Update On ”Love-In” Held By Montana FWP With Anti-Wolf Crowd….

It’s been over a week since Montana FWP held a “Love-In with the anti wolf crowd at the Red Lion Colonial Inn in Helena. The purpose, besides sucking up to the hunting and ranching groups, was to form a coalition of anti-wolf stakeholders. At first I thought it was a joke. Seriously, a state agency lobbying to the anti crowd, to form a coalition? No more pesky lawsuits for them, they want to change things on the Congressional level and strip wolves of their ESA protections.

This is the same state agency that authorized killing entire wolf packs killed for agribusiness. Who increased the now halted wolf hunt quota from 75 to 186 wolves and threw in a wolf archery season for good measure.  They gave Wildlife Services control to kill wolves for livestock depredation without having to contact them first.  So I can’t say I’m surprised by all the coalition building with the wolf hating crowd but c’mon, this is wrong on so many levels. 

Not much has been reported on what was said at “the meeting”‘ but oh would I have loved to be a fly on the wall. The handwringing, the complaining, the brainstorming trying to figure out ways to bypass, circumnavigate, detour, go around the barn,  elude, dodge, or skirt Judge Molloy’s decision to relist the gray wolf. 

Ten groups were represented, including the Woolgrowers Assoc. and RMEF.  How about the Cattlemen’s Assoc. and SFW?  Those are good guesses. Sadly, I wasn’t invited because I don’t have the right wolf hating credentials. I happen to believe living in wolf country is pretty special, kind of an honor. 

One thing that’s bothering me is how the heck those select groups found out about the meeting ? As I recall, the date and time were reported by the press just one day before it took place. How did that crowd show up at 10 am the next day in Helena? Was it mental telepathy? Like  “Close Encounters of the Third Kind“?

Or something like “Field of Dreams”‘, if you schedule it, they will come?

Well it’s all a big mystery how they found out. I was under the silly impression if the state holds a meeting concerning  all citizens of the state, they would actually tell them, not just a select bunch.

“The delegates to the Constitutional Convention made a clear and unequivocal decision that government operates most effectively, most reliably, and is most accountable when it is subject to public scrutiny…

While on any given occasion there may be legitimate arguments for handling government operations privately, the delegates to our constitutional Convention concluded that in the long term those fleeting considerations are outweighed by the dangers of a government beyond public scrutiny.”

Justice Terry Trieweiler for the court in Great Falls Tribune v. Day – 1998


  “All meetings of all agencies (includes boards committees and subcommittees) must be open to the public. MCA 2-3-202″


Open meetings

“The legislature finds and declares that public boards, commissions, councils, and other public agencies in this state exist to aid in the conduct of the peoples’ business. It is the intent of this part that actions and deliberations of all public agencies shall be conducted openly. The people of the state do not wish to abdicate their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them.”[20

Another disturbing aspect of the “coalition” is it was formed in one day.  Call me picky but don’t the Montana Sunshine Laws make it clear that decisions concerning issues effecting the public, must be open for public comment first? Just asking?

 The Open Meetings law affords “reasonable opportunity to participate in the operation of governmental agencies prior to the final decision of the agency” (2-3-201).

To summarize, a meeting was held by Montana FWP in Helena, Montana on August 2oth,  with the express purpose of forming a coalition with anti-wolf stakeholders, yet barely any notice to the public was given and a coalition was formed on the same day. Sounds very fishy to me.

So then we have to ask this question:

Does Public Information in Montana Need Better Enforcement?

The question was raised by the executive director of the Montana Newspaper Association in the organization’s most recent newsletter. The organization sponsored Freedom of Information (FOI) Hot Line is getting an increasing number of calls from media, citizens and even government officials, and usually the questions are “straightforward.” And, the answers are “clear as a bell.””

“Has the time come to remove the onus for enforcing public information and open meeting laws from the citizen or media complainant and put the burden on government?

It seems this isn’t the first time this issue has come up.

So what came out of all the coalition building?

From the Helena IR: 

Groups form coalition on wolf issue

By EVE BYRON Independent Record helenair.com | Posted: Saturday, August 21, 2010 12:00 am |

Representatives of livestock producers, outfitters, hunters and wildlife enthusiasts promised Friday to present a united front with the state of Montana as it moves forward as quickly as possible, on multiple pathways, to try to regain tools needed to control growing gray wolf populations.

Joe Maurier, director of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and Bob Lane, FWP attorney, said they’re planning on filing a motion with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn an Aug. 5 U.S. District Court ruling that put wolves in Montana and Idaho back on the list of animals protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. While that appeal is pending — which is expected to take a year or longer — the state also will ask the federal government to issue “take” permits in Montana that would allow for some public hunting.

The state also is considering entering into discussions with plaintiffs in the case over what it would take to return full management of wolves to the state; seek federal legislation to change the status of gray wolves in Montana; and ask Congress to make it clear that delisting of wolves in one state, but not in an adjoining one, is part of the flexibility allowed under the Endangered Species Act.

In addition, officials will ask the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to consider wolves a threatened species rather than endangered in the northern half of Montana, which allows for more management latitude. They’re considered an experimental population in southern Montana, which means wolves can be shot on sight when caught preying on livestock.

Maurier added that what both Montana and Idaho officials probably won’t do is try to convince Wyoming to lift the predator status of wolves in that state, because at a meeting among leaders of the three states Thursday, Wyoming officials made it clear they weren’t planning on making any changes at this time.

“Our intent is to be more aggressive than we have in the past and we’ll see how that works,” Maurier said. “… We are going to work our tails off as long as I’m here to do whatever we can to provide a clear path forward and resolve this problem. If there was a silver bullet we would have used it by now.

“The bottom line is we can’t do it alone … and that’s why we brought you here today.”

While members of the 10 groups at Friday’s meeting agreed with some of the tactics Maurier outlined, many were resoundingly opposed to any type of talks with the 13 environmental organizations that filed the lawsuit to return wolves in Montana and Idaho to the list of endangered species.

“How do you negotiate any kind of settlement with those folks that is binding for any kind of long period of time?” asked David Allen, president of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. “Anyone with a computer, attorney and blog can become an environmental group overnight. What’s to stop that group from becoming another group and suing you?

“… I just figure what’s the point with those folks? They have shown no propensity to sit down and deal like big boys and girls.”

While acknowledging Allen’s point, Maurier added that it doesn’t hurt to at least open discussions.

“It never hurts to talk, maybe for educational purposes, if nothing else,” he said. (How open minded Mr. Maurier, the idea that the rest of Montana’s citizens have a right to speak, what a concept!)

Officials with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which handled the reintroduction of gray wolves into the Northern Rockies ecosystem beginning in 1994, declared in May 2009 that wolves in Montana and Idaho no longer needed federal protection status, and took them off the list of endangered species. As part of the two states’ management efforts, they each held their first-ever hunting season last fall, and wolves that were harassing livestock were able to be shot without permits.

However, Wyoming’s wolf management plan declared them to be predators in most of the state outside of Yellowstone National Park, and allowed them to be shot on sight as long the state retained a minimum population of about 75 animals, or 15 packs of at least five animals each. That wasn’t acceptable to the USFWS, and they remained protected under federal law.

In his ruling earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy wrote that the wolf population can’t be considered “recovered” and delisted in Montana and Idaho, but not in Wyoming.

Lane said he thinks that argument won’t stand up to an appeal, since wolves are considered only threatened in Minnesota, but endangered in Michigan and Wisconsin. Montana and Idaho will appeal Molloy’s ruling on that basis, he said, but added that if it is remanded back to Molloy, other issues raised by the environmental groups also would need to be resolved, which could take a few years.

That’s why the state and groups will also take their case to Congress, seeking fast-track clarification that partial delisting is allowed under the Endangered Species Act. Both Sen. Max Baucus and Rep. Denny Rehberg have announced plans to introduce legislation to give more control of wolf management to Montana. Maurier said those bills probably will be reconciled as they pass through the House and Senate. (Do they really think trying to gut the ESA won’t be met with a fight?)

Currently, about 1,700 wolves roam throughout Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, eastern Oregon and Washington. Montana is home to about 525 wolves and plans to manage for 400 or more; Idaho has about 835 wolves, with a management goal of 520; and Wyoming has about 320. (How pathetic is it that Montana, Wyoming and Idaho are complaining about having 1700 wolves when the  Great Lakes Region of  Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin have over 4500 wolves?)

Those at Friday’s meeting said wolves have dramatically lowered elk and moose populations in some parts of Montana and are preying in ever increasing numbers on livestock. They fear that as the number of wolves continues to rise, so will conflicts.

“We have screwed around with this far too long,” Allen said.

I couldn’t agree more Mr. Allen!


*blue italics mine

Photo: Courtesy First People  

Posted in: Montana wolves, gray wolf/canis lupus

Tags: gray wolf, Montana FWP, anti-wolf coalition, open meetings, Montana Sunshine Laws

More Pics of Wenaha Wolf Pups!

Here are three more pics from ODFW of the pups. I don’t agree with all the handling? Not sure why they have to capture the pups, it’s so invasive and I’m sure the parents were fairly upset. But we can’t pass up pics of the pups, they are adorable. Don’t like the ear tag though, it reminds me of tagging calves.

Wenaha Wolf Pup Being Weighed

Wehaha Wolf Pup Being Released 


Photos: Courtesy ODFW

Posted in: Oregon wolves

Tags: Wenaha wolf pups, ODFW, Oregon, gray wolf

Published in: on August 25, 2010 at 10:21 pm  Comments (16)  
Tags: , , ,


Here are the pics of Oregon’s Wenaha Pack pups. Thanks Erin for providing the links!

Not sure if the two pics are of the same pup or both pups. But no matter, the pics are adorable. Those little girls look wonderful. Can you imagine anyone hurting these babies?

Remember USFWS in Wyoming recently had 10 wolf pups killed, along with their parents. Those  pups were younger then this.

Photos: Courtesy of OFGProducerEd

Posted in: Oregon wolves

Tags: Wenaha Pack, Pups, ODFW, Biodiversity

Published in: on August 25, 2010 at 12:31 am  Comments (11)  
Tags: , , ,

Oregon’s Imnaha Pack Alpha Male Found!! And the Wenaha Pack Has Pups!!

Imnaha Pack Alpha Male (caught on a trail camera)  HOWLS!!

Finally good wolf news!  Oregon’s Imnaha pack alpha male, who’s been missing since May 31, has been spotted on a trail camera, still wearing his collar. The collar must be malfunctioning. 

AND Oregon’s Wenaha wolf pack has two confirmed pups and there may be more. The two pups were trapped (that must have been stressful for them), checked over, weighed and sent on their way. ODFW states they will be releasing  pics of the babies soon. Can’t wait!!


Two New Wolf Pups In Eastern Oregon

August 23, 2010By Dennis Newman

The Wenaha wolf pack in Northeast Oregon has produced at least two pups this season. ODFW confirmed the news this afternoon. They appear to the first pups born to the Wenaha pack.

And there’s some good news to report on Oregon’s other wolf pack. After being missing for almost three months, the alpha male of the Imnaha pack has been located.

As for the alpha male of the Imnaha pack, he’s finally been recorded on a trail camera. The image is the first we’ve seen or heard of him since May 31st. ODFW says the photo shows him wearing his tracking collar. So it’s a safe bet that the collar is broken and wasn’t able to transmit information about his location. ODFW also plans to release that photo later today.

Read the rest of the story, CLICK HERE

Wenaha Pack yearling wolf….so beautiful!

Photos: Courtesy ODFW

Posted in: Oregon wolves

Tags: Wenaha pups, Imnaha alpha male alive, good wolf news, ODFW


Published in: on August 23, 2010 at 11:13 pm  Comments (11)  

Update: Montana FWP Holds “Love In” With Anti-Wolf “Stakeholders”….

Montana FWP  held  a “LOVE IN”  with anti-wolf groups in Helena yesterday for the purpose of forming a “coalition”. 

“I think it’s important to have a coalition so that especially our congressional delegation understands it’s Montana-wide, this concern,” said FWP director Joe Maurier.”

Really, it’s Montana wide? You get woolgrowers, stockgrowers, hunters, ranchers et al. in the same room and that’s a fair representation of Montanans? Was there one environmental group at that “roundtable”? Bueller? Bueller? Stop kidding yourself Mr. Maurier.

Does anyone find this outrageous behavior? The state getting together with “special anti-wolf stakeholders”, that are oh so frustrated the wolf hunts have been stopped?  

They can’t accept the fact they won’t be able to have a wolf slaughter, I mean hunt, this September, so it’s sour grapes all the way around. Now they want to change the Endangered Species Act and strip gray wolves of their protections.

Oh irony, irony. The very reason wolves were placed on the Endangered Species list in the first place was to protect them from this kind of persecution. This “coalition” drives the point home like a laser.  And they are pulling out all the stops. Tester and Baucus, the two Montana senators, are writing to Ken Salazar for help.

The situation deteriorates daily. They just can’t come to terms with Judge Molloy’s decision to restore gray wolves protections. Just a unbelievable display of tantrums.

I’ll be writing more about this “kiss up to the wolf haters roundtable”, later this weekend, when I can think objectively. I’m afraid if I try to expound on this further I’ll break my own rules of decorum, in other words, I’m pissed off and I hope you are too.


Montana, wolf hunt advocates form coalition



State pursues options on wolves

Leaders try to counter recent federal ruling



More handwringing:

Tester, Baucus call for wolf management meeting

Tim Leeds — tleeds@havredailynews.com

Published: Friday, August 20th, 2010




Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: ESA, gray wolves, Baucus, Tester, Montana FWP, wolf persecution, tantrums

Published in: on August 21, 2010 at 1:41 am  Comments (7)  

Action Alert: Montana FWP Plans To Meet With Ranching and Hunting Lobbies To Build Coalition!

We did win a major victory when wolves were relisted on August 5th but you would never know it with the continual whining by the states, ranchers, hunters, et.al. The newest and most egregious assault on wolves is Montana FWP’s intention to hold a meeting, tomorrow, Friday, August 20th, at the Red Lion Colonial Hotel in Helena. The purpose?

“Montana officials are planning to meet with ranchers, hunters and other groups about joining forces after a federal judge restored Endangered Species Act protections for wolves.

“Wildlife officials in Montana and Idaho oppose the ruling earlier this month by U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy that blocked the states’ wolf management plans and their fall hunts.

Ranchers and hunters have also blasted the ruling, saying wolves have grown too numerous and are attacking livestock and game.

Ron Aasheim of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks says state wildlife officials will meet Friday in Helena with stockgrowers, woolgrowers, hunters, farmers and other groups to discuss forming a coalition.

Aasheim says participants will discuss the state’s options and a possible appeal. They meet 10 a.m. at the Red Lion Colonial Hotel in Helena.”

Is this even legal? How can the state of Montana seek to form a coalition with anti-wolf lobbies? This has to be a conflict of interest. Does the state not represent the entire population? What about wolf advocates who don’t hunt or have ranches or farms but want wolves protected? Do we count at all?

Does everyone see what wolves are up against? How the USFWS could push to delist gray wolves in the Northern Rockies, when they are fully aware of the toxic climate that exists in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming against wolves, is egregious beyond measure.

Is anyone responsible for “managing”wolves looking out for them?

Will wolf advocates be at the meeting tomorrow with their video cameras, to document what is being said?  Will there be minutes to this meeting? And who are the other groups Ron Aasheim of Montana FWP is talking about? I don’t see one environmental group mentioned? How desperate do you have to be to pull a stunt like this, barely two weeks after wolves protections were restored?  Should Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks be renamed, Montana For Hunting, Ranching and Woolgrowers?

Think about this for a minute. This is the state of Montana, holding a meeting,with practically no notice ( I could not find an announcement about this meeting anywhere before today, if there is such a link,  please post it on this blog), to build a coalition with groups who are clearly anti-wolf.  Oh and we can’t forget the unnamed “‘other groups”. Who are they, the Safari Club and Cattlemen’s Assoc.?

Wolf advocates, if you can make this meeting under such short notice, I urge you to do so. Wolves can’t speak for themselves, they need our help. The persecution of these magnificent animals knows no bounds. Please take this seriously. In my opinion the state is trying to find a way to circumvent the ESA and hold wolf hunts. I believe there are powerful hunting forces behind this push to dismantle the ESA and strip wolves of their protections. If it wasn’t for the endangered species act, wolves would never have made a comeback at all.

Here’s a video of one of the last wild Mexican gray wolves, captured in Northern Mexico in the 1970’s. Is this what’s  in store for wolves in the Northern Rockies? Just a few wolves left standing?


Aug 19, 2010 12:28 pm US/Mountain

Mont. Seeks Wolf Coalition With Ranchers, Hunters


Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: endangered species act, gray wolf, Montana, USFWS, Helena meeting Montana FWP

Assault on the Endangered Species Act and the War On Wolves…

There is no rest for the weary. One day after Judge Molloy relisted gray wolves in the Northern Rockies, the whining over his decision began and there is no sign it will abate, in fact it gets louder by the day. The drumbeat of negative wolf articles seems never ending.  I have never in my life read or heard so  much complaining. It’s like the sound of  a thousand three year olds crying in unison. All because wolf hunts were called off. 

Here are a few sample headlines from the hundreds and hundreds complaining about Judge Molloy’s decision.

Fish and Game disappointed with wolves’ relisting



Gazette opinion: Wolf ruling endangers state management solutions



Gray wolf back on protect list in Mont. and Idaho, to ranchers and hunters ire



Local sportsmen group asks state to control wolves


The negative headlines go on and on but you get the picture. If you do a search on gray wolves, there is an overwhelming number of negative reports on wolves regaining their federal protections.  Once again environmentalists and wolf advocates voices have been drowned out by the anti-wolf crowd. Apparently nobody cares what we think or feel about this important decision and what it was like watching the horrendous wolf slaughter over the past year.  Nope, it’s only the hunters and ranchers opinions that seem to matter. We are left out in the cold once again, along with the wolves. We werent’t allowed the luxury of enjoying the victory for one day before all the threats and hate spewing rhetoritc started.

By reading the media articles you would get the idea wolves lack support and everyone wants them “managed”.  That is patently not true. What IS true is the media seems to have signed onto the anti-wolf side of the story. Maybe they decided it sells more papers or increases hits to their websites.

Don’t be fooled by lopsided reporting filled with half truths and distortions. Wolves have supporters all over the world and if the only way to get the truth out is to report positive wolf news on our blogs and facebook pages, so be it. Actually the main stream media is becoming less and less relevant, as people turn to alternative sources to get their news.

We have to question what’s behind this crazy, out of control response? I believe it’s an orchestrated effort to trash the endangered species act. Do you remember any of the groups that signed onto the delisting lawsuit?  The Safari Club and the NRA, come to mind. They have a big stake in this. How happy would the Safari Club be to see the ESA weakened?  

It’s also no accident Senator Baucus and Rep. Denny Rehburg, both from Montana,  are talking about changing the ESA to ban gray wolves from federal protection. Wolves once again are being used as political pawns and scapegoats.  When these politicians are talking about wolves they don’t have to talk about the almost 10% unemployment rate or the rock bottom approval rating of Congress, at 11%, the lowest since those records have been kept. It’s a transparent strategy at best and I’m sure Americans have more on their minds then denying wolves ESA protections. Are wolves causing unemployment? Have wolves caused the housing crisis? The anti-wolf crowd needs to get in touch with reality, wolves are very popular among many Americans. The GYA brings in $35 million a year to the area, higher then hunting profits. Wolves are actually more valuable to the states alive then dead, if they would stop listening to just ranchers and hunters and tap into wolf ecoctourism.

But no, our politicians in Montana are too busy kissing up to the ranching and hunting lobbies.

From the Flathead Beacon:

Bill Would Prohibit Wolves from Federal Protections

By Kellyn Brown , 08-11-10

Just days before a federal judge reinstated protections for wolves in Montana and Idaho, a Texas lawmaker introduced a little-noticed resolution that would prohibit wolves from being considered a threatened species. H.R. 6028, introduced by Republican Congressman Chet Edwards on July 30, basically adds one line to the Endangered Species Act.

Here’s the bill:

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to prohibit treatment of the Gray Wolf as an endangered species or threatened species.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


Section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) The Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) shall not be treated as an endangered species or threatened species for purposes of this Act.’


The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, who just last year was trumpeting their success in recovering elk populations across the country, is now calling on Congress to re-write the ESA. They’ve made a perceptible turn to the extreme anti-wolf position, which doesn’t come as a shock to me. When the RMEF released their rosy picture of elk recovery across the country, in the Spring of 2009, the wolf issue was just heating up. I don’t think they had any idea it would blow up the way it did. Their members had to be upset the RMEF was saying elk were doing so well, it didn’t fit in with the “wolves are killing all the elk mantra”. So now the organizaton has stepped up their rhetoric. David Allen, CEO, RMEF wrote to this blog back in October 2009.


October 26, 2009 at 11:12 am

David Allen said:

Relative to your comments quoting RMEF elk numbers being higher than 25 years ago, you are only using part of the facts. You can make anything appear to support your position when you only use partial information.

Elk numbers are down substantially in the areas where the wolves have been allowed to flourish. Unfettered and unchecked management of the wolf population is the worst kind of wildlife management possible. We have the most successful wildlife model in the world and it isn’t because we micro-manage one species over another. Our wildlife system is not only about the wolf; it is about all species.

Goals and criteria were set for the wolf reintroduction and have been substantially surpassed. If those who support the reintroduction of the wolf want a balanced playing field then you will have to begin to stick to what was originally agreed to and stop moving the goal line.

If folks truly want the “natural process” to manage wildlife, then we all (Man) have to leave. Man put nature out of balance and Man has to manage wildlife or leave this planet. The states have managed our wildlife populations very successfully for decades; we will fail fast if we take this management out of their hands.

We do not live in a zoo.

David Allen
President & CEO


Nabeki’s response:

On October 26, 2009 at 1:35 pm nabeki said: |

Hi David,
It’s pretty hard to argue with your own numbers. Your organization reported that Idaho has 115, 000 elk, up 5% from 110,000 in 1984 and Montana has 150,000 elk, up 66% from 90,595 in 1984. Then you turn around and say well what we really meant is elk numbers are up in those states but only where there are no wolves. That doesn’t make sense at all. I find it ironic that hunters are so concerned about elk numbers because they want to be the ones to kill them and not the wolf. So really the issue hinges around hunters believing wolves are their competition.

Conservation Group Celebrates New Data on Milestone Anniversary
MISSOULA, Mont.—Wild elk populations in 23 states are higher now than 25 years ago when the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) was launched to help conserve habitat for elk and other wildlife.

Nationally, elk numbers grew 44 percent, from about 715,000 to over 1,031,000, between 1984 and 2009 (see chart).

During that same time span, Elk Foundation fundraisers have generated millions of dollars, which helped leverage millions more, for a conservation effort that has enhanced or protected nearly a square mile of habitat per day—now totaling over 5.5 million acres.

Population highlights among top elk states: California, Nevada and New Mexico experienced the greatest increases with growth exceeding 100 percent. Colorado, Montana and Utah herds are 50-70 percent larger. Oregon and Wyoming are up 20-40 percent.

So I don’t see a problem with elk, the only problem I see is an irrational fear of wolves. So much of what is written about wolves is untrue and sensational. But what is true, is wolves are healthy for the environment. Look at the Yellowstone example, wolves dispersed elk from stream and river beds, which have brought back the ash and willow trees for the first time in sixty years. Beaver and song birds have moved into these areas following this rejuvenation.

Yes, elk as you know, have changed their browsing behavior and may be harder to hunt but it seems to me that hunters need to change their tactics to encompass that, instead of complaining about it.

Congratulations to the RMEF for continuing to help keep elk populations healthy and strong. I would only hope they wouldn’t be caught up in the wolf rhetoric that seems to plague other hunting organizations.

For the wolves, For the wild ones,


David Allens’s response, CEO, RMEF:

On October 26, 2009 at 7:08 pm David Allen said: |

By stating we need less management you demonstrate you do not understand the science of managing wildlife.

You also continue to pick and choose the stats you like that support your position but ignore what contradicts your position.

This is how we got into this mess. Intellectual integrity has been missing from day one of the wolf reintroduction.

Wolves must be managed as all other wildlife, period; and they will be I can assure you.


Nabeki’s response:

On October 26, 2009 at 7:59 pm nabeki said: |

Hi David,
I quoted YOUR numbers from the RMEF, so I’m not sure what you’re questioning? On wolf-cattle predation I quoted the USDA.

The negative dogma surrounding wolves will continue as long as people are grounded in emotion about these animals. Wolf advocates will fight just as hard for sound wolf policies, I can assure you of that and what’s going on now is not sound wolf management. Enough of these animals are killed by the feds every year, let alone having wolf hunts mere months after they were delisted. Minnesota with their 3000 wolves stated they wouldn’t even consider a hunt for five years if wolves were ever delisted in their state. Yet we have the Governor of Idaho going on television, ramping up the wolf rhetoric stating, “I’m prepared to bid for the first ticket to shoot a wolf myself.” I believe over 25,000 wolf tags were sold in Montana and Idaho combined to kill 295 wolves. Who’s being emotional about wolves, the conservationists or the anti-wolf crowd?

It’s obvious we don’t agree on this issue. I’m sure the 100,000 hunters roaming Montana’s wilderness will be able to kill the remaining 55 wolves before wolf season is shut down. And I’m equally sure they’ll have a successful elk hunting season with the numbers of elk way up in this state.



I saw all this coming from them but I never thought they would go so far as to try and gut the ESA.  The irony of all this is it was the ESA that saved the wolf and brought them back from the brink  in the West. It gave wolves the protection they needed to make a comeback. Now there are calls to change wolves protections because the anti-wolf crowd lost in court. They’re acting like typical sore losers. By calling for extreme measures to kill federally protected wolves,  it proves wolf adovcates’ point, wolves are severely persecuted and scapegoated. They cannot exist or survive long term without protection.

August 6, 2010

RMEF Calls on Congress to Reform Endangered Species Act


Oh but wait, there’s more. “Sportsman” and I use that word loosely, are bugging the heck out of  “wildlife managers” in both states to do somethin about those dang varmit wolves that are killing all the ungulates.  They don’t want wolves as competition, oh  no, they want to kill the elk, deer and moose themselves!!  Those pesky wolves, what right do that have to hunt and survive?  Don’t we have dominion over them? They just can’t be allowed to live in peace, now can they? 

MANAGE,MANAGE, MANAGE, that’s the message.  What would happen if wolves weren’t collared and relentlessly tracked like terrorists? They might actually be able to live out their lives in relative peace, without interference and brutality from humans. I know one thing, they wouldn’t be very easy to find without those infernal collars. Most wolves, unless they’re habituated, don’t want to be any where near humans and can you blame them?

Just to remind everyone, wolves kill very few livestock . In the expanse of the Northern Rockies in 2009,  just 214 cows were lost to wolves, out of six million cows. To put that in perspective, 10,500 calves died due to winter storms in one year. In the yearly interagency wolf report for 2009, written by USFWS, which covers the Northern Rockies, the report stated in part: ….”wolf depredation results in a comparatively small proportion of all livestock losses”….

From the Billings Gazette:

“Officials say wolves account for a fraction of livestock losses.

In 2009, sheep producers reported losing 56,000 animals for reasons other than predators, such as disease and weather. They also reported losing another 18,800 animals to all predators, mostly coyotes. Eagles were blamed for another 600 sheep deaths, the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service reports.”

Here are the charts the feds and states don’t want you to see:

Vulures killed more cows then wolves that year. Coyotes and domestic dogs were in the number one and two position. Even so all predators are responsible for a tiny blip of livestock losses.(NASS 2006)

Of the 104,500,000 cattle grazing in the US,  notice the small number of deaths attributed to all predation compared to the 3,861,000 cattle deaths from a myriad of non-predation factors. (NASS 2006)

On their quest to please the tiny,VOCAL, minoriy of wolf hunters, ranchers and haters, Montana and Idaho want to  revive the 10j rule to reduce the wolf  population significantly. Idaho has declared they want to slash  the wolf population down to 500 animals from 850, they made this statement before and  AFTER wolves were relisted.

The 10j rule is part of the original wolf “management” plan,  an awful concession to ranchers. Wolf advocates were willing to make those concessions back in the ninties, so they could bring wolves back but it’s turned into a bloody, brutal tool, that gets entire wolf packs, including puppies, killed.  Montana and Idaho are talking about using the 10j rule to kill wolves for “prey declines”.

“Subsection (j) in Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act permits reintroduction of  an endangered species to a location where it used to live, but has since been driven out or exterminated. For each reintroduction effort, a special rule, called a “10(j) rule,” is written, which determines whether the population is essential to the survival of the species and specifically describes how the species will be treated by agency staff, whether lethal control can ever be used on the species, and what private citizens can or cannot do in regard to the species. Reintroduced species are managed differently than other endangered species. Federal agencies have more control over these reintroduced populations, which they call “experimental populations,” than they do for endangered populations that have not been reintroduced.

The 10j rule was rewritten in 2008, to allow more leeway to kill wolves. It’s being challenged in court:

From the Ravalli Republic: 

The ESA’s 10(j) rule was revised in 2008 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to give states more latitude in managing wolves that were deemed to be impacting ungulate herds.

That same year environmental groups filed a lawsuit challenging the revised rule in U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy’s court.

Wolves were delisted in March 2009 and the lawsuit was put on hold after Idaho dropped its request to implement the rule.

Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity said that lawsuit will move forward now that states are considering asking for permission to use the rule to kill wolves.

Robinson said wolves have been made the scapegoat of declining elk numbers that are the result of habitat degradation and other factors.

“We consider it a misplaced attempt to use the rule to kill wolves … our lawsuit will move forward,” Robinson said.

Wildlife Services is taking comments until August 31, 2010 on a environmental draft analysis that examines the myriad of ways to kill and “manage” wolves, including killing pups and sterilizing alpha pairs. Isnt’ that just great? Wolves have just been relisted, they are a federally protected species yet Wildife (Dis)Services wants to hear from you about their so called “wolf management plan” or more brutal ways to kill wolves.

Please make sure you get your comments in by August 31, 2010. There are four alternatives.  I’m adding a fifth one…STOP KILLING AMERICA’S WOLVES FOR AGRIBUSINESS!!

These shadow trophy hunts are being paid for with your tax dollars people, a subsidy for agriculture. It’s not a coincidence Wildlife Services is part of the USDA, their extermination arm.

Here are the choices:

• 4.4.1 Alternative 1 – Continue the Current Wolf Damage Management Program (No Action)

This would be keeping the status quo. Slaughtering wolves the way they have been doing, which is bad enough.

• 4.4.2 Alternative 2 – Expanded Wolf Damage Management Program (Proposed Action, Preferred Alternative)

This disgusting option includes denning  (using a poisonous gas cartridge , gassing wolf pups in their dens) and sterilizing alpha pairs of wolves. Who kills puppies and sterilizes wolves? This is what we have passing as “wolf management”? SHAME!!!

• 4.4.3 Alternative 3- Nonlethal Wolf Damage Management Only.

Under this Alternative, WS would not conduct any lethal wolf control and would have no impact on the wolf population in Idaho.

• 4.4.4 Alternative 4 – No Federal Wolf Damage Management in Idaho


Contact Wildlife Services and vehemently oppose any sterilization of alpha pairs or gassing of pups in their den. I can’t believe we’re even discussing these brutal policies in the 21st century.

From The Wildlife News:

Idaho WS State Office
9134 W. Blackeagle Drive
Boise, Idaho 83709
telephone: (208) 378-5077
fax: (208) 378-5349


Written public comments will be accepted through
August 31, 2010
and can be submitted via e-mail to:


or by mail or fax to the Idaho WS State Office
(address and fax listed above).


More of Idaho’s take on  gray wolves relisting:

Idaho F&G: Explore wolf hunt, despite relisting

The Associated Press

Published: 08/06/10


Boy, Montana and Idaho have their thinking caps on and as the deputy director of Idaho Fish and Game stated “There may be some rock out there we haven’t turned over.”

These are the people we are supposed to believe are “managing” wolves responsibly. We all know “management” is a code word for killing wolves. I’ll say it again and it needs to be repeated over and over.  State game agencies SHOULD NOT BE MANAGING PREDATORS. It’s a conflict of interest. They are looking out for the wants and needs of hunters, not wolves.

To add to the growing list of ways to get around the ESA  Montana wants to allow sport hunters to kill wolves for agribusiness instead of Wildlife Services. Hmmm, I thought Montana wanted to kill wolves because they were killing all the elk and livestock? But of course we know that’s a red herring.  Apparently there are hunters out there who are pretty darn disappointed the wolf hunts have been cancelled. I guess the “wolf managers” don’t want to disappoint those poor hunters and deny them the great opportunity to shoot a wolf in the guts, hear it’s agonizing howls and screams. Oh, they must find a way.

Montana seeks to restore hunting for endangered wolves

August 11, 2010

http://w ww.greatfallstribune.com/article/20100811/NEWS01/100811014/1002/rss

This reminds me of a meeting held in Kalispell, Montana this year, concerning the increase of wolf hunting quotas. Apparently one of the speakers at the meeting was asked why Montana was killing wolves, when they know full well wolves kill very few livestock compared to other factors plus elk were doing pretty well in the state. His answer, “BECAUSE WE CAN”. There you have it wolf warriors, “because we can“. But wait what about the marauding Canadian wolves killing everything in sight?  Gee, I guess that’s just propaganda to appease the wolf haters, you know sort of preaching to their base.  He went on to say something to the effect there’s been a tremendous interest in wolf hunting, even from other states. I guess people are calling Montana to find out when they’ll get their chance to murder a wolf. Can’t disappoint those people, the show must go on.

So you see dear readers it’s not about cows or elk, it’s about WOLF HUNTING. Hunters want the chance to slaughter a wolf for $19. Quite the bargain, huh? That’s all a wolves life is worth in Montana, just $19 a tag, of course the price goes up to $350 if you’re an out of state wolf hunter.

The latest and most egregious plan to circumvent the ESA and kill wolves is a lame idea to hold RESEARCH HUNTS!!!`  Apparently the states have been watching too many episodes of  Whale Wars.

Japanese whaling ship… with RESEARCH written in English on the side of the vessel. They’ re not fooling anyone by killing whales in the “Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary” for RESEARCH.  Is this what the states have in mind for wolves? We were born in the dark but it wasn’t last night!!

These are the same people who have been killing gray wolves at record rates. USFWS recently killed two wolf packs in Wyoming , including all the pups. Wildlife Services has been killing wolves, including entire packs in Montana  for agribusiness, Idaho does the same thing. They held wolf hunts mere months after wolves were deslisted.  They created a wolf archery season along with baiting, calling and trapping for the now cancelled 2010 wolf hunts.  They didn’t seem to care one whit what was happening to wolves and their social structure. 500 wolves died in 2009 alone in the Northern Rockies, yet when wolf advocates questioned what effect the “Russian Roulette” killing was having on wolves, this is what we heard. 

Wildlife officials mull ‘research hunts’ for wolves

By MATTHEW BROWN – Associated Press writer trib.com | Posted: Thursday, August 12, 2010 12:00 am


Now they want us to swallow the notion they’re interested  in the impact of the slaughter. If only they could  hold research hunts, they could find out what you  and I already know. The double whammy of the hunts and WS killings is wrecking havoc on wolves, one of the most highly social animals on earth, second only to  humans and African lions. Doesn’t take another wolf  killing season to figure that out.

Are all the “stakeholders” (I hate that word and apparently we’re not on the list of “stakeholders),  sitting in smoke filled rooms “turning over rocks” to see what crawls out from under them to circumvent ESA? I think so.  Maybe the rooms aren’t smoke filled but the plotting is definitely going on.

From trib.com:

Wildlife officials in the Northern Rockies said Wednesday they are considering hunting wolves in the name of research to get around a recent court ruling that restored federal protections for the animals.

Environmentalists derided the proposal, vowing to challenge in court any new plans for hunting the estimated 1,367 wolves in Idaho and Montana.

“They’re adopting the Japanese whaling approach of holding hunts under the obviously erroneous concept of research,” said Mike Leahy, Rocky Mountain director for Defenders of Wildlife. “They’re trying to be too clever by half.”

UPDATE: Research Hunts nixed. They were too transparent even for Montana FWP and USFWS. Now they are concentrating on “conservation hunts”, basically killing wolves for existing. They want to use the horrible 1oj rule to kill wolves for “prey declines” as a way to circumvent the ESA. Idaho announced they will slaughter 80 wolves in the Lolo zone, just for being on this earth. They claim the wolves are killing the elk in the Lolo. OMG wolves are killing elk?  How shocking?   The Lolo elk herd has been declining since the early nineties and IDFG knows it.

They are disgusting and should NOT be managing our predators.  More on the 10j coming soon.

‘Research hunt’ for wolves dropped as officials balk

By MATTHEW BROWN • Associated Press Writer • August 13, 2010


Any and all attempts to circumvent the ESA should be met with HELL NO from wolf advocates. Please don’t take any of this lightly. I know we just won a victory but this is a war on wolves. Their relisting  was an  important win but the war rages on.

I urge you to write, call, raise your voices in protest over the  jiihad against wolves, not just wolves in the Northern Rockies but all wolves.

I beg everyone to write their congressman and senators to tell them in no uncertain terms they may not change the ESA to remove wolves protections. They work for us, not the other way around. I’ve included a link at the bottom of the post for all contacts. Be sure to write to Senator Baucus and Representaive Rehburg of Montana to express your outrage over there intentions to manipulate the ESA to remove wolves protections.

Contact Senator Max Baucus, (D) Montana



Senator Baucus is holding a “listening session” tomorrow,  Friday the 13th,  in Columbia Falls, Montana, on general subjects but I’m sure his statement to meddle with the ESA and deny wolves their federal protections will surely come up.

Baucus hosting Columbia Falls meeting

By Dax VanFossen

Updated: Aug 12, 2010 12:20 PM



Contact Representative Denny Rehburgh, (R) Montana



I didn’t want to write this post. I was trying to enjoy our victory but the happiness was short lived. As long as this tiny, vocal minority in the West has a stranglehold on wolves and other native carnivores, the battle will continue. 

Stand up and speak out for wolves before it’s too late, the other side will do anything to get wolves killed. This is Wolf Wars part 3000!!

Click here for contacts. We must act!!

I’m going to post a link to the contact info for the entire Congress. If anyone has access to that link, could you pass it on to me? We need a big push to shut down any meddling with the ESA by Congress.  We cannot let them touch the ESA or all protected species will be at risk. The grizzly bear could be next.

Photo: Japaense vessel, Courtesy Greenpeace

Photo: wolf, Courtesy kewlwallpapers.com

Posted in: Wolf Wars

Tags: wolf hysteria, playing dirty, 10j, IDFG, Montana FWP, USFWS, war on wolves: part 3000, thwarting ESA, tampering with ESA


The Magnificent Wolf

I never tire of watching this video, just excellent. It captures the wild spirit of wolves. I love the music and chanting.

Long live the glorious wolf. May you always be free!!

Photos: kewl wallpapers.com

Posted in: graywolf/canis lupus

Tags: The beauty of canis lupus, freedom, biodiversity, wolf song, apex predator

Published in: on August 11, 2010 at 1:38 am  Comments (6)  
Tags: , , , ,

Beautiful Boy! UPDATE: It’s Confirmed, He’s Been Shot Dead!

UPDATE: October 6, 2010

It’s true!! A disgusting poacher killed a federally protected Oregon male wolf. They need to find this person or persons and throw them in the slammer. Aren’t you sick and tired of reading about dead wolves? Enough!!

Wolf Wars is in full swing. While Mt. Rep. Rehberg, Mt. Senators Baucus and Tester, Idaho Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch, Utah’s Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah and Utah Senator Orin Hatch-R are backing legislation to strip gray wolves of their ESA protections, this little wolf is proving why wolves are not even safe while protected by the ESA, let alone without it!!


Protected wolf in tracked pack killed in Ore.

The Associated Press
POSTED: Tuesday, Oct. 05, 2010

GRANTS PASS, Ore. State authorities confirmed Tuesday that a federally protected wolf has been killed in northeastern Oregon.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife wolf coordinator Russ Morgan said the killed wolf was a 2-year-old Wenaha pack male recently fitted with a radio tracking collar. The silver male was captured and fitted in August, Morgan said.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has jurisdiction since wolves were restored to the endangered species list in August, is investigating, he said.

Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman Joan Jewett said it had no comment.

The wolf was a subdominant male and the only member of the pack carrying a radio collar, allowing biologists to track the pack’s whereabouts. The pack has four adults and at least two pups.

Wiped out in Oregon by bounty hunters more than 60 years ago, wolves first returned to the state in 1998 from Idaho, where they were introduced in a federal effort to get them off the endangered species list.

Two other wolves have been illegally shot since then. Two from the Imnaha pack were killed by government hunters for attacking livestock.

Ranchers angry over the state management plan’s limitations on killing wolves to protect livestock spoke out last week at an Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission meeting.

“The more and more these depredations occur, ranchers are going to – I think these guys are going to defend themselves,” Oregon Cattlemen’s Association President Bill Hoyt said in an interview.

Steve Pedery, conservation director for Oregon Wild, a conservation group, said the Wenaha pack has not been tied to any livestock attacks.

“This wasn’t something easily brushed aside, like somebody mistaking it for a coyote,” said Pedery. “This was a silver wolf wearing a big honking radio collar that is hard to miss. Somebody was out to shoot a wolf. It is very important that the agencies get on top of this so it is a deterrent to other yahoos who want to follow suit. That’s what makes us nervous about them being completely silent now.”



UPDATE: October 5, 2010

There’s an unconfirmed but reliable report, posted in Oregon’s La Grande Observer, that this sweet guy has been shot and killed. Apparently he was found by wildlife officials during a routine telemetry check. Just another sad chapter in Wolf Wars that’s raging across the West, fueled by the blind hatred that caused the first Western extermination. It’s 1910 all over again.

Ironically there are meetings being held today in Hamilton and Dillon, by Montana Rep. Rehberg, to discuss his anti-wolf bill, that would strip gray wolves of their ESA protections. The meeting panels are stacked with the anti-wolf crowd but did we really expect the “listening sessions” to be fair and balanced? Absolutely not!!

The killing of this beautiful wolf is the reason wolves cannot survive in this country without the protection of the ESA. It’s very disturbing this Wenaha pack male had recently been collared. Coincidence that he is now dead? Did someone gain access to his telemetry? I’ll report more on this sad case when the information becomes available.


August 9, 2010

Isn’t he a beauty?  He’s a two-year old male from Oregon’s Wenaha pack. The pack consists of four adults although he looks so much like a puppy. There are unconfirmed reports the pack has puppies. This picture was taken during the collaring process.

I don’t like collaring, someday this collar could get this guy in trouble. Traditionally collaring was used for research but now if wolves are suspected of livestock depredation it’s a way Wildlife (Dis)Services can track down the pack and kill the wolves. They’ve killed entire packs this way in the Northern Rockies.

Oregon has two confirmed wolf packs, the Imnaha and Wenaha packs. The Imnaha pack has been in the news because Wildlife Services was hunting two  uncollared  gray wolves from the pack. They say the wolves were involved in livestock depredations back in late Spring 2010. Several conservation groups filed a lawsuit to stop the hunts.

From NaturalOregon.org

Four groups, the Hells Canyon Preservation Council, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands and the Center for Biological Diversity sued to stop federal agents from killing two members of the Imnaha wolf pack in Wallowa County. The agency carrying out the hunt is USDA’s Wildlife Service.

The lawsuit claims that Wildlife Services should have first conducted an environmental analysis to assess how much damage would be done by the hunt. There are two known packs in the state, with 14 wolves. There’s also a few more lone wolves roaming Oregon, so the total could be closer to 20. Killing two of them means reducing their numbers by ten percent – or more. If that kind of damage is considered “significant”, then the feds may be required to take the additional step of writing an Environmental Impact Statement.

Wildlife (Dis)Services called off the hunt until they conduct an environmental review, so basically the hunts are over. I can do the review for them. Oregon has approx. twenty wolves, tops, two confirmed wolf packs and a few lone wolves. If they kill two of them for a few calves, that could seriously impact the wolves survival.

What you won’t hear about are the thousands upon thousands of cows  ranchers lose every year to weather, disease, reproductive issues and theft.  All predator losses are a tiny percentage of the totals. Wolves killed fewer cows than vultures nationally  (NASS 2006).

Happily the Imnaha’s are safe for now.

UPDATE: Remote cameras captured images of four Imnaha pups and six adult wolves, including B-300, the alpha female, nick-named Sophie. The alpha male was finally spotted on camera as well after he seemed to disappear for several months. His collar was not functioning and he hadn’t been sighted since May 31. Thankfully he’s alive.

Here are pics of the Imnaha pack with pups taken by the trail cameras.

Imnaha pups frolicking

Imnaha adult

Four Imnaha adult wolves

I’ll continue to follow the progress of  Oregon’s Wenaha and Imnaha wolf packs. These wolves are now protected by the ESA, since Judge Molloy relisted wolves on August 5th, 2010.


Male wolf from Wenaha pack radio-collared and released in northeast Oregon

August 6, 2010


Photos: Courtesy ODFW

Posted in: Oregon wolves

Tags: Wenaha pack, Imnaha pack, Oregon wolves, collared wolf, Wildlife Services

Published in: on August 9, 2010 at 12:50 am  Comments (23)  
Tags: , , , , ,



Ulrok the Rottweiler adopts wolf pup Beldaran

Breath a sigh of relief and HOWL for joy Wolf Warriors….wolves will NOT be subjected to the brutal hunts in Montana and Idaho.

Judge Molloy has relisted wolves in the Northern Rockies.!!

It doesn’t mean the battle is over but it’s a  major victory for wolves. Now we can concentrate on pushing the Center for Biological Diversity’s national wolf recovery plan.

Let’s savor this victory for wolves,  We know the decision will likely be appealed to the Ninth Circuit but for now wolves are safe from the bloody, disgusting, unnecessary, wolf hunts!!





Judge puts wolves back on endangered species list, hunts halted


Photos: Courtesy Barry Bland, Barcroft Media

Posted in: gray wolf/canis lupus, H0wling for Justice

Tags: Judge Molloy, Victory, gray wolves relisted,  no wolf hunts,  ESA

%d bloggers like this: