Springtime in the South Hills near Twin Falls, Idaho. Copyright Ralph Maughan

Springtime in the South Hills near Twin Falls, Idaho. Copyright Ralph Maughan

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.

Here is the link to the “old” wildlife news of February 13, 2016.

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.

492 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife news? April 5, 2016 edition

  1. Salle says:

    Hey folks,

    Carter Niemeyer has a new book out!!

    Just got my copy today, can’t set it down already…


    • Jeff N. says:

      Just finished it over the weekend. Good read.
      Immer gave a head’s up regarding this book about 10 days ago.

      Thanks Immer and enjoy Salle.

  2. Moose says:

    Discussion of Phase I findings (low snow area): “Michigan Predator-Prey study” being conducted by Mississippi State U.

    Very interesting findings regarding doe and coyote behaviors in reaction to wolf presence.


  3. Ida Lupines says:

    You probably saw the headlines a couple weeks ago when a pack of wolves near Jackson, Wyoming, killed 19 elk in a single night. The event was blown up by CNN, The Guardian, and others as an example of the threat re-introduced wolf populations in the American west present to game and livestock. But I knew there must be more to it than just big bad wolf fears, so I started digging.

    The Truth About Wolf Surplus Killing: Survival, Not Sport

    Some initial Googling led me to this study, published by the Journal of Zoology, that found a correlation between the level of snowpack in a given year, and instances of wolves killing large numbers of prey. Could that really mean they’re storing kills for future consumption during times of harsh weather, when food may be hard to come by, as well as being key to survival? I called a wolf biologist to find out.

    Really disappointing that the media ran with this kind of wolf hysteria when there was a rational, scientific reason for it. As we all knew there would be. Sad that the F&W departments go along with the crazy.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Speaking of distasteful, I love to read the comments section, when it shows that the general public are becoming increasingly distrustful of the lines they are being fed by the media and government agencies.

  4. Ida Lupines says:

    Here’s some fantastic news. Has it already been posted? I seem to remember something posted recently, but maybe it hadn’t been finalized:

    Endangered salmon blocked for nearly a century from hundreds of miles of the Klamath River in Oregon and California are expected to return en masse under unusual agreements signed Wednesday to tear down four hydroelectric dams.

    Yay for en masse! The herring have returned out here too and it is such a gorgeous sight, I can only imagine what it must be like with salmon.


  5. Kathleen says:

    Oregon: “Arrest for decapitating sheep: Two poachers arrested for severing heads off protected species”


    • Ida Lupines says:

      Can’t blame the wolves this time. Unfortunately there will be no ODFW gunnery squadron to combat poachers, despite one migrating in from Oregon. Maybe an electronic ankle bracelet will help keep track of ’em in the future.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I have to sincerely thank whoever it was who called the authorities and turned these poachers in.

  6. Savageslc says:

    Good morning folks. I am looking for a national list of wildlife friendly candidates for the upcoming elections that I could share on my blogs. Thanks

  7. rork says:

    Brett Haverstick (Friends of the Clearwater) is quoted. As most of you know he had an article about bikes here not long ago. He unfortunately is a horse apologist it seems.

    • WM says:


      If memory serves, you are not a fan of horses in designated Wilderness. I can respect that. But there was never an intent to exclude horses when the Wilderness Act and most (all?) the individual wilderness statutes creating specific ones has been passed.

      Historical context is important here, and since so much of Wilderness requires several days to get to the interior of some, it wouldn’t get used by many, at least back in the 1960’s when backing gear was still pretty heavy and there were no light weight mountain tents or all the gourmet freeze-dried food we have today.

      Keep thinking wilderness is what Congress says it is, even if it makes you grit your teeth.

      Without the horse crowd I expect the original Wilderness Act might have had much more opposition. Other concessions were also made (bicycles were never contemplated however).

      Also, might consider that a prominent champion of Wilderness, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, used to love to ride his horse in designated Wilderness – Goat Rocks Wilderness, and the adjacent designated wilderness to the north in the Bumping River drainage, that now bears his name, as well as other Wilderness on parts of the Pacific Crest Trail.

      While I don’t agree with Bret H on a lot of stuff, I don’t think he has any role as an apologist for horses. If you look for a scapegoat look to Congress for that imperfection – along with the airplanes, landing strips, reservoirs, and the occasional jet boat, as well as those nasty helicopters that resource agencies use.

      • WM says:


        When I was first in the Bob Marshall as a teenager, shortly after it was designated, there were very few backpackers. We saw few users, but those we saw were on horseback. The USFS also used horse packers to supply the backwoods guard stations (very few), and the trail maintenance crews to keep the trails clear of downed trees …..so the folks on horses could use the trails.

      • rork says:

        Oh I get that using horses was traditional, and I get what the law is. How things are and how I want them to be don’t have to be the same though. I personally don’t need trails except in over-used places, and then only as a means of decreasing our damage. In Frank Church, Missions, Pasayten, it’s common to not be able to find a human trail in the places I prefer (choose those places too difficult for horses is the trick). Imagine how big the Bob would be of we didn’t improve it. “Wilderness under construction” signs aren’t what I want. I am a bit concerned about ungulate overpopulation, but with more wolves, bears, cougar, it might not be so bad anymore.

  8. Ida Lupines says:

    In the interest of fairness, a rather even-handed and fair assessment of the killing of OR-4 from, of all places, the Capital Press.

    Although I have to wonder if only 10 years really is ‘old’ for a wolf in the wild; if human beings were not constantly trying to kill them off, I wonder how long they would live naturally. And I am sure they would adjust their hunting abilities to other prey.

    Without protections, we’d have no wolves at all, as they were almost driven to extinction. Europeans and European-descended people have been trying to kill them off for centuries. It doesn’t look like it will ever stop.

    Death of OR-4 a Soberign Turn for Oregon’s Wolf Plan

    • rork says:

      Big dogs don’t live forever, even with modern medicine and human-provided food.
      We pretty much wiped out elk and deer most places too, ya know. We’ve changed.

      • Louise Kane says:

        no they don’t live forever but most times they don’t end their days chased down by a helicopter and gunned down with their pups. Its a sad end for that wolf no matter how you look at it. That it comes after the loss of state protections makes it more important to recognize that losing state and federal protections for wolves never turns out good for them.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Yes, it came immediately after the loss of state protections. I think now that ‘delisting’ comes with meaning of hunting and killing now, in one way or another. To have killings coming so soon after delisting in OR, human brains must be wired this way, I have no other answer for it. All of the states are following the same trend. Why did they not try to relocate OR-4?

          Even California now I am starting to wonder about.

    • Ida Lupines says:


      I hope they get a handle on this, and soon. “No significant environmental harm so far.” There’s always environmental harm. Same old story. 🙁

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Just awful. Now this is something that has to be blamed on the Park management. There is no excuse for this whatsoever.

      I remember complaining once to a Park ranger about people getting up too close to elk to photograph them, and being told I was not on my turf there. I most certainly am on my turf at a National Park. This was not recent, and I can only imagine how bad it is now.

      Increase funding or do something so this out of control behavior is minimized. It is way over the top. The idiots jumping into hot springs is unbelievable too.

      I’m glad National Geographic published this.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        The other thing I remember being annoyed at was cars honking at bison to hurry them across the roads (yeah, right). Thankfully the bison paid no attention.

        I just cringe inside with the behavior of people. I always visit places in the off season, because the large, out of control crowds interfere with many other people’s enjoyment of the Park. Saw many beautiful animals and sights.

        But other than that, I enjoyed my visit immensely, and even and outlier such as I was careful about avoiding areas to hike in where grizzlies had been seen.

    • rork says:

      The idea that it is our responsibility to carry pepper spray is good. It’s not cause we care if you get eaten – it is to protect the bears. I didn’t always think about it that way.

  9. skyrim says:

    A recent piece of news on Wyoming Grizzly delisting. Pay attention to comments of one Jackson Outfitter regarding Bear 399. Anyone close enough to this issue care to share the identity of this individual.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Wow, glad to see that Park officials want to stand up for the bears. I hope they take this threat. I hope they take this threat seriously and watch her like a hawk, because it would be a terrible thing. It’s a bad enough thing when it is a result of carelessness, but deliberate targeting and killing is without morality.

      I hadn’t heard about the collared wolves being shot. What kind of scum does this? There must be a way to prevent this from happening, deliberate abuse of hunting laws. There needs to be a higher fine or some kind of deterrent.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I wonder if it is the same “Jackson Hole Outfitter” who paraded a dead wolf down the center of Jackson? Sounds like the same kind of thing.

  10. Louise Kane says:


    Dan Ashe says decision not to protect wolverines not political
    judge tells the agency to rethink that

    I’m hoping red wolves will get some judicial interference as well, and that Ashe is out soon. November can’t come early enough. If Clinton wins would it be too much to hope for another Babbitt like SI?

    • Ida Lupines says:

      No, not too much to hope for. And not a moment too soon.

      For the Interior Dept. to show much concern for climate change on the one hand, and then to say that ‘there isn’t enough evidence’ in the case of the wolverine on the other doesn’t even make sense.

      To leave these poor 300 or so animals vulnerable left vulnerable to trapping is unconscionable.

  11. WM says:

    Reintroduced Colville tribal pronghorns swim the Columbia River. Interesting behavior, as the river is pretty wide in this stretch (as it is elsewhere).


    • Nancy says:

      “In 2011, the Yakama Nation relocated 99 pronghorns to reservation lands, and according to online Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife resources, the animals moved east as far as Pasco and south as far as the Columbia River. Separately, a group of three bucks and a doe were even observed in Asotin and Garfield Counties in 2013”

      Interesting WM. Some species seem satisfied when relocated (especially to their native lands) Others? Not so much. But Gosh dang it, their a “game” animal, so lets just keep screwing with them, til we get it right 🙂

      “The Washington State Game Department (the predecessor agency to the current WDFW) attempted to establish pronghorn populations by reintroduction on three separate occasions, none of which could be termed successful. In the late 1930s, pronghorns from Nevada were introduced to what is now the Yakima Training Center, after first being kept in captivity. In 1950, a separate attempt was made to introduce pronghorns in Adams County, near Ritzville. In 1968, a small number of pronghorns were released in Kittitas and Grant Counties. Although many animals survived, reproduced, and moved widely, no animals were known to have survived past the mid-1980s”

      Just took some nice pics of 100 – 150 Pronghorn antelope the other day on a pass close by. Some have since filtered into my valley, others are waiting for the snow to go off the pass, so they can filter into the next valley.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Isn’t that something.

        I remember seeing a herd of pronghorn on a trip out West – I think when we drove from MA to CA. WY? Nevada? I can’t remember. They are beautiful animals; I was so excited to see them. Our only antelope.

        • TC says:

          They’re not antelope. They’re pronghorn, the only surviving member of their own family.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Sorry, I see them as the inspiration for ‘where the buffalo roam and the deer and the antelope play’.

            As the only surviving member of their own family, as you say, I’m glad they were protected!

      • WM says:


        Why do you suppose two tribes – Colvilles and Yakamas – reintroduced pronghorns?

        By the way, I don’t think I have seen a historic range map that shows there were many in eastern WA or Eastern OR in the first place. Incidentally, the “Yakima Training Center” is a military reservation where the Army does tank and heavy gunnery (and I think mobile rocket launcher) training. No hunter access ever, from my memory.

    • rork says:

      The mule deer swim the river pretty often, and really like the islands. I wasn’t sure pronghorn would do that though. I’ll be looking for them in Sep.

      And yeah, some people think anything that might ever have chances of being good for a hunter is bad.

    • Mark L says:

      wonder if the cat people would have any problem with coyotes being near the colony…

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Nothing cuter than a li’l piping plover chick. The article I linked said around here, they are using slightly electrified fencing to keep coyotes out of the nesting areas, and it isn’t enough harm the birds. Should work for other predators too. A solution to make everyone happy.

  12. bret says:


    Mount Spokane ice crawler may be a unique species, scientists say

  13. rork says:

    It’s an article by Ralph Maughan about the 19 elk situation.
    Richard Proenneke, the “Alone in the Wilderness” guy, pissed me off when he stole a caribou carcass from wolves and rationalized that they weren’t very nice animals killing stuff for fun – but if you go up to the kill and take it, you don’t get to observe what would have happened in your absence.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Yesterday, I had a grouse hit a window, screen first, and unfortunately, did not make it. I had work I was doing at the time, and forgot about it. I came back a couple hours later (was below freezing) and the only things around were feathers on the ground and Ravens in nearby trees.

      All this as a lead in for wolves and Ravens and the hysterics demonstrated by folks who have a fear for both these important animals. Sure we’ve had to compete with them over centuries, but is the fear really derived from battlefields and deposition of plague victims? One can only imagine fields littered with dead, with Ravens darkening the skies and fields with the smorgasbord provided, with wolves being drawn in by the racket from the Ravens.

      All this fear and superstition caused by the actions of man.

      • BOB says:

        A fear of ravens?
        Yes, a article written here just days ago about the evils of cattle increasing raven populations.

    • WM says:

      With all due respect to Ralph and his usually balanced writing, I have a rather significant problem with the title of the article, and an implied statement in the text.

      The title “Wolves Kill 19 Sick Elk”

      Really? OK, lets’ see the proof.

      The text: The wolves will abandon a kill if the perceive something wrong — poison perhaps, sickness in the meat, just something “funny.” If people come upon a half-eaten or barely eaten carcass that does not mean it is abandoned. No, it usually means wolf, bear, cougar, coyote, etc. are in the area, often close by. They are probably sleeping off their feast. They return many times until it is consumed. Wolves almost always give up their elk if people come…”

      There is no factual finding referenced in the article that these elk calves at this winter feeding location were “sick.” I don’t think Ralph actually said they were…. but there is conjecture based on what specific facts for these dead almost yearling calves.

      And the title of the article is perhaps a lie, or at least an unsupported conclusion?

      Good journalism demands more, and if there is no factual proof these specific calves were sick – proven by an unbiased source – the title should be changed. If there is a forensic conclusion by qualified authorities that they were “sick” that point should be explained in the article.

      Anybody disagree?

      • Nancy says:

        From a good friend, who read the article and closing in on 90 years of life, use to hunt my area, WM:

        “Sorry situation. Especially the removing of the wolf’s kill causing them to kill again. Unintended consequences. Next worse, hoof rot at the feeding stations. I’ll remember that next winter when I see those videos of hay dumping in the snow”

        Last sentence from my friend who use to hunt:

        “Looks like more elk get killed by ignorance than by wolf or gun”


        Far more elk, deer and pronghorn populations here in the west are killed by vehicle collisions & fence lines (not to mention poaching) but who’s counting when it comes to finding the perfect scapegoat?

      • Immer Treue says:

        There is not any specific proof in the pudding that the elk were indeed “sick”.
        I wonder what has been done with the elk, and if any necropsy was performed. That a pack could kill so many in one night certainly does stimulate questions. Elk are not sheep.

      • Jay says:

        Certainly a pretty big leap of an assumption in the title of the article.

        Regarding your comment “…but there is conjecture based on what specific facts for these dead almost yearling calves.”–correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe you’re insinuating that these “almost yearling” elk are more hearty and less prone to be selected out because they are approaching a year old? If so, that premise is wrong, because late winter/early spring is when calves are in their poorest condition due to the fact they put most of their energy in the summer/fall into growth, rather than fat. Then, they stand around all winter (one of the more severe winters in the past several years, I might add) trying to stay alive eating low quality forage and catabolizing muscle tissue. The article Timz posted below of the elk calves dying (starving might be more appropriate) on the feed grounds substantiates this.

      • rork says:

        “If there is a forensic conclusion by qualified authorities”
        The authorities thought they needed to be fed, but are otherwise saying nothing that I’ve heard.

    • timz says:

      People are suppose to know better. I’ll bet any money this guy is a wolf hater.

  14. timz says:

    I don”t know but many of these elk were in poor health. Seems commonplace at feeding grounds.


  15. Ida Lupines says:

    I would say running with a story about wolves killing for sport and fun (just like us!) is about an irresponsible journalism as you can get. It shows that these old wives tales, exaggerations, and myth are still believed and sell to the public. Posing them for macabre photographs isn’t exactly honest either. I was glad to see that Ralph wrote a more truthful and rational piece. I hope it spreads ’round the world as quickly as the other one. It shows that feeding elk like this is not healthy and natural, and human meddling puts them in danger.

    The elk had hoof rot. That sounds like disabled and sick to me. Why Wyoming Fish and Wildlife supported this story by not coming out more strongly against it with something a little more rational is a mystery, but apparently they are being held hostage and threatened about wolf delisting?

  16. Ida Lupines says:

    Or I should say lining up the 19 elk for a dramatic photo is very misleading to the public. But that’s the name of the game, isn’t it. It’s the feeding grounds and human meddling that caused the problem.

  17. rork says:

    There’s been many articles about Great Lakes Salmon and fish in general lately.
    http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2016/03/salmon_sufferin_in_lake_michig.html is not a bad summary, and it points to the new and cool paper modeling Lake Huron crash (which has tables of organism densities for 1984 and 2002 – I fear it is behind a paywall though).
    http://michiganradio.org/post/great-lakes-fisheries-expert-time-forget-salmon-go-native-species was an interview.
    DNR said it will cut stocking of Chinook in Lake Michigan yet again, and may stop altogether (like they’ve done on Huron). Charter fishing may be hurt, but there’s nothing for it.
    I don’t think either mentions that the reason the alewife were causing thiamine deficiency in Lake Trout is cause alewife have a thiaminase that destroys it. All the Lakers I caught last year near the straits were wild, and they are now thick in there, and so are walleye. People here think the new invasive mussels (quagga, zebra) have changed the water from what it used to be, but they mean from what it used to be 50 years ago (with farms, lawns, sewers contributing nutrients), which they thought “normal”, not thinking about what it used to be 200 years ago.

    • Kathleen says:

      It sounds like the non-native cascade of collapse, which *should* be a good thing. My Indiana hometown on Lake Michigan bills itself as the “Coho capital of the world” and now that industry has moved away, relies on the lake/tourism for revenue (sadly, at the suffering & expense of sentient fish): https://www.facebook.com/MichiganCityLaPorte/posts/10154105562834855

      Remember the great alewife die-off of 1967? Our town’s beaches were hit so hard that the National Guard was called out to help. Here’s an article you might find interesting, rork, from 1992: “Smell Of Money Might Make Alewives Tolerable” http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1992-05-05/news/9202090855_1_chinook-salmon-lake-michigan-alewife

      Yes, Lake Michigan has been through a great many changes in just my lifetime–as a small child in the ’50s it seemed relatively clean–certainly I swallowed my share of it. A bit later I remember coming out of the water with black, tarry stuff on my yellow crushed velour swimsuit–this was a few years pre-Clean Water Act. The alewife, the eels, the coho, the mussels, the increasingly-littered water and beaches–and I guess we’re still waiting for Asian carp, though their DNA has been found in Chicago…

      Another good site I’ve posted here before: Great Lakes Echo http://greatlakesecho.org/

  18. Gary Humbard says:

    “It is ironic that a parasite originally introduced to help eradicate wolves may increase their effects upon prey populations a century later and is potentially one more in a long list of unintended consequences in wildlife management,”.


    • Ida Lupines says:

      Thank you for posting this, Gary. Is there any way to treat for this? We do seem to handle wolves a lot and so have plenty of opportunity. The immorality of introducing a disease deliberately so than a living would suffer is just unconscionable. You are one of the great voices on here, with your experience with the BLM.

      This is why the NRM delisting was/is such a bad idea. I can see that this mindset hasn’t really gone away, in fact seems to be showing up again in Idaho, the banging of pitchforks in WY and the Great Lakes, and OR bowing to pressure.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I guess what I mean is, we should be trying to reverse the terrible mistakes of the past, not continue with them!

        The times we choose ‘not to interfere’ leave me mystified. What to do about Isle Royale is still being dragged out (for as long as possible until the situation resolves itself?) and allowing wildlife to suffer through mange without treating it. We can treat our family pets for this. But yet if a wolf give a cow an offhanded glance, the aerial gunners are out. (Apparently in BC if people don’t like the way a wolf looks at someone, it’s a death sentence!)

        I also am disturbed by the same not-so-benign neglect of Bundy’s cattle – can’t somebody feed them or at least collect them for humane reasons and because their ‘owner’ is in prison? Why isn’t his family doing something about it?

        Taking a hands off approach and letting animals die off isn’t fooling anyone. It’s the same with our wild mustangs too.

  19. Immer Treue says:

    Apparently, only two wolves remain on Isle Royale.


  20. Kathleen says:

    Ask the RGJ: Are cows starving in Nevada desert?
    Short answer: Yes.


    • Nancy says:

      Seems there’s a Golden Oldie out there to fit too many situations these days.

      Think cows, Kathleen.

      “Clowns to the left of them, jokers to the right” a pretty active description of public lands destruction.

      And about a minute in? Hard to ignore the BS about a “self made” man:

      • Rita k Sharpe says:

        Nancy, That song fits perfectly.

      • Kathleen says:

        Darn it, Nancy, I can’t hear that song anymore without hearing the Iraq war parody–Sunnis to the left of me, Shia to the right, here I am stuck in Fallujah with you.

  21. Louise Kane says:


    For once a wildlife agency listened to its greater constituency! Kudos to the agency, and to the citizens who objected to needless slaughter.

    • rork says:

      The necessity of it would need to be demonstrated for me to approve, and a few extra deer or turkeys isn’t a good enough argument. That’s true for Marten and Fisher too. It gets trickier with Mink perhaps.
      In MI last reports: 600 bobcat, 10K mink, about 300 Marten, 300 Fisher, 200K muskrat, 120K raccoon, 30K Opossum, 10K skunk, 3000 Weasel, 100 badger, 13K coyote, 10K beaver, 5K red fox, 1500 gray fox, 1000 otter. That doesn’t count hunting. We have otter, badger, bobcat, at the up-north place, but nobody has ever imagined them as game animals.

      • Immer Treue says:

        13K coyote, 5K red fox, 1.5K gray fox removed, equals a whole lot more mice to the whole deer tick Lymes disease cycle.

  22. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Environmental impact

    According to a study by the Carnegie Institution for Science’s Department of Global Energy, the destruction under Genghis Khan may have scrubbed as much as 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere by allowing forests to regrow on previously populated and cultivated land.


  23. Kathleen says:

    It’s from The Onion, so have a laugh!

    “Scientists Slowly Reintroducing Small Group Of Normal, Well-Adjusted Humans Into Society”

    Excerpt: “Our hope is that within a century or so, the traits for making sound long-term decisions and being able to tolerate people different from oneself will propagate and begin to reemerge within the species at large. …

    … “Top researchers confirmed that it was already far too late to halt the country’s dominant breed of humans—a**holes—from spreading uncontrollably to every region on earth.”


    • Ida Lupines says:

      Unfortunately, they may be like the unicorn – completely mythological.

  24. Kathleen says:

    “Mama coyote, blinded by a bullet, is alive thanks to rescuers” …and not only that, she gave birth to five pups!

    Excerpt: “In the old days, it was Mother Nature that animals had to deal with,” Di Sieno said. “Now, it’s us — human beings with their guns, poisons, cars and urban sprawl.”


    • JB says:

      “Di Sieno plans to care for the puppies until they are mature enough to be released in the surrounding mountains. She has big plans, however, for Angel, with whom she has developed strong bonds.”

      Compassionate, but that plan of action isn’t likely to end well for those pups.

      • Louise Kane says:

        I read this and thought the same thing. Happy outcome not so much. Separating the pups from the mother is not likely to end well for either, pups or mother. If they are going to take on the mother the pups probably need to stay with her.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Poor sweetheart – at least it had a fairly happy outcome. Hard to believe there are people who would harm her like that, so carelessly.

  25. Gary Humbard says:

    “Wyoming, unlike those other states, has a multiplier — it figures seven calves are killed by wolves for every one confirmed — that bumps up funds doled out to ranchers who graze livestock here.”

    While a total of 41,000 cows and calves died in Wyoming in 2010 (last year I could find statistics for), those 72 cows that wolves supposedly killed in 2015 are little gold mines for ranchers. Come and get her boys and girls!

    “We just got to keep them up here in the northwest corner and our elk herd has to be the sacrificial lamb, I guess.”

    Yeah, how dare outfitters and hunters in general have to put up with some competition.


    • BOB says:

      Gary, there is some good research out there that shows for every animal lost to wolves there are many more lost but not confirmed. Add in weight loss and livestock that did not breed because of the stress, you have a gold mine without any gold.
      Say that for every animal confirmed it’s only 5 more that go unconfirmed, wolves then would be responsible for 1% livestock deaths. About one calf and one sheep for every wolf counted under Wyoming’s population.
      As far as the hunters, why did calf elk recruitment drop from the 40-60 range to the single digits after wolves returned?

      But maybe I’m on the wrong form for honest discussion?

      • Immer Treue says:

        For the sake of honest discussion, might elk calf recruitment have dropped as elk continue to readjust to the presence of wolves? Something with which they did not have to contend for 70 years?

        In regard to the “missing” livestock, The study of which John Oakleaf was involved addressed this topic, and it has been discussed here.

        As to livestock not packing on the weight, are wolves the cause, or is there just a correlation, that might be due to many factors, including drought? This topic is a belly up to the buffet table for ranchers (and I am not anti ranching), but any compensation for this is stretching the imagination.

        • BOB says:

          Immer, only one factor has changed, that’s the reintroduction of wolves, so yes, wolf impact is greater than the number eaten.
          There is also research out there that directly ties the weight loss to the fact that the ranch had a depredation. Comparing neighbor ranchers with same weather and no depredation.
          In the meetings I went to ranchers were told that if wolves were reintroduced they would not carry the financial burden. You may not be anti ranching as you claim but the cost wolves have incurred on states with wolves in the west is greater than any compensation programs. That’s the real expensive buffet table if we’re honest.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Ranchers should do a better job at taking care of their animals, and make them less prone to being attacked, it should not be the federal governments responsibility to kill predators, in particular on Public land. The hook and bullet club must also discontinue the antagonistic attitude toward non-consumptive users of wildlife, in concert with same non-consumptive folks putting their money where their mouths are. In regard to contribution of $ toward wolf management. Simple means can contribute a good sum of $ to the agencies in charge of our wildlife. Management should not be synonymous with killing.

            • BOB says:

              I see your well versed in the talking points Immer.
              Less than 1% of cattle are killed by wolves yet ranchers need to do a better job? What happened to the honest conversation?
              Get the federal government out of killing wolves and see who will howl the loudest. Ranchers already pay more than they get from the federal people killing wolves. Ranchers would gladly fund their own program to kill wolves, don’t think you would like the results.
              As far as management being synonymous with killing, that sounds like your the antagonist. Any time management allows killing it means there is enough of that species to allow killing. Consumption requires a larger population than non-consumption, that is what management is all about. Before the hook and bullet club is allowed to kill one of anything non-consumptive users have been bellied up to the buffet table for years.

              • Immer Treue says:

                At < 1%, one would hope the "job" and it is a job, would be a bit easier than preventing all the other type of livestock deaths from occurring. How they do it is up to them,on private land. On public land, only non lethally.

                As far as honest conversation, management is not synonymous with killing, in particular with livestock. It's got more to do with prevention.

                And nothing has prevented the hook and bullet club from bellying up to the buffet line in the past, present, or future.

                Consumptive use of wildlife requires surplus of wildlife, hoping to maintain that sweet spot on the growth curve.

                • BOB says:

                  Overall beef deaths from all causes are less than 4% for the whole nation. There are parts of this world where humans die at a higher rate. That means where wolves live the death loss increases significantly.
                  As for the public lands private land difference. Your wishes would be like when your robbed at home you expect some police help but when your in public no police or any other protection is needed.
                  “Nothing has prevented the hook and bullet club from belling up…” I call BS. Ever hear of the endangered species act? Consumptive users are the first to be turned away. Read your last sentence.

                • Immer Treue says:

                  I’ve read it again. Your point?

                  perhaps if ranchers were paying the Feds for use of public lands what they would have to pay someone to graze on private lands, your robbery analogy might hold a bit of water. The Feds should not be “hitmen” for ranchers on public lands.

                  Perhaps Nancy has the stats for cattle losses all causes. Wolves, save the few ranchers they do impact, are no threat to the ranching industry.

                • BOB says:

                  Well Immer everyone is entitled to a opinion.

                • Nancy says:

                  Immer, I doubt BOB is interested but here are the last 2 years of weekly wolf reports (he can find previous years googling)

                  At a glance its obvious that a pattern forms in some of these areas (Grant for instance) Young cattle killed, wolves shot (an entire pack taken out in 2015) but the depredations there are continuing into 2016.

                  Wonder why? Perhaps because no one is taking preventative measures? Or when a pack is taken out more wolves fill the void? (as some have suggested)

                  One location that had lots of problems with wolves a few years ago, seems to show up less and less in these reports – the Big Hole. Perhaps for a couple of reasons maybe? One ranch got 2 big livestock dogs that roamed a sizable area. An association (of ranches) hired a range rider. (SAP would probably know more about the situation since he’s spent time there)

                  Report for 2015


                  Report so far for 2016


                  Had 2 wolves gunned down in my neck of the woods just about a week ago (watched from my window as the plane made pass after pass over one small area on another ranch, across from me, no cows there and unless the plane was backfiring, they got their wolves then)

                  The ranch that suffered the depredation (a newborn calf) has added quite a few head of cattle to their operation since the price of beef skyrocketed.

                  More cattle means more space for calving. Now instead of calving in a well lit, secure area, they leased a huge area and cows are popping out calves in the sagebrush.

                  Mule deer have been migrating back into the area for over a month now. They love hanging out in sagebrush. Use to see them all the time in this area. Not now.

                  Between the feeding tractor, twice a day and 75-100 cows (plus calves) not a desirable area anymore. But I’m sure a newborn bovine, hunkered down in the sagebrush was a nice find for these wolves.

                  For the price of that calf, they could of hired a night rider, for a month. Instead, a plane was buzzing around twice a week ($$) for 2-3 weeks, looking for these wolves till they gunned them down. The calf paid with its life, so did the wolves (and us taxpayers too – WS plane)

                  Had a woman who ranched years ago, tell me that coyotes would start eating on a newborn calf before it was even out of the cow so it appears that wolves aren’t the only predator a rancher needs to be concerned about, the numbers of predation by coyotes is proof of that.

                  With the price of beef now a days, it makes sense to protect your inventory from all predators, right?

                • Immer Treue says:

                  “At a glance its obvious that a pattern forms in some of these areas (Grant for instance) Young cattle killed, wolves shot (an entire pack taken out in 2015) but the depredations there are continuing into 2016.
                  Wonder why? Perhaps because no one is taking preventative measures? Or when a pack is taken out more wolves fill the void? (as some have suggested)”

                  Nancy, summarized from Carter Niemeyer’s Wolf Land.

                  During his career as a government trapper, he realized that killing all the problem animals, including skunks, coyotes, bears and wolves didn’t really solve anything. The proof in the pudding was that the killing had to be done in the same place every year. He concludes that ranchers should do a better job at taking care of their animals, and make them less prone to being attacked. Niemeyer concludes it should not be the federal governments responsibility to kill predators, in particular on Public land.

                • BOB says:

                  Nancy, your wolf reports would better serve Immer. Then there might be a small chance that some information like most wolf kills in Montana occur on private land would seep in with the opinions.
                  It also looks like you work on the cheap 700 pound calves will be worth about 1200 dollars this fall. Let me know when you want to start work.

            • Louise Kane says:


              • Leslie says:

                Jumping in here…I just don’t have much sympathy for ranchers who do not even attempt non-lethal deterrents. And why do ranchers expect federal help? Personally, I never rec’d federal reimbursement for any of my business losses. I worked with clients for over 20 years in non-lethal methods for deterring deer, moles, gophers,skunks, raccoons and insect damage. Can be done but takes a bit more effort and of course, outsmarting the wildlife. Yes, you’ll have losses, but these can be minimized. Just using poisons or shotguns is the lazy man’s way out.

                • Leslie says:

                  And FYI, wildlife services has even spent a lot of taxpayer $$ studying these non-lethal methods. They have over 100 coyotes that they test these methods on and they work. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/programs/nwrc/sa_field/ct_utah

                • BOB says:

                  Leslie, a couple things jump out here. One ranchers were told before wolf relocation they would not bear the cost of having wolves around. This is what the fed’s promised and ranchers expect them to keep that promise. Second livestock losses are less than 1% yet all I hear is ranchers are not doing enough. Let’s be honest that’s minimal.
                  Lastly tell me where has poison been used to kill wolves in the lower 48.
                  I see a lot of sympathy but not much in the way of reality.

      • Louise Kane says:


        Not entirely on point but a Montana wildlife biologist introduced mange to wolves to eradicate them (how disgusting is that) and now the animals with mange must have more caloric intake to retain heat .

        anyhow Immer is correct ranchers need to do a better job. They need to stop treating public trust resources (predators) as public enemies and expect that the public is going to support their archaic myopically short sighted polices as smart or beneficial.

        The wildlife agencies that do things like this are not working for the public they are working for ranchers. Ranchers can’t expect all the costs of doing business to be externalized nor can they expect to exaggerate losses and not get called out by the fallacies they perpetuate.

  26. Ida Lupines says:

    Federal gov’t sneaking around behind the public’s back again! I wish they would just stop jumping and saluting every time a prima donna rancher screeches:


  27. Kathleen says:

    From Wilderness Watch: “Legislation threatens Owyhee Wilderness with ranchers using ATVs, Trucks–Emails needed ASAP”

    Should ranchers be allowed nearly unlimited use of motor vehicles for herding livestock and other routine ranching purposes in the six Owyhee Canyonlands Wildernesses in Idaho? Another legislative assault on designated Wilderness.


    • Salle says:

      A designated wilderness is a federally protected area. As for the Idaho legislature, they demand that you go over their heads when it comes to public lands, this case is no different. Start flooding the appropriate agencies with pictures of damage and citizen statements of concern. There is little else that can be done with the state legislature.

    • Kathleen says:

      It took me all of five minutes yesterday to compose a message opposing S. 1167. Anyone who cares about Wilderness still has all of today to submit a message that’ll be entered into the hearing record (hearing is tomorrow)–the Wilderness Watch link makes it easy.

  28. Nancy says:

    Not exactly wildlife news:

    “Lewis and Clark County Sheriff Leo Dutton says there was nothing suspicious about the fire”

    Well, except for the fact that over 3 thousand pigs “warehoused” in this barn, didn’t make it out.

    “Colony secretary Ben Wipf says they’re still waiting to hear from their insurance company on an estimated value of the loss”

    Wondering if maybe a pig, disgusted with the living conditions, kicked over a lantern.


  29. BOB says:

    Private land, range rider and no carcasses, yet


    • bret says:

      Lived not far from there BOB, beautiful country.

    • Nancy says:

      “The producer whose calf was attacked has a range rider checking cattle daily and maintains sanitation by burying carcasses”

      This comment says it all BOB and probably why the depredation took place. “checking cattle daily” Translation – No one is there (except for a ride thru, during the day) when these cows are calving.

      You know calving can be an intense operation BOB, if the cow runs into complications and no one is around, you can lose the calf, the cow or both, in a short period of time.

      I’d gather from the “maintains sanitation by burying carcasses” they suffer a few losses.

      Someone posted a link to the Blackfoot Challenge (living with wolves & bears) This community in Montana, has figured out that burying the carcasses does little good because predators can & will dig them up.

      Got a rancher down the road from me that has his calving operation right off the road. Use to see dead cows & calves piled up right next to his calving area. Not as obvious now (big mound of dirt there) but I do see dead newborn calves in the area dumpster. (that will make the black bears happy since they can get in and out of the dumpsters with ease)

      • BOB says:

        The reason burying dead stuff doesn’t work in the Blackfoot is because of the grizzlies it has nothing to do with wolves or other predators.
        Not sure about your translations, your last translation was people will work a month of nights for $1200.

        • Nancy says:

          “Riggs and Steen also discovered that the wolves had dug up a dead cow Patton had buried about a half mile east of the ranch.

          So, wolves would rather dig up a cow buried than go after one of the living cows. Interesting”


          The article is no longer available BOB but I’m sure you get the jest of the conversation, depending on what site relates to the incident if you want to Google it.

          My translation is just fine BOB. It does happen and fact is, too many ranchers have been slobs about disposing of their dead livestock over the decades, which brings about these incidents with wolves (not to mention other predators)

          Use to brush fields for a ranching friend, BOB and I can’t tell you how many old bones and some recent winter dead cows and calf carcasses I’d run across every spring (they own about 6 thousand acres)

          Venture a guess this mentality is why so many predators got and continue to get, into trouble.

          And FYI, this friend also believed that wolves wouldn’t dine on a dead animal either, so why worry about any cows that died out on the “north 40” from disease or weather.

          Another ranching friend had a crippled old cow that hobbled around for weeks before it finally died. When it died, she had it’s body dragged down by the creek on the property because as she said (even though wolves were present in that area) “well the other critters got to eat too”


          I could go on but I’m sure you can relate, like the guy I talked to just a couple of days ago – dragged a crippled steer (who finally died on his little piece of property) over on a ranching neighbor’s property because he KNEW wolves were in the area and he couldn’t wait to shoot them if they showed up (had a wolf tag)

          Sure you’ve guessed by now BOB (although I’m thinking you’ve posted on the WN site before) that I live in ranching country, have for the past 20 years and while I do muster up sympathy for little ranching operations just trying to get by (although I know of none in my area, suffering) so I’ve got no sympathy what so ever for that 1800 mentality regarding how wildlife (especially predators) ought to be dealt with.

          And Re: the $1.200 for a night rider, for a month, BOB? Hell, I’d do it for free if it helped to reduce the conflict/impact between a native species and an invasive species, on the landscape 🙂

          But I’m also confident, given the minimum wage in most western states, there would be more than enough teenage kids around, who love to rodeo, live on ranches and love their ole Uncle Tom or Bill, etc. etc., that they’d jump at the chance to spend a night, range riding and helping out for a few extra bucks in their pockets 🙂 Show up for dinner before hand, would also be a plus.

          Get my drift, BOB?

          Just saying…….

          • Immer Treue says:

            Cost per hour in fixed wing or helicopter vs range rider and less chance of predation or dead wolf(ves), no brainier.

          • BOB says:

            Now I’m beginning to question what’s the truth and what is a big fat lie.
            Your story about the guy with the wolf tag is a whooper being as wolf season ended over a month ago in Montana.
            Question is what is stopping you from being a free range rider with your connections?

            • Nancy says:

              “Your story about the guy with the wolf tag is a whooper being as wolf season ended over a month ago in Montana”

              True, an ignorant comment by that guy but SB 200 has no season. But feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, BOB.

              “Question is what is stopping you from being a free range rider with your connections?”

              My well known (and often voiced) concerns over the years about wolves and other predator’s right to exist, BOB 🙂

              • BOB says:

                “True, an ignorant comment by that guy but SB 200 has no season. But feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, BOB.”

                SB200 has no season and absolutely no reason for a tag, but it’s your story. Sounds really good to the average reader until you find out the season ended a month ago and you don’t need a tag to shoot a wolf under SB200.
                Just like your story about planes shooting wolves (which I’ll check on). WS in Montana has their own helicopter why would they use a plane when they have a helicopter. They just trailer that baby out to the area and an hour later their loaded up and all done.

                • Leslie says:

                  This is today’s testimony to the House Natural Resources committee on the ESA. BOB if you go to 51 minutes, a sheep rancher from ID speaks about his success of using non-lethal deterrents. WHen they started their ranch in 1999 they had several wolf kills. Now it’s been 0 for many many years using these methods. The whole thing is actually interesting if you’ve got the time. https://www.facebook.com/NRDems/

                • Leslie says:

                  BOB My understanding of Wyoming’s predator zone, when wolves were delisted, is that killing by any means is legal. And coyotes are run over for fun in Pinedale by snowmobiles as a contest every year. People are very creative in their killing methods. Just last year someone baited meat near a FS station trying to kill wolves, but instead killed several dogs. But most people don’t want to take the time to just outsmart the animals using non-lethal means. Takes more thought process.

                • Nancy says:

                  “SB200 has no season and absolutely no reason for a tag, but it’s your story”

                  You could stop cherry picking BOB, said it was an ignorant comment made by someone who’s obviously anti-wolf (drags his dead steer to a neighbor’s property?) He’s also worried about his kids getting eaten by wolves. How many times has that happened in the last 20 years around here, since those big, bad Canadian wolves were re-introduced?

                  “That was Wildlife Services in pursuit of wolves that hit a local ranch the week before”

                  A statement from a biologist at MFWP, BOB, when I inquired about the plane in my area end of March.

                  No doubt the helicopter comes in handy when they are capturing & collaring or, hunting them down in rough terrain but fixed wing aircraft work just fine if they have the opportunity to gun them down in wide open spaces. I suppose it also depends on what’s available at the time BOB.

                  Idaho WS uses fixed wing and so does Alaska.

                  Sure you can recall these “fly boys” that made such an impression:


    • Kathleen says:

      Showing the rancher sitting on the back of a bison wasn’t particularly helpful, especially without revealing that his animals, like most ranched bison, aren’t genetically-pure wild bison. We drive past this herd on a regular basis and their behavior is cattle-like and they aren’t behind double fortified fences the way the poor captive/quarantined wild animals are north of Gardiner.

  30. Ida Lupines says:

    Westre thinks Yellowstone should look at stricter rules to prevent human-bison clashes. Currently, Yellowstone prohibits people from getting within 25 yards of a bison — a rule that’s frequently disobeyed.

    “If I was running Yellowstone you wouldn’t be able to get out of your car during calving season,” says Westre. “The other time is during breeding season. That’s when the bulls will get you, because they don’t want you anywhere near the cow they’re courting.”

    A man after my own heart. I remember the first time I ever saw one, and it is tempting to get too close – but he or she looked me straight in the eye, I told him he was beautiful and then something told me to back away! 🙂

    Thanks Nancy, a lot of interesting points made in this article.

  31. Jeff N. says:

    2016 Mexican Gray Wolf release/translocation report. Good info on current genetic make up of wild population also.


  32. Ida Lupines says:

    And coyotes are run over for fun in Pinedale by snowmobiles as a contest every year.

    I know that some think it is ‘blasphemy’ to call those made-in-the image-of-God human beings barbaric, but what else can a reasonable person call this but barbaric? Let’s just for argument’s sake play along with the idea that coyotes need ‘management’ – why must it also be the most violent way possible? Why must we think it is fun to not only kill sumthin’, but violently too?

    I hope someone puts a stop to this. I don’t think these people even have the good sense to be ashamed. Decent people must step up and put a stop to this.

    Do not let this state anywhere near grizzlies. I know we can ‘t see ourselves as the scumbags some of us are, but we can’t be that blind.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I know that the current administration tries very hard to appeal to humankind’s ‘higher nature’ *cough*, but some don’t have a higher nature. The sooner we accept that (they can’t seem to), the better off wildlife and we will be. Scum!

  33. Ida Lupines says:

    I wonder what this will mean for the grizzlies:


    The animals may have recovered, but the people have not. I truly cannot believe that the first thing people think of once the bears are doing even remotely well (I have worries about their food supply) is to start killing them again.

    If it wasn’t for the beautiful scenery and wildlife in this area, it would be a ‘flyover’ area that you’d never want to set foot in, a remnant population of violent people.

    • Salle says:

      Oops, didn’t see you post until I posted mine.

      I have nothing positive to say about this guy and so I’ll leave it at that with my post below.

  34. Salle says:

    About time.


    Far as I’m concerned, he should have been replaced a couple decades ago, been milkin’ it for too long.

  35. Nancy says:

    R.I.P. Prince

  36. Leslie says:

    Great article by Louisa Wilcox on good ranching practices vs. the slovenly practices in the Upper Green re: grizzly bears. http://www.grizzlytimes.org/#!Cattle-in-Grizzly-Country/c1ou2/5718f4480cf2dd6f7fc8026b

    • timz says:

      I once watched to little kids, no more than 5 or 6 years old feeding a coyote hot dogs right out of their hands with a ranger standing 15 feet away watching. I asked her if that wasn’t illegal and all she did was say, “that little guy is quite acclimated”, laughed and walked away. This was in the Old Faithful parking lot.

    • Nancy says:

      Finding this troglodyte will probably be a problem Leslie, in the mean time, thousands of “deliberately ignorant” folks, who have or will view this video, no doubt will think this is somehow acceptable behavior while encountering wildlife in Yellowstone.



      – a person who is regarded as being deliberately ignorant or old-fashioned

      “For the benefit & enjoyment of the people”

      That motto needs to change & the mentality of the Park, if we still want to hang on to (and catch a glimpse of) what’s left of wildlife and wild places.


      • Ida Lupines says:

        “The Endangered Species Act (1973) requires federal agencies to protect species that are (or are likely to become) at risk of extinction throughout all or a significant part of their range. It prohibits any action that would jeopardize their continued existence or result in the destruction or modification of their habitat.”

        Thanks for posting, I’m glad there’s a listing of some of the forward-thinking environmental laws of the late 60s-70s that are in jeopardy today because people have become complacent.

  37. rork says:

    About Wisconsin CWD idiocy. The apparent strategy is to force the game managers to do nothing about CWD for a few years, and maybe appear to try to do something later when the problem has gotten gigantic. Political epidemiology is often very bad.
    (If you haven’t heard, politicians are having troubles getting a move on Zika, and were dumb as stumps about Ebola. Who needs a Surgeon General or CDC when we have genius legislators ready to grandstand about it.)

  38. Louise Kane says:

    Great article on wolves, woodland caribou that crossed an ice bridge and established themselves on a Lake Superior Island and Beavers. Wolves not decimating caribou. They are eating mostly beaver. Like sharks that are not interested in humans as meals because they lack the caloric value of seals and other marine prey, wolves target beaver because they are easier to eat and have great fat reserves. The caribou may actually be suffering because they do not have enough predators and their carrying capacity has been reached.


    Wolf – Caribou Detente? Clues Hidden on Lake Superior Islands

  39. Gary Humbard says:

    His argument against delisting appears to be spot on. He worked for over 20 years with grizzlies, is retired, and has no ownership in the delisting process which may reduce his bias one way or the other.


  40. Salle says:

    Ignorance abounds on this one!!

    Feds Order Wolf Trapping in New Mexico

    Removal of Alpha Male Would Hasten Mexican Wolf Decline


    They are planning to trap the alpha male right after the litter is born! WTF?

    • Ida Lupines says:

      So who is going to feed the pups?

      You’ve got to marvel (not) at the new ideas that come up for destroying wolves – when livestock depredation wears a little thin, then sneaking helicopters in the wilderness ‘by mistake’, now something new. 🙁

      • Jeff N. says:

        What they will do in this situation, as they have in others, is provide a food cache for the mother, consisting of road killed elk and deer, as well as processed elk logs ( basically giant elk sausage, no joke).

        They have use this method in situations like this, as well as when wolves den in the midst of cattle, to deter them from dining on steak.

        It doesn’t look good for this alpha male but I hope he is a sneaky bastard and savvy enough to avoid being trapped or gunned down from an aircraft.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I should have written after the pups are weaned. I also should have asked about other pack members bringing in food for mom?

          It sounds like a vicious circle tho – shooting wolves for becoming habituated to humans and livestock, then humans feeding them which keeps them habituated to humans? A no-win situation for our poor wolves. 🙁

    • Louise Kane says:

      I’m not sure what is worse Salle the USFWS “policy” on Mexican wolves or their unconscionable lack of regard and willful deliberate treatment of the Red Wolf and Alexander Archipelago wolf. All three teetering on the brink. The call should be “not on our watch” instead of its politically expedient and easier to watch them go extinct. Seeing this kind of institutional ignorance and lawlessness makes me filled with rage.

  41. Louise Kane says:

    Must see
    all of the images are astounding
    the ravens illustrate how wrong humans are when they assume that other species do not have the capacity to love, grieve, or be loyal family members. All it takes is to watch, the evidence is undeniable.


    • BOB says:

      Yet every second of the day beings with the capacity to love, grieve, or be loyal family members kill other beings with the capacity to love, grieve or be loyal family members.

  42. Kathleen says:

    Beaver slaughter derby in Saskatchewan — the biggest beaver, the most weight in dead beavers…in 40 days.

    “Wildlife group calls for end to beaver hunting contest”

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Jeez – throwbacks from what era still keep this monstrosity alive?

    • Kathleen says:

      Don’t miss the video at that link–the truck loaded down with dead beavers and a raccoon head sticking out of the pile. Sick.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      See? Nature is in perfect balance.

      Wildlife report: Turkey vultures dragging off fresh roadkill (doing their job), and lots of turkeys fanning their tails.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Wow. I have to say I was amazed at the wing span of a turkey vulture when I was out hiking. There were three of them congregating in a field. I’ve seen them in the air, but never on the ground. Another time it was carrion beetles I saw. Fascinating.

        • skyrim says:

          Saw a group of about 8 (turkey vultures) in an open draw a short distance from my cabin a few years back. They were sunning themselves and drying their wings. What a sight!

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      An interesting article with a silly headline, “Whitebark pine trees: Is their future at risk?”

      Of course, they are at risk when 90% have been killed.

  43. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Critically endangered and ancient Himalayan wolf needs global conservation attention

    When compared to the European wolf, this one stands out with its smaller size, unusually longer muzzle and stumpy legs. Another clearly distinctive feature is the white colouration around the throat, chest, belly and inner part of the limbs. On the other hand, its characteristic woolly body fur has given the subspecies the common name ‘woolly wolf’.
    However, the distinctiveness of the Himalayan wolf is far more than skin-deep. The authors note that recent studies have already revealed that these wolves have split as a separate branch within the ‘tree of life’ so long ago that they are divergent from the whole globally distributed wolf-dog clade. Having undergone such an isolated evolution, the Himalayan wolf is considered of particular conservation concern.

    …the populations are still suffering heavy mortality … the wolves are considered to pose a threat for the local livelihoods

  44. Salle says:

    The Rise to Power of the Congressional Anti-Parks Caucus

    The 20 legislators identified in this brief are responsible for espousing anti-parks rhetoric and introducing legislation aimed at weakening protections of lands that are owned by all Americans and important to a majority of Americans. At the heart of these members’ anti-park ideology are some common threads: Tea Party affiliation; competition from far-right candidates; and uncompetitive partisan districts.

    The decline of bipartisan parks legislation has come to a head just as the National Park Service marks 2016 as its centennial year and celebrates 100 years of stewardship for American public lands. In this year especially, the parks, and indeed all of America’s public lands, deserve a policy agenda that reflects the value Americans place on these exceptional places and the conservation benefits they provide the country. It is the job of Congress to make sure these important places continue to be protected for future generations and improved upon so that they become more accessible to and inclusive of all Americans.

    To counter the anti-parks caucus, those hundreds of congressional members who understand the American values that are inherent in the National Park System should join together to create policy that shepherds the parks into their next century of conservation.


    Long but very informative.

    • Louise kane says:

      Tonight a friend informed me Ken burns doc on the nation parks aired on pbs

    • rork says:

      I think it’s saying that the hot spot has been moving, and is now near Yellowstone, but it has a few paragraphs (and headline) where the writer seems mighty confused, or is just trying for clicks. Next big one won’t be where they were millions of years ago.

    • rork says:

      In future, when you point to news, assume I read it and would say thankyou yet again if it didn’t waste other people’s time. I really appreciate it.

  45. Kathleen says:

    “Mendocino County dumps federal killing of livestock predators”

    Excerpt: “Wildlife advocates scored a major victory Tuesday when Mendocino County agreed to terminate its contract with the federal agency that helps ranchers kill predators such as mountain lions and coyotes that feast on livestock.”


    • skyrim says:

      Best news I’ve read in awhile. We had to begin somewhere and this makes perfect sense coming from CA.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Yes, great news! Although I don’t know as I’d refer to it as ‘feasting’ on livestock. We just can’t seem to get away from this irrational response to predators! We’ve got to stick some kind of menacing adjective in there; hopefully someday, we’ll be able to refer to wildlife behaviors without loaded, emotional references. 🙂

      I was happy to read about the new lobo recovery plan also. Thanks, JeffN!

      • Ida Lupines says:

        ^^or verb, sorry, or any kind of speech or writing. Their behavior is more like catch-as-catch-can, unless humans make it easier for them. I read a description of a fictional book about wolves that said there was a ‘hint of menace’. *eyeroll*

  46. Kathleen says:

    Take the daily poll: “Should coyote hunts be legal in Nevada?” Right now, ‘yes’ is at 51%–let’s help them see the light.

    • Nancy says:

      I bet he thought he shot a wolf, Immer.

    • BOB says:

      Call it what you want Immer, free running dogs get shot in Montana, especially those that chase wildlife, been that way for a long time. Part of being a pet owner is watching over the animal. A well behaved guest makes sure of where their dog is and what it’s doing, don’t matter if your in town or the country.

      • Immer Treue says:

        Guess we can say free running dogs, wolves, and coyotes get shot in Montana. Thing is, dog was not on the shooter’s property, owner, whether you choose to believe or not, said his dog didn’t run deer. Last, apparently, shooter lied about livestock.

        If all this plays out, it’s just an example of quick draw mentality, shooting the dog because I can, not shooting the dog because I should. Call it what you want BOB.

        • timz says:

          “Any dogs coming around here are liable to get shot. All you can do now is spread the word!”

          Had he said that to me after killing my dog it would be his last words for awhile and he’d be taking his meals thru a straw for a few weeks.

          • BOB says:

            Key board tough guy too funny.

            • timz says:

              Bob, keyboard half-wit,too funny

              • timz says:

                Bob, I’ve had a German Shepherd I know how smart they are. I’d be willing to bet any amount that based on your present and past posts the one this @-hole shot probably had an IQ double yours.

                • BOB says:

                  Just send all your money to the Montana livestock loss board, to pay off your bet.

                  That or get your smart dog to turn on your computer and type one of my past comments at a higher IQ level.
                  Thanks for showing your IQ your right your old dog probably seemed real smart to you.

                • timz says:

                  Thanks for proving my point with that post. Absolute drivel.

                • timz says:

                  BTW, suggesting giving to a livestock loss board further proves your not very bright.

                • BOB says:

                  Clearly timz your one smart and tough dude, I now see the proof in your post. You argue your points so well and without insult and your smart enough to attempt beating up armed adults.

                • Jerry Black says:

                  timz…FYI, Bob is one of those that sneaks around the woods setting traps and torturing animals for a living….yep, a trapper and former president or vice president of Montana Trappers Ass….kinda says it all, doesn’t it?

                • Jerry black says:

                  Timz….. Appears I have the wrong Bob…. My apologies to Shep

        • Ida Lupines says:

          And the saddest thing is gov’t keeps giving them what they want, very ‘liberal’ (’bout the only thing) wolf killing laws open to very loose interpretations, all in their favor, deer and elk basically belong to them, divvying up grizzlies before they are even delisted because they know it’s a foregone conclusion.

          But yet it’s never enough, and now they want to secede from the union and take all the public lands!

          This man sounds like a miserable you-know-what, and I hope he at least gets more than a slap on the wrist for this. Isn’t giving someone a chance done out there? They have expanded wolf killing to include dogs out there! Even looking like a wolf gets a dog in trouble, recently someone walked right up to a hiker and shot his malamutes, wasn’t it? If that isn’t speciesism, I don’t know what is.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            I always say, I wish these states would be allowed to secede, so that we could declare war on them.

        • BOB says:

          In Montana it doesn’t matter who’s land the dog is chasing deer on, it’s fair game for anyone.
          Considering the average dog owner only spends about an hour a day outdoors with their dog, they don’t know what their dog does off lease.
          Wolves are considered a game animal unlike coyotes we can’t just shoot wolves. Perhaps you should holster your quick draw mentality.

          • Immer Treue says:

            The shooter did a number of things wrong. First, he shot into someone else’s property. Two, a decent human being might inquire of their neighbor if they have or have seen a particular dog on there property, esp if running deer. I’d call that the neighborly thing to do. Hell, even up here, I’ve got a neighbor who understands his “right” by law to dispose of a dog chasing deer, but he also had the decency to inform another neighbor of their dogs activity and asked them as a gentleman, to keep a better eye on their dog.

            It’s called being a human being, rather than the gun being an extension of some excuse of being a man. More of a priapulis.

            Yeah, there’s a season on wolves, for those who follow the laws. Guess it doesn’t pertain to the cheer leaders for illegal killing of wolves. Ironic, but evidently Rockholm’s dog got nailed by wolves. I wonder, just wonder if it took off after wolves? I also wonder if above a$$ wipe would shoot a dog chasing big game known as wolves? Then again, we have a type of wild life that will defend itself.

            I think it’s all about being a decent neighbor prior to killing someone’s dog. No quick draw mentality that, but more of thinking prior to pulling a trigger.

            • BOB says:

              A decent human would have watched over his dog to have prevented the whole event from happening.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Death is forever. The shooter played god, and it wasn’t necessary.

                Your comment only backs up what many have been saying for a long time, if ranchers would only watch over their livestock, they could prevent predation.

              • BOB says:

                We constantly hear about how they have smart well behaved dogs. How they don’t chase wildlife. At some point you get tired of all the excuses.
                Montana livestock depredations have declined greatly since 2009. Facts show ranchers are doing a better job than you and others willing to admit. It’s not about livestock losses as much as rancher bashing.
                If dog owners watched over their dogs, they could prevent them from being shot.

                • Immer Treue says:

                  I don’t “bash” ranchers, nor do I make excuses for them. As per the article, said shooter was not a rancher, just a Johnny with his gun.

      • Nancy says:

        “Part of being a pet owner is watching over the animal”

        Too funny 🙂 You know there’s a double standard out here BOB. Bitch about (and shoot) someone else’s dog but don’t tell me what to do with MY dog(s)

        The handful of times I’ve seen dogs running wildlife & livestock, they’ve belonged to my ranching neighbors. Got one neighbor who’s cow dogs are often on the road looking for roadkill….

        • BOB says:

          Not sure about the funny part as you seem to be part of the problem. The law is clear about dogs chasing wildlife. The question is what besides bitching on your computer have you done about it? Or are you one of those who expects the government to fix all your problems?

          • timz says:

            “Or are you one of those who expects the government to fix all your problems?”

            You mean like livestock compensation boards and wildlife services?

          • jon says:

            Hunting dogs chase wildlife too. Should they be shot too ignoramus?

      • Louise kane says:

        Free running dogs chase wildlife all the time

        Most of the time legally
        It’s called hounding

        Legalized wildlife terrorism

        Anyhow dogs and weapons against wild animals equals not fair

        Double standard indeed nancy
        Shoot cause you can

        I lost a beautiful German shepherd because he walked through a man named wacky jack’s yard

        It was back when cape cod was still relatively wild and dogs were loose and the fishermen were tough
        This guy was really crazy and mean
        We lived near him
        One day our beautif dog disappeared
        Friends heard him
        Brag in the bar about how he killed him
        Cause he could

        He was a yard away not doing anything but taking a pee

        Wacky jack died as miserable a life as he lived penniless divorced and from lung cancer

        • BOB says:

          Clearly Louise people like you shouldn’t be allowed to have pets. How would you feel if Jack came over and pissed and crapped in your yard. You have no respect for your dog or others living around you and haven’t the sense to understand.

          • Immer Treue says:

            You have unknowingly walked into a shit storm, by making a statement for which you, sir, are unqualified to make.

          • Louise kane says:

            Bob you know nothing about me
            Zero zilch nothing
            The event I spoke of took place close to 38 years ago
            There were no leash laws back then Nd people here let their dogs out all the time
            Even then we kept a good eye on our dog
            Better than most
            The man that shot my friend was as Immer wrote, using the gun as an extension ….
            Thst event marred my life
            I’ve had numerous dogs all of them good friends
            I’m a careful considerate dig owner
            38 years later I ridgidly adhere to the rules of dog ownership poop scooping, dog restrained from wildlife harassing and like others in the new world of dig ownership post leash laws
            I don’t ever let my dog out unattended
            If you remember an older song by Dylan If dogs run free why can we ? You’ll remember letting your dog out for 5 minutes in that era was not an unusual thing. It took 5 minutes for my dig to be shot because even back then I cared more than most. So now dogs on leashes walk all over they pee on sidewalks , yards and in parks in your scenario it might be ok to shoot because the dog peed on some edge of lawn before the owner could stop the stream? That kind of mindset is why people hate guns and the excessive over zealous righteousness that many gun owners use as rationale u feeling their gun ownership
            Shoot first ask later
            Barring all else the shooter could have been a good neighbor here in this instance. In my old heartbreak, the man that shot my dig was locally despised and he probably waited to see my well behaved much loved dog set out for his 5 minute bathroom

            • Ida Lupines says:

              So sad. This is, to me, one of the unintended consequences of delisting wildlife – for some, it even extends to dogs!

              It really disturbs one’s view of human nature to read about this – especially when the tooth-and-claw of nature is so shocking to some humans! Is it really so much trouble to give an innocent animal a break and wait till his owner catches up with him and takes him home? Or if it happens a lot, to speak with the owner? I’d never dream of harming an animal on my property ever. #1, I just couldn’t do it and 2, that animal belongs to someone or a family!

              I was out walking the other day and a couple of young women had two little Siberian husky pups, so lively and stickily built, I was reminded of a certain wild relative.

              The points you make about the wildlife killers are good Louise. Hopefully, the on-line comments will only be a kid from his family basement.

              After the recent grizzly killings, for whatever human reason, if 399 has been disturbed in any way there will be demands for answers. Is her collar signaling or can’t it be picked up?

            • BOB says:

              I don’t have to know you louise, your just like other dog owners who think it’s ok for your dog to piss or worse on someone else’s property. As you said, doing nothing but taking a pee. That in it’s self shows your disrespect for others. Next time you pick up one of those doggy bags full of stink, empty it in the middle of your living room along with 10 others. Then pick it up again and just leave what sticks. It’ll serve as a reminder of what you leave for everyone else to live with because of your selfish behavior.
              You keep your dog caged in your house for your own selfishness then collar it and force it to do it’s business on demand while you take your walk. I would guess you spend some time bitching about caged animals while your dog spends around 23 hours a day caged in your house and 1 hour a day on a leash. Some life for any animal. Double standards indeed.

              • Jeff N. says:

                “Next time you pick up one of those doggy bags full of stink, empty it in the middle of your living room along with 10 others. Then pick it up again and just leave what sticks.”

                Sounds like BOB has experience in this little exercise. Very detailed there BOB. Do you want to share any other fun games that you play using dog sh!t BOB?

              • Jay says:

                You are (or “you’re”…seems you struggle with that one) an angry, angry person.

                Last time I went camping, the campsite was full of cow stink, very much like you describe for dogs. Double standard, indeed.

              • Rita k Sharpe says:

                Still on the dog issue.

              • Immer Treue says:

                As Louise wrote, you don’t know her. The ignorance in your comments betrays an anger for which you appear to have little control.

            • Nancy says:

              Its tough sometimes but please don’t feed the Trolls 🙂

              • Louise kane says:

                Plus 1 Nancy
                Sorry I got trolled in
                Pun intended

              • BOB says:

                Thanks everyone for the debate, fun to watch such a large group concede weakness and have nothing to defend their position but insults and censorship.
                As far as knowing louise kane, two minutes on a computer tells enough.

      • jon says:

        and those rednecks who shoot those free running dogs are criminals and should be jailed and fine. They are sick psychopaths.

  47. skyrim says:

    Another excellent article by Todd Wilkinson in the Jackson Hole News and Guide ref: Grizzlies hunted in/near the Parks (Yellowstone/Grand Teton).
    Pay attention to, and remember the names of the bad guys here. I fear that this will be my last year of visiting (twice each Summer) Teton County.
    I’m not anti hunting but I am anti “a$$holes”

    • TC says:

      Well that’s just silly. Teton County contains, per capita, probably more granola-eating, vegan, tree-hugging, activist, content and happy outdoor and wildlife enthusiasts, if not downright wildlife nuts, than any other county within or bordering the GYA. To let a few bad seeds spoil the entire county is just not logical. Todd Wilkinson could not thrive, publish, or even really feel comfortable in many other towns or counties in the Rocky Mountain West, certainly not in the northern Rockies. Boulder might enjoy his style I guess. Possibly Missoula, but that seems a stretch. C’mon folks. First to call the entire GYA/NRM a “flyover” wasteland filled entirely with knuckle-dragging degenerates (never mind the entire cadre of folks here, your moderator included, that negate such thinking), and now giving up on Jackson and Teton County – perhaps the most environmentally conscious, forward-thinking, progressive, ecologically friendly town and county the entire region. It’s a pretty small world if you’ll only visit environmental havens devoid of multiple perspectives and conflicts. And you’re not really needed there anyhow.

      • skyrim says:

        “And you’re not really needed there anyhow”
        Oh Gee……

          • skyrim says:

            This comment was added to Todd’s piece yesterday by William H. Addeo:

            Bear 399 wil not emerge from her den because of a new hunting tactic called, “Shoot and shovel.” I used to just throw the carcasses off the swinging bridge but I got tired of driving all the way there. I should really call it ,”Shoot and shovel and shut up.” Man will always balance the species and everything will be fine. Environmental wackos will always lie and wear their leather and eat meat others kill and hate anyone who thinks different than them. Wilkinson likes to insight riots because it’s the only way he knows how to write. He spews his venom on all detractors and that is his coat of arms. The liberals use him as their shield and he gets paid a poor man’s salary just to suck up to them. His welfare check of a social media nature is nothing more than a token for his effort. Meanwhile he scrapes for a free dinner out whenever the phone rings from someone he thinks admires him. He actually doesn’t know he is being used like a condom to stop anyone from daring to speak up against them.
            I will continue to do what is right to control and kill every single wolf I go after. So, I am announcing my plan now. This summer, when town is full of tourists, I will be depositing a dead wolf every week somewhere in town to show my support for my favorite animal, the majestic Elk. 399 has been 86’d. I will do my best to make sure that the wolf really is endangered by killing every single one that I go after. Nobody knows the woods better than me. I dedicate this movement to my good friend Sam and his life long challenge of protecting our wildlife. There really is a good place for bears and wolves, it’s right next to the mashed potatoes and gravy. God Bless America!


            • Ida Lupines says:

              I knew that name rang a bell. Yes, he’s the same ‘attention-grubbing’ guy who paraded the wolf down the center of Jackson along with his arrested-for-bald-eagle-poaching ‘hunting guide’, Sam Coutes:


            • skyrim says:

              Ernest Thompson Seton wrote this some 114 years ago to aptly describe the above individual:
              ” There was once a wretch who, despairing of others claims to notice, thought to achieve a name by destroying the most beautiful building on earth. This is the mind of the head hunting sportsman. The nobler the thing that he destroys, the greater the deed, the greater his pleasure, and the greater he considers his claim to fame”

            • Louise kane says:

              Sky rim
              Have any info on where this guy lives or anything you can send to me
              I’ll write a letter to the local enforcement agency and follow through on it
              I’ll also post on some of the lists that I belong to
              Promise to do this
              I’ve written concerning other poachers in Wisconsin and Montana and made sure they were investigated
              I hope others will write or call also
              Nothing will change only by complaining about people like this
              The agencies need to see that citizens are watching and demanding enforcement

              • skyrim says:

                I have not been able to find out much about this guy via the usual channels. However, I am fairly certain that LE is aware of his activity and claims.
                Like TC has correctly stated above; Jackson is a very progressive place and these animals have many powerful and wealthy friends who would spare no expense to bring a guy like this to justice. He could very well be all bluster and B.S.
                I myself could admit to a particular crime, but without evidence that same crime was committed, LE has no case against me. I think the feeling is, after reading much about the issue, this clown reminds me a lot of Mckittrick.
                399 is up against the odds but mostly because of her age. By mid May, when I will be there, she may or may not be seen, but it is a sure thing it will be front page news. If not the speculation will continue. Wildlife officials likely know where she has denned and will be looking for her sign this Spring. I do not know if she was collared in the last project but it’s possible.
                My only interest in the true identity of the named individual is to be able to know who he is, if he owns or is involved in a business in the area that I will not be frequenting.
                Judging by his most recent comments in the Guide I’d say he’s a prime candidate for front page news of a different flavor. It’s this reasoning that keeps me out of schools, shopping malls and movie theaters.
                Thanks for your concern.

