Wolves In North America Losing Their Genetic Diversity….

NatureColdWarriors_3wolves

September 19, 2014

I thought this was worth reposting, in light of the ongoing and relentless wolf slaughter.

===

February 7, 2012

The mass slaughter of wolves over the centuries in North America has caused more damage then we could ever have guessed. As far-fetched as it sounds it could push wolves to extinction.

A 2004 study in New Scientist found wolves in Canada have lost 43% of the their genetic diversity. This is very concerning, it means wolves are becoming increasingly inbred. This can effect them negatively in so many ways. Weaker immune systems unable to fight off disease,  skeletal deformities, the inability to withstand increased hunting pressure, smaller litters.  It’s a shocking find, yet very little attention has been given to this important study.

The hunt slaughter, taking place in the Northern Rockies, could have far-reaching implications. The 432 wolves who’ve been killed in the hunts took their genetics with them, they won’t be coming back. All this killing is weakening the wolf. Could they be wiped out by an epidemic, due to their diminished genetic diversity?

Are either of the fish and game agencies in Montana and Idaho concerned about wolves loss of genetic variability? Isn’t it their job to know and care about this? What about Yellowstone wolves? Their numbers have crashed several times. The iconic Druid Peak Pack is gone, taken down in large part by mange mites they were unable to fight off.

When Judge Molloy presided over the 2009 delisting lawsuit there were several  issues raised supporting wolves relisting,  including  the lack of  genetic connectivity of the three wolf sub-populations (Idaho, Montana, Yellowstone NP).  Unfortunately his ruling focused on just one, the USFWS decision to delist Montana and Idaho wolves, while keeping Wyoming wolves listed. Once Judge Molloy returned wolves’ protections,  in August 2010, the anti-wolf forces went to work and lobbied Congress to remove Northern Rockies wolves from the ESA,  without judicial review.  Sadly, the science was not mentioned again.

===

New Scientist

Wolves’ genetic diversity worryingly low

 by Gaia Vince

18:41 26 November 2004

Wolf eradication in the US has had a far more devastating impact on the genetic diversity of remaining populations than previously thought, a new study reveals.

Although wolves were systematically eradicated across North America over the last couple of centuries, it had been thought that the human impact on the Canadian wolf population – which is currently a relatively healthy 70,000 – was minor.

Conservationists therefore assumed that the Canadian population had the same level of genetic diversity that had existed in the 19th century – prior to the mass slaughter – and that small-scale re-introductions of these wolves into the US would lead to diversity on a par with this earlier period.

But these assumptions were wrong, according to researchers from the University of Uppsala, Sweden, and the University of California Los Angeles, US, who looked at the genetic diversity of the original wolf populations using DNA analysis. They used bone samples taken from grey wolves dating from 1856 – held in the National Museum for Natural History in Washington DC – and compared this genetic diversity with that of modern wolves.

“We found a 43% drop in genetic variability in the modern wolves,” said Carles Vila, one of the team. “It is impossible for the wolf populations to recover this important diversity, which enables them to adapt to different environmental challenges.”

Bears and lions

Vila notes: “It takes thousands of years of naturally occurring mutations to build up such diversity. And if the Canadian wolves – with such a large population remaining – have lost so much genetic variation, what is the situation for other endangered species in North America, such as bears or mountain lions?”

Wild wolves from across North America were captured and reintroduced to the Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, US, 10 years ago with considerable success. For example, the population of elk was reduced to more sustainable levels, allowing vegetation to recover.

It was hoped that choosing wolves from across the continent would produce a population with high genetic diversity. But the new research shows this has not happened.

Isolated pockets

The researchers suggest the wolves’ limited genetic variation will make them more vulnerable to factors such as disease or environmental change, limiting the pack’s ability to survive in adverse conditions.

“The species now exists in such isolated pockets that it is impossible for them to breed across the gaps, so genetic diversity will continue to fall,” Vila told New Scientist.

Read more: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6730-wolves-genetic-diversity-worryingly-low.html

===

In 2007, geneticist, Dr. Ken Fischman, Ph.D, testified at an IDFG  open house on Idaho’s then wolf management plan.

Testimony Concerning The Idaho Wolf Population Management Plan – 2008

 Idaho Fish & Game Open House

Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, December 12, 2007

 Genetic Problems in Small Populations of Idaho Wolves

 Ken Fischman, Ph.D.

Sandpoint, Idaho 83864

 Ladies/Gentlemen:

 My name is Ken Fischman, and I live in Sandpoint, Idaho.  I have a Ph.D. in Genetics, and over 30 years of experience in Genetic research. I wish to address the question of the number of wolves in Idaho that would constitute a genetically viable population.

    Everyone has been impressed by the rapid increase in Wolf numbers since their reintroduction.  However, that was to be expected when wolves were first introduced into this area, in which the ecological niches for large carnivores were previously quite open.  As these niches are filled, wolf reproduction will likely slow down.

    I would like to put the 673 wolves in Idaho in geographical and comparative perspective.  The size of Idaho is 82,751 square miles. That works out as one wolf for every 123 square miles.  The Human population is more than 1,240,000, which means one wolf for every 1,842 people.

    ID F&G has proposed a minimum of 100 wolves and 15 Breeding Pairs as a statewide objective.

    A key principal in Population Genetics is that what is important for species preservation is not the total population, but the number of Effective Breeders.  ID F&G estimates that there are currently no more than 42 Effective Breeding Pairs in Idaho.(that is, wolves, not people)

    Because only a small fraction of a pack reproduces, that further decreases the genetic pool.  If Idaho’s wolf numbers are reduced to this level, it could lead to severe inbreeding, thus decreasing their genetic diversity, and making them more prone to a population crash under a variety of circumstances.

    The concept that the existence of over ten breeding pairs of wolves should justify removing wolves from the Endangered Species list is therefore biologically insupportable.  It is clear therefore, that this was a political, not a scientific decision, and has no basis in any established genetic or evolutionary principles.

     Inbreeding is far from the only danger to small populations. Even under the best of circumstances, the lives of wolves are precarious.  Any one of dozens of natural or man-made calamities, which could be weathered by large, dispersed populations, such as a virus epidemic, an unusually severe winter, change of climate, or loss of habitat, could wipe out such a small number of animals almost overnight, with permanent loss of their gene pool.

    Population Genetics guidelines estimates that a Minimal Viable Population is 500 individuals, and I calculate that the Number of Effective Breeders should be at least 50 pairs.

    Under any other circumstances, and with almost any other animal population, the numbers of wolves in ID F&G’s Statewide Objective would be considered, not a success, but a population in danger of extinction.

    This is the likely outcome if the number of Idaho’s wolves is reduced to the level ID F&G has proposed.

      No, in a manner of speaking, these wolves are not out of the woods yet.   A much larger, genetically diverse, and widespread population would be needed if wolves are to become once again a stable, permanent part of the forests of the Northern Rockies.

    Thank you for your time and attention.

====

What happens to a  species when genetic diversity declines?  Look to the wolves of Isle Royale.

Bone Deformities Linked To Inbreeding In Isle Royale Wolves

Science Daily

ScienceDaily (Apr. 2, 2009) — The wolves on Isle Royale are suffering from genetically deformed bones. Scientists from Michigan Technological University blame the extreme inbreeding of the small, isolated wolf population at the island National Park in northern Lake Superior.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090402171440.htm

===

Wolves will never regain the genetic diversity they once had. Instead of conducting more research into wolves decreasing genetic variability, it seems “wolf managers” will just try to guess if the mass slaughter of wolves in the Idaho and Montana hunts will weaken the species even further.  Russian Roulette anyone?

====

Photo: Courtesy Nature Cold Warriors

Posted in: Wolf Wars, biodiversity

Tags: wolves decreasing genetic diversity, Dr. Ken Fischman, Ph.D, IDFG, University of Uppsala, Sweden, UCLA, wolf inbreeding

Eastern Oregon Wolves Could Be Facing Delisting In 2015…

walla-walla-pack-pup-odfw

Eastern Oregon Wolves Could Be Removed From State’s Endangered Species Act

OPB | Sept. 16, 2014 2:21 p.m. | Portland

Gray wolf populations are on the rise in Oregon, but that may not necessarily be good news for the animals.

The Statesman Journal reports  that the state may have enough potential wolf couples in 2015 for the minimum requirements to delist the animal.

“We were told in the beginning that when wolves first came to the county, we were waiting for that day,” said Todd Nash, wolf committee chairman for the Oregon Cattleman Association, in an interview with the newspaper.

According to Oregon’s Endangered Species Act, the state Department of Fish and Wildlife must verify four breeding pairs in eastern Oregon for three consecutive years.

In 2012, there were six pairs and last year the organization located four pairs. It’s predicted that 2014’s count won’t be complete until early next year, but early reports show more than four couples.

By removing wolves from the state’s endangered species list, ranchers would be permitted to use lethal force to defend their animals in more situations.

According to ODFW , shooting a wolf is considered a misdemeanor, which carries a maximum penalty of $6,250 fine and a year in jail.

http://www.opb.org/news/blog/newsblog/eastern-oregon-wolves-could-be-removed-from-states-endangered-species-act/

===

Anyone who’s read the Oregon wolf “management plan” could see this coming a mile away. There was major push-back against “the plan”  in 2010. The number of breeding pairs needed, to reach delisting, was ridiculously low.  Here’s part of what Oregon’s wolf plan states:

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan

Wolves may be considered for statewide delisting once the population reaches four breeding
pairs for three consecutive years in eastern Oregon.1

Four breeding pairs are considered the minimum conservation population objective, also described as Phase 1. The Plan calls for managing wolves in western Oregon as if the species remains listed until the western Oregon wolf population reaches four breeding pairs. This means, for example, that a landowner would be required to obtain a permit to address depredation problems using injurious harassment.

While the wolf remains listed as a state endangered species the following will be allowed: Wolves may be harassed (e.g. shouting, firing a shot in the air) to distract a wolf from a livestock operation or area of human activity.

Harassment that causes injury to a wolf (e.g., rubber bullets or bean bag projectiles) may be employed to prevent depredation, but only with a permit.

Wolves may be relocated to resolve an immediate localized problem from an area of human activity (e.g., wolf inadvertently caught in a trap) to suitable habitat. Relocation will be done by ODFW or Wildlife Services personnel but will not occur with wolves known or suspected to have depredated livestock or pets.

Livestock producers who witness a wolf ‘in the act’ of attacking livestock on public or private land must have a permit before taking any action that would cause harm to the wolf.

Once federally delisted, wolves involved in chronic depredation may be killed by ODFW or Wildlife Services personnel. However, non lethal methods will be emphasized and employed first in appropriate circumstances.

Once the wolf is delisted, more options are available to address wolf-livestock conflict. While
there are five to seven breeding pairs, livestock producers may kill a wolf involved in chronic
depredation with a permit. Five to seven breeding pairs is considered Phase 2.

Seven breeding pairs for three consecutive years in eastern or western Oregon is considered the management objective, or Phase 3. Under Phase 3 a limited controlled hunt could be allowed to decrease chronic depredation or reduce pressure on wild ungulate populations.

The Plan provides wildlife managers with adaptive management strategies to address wolf predation problems on wild ungulates if confirmed wolf predation leads to declines in localized herds.

In the unlikely event that a person is attacked by a wolf, the Plan describes the circumstances under which Oregon’s criminal code and federal ESA would allow harassing, harming or killing of wolves where necessary to avoid imminent, grave injury. Such an incident must be reported to law enforcement officials.

A strong information and education program is proposed to ensure anyone with an interest in wolves is able to learn more about the species and stay informed about wildlife management activities.

Several research projects are identified as necessary for future success of long-term wolf conservation and management. Monitoring and radio-collaring wolves are listed as critical components of the Plan both for conservation and communication with Oregonians.

An economic analysis provides updated estimates of costs and benefits associated with wolves in Oregon and wolf conservation and management.

Finally, the Plan requires annual reporting to the Commission on program implementation.

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/Oregon_Wolf_Conservation_and_Management_Plan_2010.pdf

===

This was posted in June 2010 on Howling for Justice, written by wolf advocate Katie, a Oregon resident, explaining why the plan was insufficient and should be changed.

Help Change Oregon’s Wolf Management Plan, PLEASE COMMENT BY JUNE 30th

June 21, 201o

 “Wolves may be considered for statewide delisting once the population reaches four breeding pairs for three consecutive years in eastern Oregon…. The plan calls for managing wolves in western Oregon as if the species remains listed until the western Oregon wolf population reaches four breeding pairs.”

This means when there are four packs in eastern Oregon and four in western Oregon, wolves will be stripped of ESA protection statewide.

The average gray wolf pack size is about 8 wolves. If packs in Oregon follow the norm, then roughly 64 wolves will be present when they are delisted. A recent study suggests Oregon could support up to 2200 wolves and still maintain a healthy ecosystem. I don’t know about you, but 64 wolves doesn’t sound like recovered to me.

READ MORE: http://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/help-change-oregons-wolf-management-plan-please-comment-by-june-30/

===

So it’s come to this. Oregon, one of the friendliest of wolf states, may soon subject Eastern Oregon wolves to delisting because of the state’s weak management plan. This is the defining statement in their “plan”. “Seven breeding pairs for three consecutive years in eastern or western Oregon is considered the management objective, or Phase 3. Under Phase 3 a limited controlled hunt could be allowed to decrease chronic depredation or reduce pressure on wild ungulate populations.” 

Howling for Justice does not support managing wolves. Wolves are self-regulating and do not need to be “managed” Managing wolves is a catch phrase for the lead up to eventually hunting and killing them,  as you can see by the statement above, quoted from Oregon’s wolf management plan.  IMO, management includes continually harassing wolves through collaring, counting their numbers, treating them as though they are terrorists, needing to be watched every second. Wolf management plans are driven by agribusiness and unfortunately state fish and game agencies bow to that pressure. Ranchers lose thousands of livestock annually to non-predation, yet tiny wolf/livestock issues get headlines.

In 2010, Oregon ranchers lost 51, 200 calves and cows to non-predation. Yes, 51,200 and those numbers come from NASS ( National Agricultural Statistics Service). At the time, two members of the Imnaha pack, including the alpha male, father of OR7, were under a kill order for supposedly killing a few cattle. But ranchers lost thousands and thousands of cows that year to digestive problems, respiratory problems, metabolic problems, mastitis, lameness/injury, other diseases, weather related issues, calving problems, poisoning and theft. 51.200 to be exact. Can everyone see how ridiculous it is that ranchers complain wolves affect their bottom line when in fact it’s non-predation that takes a toll on their business. And remember ranchers are compensated for every confirmed wolf kill but aren’t reimbursed for non-predation deaths.  To put this all in perspective, concerning predation losses for all predators in the lower 48  in 2010, including coyotes, mountain lions, bobcats, dogs, vultures, wolves, bears. other predators and unknown predators, “coyotes and
dogs caused the majority of cattle and calf predator losses….”. NASS

 Wolf predation is a red herring and an excuse to kill wolves, period.  How could 14 wolf predations in 2010, blamed on the Imnaha Pack, have any effect on Oregon ranching’s bottom line, compared to the 51,200 cows and calves lost to non-predation? It would laughable if it wasn’t so deadly serious for wolves.

I know ranching is going to be pushing hard for delisting Eastern Washington wolves in the coming months, sadly because the Oregon Wolf Management Plan falls far short. It should be revisited and revised to allow Oregon wolves to continue to grow and prosper.

You can contact Governor Kitzhaber by clicking  HERE  to voice your concerns!

===

51,200 Dead Oregon Cows, Not Killed By Wolves, Where’s The Media?

Sept 28, 2011

READ MORE: http://wp.me/pDTDG-3RT

===

Photo: Courtesy ODFW

Posted in: Wolf Wars, Oregon Wolves

Tags: Eastern Oregon wolves, delisting 2015?, Oregon wolf management plan insufficient, revisit Oregon wolf plan

Proving Ourselves to Save the Wolf

Nabeki:

Remote camera photo from July 21, 2013, documenting three pups in the newly formed Mt Emily pack. Photo courtesy of ODFWFinally a plan to do something to help save wolves!

Originally posted on Exposing the Big Game:

Bold Visions by Bold Visions @ 11:16am

Stephen Capra

For some time now, many of us–me included–have bitterly complained about the current state of wolves in the West. There is plenty of blame to go around, but recently the focus has turned to the conservation community itself and the actions of groups like Defenders of Wildlife. Yet, it’s small conservation organizations like Bold Visions, which have yet to fully prove their merit in the debate over wolves.

Smaller organizations contribute to helping wolves via updates, commenting, video, rallies and determined writing on the subject.  This is not meant in any way to diminish the hard work that these groups have made. But to date, the only groups that seem to control efforts and the funding around the wolves are major groups that have wantonly compromised away wolves, in order to proceed with what they term ‘incremental change,’ which ultimately means their actions…

View original 879 more words

Published in: on September 16, 2014 at 2:14 pm  Comments (10)  

EU court upholds seal fur ban!

Nabeki:

Wonderful news!!!

Originally posted on Exposing the Big Game:

524840_463568800387796_314270912_n
The EU’s three-year-old ban on seal fur will remain intact after the bloc’s highest court threw out a legal challenge by the Canadian Inuit and the country’s fur trade.
The case had been brought by Inuit community group, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK), and the Fur Institute of Canada, with both organizations claiming that their livelihood depends on the trade.
Continuing reading here:
http://euobserver.com/economic/119959

View original

Published in: on September 14, 2014 at 1:04 am  Comments (9)  

UPDATE: Huckleberry Pack Alpha Female Shot Aerially by WDFW Contract Sharpshooter

huckleberry pack pups 2012 WDFW

Huckleberry Pack Pups – 2012/WDFW

September 10, 2014

This post was sent to me by “Anonymous For Wolves”

Huckleberry pack alpha female shot aerially by WDFW contract sharpshooter

On September 4th, WDFW posted a News Release under the Latest News link on their website wdfw.wa.gov) with this heading, Sheep moved from scene of wolf attacks. The release reads that rancher Dave Dashiell worked over the Labor Day weekend collecting his flock of 1800 sheep to eventually truck them, somewhat prematurely, to their winter pasture area.

This is good news for Stevens County Huckleberry wolf pack as it acts as a stay of execution after a WDFW contract sharpshooter from USDA Wildlife Services, shot dead the breeding female from a helicopter on August 23. The pack had been preying on Dashiell’s sheep with WDFW determining the need for lethal action. “If non-lethal tools fail, lethal actions can be taken. It is a process,” WDFW’s Wildlife Conflict Manager Stephanie Simek said.

Wolves are on Washington’s landscape and ranchers now need to put in place the new best practices for ranging livestock. These practices include quickly removing injured, sick or dead livestock, all of which help attract wolves and other large carnivores. Consistent human presence in non-fenced range situations to “babysit” herds is imperative. Such models are being taken from Western Idaho and Montana ranchers: range-riders go out on foot, 4-wheeler or horseback, attending to the herds.
“This may not be accomplished 24/7,” said Donny Martorello, WDFW’s Carnivore Manager, “but they go out as much as they can.” Wolves can also be hazed by shooting overhead and with rubber bullets, as well as by being chased off. Spotlights, flashing lights and fladry may also be employed.

Was Stevens County rancher Dashiell timely and diligent in his non-lethal tactics? Reports have been mixed. WDFW had claimed that Dashiell was out every day and night, along with four guard dogs, a range rider, and eventually with the department adding a second rider and a greater human presence during the night. West Coast Wolf Organizer for the Center for Biological Diversity, Amaroq Weiss, believes otherwise.

Weiss spoke with David Ware, WDFW’s game division manager who also oversees wolf management for the department. While WDFW had released statements that on August 15 Dashiell’s range rider was on task and the sheep were being moved, “Ware confirmed that these actions were not happening and that (Dashiell’s) range rider had quit a month ago. The following week the sheep still had not been moved and a range rider did not show up until August 20,” said Weiss.

WDFW observed prey switching within the Huckleberry pack: the switch from preying on wild to domestic animals. This switch can be determined by energetics, ease in taking, and by abundance, what is most often being seen.

“Sheep are such easy prey and so abundant, it’s hard to get wolves to stop preying on them,” said Martorello. Dashiell’s range allotment is also rugged, brushy and sprawling; it can be difficult to protect livestock on this type of landscape.

The GPS collar on the Huckleberry pack’s alpha male collects data every 6 hours. It was observed that by the 3rd or 4th depredation, with the wolf traveling back and forth from the rendezvous site to the sheep, the animal had begun solely preying on the domestic sheep. This behavioral pattern can also be passed on to pups.

WDFW’s original goal was to remove four animals from the Huckleberry pack as a means to reduce their numbers on the landscape. This reduction would lower the food requirements and nutritional needs of the pack. In this case, the removal of the breeding female may have broken the Huckleberry pack’s pattern of sheep depredation. Said Martorello, “Removal of a single animal may have been enough to break the pack’s cycle. The animal was removed on August 23rd and the collared male has not been back to the vicinity of the sheep since the 27th. The sheep were not moved until September 1st or 2nd.”

WDFW claims that killing the breeding female was not the department’s intention. Their goal was to not take the breeding pair, but to remove yearlings and two-year olds from the pack. The litter had a mix of colors with the pack’s collared adult male being black. The sharpshooter was to look for color (the breeding or alpha female’s color has yet to be released at the time of this writing), look for smaller–younger– wolves to shoot, and to only shoot when multiple wolves were under the helicopter to use for size comparison.

When the breeding female was shot by Wildlife Services, she was the sole animal under the under helicopter and weighed only 66lbs; small but not uncommon for an adult female wolf. “We were certainly disappointed in this outcome but, there was no way to sort from the air in this circumstance,” said Martorello .

When asked why take the risk of shooting the wrong wolf if there is no means of comparison,  Martorello explained that the department was trying to achieve an objective and the only instructions were that if the opportunity to sort existed, to try and not remove the collared male. “You know going into it you get what you get. We did not have the opportunity to sort in this case,” said Martorello .

The helicopter had been up on multiple occasions and had been unable to spot animals due to weather conditions and visibility limits. And as we learned from the aerial shooting of the Wedge pack in 2012, time in the air translates to tens of thousands of dollars ($76,500 in 2012 to kill the Wedge). Per Martorello, at some point a wolf, or wolves, must simply be killed.

The Huckleberry pack is a relatively young pack, having only been formed in the last 3 years and with a young breeding female. It would not be uncommon then, for another female next in the hierarchy to step in and care for the pups, pups approaching full-grown and traveling with the pack. She may also become the new breeding female. With the Huckleberry pack WDFW finds science, in these early stages, that pack cohesiveness remains and that there may not be a loss in pack structure.

Hope for the Huckleberry pack.

===

My comments:

Everything kills sheep, wolves are certainly not the main predator of sheep. Bears, bobcats, coyotes, dogs, ravens, eagles, foxes, mountain lions and others all eat sheep, since sheep have literally no natural defenses. But whenever a wolf does anything it’s treated as if it’s headline news. Mostly sheep  die from other causes, like lambing complications, disease and bad weather.  Sheep are also found on their back, they’re stolen and yes, overeat and die. Sheep and lambs are farm animals slaughtered for food.  So the hoopla about  predators attacking sheep, living in rugged country, is not really news. It’s only news when wolves are involved.

Meanwhile we have a dead alpha female, motherless wolf pups, all because of a few sheep! And please don’t think I’m denigrating sheep because I value their lives as well. I hate that the little lambs are slaughtered. Ranching is a cruel, cruel business. It would be a much better world without it!

===

Photo: Courtesy WDFW

Posted in: Wolf Wars, gray wolf

Tags: Huckleberry Pack, alpha female shot dead, WDFW, sharpshooter, sheep

Published in: on September 10, 2014 at 9:10 pm  Comments (10)  
Tags: , , , ,

Killing Wolves

Summer is almost over and instead of wolves being allowed to raise their young pups in peace they’re being subjected to pain, suffering and death because wolf hunting season is upon them once more.  This will be the fourth wolf hunt in Montana and Idaho, there would have been five but Judge Molloy relisted wolves in the Northern Rockies in 2010, stopping the fall hunt. It was a short-lived victory because Senate Democrats passed a wolf delisting rider (with no judicial review) in the Spring of 2011. The rider was sneakily tacked onto a budget bill and all Democrat Senators, save three, voted for it. Obama signed it into law, effectively ending the ability of advocates to fight the delisting in court.

Here are the links to  fish and game agencies who promote and profit off the killing of wolves for sport.  The Idaho hunt started on August 30th but in reality wolves are hunted somewhere in the state year round. Montana wolf archery started on Sept. 6,  it makes me sick to think wolves are being shot at with compound bows and broad head arrows. In Wyoming’s wolf predator zone, wolves can be killed 24/7, 365 days of the year, by any means. Wisconsin is allowing wolves to be hunted with dogs, basically legalizing dog fighting.  The brutality has begun again!

Since mid-term elections are right around the corner you might want to click here. It lists who voted for the 2011 wolf delisting rider. Then in November, you’ll know exactly who betrayed wolves and vote them out of office!

===

Idaho – IDFG - Wolf Hunt started on August 30, 2014

 
===
 

Montana - MFWP – Wolf Hunt by Archery started on Sept. 6, 2014

 
 
 
===
 

Wyoming  – Predator Zone – Wolves can be killed 365 days of the year, 24/7 by any means.

 
 
===
 

Minnesota – DNR – Hunt starts November 8th, 2014

 
 
===
 

Wisconsin – DNR – Hunt starts October 15, 2014 (Wolves can be hunted with dogs)

 
 
===
 
Dead Wolf Image Emailed To Wolf Advocate on Christmas Eve 2009 With The Caption "Merry Cristmas"

Dead Wolf Image Emailed To Wolf Advocate on Christmas Eve 2009 With The Caption “Merry Cristmas”

Aerial Gunner Shot Washington Alpha Female Wolf

Nabeki:

 

photo king_wolf

 
 
(photo – King)

Disgusting barbarians!!

Originally posted on Exposing the Big Game:

http://www.king5.com/story/news/local/2014/09/04/losing-alpha-female-threatens-pack-survival/15102151/

Washington state accidentally shoots alpha wolf

STEVENS COUNTY, Wash. — When a sharpshooter took out a member of a problem wolf pack last month, it looked like a small female, but it wasn’t just any female. A necropsy determined it was the breeding female of the Huckleberry Pack, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDF&W) officials said today.

The Huckleberry Pack has been feeding on sheep being raised on private forest lands in northern Stevens County.

State decides to kill, not scare, wolves

WDF&W biologists tried non-lethal means to keep the wolves away from the 1,800 head sheep herd. But when they found five dead sheep and three injured on August 23, they issued the order to kill up to four wolves in the pack.

The only wolf killed was the female shot from a helicopter by a federal…

View original 117 more words

Published in: on September 5, 2014 at 5:28 pm  Comments (28)  

Environmental and Animal Groups: Views on Hunting

Nabeki:

What an eye opener. Just reading down the list of green groups who support hunting, or don’t oppose it, is mind boggling!

Please do yourself a favor and click on the link and read through the complete list. You will be shocked. At the very least you’ll know what orgs to donate your dollars to and who not to. Lord!

Originally posted on Exposing the Big Game:

Introduction

There are a number of local, state, national and international organizations that publicly concern themselves with caring for animals and protecting the environment. Some have their foundations a century ago or longer (such as Audubon Society in the late 1800s), while others are relatively new to the scene (such as Love Canada Geese in 2005). Among these groups are several that clearly state their opposition to any form of hunting (particularly the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting), while others publicly align themselves with hunters (including The Wilderness Society ). Some organizations have chosen to maintain a neutral or “apolitical” stance with regard to hunting, or take exception to particular types of hunting or targets of hunting (such as Defenders of Wildlife, which focuses much of its effort on ending aerial hunting of wolves) but typically do not address the broader ecological impact of hunting.

Purpose

This wiki…

View original 168 more words

Published in: on September 2, 2014 at 3:07 pm  Comments (11)  

The Will to Change

Nabeki:

Photo by Scott Flaherty

I cried when I read this. Thank you, thank you Stephen Capra for saying everything that needed to be said. You gave my soul a lift, you lifted us all up, we who have been fighting in the trenches for so long, only to be drowned out by the compromisers. Thanking you for speaking truth to power. Now lets keep moving forward and follow your blueprint!

Always for the wolves,

Nabeki

Originally posted on Exposing the Big Game:

Stephen Capra

It’s ironic in so many ways; we live in a time where the earth as we know it is literally crying out in pain. The pain which comes from a human race at war with nature, a place that once was such a part of people’s lives is now something that stands in the way of profits, lifestyles beyond measure, and helps to define a world lacking in love and in need of therapy. For nature is perhaps our best reflection of love on earth.

It is not that it cannot be cruel or unforgiving; it is that in its purest form, it perfectly reflects harmony, life, evolution and beauty. Nothing synthesizes wild nature more than the wolf. It is the perdurable life force which reveals that nature is alive!

Today we confront not just ranchers, who since their first steps in the new world have killed, trapped…

View original 1,720 more words

Published in: on August 31, 2014 at 11:06 pm  Comments (9)  

Howling Their Hearts Out….

“Wolf Song in the fog. Tanja Aksani howl with her howling arctic wolves in the snow.”

===

Video: Courtesy YouTube Tanja Askani

Posted in: gray wolf

Tags: Arctic wolves, howling

Published in: on August 30, 2014 at 12:10 am  Comments (10)  
Tags: ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,401 other followers

%d bloggers like this: