Our friend John Laundre giving further credence to the fact that the modern American Hunter is not more qualified than other Americans to dictate how we manage wildlife................The myth of the hunter as modern day "Jeremiah Johnson mountain man" is anything but factual..............As John points out, "only 20% of the hunters 16 years and older(5% of the population of the USA) came from non-metropolitan areas"........ "Around 42% of the hunters come from metropolitan areas with greater than 250,000 people"..............."Conversely, 30% of the American population spend time outdoors watching wildlife"..........."They are just not out to shoot something and then go home!".......... “They” actually take an interest in what a live animal is doing, not just trying to find one as quick as possible and shoot it"................Once again, we reiterate that we must change how we fund state Game Commissions so that hunter tags are not the only source of revenue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Only then, will the largest segment of outdoor enthusiasts(non hunters) be truly represented in how our wildlife is managed

Do hunters know best?

by: John Laundre

I am sure we have all heard it over and over again.  It has become the mantra of the hunting industry:  hunter, presumably because they spend time in the field hunting something to kill, know more about how nature and wildlife work than non-hunters.  They chide non-hunters, city slickers, tree huggers, who they say have an unrealistic, “Bambi” understanding of nature, one where bunnies cavort with foxes, in a Disneyland atmosphere.  It is because of this “vast” knowledge that hunters smugly contend that they have the inside track on what is best for wildlife, conveniently this means hunting them!  And so, what they say goes.

Are there really still mountain men outdoorsmen(portrayed in the classic film, JEREMIAH JOHNSONS) who are experts

on wildlife in the 21st century?........How many modern hunters

understand and agree with the following: “Only the mountain has lived long enough to listen objectively to the howl of the wolf.”--

Aldo Leopold--Blogger Rick

But do they?  Do hunters have this innate all-knowing understanding of how nature works?  Let’s look at the facts.

First, where do most hunters come from?  The hunting industry would have you think that most hunters come from a rural background, living off the land, rugged individualists who use hunting to supplement their food stores.

 Images of Daniel Boone or Davy Crockett come to mind.  But in reality where do most hunters come from?   According to the 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, only 20% of the hunters 16 years and older came from non-metropolitan areas.  Around 42% of the hunters come from metropolitan areas with greater than 250,000 people. 

 Most hunters, then, are city dwellers.  In fact, when we consider the number of non-metropolitan residents, only 18% of them hunt.  Also, if we look at the average income of people who hunt, over half (57%) earn more than $50,000 per year (66% of these make over $75,000), compared to the national average of $42,500 and a national median of $27,500.  They are also predominantly male (89%), white (94%), between the age of 18 and 54 (65%), and well educated (63% with post high school education). 

  So the average hunter is an economically well off white, young to middle age metropolitan male.  Not the typical rugged mountain man type depicted by the industry!  Also at $50,000 + a year, we can kiss goodbye the image of the struggling individualist out there hunting to keep alive!

Ok, maybe they don’t come from a rural, close to nature background but they do spend a lot of time out in nature, don’t they?  And they ARE highly educated!  Maybe if they spend so much time afield, they could have unique insights into how nature works?    However, again, according to the national survey, the average days spent afield per year was 21 days!  Three weeks out of 52!  This means that all these savvy hunters that know so much about wildlife and how nature works, come from their metropolitan lives and spend just 5.7% of their time “in the wild”!  Most, especially big game hunters, only spend opening day, yes, one day, in the field.  And from this vast experience afield, they propose that they, more than others, know how nature works???

Is the modern day hunter equipped with space age killing technology truly the best informed on woodland diversity?-blogger Rick

You might say, well, three weeks is more than what non-hunters spend out there!  Let’s look at those others, which by the way make up 95% of the rest of the population.  Do these “tree huggers” spend any time out there?  And who are they?  “They” constitute 30% of the population 16 years and older (71.8 million of them, compared to a mere 13.6 million hunters).  “They” makeup over 40% of the non-metropolitan population (compared to 18% that hunt).  “They” are a balance of women (54%) and men.  “They” are as white (91%) and educated (62% with post high school training) as hunters. 

 “They” are more experienced with almost half of them (48%) being over 55 years old.  How much time do “they” spend watching wildlife?   On average, “They” spent 77 days per year, intensively observing wildlife!     And the key to all this is that “they” intensively observe wildlife.   They are just not out to shoot something and then go home!  “They” actually take an interest in what a live animal is doing, not just trying to find one as quick as possible and shoot it.

So who should know more about wildlife and how nature works?  Is it the single focused hunter who spends a minimal time out in the nature he purports to know so much about?  Or the people who actually spends over 25% more time going out to observe wildlife? 

 You tell me.............................

So the knowledge base of hunters is a lot more limited than the wildlife observers…those “tree huggers”.  In the next post I will look at the vision that hunters say they have of wildlife and nature, based on their extensive outdoor experiences, and just see how close it is to reality. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Laundre is an ecologist at the State University of New York at Oswego, noticed the impact of fear on animals' behavior after the re-introduction of grey wolves in Yellowstone National Park while he was studying elk. And he has found that the greatest impact predators can have over their prey is not by killing but rather by instilling fear in them. He coined the term for this: landscape of fear.

The State of Maine has wanted to drastically reduce it's Eastern Coyote population over the past 6 years as the states deer herd contracted due to severe winters............This is always the knee-jerk reaction of State Game Commissions who are pressured by the hunters who pay their salaries through deer license sales...............KIll, Kill, Kill the carnivores because the deer are not readily available like "twizzlers" at the corner candy store...............Lo and behold, the doomsday predictions of deer "going, going gone" have not come true, even with another hard 2013-14 winter just coming to a close.....18,000-36.000 deer have been shot by hunters over the past 15 years with 22,000 taken down in 2012-13............With an estimated herd of 150-200,000 deer, the Maine Game Commission is only letting 11-15% of the herd be killed by hunters,,,,,,,,,,,Even if Coyotes and Bears killed the same number as human hunters, the herd would only lose 22-30% of it's total numbers, hardly debilitating for a hoofed browser like white tail deer..............Maine Deer biologist Kyle Ravana gleefully saids this about deer numbers------“Our harvest has been increasing since the hard winters of 2008 and 2009".......... "For all intents and purposes, I think our population is back to what it was before those winters"..............“There are going to be some hard times, but the deer have the ability to get through those hard times pointing out that the state’s deer have evolved to be able to survive here"...................... “Through proper management, good, sound management, we can help them get through those tough times.”.

 fhttp://outthere.bangordailynews.com
/2013/10/22/hunting/biologist
-expects-banner-maine-deer-season
/#.UzWv03BN7xE.email

Biologist expects 

banner Maine 

deer season

.

 article: http://bangordailynews.com/2014/03/28
/outdoors/long
-winter-may-affect-maine-deer-and-moose-
but-bears-dont-care/

LONG WINTER 
MAY
 AFFECT DEER

By John Holyoke, BDN Staff

 Follow on Twitter  Find on Facebook

Posted March 28, 2014, at 5:30 a.m.

Logging in Alaska's Tongass National Forest might result in the Archipelago Gray Wolves being placed on the Endangered Species LIst..........Alexander Archipelago wolves den in the root systems of very large trees and hunt mostly Sitka black-tailed deer, which are themselves dependent on high-quality, old forests, especially for winter survival............. A long history of clearcut logging on the Tongass and private and state-owned lands has devastated much of the wolf’s habitat on the islands of southeast Alaska........................The Fish and Wildlife Service considered listing the wolf under the Endangered Species Act in the mid-1990s but then chose not to do so, citing new protective standards set out in the Forest Service’s 1997 Tongass Forest Plan................... Unfortunately, as outlined in the conservation groups’ 2011 petition, the Forest Service has not adequately implemented those standards..

http://shar.es/BGdZD

Rare Alaskan Wolves Considered for Endangered Species List

Greenpeace | March 28, 2014 3:31 pm | Comments

 124  0 

 

  2  156

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced today that Alaska’s Alexander Archipelago wolves may need protection under the Endangered Species Act because of unsustainable logging in the Tongass National Forest and elsewhere in southeast Alaska. The agency will now conduct an in-depth status review of this rare subspecies of gray wolf, which lives only in the region’s old-growth forests.

Alexander Archipelago wolf populations cannot survive in areas with high road density, which the logging industry relies on. Photo credit: Greenpeace

Today’s decision responds to a scientific petition filed in Aug. 2011 by the Center for Biological Diversity and Greenpeace. Following the status review and a public comment period, the agency will decide whether or not to list the species as threatened or endangered.

“The Alexander Archipelago wolf, one of Alaska’s most fascinating species, needs the protection of the Endangered Species Act if it’s to have any chance at survival,” said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska director of the Center of Biological Diversity. “The Endangered Species Act is the strongest law in the world for protecting wildlife, and it can save these beautiful wolves from reckless logging and hunting.”

Alexander Archipelago wolves den in the root systems of very large trees and hunt mostly Sitka black-tailed deer, which are themselves dependent on high-quality, old forests, especially for winter survival. A long history of clearcut logging on the Tongass and private and state-owned lands has devastated much of the wolf’s habitat on the islands of southeast Alaska.

“This gray wolf subspecies exists only in southeast Alaska, and its principle population has declined sharply in the last few years,” said Larry Edwards, Greenpeace forest campaigner and long-time resident of the region. “Endangered Species Act protection is necessary to protect the wolves, not least because of the Forest Service’s own admission that its so-called transition out of old-growth logging in the Tongass will take decades. The negative impacts on these wolves are very long-term and have accumulated over the past 60 years of industrial logging.”

Logging on the Tongass brings new roads, making wolves vulnerable to hunting and trapping. As many as half the wolves killed on the Tongass are killed illegally, and hunting and trapping are occurring at unsustainable levels in many areas. Despite scientific evidence showing that Alexander Archipelago wolf populations will not survive in areas with high road density, the Forest Service continues to build new logging roads in the Tongass. Road density is particularly an urgent concern on heavily fragmented Prince of Wales Island and neighboring islands, home to an important population of the wolves.

In 2013 the Alaska Board of Game authorized killing 80 percent to 100 percent of the wolves in two areas of the Tongass because habitat loss has reduced deer numbers so that human hunters and wolves are competing for deer—putting yet more pressure on the wolf population.

The Fish and Wildlife Service considered listing the wolf under the Endangered Species Act in the mid-1990s but then chose not to do so, citing new protective standards set out in the Forest Service’s 1997 Tongass Forest Plan. Unfortunately, as outlined in the conservation groups’ 2011 petition, the Forest Service has not adequately implemented those standards.

Today’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 90-day finding on the Alexander Archipelago wolf determined that protecting this wolf as threatened or endangered “may be warranted” under three of the five “factors” specified in the Endangered Species Act:  

1. present or threatened destruction of habitat

2. overutilization (e.g. from hunting and trapping)

3. the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms

——–

An interest of this blog is why Gray Wolves and Coyotes do not hybridize in nature but Eastern Wolves(Red Wolves) and Coyotes(both western and eastern) will and do hybridize.....................So when I came across the article below about how our two species of Woodrat(Desert and Bryant's) largely do not hybridize even when they live in close contact with each other,I wanted to see what was different between the canids and rats as it related to hybridization proclivity............... I found it interesting to note that Mating opportunities between the two woodrat species are limited because they each have their homes and forage in very distinct habitats, even though those habitats are right next to each other................Also discovered is that the desert woodrat females were intimidated by Bryant's woodrat males due to their larger body size and aggressive nature............. In contrast, Bryant's females, themselves larger, were open to mating with the smaller, more docile desert woodrat males as well as the males of their own species.................Finally, the offspring of woodrat hybridization had higher infant mortality than did the infants of "purebred" rats of either species..................Gray Wolves historically see Western Coyotes as competitors and seek to kill or drive off the Coyotes....................Eastern Wolves(Red Wolves) are viewed to be descended from an ancient Coyote lineage and when these Wolves are in small numbers and in fractured populations, the males will gladly mate with both Western and Eastern Coyotes.......And it seems that the offspring of Eastern Wolf/Coyote matings are anything but fragile,,,,,,,,,,in fact seemingly better suited to the altered habitat conditions of our Eastern landscape environment......It will be interesting to see in future years if hybridization dynamics are accelerated by warming temperatures( their likely impact on forest and field habitat conditions)----------------For more on wolf/coyote hybridization information, go to the first page of my blog and in the SEARCH BOX type in "wolf/coyote hybridization and eastern wolf/coyote hybridization)

HOW WOODRATS  LARGELY KEEP TO TWO SPECIES WHERE SOME CANID SPECIES READILY HYBRIDIZE
URL: ScienceDaily

Two new studies from the Wildlife Conservation Society, Idaho State University, and the University of Nevada Reno look at the surprising variety of factors that prevent two closely related species of woodrats from becoming a single hybrid species despite the existence of hybrid individuals where the two species come into contact.

After finding that two closely related species, the desert and Bryant's woodrats, could interbreed and produce hybrid offspring, scientists set out to determine why only 14 percent of the population in a "contact zone" had genetic signatures from both species. (If the two species were similar enough to interbreed, what was keeping them from merging into a single hybrid species?)

In the study, "Ecological segregation in a small mammal hybrid zone: Habitat-specific mating opportunities and selection against hybrids restrict gene flow on a fine spatial scale," which appears in the March print edition of the journal Evolution, the authors discuss the factors driving these mating dynamics in a hybrid zone in southern California.

DESERT WOODRAT

Trapping and handling hundreds of woodrats (also known as packrats), the scientists found that the two species are highly associated with different habitat types, though they may live within meters of each other along the boundary. Their research showed that 98 percent of Bryant's woodrats occupied a boulder-strewn hillside made up of coastal / Sierra vegetation, while 93 percent of the desert woodrats occupied the adjacent valley floor consisting of Mojave desert scrub and a sandy substrate. This, in spite of the fact that both habitats were theoretically available to both species.

"Mating opportunities between species are limited because the two species make their homes and forage in very distinct habitats, even though those habitats are right next to each other," said lead author of both studies, Quinn Shurtliff of the Wildlife Conservation Society and Idaho State University.

Gray Wolves do not hybridize with Coyotes and will look to drive them out of their habitat

Another reason why interbreeding between species is limited: personality conflicts. The scientists brought wild-caught woodrats into the laboratory to test female mate preferences.

They found that Bryant's woodrat females selected either Bryant's woodrat males or desert woodrat males with equal preference. Desert woodrat females, however, almost always mated with males of their own species.

The reason? The desert woodrat females were intimidated by Bryant's woodrat males due to their larger body size and aggressive nature. In contrast, Bryant's females, themselves larger, were open to mating with the smaller, more docile desert woodrat males as well as the males of their own species.

Western Coyotes do not hybridize with Gray Wolves but will do so with Eastern Wolves

Another factor shown to be determining the number of hybrids is that hybrid offspring do not survive to adulthood as well as do the other two species. Higher proportions of Bryant's woodrats survived to their first year of adulthood than did the hybrids (33 percent vs. 10 percent). The same was the case for the desert woodrats (22 percent vs.10 percent percent). Once the hybrids reached their first year of adulthood, however, they fared as well as the purebreds.

The reason for the low juvenile hybrid survivability, the authors say, may lie in the lack of aggressiveness and ability to compete with purebred males for denning sites and in winning territorial battles. This may necessitate greater dispersal for the male hybrids pushing them out of range of female hybrids and exposing them to greater predation pressure.

BRYANT'S WOODRAT

Shurtliff said, "These studies offer further insight into the behavioral and ecological dynamics of hybrid zones. Understanding these unique areas is important because there are many examples of naturally occurring hybrid zones, and new hybrid zones will form in the future as climate change and human impacts cause species distributions to shift and come into contact. For example, scientists have documented hybrid zones between introduced and native species, and climate change has already been linked to hybridization among flying squirrels in eastern North America. It is important to understand these relationships so that we can predict, and where necessary, mitigate their negative impacts."

Eastern(Red Wolves) will hybridize with both Western and Eastern Coyotes

"Experimental evidence for asymmetric mate preference and aggression: behavioral interactions in a woodrat (Neotoma) hybrid zone," appears online on BioMed Central.Authors include: Quinn R. Shurtliff of the Wildlife Conservation Society; Peter J. Murphy and Marjorie D. Matocq of the University of Nevada, Reno; and Jaclyn D. Yeiter of Idaho State University.

"Ecological segregation in a small mammal hybrid zone: Habitat-specific mating opportunities and selection against hybrids restrict gene flow on a fine spatial scale," appears in the March print edition of the journal Evolution. Authors include: Quinn R. Shurtliff of the Wildlife Conservation Society; Peter J. Murphy and Marjorie D. Matocq of the University of Nevada, Reno.

Eastern Coyotes will hybridize with Eastern(Red Wolves)

---

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Wildlife Conservation Society.Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Clustered mostly in the sparsely populated mountain ranges and deserts of the West(with a few patches further east) are the last remaining vestiges of wilderness in the continental USA, usually land that historically was seen as inhospitable to development or protected by law............Examples include the bayous of southern Louisiana, the north of Minnesota, and the Adirondacks of New York........There are currently just 750 such areas in the National Wilderness Preservation System comprising over 109 million acres -- roughly 5% of the United States by area.... ............ "Man has too long forgotten that the earth was given to him for usufruct alone, not for consumption, still less for profligate waste"............"Nature has provided against the absolute destruction of any of her elementary matter".............." But she has left it within the power of man irreparably to derange the combinations of inorganic matter and of organic life".............."We have now felled forest enough everywhere, in many districts far too much"........ "Let us restore this one element of material life to its normal proportions, and devise means for maintaining the permanence of its relations to the fields, the meadows and the pastures, to the rain and the dews of heaven, to the springs and rivulets with which it waters down the earth". ---- -George Perkins Marsh, Man and Nature

link to article----America the wild: Where to find untouched wilderness 

where there are no lights on at night, best places still left for wildlife

Our friend, George Wuerthner consistently and with best science, articulates accurately how important it is for top carnivores like Wolves, Pumas and Bears to actively be part of our natural systems.........This week in Colorado, George had this to say during what is known as AGRICULTURE WEEK-----"Wolf packs create carrion year round, which becomes a sometimes critical source of food for other species"........."State wildlife agencies ignore social ecology in their management of carnivores"......."Indiscriminate lethal control (hunting and trapping) exacerbates conflicts between humans and predators"..............."Human hunters who harvest elk and deer are not a replacement for natural predation because animals like wolves and cougars tend to target very different individual animals than do hunters................George covers all of the proven scientific facts about how top trophic carnivores assist strongly in keeping our world healthy and diverse...............As he states, "when animals like wolves and cougars are removed from the top of a food chain, the numbers and behaviors of prey species are significantly altered"......."That shift in turn upsets the balance that once prevailed and harms the overall environment down to plants and invertebrates"

Ecologist says top predators restore balance to mountain states' ecosystems

http://www2.steamboatpilot.com/news/2014/mar/26/ecologist-says-top-predators-restore-balance-mount/

Ecologist says top predators restore balance to mountain states' ecosystems

By Tom Ross

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

• Share this

Steamboat Springs — George Wuerthner, a prolific author, ecologist and longtime critic of grazing on public lands, came to Steamboat Springs in the midst of Agriculture Week on Tuesday to talk about the role of predators, particularly wolves, in healthy natural ecosystems.

#Wuerthner said the restoration of populations of top predators, including mountain lions and bears, in an ecosystem can restore its original health and actually provide life-giving support to other mammals and birds in times of critical need.

wolves hunting moose

#Noting that recent mild winters in Montana have reduced the amount of carrion available to ravens, magpies and wolverines, Wuerthner said wolf packs create carrion year round, which becomes a sometimes critical source of food for other species.

#“It’s particularly important in late winter and for mother grizzly bears just coming out of the den and looking for their first meal,” he said.

#Wuerthner’s talk at Library Hall was hosted by the Yampa Valley Sustainability Council, the Sustainability Studies Program at Colorado Mountain College, Yampatika and Bud Werner Memorial Library. Wuerthner is a senior scientist and ecological project director for the Foundation for Deep Ecology.

#Wuerthner said he hoped to get four key points across to his audience:

#• The many ecological benefits created by top predators

wolf chasing a coyote

#• The fact that social ecology (the pack relationships among wolves, for example) are important to the management of predators and, in his view, that state wildlife agencies ignore social ecology

#• Indiscriminate lethal control (hunting and trapping) exacerbates conflicts between humans and predators. Shooting the alpha male of a pack of wolves, for example, can reduce hunting success and lead to more and smaller packs within an area. And the reduced social structure and desperation for food can cause younger wolves to prey on livestock.

#• Human hunters who harvest elk and deer, for example, are not a replacement for natural predation because animals like wolves and cougars tend to target very different individual animals than do hunters.

#The positive effect that predators have on a larger ecosystem often is referred to as the trophic cascade.

#The theory behind that much talked-about phenomenon, Wuerthner explained, is that when animals like wolves and cougars are removed from the top of a food chain, the numbers and behaviors of prey species are significantly altered. That shift in turn upsets the balance that once prevailed and harms the overall environment down to plants and invertebrates.

#The effect can be measured in the return of wolves to Yellowstone, Wuerthner said. In their avoidance of areas where wolves den, elk are spending more time on higher, steeper slopes, which in addition leads to the perception among hunters that wolves have reduced the number of elk available to them.

wolves hunting elk

#“This is an important point,” Wuerthner said. “Hunters say the wolves are killing off elk. There are more now than before (wolves) were reintroduced, but they are harder to hunt. If you are hunting in the old places you are used to, you’re not going to see as many elk as before.”

#Hunting has been used as a tool to reduce elk populations to more sustainable levels in regions of the West, and in terms of sheer population numbers, that’s effective, Wuerthner said. However, there’s a downside, he said. Hunters tend to harvest prime bulls and fat young cows all in their reproductive years. That naturally reduces the overall fertility rates of an elk herd. Wolf packs, on the other hand, are apt to go for a target of opportunity and take down an older cow elk, who also happens to be past her reproductive years.

#One study showed that the mean age of female elk shot by hunters is 6.5 years and those killed by wolves average 13.9 years, Wuerthner said.

#Wolves have, however, aggressively reduced the number of surviving coyote pups by 30 to 40 percent in Glacier and Yellowstone national parks, Wuerthner said. Coyotes are rivals of wolves when it comes to hunting.

#“Fewer coyotes leads to more fox — wolves don’t care about foxes,” he explained. “Coyotes feed on rodents, now the numbers of rodents have increased and there are more raptors in those areas feeding on rodents."

#Coincidentally, the Jackson Hole News and Guide reported March 19 on new research that confirms that coyotes aren’t the only rival predators being targeted by wolves in the vicinity of Teton National Park.

#New research released by the Teton Cougar Project shows that only 7 percent of Jackson Hole’s mountain lions are surviving to adulthood. The project’s Mark Elbroch revealed that only 34 of every 100 kittens born in the area in the past 13 years survived to age 6 months. But when the last six years were considered, the survival rate was halved.

#Mapping the trend lines of the increasing wolf population in the study area against the declining survival rates of cougar kittens showed almost a 100 percent correlation, Elbroch said. Cougars that survive to between ages 6 and 18 months are far less likely to become the victims of other predators.

wolf and puma confrontation

#Wuerthner told his audience in Steamboat that just as indiscriminate hunting can disrupt the hunting habits of wolves, it can do the same with cougars, though they don’t hunt in packs.

#Mature male cougars tend to dominate large territories that overlap the smaller territories of the three or four females they breed with. When a hunter kills a trophy lion, the removal of that dominant individual allows younger, less effective hunters to occupy the territory.

#It’s most often these younger lions that interact with human society on the edge of cities like Boulder, Wuerthner said. Those are the desperate mountain lions, with few hunting skills, that are tempted by dogs left on the back porch of a house.

#To reach Tom Ross, call 970-871-4205, email tross@SteamboatToday.com or follow him on Twitter @ThomasSRoss1