READ THIS BEFORE YOUR FIRST COMMENT TO THIS BLOG

If you have never commented before, read this first!

This blog is moderated. You can contact me at rmaughan2@cableone.net

Your first comments to this blog will go directly into moderation and must be approved by the webmaster.

Environmentalists, outfitters file suit to end grazing in Upper Missouri River Breaks

Western Watersheds new Montana office goes to work on another lawsuit-

Environmentalists, outfitters file suit to end grazing in Upper Missouri River Breaks. By Matthew Brown. Associated Press

Note that earlier they filed to put Yellowstone bison on the endangered species list. This lawsuit was assigned to Judge Molloy. The bison lawsuit went to another Montana federal judge.

Wild cards: What we’re really doing by reintroducing wolves

“But is it really ‘bringing back the wolf’ when the wolves wear radio collars and generate better genealogical records than most humans do, and when their whereabouts at any time can be ascertained with GIS coordinates?” . . . from “What we’re really doing by reintroducing wolves.” Writers on the Range. George Sibley.  Missoula Independent.

Sibley writes a clever article/essay regarding all the information that has been generated about wolves, even down to the individual  wolf, and whether such well observed wolves can be properly called “wild.”

I don’t know because “the wild” is a human mental construct of outdoor things unmodified by humans. If the radio collar is placed by Wildlife Services so the wolf can be easily located and killed (this accounts for the largest number of collars), I’d say “no. It isn’t wild.”  If it is a Yellowstone Park wolf where the collar only modifies the animal’s behavior slightly, then maybe “yes” or “it depends.”

Sibley also argues that while the polls in Washington State show a lot of generalized support for wolves, anti-wolf people show up and dominate the public meetings. Apparently this is not true, but some might believe is so based on a couple unrepresentative newspaper articles. Here is some email objecting and giving some facts.

Mr. Sibley is mistaken when he writes about the Washington hearings: “one frazzled wildlife official noted, ‘The 80 percent of the people in this state who are supposedly for the wolves coming back are not the ones coming to the meetings.” The people showing up are mostly the grandchildren of those who eradicated the wolf from the West 70 years ago.”

Yes, there have been meetings (Yakima, Colville and a few others) that were dominated by the ant-wolf crowd. But there was Spokane, Seattle, Mt. Vernon, Sequim, and Vancouver that had more wolf supporters (in the case of at least Seattle and Sequim, it was 97% pro-wolf, 3% anti-wolf) than anti-wolf people. All in all, I feel the hearings were balanced and that was the opinion I heard from Harriet Allen, who has been at every meeting, when she reported back to the Fish and Wildlife Commission.

David

David G. Graves
Northwest Field RepresentativeNational Parks Conservation Association
Protecting Our National Parks for Future Generations

- – - – - -

Salazar continues Gale Norton’s “no more Wilderness” policy

New York Times editorial complains-

No ‘No More Wilderness’. New York Times editorial

Speaking of Utah specifically. Despite a huge base of roadless country, Utah has made a small contribution to the National Wilderness Preservation System compared to other Western States, especially given the high percentage of state being U.S. public lands.  Utah could stand another roadless area inventory, coupled with Wilderness recommendations, but the state delegation has not supported any Wilderness bills for the state in Congress except for one recent unique designation of a Great Basin mountain range in order to block access to disliked proposed nuclear waste disposal facility on the Skull Valley Indian Reservation.

DeChristopher probably going to prison

Fake bidder for oil and gas leases to stop last Administration’s leasing near Utah national parks loses his bid to rest his trial on global warming-

It looks like Tim DeChristopher will pay heavily for his civil disobedience. Republican prosecutors were not amused, and the judge will not allow a defense based on necessity to protect the climate.

Here is an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune on the DeChristopher ruling: An evil day for justice. By Rebecca Hall

Learning from first Montana wolf hunt

The Missoulian reflects on the first wolf hunt in Montana. It is now over-

Learning from first wolf hunt. Mssoulian editorial.  Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2009 2:00 am

The Missoulian finds lessons to be learned by Montana FWP such as “wolves that are causing no problems with people – such as those in national parks and wilderness areas – should be largely left alone”

Yellowstone wolves barely outside the park in the Wilderness area to the north were very vulnerable.

Before the hunts I posted a list of questions both Idaho and Montana needed to ask, gather data to answer, and act on. It would be terrible if most of these questions go unanswered. After all, finding out what would really happen was supposed to be one of the justifications for the hunts. Here is that list again.

Wolf hunt information and effects that needs to be collected. I hope folks will link to this, modify as they see fit, add to it, ask their Fish and Game folks, spread it around.

Wyoming Game and Fish establishes a season on antler gathering

Season established to reduce disturbance of ungulates on their winter range-

Antlers and some horns (such as bighorn) are very valuable. There a quite a few “horn hunters” — people who gather them after they have fallen. As a result, there is competition and an incentive to get into the wintering grounds early, often when the animals are still wintering. So the Commission has a season. The horn hunters must wait until April 1 in areas west of the Continental Divide in Wyoming.

State sets limits on hunting antlers. By Cory Hatch, Jackson Hole Daily.

Grizzlies On the Move, Back to the Wide-Open Prairie

As many as 70 to 80 grizzlies may inhabit the high plains east of the Rocky Mountain Front-

There is more about grizzlies moving east of the Rocky Mountains in Montana, out on the high plains. The article below appeared in New West.

Grizzlies On the Move, Back to the Wide-Open Prairie. By Jason D.B. Kauffman

On the Rocky Mountain Front, Montana. Copyright Ralph Maughan

Hoskins: Illegal plan just makes Turner richer

Robert Hoskins’ op-ed on FWP giving the quarantined bison to Ted Turner-

Op-ed in the Casper Star Tribune. Illegal plan just makes Turner richer. By Robert Hoskins

Work progresses on wildlife overpass near Elko, Nevada

Stimulus funds being used to solve high vehicle/ungulate collision area on US 93, north of Wells-

Story on wildlife overpass. Las Vegas Sun

Wolf pack of at least ten in Oregon’s Imnaha River drainage

Here is some really good news to offset that about Idaho Fish and Game Commission-

The alpha female is former Idaho wolf B300F. I predicted earlier that the Imnaha River was a natural migration corridor for Idaho wolves into Oregon.

- – - – - – - – - -
News Release

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Contact: Michelle Dennehy (503) 947-6022; Fax: (503) 947-6009
Internet: www.dfw.state.or.us

Nov. 19, 2009

Video shows 10 wolves in the Imnaha pack

A video taken by ODFW on Nov. 12, 2009 in the Imnaha Wildlife Management Unit (east of Joseph, Ore. in Wallowa County) shows at least 10 wolves make up a pack that ODFW has been monitoring since June 2008. The video was taken from an adjacent ridge across a canyon and shows a mixture of gray and black individual wolves moving upslope.

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/news/video_gallery/imnaha_wolf_pack.asp

Also found here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/IEODFW

“ODFW has been regularly monitoring this pack but until this video was taken, we only had evidence of a minimum of three adults and three pups making up the pack, says Russ Morgan, ODFW wolf coordinator. “Pups can be difficult to distinguish at this distance, but it appears there may be as many as six pups in the video.