Visitor Counter

hitwebcounter web counter
Visitors Since Blog Created in March 2010

Click Below to:

Add Blog to Favorites

Coyotes-Wolves-Cougars.blogspot.com

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)

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

linda Mccracken has become a friend of this blog........A long time New Hampshire resident, Linda has been investigating alleged Puma sightings across New England and New York State for years.........She is 100% certain that there has been a breeding population of the big Cats in the Northeast perhaps going back as far as the 1950's(perhaps they never were fully extirpated from the region per Linda)..........Linda offers her perspective on the "cat" that most say was a bobcat,,,spotted last week in upstate New York(Pleasantville),,,,,,,,,,Linda absolutely believes that the Regional Game and Fish people know that Pumas exist on the landscape despite their public stance that Pumas are currently absent from our Eastern Forests.........Linda provides her email address and encourages those who feel they have seen Pumas to contact her about those sightings and join her in her quest to prove that Pumas are not "ghost cats" in the Northeast

Having read the story about the cougar seen in Pleasantville, NY last week that was deemed a "bobcat", I E-mailed some notes to Rick Meril. He asked me to write a report about my opinions and what is happening in the northeast, particularly New Hampshire.

First, I do not think the cougar sighting in Pleasantville, NY was a bobcat because I have a friend who lived near there. She normally had deer in her backyard, but one day she looked out the window to see a mountain lion with a big long tail walking quietly in the grass near the edge of her woods where the deer usually hang out.

Second, I collect cougar sightings in New Hampshire, but inadvertently, I've also collected 41 cougar sightings in New York State. Although most were in the Finger Lakes area, some were pretty close to New York city (probably the cats were following the Hudson River south from the Adirondacks).
Third, I checked Pleasantville, NY on Google Earth. It is surrounded on three sides by power lines. In my own research, New England cougars seem to travel via three different routes: by following rivers, power lines or trails (deer, hiking, rail trails or RV/snowmobile trails). My belief is that cougars use these same routes to avoid people, to travel long distances quickly or to hide or disperse for food as other animals use them, too. Pleasantville, NY has power lines to the west, north and east.
As for nearby four-lane highways, cougars in NH and RI have had no trouble crossing highways as they jump high and run fast. In 2005, a cougar sat next to a NH Rt. 89 exit just watching the traffic go by!

In New Hampshire, 90-95% of my friends had seen cougars over the years, several more than once. One friend saw six cougars in six months along the same state highway located in four different towns 20 miles apart. The sightings were not the same cougar as all but two were different colors, sizes, ages and health (one young cat was emaciated and starving). Five cougars in twenty miles in a six month period is a lot of cougars!

This is one reason I do not believe the government's claim that mountain lions are extinct and not here. This is why I'm trying to prove that they are here. I'm concerned that officials will claim that future cougar sightings are because of the Rewilding program.

None of my "proof", (sightings, tracks, scrapes, etc.) has been confirmed by NH Fish & Game, but officials also do not come out to check my data, including tracks, as they "have no money" and seem to be sure there are no cougars here. I've sent out two scat samples, but both came back as canine (I'm trying).

What I do have for proof is a huge database of more than 800 sightings over 80 years with locations, dates, behaviors, and other sortable categories. Much of this data is plotted out on maps so that patterns now exist of where cougars used to be (SW and northern NH) and where they exist presently, everywhere there are deer, including a few sightings in cities like Concord, Manchester, Portsmouth and Nashua.

Although most people observe the big cats crossing the road, a field or a backyard, my own face to face encounter happened very differently less than two miles from my house in 2010. I heard a loud crashing in the trees and bushes. Thinking it was a bear walking in the woods on the side of my dirt road, I was shocked to see the face of a cougar running at full speed out of the trees and across the two dirt tracks. The cougar's belly was near the ground as it was running so fast and it hissed twice at whatever it was chasing making a loud sound like "hiss-sah". Mesmerized by the dark brown spot on its long tail, I watched as the long sandy beige cat used the tail like a lever, swinging the it to the right to keep its balance as the long mountain lion turned left onto a snowmobile trail.  I had a camera in my hand, but was too shocked to click the button. Then I heard more crashing in the bushes and two very confused deer came out, looked towards where the cougar had disappeared, then at me, and then went in the opposite direction down the dirt road.

The location was perfect habitat with wild fields, trees, bushes, open trails for vehicles and snowmobiles plus a creek and a pond! New Hampshire is often diverse like this and has many granite ledges, often facing south, as well as a good supply of deer, turkeys, beaver plus other animals. The habitat is ideal for a large predator!

Last week the local police told me of a 1999 sighting in the same area as my sighting. The policeman had been out searching for marijauna plants when he saw the cat lying across a dirt road. It looked like it was hunting something, but then looked up at him and jumped into the bog's cattails.
Hunters have also seen the cougars or their tracks. One man the next town over fell asleep sitting with his back against a tree while waiting for a deer. When he awoke with his gun in his lap, there were large 4" cat tracks in the snow near his boots where a cougar had evidently sniffed his boots as he slept. This was in 2007.

This week, I spoke with a woman who heard her cat crying, looked out the window at her pet cat up on the BBQ with the largest cat she'd ever seen down on the deck. She said it looked like a lion, but she didn't think twice about protecting her cat. She grabbed a broom, opened the door, ran outside and growled at the cat to challenge it and swept it off the porch with the broom. Surprised, the mountain lion ran down the steps and away. This was in the year 2000. Tracks were seen nearby in 2010.

In five years, I've collected over 800 sightings of big cats with long tails in New Hampshire. About half of these were collected by NH Fish & Game, but they say none of the reports are confirmed sightings.

Since officials often don't come when called, I do not believe they want to confirm any sightings.
My town has had over two dozen sightings since the 1980s plus tracks, scat, scrapes and dead pets near some of the times and places when cougars were seen. The town south of us has had regular sightings since the 1940s and the town north of us since the 1930s.
One story was really interesting. Two hunters got caught in the Hurricane of 1938 (as weather forecasts then weren't what they are today). The hunters sought out a little hunting cabin on the side of a mountain. It wasn't much, but it had a roof, a door, two cots and two open windows. In the middle of the night, as the winds and rains became horrendous, a mountain lion, also looking for shelter, jumped through the window opening, landed on the floor between the two cots, looked at each of the men and leaped out the window again! It evidently thought the hurricane preferable to humans.
Some say these people are just telling stories, but hunters, police, artists and animal lovers know the difference between a large cat with a long tail and a bobcat, dog or raccoon. These are the animals that officials have tried to tell the people that they actually saw. Yes, a few city folk may get confused, but not 800 people over 80 years.


















My statistics show that cougars historically have been in the southwest and north of New Hampshire for a full 80 years, but have slowly spread elsewhere throughout the state. By the 1980s, there were reports of them in every county in the state. Originally, there were 3-20 sightings per decade, but since the year 2000, there have been hundreds of sightings! In my county alone, there were 114 sightings and/or tracks in the decade of the 2000s. Since 2010, there have been 85 sightings and/or tracks in just over a two year period!

My opinion is that wherever you have deer in your backyard, you may also have cougars. They will most likely not be seen unless you just happen to look out your window at the right time or have a pet that alerts you.
Deer, fawns, sheep and goats have been seen in various places throughout the state cached in trees. What does that sound like to you? I was told it was fishers. I don't think they are strong enough to haul a complete deer or sheep carcass into a tree.
As for a breeding population, my sighting statistics have been mapped to certain mountains and waterways that have had continuous evidence of sightings for decades, which, to me, proves that there is a breeding population. The first kittens were reported in the 1970s, but last year there were a half dozen reports of dens on private property or kittens and/or adolescents with or without spots and/or their mother that were also observed. To a person, no one will allow anyone access to the den sites as they are protecting the cats!

Personally, I believe that the officials know the mountain lions are here. Rumors have it that they have actually released mountain lions in PA and NY to take care of the overpopulation of deer. I have not heard anything like that here, but the increase in sightings does seem to indicate either an increase in cats or a lack of fear. Both make sense.















Puma in Nebraska

One hundred years ago, New Hampshire was 20% forested and 80% agricultural. Cats were killed on sight to protect livestock. My belief is that mother cats told their young to keep away from humans and hid out in inaccessible areas. There are plenty of inaccessible areas in New Hampshire including two near my house that have not been touched since the Native Americans lived here 500 years ago.
Currently, 80% of New Hampshire is forested and 20% has human habitation. I've been told that it is too forested, and that there is not enough edge territory for deer to attract cougars, but we have over 6,000 miles of snowmobile trails, and many hiking trails like the Appalachian trail and the 50 mile Monadnock-Sunapee Greenway trail (where one driveway that crosses the trail has had four sightings of mountain lions). The cats can travel sight unseen anywhere they want to go in this state to find prey.
The fact that they are now seen so often means that there are now many more cats or they have lost their fear of people. I know for a fact they are not scared of us. Half a mile south of my house, one cougar crossed the road in front of a car, then sat down to stare at the driver while he stopped to stare at the mountain lion! Another followed a woman in the woods. I hope it was out of curiosity.
If there are any professionals out there who would like to help me get proof of the big cats' presence, I would really appreciate it! The last sighting locally was in mid-December where a cougar was "doing something" in a ditch by the side of the road near where deer congregate around 4 AM in a city of 23,000 people.

In the past two weeks, I've seen tracks twice in snow that had melted and then refrozen. The tracks were inconclusive being 7"x7", but they were round, the stride was 24" and the tracks went in a direct line like a feline.

A power line parallels this highway and there have been at least 6 cougar sightings along this east-west power line within 15 miles. The north-south road which is where I live is highly traveled and has had 18 sightings (not including tracks) in a 16 mile area plus 3 sightings that were counted above that connect this road to the above power line.


















puma on trailcam in Missouri

Where else can you get such a dense area of sightings for study? If anyone would really like to help in a scientific way, please contact me at lmccracken2002@yahoo.com

John Vucetich is the co-leader of the Mt Royale(Michigan) Wolf/Moose study.........We continue to follow he and Rolf Peterson's accounting of wolf/moose predator and prey dynamics through the NY Times Science blog.......We seemingly are down to a single wolf pack on the Isle with Jon and Rolf seeking to determine how many pups of the year are female,,,,,offering hope for perpetuation of the Wolf society of this closed system

NYTimes.com

 Following the Wolf Pack

By JOHN VUCETICH


Chippewa Harbor wolves resting after an unsuccessful night of hunting.John Vucetich, a wildlife ecologist from Michigan Technological University, leads the wolf-moose Winter Study at Isle Royale National Park.

Thursday, Feb. 2
We see two wolves sleeping with full bellies in the bright sun. Two others — each with bones braced between their paws — crunch and gnaw for the rich marrow inside. The last two wolves are not visible. Presumably, they are asleep beneath nearby spruce.

The Chippewa Harbor wolf pack is feeding on their moose carcass for the third day. They’re spreading bones, blood, stomach remnants and hair over larger and larger areas every day. There seem to be enough remains to keep these wolves eating for another couple of days. After observing the wolves, Don and I go prospecting from one inland lake to another. This is the most efficient way to find wolves or tracks of wolves you don’t know are there. We get lucky, finding two wolves walking the shoreline southwest from Hay Bay. Loping at four miles an hour, they clearly have a destination in mind. Don flies circles high overhead while we watch and wonder. Who are these wolves? Did a lone wolf hook up with a successful emigrant from the Chippewa Harbor Pack? Are they the reconstituted remnants of Middle Pack? Or something else altogether?

.After crossing the mouth of the Big Siskiwit River, the larger of the two wolves stops at a rock poking through the snow, sniffs, turns, raises his tail, arches his back and deposits a big scat. He scratches the snow and moves on. The second, smaller wolf walks over and scent-marks the same rock with a raised leg. Whoever these wolves are, this is their territory, and they are defending it.  We could have figured out who this wolf was, had a raven not stolen that scat before we could get to it.“I want that scat,” I say to Don. The DNA in the scat will tell us who these wolves are. But it’s late, and the sun is fading fast. Maybe tomorrow we can snowshoe in from Lake Halloran to get it.

Friday, Feb. 3
The weather looks like it could change for the worse before we can retrieve that wolf scat. No one wants to spend a night in the bush because of excessive enthusiasm for a scat. But the weather is good for counting moose (no wind, low morning sun), so we go moose-counting. During the afternoon flight, Don and Rolf observe that the Chippewa Harbor Pack is continuing to feed and rest at the kill site for the fourth day. So they go prospecting for wolves or wolf tracks that we haven’t seen before. No new clues.

Saturday, Feb. 4
Rolf and I review all our field notes: which wolves were seen where and when? And where were they in relationship to the various sets of fresh tracks we’d observed? We realize that the two wolves we saw southwest of Hay Bay may be the alpha pair of the Chippewa Harbor Pack. All future observations will be weighed for or against the hypothesis that the Isle Royale National Park wolf population now comprises just a single pack.

On the fifth day at the kill site, four wolves are play-wrestling among themselves, tails wagging, front legs flailing. After several minutes of self-generated excitement, it is time to abandon this kill site. When they leave, they head west. We get a clear view when the pack comes out of the forest at McCargoe Cove. They are led by a strong, proud wolf, his tail pointing high to the sky. At the head of the cove, he scent-marks a stump: the exclusive privilege of an alpha wolf.

The wind is building, grabbing the wings of the Flagship, jerking with increasing violence, side-to-side, up-and-down. It is time for some work on the ground. Don sets us down on Lake Halloran. There, we strap on snowshoes and head north through alder, spruce and aspen, then downhill and onto the beach of Siskiwit Bay. After about a mile, we reach that rock poking through the snow, the one that held our scat. But we find nothing but a bare rock — and the tracks of a raven. Hop, hop, then the impression of flight feathers in the snow. A raven has stolen our scat.

Wolves eat very large prey. To minimize losses to scavengers like ravens, they are adapted to eat and digest food very quickly. Consequently, much of the protein in moose meat remains in wolf scat, more than enough to satisfy a raven’s hunger.

On our trek back to the plane, I can see that the moose’s shins are beginning to bleed. It is starting to show in their tracks. Temperatures fluctuating around the freezing mark have created a crust on the surface of the snow. Hair is thin on the front of a moose’s shin, and they get abraded from repeatedly punching through the crust. From now on, moose will begin to spend more time in thicker stands of conifer, where the snow is not so deep.



















Cow and calf moose being chased by the Chippewa Harbor wolf pack.By late afternoon, the receding wind grants us an opportunity to catch up with the Chippewa Harbor Pack. They have left McCargoe Cove to hunt moose. Before nightfall, they find a cow and calf. There are moments of terror for the moose, no doubt, but the wolves never even come close.

Sunday, Feb. 5
The wolves have traveled all night, mostly in single file, and sometimes through snow that is chest deep. They passed through one swamp after the next, all country they’d been through many times before. Though they passed several moose, none were vulnerable enough to take down. After an unsuccessful hunt, the Chippewa Harbor Pack sleeps throughout the morning in a clearing beneath the warm sun. Southwest winds are building, sending us home long before we want to leave.

NOTE ABOUT THE NY TIMES SCIENCE BLOG
This blog is the modern version of a field journal, a place for reports on the daily progress of scientific expeditions — adventures, misadventures, discoveries. As with the expeditions themselves, you never know what you will find.

Are there scientists you would like to see write about their field work? Are you a researcher interested in writing about your own field work? Send an e-mail to scientistatwork@nytimes.com. If you are nominating yourself, please include a description of your field work and samples of your writing and photographs.

Jym St. Pierre of RESTORE THE NORTH WOODS calling our attention to an extremely concerning moment in Maine where the Govenor and certain State Representatives are seeking to overturn and gut the MAINE LAND USE REGULATION COMMISSION(LURC), which for years has kept essential checks & balances in place between preserving the environmental character of our North Woods and allowing for responsible development in less sensitive land areas......For all of you who have spent time and soaked in the vastness and beauty of Maine,,,,,, as well as the rest of us who can highly empathize with the need for responsible regulators to be in place to stop greedy, thoughtless and damaging short term development,,,,, we urge you to take action below as Jym outlines

Stop Bill to Gut Maine Woods Protections!

Dear Rick,

Last year, Gov. Paul LePage and some legislators tried to abolish the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC). This is the state agency that was created to look out for the interests of all Mainers by protecting Maine's 10.4 million acres of Unorganized Territory in the North Woods. The reason is simple: they want to allow large landowners and real-estate speculators to develop the Maine Woods with virtually no restrictions.

  














the beauty and vastness of Maine with potential for wolf/puma restoration

Once citizens found out about this attack on LURC, they pushed back. In an attempt to bypass the public, the Legislature created a 13-member LURC Reform Commission, comprised primarily of people who wanted to abolish LURC. Not surprisingly, the commission's final report called for changes that would gut LURC and benefit developers. Now, these anti-LURC recommendations have been turned into a bill, LD 1798. If passed as written, LD 1798 could emasculate the agency, abolishing LURC slowly instead of quickly.
















Lynx chasing down a snowshoe hare in Maine

WHAT YOU CAN DO

1. Attend the public hearing, which will be held on LD 1798 on Thursday, February 16, 2012, at 1:00 pm. The location is the Agriculture, Conservation & Forestry Committee in the Cross State Office Building, Room 206, in Augusta, Maine. Be prepared to speak for 2-3 minutes in opposition to LD 1798. See the key points below. Bring friends to fill the room.
2. Submit written testimony. Mail or deliver 20 copies before the hearing to: ACF Committee Clerk, 100 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333.
 3. Contact legislators on the Agriculture, Conservation & Forestry Committee. Call and/or write to urge them to "Vote Ought Not to Pass" on LD 1798. Also, contact your legislative representatives; find them at Voter Information Lookup.
 4. Write a letter to the editor of the major news outlets in Maine and your local newspaper. Letters in the news media reach readers and many government officials who monitor the news. Here is a list of most Maine newspapers.

MORE ON THE ANTI-LURC BILL

LD 1798, An Act To Reform Land Use Planning in the Unorganized Territory (UT), raises many concerns. It would:

* Put county politicians in charge of a board with statewide responsibilities. A majority of the new Land Use Planning Commission (LUPC) members would be county commissioners who could appoint themselves or friends to a state board with no legislative vetting. That creates conflicts of interest where developers and large corporate landowners have an incentive to get their people elected as commissioners. Nor does this ensure local control because county commissioners are elected mainly by voters far from the UT.

* Let counties drop out. Counties could opt-out of LURC if they took on land use planning, zoning and permitting. This would result in inconsistent standards in different areas, which does not help landowners with properties in different counties who want more, not less, predictability.

* Fragment planning and prospective zoning. Some planning and zoning would be done by LURC, some by regional planning commissions. Eliminating the consistency of having one agency use uniform standards for planning and zoning across the UT would decrease fairness and efficiency.

* Scatter permitting. Some permitting would stay with LURC. DEP would do permitting for large projects. Permit review for small projects would be eliminated or go to counties. Eliminating one-stop permitting ensures less consistency and fairness for applicants.

* Undermine the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). LURC's 2010 CLUP represents compromise among many diverse stakeholders. Overturning the CLUP disrespects the public process that was undertaken over several years and the hundreds of Maine citizens who participated.

* Reduce land protections. The LURC Reform Commission would have the new board "address" (i.e., dump) several crucial benchmarks, including LURC's "adjacency," "no undue adverse impact" and "harmonious fit" criteria, which have been used for decades to guide new projects toward compatible development and away from sensitive areas. The result would be increased sprawl in the Maine's North Woods.

* Eliminate the "demonstrated need" test. Developers often want to build even where there is a surplus of lots or houses. Terminating the demonstrated need criterion harms local citizens who can make a case there is no market for a speculative project. Nor does it help developers with big dreams but thin financing avoid falling into bankruptcy when no one wants to buy what they are selling.

* Turn a planning board into a development agency. State law would be changed to say that part of LURC's mission is "to encourage and facilitate regional economic viability." Already, residential development is allowed in 95% of the 10.4 million acres in the UT. Already, LURC has approved over $1 billion in commercial and residential development. LURC's job is to guide development. Requiring it to promote growth duplicates existing development agencies.

* Increase taxpayer costs for land use oversight. LD 1798 could cost Maine taxpayers a lot of money. The state will lose economies of scale, the counties will have to raise taxes, and someone will have to pay lawyers to defend lawsuits the counties can anticipate. In an era of economic recession, we cannot afford the cost of breaking up LURC, especially when it will result in more inefficiency in government, less fairness to applicants, more inconsistency across the UT, and greater public confusion.

* Abolish LURC. LD 1798 is a backdoor way to disguise the true intent - to get rid of LURC.

Please take action to help stop this attempt to destroy LURC - our main defense against uncontrolled development of the wild Maine Woods. If you have questions, feel free to contact me via email at jym@restore.org, or by phone at (207) 626-5635.

Thank you for your help!
Best regards,

Jym St. Pierre 
Maine Director

We previously reported on Missouri State Senator Bill Stouffer's senseless and inane bill that seeks to allow residents to shoot Pumas for any reason,,,,,,,,,this, with at best a transitory few "Cats" in the "SHOW ME STATE"...............In 2006, the Missouri Conservation Commission responded to reports about the growing number of cougar sightings in the state by codifying that the cats could be shot if they are attacking livestock or property or are threatening human safety........... Stouffer's bill would remove those two key restrictions, allowing the carte blanche killing of the state-protected animals............Stouffer in all his wisdom, states about Pumas:"The truth is they don't belong here," ............All of us have a chance to inject some sense into this backward and archaic thinking by signing the petition below that former St Louis police officer Craig Lanham has introduced to prevent Pumas from being persecuted without cause..............Please take a moment to add your name to this DO NOT KILL PUMA list----thank you Helen McGinnis of Cougar Rewilding for forwarding this information to us


From: Helen McGinnis <HelenMcGinnis@frontiernet.net>
To: Meril, Rick
Sent: Tue Feb 14 06:45:50 2012
Subject: Bill to allow killing of all Missouri's cougars referred to committee

Riverfront Times Blogs

Online Petition Aims to Stop Senseless Killing of Missouri's Mountain Lions

 
By Chad Garrison
Last week we told you about state Sen. Bill Stouffer's desire to eradicate mountain lions from Missouri with his bill that would allow the animals to be shot without reason.

On Thursday Stouffer's bill moved one step closer to becoming law when it was
read for a second time and referred to committee. But not so fast...

This week Craig Lanham, a St. Louis area police officer and volunteer conservationist, fired back launching an
online petition that he hopes will derail Stouffer's legislation from ever becoming law.

"The Senate bill reeks of those unfortunate days when people shot bisons from train windows for amusement," says Lanham, who became an advocate for the Missouri's small population of mountain lions after raccoon hunters in Ray County (Stouffer's district) shot a treed cougar last year and were not prosecuted.

In 2006 the Missouri Conservation Commission responded to reports about the growing number of cougar sightings in the state by codifying that the cats could be shot if they are attacking livestock or property or are threatening human safety. Stouffer's bill would remove those two key restrictions, allowing the carte blanche killing of the state-protected animals.

"The truth is they don't belong here," stated Stouffer this month when presenting his bill.

But the bigger truth, notes Lanham, is that the cougar was native to Missouri from time immemorial until the last known animal was shot in the Bootheel in 1927. The Missouri Department of Conservation believes the 28 confirmed sightings of mountain lions since 1994 have all been male cats that wandered in from other states. Moreover, there's no record of a cougar attacking livestock or a human dating back to settlement days.

Lanham, who has worked in the past in conjunction with the California-based Mountain Lion Foundation, says he hopes his petition will catch the eye of Stouffer's fellow legislators and the governor and encourage them to dismiss the bill.

"They need to know that the world is watching."

You can sign the petition
here.

Monday, February 13, 2012

We wish our friend Cristina Eisenberg all good things as she defends her PHD Thesis at Oregon State University on Feb 22 at 130pm; Richardson Hall; room 313---------GO GET EM CRISTINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eisenberg, Cristina <Cristina.Eisenberg@oregonstate.edu>
Date: Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:11 PM
Subject: Eisenberg defense

Hello all,
I am writing to tell you that I have completed my dissertation and turned it in to my graduate committee and will be defending it on February 22, 2012. I have attached a flyer with the details of my upcoming defense. I hope some of you will be able to join me, and that those who can't will think of me that day. My defense will be challenging, as all defenses are at my school.
I also want to say thank you. Many of you contributed to my dissertation by offering information, mentorship, encouragement, and friendship along the way. My work would not have been possible without your kindness and generosity, and I am deeply grateful to you.
Cristina Eisenberg
PhD Candidate
Boone & Crockett Fellow
High Lonesome Ranch Research Director
Oregon State University
College of Forestry
The Wolf's Tooth
Published in 2010 by Island Press

Nearly extirpated from Vermont, Timber Rattlenakes are being given a 2nd chance at long term survival thanks to the efforts of Biologists and The Orianne Society(snake and reptile advocates) who are in the middle of a two year study that tracks the snakes from their winter dens and follows their movements during the Spring and Summer months........The two remainiing populations of the snake are in the Western part of Vermont and are known to travel up to two miles from their natal dens during the warm weather months of the year.....Feared and hated by most, yet the Timber Rattler adorns the Revolutionary War era flag that bore the saying: "DON'T TREAD ON ME".....The snakes can live up to 30 years but females can take up to 10 years to become fertile,,,and then only reproducing two or three times over their lifetime..........At the northern end of their historical range, it is critical that enough connective habitat exist for the snakes continuance,,,,,, and it is uber-important for us humans to be educated about the need for co-existance


Advocates work to protect rattlesnakes in Vt.

Fedor-Cunningham, 53, of Benson, remembers when Vermonters could take proof of a dead rattlesnake to a town clerk's office and be given a check for helping clear the landscape of the snakes.
Though they're no longer common and rarely bother humans, the snakes still evoke fear. So Fedor-Cunningham is working with a group of state biologists and a private organization to ensure Vermont's rattlesnake population in western Rutland County at the southern end of Lake Champlain are protected from people and people are protected from the rattlesnakes.

That group is in the middle of a two-year study to track the snakes from their winter dens, most of which are on protected land, to learn about where they go in the summer. Last spring some of the snakes, estimated at several hundred in two separate populations, were outfitted with radio transmitters. By fall researchers were surprised to find just how far they went: Some traveled almost two miles from their dens, crossing roads and passing through rural backyards.

Almost since Europeans settled North America have rattlesnakes evoked strong emotions. They are one of this country's earliest symbols of freedom. It's a timber rattlesnake that is coiled on the Revolutionary War-era flag that bore the saying, "Don't tread on me."

For centuries, the poisonous snakes were feared and every effort was made to destroy them. It wasn't until 1971 that Vermont stopped paying bounties for rattlesnake rattles. In 1987, rattlesnakes were added to the state's endangered species list.

Rattlesnakes are extinct in Maine and Rhode Island. New Hampshire has one known area where rattlesnakes settle and Massachusetts and Connecticut have about 10.

"In New England, we've killed off most of our dangerous things. It's a relatively benign place to live," said Christopher Jenkins, the executive director of the Orianne Society, a Clayton, Ga.,-based nonprofit group dedicated to protecting snakes and other reptiles across the country. It's the group working on the Vermont project.

Now biologists are torn between competing desires to educate the public about the snakes and a need to keep quiet about their movements to protect them from unscrupulous collectors or others who could kill them out of an irrational fear.These rattlesnake lives on the landscape with people and people encounter them. The snakes come onto peoples' property," Jenkins said.

Fish and Wildlife Biologist Doug Blodgett has studied the snakes for years. They are venomous, so there is a legitimate need for caution; a man was bitten on the hand in Fair Haven in 2010 and hospitalized, but it was the state's only recorded rattlesnake bite in the past half-century.
But the cultural fear is so ingrained it crosses into the irrational, Blodgett said.

"The Bible speaks to these venomous serpents and the devil incarnate," he said. "That's quite a statement. When an animal is the embodiment of Satan, that's a pretty low blow."

Being in Vermont, at the extreme northern edge of their range, makes the snakes here more vulnerable than in other areas. Rattlesnakes, which can live up to 30 years, are unlikely to spend more than six months out of hibernation each year and might only feed once a season. It can take females up to 10 years to reach sexual maturity. Over their lifetimes, they might not reproduce more than two or three times.

So the groups pass out refrigerator magnets to people within the snakes' range that have the phone numbers to call if they find a rattlesnake. The numbers get four to eight calls a year, Jenkins said.
It's through those efforts and other outreach that people know to call Fedor-Cunningham or other volunteers.

Because rattlesnakes are listed as endangered by the state it is illegal to harm them or kill them, but Fedor-Cunningham and Blodgett know not everyone calls.

"You hear stories about people taking care of it themselves," Blodgett said. "When you mess with them and you get their attention, boy, now you've got yourself a situation, especially if you don't know what you are doing and you physically force them to defend themselves. Well, what else are they going to do? They are not good things to test your reflexes on."

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Laurie Blakeman is the "Dr. Seuss" of the Alberta, Canada legislature saying in no uncertain terms that she stands up for the declining Grizzly Bears in her Province(like Seuss standing up for the Truffula Trees in the Lorax)........As Blakeman(and Seuss) both have stated: "Once the grizzlies(Truffola trees) are gone, they are gone forever"

Liberal politician bears up for grizzlies

    MLA Laurie Blakeman slammed the Conservative government for not doing enough to protect the giant of the Canadian forests despite the fact there are fewer than 700 grizzly bears remaining in the province.
     

    MLA Laurie Blakeman slammed the Conservative government for not doing enough to protect the giant of the Canadian forests despite the fact there are fewer than 700 grizzly bears remaining in the province.

     

    EDMONTON — Alberta Liberal politician Laurie Blakeman says she is willing to stand in front of logging trucks and be arrested to save the grizzlies in Alberta's Castle Crown Special Management Area.

    "I am willing to do it for the grizzlies," she told reporters at the provincial legislature. "I want to be able to see a grizzly bear in the wild in my lifetime, and more than that I would like to see my niece get that opportunity."

    Blakeman slammed the provincial Conservative government Thursday for not doing anything to protect the giant of the Canadian forests despite the fact there are fewer than 700 grizzly bears remaining in Alberta.

    She said the logging operation in the Castle area, some 100 kilometres south of Calgary, wipes out grizzly habitat and endangers hibernating bears and their cubs. She said the operation must be shut down.

    Rather than arresting protesters at the site, she said, the provincial government should be using its expertise in locating bear dens to ensure loggers keep their distance from them.
    She questioned why the area was designated a special area if it is open to forestry.
    "You would think there would be no logging in a so-called 'special place,'" she said. "But there's no legislation to make that mean anything. It is a designation without any protective teeth."

    She said she doesn't blame the logging company for wanting to log the area, but puts the responsibility firmly on the Tory government for issuing the permit for such a sensitive area.
    She said the government dragged its heels on designating grizzlies as a threatened species and should be listing them as endangered.

    Blakeman noted that 80 per cent of the region's residents have stated they oppose logging in the Castle area and wondered when the premier will "do the right thing."
    "Once the grizzlies are gone, they are gone forever," she said.





    Once the Truffula trees are gone,
    they are gone forever

    Wolverines in Europe have been known to tolerate much more human distrubance than what we believe that their North American cousins can deal with...........Now we learn that one of our Wolverines has crossed the Trans-Canada Highway............Is there hope that these tough little "bearcats" can somehow adapt to our landscape manipulations and persist into the longterm?

    Wolverine Makes First Known Trans-Canada Highway Crossing

     by Brett Israel, OurAmazingPlanet.com


    After 15 years of looking left, then right, then left again, a wolverine has finally made its run across the Trans-Canada Highway.

    The wolverine didn't run through traffic. The critter was caught by a wildlife camera while scampering over a special "wildlife overpass" along a stretch of highway in Banff National Park. The brave wolverine made the first recorded crossing of a wolverine overpass in the 15 years since they were built, reported the Rocky Mountain Outlook. The system of multimillion-dollar overpasses was built over the highway to reduce wildlife deaths.


















    "We've had wolverines using the underpasses before, but never an overpass, and any time a wolverine crosses the highway is big news," Trevor Kinley, a Parks Canada wildlife biologist, told the Rocky Mountain Outlook.

    The TIMBER WOLF ALLIANCE of Wisconsin feels that the Wolf management bills in the State Senate fail the test of 'BEST SCIENCE AVAILABLE" and therefore should be defeated................Among the flaws in these bills pertaining to wolf long term sustainability is the fact that the hunting season closes too late, interfering with mating season,,,,,,,allowance of night and road hunting,,,,,,,,,,,,,hunting with dogs permitted,,,,,,,,,,,,a generalized hunting region rather than focusing on where livestock depredation most often takes place..............It appears that the Dept of Ntl Resources Wolf Science Committee and State Wolf biologists were not consulted on the bills..............Are these bills being railroaded to pacify farmer and hunter interests rather than the interests of an optimum functioning predator/prey system in Wisconsin???????

    A gray wolf in the wild. Park officials say hunting restrictions in place in parts of of Montana have protected Yellowstone's wolves from a repeat of a 2009 hunt in which four Yellowstone wolves were shot.
    Timber Wolf Alliance’s Zach Wilson and Carl Anderson: If doing wolf hunt, do it right


    Over the last two decades, the ecology of the northern Wisconsin landscape has been changing. Wolves, a natural part of our state’s heritage and ecology, are reclaiming their presence. Now, as that recovery is becoming complete, the Wisconsin Legislature is proposing the first hunting season on wolves in over half a century. This proposal has brought strong reactions from a public that holds widely varying views on this predator.

    Since these proposals have come to light, many have asked the Timber Wolf Alliance about our position on the legislation. The mission of TWA is to use education to promote and maintain healthy, ecologically functional wolf populations in the western Great Lakes region. We have been working for 25 years with state and tribal officials, natural resource agencies, wildlife managers and the public in efforts to restore and maintain healthy wolf populations.

    TWA views the recovery of Wisconsin’s wolf population as a tremendous ecological success. TWA also maintains that the healthy population of wolves now found in the state no longer requires the intense protection it once needed. We have supported both the delisting of wolves in the state, and the use of lethal depredation control — stances based on sound science. Since our mission is science-based education rather than advocacy, we neither support nor oppose the public harvest of wolves at this time.
















    However, TWA maintains that any public harvest system must preserve a healthy, ecologically functional wolf population. In addition, any management system incorporating public harvest needs to be grounded in the best science available. Assembly Bill 502 and its twin, Senate Bill 411, fail in both these criteria, and because of this TWA opposes their passage.

    There are a number of questionable management strategies in these bills that go against the best science we have on maintaining healthy wolf populations. The most scientifically questionable points include:

    • Restriction of DNR management options regarding the use of zones and closed areas, common practice in many other hunting seasons.
    • A season that begins before pelts are prime, a waste of a natural resources.
    • A season that closes too late, interfering with mating season and population monitoring efforts.
    • Ability to hunt with dogs, which may increase wolf/dog conflicts and dog depredation payments.
    • The introduction of night and road hunting, which pose direct human safety concerns.
    • A generalized harvest with little effort to direct harvest toward areas with the greatest wolf depredation problems.
    Introducing hunting legislation at this time is also inconsistent with Wisconsin’s Wolf Management Plan. Proposing to abandon important provisions of the plan on the same day delisting was finalized increases the likelihood of legal challenges to the entire delisting effort.

    In addition to the issues with the bill itself, the process by which this bill was proposed provided little opportunity for public input. The assembly bill was published at the end of the day on Friday, Jan. 27. The public hearing was held the third business day following publication, leaving many with a strong stake in wolf management little more than a day’s notice to review the bill and prepare comments.

    While the bill’s authors testified they worked closely with the Wisconsin DNR in developing the legislation, there is little evidence that state wolf biologists or members of the DNR Wolf Science Committee were consulted in drafting this legislation. A DNR press notice released just three days before the bill was published states, “There are currently no plans for a hunting season on wolves.” Furthermore, many entities, including members of the state’s Wolf Stakeholders Group, tribal governments, concerned citizens, and the larger scientific community, were not a part of the process nor were they informed of the legislation ahead of the Feb. 1 Assembly hearing.

    Wisconsin has a strong legacy of leadership in wildlife management, a history that has been shaped by greats like Aldo Leopold and Sigurd Olson. We spent decades wiping wolves out of the state, and we have now spent decades working to see them return. If Wisconsin is going to consider the public harvest of wolves, it can take the time to do it right. Our Legislature has a public trust responsibility toward wildlife and to proceed in a manner that incorporates broad public input, the best available science, and sound conservation practices. These bills fail on all these criteria.

    Zach Wilson is coordinator for the www.timberwolfalliance.orgTimber Wolf Alliance and Carl Anderson of Verona is a local representative for the group.

    Where is the tail?............Another alleged Puma sighting in Connecticut, near U. Of Connecticut's Farmington Campus------That is one big bobcat in the grainy picture below;;;;;or is it??????????????

    Possible Mountain Lion Sighting at UConn Health Center
    However Farmington animal control officer says is was a bobcat; blurry photo sparks rumors and debate
    Rumor has it there’s a mountain lion roaming the area around UConn Health Center in Farmington. Employees in an office building there snapped a picture of a large animal that was said to be just outside. The picture was circulated in the office and on Facebook and conjecture ensued.
     
    “It’s not a mountain lion. It’s a bobcat,” said Farmington animal control officer Charlene Rogers, who had seen the picture.“Bobcats live in our area, especially in the UConn area and there has been a family denning there for at least 20 years,” Rogers said. The sighting was reported to UConn Health Center police as well.

    Officially, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection maintains that there are no mountain lions living in Connecticut.In June and July of 2011, mountain lion sightings were confirmed in Greenwich and in Milford, where a mountain lion was ultimately hit by a car and killed. DEEP reports say that the rash of sightings in southern Connecticut was of the same animal, which had traveled more than 1,500 miles from South Dakota.

    “The confirmation of a wild mountain lion in our state was the first recorded in more than 100 years,” said DEEP Commissioner Daniel Esty at the time. “This is the first evidence of a mountain lion making its way to Connecticut from western states and there is still no evidence indicating that there is a native population of mountain lions in Connecticut.”

    According to Rogers, there are clear differences between a bobcat and a mountain lion that make it easy to distinguish the two species. A mountain lion is of greater size, a distinct color, has a wider head shape and a long tail.

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service describes the animal as one color, either reddish brown or grey-brown, "with very long tails and broad, round heads with erect, rounded ears" and weighing between 100 and 140 pounds


    Bobcats, according to the DEEP description, are about twice the size of a house cat, with yellow-brown or reddish brown fur and faint black spots. Bobcats are also stout, with a short tail, prominent face ruff and tufts of black hair sprouting from pointed ears.

    Native populations of mountain lions once lived in Connecticut but as settlers cleared land and forests diminished, the animals disappeared from the state. Scientists believe mountain lions were eliminated in Connecticut more than 100 years ago.

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service even concluded in 2011 that the eastern cougar is extinct and may have been since the 1930s.

    Saturday, February 11, 2012

    The Alberta, Canada Tar Sands is in the process of becoming a killing field for Wolves with the rationale being that the less wolves, the better protection for withering Caribou herds............Let Prime Minister, Stephen Harper know how opposed you are to the aerial and/or terrestial killing of Wolves,,,,,and that improved habitat protection for Caribou is the key to their survival...........I thank Norm Bishop for his inspirational Aldo Leopold input for this Posting................."No important change in ethics was ever accomplished without an internal change in our intellectual emphasis, loyalties, affections, and convictions............ The proof that conservation has not yet touched these foundations of conduct lies in the fact that philosophy and religion have not yet heard of it............... In our attempt to make conservation easy, we have made it trivial."--Aldo Leopold

    Dear Friend,

    If Alberta Canada's tar sands oil fields are fully developed, an area of
    boreal rainforest the size of Florida will be eviscerated, leaving in its
    wake only giant ponds of toxic wastewater.

    To make up for the fact that extracting tar sands oil is threatening
    caribou herds by destroying vast swaths of rainforest habitat in Alberta,
    the Canadian government has called for strychnine poisoning and aerial
    shooting of thousands of wolves in areas of tar sands mining.
    This plan is both cruel and deeply misguided.

    I just signed a petition telling Canada's Prime Minister Harper to Stop
    Canada's planned tar sands wolf killings.

    by--Norman Bishop

     Learn more and add your name here:
    http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/tar_sands_wolves/?r_by=34874-3219902-
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Canadian Government Plans to Poison Wolves Due to Tar Sands Project    
    Los Angeles Times; Jeremey Symons
    The toll of tar sands development has been largely hidden hundreds of miles to the North. Canadian forests once provided the last undisturbed refuge in North America for migrating songbirds, ducks and geese, and the vast stretches of wilderness in northern Alberta have been ideal for wild wolves and caribou that have thrived in balance with nations of native Canadians for countless generations.
    Alberta's carefully constructed web of secrecy was pierced this week by news that Canada is planning to poison thousands of wolves in a desperate effort to save caribou decimated by oil development. Recent scientific studies have proved that Canada's Woodland caribou herds are heading toward extinction due to habitat destruction from tar sands and other oil development. Today's Los Angeles Times article sums up the story:
    Woodland caribou herds in Canada are declining, and tar sands development is a big part of the reason why. But Canada's national and provincial governments know what do about that: Kill the wolves.
    The news was uncovered by the National Wildlife Federation, whose biologists concluded:
    Canada's proposed solution to habitat destruction from tar sands development is to destroy the wolves that prey on caribou, instead of protecting their habitat.
    Two particularly repugnant methods of destroying wolves -- shooting wolves from helicopters and poisoning wolves with baits laced with strychnine -- would be carried out in response to the caribou declines. Strychnine is a deadly poison known for an excruciating death that progresses painfully from muscle spasms to convulsions to suffocation, over a period of hours. Wildlife officials will place strychnine baits on the ground or spread them from aircraft in areas they know wolves inhabit. In addition to wolves, non-target animals like raptors, wolverines and cougars will be at risk from eating the poisoned baits or scavenging on the deadly carcasses of poisoned wildlife.
     GRAY WOLF











    Americans have been dragged into this mess via the controversial Keystone XL pipeline proposal, which would move the thick black crude under 1,700 miles of the U.S. heartland. So now the same oil companies that have ravaged Alberta's wilderness have brought their deep pockets to America to fight President Obama's prudent decision to deny a permit for this massive new tar sands pipeline.

    They're running millions of dollars in TV commercials and spending millions more on lobbying. By turning tar sands into a kitchen table issue in the United States, Transcanada has drawn more scrutiny on what is really happening with the massive tar sands expansion than Alberta was prepared for.
    This story is gaining a lot of attention and picking up steam and has gone viral, which isn't surprising since National Wildlife Federation is the United States' largest conservation organization with four million supporters. National Wildlife Federation was also a leading voice in the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park -- wolves imported from Canada thanks to the generous cooperation of the Canadian government in the mid-90's.

    Wolves aren't the only wildlife impacted by tar sands. Waterfowl that land on the industry's toxic tailing ponds have been killed in the thousands.

    We have a voice and a role to play here in the United States. Oil companies have convinced some members of Congress to try to overrule the president's prudent decision on the tar sands pipeline. Let Congress know that America shouldn't reward Alberta's oil industry by reviving Transcanada's tar sands pipeline project. This tar sands pipeline is the oil export gateway that oil companies need to drive a massive expansion of habitat-destroying tar sands operations. And it would amount to an American seal of approval for the strychnine-poisoning of Alberta's wolves.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Norman Bishop commenting on Leopold's Land Ethic and how it is so foreign a concept to our Political Leaders...............and candidly, most of humanity
    I just completed reading Daniel Quinn's Ishmael (1992. Bantam/Turner). Half a century ago, I read much the same message as Ishmael left me with. It was Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac. In his foreword on P. viii, he writes, "Conservation is getting nowhere because it is incompatible with our Abrahamic concept of land. We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect."

    Later, in his essay, "The Land Ethic," he writes (P. 204), "In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow-members, and also respect for the community as such."

    In "The Ecological Conscience" (Pp. 207-208), he decries the shortcomings of conservation education, saying, "It defines no right or wrong, assigns no obligations, calls for no sacrifice, implies no change in the current philosophy of values. In respect of land-use, it urges only enlightened self-interest." And on P. 209, "To sum up: we asked the farmer to do what he conveniently could to save his soil, and he has done just that, and only that." (Pp. 209-210):

    "No important change in ethics was ever accomplished without an internal change in our intellectual emphasis, loyalties, affections, and convictions. The proof that conservation has not yet touched these foundations of conduct lies in the fact that philosophy and religion have not yet heard of it. In our attempt to make conservation easy, we have made it trivial."

    In "Land Health and the A-B Cleavage," he writes (P. 223), "In all these cleavages, we see repeated the same basic paradoxes: man the conqueror versus man the biotic citizen; science the sharpener of the sword versus science the searchlight on his universe; land the slave and servant versus land the collective organism. In "The Outlook" (Pp. 224-225), he continues, "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise."

    Much of my life has been spent trying to educate people on bits and parts of the above concepts. I hope they catch hold before we no longer have any options left.
        

    The National Wildlife Federation has penned an excellent summation of the the environmental catastrophe that is unfolding in the Alberta, Canada Tar Sands...... The land and the entire array of wildlife that calls the land home is under assault in the same fashion that is occurring in West Virginia with Mountaintop removal and coal mining---We are truly out of control energy addicts and every fossil fuel and green fuel(wind/solar) energy project has devastating impacts on our natural systems from complete puncturing of the landscape to road building to open pit residue holding ponds to covering thousands of acres of desert with panels to lining our mountains with 300 foot windmills---THERE MUST BE ANOTHER WAY TO POWER US UP?????????????????

    Tar Sands Development to Lead to Poisoning of Wolves

    Canada is poisoning wolves to deal with the disrupting effects tar sands development is having on wildlife.

    / Doug Inkley, John Kostyack and Sterling Miller-Ntl Wildlife Federation
    Gray Wolf
    As the Obama administration decides whether to give the go-ahead to the 1,700-mile Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline from Alberta, Canada, to Texas, wildlife biologists have sounded a new alarm: expanding oil and gas production is contributing to the decline of caribou herds in Alberta.

    Incredibly, Canada’s proposed solution to habitat destruction from tar sands development is to destroy the wolves that prey on caribou, instead of protecting their habitat. Two particularly repugnant methods of destroying wolves – shooting wolves from helicopters and poisoning wolves with baits laced with strychnine – would be carried out in response to the caribou declines.

    Strychnine is a deadly poison known for an excruciating death that progresses painfully from muscle spasms to convulsions to suffocation, over a period of hours. Wildlife officials will place strychnine baits on the ground or spread them from aircraft in areas they know wolves inhabit. In addition to wolves, non-target animals like raptors, wolverines and cougars will be at risk from eating the poisoned baits or scavenging on the deadly carcasses of poisoned wildlife.
    Wolf Pups
    Canada’s Minister of Environment Peter Kent said in September that thousands of Alberta wolves will need to be killed to rescue caribou impacted by tar sands development. “Culling is an accepted if regrettable scientific practice and means of controlling populations and attempting to balance what civilization has developed. I’ve got to admit, it troubles me that that’s what is necessary to protect this species,” Kent commented. Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute estimates that many thousands of wolves could be destroyed over five years under Canada’s proposed plan.

    The minister has it backwards. Rather than killing wolves, he should be stopping the habitat destruction and restoring habitat associated with tar sands production. Without healthy habitat, the decline of caribou is inevitable, no matter how wolves are managed. If Canada wants to protect caribou herds, the first priority should be protection and restoration of caribou habitat.

    Oil and Gas Extraction Harms Caribou


    Caribou
    Caribou have made the northern hemisphere their home for 1.6 million years, but today, some populations of caribou are declining. Environment Canada recognizes the boreal and southern mountain populations of caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Alberta as threatened. “. . . the Alberta Caribou Committee notes that three of the province’s 18 herds are at immediate risk of disappearing because of loss of habitat. Six are in decline, three are stable, and not enough is known about the remaining six to determine how well they are doing,” wrote Canadian author and Arctic specialist Ed Struzik on October 27 in Environment360. “Scientists are confident, however, that they are in decline as well, further fueling efforts to protect caribou by eradicating wolves,” he wrote.

    A team of Canadian and U.S. scientists, led by Samuel Wasser, director of the Center for Conservation Biology at the University of Washington, agrees that mining oil from tar sands is a greater threat to caribou than predation by wolves. Lu Carbyn, an Emeritus Research Scientist with the Canadian Wildlife Service and adjunct professor at the University of Alberta, agrees that restoring habitat in highly disturbed oil and gas regions should be the top priority for anyone interested in caribou conservation.
    Caribou
    The Wasser study found that in winter, when food sources for caribou diminish and the animals rely on lichen, oil production activity is at its height. Moreover, oil extracting operations take place in the same open, frozen areas that caribou use. The noise, vehicles, machinery and industrial commotion of oil extraction stress the caribou as they try to paw through the snow for sustenance.

    Wasser’s group recommended that high-use roads be moved out of the open, flat areas.
    Tar sands extraction is one more in a long series of insults to the natural resources of Alberta. Logging and oil and gas production are also adversely altering, fragmenting and degrading the boreal forests of Canada. “At last count, 34,773 wells, 66,489 kilometers of seismic lines, 11,591 kilometers of pipelines, and 12,283 kilometers of roads had been built in caribou country in west central and northern Alberta. That doesn’t include the vast areas of forest that have been logged,” according to Struzik. As a result of this extensive habitat destruction, Struzik goes on to say that “over the past five years, the government of Alberta has spent more than $1 million poisoning wolves with strychnine and shooting them from the air. In all, more than 500 wolves” have been destroyed.

    Habitat Protection, Restoration Should Be the Focus

    Carving up forests is threatening caribou, many experts say, including the Canadian government itself. “Boreal caribou are primarily threatened by a reduction in the availability and suitability of habitat necessary to carry out the life processes necessary for their survival and reproduction,” states Environment Canada’s proposed caribou recovery plan. More development means more habitat loss, and fewer caribou, wolves and other wildlife. All wildlife need healthy habitats to thrive.
    In essence, it seems that Canada has decided to scapegoat wolves for the decline in caribou populations for the sake of promoting yet another polluting, heat-trapping fuel.

    Tar Sands: an Environmental Disaster

    Tar Sands destruction
    Tar sands oil extraction is wreaking havoc on the environment in Alberta in other ways and there’ll be more through the heart of America if TransCanada gets a permit.To produce one barrel of this heavy crude, extractors level the forest, dig up four tons of earth, consume two to four barrels of fresh water, burn large amounts of natural gas and create toxic sludge holding ponds. Multiple chemicals can escape from tar sands operations.

    Then there are the holding ponds. Operations in Alberta have already created 65 square miles of toxic holding ponds, which could kill scores of migrating birds and pollute downstream watersheds if they fail.

    In the United States, the pipeline could impair a broad range of habitats, including many rivers, sage grouse habitat and walleye fisheries. Once built, the pipeline could break and leak. The Keystone XL would carry tar sands sludge and bitumen, a substance more corrosive than crude oil that is thinned with other petroleum condensates and pumped at high pressure and at a temperature of more than 150 degrees through the pipeline.
    Tar Sands destruction
    Finally, there’s the issue of climate change. At a time when we should be cutting carbon emissions to stem climate change, burning more tar sands oil will inject even more heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Tar sands produce more carbon pollution per barrel than conventional oil. And this does not take into consideration the destruction of trees that sequester carbon.

    More tar sands oil perpetuates the nation’s over-reliance on fossil fuels and dirty 20th century energy systems for another five decades. In short, more tar sands oil means more global warming.
    Scapegoating wolves to produce profits for the oil industry, all at the expense of our energy and environmental security, is wrong. Caribou and wolves need habitat. The Canadian government needs to get on board.

    Doug Inkley is the National Wildlife Federation's Senior Scientist, John Kostyack is Vice President of Wildlife Conservation for the National Wildlife Federation, and Sterling Miller is the Northern Rockies NWF office's Senior Wildlife Biologist.

    LEARN MORE about the Keystone XL pipeline and what people across the country are doing to fight it
                                             
    Gray Wolf
    Protect Wolves from Dirty Oil
    Urge Congress to oppose dangerous tar sands development.

    Friday, February 10, 2012

    After World War 2, Black Bears in the South had been virtually extirpated from every region except for the Great Smokey Mountains.........As they have in the Northeast and parts of the Midwest, the bears are reclaiming their historical homes from Florida across to Alabama and up into Tennessee and Georgia.........Coexistance strategies to keep Black Bears wild and not acclimated to human dwellings will be part of the effort that State Wildlife Agencies take to minimize the rare negative encounters that can occur betweeen Bruin and Man

    Bear sightings becoming more common throughout Southeast


    A black bear roams in North Georgia.  Georgia Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division
















    A black bear roams in North Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division
    THE BEAR FACTS

    • Adult black bears are 5 to 6 feet long and weigh 200 to 600 pounds.
    • Females give birth to two or three blind, helpless cubs in midwinter and nurse them in the den until spring, when all emerge in search of food.
    • The cubs stay with their very protective mother for about two years.
    • Black bears can live about 20 years and are North America's most familiar and common bears.
    • They typically live in forests and are excellent tree climbers, but they are also found in mountains and swamps.
    • Despite their name, black bears can be blue-gray or blue-black, brown, cinnamon or white.
    Source: National Geographic

    Black bears, once seen in the Southeast only during a visit to the Great Smoky Mountains, are making a comeback.From Little River Canyon in Alabama to Cloudland Canyon in Georgia and along the Cumberland Plateau in Southeast Tennessee, bear sightings are becoming more common — sometimes in backyards.

    "They are coming back. It's a great thing," said Little River Canyon National Preserve Ranger Larry Beane, noting that rangers on the preserve estimate there now are 12 to 20 bears on Lookout Mountain's southern sweep.

    But "great" has a caveat.The bears need to stay wild and not learn to associate people with food, experts say.So in Alabama's Little River region, about 70 miles southwest of downtown Chattanooga, rangers intent on preserving the few bears there are embarking on a massive public education campaign."Confrontations with black bears are very rare. Most incidents are the direct result of people approaching the bear for photographs, surprising the bear or feeding the bear," Beane said. "Never approach, feed or follow wild animals, especially bears."

    In Southeast Tennessee, bear ranges have expanded out of the mountains on the state's far eastern border and west into more populated areas of Bradley County and the Cumberland Plateau. The bear population has increased so dramatically that wildlife managers are surveying the public's bear tolerance and contemplating increased bear hunts. Bear hunts that netted 20 animals in the 1970s are now tallying nearly 600.

    And memories are still fresh of a 2006 bear attack in Polk County that left a child dead and her mother and brother injured."Bear fatalities [of humans] are very rare. There have only been three east of the Mississippi in the past 100 years. Unfortunately, two of those three were in Tennessee," said Daryl Ratajczak, chief of wildlife and forestry for the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency.

    Six-year-old Elora Petrosek was killed by a black bear during a Chilhowee Mountain trail walk in the Cherokee National Forest with her mother and brother. Susan Cenkus, 45, of Clyde, Ohio, and her son Luke Cenkus, 2, were mauled in the attack.Ratajczak said rangers believe the attacking bear mistook the smallest child, who was attacked first, for a small animal.

    In May 2000, 50-year-old Glenda Ann Bradley was killed in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park by two female black bears. The third bear death east of the Mississippi was in New York, Ratajczak said.

    Bear Sense
    Despite the tragedies, wildlife officials insist black bears — the only bears found in the eastern U.S. — are shy and normally not a threat to humans.But problems often arise when people unthinkingly teach bears bad habits.When bears begin to associate humans with food or lose their fear of humans, the likelihood of bear-human interactions that end badly dramatically increases, Beane and Ratajczak said.
    Bad interactions include garbage-can diving, injured pets and wrecked gardens or bird feeders.

    And sometimes it's not the bears who are trespassers. Some new forest residents are actually homeowners in developments that have edged into what was once bear domain.
    TWRA has been called in the past year to new subdivisions in Bradley County when people see a bear, said Dan Hicks, a wildlife officer and spokeswoman for TWRA, and he said he expects more calls in coming months."This is the time of year when we get more complaints," he said.

    Although black bears in this region don't hibernate in the strict comatose sense of the word, they do den and sleep for long periods. When they emerge this time of year, they're hungry.Beane said rangers in other parks have seen visitors tossing potato chips from their cars to bears, or getting out of their cars to take photographs of the wild animals.

    Residential and campground problems also can arise when residents leave pet food bowls out or when campers toss uneaten food scraps in the woods."We'd like to prevent things like that from happening," Beane said. "We [humans] have a better learning curve than bears do."

    Hunts vs. Education
    Bear hunting is illegal in Alabama, but in Tennessee TWRA has been "managing" bear numbers with hunts since 1973. The hunt "harvests," as TWRA calls them, can keep bear ranges intact and provide a way to monitor the rise and fall of the animal's populations.

    In April or May, to help TWRA officials decide whether the agency will increase hunts or allow the bear ranges to expand, wildlife officers will examine the results of a telephone survey with 1,300 Tennesseans. The survey, conducted by the University of Tennessee, was made in three specific areas where bears already live near people, where bears are moving near people and where bears have never lived near people.

    The surveyors asked a number of questions about bears, including:

    • Do you enjoy seeing bears?
    • Do you want to see bears in your county?
    • Do you want to see bears in your backyard?

    Ratajczak said he believes the public has an unnecessary fear of bears, so he expects the majority of Tennesseans want to see the bear population grow — but not necessarily nearby."Bears are vastly different from deer or turkey. If I told you I saw a turkey in your yard yesterday, you'd smile and think that was cool," he said. "However, if I say there was a bear in your backyard, you might give me a completely different reaction."

    Ratajczak and Beane said bears are nothing to fear — as long as you act properly around them.
    "If people keep feeding their dogs out in the edge of the woods with pans of food that sit there two days, and they put their garbage out in open cans or go camping and throw all their food in the edge of the woods, the bears will find that and say, 'Hey, this is a good place to eat. I'm coming back,'" Beane said.

    If those temptations are absent, Beane said, the bears won't be attracted to things that will cause them harm."If they stay in the woods and eat nuts and berries and grubs and whatever they dig up and find, they'll live a happy little life here."And we'll see them occasionally," he said.

    Wildlife writer Ted Williams, Audubon Kansas and the Nebraska Niobrara Sanctuary have made a case to the Nebraska Legislature that calls for the protection and management of Pumas in the Great Plains States,,,,,,,,,,,,While a hunting season would eventually be allowed, resources would be allocated for research, management and perpetuation of the Cats..........There are some areas with sufficient habitat and prey in the Great Plains and Ozark states where small breeding populations of Mountain Lions could become established............ And, they can co-exist with farming, ranching and other human activities-as they do now in the Black Hills, Pine Ridge, and Badlands of western North Dakota..

    Mountain Lions Need Public Understanding


    Kansas Audubon
    flyrodreel.com
    Audubon of Kansas E-News


    Achieving Co-existence With and Conservation of Mountain Lions Requires Public Understanding

    We believe that positive conservation, research and management programs should be implemented for Mountain Lions in Nebraska, Kansas and other Great Plains states. On behalf of the Niobrara Sanctuary (as Manager), our Great Plains Conservation Partnership Program, and Audubon of Kansas, Ron Klataske presented testimony on LB 928 during the hearing conducted by the Natural Resources Committee of the Nebraska Legislature on Thursday afternoon February 2, 2012. Click here for a copy of the statement.

    At least one Mountain Lion has been periodically present on the Hutton Niobrara Ranch Wildlife Sanctuary and the immediate vicinity since May of 2010 when it was first captured on a trail camera maintained by Lana Micheel on adjacent property. Tracks, sightings and additional camera views have recorded the presence periodically and as recently as this past month in mid January.

    Although LB 928 would authorize the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC) to establish hunting permits for Mountain Lions, the most important aspect of the legislation is that it would give these native cats a status with greater recognition and allow NGPC to devote resources for research and management of the species. As the bill states, "Any money derived from the sale of permits by auction shall be used only for perpetuation and management of mountain lions." We believe the other funds generated from applications for a permit selected with a raffle should go to that purpose as well.
    Niobrara Mountain Lion
    Lana Micheel

    At present, Mountain Lions are protected in Nebraska, but they are often needless killed: illegally killed and not recognized as a valuable part of the state's wildlife heritage, or shot by various "officials" because they venture into and cannot find their way out of developed areas or because they take refuge near a rural farmstead or town.

    The status quo is conceivably more of a threat to the species than purposeful management and very limited hunting.

    They are very much like "a man without a country in a no-man's-land" in Nebraska and in even greater limbo in many other states. Without upgraded recognition they are in constant risk of being classified by legislative measures that would declare them as an animal that can be shot on sight by anyone.

    This fact was clearly illustrated by a regressive bill recently introduced in Missouri, a state that is otherwise often noteworthy for progressive conservation programs. On the same day as the hearing in Nebraska, Republican State Senator Bill Stouffer of Napton, Missouri introduced a bill (SB 738) that would allow any person to kill a Mountain Lion (for any purpose) in the state.
    Micheel Mountain Lion
    Lana Micheel

    A similar eradication bill was introduced a couple years ago in Kansas; it was fortunately tabled.Mountain Lions are apparently not protected at all in Iowa, where a number have been killed-needlessly in our opinion--in recent years. One was shot out of a tree by a deer hunter, and another was tried by a dog in a rural backyard and shot by law enforcement officers who expressed a degree of reluctance after killing the magnificent young animal.

    Senator Louden said at the close of the hearing in Lincoln that he knows of numerous Mountain Lions that have been shot in the area of his ranch in northwestern Nebraska and in another vicinity. He suggested the killing has been done under the approach of "shoot, shovel and shut up." The South Dakota Legislature has bills pending (HB 1081 and HB 1082) that would essentially authorize this approach, gut regulated Mountain Lion hunting observed by ethical sportsmen, tie the hands of the state wildlife agency, and make those provisions retroactive to December 8, 2010 so that a person charged with a specific violation would be able to "walk away" after disregarding laws and regulations.

    Audubon of Kansas has information on two Mountain Lions that were killed during the past ten years in Kansas that were never officially acknowledged. A separate violation resulted in the arrest and confiscation of a lion at a taxidermy shop. If poaching of other wildlife (deer, elk, etc.) is any indication, many more are likely killed that are never disclosed or investigated in the central and northern Great Plains.

    There are some areas, landscapes with sufficient habitat and prey, in all of the Great Plains and Ozark states where small breeding populations of Mountain Lions could become established, if permitted to do so naturally. And, they can co-exist with farming, ranching and other human activities-as they do now in the Black Hills, Pine Ridge, and Badlands of western North Dakota.

    The Nebraska legislation may begin to help to transform the sometimes-condoned culture of criminal behavior (shoot, shovel and shut up) toward a culture of conservation. Though limited, an opportunity for ethical hunting may help to replace inexcusable killing if sportsmen, wildlife enthusiasts (including landowners in both categories) and agency personnel increasingly work as collective stakeholders with an interest in conservation of Mountain Lions.

    Two of the most promising instances of partnerships between individuals and wildlife agencies occurred in January.

    Nebraska Game and Parks Commission officials released a Mountain Lion that was accidentally caught in a trap in Dawes County in the northwestern part of the state. The trapper who caught the young female, which weighed about 50 pounds and appeared healthy, in a legally set trap called wildlife officers immediately after he discovered it. Tracks in the snow indicated that another youngster and their mother were lingering nearby.

    Similarly, a man in Reynolds County in southeastern Missouri caught a young male Mountain Lion in a large cage trap. Conservation agents collected DNA samples and released the cat into the wild.

    The approach outlined by NGPC biologist Sam Wilson is reassuring.
    Our qualified support for LB 928 is also based on the fact that at this time we are willing to place confidence in the Nebraska Game and Fish Commission, particularly with the biologists in the wildlife division currently responsible for any Mountain Lion research and management that will be initiated. The testimony of Sam Wilson underscored the agency's present commitment to properly manage the species.

    Recognizing that the population in the Pine Ridge area of northwestern Nebraska may only have a population of twenty Mountain Lions, it is anticipated that only one or two hunting permits will be issued. Biologists estimate that sustainable take of Mountain Lions may only be ten to twenty percent of a population.

    However, we also recognize that state wildlife agency Commissions may yield to pressure from various interests that may call for allowance of increasing take beyond the recommendations of biologists, and beyond the sustainability of a population. According to the Mountain Lion Foundation, and the Black Hills Mountain Lion Foundation, the South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Commission has voted to override the recommendations of the agency's biologists and increase the quota for the kill for three years in a row. The S.D. 2012 hunting season underway now will allow the take of up to 70 Mountain Lions, including up to 50 female lions. With a population around 200, that may be more than twice the kill recommended by biologists. (The season was initiated in 2005)