                • Ida Lupines says:

                  Jackson is a very progressive place and these animals have many powerful and wealthy friends who would spare no expense to bring a guy like this to justice.

                  I wish they had done it before. I find it to be, while lovely, another one of those isolated islands of the West, a rich person’s playground and for the hipster/café latte/outdoor recreation crowd, and I don’t know how much they care about wildlife, except for Ted Turner and a few others. I love it.

                  Did you say 399 was collared? Then F&W should know. We demand to know.

                • Louise kane says:

                  Sure you are right about people watching for best 399
                  I think it does help though to make the calls and e mails
                  1) by law they must investigate the claim
                  2) you create an administrative record and are entitled to am response
                  3) the investigation can legally use internet evidence do you can help provide evidence by pointing to Internet claims of illegal activity
                  4) whether or not the claims are bluster once an investigation begins the investigation creates a chilling effect for posting that kind of vitriol that perpetuates wolf and predator hating or may encourage poaching by others and if poaching had occurred puts the party on notice that their activities are being monitored and could provide incentive to stop or deter continued illegal activity
                  5) it helps me to feel less helpless
                  6) let’s the authorities know the public cares and values wildlife and creates an incentive to be vigilant in pursuing leads

                  I have gotten several investigations one of which was able to help in an ongoing prosecution because of Internet evidence I captured and sent to Wisconsin authorities
                  They did their jobs and followed through with the investigation and a report. I think it matters to expect accountability when someone advertises and promotes wanton waste and lawlessness

              • Ida Lupines says:

                We know that people from the gov’t agencies read this blog, and scientists, and by voicing our concerns broadly in this way, we’ve seen our concerns responded to.

                They must have known about this guy for years, and his hunting guide compatriot. But who knows who it is commenting. All I did was make a connection by being reminded of the brazen wolf killing in Jackson. I’m sure he’s not the only one out there.

                Is it even him making the comment?

      • Ida Lupines says:

        ???? There may be more outdoor recreation enthusiasts.

        If you don’t want to be harassed or shot at, or threatened – I’d avoid it, so I’m told (or travel in a large group and carry bear spray!). If you recall, Jackson was the place where someone with their hunting guide paraded a dead wolf through the center of town. People just gawked. What are these so-called wildlife advocates doing? The laws are horrible out there. We obviously are aware that there are some great groups who defend wildlands and wildlife – but they are not the majority. We are obviously aware of the people who post here. We’ve listened to average person on the street interviews who are not aware and who would like more land for human use, well-meaning as they might be. These are not the people who would deter visitors. It is the prevailing attitudes. I love Yellowstone and Grand Teton, but it’s being ruined. I couldn’t even watch the PBS program again (I have seen it before). Too much about people and their endless needs now.

        I’d be willing to bet that wildlife advocates on both coasts do equally as much if not more, and also I’d bet Todd Wilkinson has a few tales to tell that are uncomfortable. It’s more than a few bad seeds, and they seem to run the place.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          **I should add ‘paraded a dead wolf through the center of town’ during (one of) the delisting controversy(ies), bolder than brass.

          But for all the good people who I am sure are out there – it’s news like this that will turn visitors off and away.

      • Kathleen says:

        “Boulder might enjoy his style I guess. Possibly Missoula, but that seems a stretch.”

        Wilkinson and Mangelsen brought their road show on Bear 399 to Missoula last November and it was standing-room-only in one of the big lecture halls on the UM campus. People were sitting in the aisles and standing against the walls. They were very well received.

        • skyrim says:

          As they would be received in many places in the West Kathleen. A worthy cause is just that in any venue, in any town, in any country.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I don’t know, we all know that university towns and cities are much more liberal than average, and don’t represent the entire area. Who knows why it was standing room only? Perhaps they wanted to see somebody famous and that was all. At any rate, something isn’t translating to the wildlife laws.

          Don’t anybody take this the wrong way, but Colorado to me is a prime example of extremes – pot legalizers on ones side – wolf haters on the other. Why haven’t wolves been reintroduced to Colorado if it is a ‘liberal’ state? Does any side really care about wildlife and wildlands? I haven’t got a lot of confidence lately. Granola isn’t a reliable indicator!

  48. timz says:

    That Addeo person is one sick sob. Let’s hope karma catches up with him before he can do to much more killing.

  49. Peter Kiermeir says:

    For the first time since wolves returned to Germany, a wolf was killed by order of the authorities. The yearling MT6 was shot yesterday in Lower Saxony. He already has some history stalking people, coming to close to a woman with a stroller and there was a very recent case of biting a domestic dog. There are rumors, that he became habituated to humans when he was fed by soldiers on the military training grounds this pack lives on. There is a heavy uproar in the pro- and the anti-wolf community and one cannot foresee where this case will lead us in Wolf conservation. There was however broad agreement between the wildlife agencies and authorities that this step was necessary in order to remain credible in the public opinion.
    (sorry, no English language text available so far)

  50. Ida Lupines says:

    This surely must be a sign of the apocalypse:

    Tester and Jewell to Visit Devil’s Elbow at Hauser Lake Next Tuesday

  51. birdpond says:

    Hi I’m looking for verification right now oft his https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/04/27/wolverine-killed-in-north-dakota/ – Time sensitive – Need info, true false etc – THANKS

  52. Nancy says:

    Birdpond – I think if you are looking to verify this information I’d contact the site directly. Appears they have a pretty tight grip, especially on comments:


    I mean you got to love # 6 or at least I do 🙂

    “Rightwing commenters are on thin ice on this blog and can be banned at any time for any reason or no reason.
    This is a progressive and socialist blog, particularly in terms of economics. We have a very strong dislike for rightwing economics and the Republican Party, and we don’t want pro-Republicans or those supporting rightwing economics on the site. No attacking Obama or the Democratic Party from the Right. No Republican Party or Libertarian Party propaganda. Advocacy of nonpartisan social conservatism is however allowed. Post at your own peril. We may let you stay, but you can also be banned at any time”

    IMHO, best to start there as to what’s factual and their references?

  53. birdpond says:

    hmmm now the page is gone . .. hmmmmm

  54. rork says:

    New MI wolf count is out. Estimate is 618. 2014: 636. 2013:658. 2012 (and 2015): no count. 2011: 687. They give some details but failed to mention parts of the history in MI (where we stopped 2 wolf hunt laws with referendums). That seems on purpose. We can manage wolves scientifically without hunting seasons, is my usual claim. We have already proven it can be done.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I guess MI has decided to hammer the coyotes even more because they can’t get their way to kill wolves legally. That’ll show those damn enviros and court judges! Dismal. From Wolf Patrol:

      DNR Approves Year-Round Coyote Hunting Season, No Holds Barred

      • rork says:

        I don’t think much of your guess.
        (Your link is straight to the DNR press release, which might not have been intended.)

    • Louise kane says:

      Why do you think population is down when no hunting? Poaching or just fluctuations for other reasons?

      • rork says:

        Like article said, we have less deer, not that I am giving that probability 1 as the cause. Maybe beaver got knocked down a bit, or prey is getting “smart”. Real conclusion is perhaps that wolf population is simply flat, and whether it’s density (wolves killing each other) or food, or a combination, is so complicated that it’s hard to be sure unless you get to see what happens for a long time. If deer population goes up, that’ll be interesting.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Well thank goodness we have a chance to really study it before calls for hunting seasons interfere. We might never have known about it with how quickly calls for hunting are put in place after a delisting. This is really interesting information, rork.

          It ought to throw a monkey wrench into all we’ve been told about wolf populations. They don’t need humans to manage them. And as we know there are non-lethal measures humans can also take to protect their overwhelming interests.

        • Louise Kane says:

          Thanks Rork, those conclusions make sense given that human hunting is not a factor and in looking back at the MN population plateau for 10 or more years.

          • Immer Treue says:

            I believe if one follows the deer population increase in MN, one can observe a correlating increase in the MN wolf population. After two rather benign MN winters, doe survival has increased, and a large fawn population will most likely surface. This should also correlate to more wolf pup survival this year… And one might expect an increase in the MN wolf population in the near years ahead unless, doe tags and hunter’s choice are offered, and the return of normal to severe Winter. It’s all about food.

            • Immer Treue says:

              I might also add, that the first wolf season in MN > 400 killed, depredation removal ~270, poaching ~ 10% population, in the ballpark of 1000 wolves disappeared that year. Population has been fluctuating 2200 to 2400 since. I’d look to an increase this year because of deer numbers on the rise.

            • rork says:

              I am repeating myself for others: I think in some circumstances it might not be food. If there’s lots of food it might get wolf-density dependent. That might be rare. Yellowstone history seems to point to food being key for example. We had enough deer in 2011 and 2012 that the plateau for wolves felt like density dependence. However, I could easily be wrong on such a complicated matter (just one example: deer are adapting). More data is helpful. I may need to live a very long time, and get lots smarter, but I’m not expecting that.

  55. New link. Not sure why the old one did not update. I changed the date from yesterday to today to keep it on top of the page.


    I suppose I can answer any questions you want right here, or if not, you can email me or maybe even call me.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      Thank you for reposting Robert. The first URL was one digit wrong — 04/27 instead of 04/28.

      • Hi Ralph. Pleasure to be commenting on your fine site. I’ve been reading this site for a while.

        I was just able to confirm via North Dakota Game and Fish that the wolverine story is true.

        It’s great news! You might want to run a piece about it.

        This is really exciting!

      • The story is ready to go now. I finally found the date of last recorded wolverine in North Dakota. It was in 1919. So this is the first wolverine recorded in North Dakota in 97 years and the first wolverine verified in North Dakota EVER.

        This is a cool story. I think the media is going to pick it up. It’s already going viral I think.

  56. Kathleen says:

    How to save life on earth according to EO Wilson.
    His bold plan to set aside half the earth for other species. An interview on tonight’s PBS Newshour.


    • Ida Lupines says:

      Wilson acknowledges that the world’s population will continue to grow from its current 7.3 billion to around 11 billion, before leveling out.

      I have read this from other sources too, and just have a couple of questions:

      1. How do they know this? I know that scientists and leaders don’t want to give up hope, but really now. I don’t see how saving any part of the planet – water, forests, land is even possible, let alone 1/2 the planet.

      2. Will it even matter at that point? What other creature on the planet has that high of a population, 11 billion? We won’t allow any other creature to get anywhere near that high.

  57. BOB says:

    NG claims we have a new wolf species living in Nepal.

  58. Jeff N. says:

    Lobo cross fostering in NM. NM Game and Fish claiming state’s rights being trampled and the sky is clearly falling.


  59. Leslie says:

    Billboard goes up in Cody. SF&W member spends $10,000 for a billboard that says “Wolf Griz Delist Hunt’. Here is the article that quotes the Billboard financier with photo

    • skyrim says:

      Big Wonderful Wyoming
      “Where men are men and Sheep are nervous”

    • Nancy says:

      A classic example of having more money than brains.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      These mouthy people making threats are a reason to think the grizzly will not be delisted.

      Read this column by Todd Wilkinson, “Beware Wyoming’s hostility to grizzlies.” Bill Addeo, a resident of Hoback Junction, is quoted as writing “I KILLED BEAR 399. So, if Wilkinson is doing a book on bear 399, he needs to talk to me about the bear’s last moments gasping for air as the cubs ran about. I was there taking pictures and have all the inside information.”

      Not only that, read Addeo’s comments beneath Wilkinson’s column.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Ralph, maybe revise that to, “These mouthy people making threats are a reason to think the grizzly will (SHOULD ) not be delisted.”

        That bizarre brand of hatred and glorified violence against an animal is common by these same types against wolves, but not only does it not matter but the violence escalated post delisting and the agencies are still pressing for more delisted populations.

        I wish it were not so, but it seems the USFWS is not the caretaker that is should be as required by law. They seem to be more like henchmen for the states.

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          That bizarre brand of hatred and glorified violence against an animal is common by these same types against wolves

          like in this excerpt from Carter Niemeyer’s “Wolf Land” (pp. 158-9):

          “Hey, did you hear?” asked a low voice in the flickering darkness. Another trapper I’d known for years was talking about collaring the latest Phantom Hill wolf.

          “One of our guys beat the shit out of it with a chunk of lodgepole while it was still drugged.” He went on to say that the wolf didn’t move for days, according to the radio collar. The wood-wielding trapper thought maybe he’d killed it, so he went back to check.

          “I guess it lived because the signal started moving away,” the trapper said, tossing a stick into the fire. ” Must’ve heard the asshole on his trail again.”

          …. It wasn’t enough to hate wolves for being back; some people needed to torture them. Too often, federal trappers believe they work for the ranchers. … Things are still no different, with some Wildlife Services trappers letting wolves die slowly in traps, gassing puppies out of dens, and keeping a running tally of the dead by marking their yellow airplane with paw print decals, the way an ace flighter would. They believed heartily in the old adage: The only good wolf is a dead wolf.”

  60. skyrim says:

    Over inflated Ego is also a factor here.

  61. Ida Lupines says:

    There’s something very wrong when ‘landowners’, hunters and ranchers cannot respect an animal that is collared and part of scientific studies – that is all. If one of the collared animals has preyed upon livestock, that’s one thing. Then have the appropriate govt’ F&W people address it.

    But to deliberately disrespect collared animals who are vulnerable because of the collars, after being given a delisting and hunting, says something bad about human nature. And people wonder why delisting is so bitterly contested. This is why. Give ’em an inch and they take a mile.

    I was a little disturbed by the new billboard – but let it do its work. It might be to advantage. Over at a certain blog that shall remain nameless, there’s a lively discussion about a previous billboard put up by wildlife advocates, that was screeched about and taken down quickly. Wonder what they have to say about this one?

