Hunt quota likely 220 wolves this fall . . . Montana FWP Commission

Montana’s second hunt to be much larger than the 2009 hunt-

Montana’s wildlife commissioners have tentatively approved a wolf hunt this fall of 220 wolves, compared to their 2009 hunt of 79. There was no hunt in 210. At the end of 2010, the official wolf population estimate for Montana was 566 wolves.  This quota, if filled, is predicted to drop the state’s wolf population by 25% at the end of 2011, although there are competing computer models.

Idaho has an estimated 705 wolves, well down from its peak in 2009. Idaho’s Fish and Game Commission is expected to approve a big hunt quota, although their quota in 2009 was not reached.

Montana FWP tentatively approves 220-wolf quota for fall hunt. By Matt Volz. AP

Montana proposes 220-wolf hunting quota for 2011 season

If filled, the quota will result in estimated 25% reduction in state wolf population-

Montana’s wolf hunt is expected to be easier on the state’s wolf population than Idaho’s. With the congressional delisting of the wolf in the Northern Rockies, Montana and Idaho can pretty do what they want in terms of wolf quotas.

State wildlife officials propose 220-wolf quota for 2011 season. By Eve Byron Helena Independent Record.

Also, Obama administration takes wolves off endangered species list. AP.  They are also delisting the Great Lakes population, which is certainly ready. Unfortunately, all three states: Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan have fallen to tea party governors. Michigan’s seems as bad as Wisconsin’s notorious Scott Walker.

Budget bill pending before Congress would remove wolves from endangered list

Well, they’ve done it. They’ve reached an agreement to keep language in the upcoming budget bill which would delist wolves everywhere in the Northern Rockies except Wyoming. (Added to clarify what has happened)

While this process doesn’t immediately delist wolves, it cannot be challenged. It is unclear exactly what the language says but presumably wolves in the Northern Rockies will be delisted in all but Wyoming as previous wording has indicated. Previous language mandates the US Fish and Wildlife Service to republish the rule which delisted wolves in 2009. It does not preclude a petition to relist wolves if their populations become endangered again. The delisting rule still holds the states of Idaho and Montana to their management plans but it seems that, with the most recent “wolf disaster declaration” that they don’t intend to allow more than 100 wolves to persist in the state.

Also, the recent settlement agreement, as some have previously indicated, will likely provide political cover to the USFWS to accept Wyoming’s management plan with little or no changes. It seems that wolves are facing dark days ahead.

Here is the previous language, “SEC. 1709. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this division, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule published on April 2, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 15123 et seq.) without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule. Such re-issuance (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review.

Budget bill pending before Congress would remove wolves from endangered list.
Matthew Brown – Associated Press

To clarify, the language has not been passed yet.  It was not included in the short term budget agreement which funds the government for the next several days but, rather, will be included in the long term budget bill which is being written and will be posted for review for three days as House rules require.

US Fish and Wildlife is accepting comments on Montana’s wolf reduction proposal in the Bitterroot Mountains

Blaming wolves for poor elk management?

Graph of information presented in Montana's Bitterroot 10(j) proposal. (Click for Larger View)

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has issued an Environmental Assessment for Montana Fish Wildlife and Park’s wolf reduction proposal for the Bitterroot hunting district HD250 just southeast of Hamilton, Montana.  In the proposal to kill all but 12 wolves in the district, they claim that wolves are responsible for declines that they have seen in the district and that they are causing “unacceptable impacts” elk population there such that they can no longer meet the objectives they have set there.

While the elk population has declined it should be noted that there was a sharp increase in harvest of all classes of elk in the area after wolves were documented even though as one of the peer reviewers says “[t]here is strong evidence that female harvests need to be reduced when wolves are present (for example, see Nilsen et al. 2005, Journal of Applied Ecology)”. The elk count objectives for the area were also drastically increased to levels far above what the area had previously supported and harvest levels remained high as well.

There is also very little information about the population of bears and mountain lions which also take elk.  Bears, in particular, take very young elk and can have a very large impact on elk populations.

Whether or not killing large numbers of wolves and other predators is effective in increasing elk populations is still debatable but it seems apparent to me that the FWP is blaming wolves for their poor management of elk and that their objectives were based on more wishful thinking rather than what was actually possible.

Here are the Criteria for Proposing Wolf Control Measures under the 2008 NRM Gray Wolf ESA Section 10(j) Rule

1. The basis of ungulate population or herd management objectives
2. What data indicate that the ungulate herd is below management objectives
3. What data indicate that wolves are a major cause of the unacceptable impact to the ungulate population
4. Why wolf removal is a warranted solution to help restore the ungulate herd to management objectives
5. The level and duration of wolf removal being proposed
6. How ungulate population response to wolf removal will be measured and control actions adjusted for effectiveness
7. Demonstration that attempts were and are being made to address other identified major causes of ungulate herd or population declines or of State or Tribal government commitment to implement possible remedies or conservation measures in addition to wolf removal

Earthjustice’s lawyers chastise Schweitzer for comments on wolf management

Earthjustice’s lawyers chastise Schweitzer for comments on wolf management.
By ROB CHANEY of the Missoulian

Montana Governor changes direction on wolves

May be violating federal law

Today Governor Brian Schweitzer has sent a letter to the Department of Interior stating that Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks will no longer prosecute killing of wolves by landowners defending livestock in northwest Montana, they will kill entire packs upon any livestock depredation, and they will kill entire packs of wolves in the Bitterroot to protect elk herds.

This would appear to violate federal law.

The letter is here and copied below :

Denny Rehberg introduces wolf legislation.

Denny Rehberg (R-MT) has introduced the first wolf bill of the new congress into the House of Representatives which would hand over management authority of wolves to the states of Montana and Idaho.

Here is the bill

Update 1/27/11: Apparently there are two bills.  The second one would remove all protections from wolves nationwide.

Here is the other bill

FWP warns MSU over scientist’s wolf study

Come to the same conclusions as we do with the data, or else says Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks!

Despite what FWP says, this is a flat out attempt to suppress the scientific method.

FWP warns MSU over scientist’s wolf study. By Gail Schontzler. Bozeman Chronicle Staff Writer

It is good to see MSU stand up to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks in this matter. In the growing climate of fear and intimidation of science in the United States, you can bet the Montana state legislature will get involved in this.

Dr. Creel’s research conclusions have, in fact, not been as positive for the wolf as wolf conservationists had hoped.  Nevertheless, the state’s anti-wolf wildlife politicians are not happy.

Montana elk hunters around Yellowstone Park have a generally successful season

Madison Valley most successful.  Number of deer killed down slightly-

Elk hunters successful in 2010. Bozeman Chronicle. By Daniel Person.

In addition hunting was good in Northwestern Montana. Here’s the story. Ideal conditions close hunt season. By JIM MAN. The Daily Inter Lake Daily.

Weather helps western Montana hunters close out big game season. Missoulian.

All the articles say it was the great weather for bringing the elk down where they could be more easily found.  However, I thought wolves had nearly destroyed the elk herds.  I guess good weather can actually perform a resurrection (or show what bullshit the wolves-have-killed-everything is).

Tester To Chair Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus

Western Democrats want to gut the Endangered Species Act

Jon Tester, the Democratic Senator for Montana, is facing a tough re-election battle in 2012 which may hinge on the wolf issue. He is desperate to find a solution which allows the State of Montana to manage wolves and wants to get something passed in the Senate during the lame duck session before the next congress is sworn in.

His proposal, also supported by Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus who sold out on the health care bill, is to change the Endangered Species Act to allow distinct population segments (DPS) to be split along state lines to allow wolves to be delisted in Idaho and Montana and not Wyoming. While this may sound like an innocuous change to the ESA it could have devastating effects on the integrity of the ESA for other species. To use political boundaries rather than biological boundaries based on defensible science would allow the Interior Department to incrementally list or delist species based on politics rather than science, a goal of ESA opponents for many years. Essentially it would gut the Act and make it even an weaker tool for protecting endangered species.

But Tester said he thinks there is still a chance that the wolf issue could be dealt with this year. He favors some plan that puts management of the wolf back into state management in Montana and Idaho.

“That is one I would like to get done this lame duck session,” Tester said. “I think the state of Montana had a pretty good plan.”

Tester To Chair Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus – cbs4denver.com.

Otter meeting with Interior secretary, other governors on wolves

Salazar can’t just change the rules without an open, public process under NEPA.

The governors of Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana are meeting with Ken Salazar in Denver on Monday to talk about wolves. It will be interesting to see what comes of this. Really, there are very few options for the Department of Interior short of trying again but until Wyoming’s plan is accepted it is unlikely they would be successful. There may still be efforts to get a legislative change to the Endangered Species Act during the lame duck session but for some reason I find them unlikely to move forward.

Otter meeting with Interior secretary, other governors on wolves.
Idaho Reporter

Leader of Mexican wolf recovery steps down

Family concerns!

We always know that sounds suspicious. Nevertheless, if he does have an sick relative, I wish them the best recovering.

Bud Fazio to move to Albuquerque to work on fish. AP

– – – – –

I will go out on a limb and say this was not voluntary!

Proposed bill would strip feds of wolf authority within Montana

Another temper tantrum from the reactionaries in Montana.

State Sen. Joe Balyeat, R-Bozeman is planning on reintroducing a bill which claims that the Federal government has no right to manage wolves in Montana. This contradicts numerous court rulings and would most certainly cause the state its present ability to manage wolves and further put any delisting effort out of reach for the region.

Of course it puts in place a few ridiculous sanctions against wolf supporters who may be “party to a lawsuit with the purpose of preventing or delaying the implementation of state management of wolves.”

Another overreach by the reactionary right who want to distract people away from the issues that their ideology fails to solve. This won’t solve joblessness or any of the other problems faced by many in this poor economic climate. It might make a few people happy but the only thing that is really clear is that more jumping up and down and screaming about how unfair things are doesn’t solve the problem that they have identified.

Go ahead Joe. The wolves will thank you.

Proposed bill would strip feds of wolf authority within Montana.
Rob Chaney Missoulian

FWP eliminates wolf coordinator post

Will Montana drop wolf management entirely?

Carolyn Sime has been moved from her post as wolf coordinator to work on other issues but it appears that may not be the only change. It appears that Montana may be considering following Idaho’s lead and drop wolf management entirely. At least it is not “off the table”.

FWP eliminates wolf coordinator post.
By EVE BYRON Independent Record

Bitterroot: Where have all the elk gone?

Elk pop. of West Fork of Bitterroot has dropped 21 % in four years. Wolves live there too. Therefore wolves must be responsible?

This seems to be the current argument of Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. They used to have other explanations.  More properly this new logic would be one hypothesis (one of a number of possible explanations*). They want the federal government to give authority to kill 12 wolves. If granted, would this be a good test of the hypothesis?

Story on the issue: Bitterroot: Where have all the elk gone? by Alex Sakariassen. Missoula Independent

– – – – – –

*Of course, there are the ideologically driven. They don’t need a test. Wolves did it. They always do.

Montana wolf weekly Oct. 16-22, 2010

Latest official state news on Montana wolf management-

MT wolf weekly news Oct. 16-22, 2010.

Reminder: Re-Wilding Montana is TONIGHT

An Event in Missoula, Montana on October 25, 2010

It never fails. Every time I find myself driving across the immense open space and undulating landscape of the front range in Montana, I puzzle myself over the absence of bison. And each time I hear about the threat posed to livestock by wolves, I wonder how different it would be if bison were out there. Just today, I was speaking to Chief Jimmy St. Goddard of the Blackfeet Nation about restoring balance to nature (versus plopping species down onto landscapes), and he stated “wolves will go where the bison are.” Humans, being lazy by nature, tend to think that given the choice between cows and bison, wolves would favor the slow, dumb ones. But we’ve never given them that choice. Since wolves co-evolved with bison, I tend to think Chief Jimmy knows what he is talking about.

Last year, WWP’s Montana office premiered “Lords of Nature” in Montana, a film documenting the importance of top predators like wolves to healthy ecosystems. Scientists were surprised to learn after reintroducing wolves into Yellowstone that there was a dramatic improvement in riparian ecosystems, benefitting fish and birds and creating a cascading beneficial effect on the food chain. Then we had a lively panel discussion that included Montana Wolf Coordinator Carolyn Syme. In arguing for management authority in federal court, Montana emphasized how “all species fit together”, with the wolf being an “integral part” of the ecosystem. But when asked why bison should not then be welcomed back to Montana, Syme refused to answer, pretending the question was a matter of opinion, not science.

Latest Montana official wolf news. Oct 7-15, 2010

We haven’t been posting these are frequently as we could. Here is the latest. It has quite a bit of news. We have not seen an Idaho wolf news report since June.

Idaho officials deny Rehberg claim state will ignore wolf protections

He can always hope

It seems that some of the most vocal wolf opponents just keep digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole. At a recent event Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg claimed that Idaho officials were not going to uphold protections for wolves. Presumably he came to this conclusion based on public statements by IDFG commissioners who questioned whether they should enforce those protections without federal funds to do so. Or, he heard the claim that an IDFG conservation officer told a camp of hunters that the rules wouldn’t be enforced.

Even if the claims aren’t true, Rehberg sounds like he supports such a policy for Montana.

That kind of attitude isn’t going to help secure management authority over wolves to the states. It seems that I’m not the only one who thinks this either.

Ben Lamb of the Montana Wildlife Federation:

“It kind of makes us look like mouth-breathing rednecks here,” Lamb said. “And it gives credence to everything the NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) and Defenders of Wildlife say about the hunting community. It really polarizes the issue.”

Idaho officials deny Rehberg claim state will ignore wolf protections.
Missoulian

Re-Wilding Montana

An Event in Missoula, Montana on October 25, 2010

It never fails. Every time I find myself driving across the immense open space and undulating landscape of the front range in Montana, I puzzle myself over the absence of bison. And each time I hear about the threat posed to livestock by wolves, I wonder how different it would be if bison were out there. Just today, I was speaking to Chief Jimmy St. Goddard of the Blackfeet Nation about restoring balance to nature (versus plopping species down onto landscapes), and he stated “wolves will go where the bison are.” Humans, being lazy by nature, tend to think that given the choice between cows and bison, wolves would favor the slow, dumb ones. But we’ve never given them that choice. Since wolves co-evolved with bison, I tend to think Chief Jimmy knows what he is talking about.

Last year, WWP’s Montana office premiered “Lords of Nature” in Montana, a film documenting the importance of top predators like wolves to healthy ecosystems. Scientists were surprised to learn after reintroducing wolves into Yellowstone that there was a dramatic improvement in riparian ecosystems, benefitting fish and birds and creating a cascading beneficial effect on the food chain. Then we had a lively panel discussion that included Montana Wolf Coordinator Carolyn Syme. In arguing for management authority in federal court, Montana emphasized how “all species fit together”, with the wolf being an “integral part” of the ecosystem. But when asked why bison should not then be welcomed back to Montana, Syme refused to answer, pretending the question was a matter of opinion, not science.

This year, we are presenting two films with a panel discussion. We’re excited to show the new High Plains Films documentary on bison, “Facing the Storm.” According to the filmmakers, the film shows that “the American bison is not just an icon of a lost world, but may very well show us the path to the future.” In a second theatre, we will be showing a film that premiered at the Wildlife Film Festival last year, “The Wolf that Changed America.” It’s a remarkable story about a wolf bounty hunter named Ernest Seton who was hired in 1893 to kill America’s last wolf, a notoriously crafty and elusive wolf named Lobo, and was so changed by the ordeal that he became a global advocate for wolves and helped spearhead America’s wilderness movement. Afterward, there will be a panel discussion with George Wuerthner, author of “Welfare Ranching”, Richard Manning, author of “Rewilding the West”, FWP Commissioner Ron Moody, and Chief Jimmy. Buffalo Field Campaign Spokesperson Stephany Seay will moderate the discussion.

According to recent scientific studies by independent experts, wild bison present almost no risk whatsoever of transmitting brucellosis to livestock. So the kind of balanced wildlife management approach we intend to discuss in this public forum is socially feasible, scientifically justified, morally compelling, and economically smart. Please join the dialogue.

Tom Woodbury, Montana Director, Western Watersheds Project.

Feds, States and others file appeal on wolf ruling

Federal Government appeals the wolf ruling-

I missed this one but it is important. Everyone knew that the states and many other groups would appeal Judge Molloy’s ruling on wolves but no one was sure whether the Federal Government would appeal the ruling too. Now that question has been answered.

State and others file appeal on wolf ruling.
By Eve Byron – Helena Independent Record

Montana Denied Permission to Hunt Gray Wolves

No Montana “conservation hunt” on wolves-

It looks like the USFWS saw through Montana’s notion of having a sport hunt on wolves under the guise of a “conservation hunt”. They said no.

Montana – Permission Denied to Hunt Gray Wolves. Associated Press in the New York Times

Longer version:

Federal officials deny Montana request to hold a ‘conservation hunt’ for endangered wolves.
Canadian Business Online

Even longer version:

Federal officials deny Montana wolf hunt request.
BusinessWeek

Congressman Denny Rehberg holding “Wolf Impact Hearings” in Montana

Don’t expect facts, just politics and ranting.

Do you want to speak your mind and tell Denny Rehberg what you think about wolves? Here’s your chance. Of course these “hearings” are just grandstanding and are being held only in areas where anti-wolf sentiment is strong but you can attend and let your voice be heard.

Issues like this are just a distraction from other real problems in Montana. Jobs, education, and other concerns are subservient to those of ranchers and the noble landed elite.

Don’t expect much factual information at these hearings. Oh, and while you are there you can meet Toby Bridger…. or is that Toby Bridges of LoboWatch fame.

Congressman Denny Rehberg : YOU`RE INVITED: Wolf Impact Hearings in Dillon, Hamilton, Kalispell.

Montana FWP and Idaho Fish and Game submit wolf reduction proposals

Idaho and Montana have submitted proposals to the US Fish and Wildlife Service for approval to kill up to 186 wolves in Montana and up to 80% of the estimated 76 wolves in Idaho’s Lolo hunting zones.

Here is the IDFG proposal:

IDFG proposes an adaptive strategy to reduce the wolf population in the Lolo Zone. Wolves will be removed to manage for a minimum of 20 to 30 wolves in 3 to 5 packs. The level of removal will be dependent on pre-treatment wolf abundance. Using the minimum estimated number of 76 wolves in the Lolo Zone at the end of 2009 (Mack et al. 2010), a minimum of 40 to 50 wolves would be lethally removed during the first year. Removal during subsequent years would be lower, but variable, depending on wolf abundance. However, IDFG will maintain a minimum of 20 to 30 wolves annually in the Lolo Zone for a period of 5 years.

We’ve covered the Lolo wolf issue in detail over the last several years.

Scientists: Wolf Hunts More Deadly Than Previously Thought

Proposed Montana wolf hunt, now on hold, would have significantly reduced state’s wolf population-

Scientists: Wolf Hunts More Deadly Than Previously Thought. By Virginia Morell. Science Insider. Link is now fixed!

Here is the actual scientific paper. Meta-Analysis of Relationships between Human Offtake, Total Mortality and Population Dynamics of Gray Wolves (Canis lupus). By Scott Creel*, Jay J. Rotella
Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana.

We have been discussing this all day under another thread, but it is important to post this story.

– – – – – – – – –
It’s unreasonable to except that there won’t be future wolf hunts in the Northern Rockies, despite the current count imposed relisting of the gray wolf.  However, this article demonstrates that Montana and Idaho’s wolf hunting plants for 2010 (which would have already been underway) would have significantly reduced the wolf population. Idaho was honest about their intention to reduce the population. Montana argued that a hunt of that size was needed merely to keep the current population from growing, and that was about all it would really do.

There were wolves in Montana before the reintroduction

Latest “shocker” from anti-wolf is no shock at all-

The anti-wolf folks are always coming up with new charges, which generally just show they haven’t been paying attention.

The latest is that there were wolves in Montana prior to the reintroduction in Idaho and Yellowstone!!!!

This is true, but it is not some hidden conspiracy. The fact has been discussed in numerous books and articles, and USFWS duly reported the number of Montana wolves and location of these wolves each year in its annual reports.

Here are the figures taken from their annual reports:

1979 = 2 wolves; 1980 = 1; 1981 = 2; 1982 = 8; 1983 = 6 1984 = 6; 1985 = 13; 1986 =15; 1987 = 10; 1988 = 14; 1989 = 12; 1990 = 33; 1991 = 29 1992= 41; 1993 = 55; 1994 = 48;   reintroduction 1995 = 66

Oddly enough after reintroduction, the numbers stagnated for quite a while. For example, there were only 64 wolves in 2000.

It’s reasonable to assume that without reintroduction, wolves would have naturally reestablished themselves in most of Montana, but migration would have been slow with a lot of wolves up north before they made it to Yellowstone and Wyoming. Because these wolves were fully “endangered,” rules governing them would have been a lot more strict than with those that were finally reintroduced in 1995.

Man threatens to sue FWP over wolf-ruling coalition

Tired of one-sided wolf management

Jerry Black, a frequent commentator on this site, is challenging Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks for its attempt at building a coalition with hunters, outfitters, and livestock interests for the purposes of overturning Malloy’s wolf decision.

He’s tired of the one-sided state management which benefits only those special interests who want wolf management to have a heavy handed approach. It also looks like the FWP’s meeting violated state’s open meeting laws because it did not invite everyone in a timely manner.

Man threatens to sue FWP over wolf-ruling coalition.
Great Falls Tribune

State wildlife officials had no idea what a hunt would mean for then delisted wolves

A couple of years ago, Steve Nadeau answered a question I had about the impact that a public hunt would have to wolf populations.  At that time, as the state was posturing for “competent manager” status, Nadeau spent much effort trying to reassure advocates that state managers had a good idea what effect a hunt would have:

Now, state managers are asking us to believe they need to learn more – apparently, the absence of knowledge is such that in response to the legal spanking state wildlife managers took last week on the wolf issue, state managers are looking to “research” what effect killing wolves will have to wolves.

Wildlife officials mull ‘research hunts’ for wolves – AP

Which is it ?

Did state managers know enough about the impact a hunt would have to remove federal protections via “delisting” ? … or do we now know so little that we need to remove  federal protections for “research” ?

Victory ! Wolves Relisted in the Northern Rockies !

Victory !  Wolves Relisted in the Northern Rockies !

Judge Molloy rules in wolf advocates’ favor !

Federal judge puts gray wolves back on endangered species list – AP

Read the Order

– – – – – –
Update:  Here is  the story in the Washington Post.
This story is pretty matter of fact {well facts on the wolf issue are good 😉 } What is interesting, however, is at the very end — the federal lawsuit by Wyoming to require the USFWS to accept their “flawed” wolf plan. There is speculation that Molloy’s vacation of the rule might make this suit (the one before federal judge Johnson) moot — might. Ralph Maughan

– – – – – –

Montana FWP more than doubles wolf hunt quota for 2010

186 allowed to be taken in an attempt to reduce MT wolf population to between 411 and 488.

This has been in the news for a while but we didn’t report it here because we all have been traveling.

Montana wants to reduce the population of wolves to between 411 and 488. They have decided to allow hunters to kill up to 186 wolves of which 111 could be taken from northwest Montana, 34 in western Montana, and 34 in southwest Montana.

It’s still a very hot debate as was pointed out by the commissioners:

Commissioner Ron Moody of Lewistown described many of the comments as expressing a “narrow, culturally bigoted point of view which expresses an inflexible ideological” contempt for people with other viewpoints.

Montana FWP more than doubles wolf hunt quota for 2010.
By JENNIFER McKEE Missoulian State Bureau

Norm Bishop’s comments at Montana wolf meeting

There will be media stories, good comments, and ignorant angry comments, but here’s one from a person who knows-

Without commenting specifically on numbers or distribution of hunting quotas, I offer just these notes for your consideration.

Aldo Leopold; forester, wildlife ecologist, conservationist, father of game management in America, lived from 1887 to 1948.  In 1944, he reviewed Young and Goldman’s Wolves of North America, which chronicled the extirpation of wolves.  In his review, Leopold  asked, “Are we really better off without wolves in the wilder parts of our forests and ranges?”  He also asked, “Why, in the necessary process of extirpating wolves from the livestock ranges of Wyoming and Montana, were not some of the uninjured animals used to restock the Yellowstone?”  Thirty years later, in 1974, the planning began, and in 1995, twenty years later, wolves were restored to Yellowstone.

Leopold’s thinking about deer, wolves, and forests is epitomized by his essay, “Thinking Like a Mountain.”  In brief, he shot a wolf.  In later years he came to “suspect that just as a deer herd lives in mortal fear of its wolves, so does a mountain (and its plants) live in mortal fear of its deer.”  To deer, we could add elk.  In Yellowstone, the lack of wolves led to woody species like willow and aspen being suppressed by elk browsing.  With the return of wolves, willows are growing, once-rare birds are nesting in them, beavers are building dams from the willows, and the wolves are feeding a couple of dozen species of scavengers, including eagles and grizzly bears.

I’m far more concerned about disease than about predators on our large game.

Chronic wasting disease could wipe out our elk and deer.  Wolves test elk and deer, looking for vulnerable animals all day, 365 days a year.  You and I can’t do that.   N. Thompson Hobbs (2006) evaluated the potential for selective predation by wolves to reduce or eradicate chronic wasting disease (CWD) in populations of elk in Rocky Mountain National Park.  If it works, can we afford to throw away our only means of controlling CWD?

June 2. Wolf hearings in Montana.

Montana could double or triple wolf quota. Please attend-

Montana, Fish, Wildlife and Parks will be holding them.  The meetings will be held at the following locations on June 2 from 7-9 p.m.:

* Billings—FWP Headquarters; 2300 Lake Elmo Dr.
* Bozeman—Holiday Inn; 5 E. Baxter Lane
* Glasgow—Valley County Court House; 501 Court Square
* Great Falls—FWP Headquarters; 4600 Giant Springs Rd.
* Kalispell—FWP Headquarters; 490 N. Meridian Rd.
* Miles City—FWP Headquarters; 352 I-94 Business Loop
* Missoula—Double Tree Hotel Missoula Edgewater; 100 Madison

Proposed Wolf Hunting Season for 2010—major changes from last year:

• This year FWP is proposing to at least double or triple the number of wolves that can be shot by hunters. There are 3 “quota” options for public comment and consideration: 153, 186, or 216 wolves. (Last year’s hunting quota was 75 wolves.)
• The proposal Wolf Hunting Units—14 smaller units proposed with several sub-units (last year’s structure was comprised of 3 large units statewide).
• Extended season length—the season will run until December 31, 2010 unless the quota is met sooner. A new archery-only season beginning Sept. 4. A new backcountry rifle season beginning Sept. 15.
• Only one wolf license per hunter.

There are 3 proposed rules that tighten hunting regulations that may help reduce illegal wolf killing, and which can be supported:

• Any illegal take (poaching) will be subtracted from the hunting quota.
• Any “over-run” of the quota in an individual sub-unit will be subtracted from the quota in the larger area.
• A new 5-day waiting period—wolf hunting licenses will not be valid until 5 days from the date of purchase.

You may comment on any of the proposed regulations above, as well as the quota numbers.

You could also ask FWP Commissioners to ban hunting within 10 miles of Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks to protect core populations.

FWP Commissioners will read public comment until June 14, and then vote to select one of the three quotas, and vote to approve or disapprove individual regulations at their July 8 meeting.

For more details on the proposed wolf hunting regulations, see: http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/default.html

Montana wolf weekly, May 15-21

Here is the latest official news on wolves from the State of Montana-

There is quite a bit of news on their next hunting season, and I think it is still open for comment.

Montana Wolf Weekly-2010-05-21

Montana Legislature Environmental Quality Council holds hearing on the tapeworm and more

Dr. Norman Bishop reports on the testimony-

I think the recent controversy over one kind of tapeworm that infests wolves and other canids and which can cause a secondary infection in other animals, including people, is mostly hot air meant to scare. However, in response to the controversy the Montana Environmental Quality Council held a hearing a few days ago. Dr. Norman Bishop of Bozeman, a naturalist with long experience with wolves and other wild animals testfied.

I also asked him to write up an account of the testimony given by the other participants in the hearing. I’m glad he took the time to do it rather than simply rely on media reports. Here is his report. I want to thank him for his testimony and time-consuming note-taking and write-up.

– – – – – – –

Notes by Dr. Norman Bishop

I attended the Montana Legislature Environmental Quality Council’s session at the Capitol in Helena Friday May 7, 2010. Their agenda was Agency Oversight: FWP – Wolf Management.

On the topic of Echinococcus granulosis, (E.g.), Dr. Valerius Geist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, University of Calgary, gave a ten-minute talk via conference phone to the Council. He had emailed a 4-page statement to them. He said there was a chance of transmission of E.g. from deer and elk wintering where family dogs may be. He proposed a number of draconian preventive measures against E.g. spreading into family dogs: promote deworming, reduce straying and scavenging by dogs, medicate dogs after hunting. He would reduce wolves and coyotes; wolves, to prevent infections of humans when fearful elk seek refuge near buildings. He recommended hunting big game on their summer ranges, and targeting wolves there as well. He would reduce hydatid disease in wolves by using airborne baits with worming agents. He said to trap coyotes, and to burn grasslands to eliminate E.g. eggs. He warned against touching freshly skinned canids, cleaning the skins, and soaking them in helminthic. He said not to poke around scats, don’t pick berries or mushrooms, and eat with clean hands; cook liver and lungs of game over a campfire to kill cysts.

3 wolf packs in SW Montana to be eliminated

Big Hole Valley will be empty of wolves after control actions finish.

The rancher who closed his land to public hunting will get his way once all of the wolves in the Big hole Valley are killed.

3 wolf packs in SW Montana to be eliminated.
By Nick Gevock, Montana Standard

As feared, the Montana wolf damage mitigation board is just a rancher slush fund

Defenders’ handover to Montana fails to initiate a single proactive project in its first year-

When the wolf was delisted, Defenders of  Wildlife stopped paying compensation for the loss of livestock to wolves in Montana. However, Defenders gave the state $100,000 to get the “Montana Livestock Loss Reduction and Mitigation Board” started. It was to not just pay for losses, but fund preventative measures too. The Fund also received additional private contributions, mostly from conservation groups.

In the first year, the Board simply handed out money to those who lost livestock, and apparently required nothing in return. Now the Fund is a bit short of cash. Can we feel bad about that? Yes, and maybe they got their training from those who insured junk mortgages.

Montana media are running stories with headlines such as this: “Montana livestock board pays for 369 wolf kills in 2009.”  That is not the real story, however. The story is the waste of the money in the fund.

The story above says, “some question whether it is doing enough funding preventative measures.”  It turns out the “some” who question are those who gave the money for the Fund — just a small detail!

The story also fails to say that most of the losses came in a few big sheep killing incidents.

Here is what Montana wrote about the financial status of the fund in the 2009 wolf report:

2009 Northern Rockies wolf report is out today

Long awaited official USFWS report on wolves is released-

Here is a brief AP story on some of the report’s conclusions. Folks should note that with the larger wolf population figures of recent years and the effects of the hunting seasons, the population estimate, and the especially estimate of the number of breeding pairs of wolves, undoubtedly are known with less precision than in the past.

Here is the link to the actual report, or more accurately, reports. http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/annualrpt09/index.html

Montana Allows Unfettered Killing of Wolves by Wildlife Services

“Wildlife Services agents no longer need FWP authorization to kill wolves at or near confirmed livestock depredation sites.”

Wolf © Ken Cole

This is about the worst scenario for wolves of Montana that could be concocted by the state, especially while the decision to delist them is being considered in the courts. This nudges wolves even closer to a condition where the killing by a Federal agency becomes entirely unregulated. These conditions resemble those in place when wolves were eradicated in the first place. For those who think that Montana has a better management plan than the other states, think again.

This sets up a situation whereby Wildlife Services may kill an entire pack of wolves for killing a single sick cow or sheep left out on the landscape, a circumstance often documented by those who are watching. This does, however, put a greater responsibility on the agency that has actually made the call on how these situations are handled. Wildlife Services can no longer claim that FWP made the call on how the situation was handled when things go awry.

At the same time, livestock producers who use public lands have no requirements to do anything to avoid such circumstances.  The removal of livestock carcasses that have died natural deaths, or the removal of sick animals, is not required as part of the authorization to graze on public lands.  Non-lethal methods which have been demonstrated to be effective deterrents against livestock depredations are not required.  These poor livestock husbandry practices will continue and be rewarded by livestock compensation programs in place and being proposed by the government.

Will this action influence Judge Malloy’s decision on whether to remand the decision to delist wolves back to the USFWS?  Will Ed Bangs see this as a reason to change his decision?  Time will tell.

Too many wolves: FWP gives wildlife agents more authority to kill problem predators
By EVE BYRON Helena Independent Record

Mont. giving more authority to kill problem wolves
Associated Press

Wolf population growth in ID/MT/WY halted in 2009

Increased mortality has stopped the wolf population growth says USFWS-

Tally shows wolves holding steady in region after Montana, Idaho hunting seasons. By Matthew Brown. AP

The 3 state wolf population growth has stopped. Wyoming’s population, where there was no wolf hunt, grew slightly. Montana’s population dropped slightly. Idaho figures are not in, but said to be comparable to last year. Although the article above attributes the halt to the hunt, it should be noted that wolf population growth had been dropping on its own for several years.

The article says “The number of breeding packs increased slightly, from 95 to 111.” [emphasis added]. This could be because increased mortality, especially with hunting might be expected to result in more pack, but smaller packs. However, the delisting plan requires each state to count its breeding pairs, not breed packs. They are not the same. A breeding pack is a group of wolves with some pups at the end of the year. The definition of a breeding pair is different. It has to be two or more wolves with 2 pups at the end of the year and the individual wolves that produced the pups have to also be alive too at the end of the year.

Here is an opposing view from the NRDC. Big Problem: Wolf Population Declining [see note] in Northern Rockies. By Matt Skoglund. Opposing Views. Note that this headline is wrong because NRDC doesn’t say in the article that the wolf population is declining. Skoglund had originally entitled it “The Northern Rockies Wolf Population Has Stopped Growing.” It was changed when Opposing Views picked it up.

Montana Wolf Attacks Spike in ‘09, Sparking Backlash

There might be a backlash, but it is doubtful related to a spike in wolf attacks on livestock-

Matthew Brown from AP wrote this story. It has some good facts in it and a lot of wild anger from livestock owners.

I think what sparks backlashes are not the number of livestock killed. It is the number of news stories about it.

I think if someone did a content analysis of the news about wolves and livestock and compared it to the number of wolf-killed livestock each year since the reintroduction, there would be no relationship.

Matthew Brown points out that “The sharp increase over 2008 livestock losses, reported Thursday by state officials, was fueled largely by a wolf pack ravaging 148 sheep in southwestern Montana near Dillon in August.”

This single story got a lot of media attention, and I never read a single good account from the media or the Montana government giving the details of how this happened. At the time on this blog, I complained day after day about the lack of facts, except that a lot of sheep were dead.

As far increasing the hunt quota next because of the perception of large livestock losses, Montana FWP’s report was very clear that the hunt removed far fewer wolves in areas with livestock than they hoped, and more in livestock-free parts of the backcountry.  Therefore, increasing the quota would be purely a political move unrelated to wolf depredations in fact.

Wolf supporters have got to win the delisting case, as the state wildlife agencies are nothing but political pawns. I am sick to death and furious!

– – – – – – – –

The statement that there are 8 dead livestock by wolves for every one found is often repeated as in this story. It seems to me they used to say “1 in 5,” but at any rate in checking, this all seems to come from one small study by John Oakleaf.  The area studied was hardly representative — a remote section of public land leased for grazing that was  known to have a high density of wolves. No doubt in less rugged and accessible country the number not found would be less.

If you think about it, the broad statement is absurd. The percentage of livestock killed by wolves and not found would vary everywhere. Every season cattle and sheep are simply missed (not rounded-up). They linger and die of the cold. They are also lost to accidental injury, sickness, poison plants, and other predators. Most carcasses would be scavenged by many scavengers, including wolves.

To sum it up, this “one in eight” figure appears to be an effort to inflate a relatively small problem for political purposes, and is based on a single unrepresentative study.

Latest, Dec. 31, official Wyoming wolf report

Wyoming Gray Wolf Recovery Status Report. USFWS-

I notice livestock predation by wolves in Wyoming in 2009 was really trivial. Of the dead sheep, which was up in ’09, “three packs (Big Horn, Black Butte, and Dog Creek) were responsible for all of the195 confirmed sheep depredations. The Big Horn Pack consisted of 3 adults male wolves and all 3 wolves were removed in control actions. The Black Butte Pack consisted of 2 adults and 6 pups. Both adult wolves and 4 pups were removed. Six adult wolves and 6 pups made up the Dog Creek Pack. Five adults were removed.”

Too bad about the Dog Creek Pack. They could have sent more wolves into Eastern Idaho. They were a border pack.

WYOMING WOLF WEEKLY- Dec 21 through Dec 31, 2009.

Detailed summary of the Montana wolf hunt

Here is a detailed report. Will Idaho do the same?

Montana FWP just released a detailed summary of their wolf hunt with a lot of numeric data — good.  I hope Idaho has a report with this much information, but it probably won’t come until June when it might be too late to be used to adjust the 2010 wolf hunt, if there is one.  It is my impression that it is easier to hunt wolves in Montana than in Idaho.

Here it is (pdf). 2009 Wolf Hunting Season Summary

Federal agents hunt for wolves from 5 Montana packs

Up to 22 wolves could be killed in Montana

“Carolyn Sime with Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks says it is unusual to have so many livestock attacks this late in the year.”

This couldn’t be what happens when you disrupt pack structure with a hunt could it? These questions need to be asked of wolf managers.

See: Wolf hunt information and effects that need to be collected

Federal agents hunt for wolves from 5 packs. Associated Press – Idaho Statesman

So far this year 91 Montana wolves were killed by livestock owners directly or Wildlife Services (mostly WS). 112 were killed in the hunt, natural causes, etc. This is a total of 203 dead wolves. If this action is carried out the dead wolf total for the year could reach 225, or 45% of the state’s wolf population. The rule of thumb, meaning it isn’t a hard and fast percentage, is that somewhat over 30% of the wolves in a state can die during a year with no decline in the wolf population.

Wolf pack killed by government on Senator Baucus ranch

Vicious beasts kill 2 goats and 3 or 4 guard dogs over a year’s time-

I saw this story Dec. 8, but it said the Mitchell Mountain Pack had over the space of several years killed two goats and a guard dog here and there at the “Sieben Ranch.” I just figured that was a typical wolf overreaction story that hardly merited reporting.

Then I learned maybe there is a reason this massive 125,000 acre ranch is just called the Sieben Ranch. It is owned by Montana Senator Max Baucus.

FWP plans to take out entire Mitchell Mountain wolf pack. By Eve Byron. Helena Independent Record.

Oh yes, this was done by Wildlife Services at taxpayer’s expense.

Official: Montana Wolf hunt was effective

The real story is that 40% of the wolves in Montana were killed this year-

Official: Wolf hunt was effective. By Matthew Brown. Associated Press

The rule of thumb is that wolves can withstand annual mortality of about 30 per cent of the adult wolves, and the population will remain stable. The article below indicates that hunters killed 14% of Montana’s wolf population this year. On the other hand, 26% were killed by Wildlife Services, poachers, ranchers defending their livestock, and natural mortality. They aren’t done yet either. There was just an article about them taking out a wolf pack near Helena because the wolves killed a couple sheep dogs and a goat or something. These officials, not named in the article, want to increase the number of wolves  taken in the hunt next year, but what the figures show is that it’s not the hunt that threatens the wolves, but the killing of wolf packs for mostly trivial livestock losses.

I’m not sure why the article ended with this: “Ranchers like Jerry Ehmann, 63, counter that the state’s hunt is not doing enough. Ehmann said he used to run about 200 head of cattle on 25,000 acres of public land in southwestern Montana’s Bitterroot Range. After wolves started harassing his animals this year and five calves went missing, Ehmann decided to cut back to only 72 animals and keep them fenced in on his ranch near Sula. He sold off the remaining cattle in November.”

Are we really to believe that the only reason this rancher reduced his herd of 200 to 72 is because “5 calves went missing” — not killed by wolves, but just missing. Calves too, not cattle. Isn’t there a recession or something going on too?  😦 And isn’t this rancher getting toward retirement age?

Update editorial in the Great Falls Tribune. Highly regulated wolf hunt does seem like the right track. The Tribune looks at the Montana hunt and finds it to be sucessful and not a threat to the wolf population. What Tribune hasn’t looked at, what few look at, and what cause dispute between some hunters and wolf advocates, is the focus on hunting.

The Montana problem is not wolf hunting, it is Wildlife Service killers shooting wolves for usually minor offenses like killing a couple sheep or cow calves or maybe someone just ” a couple of my livestock gone missing.”

Hunters angry over dwindling elk need historical perspective

A historical perspective on the Gallatin Canyon elk “decline” controversy-

The following is by Norman A. Bishop of Bozeman, a member of our Board and long time naturalist in the Greater Yellowstone area of Montana.

– – – – – –
Hunters angry over dwindling elk need historical perspective

“Hunters vent anger over dwindling elk” in Gallatin Canyon (Chronicle, Dec. 4) took me back a few decades to an insightful 44-page Montana Fish and Game Department report by Allan L. Lovaas, “People and the Gallatin Elk Herd.”  In that 1970 report, Lovaas chronicles the history of the area, its elk, and the many factors affecting their numbers. The factors he lists include hunting (including for the market), trapping and feeding (elk), eliminating predators, removing Indians, grazing of livestock, controlling wildfires, creating wildlife preserves Yellowstone), and, mostly, through permitting the herd to burgeon out of control on its depleted range.

FWP biologists Kenneth Hamlin and Julie Cunningham compiled comprehensive report in 2009, “Monitoring and assessment of wolf- ungulate interactions and population trends within the GreaterYellowstone Area, southwestern Montana, and statewide.”  Item 4 in their Executive Summary is: “The number of grizzly bears in Southwest Montana and the GYA has increased more than 3-fold since 1987, concurrently with the increase in wolf numbers, affecting the total elk predation rate.”  And item 8, “In areas with high predator (grizzly bear and wolf) to prey ratios, …elk numbers have declined…”

In a 2003-2004 study, researchers noted that predation, hunting, and drought contributed to a decline of elk in northern Yellowstone.  They traced 151 newborn elk calves for 30 days, and found that predators caused more than 90% of their deaths.  Bears killed 55-60%; coyotes and wolves each took 10-15%.  The authors said it remains to be seen if wolf predation is additive to other mortality sources.

Lovaas saw the larger picture in 1970, and so do astute wildlife managers today.  They recognize the rarity in natural systems of single-cause effects, and don’t just blame wolves.

Norman A. Bishop

Bozeman, MT 59715

Government wolf updates

Recently, there have been a few government wolf updates published.

Wyoming Status Reports (which sometimes have information from states like Washington, Oregon, Utah and Colorado):
11/27/2009
11/13/2009
10/30/2009

Idaho, as has been the case since wolves were delisted in the first time in 2008, has provided little information other than numbers. Their reports don’t mention the areas where incidents occur or the packs involved. They also don’t mention information about new packs or other interesting information. This information exists but is rarely published anymore.

There has also been no update to my knowledge about the 6 Soldier Mountain wolves killed near Fairfield this summer. Tissue samples were sent to the USFWS lab in Ashland but I am unaware whether there have been any results from the testing. One BLM law enforcement officer claimed that the wolves may have died from drinking water that may have had chemicals linked to an illegal marijuana growing operation discovered in the area but there has been no official explanation of the incident.

Idaho Report
November 2009 Management Progress Report

Recent Montana Reports:
2009-11-13 Montana Wolf Weekly
2009-11-20 Montana Wolf Weekly
2009-11-27 Montana Wolf Weekly

Big game animals scarce in once-popular hunting district along Gallatin River

This is the story about hunting district 310 that a lot of SW Montana hunters are upset about-

Big game animals scarce in once-popular hunting district along Gallatin River. By Brett French. Billings Gazette.

Wolf work mounts: With 1st Montana hunting season done, canine hides in taxidermists’ hands

On mounting a wolf for display-

Wolf work mounts: With 1st Montana hunting season done, canine hides in taxidermists’ hands. Written by Rob Chaney. Missoulian.

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.

Poll: Montanans support grizzly bear ESA protection, Tester’s Wilderness bill, and the wolf hunt

Scientific survey shows thumbs up for Schweitzer, Tester, Rehberg; big drop for Baucus-

Story in the Missoulian. Baucus’ approval rating among Montanans drops by 20 percent. By Matt Gouras. Associated Press

In any survey, it is good to look at the actual questions. Here are the full survey results.

Montana wolf hunt to end today

Quota of 75 will be reached-

Updated Montana wolf hunt ends today. By Matthew Brown. Associated Press.

It looks to me like wolf hunting has been easier in Montana than Idaho. Although over 100 wolves have now been killed in Idaho, Idaho’s hunt began earlier and goes longer.  Idaho also has about 50% more wolves than Montana.

The AP story above is a new longer version. In it we learn for the first time that Idaho’s Fish and Game Commissioners are thinking of being duplicitous and extending the wolf season in some parts of Idaho’s already overlong season.  From my perspective, one that admittedly lacks information because Idaho Fish and Game has given out very little specific information about the hunt, I don’t think it has been all that terrible. However, changing the rules, such as extending the season, is exactly what critics of the hunt predicted would happen.

Montana wolf hunting season status page.
Idaho wolf hunting status page.

Wolf quota reached west of Glacier National Park after Monday morning kill at Big Creek

Quota of 2 wolves has been reached in North Fork of Flathead area-

The quota was only two, but three wolves were poached in the during the hunt.

Story: Wolf hunt closed west of Glacier. Missoulian.

Montana: Poaching, other issues throw wrinkles in state’s wolf hunting quotas

Is one state doing a better job than the other on the hunt?

I think it’s still too soon to say, and too soon on the quotas too.  Wolves killed picked up quickly in Idaho as more elk and deer hunts opened. Now the number killed is slowing down, but wait until there is more snow on ground and the wolves can be tracked. Idaho’s hunt goes for months too. What will happen will the wolves, as they have to, come down to the winter range with their prey? They will be easier to see.

I still worry about non-hunt wolf kills by the states. The 23 wolves killed by order of Montana on the Blackfeet Reservoir still has no publicity or explanation. That is 1/4 as many as their state wolf hunt quota.

Poaching, other issues throw wrinkles in state’s wolf hunting quotas. By Michael Jamison. The Missoulian

Rocky Mountain Front, wildlife, and other projects get funded in Montana in Interior Appropriations Bill

Bill includes funding to reimburse for wolf kills, but may also contain money for proactive measures-

From what I’ve read, this sounds pretty good to me for wildlife and outdoors in Montana. Great Falls Tribune.

MT man poaches 2 wolves; pays $1135

Columbia Falls man cited for poaching two wolves-

Although it is wolf hunting season in Montana, one NW Montanan couldn’t wait. He shot two wolves along Whale Creek Road in the North Fork Flathead drainage on Oct. 9.  He plead guilty and paid a large fine for a wolf violation, a $1,135 fine.  A third wolf has been shot and left in the general North Fork Flathead area. That was in the Red Top Meadow area. Montana FWP is looking for info.

It isn’t clear if these poached wolves will be added to the quota of 75.

– – – – – – –

Someone sent me the photo below. This appears to be in the Lolo area NW of Missoula.

 

Ten wolves shot in Montana on opening day!

Montana’s wolf hunt did not have a slow start like Idaho’s-

Out of the quota of 75, already 23 wolves have been killed. In total eleven wolves were shot over the weekend.

The entire state was open to hunting for just 3 days. Southern Montana’s quota was filled on Sunday with the hunt ending at sunset today (Monday). Nine wolves in southern Montana had already been killed near Yellowstone Park before the general wolf, deer and elk season opened this weekend, so it took just 3 dead wolves to fill the quota for district 3, which takes in most of southern Montana. Note: district 2  which is still open includes SW Montana, a much smaller area than district 3. See map.

Story: Ten wolves in Montana shot on opening day. Great Falls Tribune.

Mont. shuts down wolf hunting in one of three districts

Remainder of the wolf quota was filled on the first day of the general hunt in district 3 (southern Montana)-

Mont. shuts down wolf hunting in one of three districts. By The Montana Standard News Services – 10/26/2009

Wolves in hunters’ sights as Montana big-game season opens

Until now only limited parts of the state have been open of wolf hunting-
Now many hunters will be looking for wolves statewide along with many elk and deer hunts-

Hunters being given chance to manage wolves. By Rob Chaney. The Missoulian

Montana’s wolf quota of 75 is small compared to Idaho’s 220, despite Idaho’s 1/3 larger wolf population.

Controversy continues over the death of Yellowstone Park wolves that were north of the Park during the early wolf hunt. Montana wolf hunt is stalked by controversy.  The demise of a much-studied pack raises questions about lifting the hunting ban in areas bordering Yellowstone park. By Kim Murphy. Los Angeles Times. The article confirms what I have been saying, “Wolves often stalk elk outside the park and are attracted by entrails the hunters leave behind. But this year, the elk season coincided with the opening of the state’s first wolf hunt in modern times.” [emphasis mine]

Some preliminary data on Montana wolf hunt

It’s good to know some data is actually being collected-

This is interesting although based on only 9 kills and all in the A-B Wilderness north of Yellowstone.

Details provide insight to first hunts. Billings Gazette.

SW Montana nobleman locks out hunters out of his duchy because he doesn’t like MT wolf policy

Big livestock operator says there are too many wolves; so bans hunters in protest-

Rancher halts public hunting. Hirschy protests wolf policy, withdraws from state program. By Nick Gevock. Montana Standard.

The Big Hole country is mostly very nice, but there ought to be a public land access program started where access for the public is condemned across the land of the local earls, barons, and dukes.

Debate arises whether Montana wolf hunt wiped out Park’s Cottonwood Pack

Four pack members were killed. Which pack or packs did the other 5 wolves come from?

Defenders of Wildlife is disputing with Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. It does appear that at least some pups from the Cottonwood Pack are left. Maybe some adults survive too.

Strictly speaking the Cottonwood Pack has pretty much always been a Park transboundary Pack, a backcountry pack to be sure, but it is often north of the Park. However, I do think Park wolves, like Park bears, have learned to move north during the the elk hunt to clean up the remains of the hunt. This makes them vulnerable to being killed in the Montana wolf hunt.

There has been a lot of misinformed talk about a hunt on Park wolves, but, of course, there is no legal hunting of anything inside Yellowstone Park.  However, could what are normally Park wolves be effectively hunted the rest of the wolf season or in the future if Park wolves, being smart like bears, move north when the elk hunt begins.

Story. Wolf pack adults killed by hunters, group says. Billings Gazette. By Brett French.

Montana resumes big-game wolf hunt on Sunday

Rest of state opens up as well as Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness which had an emergency closure-

The quota is 75, of which12 have already been killed.

Montana resumes big-game wolf hunt on Sunday. By the Associated Press.

Although only 3 more wolves can be taken in the Wilderness area just north of the YNP boundary, if wolves do come northward out of the Park to eat the remains of the elk kills in the Wilderness area (likely I think), having this area in the wolf hunt has the clear effect of legally killing what are normally Park wolves.

Here is the Montana wolf hunt map.

NRA wants to join lawsuit on delisting

NRA members tell phantasmagorical story to try to gain standing-

If this really happened, most people would regard it as the highlight their trip, not the basis of a lawsuit. Three blood dripping wolf packs, driven off by snowballs!  They should be denied standing to intervene.

NRA wants to join lawsuit on delisting. By Eve Byron. Helena Independent Record.

Wildlife Services Montana kills twice as many wolves on Blackfoot Reservation than entire wolf hunt so far

23 wolves in pack killed for some reason-

So far 12 wolves have been killed in Montana’s wolf hunt. It has generated a lot of controversy because most were taken in a small area just north of Yellowstone Park. Montana’s wolf hunt quota is 75.

I read in the latest Montana Wolf Weekly Report today that in contrast to the 12, twenty-three wolves in the Livermore Pack on the Blackfoot Indian Reservation were killed by Wildlife Services this year. Fifteen were killed in September alone. These wolves were said to be responsible for an unstated number of livestock losses. I read a number of their past wolf weeklies and could find no information why 23 wolves had to die for killing something.

Here is the URL of the wolf weekly that reports this http://fwp.mt.gov/content/getItem.aspx?id=40509

While the focus remains on the wolf hunt, I must emphasize again the real threat to wolves is not hunters, but Wildlife Services with its huge budget, high tech gear, and a mandate to aid and comfort the noblemen of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming.

Montana wolf-hunt quota could change after 9 shot near Yellowstone

The remaining quota might be adjusted or other changes made-

Montana wolf-hunt quota could change after 9 shot near Yellowstone. By Matthew Brown. AP

Wildlife advocates irked by wolf tally next to Yellowstone

More reaction on the “unexpectedly” large number of wolf hunt kills next to Yellowstone Park-

Wildlife advocates irked by wolf tally. By Daniel Person. Bozeman Chronicle.

Montana suspends wolf hunting near Yellowstone Park

3/4 of the quota was reached quickly, and all very near Yellowstone Park-

Montana suspends wolf hunting near Yellowstone Park. AP

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks likes to think that a wolf hunt will decrease wolves killing livestock, but if all the wolves shot are wolves that have never even seen a cow, that argument isn’t valid.

Montana’s backcountry wolf hunt criticized after surprisingly quick kills. By Pete Thomas. LA Times.

Montana Wolf overseer surprised by high harvest

A premature NYT article about the Idaho wolf hunt had made it appear the hardly any wolves were being killed, now a different view from Montana-

Actually it is still too early to know if the states’ wolf  “harvest” quotas will be meet, although the sudden jump in Idaho numbers as general elk season opened as well as all wolf hunting units open in Idaho, makes it more likely the quota will be filled.

The fact that wolf hunters are doing well in the backcountry has important implications if the trend continues. The reason is the deliberately propagated belief that hunting would disproportionately eliminate “problem” wolves in the front country where there are livestock.

Story: Montana Wolf overseer surprised by high harvest. By Brett French of the Billings Gazette.

I should add that Montana set a more cautious wolf quota than Idaho. Montana has a shorter wolf season too. Therefore, there is less chance of an overshoot than in Idaho.  Idaho is also expected to use Wildlife Services, a quasi-federal agency to stage a pogrom against wolves after the hunting season to eliminate wolves in areas where the landed noblemen of the state have been disturbed by their presence.

– – – –

10/7. Update. Looking at the quick rise on hunter success as more deer and elk seasons open, coupled with snow, I think Idaho and Montana will meet their wolf quotas. Ralph Maughan
10/7. Story spreads to LA Times. Montana’s wolves surprisingly vulnerable during inaugural hunt. By Pete Thomas.

Wolves add to awe of El Capitan hiking adventure

A brief encounter with a wolves makes climbing a major Bitterroot peak a perfect adventure-

Wolves add to awe of El Capitan hiking adventure. By Will Moss. The Ravalli Republic (in the Missoulian)

First Montana wolf hunt kill recorded

Wolf was shot north of Yellowstone Park-

First wolf hunt kill recorded. By Eve Byron Helena Independent Record

Few details are available on-line so far.

Wolf Advocates Seek to Expedite Request for Summary Judgement

Wolf Advocates filed this motion in Montana District Court today :

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Expedited Merits Briefing

Update. Newspaper story on this: Wolf advocates won’t appeal court decision allowing hunts in Idaho, Montana. By Rob Chaney. The Missoulian

Are Hunters Stupid?–The Unintended Consequences of Wolf Hunting

George Wuerthner has written an essay exploring the reaction of many people to the wolf hunt.

Are Hunters Stupid?–The Unintended Consequences of Wolf Hunting . New West.

Wolf hunt information and effects that need to be collected

Side-effects of policies are often the most interesting-

So the hunt is underway in part of Idaho. All of Idaho will be added in a month. Meanwhile Montana will begin a hunt. Most people will focus on whether somebody got a wolf, where, how?  There will be pleasure and outrage. Some basic statistics will be kept.

One of the most important and interesting things about new policies is what side-effects are there, including unanticipated ones?

So I am listing some possible side effects. Some are so obvious the various groups and governments are probably keeping track. Some entities might also not want them tracked. Some are not feasible to collect.

• What happens to a disrupted wolf pack? Do they usually regroup or do they disperse? Will disrupted packs and orphaned wolves take more or less livestock per wolf, or in total, than before the hunt?
• What percentage of wolves limp off wounded? And then, will wounded wolves resort to killing livestock?  Will wounded wolves be a danger to people?  Healthy wolves haven’t been.
• How many coyotes will be shot? How many dogs?
• Will the hunt serve to disperse wolves to new areas, including populated ones?
• How fast will the wolves learn that they are now prey to humans?  If so or when, how will their behavior change?
• Will disrupted packs kill fewer elk and deer or more?  We know that smaller packs and lone wolves lose more of their carcass to scavengers and so they might possibly hunt more often.
• Will the hunt increase strife between wolves — more wolves killing each other?
• Will it have effects on the genetic structure of the population of wolves in Idaho and Montana?
• In the course of a year, or two and more if wolf hunts continue, what is observed degree of association between the percentage of wolves killed in an area and the deer and elk population? Actually this is a main effect — a stated intention of the hunt. So we expect Idaho Fish and Game to keep very good records if their rationale for the hunt is for real.
• How much money is made (or lost) by the Departments on the hunts? This needs to also apply to the reestablishment of radio collars.
• How many killed or wounded wolves were there in addition to those tagged?

Wolf hunts are on as judge eyes request to stop

Judge ponders rather than rule. Idaho wolf hunt begins Sept. 1; Montana Sept 15-

Idaho’s first wolf hunt will begin as scheduled tomorrow. Judge Molloy heard the arguments and said he’d decide as quickly as he could, but he did not issue an injunction.

Wolf hunts are on as judge eyes request to stop. By Matthew Brown. AP in the Idaho Statesman.

Big hearing on plea for injunction of Idaho and Montana wolf hunts is this morning in Missoula courtroom

Judge Molloy could allow hunts to procede or stop them despite the on-going sale of tags-

I’ve also wondered if some middle ground ruling is possible, given the intense emotion on both sides of the issue. I’d like to see a new delisting rule crafted. The content of the current rules bothers me more than the wolf hunt because as always the real threat to the long term viability of the wolf recovery are the cattle and sheep industries and their captive federal agency, Wildlife Services, that goes around killing wildlife some influential people think are problems.

Story in the Missoulian. By John Miller, AP.

If the hunt is canceled Idaho wolf tags sold (over 10,000) will have to be refunded. There will probably be some illegal or vigilante action this time. Hopefully folks will obey the law. It’s doubtful, however, that enough wolves would be killed illegally to make any biological difference to the states’ wolf population.

Wolves kill 120 sheep at ranch near Dillon

This is the kind of depredation where the wolves need to be shot-

This is unusual. Furthermore it took place on private land. Assuming there are no important facts left out of the story, these wolves should all be shot.

. . .  a couple sidebars to this. 1. They need to get the pack that did it. This should not be a revenge killing situation. 2. People might think this is typical because of the constant trickle of media reports of a lamb here or two or three ewes there.

Wolves kill 120 sheep at ranch near Dillon. By Eve Bryon. Helena Independent Record.

8/29 Update-Comment by Ralph Maughan

Montana Gov: State would fight injunction on wolves

This is hardly news. I won’t bother to put a link, but has anyone thought of this . . .?

What if Judge Molloy allows the hunt, but puts the wolf back on the endangered species list?

This doesn’t have to be an all or nothing kind of decision. The judge could allow the hunt to begin under careful scutiny of the Court and grant the injunction the minute any “funny stuff” starts. The plaintiffs make a number of claims in the lawsuit. It is not just an anti-hunt suit. JB recently posted a list of the total list of the claims the plaintiffs are making in their brief.

As I have written many times, I fear the the cattle and sheep association/Wildlife Services wolf killing machine more than a well regulated wolf hunt. The wolves will probably replenish themselves in a year, but they won’t come back from the Idaho Fish and Game Commission’s stated intent to use minor livestock depredations as an excuse to kill dozens of wolf packs.  Hunting won’t harm genetic diversity, it might make the wolves more wary, it might even spread them to other states — awesome!!  High tech Wildlife Service killers, however, won’t allow any wolves to remain in a pack.

Conservation Groups Challenge Wolf Hunting

A coalition of 13 wolf advocate groups have submitted a motion to Judge Molloy’s court asking for a preliminary injunction to stop the Idaho and Montana wolf hunts.

Memorandum in Support of Motion For Preliminary Injunction (41 pages)

The above memorandum in support of the Preliminary Injunction request is a phenomanal effort – those interested in this important piece of conservation history are encouraged to read it.

The Press Release Follows:

Missoula, MT— Conservation groups today asked a federal district court to block fall wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana. The request came in an ongoing lawsuit seeking to restore federal Endangered Species Act protections to wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains until wolf numbers are stronger, the states develop an adequate legal safety net, and connectivity between recovery areas is assured.

Idaho Fish and Game Commission sets wolf hunt quota today

Commission will decide today whether an Idaho wolf hunt will be accepted by wolf conservationists or whether a bitter battle begins-

Update: Commission sets wolf quota at 220 wolves.
More information will follow when I get it. Here is some. Idaho’s wolf hunting limit set at 220. Idaho Statesman. From what I read, including the comments in the Statesman, it looks like I’m shaping up as a moderate on this one.

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission meets in Idaho Falls today to set the wolf kill quota just 2 weeks before the wolf season begins. Tags will go on sale Aug. 24. In July, Montana set a wolf quota of 75 after seeking public comment and developing computer models of various quotas and their estimated effect on wolf populations.

Idaho hasn’t sought public input. As I write this, how the quota was determined is not clear.  Some indications are they will have a quota as high as 500 to 700 wolves. Idaho has the best wolf habitat in the lower 48 states as indicated by its current population of perhaps 1000 wolves compared to adjacent Montana with just half as many despite having wolves in the state since the 1980s, beginning with natural in-migration from Canada.

Some people think wolf hunting will prove difficult and the quota won’t be filled. Outdoor writers Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman is a well know person who holds to this school of thought.  Others believe there will be a slaughter — wolves being easy to find while elk or deer hunting coupled with a very long hunting season. I tend to the latter because of the length of the season and the likelihood that a fair number of hunters will shot two, tag one, and leave the other.

My view is that I am not against a wolf hunt, but a real hunt of any game animal does not as its purpose reduce the population by very much. If the Commission announced they were going to reduce the state’s elk population by half, for example, that would not be a hunt. Of course, they wouldn’t do that.

Because wolves have not been hunted before  in Idaho, and Idaho so much different geographically than Alaska, a lot of information needs to be gathered. It will be important to see if the Commission puts in place a mechanism to gather critical information, especially so that they can see if a wolf hunt (or reduction) has any effect on elk, deer, or moose populations. Will wolves become more wary of humans?

It is also important to see if the hunt has an effect on livestock depredations. Conventional wisdom is that a reduction in wolves will reduce the number of sheep and cattle killed, but others believe that because wolves are a pack animal and learn what is prey from their pack, disrupted packs will send orphaned pups, wounded wolves and subadults into the herds of livestock.

I for one, would not protest a quota of 100 or 200 animals (comparable to Montana), not that I think any hunt is a biological necessity. However, a high quota with lax oversight will spark a bitter battle. It’s all up to the Fish and Game Commission what they want. For those who want the wolf relisted, a high quota with lax enforcement is more likely to yield success in their lawsuit than a more measured approach. Montana’s Commission (Fish, Wildlife and Parks) seemed to sense that.

Idaho Fish & Game to set limits for first wolf hunt. By Roger Phillips. Idaho Statesman.

Idaho officials to set wolf hunt quotas today. Associated Press

Montana FWP study finds multiple factors in wolf-elk relations

Multiyear Montana study shows the relationships between elk and wolves are not simple-

FWP study finds multiple factors in wolf-elk relations. By Rob Chaney. Missoulian

Nowhere are data adequate to ‘scientifically’ assign cause(s) for any declines that may occur,” author-biologists Kenneth Hamlin and Julie Cunningham wrote in their conclusion.”

However, this conclusion certainly does not mean that wolves do not affect elk in many ways, as do wolves and bear together, and each other as well.

The effect of wolves also varies in different parts of Montana despite there being similar densities of wolves, e.g., NW Montana versus SW Montana and Yellowstone.

This is an important study and you can read the 95 page report and/or save as a pdf file.

We shouldn’t manage Montana’s wildlife like a giant game farm

Marty Essen asks for balanced management of our forests and wildlife-

We shouldn’t manage Montana’s wildlife like a giant game farm

In response to some recent anti-wolf letters in local newspapers, I’d like to offer an alternative point of view.

Blaming the wolf for fewer elk, without considering other factors, is disingenuous at best. Here’s what scientists know as fact: wolves and elk have a history together that goes back to before humans entered their territory. If wolves were going to wipe out the elk, they would’ve done so long before humans arrived. In a natural ecosystem, wolves and elk exist to the mutual benefit of both species.

The real issue is whether it’s morally acceptable for humans to artificially manage our forests for the benefit of one special interest group: hunters. According to Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, 129,708 resident elk licenses were sold in 2008, and there are an estimated 193,484 total hunters in our state. Considering that Montana’s population is 967,440, hunters are a much smaller group than their political influence indicates (and not all hunters are anti-wolf).

On the other hand, many people, including conservation-minded hunters, won’t speak out in defense of wolves because they fear being threatened (I’ve been threatened more than once). That doesn’t mean their concerns should be ignored. Countless people head into the woods each day, hoping to spot a wolf. Yes, the reintroduction of wolves isn’t just for the animals—it’s for people too!

One anti-wolf writer suggested that we have a public vote on the “wolf problem.” In essence, we already had that vote when we banned game farms. If we manage Montana’s wildlife solely to favor human-hunted species, all we’re doing is turning our state into one giant game farm.

The best way to manage Montana’s wildlife is to strive for a natural balance. It’s good for animals; it’s good for non-hunters; and it’s good for hunters who believe in a fair chase.

Copyright ©

Marty Essen
Author of the multi-award-winning book, Cool Creatures, Hot Planet: Exploring the Seven Continents
www.CoolCreaturesHotPlanet.com

Montana FWP to set wolf quotas Thursday

FWP to set wolf quotas Thursday

By EVE BYRON – Independent Record

Montana’s 2009 wolf hunting season could have quotas ranging from 26 to 207 under three options that will be presented to the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission Thursday.

——————

Addition by Ralph Maughan

I received this today. It is background on setting the wolf hunt quota.

FWP COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET

Meeting Date:  May 14, 2009 Agenda Item:  2009 Tentative Wolf Quotas

Action Needed: Approve Tentative Rule Time Needed for Presentation:  30 minutes

Background: Regulated public harvest of wolves, first endorsed by the Governor’s Wolf Advisory Council in 2000, was included in Montana’s wolf conservation and management plan. In 2001, the Legislature authorized the Commission to reclassify wolves under state law from an endangered species to a species in need of management upon federal delisting. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to delist the gray wolf in Montana from the Endangered Species Act, will be effective May 4, 2009.  Litigation challenging the federal delisting decision is expected.

Wolves were delisted today, May 4

Wolves in Northern Rockies and Great Lakes officially delisted May 4, 2009-

Will delisting be better the second time around?

Today for the second time in the Northern Rockies, wolves were delisted with all management decisions handed over to the states of Idaho and Montana, but not Wyoming where delisting  will not take place under Wyoming makes changes in its proposed wolf management.

Wolves were also delisted in Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Lawsuits, in the form of 60-day notices (of intent to sue) were filed 30 days ago. As a result an injunction on the delisting could be in order 30 days from now. This happened before, somewhat over a year ago, when Montana’s federal district judge quickly enjoined the delisting. This prompted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to withdraw their entire delisting rule, but to issue a new one about 2 months after Obama took office. The primary difference between the Bush (Kempthorne) delisting and the Obama (Salazar) delisting is that Wyoming was taken out of delisting for failure to produce an acceptable state wolf conservation plan. Critics of the new delisting say the special status for Wyoming is a fatal defect in the delisting and they will argue so in court.

A number of additional groups, including the State of Wyoming, will file against the delisting rule this time around.

In the next 30 days, some wolf supporters fear a state operated wolf bloodbath, especially in Idaho. Others believe Idaho and Montana will want to show they won’t try to wipe the wolves out, and so they will not manage* — kill — very many in the immediate future.

Story in the Associated Press by Matthew Brown.Wolves off list, but legal battles loom.

– – – – —

* When used in the context of wolves by state game agencies, the word “manage” always means to kill.

They just published the wolf delisting rule in the Federal Register

Some of us hoped that they had second thoughts.

Here it is in the Federal Register. (Updated link for Northern Rockies Wolves)

Federal Register Link for Great Lakes Wolves

Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery 2008 Interagency Annual Report

All 3 states and the FWS reports available.

Wolves in Central Idaho © Ken Cole

The annual reports of all three of the recovery states have been released. There is a wealth of information in these reports about various packs.

The minimum estimate of wolves in the three states is 1645, a 9% increase over last year.

In Idaho there are 846 wolves, a 16% increase.
In Montana there are 497 wolves, an 18% increase.
In Wyoming there are 302 wolves, a 16% decrease.

You can view the reports here:
Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery 2008 Interagency Annual Report

Balyeat bill would cap wolves in state

Senate Bill 183 would limit the number of wolves in Montana to 225.

Montana State Senator Joe Balyeat (R-Belgrade)

Montana State Senator Joe Balyeat (R-Belgrade) has introduced Senate Bill 183 which would limit the number of wolves in Montana to just 225. Currently the estimated number of wolves in Montana is around 500 according to the recently released Montana Gray Wolf Conservation and Management 2008 Annual Report.

“I acknowledge it’s strong medicine, but I believe we need strong medicine to deal with this wolf crisis”

This kind of “medicine”/legislation would likely scuttle the current delisting process all by itself and hand management of wolves in Montana back to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, maybe for good. Perhaps there is something to love about this bill by all sides. 😉

Balyeat bill would cap wolves in state
Bozeman Daily Chronicle

Salazar’s Wolf Decision Upsets Administration Allies

Salazar’s failure to consult POTUS gives new Administration a headache (as it should)-

Salazar’s Wolf Decision Upsets Administration Allies
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post

It appears that Salazar wasn’t interested in consulting anyone but the Bush Administration personnel and some other agency folks for the “good science” they have already “produced”.
He only consulted governors with less than favorable attitudes on predators, wolves in particular. He had no intention of hearing anything other than what he wanted to hear to make this decision.

Fortunately, not everyone in our halls of governing agree with him. Perhaps due to the fact that they are not ranchers.  He didn’t seem to think that his boss needed to be consulted either, even directly following commitments by Obama himself to uphold the ESA and scientific integrity in speeches within 48 hours of announcing this “Friday night” ruling.

Perhaps the same comments on commitment to scientific integrity made by Obama on stem cell research should be applied to the ESA and wolves.

NW Montana hunters at local rally complain predators are wiping out elk

They’ve been saying the same thing for years. How many times can elk be wiped out and their numbers stay generally the same? 😉

Wolves in the sights: Hunters complain predators are wiping out elk. By Michael Jamison of the Missoulian

Montana wolf weekly for Feb. 6-13

Latest Montana wolf news from Montana Fish, Wildlife, Parks-

There is some interesting news here, mostly regarding research about to be published or recently published.

Ralph Maughan

– – – – – – –
MONTANA WOLF PROGRAM
WEEKLY REPORT

To: Interested Parties
From: MFWP Wolf Program Coordinator, Carolyn Sime

Subject: Wolf Program Activities and Related Information, February 6-13, 2009

Contributors to the Montana Wolf Weekly are Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP), Universities, USDA Wildlife Services (WS), the National Park Service (NPS; Glacier NP; Yellowstone National Park will be reported in the Wyoming Wolf Weekly), US Forest Service, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, and the Blackfeet Nation.

Highlighted activities relate to: monitoring, wolf – livestock interactions, outreach and education, research, law enforcement, and other miscellaneous topics of public interest. The Weekly Report will be available on each Monday, covering the previous week. It and other wolf program information (including the 2007 annual report) can be found at: http://fwp.mt.gov/wildthings/wolf/default.html.

Montana FWP study finds mixed impacts of wolves on ungulate populations

Finally, a real study, and released to the public-

Not surprisingly (to me anyway) the effect of wolves on elk populations varies by area and presence of other predators such as grizzly bears. In addition hunters affect elk more than wolves. When considering wolves and ungulates alone, I take this report to be generally quite positive for the effects of wolves on ungulates.

Here is the news release, but there is the much larger report available to for those interested. Here is the 90+ page full report. Ralph Maughan

Added. Notice how the MSM immediately gives the results of this an immediate spin by means of the headline. Wolves tied to elk decline in parts of state. By EVE BYRON – Independent Record

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – FEBRUARY 6, 2008
Contact Ron Aasheim, 406-444-4038; Justin Gude, 406-444-3767; or visit FWP’s Web site
at fwp.mt.gov

Study Finds Mixed Wolf Impacts On Elk Populations-
Not all elk populations respond in the same manner when faced with sharing the landscape with wolves, a new report by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks suggests.

Researchers who spent the past seven years measuring the populations and behavior of elk in Montana found that elk numbers in some areas of southwestern Montana have dropped rapidly due mostly to the loss of elk calves targeted by wolves and grizzly bears that inhabit the same area. The same study, led by FWP and Montana State University, also suggests that in some areas of western Montana elk numbers have increased while hunter-harvests of elk have decreased, with little apparent influence by local wolf packs on elk numbers.

“One-size-fits-all explanations of wolf-elk interactions across large landscapes do not seem to exist,” said Justin Gude, FWP’s chief of wildlife research in Helena.
The 95-page report contains two sections. The first section summarizes research efforts in the Greater Yellowstone Area and southwestern Montana, with a primary focus on wolf-elk interactions. The second section summarizes FWP data collection and monitoring efforts from the entire range of wolves in Montana.

Three new Montana “wolf weeklies”

Here are the three latest reports on Montana wolves from MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks-

2009-01-09-montana-wolf-weekly

2009-01-16-montana-wolf-weekly

2009-01-09-montana-wolf-weekly

“Elusive, destructive wolf killed”

If this is as bad as it gets, wolves are not much of a problem-

Over a number of months a pair or wolves killed $5-6 thousand worth of sheep and goats owned by farmer near Reeds Point, Montana. The story is mostly interesting because it was so hard for Wildlife Services to get these wolves even with all of their high tech.

I suppose this was a serious matter in a state where the wildlife agency sees it acceptable to kill a pack of 27 wolves because they killed a handful of livestock, some of them sick.

How much did Wildlife Services spend to kill these two wolves, the last one of which was shot from a helicopter last Friday?

How much did you lose in your retirement account last year?

How much do you owe on your overpriced student loan(s)?

How much did your health insurance not pay on your serious, or even not so serious illness (assuming you have any health insurance)?

How much are you out because you lost your job?

Has the news media done a story on your personal struggles?

Why does the government waste money on things like this, and not help you?

News story in the Billings Gazette. Elusive, destructive wolf killed. By Brett French.

Government Has a Suspect in August 2008 Mexican Wolf Killing

Finally, will someone get what they deserve for killing a rare Mexican wolf?

See the news release below. Ralph Maughan

– – – – – – –
For more information, contact:

Rob Edward, WildEarth Guardians, (303) 573-4898 x 762 redward@wildearthguardians.org
Greta Anderson, Western Watersheds Project, (520) 623-1878 greta@westernwatersheds.org
Dave Parsons, The Rewilding Institute, (505) 275-1944 pbc@cybermesa.com

Government Has Suspect in August 2008 Mexican Wolf Killing

SANTE FE, N.M. – The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has concluded an investigation into the illegal killing of an endangered Mexican gray wolf and presented the results to the U.S. Attorney’s office.  Law enforcement officials report that the suspect in the killing is a ranch caretaker in southern New Mexico.

Conservationists Request Feds Replace Photo of Mexican Wolf

‘Poster Wolf’ Was One of 18 Rare Mexican Wolves Killed Through Capture; Altogether, More Than 2,900 Gray Wolves Killed-

Conservation groups are fed up with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service continuing to use the photo of a particular Mexican wolf as their “poster wolf,” after they trapped and accidentally killed her back in 2005.

They are also angry that government wolf management is becoming more and more lethal even though the wolf population has stopped growing in size and is showing signs of collapse inside Yellowstone Park.  Ralph Maughan

News Release-

SILVER CITY, N.M.­ Sixteen conservation and animal welfare organizations today asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to replace the photograph of the “poster wolf” of the Mexican gray wolf program – prominently displayed on the federal agency’s website, http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/, and in a oversized blowup poster at the agency’s Washington, D.C., headquarters – because the wolf was trapped and inadvertently killed in 2005. (Click here to read letter to the Fish and Wildlife Service).

“Brunhilda,” alpha female of the Francisco Pack of Mexican gray wolves. Photo by George Andrejko.

The wolf was one of at least 2,911 gray wolves killed as a result of Fish and Wildlife Service actions since 1996, most in the northern Rocky Mountains and upper Midwest, but also including 29 highly imperiled Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest (see attached charts).

[Montana] Legislator wants state to fight feds over wolves

Some pretty reactive folk in Montana are looking to take on the feds with state legislation to “manage” wolves.

Legislator wants state to fight feds over wolves – Daily Inter Lake

– – – – – –
These are the usual suspects: “Friends of the Northern Range Yellowstone Elk,” an anti-wolf state senator (Joe Balyeat) who poached an elk on private property in 2006, and the Montana Shooting Sports Association that wanted to secede from the United States back in the 1990s. They are probably on a fundraising/membership drive.

I found this on Balyeat and the people he associates. They’re Back: The Montana Legislature’s Right-Wing Presence. Dec. 2000. Montana Human Rights Network News.

The wolf is an organizational tool for their extremist political and right wing religious views. Ralph Maughan

Impacts have hunters howling

Articles like this spread misperception-

Impacts have hunters howling. Rapid growth of packs, observers say, mirror decline in deer numbers. By Jim Mann, Northwest Daily InterLake.

In fact the number of wolves in Montana, including this area are down this year. The number of wolves in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming is no longer growing.

For the last 7 or so years ago many reporters and politicians have led us to believe that wolf numbers would climb indefinitely. Now that a natural or artificial plateau or decline has been reached, they continue to act as though nothing has happened.

An accurate headline would be “Hunters howl, but fewer wolves do.”

Killing of Hog Heaven pack draws cries of protest

Fortunately the Hog Heaven Pack’s slaughter is not going away. You can bet more of this is planned-

Killing of Pack Draws Cries of Protest. By Jim Mann. Northwest Montana Daily InterLake.

In the article, it reads “Laudon [of MT Fish, Wildlife, Parks] said he can imagine what it would be like if the state completely ignored the concerns of livestock owners and the costs they incur due to wolves.

” ‘There would be a hell of a do-it-yourself club out there,’ he said. ‘We can’t have that. Now that would be a trigger-happy Wild West.’ ”

In fact, without their radio collars and aircraft, a do-it-yourself-club would be far less lethal than Wildlife Services. The problem is Wildlife Services and their “toys.” These need to be taken away from them.

This level of livestock loss is trivial, and would be of no public interest at all were it not wolves.

I have it from a pretty good source that slaughter of this pack (assuming it even was just one huge pack) was a trial run. More will be in order and soon, including Idaho if they get away with this.

With all of the truly bad news out there, what looks like an impending depression, they might think there is enough noise in the news that their actions won’t be noticed.

– – – – –

Related. Wolf kills rise in Rockies. Bush administration set to remove gray wolves from endangered species list [again]. By MATTHEW BROWN. AP

Montana hunters say they had a close encounter with wolves

What really happened was probably a matter of interpretation. The hunters were not injured or even touched-

Story on the close encounter. Helena Independent Record. By Eve Byron.

“The idea of them charging people — I’ve never heard of that,” Bangs said on Tuesday. “But that doesn’t mean this guy doesn’t think he was charged. The whole threat may not be real, but I’m sure his fear was real.”

I suspect what happened was similar to this story with photos reported to me (with photos) several years ago. It’s amazing how your preconceptions can complete the story in your head to explain an ambiguous situation.

Yellowstone wolf pack encircles two photographers . . . . .”wild and beautiful.” Ralph Maughan’s Wildlife News.  Nov. 28, 2006

Slaughter of Hog Heaven Pack condemned by Montanans and wildlife groups

State and feds’ behavior called “outrageous” “unnecessary”–

Story: “Montanans, wildlife groups condemn state, feds for wolf pack slaughter.” Missoulian.

The coalition (Wildlife Watchers and Big Wildlife) issuing this statement also said the action left many questions unanswered and that the public must be given specific formation about the killing of so many wolves.