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 May 21, 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.

592 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife news? July 20, 2016 edition

  1. Sunday, July 17, 2016


    kind regards, terry

  2. Jim Wiegand says:

    My comments for the Wind industry/FWS proposal to kill 6200 eagles annually are very newsworthy…………..I have reviewed the recently completed FWS status report on bald and golden eagles: ”Bald and Golden Eagles: Status, trends, and estimation of sustainable take rates in the United States and the associated DPEIS for the proposed rule. Golden eagle populations are far from being stable nor are they increasing.
    My comments provided in the attached file prove both of these reports are filled with methodology bias, filtered and highly flawed non-scientific information rendering these false reports useless in determining any Action on the proposed rule. In fact these two reports are a complete fabrication created for the benefit of the wind industry.
    It defies all logic and moral conduct that enough cheap energy is being exported from the US that could produce triple the energy production from all of America’s eagle killing wind turbines, while dirtbags hiding behind fraudulent research are peddling these worthless turbines to Americans.
    I have integrated and provided links with these comments. The information found at these links are to be included as part of my comments.
    Read my entire 5000 word scientific analysis of This proposal here:

  3. Ida Lupines says:

    Thank you both for your concern and informed comments!

    • Jim Wiegand says:

      I have been after this industry for years for their fraud. I have even offered to help with any wind industry court cases for free, with expert testimony and specific questions for the shill researchers so I could exposed the fraud. But important cases keep getting dismissed by inside judges. I wanted to speak at a recent Altamont hearing but they only allowed 2 minutes speaking time and let the shill researches talk for 20-30 minutes. I then asked Alameda County Supervisors in an email to hold another meeting where I could talk and ask questions of any of the researchers. I never received a response. This industry is a complete fraud and inside rigging is what is keeping it afloat.

  4. Jim Laybourn says:

    On the morning of July 20th I found a grizzly cub of the year killed on the highway west of the summit of Togwotee Pass. I contacted a Wyoming Game and Fish Department team that was camped down the road to come to the scene. The mother bear and it’s surviving cub were still nearby and she kept returning to the area. She had drug the dead cub off of the road and had returned to it once while I was there and stood over it. Both she and the surviving cub seemed greatly distressed and were making unusual noises that I had never heard before. I was very concerned that she would also be hit and killed by traffic if she stayed in the area. The Wyoming Game and Fish biologists removed the cub and we remained on scene and kept an eye on the bear and her cub who circled around several times but did not approach the road again.
    I had just recently read a National Geographic article about wildlife mouri ing the death of the relatives, and this certainly appeared to be what we were witnessing.
    Another grizzly had been hit by a car and killed on the same road last year, please contact the Wyoming highway department and urged them to try to do more to alert the public to the wildlife hazards on this highway. On a 5 mile stretch of the road we have seen a dead fox, three dead porcupines, a deer and now the grizzly cub in only the last few weeks.

    • Kathleen says:

      Yes, the idea that animals mourn their lost loved ones is not new. There are many books on the topic–the first one I read was “When Elephants Weep: The emotional lives of animals” (1996)by J. Moussaieff Masson. Another is “The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy — and Why They Matter” (2008) by Marc Bekoff.

      I saw (and will never forget) bison mourn a dead herd mate shortly after he was killed by a shooter (there was no “hunting” involved) outside of Yellowstone. From the Animal Sentience journal:

      “…it is not only big-brained mammals like elephants, apes, and cetaceans who can be said to mourn, but also a wide variety of other animals, including domestic companions like cats, dogs, and rabbits; horses and farm animals; and some birds. … Human grief may be
      unique in our species’ ability to anticipate death and to consider its meaning across time and space, and yet such hypothesized species-specific features do not imply a more profound emotional experience in humans compared to other animals.”

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Ugh. Doesn’t it make our callous disregard for any creature other than ourselves (and even that is questionable at times)that much more difficult to take. Very sad about the bear mom and cub. 🙁

        Cute anecdote: I happened to observe a male ruby-throated hummingbird just sitting on the deck railing for several minutes the other day, not moving. Then, another male, much smaller, fed at the feeders, while he seemed to watch. Normally, the hummingbirds are extremely territorial. Could it have been offspring, and papa teaching where to feed? It struck me as very much in common with us.

    • Nancy says:

      “I had just recently read a National Geographic article about wildlife mourning the death of the relatives, and this certainly appeared to be what we were witnessing”

      Witnessed wildlife mourning over their dead family members on roads and highways, more than a few times over the years I’ve lived in Montana, Jim.

      Contacting highway departments will do nothing, sadly, about alerting or encouraging people to slow down. The human species is too damn much in a hurry these days to care about other species that might just intersect with their schedules on roadways 🙂

      Yeah, “they” put some signs up “Wildlife crossings next X amount of miles” but few locals and tourists, in a hurry, pay any attention and those signs don’t even cover (if they’ve done any kind of research at all) all the areas where wildlife have a tenancy to cross (dips and tree covered areas) year after year because they have no choice anymore when migrating back and forth over man made roads and highways.

  5. Yvette says:

    A new Chicago city ordinance will protect urban coyotes by designating them as beneficial predators. There will no longer be any attempts to control or kill them unless there is a problem coyote. No more hunting, trapping or poisoning.

    Big win for coyotes! Big win for humans. Not so good for the rats and geese.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Yes. Wow, isn’t that great! As it should be. Thanks for posting, Yvette.

    • Louise Kane says:

      awesome Yvette thanks for posting
      This is how wildlife/predators should be treated.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Do they take these kinds of things into account when determining hunting quotas, I wonder, or just appeasement of the squeaky wheels?

      • Logan says:

        They take it into account although sometimes it goes in the opposite direction than what you would think.

        In the past there have been times that due to a large fire in winter range the harvest quotas are liberalized to reduce the animal population because the carrying capacity of the land has been so reduced.

  6. Kathleen says:

    “Hours of Beauty: Terry Tempest Williams makes a plea for our national parks” Book review:

    We went to hear Terry Tempest Williams speak last night in Missoula at the university–as always, it was a beautiful and inspirational address promoting not just her newest book (The Hour of Land: A Personal Topography of America’s National Parks) but the necessary defense of not only national parks, but all our public lands now under siege.

  7. Kathleen says:

    From Wilderness Watch:
    “Tell Congress to Reject a Bill to Allow Bikes and Other Machines in Wilderness! We need your help to protect Wilderness across the country!”

    “Utah Republican Senators Mike Lee and Orrin Hatch have introduced a bill, “The Human-Powered Travel in Wilderness Areas Act,” that would open Wilderness to mountain bikes and other machines for the first time ever. The bill was instigated by the Sustainable Trails Coalition, one of the most anti-Wilderness organizations to form in recent years.”
    Read more from Wilderness Watch:

    (I posted a previous message similar to this one but with a link that flagged it for moderation. Trying again.)

  8. Louise Kane says:

    Please take a moment to comment against the USFS proposed timber logging and road expansion proposals. Option 1 is the option that is no change or no logging.

    please spread

    • Louise Kane says:

      Comments can be made via email to

      • Gary Humbard says:

        The comment period is over (July 18). From a former BLM employee who worked on many environmental analysis documents, I can tell you your comments now will NOT become part of the official record and that is critical.

        65 million board feet is a lot of trees and hopefully the agency will choose the least amount of volume for their alternative. They will NOT pick the no action alternative unless it’s found to be in violation of a law(s).

  9. Jerry Black says:

    “Rushing to Stop a Fire That Never Came”…Seattle Times

    • Gary Humbard says:

      I’m not familiar with the area, but it seems like an over-reaction to the deaths of USFS firefighters and the record year of acres burned. The death of the firefighters had NOTHING to do with this cut line as they died due to mistakes made by them and/or their supervisors. I was a wildland firefighter and there are certain rules that if followed, 99% of the time, you will live to see another day and suffer no major injuries.

      I seriously question the need to do it, but it should have been done with better supervision; requiring leaving the biggest trees standing that are more fire resistant, leaving all cut trees greater than 20″ diameter on the ground for wildlife species, protecting streams and other environmental protections.

      An independent panel needs to do a review of this project and come back with recommendations. Then the USFS needs to answer why they will not institute each of those recommendations. Now that its done, how will the agency maintain the fire break to keep it effective with it’s current lack of funding. IMHO, predicting where fire breaks should be constructed is like winning the lottery and a complete waste of money. Unfortunately and this is big, firefighting dollars do not come from local districts and is instead “emergency funding” which is basically unlimited, no questions asked, whatever it takes to “fight the fire”. Since this project was a revenue maker, it’s no surprise that it was completed when only 1% of a probability it would be effective.

      The heads of most private organizations would be run up the fire pole, but the USFS promoted him!

  10. Leslie Patten says:

    A dangerous man. Trump considers oil and gas mogul for secretary of energy

  11. Kathleen says:

    From the Mountain Lion Foundation (not sure if this has been posted, but to be on the safe side):

    “The US Fish and Wildlife Service is accepting public comments on their plan to remove the eastern cougar from the Endangered Species List and declare it an extinct subspecies. We believe the federal government should instead be working to restore mountain lions to their historic range . Let them walk unhindered through the prairie states, the midwest, and find a home in the Adirondacks, and the Appalachias. Every single person who signs means so much!”

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Why is this country allowing the East to turn into an industrial wasteland? There is not consideration for any new monuments or national parks (We’re waiting for one in Maine and for Nantucket Sound to be declared a marine sanctuary!). It’s always about the West, and Western politics, especially their views on wolves, dominate the entire country (when those most vocal tell outsiders to mind their own business)! There have been articles and opinion pieces recently about how cougars could the deer population in check here.

      I’d love to see some semblance of wildness, or a lot more than we have, and for what we have to be better ‘managed’ and cared for. Our large populations are concentrated in and near the cities, and we’ve got lots of wild areas that could support cougars and even wolves.

      The ‘Northeast Kingdom’ would like to have some of her royalty back!

  12. Gary Humbard says:

    Protect natural habitat and they will come. Look at the predation sites in the relatively small Griffith Park.

    Another example how installing GPS collars can benefit wildlife; providing data indicating the importance of quality natural habitat and where corridors should be protected to provide areas for dispersal to wildlife.

    I’ve seen only three cougars in the wild, but they were magnificent animals and IMHO should not be hunted by humans unless on their VERY RARE occasions, they attack and injure or worse kill someone. Once they taste human flesh, they are likely to try again and again.

    • Louise Kane says:

      I agree with your post but ask how do you qualify the idea that once they taste human flesh they are likely to try again. When cougars have attacked humans I have not read much about the reason for the attack, protection of young, predatory response, hunger etc…I’ve seen less on anything related to statistical likelihood of recidivist attacking behavior.

  13. Louise Kane says:

    Tim Kaine is cosponsor of the dreadful “BiPartisan Sportsman Act” I wrote this to his website. To his credit he is one of the few that allow comments from others outside of Virginia. This is his website if you want to send a message in advance of a possible election

    Dear Senator Kaine,

    I’m a long time Democrat and also a wildlife advocate. Although I can’t imagine a world with Donald Trump as President, I was disappointed to see your appointment as VP candidate. The reason, your stance on wildlife, hunting and the co sponsorship of the BI Partisan Sportsman Act. This Act has repeatedly failed and for good reason. The Act in its many versions attempts to bypass the underlying intent of some National Parks and other public lands by expanding hunter access in some of the few areas that may be limited in hunting or that provide refuge for wild animals, and for humans that do not want to be exposed to hunting.

    As habitat dwindles in the US and globally, wild animals have less ability to live their lives and reproduce without the stress of hunting, hounding, trapping and harassment. Humans that value wildlife and are non consumptive users also find fewer places of refugee from guns and violence. Our public lands should not be exploited any more than they already are.

    Additionally, the ACT especially is troubling because it specifically targets wolves and ignores recent court rulings that have remanded management of wolves back to the federal government because they continue to be mismanaged by the states. Every ruling ever challenged in the courts regarding wolves have been found in favor of retained protections for wolves because agriculture, hunting and livestock industries continue to scapegoat wolves despite independent scientific consensus that these animals are ecologically beneficial and do not represent the exaggerated threat that special interests rant about. There is a level of persecution against these animals and other predators that is quite difficult to comprehend in light of the body of work that dispels the myths surrounding wolves and other wild predators.

    Finally, this act would also exempt polar bear trophies from import regulations, and has in the past allowed for expanded access to parks and public lands using motorized vehicles and exempts lead ammunition from regulation. The Act also includes the expansion of trapping, a pastime that creates excessive suffering and is banned by 38 civilized nations around the world and that most Americans do not even understand is still legal.

    Isn’t it time to explore all sides of the issue when considering the impact of hunting, and of the technologies that now exist to make most hunting unfair as defined under the North American Model of Hunting that most serious and fair hunters subscribe to. Last year I wrote a document/report to Congress to object to legislation that was supported by Cynthia Lummis and others to remove wolves from the ESA. The letter was signed by more than 90 scientists and professionals as well as two citizen representatives from each state but the Dakotas. The letter/report is posted here and was written by me and reviewed by a well published carnivore scientist who has produced more than 40 peer reviewed published papers on carnivores.

    I urge you as you move into the election to consider your non consumptive wildlife constituency and to examine the demographics of the US population which indicates hunting is on the wane and that wildlife need more protections as their habitat is taken and they try and survive against an onslaught of technology that makes the playing field even less fair than it was considering that hounding baiting, trapping, snaring and motorized vehicles make it almost impossible for any wild animal to live or reproduce unmolested or ecologically successfully. The cell phone and internet now make it even more difficult for wild animals to escape detection.

    I would appreciate a thoughtful personal response on how you plan to consider my and others concerns about your position on wildlife protection and our objections to legislation such as the Bi Partisan Sportsman act that are so offensive to many of us.

    Louise Kane

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Wow. What a terrible disappointment. I guess for animals, the political parties are either Bad or Worse, lately anyway. I do not want 🙁

      • Ida Lupine says:

        oops, should say – ‘I do not want or feel comfortable with this choice’. Why couldn’t she have picked Bernie? It’s almost, but not quite, as bad as appointing one of Donald Trump’s sons to the Interior Dept.! I hate that wildlife and hunting is being used as a bargaining chip to swing votes?

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Welp, it’s a vote for the Green Party for me again this time.

          • Jim Wiegand says:

            The so called “green party” is the Fraud party. You could fill a large prison with the layers people behind the wind and renewable energy fraud. I call them the “green gangsters” or the “green Gestapo” because of the mountain of fraudulent research and rigged reports I have come across.

          • Ralph Maughan says:

            I preferred Bernie, but he moved the DNC well to the left. He now supports Hillary.

            I hope people will consider what will happen to the environment under Trump. Hillary has a good record in the Senate on wildlife and the environment. The Democratic Platform is good too.

            Every vote for Jill Stein on the Green Party is like a half vote for Trump.

            I recall how Ralph Nader’s third party candidacy in 2000 gave us George W. in a razor thin election. I don’t want to live through that again.

            • Ida Lupines says:

              I know you’re right. But it is very disappointing, that compromise is always, always the environment and wildlife.

            • timz says:

              What good is an environment when she turns us further toward being a third world country. Again we have nothing to choose from.

              • Ida Lupines says:

                And what if this ‘strategy’ backfires? We could still end up with Trump as president. I’m amazed that he has gotten this far. If she had picked Bernie, she might have been able to get younger people to vote. Who knows what will happen.

                I’m not liking reading articles about the latest goings on with the DNC, and reading patronizing articles about compromise being the name of the game. If anyone knows what it’s like to watch in horror as their values are repeatedly compromised, it’s an environmentalist! 🙁

                • Louise Kane says:

                  She did not pick Bernie and so its time to move on from that or suffer the consequences under a Trump presidency. I can’t imagine a worse fate. Hilary Clinton may not be perfect but she has am amazing body of experience and dedication to public service. I’m a little tried of the relentless public bashing she receives, much of it coming from the GOP and now Trump. If you say something enough it becomes true even when the nuances are ignored. Trump has perfected the art of appointment if blame but he has no answers, has never done a but of public service and his greatest endorsements come from his kids who expect us to believe the my father is a good dad because he works so hard and never gives up line. a vote for anyone other than Hilary Clinton helps Trump. No statement is made by doing that.

                • Mareks Vilkins says:

                  We could still end up with Trump as president. I’m amazed that he has gotten this far.


                  excerpt from “Keeping the Rabble in Line”
                  p. 117
                  chapter “Class”
                  January 21, 1993

                  DB: It’s only in America that a billionaire can run for President and pose as a populist, as Ross Perot did. What was your take on his candidacy and the whole Perot phenomenon?

                  NC: The most interesting period, I thought, was when he just appeared, at the very beginning. He could have come from Mars, as far as anyone knew. Nobody knew what his program was. He probably didn’t have one. He had nothing to say. He was just this guy who said, Look, I made a lot of money and I’ve got big ears and a big smile. Within about two weeks, he was running even with the two major candidates. I think what that indicates is pretty clear. It means the population is so desperate that if somebody lands from Mars, they’ll try him.

                • Mareks Vilkins says:

                  Martian – someone who sees the world on a multidimensional level,yet has the understanding that everything and everyone is interconnected like a single organism. Many martians smoke weed and/or use psychedelic drugs to further enhance their knowledge,creativity, and understanding of the universe.

                • Mareks Vilkins says:


                  Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

                  “A proposed policy change with low support among economically elite Americans (one-out-of-five in favour) is adopted only about 18% of the time,” they write, “while a proposed change with high support (four-out-of-five in favour) is adopted about 45% of the time.”

                  When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.

            • Louise Kane says:

              +1 Bill Clinton’s administration appointed Bruce Babbitt. I was hopeful for like appointments. My fear is that someone who would sponsor something like the Bipartisan act is either not informed and/or very biased toward pro hunter anti-predator policies. Since Presidents rely on their cabinet and to some extent their closest staff Tim Kaine may well have a great deal of influence. I see sponsorship of that Act as a bad sign. He receives a higher score than deserved on the CL scorecard.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                Yes. I hope it isn’t a foreshadowing of who will be appointed as Secretary of the Interior! As soon as Bernie started talking about banking reform, I knew he wouldn’t have a prayer.

                I had always planned to vote for Hillary, wavered about Bernie but didn’t think he could win, and was thrilled that we’d have the first woman president. But this bothers me. I’ll still vote for her, but it’s disappointing. Many of the conservative leaning won’t change their minds about voting Dem, I fear – even if the Sportsmen’s Act sweetens the deal somewhat. Blech!

              • Ed Loosli says:

                Bruce Babbitt was an amazingly good Sec. of Interior for Bill Clinton.. HOWEVER, now he has flipped and has become a paid lobbyist for California Big-Ag and Southern California water interests in promoting Gov. Brown’s proposed 40ft diameter tunnels, which will swipe huge amounts of water directly from the Sacramento River to Central Valley farms and So. Cal. cities. The Sacramento Delta with its salmon and and other Endangered fish will be left high and dry.

            • Yvette says:

              “I preferred Bernie, but he moved the DNC well to the left. He now supports Hillary.

              I hope people will consider what will happen to the environment under Trump. Hillary has a good record in the Senate on wildlife and the environment. The Democratic Platform is good too.”

              That has been my view, too. I’ve tried to get some of the Bernie people who refuse to vote for HRC to consider what will happen to our environment, wildlife and federal lands under a Trump administration.

              I don’t know that people like me will survive a Trump presidency. <<<< That is only partially hyperbole. I read a headline today that N. Korea's Kim Jong Un, (one of the leaders that Trump has spouted off as being admirable) had one of his premiers executed for not sitting up straight.

              Trump will not win. I have more belief in Americans, as a whole, than to believe we will allow that to happen. That is coming from someone who is cynical toward and distrustful of people and government. And, I live in the heart of Trump-redneck-ville, Oklahoma. If I'm wrong, I fear we can kiss this planet good-bye. We simply cannot allow Putin's friend to win.

  14. Louise Kane says:

    More bad news
    Republicans seem determined to leave an overpopulated, politically and racially divided wasteland for their future generations. The profiteers who think they may be insulated from the impact will be in for a surprise. Everything is connected.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I looked at the link quickly and I at first thought it said ‘Morning Insult’. My mind is still boggled that I must be forced to vote for a democratic presidential candidate whose running mate is a co-sponsor of the Sportsmens Act!!! I am extremely dismayed that a fox could be that close to the henhouse and get the bill passed. After we’ve been trying to fight it for years too. What a slap in the face. I thought after 8 years of suffering through Obama and his giving away the store compromises and his godawful Interior secretaries who have done untold damage, we’d finally have new hope with Hillary (based on Bill). I guess not!!! I guess it is true that anything to do with the environment is not to be mentioned during an election. It’s almost as bad as having Jon Tester as her running mate.

      • Jim Wiegand says:

        Their are plenty of dirt bags in both parties playing good cop/bad cop with the public. But never in my life have I seen such blatant corruption as I have with the Democrats in recent years, sanctimoniously pushing and rigging their green nightmare on the public.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          Yes. It’s truly shocking.

        • rork says:

          Nationally, Democrats have not even had the power to pass legislation of note since what, 2010? Perhaps “recent years” means the last 4 decades for you.

          • Jim Wiegand says:

            Read about the Denver Eagle Repository in the article Harvesting Eagles. It was set up by Bill Clinton in 1997 to handle and hide the flood on new eagle carcasses coming in from “green” energy developments. The Denver Eagle Repository is being used by corporate America to hide the cause of death and the bodies of thousands of eagles that have been slaughtered by turbines.

            • rork says:

              Ah, 20 years ago is recent, I see. I agree wind has problems, and corn has problems, but CO2 is also a problem.

              Try an overview of corruption:
              Compare executive branch scandals of current administration with previous one, and for either epoch compare number of house and senate scandals due to D’s and R’s. D’s are not even close.

              • Jim Wiegand says:

                Wind energy today is as effective at solving C02 problems as flushing a toilet is to cure cancer.

                • Immer Treue says:

                  Well gosh, I’ll do all my “business” outside now. Got kind of use to it after last week’s storm. Won’t have to worry about that nasty flush!

            • Yvette says:


              “The collection efforts of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides a legal means for Native Americans to acquire eagle feathers for religious purposes, which in turn, reduces the pressure to take birds from the wild and thereby protecting eagle populations. It also, promotes a government to government relationship with federally recognized tribes, as well as, fulfills the U.S. governments trust responsibilities to Native Americans.”


              “It is illegal for any individual to possess a bald or golden eagle, including its parts (feathers, feet, etc.). The distribution of bald and golden eagles and their parts to Native Americans is authorized by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and Regulations found in 50 CFR 22. Enrolled Native Americans wishing to obtain bald or golden eagles or their parts, must be at least 18 years old and submit a First Time application for a new applicant and a Re-order form if they have applied in the past. Requests are filled on a first come first serve basis by date of application. Numbers of requests, by far , exceeds the number of eagles available which imposes various waiting times for orders to be filled.”

              This is why there is a repository. It had nothing to do with hiding eagle losses by the wind industry.

              One problem with the repository was the time it took to obtain a feather or feathers, and for the Zuni Tribe, the frequency and number of feathers they needed to for their ceremonial practices. That is why the Zuni’s were the first tribe to work with USFWLS to build an eagle aviary for injured eagles. If the injured eagle was releasable they were released. If they were not releasable due to long term result of the injury they were allowed to live the remainder of their lives at the aviary, thus, averting the ‘fly or die’ regulation.

              The Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma followed the Zuni’s and now have one of the largest tribal raptor aviaries in the nation. The molted feathers are collected daily and stored for ceremony.

              These tribal aviaries have resolved the problem of the long wait for feathers from the repository.

        • Louise Kane says:

          Oh come on now, without democrats kiss public lands good bye, clean oceans, clean air and water regs would disappear and you could be assured that a trophy hunter Trum would be in the position of Secretary of Interior. Congress needs to be more accountable, more transparent, less sanctimonious, less corrupt and more effective but when it comes to bad environmental policy the GOP is largely responsible for much of the foot dragging obstruction and destructive policies.

  15. Louise Kane says:

    Congress is about to be out of session, the Endangered Species Coalition has an easy form to request a face to face constituent meeting with your representatives.

    I think they provide talking points and help interested parties to set up the meetings. This years lineup of bills with riders to erode ESA protections and remand wolves back to the states is mind boggling. Please put your money where your mouth is, as the saying goes.

    Meetings and correspondence matter. or at least they should and have in the past.

  16. Susan says:

    “DNA Study Reveals the One and Only Wolf Species in North America”

    Conclusion is that there is no Red Wolf or Eastern Wolf, just Gray Wolves, Coyotes, and Gray Wolf-Coyote hybrids.

    This has been argued before and my answer is always the same:

    Even if the Red Wolf of the southeastern U.S. is not a distinct species, it is the ONLY genetic remnant of a unique southeastern Gray Wolf population, an animal native to that ecosystem that has otherwise long vanished.

    That in itself is worth conserving…

    … Unless one believes that ecologically distinct subspecies of the enormously widely-distributed Gray Wolf are not worth conserving. Shall we let the Arabian Wolf die out as long as the Mackenzie Valley Wolf still exists in the wild?

    • Ida Lupines says:

      I wonder what this will mean for a national delisting, when gray wolves have been restored to only a small fraction of former their range (Yes, Dan Ashe, we know they can’t be reintroduced to downtown Denver and Los Angeles!). But they can be reintroduced to the least human populated areas such as Northern VT and Maine. The only state with less people than VT is WY.

      Does this have to change the status of Mexican and Red wolves – a subspecies is still a different animal? This ought to present quite a quandary. 🙂

  17. Susan says:

    State Evidence Suggests New Wolf May Be in California’s Lassen County
    by Center for Biological Diversity
    Wednesday Jun 22nd, 2016 5:23 PM

  18. rork says:

    I have another feather story. Near our rather large Black Lake (northern lower MI) I came across a huge cottonwood near the lake, whose base was covered in bird droppings, and about 100 eagle feathers. No nest, just a good lookout. Saw about 8 primaries. Told a friend in Onaway (close) who is Odawa.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Couple of months ago, or so, I had a sparring match with ODFN about after a summers time, I could have enough eagle and Raven feathers for a war bonnet. You’ve stumbled upon one of those areas.

  19. JB says:

    Another warning about the removal of top predators…

    • Kathleen says:

      Yes, and alligator gar (what an awesome fish!) were removed for a reason similar to why wolves are persecuted–the belief that they competed with sport anglers: “To many, it was a freak, a “trash fish” that threatened sportfish, something to be exterminated. … a mistaken belief that they hurt sportfish led to widespread extermination throughout the 1900s, when they were often shot or blown up with dynamite.”

      How short-sighted, self-centered, and ignorant humans can be. Thanks for posting–wonderful to know there’s a natural control for Asian carp.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      1.3K comments … “one more controversial species”, so to say

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I almost don’t know what to say, how awful. Just that I am relieved that we realized our mistake before it is too late for this amazing fish.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      deputies are now required to activate the cameras for all public interactions while on duty – does it apply only to the Adams County?

  20. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Wolf OR-7’s Pack Has Pups for Third Straight Year, Neighboring New Wolf Pair Also Has Pups

    A scientific analysis determined that Oregon can support as many as 1,400 wolves. Oregon wildlife officials have indicated that there are currently approximately 155 wolves in the state, and that wolves are occupying only a little more than 12 percent of suitable wolf habitat.

    “When an 8-year-old wolf has his first-known litter of pups and when his 8-year-old brother is confirmed to have had his third litter, it’s a moment of awe and wonder,” said Weiss.

    I agree, give wolves a chance to play rock’n’roll in Oregon,man!

    • Gary Humbard says:

      Just a little clarification. Wolves are still protected by the ESA within 2/3 of Oregon and are still under the Oregon Wolf Plan in NE Oregon where 90% of their total reside.

      The Oregon Wolf Plan was developed using input from conservation groups and the livestock industry and both groups were in agreement with the adoption of the plan. Wolves are only killed if they repeatedly kill livestock after numerous non lethal attempts have failed. No trapping or hunting is allowed.

      Oregon, like California and Washington are politically blue states and I have little doubt they will continue to disperse and increase in population. I doubt their numbers will increase to 1,400 though, as the wild game here is not as prolific as in the Rocky Mountain region. The article didn’t indicate what scientific analysis it referenced but probably from Oregon State University (same institute that promotes trophic cascades which has not been universally accepted yet). Just saying.

      • Louise Kane says:

        They also need to disperse and they are constrained by Idaho’s bloody war on wolves. And by prey, I’m still very saddened by )R 4’s gruesome last moments. That was a tragedy. That wolf had endured numerous collarings and the stress that goes with it, he was mostly not a trouble maker The ODFG should have left them alone.

  21. Kathleen says:

    Caterpillar transformations – click on the caterpillar to see the future butterfly or moth. So amazing.

  22. Ida Lupines says:

    Aren’t they something. I went to my local bird sanctuary the other day and saw quite a few monarchs. I get black swallowtails, and one drinking nectar at my hummingbird feeder was a beautiful sight.

  23. Yvette says:

    Interesting how this DNA research may keep the Red Wolf off of the endangered species list. My question is how long have Red Wolf been hybridized? Next, how are they different than coywolves?

  24. Nancy says:

    “That complicates things for the National Park Service, he says. Until now, the goal has been preserving parks, keeping things the same. Now, they may have to let plants and animals move — and they’ll have to help the public understand what’s happening”

    • Ida Lupines says:

      Aren’t they beautiful. We stopped to admire some driving through the desert from California to LV, Nevada. Really hot and really beautiful trees, unique and a national treasure. What a beautiful drive.

  25. Kathleen says:

    Wildlife-related in a round-about way…this video was recorded on a nestcam! An amazing time-lapse of the start of the Roaring Lion fire just south of Hamilton, MT in the Bitterroot Valley.

    It’s believed to be human-caused. It blew-up incredibly quickly Sunday afternoon (heat, wind, low humidity). Fourteen homes lost and one person dead from heart failure during the evacuation. InciWeb update (updated one min. ago):

    At InciWeb, you can also click on ‘photographs’ in the menu bar.

    • Nancy says:

      The video is frightening and here’s another video of stills of the Roaring Lion fire. And yes, got to wonder what the hell is going thru this person’s mind, with the background music:

  26. Nancy says:

    “Due to the bear’s degree of food conditioning and because she did not have cubs with her, the decision was made to euthanize her on Monday”

    {Based on photos} officials believed the bear had gotten into garages, a barn and killed chickens in the same general area during the last two years”

    During the last 2 years? And that requires a death sentence? No age listed for this bear. Nor any information about what might just of led to her “food conditioning”

    Think that dumbf**k over in Idaho, a year or two ago (youtube) encouraging a black bear family, to scale the second level of his townhouse (food conditioned) so he could brag about wildlife what he caught on video…

    Course bears are bears 🙂 when trying to hang on to what’s left of their little piece of wilderness:

    • Kathleen says:

      The bear was not “euthanized.” The bear was EXECUTED. Montana FWP simply kills bears after the fact rather than fine people who maintain attractants in grizzly country and require the use of electric fencing–proven to work.

      • Elk375 says:

        That bear broke into manufactured homes on the North Fork of the Flathead. What else can one do, turn their home into a prison with electric fencing and razor wire.

        How can the Montana FWP fine anyone who maintains attractants in grizzly country and require the use of electric fencing-proven to work? There is no law requiring electric fencing on private property in Montana, it is all voluntary.

        • Nancy says:

          “What else can one do, turn their home into a prison with electric fencing and razor wire”

          Well yes and why not Elk? Especially when one resides in “bear country”

          Sad the double standards when it comes to western states:

          a rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups OR (adding here) wildlife.

          At a place yesterday (its a getaway for the owners who lives elsewhere) and the neighbor’s cattle got in and rubbed downspouts off, ruining the gutters, crapped all over the yard, etc.

          The owner of said cows, passed by this place every day and guessing, mighty grateful for the couple of acres of free feed because they did nothing to move them out but hey, they can’t be held liable if their cows aren’t properly fenced OUT.

          So imagine two years, this bear has been hanging around (from all accounts) getting into a bit of trouble here and there and then suddenly “someone” signed her death warrant. (Google bears breaking into camp trailers, if you think this is some sort of isolated event)

        • JB says:


          Several years ago now I visited a homestead near Lake Clark National Park (in Alaska). The homeowner had electric fence surrounding his property, including his yard where he kept goats. He also had what he called a “bear dog” whose job it was to chase off bears.

          No laws required–just common sense.

        • Yvette says:

          How did the aboriginal people up in the Yukon live in grizzly country? This was an entirely different paradigm but it worked.

          They even shared their salmon fishing site with the grizzlies.

          I just shake my head at the flippant attitude and lack of creativity of some people.

          I believe you can read the full paper with this site.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      It’s a good day today. 🙂

      • Gary Humbard says:

        “The mining company’s claims predate the 1980 formation of the River of No Return Wilderness. The company wants to mine two of those claims but must first prove they are valid claims with marketable amounts of minerals. To do that, Winmill said, noting the company’s right to mine in the wilderness, the company must be allowed to do work that includes activities that wouldn’t normally be permitted in a wilderness area”.

        I’m a positive minded individual, but IMHO this last statement doesn’t bode well for a permanent restriction for access to the mining company. The Forest Service will go back and make the necessary changes to their analysis and the mining company will be in there screwing up the solitude and environment to some degree. Don’t blame the Forest Service, they are just abiding by the antiquated 1872 law, look hard at you guess it, Congress.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I’m not sure – and I’m no legal expert, but I thought I had read where the mine had to have a history of use so that exploring it isn’t necessary? Not being left idle for decades, and then to run roughshod over the entire area to see if it may still be a viable mine. I hope those fighting this will scrutinize every line and make sure everything is examined closely. You can see that the Wilderness Act means nothing to some – I had to smile when the judge said the worked could walk in and out.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Make that ‘the workers could walk in and out’.

            Are we sure the Forest Service is abiding by the law, or did someone’s favorite politician intercede and override the Forest Service? Wouldn’t the Wilderness Act moderate the mining act for modern times, somewhat?

          • Elk375 says:

            Two situations Ida: If the mine is a claim or if the mine has been patented. If claim has a patent then it is private property.

            • Ida Lupine says:

              Ok. But why haven’t they pursued it before now, or maybe they have?

              • Ida Lupine says:

                Well. I hadn’t read enough background – the Wilderness Act does moderate activity there – the claim itself isn’t in question but how to get in and out of protected wilderness while doing the least amount of damage. The Forest Service has been sent back to the drawing board. I guess it’s pack mules and gold pans just like in the 1890s:


                • Ida Lupine says:

                  Mechanized vehicles are prohibited by the Wilderness Act, so the mining company is asking for an exemption from the Wilderness Act is what it sounds like to me?

                  It’s extremely offensive, because the Forest Service knows very well the proscriptions of the Wilderness Act. The court says it violates NEPA as well.

                  It looks like the court is going to stand by enforce the blocking of mechanized vehicles, especially to the extent the FS tried to pull over. There is also information required that they did not include. So it is a lot more complicated than correcting errors, if they even can be corrected. The mine collapsed some time in the 1920s and no production since 1941. There could even be safety issues.

                  “Winmill noted that the Forest Service did extensive analysis of some mining claims that weren’t part of the argument, but apparently failed to do so for the ones at issue. He ordered the agency to reveal whatever confidential information the company, provided that justified its claims the development was necessary.”


  27. Kathleen says:

    Interesting segment on the PBS Newshour tonight: “In an increasingly damaged sea, one animal is thriving.”

    Jellyfish are proliferating. Why? Climate change – check. Over-fishing – check. Dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico and algae blooms – check. They are so fascinating–but their numbers indicate trouble.

  28. Kathleen says:

    “Ecology of Fear: Researchers Discover ‘Super Predators’ More Frightening Than Bears, Wolves”

    Excerpt: “A new study reveals that smaller mesocarnivores now fear humans more than their actual predators, making humans the new ‘super predator.’
    “According to the study published in the journal Behavioral Ecology, their fear of humans may have been because over the past years, humans had been hunting more animals than their own predators.”

    • Louise Kane says:

      I have not had a chance to read this yet Kathleen so thanks for posting it. I saw the title the other day and was reminded about a conservation I had with a biologist who first told me that coyotes and wildlife are not nocturnal contrary to what most people think, they have just been forced to become nocturnal because humans persecute them. A terrible thing to consider. How to live in a world where you must only be out from dusk to dawn because you are not tolerated. Humans are blight on the world.

      • Kathleen says:

        Yes, Louise, truly a terrible thing to consider. And even when harm isn’t directly intended, the human blight affects animals’ survival because we’ve altered their world so significantly. Take artificial lighting, for example. Sea turtle hatchlings are confused by bright nighttime lights and crawl toward them instead of toward the sea; baby puffins (pufflings!), when they emerge from their burrows on Scottish islands, are likewise confused and fly toward mainland lights instead of the open sea. Once on the mainland, they seek out dark places to hide. Human animals impact the lives and survival of nonhuman animals in ways we can’t even fathom.

  29. Kyle says:

    No doubt this will only grow more controversial.

    Why revise the Wilderness Act to accommodate bikes? Why must we open up every trail to bikes when plenty already exist? Why must the biking crowd (many of whom are rude to hikers and assume all should yield to them) revise the fundamentals of the wilderness ideal? Why can’t more people actually walk into wilderness?

  30. Gary Humbard says:

    Wolves at my door! This new wolf pack is only about 40 miles from my residence so maybe, just maybe, I will someday hear the howl of a wolf I have always wanted to hear (without going to Yellowstone!).

    • This is great. I just visited Silver Lake. I had no idea.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      Here is an update about the Silver Lake Wolves from Oregon Fish and Wildlife:

      Pups for Rogue Pack and new “Silver Lake wolves”

      ODFW and USFWS have confirmed that OR3 (an eight-year-old male originally from the Imnaha pack) has paired up with OR28, a three-year-old GPS radio-collared female originally from the Mt Emily pack. Based on remote camera images, the two are believed to have produced at least one pup in 2016. They are primarily using the Silver Lake Wildlife Management Unit in western Lake County and have been dubbed the Silver Lake wolves. (A group of wolves is designated a pack when there is evidence of a minimum of four wolves traveling together in winter.)

      Wolf OR3 dispersed from northeast Oregon’s former Imnaha Pack in 2011, just a few months before more well-known wolf OR7. But unlike OR7, OR3 had a VHS collar not a GPS collar. VHF collars do not automatically transmit location information and wildlife managers lost track of him after the fall of 2011. OR3 made a brief reappearance on a trail camera in the Cascades in northern Klamath County in summer 2015. His radio-collar is no longer functional. It is unknown if OR3 bred before this year.

      Other wolf activity in SW Oregon includes the Rogue Pack, the Keno wolves, and 2 radio-collared wolves (OR25 & OR33). Reproduction has also been confirmed in 2016 for the Rogue Pack, with remote camera photos of 2 pups. Occasional remote camera photos of wolves are captured in the Keno AKWA. Biologists will continue monitoring activities to learn more about these wolves. OR25 (Klamath Co) and OR33 (Klamath and Jackson Co) are both males dispersed from the Imnaha Pack and are each believed to be traveling alone.

  31. Nancy says:

    One of a few reminders. Oh, and you say you haven’t heard of Earth Overshoot Day? 🙂

  32. Ida Lupine says:

    I’m not willing to cut the Democrats much slack anymore. They have been bargaining away our public lands, clean air, water, and wildlife. They may not be as bad as the GOP (that would be a tall order for anyone) but they are far from good and have shifted more to the right. I’m growing increasingly worried about Hillary – I watched her on the news tonight and there were a handful of animal rights protesters. Well, the Secret Service came flying out as if a member of ISIS was in the audience! She came back with a remark about the Trump boys and their trophy hunting – but if she supports the Sportsmen’s Act, or is willing to make a deal with it, she will be helping Trump’s sons and others like them get their trophies! I’m not sure how knowledgeable she is on these types of issues, not many are. The Democrats have done a hatchet job on Bernie Sanders, and I see that animal rights people are expendable too. I’ll see how things look and if I must vote for her, I will – but I’m becoming increasingly concerned. I’m in a deeply blue state, so I can vote my conscience. I don’t think her VP supports her entirely on women’s reproductive rights either.

  33. Immer Treue says:

    Bear hound/ wolf interactions are once again on display in Wisconsin. As usual, comments are entertaining, and one of the repeat commentators eeriely like one who sometimes frequents TWN.

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      8.5m trees have been planted in 25 years

      if 600 seedlings are planted per hectare, then it gives 60K seedlings/km2 or ~140 km2 for 8.5M seedlings

      140:25 years = 5.6 km2/year

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      “Between ash dieback and the emerald ash borer, it is likely that almost all ash trees in Europe will be wiped out, just as the elm was largely eliminated by Dutch elm disease,” said Peter Thomas, a tree ecologist at Keele University whose analysis was published in March’s Journal of Ecology.


      glad to see reference to Peter Thomas’s work – I like both of his 2 books about trees & forest ecology

      “Trees: Their Natural History”

      “Ecology of Woodlands and Forests: Description, Dynamics and Diversity”

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      Talis warned Oliver that self-seeded trees performed better than transplants because they were “at home” in a way that planted trees never can be.

      “Transplants are like orphans, deprived of family support – a forest should work like a community, not an orphanage, nor an army.”

      “An inspirational forester”

      Talis Kalnars was a pioneer of ‘continuous cover’ forestry in Britain, writes Phil Morgan. His woodlands were not only beautiful but profitable, as he nurtured the ‘natural capital’ of the forest ecosystem, and only harvested the dividend of high value timber.

      “The productive capital of a forest is the forest itself. Clear fell the forest and you are destroying your own infrastructure that you have worked so hard to build up.

      “Yes, you realise some money from the timber, but it’s a one-off. And then you have to rebuild your capital from scratch. That’s expensive and difficult because clearfelling has created a hostile environment for trees”.

  34. jon says:

    They’re going to murder some more innocent wolves in Washington State. Wolves doing nothing wrong, but trying to survive. Not their fault.

    • Immer Treue says:

      I think trying to connect dinosaur extinction to climate change (in the least) in regard to what is going on now is a stretch. If memory serves me correct, during the 150 million years or so of dinosaur dominance global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels were higher. The Deccan Traps were also associated with plate tectonics as the Indain sub continent collided into the Asian mainland.

      About the same time there was a giant inland sea in mid continental N America. The dynamics of the earth dwarf the current effects of man.

      As an aside,I believe, we are going through a positive feedback cycle as the ice and glaciers from the last period of glaciation continue to melt and recede…which has little to do with man. It’s the cyclical nature of the earths geologic history. That said, l believe man has contributed to this, and most probably has served as a catalyst to accelerate the warming process, and as it continues to accelerate, it will do so at a pace which will make adaptation to the said warming all the more difficult.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        from David Archer’s “The Long Thaw: How Humans Are Changing The Next 100 000 Years of Earth’s Climate”

        p.6 : The deepest and most profound climate changes in the recent geologic past seem to take place on timescales of millennia and longer. The great ice sheets grow and usually melt on timescales of millennia, a huge response to the wobbles in the Earth’s orbit. The natural carbon cycle acted as a positive feedback, amplifying the response to the orbit.

        The climate of the Earth is so dramatically sensitive to the ten-thousand-year orbital wobbles that it might also put on a pretty good show in response to the long tail of the fossil fuel CO2. I will try to convince you that human climate forcing has the potential to overwhelm the orbital climate forcing, taking control of the ice ages. Mankind is becoming a force in climate comparable to the orbital variations that drive the glacial cycles.

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          p. 153 : Times like today, when the orbit is nearly circular, diminish the solar variability because it doesn’t matter where in the orbit the Northern hemisphere summer comes, it’s about the same distance to the Sun all around the orbit. The last time the Earth was in this configuration was about 400 millennia ago. The interglacial period at that time was about 50 thousand years long, the same as what the trigger model is predicting for our current interglacial period.

          • Mareks Vilkins says:

            p. 156 : If mankind ultimately burns 2000 Gton C (this is about the business-as-usual forecast for the coming century), then it looks as though climate will avoid glaciation in 50 millennia as well, waiting until the next period of cool summers 130 millennia from now. If the entire coal reserves were used (that is, 5000 Gton C), then glaciation could be delayed for some 500 millennia, half a million years. The Earth could remain in an interglacial state until the end of not our current period of circular orbit, but the next circular time, 400 millennia from now.

      • Louise Kane says:

        I think the point of the article was cumulative impacts of human caused global warming could be tipping the scales.

        almost exactly what you surmise
        “that said, l believe man has contributed to this, and most probably has served as a catalyst to accelerate the warming process, and as it continues to accelerate, it will do so at a pace which will make adaptation to the said warming all the more difficult.”

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        I believe man has contributed to this, and most probably has served as a catalyst to accelerate the warming process

        97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.

        Surveys of the peer-reviewed scientific literature and the opinions of experts consistently show a 97–98% consensus that humans are causing global warming.

        That humans are causing global warming is the position of the Academies of Science from 80 countries plus many scientific organizations that study climate science. More specifically, around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.

  35. Gary Humbard says:

    “The balance we’re trying to strike is fulfilling our responsibilities under the O&C Act, while also meeting our responsibilities under laws like the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act,” Brown says. “When we fulfill all of those, we don’t have a lot of decision space.”

    Those comments sum up the BLM’s management decisions in a nutshell.

    Numerous timber companies partially rely on federal timber in the PNW to run their mills; supplying the demand for lumber while providing steady decent paying jobs (there are quite a few). To continue their operations they are either going to have to use short rotations resulting in the cutting of relatively small trees within large clearcuts, extensive road building and minimal stream buffers on private lands or partially offset these impacts through the purchase of federal timber sales which are the gold standard regarding environmental protection measures.

    And if the plans stand, Kerr says, “I’m looking forward to them trying to cut old growth and having people sit in trees again.”

    It was wonderful.” Up on the platforms, flying squirrels would sometimes land on protesters. “They’d try to take the food out of your hand,” Wilson says. “We’d see them launch. They’d go to the edge of the platform and just, choooooo.”

    I’m quite familiar with these two gentlemen and the organizations they work for, and their basic mindset is NO trees older than 80 years old should be cut on federal timber land and only “managed stands” should be thinned.

    In federal forestry agencies today there is the term “you have to crack eggs to make an omelet”. This basically means there are instances when short term impacts occur in order to speed up the restoration of forest stands. I worked on the 2009 thinning sale referred to in the article and I can say unequivocally that this timber sale and every other thinning sale I worked on was implemented with strict environmental protection standards.

    • Nancy says:

      “Reading up on the behavior of trees — a topic he learned little about in forestry school — he found that, in nature, trees operate less like individuals and more as communal beings. Working together in networks and sharing resources, they increase their resistance”

      Goes hand in hand with the link I posted above re: Suzanne Simard/Ted Talk

      As THE dominant species on this planet (always putting profits above the existence of other beings) it sadly will be a while longer before we recognize and start connecting the dots.

      Like recycling garbage, that 300 million people generate (for building materials) instead of cutting down what’s left of our forests. The list goes on and on………

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        always putting profits above the existence of other beings

        “Intrigued, Mr. Wohlleben began investigating alternate approaches to forestry. Visiting a handful of private forests in Switzerland and Germany, he was impressed. “They had really thick, old trees,” he said. “They treated their forest much more lovingly, and the wood they produced was more valuable. In one forest, they said, when they wanted to buy a car, they cut two trees. For us, at the time, two trees would buy you a pizza.”

      • Ida Lupine says:

        This is one of the more beautiful things I have ever read.

    • Professor Sweat says:

      “Numerous timber companies partially rely on federal timber in the PNW to run their mills; supplying the demand for lumber while providing steady decent paying jobs (there are quite a few). To continue their operations they are either going to have to use short rotations resulting in the cutting of relatively small trees within large clearcuts, extensive road building and minimal stream buffers on private lands or partially offset these impacts through the purchase of federal timber sales which are the gold standard regarding environmental protection measures.”

      Public resources are the life-support system supporting an industry that from what I understand, at this point is struggling to compete with foreign imports. It is extremely frustrating that our government is more than happy to socialize the costs of private profits. By the way, where are these Oregon old-growth forest stands that logging companies are salivating over? The Coast Range is already a checkerboard of clearcuts and theres only like 3% (or some other minuscule amount) of remnant old growth left. That being said, I’m not 100% against thinning and selective cutting of younger growth. I just think that remaining old growth should be sacrosanct. There’s something like 90+ unique species of fungi to PNW old growth forest systems, plus the specialized habitat it provides in that region for Spotted Owl and Marbles Murrelet, as well as countless other organisms. Why does that have to be second to breaking out the public lands defibrillator for companies flatlining in today’s global market? Rant finished 😉

  36. Jeff N. says:

    This little blurb on the USF&W Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery page. Mid-July pup report.

    “2016 Denning Packs and wolf pups

    July 2016

    This summer, members of the IFT have documented denning behavior in at least 11 Mexican wolf packs in the Mexican Wolf Recovery Area. As of mid-July, a minimum of 42 pups in 9 packs (Bluestem, Elk Horn, Hoodoo, Iron Creek, Luna, Panther Creek, Prieto, SBP, and Tsay O Ah) have been documented. Six of the 42 pups in the count are a result of cross foster events. Throughout the summer and into the fall, the IFT will continue to monitor and document wolf pup numbers. As the pups get older, the IFT will attempt to capture pups, administer vaccines, and affix pup size radio collars to monitor survival.”

  37. Cody Coyote says:

    The National Geographic news article repeats the bad rap that Coyotes get by calling North America’s own native Canid ” the most hated animal in America”. But they redeem themselves by reviewing Dan Flores’ book ” Coyote America – a natural and Spuernatural History ” which explains how Coyotes aren’t just surviving in the face of massive eradication attempts, but actually thriving and expanding.
    Fine with me. If I didn’t keep cats, I’d love to have a couple Coyotes for companions. They are amazing animals. SOmewhere in that article is the thought the Coyote howl is America’s honest national anthem…none of that ” bombs bursting in air ” stuff.

  38. Louise Kane says:

    If any of you made comments to the USFWS re Flathead National Forest Plan then be aware of this notice

    “FS Flathead National Forest
    You are subscribed to FNF Plan Revision & NCDE GBCS Amendment to the Lolo, Helena, Lewis & Clark, and Kootenai NFs for USDA Forest Service. This information has recently been updated, and is now available.

    The staff of the Flathead National Forest replaced an incorrect figure found in appendix 1 of the draft environmental impact statement for the Flathead National Forest’s draft revised Land and Resource Management Plan (draft forest plan) as the incorrect figure was originally inserted. The correct figure 1-38 (grizzly bear security core, wilderness, and recommended wilderness alternative A south half) is attached.

    The corrected appendix in its entirety can be found at The original appendix can be viewed on the project website (

  39. Nancy says:

    More here and comments:

    “There is no shortage of excuses why this must be. First and foremost though, there exists the unspoken priority of the plot line: to use corporate proxies claiming conservation values to maintain the death spiral of disaster capitalism”

  40. Louise Kane says:

    not exact;y wildlife but pretty astounding the impacts to wildlife and people

  41. Ida Lupine says:

    “Colorado wildlife managers say they are set to start a three-year study on whether killing bears and mountain lions can help boost deer populations in the northwestern part of the state, where hunting is a big part of the local economy.”

    According to Anderson, the predator control study will take place in May and June, just before and during the fawn birthing period. He said all predators taken will be utilized to the fullest, including distribution of meat to people that need it, and CPW will use carcasses for education.

    This is shocking to me, and it is only a study. Hunting as an ‘economic engine’ at work in the wilderness. Who eats the meat of predators? It really is becoming a stretch to continue with the argument of hunting as conservation.

    • Nancy says:

      Ida – might check out this link. Predators don’t seem to be a factor, at all, for mule deer declines, but hey, while there may be many other reasons, predators have a way of getting other predators (human hunters) juices going when local economies depend on the hunting industry (Big Bucks 🙂

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Thank you.

        I have to tell you all, I finally got to see the Perseids last night (or early this am). Every year, either I fall asleep or the weather isn’t good, or I can’t tell if I saw them or not. But this year, there was no mistaking the falling stars. What a show, what a show! 🙂

        • Kathleen says:

          Thanks to your reminder, I went out 4 times last night (the moon took its sweet time going down behind the ridge) and never did see a shooting star but I DID see the International Space Station!!! (along with assorted lesser satellites) I just checked its schedule for last night and yes, indeed, that was it. You can track the ISS over your area here:
          I read in the paper that the meteor shower will peak tonight–perhaps I’ll have to sleep out on the deck.

          • Nancy says:

            Great viewing between 4 & 5 am this morning, Kathleen 🙂 Lots of shooting stars & 4 satellites.

            • Kathleen says:

              Damn, missed it. I woke up at 2:50am and went out on the deck–stood out there for 5 minutes and didn’t see even one, so I bagged it. I did get a nice close fly-by from one of our resident bats, though. Earlier in the evening at dusk, having consulted the schedule, I got a great view of the International Space Station AND simultaneously a bat flying through the view. Well, I’m glad *you* got to see them, Nancy.

  42. Yvette says:

    This 2016 IUCN Red List on endangered and threatened species indicates the biggest threats to species is human caused.

    Agriculture, overhunting, poaching, biodervisty loss, pollution, ect., and less about climate change.

    Even though numbers within many different species is declining, I see these results as good news. We can change this. We can turn this around. It’s a matter of making it happen. Easier said than done, but overexploitation, overhunting and poaching are high on the list, as is agriculture.

    • Louise Kane says:

      I was just about to post this Yvette, thanks for getting to it first. Its a welcome analysis. The claim that wildlife benefit from hunting and that harvest levels are sustainable should by now be falling on deaf ears.

      • rork says:

        In the US, we can alter the harvest levels. Poaching is a problem, but not a huge one. Near me in MI, I can hardly name any iconic wildlife that has declined in the last 40 years. Yesterday I saw baldies, osprey, cranes, mink, deer, muskrat, trumpeter swan, all vastly more abundant than previously. Coyotes and bear abundant. Wolves expanding their range. Of those, we harvest deer, mink, bear, coyote, muskrat, and I claim with the deer that it is necessary, deaf ear baloney not withstanding. Habitat loss is allot harder to reverse, and I question the sustainability of our farming, so I take these as the much more serious problem, at least here. But I’m not an anti-hunter.

        • Yvette says:

          I was thinking of wildlife overall and more on a global scale.

          There is definitely a serious problem with species declining with many of the iconic African wildlife. Poaching is driving the problem with elephants and rhinos, but even giraffes have declined by 40% in the last 15 years.

          Dr. Peter Kat of Lion Aid says wild lions numbers are in more trouble than is being reported. I remember him talking about this on in interview on Our Wild World radio program. There was a huge difference in the estimated population.

          Then there is this:
          “Data on lion numbers is not reliable, said Peter Lindsey, a lion conservation specialist at Zimbabwe university and author of a survey of trophy hunting in Africa. He has argued in academic papers that hunting could be a positive force because it provides an economic motive for maintaining wildlife habitats.

          “But in countries like Tanzania, which holds 30-50% of all Africa’s wild lions, trophy hunting appears to be the primary driver of lion population declines outside protected areas,” said Lindsey.”

          Of course, the great apes are losing habitat and all of those specie’s populations are down.

          I was also thinking of the global amphibian losses. Nearly 1/3 of the world’s species are threatened worldwide. Here in my region, it’s the loss of horned lizards that distresses me. I grew up with Texas Horned lizards being everywhere. I’ve not seen one in the wild in decades. I’m sure part of the reason is the region of OK where I live, but it’s well known in these parts that Texas Horned Lizards are disappearing and no one really knows why. I think there is a data gap with the reasons for why horned lizards are declining.

          And I’ve not even mentioned the pollinators; the monarchs and the bees. There is plenty of work waiting for young grad students.

  43. Kathleen says:

    “Lost prosthetic leg found in Wisconsin beaver dam”
    (You can’t make this stuff up…)

  44. Kathleen says:

    Here’s the final word on the bear who killed the mountain biker after the cyclist ran into the bear…the investigation is now closed.

  45. Louise Kane says:

    anybody know anything about this
    with Don Young’s name on it, I am immediately suspect and Audubon is often at the heart of predator control programs.

  46. Kathleen says:

    I was stunned to see this quote from someone who teaches at the University of Montana, College of Forestry and Conservation:

    “Conservation requires unique and innovative strategies, and thinking outside the box,” Thomsen said. “Conserving for conservation’s sake is not going to cut it anymore.”

    For instance, the illegal killing of Cecil the lion outside a national park in Zimbabwe a year ago prompted outrage in the United States, but one lesson from Africa is that trophy hunting isn’t always bad, she said. In fact, it can bring money to people who would otherwise have an incentive to poach.

    “We see trophy hunting tourism as a way to conserve,” said Thomsen, who would like to pursue research on trophy hunting in collaboration with scientists in Africa. “We see that it has a direct link to (financial) benefits in the communities.” -end of excerpt-

  47. Nancy says:

    Yet another sad example of humans, “tinkering around” with the lives of wildlife:

    “Raccoon predators include cougars, bobcats, coyotes:

  48. Ida Lupine says:

    How are those rabies vaccine drops supposed to work? I don’t see how they can be distributed evenly – some animals may get none, and others may ‘OD’ (gorge) on many of them especially if they are sweet and fatty. Is that harmful? What about non-target animals, like someone’s pet? I was always under the impression that small mammals like squirrels and chipmunks don’t carry rabies.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I used to think they had value, but now I wonder. Dropping live and also genetically modified (brand new!) viruses out into the landscape makes me leery. There have been cases (see CDC) although rare, where someone has gotten infected from skin contact by picking up a damaged bait. Killed viruses are used for pets. It’s like the needle in a haystack approach. I’d feel better if, like in Canada, trap, vaccinate directly, and release would seem more effective, but with obviously difficulties. These are questions that deserve answers and explanations, not put-downs.

  49. Kathleen says:

    “Hunters in sick new low as black bear is stabbed with 7ft spear then left to die”

    “Alberta government orders investigation into spear killing of bear; Calling the video ‘unacceptable,’ province promises new legislation to ban spear hunting”

    • rork says:

      We have people wanting to make spears legal on deer in MI. They aren’t doing that well. Our laws in MI explicitly say what kinds of weapons are legal. All the people I’ve ever seen use spears use atlatl, which were invented before humans came to North America. We see them at archery ranges.

      • Kathleen says:

        Montana tried to legalize spear hunting in the 2011 legislature but the bill didn’t get out of committee. This piece tells why a senator introduced the bill, gives MT FWP’s response to a query about it (“it’s a social issue”), and links to a museum dedicated to the self-proclaimed “greatest spear hunter in recorded history.” Just FYI for anyone who’s interested or wants to relive that mind-blowingly awful 2011 legislative session.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Wow. Canada is or has taken steps to make it illegal, but America won’t, and even wants to promote it? This man wouldn’t have stood a prayer if he hadn’t baited the bear, despite how great he thinks he is. If they want to hunt in this way, it should be without the loaded 4 x 4 pickup, cellphone, and other modern conveniences. Just a man, his spear, and a couple of sticks to rub together to make a fire.

          You wonder if these senators and politicians have any other issues that they spend as much time on.

          • Mat-ters says:

            Ida, I’m wondering if the Native American tribes would want to hunt with spears would you have as much contempt?

            • Ida Lupine says:

              No, I wouid not. It was a necessity and they had no alternatives hundreds and even thousands of years ago. There’s just no comparison. Today, it’s rather overly indulgent and greedy, not to mention terribly cruel and inhumane, when there are so many weapons and high tech advances that continually increase the degree of unfairness and lack of fair chase for wildlife. Hunting over bait is not fair chase by any means.

              If he wants to be a purist and use bow and arrow or spear, then he should give up the camera and other high tech equipment – there’s no purpose to that but to relive the thrill of taking a life, as a serial killer would do.

              • Mat-ters says:

                Ida, Don’t you think it would be quite naïve to think that American Indians didn’t hunt over bait or trap animals or run them off of cliffs? One of the disconcerting things in life is that our creator has put us here with the knowledge that we can not survive as a species without “taking a life”. In my humble opinion, those that think different are naïve or have an agenda.

                • Yvette says:

                  Mat-ters, we Native Americans, Ameri-Indians, or Indians are still here.

                  I’m Indian, Muskogee Creek is my tribe, and I’m 1/2. My nieces and nephews are mixed tribes; Northern Cheyenne, Creek and Umatilla. The men hunt but never for fun or sport. At least not in my family. They use modern day equipment. No spears. That is stupid, don’t you think? Why would they?

                  I’d appreciate it if you didn’t speak about us Natives like we don’t exist anymore. We are still here. Maybe to the chagrin of the US government, we survived the attempted annihilation and ethnic cleansing. We are still here. What’s more, there are any different tribes with a wide variety of culture and cultural practices, which are largely based on geography of a tribe’s aboriginal lands. One mistake I see with non-Indians is lumping all Indigenous people from this continent as if they are one peoples. We are not. My tribe’s aboriginal lands were in the Southeastern region of this continent. What we did and how we hunted is likely quite different than the way tribes in the Pacific Northwest did. The geographic region being different means different traditional foods, both animal and plants; different cultures; etc. Did any use spears? quite likely, I’m sure my tribe gigged for fish. I know for a fact that some PNW tribes fished for salmon and used traps but they also managed their salmon fishing. There were limits and what those limits the number of harvest left salmon for tribes that were further downstream and ensured enough salmon made it to the spawning beds to carry on the cycle of life. This was before the gold rush of 1849 when Whites came in and destroyed the salmon fishery in the Klamath basin with over fishing. Capitalism. Got to love it.

                  The Muskogee Creek’s had permanent towns built along rivers and streams. We fished, hunted and farmed. We had individual garden plots and communal farms for the town. I know we did not hunt or trap for fun or sport.

                  Your question was directed to Ida, who is not Indian, but I am, so I’m going to answer it. I definitely would mind if any of the tribes in the US or Canada hunted with spears. I know of not one single tribe that has their own fish and wildlife laws (many do have that) that would allow spears to be used.Especially the way the Bowmar man used it to torture and kill this bear. What a man of low character.

                  We tribes are far from perfect but I don’t think any would allow spear hunting in 2016.

                  We’re modern Indians. Some tribes are far more traditional than others or have tribal members who are so.

                  For perspective ask yourself this: Do you still shoot with a muzzle? Drive a wagon? Live in a clapboard house or one built into a hill in the plains? If not, then why do you speak about us Indians as though it is 500 years ago?

                • Nancy says:

                  Most excellent response Yvette 🙂

                • Louise Kane says:

                  Yvette thank you again for another great post/response and for your consistent urging of/ for compassion towards other beings.

              • Mat-ters says:

                Yvette, No “mistake” here! I’m quite sure my Native American History, bloodline, and knowledge of native American history are as polished as yours, if not more! I was only seeing if Ida had a bias, she does if she truly meant to say “No” Are you speaking to her through me when you said “I’d appreciate it if you didn’t speak about us Natives like we don’t exist anymore” as it relates to my question and her answer.

                Speaking of bias, “Capitalism” again, in my humble opinion has allowed whiteman, wildlife, and the natives to thrive. Are you one of those that only want natives and certain types of wildlife to thrive?

                • Yvette says:

                  “Are you one of those that only want natives and certain types of wildlife to thrive?”


          • rork says:

            “America” won’t make it illegal most places cause we don’t need too – it’s already illegal.
            Once you’ve invented the bow and arrow, you can use the atlatl and spear for firewood. Our special guy, throwing a giant hand held spear where the shaft won’t even penetrate, is a knucklehead.

  50. Kathleen says:

    “Mystery of bizarre bird deformities may be solved”
    Definitely click on this if just to look at the picture of the black-capped chickadee with a deadly beak deformity. A virus is suspected, and “may endanger the health of bird populations around the world…”

  51. Ida Lupine says:

    Absolutely right, I am not qualified to answer those types of questions. Except that I think in modern times we have too many methods to choose from in killing an ever-dwindling population of predators and other wildlife. A little humility and self-restraint are in order.

    But for some better news, I did not realize that it was the 100th anniversary of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act on August 16th:

    • Yvette says:

      “Absolutely right, I am not qualified to answer those types of questions.”

      I’m not sure if that was directed toward me or not. To clarify my post, I did not mean you were ‘unqualified’ to answer. Anyone can answer. I was simply trying to provide a perspective from one individual (me) who happens to be Native American.

  52. Kathleen says:

    “Appreciate transformative power of fire” on today’s opinion page (Missoulian) by a biologist from UM.

    aaand…cue the ignorant responses: “This whole “pro fire” business is nothing but a knee jerk response of illiterate people to what they perceive as the threat of “thinning in the wildland Urban Interface”…”

    One of our favorite trails in the Bitterroot burned in 2006–much of it a stand-replacing burn. At first it about killed me; plus, it was arson, so it was extra hard to take. We’ve gone back nearly every year since and have taken pics from specific locations; it’s been a beautiful transformation. In 10 years we’re at the small trees, shrubs, and dense wildflower stage.

  53. Kathleen says:

    “Large section of Yellowstone River closed to all recreation due to parasite”

    Excerpt: “…the catalyst for the fish kill to be Proliferative Kidney Disease — one of the most serious diseases to impact whitefish and trout…. The effect of the disease on Yellowstone’s fish populations is exacerbated by other stressors like near record low flows, consistent high temperatures and the disturbance caused by recreational activities.”

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Humans cannot account for all of the threats to wildlife and wildlands when they make arrogant claims to ‘manage’. There are so many unforeseen problems they’ll be spinning like a juggler.

      • Kathleen says:

        “Ecosystems are not only more complex than we think, they are more complex than we CAN think.”

        • Nancy says:

          “It could be argued that living organisms have long been subject to a myriad of evolutionary pressures arising from the environment (Reusch & Wood 2007) and are consequently well adapted to respond to such pressures.

          **However, the current pace of environmental change is unprecedented (Thomas et al. 2004) and it is unknown whether the capacity of species to adapt to such changes and counteract their harmful and often combined effects may be exceeded. Regrettably, published data on this subject are still extremely limited, making it difficult to understand the full extent of the effects of environmental change on wildlife health”

          In a nutshell:

  54. Nancy says:

    A good read:

    “It could be argued that living organisms have long been subject to a myriad of evolutionary pressures arising from the environment (Reusch & Wood 2007) and are consequently well adapted to respond to such pressures.

    However, the current pace of environmental change is unprecedented (Thomas et al. 2004) and it is unknown whether the capacity of species to adapt to such changes and counteract their harmful and often combined effects may be exceeded.

    ***Regrettably, published data on this subject are still extremely limited, making it difficult to understand the full extent of the effects of environmental change on wildlife health”

  55. Nancy says:

    Sorry, didn’t mean to repeat my comment/link but the one I posted earlier (a little before 4 pm) didn’t appear until I posted basically the same comment/link, 3 hours later. ??

  56. Nancy says:

    “Joode Weinhold said, “So noisy and so busy and so overcrowded, they were closing areas because of overcapacity of the cars.”

    Although Weinhold and her husband flew over the Atlantic to see Yellowstone, they left because it was too crowded for them”

    It’s been tossed around before – buses.

    • Gary Humbard says:

      June, July and August account for ~70% of all yearly visitations so maybe a little planning will provide a quality visit. I went there in early October two years ago and found my experience quite enjoyable and the weather was nice. Fall colors, cool mornings and evenings brought out the wildlife and the visitors were not in a hurry. I’ve noticed after the kids get into school, a lot of places get much less crowded so September and October are my favorite months (not that I don’t like people).

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I went after Labor Day – quite beautiful and even a little snow! I loved it. I prefer less crowds, people in smaller groups and individual basis are nicer. So I like to go off peak and off season when I travel. All the pollution from cars can’t be good, it’s really a shame.

  57. Kathleen says:

    Remind me never to hire these Alaskan guides–they guided their group right between a mom grizzly and her cub–near a salmon spawning stream. Hello???

  58. Gary Humbard says:

    For those with “open minds”, these numbers are quite impressive and I’m thankful that some hunting organizations put their boots on the ground and money in the coffers to restore habitat and protect wildlands from development.

  59. Ida Lupine says:

    Oh, how I wish I had not allowed myself to be hunted over bait. Sometimes it’s hard to resist. I won’t make that mistake again. I was referring to the hunting practice, not any group of people. To my knowledge, it is not commonly used in modern times.

  60. Kathleen says:

    For everyone waiting for a change at US Fish & Wildlife Service, that time has come.

    “I look forward to the opportunity to help lead a community of organizations and professionals also known for scientific excellence and dedicated care for wildlife and the wild places where they live: AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums.” – Daniel M. Ashe

    Captivity–it’s just easier.

  61. rork says:
    No substantial rise in wolf numbers, despite lack of hunting season. Also summarizes MI and WI numbers. Article failed to mention one cause of wolf death – they kill each other.

  62. rork says:
    Painful read for folks with some knowledge of evolution, but does point out some facts. Author is grateful scorched earth policy stopped, but maybe the problem was that it didn’t go far enough early enough.
    I propose we use gene editing (CRISPR-Cas9) to modify deer PRNP gene, and see if we can make deer immune, and still be healthy, if that is possible, which it may not be.

  63. Louise Kane says:

    on the new 87,500 acre Kathadin National Park in Maine
    sorry to see hunting allowed
    I wonder if the donators tried to restrict hunting? anyone know?

    “The Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) shall manage these lands through the National Park Service, pursuant to applicable authorities and consistent with the valid existing rights and the purposes and provisions of this proclamation. As provided in the deeds, the Secretary shall allow hunting by the public on the parcels east of the East Branch of the Penobscot River in accordance with applicable law. The Secretary may restrict hunting in designated zones and during designated periods for reasons of public safety, administration, or resource protection. This proclamation will not otherwise affect the authority of the State of Maine with respect to hunting.”

  64. Ida Lupine says:

    I just heard! Thank you, thank you, thank you President Obama!!!!! Can’t wait to visit. Thank you!

  65. Ida Lupine says:

    What I just read is that hunting bears with bait and dogs is not allowed:

  66. Mareks Vilkins says:

    For the second time in four years, the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife is exterminating a wolf pack to protect Len McIrvin’s cattle — this time, a WSU researcher says, after the rancher turned his animals out right on top of the Profanity Peak pack’s den.

    “This livestock operator elected to put his livestock directly on top of their den site; we have pictures of cows swamping it, I just want people to know,” Wielgus said in an interview Thursday.

    The allotment Wielgus monitors, and McIrvin grazes, is on public land in the Colville National Forest.

    The cattle pushed out the wolves’ native prey of deer, and with a den full of young to feed, what came next was predictable, Wielgus said.

    McIrvin has refused to radio-collar his cattle to help predict and avoid interactions with radio-collared wolves, Wielgus said.

    By contrast, Wielgus has documented no cattle kills among producers who are participating in his research studies and very few among producers using Fish & Wildlife’s protocol.

    “In Washington, more cattle are killed by logging trucks, fire and lightning than wolves,” Wielgus said.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      If this man is deliberately encouraging wolves in protest, the pack should not be killed. He seems to be the only one who repeatedly has (or causes?) problems. And especially if this is occurring on public lands, repeatedly. The Department should not always cave to this rancher’s deliberate disregard for the program. Public sentiment is against this. Taxpayers should not have to fund it.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        This should a game changer, I hope. The man is already getting a deal by being allowed to graze on public land, in the Colville National Forest as well. He is taking advantage.

    • Gary Humbard says:

      It amazes me that someone tries to tie cattle getting killed by other means such as logging trucks, fire and lightning to wolves. The issue is the loss of cattle due to wolves to particular ranchers.

      It’s also time for ranchers to do everything within their limits to co-exist with predators and quit the “lets send the wolves to urban areas” statements. As you can see from the above link and Mareks link, there are two different thoughts on the removal of the entire pack, but unfortunately humans have the trump card over wolves. I don’t think the federal agencies who issue grazing permits can include stipulations that require protection of wolf den sites unless they are listed as T&E species and in this case, they are not federally listed.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Why, though? A loss is a loss, whether due to wolves or other reasons. From what I have read, wolf depredation is minor compared to other losses. Why should loss due to wolf depredation be seen differently, simply because it is based on an emotional, age-old antipathy and a fight for who is dominant on the landscape? We are in modern times now, and we harp about basing our decision on rationality and science.

        This man appears to be flouting the rules because he doesn’t want wolves at all. This is public land, and deliberately taking cattle into known wolf areas, and expecting to be compensated and have the wolves killed at taxpayer expense is abuse of the system. If despite all of the man’s best efforts, he still had cattle lost to wolves, then it might be different, but he has not given his best efforts, and from what I have read, refuses to put his best efforts into preventing loss. If it were private land, he might well have a case, but it is public land.

        This man has gone to the well once too often. It is disappointing that the WDFW allows it without resistance, especially since other ranchers do cooperate. Wolves are not threatened and endangered because they were intentionally taken off those lists prematurely, as we well know, and like always, the delisting is deliberately being abused.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        It amazes me that someone tries to tie cattle getting killed by other means such as logging trucks, fire and lightning to wolves. The issue is the loss of cattle due to wolves to particular ranchers.

        The common denominator is unattended cattle.

        If the cattle would be attended there would be no loss due to trucks, fire, lightning and wolves.

        • TC says:

          Well, no. Not much you can do about lightning on range, except get yourself protected as much as possible; horses and cattle get hit by lightning in corrals for goodness sake. And even the best efforts will not ameliorate a fast-moving fire, especially in grasslands, shrublands, or sagebrush steppe. Trucks on open range always are a hazard, both for livestock and wildlife, and I know a rancher that was hit while crossing a forest service road on his horse (both survived). Wolves – probably buy that one. We’ll need a paradigm shift there that does not seem to be happening, except with a few select producers.

          • Mareks Vilkins says:

            In general,agreed. But when one zooms-in then the picture becomes more complicated.

            There are about 20 000 ranchers who hold grazing permits on federal land (out of 600K), and they represent about 3 percent of the beef raised in the U.S.

            Bottom line: they need to make their case to the urban populations (US urbanization rate is 80%).

            Being allowed to graze their livestock on public land is a big deal for them.

            It’s in the collective interests of ranchers for them to be able to call out the bad actors like McIrvin or Koski.

            • Mareks Vilkins says:


              What toll does wildfire take on the livestock industry?

              Nationally, statistics are hard to decipher. The U.S. Department of Agriculture lumps wildfire deaths into a catchall category titled “adverse weather,” which also includes lightning strikes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, and blizzards. The Department also issues a Cattle Death Loss report every five years. For the period 2005-2010, nearly 490,000 cattle died from adverse weather. Given the spike in dramatic weather events of late, the next report will make for an interesting compare and contrast.

              Locally, the figures are more precise.

              In Washington state, last year’s Carlton Complex fire killed 1,000 cattle. This year’s Okanagan Complex fire is located in a more developed agricultural community. The ranch community has banded together to help each other out, but the death toll will likely be even greater.

              Fires threaten the already delicate economic balance ranchers face. Many would rather lose their homes than their cattle. Animal husbandry—the science of developing certain traits in a domestic animal—takes generations to refine. A house or barn can be rebuilt in a summer.

              Livestock deaths from wildfire have not reached the point of impacting consumers. The 2014 Farm Bill provides funding for the Livestock Indemnity Disaster Program, reimbursing ranchers and farmers for up to 75 percent the value of animals killed by natural disaster. In 2014, the program cost taxpayers $21.7 million.

          • Mareks Vilkins says:


            When Lightning Strikes

            “If you think lightning never strikes twice in the same place, think again. The USDA’s recently retired Chief Meteorologist Albert Peterlin says, “Lightning is not just a random event natural killer, but more an opportunist taking advantage of a preferred pathway. Where lightning has struck a tree in the past, it will likely hit again. An area of pasture that has been deadly once could be again. With lightning, the past is a prologue to the future.”

            For horse owners, the message is clear–to help safeguard livestock from lightning strikes, learn what lightning likes, then either remove the attractant or remove the livestock.”

            good educational article, imo

          • Mareks Vilkins says:


            “As animal husbandry people, we are responsible for those animals,” Dent said. “They’re not the smartest things on earth, and we have to take care of them.”

            … Although the cattlemen agree to accept responsibility for whatever happens to them when they go in, Vogel said it will still be up to firefighters to rescue them if they are overtaken by fire. And he said that puts firefighters at risk.

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          it just happens that two years ago Gary Humbard wrote:

          “Here is a perspective, one lightning storm killed almost as many cattle than wolves and grizzlies (52 confirmed) combined in Montana in 2013. Lets get that printed in a Montana newspaper (oh wait that’s not sensational enough).”

    • Kathleen says:

      How AWESOME is THIS?!? Excerpt:

      “All commercial extraction activities, including commercial fishing and any future deep-sea mining, will be prohibited in the expanded monument. …It features the largest seabird gathering site in the world, with more than 14 million birds from 22 species, nearly all of the remaining endangered Hawaiian monk seals, Hawaiian green sea turtles and Laysan albatrosses.”

      • Ida Lupine says:

        It is awesome – but closer to home, I wish lands would be protected from human overuse and presumptive ownership. Although, I’m happy Maine’s woods are being protected.

        I can’t turn a blind eye to what is going on in Washington state for a self-important rancher. Instead of taking a pack out at his unending demands, he ought to be fined for non-compliance each time! Then we’ll see how he flouts the rules.

  67. Nancy says:

    Interesting Elk, although there has been the occasional sighting,for years. Probably just passing thru 🙂

  68. rork says:
    “Systematic review of management strategies to control chronic wasting disease in wild deer populations in North America”
    Open access, not that hard to read, a great review of interesting studies. Much still to learn, but preponderance of evidence does not seem to be that “leave CWD management to Mother Nature” is the best option, even if some people in WI want you to believe that. Perhaps my more important take-away was: WI is a great place to do further controlled experiments. Study duration may have to be fairly long unfortunately, so great willpower is needed.

    • Nancy says:


      “The evidence in support of predator species for the control of CWD is worth consideration, and is not only limited to the study by Wild et al. [22] evaluated here. Deer killed by mountain lions in Colorado had significantly higher CWD prevalence compared to hunter-killed deer, suggesting that mountain lions selectively preyed on infected deer [43]. Similarly, mountain lion attacks against CWD-infected deer were increased fourfold compared to non-infected deer [44]. Decreased attentiveness of CWD-infected mule deer was considered the reason for their greater propensity to vehicle collisions [43]. If predators are able to detect a subtle difference in CWD-infected deer early in the course of the disease, removal of these deer by predators may be more effective at decreasing the spread of CWD compared to non-selective culling. Furthermore, it was suggested that the absence of large predators could pose a risk factor for the establishment of CWD in new areas”

      Perhaps, at least in the northeast, if coyotes were not “harvested” in huge numbers (30,000 annually in WI alone) they could potentially have an effect on infected deer, the same way mountain lions do in CO?

      • Immer Treue says:

        Killing coyotes will/does have the same effect as Trump’s supposed wall: nothing

  69. Kathleen says:

    A single bolt of lightning killed 323 reindeer in Norway. Article includes video:

  70. Richard Eissinger says:

    Today from the Salt Lake Tribune a positive article on rancher BLM cooperation:
    ‘We are not all Cliven Bundys’: Rich County ranchers partner with BLM to revolutionize grazing

  71. Kathleen says:

    “FWP commission OKs elimination of Tendoy sheep”

    Disgusting. These are sentient individuals condemned to die simply because they aren’t producing a “huntable” herd. When they’re dead, a new herd will be introduced–as if sentient nonhumans are nothing more than widgets to eliminate and replace for the sole purpose of killing. And the problem originates with the exploitation of domestic sheep, who transmitted pneumonia to the wild ones.

  72. Kathleen says:

    “Police shoot, kill mountain lion in Whitefish neighborhood”

    The lion was nonaggressive but apparently didn’t show “enough fear” of humans.

  73. Kathleen says:

    “The Anthropocene: We’ve begun a new era and it’s not looking good”

    Excerpt: “From fossil fuels to domesticated chickens, the future fossil record is less about bones than manic habitual patterns that moved those bones around the world:

    “If we accept a mere tenth of what animal-rights activists are claiming, then modern industrial agriculture might well be the greatest crime in history.

    “From Cambrian to Tertiary, planetary epochs are defined by life’s rise and fall. The Anthropocene is the first era consciously influenced by one of Earth’s creations. Like any rambunctious, ignorant child, we’re aimlessly rebelling for the sake of it, stuck in our ways before the species’ prefrontal cortex has had a chance to develop.”

  74. Immer Treue says:

    While Revisiting Highway 61 today, got out of vehicle to stretch legs and allow the dog to sample Superior, I happened into a retired couple from Australia who were on an extended world tour photographing wildlife. Needless to say they were apalled at the “kill” mentality that exists here. We spoke for a while about Denali wolves and African lions, and from their perspective the money lost in photograph is opportunities from tourists dwarfs any possible financial gain from the killing of said animals.

    • Louise kane says:

      The Australians are correct but if there is a country that has as terrible predator killing policies it’s Australia

      Dingoes and crowd are killed incessantly and often with 1080

      I can’t imagine a worse death
      And the shark nets…

      I hope the visitors take their concerns back home also

      Dingo killing us a tragedy of epic proportions

  75. Immer Treue says:

    While driving over extended distances, ones mind can most certainly wander. While the naysayers are still awaiting the first human fatality due to wolves in the lower 48, perhaps we should look at the puzzle from the actuary’s perspective…

    How many people have not died due to auto collisions with deer, elk, moose that were removed due to wolf predation?

    • Mark L says:

      I think you are absolutely correct…they probably have prevented some, but most people are not going to delve into ‘veridical problems’. There’s no money in that

    • rork says:

      You’d need to estimate the reduction of deer. I’m used to thinking it’s a pretty small effect. I know you know all this – it’s intended for other readers.

      But if we let the simple-minded predator-enemies estimate the effect size, then it might look very dramatic. Maybe that’s what you were thinking, now that I consider it.

      • Immer Treue says:

        I’m sure insurance actuaries have modeled the effect. If MN wolves,,depending on their population size, prey upon 40,000 to 60,000 deer per year, year after year, that missing annual population would surely have caused a number of accidents with autos/trucks, and over the years a fatality or two.

        Hunting by humans, and severe winters have larger effects on deer population, but wolf and other predator pressure is applied year round.

  76. WM says:

    Sure looks like Dr. Rob Wielgus at Washington State University stepped into some wolf poopie when making incorrect statements to the press and others about the facts leading up to the Profanity Pack removal. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a defamation lawsuit from the livestock operator, if he thought it was worth the effort. The University is not happy about this and is scrambling to distance itself from him, as are wolf conservation groups, including Conservation Northwest, HSUS and several others. No doubt he has been to the Dean’s Office over this:

    • Mareks Vilkins says:

      the livestock were released at low elevation on the east side of the Kettle Crest more than 4 miles from the den site, and dispersed throughout the allotments based on instructions found in the Annual Operating Instructions (AOI). The CC mountain allotment is more than 30,000 acres and livestock are generally moved from pasture to pasture following an established rotation.

      30K acres make 47 mi2 area (with radius 3.85 mi)

      it’s not a safe distance from a den

      • Louise kane says:

        Thanks Mareks it’s not safe distance or prudent either and why should they take steps to protect their cattle when the state kills entire packs of wolves when the inevitable conflict arises sbd the inevitable urging and whining starts
        It’s sickening

    • bret says:

      Martorello did not return phone calls, and neither did the rancher, who grazes cattle on public land in the Colville National Forest.

      That rancher and another producer with cattle near the Profanity Peak pack had been taking steps recommended by the department to avoid conflict with wolves, Martorello has said, from deploying range riders to picking up carcasses to avoid attracting wolves, and turning out calves when they were bigger and more mature. He praised the ranchers’ cooperation.

      • bret says:

        Using the same open-source data, University of Washington researchers could not replicate the results reached by researchers at Washington State University who in 2014 found removing livestock-killing wolves leads to increased chances of depredations the next year.

        “We did not find any statistical support for the Wielgus and Peebles’s findings in this replication,” writes Nabin Baral of the UW’s School of Environmental and Forest Sciences in the College of the Environment, et al, in

        • WM says:

          Thanks Bret.

          Glad someone took a closer look at it. I wonder if Wielgus made any kind of rebuttal after their paper was published?

          Here is the paper from the University of Washington researchers, and they don’t hold much back. The first two paragraphs under the Discussion Heading give it to Wielgus with both barrels, so to speak:

          And the third paragraph is the final blow.

          “The failure of our attempt to reproduce the results using the same data and following more rigorous statistical procedures casts doubt on the reliability and validity of the conclusions drawn from the Wielgus and Peebles’s [1] models.”

        • Mareks Vilkins says:

          from website:

          “WSU, UW research clashes”

          However, Wielgus is confident in his methodology.

          “As time went on and the years progressed, all these wolves in all these states increased,” Wielgus said. “The number of livestock at risk increased, the number of depredations increased, the numbers of wolves killed increased. They put in year, which is auto-correlated with all those other variables so their analysis found that year had the biggest effect on livestock depredations.”

          He said that by doing this and using time as the control variable they were ignoring a larger issue.

          “Year doesn’t really mean anything,” Wielgus said. “And they found that oh, in addition, the more wolves you kill the fewer livestock depredations you get. Their same analysis showed that the number of wolves has no effect whatsoever on number of livestock depredations, so their analysis was biologically impossible.”

          So because they used year as a control variable, it was auto-correlated with everything, which means that none of the other parameters such as number of wolves and breeding pairs that Wielgus mentioned can be interpreted.

          “None of the UW researchers in this study were biologists, so they have never analyzed this kind of data,” Wielgus said. “Well they re-analyzed my data set and instead of controlling for the number of wolves they put in year as the control variable.”

          Wielgus said the UW researcher knew this was a problem, and he along with other reviewers pointed it out and the UW researchers chose to ignore it.

          “These folks are incompetent amateurs that don’t know what they’re doing,” Wielgus said.

          • Mareks Vilkins says:


            “Washington Wolf Cull Won’t Save Livestock: Study”

            But here’s the thing: lethal interventions don’t have a record of working, said Adrian Treves, director of the Carnivore Coexistence Lab at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

            Today, Treves and his colleagues present analysis (PDF here) in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment of an exhaustive investigation of numerous studies centered on methods to prevent wolves, coyotes, bears and big cats from killing livestock.

            An overwhelming number of experiments looking at ways to reduce predators from taking livestock do not measure up to a “gold” or even “silver” standard of scientific scrutiny, the researchers found. Of the ones that did, nonlethal methods had a better track record and none of them led to more livestock losses. But lethal methods sometimes did.

            For that reason, the team recommends that wildlife agencies suspend campaigns like the one going on in Washington and apply more stringent criteria to future control efforts. If followed, these recommendations could keep more livestock and wildlife living and save taxpayer money.

            … Although they limited the findings to those published in English and conducted in North America and Europe, they amassed a paper mountain of more than 500 articles.

            Of those, only 12 met a high level of scrutiny.

            Interestingly, none of the studies that met a silver or gold standard came from the USDA’s Wildlife Services

            “They have a big research arm funded for 40 or 50 years and they can’t seem to do any quality work,” said Robert Crabtree, chief scientist and founder of Yellowstone Ecological Research Center. “Shouldn’t someone take a look at what’s going on here and evaluate the millions of dollars spent for decades trying to justify lethal control?”

            Of the 12 studies that did hold up to scrutiny, five were non-lethal experiments and seven were lethal.

            When Treves and his colleagues looked at which methods were the best at keeping predators away from livestock, nonlethal came out on top: 80% were shown to be effective compared to 29% of lethal strategies.

            “Nonlethal methods seem to repel the predators without disrupting the social organization of the predators,” said Treves. “Disrupting the social organization by killing long-term resident predators seems to invite newcomers that prey on livestock more than did the older residents that were there before.”

            But not every rancher wants to invest the time, money or personnel into nonlethal methods. In 2012, Washington used $76,500 of state funds to eliminate the eight members of the Wedge Pack. It’s unknown how much it will cost to kill all 11 members of the Profanity Peak pack. (Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife did not respond to requests for an interview.)

            “If lethal control was unsubsidized on public lands, meaning the rancher had to pay [for it], the phone would be ringing off the hook in terms of people wanting to understand nonlethal methods and how to reduce depredation,” said Bean.

            In large parts of America, getting ranchers to adopt nonlethal strategies is a struggle. Ranching is part of their livelihood, a tradition passed down through the generations. And in an industry where profit margins are tight, trying something different might pose too large of a risk.

    • Louise kane says:

      Not so fast WM
      There are many possibilities that the university issued thst statement including grant and funding repurcussions and pressure exerted by the livestock community
      In looking at where the cattle were placed and the size of the territory the claim is not far off
      Take a look at the Washington eolf plan special considerations are supposed to be given to wolf denning sites
      It doesn’t raise any red flags to you that this livestock producer is responsible for deaths of both the packs killed and the degradation of the intent of the policy to prevent wolf deaths due to conflicts
      You are smarter than that and choose to use your words to support wolf killings more often than not

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        some additional information:

        “Washington wolf killing sparks rebukes, controversy”

        by Associated Press

        September 2, 2016

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Perhaps if ranchers were willing to cooperate, even just a little, with those who want to restore wolves after their near complete extirpation, the conflicts would lessen? The country has already given them everything by allowing them to handle predations through either WS or themselves. We don’t need hunting seasons or taking them off the endangered/threatened list. Demanding complete extirpation of a species again just for their interests is too much of a price to pay. I do not want to pay it. The cattle are now off the allotment so there is no reason to continue with the expensive aerial killing and hunting of these poor animals. When wolves are first spotted, they should be relocated.

          I’m tired of handholding and coddling. Even the report of Sally Jewell’s appearance at Katahdin Woods, as well as even the NYT (that bastion of the Democratic Party) and Boston Globe are walking on eggshells for fear of disturbing disgruntled people who want a environment-destroying paper industry again! Sorry, but since our predecessors took more than they should have, there’s less and less for others now and in the future. Wilderness is never ‘common’, and is becoming more and more rare as time goes on. Cattle-ranching is hardly a way of life that is threatened. These people need to grow up.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            ^^and cheap grazing rights honored for centuries. What more do they want? We realize that at times there will be conflict that need to be addressed, but not what is going on in WA and the West. It’s too much.

  77. Ralph Maughan says:


    Thanks for posting your comment because the idea that they put cattle right next to the wolf den seemed to be the main motivation for anger against the rancher.

  78. Yvette says:

    Bad news in lots of places.

    Thirty percent of the African elephant population has declined in just 7 years. This is species genocide.

    And closer to home: It doesn’t look good for the Santa Monica mountain lions.

  79. Ida Lupines says:

    I just love the tone of this article, and needless to say I am thrilled by this. I will be voting Democrat.

  80. Kathleen says:

    My love affair with pikas started in Colorado–particularly the San Juans.

    “Adorable American pika is disappearing due to climate change”
    Excerpt: “According to the survey, American pikas have completely disappeared from Zion National Park in Utah, where there had been sightings of the animals as recently as 2011. In Cedar Breaks National Monument, also in Utah, pikas were found within only one-quarter of their historical range. And in northeastern California, the animals were found in just 11 of their 29 confirmed habitats.”

  81. Kathleen says:

    I’m not much of a petition-signer–believing that they probably aren’t effective (for the most part) and perhaps even give people the false sense that they’ve “done something” toward solving a problem. Citizens *can* petition the president thru a conduit set up by the White House–providing that 100,000 signatures are recorded in 30 days. For anyone interested: a petition on delisting the Yellowstone grizzly…9/22 deadline.

  82. Yvette says:

    Not directly wildlife news, but given the ecological link of fresh water systems to the welfare of wildlife, I think this counts.

    The Sanding Rock Sioux have been protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline for months. They also filed legal action against the ACOE for failure to comply with the legally mandated government-to-government consultation on actions that effect tribes and their treaty land.

    I’ve been gone all weekend and came back to find this happened. A couple of things happened; the first is they desecrated burial and/or archeological sites and the second this is someone gave the order to attack the unarmed and peaceful protesters with pepper spray and vicious attack dogs. This happened after the oil company moved forward with dirt work.

    I, like most who read and post on this blog watched two different month(s) long armed protests instigated by the Bundy family. Everyone here knows the background. The Bundy’s and all of the right-wing militia people who helped in both the stand-off and the Ammon Bundy illegal occupation at Malheuer WL Refuge know that all law enforcement handled them with kid gloves. At Malheur the Bundy’s and others destroyed federal property, desecrated artifacts, and used federal property to dig and move dirt on the wetland wildlife refuge. They were allowed to come and go from the refuge. They were armed.

    I stated back when this was happening that no other demographic would be allowed such illegal actions. The Standing Rock Water Protectors are unarmed. They have been peaceful. They are legally protesting and doing so on their treaty land. So what happens? Somebody sent in vicious attack dogs. Can you imagine the outrage had this been done to the Bundy’s?

    Watch the video.

    and and article on the destruction of burial sites.

    Now what would they do to a bunch of us Indians if we were armed like the Bundy gang?

    • Nancy says:

      There are a series of videos in the Democracy Now link Yvette provided above for those interested in why these protests are taking place, I would strongly suggest listening to the Winona LaDuke interview.

      She is spot on with the fact that if our government really wants to create more jobs, addressing the decaying infrastructures in this country, should be at the top of the list.

      It is shameful but not surprising, that there is no national media coverage of these protests.

    • rork says:

      Complaints about that author. He ignores that hunters and trappers kill many more coyotes than WS, and that contest impacts are actually negligible. He “forgets” about furs. Also, he forgets to even mention possible impacts on other game populations, which would be a major counterpoint of some, but is complicated.
      Sheep keepers near me do their own coyote killing, or make deals with hunters or trappers, without WS help, but the best don’t bother, relying on fences, barns, dogs, and being smart about many details (they aren’t just running around on vast landscapes here in MI).

  83. rork says:

    A new PLoS one paper about CWD in Wyoming has been covered twice (paper is public). is pretty good. has a few more details but contains a bizarre quote about reducing hunting to sustain deer densities, whereas I think this data further bolsters the case for keeping densities low. Hunters (and predators) tend to kill CWD infected animals more often, and at lower density we might hope for less transmission (my evidence is weak), and greater selection for resistant PRNP alleles (exactly opposite of what some WI writers say). Interesting tidbit: Of the deer they tracked that died, 46 died of hunting, 17 of CWD, 6 by car, 5 by predators. Sadly, they are holding back the data about PRNP genetics (for a separate paper).

    • Jim Wiegand says:

      Nothing in my lifetime has been more damaging and more rigged against wildlife in this country than what I have seen over the last 20 years. For example the wind industry slaughtering endangered and highly protected species, exploded because of Clinton administration rigging that created no accountability for this industry. The truth is that the wind turbine cannot and will not solve any environmental problems. The public people would know things like this if the industry would stop paying experts to lie and Americans were not forced to live with Clinton style politics. Years ago I asked the American Wind Energy Association to produce just one honest study related to wind turbine mortality. As of today I have not received a response and this offers still stands. I made this statement because I know and can prove that this industry is hiding behind a giant wall of scientific fraud, where on their side, the truth does not exist. With voluntary regulations and a premeditated pattern of absurd, contrived, and bogus nonscientific studies, the truth about wind turbine mortality to highly protected species has been hidden. The wind industry has been able to hide most of their wind energy slaughter from the public thanks in great part to Bill Clinton. He amended the Freedom of Information Act in 1997 to protect wind energy interests and help them conceal their industrial carnage. The Clinton Administration also silenced all Interior Department USFWS employees with penalties of 3-year prison terms for those releasing information not approved by superiors. Bill Clinton established the new much larger Denver eagle repository in 1997 to not only distribute eagle parts to native Americans but to handle the flood of new carcasses coming in from wind energy. Since then more than 33,000 eagle carcasses have been secretly shipped to this facility. Thanks to Bill Clinton, the origin and cause of death for all these eagles will remain a top secret until his laws are changed. About a year ago I had a meeting with a wind tech working in CA. I was showed images was told about 5 golden eagles killed in 1 month by his company’s wind turbines. These eagles were not reported. I told FWS and waited weeks but there was no investigation. This wind tech had unknowingly signed a nondisclosure agreement and did not even know it until I pointed it out in his contract. He wanted to tell this story but the USFWS would not give him immunity. How convenient and how corrupt can you get. Now we have another President covering for this fraudulent industry. After years of a fraudulent wind industry NOT reporting their massive slaughter to thousands upon thousands of eagles, the Obama administration has put together a recent proposal that will allow the wind industry to slaughter 6200 eagles annually with their “bird safe” turbines. A clearer example of a corrupt politician rigging the system for industry profits does not exist. In the big picture wind turbines produce very little energy and because of rigging, all energy reported by the wind industry in America is embellished. The reason is that wind farms do not have to account for the energy flowing into wind projects so the real energy numbers are not known and from fake industry numbers, they are receiving billions in tax credits. Think I am making any of this up?…………….. Then call for an open hearing where I can ask any questions I wwish of the wind industry’s fake experts.

      • Kathleen says:

        Maybe this was posted 5 months ago–from Audubon, last March: “Will wind turbines ever be safe for birds?”

        • Ida Lupine says:

          What a beautiful site (and sight)! I think wind farms on a massive scale will never be safe for birds and bats. We humans can’t seem to do anything except on a large scale. Massive solar farms either.

          In some instances due to low populations, a few turbines don’t seem to present too much danger. But anything on a massive scale cannot work. Rooftop and parking lot solar would seem an ideal answer and efficient use of space – but for some reason, humans have to tear up habitat (that’s just sitting there unused, I guess) and install something massive.

          I also heard that most humpback whales were taken off the endangered list today? Pandas last week. I think that nowadays, no animal can be considered not endangered. 🙁

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Another thing I don’t like is that a bird or animal shouldn’t have to be ‘scared away’ from its own habitat to make room for more of us and our endless requirements? Is no area free from human interference?

            Human overpopulation is going to negate anything we do to mitigate our impact. Any alternative energy benefit is going to be offset by volume and number.

          • Yvette says:

            Ida, driving back from my weekend trip I drove through the small town where I use to work not long ago. Since I left that job at the end of June the electric co-op in that region have put up a small solar ‘farm’. It’s on the grounds of the co-op’s offices. It was awesome and I was proud.

            On the other end of town there are apartments that my tribe built for our elders. We (not me personally as I wasn’t on that project) built the newest section with insulated panels for insulation and other high energy efficient building methods. At first the duplexes were ‘too tight’ and they had to adjust them for more ventilation. But they got it right. I think they used geothermal techniques for the heating and air, but can’t remember if that did or did not. One funny story is one of my co-workers who worked on the administrative side of the project got a call from one of the tenets—–in mid-July. His complaint was the AC wasn’t working because it was hot. We’re in OK and it gets hot in May, sometimes even April. My co-worker personally checked on this man’s duplex. From the time he had moved in the duplex the man had never had to turn on the heater or the AC. Point is, there are things we can do. Small things, and they aren’t going to be the answer for all our needs but things are happening.

            My former adviser designed a fairly large bioswale (rain garden) and we installed it in an area near a creek that runs through the tribal complex.We were considering trying to convince the tribe to let me do a project to reduce non-point source runoff by utilizing rain gardens in specific sections of the duplexes but….I took a different job elsewhere.

            There are things that can be done to reduce our destruction and our energy usage without killing off wildlife. In fact, I hope to work on projects that will improve pollinator habitat at this new job. Fingers crossed we get the funding for the project.

            • Ida Lupine says:

              That sounds wonderful. I thought about you the other day when I heard there was an earthquake in Oklahoma? Hope everyone was ok!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I wouldn’t call President Obama one of animals’ staunchest supporters. Wolf delisting happened on his watch, as well as proposed bird 30-year take permits with no accountablility for the wind industry – as Jim has pointed out. And the remark made by Hillary was a cop-out – because with Grizzly delisting, it won’t be just the Trump boys killing animals. It also made her sound uninformed on the issue. And Ken Salazar as her transition team leader? ’nuff said about that!

      So animals will be the losers whoever wins. Bad or really bad.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        So the Democrats are better than nuthin’ is how I’d describe it. The President has been good about setting aside national monuments toward the end of his term, which may or may not make for safe havens for wildlife.

      • Jim Wiegand says:

        Obama is nothing but a figurehead for corporate fraud on America. His title is President but he is not even close to being a leader.

        • rork says:

          Take your vague politic banter somewhere where it’s more appropriate, and where people might not consider contradicting you a disservice to the readers.

          • Jim Wiegand says:

            I think you should take your small minded ignorance elsewhere. Here is some inside info for you to mull over………. Despite noble claims from President Obama and others, industrial wind turbines are not about reducing carbon dioxide emissions, preventing climate change or even saving humanity. They are about rigging the law, carving out exemptions, conducting fraudulent research, killing thousands of eagles, acquiring massive profits, and gouging Americans. None of which is good or admirable.
            If President Obama’s message were at all true, America would not be exporting enough coal and fossil fuels each year to generate more than twice the kilowatt-hours of electricity now produced from all of America’s 75,000 MW of installed wind energy. This total would be three times higher if rising US natural gas exports were included.
            Yet since 2008, under the Obama Administration, these exports have skyrocketed. Coal exports have nearly doubled and crude oil exports are up about 1500 percent. Even worse, this same relatively inexpensive energy, which other countries are consuming in ever more prodigious quantities, could have been used in the USA to produce cheap electricity for the grid at a fraction of the cost of wind energy.
            Even the billions of dollars wasted on Production Tax Credits for wind energy could have purchased this cheap energy.
            As stupid as all this seems, it also underscores how broken our system of democracy, ethics and justice have become.

            • rork says:

              Do you get that this last comment of yours talks about specific issues, where the previous one did not, and that it is that difference that I’m complaining about.
              Small minded ignorance was not the problem.

              • Jim Wiegand says:

                Guess you missed this earlier comment and do keep in mind there is little difference between Obama and Clinton politics. …. Nothing in my lifetime has been more damaging and more rigged against wildlife in this country than what I have seen over the last 20 years. For example the wind industry slaughtering endangered and highly protected species, exploded because of Clinton administration rigging that created no accountability for this industry. The truth is that the wind turbine cannot and will not solve any environmental problems. The public people would know things like this if the industry would stop paying experts to lie and Americans were not forced to live with Clinton style politics. Years ago I asked the American Wind Energy Association to produce just one honest study related to wind turbine mortality. As of today I have not received a response and this offers still stands. I made this statement because I know and can prove that this industry is hiding behind a giant wall of scientific fraud, where on their side, the truth does not exist. With voluntary regulations and a premeditated pattern of absurd, contrived, and bogus nonscientific studies, the truth about wind turbine mortality to highly protected species has been hidden. The wind industry has been able to hide most of their wind energy slaughter from the public thanks in great part to Bill Clinton. He amended the Freedom of Information Act in 1997 to protect wind energy interests and help them conceal their industrial carnage. The Clinton Administration also silenced all Interior Department USFWS employees with penalties of 3-year prison terms for those releasing information not approved by superiors. Bill Clinton established the new much larger Denver eagle repository in 1997 to not only distribute eagle parts to native Americans but to handle the flood of new carcasses coming in from wind energy. Since then more than 33,000 eagle carcasses have been secretly shipped to this facility. Thanks to Bill Clinton, the origin and cause of death for all these eagles will remain a top secret until his laws are changed. About a year ago I had a meeting with a wind tech working in CA. I was showed images was told about 5 golden eagles killed in 1 month by his company’s wind turbines. These eagles were not reported. I told FWS and waited weeks but there was no investigation. This wind tech had unknowingly signed a nondisclosure agreement and did not even know it until I pointed it out in his contract. He wanted to tell this story but the USFWS would not give him immunity. How convenient and how corrupt can you get. Now we have another President covering for this fraudulent industry. After years of a fraudulent wind industry NOT reporting their massive slaughter to thousands upon thousands of eagles, the Obama administration has put together a recent proposal that will allow the wind industry to slaughter 6200 eagles annually with their “bird safe” turbines. A clearer example of a corrupt politician rigging the system for industry profits does not exist. In the big picture wind turbines produce very little energy and because of rigging, all energy reported by the wind industry in America is embellished. The reason is that wind farms do not have to account for the energy flowing into wind projects so the real energy numbers are not known and from fake industry numbers, they are receiving billions in tax credits. Think I am making any of this up?…………….. Then call for an open hearing where I can ask any questions I wish of the wind industry or Interior Department. f

  84. Kathleen says:

    “Outfitter sentenced in illegal hunting of bobcats and mountain lions”

    The business owner is already in federal prison; his employee gets three months in jail plus two years probation.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Scum. These things are what come to mind when F&W Depts. speak with (over)confidence about managing wildlife. Is this type of thing taken into account?

      For example, with the Grizzly bear population just hovering over a questionable recovery line, how can anyone feel justified in their delisting with poacher activities like this? Who knows what’s going on with other wildlife such as wolves too.

  85. Nancy says:

    First wolves and now grizzlies. The area is slowly starting to lose that “game farm” atmosphere. Go Griz!

    • Elk375 says:


      “Go Griz”

      If the Griz (No. 15) play like they did last Saturday in the first half then Iowa State University (No. 3) is going to shut down this
      Saturday. Keep up the cheer, get your poms, poms out and cheer. It is going to be a very tuff game.

  86. rork says:
    is a piece of work decrying the high number of cougars in CA. There are fewer deer there you see, and more cougars, so it’s obvious that one caused the other. No other explanation is possible. And holy cheeses, dogs and cats are getting eaten on occasion – clearly unacceptable, and there’s evidently nothing owners can do. Even worse, the author’s pet horses are at risk, so it’s clear action is needed. It’s got learned-sounding links that point to articles that aren’t what author says they are about too.

  87. Jeff N. says:

    For those interested, the 2015 Mexican Gray Wolf annual report, 60 pages.

  88. Kathleen says:

    A father and son are out elk bowhunting. After they shoot an elk, they see a grizzly. Guess what they don’t have? Bear spray. Guess what they do when the grizzly comes toward them? Run. The father says he didn’t have his pistol, either. If he had, it’s possible that we’d be reading about yet another grizzly mortality in a “defensive” shooting by a hunter.

  89. Ida Lupine says:

    I had read that story too, but held my breath. I figured an angry mob would be formed to kill the bear because he took the elk that ‘belonged’ to a human! Or the aerial gatling guns for any wolves that might be around. I don’t know that the bear is out of the woods yet, so I didn’t want to post it.

    BTW, did they ever find out more about who killed those poor wolf pups in Idaho?

  90. Ida Lupine says:

    Insisting upon killing is truly vile. I hope the next time wolves are found in this area, that they are relocated immediately, instead of the misuse of the taxpayers money that aerial killing displays are. The reason the rancher and the Dept. of F&W can get away with this is that the public isn’t aware of what goes on. And suppression of information (gag order) by the University is appalling.

    People should watch closely what happens when the next wolf or small pack is sighted, not wait for two years. This happens on public lands!

    I just read a story about a price fixing scheme by the dairy industry where the purposely killed their cattle:

  91. rork says:
    This is just a summary of MI NRC meeting, and who said what. Very short and amusing. This one guy I’ve heard before spoke:
    “Joe Allen, who traps in the Marenisco area, said he caught 11 wolves last winter before catching a single coyote. He said he has caught and released more than 100 wolves in his traps.”
    I like it when he complains, since it might make people realize it’s complicated out there – wolves have allot of side effects besides eating deer.

  92. Kathleen says:

    “Sound Sanctuary”: I just received this in a newsletter I subscribe to. If you love the sounds of nature–birds, rain, streams, frogs, crickets–you’ll love these. The last one–thrushes in the rain–totally transports me back to the Appalachian Trail in spring. It was the most amazing thing I’ve ever heard–lost count of different species after the 10 or so I could identify by song. Enjoy!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thanks, that’s a site worth keeping. I actually had ovenbirds, what I thought were wood thrushes or hermit thrushes. I may have both or all three, because I think I can recognize the song of the wood thrush, so beautiful.

    • Nancy says:

      Very cool site Kathleen!

      If you want a real acoustic rush, run all the soundtracks at the same.

      A lush rainforest comes to mind 🙂

  93. Kathleen says:

    Introduced into the House of Representatives, the LIFT Act (Limiting Inhumane Federal Trapping), HR 5954…it “would restrict the use of body-gripping traps on public lands administered by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Interior (DOI), as well as prohibit personnel in both departments from setting these brutal traps.” It has been referred to the House Natural Resources Committee.

  94. Ida Lupine says:

    Posted before (by me!) whenever a little background info is needed:

    • Yvette says:

      This is great stuff, Nancy. I’m sharing it everywhere, but that period between 9,00 – 9,500 BCE sad. I want the smilodon back from extinction.

  95. rork says:
    Mentions that our MI deer are in outstanding condition this year, thanks to back-to-back great growing seasons and wimpy winter (for a change). Talks about our antler point restrictions leading to more 2.5 year old bucks, but fails to note that this year it will result in heavy “high-grading”. Near me (SE lower), lots of yearling bucks are 8-points this year, like they used to be before the overpopulation set in, so they meet the requirements of restricted tags. As Saint Aldo mentions, one should compare the ancient racks hanging on the walls of the castles to the animals occupying the land now, and ask why they are different (in Europe anyway, doesn’t work perfectly in Michigan, yet).

    Look for me on the waters of the Hanford Reach, Columbia River, next week. Hoping for at least one 5-salt Chinook, the kind in the 40-50 lb range.
    When average boat catches 1 or 2, we catch 8 or 9. In fact, we regularly outfish the guide boats. It’s not me though. My partners are like having 2 guides with you.

  96. Immer Treue says:

    The witches coven has had their summit.

  97. Immer Treue says:

    Wisconsin CWD spreading

    Not saying wolves would end CWD, but an important tool in the tool box. The current practices of managing deer herds for highest possible yield, as well as feeding of deer is obviously not working. MN measures, perhaps too little too late.

  98. Immer Treue says:

    Just another example of the indiscriminate nature of trapping and snaring.

  99. Immer Treue says:

    Some of you may remember Jon Way who used to post here. Another example of government interference.

    • Nancy says:

      Just read Jon’s testimonial and have to wonder how many other wildlife researchers out there, are subjected to this same type of government interference?

      Kudos Jon for “coming out”

  100. Nancy says:

    Not quite Wildlife News but thoughts worth pondering as election day gets closer:

  101. TC says:

    RIP John Craighead.

  102. Immer Treue says:

    I’ll second the RIP for John Craighead.

  103. Nancy says:

    RIP. The brothers playing “tag” with a grizzly:

    • Salle says:

      Thanks for posting that, Nancy.

      RIP John Craighead. I mention their contributions to the recovery of Grizzly Bears and think of them whenever I look at a wild and scenic river (every day). As I finish up a summer of outreach and education regarding bear safety, I am sad to hear this but glad he made it to 100! Met him twice and have always cherished those moments.

      My condolences to Lance, April and the rest of the family and all his friends and fans.

  104. Kathleen says:

    “They’re young enough that they should adapt well to zoo life.”

    More grizzly cubs headed for lifetime incarceration in a zoo.

  105. Kathleen says:

    “Americans love animals more than they used to — even ‘scary’ ones”

    Excerpt: “Researchers recently conducted the survey again, and they found that while dogs and cats maintained their rock-solid top spots in U.S. hearts, creatures that were long hated have risen in the ranks. According to the results, published this month in the journal Biological Conservation, Americans today feel “significantly more positive about “bats, sharks, vultures, wolves and coyotes” than they did in 1978.”

    • Ida Lupine says:

      You’d never know it by the comments! (No offense to you, Kathleen) Also, it’s sort of a left-handed compliment to have a headline about ‘scary’ animals and the first pic is a wolf! Gotta love the media.

      I clicked on one of the links for the WI Wolf Summit (eyerolling all the way), and lo and behold, I came across:

      A few wolves are OK,” said Don Peay, founder of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife and a speaker at the summit. “They’re part of the system.”

      Peay and most others at the summit wanted to manage the wolf population by killing some off. Roughly 4,000 wolves roam the Great Lakes region.”

      I thought he only caused trouble in Utah? What is he doing stirring up trouble in WI? The wolf-hating agenda is very far-reaching.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        The tone of the article is not appealing, it seems to support rural ‘handling’ of wildlife as reasonable, without question. It doesn’t sound very knowledgeable overall, or have much depth. I wonder if these types of semi-fluff (IMO) articles do more harm than good?

        Points tho for JB’s comment about a way for ‘non-consumptive users’ to support conservation. They just won’t let us in and take part in that club, that’s the problem! Whatever happened to the wolf stamp?

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I’d probably be happier reading the actual paper. The WP piece seemed too ‘light’ or something. Dogs and cats are not wildlife, nor are they endangered wildlife.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Apologies if I appear too harsh; with all that’s been happening lately with wildlife, I’m just a little leery. Profanity Peak wolves, wild horses, grizzlies delisted for hunters, etc. The average American who may be changing their opinion of wildlife aren’t the ones making the decisions.

            A side note for Kathleen: I noticed wasps are still in the ‘hated’ group. I had put an extra hummingbird feeder out this year, and while I got more hummers, I got yellow jackets too. (My last bird, a little male from this year’s brood who was just getting his adult plumage in, left for warmer climes early this week).

            I was a little timid of the yellow jackets, but they were not interested in me in the slightest, just the nectar I was bringing. Quite an interesting little bug! I had one land on my hand, but very non-aggressive. It’s not every day you get mistaken for a flower! 🙂

            • Kathleen says:

              Hi Ida…yes, I’ve got some wasps at my hummer feeder right now–but the hummers seem to have left. Three summers ago we had yellow jackets so bad that I literally hid in the house at the end of summer. We determined that we had large, underground nests all around, and the water we put out for wildlife was attracting them. It was a horror show, if you ask me! Kudos to you for hosting one on your hand!

              • Ida Lupine says:

                I looked for a nest nearby, but didn’t see one. Thankfully, I haven’t had a lot of them, just a few. But I try to take a live and let live approach when I can. I have been stung by yellow jackets before, but nothing compares to a honeybee sting! Ouch!

        • Kathleen says:

          I didn’t have a negative reaction to this article–in fact, I found some encouragement in it. However, I did find it interesting that domestic companion animals were lumped in with wild animals, but domestic farmed animals were not…hence the usual compartmentalization between “food animals” and others was apparent: “If we keep using today’s food production methods, that will require more land for crops and cows, chickens and other meat sources, which will mean less habitat for wild animals…” As if you can legitimately survey people on their feelings about animals while ignoring that “meat sources” are sentient individuals who experience emotions and have lives they value.

  106. Ida Lupine says:

    Here’s some good news from the USF&W:

    Thank you, USF&W! Is there anything cuter than bumblebee?

    • Kathleen says:

      Yes, this *is* good news, following the bad news that their decline is so precipitous. It’s also good to see native bees get some attention–as opposed to honey bees (brought to the US by European settlers). I love bumblebees, too…and have noticed *many* fewer visiting my native plants. Very concerning.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        A 91% decline is something to be ashamed of. If this poor bee isn’t protected, we’re a sorry lot. Anyway, the bee has a few people in its corner, a documentary film has been made:

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I guess I finally realized what bothered me about that WP article. Referring to wildlife as ‘icky’ and ‘scary’. Who is the readership being appealed to, 3rd graders? It’s hard to believe that in the 21st century. The study itself of course is good news.

  107. Kathleen says:

    Why is killing the “biggest and best” of a species something to brag about? Something to get recognition for?

    “Montana archer may have shot new world record elk”


    B&C Facebook:

    • rork says:

      So far there is no recognition of the hunter, and no bragging, so I think you are doing prediction without representing it as such. It’s the animal that’s interesting. Some record ungulates are commonly known by the hunter’s name, rather than the year and location – I do find that goofy. I care little about who the hunter was, or what they have to say.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      It’s very unethical, but if so hope they have sort of a protection plan for these poor animals and just don’t abandon them to the killers down there. If you recall, this man refused to let Federal agents on his land to remove a nursing female, and pushed for a take permit to kill her. I have to shake my head in that outfitters and landowners are not scientists, but yet they are given a virtual megaphone and a platform to spout their agenda with all seriousness!

      And if they want to use current science as their reason, that means there’s a lot more to do with the Gray.

    • Kathleen says:

      Terrible news. American are eating less and less red meat for health reasons, and we’re well aware of the natural resource/environmental cost of animal agriculture. But there are animals to exploit & money to be made; now they’ll add the greenhouse emissions of shipping massive amounts of meat to China.

  108. Kathleen says:

    “Backed by Lasers, Robotic Rovers Defend the Desert Tortoise”

    Gamers as conservationists…

  109. Yvette says:

    I’m not quite sure what to make of this baloney. It sounds way too familiar to the mythologies of wolves stalking people. I’m not buying this as truth. Every time I see a coyote they are on the move and they are fast. The few occasions I do see them they avoid humans. Same with foxes and I see the foxes more often since they come into my neighborhood on occasion. As the crow flies, I’m close to the river and the fox den in places along the river.

    But seriously, ‘three coyotes stalked this girl’? She may have seen coyotes but I bet they did not stalk her.

    “The little girl who cried coyote”.

  110. rork says:
    I’ve seen several lay press CWD articles quoting this without noting that it’s just a conference abstract (hell, the writers don’t even link to it), and I can’t tell for sure what they are saying (no methods, no results, not always precise language), and it’s not been reviewed or published or confirmed by anyone yet.

  111. Mareks Vilkins says:

    not a long time ago Nancy posted a link about tree community

    interview with ecologist Suzanne Simard

    Exploring How and Why Trees ‘Talk’ to Each Other

    • Nancy says:

      Good read Mareks, thanks for posting it.

      “So I opened my mind up and said we need to bring in human aspects to this so that we understand deeper, more viscerally, what’s going on in these living creatures, species that are not just these inanimate objects. We also started to understand that it’s not just resources moving between plants. It’s way more than that. A forest is a cooperative system, and if it were all about competition, then it would be a much simpler place. Why would a forest be so diverse? Why would it be so dynamic?”

      Going to be a hard pill to swallow for those that continue to believe wildlife & wild lands, are just “resources” to be used and or abused, by humans.

      • Mareks Vilkins says:

        they will dismiss it as some kind of esoteric stuff

        • Yvette says:

          I read that the other day. Marks, I don’t think this will easily dismissed. I remember reading she has been working on this for a long time and it was something that she first discovered in her doctoral research.

          Nancy, ironic that the excerpt you posted is what stands out in my memory from reading the Yale 360 interview. LOL, great minds….!

          Regardless, this is cool chit.

  112. JEFF E. says:

    heard on a radio program: “Hillary an through Trump off by walking out on stage and directly up to Trump and shake his hand… and then look down at his hands and say, Oh, they are soooooo cute.”

  113. Elk375 says:

    Two hunters mauled by grizzlies last weekend in the greater Yellowstone area:

    (BOZEMAN, Mont.)—Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks is urging archery hunters to stay alert for bears, to know what to do in the case of an encounter, and remember that all of southwest Montana is bear country. Two weekend incidents involving grizzly bears drive this message home.

    On Saturday afternoon, a hunter received minor injuries after encountering a presumed grizzly while calling for elk in the Cabin Creek area north of Hebgen Lake.

    Then Sunday morning, another man hunting elk with his bow on the north side of the Tom Miner basin north of Gardiner was mauled by what his hunting party believes was a female grizzly with two cubs. He suffered bite injuries.

    Both hunters were treated at local hospitals and released.

    While it is impossible to prevent all events like these, archery hunters should understand the inherent risk of hunting in bear country and do what they can to avoid encountering grizzlies.

    Before venturing into an area, hunters should take notice of warning signs at trailheads, observe the brush at a distance for movement and look at the ground and trees for bear sign (i.e. tracks, scat, and trees scratches). Bear spray should be carried in an accessible place and hunting with at least one other person is highly recommended (in all cases).

    Note that areas with high deer and elk hunting success may attract bears (ravens circling may indicate a kill). Elk bugling and cow calling also may bring in bears. It is important to stay alert.

    Hunters should have with them what they need to immediately field dress their game. If hunters have success in the field and can’t haul their meat out right away they should remove the meat from the kill site and hang it at least ten feet off the ground and at least 150 yards from the gut pile.

    Returning to the meat later, a hunter should check with his or her binoculars to see if the meat has been disturbed. Hunters should never attempt to haze a bear off a kill.

    More information about safety in the outdoors and bear awareness can be at FWP’s website here:…/saf…/wildlife/bears/bearsAndHunters.html.

  114. Ida Lupine says:

    Have there been studies of if/how these prion-type diseases affect predators? I thought I read that they don’t (so far as we know). But if they do, how could it affect the safety of predator populations, while we continue to hunt them and think we can ‘manage’ all variables with the simplest method possible, killing them? The uptake to plants is interesting.

    It will be interesting to see how WI slants presents the results of their study.

    • rork says:

      I expect one outcome will be to see what others have: infected deer have higher odds of being killed by human and canine than uninfected ones.

      I can’t find if experiments have been done on canines (Pubmed failed to get me any), but “Experimentally, CWD can be transmitted by intracerebral inoculation to cattle, sheep, goats, domestic ferrets, mink, mice, hamsters, and squirrel monkeys” says Merck web page, and I’ve seen the cow studies. No indications that wolves or coyotes are getting it, but absence of evidence is not the best evidence of absence.

  115. Kathleen says:

    Stopping the cormorant slaughter – this comes from Last Chance for Animals, an advocacy group. LCA and SHARK are following Wildlife Services personnel and filming their slaughter of cormorants. Includes video:

  116. Immer Treue says:

    Brain worm in moose

  117. Kathleen says:

    Court Stops U.S. Fish & Wildlife from Killing Wild Red Wolves

  118. rork says:

    Eastern massasauga rattlesnake listed as threatened by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    Reading Tocqueville lately (letters and short pieces) he claims there were tons of the little rattlers between Pontiac and Saginaw during his 1831 trip – considerable prairie there at the time (the super-tall type we get here). Also heard the bites were invariable fatal without some unnamed treatment of the natives, and we know that’s false. I highly recommend the little “two weeks in the wilderness” piece if you know this area. Saginaw had a white population of 25 people, no roads, guard bears, and a river of very clear water. He describes mosquitoes. Duck hunting is rather good at that time, and he wages war against the birds of N America generally. Great Lakes were the most beautiful place he’d ever seen (perhaps cause they were nearly wilderness, and he could tell that wouldn’t last).

  119. Ida Lupine says:

    Does anyone know what redtails eat? I’ve had one that visits one of the trees outside my window (near my birdfeeder), so my heart was in my mouth – but the birds seem to have no fear of him (or her). Do they only eat rodents? What a gorgeous bird.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        🙂 He seemed to have his (or her) eyes peeled on the ground under the shrubs, and it looked like he caught a mouse, or maybe not. I hope my little chipmunks didn’t get caught! Usually when a hawk is nearby, the birds disappear, but not this time! I wonder if it is a young bird.

        Now I’m not so sure – this bird had a speckled chest, like a Coopers hawk, but was much bigger. I have seen a redtail last week definitely, but I have Coopers/Sharpies, and a little merlin/kestrel who was very quick!

        Anyway, it’s nice to have the hawks. Good to hear about the National Parks designation too!

      • rork says:

        That mentioned ground squirrels, but near me, grey and fox squirrels are common targets. The red-tails are not very elegant looking while catching them in dense forest – might be mostly males doing this. They crash to the ground with wings held back, not really flying, just falling. I’ve had a family near me the last 4 years – constant screaming by young (2 this year) has finally decreased.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Thank you – I know I can read about it, but it’s great to hear other people’s experiences too. I had a little, I think sharpie, there yesterday – but the red-tail just sits on the branch looking regal, the birds have no fear, and a grey squirrel tried to scare him off! 🙂

  120. Elk375 says:

    Yesterday a Bozeman man was attached by a sow Grizzly with two cub’s, after the attach he walked 3 miles to the trail head, did a selfie. Then drove to the Ennis hospital. He is a copy of selfie:

    Bear spray can works but I would want my 41 mag, too.

  121. Mareks Vilkins says:

    compare this all-star compilation of hunter/outfitter complaints about wolves in one article

    with this one:

    The population of wolves in the wild in Washington state is less than the number of cents in a dollar.

    Not surprisingly, the public comments time period drew passionate appeals from animal rights activists, especially tribal members. More than a few tears were shed by the time the meeting finished.

    “It’s the dollar that people are finding sacred, not the cows,” said Jennifer Fuentes, a member of the Apache tribe. “When will it stop? The wolves are great medicine holders … they hold us in their prayers … without them, we cannot survive.”

    “For indigenous people, the desecration of wolves is the desecration of our religious way of life,” said former Alaskan Inter-Tribal Council Officer Nikos Pastos, who traveled from Anchorage to attend the meeting.

    Still, meeting attendees pleaded with WDFW members to keep the wolves in mind when making policy.

    “I’m just asking this commission … to help us save these last poor babies,” Blackfoot member James St. Goddard of Montana said. “Are we so heartless that we can’t do this?”

  122. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Rocky Flats: A Wildlife Refuge Confronts Its Radioactive Past

    The Rocky Flats Plant outside Denver was a key U.S. nuclear facility during the Cold War. Now, following a $7 billion cleanup, the government is preparing to open a wildlife refuge on the site to the public, amid warnings from some scientists that residual plutonium may still pose serious health risks.

    We are left with a conundrum: Is Rocky Flats a brilliant urban wildlife resource, or a dangerous radioactive legacy? The weird but inescapable truth is that it is both.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Why on earth would anyone open up a wildlife refuge in a place that poses health and safety danger for animals and people who visit? Noone will visit!!! Maybe turn it into a solar array or something.

      • TC says:

        A solar array? On some of the last relatively pristine prairie habitat on the Front Range, with incredible extant biodiversity (both plant and animal) – not “visitors”, but residents. Residents that appear to be thriving despite piecemeal radioactivity (much less radioactivity than found in another recovering wildlife haven – Chernobyl). A place already declared a wildlife refuge? You might want to rethink that. Or think it, in the first place.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I knew the ‘miracle’ of Chernobyl would come up. The key word is appears. I know people want to think these places are restored wildlife havens, but it’s still like limping around with a permanent broken leg for wildlife. Not the best. Science says it isn’t safe yet, and apparently a cut-rate cleanup isn’t enough. Did you read the article? It says the city is encroaching fast, and they’ll need energeeeeee! Won’t they?

          For the parts of it that are like spent landfills, a solar array or wind farm would fit the bill, instead of our penchant for tearing up pristine habitat for them, and with the government’s love of bare minimum staff who can wear protective clothing, it sounds like a win/win.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Maybe they just ought to leave this ‘relatively'(that’s a good one!) pristine prairie habitat and its wildlife alone? Like Chernobyl, it isn’t safe for people – I know I wouldn’t want to visit it, much less expose children to the unknown dangers. It’s too early to send out the message that no matter how badly we destroy the environment, it is always going to be resilient, no matter how much we want to believe that.

            The wildlife residents, as usual, have no choice. Why can’t we just leave them be?

            • TC says:

              Well, sure, it’d be great to leave them alone (and, ironically, that’s what happened at Rocky Flats and Rocky Mountain Arsenal, both when they were in operation and since – that’s why they’re not full of invasive plant species and damaged riparian corridors and why some animal species of concern persist there). But that’s only going to happen in the future if the land is protected in some way. Making it a wildlife refuge is about the best anyone could hope for…

          • Yvette says:

            Ida, the wolves in the exclusion zone are doing better now than they have in over one hundred years. Once humans were out the wolves thrived.

            I’m pretty sure I’ve posted these photos in the past. Sergei Gaschak is a Russian biologist who captures these beautiful photos. He was one of the original liquidators after the meltdown.


            Now these are new for me.


            There are scientists who go into the exclusion zone and collect data. It’s been several years ago when I read it, so my memory fails me, but there was a collaborative research project with a university in Texas and some European researchers (I think Russian and Ukrainian but maybe others, too).

            … my next life.

            • Ida Lupine says:

              I’m thrilled that life is returning, don’t get me wrong. But I worry that people will begin to have an ‘anything goes’ attitude because nature is so ‘resilient’. There’s an anthropocene boosters tone to it all. We have to accept that in the future, we are going to have to accept lifestyle change as well.

              Rocky Flats seems to be painting a rosy brochure for sales of a housing development (can’t wait till the residents start complaining about deer and elk eating their flowers, and coyotes snatching pets). I’m not familiar with the area so I don’t know. It does give me pause to realize that all the testing was before regulation, it was shut down by the FBI for poor handling practices, and there’s a lot of unknowns.

              But by all means, if it can recover it is wonderful.

          • Kathleen says:

            “I knew the ‘miracle’ of Chernobyl would come up.”

            I have to admit to finding this rosy picture suspect, also. I’ve been fascinated with Chernobyl from the get-go–for anyone else with that same fascination, “Voices from Chernobyl” by Svetlana Alexievich is a must-read (first person accounts). Here’s a sample: Maybe the whole thing is online somewhere.

            After reading “Voices,” I do have to wonder how Sergei Gaschak is still alive and healthy if he was one of the original workers. And I have to wonder at the ‘normalcy’ being presented after seeing these photos (be forewarned, they are *very* disturbing):

            Here’s a 5 min. video from the NY Times, “Animals of Chernobyl” outlining the work of a biologist “studying the lasting effects of radiation on the flora and fauna of Chernobyl, Ukraine”:

    • Mark L says:

      More nukes!:

      Watts Bar 2 goes active. 43 years and 6.8 billion dollars later. First new nuclear power plant to enter commercial operation in 20 years

  123. Yvette says:

    Romania has outlawed trophy hunting, or they are planning on enforcing the ban.

    “Hunting for money was already illegal, but it was given a green light anyway,” environment minster, Cristina Palmer, told the Guardian. ‘The damages [clause in the habitats directive] acted as a cover for trophy hunting.”


    “But the rural population believe that hunting is the answer, and unless they can be convinced otherwise, people may well start to take the problem into their own hands. The ban is a great step, but we don’t want hunting to be replaced by poaching.”

  124. Cody Coyote says:

    Apparently , the joint Energy bills being considered by both houses of Congress presently contain a slew of anti-wildlife riders , just as in years past but moreso in this election year and sunset of Obama term. Perhaps the special interests and lobbyists are frenzying to get sausage made now in case Hillary prevails , or something.

    I have not had time to cross check these claims , but here’s what the Animal Welfare Institute is being ridden into the sausage making:
    The cynically titled “Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act H.R. 2406 in an energy bill that is currently being reconciled with the Senate’s Energy Policy Modernization Act (S. 2012) has these:

    •expand the use of dangerous and indiscriminate traps on millions of acres of public lands by taking the unprecedented step of defining trapping as a form of hunting;
    •revoke protections for imperiled gray wolf populations and preclude future judicial review;
    •force the National Park Service to allow private hunters to kill otherwise protected bison as part of certain “management”plans;
    •permanently prevent numerous government agencies from even assessing the risks posed by lead ammunition;
    •gut the historic rule of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service restricting the sale of ivory to combat wildlife trafficking and save elephants from extinction;
    •promote the controversial practice of using dogs to hunt deer in certain national forests; and
    •block the NPS and USFWS from implementing policies to protect native carnivores and limit particularly cruel killing methods on millions of acres within National Wildlife Refuges and National Preserves.

    Some fact checking and watchdogging might be in order in this lame goose Congress , pre – and post- election

  125. Nancy says:

    For anyone on the site right now, Click on north entrance traffic & arch webcam (Yellowstone) Nice bull elk wandering in and out of the webcam last 15 minutes or so, standing on the road watching traffic.

  126. Nancy says:

    Hopefully the east is catching up with this issue:

  127. Kathleen says:

    “N.J.s first extended bear hunt starts Monday”

    “…as of Friday afternoon 7,664 permits have been sold for the first week of the bear hunt compared to the 8,799 permits sold for the 2015 season.”

  128. Kathleen says:

    “States grapple with wildlife funding, ideas for tapping dollars beyond sportsmen fees” (Grand Junction, CO)

    Excerpt: “How much support there is likely to be for the latter (seeking funding from nonconsumptive wildlife enthusiasts) is very much in question, however. It requires convincing not only non-sportsmen, but some hunters and anglers who worry that if others are also paying for wildlife management, they’ll also demand a greater say in how wildlife is managed. That’s “absolutely” a concern for Denny Behrens, a Grand Junction hunter and state director of Big Game Forever.

    “Right now we’re constantly looking at the animal rights people, the environmentalists always wanting to shut down bear hunting more, shut down mountain lion hunting; they don’t want to increase deer in the state,” he said. “All of those things are counterproductive to wildlife management.”

    • Immer Treue says:

      Montana put it out there and the “sportsmen” appeared overwhelmingly against it, that is for the general public to contribute $ and to possibly have a say in WL management.

      • Kathleen says:

        True, though that was strictly wolf management–a wolf stamp for $20.

        “While the tenor of this debate was exacerbated by the powerful emotions surrounding wolves, two underlying issues are relevant to other efforts by state fish and wildlife agencies to broaden their funding. The lack of relationships with citizens who do not hunt or fish can lead to indifference or mistrust that undermines public support for new revenue sources. At the same time, the longstanding relationship between agencies and hunters that has fueled conservation for the past century can also create resistance to allowing other interests to help fund state agencies.”

        “Lessons from the Montana Wolf Management Stamp”

        • Ida Lupine says:

          “is not the only example of some hunters’ fear over the loss of influence in decisions if other interests contribute to agency funding. In Idaho, the Department of Fish and Game organized a “Wildlife Summit” in 2012 that embraced all Idahoans with the theme, “Idaho’s Wildlife Belongs to You” as a starting point to discuss broader funding.”

          I had read this also, and this is what stood out to me. Fears of loss of influence, that’s the key, isn’t it. They should not be dominating decisions to the extent they do, when more money could be brought in by including ‘non-consumptive users’.

  129. Kathleen says:

    “Chimps’ emotional response to death caught on film” – includes 2 videos

    Excerpt: “When Pansy lay down in a nest that one of the other apes had made, the rest gathered around her and began grooming and caressing her. Shortly before she died, all three crouched down and inspected her face very closely. They then began to shake her gently. “It is difficult to avoid thinking that they were checking for signs of life,” said Anderson.

    “After a time, it seemed that the chimpanzees arrived at a collective decision that she had gone. Two left immediately, but one, the other adult female, stayed and held her hand….That evening, her daughter came back and stayed with her mother all night long. She was trying to sleep, but was clearly very disturbed. All three of them were.”

  130. rork says: Result: most polled people were against wolf hunts. Comments from allot of pro-wolf group spokespeople, none from anti’s. It’s a press release. Poll commissioned by pro-wolf folks.
    I’d warn them that polls may not be listened to by politicians – in Michigan, we defeated a wolf-hunt with 64% of the actual voters in a referendum (proposal 2, 2014), and our politicians passed a law to make wolves game animals anyway.
    Be careful driving out there. Deer are getting twitterpated.

  131. Kathleen says:

    “Washington hunter recounts grizzly bear attack near Livingston” (MT):

    Yet another hunter/bear conflict. Here you’ve got a guy creeping around in griz country looking for a “prize bull elk” and he runs into a mom with cubs. She attacks.

    “Eventually, the bear decided to let Rico go after her cubs got about 40 yards away, he said. ‘Didn’t even give, like I said, the courtesy look back. Just rolled off, walked off, and walked away as if nothin’ happened.'”

    A ‘courtesy look back’? He intruded on her space and posed a serious threat (as she perceived it) to her cubs. When the kids moved off and she was done with him, he retrieved a gun from his pack and worried that if he only wounded her, she’d come back to finish him off… so “decided to let her go.” How magnanimous.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I wonder what happened to the shark? The shark had blood around the gills and from his or her mouth. Simply because someone wanted to be a thrill-seeker, with no redeeming value to that kind of activity. Was it necessary for ‘science’?

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Pursuant to a plea agreement, the court granted a withheld judgment. A withheld judgment means that after completing his sentence and probation, Clemens may ask the court to dismiss the charges against him, removing them from his criminal record.

      Ten days in jail, 200 hours of community service(? doing what), and hunting privileges suspended for four years. Not much of a deterrent from this kind of thing is there. But, at least he was caught.

  132. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Could the Funeral of the Future Help Heal the Environment?

    A traditional ten-acre cemetery holds enough embalming fluid to fill a small swimming pool. But there may be a greener way

    “If people think they’re in a cemetery, we’ve screwed up,” says Campbell. Ramsey Creek is known as the nation’s first “green cemetery,” but Campbell says it’s more than that. “The whole process of modern death seems to deny decomposition and prevent people from returning to the earth,” she says.

    To help the dead get as close to the land as possible, her team facilitates burials that look more like those of 1816 than 2016. Graves are dug by hand—not a bulldozer in sight. Bodies are preserved with dry ice and lowered directly into the ground in simple boxes or plain shrouds. This cemetery doesn’t have traditional headstones or lawnmowers, and it’s hard to tell where the graves are—rough-hewn stones serve as the only markers. Proceeds from the funerals go towards restoring the land and funding local nonprofits.

  133. Gary Humbard says:

    Never been back east, (never had a desire to) but bears are not even safe in the most densely populated state in the US.

  134. Gary Humbard says:

    Call it karma or fate but people who do this kind of thing will suffer consequences sooner or later. BTY, this wolf was killed ~50 miles from my residence and was the alpha female of a new pack.

    CBD stepping up big time too!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thank goodness, ya big bullies! There really is no reason to continue this. Thanks for the update, Immer.

  135. Mareks Vilkins says:

    Tragedy as three snow leopards die in trap set by poachers in Altai Mountains

    A major threat to them is the surging global demand for cashmere, which is derived from the under hair of domestic goats and the livestock population of these animals has soared in recent years.

    They consume the forage of mountain pastures that sustained a number of species of wild herbivores such as the ibex, the blue sheep, and the argali – the natural prey of snow leopards.

  136. Louise Kane says:

    big news wildlife services can no longer rely on an outdated EIS they must conduct a new one for the public lands in Nevada.

  137. Yvette says:

    Mixed feelings about this encounter. I think it’s natural human tendency to have the desire to pet a wild animal but not a good idea to do it even when you can.

    Still, it saved this deer’s life for that particular day. I wonder if the buck is sick? It’s still sort of a cool encounter.

    • Gary Humbard says:

      I’ve had my share of close encounters with wildlife (coyotes, elk, Rocky Mountain goat and a grizzly) and although I’ve never touched one, those encounters inspire me to learn about them and visit wild areas to hopefully have future encounters (except the grizzly!).

      I think when people do have close safe encounters they are more likely to appreciate and respect them for their importance on the landscape. Touching them though is not a good idea nor is it necessary to truly appreciate them.

    • rork says:

      I and others always suspect the deer acting like this were initially raised by humans.

  138. Immer Treue says:

    I don’t necessarily agree with the premise of cougar reintroduction to some of these areas, but what the article does address is the problem we face with too many deer. Don’t worry about wolves at bus stops when annually we have 1.2 million vehicle collisions caused by deer, 200 deaths, 29,000 injuries and $1.6 billion in vehicle damage. What is NOT addressed is agricultural and forest damage caused by deer.

    A 2005 assessment puts deer crop damage at over $100 million annually. This may also be the source for the UW stats on deer vehicle collisions.

    • Mat-ters says:

      I’m trying to get a handle on just where this forest damage is that you talk about. I think one can be pretty sure to say that areas with saturated wolves are more often than not well below the different states deer population goals. In these particular areas are those goals NOT realistic? Where the goals flawed from the get go? Are these damaged forests outside of good wolf habitat? What are cost associated with wolves moving into those area? Where is this damage?

        • Mat-ters says:

          I read over your links. Most of which points to areas in the east. Considering the issues caused by the red wolf in NC.

          Do you think that there is a ton of areas in the east where wolves fit? With Minnesota as an example, do you think areas where the state is having issues with deer are a good fit for wolves? What parts of Minnesota are we having issues with deer and issues with forests?

          • Immer Treue says:

            My interjection about wolves was minor, and its intention was a contrast between perceived dangers and real dangers. One will never have wolf or mt lion densities as high as deer, yet deer are responsible for an enormous amount of financial and personal injury.

            Anyone trying to husband new growth of a more diverse forestry considers deer a nightmare. ma’iingan, who used to post here with regularity referred to deer as a foresters worse nightmare. I begin flagging trees again tomorrow.

            • Mat-ters says:

              “What is NOT addressed is agricultural and forest damage caused by deer.”

              I’m not arguing that deer aren’t an issue to some forest, MOST of which are private and managed as private lands are managed. It’s almost absurd to say that large blocks of state and federal forest lands are having issues with too many deer. I know enough about deer management in enough states to say that it’s hard to come up with a game management unit that has large blocks of public lands that are over the goals set for that unit. I may be wrong, but in general I don’t think you’re going to find public lands above stated goals. Goals set to maintain healthy forests.

              Farmers (including tree farmers) too have the tools necessary to keep deer under control. Some states allow them (farmers & tree farmers) to shoot deer year round and have as many crop damage tags as they want. If memory serves me right, some states even allow night hunting where the problem is serious. It’s not only deer some farmers have more issues with bears and racoons, both of which can be addressed.

              Isn’t your beef with some of the private land owners Immer? You do know that some of them manage their property to the benefit of game/wildlife with year round food plots and sound wildlife forestry (favoring oak / acorns) practices that benefit all wildlife and which allow them to have healthy populations above said goals. I find it interesting that your social tolerance fades with some wildlife and is demanded with others all of which are hazards to the drivers on our roads.




              • Immer Treue says:

                I don’t have a “beef”, but I do have a concern. There is a deer problem. In Wisconsin alone, ~280 farmers/landowners were issued Damage Permit Hunting for deer, in almost every county of Wisconsin, which included 25 counties that have wolves.

                6. Wisconsin
                Odds of hitting a deer: 1 in 77
                Last year’s rank: No. 6
                Wisconsin’s Department of Transportation says the number of people injured or killed in crashes with deer has been rising since the late 1970s. The Badger State logged nearly 20,000 collisions with deer during 2015, accounting for more than 16% of all vehicle accidents.
                MN was at 7. With a 1 in 80 driver probability.


                The whole concept of deer management, especially with the increase of CWD, and the association of deer and then spread of Lymes disease, needs to change. I understand the money generated from hunting deer, in particular with all the fancy gear associated with the pastime. I also understand fewer deer would mean fewer predators…

                I’m just raising the question, is the current mindset with the way deer are managed healthy for the deer, the land, and people?

                • Mat-ters says:

                  Your trying to dance around and obfuscate my questions on “where”?

                  My comments above do address your current question. Yes, our current mindset does address our public forest health very well. The current mindset also allows our land owners to address deer issues.

                  We also need to be more supportive of measures that address Urban deer, state parks and preserves that harbor deer. In our area sandhill cranes are just as big an issue for farmers as deer are, spring planting damage is huge.

         Page 4 Agricultural Crop Damage

                • Immer Treue says:

                  Those who have enrolled, by county, in Wisconsin.

                • Mat-ters says:

                  Immer, you do know that even at population goals almost every farmer in a county like Marathon could qualify for the program if they have nearby woodlots and low lands. Some farmers have less tolerance for any deer eating their crops. Your Enrollment list could be 1000 times more if every farm enrolled even at goal levels (which some of these counties are at). I don’t begrudge any of the farmers on the list for they have to allow hunting. I do begrudge the farmer that complains about the deer demands compensation but doesn’t allow hunting or the shooting of does. This is a tool farmers have that works.

              • rork says:


                Trying coming to Michigan and find young white cedar. Perhaps after three harsh winters (13,14,15) some finally exist.

                Search Pennsylvania deer exclosures. Managers report seeing plants (like red trillium) not observed in years.

                We keep too many deer for a reason – the hunter’s money. Degradation of the land is long-term, and so slow that most people don’t notice the change. The price of land often is more about deer densities than forest quality near me.

                • Immer Treue says:

                  Well said. An interesting aside, 3-4 times per year I travel the Rte 53 corridor between Eau Claire and Superior Wisconsin, about 135 miles. Prior to the wolf population surge, during the mid 90’s there was carnage on the road, usually one could observe 25-30 vehicle killed deer on the shoulders (north bound). Last 3-4 years, not so many. Cause or corellation?

                • Mat-ters says:

                  Rork, I’ve been told that the way some land owners manage their property (leaving row of standing corn, creating year round food plots) the biological carrying capacity of deer would be TWICE goals or even more. I think its funny how the discussion here centers on the Social Carrying Capacity of deer and biological carrying capacity is tossed to the wind. Then, I’m sure, if we were talking about wolves biological carry capacity rules the day and Social Carrying Capacity be damned.

                • Immer Treue says:

                  Man, you just don’t get it. This has very little if anything to do with wolves, and everything about deer numbers. I like venison as much as the next person, but with deer depredation hunts already attempting to knock back deer numbers, we have the increased threat of vehicle collisions with deer, resulting in financial loss, injury and on average 200 deaths per year. Why would you want to increase deer numbers, in particular with the absence of predators in many regions, where we would have an increased likely hood of CWD and Lymes. On a habitat/ecological level, deer reduce forest variation, thus impacting other animals that live in forests. There’s already enough, if not too many deer.

                • Mat-ters says:

                  Interesting tone there Immer. “Why would you want to increase deer numbers” I said absolutely nothing of increasing deer numbers. Mat-ter of fact we are headed out tomorrow morning to address deer numbers! BUT, I did say that PUBLIC forest lands are not overrun with deer and Farmers do have the tools needed to address deer wildlife issues. Something “you just don’t get” your words: (What is NOT addressed is agricultural and forest damage caused by deer.)

                • Immer Treue says:

                  “You’ve been told”… Nice cover.
                  You’re too gutless to even take a stand.

                • Mat-ters says:


                  Immer, I would like you to read the section on “Common Deer Density Targets” How many of the deer management unit in WI & MN are under the 10 deer per sq M this report says is unhealthy for forest. Oh, I’m sure you will find other things at this site that will take precedence – in your view.

                • Mat-ters says:

                  Your words “You’ve been told”… Nice cover. You’re too gutless to even take a stand.” I’m not into escalating the discourse Immer.

                  BUT, my stance is what is found in the link I posted on Deer Friendly. “The number of deer that a community wants is a community decision. There is no biologically correct number. The biological carrying capacity of many of our urban areas can be over 100 deer per square mile. What the community needs to determine is the social carrying capacity, —how many deer the citizens are willing to tolerate.”

                  I’m sure the 100 deer per square mile listed here is THREE TIMES ANY zones goal in MN or WI.

  139. Helen McGinnis says:

    Why are you opposed to cougar reintroduction?

  140. Yvette says:

    I wish I knew why people think they just have to shoot and kill animals. What is the deal?

    • Mareks Vilkins says:


      When you cut that dude with just a little mania
      You did it so, … ah

      When the blood comma’ down his neck …
      Don’t you know it was better than sex, now, now, now
      It was way better than getting mean
      ’cause it was, the final thing to do, now
      Get somebody to come on to you
      and then you just get somebody to
      to now, now, come on to you
      And then you kill ’em, yeah
      You kill ’em, now, now, cause I need kicks …
      I’m getting bored, I need, need, need, need now, now some kicks