them. Our favored crops also take up large swaths of habitat. And we all know about cattle.

  70. aves says:

    Modifying airport habitat to reduce bird strikes:

    • Mark L says:

      Funny, I’ve argued the same ‘get taller grass’ talking point for years. I do think it’s ironic they are trying to rid us of ‘Canadian geese’…are they foreigners? The increase of rodents can be addressed by not killing off so many…(tada!) coyotes in the immediate area. After all, what are the coyotes that are present on airfields after?

  71. Nancy says:

    Ohhh, say can you see…… in my 20 years in Montana, I’ve never seen a Wolverine and, only met a handful of people who have.

    • Jeff N. says:


      If you recall, Save Bears claimed to have seen 30 wolverines in one year. Apparently the guy had mad wolverine viewing skills. So you just have to know where to look.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      For wolverines, the withdrawal also means an end to the federal government’s proposal to reintroduce the species to the southern Rocky Mountains of Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico. Ashe said he will encourage the states to pursue reintroductions on their own.

      So what happened to all the extra manpower and money available for other species after the wolves were cut loose delisted? Looks like a lot of other species are going to have to try to survive on a wing and a prayer too.

      I thought there was no room for climate change deniers in the Interior? I guess you can acknowledge it exists, but not have to do anything about it. If anyone else were to call computer models ‘speculative’ you’d be called a climate change denier! Talk about double-speak. Who is running the show anyway? I know. Energy companies. What was that about science again?

      Just do nothing and hope for the best.

  72. Kathleen says:

    Don’t know if this has already been posted–it just made it into our paper today. 82-year-old guy grabs his gun and shoots the black bear who entered his home–game warden tells him “You did the right thing because he was getting too familiar, and if you guys had been gone and he got in the house, it’s hard telling what kind of mess he would have made.”

    But read the article and you learn they left garbage in the back of their truck and cat food on the patio!!! Why isn’t the game warden ticketing them–at the very least? Instead, it’s the bear’s fault: “he was getting to familiar.”

  73. Jeff N. says:

    It appears that sharing a seat at the table may be cause for some discomfort for some regarding who is in the seat next to you.

    Quote from Keith Kubista, president of Montana Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife:

    “We encourage non-consumptive users to contribute to management but not in this wolf stamp approach.”

  74. Nancy says:

    Had to post it – there will never be another comedian with his

  75. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Las Cruces conservationist group clashes with Hidalgo County official over Mexican wolves, free speech
    Hidalgo County official says she was protecting market

  76. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Are Wolves A Threat To Your Cattle?
    New Mexico ranchers are fighting for the right to protect their livestock from the threat of the Mexican Gray Wolf.

    • Yvette says:

      There are what, about 80 Mexican grays in the wild? If their predation success rate is about equal to Canis lupus then I fail to understand how 80 Canis lupus baileyi can be that big of a threat to cattle.

      Sounds like the same old same old.

    • Mark L says:

      “A fifth-generation rancher from Mitchell, SD, Amanda grew up on a purebred Limousin cattle operation in which she and husband Tyler are active. She graduated with a degree in agriculture journalism…”–Contributor

      Oh, now I’m gettin’ it. :rollseyes:

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      In the story that Peter Kiermeir links to, it says, “According to, while wolf predation causes relatively few livestock losses compared to other sources, that small percentage can add up to big losses for individual livestock producers and their livelihood.”

      I have been thinking about this statement recently because it is used very often by livestock interests and even wolf advocates at times. Wolves not only are not a threat to the industry, the idea that a few livestock operators bear some big burden of predation, is almost always untrue.

      With 20 years experience we see that most wolf attacks are small in scale,avoidable with changes in practice, and often apparently not all that troubling because those “aggrieved” livestock owners often refuse financial compensation and are willing to suffer future attacks when changes in practice would stop them.

  77. rork says:

    Yet another mlive article, not a bad review. Wolf wars in the comments section is expected, with the unemployed and retired having the advantage. Nothing really new, just that we are atwitter cause our senate might vote on the initiative today.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Well I’m glad to see that at least some people are aware and paying attention to this, not wrapped up in and distracted by their own little worlds.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I take that back, at least for the majority of the comments. It’s hard to believe that who have such warped perception of the issue are in the position to make the rules and outrank other forms of life.

        Hunters ramble on and on about their heritage, their rights, etc. but do not seem to realize all this is not happening in a vacuum. There are many threats to wildlands and hunting in the future, and it is not environmentalists, wolves, sage grouse or wildlife advocates who are a threat to them or their way of life. 🙁

  78. Kathleen says:

    “A type of genetically engineered fly which eventually kills itself off could be an effective method of pest control, according to new research.”

    What could possibly go wrong?!?

  79. WM says:

    Wolves go after sheep in small China village. Humans are attacked and suffer injuries defending:

    I often wonder if fairytale perceptions are grounded in real life incidents over centuries, notwithstanding over-exaggeration. So Peter and the Wolf, Little Red Riding Hood, 3 Little Pigs and a bunch of others got the message out. Don’t mess with them.

    Sorry, it just seemed like time for a little dose of reality – Valarius Geist style, this time in China, not Russia.

  80. Louise Kane says:


    have you seen this. I just received this link from the Keep Michigan Wolves Protected campaign
    a sorry legislative action

    • WM says:

      ++When the government cancels elections or diminishes the right to vote….++

      The Seattle City Council (mostly liberal D’s with socialists leanings and even 1 recently elected Socialist that have taken many by surprise) have done the same thing. They rapidly passed a minimum wage ordinance, making it by far the HIGHEST wage in the entire country to $15/hour (WA state already has the highest state wage at $9.32), knowing that they could have let the voters of Seattle decide on an initiative vote in the next general election. By the way, the Council did no economic analysis on what this dramatic increase would do to the cost of goods and services, or wage inflation, which could cause some small businesses to close or move outside the city where the wage is still state minimum. Independent franchise businesses have sued to stop implementation of the ordinance, believing they too may be pushed out of business (think dry cleaners, motels, fast-food, furniture stores, newspaper delivery, courier services, coffee shops, catering). This has all happened in the last 3 months. The cost to go up for visiting a museum or zoo, park a car in a lot, and the services of the City itself for some low skill jobs will all go up, as costs are passed on to consumers and tax payers, in an attempt to raise a living wage for the working poor, while extracting dollars from the middle class.

      Not saying this is necessarily bad, but the voters in the City are being completely by-passed by political design.

      • Louise Kane says:

        did they do this by bypassing a voter initiative process with collected signatures and a referendum pending for ballot?

        • WM says:


          Some are still mystified at how this minimum wage thing happened. New mayor, a new socialist (really) council member, and 5 other council members who were in some fashion committed to a “living wage” idea. No research was done other than one lone economist from UC Berkley, who is also a socialist. So this thing went from an idea to an ordinance in less than 6 months. The ordinance even says if an out of town employer who has workers in the City (say a daily furniture delivery from a warehouse in the suburbs) they are covered by the wage law if they work more than 2 hours in 2 weeks, even if they don’t live here. So, to play this out, the cost of your new sofa, a head of lettuce, clothing or virtually anything delivered to a retailer from an out of city distribution center warehouse just went up to pay for delivering it.

          To answer your question, I’m pretty sure the Council didn’t want voters to weigh in, so no referendum was discussed. And the timing to mount a citizen petition for an initiative to get it on the ballot was simply too short for the November ballot, because nobody thought they would pass it so quickly. The even goofier part is that most wage laws are passed at the state or federal level, for all the reasons you can imagine.

          • Louise Kane says:

            Thanks for the response, WM
            It seems that legislators with their own agendas are becoming more common. They forget they are public servants.

            the difference between your example and why I think the Michigan situation is very egregious is that the legislature took the initiative to introduce (Casperseon on July 4th I think) a bill that would overturn a citizen’s referendum where 257,000 signatures were collected in a timely and legal manner. They deliberately went against a large constituency in an underhanded. stealthy manner and rushed through the legislation in something like two months or less only days after the citizen’s turned in their signatures. Its no easy thing to get that number of signatures in the required timeframe and to have them certified. To do so indicates large public support for the referendum.

            To push the legislation that made the referendum moot, was really sleazy. The legislators forgot that they work for their constituents and that by subverting a vote and the referendum process they are voting against a substantial constituency that “hired” them in the first place.

            One senator’s agenda should not trump an important democratic tradition and the will of a population that wants to vote on an issue and had preserved that right through the referendum process.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        53% of Democrats Have a Positive View of Socialism, Gallup Poll Claims


        65% of Americans would “rather President Obama and Congress focus on job creation than deficit reduction.”
        (CNN/Opinion Research poll, Sept. 2011)

        72% of Americans “favor raising taxes on those making more than $250,000/year to cut the deficit.”
        (Washington Post-ABC poll, July 2011

        78% of Americans “oppose cutting spending on Medicare, the government health insurance program for the elderly, to reduce the national debt.”
        (Washington Post-ABC poll, April 2011

        Americans were asked: “To balance the federal budget, which of the following would be the first step you would take?” They responded:
        61% Tax the rich
        20% Cut the military
        4% Cut Medicare
        3% Cut Social Security
        (60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll, Jan. 2011)

        78% of Americans want “universal healthcare.” 59% support a “national health insurance program similar to Medicare, but covering everyone.”
        (CBS/New York Times poll, Feb. 2009)

        67% support raising the minimum wage to at least $10/hour.
        (Public Religion Research Institute, June 2010

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          Tales of the cities: the progressive vision of urban America

          A union leader is being hailed as a possible mayor in Chicago while elsewhere mayors are pursuing policies Obama has been unable to enact on the national stage

          People think in terms of red and blue states, but the real distinction is between town and country. With just a handful of exceptions, every city of more than 500,000 inhabitants votes Democrat; in all of the 10 largest cities in America white people are a minority.

        • JB says:

          Those data are interesting. I think there may be a disconnect between how people self-identify ideologically with their policy preferences. Typically, more Americans identify themselves as conservatives than liberals.

          In other polling news, folks here should check out this poll:

          Notice what’s missing?

          • Mareks Vilkins says:

            I think there may be a disconnect between how people self-identify ideologically with their policy preferences.

            yes, when voters are asked what they think are policy choices made by politicians they are completely misguided, particularly Republicans

            Class War?: What Americans Really Think about Economic Inequality
            by Benjamin I. Page and Lawrence R. Jacobs

            At every income level and in both major political parties, majorities embrace conservative egalitarianism; a philosophy that prizes individualism and self-reliance as well as public intervention to help Americans pursue these ideals on a level playing field. Drawing on hundreds of opinion studies spanning more than seventy years, including a new comprehensive survey, Page and Jacobs reveal that this worldview translates to broad support for policies aimed at narrowing the gap between rich and poor and creating genuine opportunity for all. They find, for example, that across economic, geographical, and ideological lines, most Americans support higher minimum wages, improved public education, wider access to universal health insurance coverage, and the use of tax dollars to fund these programs.

            In this surprising and heartening assessment, Page and Jacobs provide our new administration with a popular mandate to combat the economic inequity that plagues our nation.


            The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Don’t Get
            by Benjamin I. Page, Marshall M. Bouton

            Drawing on a series of national surveys conducted between 1974 and 2004, Page and Bouton reveal that—contrary to conventional wisdom—Americans generally hold durable, coherent, and sensible opinions about foreign policy. Nonetheless, their opinions often stand in opposition to those of policymakers, usually because of different interests and values, rather than superior wisdom among the elite

            majorities of virtually all social, ideological, and partisan groups seek a policy that pursues the goals of security and justice through cooperative means

          • Mareks Vilkins says:

            Notice what’s missing?


            climate change, an issue that only 24% of Americans say they worry about a great deal. This puts climate change, along with the quality of the environment, near the bottom of a list of 15 issues Americans rated in Gallup’s March 6-9 survey

            Thirty-one percent of Americans indicate that they worry “a great deal” about the quality of the environment this year, marking the lowest level of worry about the environment more broadly since Gallup began measuring this in 2001. Americans were most concerned about the environment in 2007, when 43% worried a great deal.

            Among Democrats and Democratic leaners, 45% say they worry a great deal about the quality of the environment. This percentage drops to 16% among Republicans and Republican leaners.

            Gallup finds a 26-percentage-point difference in worry about climate change, with Democrats again more likely than Republicans to worry a great deal

          • Mareks Vilkins says:

            but compare Gallup with this one:

            “With which one of these statements about the environment and the economy do you most agree? Protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth. OR, Economic growth should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent.”

            Protection of the environment – 50%
            Economic growth – 41%

            very long list with other questions and interesting results!

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        2014 Job Creation Faster in States that Raised the Minimum Wage

        Of the 13 states that increased their minimum wage in early 2014, all but one (New Jersey) are seeing employment gains. Furthermore, nine of the remaining 12 states are above the median for this period.

        The experience of the 13 states that already increased their minimum wage in 2014 paints a very positive picture for Washington and its low-wage workers.

    • rork says:

      Every interested person in MI knows our senate passed the wolf initiative, but thanks Louise. We await our House’s action. Governor is irrelevant in this, quiet even.

      I was rather proud that we seemed to have at least waited long enough to have demonstrated that wolf densities peak at a less-than-frightening level, at least in our U.P., and that we didn’t need sport wolf hunts (but Yoopers with bad troubles would still get permits to kill wolves, or even get professional help – no fairy tale endings here). Michigan, it’s wildlife managers, and it’s hunters, were going to have an unmatched reputation as straight thinkers.
      That might not happen. Wolves became political pawns. GOP has been fired up here lately. The legislators may be poorly informed about wolves, but they probably thought harder about how it will influence their (poorly informed) constituents. I’ve proposed new laws that say the people near Ann Arbor decide everything.

      • Louise Kane says:

        I figured you were aware your take is perfect ]…

        more this morning in my mailbox on off chance you have not seen it

        Hard to read

        The captured wolf was killed by a wildlife services person hired to do collaring by the Michigan Dept of Fish and Game

        “Because of the nature of the interaction … we did not want to take any risk of the wolf continuing that behavior when there weren’t extenuating circumstances,” Bump said on the Mike Avery Outdoor Magazine radio show.”

        When else would the wolf have the opportunity to bite a human
        It was being collared ?

        Trapped wolf bites researcher, who kills the animal; wildlife officials call the incident rare

        • Immer Treue says:

          MN will also hire trappers for control action, but I’m pretty sure also for collaring.

  81. Ralph Maughan says:

    When the government cancels elections or diminishes the right to vote, democracy itself is abolished. This justifies the use of non-democratic methods in response, those being a tool that remains that folks might possibly use.

  82. Peter Kiermeir says:

    “The tigers of Dudhwa reserve are under the vigil of women this monsoon. Every day, 24 women home guards cover a distance of 8-12 km on foot to protect the tiger terrain from poachers. Their tip-off helped the reserve authorities nab six poachers who were caught with spears and traps.”

  83. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Michigan: Trapped wolf bites researcher, who kills the animal;

    • Mark L says:

      “He said the injured researcher is under contract with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Fish and Wildlife Services, and has done control work in the past.”

      Suprise, suprise.

      • Barb Rupers says:

        The article is in error as there is no “U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Fish and Wildlife Services.”

        Wildlife Services is in the Department of Agriculture: “to provide Federal leadership and expertise to resolve wildlife conflicts to allow people and wildlife to coexist”

        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is in the Department of Interior: “Agency with mission of conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.”

  84. Nancy says:

    Just another day in what’s left of wilderness areas:

  85. Nancy says:

    Gee, do you think it was pressure from hunting groups or the extra $3 to $10 grand for the FFWCC coffers?

    • Amre says:

      It dose not seem like there is an actual need to kill alligators there. Personally, i’ve been disappointed with FWC for a while.

    • Nancy says:

      “A contract range rider will also be on the site for five to seven days while the sheep are moved”

      So what does that mean? Suddenly there’s an attempt (after the fact/depredation) to supervise and actually be responsible for these sheep?

      • bret says:

        He has been working with WDFW conflict specialist before the incident and has four Pyrenees sheepdogs.

        • Nancy says:

          So why was nothing said in the article about sheepdogs Bret?

        • WM says:


          Who is footing the bill for the contract rider, horse and the 4 guard dogs, and any idea how much for the package?

          • bret says:

            WM, I believe it is a cost share program with WDFW and ranchers, Conservation NW is involved with volunteers and money.

            • WM says:

              Just trying to get a handle on how much is being spent, or otherwise some sort of “subsidy.” Most “conservation” groups never want to talk about that part quantitatively. And, that is dishonest, because it is an integral part of the wolf recovery program.

    • Amre says:

      Prepare for the ranchers who owned these sheep to wine to the media in the coming days.

      • WM says:

        Is there some reason sheep ranchers shouldn’t “wine” (whine)? They have lost stock that has monetary value they will not recover unless they prove up their losses and hope the proof is accepted.

        And, this loss happened on private land leased from a timber company.

        • Amre says:


          I acknowledge the fact that the ranchers did loose money thanks to this incident.

          But while wolf predation might be an issue for some individual producers it is obviously not an issue for the entire industry, yet industry groups such as the national beef association, and the national wool growers association act like it is when disease, weather, birth complications, and other predators take out far more livestock than wolves, yet they don’t whine about that.

          Personally, i don’t have an issue with control of wolves on private land, as long as the producer uses nonlethal methods prior (and in this case, it is private land.)

          Its just when ranchers graze on public land for a pathetically low fee and wolves are killed for eating those cows/sheep, even though those public lands were intended for wildlife, not livestock, that gets me angry.

          I think WDFW dose’t want another controversy like it had when it killed 7 members of the wedge pack.

          • WM says:


            ++Personally, i don’t have an issue with control of wolves on private land, as long as the producer uses nonlethal methods prior (and in this case, it is private land.)++

            Neither do I, but wildlife of any sort does not understand private/public land boundaries and use both. And, as long as there are lessors of private land, and a public lands grazing program on BLM or FS lands there will be these kinds of dilemma situations. Just trying to show it is complex, and folks who make a living with livestock do, to some extent, deserve the right to “whine.” Not everyone is a cattle/sheep baron or landed nobility as some seem to suggest on this forum. I expect that is particularly true in Stevens County, the “Forgotten Corner” of WA. There is a book by that title, by the way, written by an old friend of mine.

            • Amre says:


              “Neither do I, but wildlife of any sort does not understand private/public land boundaries and use both.”

              I don’t think anybody denies this fact. As i said before, i would like nonlethal methods such as guard dogs, fencing, and range riders to be used first, and if that dose not work, then lethal control can be used as a last resort, but only on private land. The reason I dislike control on public land is that the ranchers don’t have a right to graze there, its a privilege. In an ideal situation, there wouldn’t be livestock on public lands in the first place, but realistically, that won’t happen anytime soon.

              I agree with you that its a really tough dilemma. On one side, you have the ranchers, who’s livelihood’s can sometimes be at stake, not just because of predators, but also because of the markets. On the other side, you have those who want to conserve wildlife. For the wolves, their very lives could be at stake in these situations.

    • WM says:

      The report of sheep depredation on 8/12 is listed as “probable wolf kill,” although the narrative seems to suggest it was a confirmed based on the fact that the sheep was reported as healthy, and GPS collar information coincident with wolf presence at the time of death. So, now do wolves in OR get a beyond a reasonable doubt threshold, rather than more probable than not/preponderance of evidence. Strikes me that “clear and convincing” ought to be the standard, and this would on its face seem to meet it.

      So, now somebody with a political agenda can say, well it wasn’t a “confirmed kill,” and the reason is they ate all the evidence.

      • Yvette says:

        Reading you guy’s short conversation reminded me of one of the biggest questions I had way back when I first became aware that ranchers were reimbursed when they lost livestock to wildlife depredation. The only answer I’ve found is ‘that is the way it’s always been done.’

        Anyone in business, any kind of business, faces the potential of losses. It could be because of anything; theft, natural disaster, poor business planning, economic fluctuations, etc. Insurance won’t cover losses due to poor decisions or economic fluctuations. That is one of the risks that people take when they decide to have a business.

        I’ve gathered the agriculture industry in America is different than other businesses. Through various federal programs ag producers are compensated for losses. (not always, but often enough for us to discuss). Ranchers seem to be the one of the biggest winners in this area.

        Those of us with the interest keep discussing various methods to compensate the rancher when a loss of an animal occurs. Lethal or non-lethal? Should WS be killing millions of wildlife pro-actively? Is that pro-active killing even working? What harm is it causing to the environment (poisons), to the ecological balance (millions of coyotes killed annually)? But are we asking the right question?Here is what I do not yet grasp.

        1. Ranchers lease public land at a price far below market value. We citizens pay the price both financially and by degradation to our watersheds and to entire ecosystems. One of those ranchers refuses to remove his trespass cattle and refuses to pay the > million dollars in cheap grazing fees he owes. Our government has allowed this so-called Christian cheater to get away it. Cheap grazing fees and no responsibility in the degradation of ecosystems is a pretty good deal in my opinion.

        2. When one of those ranchers loses a cow or a sheep to a predator they are compensated for that loss when the depredation is confirmed. Some of these ranchers have poor animal husbandry. Some of it is simply bad luck.

        All of these ranchers know they take a risk when they graze their animals. It doesn’t necessarily have to be from a predator. Lightning strike, snake bite, drowning, or any number of things. It is a business risk. Predator attack is a business risk in the ranching industry—whether on public land or private land.

        Why is this particular industry being compensated by the federal government when they suffer a loss? Why are we not pressing this question more? Am I wrong to assume that question hasn’t been pushed as hard? I do not understand what it is about this particular industry where we just assume that we are responsible to pay them for their business losses. Help me understand the reasons beyond, ‘because that is the way it’s always been done’.

  86. Nancy says:

    “Instead of tossing the catch, he donated it to Timon’s Ministries in Corpus Christi, Texas where about 75 pounds of the shark’s meat ended up”

    Tossing the catch? And where, “pray tell” did the other 700 lbs. end up?

    • Amre says:

      I’m against killing sharks in general, especially large mature females like this that are critical to the population. Also, tiger shark populations on the eastern seaboard have declined by about 96%, and their listed as “near threatened” internationally by the IUCN. There are many other ways to help the poor/homeless besides killing sharks.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        It’s more BS to try to improve the image of shark tournaments, I would imagine. The media has no integrity anymore, so who can believe what they try to write.

        What if the homeless don’t want yukky shark meat? I’ve heard it has a strong ammonia taste. Spare me. I know beggars can’t be choosers, but I don’t think this guy did the homeless any favors, and it is self-serving.

        It ain’t salmon, that’s for sure.

        • Amre says:

          Don’t forget the high mercury content.

        • Nancy says:

          Ida – you would surprised at how much shark meat is passed off as scallops.

          • Amre says:


            The article isn’t talking about shark meat being passed off as scallops. Its about how overfishing sharks is contributing to the collapse of scallop populations.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            I would be very surprised, because scallops are very sweet and mild. I’m only familiar with sea scallops. I live very near the scallop capital of the nation, New Bedford, MA. My father was a commercial fisherman and my husband works in the food industry and has been in fisheries for years (including the NMFS). I don’t even see shark much at the markets, maybe just a small presence. Our waters in the Northeast are too cold for sharks except for a few months in the summer (at least they were before climate change).

            I have been reading a lot about fish fraud at restaurants though, because I think we can no longer get popular fish in the quantities we demand because of overfishing. We just don’t seem to get the concept of over fishing, or over- anything – and like out West, I think the state and federal governments try to placate fishermen by not restricting catch as much as they could – and eventually it won’t help the fishermen or the fish to come back.

  87. JEFF E says:
    you can’t fix stupid

  88. Ida Lupines says:

    No, and worse than that, Stupid can be downright dangerous. The visual for this is so ugly – the first thing this group of thugs and their spawn sees – Shoot!!!! Coyotes, skunks, weasels, jackrabbits, raccoons and starlings.

  89. Ida Lupines says:

    A Colorado hunting outfitter accused of injuring mountain lions and bobcats to help clients kill them more easily pleaded guilty on Friday in a U.S. court in Denver to one felony count of conspiring to break a federal wildlife law, prosecutors said.

    As part of the plea deal, Loncarich admitted he led a ring of professional hunters who shot, trapped and caged the wild cats to provide clients with phony fair chase hunts in Colorado and Utah from 2007 to 2010, prosecutors said in a statement.

    Another lovely example of humanity. *shudder*

  90. aves says:

    Taking up arms where birds feast on buffett of salmon:

    • Ida Lupines says:

      This really bothers me. Not only have we decreased salmon numbers dramatically by dams and cut into the food supply of other animals by doing so, we want to deny other creatures access to what is available.

      Animals are entitled to food, and salmon is a fish that a lot of animals rely upon. I remember watching a nature program where salmon DNA is even in evergreen trees, which really struck me as how salmon is such a part of the cycle of life.

      We don’t even care, we greedily want it all for ourselves, and still recklessly reproduce our own numbers which really cannot go on forever without consequences. I’ll be happy when a lot of these dams go, as some are scheduled to. And I hope the EPA and Alaska kick the Pebble Mine corporation to the curb for threatening the health of the ecosystem.

      It might have been this, I’m not sure:

    • Amre says:

      It reminds me of elk hunters in the NRM that are angry with wolves for eating elk. What are they suppose to do, starve to death so the hunters can shoot elk?

      Same thing here. When an animal is doing what all animals do(eating) it has to get punished even though humans have caused the salmon decline.

      Fishermen take out about 18% of the columbia river salmon population annually. Maybe they should start with limiting that more?

  91. Ida Lupines says:

    And one last (but not least) thing –

    To me, protecting the salmon (and everything that depends upon them) is the clearest example of sportsmen environmentalists and non-hunting/fishing environmentalists working together to protect something we both hold dear:

    Have a good evening!

  92. Louise Kane says:

    I’m betting Rork may have posted this but I can’ find it. If so I am sorry for the duplicate.
    The legislature passed the bill in MI that will by pass two voter referendums that overturner the DNR as the sole authority to designate wolves as a game animals. In other words, wolves will be hunted. Two voter initiatives to protect wolves ignored and trumped by a single party determined to be able to kill wolves. The really sad part is that this speaks very clearly to the power and influence that special interest money and lobbyists muster when it comes to continuing an agenda of irrational, fear, hate and malice towards wolves. It’s astounding in this case. if you read the comments at the end of the story they are in stark contrast to those that you might see in a Boise or even Bozeman paper. Many of them are really angry about the legislature taking the vote away from the citizens and many more are angry about hunting wolves and are very educated about the issues. It’s unusual to see this kind of dogged support for wolves. The passage of the bill is really tragic given that it could be likely to see tolerance for wolves go down, after hunting is allowed (JB just publishe a paper illustrating this) and tragic that wolves and the citizens supporting them both lost out to a corrupted decidedly anti-democratic undertaking by the republican legislature. what is the lesson here, the less fair you play the more likely you are to win? Rork I read your excellent comments. I’m now hoping that there is a legal basis for to overturn the law based on the fact that the law contains several discrete unrelated provisions, like a rider and I am reading this could render it moot. I hope so. AHH back to the issue of those pesky lawsuits. As someone recently posted, no lawsuits necessary when the rules are followed and the game is played fairly.

    • rork says:

      A couple of our cities that held more liberal voters are roughed up and depopulated. GOP controlled a well-gerrymandering of the state, and it permits them things they otherwise might not do. Democratic resurgence in our legislature seems difficult. New governor is perhaps a possibility. Wolves won’t be the issue on most folks minds, but as the article points out we’ve had some other reasons to complain.

  93. Louise Kane says:

    anyone know if this is true African govt selling rhinos to private game reserves???

      • Louise Kane says:

        I’ve seen it sadly. That tried argument really irks me.

        this equally is maddening
        “Trophy hunting is only allowed under strict permit conditions, and a maximum of five black rhino per year may be hunted in each of South Africa and Namibia. The rhinos are selected on careful biological principles: rhinos used for trophy hunting are old, generally post-reproductive bulls, who may have a detrimental effect on the overall rhino population, by being aggressive or territorial. By removing the problematic individual, this may enable a higher growth rate for the population as a whole.”

        what a pompous proposition that the evolutionary processes that define what animals survive, what pass on their genes, what information the elder animals share with other members of their species must be circumvented by trophy hunting to keep the herd healthy.

        hmm lets see poaching and hunting puts rhinos at risk and trophy hunting will save them

        • Ida Lupines says:

          by being aggressive or territorial.

          ????? Isn’t that what all animals do, including humans? You should see the hummingbirds at my window – talk about aggressive and territorial!

          It looks like that silly theory posted has already begun. 🙁

          • Ida Lupines says:

            If an animal’s aggression and territorialism is ‘bred out’, the animal will not be the same animal, nor will it have the skills to survive.

            This rationale is pure BS, and if we are headed in that direction, it’s getting closer to a game farm.

  94. Louise Kane says:

    The more public sites become well public the more abuse is uncovered particularly when it comes to trophy hunting. There is something off about killing animals for pleasure. I’d very much like to see trophy hunting banned world wide.

    • Elk375 says:


      I just watched the Green Mile Video, it involves has only a faction of less than .1% of hunters. These so called hunters are from the UAE and they behavior wrong. The owner of the safari company is Indian decent and only care is money.

      The leading African hunting forum is Accurate Reloading which is owned by a owned by a wealthy UAE citizen Seaad. Seaad has posted the video and made some very disparaging comments about there behavior. The behavior of these killer is not the behavior of an African hunter.

      Read the comments on this video from many safari hunters.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Hi Elk,

        I did read the comments and I was glad to see that other hunters were appalled. I think however that when you scratch the surface you see a deep underbelly of a new emerging disrespectful culture of trophy hunters that treat wildlife like they are out for target practice. There also seems to be some pent up hate and discontent that some people take out on wildlife and you see it in the predator hunting forums and the killing contest sites. It should be as disturbing to hunters as it is to non hunters. I appreciate that you are not of that ilk, to use a phrase that someone I read often recently used. But many are. I understand the culture of hunting and fishing and while i may not subscribe to it, I don’t understand at all trophy hunting. I am adamantly opposed to it and to the idea of killing for sport.

      • Amre says:

        That behavior is simply some of the most disgusting i have ever seen in my life. And the fact that their letting a little kid do it is even worse. Do you think he’ll have any respect of animals, or life in general, when he grow’s up?

        I just hope people don’t use this video as another lame excuse to discriminate against arabs and muslims….

  95. Ida Lupines says:

    This is what happens when you proceed full speed ahead with a new technology without anticipating or properly researching its effects in the environment. And the ‘but domestic cats kill X number of birds per year’ is wearing thin – the bird deaths from all threats to them are cumulative, and the more these large solar plants are built, the more bird deaths we will see. According to Dan Ashe and F&W, climate change is all speculative anyway:

  96. Kathleen says:

    Two interesting and disturbing articles I just ran across on my way to somewhere else…unsure if either has been posted already. First,”The radical plan to phase out Earth’s predatory species” because doing so will eliminate suffering of prey animals.

    “Should animals be permitted to hunt and kill other animals? Some futurists believe that humans should intervene, and solve the “problem” of predator vs. prey once and for all. We talked to the man who wants to use radical ecoengineering to put an end to the carnage.”

    Second, artwork that I found disturbing and perverse yet kinda fascinating…

    “These whimsical paintings are the work of San Francisco artist Robert Bowen. It’s part of a collection called “Blasphemous Nature” in which animals are mixed with technology in perplexing and provocative ways.”

    • Amre says:

      His vision is just plain silly. Here’s one of the questions he dose’t want to answer: What will us humans do when the herbivore’s get overpopulated?

    • Immer Treue says:

      Can’t wait until; we are up to our necks in mice and rats; we have a deer through every windshield; Lyme disease becomes endemic, as does CWD; then they begin to go after everyone’s canine and feline friends.

  97. Ida Lupines says:

    That theory is so bizarre, subjective and human-centric that I am at a loss for words. Suffering is a human concept, and predators don’t allow prey to suffer in the way that humans, who have a full understanding of the meaning of the term, do. What does this person propose to do about the human propensity for violence and predation? I’m no expert on Eastern religions, but this person doesn’t seem to have a real understanding of that either.

    Speaking of artwork, I was admiring greatly whoever EarthFirst!’s artists are. I was directed to a link there. The nature drawings are gorgeous:

    Religions pertain to human behavior, ‘lion and lamb’ are figurative, not literal, IMO.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      But at the rate we are going, predators may be wiped out, but not with the results this man envisions. smh 🙁

  98. Immer Treue says:


    Foreshadow of future doom?

  99. Louise Kane says:

    some really great ideas here
    I like the part about the biologists providing visist to the field to see wild predators in non threatening habitats. I often wonder if some of the wolf killers were asked to view wolves i their habitat or to see the Living with Wolves documentary if they might experience subtle shift that is referenced here.

  100. Ed Loosli says:

    Dan Ashe, Director of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife should RETIRE and the sooner the better. He has lost any interest in trying to recover rare species like wolves, grizzly bears, bison, wolverines (which is his job), and all he now says, is that these species are not in trouble, so everybody should just “move along – nothing to see here”. At this point, Dan Ashe is just speaking for the cattle industry and oil/gas/mining interests.

    • WM says:

      ++He has lost any interest in trying to recover rare species like wolves, grizzly bears, bison, wolverines (which is his job), and all he now says, is that these species are not in trouble, so everybody should just “move along – nothing to see here”.++

      No he isn’t. He is speaking for a D Administration that would like to keep some seats during the mid-term election without losing the Senate, or widenin the R strangle-hold on the House, and would hang on to the White House another 4 years, And, as for wolves, they don’t need ESA protection, because they are not in danger of extinction (except the Mexican wolf which surely has some political problems of its own). Bison are doing fine except they have no place to go. Grizzlies are at a high, but have not much more habitat/human tolerance in a climate changed world. Wolverine policy is a bit of a mystery, but see sentence 2, above.

      The ESA is not a predator/wildlife protection act, as some here seem to think. It is a preservation from EXTINCTION law.

      • Mark L says:

        WM says,
        “Bison are doing fine except they have no place to go.”

        How is that doing fine? Kind of like the ivory-billed woodpecker 2 centuries ago, right?

        • WM says:

          Mark L.,

          So tell us exactly what FWS and Dan Ashe are to do about the habitat and MT livestock industry issues? Please be specific.

          • Mark L says:

            Well, if I had a wish list, maybe putting more space between the name Dan Ashe and the letters FWS would be a high objective? (but I’m not a wisher)
            Non-specifically (and because I don’t do requests WM), I think websites just like this one do a good job of exposing some of the livestock industry’s hype against bison. Is the majority coming from the beef industry, or from all meat sources? I suspect that without a ‘very slanted spokesman’ to keep ralling the beef livestock industry’s far right, the more ‘normal’ middle are tiring of the constant rhetoric. Back east, a lot just don’t listen any more cause it’s the same ole bison hate mongering mantra (and a lot doesn’t apply back east too).
            Heck, there was an interesting article in yesterdays Wall Street Journal (op/ed I think) where someone said ‘eating cheeseburgers isn’t melting the arctic’ (or something like that). The guy kept saying ‘meat’ instead of ‘beef’ or ‘chicken’ or ‘pork’. Why? Cause if you separate the ‘beef’ from the other sources of meat, how much of our environmental problems are addressed? How much conflict do bison have with chickens pigs or sheep?
            I’ve tried to my comments out of politics mode, so a lot of this will seem irrelevant to you. Same when some on here go into ‘legal’ mode. We argue what we are good at, not through what we’re not.

            • WM says:

              I don’t disagree with you about the plight of bison, but that is outside FWS scope of duties at this point (except their duties at the National Bison Range, which is a subset of Wildlife Refuges for which they are responsible, and which is a long