  62. Ida Lupines says:

    Huh. I hadn’t realized it all had been verified. Well, hopefully it will all come back to bite him in the ass.

  63. Yvette says:

    Don’t forget to make your comments on the delisting of the grizzly, but I doubt anyone here needs to be reminded.

    Here are two interesting articles regarding the blame of the illegal killing of Scarface (bear 211) being directed toward a tribal member.

    “GOAL Tribal Coalition Co-founder, R. Bear Stands Last says the five month delay in announcing Scarface’s death was an intentional move by FWS to not “hinder” the “narrative” around the Yellowstone grizzly being delisted.

    “Telling millions of people who have seen Yellowstone’s most famous grizzly that the bear had been killed by a hunter would have changed the dynamic and inspired more opposition and negative public comment,” said Bear Stands Last.

    “It would have contributed to derailing [FWS’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, Chris] Servheen’s and [FWS Director, Daniel] Ashe’s agenda,” Bear Stands Last adds.”



      • Louise Kane says:

        “My message to trophy hunters who want to kill this sacred being on our sacred lands is this: go home,” says Johnny Arlee. “It’s crazy to have these rich white people coming here to kill, kill, kill and to brag about killing a grizzly bear. Human beings are crazy. There has got to be a change in our hearts,” concludes the Salish elder.”

        Indeed go home…stop killing
        What a thing to contemplate, wolves and bears subject to immediate slaughter post delisting so some sob can kill a magnificent being for a trophy. Things have got to change.

  64. Louise Kane says:


    anyone have any doubts about the grizzly slaughter that will occur post delisting look at this obnoxious billboard. Why do these people have such power? Why do others defend their right to kill for sport? Who gave that right to humans? I know some of the questions are rhetorical, or as John Prine once wrote a question not really a question if you know the answer to, but still… Who gets up in the morning and sets out to destroy such lives? I’m always amazed by the laws, by the audacity of people that like to kill and that they find common ground with so many others. The heart and mind of a trophy hunter must be a black hole where no compassion, empathy or understanding takes place.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Going for the subliminal with those four basic words is unnerving and I hope we’ve evolved beyond that behavior – so it will have a negative effect. blech!!!!

  65. Ida Lupines says:

    “In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be a tradeoff. You could have wolf harvests outside of the parks, which also bring in a lot of economic activity, and it wouldn’t have an effect on the populations or probability that tourists are going to see wildlife in the parks.”

    What an offensive thing to say! Obviously, it ain’t and you can’t! So there’s no sense tying to try to artificially create something like that, it is an unattainable goal and harmful to wildlife, and vistors’ positive experiences in the national parks, who are the majority! The environment is much different than it was 200 years ago.

    We hear so much about how ‘wildlands’ are not the same any more from those rambunctious gardeners, the same should apply for rambunctious killers (not just in the US but in other unfortunate countries where we have set foot).

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I guess stating something so obvious is greatly offensive, even the fact that life-taking would be encouraged as as economically desirable, and acceptable! That is about as coldly ‘rational’ as you can get.

      Due to this behavior in the past, winner take all mentality, it cannot continue, and has affected people of modern times in every way. We can’t realistically expect to have the same things and live the same ways as our forebears.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        ^^without some great moral and ethical tradeoffs, which I am not willing to make nor accept. I’m glad I won’t be around to see how bad it eventually gets.

  66. Ida Lupines says:

    Don’t know if anyone has seen this? From a former USF&W Special Agent (that alone speaks volumes, I think, in addition to the article) re grizzly delisting:


  67. Yvette says:

    There is a 2009 research paper by D.A. Clark and D.S. Slocum titled, “Respect for Grizzly Bears: An Aboriginal Approach for Co-existence and Resilience”

    Though the research is from the Yukon, up in Canada, and with the First Nations people in that region, it is still relevant to issues here. I hope you guys will read it. If you’re going to comment on the delisting, please consider this perspective because here in the U.S. there is ongoing controversy and cultural conflict with this proposed delisting. This paper can be accessed for free.


    Additionally, the USFWS failed to follow the Clinton executive order #13175. Every federal agency is mandated to have a written government-to-government consultation policy and the policy has specific requirements. The USFWS did not follow their own written and legally required policy. Some of the importance of EO #13175 is Captured in the research paper even though the tribes and the political boundaries are different. The political boundaries are of little importance regarding capturing the tenet of the cultural mores that guide some people and their relationship with some wildlife species.

    • Nancy says:

      Some hope from those that can provide support, Louise 🙂


      • Ida Lupines says:

        This is amazing. 🙂

        I hope the same can be done for elephants; those elephants kidnapped to American zoos, for example. I felt so bad seeing how these lions’ physical conditions had deteriorated so. I hope they will have a happy life back in the African sanctuary.

        Ringling had its last elephant show ever.

        And we’re always talking about the risk to humans from zoonotic diseases. Elephants contract TB from humans. Captivity is not safe for them:

        As of 2015, tuberculosis appears to be widespread among captive elephants in the US. It is believed that the animals originally acquired the disease from humans, a process called reverse zoonosis. Because the disease can spread through the air to infect both humans and other animals, it is a public health concern affecting circuses and zoos. – Wikipedia

        Linked articles/studies:



      • Louise Kane says:

        +1 Nancy, there are some good people, its hard to remember. Its just to bad every bit of kindness has to be fought so hard to achieve. It should be the other way around, every injustice and act of cruelty an unusual event.

        • Nancy says:



          From a commenter, who I believe summed it up well:

          “Babies are useful to study because they aren’t aware they are being studied, and they are young enough that their personalities aren’t very developed yet. I believe that most babies would mistreat the “bad puppets” because it was motivated by seeing the other mistreated. But, with that being said, I’m assuming that these babies come from decent homes and are not neglected. I believe more in the determinism side of behavior and psychology. Environment and upbringing are very important variables, that should be included in the study. So, the sample may have been skewed in that respect. I think that our actions are determined by genes and environment. Factors that also affect behavior; intelligence and judgement are also predetermined”

          • Ida Lupines says:

            I think ‘are we inherently good or evil’ is rather archaic for today’s world. We’re who we are, in varying combinations of good and not-so-good.

            Like any other creature, we are motivated by survival. We do what we need to do to survive; and it extends to all of humanity as well, not always just to ourselves. With our so-called advanced brains and reasoning capacity, it just manifests itself differently. Our nests are more elaborate, for example.

            I just wish we could see it within ourselves to extend our empathy to other living things. There have always been people who do, just not enough of them.

            So we hold up a rare example of some who do care about animal welfare as if to say ‘See? We did this!’ but they are far from the majority. For every one example, you can find hundreds of either outright cruelty or harmful stuck in the status quo.

  68. http://www.inforum.com/news/4022974-wolverine-sighting-first-north-dakota-more-century

    Wolverine story is a true story. I told you guys it was true. I cannot believe how many morons on the web were accusing me of making this story up. I have a BA in Journalism and am a former magazine editor. I never make up anything. People are way too skeptical for their own good nowadays. What’s with all the hyper-skepticism anyway? Everything is either a conspiracy, a lie, a fraud, a joke, a con, or made-up. Nothing’s ever real.

    • Yvette says:

      To heck with the skepticism and conspiracy theories. What struck me from the article is….”first wolverine seen in ND since the 1800’s”……..”it was SHOT last week.”

      Nothing ever changes, does it? I suppose ‘harassing cattle’ is now an excuse like ‘I thought it was a coyote’.

      Sometimes it’s hard to fathom how stupid we are. A wolverine, in a region where it’s been missing for well over 100 years, “harassing cattle”. I wonder is the trigger happy cowboy would pass for a coyote.

  69. Kathleen says:

    “Wild Science: Wilderness & Climate Change”
    from the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute in Missoula

  70. Louise Kane says:


    coyote gives birth while caught in a trap, luckily a rescue has the poor thing. I really hate trapping.

    • Yvette says:

      Wild Heart Ranch is the rehabber and that is in my area. Annette is 100% dedicated to rehabilitating injured wildlife and releasing them. The coyote you linked came in last week, I believe. May have been the week before that. Last I checked she And her pups were doing great. How unfortunate to know she has a mate out there who lost her. Had some punk not caught her in that trap she would have given birth in her den rather than with her leg injured and in a trap. Annette seemed to be pretty fired up over this one.

      By the time this mom and her pups can be well enough for release she will have probably lost her mate. The only good thing is she ended up in the the best hands possible. This coyote mum and her pups will live to fight another day. BTW, anyone who wants to donate to a fantastic wildlife rehabilitation facility Wild Heart Ranch is a great one, or just go to their website and buy a shirt or something else. It’s spring, so they are busy with rehabbing lots of babies.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        That’s great tho, a miracle that she and the pups survived. Never say never, are they planning to release her and the pups back into the wild? She’ll find her mate if he’s still alive, I’m sure of it.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Buying a shirt sounds like a great idea for spring. 🙂

  71. Cody Coyote says:

    This is how we roll in Wyoming.

    The local Wildlife Services lead agent in Cody , Jim Pehringer age 47, moonlights as the Game Manager for the 11,000 acre mostly private land Antlers Ranch on the Wood River SW of Meeteetse. A day job as coyote killer and wolf wrangler, and a side job as hunting manager in premium Whitetail deer habitat. In my county , Wildlife Services also contracts with the State predator control boards at the county level…state pays half, county pays half. But all those animal elimination duties apparently left time for other wildlife-related pursuits , albeit under the counter.

    Pehringer just got busted for 8 counts of illegal outfitting. The investigator was the former Sheriff of Park County , who alleges Pehringer outfitted at least 8 different deer hunters back in autumn 2013. Pehringer pled not guilty to the misdemeanor charges recently. He’s been with WS for years.

    This was all reported in today’s print edition of the Powell Tribune here in Park County WY , but the story does not appear online ( yet). Which is why I’m summing it here now that it’s public record..

    Comment: those Wildlife services guy just don’t know when to quit when it comes to killing animals , do they ?

      • skyrim says:

        Thanks Cody and rork.

        “The state of Wyoming ((generally)) requires people to get an outfitting license if they’re being compensated for helping big or trophy game hunters”.
        Something about the placement of “generally” is a bit telling here……
        Reads like the prosecution is showing their cards pretty early. (Assuming the statement is not the reporters)

        • Nancy says:

          “Have you ever been on an outfitted hunt where you suspected your guide had been the cook or maybe the wrangler the day before you showed up? Well, perhaps he had.

          Turns out the title “guide” can be used rather loosely depending on where you hunt. In North America, there are no federal laws that define, test, or regulate hunting guides–and often no state or provincial regulations, either.

          Until a prospective guide passes the appropriate tests, he cannot legally guide hunters. In many, perhaps most, cases, however, the Board of Guides and Outfitters is more interested in keeping track of illegal guiding activity (guiding without a license) than guide competency”


    • Cody Coyote says:

      A more detailed version of this story was published later this afternoon by the same reporter at a separate news website:


    • Ida Lupines says:

      Unbelievable. I thought this had been stopped already? I remember something about it being challenged in court?

      Killing birds now to save them later is something I cannot get on board with.

      Same goes for mega solar farms. I hope there are not designs on land after the cattle are gone to replace them with solar – there’s been a lot written about how they have displaced desert tortoises and how USF&W had to ‘euthanize’ them, after trying to ‘relocate’ them without success; and how they fry birds in mid-flight! George W. or Ralph M. I believe have written about it here.

      At least after cattle are gone there’s hope for recovery – with massive wind and solar, the threat is permanent and growing. With all the land we already occupy, it is unconscionable to take more. There are plenty of parking lots and housing developments for rooftop, much more efficient.

  72. Nancy says:

    “National Trapping Association President Chris McAllister says the suit is an attempt to shut down the industry”


    An industry, by the way, that’s had little if any oversight for decades, regarding the damage it’s done or is doing to the ecosystem, by taking out key predators…. for profit.

  73. Kathleen says:

    “Montana outlines specifics of possible grizzly hunt”
    A spring hunt & a fall hunt.

    “Prominent biologists ask Pres. Obama to halt grizzly delisting” (maybe this was already posted & I missed it)

    • Ida Lupines says:

      A spring and fall hunt? They can’t be serious.

      I had to stop reading some of the comments to the second article, the sheer density of some of them is giving me a headache. When I read them, I truly fear for the future.

    • Yvette says:

      We should band together with Doug Peacock and http://www.goaltribal.org to convince President Obama to stop the delisting of the grizzly.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Kathleen posted about hunters wanting not only a fall hunt, but a spring hunt too! They are not only pushing for one hunting season, but two! It must be a joke? Talk about nerve. Where is the compromise here, except for wildlife advocates as always? I don’t see how the Interior Dept. can support this as conservation. No way, and no additional wolves at Gardiner either. I hope they are in for a battle.

        Not at all concerned about the conservation and welfare of a species. Spring would be the absolute worst time to hunt. They don’t even care, as long as they get what they want. I don’t know why the government continues to roll over for them!

        That vile video with a guy continually shooting a grizzly for fun is posted too. A real example of an ethical hunter.

  74. Louise Kane says:


    trophy hunting proponents not convincing the public that they are “conservationists”

  75. Ida Lupines says:

    I’m glad that TPTB are starting to see monuments and protections in terms of corridors:


    But, we’re still waiting here on the East Coat for Nantucket Sound to be declared a marine sanctuary! It’s been proposed twice, and nothing has been done. The East Coast apparently is forgotten as an industrial waste dump. This Administration supports a wind farm right in the middle of it, the absolute worst spot anyone could pick; for one thing, it’s critical habitat of endangered right whales, with a population of only 500:

    “Information from the New England Aquarium states only 17 right whale calves were born this year in the waters off Georgia and this is the second killed this year.”


  76. Gary Humbard says:

    Cougar study in Yellowstone.


  77. Immer Treue says:

    Perhaps, yet still a bit premature to raise the glasses high, but studies of Yellowstone tree recovery continue to reinforce benefit provided by wolves.


    • BOB says:

      The question then becomes when are the tree’s in your backyard going to start growing?

      • Immer Treue says:

        The trees in my “backyard” will grow much better with a few less does, a few more wolves, In particular white pine.

        Also, could use some assistance in knocking back balsam fir, which nothing in this vicinity eats, save spruce budworm, and they kill the balsam, increasing fire hazards.

        • BOB says:

          You’ve had a stable wolf population for what 20 years and still no tree growth.
          No hunting of wolves, so how do you expect to have a few more wolves?

          • Immer Treue says:

            Things go boom in the woods, and seldom is a question asked. On average, 10% of the MN wolf population disappears by these means.

            Deer begin mowing down white pines by the first snows, and if not covered by snow, very few pines will survive the scrutiny of does.

          • Immer Treue says:

            That 10% illegal take also occurred during hunting seasons. If only people would leave them alone.,there’s no livestock up here, and a few dogs dumb enough to go running in the woods after wolves…

            • BOB says:

              Far as I know 10% take does not lower overall wolf populations.
              Second that 10% number comes from your math conversion of collared wolves that get killed. Just my own research but some day I expect to see research showing collared wolves are just dumber or if your prefer get killed at a higher rate. Either way I doubt your wolf population will ever effect the deer population enough to save your trees. Just go back and read your own comments about wolf and deer populations. Nature is in a constant state of change.

              • Immer Treue says:

                There’s always paper flags on growth leaders, and the hope of antler less hunting next season, in particular in the moose zone in which I reside.

  78. Nancy says:


    And here I thought all the smoke in the area today was from some rancher burning piles of dead or dying willows, trashed by their livestock. A common practice in these parts.

  79. Nancy says:

    “One man named J.T. Reynolds spent his career fighting for better treatment of minorities and women in what he describes as the white-boy culture of the agency. Now retired, he used to work as a chief ranger, superintendent, and in several regional offices. During his time with the agency, he saw that women and people of color were not being promoted, recruited or hired as often as he thought they should have been.

    While deputy superintendent of Grand Canyon in the late 1990s, working under superintendent Rob Arnberger, Reynolds started receiving complaints from women in the park about the gender wage gap, unfair treatment by supervisors, lack of promotional opportunities, crude comments and other forms of sexual harassment”

    This doesn’t surprise me given how much of that “white boy” culture/mentality goes on still in other branches of law enforcement & the military.


  80. Kayla says:

    In today’s Jackson Hole Daily, there is an article entitled … “Trump Would Back Many Land Transfers to States”. He would not only give some land back to the states but would grant locals much more say in land management decisions and you know what this means. This means Bad News For The Environment and Bad News for everyone who likes to recreate on the country’s public lands rather to hike, backpack, hunt, or fish. It would be like everything else … ALL Just about the money.

    Now as for the Democrats, BOTH Clinton and Sanders OPPOSE all federal Land Transfers. So if one likes to recreate on the public lands, and recreating in any fashion on the country’s public lands is a part of one’s life …. guess this election means only one avenue. Why does so many fall into the trap of it’s all about the money when Life offers so much more then just money, money, and more money.

    • Gary Humbard says:

      Kayla, I read an essay from Hank Fischer of Defenders of Wildlife regarding a proposal to reintroduce grizzlies into the Bitteroots in the late 1990s. The committee that recommended the reintroduction was formed “bottom up”; that is 5 local citizens that represented woods products, mining, hunting, recreation and ranching along with one FS, USFWS, and IDFG representative. Mr. Fischer was surprised at how many common goals these diverse citizens had and until politics got involved (George W. administration) it was sailing along. It took 2 years and ~1 million dollars to get all of the legal paperwork done.

      Conversely, the reintroduction of wolves cost over ten million dollars and at least 10 years before wolves were reintroduced and even then, without compensation to ranchers, it would have never happened. It was a heavy top down committee.

      Some folks will argue reintroducing wolves vs grizzly bears is not comparing apples to apples. Maybe not, but they both affect local actions.

      Under federal policies, once a federal action is proposed, each citizen has an equal say; it’s just how best to formulate the proposed action. I believe the more local support you can get, the better; and that there is much more common ground than most people think.

  81. Gary Humbard says:

    If anyone is knowledgeable about this issue, please chime in.

    If you have a severe wound that is spurting blood (12 woodland caribou remaining) putting a band aid (killing wolves) will not save yourself. It’s all about habitat, and until BC applies a tourniquet, and puts a moratorium on cutting old growth, the bleeding will not stop.


    • Immer Treue says:

      I’ve locked horns with the daffodils on this issue, and their response is, that there are plenty of wolves, what’s wrong with trying to save caribou?

      The problem is, it’s more than wolves.,if there are only 12 caribou as you cited, that’s not enough to support the wolves that were killed. They are eating something else,,most likely moose and deer, that once were absent from the area. Old growth is the woodland caribou’s domain, very low productivity, so it doesn’t support other ungulates.

      Without removing moose/deer/ or whatever else wolves are feeding upon, killing wolves only opens area for new packs to move in, threatening caribou, but primarily feeding upon other ungulates. It becomes killing wolves just to kill wolves with no long term benefit to the caribou.

      • JEFF E says:

        The problem with debating a daffodil is your debating with a daffodil; much like trying to have a conversation with a fence post.
        After a while it is just not worth the time and effort.

    • BOB says:

      Interesting comparison.
      Habitat or the lack of isn’t killing the caribou.
      The deer and moose aren’t killing the caribou.
      Tourniquets are a quick short term solution.
      Wait until the habitat recovers and there won’t be any woodland caribou left.
      There’s one choice kill the wolves to give yourself time [apply the tourniquet], then work on all the other problems, like too many deer while the habitat recovers.

      • Immer Treue says:

        The tourniquet is a rather unfitting analogy if one continues cutting the afflicted individual/system elsewhere. One must also release that tourniquet periodically lest gangrene sets in.

    • Jay says:

      In fairness, BC has experimented with significant reductions of moose in experimental areas to see if reducing wolves’ primary prey causes some relief to caribou, their secondary prey. Woodland caribou are a threatened species in southern Canada, so they are required to take measures to save them (including reducing predation–which is the proximate cause, moose population increase caused by logging being the ultimate cause). Whether it’s a lost cause or not to save some of these tiny herds is the million dollar question.

  82. Ida Lupines says:

    The problem is that habitat will not recover without some serious efforts from humans to curtail their activities. And what do we do when there’s an event that humans hadn’t ‘planned’ on, like disease, or a wildfire, or other climate event?

    But rather than check our own activities, we’ll go for the temporary fix every time. This mirrors the ‘wild horses are wrecking the landscape and need to go, in the cruelest ways possible’ mantra, where we refuse to take into consideration the damage millions of cattle do.

    Here’s an old article about humans’ carving up caribou habitat, but when history repeats itself, it is still valuable info:

    “The development of the tar sands and other oil and gas fields in Alberta has carved up the Canadian province’s boreal forest, threatening herds of woodland caribou. But rather than protect caribou habitat, officials have taken a controversial step: the large-scale killing of the wolves that prey on the caribou.”


    • Ida Lupines says:

      It shows you just how long the killing of wolves has been going on as well, with no or very little steps taken about habitat then or in the future.

  83. Ida Lupines says:

    But there’s hope yet (Feb. 2016 article):

    “Canada’s tar sands industry is in crisis as oil prices plummet, pipeline projects are killed, and new governments in Alberta and Ottawa vow less reliance on this highly polluting energy source. Is this the beginning of the end for the tar sands juggernaut?”

    Once Unstoppable, Tar Sands Now Battered from All Sides

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Reading through the article, rather prophetic:

      “While it may not be time to raise the white flag of surrender in Fort McMurray, the tar sands capital in northern Alberta, the industry is suddenly weathering a perfect storm that analysts say has significantly altered its prospects.”

  84. Gary Humbard says:

    Arizona Game and Fish KILLs versus “euthanize”, bear and the public is questioning why. I don’t think the bear was suffering so lets call it as it is.

    You live in Flagstaff and are nearly surrounded by national forest; citizens reap the benefits but the agency is not willing to accept the risks. Seems contradictory, wrong and CYA!


  85. Patrick says:

    Large ranch acquired to expand the American Prairie Reserve!


  86. Ida Lupines says:

    I hope this isn’t representative of today’s National Park visitors. I read this after a story about a selfie-taker who knocked over and smashed a 126-year old statue:

    Guns Beer and Vomit: Rampage Leaves Endangered Fish Dead in Death Valley

    As opposed to blood, sweat and tears, I guess. 🙁

  87. Kathleen says:

    “U.S. Courts Crack Down on Feds over Mass Wildlife Culls:
    Judges say wildlife officials have been slack on science in assessing the need for exterminating wolves, wolverines and cormorants”
    ‘slack on science’…ya think???


    • Ida Lupines says:

      I hadn’t seen this post, Kathleen. Yay! I look forward to reading it more thoroughly.

      “Slack on Science” – now there’s a slogan and logo long overdue.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Sad. I suppose it would never occur to some that this animal was remarkable. What an idiot.

  88. Kathleen says:

    “Montana proposes to triple wolf harvest near Yellowstone”

    Killing–you can never have too much of it.


  89. Kathleen says:

    Oh, here’s a shocker! “Study suggests wolf harvest reduces park sightings” Please see item directly above. Talk about killing the goose that lays the golden eggs…geez.


  90. Cody Coyote says:

    The iconic 8-9 year old Wolverine known as M56 who was tagged in Wyoming’s Grand Teton Park and epically wandered across four states- the first Wolverine seen in Colorado in nearly a century – was shot and killed by a North Dakota rancher who saw it near his cows. Shoot first, ask questions later….Grrr.


    • Yvette says:

      This crap is beyond old. Something has to change. “Harassing cattle” I remember reading that a few weeks ago that the rancher said that the wolverine was harassing the cattle. The article I read then did not identify the wolverine as you did but simply reported the first one to be seen in ND in a 100 years was shot and killed. Really? Doubtful he even knew what it was. Have wolverines ever harassed cattle?

      We need new laws that have some meat to them where these trigger happy people learn to think before shooting. Good luck.

      • A wolverine can absolutely kill a calf and they do kill cows. I recall a Norwegian-American who grew up in Norway, went to the US for a long time and then went back to Norway recalling in his memoirs how wolverines had killed three cattle on their farm. At least one was a calf and at least one was a full-grown cow. I forget which the third one was.

      • Louise kane says:

        We need a new federal law protecting wildlife from livestock and livestock producers

        Wild residents first
        Human interests second

        Now that would be progress

  91. Jerry Black says:

    Montana Seeks to Triple Wolf Kill Adjacent to YNP


    Interesting that Marc Cooke, of Wolves of the Rockies which has over 200,000 members, would make the statement below considering that he and his group refuses to support I-177.
    This initiative would ban recreational and commercial trapping on Montana’s public lands.

    “Marc Cooke with the advocacy group Wolves of the Rockies said he’s urging officials to drop their plans to up the quota in the 60-square mile hunting district around Gardiner.
    “It’s kind of ridiculous that they would consider bumping it up to six, considering it’s such a small amount of land,” Cooke said. “These Yellowstone wolves and these people who go to Yellowstone to watch wildlife they need to be heard, too.”

    • Anja Heister says:

      Please support I-177 in Montana. If it gets on the 2016 ballot, the initiative will END RECREATIONAL and COMMERCIAL TRAPPING of wildlife on Montana’s public lands, including WOLVES! Request that WOLVES OF THE ROCKIES SUPPORT I-177… it is beyond me why Marc Cooke and other wolf “protectors” would not support our efforts to end trapping!

      • Louise kane says:

        Hi Anjia
        I believe it is similar to Conservstion northwest past positions
        A fear of offending the offensive

      • Jerry Black says:

        Come on Marc Cooke…let’s hear the reason you and your group of wolf”advocates” refuse to get out there and help with this initiative.

      • Louise kane says:

        Oh and thank you Anjia for all your on the ground work to end suffering through anti trapping campaigns! Trapping is indecent

  92. Nancy says:


    Appears to be a lot of pushing and shoving going on, when it comes to APR and a grazing allotment in Montana.

    • Nancy says:

      And a follow up of course:

      “The purpose of the Taylor Grazing Act is to stabilize the livestock industry and to permit the use of the public range according to the needs and the qualifications of the livestock operators with base holdings.”[3] The Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) in 1976, and the Public Rangelands Improvement Act (PRIA) in 1978, also confirm that grazing permits are intended for grazing purposes only. Both those statutes define “grazing permit and lease” as “any document authorizing use of public lands … for the purpose of grazing domestic livestock.”

      And might I add, the HELL with wildlife and any past or future claims, they might have on public lands regardless of public opinion…..


      • BOB says:

        More rancher bashing Nancy?
        Over 75% of Montana wildlife lives on private land in Montana with all those domestic livestock. Ask a hunter if they would rather hunt private or public land?
        I can show you millions of acres of Montana land with no grazing and a pitiful little amount of wildlife compared to grazed lands. Most forage benefits from multi species grazing. But hey your the expert.

        • Jerry Black says:

          “Over 75% of Montana wildlife lives on private land in Montana with all those domestic livestock.”REALLY?
          Actually “live on” or just visit at night to graze on the green forage? Then head out and bed down other places…..because I see plenty of elk and deer that come down to feed in the evening and return to “public” land by morning….. that’s in the Blackfoot at my son in laws ranch….I’m sure it’s the same in other areas.

          • BOB says:

            “at my son in laws ranch.” Really?

            From what my sources tell me your son in law wouldn’t have a pot to pee in if his father hadn’t given him one.<