Sunset in Butte Valley. Central Nevada. Copyright Ralph Maughan

Sunset in Butte Valley. Central Nevada. Copyright Ralph Maughan

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 (Oct. 25) “old” news.


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.

354 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife related news? Nov. 7, 2014 edition

    • Gary Humbard says:

      This is another case of humans encroaching on wild lands, and native wildlife paying the price. These lions should not have been killed and instead the owner needs to find a “safer” place to live.

      Since these mountain lions were doing what they have done for thousands of years and they happened upon some easy prey, hopefully MFWP will work with this guy to make sure he knows that this was a one time occurrence for allowing the killing of lions or other predators.

      • W. Hong says:

        The article I read on this said he has lived there for 25 years. Do you think he should sell his property and move?

        • Gary Humbard says:

          The issue is should native wildlife be killed because humans have moved into THEIR habitat, not how long someone has lived there. When I’m in wild areas I know the risks and prepare for them as best as possible with the understanding that something may still go wrong. I embrace and respect the wildness. This guy wants to live in a relatively wild area, but not accept the risks that come with it. IMO wrong mindset.

          • W. Hong says:

            They said it is only about 15 minutes from town in a very well used area and that this was an odd thing as there were 3 lions in that area. HOw do you take the risks when this has not happened in 25 years?

            • Ida Lupines says:

              This sounds like a perfect example of what we can expect in the future if we aren’t careful. What used to be wild areas becoming more urban, and nobody remembering after (only) 25 years, forgetting/refusing to make any concessions to living with withlife and the wildlife with nowhere to go, and the temptations of human settlement.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                oops make that ‘wildlife’.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                And the recent killing of the bear too – didn’t do anything wrong until one day he did, and then ‘ka-blam’! I don’t want a country like this.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Speaking of ‘ka-blam’, I haven’t seen any deer since last fall and I haven’t heard/seen any hunters. In the 30 or so years I have lived in my (increasingl less and less) rural town, hunting has becoming less and less it seems. I only saw one camo-clad guy this year dutifully packing it in for the day at sundown, empty-handed it would appear.

                There’s been a hella lot of development, trees bulldozed down everywhere – I believe development is responsible for less deer, not ‘coyotes taking fawns’.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                So sometimes I think increasing urbanization is the enemy of wildlands/wildlife, and not hunting/ranching. 🙁

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think I would feel sad about less hunters. 🙁

            • Nancy says:

              More than a few things to keep in mind here W. Hong –
              Their neighbors had had troubles with mountain lions.

              Could be way off base here but goats and sheep excited to see him every morning when he went out to feed them, didn’t sound like they are enclosed for the night, even with the threat of predators.

              Brief shots of fence lines in the video, wouldn’t hold many predators off either. Although the high netting around the trampoline would prevent kids and grandkids from injuries 🙂

              Another story of wildlife paying the price for human stupidity….

          • Elk375 says:

            Gary is Pattee Canyon really a wild area? Have you ever been there? There are homes everywhere and when I was in college we used to go up to the picnic area and drink, drink and drink. Pattee Canyon is an urban area with mountain lions.

            • Gary Humbard says:

              ELK375, I stand corrected as I should have done my homework before I made a comment. Looking at Google Earth shows a fairly urban area. Thanks

              • Kathleen says:

                The Missoulian article said he lived “near the end of Deer Creek Road.” If you get on Google Earth and follow Pattee Canyon Rd. (533) east to Deer Creek Rd., you’ll find that it doesn’t appear to be at all urban.

            • Barb Rupers says:

              The property is one-half mile southeast of Pattee Canyon Park.

            • IDhiker says:

              I lived in Pattee Canyon for eight years in the late sixties to mid-seventies. It was fairly “wild” then, but those days are long gone. My brothers and I hiked all over but never saw any lions. Now it’s mostly a recreation area with homes located in woods. I guess I would say it borders “wild” areas (commercial forest).

  1. Nancy says:

    So my question is, why isn’t the livestock & crop industry taking a stand on this? Or is it a case of “out of sight, out of mind” when the trucks roll out of the farm or ranch with their products?

  2. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Gates foundation spends bulk of agriculture grants in rich countries

    African NGOs received just 4% of Bill Gates’s money for agriculture work, with 75% for US organisations, report says

  3. Mareks Vilkins says:

    I will repost a link to this great interview about George Monbiot’s book “Feral”:

    by Steve Wheeler

  4. Gary Humbard says:

    Now hold on USFWS, one bruin scientist explains the great bear within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem should not be de-listed.

  5. snaildarter says:

    Article on killing owls to save owls. This problem may become more common as Climate change more habitats northward

    • Gary Humbard says:

      Lawsuits were successfully filed to list the northern spotted owl (and supposedly to not necessarily protect old-growth forest), and since 1995, ~90% of NSO habitat has been protected from timber harvest in western Oregon and Washington and northern California. Since these lands are managed mainly for the protection and restoration of NSO’s, does it not make sense to reduce the leading threat (barred owls) to NSO’s.

      Humans have degraded NSO habitat for the last 100 years and it will take time for the restoration of old growth forests, but in the meantime we should have options to maintain the viability of NSO’s, unless of course it wasn’t about the owl after all.

  6. Kathleen says:

    Meta-Analysis of Attitudes toward Damage-Causing Mammalian Wildlife

    Excerpt from abstract:
    “Many populations of threatened mammals persist outside formally protected areas, and their survival depends on the willingness of communities to coexist with them. An understanding of the attitudes, and specifically the tolerance, of individuals and communities and the factors that determine these is therefore fundamental to designing strategies to alleviate human-wildlife conflict.”

  7. Barb Rupers says:

    Beautiful sunset picture, Ralph!

    I don’t see killing one species to save another as a long time solution to this kind of problem; except, perhaps, in cases like sea lions eating endangered salmon at a man made barrier.

  8. Immer Treue says:

    Minnesota Moose Wolf Dilemma: Part 2

    Sorry, but I do not have the access to put the entire paper on TWN. Those of you who have access to the entire paper can come up with your own conclusions. The entire paper was sent to me by a co-worker of Mech. Below are a couple of excerpts, and some questions that I forwarded.

    The Journal of Wildlife Management 78(7) 1143-1150.
    The Journal of Wildlife Management; DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.775

    Re-Evaluating the Northeastern Minnesota
    Moose Decline and the Role of Wolves
    L. DAVID MECH,1,2 U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, 8711–37th St. SE, Jamestown, ND 58401, USA
    JOHN FIEBERG, University of Minnesota, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA
    ABSTRACT We re-evaluated findings from Lenarz et al. (2009) that adult moose (Alces alces) survival in
    northeastern Minnesota was related to high January temperatures and that predation by wolves (Canis lupus) played a minor role. We found significant inverse relationships between annual wolf numbers in part of the moose range and various moose demographics from 2003 to 2013 that suggested a stronger role of wolves than heretofore believed. To re-evaluate the temperature findings, we conducted a simulation study,
    mimicking the approach taken by Lenarz et al. (2009), to explore the potential for concluding a significant
    relationship exists between temperature and survival, when no association exists. We found that the high R2s and low probabilities associated with the regression models in Lenarz et al. (2009) should be viewed
    cautiously in light of the large number of fitted models (m.45) and few observations (n.6 for each of 5
    response variables). Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in
    the USA.

    Two excerpts from the paper

    Although the wolf-population trend in the wolf survey area does not necessarily represent that in the entire
    moose-survey area, it is likely more representative of the wolf-population trend in northeastern Minnesota than in the entire state. The relationships we found are consistent with a hypothesis that from 1997 to about 2003 annual moose numbers were relatively unaffected by wolves and that wolf numbers tended to parallel moose numbers. However, starting in about 2004, after wolves increased 41% from 44 in 2000 to 62 in 2004 and 84% to 81 in 2006, moose numbers began declining. The moose-population estimate was inversely related to the number of wolves each year.

    Wolf-population density in the wolf-survey area was able to remain high even as moose numbers were declining because throughout much of the wolf-survey area as well as the larger moose-survey area, deer and beavers continued to be available, probably subsidizing wolves while they also preyed on declining numbers of moose. Some wolf packs even occupied narrow territories stretching as far as 42 km from the northeastern part of the wolf-survey area where few deer live in summer and none in winter to the southwestern part where deer live in summer and congregate in winter.

    The last paragragh is the most revealing. It is something I have put forth on this blog a number of times, and that is deer. July 4, 1999 there was an enormous storm that racked the BWCA referred to as the BWCA Blowdown

    Followed by prescribed (preventative) burns and a series of warmer winters mid 2000’s this area was opened to deer which are historically at low densities through the study area. This would coincide with the increase in wolf numbers, and the inverse decline in moose. This would reinforce the second paragraph I have included from the Mech/Fieberg study.
    The last two winters here have been prolonged and brutal. Recent information reflects wolves in the study area have begun to decline. Deer have taken a beating from Mother Nature, so the MNDNR initiated emergency deer feeding last Winter, however, this was not implemented in the moose zones. The question is why? Are deer and moose just a bad mix: brainworm; liver flukes; and maintenance of a higher wolf density, all of which are tough on moose.

    • rork says:

      Theories are cheap.
      Not feeding moose: Even feeding deer is risky. Disease concerns and worries about congregation and extra travel making them easier prey.
      Two more factors: I’d still add ticks to the deer/moose mix, not that I know the deer cause it, just correlated (due to weather), but maybe some causation. Temperature itself is correlated and hard on moose, likely discussed here before. When young, I thought there was an invisible line in Ontario, where deer stopped and moose (and a few caribou) took over, without knowing why (still don’t).

      • Immer Treue says:

        Not sure I understand your reply. My point was, wolf population rose as moose declined. Was it purely a moose economy for wolves, or did deer(due to blowdown and a series of mild winters) maintain a robust wolf population that in turn put more pressure on moose.

        Past two winters will add to confidence of the latter if true. Wolf population should continue to decrease and…

        • rork says:

          I get that wolf numbers can be higher thanks to more deer, but am saying that even with no wolves you can have these factors:
          brainworm and maybe flukes
          I’m not trying to detract from wolves being able to add to that some places. Sorry if I’m not focusing on just one area or one question.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      You all write like the human factor either is a given or isn’t a major, but I’ll just say contributing, factor to moose decline. Can these additional factors, over which we have no control, lead to additional moose (and wolf) death. You can’t blame the wolves for a deteriorating and shrinking habitat. Even the biologists have been responsible for moose calf death.

  9. Monday, November 3, 2014

    Persistence of ovine scrapie infectivity in a farm environment following cleaning and decontamination

  10. Immer Treue says:

    A friend gave me a couple beaver carcasses to put out for trail camera entertainment. Going through over 1400 pictures there are a number of wolves, and upon close inspection, one has a trap on its right front paw. Trap is not the type used by DNR, and trapping season is still a long way off. No livestock around me. People are sick.

    • Nancy says:


      “Three hunters were cited and many more received verbal warnings after reports that dozens of hunters were firing into a herd of about 500 elk near Canyon Ferry Reservoir on the second day of the general big game hunting season.

      Fish, Wildlife and Parks wardens say 30 elk were killed on Oct. 26, an unknown number were injured”

      But a jolly good time was had by all with just a few citations & verbal warnings issued.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Wow. This is not hunting. As soon as you try to give the benefit of the doubt…

      • Ed Loosli says:

        Sooo, did the Montana’s Fish, Wildlife & Parks CLOSE THE CANYON FERRY RESERVOIR AREA TO FURTHER ELK HUNTING?? Probably not… Wildlife Management by anarchy. What a pathetic joke are the wildlife departments of Montana, Idaho, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, and I am sure I am leaving out some other deserving states.

        • W. Hong says:

          I understand why doing this would be bad and unsafe, but did this cause them to kill more elk than they wanted in this area? Why would they close the area?

          • Ed Loosli says:

            The Montana game rangers should CLOSE THE AREA because the elk killers there are out of control and killing elk standing around a Reservoir is NOT hunting — It is slaughter. And, oh yes, I forgot to add Maine to my list of the pathetically bad. Maine is the only state in the union still allowing the “big three” of Neanderthal wildlife killing methods; Bear Baiting & Allowing hunters to chase down game with dogs to make it easier for them to kill & Trapping of all manner of wildlife.

            • Elk375 says:

              I doubt that the area could be closed by the rangers.

              Ed, what is hunting?

            • Ida Lupines says:

              The vote was very close – so it’s only a matter of time before these lazy slobs’ garbage dumping days are numbered.

      • Elk375 says:

        The three hunters were cited for not having landowner permission. Not for shooting into a herd of 500. One 5 x 5 was seized and 30 elk killed apparently the other 29 hunters did nothing that would require a citation. I assume that the 29 elk killed were legally killed and the hunters tagged them and now those have been cut up and are in a freezer.

        Ed, why would the FWP close the reservoir area to further elk hunting.

        Ida, is this not hunting? I have seen this situation many times and it will happen again and again. Sometimes things work out and other time it is a cluster F. The elk bunch up get confused and hunters are going to go where the quarry is.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          You’re descripion is right. No it is not hunting. But it also said an unknown number were wounded, and probably will die. This isn’t sporting behavior, it is wasteful entitlement. We’re a cold-blooded species when it comes to anyone but ourselves. Then we’ll blame the wolves.

        • rork says:

          I sure didn’t get enough from the story to know how bad other hunters were behaving, but have a story. A problem that can happen to MI hunters (who aren’t elk experts, and some are not experts at anything) is that they shoot an elk in a group (imagine several females), but they don’t fall down instantly or run like hell, and being uncertain the shot was killing, hunter wants to fire again, hopefully at the same animal, but sometimes not, and perhaps now elk are moving – Oy. Our DNR now trains folks who get elk tags not to make this mistake. Even with lone bulls, panicky hunters here often send extra bullets when there was no need. I’m not saying that happened even once in the linked story.

          • Nancy says:

            Rock – it was a free for all, not hunting. As Elk said ” a Cluster F.

            Second day of hunting season, everyone knew where these elk would be. Sure word traveled fast since cell phones are so popular. Like “fishing in a barrel”

            • Nancy says:

              “The herd moved among public, private and block-management land (overseen by the state and landowners) throughout the day as hunters continued to shoot at them, Warden Justin Feddes said. As word of the herd spread, more people came out, with some attempting to keep the elk on the flat with vehicles, Feddes told the Independent Record”

              “People seem to lose some of their common sense when there’s that many elk that close,” Flynn said. “It’s difficult to watch, and I’ve talked to several people who did see it and said it was ugly as it could possibly be.”


              • Nancy says:

                This story broke 10 days ago:


                “Unfortunately a situation like that brings out the worst in unethical hunter behavior,” Loewen said. “If I could emphasize one thing, it’s that type of activity drains local game wardens babysitting elk and unethical hunters.

                I wouldn’t even consider it hunting.”

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Didn’t anyone take a picture or a ‘selfie’ of this carnage so that it can be posted all over the interwebs showing what hunters are capable of, as is done with predators? Since the ethical hunters won’t distinguish themselves from this type, neither will I. I see excuses are being made.

                Meanwhile, out at YNP, abuses are rampant too. Ron Coronado is getting all kinds of threats, as are the wolves.

                Even somebody identifying themselves as Toby Bridges has been making threats over at their Facebook page, until somebody fumigated the place. We continue to see what a stupid idea delisting is. We have both legal killings and poaching now.

                Reading comments, the willful ignorance about wolves is astounding.

                ♫’Panicky’s just another word for trigger-happy fools….’♪

              • rork says:

                OK Nancy, those stories had enough details to be obviously bad. The hunters-see-moderate-success mentions the kind of problem I was referring to. Blocking elk with cars is easily condemned, and more than just ignorance. First article did not give those details. I wasn’t that familiar with what can happen either – the worst of that doesn’t happen near me (hunting is solitary, elk groups that size impossible).
                ” Since the ethical hunters won’t distinguish themselves from this type” has no basis in fact, if “this type” is spelled out sufficiently, but keeping it as vague as possible makes better anti-hunter noise. I have recently noticed that common in anti-wolf rhetoric too: “We’re certainly not trying to eliminate them, but there needs to be a balance, and right now it’s out of balance,” Casperson, yesterday. If the person would be more specific about what the problem and their proposed solution is, it would leave too much room to contradict them.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                Rork, I think ‘this type’ of hunter is self-explanatory. We see this kind of hunting every year, all the time, so your ‘new information’ comment seems a little disingenuous. Last year it was kids shooting into herds of elk, sometimes supervised by adults, sometimes not.

                At Least Nine Elk Shot In Five Minutes Near Sula; Young Hunters Cited

                “There was a lot of unethical behavior that happened that day,” he [MFW&P Warden Lou Royce} said.

                People were shooting into herds of elk running across the hillside. Some were shooting right off the roadside. Others were shooting elk on private property without permission.

                And with nearly the same script!

                We here at TWN go over and over all kinds of solutions, but they are always dismissed ultimately (after the obligatory comment period). It’s going to take more people than just me and/or a few others to make change.

              • Kathleen says:

                I witnessed the prelude to a similar slaughter the year I helped monitor the re-instated bison hunt. It was just as dawn was breaking–this was east of Gardiner, at the Gardiner end of the road to Jardine. Pick-up trucks lined up–mirrors practically touching–and so-called hunters milling about. I asked “What’s going on?” and was told they were waiting for daylight to shoot across Bear Creek to Deckard Flats just outside of Yellowstone’s northern boundary. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing, and then the other stories began–once, I was told, two shooters simultaneously shot into a group of elk and when one elk fell, they started fighting over whose bullet downed the animal.

              • rork says:

                Main point was that I’ve not seen “ethical hunters won’t distinguish themselves”. Early this season I went without shots cause a herd of 2 deer were too lined up – every experienced hunter knows that’s not ethical (I don’t know if there are bullets where it would be close to OK or not).
                “Self-explanatory” is what Casperson might say. We can’t legislate against “types”.

              • Louise Kane says:

                The uglier trends in “hunting”, advanced technology, the loss of species diversity and populations of some animals bear scrutiny. I don’t think many hunters here would like some of my solutions. Nothing that more refuges from hunting, less hunting permits, shorter seasons and less take, no trophy hunting, no traps and snares and more predators couldn’t help. And the backlash now…..

              • Immer Treue says:

                To capitalize on your trapping ‘comment’. I think the money component of that willnfight anti-trapping movements to the brink of doom. It’s not so much the trappers, most of whom are recreational trappers, or the trapping tools industry. Some make a living at it, but for the most part it’s chump change compared to the furriers and others who market the finished products.

              • Yvette says:

                WTH? What a bunch of yahoos. It sounds keystone cops—–hunter style.

                What is it with these kind of hunters? Is this the way they prove their manliness to themselves? What a joke they are, but it comes at the expense of lives. I’m glad they got cited.

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Hopefully milkweed plantings will helpit will do some good in the future.

      While I was in Maine 10 years ago visiting a friend he put off his last cutting of a hay field because we found a monarch caterpillar on a few milkweed plants.

    • Yvette says:

      That’s cool to hear that Blanchard, OK is doing this. I didn’t know. However, Monarchs have had problems for a while. Pesticides in the corn, soybean and other crops from the bread belt of the U.S., and our drought.

      This link is an exceptional article/interview with a Monarch researcher.

      I doubt that enough people can plant enough milkweed to overcome the detrimental effect of the massive use of GMO crops and use of pesticides. However, I will help by planting the milkweed. Perhaps………ODWC (Oklahoma dept. of Wildlife Conservation) could do a massive plea for people to plant milkweed throughout the state? Hmm, I think I’ll request it. If a campaign is started people will plant the milkweed.

      • rork says:

        “GMO crops” should be replaced with “use of glyphosate” I think. The problem is not cause the crops are genetically engineered. Folks can breed glyphosate resistance into crops conventionally (but it’s slow, so GMO versions will scoop you), and indeed the weeds are getting resistant even without us trying to make them so. Glyphosate is also used on non-resistant crops to stop their growth before harvest (soybeans), or on fields before planting. Any strategy that controls weeds “too good” is a potential problem.
        Of the farmers near me I have only noticed 1 that has obvious refuges (helps slow acquired resistance in weeds and insects by keeping non-resistant genes around) even though it is recommend to all of them. Managing road-sides better can help, like article said. Millions of gardeners should grow more milkweed. I get volunteers for common milkweed, and grow butterfly milkweed on purpose.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          It’s an extremely pretty plant too. And the pods are beautiful in the fall. What’s not to love?

          • Ida Lupines says:

            Since I stopped treating my lawn, all kinds of wonderful wildflowers that some may consider weeds have returned. One of my favorites is the violets. It’s great, and my lawn looks about the same as my neighbor who’s always coddling his.

  11. Ida Lupines says:

    Update November 7: YWP Finding Kill Site Near Yellowstone Park Boundary

    I also wanted to respond to something, I do look forward to reading WM opinions, I’d hardly consider him the font of all legal knowledge so I don’t find it necessary to fawn about him, but that was a rather pompous post from him yesterday. What’s buggin’ ya, WM?

  12. Ida Lupines says:

    Rork, don’t try to play games with semantics. Nobody is saying legislate against ‘types’, we’re saying legislate against acts, for example, like stealing and killing (together = poaching). It’s like playing a certain type of ‘card’, which is all a particular party has to work with, it seems. The kind of argumentum ad hominem that is to stop a discussion.

    And that non-Darwinian comment you made about moose reproducing less depending on the state of their environment had me rolling my eyes. It certainly is Darwinian. Humans ought to take a lesson from nature. We’re all seemingly ready to go over a cliff like overpopulated lemmings.

    You say you hunt ethically (if there is such a thing) but I notice all hunters take personal offense if any of them are criticized, even the ones who behave badly. Maybe you do, but we should acknowledge that there are those who don’t, not by a long way.

    • rork says:

      I first gave the example that shooting a second time when you are not sure which animal is your target is unethical. I said that when you might hit another animal it is unethical. For those we could make hitting a second animal a legal offense. I’ve often said shooting at moving animals is unethical (make them stop by making noises), though some gun folks may be able to do it on very slowly moving animals. These ethics are supposed to come with your culture, but not everyone has been exposed to the ideas, or convinced. Big buck running across field can make even experienced hunters loose their brains on occasion – missing the first time proves that you had no business shooing (which you knew already), but they actually fire a few more times. I still don’t have a good sense for how the recent debacles feel – how many people are idiots or not and how it unfolds. I’m used to stories of one, or a small group, of idiots, and those I think I do understand.

      “It certainly is Darwinian.” This explanation, even with eye rolling, is not too convincing. One could try to invoke multilevel selection or haystack models, but I doubt they apply well to moose. Genes don’t usually get selected for cause they are good at anything other than giving individuals with that gene an advantage over the other individuals in the population. That a gene “would be good” for the population if every individual had it, is not enough to make the gene spread – the “good” gene has to be good for the individual, that is, give advantage to individuals over the other individuals with the “bad” gene. You may get this or not (not sure), but lots of folks do not, and instead imagine “good for the species” means it would be selected for.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I just wondered about selecting for future survival – is many, many numbers the answer or a few strong survivors that the habitat can support?

        • Ida Lupines says:

          It seems that we are only concerned with ‘numbers’ so that hunters can hunt moose like a shooting gallery – not with their health and long-term survival. Hunters of course will take the biggest and best. Some of the more vocal anti’s may try to rewrite history, but wolves do take the prey that they can get – not a strong, healthy, fast-moving animal.

  13. WM says:

    Tim Preso of Earthjustice, on the recent wolf relisting ruling in WY.

    The title is misleading. It should be “What the judge didn’t say (but maybe should have),” to be consistent with where this case now stands. He is being speculative on the deficiency of the WY wolf management plan as compared to what the delisting requirements may or may not be. Why? Well, there has been no legal ruling on these aspects, because the judge did not address them – yet.

    • Immer Treue says:

      IMHO, Wyoming has always been the rod in the spokes in regard to wolf management. I’ve felt this way since 2009. If they had come up with a sound plan back then, much of the tug of war might have been defused. Also, on this blog and elsewhere, the 10/100 for three consecutive years was a biological standard for an recovery goal. Nobody has said 100/1000 perthre years per state, but one would hope that rational minds would have put this all behind us rather than what the precocious child Wyoming has become. Oh well, you’re timed out.

  14. Immer Treue says:

    For thise keeping score in MN wolf hunt.

  15. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Browning man accused of killing three grizzly bears

    “(He) was instructed to call the (Fish and Wildlife) office if there were bear management issues” but “(He) responded that he would just shoot them anyway.”

    “(He)said he shot the “mother grizzly” first and then shot one of the young bears. The third bear, he said, ran after he shot the first two but returned an hour later and “stood over the two dead grizzlies.”

    • Nancy says:

      An interesting read Peter:

      “Mission Valley. — Frost (1985) undertook a study in May 1984 of 154 Mission Valley (in northwestern Montana) residents’ attitudes toward grizzly bears and many of the findings have relevance for consideration in the Bitterroot Mountains reintroduction proposal.

      When asked if their neighbors had seen grizzly bears on their property, 88.5% of the population said yes, 56% of the population had observed grizzlies on their own land. When asked if neighbors or friends manage their property to maintain and protect grizzly bear habitat, only 4% answered a definitive yes, whereas 20% of the respondents said that they were managing their own property in this way. Seventy percent said that some of their local neighbors, friends, or relatives have had a problem which was caused by grizzly bears, while only 17% of the respondents indicated that they themselves had a problem with grizzlies. Forty percent said their nearby neighbors left food items around that could attract grizzly bears onto the property”

    • Ida Lupines says:

      What an brazenly awful man. I hope something will be done about it, but who knows. At least the bears are protected now – but this is a sneak preview of what to expect once they are delisted.

      I saw Nancy’s post where it said that 40% are still leaving out food that could attract bears and wildlife. ‘My property, and don’t have do anything to discourage wildlife’ mindset. What a dark time for our continent when Europeans and their ideologies set sail for North America.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      …won’t allow the state of Wyoming to “inflict its policies” on Eastern Shoshone tribal lands.

      Hooray! Good for them.

    • Yvette says:

      Good. Since they are a sovereign nation they have the authority to write their own tribal laws. I hope they will take what is in the resolution, tweak it to add protections for grizzlies and wolves, then sign it into tribal law. Devise plans on implementation and how to handle violations. The Wind River Rez has nearly 3,100 sq miles of land. At least that would be a protected area for the grizzles and wolves.

      I hope the Arapahoes get on board with the E. Shoshone’s resolution.

      Reading the one comment on the article I see they’ve already ticked off one person. Probably a predator hunter or a northern good old’ boy.

      • WM says:

        But, Yvette, the Eastern Shoshone share the Wind River Reservation lands with the Northern Arapaho. The Shoshone have fewer than 4,000 enrolled members and the Arapaho over 8,000. From my ramblings there some years ago the Arapaho raise quite a few cattle, and maybe some sheep. They also run casinos. Don’t know what the Eastern Shoshone do, but published information suggests they are living in the past, while the Arapaho are moving on. Will they adopt the same policy regarding predators, and if the policy conflicts what does that mean?

        • WM says:

          And then there is the accompanying Eastern Shoshone mythology regarding “Wolf” as god:

        • Yvette says:

          Good questions, WM, and ones that will need to be addressed. I pulled up my GIS and put in a federal land layer so I could get a geospatial reference on where the Shoshone and Arapaho were located in relation to one another. It confused me for a minute until I realized they were both located on the Wind River Rez.

          I can’t make any assumptions on how either tribe would proceed because I’m not familiar with their relationship and the tribal politics of either tribe. It would be good to see both tribes negotiate an agreement that would be good for both tribes, tribal interests and places wildlife protection high on the priority. They are surrounded by so much federal land it seems to put wildlife protection and conservation high on the priority would benefit all; tribes, federal agencies, and animals and ecosystems.

          As for the Arapaho moving ahead and the Shoshone living in the past… experience is the most successful (not necessarily based only on finances) tribes are those that maintain their old cultural ways but are able to operate with modern enterprises. It’s an odd juxtapose, but too much assimilation seems to always have bad blowback that comes with many social problems for us Indians. I think the Confederated Tribes of Umatilla is an excellent example of a tribe that is progressive, fairly financially successful but has not lost their traditional ways. (my nieces and nephews are enrolled with the Umatillas.)

    • Yvette says:

      Scared little man. I highly doubt he was threatened by anything more than his own mythology based fears. Anyone with that much fear when in the woods needs to put down the gun and stay at home.

      • Harley says:

        Actually, I was thinking maybe that gunshot did what the article suggested. Educated the wolf not to be too inquisitive to humans. That is really the best thing for wolf survival IMHO. And it doesn’t appear to have killed the wolf. There are those in the woods that would gladly do lethal harm to wolves, as of course you all know, so if this wolf takes away a better understanding of things, he or she may live a bit longer.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I hope he or she doesn’t get an infected wound though. 🙁

          • Ida Lupines says:

            And how ya gonna keep the humans from being too inquisitive about them?

            • Harley says:

              Ha! Define inquisitive! Trying to kill a wolf is not inquisitive.

              But I do understand your point.

              And wolves get wounds. They heal. I would worry more about a wolf that gets kicked by a moose.

              • Ralph Maughan says:

                If they had surrounded me, I would hope I had my camera ready.

                In the past when I have run into wolves close up, I have never been fast enough with a shot.

                I believe it is likely none of the instances of wolves where it is claimed they were threatening or stalking were true. Not one.


                1. No successful attacks. Wolves not so incompetent that can never even get a bite before they are shot.
                2. Often a dog was present, the true object of their attention
                3. Most often reported by hunters who did not like wolves and so often had a reason to exaggerate or who misinterpreted wolf behavior.

              • Nancy says:

                Mentioned this before, if you were a wild animal and saw people (check out the images on the link) that looked like these guys, who no doubt, washed in a no scent soap & laundered their clothes in no scent soap, wandering around in the woods, wouldn’t you be real curious as to what the heck they were?


              • Harley says:

                LOL! I’m not sure why that made me laugh Nancy! I guess it’s that mental image of the wolf looking really really puzzled! The animal equivalent of WTF??

              • Nancy says:

                Harley – good to see back 🙂

                Have you had the chance to read Crichton’s book “Prey?” or ” The Lost World?” Some interesting references to “camo dinos”

              • Harley says:

                Nancy, my son is the Crichton fan, but I vaguely remember some reference to that when we would talk about the books.

                By the way, those pictures were really cool, it’s like one of those hidden picture within a picture thing.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Add a bit of doe/cow estrus scent to the camo, and wolves will naturally show interest. ma’iingan used to comment about hunters “treed” by wolves in Wisconsin.

              • Mareks Vilkins says:

                Nancy, thanks for a laugh!

                my favorite is:


                Rustic Hunter Painted Toilet Seat -Real Tree Camo

                Price: $99.95

                This is a standard size western toilet seat/lid that has been wonderfully painted with a rustic hunting camo motif and is just beautiful for rustic bathrooms.

                Maybe this is one of those things that is the perfect gift for someone who has everything, but one thing for sure, if you like hunting or camo and rustic decor, you will love the quality and beauty of this seat. This camo toilet seat lid is painted on both sides as an added bonus, so you can see the image when the lid is either up or down. You and your friends will love it.

                Not only is the lid painted but it has also been top coated with enamel for a high gloss finish, easy for cleaning with a high quality shine. Bring this beautiful rustic camo seat into your bathroom for a look that can’t be beat.

                This is sure to be a hit with any rustic southwest, western ranch, cabin or hunting lodge style.

                Fits most standard size toilets, mounting hardware is included for easy installation. Measures 15.75″ overall length.

                You May Also Like…

  16. WM says:

    And the “tension” builds with fewer than 60 wolves as the official count in WA.


    -Did this guy make up a story about wolf behavior in this instance, or did they exhibit behavior described by wildlife behavioral ecologist Dr. Valarius Geist, when observing wolves on Vancouver Island, where they hung around and did not respond to attempts to shoo them away?

    -Since no wolves were killed, apparently, will they all learn from this experience in which one lost some skin?

    _In the end, did this guy “do the right thing” for the circumstances, or did he get away with something?

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      maybe it would be appropriate to provide educational material about wolf’s body language? to know the difference when one’s aggressive or just curious

      • Nancy says:

        “maybe it would be appropriate to provide educational material about wolf’s body language?”

        Especially since hunters are not the only predators out there.

        .”If you talk to animals,
        they will talk with you
        and you will know each other.

        If you do not talk to them,
        you will not know them,
        and what you do not know
        you will fear.

        What one fears,
        one destroys.”
        Chief Dan George

    • Louise Kane says:

      I’ve only seen a large herd of elk once. It was one of the finer moments of my life. To think of these animals treated like this is sickening. Issuing citations? wonder what the penalty would have been if people colluded to interfere with the hunters to help the elk?

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Yes, I’ve seen a large herd in Yellowstone. It was a magnificent sight. Elk are a magnificent creature. I can’t imagine what would make someone want to shoot into a herd.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Anyone interfering with a hunter would most probably have been arrested and spent a night or two in jail.

    • Yvette says:

      That is bizarre behavior. What would drive a sane hunter to behave in such a manner? There is zero honor in shooting into a herd of elk as this group did. High fines and revoke their hunting license for a long enough period to make a difference.

  17. WM says:

    These are circumstances when game violations need to be tripled or 4X, like an automobile speeding in a construction zone (in WA anyway), and then hunting privileges (rights) suspended for two years for each violator.

    • Nancy says:

      “Flynn believes that cellphones play a major role in coordinating between hunters and that party hunting, or one hunter tagging an animal harvested by another hunter, was also taking place”

      Can recall a few years back (in the Bob) outfitters were not allowed to communicate via 2 way radios during hunting season. Heavy fines if caught.

      My how things have changed for the worse, for wildlife.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Nancy my son, like my father was, is a commercial fisherman. He has repeatedly told me that the new crisis in this year’s bass fishery can be blamed on recreational fishermen. Now one thing I know is that fishermen (commercial and recreational) will always blame the other group for rescource scarcity. Yet, my son is educated about fisheries issues having focused part of his education in fisheries biology, and he states that cell phone use in recreational fisheries is a huge problem. As soon as a school of fish show up, the fisherman calls his buddies and all of the boats charge over and set their lines over the schooling fish. I would argue that there is more to the recent declines in the striped bass industry that cell phone usage such as a let up on regs that were working, decreased fork length of fish etc, but I had not thought about a cell phone as a technological advance that could severely impact resources but I am becoming convinced.

    • Louise Kane says:

      I like where you are going with this WM but that kind of behavior deserves hunting license revoked forever.

    • Nancy says:

      Agree WM but who’s gonna take the lead here when F&G depend on the revenues? (and fines?)

      • Elk375 says:

        I have read several articles about the incident at White Gulch on the second day of hunting season. How many people who have commented on this incident have every been to White’s Gulch or have looked at a map. White Gulch is found on only very detailed maps and is one gulch north of Confederate Gulch. (FYI: Confederate Gulch was the richest placer gold find in the US. )

        First there were 3 game wardens out there during the shoot looking for any violations that could be cited. There was only three citations issued all for trespass, one for failure to sign in on the block management box and two for not having permission on a ranch that was not in block management. This is minor illegal actively. There may have been unethical behavior but not other illegal behavior other wise there would have been additional tickets issued.

        After 50 years of hunting, I have seen almost everything and I have seen this type scenario in different forums many times, some ugly, some OK and some successful. Typically, today I just try to avoid situation like this and if I get into this type of situation I just sit down and watch.

        “Overall, for the activity that was going on up there it was a pretty minor incident, but it needed to be addressed,” Hawkaluck said of Garrison’s citation. “He wasn’t signed in on block management, and it was an unfair advantage for those that did sign in.” The game warden said overall that all of the activity was minor. For those who are not Montana’s three trespass violations do not concern you.

        Montana Code 87-6-405 addresses using vehicles to hunt.

        “Use of a self-propelled vehicle to intentionally concentrate, drive, rally, stir up, or harass wildlife, except predators of this state,” is unlawful, according to the code.”

        If you have found the state sections in White’s Gulch there is a paved state highway through the sections and several country roads on the section lines. If the elk start running across the state section is it illegal to get in your truck race down a state highway ahead of the elk cut them off or turn down a county road and blocking there exit. Unethical, illegal no but who ethics.


        ” I first gave the example that shooting a second time when you are not sure which animal is your target is unethical. I said that when you might hit another animal it is unethical. For those we could make hitting a second animal a legal offense. I’ve often said shooting at moving animals is unethical (make them stop by making noises), though some gun folks may be able to do it on very slowly moving animals.”

        The way to avoid shooting a second elk or wounding one is to shoot at the last elk in the group, if you hit it, it will generally lag behind giving you a second clear shot. Shooting at moving animals is unethical. What a general statement, I have shot over 200 big game animals and I have kill 30 plus elk, deer and antelope on the full run. I have no hesitation to shoot a running animal if the shot is clear. I have wounded and lost several animals but shit happens. I really feel sorry for those that would and lose a high trophy fee African animal.

        • rork says:

          I’m bow hunting, Elk375. I welcome the view of those expert with guns, since although I’ve been out there with a rifle a few dozen times, I’ve never fired at a deer with one (don’t need to, freezer is pretty full). I have seen and heard many stories of shots at running deer in MI though, and it is not good, so I discourage it, but maybe it can work in some situations (close enough for example). Again, I don’t claim to be expert at that, and I mostly know MI deer, where you can just resist, and hope for good shots another time.

        • WM says:


          If the facts from the article are accurate, this was a large herd (up to 500 animals), and public roadways of some sort, mixed land ownership (even some ag land, with some guy’s sprinkler system at risk), where a bunch of over-eager shooters (I sure as hell won’t call them hunters) converged almost simultaneously. Some apparently took risky shots, tried to cut animals off with motor vehicles of some sort, and maybe used electronic communications.

          To me it just looks like a recipe for the worst ofbad public relations from the start, game waste, human confrontation, and an environment in which, if they had the time and resources wardens could have written more tickets than they did.

          Overall, in most places elk don’t herd up that much to a herd that size, this early in the year. Don’t know about this particular area, however. If MTGFP knew about this herd (and I am sure they did, with its size), they needed preventive rules of engagement to avoid what happened. I don’t know how anyone could disagree with that.

          From my experiences in hunting elk in 4 states over forty years, there aren’t that many instances where large herds become the isolated focus of a bunch of yahoos. But, I know it happens from time to time, in some places (I recall events like this, but with smaller herds up on Bethel Ridge in WA). This isn’t hunting it is as Jerry Black says an “elk massacre.”

          There ought to be special rules for large herd engagement – as in you can’t do it within 1/4 mile of a public road of any type, plus all the other prohibitions, and as I said earlier the fines ought to be much higher for people who engage in this shit. This is not “hunting.” There is nothing in this scenario that says hunting; it is something else, I sure don’t know what to call it except unethical, and it should be illegal for oh so many reasons. Maybe there is a lesson to be learned by regulators, here.

          • rork says:

            I think you only proposed 1 new one (the 1/4 mile rule), and it might not fly well. I grant you heavier penalties as a suggestion too though. There may well be disagreement when you get to the details is my point. You also mentioned timing of the hunt, and I hoped experts might teach us if that can be manipulated to good effect without to much downside.

          • Jerry Black says:

            Elk…..hasn’t this also happened in the Madison Valley?

            • Elk375 says:

              Yes it has and it happen out of Dillon on a private ranch last year. I am busy at the moment so it will have to wait.

      • JB says:

        “…dozens of hunters converged on a large herd of elk on a section of state land near White Gulch near Canyon Ferry Reservoir. While many of those hunters took clean shots, as the herd scattered other hunters reportedly shot into the herd, shot at running animals and generally displayed what some consider unethical hunter behavior.

        By the end of the day, around 30 elk lay dead, an unknown number were wounded and three hunters had received citations…”

        –I’m surprised that nobody has commented on the alleged ‘need’ of F&G agencies to recruit more hunters. “Dozens” of hunters apparently converged on the same herd, which resulted in unethical behavior, and a potentially dangerous situation. Yet MTFWP, like so many other agencies, is desperate to ‘recruit’ more hunters to maintain funding.

        Perhaps this is an indication that there are enough hunters [at least elk hunters] already? We could sure use a few more deer hunters back here in the Midwest, though…

  18. Ida Lupines says:

    Nothing ‘fair’ about it. Is this another roundup in addition to the one that was posted over the weekend? What is wrong with people? I’m disgusted with them.

  19. Louise Kane says:

    Maureen Hackett’s rebuttal to the wolf moose piece in the Tribune.

    • Ida Lupines says:


    • Immer Treue says:

      And we make it full circle. What I did not see in Hackett’s rebuttal was an increase in the wolf population in the study area, where it was mostly a moose economy. Since the early mid 2000’s the wolf population increased and there was a correlation (does not imply cause) with wolf increase and moose decrease.

      Reading the comments below the rebuttal are no longer entertaining, on either side. A tepid pool of mostly ill informed individuals.

      • Nancy says:

        “Look to humans, other causes in both species’ struggle to survive”

        Think that was the most profound comment and, at the head of the article Immer.

        • Immer Treue says:


          ““Look to humans, other causes in both species’ struggle to survive””

          In the grand scheme of things, without a doubt. In this particular case not so much, probably more of mother natures witches brew.

      • Louise Kane says:

        for some reason I can’t get the comments to open but I can imagine….
        woofs are eating all the mooses
        The Canadian wolves are a plague on the land vermin
        If we don’t hunt wolves they will be after children next
        They like to kill I’ve seen them rip out the baby moose out of the mother, for fun
        overpopulated only way to keep em down is to kill em…..

        One woof chased me up a tree after it ate 3 of my dogs
        something like that?
        thats the kind of comment I see all the time in the Montana and Idaho papers…

        • Elk375 says:

          If you are from MA why read the Montana newspapers, I do not read the MA newspapers. Too many people from the east have to much interest in Montana, Wyoming a Idaho.

          • Nancy says:

            Wonder what would happen to Montana, Idaho & Wyoming if people from the east didn’t spend their bucks here Elk?

          • Louise Kane says:

            Elk just seeing your comment. Most people don’t confine their reading by region? Since I am particularly taken with predators and especially canids, that means I’m paying attention to the western states. There are damn few wolves left in the Eastern states, save for the 100 or fewer in NC, to read about. Conversely the western states and wolf management are big topics on my radar screen. A great portion of the land in those states is also public land so another reason to pay attention.

            I’m also interested in state management issues. I know you won’t agree, but I’m hoping one day to see national wildlife management reform. I don’t see why setting wildlife management goals to maximize biodiversity and to create standards could not be achieved under a wildlife conservation act much like water and air standards are maintained under federal acts. Federal standards could prevent or curb regional bias for or against particular species, prevent killing contests, outlaw publicly unpopular cruel and inhumane methods of killing, create interstate refuges and wildlife corridors, and require states to consider wildlife as public trust assets belonging to all the people of the US.

            yes yes I know states own the wildlife in their state boarders but a federal law would supersede those laws. In a world with species in such great decline ( I am not talking elk and deer) with biodiversity challenges, I think creating national standards, if created with care under the right circumstances, might be ecologically beneficial.

            Probably not the best political environment currently but I’m hopeful that discussion for wildlife management change will be on the horizon. I like Lennon’s line, “You may say I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one!”

            • Elk375 says:

              It is not going to happen in the next congress or in the following years. I am afraid that the opposite is going to happen. Private landowners are going to tried to privatize wildlife on their property.

              It is going to start with the Wilkes Brothers having purchased over 250,000 acres in the last few years and donating the maximum amount to each state legislator candidate.

              James Cox Kennedy, the heir to Cox Communications, wants the challenge the Stream Access Law in the US Supreme Court. He feels that the Ruby River is his private fishing river and that he owns from the center of the earth to the heavens but that he is allow to fly his Gulf Stream Four over everyone one else property.

              State wildlife agencies have over 100 years of wildlife data that the federal government will never be able to create.

              ++ I don’t see why setting wildlife management goals to maximize biodiversity and to create standards could not be achieved under a wildlife conservation act much like water and air standards are maintained under federal acts++

              Why biodiversity will never be maximize is that western states are not all federal lands. Montana is 30% federal and of that 30% a large amount is intersperse with private land. Land that is not accessible without a helicopter (yes, I said helicopter and helicopters are being used presently to access those lands. Biodiversity will fail as long as there are cattle and row crops on either private lands, federal lands or both.

              We can only try to protect the last wild lands with wilderness designation.

              This I say as a hunter who has a GPS with a landownership chip showing federal, state and private ownership. It can be real difficult to find access to public lands. The
              Crazy Mountains east of Bozeman, Montana are mostly Forest Service lands with some private checker boarding. There are seven public access points on a mountain range nearly 75 long and 25 miles wide.

              You can rock the boat but it may capsize on the wrong side.

              • Nancy says:

                “You can rock the boat but it may capsize on the wrong side”

                For whom though is the big question, Elk.

                Another year of record numbers at Yellowstone.


                Too hard for that tiny fraction that hunt to accept the fact that a greater majority of our species, just want to experience the joy of seeing wildlife, in what’s left of their habitat.

                You know where I live Elk.

                The “hay days” of hunters booking all available motel rooms in my area, first couple of weeks of hunting season, throwing lots of money around plus sitting at local bars, restaurants til closing time is over, been over.

                Here 20 years ago so can attest to that fact.

                Time to realize in states like Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, what’s left of wildlife is precious, land is precious, and when the two are combined? Folks, from areas that are overwhelmed by our own specie’s wastefulness, will come to experience it 🙂

              • Elk375 says:


                I have spent 3 summers working in Yellowstone National Park, one year for the National Park Service, building boardwalks, and 2 years road construction at West Thumb.(1970 to 1972). In 1972 I broke some ribs and spent 4 weeks flagging traffic at the West Thumb, Lake and Jackson junction.

                Most people make a whirl wind tour of Yellowstone with ever getting more than 200 yards from there cars.

                Yea, they want to see a bear and Old Faithful erupt then the next question was how far is Jackson or West Yellowstone and does such and such motel/hotel have a swimming pool. Looking into the back seat of the vehicle there were two or three children barely under control with parents desperately wanting to escape the wilderness. I do know what and why people come the Yellowstone and over 90% percent take a quick look and want to move on.

                I have read the National Park research of how many people get more than a quarter of a mile from there cars, I think that it is less than 10%, not sure.

                “The “hay days” of hunters booking all available motel rooms in my area, first couple of weeks of hunting season, throwing lots of money around plus sitting at local bars, restaurants till closing time is over, been over.”

                Interesting, I went hunting the second day of the season, Sunday< or maybe just spent $100 on gas. I arrive at the Wall Creek Wildlife Management Area before sunrise, no elk, one hundred vehicles and 300 people and a brand new county road through the management area so the adjacent ranch could log. Left there early morning went to the Centennial Valley, I had a doe antelope tag hoping to get a HEAD shot on a doe but the antelope had migrated west toward Interstate 15.

                Left the Centennial Valley and drove up Long Creek to the Ruby River Divide and down the Ruby River. There was in excess of 300 vehicle with travel trailers and over 1000 people all of the way down the Ruby. Five Years ago there was less than half that number. There were to many people for the resources. Sad, very sad.

              • Nancy says:

                “There was in excess of 300 vehicle with travel trailers and over 1000 people all of the way down the Ruby. Five Years ago there was less than half that number. There were to many people for the resources. Sad, very sad”

                Are you wondering why that is happening

              • Elk375 says:

                I am not are you? Half of these hunters are from Missoula and Kalispell. They feel the wolves and other predators have lowered the elk population in Northwest Montana. Predators have had an effect on ungulate population in that area of the state.

                Secondly, there are large intact federal and state lands and the elk population is good.

              • Yvette says:

                Elk375, Mareks posted this link earlier today. I think it is worth your time to read.


              • Nancy says:

                :Half of these hunters are from Missoula and Kalispell. They feel the wolves and other predators have lowered the elk population in Northwest Montana”

                “Lowered?” Guess that’s as good excuse as any when it comes to the playing field getting leveled 🙂

  20. Ida Lupines says:

    And another lovely example of humanity, the highest life form on earth:

  21. Ida Lupines says:

    Minnesota Wolf Hunt Met With Pack of Protesters

    So which is it, are there too many deer, or not enough deer? Seems we can never get a straight answer. I hope the heavy snow will put a damper on things.

    Thank you, Mother Nature, for intervening!

  22. Yvette says:

    Recently, I’ve begun to think it possible that our specie’s intelligence is constrained to short term visions. Our type of intelligence seems incapable of multi-generational vision with the ability to consider long term consequences. It is at the cost of every other species and their habitats.

    This Yale 360 opinion article captures some of that tenet and uses it to explore how we have managed to lose greater than 50% of the planet’s vertebrate species in only 40 years. Those of you on this blog that have engaged in global population discussions may find it interesting.

    Humans have always had a hard time thinking of themselves as creatures, strictly akin in nearly every way to all the other creatures on this planet. We’ve always insisted on our specialness. But we’re special in ways that have freed us — so far — only to behave as if we’re utterly ordinary. We turn out to be creatures who can be restrained, collectively, only in the ways that every other creature is restrained, by scarcity and death. As a species, we appear to be utterly incapable of self-restraint. This is something we share with every other organism on this planet.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Great post, Yvette. I’ve observed and commented the same many times. I was reading where one of the poor female elk was shot in the face. In the face! If you can imagine that. There’s no respect for the animal or for life with that kind of behavior. I’m glad to see some hunters stepping up to condemn it, instead of supporting anything possible that people do is their right.

      • Elk375 says:


        ++ I was reading where one of the poor female elk was shot in the face. In the face! If you can imagine that. There’s no respect for the animal or for life with that kind of behavior.++

        I do not know the context of what you were reading.

        A face shot is a head shot the best shot one can make. Does it matter whether the bullet enters in the face and exits the rear of the skull or enters the rear of the skull and exits the face. Or, enters the ear and exits the ear.

        It is called a head shot, instant death, no wasted meat.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Oh BS. Maybe for a sniper in the military, but for deer hunting the traditional way is the shoulder. Anyway, this poor deer was in the way of a buck, and that is why she got hit, this hunter wasn’t aiming for her, just shot. Did anyone even bother with the meat? Some animals were just plain wasted. This is a very poor example to defend as hunting.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            ^^The traditional, honorable way – not the anything goes, idiot way.

          • Elk375 says:


            Bull Poop, you know so little about this and many other subject’s that it can be infuriating.

            “but for deer hunting the traditional way is the shoulder”

            The traditional way in not the front shoulder; It is behind the front shoulder 2/3 of the way down, through the rib cage into the heart and lung area. Very little meat is ruined.

            A shoulder shot will destroy meat possibly an entire shoulder.

            There is nothing wrong with head shots, neck shots or upper spinal shots. The best shot in my opinion is the spinal hump above the front shoulders. No wasted meat and instant death. Head shots have always traditional.

            You have insinuated that the meat was wasted, do you know that for sure? No.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      I’ve begun to think it possible that our specie’s intelligence is constrained to short term visions


      it’s more about the way how economy is structured:

      Human intelligence and the environment

      It’s particularly interesting to take a look at the people who are running these campaigns, say, the CEOs of big corporations. They know as well as you and I do that it’s very real and that the threats are very dire, and that they’re threatening the lives of their grandchildren. In fact, they’re threatening what they own, they own the world, and they’re threatening its survival. Which seems irrational, and it is, from a certain perspective. But from another perspective it’s highly rational. They’re acting within the structure of the institutions of which they are a part. They are functioning within something like market systems – not quite, but partially – market systems. To the extent that you participate in a market system, you disregard necessarily what economists call “externalities,” the effect of a transaction upon others.

      …. It’s not because they’re bad people or anything. If they don’t do it — suppose some CEO says, “Okay, I’m going to take into account externalities” — then he’s out. He’s out and somebody else is in who will play by the rules. That’s the nature of the institution. You can be a perfectly nice guy in your personal life. You can sign up for the Sierra Club and give speeches about the environmental crisis or whatever, but in the role of corporate manager, you’re fixed. You have to try to maximize short-term profit and market share — in fact, that’s a legal requirement in Anglo-American corporate law — just because if you don’t do it, either your business will disappear because somebody else will outperform it in the short run, or you will just be out because you’re not doing your job and somebody else will be in. So there is an institutional irrationality. Within the institution the behavior is perfectly rational, but the institutions themselves are so totally irrational that they are designed to crash.

  23. WM says:

    Ah, 3 more upstanding illegal immigrants, that should be referenced when discussing immigration policy with the federal government. So, how much for the state of NV to investigate, prosecute, and if found guilty, to incarcerate these scumbags for how long?

    Of course, one penalty that has been rumored and may provide a higher deterrence effect, would be to cut off their trigger fingers, brand the letters “I I” on their forehead and tell them they will be shot on sight if they ever come back to the United States. Too harsh?

    • WM says:

      Sorry, they have already been convicted on state charges, with attendant expenses associated with those charges. Now the feds are investigating/prosecuting for violations of federal law. Makes the above rumored remedy even more compelling.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Waithman said the men were engaged in an extreme version of what conservation officers call “thrill kills,” indiscriminate killing of wildlife for excitement rather than for food.

        “These are people who, for whatever reason, don’t want to shoot at paper targets anymore and go out and kill stuff for fun,” he said.

        Nevada game wardens will never be able to fully tally all the wildlife illegally killed by the poaching ring, said Edwin Lyngar, a spokesman for the state wildlife agency.

        “They just sort of shot at everything that moved,” he said.

        Ugh. That last line sounds like it’s from a David Lynch movie – Frank Booth from Blue Velvet. *shudder*

        • Yvette says:

          The just sort of shot at everything that moved.

          Why, welcome to American! You should fit right in.

          Sarcasm aside, I am a person that staunchly believes, “the rules that apply to one should apply to all.”

          I would like to see this attitude and response to these little bast*rds that have illegally entered our country and are slaughtering our wildlife also applied to the legal American citizens that pass themselves off as hunters but are really just thrill killing.

          Coyote killing contests, anyone?

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Thank God for social media – these people seem to want attention so much that they don’t even consider it will get them caught. That’s good enough for me.

    • Yvette says:

      In this instance, I agree with you on your ‘illegal immigrant’ stance. They need to not only face charges on the poaching but need to be deported……after they serve time in prison.

      I would ask if your sentence would extend to the slob hunters like the yahoos in Montana shooting into the large herd of elk? I wouldn’t say shoot them onsite, but I rather like the idea of branding them. Brand them across the forhead: “Prissy Slob Hunter”

      If not those slob hunters, would your sentence extend to the poachers like Mick Gordon and his ‘Kill Em All Boyz”? Remember hims from a few years ago? He is from your neck of the woods? If not, here is a reminder.

      Along the way, Gordon bragged that he killed lots of bears, cougars and bobcats. He shot four or five bull elk a year. A few months earlier he’d poached a big cougar. He and a buddy tossed dynamite into a creek to kill fish.

      Gordon declared that “he had poached everything there was to poach.”

      rI find this comment from the article interesting. “These are people who, for whatever reason, don’t want to shoot at paper targets anymore and go out and kill stuff for fun,” he said.

      ^^^ That is every last sport hunter, trophy hunter, coyote killing contest hunter, and predator hunter. Why yes, let’s cut off their trigger finger and brand them as such.

      This particular post of yours surprises me. Your love of, and respect for law right down to the ‘t’ always keeps your responses within the boundaries of the law. Until today. Maybe it’s that these aren’t White boys? I don’t know that answer, but it’s worth self reflection.

      I do rather like the branding idea, though, but I would include the slob/predator/sport/trophy hunters right here in America. Yes, there is a good reason I am not queen of anything.

      • WM says:

        No skin color involved, Yvette, and it irritates me when someone raises that spector. Has only to do with the blatant “illegal” behavior (of being here and violating state/federal laws) and failure of the federal government to consistently enforce immigration laws already on the books.

        • WM says:

          And, Yvette, if you think illegals who are here don’t break the rules when it comes to wildlife, I’ve got news for you, it happens all the time, from fishing to hunting to trespassing. I would like to know how many “illegals” buy fishing or hunting licenses, then if they do whether they follow the harvest rules. Some of the fishing stuff even has Native American tribes pissed, like illegal fishing for steelhead and salmon from the coastal rivers of WA (lots of illegals working in the timber/floral and mushroom harvests out there).

          • Yvette says:

            I’m not disagreeing with you about undocumented people here breaking rules.

            I stated quite plainly that I think the the rules that apple to some should apply to all. I seriously don’t care where someone comes from or what color they are if they are illegally hunting, hunting in a manor where the animal is tortured (‘smoke a pack a day’ group comes to mind as well as coyote killing contest twerps) or poaching then I fully wish our laws would punish them and punish them severely.

            WM, if I may, you have alluded your disdain for illegal immigrants in past posts. It is a problem, I get that, but it is not a problem for corporate America. They love them. Our system of capitalism…..the most profits at any cost, and to hell with any rights of any person or animal. Money is only thing that matters. That is how our system of capitalism works. Our ag industry would shut down without illegal immigrants. The meat packing industry is notorious for recruiting and employing undocumented workers. Why? They have no rights. No legal way to ensure they have safe and just working conditions or pay. That is American capitalism and the illegal immigrants are the modern day slaves. If capitalism is here to stay then illegal immigrants will not go away. The oligarch, capitalist Gods of America need their slaves.

            My point is anyone that complains about illegal immigrants needs to be just as loud about our system of capitalism that breeds the cycle of slavery.

            I do not want to steer too far off of wildlife topics, but I did feel a need to respond.

            Lastly, the Mich Gorder, “Kill Em All Boyz” guy? If I remember, he got the maximum sentence, which was a slap on the wrist. Maybe we need to make stiffer fines and sentences for poaching, and slop hunting?

            • WM says:


              I won’t respond in full to your assertions. However, a couple things for you to think about. First “slavery” – it’s not. There is free will involved in entering (or leaving)the US. Second, not everybody comes for work. Lots of women and children who come for a better life (can’t blame them for trying and succeeding – where else can you have a baby(ies) and its paid for, then gives you an anchor to stay because the baby is a US citizen by birth) but it is the unearned benefits that keep many of them here. Third, for many years legal migrants have worked agriculture and returned after harvest is over, or green card expires. It is lack of enforcement that keeps the pipeline flowing. Fourth, the politics are complex- whether it involves bleeding heart liberals, greedy capitalists, the Catholic church which gets power and money from this segment, the foreign governments which receive informal foreign aid from the remittances sent by some of these workers.

              Reform is necessary and the Mexican government needs to step forward and redistribute some of its 5/95 split of wealth and political power, because we are well on our way to turning the US into a third world country annex.

              • JB says:

                It’s way too easy to paint the immigration issue with an overly broad brush. Lots going on here, and, at least in my opinion, cases should be evaluated on an individual basis (which, of course, costs money); else we risk sending child refugees–often running from gang violence–back to meet a terrible fate.


              • WM says:

                As if we have a legal (or moral?)duty to fix ALL the world’s problems. Once, immigration (legal anyway), was a way to settle this country. What is the purpose now, except to add to US population, mostly? What is another 50,000 under age children with no education and no skills to contribute, on US public assistance? Harsh view, but not without a solid rationale. Central American countries, exporters of these child refugees, do not even share a border with the US. Mexico needs to help, since they all must enter Mexico first. Oh, but wait they will be happy to ship them on thru to the US, while Carlos Slim and his Mexican capitalist buddies (the 5-10 percenters that run the country)get richer and more powerful by the minute, and the Mexican government more corrupt. There is always an excuse. This has to stop somehow and soon, and it won’t be in the next two years of the Obama presidency, that is for sure.

              • JB says:

                Who said anything about fixing “all the world’s problems” (strawman)? And legal obligation–actually yes, if the qualify as a refuge and the Refuge Act of 1980. Moral obligation? To attempt to prevent the exploitation and or killing of innocent children? You’re goddamn right we do! And there are numerous ways we can help without putting every immigrant child on welfare and making them a citizen. C’mon, WM, you’re better than that response.

              • JB says:

                Cripe, you got me all riled up. Should read:

                “…actually yes, if THEY qualify as a refuge UNDER the Refuge Act of 1980”

              • Yvette says:

                WM, America doesn’t have a moral obligation to fix the world’s problems. We have the moral obligation to stop creating the problems in Central America and Mexico. We could start by not training their dictators in how to torture their own citizens, and by not supporting coups that depose democratically elected leaders because they try to raise the minimum wage, which of course, the American corporations like Chiquita and Dole were against.

                I was going to drop this discussion, but I’m posting a link. It is just an example of why I don’t believe the illegal immigration problem will ever be adequately addressed. No politician or lawmaker in America is going to go against corporate America. It’s all about the profits and accessing the cheapest labor.


              • Louise Kane says:

                interesting discussion of moral obligation to prevent the exploitation and killing of innocent children. I happen to agree that we do. I wish humans could extend to wild animals similar considerations. I also believe we have an obligation to other beings we share the earth with not to exploit, torture, trap, snare and break up their families. why should these considerations extend to humans but not to other beings?

              • Louise Kane says:

                excuse me agree that we do have an obligation…..

              • Louise Kane says:

                not wildlife but to add to this discussion Al Jazeera put out a fascinating documentary It followed four or five individuals as they retraced the steps immigrants take to make it across the border. Even the hard core immigration opponent came to a place of empathy after “walking a mile in their shoes”….

              • Mareks Vilkins says:

                every time at TWN pop-up the immigration theme WM will spit out his usual wore-out misinformation about illegals:



              • Mareks Vilkins says:

                As if we have a legal (or moral?)duty to fix ALL the world’s problems.

                well, how about millions of refugees created by US invasions in Afghanistan, Iraq etc?? who are giving them shelter and food? if you assume that the US government – think again.

                what about subsidies for US ag-business who’s products are flooding Mexico, C-America and driving local farmers into bankruptcy? then complain about illegal immigrants in the US

              • Mareks Vilkins says:

                Debunking 8 Myths About Why Central American Children Are Migrating

                ‘Lax enforcement’ is not the culprit — U.S. trade and immigration policies are.


              • WM says:


                Just what you might expect from a “socialist” news outlet. I do often wonder where the mis-information comes from. John Pilger, self-avowed socialist journalist spoon feeds us video and untranslated interviews in Spanish. Then tauts the virtues of the Venezualan government under Chavez. This country has has been ranked in the bottom 10 percent of world governments in “transparency” as hundreds of millions of dollars have disappeared from their treasury. Yeah, I like Pilger and his journalism. He never offers solutions for these Central and South American “evolving democracy” states, by the way. That is always convenient. Maybe the US should just stay away (dissolve NAFTA and other trade agreements), stop ALL illegal immigration, and let the interests of other capitalistic/imperialist powers take over, maybe some of them even home grown on their own continent. Yeah, that would work.

            • WM says:

              The Refugee Act has quotas. I think it is 48,000 for 2014 total that is for those who request and can satisfactorily show refugee/asylum status from all over the world. So, we are already taking in others from other countries. And, if the reports were true, there were advertisements in Central American countries saying we would take nearly anyone, especially children, whether they were at risk or not.

              Alternatively, maybe to take some high risk kids from Central Americ we ought to kick some other opportunist illegals OUT, maybe even some who have overstayed their visas by a couple years. I could get behind that pretty easily.

              • WM says:

                Sorry, 2014 quota is 70,000; Latin America portion is 5,000 ( a good portion of which was already in process before this new wave of kids from Central America.

                Seems other parts of the world have their problems too. Again, the legal duty is NOT THERE, above these quotas for those who who would include those from Central America. I suppose we could put them on trains to Canada, in a similar manner to what Mexico did (sarcasm tone here).

              • Nancy says:

                Powerful article Mareks. Anyone who watched the documentary The War on Democracy can attest to the fact that the US/big business has been meddling in these countries for decades, propping up corrupt officials and governments.

                Will pass the article on to my senator Tester, who just informed me (in his monthly email update) that he’s working to help McCain “improve boarder patrol”

              • Yvette says:

                Just what you might expect from a “socialist” news outlet. I do often wonder where the mis-information comes from. John Pilger, self-avowed socialist journalist spoon feeds us video and untranslated interviews in Spanish. Then tauts the virtues of the Venezualan government under Chavez. This country has has been ranked in the bottom 10 percent of world governments in “transparency” as hundreds of millions of dollars have disappeared from their treasury. Yeah, I like Pilger and his journalism. He never offers solutions for these Central and South American “evolving democracy” states, by the way. That is always convenient. Maybe the US should just stay away (dissolve NAFTA and other trade agreements), stop ALL illegal immigration, and let the interests of other capitalistic/imperialist powers take over, maybe some of them even home grown on their own continent. Yeah, that would work.

                Ahh, the big, bad ‘S’ word. Chavez: He culled the ‘democratic’ oligarchs and oh how America hated him for it. How dare he national his country’s oil!!

                “South American evolving ‘democracy’: What we mean is oligarchs empowered by American CIA and military complex. Does the School of the Americas ring any bells? Maybe America needs to keep their greedy “democratic” hands off the natural resources of other nations….like that will ever happen.

                I’ve already explained to you why ‘illegal immigration’ will never be resolved and it is not because of poor immigrants. You just don’t want to accept that American corporations are playing on your fears.

                Why do you think America hates Cuba so much? Because Fidel Castro kicked our greedy, corrupt corporate azzes out and because they have survived the trade sanctions. America kept failed multiple times to assassinate him. That was like squeezing lemon juice on the wound. Here is an example of how that tiny socialist/communist island handles infectious diseases (while America fell flat on her face with 3 cases of ebola)

                As for a recent success of socialism. Here is that dastardly, Indigenous leader of Bolivia, Evo Morales. Damn, those socialists; how dare they decrease poverty, nationalize their oil (protecting the resources from the thieving and corrupt Westerner corporate gods) and raise the wages and living standards of the country’s poorest!


                Oh geez, and President Morales was the ONLY one to stand up to the big, rich nations at COP16.He was the President in power when Bolivia passed the Mother Earth law, too. Damn those Indigenous peasants and campesinos when they elect leaders that work for them rather than the rich ‘democratic’ nations and the oligarch puppet leaders they educate and support.

              • WM says:

                So Yvette,

                Are we to conclude you are a “socialist?”

                Before you answer, perhaps you should read this, as Chavez policies continue after his death, under his hand picked successor, Vice President Maduro, now elected President.

                “Venezuela remains highly dependent on oil revenues, which account for roughly 96% of export earnings, about 45% of budget revenues, and around 12% of GDP. … Government spending, minimum wage hikes, and improved access to domestic credit created an increase in consumption which combined with supply problems to cause higher inflation – roughly 20% in 2012 and rising to more than 56% in 2013. Former President Hugo CHAVEZ’s efforts to increase the government’s control of the economy by nationalizing firms in the agribusiness, financial, construction, oil, and steel sectors hurt the private investment environment, reduced productive capacity, and slowed non-petroleum exports. In 2013, Venezuela continued to wrestle with housing and electricity crises, and rolling food and goods shortages, resulting from the government’s unorthodox economic policies.


                Guess we will see how this all plays out for the people of Venezuela. Also a bunch of folks want the Castro brothers out – oh, wait many of them gave up hope and are now living in Miami. Boatloads still coming (sometimes sinking before they hit US soil).

            • Nancy says:

              “This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “What is the difference between capitalism and socialism?”

              We’re answering: “In a capitalist society man exploits man, and in a socialist one, the other way around.”


      • rork says:

        Yvette, in your outrage, you are equating legal and highly illegal activity. They are not the same.

        I think it’s nearly irrelevant that the poachers were immigrants of any kind, unless someone wants to supply some data about that, which will likely amaze me. I think we need more points of interdiction (we have to catch them here), in case you think I’m weak against illegally staying here.

        • Yvette says:

          rork, my post was mostly sarcasm.

          What I truly would like to see is stronger sentences for illegal hunting. I would also like to see some of the legal ways of hunting made illegal. Bear baiting, hounding, and trapping (in most cases) should become a thing of the past.

  24. Louise Kane says:

    anyone looking for something beautiful
    my friend Jimmy Jone’s newest gallery
    always photographs wild animals

    spectacular shot of snake toward the end and of 3 geese flying

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Thanks for the beautiful photography link!. It brought to mind one of my favorite wildlife photographers, Miguel Lasa.

      • Nancy says:

        Barb & Louise, thanks for the sites!! Beautiful shots. Needed something to boost my spirits today.

        5 degrees outside, will probably be the high today, even with the sun shining…

        My little girl (dog) wants to be outside chasing a tennis ball but she doesn’t last more than a few minutes. Need to find her some snow boots 🙂

  25. Helen McGinnis says:

    Who should pay for Wyoming’s wildlife?

    Wyoming should change the way wildlife management is funded, shifting the principal burden off the backs of hunters and insulating other revenue from political mending, authors of a Wyoming Law Review article say.

  26. Louise Kane says:

    breaking Elk’s rules by posting about Montana
    Elk is the thinking here, along the lines of what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. insert Montana, Idaho or Wyoming?

    • Logan says:

      Wow, I’m all for killing a grizzly in self defense but this guy was not threatened and didn’t even try non-lethal means of scaring the bears away. He should get worse than a $25K fine per bear. He should lose his property.

  27. Ida Lupines says:

    Yes I think we do have an obligation to protect/help those members of society that cannot speak for themselves, or consent. Children, animals, etc.

  28. Yvette says:

    Not sure if this has been posted, but I haven’t seen it if it has. Good story and excellent short video on the wolf reintroduction and the battles that have followed.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      With each adult wolf capable of eating as many 35 elk a year, hunters believed they had reason to worry about what would be left for them.

      This denying another living thing food always boggles my mind, over and above the concept that we want to wipe them out,or just maintain a token population, because they are inconvenient. Well, perhaps the wounded elk from that recent massacre that nobody seemed to care about could go to predators?

  29. rork says:
    Not the greatest article, and nothing new for the moose students here, but the biologist only mentions temperature, brainworm, and ticks, as problems for Vermont’s moose. Some people would have factored in coywolves, but this guy didn’t – reporter didn’t ask though.

    • Professor Sweat says:

      An eastern coyote/coywolf pack can probably take down a healthy bull moose in the right conditions, so parasitic infestations would only make job easier. I’m sure they just make up one of many causes of the decline though. Any idea when they were first recorded in the area?

      • Helen McGinnis says:

        Coyotes that were somewhat different from western coyotes first started showing up in New England in the 1950s. In the 1960s Walter and Helenette Silver obtained a litter, raised them in captivity, and produced F1 and F2 hybrids. They determined that they bred true and proposed calling them Canis latrans var. DNA analysis came much later.

  30. Ida Lupines says:

    I wonder if that’s because the coywolf really isn’t a major factor? I was shocked when I saw a young girl with a cat that was very very sick. She was very upset; but it turned out the problem was an easy one to prevent. The cat was infested with fleas, and had become dangerously anemic. Don’t underestimate the effects of fleas and ticks! And I wonder if because moose and deer don’t have the vast ranges they once did, they are stuck in these infested areas, and the insects increasingly multiply in such favorable conditions.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      If the moose and deer are weakened, they’ll be more vulnerable to predators – so the predators aren’t the direct cause? It’s definitely a more complicated reason behind moose decline.

  31. Mareks Vilkins says:

    America Has a Scary Sewage Problem: Let’s Clean It Up and Jumpstart the Economy While We’re At It

    Stormwater management is an opportunity to stem a crisis and move toward a sustainable future.

    Our nation’s older cities depend largely on sewage treatment systems that overflow when it rains, dumping 860 billion gallons of raw sewage a year into “fresh” water across the country

    Traditionally, the solution to keeping sewage out of our rivers and lakes involves capital-intensive expansion of sewage treatment capacity—or even rebuilding these systems altogether to separate out waste from stormwater. Even in the face of strict consent decrees imposed by the EPA, it’s highly improbable that our most cash-strapped cities are likely to be able to find the funds—estimated at over $100 billion nationwide—to sufficiently rebuild their underground infrastructure

    As climate change continues to generate bigger storms and more intense flooding to the point that even insurance companies are beginning to sue cities for inadequate drainage capacity, can we find a way forward?

    By reworking the urban environment along ecologically sensitive lines, the green stormwater management toolbox—which also includes urban forestry, green roofs and artificial wetlands—provides an effective way to lighten the load on our sewage systems, while reducing the pollution associated with runoff—not to mention sprucing up our communities with more plants.

    But jobs–and new principles of systemic and institutional design that can be implemented in the creation of those jobs—are the real reasons to be encouraged by green stormwater management

    Green stormwater management has unique advantages: it’s much less capital intensive than the traditional approach, and because it relies on living systems, it helps establish a market for continuous skilled maintenance. Moreover, because it relies on many decentralized small projects, it opens up the space for experimentation with different approaches to create jobs building the needed infrastructure—and at a scale amenable to community ownership and control.

    • rork says:

      Nice. Thanks.
      Even separation of storm from sewer can still mean horrible runoff hits the river. So even if separated, we still have to work on slowing that rainwater down, and keeping it clean, and not heating it up. In Ann Arbor they give tax breaks if you have approved rain capture systems in your yard, but it takes bigger projects of retention and detention too. Our “urban” drainages of just 5-8 square miles can deliver 1000 cfs of horrible-quality water in big storms – that’s insanely flashy. The housing was designed with a just-send-it-down-the-pipe-to-the-river attitude, and it’s expensive to fix that later (there’s no room). Call for any new development to have very very good retention designs – better than “their fair share”, and ask for designs that handle worse than 100-year storms (good engineers here do this already, cause they’re thinking that “100-year” ain’t what it used to be).

    • JB says:

      We’re in the midst of a big cleanup here in Columbus. The city took out two low-head dams, and build retention/overflow ponds that are designed to hold and filter storm runnoff before it enters the river. They also had a massive project to replant vegetation along the river (without the dams it runs at about 1/4 to 1/3 of its former width). The results are amazing.

      Some images/info:

  32. Yvette says:

    Nancy, last month you provided a link to a documentary on America’s relations and policies in Central America. I watched it and thought I bookmarked it. I’ve lost it and don’t remember the name of the documentary. Can’s seem to find it in here either since I don’t remember which thread.

    Do you mind reposting that link so I can bookmark it? Thanks!

  33. Nancy says:

    Got a question for the WN group of posters in Montana:

    This morning I found a medium gray colored bird (lighter gray underside) in my yard, about the size of a magpie. Minus 24 this morning. It was not able to fly (caught it easily) Very short tail with a white patch underneath it. Tan colored beak, tip is a light blue. Eyes rust colored black pupils, small rust colored spot top of bill, near feathers.

    Now the weird thing about this little guy is it’s feet. Long toes that appear to have flaps on the sides (not web but flaps) legs are kind of a pastel green. I’m thinking some sort of marsh bird but I can’t find it in my bird book or on sites I’ve been to on the web. Its a very calm bird, moves slowly (have it in a cat crate) Figured once it warmed I’d send it on its way but it didn’t want to come out of the crate. Left the door open on the deck, came to the front of the crate and then walked to the back again.

    Would like to know if anyone knows what this bird is. Or if its even native to Montana (could of gotten blown off course migrating)

    • Barb Rupers says:

      I know phalaropes (and coots) have lobed feet but the colors don’t sound right. Here is a link to bird feet that might help:

      • Nancy says:

        What a great site, thanks Barb! These feet (link below) are spot on for this little guy but color of bird and feet in the pic aren’t.

        Talked to the “birdman” at the local college earlier and going to meet up with him tomorrow.
        He thinks its a marsh bird and it needs to be released near water. The only pond near me is frozen over now. And, honestly, I’d rather he check this little guy out and make sure there are no underlying problems going on (should of been near water and not in my yard)

        Amazed at how calm this little guy is, well that is til I put a hand in the crate and then I get nailed! But it’s drinking water and even fished some grass out of the water bowl.

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Nancy, you might check out the grebes – they are two tone grey, short tailed – in winter both eared, and horned both range in Montana; if I recall correctly, they are not strong flyers and require a running takeoff from open water. The one you may have probably likes the warm spot you have offered. If I am correct it should be farther south in this kind of weather or on the coast.

      • Barb Rupers says:

        Oops; change winter to summer.

      • Nancy says:

        Barb – found this site and looked at
        Rails & Grebes. This little bird might fall into the category of Grebe or Rail (played the sound bite for a Rail and got no reaction, played the sound bite for a Grebe and get a small reaction) but again, color and features are off.

        Thinking about running some water in the bathtub, turning it loose, just so it knows I’m working on the situation 🙂 🙂

        • aves says:

          My guess would be a juvenile American coot:

          Best of luck with him or her!

          • Nancy says:

            Thanks for the link aves.

            Half hour ago she/he got very anxious, moving up and down and pecking at the sides of the crate unlike earlier behavior so I did “draw a bath” in the tub, dumped this little bird in and it was amazing to watch the transformation of a stressed bird to a bird in something close to its element – water.

            Top of the list immediately was preening and bathing, really fun to watch.

            Unfortunately she/he will have to go back in the crate since I don’t have heat to that bathroom other than leaving the door open (already minus 7 here) and I dread to think where she/he might end up sometime during the night if she/he decided to wander around 🙂

            • Barb Rupers says:

              Looks like aves came up with a solution!;>) I didn’t think to look at immature coots.

              At our high school I convinced the home economics teacher during her parenting classes to not use dolls or a sack of flour but a real live animal – ducklings because they imprint on their surrogate “parent”. I offered “babysitting” during the day and it was a lot of fun to put a bunch of the ducklings into the large laboratory sinks for a swim. Many of the “parents” who became very attached to their kids ended up taking them home to keep at the end of the week long project.

            • Yvette says:

              Looks like you have a bird for the winter! 🙂

          • Louise Kane says:

            Aves why do you think it ended up near Nancy and is so calm

            I pick up all kinds of birds on the beach after storms from Puffins, to Cormorants, to Ruby Throated Loons. Even this sick ones are usually aggressive.

            odd that its so calm.

            found a green turtle on the beach the other day, off the gulf stream caught in a cold snap. They are always lethargic and need to be rehabbed. Perhaps that’s what happened to your bird Nancy, off its game due to cold?

            • Barb Rupers says:

              Once, after a big Nor’Easter in Maine, a student brought to our school in Porter a small black and white bird that had been blown in from the Atlantic, turned out to be a dovekie; the only one I ever saw.

              • Louise Kane says:

                Barb, I remember after the storms here on the Cape, my Dad would take an old bucket and drive us around to collect dovekies. Resentful would be the appropriate word to describe our reaction. While my friends were playing, meeting others and doing what they wanted… we would be in for a day of driving all over to pick up birds. Gradually the resentment wore off and I remember feeling like it was a contest to see how many we could find and release. Dovekies need to be in water for a proper take off. With my Dad it was always the same. It mattered not how it inconvenienced us. You might as well be talking to yourself. When it came to animals, we were second consideration. The dogs got their ice cream cones first, we went to feed the injured seagull first, or were taken to a favorite overlook to see a fox or raccoon he was watching before school or on days off. Saturdays were all day fishing marathons, mostly catch and release. I remember very clearly being huddled in the bow of the boat under a blanket seeing the impossible clear sky above, my Dad with his cigar clamped between teeth, and woolen cap snugged over his head whistling something through his teeth. Your dovekie story brought back a flood o memories I have not seen one in years and wonder what that means….

              • Louise Kane says:

                my Dad was a single father. Somehow impossibly he managed a commercial fishing career and raised two small girls by himself and still found a great deal of joy in life. Thanks for mentioning dovekies.

          • Nancy says:

            Aves, that’s exactly what this little bird is – a juvenile American coot. Spitting image of the pic.

            It spent some time in the tub this morning and will have to sit tight til I go to town later and get to a pond. thanks for the guess work!

            Louise, when I found it yesterday I’d be willing to guess it was half froze but I am amazed at how calm it is most of the time. Stands on one leg and just stares (but throws a hissy fit when I have to handle it)

            Anxious to get it back to its own habitat.

            • Ida Lupines says:

              That’s wonderful, keep us posted on his progress!

              • Nancy says:

                Ida, Barb, Aves, Louise,

                Got into town around noon today and met up with Jack, the birdman. The pond he had in mind for a release, was frozen over so we took the little coot to a slow moving part of a nearby river.

                Jack climbed down to the edge with the crate, set it on a sliver of ice rimming the shore, and opened the door.

                Only took a few seconds for the coot to realize freedom was at hand! It jumped out of the crate and into the water and started paddling and drifting away with the current. A few yards down, it spread it wings but then continued to drift until out of sight.

                Coots are usually gone from this area by now so hopefully it will feed and then follow its natural instincts to head south.

                And interesting to note – put some cooked barley in the crate for it this morning. No interest and then about an hour later, I noticed it picking kernels of barley out of the bowl and then dipping them into the water bowl before eating it. Finished the small bowl of barley before we headed to town.

                Nice, a little bit of energy while floating the river 🙂

                Wonderful, close encounter of the best kind, with wildlife.

            • Louise Kane says:

              just a thought Nancy you may want to ask a wildlife rehabilitator to take a look. If the bird is compromised they may be able to do something for it. We have an organization here called Wild Care where I bring the birds I find. They are excellent and do assessments of the bird’s health and then release according to the bird’s health and their understanding of its habitat needs.

              • Nancy says:


                The closest wildlife rehab is about 5 hr. round trip drive so I’m gonna have the birdman at the college take a look. He’s more into raptors but should be able to tell if there’s a problem.

                I don’t think there is a problem since it can swim, flex its wings (briefly took a tour of the kitchen last night 🙂 and has been preening. Took a few bites of cooked barley this morning.

              • Barb Rupers says:

                Louise, good to hear the dovekie brought back pleasant memories which you related so well!

          • Mark L says:

            Nancy, if you draw another bath, make sure the water is COLD for acclimation…it can actually overheat in warm water in a warm house.

            • Barb Rupers says:

              While I was reading up on lobe footed birds it was mentioned that the structures are functional at efficiently lowering a coot’s body temperature.

              At one time I had a flock of about 40 ducks and graylag geese; they certainly seemed to prefer eating grain doused in water. For recently hatched ducklings and goslings lacking mothers I would flick wet cereal onto the walls of their containers to get them started on food. I got the idea by watching them pluck from the air the albumen that dried on their down which then floated away on air currents – excellent up close eyesight. As the ducks got older their preferred food was freshly dug earthworms. It was great for getting the garden worked in the spring as they would fall into the shovel hole on its first exit to get the worms and I would have to move to a different spot for the next dig so as not to squish any of them. They were definitely imprinted on me and my shovel.

              High school biology teachers get lots of strange gifts from their students and learn much from these encounters. For birds I still have the great horned owl, a rufous hummingbird, and KeDee the killdeer stories; then there is Swifty the raccoon, Suzie the red fox, Hiram the squirrel who was eaten by Bo the Boa constrictor.

  34. rork says:
    Press release today, 3:30 PM EST:
    “Comments sought for update of Wolf Management Plan” in Michigan.

    • bret says:

      Justin Dellinger, a PhD candidate at the University of Washington, is studying how the presence of wolves on a controlled landscape directly and indirectly affects prey and thus habitat.

      Wolves, however, aren’t the only predators on the landscape of the Colville Indian Reservation. Cougars make a living there, too. The video here was recorded last winter by one of Dellinger’s deer video collars. It shows one deer going about its business of traveling and foraging. Watch closely.
      Dellinger thanks the Colville Indian Reservation for graciously allowing him to perform his research. As you’ll see below, his video collars have captured some amazing footage.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Thanks for posting

  35. Barb Rupers says:

    Good news! OR-7 apparently not implicated in the death of a bovine in SW Oregon:

    From the same source newspaper the origin of the SW Oregon wolves are NE Oregon and they are not hybrids.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Yes, good news! So some are trying to associate him with livestock kills. Not surprising. For all we know, the carcass was left there. I always wonder how they can distinguish if predators actually made the kill, or if they just happened upon it and fed. Someone will try to kill OR-7 and his family too.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        For example, what happened with the farmer who hunted down a protected wolf and shot him, not protecting his property but actively going after him – a slap on the wrist? These people really feel they have nothing to fear about the repercussions of their actions. Is shooting a protected animal a felony or misdemeanor?

        • Barb Rupers says:

          Last I heard this action was still under investigation. Try the Spokesman Review for “wolf” search.

      • Barb Rupers says:

        Ida, here is a site that gives ways of identifying different types of predation:

  36. Louise Kane says:

    The grim outcome of the coyote and wolf derby in Salmon
    Unconscionable wanton waste
    Can anyone defend this?

    • rork says:

      I’ll bite.
      Coyote killing is legal in Idaho, and trying to change that seems like a waste of time, or could actually be counterproductive, since many people would think folks proposing making it illegal are wacky, and can’t be taken seriously on other issues either.
      Special pleading against such derbies that are not arguments against coyote killing in general hold no water as far as I can tell.

      On one of my last bow hunts, the expected massive buck whitetail started coming out of the swamp, but did that shape-shifting thing that is so familiar, and turned into a coyote by the time it got to open upland where I could see it better. It hunted rodents very near me for about 20 min – I saw no successes but some close calls, and it was a wonderful gift. Infecting the minds of my fellow hunters with this attitude might help – altering mores and custom rather than altering law. If custom is altered in enough people, law might even change.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        On one of my last bow hunts, the expected massive buck whitetail started coming out of the swamp, but did that shape-shifting thing that is so familiar, and turned into a coyote by the time it got to open upland where I could see it better. It hunted rodents very near me for about 20 min – I saw no successes but some close calls, and it was a wonderful gift. Infecting the minds of my fellow hunters with this attitude might help – altering mores and custom rather than altering law. If custom is altered in enough people, law might even change.

        This is beautifully expressed, Rork.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          If you can write like this, I certainly have misread you. (You weren’t being sarcastic…were you?)

          • rork says:

            No sarcasm. Please don’t faint.
            Too bad the arguments to convince other hunters are not simple, whereas the arguments against coyotes are “common sense”.

      • Louise Kane says:

        I meant to respond to this. I think I get where you are coming from most of the time, what I don’t get is why you would think opposition to killing contests is counterproductive. It’s not just the event that is problematic its the ugly mindset that drives the action. Getting people to stop would be an easy proposition if it meant working with utters like yourself. But that’s not the case. These contests have really proliferated. There are hundreds of them across the country. You wrote something that I think is very ironic and telling. “since many people would think folks proposing making it illegal are wacky, and can’t be taken seriously on other issues either.” Just who is running the asylum? If people that want to end events like this are the lunatics, just what is rational and sane? I think you have it wrong Rork. When people read about these contests they react strongly against them. Not arguing popularity contest here but a hundred thousand people agreed that the contest should be shut down on public lands. Sounds like the general public thinks that the crazies are the ones running around with the fund killing for fun. I hope you do have the ability to pass along some of your good virtues and help your fellow hunters feel something other than fear and loathing of predators. In the meantime, something needs to be done to stop these contests. They just breed a new culture of predator hate and legitimize wanton waste.

        • Louise Kane says:

          oops a couple of spell check issues

          1) Getting people to stop would be an easy proposition if it meant working with hunters like yourself.
          2) Sounds like the general public thinks that the crazies are the ones running around killing for fun.

    • rork says:

      Predator hunters get to call anti-derby folks “eco-terrorists”. Learn new things: meat supply in danger, coyote killers stand up for ranchers, environmentalists crazy, cows good for sage grouse, and more.

      • Yvette says:

        We (coyotes AND animal/wildlife advocates) have a branding/marketing problem.

        The Salmon, ID derby is small potatoes (no pun intended) compared to the coyote killing contests in many of the other states.

        What we need is a massive advertising campaign to rebrand the coyote. ($$$$$). I can see billboards with a lovely picture of the coyote parents (usually mated for life) and pups standing in front of a massive American flag. Hell, toss in a cross and a bible. The quote would read, “America’s Song Dog”

        That’s it. Do that for 1-2 years while adding commercials and op-ed campaigns. After a year or two change the billboard to show the atrocity of piles and piles of dead coyotes. Leave it up for a short time and change back to the ‘America’s Song Dog billboard’. Introduce educational outreach targeted to the regions with heavy coyote killing contests. It’s the rebranding that will eventually start to turn the old farm boys into pariahs, or they change their behavior.

        I think it would work. However, what animal/wildlife advocates lack is corporate America’s billions.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          If we can refer to them as poetically as Song Dogs, I can’t understand why we can be so merciless to them.

          When I’ve heard them yipping in the backyard, it is most onomotapaeic, just like it is described in old cowboy songs.

        • Louise Kane says:

          You are right Yvette
          money is needed but if Americans can ban cigarette smoking in restaurants and public places and create an atmosphere of social intolerance toward smokers they ought to be able to get good people to abhor killing beautiful ecologically important species, especially when the public already appears to be against the current anti predator management strategies employed by the feds, states and municipalities.

  37. snaildarter says:

    Atlanta Journal Article Ted Turner giving YS bison to tribes in MT

  38. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Heavily-hunted wolf populations have elevated stress, reproductive hormones, study reveals

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      Hunting can disrupt a wolf pack’s complex social structure, alter normal reproductive behaviour and introduce chronic stress that “may have evolutionary consequences,” the study found. Hunting can also decrease pack size, resulting in altered predation patterns, increased time spent defending kill sites from scavengers and may lead to increased conflict with humans and livestock, the study added.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I was so glad to see this study. It isn’t only cattle that become stressed by predators. Of course it would stand to reason that wolves would be stressed by human predators also.

  39. Amre says:

    I have very little to no respect for democrats who sell out like this and basically pretend to be republicans to get votes. I have much more respect for a democrat who stands up for progressive principles, even if they are unpopular in an area, and loses and election.

  40. Kathleen says:

    ID predator derby record of decision released today…

    “Decision Record Released for Predatory Derby Special Recreation Permit”

    “IDAHO FALLS, ID – Today the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a decision record to approve Idaho for Wildlife’s special recreation permit (SRP) for a competitive event to have a predatory derby on public lands. The proposed event is scheduled to occur January 2015.”

    Continued here:

  41. Nancy says:

    “The aim of the elk management plan is to keep infected elk away from cattle to prevent the spread of the disease brucellosis. Cows infected with brucellosis can prematurely abort their young”

    Hmmm….Will be interesting to watch how this unfolds in the land of cattle. Recall a bumper sticker on a site recently that said ” Save an elk, kill a cow” Its all about hunting and probably going to get real nasty, given the fact that many ranches are handing their lands over to outfitters, nice fees/kickbacks/ little supervision and the “elk” problem will be addressed just like the predator problem….

  42. Mareks Vilkins says:

    “Influence of Group Size on the Success of Wolves Hunting Bison”

    Daniel R. MacNulty, Aimee Tallian,Daniel R. Stahler,

    Douglas W. Smith

    November 12, 2014

    we used direct observations of Yellowstone wolves (Canis lupus) hunting their most formidable prey, bison (Bison bison), to test the hypothesis that large groups are more cooperative when hunting difficult prey. We quantified the relationship between capture success and wolf group size, and compared it to previously reported results for Yellowstone wolves hunting elk (Cervus elaphus), a prey that was, on average, 3 times easier to capture than bison. Whereas improvement in elk capture success levelled off at 2–6 wolves, bison capture success levelled off at 9–13 wolves with evidence that it continued to increase beyond 13 wolves. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that hunters in large groups are more cooperative when hunting more formidable prey. Improved ability to capture formidable prey could therefore promote the formation and maintenance of large predator groups, particularly among predators that specialize on such prey.

    • Louise Kane says:

      great study
      Mareks you would appreciate a series of images that I have seen somewhere of one wolf taking down a bison. I think it might be in Jimmy Jones images I’ll try and find it.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Mareks here is the link to the amazing images. One wolf one bison. Jimmy’s comments are very informed and interesting. A wonderful photographic study.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      Utah Researchers Learn Secrets of Wolf Hunting Habits in Yellowstone

      “Hunting is hazardous business for wolves,” said MacNulty, who witnessed wolves kicked, gored and stomped to death by bison. “Wolves minimize the risk of injury by focusing on vulnerable prey, which are generally rare. So, wolves spend a lot of time on the move searching for the easiest target. Any injury that slows them down may eventually kill them.”

      A leg fracture, a punctured lung or even a broken jaw or tooth threatens a wolf’s survival.

      “In addition to hampering travel and nutritional intake, injuries make individual wolves vulnerable to rival packs,” he said. “Because of this, wolves are extremely cautious and sensitive to risk.”

      …. Such findings may assist efforts to prevent conflicts between wolves and livestock.

      “Management that takes advantage of wolves’ risk-averse behavior may be an effective way to reduce wolf predation on livestock,” MacNulty said.

      • WM says:

        ++Such findings may assist efforts to prevent conflicts between wolves and livestock.++

        OK, so here’s the big question, HOW?

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Bigger packs with stronger members are able to take out bigger prey (still the weaker members of the herd), not have to rely on livestock. Nature’s design is beautiful when not interfered with by her wayward child, humans. Healthy herds, healthy packs. But perhaps humans want this screwed up cycle they have created –

          • WM says:


            Let’s cut to the chase, here. Wolves will go for the easy meal wherever they are. Livestock are fair game, if present. Larger pack means more protective measures by livestock owners. How many guard dogs for a pack of 13 large (smart/experienced) wolves?

            • Ida Lupines says:

              I think the study is saying that if the packs aren’t hobbled, they will go after their natural prey, that they would have if unnatural livestock were not introduced to the landscape, not the easiest.

              Make it more difficult to get livestock, don’t just act like lords of all we survey. Aggressive but non-lethal measures to protect livestock should be taken.

              • Mark L says:

                How about ‘changing the cow?’ That is, make it financially advantageous to those cattle ranchers that have more wolf predation to use cattle better able to fend for themselves…at least in outlying areas? I’ve suggested longhorns, etc. before…nothing like 2 sharpened baseball bats to deter an attack. Yep, I know there are more profitable (and cold-tolerant) breeds, and there’s plenty of risk rounding them up, but when do we finally reach the conclusion that these problems are caused by domestic stock that’s been bred to be basically defenseless (and fatter $$$)?
                Despite what some in the NRM will suggest, the wolf there now is the same wolf that’s been there. What has gotten weaker and weaker through the centuries, the prey or the predator?

              • Elk375 says:

                Mark the problem with Long Horns is that one can only load a few in a cattle truck.

              • Mark L says:

                I know…that’s my point. We need to think ‘outside the logistics box’ of transportation limits. Mobile slaughter houses could address part of this issue, but once again it’s a matter of money.

              • Elk375 says:

                Lets think back in time, maybe we could get Rowdy Yates to drive them to market — problem solved. But Rowdy (Clint Eastwood) is getting a little old to ramrod a herd of Texas Longhorns to market.

              • Mark L says:

                Um…reductio ad absurdum doesn’t help the discussion if you miss the point, Elk.

              • Elk375 says:

                I am just playing with you Mark L.

            • Nancy says:

              “Wolves will go for the easy meal wherever they are. Livestock are fair game, if present”

              WM – there are over a million head of cattle in Montana alone. 10’s of thousands spent quite a few months out of the year on public lands with little if any supervision and to date – 32 confirmed dead & 14 possible, from wolf depredation.

              So it goes to show that wolves are SELDOM targeting livestock. Livestock are not their natural prey.

              Would warrant a study IMHO, as to why that tiny percentage of livestock, IS being targeted.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      And perhaps leave the livestock alone, if it really is a large number taken at all. But not if hunters keep taking out the pack members and disrupting the pack!

  43. Mareks Vilkins says:

    A Day Late & a Dollar Short: Obama & China agree on Languid Climate Goals

    • Ida Lupines says:

      You got that right – more talk, and any action pushed back to 2025-2030 (at 2005 levels)! I don’t know that we have that kind of time to wait for energy usage to peak – especially with world population continuing to grow:

      Now, in this agreement with China, Obama set an ambitious 2025 target to cut U.S. climate pollution by 26-28 percent from 2005 levels, while China President Xi Jinping is pledging to peak its CO2 emissions around 2030, with the intention to try to peak early, and to increase the non-fossil fuel share of all energy to around 20 percent by 2030.

  44. WM says:

    ++Just growing trees and setting aside the forest is not enough. Sustainable forest practices and better uses of wood can efficiently reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for the long term. ++

    This opinion piece in the Seattle Times from highly respected natural resources professor at UW, on behalf of a 14 member university team studying carbon sequestration, ought to send George Wuerthner thru the roof, or alternatively get folks thinking more about a more intensely managed forest environment:

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      B. What about trees?

      Trees are carbon-capturing systems; they suck CO2 out of thin air, and they don’t violate any laws of physics. They are two-in-one machines: they are carbon-capture facilities powered by built-in solar power stations. They capture carbon using energy obtained from sunlight. The fossil fuels that we burn were originally created by this process. So, the suggestion is, how about trying to do the opposite of fossil fuel burning? How about creating wood and burying it in a hole in the ground, while, next door, humanity continues digging up fossil wood and setting fire to it? It’s daft to imagine creating buried wood at the same time as digging up buried wood. Even so, let’s work out the land area required to solve the climate problem with trees.

      The best plants in Europe capture carbon at a rate of roughly 10 tons of dry wood per hectare per year – equivalent to about 15 tons of CO2 per hectare per year – so to fix a European’s output of 11 tons of CO2 per year we need 7500 square metres of forest per person. This required area of 7500 square metres per person is twice the area of Britain per person.

      And then you’d have to find somewhere to permanently store 7.5 tons of wood per person per year! At a density of 500 kg per m3, each person’s wood would occupy 15 m3 per year. A lifetime’s wood – which, remember, must be safely stored away and never burned – would occupy 1000 m3.

      That’s five times the entire volume of a typical house. If anyone proposes using trees to undo climate change, they need to realise that country-sized facilities are required. I don’t see how it could ever work.

      • WM says:


        I think he is making the case for shorter rotation age on managed forests. That could mean more chipped wood products like OSB (oriented strand board) which has replaced conventional plywood in recent years, or laminated wood beams. If these guys are correct, they assert younger trees need to replace some of the older trees that do not do the job of absorbing carbon so efficiently. The opinion doesn’t go as far as say remaining old growth needs to be removed (which should not IMHO for other good aesthetic/species conservation reasons).

        He is also talking about one geographic area – the Northwest US.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      As trees mature, like a garden, the carbon they sequester from the atmosphere slows down


      Trees accelerate growth as they get older and bigger, study finds

      Findings contradict assumption that old trees are less productive and could have important implications for carbon absorption

      The scientists from 16 countries studied measurements of 673,046 trees of more than 400 species growing on six continents, and found that large, old trees actively fix large amounts of carbon compared to smaller trees. A single big tree can add the same amount of carbon to the forest in a year as is contained in an entire mid-sized tree, they found.

      “In human terms, it is as if our growth just keeps accelerating after adolescence, instead of slowing down.

      The study also shows old trees play a disproportionately important role in forest growth. Trees of 100cm in diameter in old-growth western US forests comprised just 6% of trees, yet contributed 33% of the annual forest mass growth.

      while they are alive, large old trees play a disproportionately important role in a forest’s carbon dynamics. It is as if the star players on your favourite sports team were a bunch of 90-year-olds.”

      Research in 2012 showed that big trees may comprise less than 2% of the trees in any forest but they can contain 25% of the total biomass and are vital for the health of whole forests because they seed large areas

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Thank you, Mareks. Where did we get the idea that older, larger, huge trees would be less productive?

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          from Germany and its ‘forest scientists’ in the 19th century who demanded that wood must be harvested at a ‘rotation age’ (100 years for a pine) – otherwise it will ‘rot away’

      • WM says:

        The “truth” might not be so clear, but here is CORRIM’s view, and links to peer reviewed papers:

      • rork says:

        Most all of that’s on a per tree basis, while others are trying to (fairly) argue about per unit land area. That might win if we are just arguing about carbon in trees, and wood, but ignores other creatures. Don’t get me wrong. I like big trees, and selective cutting – almost acts like a forest. The other stuff we call plantations – near me, in MI, they are ecological deserts in most of the cycle.

  45. Nancy says:

    Still, the prospects for Keystone approval by Congress will likely improve in January when the Senate switches to Republican control after this month’s elections”

    Money talks….

  46. Immer Treue says:

    Finally, a groundwork study that may indicate the breakdown of wolf pack social structure due to heavy hunting and trapping activity.

    “Researchers also found elevated levels of progesterone, a hormone produced during pregnancy, which indicates an unusually high proportion of breeding females. Normally only one female in a pack produces pups, so having a high number of pregnant females in one pack indicates “a broken social structure which is disrupting their normal reproductive strategies,” says Smits. “A normal wolf pack has a very important social structure, with one breeding male and female and all the others know what their role is.”

    • Immer Treue says:

      I find this interesting:

      “The hair samples revealed that progesterone was higher in tundra–taiga wolves, possibly reflecting increased reproductive effort and social disruption in response to human-related mortality. Tundra–taiga wolves also had higher testosterone and cortisol levels, which may reflect social instability.”

      As there appears to be a correlation between heavy hunting/trapping of wolves and increased levels of cortisol, progesterone, and testosterone, this might start teasing apart on a biological level, at least some proof in the pudding, that over hunting of wolves could actually disrupt social structure enough to promote more breeding.

      I skimmed through the formal paper, and I saw no mention of coyotes(perhaps I missed it), but could there exist this correlation between the obnoxious hunting/trapping of coyotes and their great propensity for reproduction and expansion?

      • Nancy says:

        “The more coyotes are attacked by humans, the more they become entrenched,” Crabtree says. “It is easy to view nature as strictly linear — coyotes kill sheep, so we kill coyotes — but the truth is that nature is extraordinarily dynamic. If we simply stopped killing coyotes, it might actually reduce the coyote population and decrease the kills of sheep.” Crabtree adds that if the money and effort used to kill coyotes were redirected toward nonlethal predator-control methods — guard dogs, guard llamas, and better fencing practices — sheep losses would be even lower”

        How many of us over the years have brought up Crabtree’s studies on this.

      • Louise Kane says:

        What I find equally interesting is that even though so much is known about wolves and their sociality and their dynamic pack structures, studies are needed to prove that random hunting, trapping and snaring of wolves creates stress.

        anyhow, good to see on paper what common sense might infer.

  47. Louise Kane says:

    Immer this is by the same scientist
    Great man he is

  48. Ida Lupines says:

    More wolves shot within 3 miles of the Park’s boundaries. This isn’t hunting, and has to stop – the so-called hunting is interfering with the elk/wolf migration:

    • Elk375 says:

      Ida these wolves were shot 7 to 10 days ago. Do not believe everything you read there is some mistakes in that article. Hunting districts mixed up and other false information.

    • Yvette says:

      Well written report. This is exposing more people to how these hunters operate. These people are either psychologically damaged or their brains have areas function or synapse differently than most people. Anyone, I don’t care who you are, but anyone that enjoys killing or profits from killing, or both, is psychologically imbalanced.

      • Elk375 says:

        You are not knowledgeable about the area and can not see the inaccuracies of several items in the report. I know the area very well.

        The Wolf Patrol feels that it is unethical to road hunt or sit in a truck and wait until the elk come by. What the hell, five minutes ago I got an picture on my I-phone of a hunter who road hunted and may have shot his deer from the truck window. Is it unethical to hunt like that — it is illegal to shot from a truck except with out a special permit. My father shot a deer 20 minutes ago with his grandson road hunting, love you father and wish I was there, he is 90 years old and still outside hunting and looking forward to next year.

    • Jake Jenson says:

      Yellow Journalism.

  49. Yvette says:

    Six sea lions in San Diego have been shot in the last two months.

    Cartmill said the debate over seals and sea lions in San Diego has been raging for some 20 years, pitting activists against homeowners and business owners—especially in the upscale La Jolla district—who complain about sea lions occupying the beach and foul odors emanating from where they congregate.

  50. Louise Kane says:

    similar results to comments taken by BLM
    rightly so no one likes these killing contests except the creeps that put them on and the dregs that show up to participate.

  51. Louise Kane says:

    Wildlife Services employee that trapped neighbor’s dog going to trial. The trapped dog lost 17 teeth trying to get out. These traps don’t hurt wildlife a bit though.

    • Immer Treue says:

      I have a couple picture sequences of a young wolf with its forepaw lodged in a leg hold trap. The thing is, it’s probably incidental to beaver trapping. Wolf just happened to step in water set meant for beaver, and trap was not anchored securely “enough”. Wolf breaks free, but had trap on its foot for more than two weeks. It will lose all or part of foot, if it does not succumb to infection.

      MN DNR was upset about it, but I have been given the suggestion, if I see it, to shoot it. Walking the road off which I live a couple mornings ago, tracks by the obvious “trapped” wolf, three normal prints, One half print, with sheets of blood associated with the half print. Incidental trapping, or any leg hold trap, where trap is not anchored is a lost foot for a wolf. Yeah, I know…they don’t hurt.

  52. Louise Kane says:

    You said had the trap on
    is it off?

    If the wolf is traveling near you perhaps you could box trap it? I hope you might consider contacting a wild care rescue facility. They might be able to help.

    The suffering you are describing is not necessary. Traps suck.

    It will make me very sad but if you wanted to send me the images I would like to post them on a site I created to illustrate wildlife abuse. You can send them to Ralph if you want or ask him for my e mail and send them directly.

    • Immer Treue says:

      DNR CO said trapping wolf again would be difficult. Many gut piles and wounded deer up here now due to deer rifle season, so wolves are moving. Even if DNR caught wolf, euthanasia would be the probable path. Photos show a pretty substantial mange infestation… Interesting as the other three or four I have on digital film show no mange, just that one sorry sob with the trap on its foot.

      When deer season is over, one more week, I’ll see if I can bait the wolf into the trail camera and take it from there. I’ll be in touch in regard to the pictures. Kinda pissed that I messaged Howling for Wolves about this, informing them of photo documentation, and received no reply.

      • Yvette says:

        Thank you for what you are trying to do, Immer. Good luck. It’s too bad the wolf can’t be sedated and rehabilitated. Sounds like that isn’t likely.

        ‘Incidental to beaver trapping’. Our streams, wetlands, and ponds benefit from improved water quality and improved hydrological regime that results in healthy habitat for many aquatic and terrestrial species. I have no doubt you already know this. I think beavers deserve more respect and wish they would be left alone as much as possible. If they weren’t trapping this beaver that wolf wouldn’t be suffering right now.

      • Amre says:

        Good luck on your effort, Immer.

      • Louise Kane says:

        it does not surprise me that the DNR recommends euthanasia by gun and maybe that will turn out to be the kindest thing.

        I wonder if the mange took hold as result of the stress from the foot injury or the wolf had it when he was trapped. In any event, the wildlife agencies all seem to resort to kill first ask questions later.

        IMHO the places i have the best results in when I find an inured animal are wildlife rehab centers. Sometimes there are state rules that prevent them from handling certain animals but they always know where to go or who to contact.

        I did some quick research and found this information. Perhaps you might call the rehab center first and they would have some expertise to share. Likewise the science center and the zoo may also have contacts or information that could be helpful. I hate to think about that animal out there suffering like that.

        I’m not surprised Maureen or Nancy have not reached you yet. I know they stay very busy and run HFW as a sideline with a small contingent of volunteers. They generally are very responsive even if it takes a while.

        Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of MN
        Every Day of the Week
        2530 Dale St N
        Roseville, MN 55113

        The Wildlife Science Center

        MN Zoo
        Phone: 952.431.9200, 1.800.366.7811
        24-hour information line: 952.431.9500
        Minnesota Relay Service phone number: 1.800.627.3529

        On another note
        To see pups that were rescued from fire in Alaska earlier this year there is some great footage of them. Looks like they will have a nice life. Nice habitat, free from hunting and will stay together.

        Keep us updated. I’m hoping you can track and help this wolf with the right help.

  53. Ida Lupines says:

    I may have to buy TWP a Christmas present(s). It’s cold out there!

  54. Ed Loosli says:

    Immer wrote: “I have a couple picture sequences of a young wolf with its forepaw lodged in a leg hold trap. The thing is, it’s probably incidental to beaver trapping.” Incidental to beaver trapping?? Perhaps people should not be trapping beavers in the first place, don’t you think?

  55. Nancy says:

    An interesting article from The Wild Beat:

  56. Ida Lupines says:

    I simply view the animal’s welfare as my top priority.

    Thanks for posting a great article, Nancy. IMO, even wildlife advocates sometimes do not put the animal’s welfare as the top priority.

    We can see that knowing locations is being abused.

  57. Ida Lupines says:

    I hope Immer’s wolf’s injuries are able to be treated. Can mange be treated in the same way it is for pets? I like to read about people thinking outside the box regarding animal welfare.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      ^^These are the things biologists can do when collaring animals? I wonder if vaccines can be given also? In this modern world with a need for ‘management’.

  58. Ida Lupines says:

    Reading this latest report from TWP, something needs to be done to protect elk migration. A corridor or buffer zone is a must. You can’t have lazy asses just shooting into herds from truck windows. It’s abuse of the privilege of hunting, and shows no respect.

    Elk, your father must be aghast at some of the unethical behavior of today’s hunters?

    • Yvette says:

      I see the behavior described on the hunters as no different than in the past when bison were shot from the railroad train cars. Thousands upon thousands of bison slaughtered, wasted, and driven to near extinction.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Yes, and the problem with that is you would think we would have learned from the mistakes of the past, not keep repeating them. There needs to be special protection for our iconic wildlife.

        • IDhiker says:

          The times have changed, but people haven’t. Plus, ethical hunters seem to generally have a problem criticizing their unethical brethren.

    • Elk375 says:


      I am looking at a thousand plus elk. The game warden has taken 3 elk and written a number of tickets. Sometimes things can get out of hand.

      • SAP says:

        Let me guess – you’re in the Madison Valley? I better make a thermos of coffee and venture out to roust trespassers . . .

        • SAP says:

          for those of you who aren’t here, it was -15F overnight, about +10F now. It’s been frigid long enough that the elk are hungry and coming out of the hills to feed on big ranches (typically free of livestock by this time of year, because of harsh conditions). Big elk herds are visible from the highway, so things start to get a little tense.

          • Elk375 says:


            I am sure you know Ryan, the Ennis game warden, he is a hella nice guy. He is pissed today. I am coming back in the middle of week to get my Wall Creek cow. It is time for Norris Hot Springs.

      • Yvette says:

        It’s’ good to know that wolves and other predators haven’t had a significant impact on elk population.

        • SAP says:

          Hmmm . . . there’s maybe a slightly more complicated set of changes taking place, Yvette. Yes, we do have robust elk herds out here west of the Madison Range. There are two main reasons we continue to have all these elk (over 6,000 wintering in the Madison Valley, by my windshield estimates).

          First, this is pretty good winter range. The wind howls here, which keeps snow depth down. And, as this map

          shows, a lot of the private land in the valley is protected by conservation easements. This valley is very attractive to wintering elk — plenty of easily accessible forage (it’s not under four feet of snow), on open land where they don’t experience a lot of human hunting pressure.

          Second — and this is a somewhat nuanced point, but I suspect you can appreciate it — wolves aren’t having much impact on elk numbers here because wolves don’t last long out here. Breeding pairs will get established, form small packs (mostly the breeding pair and their offspring), then — typically, while the wolves have small dependent pups to feed, which means they need calories and they can’t range a great distance — start killing cattle. Then Wildlife Services steps in and wipes out wolves.

          Wolf packs out here — that is, in the New England-sized area between Yellowstone and the Frank Church Wilderness — are never around long enough to really have much effect on elk.

          I suspect, also, that the rate of in-migration by individual wolves into this region is down considerably. Dispersing wolves in the past came from YNP and from Central Idaho. YNP wolf numbers are down — partly due to wolves being hunted outside the Park, and partly due to a substantial decline in elk numbers in the Park — and Idaho has really clobbered wolves coming from the other direction.

          So, long story short: it would be a little inaccurate to say that robust elk numbers in the Madison Valley means that wolves don’t affect elk numbers significantly. Wolves don’t last long enough here to have much effect on elk.

          I think the same thing is taking place out near Cody, maybe some other places, too. The dynamic may be amplified as elk realize that these places have better forage (irrigated hay crops) and relatively few wolves, and actively select these habitats over places like the Yellowstone Plateau, the upper Gallatin, and the North Absaroka Wilderness.

          • Yvette says:

            Thank you SAP, for the explanation and the map. Nice map, btw. There are a lot of conservation easements in that region of the state.

      • Nancy says:

        Elk & SAP,

        Just heard this morning that there was another elk massacre on ranch just over the hill from me. Some idiots from North Carolina fired on the herd just across the ranch, public lands. A hunter who was in the area, intervened and called the local game warden. A lot of elk wounded. The guy doing the shooting had his rifle & binoculars confiscated and got some heavy fines. Haven’t seen anything on the news about yet.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Good! Sadly typical, nothing being done to address the problem, as was promised, just hide it.

      Just because there are other threats to birds, doesn’t mean these companies can go ahead and do the same thing. It’s cumulative.

      We do expect alternative energy to be environmentally aware on all levels, and to actually be an ‘alternative’ to business as usual.

  59. Ida Lupines says:

    The pace of the harvest strained the reporting system set out in statute by the Legislature when the season was created. That contributed to the quota being surpassed in two zones. Hunters and trappers are allowed 24 hours to report a harvest. The DNR must then give a 24-hour notice before a zone can be closed.

    Because the pace of the harvest has picked up substantially this year, the DNR tried to close zones as quickly as possible, but the quick harvest pace and regulatory delays resulted in exceeded quotas in two units. The DNR is exploring ways to slow the harvest.

    Wisconsin DNR and Natual Resources Board Begin Talks to Decrease Gray Wolf “Harvest”

    Now, how is this going to factor in to the upcoming hound hunt, with quota nearly reached, and quotas not counting those that ‘weren’t included’?

    It is so dumb and unsustainable, which we all knew it would be, but couldn’t even imagine how quickly these poor animals would be killed and how people would take advantage. So much for the ‘woves aren’t easy to get’ lie. I cannot believe they are still going to go forward with the hound hunt.

    • rork says:

      Those numbers are a bit dated. is the place.
      Zone 3 has 27 out of 40 wolves killed. Zone 6 has 27 of 35. We did not all know this was unsustainable – I think with small tweaks they can do this forever. This years quota about 150, down from 250-ish last year. Maybe population will be down and they’ll reduce again next year, or keep it about the same. You’ve posted the wolves aren’t easy is a lie stuff before and been informed that it’s likely thanks to trapping (85% of kills), but you just say it again, along with some problem about “take advantage”. Speedier reaching of quota means less hound hunting, if any at all, and less time with traps and wolf hunters out in the woods. I think trapping or not an interesting question – ethically worse (sometimes wrong species, wolf torture), but efficient and mundane, perhaps reducing other more glorious methods – not sure I want wolf hunting to be highly desired trophy affair.

  60. JB says:

    Well this ought to turn some heads. It appears that living at higher altitudes may have a strong influence on mood and anxiety, putting people who live their at altitudes over 2,000 feet at increased risk of depression and suicide:

    “In a 2011 study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, a group of researchers, including Renshaw, analyzed state suicide rates with respect to gun ownership, population density, poverty, health insurance quality and availability of psychiatric care. Of all the factors, altitude had the strongest link to suicide — even the group of states with the least available psychiatric care had fewer suicides than the highest-altitude states, where psychiatric care was easier to find.

    In a follow-up study, Renshaw looked at instances of suicide that involved guns and those that didn’t. Again, he found a positive correlation between suicide and altitude across the board.

    Renshaw also used CDC violent death data to examine the relationship between altitude and mental illness. The elevation at which people live, he found, is a strong predictor of their mental health status.”

    • Louise Kane says:

      Interesting study JB did they also examine if the relationship between location/(altitude) and depression and suicide rates was correlated to the availability of work and access/availability to social interaction with others? I wonder if they looked at the relationship in high income high altitude rates (like ski resort areas) and low income/ high altitude rates to determine if that analysis changed the outcome.

  61. Nancy says:

    Bears, bears, everywhere:

    (Typical hunter comments below the article)

    Perhaps it also has something to do with population growth:

  62. Cody Coyote says:

    A well researched article at WyoFile today by Angus Thuermer paints the big picture about who is actually paying for big game and wildlife conservation in America.

    Hint: the big hunting clubs like Rocky Mountain Elk, Safari Club , Boone & Crockett and all the species clubs are actually funding only about 1/12th of the total spent on wildlife. They are vastly outspent by the non-profits and non-hunting groups, and of course the nonconsumptive user and general taxpayer. The article has quite a lot to say about the so-called North American Wildlife Model as well.

    This is really gonna take the hot air out of the sport hunting lobby’s balloon…

    • rork says:

      Wyoming Fish and Game is 6% funded from general fund, like the article said. That’s not ton’s of leverage. Well researched? – entire budget of dept of Interior is “wildlife” spending. I’m not saying there’s no point and I agree people should try to get more say, but Smith and Molde’s article is being pointed to repeatedly, and it’s not very realistic. It’s so biased I will never be pointing to it in any serious debate.

      • Ed Loosli says:

        rork: Question – If Wyoming’s Fish & Game were funded 6% by hunters and 94% by the General Fund and other non-hunter sources, would you support it? Or, do you prefer the current status quo dominated by the wildlife consumption industry?

  63. Ed Loosli says:

    Cows – Water Quality – Lawsuit


November 2014


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

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: