PORTLAND, Ore. - The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has killed four members of the Harl Butte wolf pack and authorized killing two more from the Meacham pack after livestock deaths in northeast Oregon.
The decision has made calls from conservation groups even more urgent to revise the state's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. The plan is slated for update every five years and was supposed to be revised in 2015. Groups are concerned the new plan in the works weakens protections and even could open the door to trophy hunting, said Aaron Tam, Pacific Northwest organizer for the Endangered Species Coalition.
"The lack of transparency in the current wolf plan creates confusion and conflict among stakeholders," he said. "The governor needs to weigh in on this. Scientists don't agree with the current revisions to the wolf plan."
The Endangered Species Coalition is one of 18 groups that sent a letter to Gov. Kate Brown last week, asking her to intervene in the northeast Oregon situation and calling for more public accountability on the management plan. The current state plan allows wolves to be killed if non-lethal methods aren't successful in keeping them from livestock depredation.
Michael Nelson, a professor of environmental ethics and philosophy at Oregon State University, works with some of the scientists cited in the plan's current draft.
"I know that at least one of my social-science colleagues feels like his work was pretty seriously misrepresented in the plan," he said. "And I've spoken with my ecologist colleagues - they're wolf ecologists - and they're concerned with how their own work is represented in the plan, as well."
According to a Mason-Dixon poll conducted last year, more than 70 percent of Oregonians only support killing wolves as a last resort. Tam said most simply don't want to see wolves killed.
"Americans hunted them to the brink of extinction by 1960, and wolves are still missing from 90 percent of their historic range in the lower 48 states," he said. "We brought them back using the Endangered Species Act to see them flourish, and the new Wolf Conservation and Management Plan should reflect those values."
The draft management plan is online at dfw.state.or.us, and the Mason-Dixon poll is at pacificwolves.org.
get more stories like this via email
From Little Red Riding Hood to the Halloween thriller "Wolf Man," stories often paint wolves as scary creatures but conservationists argued it is the wrong view.
Most gray wolves across the contiguous U.S. are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. An exception includes the Northern Rocky Mountain population in parts of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, where states are in charge of managing wolf populations.
Eric Clewis, senior Northern Rockies representative for Defenders of Wildlife, said wolves have proved polarizing in recent years but they do not need to be.
"The preferred outlook really is just wolves as a native wildlife species on the landscape, rather than treating it as either this pure icon of wilderness or this just bloodthirsty animal that's out there trying to reduce elk or deer populations or decimate livestock," Clewis urged.
The gray wolf was one of the first species listed under the 1973 federal Endangered Species Act, when he said the population was "pretty much wiped out." He believes people should "take pride" in the recovery of the wolves so far.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees endangered species, announced a first-ever National Recovery Plan for the species, with an expected completion date at the end of next year. The agency said in a news release it plans to continue to work with tribes and states to "craft enduring solutions."
Clewis argued recent actions by state agencies have been misguided.
"We've had a whole suite of bills passed in all three states that are aimed more at reducing the wolf population than actually managing it based on any biological justification or recent science," Clewis explained.
The Fish and Wildlife Service noted Idaho and Montana had recently passed laws "designed to substantially reduce" the wolf populations there, "using means and measures that are at odds with modern professional wildlife management."
Disclosure: Defenders of Wildlife contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species and Wildlife, Energy Policy, Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
"The Creature from the Black Lagoon" is a scary story told around Halloween, but conservationists say the real danger in Georgia's swamps is how humans mistreat the wetlands.
The group Defenders of Wildlife is launching its "Real Scary Movies" campaign to show how pollution, overuse and habitat loss are the real danger to places such as the iconic Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
Christian Hunt, a senior federal lands policy analyst for Defenders of Wildlife, said while the swamp's alligators, snakes and other creatures can be scary, humans remain the wetland's biggest threat.
"The true threat is how people manage wetlands. It's through pollution, mining, or the draining and conversion of wetlands and swamps. The only horror, the only creature, if you will, is our treatment of the places we vilify," he said.
October 13 through 19 is also National Wildlife Refuge Week, a time to visit America's network of lands and waters that conserve and protect our wildlife heritage. During this time, entrance fees to many refuges will be waived.
The Okefenokee refuge is home to hundreds of species, many listed as threatened or endangered. Hunt said nearby operations such as power plants and other industries can cause damage through pollution, mining, or draining swamps.
"Frankly, many people are scared of wilderness," he explained. "They're scared of the wild, and they create villains, such as, say, the creature of the Black Lagoon, to rationalize that fear."
Hunt added groups such as Defenders of Wildlife are working to preserve refuges like the Okefenokee, and says if those lands are damaged or destroyed, they might be gone for good.
"They protect some of the last vestiges of wilderness, particularly in the Southeast. It's hard to quantify what would be lost if we were to lose these places, but the loss would certainly be immense," he contended.
Disclosure: Defenders of Wildlife contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species & Wildlife, Energy Policy, Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Indiana is considering a limited bobcat trapping season and the Department of Natural Resources is seeking public input on the proposal.
The plan would allow trapping in about 40 southern Indiana counties starting in November 2025, with a statewide quota of 250 bobcats. Trappers would have a one-bobcat bag limit and be required to purchase a special bobcat license.
Geriann Albers, furbearer and turkey program leader for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, said the proposal includes strict monitoring, and requires trappers to report their catches within 24 hours.
"We do have a population model for bobcats," Albers explained. "We're very confident with that 250 quota that it will not negatively impact bobcat populations. What that 250 was set on was the population model we have that shows that's a sustainable level of harvest."
Opponents argued even a limited season could threaten bobcat populations. Environmental groups, including the Humane Society, said the DNR's population model may not fully account for the bobcat's slow reproductive rate and threats from habitat loss. They contended reintroducing trapping could undermine years of conservation work that helped the species recover in Indiana.
Albers noted the DNR invited public feedback on the proposal.
"On that rule-making docket page the comment button is available for people to submit comments now," Albers pointed out. "That went up pretty quickly after the meeting but the first round of comments, we haven't scheduled yet because that usually coincides with when we do a public hearing."
A public hearing, tentatively set for November, will offer both in-person and virtual participation options. The DNR said updates will be posted on its website.
get more stories like this via email