 |
 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
||||
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
An
Overview of Wolves in the Northern Rockies
- Dr. Douglas Smith, Yellowstone Wolf Project Leader Once the most widely distributed large predator in North America and listed in 1974 as endangered, wolves are giving the ultimate sacrifice trying to survive in less than 10% of their native territories. These lands are now filled with roads and cars, hi-rises and skyscrapers, factories and mining operations, ski resorts and RV hookups, shopping malls and parking lots, and humans with all of our material possessions and our mindsets that leave little room for wildlife and their wilderness needs. We have pushed wolves out of our lives for decades by illegal, and what?s worse?.LEGAL hunting, trapping and poisoning that caused their extirpation in the 1930?s from all but a handful of lone wolves hiding out in tiny pockets of wilderness in the lower 48 states. Until 1995, ecosystems slid off balance, valleys became heavily overgrazed beyond recognition, ungulate populations grew so rapidly that many died of starvation and coyotes and smaller predators overpopulated an increasingly shrinking wilderness, oftentimes winding up in backyards or city lots. Even entire stands of aspens in Yellowstone withered away from over grazing never to be seen again??.. However, in 1995 and 1996 66 wolves from Alberta and British Columbia began what would be the ultimate sacrifice for their species. The reintroduction of the grey wolf into the Northern Rocky Mountains. With helicopters, dart guns, leg hold traps, tranquilizers, and steel crates these wolves were brought down to create what would begin the recovered population of the grey wolf. Unfortunately, the lands that they used to roam had changed, and as equally unfortunate the mindsets and attitudes of humankind had not. Many people did welcome the wolves back with more than open arms, they let them into their hearts and souls, however, still many demanded their removal and at the very least a heavy-handed management of the wolves. As if the wolves had not paid enough of a price for existence, they were now inline for lives full of monitoring, ear tagging, collaring, more darting, more tranquilizers, destroyed pack connections, limited territories, invisible boundary lines, more steel crates, more leg hold traps and even continued legal killing of their kind. All of this in the name of MANAGEMENT of this endangered wild species. This management went hand in hand with an experimental/non-essential status that would take away many federal protections and make it much easier to control the wolves if and when they walked across the imaginary lines of the recovery zones. This classification also seriously endangered the already existing wolves that happened to be surviving in the wilds of the Northern Rockies when the 66 wolves were delivered. Reintroduced wolves discovered the existing wolves. It became next to impossible to distinguish between a naturally-occurring wolf and a reintroduced (or non-essential) wolf. Not to mention offspring of a pair of this sort. The US Fish and Wildlife Service responded to many hostile, viscous, unwarranted and simply uneducated comments regarding what they would do in certain situations where these reintroduced wolves would come in contact with ranches, livestock, farmers, domestic property and rural lifestyles. Their answer was MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL! If we can tell you where the wolves are and punish them when they do not behave to your liking, then will you be satisfied and allow the wolves to remain and therefore allow the reintroduction program to be considered a success. The majority of the concerns focused on the following situations:
I would like to bring some perspective to the depredation complaint and point out that the amount of domestic animals that wolves do happen to prey on is only a fraction of animals that are lost every year to countless other causes. Please bear with me while I fill you in on some overwhelming statistics. According to the Montana Department of Livestock, in January 2002 there were 2,450,000 cattle and 335,000 sheep in Montana alone. In comparison, there were 84 wolves in the Montana and only 563 wolves in all three recovery zones combined. That is a ratio of 29,166 cattle per every wolf and 3,988 sheep for every wolf in Montana. The USFWS reports that in the NW Montana recovery area from 1987 to 2000 there have been 63 sheep lost to wolves and 480,500 lost to other predators with an additional 1,487,000 lost to weather, disease, birthing difficulties, poison and theft. In Idaho, sheep and lambs lost to wolves are less than half of one percent of total losses. In 2001 11 cattle and 62 sheep were killed by wolves in the Central Idaho recovery area. In comparison, 2,600 cattle and 11,600 sheep were killed by other predators including 60% taken by coyotes and 9% by domestic dogs, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Additionally, 30,400 sheep were lost in 2000 in Idaho due to non-predator causes. According to USFWS, in the greater Yellowstone area, annual cattle losses number 8,340, however wolves COMBINED with other predators equal only 3% of those losses. Between 1995 and 2001 wolves in the Yellowstone area killed 41 cattle and 256 sheep and an average of 8,300 cattle and 13,300 sheep die every year of various unintentional causes. To sum things up, as reported by the USFWS 2001 Annual Wolf Report, in all three recovery areas, In 2001 there were 563 surviving wolves, 19 wolves killed due to control issues, 6,130,000 cattle surviving out of the 40 lost to wolves and 1,215,000 sheep surviving out of the 138 lost to wolves. So, there have indeed been losses caused by wolves. That is not, and has not ever been the argument. Wolves are predators, they kill to eat and they eat to survive. However minimal, there are depredations on livestock and domestic animals when natural prey base is unavailable or if hunting as a pack is not an option. In response to this, from 1987 to 2002 Defenders of Wildlife has shelled out $232,100 to 202 ranchers in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. But unfortunately, compensation is not the final answer in many cases. Finality only comes at the cost the loss of life of an endangered species. At the end of 2002, 39 wolves had been killed since reintroduction by lethal control actions. This includes all 10 Whitehawk pack members who resided in the Sawtooth National Recreation Area that is designated wilderness and is required to place wildlife and recreation needs over ranching and grazing needs. So far 2003 is proving just as deadly with 12 wolves being killed including the entire Halfway Pack near Avon, MT. It seems strange that the only ones who are complaining about the cost of the few depredations are the ranchers, who are receiving compensation and in addition 23,600 of them are able to rent PUBLIC federally owned forests, deserts and meadows from the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management for $1.43 per cow each month, that is barely one-tenth of the cost to rent private land for grazing. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, Public land ranchers WEST of the Mississippi River provide just 3% of America?s beef. The complaints simply do not add up to the hardships that they are claim to be suffering. Livestock and Wolves can co-exist but it takes a commitment to take additional responsibility for public and private land users. What can be done:
It is not effective to remove entire packs from good wolf habitat, there will simply be others that re-populate that area and the cycle will start all over again. For example, according to Dr. Ralph Maughan, Wolf Recovery Foundation, there have been 27 wolves killed (4 packs) in the same area of the Stanley Basin in Idaho over the last 3 years. Instead, livestock must be removed from these areas if it can?t be effectively separated from wolves and other wildlife. Not only do wolves receive unjust hatred when they do occasionally run into livestock, they also become public enemy #1 with hunters and outfitters when they take down natural prey. Not only must they share their native territories with RV?s and cars, hikers and skiers, hunters and ORV?s, they also have to share their prey. Wolves do not kill simply for the thrill of it, they kill because they need to eat and they need to feed their pack. It takes an immense amount of energy to take down an elk or even a deer, not to mention a moose. They continually put themselves at risk or injury or even death with each hunt and continually deplete their energy supplies without any sort of guarantee that there will be a meal at the end of this particular hunt. In a recent study in Yellowstone, wolves were only successful 20% of the time while hunting a herd of elk during the winter, and only 2-3% successful when chasing individual animals that are not in a herd. So, at the very best, only one in five hunts result in a meal for the wolves and their pack. There is no guarantee. Wolves are opportunistic feeders, therefore, they are resourceful in their hunting and feeding. They will feed on what they can find and what they can hunt, which 90% of the time, is elk. Wolves are an umbrella species contributing food to many other species that may be less able to take down large prey. Wolf kills provide food for bears, coyotes, cats, foxes, eagles, and ravens. Butterflies even receive nourishment from wolf scat. They are an integral part of the increasingly fragile food chain. Wolves seldom kill what they won?t or can?t consume. They will gorge for several hours, rest and then revisit the site to continue to feed on what is remaining. They will eat everything given the time and opportunity. The few occasions of documented surplus kills have occurred in and around elk feed lots where the instinct of a wolf tells them that there are far too many elk for this one area to support. Wolves feed and hunt according to availability of prey and terrain.
Hunting does not only interfere with the wolves? prey base, it also interrupts their lives in a fatal way. 9 wolves were illegally and deliberately hunted down and killed in 2001. Wolves, on the other hand do not hunt humans. Wolves are instinctively terrified of humans, and rightfully so. Wolves are by nature extremely skittish and will most likely turn and run from you the second they lay eyes on you. Wolves very rarely can become habituated towards people and our lifestyles that can mean an easy meal. Food conditioned wolves returning to the campsite, worksite or backyard for the same reward, are often revered as a nuisance and as preying on the very people that habituated it in the first place. According to the Humane Society of the United States, every year over 4 million people are bitten by dogs and a person dies every two weeks as the result of a dog attack. There has never been a documented case of a healthy wild wolf killing a human in North America. Humans do not represent prey for wolves, instead, we represent a threat and wolves instinctively do whatever it takes to protect themselves and their pack from danger. The rabid, man-eating canine that lingers outside your window at night waiting to suck the very breath out of your sleeping children or snatch you right off your front porch exists only in fairytales. As of the end of 2002, there are between 650 and 700 wolves in the three state recovery areas, with a combined total of 41 breeding pairs. A breeding pair consists of a male and female and at least 2 pups that have survived until December 31 of that year. Therefore, according to the "final rule" governing the reintroduction, the wolves are recovered, as far as numbers speak anyway. However, before the grey wolf can be delisted, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana must submit acceptable management plans to the USFWS clearly stating their intentions to ensure the future survival of this species at acceptable levels. For Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, these levels are 15 packs or breeding pairs?..the more wolves in the state, the more legal take will be allowed, in other words, wolf hunting is practically inevitable. In addition, state of Wyoming is supporting dual classification, which one would hope would mean at least one side would favor wolves. However, the trophy game animal status is up against the predator status, which would allow wolves to be killed anytime, anywhere and in any way. Within the 15 packs threshold promised in Wyoming, only 7 are required to survive outside of the wilderness areas of YNP and the Grand Tetons, If there are less than 7 packs outside of the wilderness areas, then you would have to obtain a license to shoot a wolf, if there are more than 7 packs, there is nothing stopping you. All three state plans are now complete and ready for submission to the USFWS. Once all three plans are accepted by the USFWS, delisting will begin and the endangered grey wolf will be at the mercy of the states. In addition the delisting plan would not only encompass Montana, Wyoming and Idaho, but would also include Oregon, Washington, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado (known as the Western DPS or distinct population segment), where wolves do not currently survive, and therefore are no were near recovered. The USFWS will closely monitor the numbers for the following five years however, when those years have come and gone, I wonder how long it will take to turn back time 70 years to a time when bounties were rewarded and wolves were hunted to near extinction all in the name of unfounded and unjustified fears. It has been said time and time again, what you don?t know you fear and what you fear you will eventually destroy. I just hope that canis lupis proves to be resilient, elusive, strong and intelligent enough to outwit this destruction. And I hope that mankind can be educated and realistic enough to accept the blessing of this majestic creature once again roaming their native wildlands. I remember, as if it was yesterday, the first time I heard the howl of a wolf?I said to myself, "this sound is one I will never, ever forget, it is so precious and important to me that my ears will take it in and store it away in my soul for me to recall whenever and whenever I need. This I take with me always. Renee Van Camp
|
|||
|
|||
"A
lot of animals have adapted to humans - like coyotes, who've expanded
their range. Wolves haven't budged an inch, and the price they pay is
their lives.
Wolves
normally prey on weak, sick and old animals. Hunters normally prey on
the largest, the healthiest and the most dangerous animals. Wolves actually
force elk and deer herds to become stronger and therefore larger with
their presence, oddly enough catering right into the hands of the trophy
hunters. However, the argument that wolves are depleting all of the large
prey animals continues to loom over the canis lupis. In fact, the seemingly
endless drought that is affecting much of our nation has had severe impacts
on elk, deer, moose, bison, and all wildlife?.including wolves. If there
is not enough moisture to nurture the grasses and shrubs that the ungulates
survive on, then they are simply going to run out of food and be faced
with starvation. This drought has been increasing year after year and
elk population numbers have reflected this. However, this decline in elk
numbers does not seem to be dipping into the tallies turned in by area
hunters. .According to Idaho Fish & Game, approximately 18,500 elk were
harvested by hunters in 2001. Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks reported 19,684
and Wyoming Game & Fish counted 22,772 elk taken by hunters throughout
2001. According to research conducted by Dr. Doug Smith in Yellowstone,
wolves eat and kill less in summer months, however in the winter when
prey is at its weakest and wolves are in their peak hunting season, and
with everything in the wolves? favor, each wolf would kills an average
of 1.8 elk every month. Therefore, with 563 wolves reported at the end
of 2001, they could have been responsible for only 12,000 elk in all three
states combined. Compare this to nearly 61,000 harvested by hunters each
year in the same area. The difference being that hunters do NOT count
on the elk for survival, however, the wolves do.