Visitor Counter

hitwebcounter web counter
Visitors Since Blog Created in March 2010

Click Below to:

Add Blog to Favorites

Grizzly bears, black bears, wolves, coyotes, cougars/ mountain lions,bobcats, wolverines, lynx, foxes, fishers and martens are the suite of carnivores that originally inhabited North America after the Pleistocene extinctions. This site invites research, commentary, point/counterpoint on that suite of native animals (predator and prey) that inhabited The Americas circa 1500-at the initial point of European exploration and subsequent colonization. Landscape ecology, journal accounts of explorers and frontiersmen, genetic evaluations of museum animals, peer reviewed 20th and 21st century research on various aspects of our "Wild America" as well as subjective commentary from expert and layman alike. All of the above being revealed and discussed with the underlying goal of one day seeing our Continent rewilded.....Where big enough swaths of open space exist with connective corridors to other large forest, meadow, mountain, valley, prairie, desert and chaparral wildlands.....Thereby enabling all of our historic fauna, including man, to live in a sustainable and healthy environment. - Blogger Rick

Subscribe via email to get updates

Enter your email address:

Receive New Posting Alerts

(A Maximum of One Alert Per Day)

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Good to see some "science" coming forward to challenge the intense Wolf killing quotas that Idaho and Montana(and up to a year ago) Wyoming have(had) in place...........Fourteen carnivore biologists including Montana State's Scott Creel say what so many of us have instinctively felt was "faulty math" as it relates to what the three Rocky Mountain State Game Commissions have been claiming about the size of their wolf populations-------“The data shows that survival and reproduction has gone down while population has gone up,” Creel said. “That’s an impossible result".............

New study questions wolf hunting policies

Group of carnivore biologists casts doubt on state managers’ conclusions, goals.
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size
A new academic paper in the journal Science questions whether ecological theory and sound data are playing a role in determining wolf hunting seasons in the northern Rockies.
The paper, written by an international group of 14 carnivore biologists, argues that current wolf hunting pressure is not sustainable and that the accuracy of population estimates are not reliable. The authors also call for the states of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming to set clearly defined policy goals.

“We feel it’s time for targets to be defined more explicitly,” Montana State University ecology professor Scott Creel, the study’s lead author, said in an interview. “Right now we don’t really know what the numeric goal is. It’s not stated.
“We know there’s a goal to avoid relisting under the Endangered Species Act — all three states want to avoid that,” he said. “But is that it? ... If that is the goal, what is the ecological justification for that? It’s certainly understandable that there’s probably a social argument they’re responding to there, but is that really the goal in regard to wildlife ecology?”

Wolf hunting is allowed in Montana and Idaho, but in Wyoming hunts have been put on hold by a Washington, D.C., judge’s decision.

The Equality State is home to the smallest wolf population of the three states, and here wildlife managers have openly sought to hold numbers a safe distance from but as close as possible to the now-void delisting agreement: 150 animals. Wyoming’s statewide population, which hasn’t been hunted for 15 months, was last estimated at 333 animals.

In Idaho and Montana, where at the beginning of 2015 there were an estimated 1,324 wolves, goals have been more vague. The populations in those two states are several times the recovery goals and are hunted and trapped intensively.

“The data shows that survival and reproduction has gone down while population has gone up,” Creel said. “That’s an impossible result.”

Creel and his co-authors criticize the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for considering Idaho’s counting methodology a sound way of assessing the “absolute minimum number of wolves alive.”

“In Idaho, which holds the largest segment of the Northern Rocky Mountain distinct population segment, tabulated counts are adjusted by substituting mean pack size for smaller pack counts that might have been incomplete (74 percent of packs in 2013) and then multiplying the adjusted counts by 1.125 to account for unseen wolves suspected to be living outside of packs,” the Science paper says.

“Consequently,” the paper says, “the Idaho estimate is (approximately) 1.75 times the number of individuals known to be alive, and the biggest increase in the minimum estimated Northern Rocky Mountain distinct population segment occurred in 2006 with the adoption of this method.”
Mike Jimenez, Fish and Wildlife’s Northern Rocky Mountain wolf coordinator, said he appreciated the academic critique.
“Having people challenge management policy — hunting — that’s a healthy thing,” Jimenez said.

“Having said that,” he said, “one of the critiques that I would offer back is that a lot of the article uses data from annual reports, and the data from annual reports is not research-quality data at all.”

Jimenez used Idaho as an example. He said Idaho managers have purposely curtailed surveillance of breeding pairs once it’s known that there are more than 15, the minimum in the delisting agreement.
Creel and his co-authors, Jimenez said, falsely assumed the lower numbers of breeding pairs of wolves in the reports meant a lower number of breeding pairs in the wild.

Jimenez also defended hunting as a central component to management.
“Think of wolves in Canada and Alaska. They’ve never not been hunted,” Jimenez said. “So did that same conclusion work there?
“I would say the questions [they pose] are very good to ask,” he said. “Their conclusions also need to be challenged and asked questions about.” 

No comments: