It is time to create a new page of “Interesting Wildlife News.” Please put your wildlife news in the comments below.
Do not post copyrighted material, and here is the link to the “old” wildlife news of July 3, 2015

Wolf Mountain is the name of this gentle ridge in the vicinity of Soda Springs, ID. Nowadays a rare wolf actually crosses this namesake ridge. In late September 2011, I was talking with a hunter near the base of the ridge, he warned me that "there are wolves in these hills now. Be careful!"  ;-)

Wolf Mountain is the name of this gentle ridge in the vicinity of Soda Springs, ID. Nowadays the rare wolf actually crosses this namesake ridge. In late September 2011, I was talking with a hunter near the base of the ridge. He warned me that “there are wolves in these hills now. Be careful!”   😉

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.

383 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife news? Aug. 5, 2015 edition

  1. Sunday, August 02, 2015

    TEXAS CWD, Have you been ThunderStruck, deer semen, straw bred bucks, super ovulation, and the potential TSE Prion connection, what if?

  2. Nancy says:

    Local chapters weighing in, believe its called “damage control?” *Note the backdrop for the interview.

    “The Boone and Crockett Club is a national nonprofit organization that works to (kill) save animal species and habitat through science, education and the promotion of conservation laws. It keeps records of the biggest animals (killed) harvested through fair game hunting.

    Representatives say the size and health of animal trophies provide evidence as to how well conservation efforts (killings) are working for any given species.

    The club says countries all over the world have asked to adopt its fair chase standards (of killing) to develop hunting regulations (for mostly rich, white guys)

    In response to recent killings (ahhh, the word finally surfaces) in Zimbabwe, the Boone and Crockett Club says every country needs to investigate and prosecute any illegal hunting.

    Administrators call the recent controversial hunts a public relations nightmare, but hope the outrage they sparked can turn into a positive discussion about conservation and preservation (unless of course, you’ve got a burning desire/fetish, obsession, to kill endangered wildlife or wildlife in general for their heads – got the big bucks on hand, can fly to these countries AND pay off a few officials, in the name of conservation 🙂

    Yeah, speaks volumes for the trophy industry:

    “Wildlife needs all the advocacy it can get, and we would like to take this unfortunate, negative situation and turn it into a positive, and get more people to understand what it takes to protect (kill) our wildlife,” said Keith Balfourd, the Boone and Crockett director of “marketing”

    • Yvette says:

      “The Boone and Crockett Club is a national nonprofit organization that works to (kill) save animal species and habitat through science, education and the promotion of conservation laws. It keeps records of the biggest animals (killed) harvested through fair game hunting.”

      Generations of people, mainly men, have been hood-winked into the concept of ‘fair-game’. The origins of that term come form the Shikar Club, the British equivalent of the B&C Club and ‘fair-play’ has been claimed as a British invention. The men in the Shikar Club separated themselves and their hunting prowess from the ‘plutocratic game shooters’. The best I can tell is that description describes controlled hunts, perhaps similar to what we call canned hunts, but I think it was reserved for fowl.

      This Shikar Club solidified the protrayal of hunting as sport, and associated themselves as sportsmen and aribiters of ‘fair-play’ with this standard of hunting as tradition to be handed down through the generations.

      They also related nationalism, and masculinity with the sport of hunting as long as it was with the fair-play, which included stalking the ‘game’, enduring the exposure to harsh outdoor conditions.

      “For such men, ‘real sport’ was a release for ‘blood-lust’, which contributed in some way to their innate sense of masculine identity.”

      I downloaded a paper the other day and am just now reading it. It’s mind boggling how history repeats itself, or maybe in this case, has been extended through generations.

      The only thing missing is the word ‘harvest’.

      I found a free copy of the paper if you’re interested. It’s enlightening.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        “For such men, ‘real sport’ was a release for ‘blood-lust’, which contributed in some way to their innate sense of masculine identity.”

        I’ve always wondered about this, that it is an outlet for less-than-civilized drives in order that these (mostly) men can behave in a civilized manner in society. Correlations to other such behaviors are unavoidable. Blech! 🙁

      • rork says:

        Maybe we should go back to shooting deer with lights at night, and shooting moose when they are swimming across lakes after our boats catch up with them, or catching waterfowl by means of baited hooks.

        • Yvette says:

          rork, did you read the paper?

          • rork says:

            Yes. And I am not condoning their ideas of “sport” which seems more like a competition for who can shoot the most animals or species. But I was satirizing your comment, not the paper. “hoodwinked” was offensive. Get it Yvette? Also it’s part of a pattern of false equivalency here where people use examples from a hundred years ago as general criticism of recreational hunters today. Don’t expect me not to object. Yes, there are few jerks today that are like those past jerks, I admit it.

            • Yvette says:

              It was the model that developed out of the Shikar Club of ‘fair-play’ and even promoting hunting as conservation that I found fascinating. It seems it near identical to the wildlife management model of today, yet you didn’t get beyond the inflammatory word ‘hood-winked’. Got it.

  3. Louise Kane says:

    • Nancy says:

      Thank you for posting this video Louise.

      • Nancy says:

        And a little more to add to that original video by 60 Minutes. Important because people here in the US have forgotten what our own “great plains” and the wildlife, use to look like.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Important because people here in the US have forgotten what our own “great plains” and the wildlife, use to look like.

          Plus 1, Nancy!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      That was wonderful.

  4. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Conservationists declare victory as Idaho halts controversial wolf kill

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      Peter Kiermeir,

      Thank you. Here is the story from the Missoulian. “Idaho won’t use hired wolf killer in Frank Church wilderness.”

    • jon says:

      Great news, but I don’t trust those sob’s at fish and game. They do things in secret and then tell the public.

      • Kathleen says:

        Since this is federally-designated wilderness, it’s the Forest Svc. you shouldn’t trust in this instance. It was the F.S. wilderness manager’s job to say ‘no’ to the state’s scheme that violated the Wilderness Act.

      • Ralph Maughan says:


        That is why we went to court and the settlement we made — that they would have to tell us by the August of each year.

  5. Peter Kiermeir says:

    ‘Stuck’ with wolves, rancher says he’ll make the best of it
    Central Washington rancher says one depredation hasn’t changed his views on range-riders or living with wolves.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Decent guy.

    • Gary Humbard says:

      “Stuck with wolves” is an arrogant way of saying “It’s all about my way of life”. First, wolf predation on livestock overall in Washington probably accounts for less than 1% of all livestock deaths and probably less than 5% in NE Washington. Second, those individual ranchers are compensated for any loss due to wolves (unlike the other 95% losses) plus range riders and other non-lethal costs are incurred by NGO and WFW. Ranchers also have the benefits of marketing their products as “wildlife friendly” and of course pay fairly low rates for grazing their livestock on public lands.

      So far in Montana in 2015, a state with approximately 92,000 cows and as many sheep, a total of 15 cattle and 3 sheep have been confirmed as wolf kills, while 15 wolves have been killed by landowners and WS.

      Of course these type of articles wouldn’t even be written IF they didn’t have the word “wolf” in them. IMO, the majority of Americans believe wolves and other predators are beneficial to the landscape and it’s time for folks who live in rural areas to co-exist with wildlife in general.

  6. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Florida’s Fish and Wildlife Commission says it’s time to give up on expanding Florida panther population
    “…. according to the FWC’s Liesa Priddy, they’re becoming a nuisance for South Floridians who live around them.”

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Just shaking my head in disbelief. A nuisance to people? Maybe Floridians are a nuisance.

  7. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Cat Out of the Bag: Trophy Hunting Fuels African Lion Bone Trade in Asia

    • skyrim says:

      Oath Keepers are/were part of the Circus that stood with Cliven Bundy at his little showdown. These clowns are itching for a fight and Lincoln Mt. will give them much sympathy and affection for their efforts.
      I hope this too gets some national media attention beyond the Helena affiliates.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      They have arrived to protect yet another deadbeat.

      • Yvette says:

        Has the mine owner taken his case to court or did he decide to forego the courts?

        I’ve wondered if the Cliven Bundy ordeal would set precedent that others would respond with the same way when they have a disagreement with a federal agency. Still no consequences for Bundy and company.

      • Barb Rupers says:

        The man in the background of the Misoula report resembles the head of “Save Western Wildlife”.

  8. Nancy says:

    “This doesn’t mean that Hillary Clinton is on her way back to the White House”

    Go Bernie! 😉

  9. Barb Rupers says:


    So thousands of bison who have not been shown to transmit the disease are killed to protect the cattle; elk were shot when they migrated from the park – the firing line; wolves are reintroduced into YNP with one intent to lower the number of ungulates on the northern ranges, later wolves are killed in adjacent Montana to protect the elk, and now the elk are being targeted to reduce their threat to cattle.

    It all sounds unreasonable to me.

    • Nancy says:

      No mention of where in “southern” Montana. Could this be the famous Elk Refuge herd?

      • Nancy says:

        Cross, P.C., E.K. Cole, A.P. Dobson, W.H. Edwards, K.L. Hamlin, G. Luikart, A.D. Middleton, B.M Scurlock, and P.J. White. 2010.

        “Possible causes of increasing brucellosis in free-ranging elk of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Ecological Applications. 20(1):278-288. Description: Although brucellosis prevalence has been associated with high elk concentrations on feed grounds, this paper provides evidence that increasing elk populations and concentrations on private lands in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem also promote conditions that maintain the disease”

  10. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Still in the aftermath of Cecil:
    Lion hunting is booming, and Americans do most of the killing

    • In 2013, foreign hunters in Africa killed 794 lions for trophies. Seventy-seven percent – 613, to be precise – were shot by Americans, followed by hunters from Spain, who killed 39, or 5 percent.
    • The number of African lions killed by Americans and shipped home as trophies has jumped dramatically in recent years, from 77 in 1990 to 613 in 2013.
    • About half of the lions killed by Americans in 2013 were wild. The rest were bred in captivity and shot in “canned hunts” that have drawn outrage inside Africa and out.
    • Most lions killed by U.S. hunters were shot in South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Tanzania, where populations are not in serious danger. But some have been shot in countries where lions are more imperiled, including Burkina Faso and the Central African Republic.”

    • Yvette says:

      “Where populations are not in serious danger”…you should listen to Eli Weiss’s interview with Pieter Kat of lionaid. You can hear it on ‘Our Wild World’ on voiceofAmerica internet radio. She has a two part interview with Dr. Kat and another lion program that she did this past June.

      1. they really don’t have a solid number on lion populations.
      2. South Africa is counting the the lions they breed for canned hunting as wild.
      3. Many of the lions are immunno suppressed and are in danger if one little thing goes wrong… someone bringing their dog into Kruger NP, and thus, infected and killed four lions with canine distemper virus.
      4. Lions in Kruger NP have been infected with bovine tuberculosis and are likely spreading it amongst themselves. Guess where it originated? Domestic cattle that spread it to buffalo (how familiar is that one?) who then spread it to the lions.

      Additional news is that DSC is pressuring Delta Airlines to reverse their decision to ban the importation of wildlife trophies, bones and body parts. South Africa is also pushing back, but the pushback was to be expected since the killing business is a billion dollar business.

    • Yvette says:

      That was a fantastic read, Nancy. I followed the link and saw I had it saved from a facebook post. Hadn’t read it until today.

      I’ve bookmarked that article.

      I was struck that this holism approach may not really be new. New elements, yes, but similar to the way many cultures lived for eons, in the past. It would certainly have a modern and more technological twist now.

      What is needed now, the Capital Institute argues, is a new systems-based mindset built around the idea of a regenerative economy, “which recognizes that the proper functioning of complex wholes, like an economy, cannot be understood without the ongoing, dynamic relationships among parts that give rise to greater wholes”./

      We truly will have to evolve as a species to accomplish a shift toward this type of system thinking.

      it is vital to recognize that each community consists of a “mosaic of peoples, traditions, beliefs, and institutions uniquely shaped by long term pressures of geology, human history, culture, local environment, and changing human needs”.

      This type of change won’t come easy or without a fight.

    • Yvette says:

      Are you familiar with this group since you live in the epicenter of this battle?

    • skyrim says:

      The Teton bears mentioned in the article have an extremely large fan base to included myself. Among them some affluent, influential and powerful (not to include myself) individuals. Many are Teton County residents. I am beginning to see some progressive reasoning here with this piece of journalism. As well, the outpouring of grief and love with the tragic loss of Bear 760 late last year. There will be some expected friction between conservationists and the hunting community if/when one of the remaining bears is lost to the bullet crowd.

  11. Nathan says:

    EPA project to close Gold King mine near silverton has an unexpected sudden release of 1.5 million gallons (+) of acidic mine water containing cadmium lead zinc copper and possibly arsenic into cement creek which meets with the Animas river at Silverton. flash flood warnings were issued, Signs now up at bridges and trail heads advising public to stay out of river. I am here in Silverton and cement creek is solid orange through town?

    • skyrim says:

      A sad commentary on what issues we will face in the future.
      Bad enough, but it is due to reach Utah/Lake Powell in a weeks time.
      What are we doing to Mother Earth? Some heads need to seriously roll over this one….

    • Kathleen says:

      Article & map (can be enlarged) here:

      The Animas is a spectacular river–I’ve hiked along its upper reaches in the Weminuche Wilderness (CO), and lived very near it in its lower reaches north of Aztec (NM). It was a sad day when this wild river was dammed–we hiked in Ridges Basin before we left the Four Corners, knowing we’d never see it again. Now this–insult to injury…or maybe injury to injury. Rio de las Animas Perdidas–the river of lost souls, indeed. I still have the t-shirt from back then–“join the river of lost souls or be dammed!”

      • Nancy says:

        The “Industry” explaining tailings ponds:

      • Yvette says:

        It’s been over 10 years but the last time I saw it the river was packed with rafters and kayakers.

        This is a heartbreaking disaster and EPA certainly didn’t need anything that would fuel the FOX news and right wing vitriol. It also sounds like EPA could have notified the public a bit sooner. The first article I read about it stated the spill mostly contained copper and zinc and seemed to downplay the health hazard, but I thought if it was mining wasted there were more metals in that mess than Cu and Zn. It’s concerning to think how they are going to get this cleaned since those metals will settle in the sediment.

        And to think they were working on remediating the mining waste so it would have less impact on Cement Creek. What a mess.

        A good source with a list of articles on the history and plans to clean the mining waste.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          The EPA downplayed the potential effects on aquatic life, saying there are long-standing water-quality impairment issues associated with heavy metals in Cement Creek and upper portions of the Animas River. As a result, there are no fish populations in the Cement Creek watershed, and fish populations have historically been impaired for several miles downstream of Silverton in the Animas River, the release said.

          So apparently, any aquatic life has suffered damage and gone years ago, so no need to worry about that!

          These mines are disasters waiting to happen. The mine waste was leaking for decades and has caused trouble for years? The EPA was trying to address it, when this disaster struck – so I don’t blame them entirely. I do blame those who would like environmental protection regulations done away with or lessened.

          These are the risks that nobody talks about or plans for about mining. And the Southwest can ill afford to not protect their limited water supplies.

          But it’s a good thing this has come to light, and I’m not sure how effective ‘cleanups’ will be. I just think in horror about all the potential accidents at the many other mine sites! Now I’m really glad there’s protected wilderness in Idaho.

          I hope this will get the EPA to finally act, within their authority, regarding Pebble in Alaska. Nobody wants it. We’re so weak with enforcement that the foreign mining company is actually suing the US!

  12. Ida Lupine says:

    What a shame. Look at the color! This just goes to show that nothing is completely safe and without risk, or human error. I’m thinking of other potential mines such as Pebble too:

  13. skyrim says:

    I missed this Bundy tidbit. Sorry if it has been posted:
    I don’t get it. If Bundy refuses to pay his grazing fees, why would anyone think cancelling his grazing rights would make any difference. Washington reasoning at its best…….

  14. Gary Humbard says:

    A hiker is killed when he enters grizzly bear habitat, the bear is probably defending herself or her cub and she gets a death sentence. I have read numerous stories on real life bear attacks, and except for the rare predatory attacks, none of the victims who lived wanted any harm done to the bear. For those victims who died, very few families wanted harm done to the bear. Killing the grizzly will not bring the victim back and unless this was a proven predatory attack (hiker was off trail, on his own and probably a close encounter), IMO euthanizing the bear(s)is a over-reaction by Yellowstone NP.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      It doesn’t make sense. It’s a good thing they didn’t have to ‘euthanize’ all the bison that people have been approaching, or they’d be very busy indeed.

      We may not be able to conclusively determine the circumstances of this bear attack, but we will not risk public safety,” Yellowstone National Park Superintendent Dan Wenk said. “We are deeply saddened by this tragedy and our hearts go out to the family and friends of the victim as they work to cope with the loss of someone who loved Yellowstone so very much.”

      They won’t risk public safety? So in that case, do they plan to ‘euthanize’ every bear in the park and in the vicinity, or stop hiking altogether? What about her cub? Oh yeah, we know, put him or her in a zoo, life imprisonment.

      This is a move to make the public feel better, nothing more – and I don’t think the public even requires retaliation in eye-for-an-eye fashion in today’s world, it’s an outdated way of dealing with wildlife. Even James Holmes only got life in prison! I’m sure this man did love Yellowstone and would not want the bear euthanized in his name. I know I wouldn’t. It’s a risk you assume, especially if you hike alone. The public understands risks better than we think. I hope they reconsider this, if they haven’t already executed the bear for approaching the gods. Or put up one of those tacky roadside memorials.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        I am really tired of this bs with our wildlife. I do not think I will visit Yellowstone ever again. Other countries take better care of their wildlife.

        • Gary Humbard says:

          “Conservation officials said that there is currently no plan to capture or kill the bear”.

          Appears to be a similar situation as Yellowstone (sow defending her cub) yet no over-reaction in BC. There is no evidence that once a bear tastes human flesh they become predatory and I doubt the victims family wants the bears killed. IMO, if this hiker truly loved Yellowstone and its wildlife, he should have followed the rules of not hiking alone, carrying bear spray, talking and making noise, staying on trails and being observant.

          I wrote to Yellowstone expressing my reasons for not killing the bears but I doubt it will make any difference.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            There is no evidence that once a bear tastes human flesh they become predatory and I doubt the victims family wants the bears killed.

            This is what I wondered about, Gary. It’s of course a sad event, but it is an unfortunate aspect of being in wilderness and not being careful. We can’t expect to sanitize wilderness to accommodate us, we’ve got to take more care out there. I really do hope the Park reconsiders.

            This incident alone hasn’t made me think of never visiting again, it’s just the continual over-presence of people that ruin the experience. I know what it’s like – approaching wildlife to closely, too loud, waving cell phones en masse, not keeping an eye on young children, complaining about the price of admission that is already more than affordable.

            I don’t know what happened in the case of this poor man, but hiking alone in grizzly country isn’t wise. It really is his error.

            • Ida Lupine says:

              I remember grizzly warnings at the ranger stations, pictures of them to help identify them. I avoided where they had been seen because I would be terrified to encounter one. Come to think of it, the bison were pretty scary too, and the elk, but beautiful. Keep a safe distance!

      • Ida Lupine says:

        After the Cecil the lion incident, you can see how this country, a country I once thought was the most progressive in the world, is really backward as far as taking care of its wildlife and wildlands is concerned. It has truly been a shock to me, and we insist upon staying backward, it would appear. Not only do we want to destroy our wildlife and rivers and forests in this country, we’re destroying Africa’s wildlife too.

      • greentangle says:

        Yes, the “will not risk public safety” is the biggest joke in that statement. I gave a few more examples, as well as a link to Doug Peacock’s opinion.

  15. Nancy says:

    A tragic end to experiencing wilderness areas, Gary. Here’s another tragic example:

  16. Nancy says:

    “The Wilks brothers have gone on a land-buying spree out West, amassing huge holdings in Montana, Idaho, Texas, Kansas, and Colorado. In December 2012, the Billings Gazette reported that they had amassed more than 276,000 acres in Montana, or more than 430 square miles; more recent reports say they own more than 301,300 acres in the state. Among their purchases was the historic 62,000-acre N Bar Ranch, which had been listed for $45 million”

    A little background on these good ole boys:

    • Nancy says:

      And not hard to figure out what these good old boys are up to either:

      “Shale oil and gas drilling is increasing across Montana in the Bakken formation, in Sweet Grass and Park counties, the Heath shale below Garfield, **Fergus, Petroleum and Rosebud counties, and under the Blackfeet reservation”

      • Elk375 says:

        As of 2 weeks ago there was not one oil well being drilled in Montana the first in many, many years. There is very minor interest in Sweet Grass and Park Counties.

  17. Barb Rupers says:

    Lesiston, Idaho just lost a resident deer with strange antlers.

  18. Yvette says:

    While checking my bookmarks I found something interesting. Looks like there is a new wolf species. The African Golden jackal is actually a wolf and more closely related to the gray wolf than it is to the Eurasian Golden Jackal.

    From the picture, to me, “I thought it was a coyote”. And apparently, like coyotes are to many American Indian tribes, jackals are tricksters.

    This is pretty cool.

    • Louise Kane says:

      wow Yvette
      very cool

      • Louise Kane says:

        like Jon’s (and other’s) work on coywolves.
        the Ethipian wolf is in dire straits I wonder what the status of this wolf is? Thanks for posting that

  19. Immer Treue says:

    MN wolf numbers down a bit, as predicted, but stable.

    “Back in the early 2000s, when deer numbers were high, that’s when we had the highest wolf population,” Stark said. The number of wolves in the state topped out at 3,020 in 2003-04. Since then deer numbers have dropped, in large part because of hunting, and the wolf population has declined with them, he said.”

    This also was part of reason for moose decline. Yes, wolves put more pressure on moose, but part of reason was bumper deer crop. Couple more mild winters and deer population should soar…not good for moose.

    Alas, many of the same addle brained comments.

  20. Kathleen says:

    The Black Mambas are African women on an anti-poaching mission. These women do what they do because they don’t want to live in a world without rhinos, elephants, and lions–nor do they want such a world for their children. This video segment was on tonight’s PBS NewsHour.

    Here’s the Black Mambas’ FB page:

    • Louise Kane says:

      “Pembroke Pines police said at this time, this appears to be an isolated incident and there is no evidence to believe that other animals in the area are in danger.”

      sorry WTF scuse me but with whoever doing that loose everything and everybody is in danger

      this is sick but so is killing wildlife with bows, snares, traps where the trapper stomps the animal to death or strangles it. I know you agree Timz and not that one is worse than another but this society has been sick for a long time. To think that hunting with torture devices for fun or profit is legal is really twisted. The people that did this to the dog are worthless scum

  21. Barb Rupers says:

    Summer issue of “Friends of the Clearwater” discusses issues related to collobarative planning for logging in national forests.

  22. Ida Lupines says:

    Some disturbing information about the mine toxic spill:

    The Environmental Protection Agency had pushed for 25 years to grant Superfund status to the partly collapsed Gold King mine and other idled mine sites leaking heavy metals above Silverton, Colorado. That would have brought in major funds for a comprehensive cleanup. But local authorities spurned federal intervention, leaving a smaller EPA-led team to investigate the steady stream of pollution. That team accidentally breached a debris wall on Aug. 5, unleashing a huge pool of contaminated water.


    Long before the accident, mines in the Silverton area that were first developed in the late 1800s had been releasing a steady stream of contaminated wastewater into area streams and river, leaving some of them virtually lifeless. No fish swim where the Gold King runoff flows into Cement Creek and the upper reaches of the Animas River, which in turn feeds the San Juan.

  23. Kathleen says:

    Wildfire claims sage grouse habitat in ID

    Fire season is fully upon us here in the northern intermountain west. An air tanker headed west over our house this morning, and on our way to Missoula we saw a FS wild land fire crew (Pike) heading west out US 12. On our way home, another crew was behind us.

  24. Peter Kiermeier says:

    A Tiger has been sighted in Russia! What´s so sensational about that?
    Ok, spotting a Tiger in the wild is always a sensation but this one has been sighted 2000km west of the usual Habitat in the Amur Region.

    • Ida Lupine says:


    • Nancy says:

      Peter, just got this email from some friends heading to Russia (doing research on tigers) after I sent them your link above:

      “We are going to be at the Sikhote-Alin Biosphere Reserve which is along the coast across from Japan in that map. This is the stronghold for the remaining 500 or so Siberian (Amur) tigers that remain in the wild. However, we are first going to Lake Baikal and so will be in the region where the wayward tiger was seen”

      Will keep you posted 🙂

  25. Peter Kiermeier says:

    Not so good news from India:
    41 Tigers Have Died In India Within 7 Months, Mostly Poaching Is To Blame
    Note: The Wildlife Protection Society of India even speaks about 53 losses in 2015 so far and a total of 81 Tigers lost in 2014. Leopard losses are even worse, with 271 individuals lost so far in 2015.

  26. Ida Lupine says:

    Here’s an article about the Park’s safety – so that argument doesn’t hold up to scrutiny either. All bears are capable of harming humans, do we ‘euthanize’ them all? Yellowstone National Park is a place where animals are wild – please do not turn it into the quality of a roadside zoo:

    A total of 1,025 people died in national parks from 2007 to 2013. While the loss of those lives is tragic, it’s a minuscule proportion of the nearly 2 billion visitors to national parks in that time span — and exponentially lower than the mortality rate in the general population of the United States: 821.5 deaths per 100,000 population in 2013, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Despite all the wild animals in protected parkland, wildlife only killed six people over those seven years. Grizzly bears killed four people, a mountain goat killed one visitor, and one person died from a snakebite, the NPS reports.

  27. Gary Humbard says:

    Of those four deaths due to grizzlies, all of them have the same situations; hiking alone, not on a designated trail, probably not making a lot of noise resulting in a close encounter and not having bear spray readily available.

    On a personal note; I don’t go looking for trouble with wildlife, but I have had close encounters with a grizz, mountain goat, elk and cougar and although they were by far some of the most rewarding experiences of my life, I have since learned the “rules of the road” when experiencing nature.

    When the FWS begins the process of re-introducing grizzlies into the North Cascades Ecosystem (my hope) the facts such as those used in the link you provided, will put the hyperbole used by the opposition in perspective.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Yes! I was very pleased to read this, and having read it, I feel very safe visiting the National Parks, more safe than I realized.

  28. Louise Kane says:

    This is truly appalling. The USFWS own biologists findings stated killing the birds would not help salmonids, so what do they gain by killing 10,000 cormorants. Is someone benefitting by the contract? The use of the word unconscionable in the newsletter is an understatement .

  29. Louise Kane says:

    from two brilliant and dedicated conservationists
    Paul Paquet and Chris Genovali

    I can already hear WM howl (growl)

    • Nancy says:

      +1 Louise

      “Perhaps there will come a day when the stubborn allegiance of many trophy hunters, government biologists, and opportunistic politicians to lethal exploitation and management is understood to tell us less about the exigencies of wildlife conservation and more about the psychological pathology of people”

    • Zeewolf says:

      Thank you, Louise, for bringing this article to the attention of a wider audience. While I respect most of the people who are wildlife biologists, I am at times disheartened by the callousness displayed by some who do not seem to think beyond what the numbers will tell them and ignore the potential that animals as individuals might have value just as much as populations do.

      “Increasingly, we are realizing our treatment of large predators is a test of how likely we are to achieve co-existence with the natural elements that sustain us.”

      I would add that it is also a test of how likely we are to achieve co-existence with other human beings.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I doubt the gutless wonders in the country will do anything about it. If Zimbabwe bars Palmer from the country for life, that would be fitting, I think.

  30. Peter Kiermeir says:

    On a lighter side: Nice Pictures from Finland, showing interaction (friendship as the photographer calls it) between a wolf and a bear.

  31. Peter Kiermeir says:

    5 lies you need to stop believing about the lion cub petting industry – See more at:

  32. Louise Kane says:

    The tragedy of Cecil should not blind us to two important bills that are pending votes the Sportsman Heritage act that would open millions of acres to trapping and sentence more wildlife to torture and the appropriations bill with the wolf riders. Please don’t forget about our wildlife here. They will most likely be voted on this month. Contact the Committee on Natural Resources – all members and your own senators as well as any others you are inclined to speak to.

  33. Louise Kane says:

    Sharks in the waters of my town
    doing their job and eating seals
    there are thousands of seals along the shore now
    I don’t throw the dog toys into this area any more

  34. Ida Lupine says:

    Over at the Wolf Patrol Facebook page, there’s a post showing a photo of one of the Yellowstone collared wolves, 527, stuffed and mounted, and sent to WP by a “well-known Montana trapper”, complete will tracking collar! How F&W lets them brazenly get away with this is beyond me.

    Wolf hunting season is coming up already. I’m glad that these tactics don’t work in other countries.

    • Yvette says:

      The wolf hunters and several types of hunters are instigators. They will post the most gruesome pictures and make certain that those who are working to protect and insure hunters abide by their own standard of ‘fair-game’ see those pictures.

      What it does is provide us with a glimpse into their malfunctioning minds.

  35. Ida Lupine says:

    Lest WM thinks the bison won’t have their day too, read on:

    “Even for a park with a history of unhappy encounters between people and wildlife, 2015 is shaping up as an eventful year for Yellowstone and its bison.”

    For Some Yellowstone Bison, The Roaming Ends at the Slaughterhouse

  36. Nancy says:

    Interesting video – Hippos save zebra, although it appears the zebra probably has a few broken bones from the croc encounter and won’t survive. Neighbors helping neighbors:

  37. Yvette says:

    This is only a resolution and it took three years to get passed in the UN, but it’s a start. At the rate that we’re losing species or that they are becoming endangered this is great news, but it will need to move beyond a resolution into planning and implementation.

    And a huge thank you to Gabon and Germany for putting this forward and not dropping the ball.

  38. Harley says:

    It’s been commented on here, now is a chance to comment in a place that might make a difference. Had this in my inbox this morning, thought it might interest some here.

    To those interested in the future of wolves in Isle Royale National Park
    The National Park Service has opened a formal public comment period that closes on 29 August 2015, a chance for people to weigh in on the possible future management options for wolves in Isle Royale National Park, where the wolf population has plummeted because of a lack of gene flow from the mainland.

    If you have commented before, please do so again, as anything preceding the current comment period is now considered informal input that may not be considered further.

    The planning information from NPS can be found at this link:

    The following link goes directly to the comment page. Note that the NPS has provided six Alternative Concepts, and seeks responses to five specific questions:

    Thanks to you for your continuing interest in this unique wolf population!

    • Barb Rupers says:

      I shall put in my opinion tomorrow; still a bit of a fence rider on this one.

  39. aves says:

    Judge rejects USFWS’s 30-year eagle kill permits for “green” energy:

    • Ida Lupine says:

      WOW!!!! That’s the best news I’ve had all year! Thank you, thank you!

  40. Professor Sweat says:

    From the Wolf and Wildlife Conservation and Coexistence Initiative conference in WI. This is the introduction to the science portion of the conference. Interesting information in the videos here to the state of affairs regarding wolves in WI (and some info on MI)and the state’s relationship with the local tribes.

    • Professor Sweat says:

      “and the state’s relationship with the local tribes. ” Should be the DNR’s relationship with the tribes through all of this.

  41. Yvette says:

    Good article on Yellowstone bison and mentions the park visitors who have been injured because of their own actions.

    One thing I wonder about is why are people so concerned about brucellosis in bison? Wasn’t it the domestic cattle that introduced it to bison?

  42. Immer Treue says:

    Looks as though The Golden Gate State finally has it’s first wolf pack in a great, great while.

    • Zeewolf says:

      Thank you, Immer – for spreading the good news and providing an uplifting message in what can be an overwhelmingly despairing world.

      I am encouraged by the recolonization of wolves into the Golden State. I visited Lava Beds National Monument in April and I suppose that means I could have been unwittingly visiting wolf country, or at least I was close to it. Hurrah! Let us hope that these pups survive to adulthood and that this pack is the first of many.

      The only downside to me, personally, is that my adopted state of Colorado has yet to have the soulful and beneficial presence of a wolf pack here in the Centennial State. I had thought that by now it would be a fait accompli and my beloved southern Rockies would be ringing with the peal of wolf howls.

      • Immer Treue says:


        • Yvette says:

          How odd. I just now clicked on a link from a facebook friend about this. I hope they stay in CA since they will have more protection there.

      • Barb Rupers says:

        Yes, indeed, it is good news following all the fires this week in my favorite area of Idaho where relates reside. Now California needs some of those golden bears to return.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Yes, thanks for bringing good news! This is wonderful for California and the Dakotas too.

      It’s been tragedy overload lately – terrible about the fires and firefighters too.

  43. Louise Kane says:

    Jane Goodall on Cecil and trophy hunting
    an eloquent and compassionate voice

    • Yvette says:

      At least most people listen when Jane Goodall speaks, and she nails it.

      Because of Cecil, more people who were ignorant about sport/trophy hunting are becoming aware. However the wildlife managers and hunters want to twist it, sport and trophy hunting is just a stupid thing to do. Whether it’s going for the elk with the biggest rack or the lion with the most magnificent mane, it’s stupid. It serves no purpose other than for some man try to prove to himself that he is vital and virile. Now more women are trying to make a name for themselves in this killing business. If you look at those women, most are attractive in a Hollywood sort of way: perfectly drawn eyebrows; too much make up for field work or hunting; fake fingernails; a phony personality; and expressions on their faces that are fitting for the next reality show. It doesn’t take an overly intelligent individual to see they are doing this to bring attention to themselves. Any kind of attention.

      Given that the kill of Cecil was 180 degrees away from the ‘fair game’ guidelines that originated in the British Shikar Club and that the American Boon and Crokett Club adapted, other people are also seeing just how utterly stupid trophy hunting is and how prissy and narcissistic are the people that love to kill. Make no mistake that trophy hunting is not a sport. It is a business—a killing business, whether it’s done by a man in need to prove his virility or a woman seeking fame.

      • Louise Kane says:

        ++++1 see note below Yvette

      • Immer Treue says:

        Well said Yvette.

      • Jake Jenson says:

        How does someone who hires someone else to do the actual hunting for them so that they can be led by the hand to the animal they’re going to kill make them anything less than incompetent which does not prove vitality – virility – and actually proves a false pride and arrogance with a false feeling of achievement. I don’t get how some people come up with their definition or psychological analysis of what those people that “trophy” hunt are doing and why they are doing it. I think the guide is more disgusting than the fool who needs the guide.

        • Elk375 says:

          So what if a hunter has a guide. All photo safaris in African have guides and having been to African both hunting and on a photo canoeing trip down the Zambezi I would never venture into the Africa bush without a guide. I doubt if anyone on this forum would do the same; it would just be plain foolish.

          • Immer Treue says:

            I agree with you, however, I think what Jake is digging at is the guide does not take his client into the field and stalk their prey, but sets it up so that it is more of a canned hunt.

          • JB says:

            I’d go a step further, Immer. The reason its different is fundamentally linked to the justification for hunting. We (most of us anyway) accept hunting as a means of acquiring food; others may be convinced to accept trophy hunting on the grounds that it requires a show of skill–a series of skills actually (tracking, stalking, hunting, etc.) that connect us to our not-so-distant evolutionary origins. However, when one kills an animal s/he doesn’t intend to eat (trophy), and when that trophy is taken primarily on the skill of another, we rightly ask ‘what is the purpose–what is this hunt for?’ Since the individual in question isn’t (a) eating what he kills, nor (b) exhibiting much in the way of hunting skill, the only purpose appears to be self gratification. Most of us reject this as a good reason to kill an animal (witness the Cecil debacle).

            Photography is different because the animals being photographed are not being killed for self-gratification.

            Recall one of the tenets of the so-called North American Model is that wildlife should only be killed for a ‘legitimate purpose’. The simple answer here is that most reject self gratification as a legitimate purpose for killing.

    • Immer Treue says:

      From the Goodall blog:

      ” How can anyone with an ounce of compassion be proud of killing these magnificent creatures? Lions, leopards, sable antelopes, giraffes and all the other sport or trophy animals are beautiful – but only in life. In death they represent the sad victims of a sadistic desire to attract praise from their friends at the expense of innocent creatures. And when they claim they respect their victims and experience emotions of happiness at the time of the killing, then surely this must be the joy of a diseased mind?”

  44. Louise Kane says:

    LA Times on human hunting and its effects on species, especially predator species, noting scientist Chris Daimont’s observation that trophy hunting is not a sustainable model for conservation and why.

    • Yvette says:

      Glad you shared this, Louise.

      “The solution, the study authors say, is to hunt and fish in ways that are more like our fellow natural predators, who have been hunting sustainably for millions of years: focus on the young, and preserve the large adults, capable of bearing more offspring. In other words, preserve the capital.”

      For the most intelligent species we humans falter when it comes to ego and greed. Those two human traits overpower the intelligence that allowed us to dominate the world. I fear our egos and greed will be the things that do us in, but we will take down so many other species in the process. Maybe it’s time to explore blending empirical science with a spiritual essence, at least, in some instances, because too many of us aren’t getting the message.

      • Louise Kane says:

        if there were any fault I could find with this piece is that I would like to start hearing of studies on fishing and hunting effort and the technology and how that is unsustainable. There are few if any public lands where populations of wildlife are unhunted. The author make a good point of explaining that trophy hunting of wild animals while trageting the largest is also diminshing the gene pool. But the sheer mass of humans aiming for these species while they are also losing prey sepcies to us and habitat surely must be unsustainable. The few areas where wildlife live ought to be protected from all trophy hunting. I was glad to see the author argue that carnivores did not evolve to withstand sport hunting. This is an important concept that ought to be brought up at every meeting, discussion, and hearing on wildife management. I do not believe there is any valid management reason for hunting carnivores.

  45. Drew says:

    Good news! Wolf pack documented in Northern CA. by trail cameras. Specific location not mentioned.

  46. TC says:

    Holy cow but the smoke in the air is bad right now and we don’t have any big fires anywhere nearby. Reduced visibility, nasty haze, red eyes, throat irritation after a few hours working outdoors. Cannot imagine how bad the air is north and west of us here in WY. Be safe out there, and keep firefighters in your thoughts, no matter your philosophy about suppressing/fighting fires.

    • Nancy says:

      TC – got a sizeable forest fire going just a few miles away from me but heard the smoke and your conditions listed above – Reduced visibility, nasty haze, red eyes, throat irritation – probably have more to do with out of state smoke than this fire.

    • Kathleen says:

      It’s the pits. Headaches, sore throats, contacts feel like sandpaper…and I’ve got my laundry hanging out in it for an added bonus…for that wildfire-fresh fragrance! Not that it matters–we don’t have air conditioning, so the windows are open all night anyhow.

  47. Nancy says:

    Building a gold mine? Seems they really ought to be referring to it as digging a gold mine.

    Gotta love the name of this company – Lucky Minerals.

    Any relation to the other Lucky guys out there? 🙂

    Sorry, couldn’t help but make a reference 🙂

    “Conservation groups are urging a stringent analysis of the potential effects on water quality and wildlife habitat, while Lucky Minerals says the exploratory work would have minimal effect on the environment”

  48. Nancy says:

    “Critics say the system is too costly or unlikely to function as designed”

    Of course its easier, to do nothing…..

    • Zeewolf says:

      Well, once again, my opinion that it is easier, more cost effective and better for the environment to prevent pollution and environmental degradation in the first place rather than spend loads of money after the fact has been reinforced. Of course, that doesn’t mean that I don’t want the money spent to clean up our collective mess… Godspeed to this crew.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Swales was leading six tourists on a walking safari when he spotted fresh lion spoor and decided to track a pride of lions consisting of two females, two cubs and two males, according to the Zimbabwe National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority.

      What the hell was this man thinking? When this happened to Blaze the grizzly, I thought to myself, would people ever walk through a pride of lions? Doubtful, so why be so careless around grizzlies? Well, here’s my answer.

      Now I expect they’ll kill the lions and ship off all the cubs to a second rate zoo?

      • Yvette says:

        Ida, he was a guide for Hwange Park and was taking people on a walkikng safari. This just happened and the details are not all out. Drew Abrahamson posted this sad and unfortunate news on her facebook page. You should look her up and read it. She is in South Africa, but is on the ground and in the know. I trust her observations much more than the news.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I’ll take a look, thx. But living things are unpredictable, and situations change moment to moment. Tragic.

          • Yvette says:

            “But living things are unpredictable, and situations change moment to moment. Tragic.”

            Precisely why you should look her up and read her statement. Plus, she’s a good one to follow.

          • Joe says:

            Hi Ida,

            I just wanted to point out that there are a number of misconceptions about what the Walking Safaris in Southern Africa are about. You can see that by reading the many inane comments on the article that was referenced. In Southern Africa, you are not allowed to hike in parks containing lions and/or elephants without a guide. This is very different than we are used to in North America but the reason for the rule is pretty obvious; lions and elephants are extremely dangerous. In many parks in Southern Africa like Hwange where this attack happened or Kruger in South Africa; you are free to drive on your own during daylight hours but not get out. Think of it like being able to drive through Yellowstone but you can only get out of your car at a handful of scenic spots and in the lodge areas and only during daylight. From dusk to dawn you have to be back in a main camp or lodge. In East Africa, it’s even harder to “self drive” and many places like the Masai Mara and Ngorongoro can seem more like a line of paparazzi following a lone lion or leopard. Not to mention East Africa trips tend to be exorbitantly expensive. For some of us, that just doesn’t feel very wild.

            This is where the Bush Walks come into play. South Africa, Zimbabwe and Zambia are really the home of the best walking safaris (photographic not hunting) in Africa and the level of guiding is superb. They cater largely towards people who have gone from guided driving to self drive safaris and now want to do something more immersive. They are not about tracking lions or pushing the envelope of what is safe, they are about spending from a few hours to several days in the wilderness with some of the best trackers, naturalists, guides on the planet. Most of the ranger/guides have an encyclopedic knowledge of the bush and it’s like spending 2-3 days in a PhD level course on African flora and fauna. You get to learn about and see all the small things you can’t experience from a truck like insects, reptiles, tracks, spoor, Rhino middens, leopard territorial markers and countless other things. Yes, if you run across rhino or lion tracks and they are fresh you will most likely head off to see if you can find them but the guides always put safety first and they do not knowingly put their clients’ lives in danger. The purpose is to learn to see, smell and hear the world from the point of view of the animals. Their safety record speaks for itself. Camp Hawing, for example, runs daily morning bush walks and this is the first incident you are reading about in years. That being said, these are large, dangerous and unpredictable animals and even when everyone does everything right, bad things can still happen. That is what makes it so exciting. On our last trip we almost walked into a thicket with a lioness and cubs in it and we never saw her. She growled at us and we calmly, carefully diverted around the thicket and continued the walk; never once putting the safety of the group at risk to get a look but what you hear is just as important as what you see.

            Please remember that the Walking Safaris are geared towards people who want a more intimate experience in the African Wilderness and are willing to pay a premium for it. This supports the National Parks staff, guides and rangers who are on the front lines every day protecting the wildlife from poachers. In Kruger (South Africa) for example, the guides who work any one of the seven 3-night Wilderness Trails make only about $800/month (plus tips) and they are among the highest paid field staff in the park. They act as teachers, mentors, guides and protectors for the people who bring much needed funding to the parks. SAN Parks, for example, is financed entirely through visitor fees. They also serve as the eyes and ears of the anti-poaching patrols and their mere presence reduces the poaching incidents in the areas where the Wilderness Trails are conducted.

            Please don’t confuse the safari hunting guides involved in the Cecil incident with the tourist guides who provide thousands of people with an opportunity to experience the magnificence of Africa’s wildlife in a way that just can’t be done from the back of a truck. My wife and I have done 13 “bush walks” over our last two trips to South Africa and Zimbabwe and every single person we shared the trail with left more committed to conserving wildlife than when they started. If the paying tourists disappeared, so would the parks and the wildlife the protect for most African countries can’t afford to pay for the staff and rangers without those tourists.

            Sorry for the long message but I hope this sheds a little context on what they were doing that unfortunate day and why people should have been more respectful to the guide and his family for he probably saved the lives of six other people that day doing something he loved while protecting the animals and wilderness he loved for less in a year than many of the tourists probably make in a month. He and his fellow rangers are the only reason there are any elephants, rhinos, lions and other wildlife left in the wild.

            PS – If you’d like to read my trip report on our last trip to Kruger you can find it below:

            Joe’s Kruger Report:

            You might just decide to go as it’s much more affordable than you might think, on par with a stay in any of the cabins in Yellowstone.



  49. timz says:

    On the lighter side..

  50. Peter Kiermeir says:

    NOAA declares deaths of large whales in Gulf of Alaska an unusual mortality event

    Note that picture with bears feeding on that whale carcass!

  51. Nancy says:

    A bite to the head would of assured him a spot in this year’s Darwin Awards:

  52. Zeewolf says:

    I apologize in advance for the long-winded, verbose scree that follows…

    Recently I editorialized in the post about California’s first wolf pack in nearly a century that it would be worthwhile to set aside any and all obtainable acreage of, say, five acres or above so that the land may go about fulfilling its ecological potential, whatever that may be.

    One of the responses was, legitimately enough, “It is called money. $$$$$$$”. Because this topic is not strictly about the current wolf restoration situation in California, I chose to respond and further expound on my thoughts here, where general wildlife topics are often discussed.

    I suppose that, in my original post, I didn’t discuss money because it is so obvious that money makes everything go round in this world. Indeed, it is so obvious that I thoughtlessly ignored that particular problem. As was once (in)famously stated: “The business of America is business”. And what is business except the acquisition and disbursement of money?

    What appeals to me by buying up private property for conservation purposes is that we do, in this country, have a strong history of rights with that property. While this can lead to environmental degradation from sub-division, mining, intensive agriculture and other land uses, it would seem that it is possible to subvert the current paradigm by applying those same rights in the name of conservation.

    As noted earlier, there are some groups that are doing this already, i.e. The Nature Conservancy, The Trust For Public Lands and numerous local land trust throughout the nation. Perhaps these organizations are doing all that is possible given the constraints of resources available to conservation. However, in my opinion, more could and should be done.

    Back to money… The simplified statement “it is called money” just barely hints at the complexity of the situation. First, where would the money come from? The public lands agencies have their hands full, so to speak, and can barely manage the lands that they have what with the congressional inhibitions and competing interests. Tax hikes of any sort for this purpose on a national or even regional scale seem unlikely.

    My thoughts are centered on the acquisition of generally more productive low-lands that have been more likely historically to have been settled by homesteaders and converted to private land. Thus to acquire that public land would take money, money, money. So, where does it come from? A new organization that raises funds is one possibility. Perhaps the ten or fifteen largest conservation organizations, such as Defenders of Wildlife, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Biological Diversity, et al, could all contribute one percent, or even two, to a central “clearing house” organization that would oversee land purchases.

    Part 2 to follow…

    • Elk375 says:

      Good comment Zeewolf but please do not leave out the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. They have protected over 5 million acres.

      • Zeewolf says:

        Thank you for the compliment, Elk375. I did not mean to imply that my mention of any particular organization was meant to be comprehensive and will have to admit to a certain lack of knowledge regarding who’s who in land conservation.

        I just read a bit about RMEF and their efforts and I will say that I am heartened. I have heard some negativity towards this organization from some folks due to the perception that RMEF is anti-wolf and/or predator. I don’t really know one way or another if this is true and have yet to make up my mind about their intent. Perhaps it was an aberration on RMEF’s part or over-sensitivity from pro-wolfers.

        Regardless, I have no doubt that if habitat is being secured for elk then many other species will benefit. Thanks for the “heads up”!

  53. Zeewolf says:

    Part 2…

    The response “it is called money” was directly tied to my quote “This is a daunting task to say the least…”. By this phrase “daunting task” I didn’t just mean the acquisition of money. I was also thinking about how the funds would be disbursed and where said funds would be applied.

    At this point in the extinction crisis I feel that any parcel of land would be useful to let flora grow on it not only for the flora’s own sake but for whatever fauna could be supported. But where to start? That is what I meant, also, by “daunting”.

    I also meant, by “daunting”, how to overcome skepticism and outright opposition. Opposition by the counties involved that might be losing tax revenue. Opposition by realtors who wouldn’t like salable lands being removed from the inventory. Opposition from neighbors, or other folks who disregard any positivity to be gained from enhancement of ecosystems and biological diversity; the list, I am sure, could be expanded.

    Money is important to this equation, but it is not enough in itself. Commitment to the cause from the parties and individuals concerned is also key. Long-term monitoring (which I suppose would take money) would be important. Ensuring that any program was applied fairly and not corrupted to benefit “those in the know” from gaining on their own real estate purchases. Once again, at the threat of wearing out the word, the task is daunting.

    When I look around my current home county I see that most of the private lands along the major creeks and rivers have been converted from their native grass and sagebrush to an irrigated monoculture of non-native timothy. Is it any wonder that the once-common grouse are being slowly “suffocated” when they don’t have proper habitat to situate their leks on? What if even five percent of this rich, productive bottom-land could be taken out of agricultural production and returned to a native state? Would it even make a dent or be worth the effort?

    The time for action is now. It is so damnably cliche to write that that I hesitate to do so, but I can’t help but feel that it is also the truth (I realize that “truth” can be relative). I believe, having seen the reality in Washington, D.C., that Defenders of Wildlife needs their “K Street office” in order to affect positive change for wildlife and wildlands. But why not make a direct effort using the available rights afforded to private lands to not just advocate for an endangered species or two (or few hundred) but actually add lands that are managed solely for conservation?

    I apologize in advance for being a naive rube, and perhaps doing nothing more than farting in the wind and therefore wasting valuable ether on the internet, but I am concerned with the state of the world. Not just the extinction and climate-change crises in general but all the negativity associated with trying to fight what amounts to a rear-guard action. This could be a way for people to accomplish something not only positive for the environment but something that is a long-lasting and tangible asset for a richer, more diverse Earth.

    • Nancy says:

      “But why not make a direct effort using the available rights afforded to private lands to not just advocate for an endangered species or two (or few hundred) but actually add lands that are managed solely for conservation?”

      Here’s a way to do it Zeewolf:

      And this could be “our” first purchase 🙂 🙂

      And no, I’m not in real estate. I’ve been to this ranch (when the cabin was going up) and it is an awesome piece of property in national forest. Only one way in or out, on a steep, scary Forest Service road. Obviously its presently owned by a “head hunter”

      Just got my attention again, didn’t realize it was on the market.

      • Elk375 says:

        Nancy, $3,500,000 is to much money for 158 acres, to much of the value is in the lodge which does not help wild lands or wildlife. The lodge building cost is approximately $1,000,000 with a 25% external depreciation or a current improvement value $750,000. The site value is $2,250,000 or a $15,000 an acre. For $15,000 per acre or $2,250,000 for land value one can acquire better more effective wildlife habitat.

        It looks like someone built their fantasy castle and 5 to 10 years later are now bored with it and want to move on. Unfortunately this is happening all over Montana and the west.

        • Nancy says:

          Its all about the location Elk. And, the lodge could pay for its self with maybe the right promotion? A place to hold occasional wildlife seminars or cater to small groups interested in ecology.

          Land around here is going for $30 to $40 grand an acre and too many large tracks of land, with a cheaper price tag, are sandwiched in between ranches or subdivisions.

      • Zeewolf says:

        Nancy… wow! Crowdfunding had not occurred to me. I checked out that link and a light went on in my head. With the proper backing and marketing the idea of purchasing property for conservation would potentially appeal to many people, or at least I would like to think so.

        However… how would it be started? Who would run the organization? This is not a one-person operation and would need to have a non-profit set up to establish any sort of legitimacy. A time consuming and, here is that pesky word yet again, daunting task.

        One of the other specters that may haunt the effort would potentially include offending local land trusts already in operation. Would any new efforts be needlessly wasteful and redundant? Or would a national effort get more done by pulling in money from outside the local area?

        Who would make the decisions about which properties to buy? Where would the focus be? Worldwide or (my preference) the interior western United States?

        I looked at the parcel that had been linked to… Part of me believes that Elk375 is correct and that the price per acre is higher than it should be. At a thousand dollars an acre three million dollars could buy three thousand acres of not-so-sexy sagebrush steppe; a slight drop in price could result in the permanent acquisition and protection of five entire sections. Five square miles… how wonderful would that be?

        Part of me also realizes that by purchasing an inholding on public lands at an exorbitant price the result would be to safeguard many thousands of acres of National Forest or other public lands in the region. Would not the price-per-acre then be decreased significantly, if not on the deeded land itself but in the total acreage protected? (Personally, I would love to see a wealthy philanthropist purchase the land and then have the house demolished and take the tax credit.)

        The last two paragraphs bring up yet another question to be contemplated and that is how would the cost-benefits be analyzed? “Daunting”… a multi-headed hydra, whack off one and two more rise to take their place.

        Nonetheless, I believe that these questions and others as yet unexpressed could be overcome with the proper outlook. For me, anyhow, the point is to make positive, tangible additions to wildlife habitat that would rely on private funding of a citizens’ initiative in cooperation, if possible, with government and local, regional and national NGOs.

        • Nancy says:

          “However… how would it be started? Who would run the organization? This is not a one-person operation and would need to have a non-profit set up to establish any sort of legitimacy. A time consuming and, here is that pesky word yet again, daunting task.

          One of the other specters that may haunt the effort would potentially include offending local land trusts already in operation. Would any new efforts be needlessly wasteful and redundant? Or would a national effort get more done by pulling in money from outside the local area?

          Who would make the decisions about which properties to buy? Where would the focus be? Worldwide or (my preference) the interior western United States?”

          All good questions Zeewolf. The most important one being “how would it be started?” I suppose from a vision and a lot of like minded people, and the west would certainly be my place to start 🙂

          Your comment about “acres of not-so-sexy sagebrush steppe” reminded me of the ranch next door that was on the market for years. Around 2 thousand acres, most of it in sagebrush. Wonderful mule deer, elk and sage grouse habitat. Couple of nice springs & a decent creek running thru it. Bordered both BLM & Forest Service land in the back.

          Across the road, a hay meadow with over a half mile of creek front. It was finally auctioned off 2 years ago (when they couldn’t find a buyer) for $850 grand to a wheat farmer from Idaho.

          The sagebrush is now over grazed by lease cattle, the springs have tanks on them, big sections of willows on the creek across the road, have been ripped out.
          Would of been a great investment. How many other places like that? And not just private:

          Click on the Land Banking Report July 2015

  54. Nancy says:

    Much easier to kill, than capture and transplant her out of the area:

  55. Nancy says:

    “If you don’t want bears in your backyard, according to Jonkel, don’t invite them.

    “I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been called about a bear in the back yard,” added Jonkel. “There’s a swing set with 70 rotting apples under it and a big bag of garbage next to the door and bird feeders swinging all over the place.”

  56. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Global Extinction Rates: Why
    Do Estimates Vary So Wildly?

    Is it 150 species a day or 24 a day or far less than that? Prominent scientists cite dramatically different numbers when estimating the rate at which species are going extinct. Why is that?

  57. Helen McGinnis says:

    Living Large: Wolves, Bears Cougars and Humans in North America. I don’t know if this has already been announced here, but this HSUS-sponsored conference on co-existing with large carnivores, to be held in Washington DC on October 12-14, 2015 looks like a good one:

  58. Kathleen says:

    And yet another: “Bear that disrupted Flathead campground games to get to trash euthanized”

    “They’d been letting him get into unsecured trash for an extended period of time, and it had gone unreported,”

  59. Yvette says:

    New Mexico Fish and Game has unanimously voted to allow trapping of cougars with no special permits and will increase hunting limits on black bears and cougars.

    The new rules will allow for more black bear hunting in all but two of the state’s game management districts as well as the doubling of cougar hunting limits. The trapping and snaring of cougars on private land and state trust land will also be allowed without special permits.–Hunting-Limits

    • Louise Kane says:

      Susana Martinez and her commission have wreaked havoc on New Mexico’s wildlife.

  60. Louise Kane says:

    you have to wonder how killing Cecil affected the prides in the area?

    • WM says:


      I took a quick look at the Draft report. The conclusion I saw from this biologist’s work was limited to cormorant impact to Snake River STEELHEAD population, not all the salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River system where cormorants are present. Whether one can draw broader conclusions may well be speculative (steelhead trout however belong to the Salmonidae taxonomic family, but are not salmon). Do they behave the same in migration at various stages of their life? I don’t know but I can say for sure humans don’t go about catching them with the same techniques.

      Big difference in what the report says and what the Audubon reporter wrote, possibly incorrectly… unless I missed something in my quick review.

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Some more background on the project:

      If they have only killed 158 cormorants as of late August it doesn’t seem as though the population is suffering much from the cull yet. The cost per bird is probably fairly high. How much does the oiling of eggs cost?

    • rork says:

      We kill lots of cormorants in MI.

      I have been hoping for more detailed assessments of the impacts. At the start it felt like anglers were just complaining based on no good data, and bang for the buck would still be nice to estimate accurately. We still have lots of this bird.
      PS: In southern MI, we are having a steep increase in baldies. It’s nice. Osprey too. I suggest we stop all fishing on a selected 5% of small lakes, and declare those fish as marked for other uses. I’d like more places where fish communities are at wilderness densities, not so I can fish it, just so I and others can see it. It might astonish many.

  61. WM says:


    Just thinking out loud here. Oiling eggs = birth control. Likely cheap and ultimately more efficient to decrease population unless they have a contractor involved, and certainly less of a public spectacle than shooting, netting or other methods of taking out adults.

    Interesting comment by one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers. Dam operation would help with the salmon survival rate. Well, ya sure it would …wonder how that is playing out in this very dry year with lower flows, and too warm water that are jeopardizing salmon survival throughout the Columbia system, not just the mouth.

    On a water related matter, I just checked the on-line data for the USGS gaging station on the Hoh River (yes the rain forest river). Its fluctuating flow is about 400to 500 cfs diurnally (summer flow from glacier melt). The usual summer flow average is 3 to 5 times this amount, which typically includes rainfall runoff. Other WA coastal rivers are similarly affected, which is very likely to adversely impact salmon returns. I heard volunteers were trying to deepen a channel in the Dungeness River (Sequim near Port Angeles), to create a path for salmon headed for the hatchery on that river. I expect your area in OR is not much better off.

    • rork says:

      I’m hoping Hanford Reach (Columbia, above the Snake) will be less affected. I see chinook returns are starting, about at 2014 pace. 8/28 was the first day with over 10K at Bonneville, so maybe they won’t be as late as I feared. Cause I’m going end of Sep. Lower water makes the Reach look more impressive and dangerous (and easier to read), and thankful for the jet sled. We will no doubt be rescuing inexperienced folks again, but that’s always so.

      • rork says:

        PS: I’ve found recently. Chinook take stopped at Buoy 10. I also checked temperatures and they are back at 10 year average at Bonneville, and below average at McNary. Graphs at

      • WM says:


        We finally got rain in Seattle, and on the Olympic Peninsula last night. Hopefully these pretty heavy storms are moving inland dropping air temperatures, and without lightening strikes, to aid in slowing the raging fires in the NE part of the state. The ground is so dry and the vegetation so dehydrated one has to wonder how much water will be absorbed/consumed before any makes it into the steam systems, and once in the Columbia system how much will be held back to replace depleted reservoir reserves for hydropower.

  62. Gary Humbard says:

    Food bins are being tested for bear resistance in West Yellowstone to reduce conflicts with local residents and campers throughout the GYE.

    The Greater Yellowstone Coalition is providing funding and labor to install “bear proof” food bins within many of the Forest Service campgrounds adjacent to Yellowstone NP. These are the kind of on the ground actions that directly benefit both bears and humans but sadly never get the headlines.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      That’s great – the trash bin looks like it’s made of paper next to those beautiful, powerful animals, and intelligent. It’s great that visitors can see this too.

    • Leslie says:

      I have one of those homeowner type containers that I purchased in 2006, and yes, it has worked. At that time the WG&F had a partnership funding to subsidize the can so I only paid $50. Now they no longer have $$ for homeowner subsidized trash cans and they are $150. I doubt most homeowners are going to purchase them at this price. FS campgrounds should have their cans and the govt. should be purchasing them. THe GYC subsidy would be better spent on homeowner cans.

  63. Leslie says:

    Another food adapted bear. These bears are killed because of human negligence. Grizzlies do not break into homes. That is a black bear stunt.

  64. Leslie says:

    Sorry, that is an old article. But I understand there was another bear in Silver gate this year that was shot and I was trying to find that article.

    • WM says:

      I see this is a Laura Zuckerman article reporting from Salmon, ID. The Kootenai Tribe has something like 165 enrolled members. So, it will be, indeed, interesting to see how that $35,000 of federal money to come up with a workable plan will be used to produce a plan which the states/feds could not.

      Wasn’t one of the impediments to continued woodland caribou survival (in addition loss of habitat), an issue of climate change, generally? Wonder how the reindeer fared this summer? Boondoggle or money well spent? Only time and a new plan will tell. I’m not holding my breath on this one.

  65. WM says:

    Recall how the Pacific Crest Trail got a lot more users after the release of the Reece Witherspoon movie a couple years back. Sorry I forgot the name of the movie?

    Looks like the same is in store for the Appalachian Trail with a the release of a new Robert Redford movie next week, based on a book from some years back “A Walk In The Woods.” The book was a good read, though I don’t think the movie tracks it that well.

    What is now happening on parts of the App Ttrail, even before the movie release, is kind of disgusting and likely to change the terminus.

    • Nancy says:

      “Doing this in 46 days is like going through the Metropolitan Museum of Art in one minute and 17 seconds.”

      Love that comment, WM. Agree, the book was a good read.

      • WM says:


        It must be media blitz week for the App Trail. Immediately after writing the comment above I opened the Sunday Seattle Times, while eating breakfast, and out pop two App Trail articles, one in the national Parade Magazine (naturally a quick reference to the Redford movie) and a syndicated piece from the NY Times on page 2 that tracks the MSNBC piece above.

        Mind and thought control from the major media in concert with the financial interests of Hollywood.

        • Elk375 says:

          I just finished reading both of them.

        • Nancy says:

          “Mind and thought control from the major media in concert with the financial interests of Hollywood”

          A review of Bryson’s book in the NY Times – 17 years ago:

          “A Walk in the Woods” is a funny book, full of dry humor in the native-American grain. It is also a serious book.

          Nothing really terrible happened to the author, but by playing on our fears, he captures the ambivalence of our feelings about the wild. We revere it but we’re also intimidated. We want to protect animals but we also want to kill them.

          The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but they also “choke off views and leave you muddled and without bearings.” He continues: “They make you feel small and confused and vulnerable, like a small child lost in a crowd of strange legs.”

  66. Louise Kane says:

    these are amazing
    hauntingly beautiful
    hoping no one hunts and kills either of them

  67. Barb Rupers says:

    Female with three cubs attack a bow hunter in Targee-Caribou NF. hunter had bear spray but didn’t use it.

    • Immer Treue says:

      “While we’re thankful the hunter didn’t suffer more serious injuries, critical thinkers must ask, “Why was the handgun more accessible than the bear spray?”

      The hand cannon sure did a good job, eh? Now, in all probability either a wounded bear that someone else must deal with, and three cubs that may be without their source got winter survival.

      • Elk375 says:

        Bear spray does not have a good design for user friendliness. Bear spray needs to be redesigned. A pistol is easier and quicker to use due to the design.

        • Outdoorfunnut says:

          I wear a tea shirt with a top left pocket…… Works great for the dogs while riding bike with the family. (only used it once …..solved the problem) BUT, I have pulled it from the pocket maybe seven or eight times.

        • Nancy says:

          Maybe bear spray manufacturers need to re-design the can to have the look & feel of a pistol?

        • Gary Humbard says:

          Amazon has a a good video showing how to use bear spray by removing it from the holster or from the hip. Using bear spray is like using a gun, practice, practice and more practice.

          • Professor Sweat says:

            Here’s to hoping Dirty Harry didn’t just orphan 3 cubs. I can guarantee that it takes more practice to shoot a .44 straight than to deploy a can of bear spray. I guess it’s hard to compensate for other inadequacies with a can of spray though.

          • Elk375 says:

            Bear spray is $40 a can or $10 a practice can and practice once. I can reload large bore pistol ammunition using hard cast lead bullets for around 35 cents each and practice all I want. I can not reload bear spray cans.

            • Immer Treue says:

              Yes, but what is the price of a good 44 magnum, one that might be dependable enough to use in such a life saving situation?

            • rork says:

              What’s the cost of a dead bear, or is that irrelevant?

          • WM says:

            The “practice session” would have been more convincing if the demonstration included a comment on the likely instinctual hesitation and discard of the rifle the guy was carrying. (Which do I use …think ….think gun or bears spray?) Add a half second, or a full second if the sling is over the shoulder, to dump the rifle, and the bear just came 22-44 feet or more, closer to you, before you even get to the Velcro strap on the bear spray holster. Practice…Practice…Practice. Thinking is a part of that.

            Loved the in-holster deployment. Means the bear (in this instance) has to be roughly in the 15 percent zone to this guy’s right side. So what does one do for the other 85% of coverage, pray?

            I’m not advocating for a firearm over bear spray, but the muzzle blast/concussion/sound from a large bore firearm may sometimes also be unpleasant for the charging bear even if it is not hit, and in certain instances may be much quicker to deploy if a hunter’s firearm is at the ready at the beginning of the encounter. Is it enough to deter?

            I am all for the bear spray when backpacking – because it is lighter than alternatives, too.

  68. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Ancient hybridization key to domestic dog’s origin, wolf conservation efforts
    The ancestry of man’s best friend may be more complicated than its furry coat and soulful eyes betray. Understanding the evolutionary history of the domesticated dog may ultimately help protect endangered wolves, according to a study from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

    • Immer Treue says:

      The hunter reportedly was carrying bear spray, but apparently couldn’t access it because the bear bit his left hand. Fish and Game officials said the man was able to scare the bear off after he used his right hand to shoot at the bear five times from point blank range.

      I’ll confess ignorance in all things .44 magnum. If a revolver, does it require to be cocked? If holstered, is there a safety strap? Long time ago, I shot either a .44 or .357. It required two hands, and locked elbows, or you got it back in the forehead.

      I don’t know, is there such a thing as a .44 magnum semi automatic? Same thing, secured holster, safety, recoil?

      I wasn’t there, but I’m wondering how one clears holster, takes off safety, cocks pistol, and shoots something of that magnitude with one hand.

      Honest questions that I would assume/hope that someone with experience with such weapon could answer.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        What’s odd about the story is that nothing is said about whether or not the bear was actually hit with those bullets? So either he’s lying or Idaho F&W is lying about it.

        The story has been extremely vague from the first notice of it. Was it actually a bear that bit him? Maybe he owns dogfighting dogs. With all the bravado we read about from hunters, probably they’ll carry bear spray to comply with the rules, but never intend to use it. They’re always blustering about .44 magnums.

        What do we plan to do with all the motherless cubs left behind by hunters and if and when delisting occurs? There’s only so many zoos that can take them.

      • Jake Jenson says:

        Double action revolver. Single action revolver. Right handed the safety should be under the thumb. No problem shooting those with one hand. I’ve seen that caliber in automatics in the past, I think Desert Eagle made one.

        • Immer Treue says:

          Thanks. If a semi automatic, it would Semmelweis a bit easier than cocking a revolver. Then again with a bear hanging on to his left hand… Squeezing off five shots, one might assume he had a semi.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Semmelweis? How does auto spell chage seem into that?

            • Jake Jenson says:

              I hate auto spell. lol. I’d prefer the double action six shot piece myself because I am not comfortable with any gun with a round in the chamber on safety in a holster on my thigh. And actually the revolver has a built in safety bar which prevents accidental firing because the trigger must be depressed for the hammer to hit the primer. Pull from holster point squeeze trigger. Nothing to unlock. The auto would need to be unlocked while pointing and squeezing trigger. If there is no round in the chamber the hunter in this case would be in a bind.

      • Jake Jenson says:

        I’m not at all surprised that he apparently failed to make a solid hit.

      • Outdoorfunnut says:

        I’m thinking one hand is sufficient in that situation when the drugs take effect. Its called adrenalin. I do believe I can cock my uncles 44 with one hand.

  69. aves says:

    USFWS about to be sued for failure to protect red wolves:

    Some background:

    Some private landowners don’t want red wolves on their land. Typically, the USFWS will remove the wolves and release them elsewhere. But when 2 wealthy landowners refused to allow the USFWS to come on their property to remove the wolves, the USFWS gave them permits to kill wolves. This spring, one of the landowners shot and killed a lactating female wolf.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      There was no excuse for that, none at all. I don’t understand how they could bar the USF&W from coming onto their property for an established program, especially to remove the ‘offending’ animals? The landowner wants to get rid of them, despite bids for sympathy in the press. But I bet they like living next to the wildlife refuge, don’t they. Can’t have it both ways, or can we, living in America.

    • Louise Kane says:

      I had read about this aves and wondered how such a thing could happen? It is surreal that the agency would do this.

  70. Ida Lupines says:

    Thanks, I know less than nothing about guns either. I’m glad everything turned out ok for all concerned.

  71. Peter Kiermeir says:

    New Management Guidelines for the Florida Panther

    “The new guidelines are a response to a growing number of complaints especially among ranchers and large landowners in south Florida about panther attacks on cattle and other domesticated animals.”

    “Cliff Coleman manages Black Boar Ranch, a south Florida shooting preserve. He says there are too many panthers.”


    FWC Commissioner, Others Ask For Legal Protection To ‘Take’ Panthers While Developing Land

    “A Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation commissioner is seeking a permit that would give her and other landowners legal coverage if they were to kill or harass endangered animals while developing thousands of acres in eastern Collier County.”

  72. Ida Lupines says:

    Just saw some tiny little frogs (greenish-grey and only about an inch long) clinging to my garden window and hummingbird feeder and side of my house. Cutest. Critters. Ever. Anyone have any idea what they are? I was worried they would need water so I put some out for them. Never saw them before.

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Did you have a recent warm rain? Look up spring peepers for possibe identity. They were common in Maine in the spring, don’t recall seeing them in the fall. Here in western Oregon a related Pacifid tree frog can be found any time of the year in unexpected places, hanging on windows, under sleeping bags, around dog watering dishes. .

    • Professor Sweat says:

      Possibly a grey tree frog. Do you ever hear this call?

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Oh yes. A fantastic springtime sound. These guys I guess are migrating? It’s been humid but no rain, but some is expected. Maybe they can tell when it’s going to rain! I think they might be spring peepers. Cutest little guys ever. I’ve heard them a lot but never have seen them. Now I have. Wow!

        I’ve seen the grey tree frog in camouflage on a tree trunk. Very striking.

        I have seen the grey tree frog in

    • rork says:

      Try gray tree frog (Hyla versicolor). Like the sciency name suggests they can change the coloration though, which can make it very confusing. Compare with spring peeper – some such species (genus Pseudacris is big) likely near you I think. Both are abundant near me (in MI), along with a few others. Other common small frogs are wood frogs (genus Rana) and cricket frogs (genus Acris), getting to exact species not always easy.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Who is going to believe this crap?

      Firefighters and officials must be stressed out to the max, so they shot the nearest bear, they are not going to waste any precious human time figuring out which bear dunnit. Maybe they shot him because he was there as stress relief. We all know human life, however low, is more important than any wildlife. Property is more important than life also. Don’t they know or care that wildlife is under stress from our man-made fires and other messes too?

      I still can’t get over the story about the bow hunter 15 miles outside of Yellowstone – did they find shell casings, anything, to verify his story that he even encountered a grizzly bear and cubs? Or is it going to be one of those stories that floats out on the ether and disappears, so that ‘dangerous’ grizzlies can be delisted one day?

      What happened to the missing little boy?

      All of these things have happened in Idaho.

      • Elk375 says:


        He used a 44 mag revolver. Spend shell casings would be in the cylinder of the revolver. If he was going to the hospital he should have unloaded his gun and may have thrown out the empty cases or mixed them with other empties. If he was injured I doubt if he gave a second thought.

    • Ralph Maughan says:


      Good link.

      These findings certain contradict the common sense and also the scientific views about the rates of increase or decrease in the numbers of predators and prey.

      Important findings!

      • Nancy says:

        Ran across the article Ralph when I brought up the WWP link at the bottom of TWN site, from the Washington Post.

        “Ten Animals That Will Vanish With The Western Sagebrush”

        Nice that the WP is giving some attention to these issues 🙂

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Yes, I appreciated reading this one too, Nancy.

  73. Louise Kane says:

    Posted with Dave’s permission
    Scientists can and must be advocates IMHO
    While this pertains to New Mexico Fish and Game and the Governor’s policy, the statement reflects the problems in many states. The USFWS is also a problem, as Aves posted, they just killed lactating red wolf female because the landowner did not want the wolf on his property. That action was criminal in every sense of the word.

    Comments – David Parsons
    NM Game Commission Meeting
    August 27, 2015
    Santa Fe

    The New Mexico Game Commission appointed by Governor Martinez is guided by politics not science. It is run largely BY hunters and ranchers FOR hunters and ranchers. Hunters and ranchers comprise only about 3.6% of all New Mexicans. I occasionally hunt and grew up on a farm. I have nothing against hunters and ranchers, but about 96% of the public has been cut out of the wildlife decision-making process in NM. They deserve a voice, too.

    Only 69,000 New Mexicans hunt, but over 8 times as many (566,000) enjoy watching the diverse array of wildlife that inhabits the Land of Enchantment. And wildlife watchers spend about 2.5 times as much money as hunters. From 2001 to 2011 the number of hunters in NM declined by 47%. The NM Game Commission needs to wake up and recognize these trends.

    About 1200 species of birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians make their homes in New Mexico. Yet the NM Game Commission and Department concern themselves with “managing” only 40-some species for trophies, sport, consumption, or the fur market. This is less than 4% of the vertebrate wildlife in NM.

    The Governor’s Game Commission manages for an overabundance of elk, deer, and other non-predator game species, while knocking large predator species to population levels below their natural levels of abundance. This throws ecosystems out of balance. Modern science tells us that top predators are essential to maintaining ecological health and biodiversity.

    The culture of the Game Commission and Department hasn’t changed much in the last 50-100 years. When is the last time you heard the Game Commission discussing ecosystem health or biodiversity conservation, or the role of large predators in ecosystems?

    Past Governors have dedicated a seat on the Game Commission for a representative with wildlife conservation credentials, like the late David Henderson for example. But the Martinez Administration and her Game Commission have chosen to blow off the conservation community.

    The wildlife of New Mexico, game and non-game species alike, do not belong to the Game Commission—they belong to the public. Wildlife is a public trust resource. For better or worse, the Game Commission and Department of Game and Fish have been granted the responsibility as the public’s trustee for all of New Mexico’s wildlife—the assets of the trust. In their Public Trustee capacity, the Game Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to protect and conserve all assets of the wildlife trust for this and all future generations.

    Trophy hunting—the most apt description of hunting cougars and bears—runs afoul of the Governor’s and Game Commission’s responsibilities as trustees of the public’s wildlife.

    And then there is the denial of permits for the housing and release of state and federally listed endangered Mexican gray wolves. The Game Commission and by extension Governor Martinez are in direct violation of both state and federal law by these actions. If one of us had committed such violations, we would be charged with a crime and vigorously prosecuted.

    The New Mexico Game Commission is pathetically political and beholden to favored special interests representing less than 4% of the citizens of New Mexico.

    Reform to bring the Game Commission up to 21st century standards of wildlife and ecosystem conservation is desperately needed. With the sixth mass extinction of life on earth already under way (due to human causes), the time to begin that reform is NOW.

  74. Nancy says:

    “The lawsuit contended there was a link between the transfer of ownership and terrorism”

    Hmm? Could possible future plans include ripping the “damn” thing out? Just a thought 🙂

    • Nancy says:

      A little more insight on the Salish and Kootenai tribes.

      • Yvette says:

        I sure enjoyed reading that article, Nancy.

        They also have had a tribal college for a long time and it’s a good one from what I understand.

        I have much respect for the Salish and Kootenai. They have accomplished a lot since taking over running their tribe and releasing the BIA. Great article, Nancy.

        And the dam? The courts didn’t find any merit in the state throwing around the big ‘T’ word.

        This is when it gets good….for everyone:

        Last December, the tribes, state and the Federal Highway Administration reached an agreement. The plan includes at least 42 wildlife crossings, including a $1 million wildlife overpass that grizzly bears can use to migrate from the Bob Marshall and Mission Mountain wildernesses into the Bitterroot Mountains. Highway signs will be written in Salish, Kootenai and English, and feature a logo of Coyote, the legendary hero of the tribes.

        Construction designs use native materials such as quarried stone and rough-hewn timber, and disturbed areas will be replanted with indigenous plants.

        Roadbeds will follow the contours of the land, with as little rock cutting as possible. Human development outside already established towns will be limited. And engineers believe the addition of passing lanes, turning lanes, climbing lanes, and wider shoulders should cut down on accidents.

        “It’s a new way of looking at things,” says Loran Frazier, spokesman for the Montana Department of Transportation. “I am thrilled that we’re moving forward, and I’m excited about the project. It started as negotiations and we have reached a consensus, as well as a great working relationship.”

        The new design will also cost about $50 million less than the original proposal.

        I haven’t been to the Polson area since 2011 and I can’t wait to see the highway. Way to go, Salish and Kootenai. Lead the way and show them how to improve designs AND save money.

  75. Peter Kiermeir says:

    China: Hungry wolf wanders into Yunnan village, ends up as dinner

    • Louise Kane says:

      a horrible and far too common ending for wild beings
      they are not viewed with wonder or reverence but stoned, shot, bow and arrowed or otherwise tortured to death just for being seen. A sick world

      • Ida Lupines says:

        It sounds like a horror movie. 🙁

        On a more beautiful note, I was out walking at my local Audubon sanctuary, and I happened upon a hummingbird migration stopover, I think – there were so many of them in a field of wildflowers. I have never seen that before.

        • Kathleen says:

          Wow, awesome! lucky you!!! I saw part of a monarch butterfly migration back in ’83 on a mountain top along the Appalachian Trail. That was special, too, and humbling.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            I’ve yet to see that – but there was someone checking for Monarch eggs there as well, only one on a milkweed leaf – I’d always thought the eggs were in clusters.

            Those hummingbirds were amazing – so many, and a field of wild flowers, jewelweed and wild morning glories. There were some cedar waxwings too, so aptly named. There’s never a bad time to go out wildlife watching – I was amazed at the amount of late summer wildflowers.

            Louise’s link of the starlings murmuration was beautiful, wasn’t it? 🙂

  76. Ida Lupines says:

    Of course bears are going to teach their young to go for the easy pickin’s. Why is this rocket science? The question is whether or not it is ‘nature vs. nurture’ for human beings to leave garbage around, and would rather have that right than help discourage the bears!

    It’s a shame because the last time I was in Lake Tahoe, I couldn’t believe how beautiful it was. And whatever those pine cones are. I hope it isn’t going to be overdeveloped, overrun with people, and tacky and trash-laden, and devoid of wildlife now.

  77. rork says:
    I thought it did a bad job of selling the public on deer farming. I wanted to hear what rules the rancher who had CWD in Ohio broke, and an explanation of how current practices make a repeat of that impossible. Instead we are told that taking all reasonable precautions happens cause it’s enlightened self-interest.

    • JB says:

      Impossible my arse.

      • rork says:

        Hope it is clear I don’t think it’s impossible with current regs either – I want to stop the moving of living deer. Even then there are some remaining risks (moving semen; spontaneous occurrence in high density setting).

        • JB says:

          Never got that impression, Rork. I’m hopeful this will help Ohio put an end (or at least limit) the privatization of deer (whether for ag or “hunting”).

    • Nancy says:

      Rock – the rack on the dominant buck at this “deer farm” is really bizarre.

      Is this a glimpse of the future, for wannabe head hunters, who don’t have the time to actually go out and hunt?

      Drop by a “deer farm” like this, shoot, kill and then either hang the head/horns on the wall or have the horns made into a nice chandler, over the dining room table. Chandler comes to mind, looking at the horns on this resident buck.

      • rork says:

        Genetic selection, breeding plans, and nutritional plans are already there, to better satisfy the discerning (wealthy) customer. It’s nothing like I am looking for. The antlerless deer tags went on sale yesterday – I have 3. This is not a competition, except perhaps about having more knowledge of the green world, which is a thing we share.

  78. Kathleen says:

    This might have already been posted–apologies if it has.

    “Connecticut wildlife officials have shot and killed a young bear that closely followed and touched a hiker and became the center of a debate over the state’s wildlife management practices.”

    When will the killing ever end??? At least they don’t disingenuously use the word “euthanize” as a euphemism for what they’re doing to these animals.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      The part about the bears in Yellowstone isn’t entirely correct, is it? I thought people were crowding the poor bears trying to cross the road, at least that’s the way I read it. A hiker in Connecticut is one thing – but being ‘surprised’ by bears in Yellowstone is a bit much! The bear on the car was ‘encouraged’ by the photo takers or something too, I hear, to send in to the news for pay.

      The CT tagging doesn’t look very humane either. I’m tired of the word ‘euthanize’ too. It seems to be a ‘conscience easer’ for those who have one when it comes to killing the bears because human activities take precedence. Hikers should have to carry bear spray out in the wilderness, wherever they are. I’d certainly not want a bear to be killed. Couldn’t they just have relocated the poor bear?

      The link that JEFFE posted too, calling natural bear behavior, ‘bad behavior passed down to cubs’ because it conflicts with human activities isn’t correct and isn’t amusing either if it amounts to having to kill bears because people don’t want to take the proper steps to coexist with them.

      I don’t know what the trend is lately of spreading misinformation about wildlife. What a mess.

      • Kathleen says:

        Yes, the black bear mom in YNP was just trying to round up her freaked out cubs and get off the bridge, as I understood it. But if you google it, you’ll see that the narrative has become “bears chase tourists on bridge.” That makes sense, tho–it’s all about us, right? Humans can’t seem to fathom that animals have their own lives (which they value), their own interests, and their own agendas.

        “The bear was the only one doing anything right there,” Gibson said. “The bear was definitely not charging at people. The bear was trying to get across the bridge, and people were in the way.”

        As for the CT bear killing, that occurred in a “wildlife management area,” so you’d think anyone going in there would be prepared to encounter wildlife. But then, killing them dead does qualify as “management” in our speciesist world, doesn’t it.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          It’s awful. It would be understandably a little frightening for the woman to have encountered a bear – but I don’t think automatic killing is the answer. Education, caution, and a calm response .

          The CT bears seemed to be just curious, and a bear can pay with his or her life for that. Sad, because they don’t know that, and we do. That’s why I was so upset about the Yellowstone incident, because the man didn’t care about the welfare of the bears, it was more important for him to go hiking alone, unencumbered by bear spray or anything else.

  79. Kathleen says:

    hyper fascia? That’s a new one!

  80. Louise Kane says:

    extraordinary project by JIm Brandenburg ten years of documenting the north and its inhabitants and habitats. I watched one segment on wolves day 233 of 65 called ensemble

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      His ranch is at current day grizzly bear central. This is in Island Park too, like the recent hunting attack and lesser stories I did not post about.

      It is true that there were only occasional grizzlies here 30 years ago, but to have this area absent of grizzlies now, not only would the threatened species status have to be rescinded (which might happen soon), the bears would have to be killed back to their status in about 1980 — a complete undoing of all the progress to save them.

      Once again, it’s an example of the threat that cattle ranchers pose to our wildlife.

  81. Yvette says:

    A new study has been published by NOAA and Seattle based researcher, John Incardona on the lasting adverse effects from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The ecosystem isn’t recovering.

    “The thresholds for developmental cardiotoxicity were remarkably low, suggesting the scale of the Exxon Valdez impact in shoreline spawning habitats was much greater than previously appreciated. Moreover, an irreversible loss of cardiac fitness and consequent increases in delayed mortality in oil-exposed cohorts may have been important contributors to the delayed decline of pink salmon and herring stocks in Prince William Sound.
    Our findings indicate that embryonic exposure to very low, environmentally relevant levels of crude oil causes permanent structural and functional changes to the fish heart.”

    And Obama has given Shell Oil the final permit to drill in the Arctic.

    I suspect we will see long and lingering damage to the ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico, too. It’s just so frustrating as we seem to be powerless.

  82. Kathleen says:

    “Grizzly bear hunt video goes viral after release by animal rights group”

    Excerpt: “A video showing hunters killing a grizzly bear has gone viral after being published by a B.C. wildlife activist group earlier this week.
    The Wildlife Defence League says it aims to end the practice of trophy hunting, where animals are not killed for food but simply for sport and trophies, and is using the video to highlight their cause.”

      • Louise Kane says:

        The entire trophy hunting industry is sick and twisted just because its always been does not mean it should continue. In a world where scientists describe a sixth extinction underway isn’t it time to rethink killing for sport. Aside from ethical considerations… killing for sport is wasteful, ignorant, and encourages killing the biggest and best of species that surely has some impact on species.

        as an ethical consideration, people who enjoy this are missing something

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Wow. I finally mustered up the courage to watch it. JHC, what a couple of effin psychos. That poor bear suffered ungodly, and one of the psychos was as cool as can be about it, almost military – the mark of a psychopath if you ask me. Just wow. What is this world coming to.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          It was almost like he fantasizes about being a sniper assassin in a video game or something, that isn’t hunting. They’re not even afraid to show their ugly face on the internet. Just wow. It’s sad that there is no law to protect wildlife from people like this, if you can call them that.

          But, today of all days, I shouldn’t be surprised at the evil humans are capable of, or that no level is to low for humans to sink to.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      This whole ritual has become so tiresome…Why can’t we strike up a more intelligent dialogue? – JB

      a more intelligent / pragmatic move would be to introduce those ‘ignorant humans’ who hunt for a thrill/challenge’trophy to the healing practice of Buddhist mindfulness based on ‘compassionate and deep listening’.
      How can I not let my anger explode?

      funny and practical answer by Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh starts on 2:56

  83. Elk375 says:

    How stupid can hunters be! Videoing a kill like this and posting it on social media.

    • Nancy says:

      Elk –

      IMHO, These sick individuals, can’t help it, no doubt driven to boast about their conquests.

      And I would guess, there is an aspect of the “hunting” culture out there that will find this kind of abuse & death of an animal… entertaining and some, are already gearing up for their “hunt”

      Maybe its time for hunters to start exposing this kind of BS, because it goes why beyond hunting ethics.

      • Elk375 says:

        Nancy, if the bear was shot dead with one shot and died instantly and fell behind the rocks no one would think a thing about it. But it slid down a snow field leaving a trail of blood and tumbling head over heal. What type of ethics is the hunter going beyond? He is licensed and shot a bear at this point there is no ethical violations.

        My point is why put the video on you tube.

        “”IMHO, These sick individuals, can’t help it, no doubt driven to boast about their conquests.”” Sick individuals, one ought to view some of the skiing videos posted on You Tube. Skiers skiing down a 45 degree 6 foot wide couloir at 50 miles an hour with one slip and they are dead. Those are sick individuals.

        • Nancy says:

          “Sick individuals, one ought to view some of the skiing videos posted on You Tube. Skiers skiing down a 45 degree 6 foot wide couloir at 50 miles an hour with one slip and they are dead. Those are sick individuals”

          What are you saying Elk? Because some in our species actively SEAK OUT that kind abuse in their own lives, I’M suppose to understand this sick F**K’s abuse (and lets not forget the vocals) filming and watching this bear, slowly die, as it rolled down this hillside.

          • Kathleen says:

            Agreed, Nancy. Extreme skiers and other extreme ‘whatever’ enthusiasts are making a choice for themselves, putting their own well-being and life on the line, and are willing to take the risk and pay the consequences. Call it foolish, sick, or brave, they’re choosing for themselves. Heck, I used to jump out of perfectly good airplanes! The two fine specimens in the video, on the other hand, are taking no risks, are cruelly taking another’s life, are joking about it, posting it, and for what–thrill killing, trophy killing. At the end of the article, a Canadian government official says “…the scenario in the video does not reflect the values or practice of responsible hunting.” That anyone can defend that callous and inhumane display is frightening.

            • rork says:

              We recently had a guy cross Lake Michigan in a kayak. He made sure the press knew about it, and they were dumb enough to cover it. He tried last year and had to be saved by the Coast Guard, 30 miles offshore. I’m tired of people fashionably “challenging themselves” in pointless ways, giving our young people terrible examples.

        • Immer Treue says:

          “Nancy, if the bear was shot dead with one shot and died instantly and fell behind the rocks no one would think a thing about it.”

          Elk, sorry for piling on… If my aunt had testicles, she’d be my uncle. There was no if, and they posted for the world to see. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Nancy, if the bear was shot dead with one shot and died instantly and fell behind the rocks no one would think a thing about it.

          No, we probably wouldn’t. Because the animal did not suffer. Here, these scumbags are actually enjoying the suffering by shooting him ten or so times – enjoying his confusion and pain – and then continuing to enjoy as he slowly bleeds to death and dies, not being able to see the cowards who are shooting at him.

          “That guy took a lot of lead.” Just shaking my head. I hope he gets the Palmer treatment. But he’s too cowardly than even Palmer.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            This is not hunting. I put these two whatever they are in the category of terrorist – wildlife terrorist. I don’t see how anyone can defend this as hunting, and I hope he pays dearly for what he has done.

      • JB says:

        Elk–If the best defense that can be mustered for killing grizzlies is that it is legal, well, I don’t think the practice will continue much longer. Just today I received an email from a pro-hunting organization that conducts survey research. They found that while more than 3/4s of Americans (77%) support hunting only 47% support hunting for black bear (42% support mountain lion hunting; grizzly were not included). Likewise, while 85% supported hunting for meat and to protect people from harm, 53% supported hunting for sport, 40% for “the challenge” and 28% “for a trophy”. Importantly, the methods used by this group likely result in an overestimation of support for hunting, as evidenced by another recent study, that found only 61% of Americans support hunting.

        “That anyone can defend that callous and inhumane display is frightening.”

        Is it “inhumane” to kill? Is it “inhumane” to relish in a successful hunt (yes the “hunt” can be separated from the act of killing). Is it any more “callous” to shoot a bear than swat a mosquito…or catch and release a fish? Until you can articulate a well-reasoned argument (without condemning individuals) you’re just blowing hot air. In fact, I think you’re turning off people who might otherwise agree with you.

        This whole ritual has become so tiresome. I’ve been coming to to the wildlife news for the past 6 years and nothing has changed. People who don’t want any hunting post videos and pictures of stupid hunters and use them to berate hunting in general. Then the predictable counter (given by past posters such as Layton and SaveBears) ‘well, it’s legal.” This whole scene has been repeated 1,000 times. The only thing that’s changed is the people posting. Why can’t we strike up a more intelligent dialogue?

        • Elk375 says:


          I have two hours of paper work and I leave for Boise early AM. Sorry that I do not have the time to write.

        • Immer Treue says:


          With all the respect in the world, Yes and no. As wonderful as the internet is, the world is at your finger tips, it is also disturbing, in that the information that custom fits your argument is also at your finger tips. What this has done has increased polarization of public opinion. What is different about such a video is that it depicts something that in the past, most would have never seen, and currently has over 2.5 million views. Some who view the video will regale, most will probably be unaffected, yet, others will be disgusted. How much momentum will be generated from this type of video for the movements to end trophy hunting? It’s rather ironic that there exists a paranoia that wolves are part of a plot to take guns away from people, when this type of video will more than likely go much farther in that direction in the sense that this type of hunting may fall prey to public opinion, rendering said guns useless (at least for bear hunting).

          With all the problems that exist in today’s world, one might criticize the interest generated by this video, or for that matter, Cecil the lion. The Wildlife News is a forum for discussion of wildlife that is head and shoulders above most other forums, as a small hunting minority continues to express their views, and is not buried beneath the criticism of anti-hunters. I would hazard a guess, as per your survey, that most who post here, at the very least, have a begrudging admiration for the posters on this blog who hunt and fish for food.

          There exist contributors to this blog who are unabashedly open in their views that have used the blog as a tool to help compile data and information for use on the national level, one or two I believe, with whom you have conspired or assisted. Perhaps a whole lot of “hand wringing” is necessary so that the chafe can be separated from the grain. I have said before, and I will repeat, that I believe ethologists are on the brink of finding out information about the animals with which we share the world that will make us humans pretty damn uncomfortable. Though we may be different from other members of the animal world, that doesn’t necessarily make us better.

          You ask, “why can’t we strike up some more intelligent dialogue? It’s there, sometimes you just have to search for it like the diamond in the rough. And though we are all busy and distracted with the pressing issues of our own lives and personal interactions, is there any reason not to lead in the direction of more intelligent discourse?

          • Nancy says:

            “I have said before, and I will repeat, that I believe ethologists are on the brink of finding out information about the animals with which we share the world that will make us humans pretty damn uncomfortable”

            ++++ 1, Immer.

            Timz posted this wonderful video just last month. A shocking difference between a bear, enjoying life, rolling down a hill and a dying bear, full of bullet holes, rolling down a hill:


          • Yvette says:

            ***”You ask, “why can’t we strike up some more intelligent dialogue? It’s there, sometimes you just have to search for it like the diamond in the rough. And though we are all busy and distracted with the pressing issues of our own lives and personal interactions, is there any reason not to lead in the direction of more intelligent discourse.”

            Excellent point, Immer. I’ve not been on here as much as in the recent weeks and just caught the conversation on the latest ‘news’ thread. I was curious as to what JB said so I came to see for myself this conversation on the ‘antis vs. the others’.

            ***”I have said before, and I will repeat, that I believe ethologists are on the brink of finding out information about the animals with which we share the world that will make us humans pretty damn uncomfortable. Though we may be different from other members of the animal world, that doesn’t necessarily make us better.”

            So well stated and I believe it to be true.

            I recently have a new facebook friend who is a colleague from a NM tribe. Like many of the American Indian/Native American/Indigenous (choose your liking) people he hunts. Like many in my family and/or people I know they are at first taken aback on my hunting stance. He like many of my friends and colleagues that hunt typically are not trophy sport hunters. They supply meat for the family and there is often a need to do so, or at least, the desire for leaner, healthier and more ethically killed animals than what we get from the grocery store.

            We usually end up clarifying my stance and the reasons I have based my opinions that I see a lack of morals and ethics in killing for trophy and sport. It is killing for fun. Is there a difference in swatting a mosquito and killing an elephant for his ivory or for a trophy and a picture? how about baiting a beautiful male lion out of a protected area in a Zimbabwe NP? Killing and beheading him for your wall mount? Disrupting the social order of the pride? Yes there is a difference. It is the depth and capacity of the animal’s intelligence and spirit and it is the ecological role that animal contributes. Yes, there is a difference.

            As for intelligent conversations they are still to be found on this blog, IMO. I’ve learned quite a bit on TWN and been able to network. It’s better here than most blogs.

            I’m sort of missing having the time to come on here and read and comment. All well, the busy pace of life waxes and wanes. I have to get myself busy writing, but as usual, you and several others (JB, Nancy and others, add intelligent comments and thoughts for me to ruminate).

    • Immer Treue says:

      The video is fn stupid. So much for the humane, clean shot no suffering bullshit. They may have done nothing wrong…but they also did nothing right. Nothing sporting about it, but we hear their droning about being sportsman.

    • Louise Kane says:

      its not the act of videoing it and posting it that is wrong, its the act of killing that is abhorrent and cruel.

  84. Ida Lupines says:

    I think some of them just want to show just how little concern they have that anything will be done about their activities. I can’t watch! Killing bears or complaining about their getting in the way of human activities is the new object of focus it appears, (to try and get them delisted?)

    This is very unpleasant also, less direct but just as deadly:

  85. Louise Kane says:

    with all the fires, toxic oceans of algae and plastic, fury of the hurricanes and superstorms, melting of icecaps and potential releases of oceanic methane gases it would not be hard to believe in armageddon. Only we won’t have God to blame for it, we are creating hell on earth slowly and surely.

  86. Ida Lupine says:

    Oh God, now Sally Jewell is out here wreaking havoc on our wildlife. I guess this Administration’s strategy is not giving any animal ESA protection. It doesn’t look good for the Sage Grouse, does it. Thank God there’s only a year to go before they all get the boot. Sally Go Home!

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Does anyone think that 11,500 rabbits is a recovered number for the entire region of New England, New York and Connecticut, and to have until 2030 to reach this number, the barest minimum recover and the longest possible stretch of time to do it in? I have yet to see any real plans for the Sage Grouse, so only it’s a tiny bit better than that I suppose. Same with grizzlies and wolves – the barest minimum recovery number and the highest number to set aside for recreational killing would be my guess.

      The reports are making it seem like the animals have been taken off the Endangered list when it was only that they were being considered as a candidates to be added to the Endangered list. When most of our wildlife, except for deer and elk and animals that humans want, are decreasing in number from human activities, and they and their habitats threatened by climate change and human development, it is rather foolish to leave it up to states to manage the endangered animals, when human activity has led to their decline in the first place. Federal protection is needed as insurance.

      Even now, Western states are balking at any kind of sage grouse plan and dragging the time for recovery out. The animals may not have the amount of time that is convenient for human development, recreation, and everything else we have commandeered land for.

      This Administration stinks as far as protecting wildlife. Sometimes I really have to check be sure it is Democrats who are in office. Perhaps under a new administration, we can go back and fix the damage done in this one. Good riddance! Sally Jewel is one of the poorest Interior Secretaries we have ever had, and cannot even hold a candle to the likes of Bruce Babbitt and Stewart Udall, the standard by which all are measured.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Sorry, that should read 13,500 rabbits. Whatever did these poor animals do before humans came along to create and ensure ‘healthy young forests’ for them, but only a byproduct of our own activities? ‘Healthy young forests’ sounds like codeword for more cutting down trees and making way for development, and more meddling where we don’t belong.

        I’ve never seen more propaganda in my life (I wasn’t around during WWII) – and it is sad that it is under a Democratic administration.

      • Kathleen says:

        Same thing with wolverines…there are what, 250-300 left in the lower 48 but the proposal to list them under the ESA was withdrawn because, on second thought, ‘climate change won’t really affect them,’ and heck, ‘there are plenty of wolverines in Canada’!

      • Louise kane says:

        +1 Ida

  87. Kathleen says:

    “Identify hunters in violent bear killing video, get a reward: animal rights group”

    Excerpt: “An animal rights group is offering a $2,500 reward for anyone with information that might help identify the hunters in a violent video that depicts the bloody killing of a grizzly bear.

    “The video was posted by the Wildlife Defence League on Facebook and it has since garnered nearly three million views. It shows the hunters shooting the bear numerous times as it tries desperately to escape.”

    • Immer Treue says:

      I was both depressed and angry after viewing the video. However, in all honesty, What good could possibly come from identifying the two individuals?

      • Kathleen says:

        Hello, I.T.: Well, there’s this, from the article:

        “It’s possible that the killing of this bear was lawful,” said Howie. “That does not mean, however, that no criminal or wildlife act violations occurred.”

        And then there’s the possibility that the Wildlife Defence League is using it to gain support and further their mission:

        So…I don’t have a better answer for your question, just posted it because it’s a follow-up to an item that has generated lots of interest.

        • Immer Treue says:

          Got no problem whatsoever with Wildlife Defense League using this outrageous video to further their mission. If the individuals responsible for the shooting and filming are guilty of no other crime than stupidity, their names will serve no purpose, and harrassment may get WDL in hot water.

          The content of the video is damning enough.

      • Louise kane says:

        Possibly the good that might come in identifying individuals is to help keep the spotlight on the people who abuse wildlife
        Public censure creates an atmosphere of intolerance and possibly fear of exposure
        Currently it seems abusive treatment of wildlife is more common than many might imagine and there has been little furor
        I think social media is exposing the norm for a subculture of hunters that have been evolving without much exposure
        As this kind of behaviour is exposed it is crystal clear that most find some practices that are technically legal as despicable as they are
        Exposing the individuals brings to light the problem and illuminates the potential consequences for being in the spotlight
        Not many have the resources like Palmer for example to hide out for weeks on end when their cowardly and cruelty are exposed

  88. Nancy says:

    Immer – just one of many hunting sites out there “dedicated” to hunting big game:

    “If you advocate extremely long-range hunting, it says to me that you are not much of a hunter. It says you need a mechanical crutch to make up for a lack of basic woodsmanship. It also says you really don’t respect the game you hunt. Hunting should be a challenge with no sure outcome or guarantee. It should be the searching, the pursuing, and the stalking, but not the remote act of killing that defines it”
    —Mike Schoby

    Like Palmer, the American dentist, who no doubt paid a boat load of money, hoping to garnish a head/hide for his “trophy room” this bear, like that lion, paid the ultimate price.

    “So, here is how I define long range and make an ethical decision: When that trigger is squeezed, an ethical hunter should be 100 percent confident in their ability to kill quickly and cleanly. They should also know that the shot was taken from as close a range as possible”

    It really does boil down to Ethics. And IMHO, these hunters need to be exposed and shunned, in their communities, if this is what they consider “fair chase”

    # 4

    “Attain and maintain the skills necessary to make the kill as certain and quick as possible”

    Fact is, high tech killing of wildlife (for fun and sport these days) doesn’t even remotely resemble subsistence hunting of years past.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      It says you need a mechanical crutch to make up for a lack of basic ‘woodsmanship’.

      Wow, if that doesn’t say it all. 🙂

  89. WM says:

    More (and rather sad) folly on the wild horse scene in NV. Tax money spent for BLM to round them up because there is no water or feed.

    Wonder how Bundy’s cows are doing?

  90. Nancy says:

    This statement WM:

    “The Cold Creek horses are the last wild herd in Southern Nevada and are beloved by the local community who have fought against a BLM roundup for years”

    And the comments below, add a lot more insight into this sad story:

    “A wealthy woman wanted to take all those horses & give them a place to graze & be safe, HOWEVER, the BLM said NO to her”

    “Ya gotta wonder how much fencing there is in the area keeping these horses from reaching water and forage. The word “free-roaming” hasn’t existed since the 70’s. Our public land are criss crossed with fencing for ranchers – they call them “range improvements”

    “The GAO and National Academy of Sciences…and others.. completely dispute the BLM lies that horses are destroying habitat. Livestock consume 81% of Nevada forage. In fact….in spite of the roundups that they have conducted – with the horrific use of helicopters most of the time — the statistics show that there has not been improvement like the BLM claims. Scientific studies have shown that our horses benefit the environment. And….please…let us drop the silly title of feral or domestic over wild. It is a political weapon only. The cattle are not native either. We have palm trees all over Nevada….rip them out — they are not part of native habitat. We impact and change our environment every day”

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      as I’ve written 18 months ago:

      “The Internal Revenue Service formally designates certain individuals as potentially dangerous taxpayers (PDTs)


      so the question goes – have IRS already designated C Rambo B as PDT?

      or maybe IRS are afraid of one more Joe Stack III destroying IRS office in Carson City or Las Vegas? so they will let him go off the hook like BLM have done”

      for those who doesn’t know who is Joe Stack III

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      for BLM the politcorrect way of imitation of action is to ‘challenge’ single old lady, imo

      C Bundy? – forget about it, stallon

    • WM says:

      Well, the US government should initiate a “show cause” hearing to get Bundy to appear before a federal judge to explain why he hasn’t complied with the Court’s past orders and allowed BLM to remove his cows and get the US reimbursed for damages. I just keep hoping US Marshals, maybe with a little live fire training exercise with Seal Team 6 would put an end to Bundy’s foolishness. Probably little chance of that until after the 2016 Presidential election, and then,… well, who knows?

      Further to my earlier post, one has to wonder how many cows Bundy has lost to the drought in this area. I do not like to see animals die of starvation and dehydration, but in this instance maybe the Bundy trespassing cow problem will partially cure itself.

    • rork says:

      That last paragraph is junk. Folks like me who are against feral horses do not prefer cows. We impact our environment – so it must be OK?

  91. Nancy says:

    There appears to be not one, but an entire “herd of elephants” in the room, when it comes to saving sage grouse populations.

    “But the study also identified ways to avert those declines by classifying areas for their resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive species such as cheatgrass, and then applying suitable strategies”

    🙂 Doublespeak: deliberately euphemistic, ambiguous, or obscure language.
    “the art of political doublespeak”

  92. Moose says:

    Village in Botswana negatively impacted by trophy hunt ban.

  93. Louise kane says:

    I’m visiting an old friend in Asheville after a family member died
    I reached down to find a book to read and saw something entitled Octavia’s brood (science fiction stories from social justice movements)
    It’s an anthology of short stories that explore the connections between speculative fiction and movements for social change
    One of the book reviewers wrote
    “Octavia once told me that two things worried her about the future of humanity The tendency to think hierarchically and to place ourselves higher on the hierarchy than others”
    I thought that sums up easily the problem with wildlife management and in “managing” and seeing the world around us
    Yvette I was thinking of you, nancy, and Immer in particular in starting to read this book

  94. rork says:

    Our great lakes char (various lake trout, brook trout) and pacific salmon, have problems with thiamine deficiencies. In lake trout it’s so bad that reproduction is minimal some places. It’s been known to be alewife associated for some time. It’s now been more or less proven that the alewife make it themselves – they have a gene that makes a thiaminase (destroys thiamine). Some other organisms may have one too.
    Warning: The use of “synthesized” instead of “sequenced” in two places was painful.

  95. rork says:

    Farmer pro-active wolf killing in WA, from last Oct, finally gets near-homeopathic treatment.

    • bret says:

      Not at all shocked, the most inhospitable place for wolves in the state is the palouse region.

      WDFW spending $850,000 for a conflict specialist will be of little use in this area of the state.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Wow. These people really make it their business to be as offensive as humanly possible, don’t they. 🙁 A hundred bucks.

    • WM says:

      It strikes me the Whitman County Prosecutor is just a smart guy politically if he wants to keep his elected position, and a survivor. To do more to prosecute this farmer would likely go heavily against the sentiments about wolves in this highly agricultural area of the state, even an area (county) with a fairly liberal university population.

      Also expect he has other real cases to worry about, and a small budget to work with.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I don’t believe that to give more than a nominal and perfunctory penalty will go against wolf sentiment because that is already at rock bottom. I hate this ‘fraidy cat sensibility of don’t rock the boat because it could be worse.

        I do believe you that it is all about his political aspirations and survival, tho, as it always is. All about us, all the time.

        On a more pleasant topic, a wildlife report: At the lake this evening, 2 bald eagles, and osprey, baby loons and countless other water birds.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          And if I were a fisherman, it’s like fish in a barrel out there, jumping everywhere. It’s great to see the birds fishing.

  96. Kathleen says:

    “Capping months of debate, Missoula on Monday became the first city in Montana to ban the use wild and exotic animals in shows and non-educational displays.”

  97. Nancy says:

    A dated but good read for those pondering human populations and

    “For the rest of life on Earth, the implications of all this are obvious. Where we go, nature retreats”


August 2015


‎"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