450 acres of sub-alpine Forest surrounding the BRECKENRIDGE SKI RESORT in Colorado is targeted for further resort expansion.........Lynx love this type terrain and the Forest Service has acknowledged this but still has stated that they are in favor of proceeding with the development.............Contradictory statements by Forest Service Officials first stating that lynx can sustain the expansion impacts and then turning around and making other statements that suggest anxiety about Lynx ability to persist in mixed developement regions............Your head begins to spin when you read the article below............So much "used car salesmen" b.s. in these type discussion..........Talk about political mumbo jumbo and slide of hand and deception...........Nauseating it is and representative of the ANYTHING BUT SCIENCE BASED DECISION MAKING that should be at play in managing for long term persistance of the just recovering and restored Colorado Lynx population

Ski Resort Expansion Threatens Lynx Habitat

Plans for Breckenridge Ski Resort in Colorado could affect the elusive cat, among other environmental consequences.

By Janice Kurbjun
Editor's Note: The famed Breckenridge Ski Resort is planning an expansion that has Colorado residents worried. A proposal to incorporate an area called Peak 6 threatens wildlife habitat, an ecologically valuable watershed, and spruce and fir hundreds of years old. The proposed expansion would include a six-person, detachable lift and 450 acres of terrain. The first draft of an environmental impact statement (EIS) was released June 10 by the Forest Service for 45 days of public comment......

Summit County has a few lynx living in the area, having moved northward from the 1999 reintroduction area of the San Juan Mountains. By 2005, more than 200 lynx had been released, and monitoring was beginning to show success. In September of last year, the Colorado Division of Wildlife announced the reintroduced population was self-sustaining. They've since switched their monitoring to another focus area.

"The lynx is found in dense sub-alpine forest and willow-choked corridors along mountain streams and avalanche chutes, the home of its favored prey species, the snowshoe hare," the Division of Parks and Wildlife website states. Those dense, sub-alpine forests are what comprise the terrain for Breckenridge Ski Resort's Peak 6 proposed expansion—meaning the project's effect on lynx has come under significant public scrutiny.

The Forest Service issued an amendment that allows the project to move forward despite being "likely to adversely affect" lynx and despite the project being situated in primary lynx habitat.

 "Most of the Peak 5 and 6 habitat block below treeline is an intact, continuous, second-growth, spruce-fir dominated forest block that is little-used by humans," the Forest Service's draft environmental impact statement states. "Most of the Peak 5 and 6 block also supports a multi-layered understory with . . . relatively high snowshoe hare track abundance."

The statement adds that there is high-quality habitat along with low-quality and non-habitat in the area. There's also highly suitable habitat for lynx south of the ski resort. Lynx have been known to coexist with the ski resort operations in order to cross the Tenmile Range to connect with southerly habitat, the document states.

White River National Forest Service supervisor Scott Fitzwilliams said previously that the lynx habitat in Breckenridge is already so fragmented that making the waiver shouldn't have a dramatic impact. On the other hand, he said, there are collared lynx known to be living near Copper Mountain, making it a more sensitive area.

"We're still learning about them, too," said Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife spokesman Randy Hampton. "How they adapt in Colorado, circa 2011, is not always consistent to what we know about lynx circa 1950," he said, adding that some behaviors are unexpected — like appearing under ski lifts, and next to highways. Indeed, according to the environmental impact statement, Colorado lynx have maneuvered across broken habitat, and have bedded down in areas proximate to human activity.  But the environmental impact statement also says that Colorado's lynx habitat is already patchy and discontinuous.

"Maintaining landscape-level habitat connectivity may be paramount to maintaining a viable population," the document states. "Colorado lynx habitats are not only constrained by broad alpine zones and non-forested valleys, but also by towns, reservoirs, highways and other human developments that fragment and isolate montane and subalpine lynx habitats." It adds, "Any continuously forested corridor between mountain ranges supporting lynx habitat that is relatively free of human development has the potential to be an important landscape linkage. Large tracts of continuous forest are the most effective for lynx travel and dispersal."

Nonetheless, research and analysis seem to show that ski areas and lynx can coexist, primarily through the day-time uses of on-snow operations versus nighttime uses of the lynx, which are primarily nocturnal. Officials claim there's a difference between habitat connectivity and the ability of a lynx to move through portions of the landscape.

Forest Service spokesman Pat Thrasher said Peak 6 is within the Forest Service's larger lynx study area, but is a relatively small portion from an acreage standpoint. He added that all data collected from the area so far is raw and unanalyzed, including the lynx population of the area.

Breckenridge Ski Resort chief operating officer Pat Campbell said she and her mountain operators defer to the experts when it comes to their project's impact on lynx. "They determine the project design criteria and mitigation based on potential impacts," she said. "We trust them to manage those public lands appropriately. It's their say."

Lynx were reintroduced to the area because biologists felt there was still good habitat for them to thrive. They are said to have disappeared from the area around 1973.

Hamilton, Montana Protest Rally--Seeking to get Montana to mitigate their wolf management plan and set guidlines that are ecologically sound and not just focused on rancher/hunter bias

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Toni Stark <iamironwoman@gmail.com> wrote:

Rick,

We are planning our protest rally in Hamilton, Montana on Sunday, August 28th at 3:00 P.M. in front of the old Hamilton Courthouse.

We need at least 50 people there as that is the number of anti-wolf supporters that attended the Ravalli County Commissioner's Hearing this week.  (See: Bitterroot Star  8/23/11 article.) Two local musician's will be joining us and will have some songs about wolves to perform.

Toni

On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Rick Meril <rick.meril@gmail.com> wrote:

Jenny Sue Hane is trying to organize a protest/rally in Bozeman, Mt. She needs volunteers to help her. You can PM her on her FB page or go to Howl Across America:

http://facebook.com/HowlAcrossAmerica and click on the discussion tab to see all the rallies being planned.

C'mon people, the hunts start in nine days.

Howl Across America"Howl Across America" is a call to all wolf advocates to hold their own local protests in August 2011

First recorded picture of a cougar in Nebraska pursuing a white tail deer..........Location is the Niobrara Valley region in North-Central Nebraska, the 2nd most prolific area of the State where a breeding population exists

A trail camera mounted on a wooden fence post in north-central Nebraska captured a rare image of a mountain lion in hot pursuit of a white-tailed deer.

Valentine businessman Kirk Sharp's digital photograph shows a whitetail darting into athick stand of ponderosa pine trees on a canyon ridge line. The mountain lion is steps behind its prey.

"I don't how long the lion stalked the deer and I don't know where the chase began or whereit ended, but it went by my camera," Sharp said Tuesday. "They were moving fast."

Sam Wilson, theNebraska Game and Parks Commission's mountain lion authority, said that it was the first photo he has seen of a cougar chase in Nebraska."It's an awesome picture," said Wilson, who is meeting this week with other western states wildlife biologists in Gering, Neb.

Sharp said he has16 trail cameras posted around his ranch a half-mile north of Rocky Ford on theNiobrara River. The cameras are automatically triggered by motion sensors.Hunters use them to spot wildlife, determine game trails and select sites to hunt. Sharp said he never had seen a cougar in the 16 years he has owned the property. One of his first trail cameras snapped a photo of a mountain lion on the ranch in 2004. About 12 years ago, his son watched one sit on its haunches and stare at turkey decoys before ambling away.

Wilson said thatthe Niobrara valley around Valentine is the state's second-largest block of prime mountain lion habitat. The Pine Ridge in northwest Nebraska is No. 1. The Wildcat Hills near Scottsbluff ranks third. "We've had confirmed sightings of roaming males in the Niobrara valley for years,"Wilson said.

The Washington State proposed Wolf management plan--Backround and July 2011 Update(click on links below for a full read of the updated plan)

<>   <>

<>  Washington State Gray Wolf Conservation and Management The gray wolf is an endangered species throughout Washington under state law and is endangered under federal law in the western two-thirds of the state. Wolves were once common throughout most of Washington, but declined rapidly from being aggressively killed during the expansion of ranching and farming between 1850 and 1900. Wolves were essentially eliminated as a breeding species from the state by the 1930s, although infrequent reports of animals continued in the following decades, suggesting that small numbers of individuals continued to disperse into Washington from neighboring states and British Columbia. Reliable reports of wolves have been increasing in Washington since 2005 due in part to the recent recovery of wolf populations in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Washington now has a small breeding population of wolves in the initial stages of recovery. The state's first fully confirmed wolf pack in many years was discovered in Okanogan County in 2008. This was followed by the discovery of single additional packs in Pend Oreille County in 2009 and 2010. In July 2011 packs were confirmed in both Kittitas and Stevens Counties. In 2007, in response to the expected return of wolves and the state management responsibility following federal delisting (as well as state law WAC 232-12-297 requirements), the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) began developing a conservation and management plan for the species. The plan addresses two major issues: (1) recovery objectives and strategies for downlisting and delisting wolves at the state level, and (2) management strategies to reduce and address wolf-livestock conflicts.  Development of the plan in ongoing. The final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Recommended plan has been completed and will be presented to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission for consideration in August 2011. For more information, see: Wolf Plan Development Process and Archive <>  <>  <>  <>  July 2011 Update FINAL RECOMMENDED WOLF PLAN Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan for Washington Other information ·         Wolf Plan Development Timeline ·         Public Comments Received ·         Blind Peer Review Comments <>  <>  <>  <>  <>             <> <>  Toll-free Wolf Reporting Hotline for Washington 1-888-584-9038 More Contact Numbers and Information <><><> <><> <><><> <><> <><><> Interested in receiving notices about wolf plan review? Sign up here

Vermont Black Bear Season to begin Sept 1.....State Biologists claim the population has doubled from 3000 to 6000 Bruins over the past 25 years and are now found throughout the State..........Limiting the season to two Months through mid November allows Bears to den up and females to have the chance to raise and teach their new borns through the Spring and Summer Months

Vermont's bear hunting season opens Sept. 1 and runs through November 16

WATERBURY, Vt. — Vermont's bear hunting season opens next month.

Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department officials say the state's black bear population has grown over the last two years and is now estimated to be slightly more than 6,000. Officials say that's above the objective of 4,500-6,000 bears listed in Vermont's Big Game Management Plan for 2010-2020.

Twenty-five years ago Vermont had fewer than 3,000 bears, mostly in the mountains and Northeastern part of the state.

Wildlife biologist Forrest Hammond says changes in hunting regulations have expanded the population.

He says there are more cases of bears doing damage when they are attracted to bird feeders, pet food left outside, garbage cans, barbecues, livestock and field corn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
READSBORO, Vermont --With bear season starting Sept. 1, hunters are asked to avoid shooting bears inthe Readsboro/Searsburg area that have been fitted with collars.

Wind power study
The collars are part of a seven-year study on the movements of black bears, said Biologist Forrest Hammond of the Fish and Wildlife Department. Hammond, who leads thestate's bear project, said the study is being paid for by Iberdrolla Renewables as a requirement for a wind power project the company is proposing.

Hammond said this is the first study in the country involving black bears and wind power.
During the 1990s, black bear studies were done with the Stratton Mountain ski area, and data was used to create development plans for other ski resorts across Vermont.

He said the plan is to put collars on six bears sometime in September. Each collar collects and stores Global Positioning System data and is also fittedwith a VHF emitter, allowing the bears to be located with radio antennas.

Come March,Hammond said, the VHF signals will be used to find the bears in their dens so the positioning data on the collars can be downloaded. The collars will then goback on, and the process will be repeated, provided the bear isn't killed.

Hammond said the collars will make the bear's neck look "lumpier" and may be fitted with an orange tag, but may not be visible for hunters to notice befores shooting.

"Reducing wildlife conflicts through a market approach is not a new idea". ........."In a few cases, environmental groups have paid ranchers to voluntarily retire federal permits, and the conservation group Defenders of Wildlife began a program -- now run by the federal government -- to compensate ranchers for confirmed livestock kills"...... "For state land trusts, open permit auctions are obligatory because the law requires them to reap the highest profits to support schools"......."Congress should make this happen on a wider scale, empowering land managers to fully appraise permits using the latest environmental and livestock science and by allowing ranchers to sell them at market rates".......... "The Endangered Species Act may be our best tool for keeping wolves from going extinct, but a fair market for grazing could help find the right balance when wolves roam free"--Brendan Borrell of the PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER

by: Brendan Borrell visited Bozeman, Montana, as a media fellow at the Property and Environment Research Center.....his opinions on wolf/rancher co-existance are as follows: 

Get your rifles ready: Wolf season opens at the end of August, and for as little as $11.50 you've got a better chance than ever of bagging this toothy predator.

In July, Montana doubled its kill quota to 220, and Idaho, well, it has declined to set a quota. Wyoming plans to treat wolves as predators in most of the state, allowing them to be killed on sight. If all goes according to plan, the Rocky Mountain wolf population will be knocked down 60 percent from its peak of 1,733 in 2009.

This is obviously a perfectly sound strategy for preserving an iconic American species, which taxpayers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars breeding and feeding. No, not wolves, but public-lands ranchers, whose livestock graze on federal property and who are increasingly concerned about attacks by free-ranging wolf packs.

During this 15-year saga over wolves in the West, which pits conservationists against cowboys, it was easy to miss that the most outspoken cattlemen were not simply asking to guard their private property from deadly intruders. They were defending their right to pay rock-bottom prices to let their cattle graze unchaperoned on 162 million acres of federal land. Conservationists, trying to protect the wolf, were forced to claim these open spaces, vilifying ranchers and hunters and tying up federal regulators in a two-year lawsuit that was ultimately circumvented by Congress.

Fostering Conflict

Living with predators is never easy, but federal grazing policies seem designed to foster conflict rather than cooperation. The future of both wolves and ranchers depends, in part, on reforming our archaic and noncompetitive system through a shift to transferrable federal grazing permits sold on a regulated market.

Increased fees could offset government land management costs, improve environmental monitoring and enforcement, and compensate ranchers when wolves and other predators kill livestock. Environmental groups should be allowed to purchase and retire federal grazing permits in choice wolf habitat. The hunts should also continue, but with limits.

Wolves once roamed throughout the United States, but their presence was never welcome among men and women trying to make a living off the land. In the late 19th century, settlers and government workers devastated Western wolf populations using poison-laced animal carcasses inside and outside their stronghold in Yellowstone National Park. Animals that survived still faced shrinking forest habitat and a decline in their prey species, such as bison and caribou. In 1973, the northern Rocky Mountain wolf became one of the first animals listed under the new Endangered Species Act, but the move only provided the bare minimum of protection and little hope for recovery.

That's due to the complicated history of public grazing, which also dates back to the late 19th century, when the federal government encouraged western expansion into fertile valleys suited to agriculture. Unclaimed tracts in the uplands became a tragedy of the commons as shepherds and cattlemen competed for space, their livestock trampling healthy stream beds and turning grassy meadows into dustbowls. Range rights were enforced through coercion and violence.

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 reduced overgrazing by granting ranchers renewable leases to specific allotments, which allowed them to build fences and encouraged them to take care of the public land.

Today, ranchers have 26,000 permits to graze millions of livestock on pasture managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. They pay $1.35 per head of cattle per month -- a price set by cattle prices, livestock production costs and, ostensibly, private grazing lease rates. But since 1980 that amount has decreased 40 percent to its statutory minimum, and it is typically one-10th of grazing fees on private property and state lands.

Taxpayers Foot Bill

The U.S. spends about $135 million per year managing public-lands grazing, according to the Government Accountability Office, but collects only $21 million in fees. Taxpayers also foot the bill for the Agriculture Department's predator control program, whose hunters killed 81,684 coyotes and 478 wolves in 2009.

These subsidies might be acceptable if the federal government adequately managed public lands for both food security and environmental sustainability. But many allotments have more cattle than they can support, and land managers rarely hold ranchers accountable when they violate their contracts or damage public lands. Permits have been revoked in just a handful of extreme cases after bankruptcies and charges of animal abuse. It's a plum deal for these lucky ranchers, who drop their calves and cows off at the beginning of summer and pick them up a hundred pounds fatter in the fall.

In 1995, the range wars began anew. That's when Canadian wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone to bring the elk-heavy ecosystem back into balance. Other wolves started moving into northern Montana and Idaho on their own. As their numbers swelled, they were killing a few hundred sheep and cattle every year.

Ranchers have always had the right to shoot wolves caught in the act of attacking livestock, but they wanted to be able to shoot any wolf on sight and to enlist sport hunters for their cause. In 2011, they got their wish. Congress -- at the urging of the Public Lands Council and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association -- took the unprecedented step of booting Rocky Mountain wolves from the endangered species list.

Idaho and Montana plan to use hunting to keep wolf populations hovering at just above the threshold that would invite federal scrutiny: a couple of hundred animals each. Wyoming has agreed to treat its 340 or so wolves as predators in all but the northwest corner of the state.

Remarkably, legislators from these states are also seeking, through the 2012 Interior Department appropriations bill, to weaken environmental oversight of grazing permits, ban judicial review of wolf protection in Wyoming and the Midwest, and restrict legal challenges to grazing management. These moves would only lead to more acrimony in the West and, inevitably, more money wasted in the courtroom.

A Market Approach

Reducing wildlife conflicts through a market approach is not a new idea. In a few cases, environmental groups have paid ranchers to voluntarily retire federal permits, and the conservation group Defenders of Wildlife began a program -- now run by the federal government -- to compensate ranchers for confirmed livestock kills. For state land trusts, open permit auctions are obligatory because the law requires them to reap the highest profits to support schools.

Congress should make this happen on a wider scale, empowering land managers to fully appraise permits using the latest environmental and livestock science and by allowing ranchers to sell them at market rates. The Endangered Species Act may be our best tool for keeping wolves from going extinct, but a fair market for grazing could help find the right balance when wolves roam free.

Nevada is underway with its first Black Bear hunt in modern times with a quota of 20 animals(maximum 6 females)...............The season will stretch until December or until the quota is reached............The "quota is reached" philosophy is a flawed one in my opinion..........Why with a small population of Bears is it necessary to allow killing until the quota is reached.............Instead, if December comes and goes and only 12 Bruins have been taken, SO BE IT! Give the bears some space and let them grow in number...........Quota till reached makes no sense if your goal is to expand the population across a wider area of the State................For you hunters, it ups the ante by putting a finite time limit................For the bears, a sporting chance(of sorts) to make it to the "finish line" of the hunt without being snared.............

Fourth bear killed in Nevada black bear hunt

Share

The Associated Press

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2011 - 4:21 pm

Last Modified: Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2011 - 5:07 pm

RENO, Nev. -- Four bears have now been killed since Nevada's first black bear hunting season began four days ago.Department of Wildlife officials say a huge male bear weighing about 700 pounds was killed Tuesday in the Kingsbury Grade area.

Another male was taken Monday in the Sweetwater Mountains south of Wellington, and two female bears were killed over the weekend when the season opened.

Regulations adopted by the Nevada Wildlife Commission sets a maximum quota of 20 bears. Of those, only six can be female. The season runs through December or until those limits are reached.

So why is it that almost every "hunting & fishing" news reporter has a near addiction need to tell everyone that some act of god will be necessary for cougars to once again roam the Eastern half of the USA?......Below is a Massachusetts reporter staying true to the "cougar imposible in the East" party line........... The equivalent mantra of a democratic or republican candidate adhering right down the line on his/her monotonous and likely untrue "talking points".............I realize that the odds are long of both a male and female cat wandering down from the Dakotas or Great Lakes to mate up in New England............I also know it would be best if State Wildlife Agencies grew some cajones and went about restoring Cougars because it was optimum for the landscape to have this trophic carnivore "doing its thing" as a "regulator of the watershed".............But we have had one occurrence(Connecticut cat from Dakotas)take place that no one felt was possible.......I choose not to swallow the party line of "cougar imposible"..............While simultaneously also working to get the States to restore our majestic Mountain Lion as part of their rewilding programs

The brouhaha over local mountain lion reports quieted considerably, with most authorities having speculated that we're likely seeing single animals that were illegally kept and escaped or were released.

Maine bear and bobcat hunter Mark Dufresne responded to my recent column on local mountain lion sightings. He's regularly in contact with 20 bear and cat dog hunters up north. None — including Paul Laney, who has taken as many as 55 bobcats in a single year, and Nelson Cole, who is always in the big woods — has ever crossed a mountain lion track. They know as much about New England wild cats as anyone, having guided clients every possible day in any weather, including blizzards. They know they would have long ago treed lions if any had established a breeding population. For Dufresne, resident local mountain lions are wishful thinking. "You can make yourself believe anything you want," he said.

Dufresne remarked that up north, mountain lion sightings tend to come not from typical lion habitat but rather "big money areas like Cape Elizabeth that have no big pieces of forest." He believes people who can afford and are enamored with unusual pets have illegally kept and released them there.

Dufresne has considerable experience hunting mountain lions in Utah, where he's cornered many. When females have kittens, they're particularly easy to detect. He's consequently certain there's no breeding population of them in New England. For many, he speaks ex cathedra on the subject. But the latest DNA findings from Connecticut are bound to increase the volume of the controversy, if not change the mind of Dufresne and local scientists.

The mountain lion killed in June on the Wilbur Cross Parkway not far from New Haven sneaked its way here from 2,000 miles away in the Black Hills of South Dakota, passing through Minnesota and Wisconsin in 2009 and 2010. This astounding revelation surprised many skeptics, who were confident the big cats could never migrate such enormous distances across a labyrinth of human obstacles. But this single incursion appears to be a one-in-a-million lightning strike, a monumental aberration. The lion's journey and brief presence were followed for two years. The treacherous gauntlet of roads and highways soon caught this cat and would likely catch many more such vagrants if they were here in any substantial number.

How likely is it that two or more migrating mountain lions could make such an extraordinary odyssey, somehow survive, encounter each other, and begin a new population here? A lottery ticket is a surer bet.

British Columbia residents are inadvertantly bringing on the destruction of their Grizzlies and Black Bears through their errant garbage disposal habits.....The simple act of putting your garbage out the day of pick-up rather than the night before would do so much to minimize the habituation of bears to human refuse..........Bear sightings(not population increases) are up nearly 20% because of our lax and innappropriate behavior which causes bears to lose their fear of human settlement, ultimately reinforcing the known fact that a FED BEAR IS A DEAD BEAR,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.It is up to us to reduce the conflicts and subsequent mortalities by making a simple change in our weekly disposal routine

167th bear killed at B.C. trailer park

A black bear that was trapped at a Cultus Lake trailer park was the 167th bear to be killed by conservation officers in B.C. this year.

The 70 kilogram male was trapped following complaints it was regularly tipping over garbage cans at the Columbia Valley Road trailer park.

According to Conservation Officer Steve Jacobi, so far this year 163 black bears and four grizzlies have been destroyed province wide and in most case the bears are attracted by garbage left out by residents."It's not the bear's fault that it's come into contact with people and losing its fear and getting habituated. It's just that if people would put out their garbage on garbage day — the morning of — it would reduce a significant amount of our complaints," he said.

"After a period of time the bear gets pretty used to coming into this area and eventually gets very bold and starts coming around the daytime," said Jacobi.Once a bear gets used to humans it usually has to be put down, Jacobi says. Only 10 of the bears they've dealt with this year have been suitable for rehabilitation or relocation, he said.

Bear sightings in the Fraser Valley alone are up between 10 and 20 percent over last year, he said.

Tennessee has declared that Exotic Wild Boars to be eradicated from the landscape(In my opinion, unlikely to occur unless a combination of extreme trapping of hogs and restoration of wolves and cougars take place).........The hogs reproduce like rats.........rip up landscapes and in general throw the system into disrepair and ill-health............Hogs began going feral 400-500 years ago as explorers and farmers let their pigs forage the woods for food.............Many did not return to the "farm", forming wild communites of their own...........Add to that hunting groups setting feral hogs loose in different regions for hunters and you have an "introduced exotic" animal that is one tough customer to eliminate from the system

Tenessee's new wild hog management now in effect

New regulations regarding wild hog management in Tennessee are now in effect. Changes to wild hog management in Tennessee came as a response to concerns from landowners, the Tennessee Legislature, the Farm Bureau, and Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency biologists.

Wild hogs have been removed from big game status to a non-protected nuisance animal marked for eradication. Wild hogs cause extensive damage to farm crops, wildlife habitat, contribute to extreme erosion and stream pollution, and carry diseases harmful to livestock or other animals as well as humans.

A primary reason for wild hogs' rapid spread is illegal movement by those who wish to establish hog populations for hunting in areas that may have little or no wild hog populations. Therefore, in consultation with other states facing similar problems, the regulations have been changed to allow landowners great leeway to control hogs on their property while removing incentives to transport wild hogs to establish new or increased hunting opportunities, specifically for wild hogs.

The TWRA recognizes two important factors in implementing these changes: (1) hunting is an inefficient way to control wild hogs and does not offset the high survival and reproductive rate of wild hogs (2) illegal transport and release is the leading contributing factor in the spread of wild hogs. In cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Agriculture, measures have been implemented which make it illegal to transport or own an undocumented wild appearing hog.

The TWRA is implementing a 5-pronged approach to wild hog eradication in Tennessee:

Eliminate Status
Wild hogs have been removed from big game status and placed in a nuisance category.
Eliminate Hog Hunting
Special provisions have been implemented for landowners and their designees to control wild hogs on their lands. However, sport hunting of wild hogs is legal on only specific wildlife management areas as a part of an overall eradication program for those WMAs. While the TWRA obviously supports hunting, data indicates that sport hunting for wild hogs only adds to the incentive to create new and expanding populations. Similar to the provisions used by many landowners, the TWRA will begin intensive eradication measures on WMAs by trapping, which has been shown to be a much more efficient reduction method.
Increase Landowner Control Opportunities
As a non-protected species, private landowners and their family members or tenants that are exempt for purchasing a license for that property may freely take wild hogs with methods legal for taking big game or small game without license or permission from the TWRA. Landowners may now trap wild hogs without permit but no live hog may be removed from the traps.
Landowners wishing to get a method exemption (e.g., shooting at night, shooting over bait) may contact their local TWRA office and they will immediately be issued an exemption once they provide their name and location of property. Landowners may have up to 10 designees on the exemption form to assist with the wild hog eradication on their property. There is a special eradication program in Cumberland, Overton, Fentress and Pickett counties that allows landowners to use dogs under the methods exemption.
Increase Enforcement
Illegal transport of wild hogs was nearly impossible for the TWRA to enforce under the previous regulations. The Tennessee Department of Agriculture (TDA) has jurisdiction over confined swine while the TWRA has jurisdiction over unconfined swine. In conjunction with the TDA and other state and federal agencies, the TWRA is working diligently to tighten enforcement abilities related to illegal transportation and release of wild hogs.

Increase Public Awareness
Current efforts to eradicate hogs, rather than manage wild hogs, will understandably be met with some misunderstanding and resistance. However, the problems related to wild hogs have risen to a critical level and will only get worse without intervention by government agencies, private organizations and the public in general.
The TWRA will work with a variety of organizations to ensure landowners know the consequences of having wild hogs on or near their property. The $1.5 billion lost annually because of wild hog damage, plus the potential crippling effects that disease transmission could have on the livestock industry, and the severe habitat destruction caused by wild hogs are evidence of a need to act as quickly and decisively as possible.
A guiding management plan created with multi-agency input with multi-level approaches is required to attain sufficient pressure on wild hog populations in Tennessee. Complete eradication of wild hogs is the ultimate goal for the TWRA and others, but the agency understands the scale of the hog problem in Tennessee and realizes this is an unlikely goal. However, the TWRA will identify areas where hogs can be eradicated and work diligently to remove hogs from those areas. The TWRA will also work in cooperation with state and federal agencies, and other partners to assist landowners in alleviating problems wherever possible.
TWRA Wild Hog Proclamation Overview
Landowners may use the following methods without exemption.
1.) Any legal weapon and ammunition for taking big and small game during daylight hours.
2.) Live traps with bait. Bait may not be used during big game seasons without an approved exemption. All targeted wild hogs must be dispatched before removal from the trap.
Landowners will be granted an exemption to the above upon request.
1.) Landowners may request a wild hog methods exemption by two means:
A.) Immediate issuance of an exemption when landowners provide information to agency personnel on the phone. The exemption form number issued will serve as their proof of exemption until the hardcopy arrives by mail.
B.) Landowners may visit a regional office or request an officer visit to complete a request for exemption.
2.) Landowners, family members legally allowed to hunt the property without a license, and up to 10 designees may assist in the control effort provided by the methods exemption. No more than 10 individuals may be used as designees annually, as defined by the TWRA's calendar year (ending Dec. 31). A notice will be sent in December to permit holders and they will have the option to renew.
3.) The exemption will allow shooting at night with the aid of artificial light, shooting over bait during big game season, or any other methods, approved by TWRA. Dogs may be used as part of the experimental management program in Overton, Fentress, Cumberland and Pickett counties, but no dogs may be used during November or December.
4.) Landowners must keep accurate records of total number of hogs killed on their property. This information must be provided to the TWRA on the provided Wild Hog Methods Exemption Report form provided by the agency within one month of exemption expiration.
Possession of wild appearing hogs.
Possession or transportation of live wild-appearing hogs, without documentation from the Tennessee Department of Agriculture indicating such swine originated from a legal captive source, is prohibited.
TWRA

The Santa Monica Mountains that ring Los Angeles continue to be a "safehouse" for Cougars, Coyotes and Black Bears............Every City in America should look to imitate the extensive, contiguous greenspace that Los Angeles has purposefully saved into perpetuity........Californians, while nervous and even sometimes hostile to" wildlife in their midst" have nonetheless over the past 40 years voted to protect their keystone Cougars and Coyotes and to make it unlawful to randomly shoot, poison or trap them simply because they appear in and around our towns............Wildlife officals continually remind folks of the steps they need to take to co-exist with our Carnivores.........California is screwed up in many ways.........This is not one of them.........Kudos to the forward thinking of the residents who reside there!

Mountain lions have residents on edge in Burbank, Glendale hills

With multiple confirmed sightings of mountain lions and coyotes in the region this summer, experts say small children and pets should not be left outdoors unattended.

Several recent mountain lion sightings in the Burbank area are raising safety concerns among some hillside residents who say the animals pose a threat to pets and small children.

Burbank police have logged at least four mountain lion sightings this summer, including two this month. Another resident reported seeing a lion about 9 p.m. Monday in Glendale, but animal control officials didn't investigate because the call was a day late, said Ricky Whitman, a spokeswoman for the Pasadena Humane Society.
"It's not uncommon to see them in the foothills and we know that they are there," she said.

Still, Whitman said residents often mistake coyotes and bobcats for mountain lions because they are similar in shape and size.

Burbank residents reported seeing what they thought was a mountain lion feeding on a dead deer early Sunday in the foothill neighborhood of Viewcrest Drive and Reynolds Drive, but Burbank Police Lt. John Dilibert said wildlife experts confirmed that a coyote had killed the deer.

The experts cited bite marks on the deer and animal tracks at the scene.

Coyotes were also spotted about a month ago in the Glendale foothills, prompting animal control and police officials to issue public warnings, said Glendale Police Sgt. Tom Lorenz.

Sun Valley resident Carlo Spiga reported seeing a mountain lion climbing over a chain-link fence in his backyard last week. He was alerted to the cat by his dog's barking.

In the past, Spiga said, he has photographed mountain lion tracks in his yard and discovered a resting spot. But his most recent encounter was different, he said. Spiga flashed a light at the lion, but it didn't run away.

"He just kind of froze and I just kind of froze," Spiga said.

The lion instead moved slowly over the fence as if it was unbothered by the light and Spiga's presence, he said. Although the lion eventually took off, Spiga said the encounter was unsettling.

"I have a 4-year-old daughter and 10-year-old girl," he said. "I am just seriously scared."

The lion was probably hunting Spiga's dog, said Andrew Hughan, a spokesman for the California Department of Fish and Game.

"If the mountain lion was hungry, they don't look at people for food," he said.
In 2009, officials determined that a mountain lion killed an 85-pound German shepherd/Akita mix while it slept on a backyard patio in Glendale. The dog was found with a deep gash extending from the base of its head to its tail.

Officials said there isn't much to be done about the wildlife population besides taking precautions for pets and small children. Mountain lions often avoid people and prefer to eat deer, pets and livestock, officials said. "Usually, they don't really like people very much," Whitman said.
Still, officials warned that pets and children shouldn't be left unattended, especially amid multiple sightings.

"It's better to be safe than sorry," Hughan said.

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

Coyotes Suffer The Gun: More SoCal Wildlife Killings

Laguna Woods is not the only SoCal zone killing coyotes.Altadena County has also "removed and killed" seven coyotes this summer, reports Altadena Patch, due to an increasing number of reported pet attacks and coyote sightings.The county traps and kills coyotes only when they appear to be a nuisance, said Raymond Smith of the county's Weed Hazard and Pest Management Bureau during Tuesday's City Council meeting.

He also noted that humans must prepare to coexist with the animals."Nothing that I can do, or the Sheriff’s Department, or anyone else, is going to get rid of them," Smith said.

Altadena officials will continue to trap and kill the animals until the department determines that they are no longer a problem for residents. MaryEllen Schoeman, a wildlife rehabilitator with Animal Advocates, spoke in opposition of the policy."Trapping, with all due respect, does not work," Schoeman said. Once an animal is removed, another animal tends to fill the void, she said.She schooled meeting attendees on coyote habits and suggested tips for deterring the wild animals from residential areas.

*Coyotes that establish a den on a resident's property can be removed by the bureau.


*Residents should strongly discourage or report anybody who is feeding coyotes.


*Residents should not leave out trash or food on their property.


*Pets will not be safe behind fencing unless it is very high. Six feet is not high enough.


*Adults should not fear a coyote attack as they only happen in extremely limited circumstances.


*This is an unusually strong year for coyotes in the foothills, and the population levels are high. Populations tend to be cyclical, so it will not remain this way forever



Coyotes are not the only wildlife foraging for food in inhabited areas this year. A recent bear sighting in Glendale has alarmed officials and residents; however, the beasts have yet to be identified as a threat. We hope the brown creatures stick to munching on garbage to avoid the spray of bullets.

One of the first Postings on this blog(Feb 24, 2010) featured an article by Cheryl Lyn Dybas entitled: "MINNESOTA MOOSE,,GHOSTS OF THE NORTHERN FOREST"(at end of the article below, click on link to read her article) .........As I stated in that blogpost, "We have a conundrum as it relates to our Great Lakes Moose population, once so vibrant and now in severe decline. Simultaneous to this decline is the acceleration of the Moose population in New England and New York State.........Moose have recolonized this region in ever growing numbers seemingly facing the same limiting variables that Great Lakes Moose face..........warming temperatures, debilitating Winter ticks, other ticks that spread brain disease from whitetail deer, changing habitat brought on by human sprawl, fawn predation from coyotes and black bears"..............It is true that wolves are not in New England(and of course are 3000 strong in Minn.,,,,,,,, but Minn. Dept of Ntl Resources is on record stating that while wolves do take moose fawns, the downward spiral in the Great Lakes Moose population is due to adult females not living long enough to breed consecutive generations of youngsters(Wolves not taking large numbers of adult females)............They do feel that artifical feeding of deer has to stop so as to minimize congregations of these animals, which encourage the spread of brain parasites to Moose............

Can Minnesota's moose be saved?
By Dave Orrick

Minnesota's iconic moose population - now down to about 5,000 - stands in the balance. The balance of what, no one's quite sure.Warmer weather, habitat changes, deer expansion and disease, as well as killing by people and  wolves, are all among the variables that affect, to varying extents, the brooding and drooling symbol of the northwoods

.
For the first time, this year's aerial surveys indicated a statistically significant decline - down from more than 8,000 in 2006 - in the moose population of northeastern Minnesota, including the Arrowhead region. The population in the northwestern part of the state already has collapsed, down to about 100 animals from more than 4,000 in 1986. This as the range of the moose has shriveled steadily since the 1960s, when moose could be spotted all across the northern part of the state.

A new draft plan released by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources last week spells out not only the doom possibilities but also the practical ones: Taxpayers will need to spend money to figure it out; tourists, resortoperators, cabin owners and hunters will have to cease feeding deer; and hunters might have to give up moose hunts.In fact, according to the Minnesota Moose Research and Management Plan, moose hunting will close in 2013 if things don't change. The plan, which is open for public comment but mostly destined to become official policy, proposes that hunting will close if any of three scenarios come to pass.

One scenario - three years in a row of surveys finding fewer than two bulls for every three cows - already became the reality with this year's survey. Lou Cornicelli, the DNR's big-game coordinator, knows that's a tough idea to stomach for the 6,000 people who apply annually for a chance at an epic moose hunt."It's a difficult one," he said. "We may not have a moose season going forward. It's not an easy answer for folks. Certainly the existence of a moose population is more important than to have a hunting season. I think we'd all agree with that. If you don't have moose, you can't hunt them."

 Hunting isn't a major killer of moose. Only bulls can be targeted, and hunters harvest a mere 2 percent of the population. Last year, 213 moose-hunting permits were issued, and this year that number is being reduced to 105. Given recent hunter-success rates, Cornicelli predicts about 50 moose will be shot and killed. Last year, it was 109.A hunting ban would not include American Indians, who are not covered by the 1854 treaty establishing hunting rights, but Cornicelli noted tribal members kill few moose - 35 last year.

The fundamental problem facing the moose herd is that adult females aren't living long enough. They're getting pregnant - although officials worry pregnancy rates might fall if the bull-to-cow ratio doesn't increase. But for now, the females are giving birth to healthy calves - but not enough of them because the females are dying too young."The most important thing in a long-lived, slow-growing population like moose is life spans of adults," Cornicelli said. "They're dying faster than they can replace themselves."No one is sure why. In the opening sentence of its report, the authors call it an "inexplicable decline."

One factor could be brainworms that are carried by white-tailed deer, which are increasing in some areas of moose habitat. The report takes issue with the controversial practice of some hunters and resort owners to feed deer in the winter, an action that concentrates deer and, according to the report, encourages the spread of disease and parasites, which can sicken moose. Thus, the report recommends banning deer feeding.

The 51-page report based its recommendations largely on the Moose Advisory Committee, which was established in 2008 as part of a mandate from the Legislature to draft the very plan the DNR is releasing. The 18 members of the committee included moose experts and interest groups such as hunters."This plan is our document with the help of 18 people who know a lot about moose," Cornicelli said.

That doesn't mean everyone will be happy with it.For example, the plan doesn't suggest any course of action with regard to wolves, which kill and eat moose. The report concludes the impact of wolf predation on adult moose is small, although it acknowledges that no one knows how significant predation of calves is

.None of it sits well with folks such as Dean Dietrich, whose extended family has lived near Isabella for generations."I just think we're being flimflammed," he said. "You've got 5,000 moose and (perhaps) 3,000 wolves? There's your answer."

Millions of additional dollars are needed for research and habitat restoration projects, according to Cornicelli.The report concludes: "As moose populations benefit all Minnesotans, it is critical that a broad source of funding be developed because without this scientific info, we may lose moose and never know why.

CLICK HERE  TO READ CHERYL LYNN DYBAS'   "MINNESOTA MOOSE: GHOSTS OF THE NORTHERN FOREST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Louisa Wilcox of the NRDC writing on the "3 sisters of death" that are obliterating Whitebark Pine Trees(a key foodstuff for Grizzlies).........(1)White Pine blisterrust, (2)climate change and (3) Mountain Pine beetles teaming up to bring a Shakespere-like tradgedy to this keystone tree........... "There is one significant difference between watching the play Macbeth at your local theater, and watching the current whitebark tragedy playing out in the real world. The blood is not on Macbeth's or Lady Macbeth's hands, it's on ours. Because blisterrust would not be a problem, except that we humans accidently imported it to North America. And climate change and the related mountain pine beetle epidemic are the direct result of our use of fossil fuels. We may not be able to wash the blood off our hands—as Lady Macbeth could not, in her famous sleepwalking scene. But we should be able to make a commitment to turn the thermostat down, so that what's left of these beleaguered forests have a fighting chance—along with the rest of us on this fragile planet"--Louisa Wilcox

Twisted Sisters: of Whitebark Pine and Macbeth

Upon reading last week's finding by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) that whitebark pine is so threatened it warrants endangered species protections, somehow I found myself reflecting on the witches in Macbeth. Three witches kick off Shakespeare's epic tragedy, with prophesies of the bloody rise and fall of general, then king, Macbeth. The witches have been compared to the three fates of Greek tragedy, who together spin the thread of each human's life—and cut it at the end.

Thinking about whitebark pine, it seemed to me that the three witches in this context are white pine blisterrust, mountain pine beetles and climate change. Just like the witches in Macbeth, these forces work together to cook up a brew that is even more deadly than what each could do on her own. (Remember their famous line: "Double, double toil and trouble…"—which Shakespeare apparently lifted from an actual witch curse of his day.)

Although the FWS finding doesn't read like Shakespeare, it is worth reading nonetheless. It's a good, plain prose too, not rife with jargon and scientese; and it summarizes an amazing amount of important information on whitebark pine and its threats. Following is a short recap. I will number the witches listed below, as Shakespeare did his.

Witch #1. White pine blisterrust is a deadly invasive disease that was introduced into the U.S. from Eurasia over 100 years ago, when it tagged along on imported wood. Blisterrust results in the mortality of an overwhelming majority of infected trees, and all age classes of trees are susceptible. Blisterrust kills trees within an average of 20 years after infection, according to one recent study. Infestation rates are increasing, and the disease is now found throughout almost the entire range of whitebark pine, including the northern tip of the tree's range in Canada. If climate conditions become wetter, infestation rates will further escalate. Currently, colder, drier areas of the range that originally were thought to be less susceptible to the disease are now showing considerable rates of infection. Observing the trends in blisterrust, Forest Service expert Bob Keane is quoted in the FWS finding saying: "While whitebark pine will continue to persist on the landscape, these forests may become functionally extinct."

Witch #2. Climate change is expected to significantly decrease the prospect of survival of whitebark pine throughout its range. One Forest Service model, referenced in the FWS finding, shows that by the end of the century, only 3% of whitebark pine is anticipated to remain on the landscape in the U.S. (The U.S. which constitutes half of the tree's range; the rest of the tree's range is in Canada.) The whitebark pine has little ability to adapt to climate change, given its long, 60-year interval between generation. The ability of these trees to migrate north is also very limited because the current and anticipated rate of climate change is too great—unfortunately, trees can't walk, like the Ents of the Lord of the Rings. The ability of the tree to migrate to the north is further limited by, blisterrust, (Witch # 1) which is found at the northern end of the tree's range.

Witch #3. Mountain pine beetles: Due to warming temperatures and drier conditions brought on by climate change (Witch #2), mountain pine beetles have been able to flourish in whitebark pine at unprecedented levels, in areas previously thought to be "immune" from beetles. Mountain pine beetles have killed millions of acres of whitebark pine in what was previously thought to be inhospitable habitat. There is no way to stop beetle epidemics once they have started: epidemics typically subside when the availability of host trees is exhausted—i.e., when beetles have eaten all trees larger than roughly 6 inches in diameter. The numbers of whitebark pine hit by beetles continues to increase range-wide. Mountain pine beetles attacks are facilitated by blisterrust (Witch #1 and Witch #2), which weakens whitebark pine, making them more vulnerable to beetles (Witch #3).

These witches work together to drive a dynamic that is pushing whitebark pine to the very brink of ecological extinction.

To quote from the FWS document:
…"The interaction between white pine blisterrust and mountain pine beetle further intensifies the impact of both threats. White pine blisterrust and mountain pine beetle are impacting whitebark pine equally in both Canada and the U.S. portion of the range. In other words, there is currently no refuge from these threats. There is no way to control or reduce or eliminate either threat at this time, particularly at the landscape level needed to effectively conserve these species." (Bold added)

That's FWS' way of saying that the fates are, together, cutting the thread of life of whitebark pine, a tree that is vital to the high elevation ecosystems where they live. It's like the witches' curse that has now become a deadly reality.

As the witches say at the beginning of Macbeth, "When shall we three meet again?  In thunder, lightning or in rain? When the hurly-burly's done....When the battle is lost and won."

For whitebark, the battle has been lost, in the short term anyway—and it is nothing short of a tragedy of Shakespearian proportions. The fact that we have "won" a "warranted but precluded" funding is a positive step, but it fails to stem the tide of this epic loss of a unique forest ecosystem.

At one point in Skakespeare's play (called the "Scottish play" by thespians fearful of the Witches' curse), one of the witches talks to Macbeth about "the deed that hath no name". But the deed had a name. She was referring to his plans for the murder of a man, Macduff, who Macbeth considered a threat. Here, in the context of whitebark, the deed is ecological extinction, or murder, if you want to go that far. For it is we, humans, who killed this tree.

There is one significant difference between watching the play Macbeth at your local theater, and watching the current whitebark tragedy playing out in the real world. The blood is not on Macbeth's or Lady Macbeth's hands, it's on ours. Because blisterrust would not be a problem, except that we humans accidently imported it to North America. And climate change and the related mountain pine beetle epidemic are the direct result of our use of fossil fuels. We may not be able to wash the blood off our hands—as Lady Macbeth could not, in her famous sleepwalking scene. But we should be able to make a commitment to turn the thermostat down, so that what's left of these beleaguered forests have a fighting chance—along with the rest of us on this fragile planet.

The Kennebec Journal(Maine) newspaper taking a strong stance in favor of the U.S. Interior Dept doing a feasibility study on the pros and cons of a Maine Woods National Park........As the Editors state: "why be afraid of a study"..........."The Study would give both sides of the debate a common set of facts to argue over"

---

From: Michael Kellett <kellett@restore.org>
Sent: Sun Aug 21 11:22:15 2011
Subject: OPINION: Maine Woods National Park study would give us facts to argue about, Kennebec Journal, 20110821

OUR OPINION: Park study would give us facts to argue about

There may be plenty of strong arguments against turning 70,000 acres of Maine's northern woods into a national park, but the arguments against using research to put the park idea to a test sound weak.

Unfortunately, that didn't stop residents of the Katahdin region from lining up and telling Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar that the Maine Woods National Park idea is a non-starter, and they don't need any more information about it.

Opponents have some heavy political muscle behind them, with both of the state's U.S. senators weighing in on their side, and both houses of the state Legislature voting to pass a resolution saying that a feasibility study would be unwelcome.

You have to wonder what these people are afraid of.

If they are right, and the creation of a park in what is now privately owned forest would result in a loss of thousands of jobs in the forest products industry, then the study should show that.

At least then both sides of the debate would have a common set of facts to argue over.

Instead, what we have are competing hunches. Would a park cost jobs? Who knows? The experience of other national parks in other parts of the country suggest that parks can be economic engines that create jobs. It's worth knowing if the same thing could happen here.

Maine is in the very unusual position of having a large landowner willing to donate a huge tract of significant forest habitat to the nation.

Philanthropist Roxanne Quimby, controversial in some quarters because of her sometime opposition to hunting and motorized recreation on land she owns, is giving the state a rare opportunity to at least ask the question of whether a new national park is a good idea. We would not have the opportunity to answer that question if it weren't for her offer.

Maine has enjoyed a history of public access to privately owned land. But as ownership patterns of the northern woods change, there is no guarantee that this unusual situation will survive.

It pays to think ahead and consider what would lie ahead if forest is sold to commercial recreation outfits that want to keep the public out.

Supporters of commercial forestry and traditional pastimes such as hunting and fishing have nothing to fear from a feasibility study of what a national park would mean to the people of the state, both those who live near by and those who don't.

Salazar should go ahead and order that study, despite the opposition he heard in Maine last week.

Helen Mcginnis at COUGAR RE-WILDING bringing more clarity to yesterdays Post regarding alleged Cougar attacks of horses in Quebec..............Helen rightly reminds that Cougars do not seek to risk life and limb attacking full grown horses ..............While we all hope that Quebec still harbors F. Concolor, the odds are that the horses that were hurt in this Canadian Province likely sustained their injuries in some way other than through an attack by a Cougar

From: Helen McGinnis <HelenMcGinnis@frontiernet.netTo: Meril, Rick
Sent: Sat Aug 20 05:24:27 2011
Subject: Alleged cougar attacks on horses in Quebec

Rick,

Frequently, when cougars are documented in an area of the Midwest, reports of alleged attacks on horses follow.  I expect we'll read about more of them in the Northeast.

I must have more than 20 such instances in our files.  Whenever photos are available, we (specifically Joe Lankalis) have determined that a cougar was not involved.

Cougars almost never attack adult horses, although they do attack and kill foals and miniature horses.   They would have to be very stupid to risk injuring themselves attacking an animal weighing about 10X more than they do.

Horses are easily frightened and can injure themselves running into barbed wire and other obstacles.
 

Helen

The continued growth of the CANADIAN WOLF COALITION is causing this great grassroots organization to be absorbed by the NORTHERN LIGHTS WILDLIFE WOLF CENTRE................CWC founder Sadie Paar is handing over the reigns to the folks at Northern Lights and is confident that they will continue to push for best Wolf conservation in Canada.............Sadie, we wish you luck in your next chapter of life and know that you will continue to be on the front lines of ALL THINGS WOLF!!!!!

---

From: sadie parr <canadianwolfco@gmail.com>
To: writeus@caribooadvisor.com <sadester@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sat Aug 20 18:29:19 2011
Subject: Canadian Wolf Coalition Continues to Grow

Hello Canadian Wolf Coalition supporters.  Wolf conservation concerns across Canada are growing despite a greater appreciation for the important role wolves play in balancing nature and ecosystems.  I am thrilled to say that the CWC has become so large that it is TOO BIG for one person to continue to organize on an independent volunteer basis, thanks to all of YOU who have helped it grow into something that people of all backgrounds are now paying attention to! 

I have been honoured, moved, humbled, and empowered in helping to create this grassroots organization, and I urge you to stay informed and stay involved.   Wolves need your help now more than ever.

The Northern Lights Wildlife Wolf Centre will be taking on the responsibility of continuing the progress that the CWC has made; forming relationships for wolf conservation across Canada and uniting the voices of those concerned.  This is where the concept was developed, and the Northern Lights Wolf Centre is open to the public every single day to educate about the issues at hand as well as having staff year round to help see goals accomplished....but they can't do it without your help! 

Visit www.northernlightswildlife.com for more information about the learning centre. 

Thank you to all of you who have helped to create the Canadian Wolf Coalition over the years.  Your input, letter writing, feedback, creativity, research, time and energy is so appreciated and critical for helping wolves remain wild and free. 

I will be working for wolves as an independent and add another name to the list of CWC supporters!  If any of you would like to contact me in the future regarding wolf related issues please use my personal e-mail address sadester@hotmail.com.  This address (Canadianwolfco@gmail.com) will remain the e-mail for the CWC and be handled by the Northern Lights staff.

Thank you again for believing that TOGETHER we can make a difference.  The CWC voice is getting loud and strong....keep HOWLING!

Most sincerely, Sadie Parr

              "Be the change you want to see in the world" M. Gandhi

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar makes a purposeful trip to Millinocket/Medway, Maine to listen to residents voice their pros and cons regarding the Roxanne Quimby/Restore the North Woods National Park proposal...........He assures folks that the Federal Government would look to work in partnership with the people of Maine on any Park initiative that might evolve out of the on-going discussions going on around the State.............There are many "die-hards" who do not want the Feds messing with their lives in any way regardless of the unemployment situation in this part of the World...........There are others who would like to see both the Park and the Millinocket paper mill spring to life simultaneously........Stay tuned for more on this issue...........Could a new day be dawning in Maine?

By Nick Sambides Jr

MILLINOCKET, Maine — Federal feasibility studies recommend against 50 percent of the proposed parks they study, and thedimensions of Roxanne Quimby’s proposed North Woods National Park would becontrolled by laws and legislatures, not bureaucrats bent on controllingnorthern Maine, the federal government’s top land manager said Thursday. Speaking occasionally and more often listening tomore than 300 people at Stearns High School’s auditorium, U.S. Secretary of theInterior Ken Salazar refuted criticisms that Quimby’s proposal would growbeyond 70,000 acres if it became a reality and that a park feasibility studywould be guaranteed to find in favor of a park.

Salazar promised that Mainers would be the primaryarbiters deciding the shape and size of any park they might opt to pursue.Maine’s federal delegation and other legislators, among others, would not allowit to be otherwise, he said. “We,” he reminded the audience, “are a nation oflaws.”

Quimby’s proposal was the subject of two livelymeetings Thursday. About 70 people attended a town meeting at Medway MiddleSchool about 2½ hours after the Stearns gathering in which residents voted 46-6 to support a feasibility study of Quimby’s proposal Medway residents join their Board of Selectmen,School Committee, and several Katahdin region civic and business organizationsin supporting a study.

 Maine’s two Republican senators, the state Legislature,the Millinocket Town Council, Maine Snowmobile Association, Maine WoodsCoalition and the Millinocket Fin and Feather Club oppose or are skeptica labout Quimby’s plan.

Salazar visited Stearns as part of his multiday tour of Maine and New Englandto discuss and gather feedback on Quimby’s proposed gift to the federal government of70,000 acres she owns adjoining Baxter State Park. He came to town,he said, to hear directly from people who might be affected if a national parkwas created.

The meeting was a feisty give-and-take session,with Salazar and National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis seeking statements and questions from park proponents and opponents alternately. Salazar alsofielded direct challenges from residents, including Town Councilor David Cyr, a leading opponent of the parks initiative.

Cyr told Salazar that he would want “to have thefederal government leave the area,” describing Millinocket “under attack by thethreat of a national park” for 10 years. Cyr said that years ago, a federal agency meddling in Millinocket paper mill operations cost it financing for a rebuild of its No.11 paper machine and eventually led to or contributed to the loss of millowners’ possession of the 19 hydroelectric dams.

Salazar didn’t answer Cyr’s claims about federalagency meddling, but said he came to the meeting out of respect for allopinions, including Cyr’s. “If there is something that we can do inpartnership then I want to take a genuine look at it,” Salazar said, drawing applause from the audience.

Earlier in the meeting, responding to criticismthat he or the federal government had been ignoring Millinocket or loca lresidents, he said: “I invited myself. Nobody invited me.” “It was my decision to come here because I wantedto listen to the people of this area,” Salazar said. “My being here is to be apart of whatever process we ultimately undertake.”“There will be nothing done with this process thatdoes not include the people in this region,” he added.

He said repeatedly that as a member of President Barack Obama’s cabinet and as a private citizen raised in one of Colorado’spoorest communities, local communities, their desires and cultural heritage are very important to him.

The federal government, Salazar said, could do two types of studies of the park proposal. A reconnaissance study would do a basic appreciation of the park landscape and cost $25,000. Salazar could order i thimself. The other, what is referred to as a feasibility study, would require congressional approval and take many years to complete, he said.

Like Salazar, Quimby, who attended the Medwaymeeting, took some direct challenges from residents. She said that she opted tooffer her land to the federal government because the parks service has the besttrack record. “In spite of the fact that they keep taking budgetcuts every year, you still get a great experience,” Quimby said, adding thatthe parks service “has withstood the test of time. It certainly has changed,but you can still get [a good experience] from visits to parks.”

An elderly man who stood up to address her from themiddle school’s gymnasium stands said he simply didn’t trust Quimby to keep thepark at 70,000 acres. “I watch the news, I read the newspapers, and Idon’t know why anybody would want to give anything to the federal government,”the man said.
“I am going to stand up for America,” Quimbyanswered. “We live here and we are the federal government. We are Americans.This is our country and I believe that if there are problems, let’s fix them.Let’s not sit on the sidelines grousing about them.”

Cheryl Russell, president of the Lincoln LakesRegion Chamber of Commerce and a Millinocket native, challenged Salazar’sassertion that a Colorado national park had co-existed well with that state’sforest products industry.A member of a three-generation logging family,Russell described the logging permitting process within national parks as“insurmountable, undependable. To say that a logging community can coexist witha national park, that was not my experience.”“We have the talent to do that with the talent ofthis room without a national park. We just have to work together,” Russelladded.

Many national parks, Salazar said, feature mixeduses, such as hunting, snowmobiling, logging and ATV riding, not seen in thestereotypical park. A feasibility study and subsequent work would allowresidents near the park to shape the park’s offerings to provide theircommunities with the greatest economic benefits, he said.

Several residents at the Medway and Millinocketmeetings said it was ludicrous to not support a feasibility study, as the studywould provide answers to important questions.“What,” said Buzz Caverly, retired director of Baxter State Park, “are you people afraid of?To ask a question, to get an answer that it will be feasible or not?”

They also said that with the area’s unemploymentrate hovering at 21.8 percent and the East Millinocket and Millinocket millsshuttered, Quimby’s gift was priceless and should be seized as an economiclifeline.

State Sen. Doug Thomas, R-Ripley, strode to themicrophone during the Medway meeting and challenged assertions made by Quimbyand her land manager, Mark Leathers. He accused both of vastly underestimatingthe economic impact of taking land out of forestry use. He said of her 70,000acres, “There is nothing special about this land.” “There is no Grand Canyon, no Mount Katahdin onit,” Thomas said, adding that he suspected that the park would draw fewvisitors given the millions of acres around it that private owners alreadyallow residents to use.“I don’t buy the economicbenefits” of a national park, Thomas said. “I think at the very least we shouldwait until we know what is going to happen with the mills in Millinocket.”



 Reply

 Forward

Just like in the Eastern USA, there have been hundreds of unconfirmed Cougar sightings in Quebec and Ontario over the past 100 years..........Could two recent attacks on horses in South Stukely and Asbetos, Canada been caused by the Big Cats as evidence there suggests? Like in Connecticut where a South Dakota Cougar was found, might our majestic "Catamounts" be on the verge of a comeback back into our Eastern Forests?

Big cat behind Quebec horse attack could be rare cougar

(click on "THE MYSTERIOUS EASTERN COUGAR link below to watch a 5 minute/30 sec video report on the possibility of Cougars existing  in Quebec) 

 CLICK HERE:       The mysterious eastern cougar5:30

Wildlife officials are hoping bait will help confirm if an elusive eastern cougar is behind a horse attack in the Eastern Townships.

They've been searching for the cat since a young woman in South Stukely witnessed her horse being attacked by an animal she described as a cougar last month. Officials haven't determined what type of animal was behind the attack, but there is speculation it could be the rare eastern cougar.

Cougars once prowled Ontario and Quebec, but for decades has been thought to be extinct.
Biologists have now rubbed scent bait on a pole near the attack site to try to confirm the species.
Isabelle Thibeau, a biologist with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Wildlife, said the possibility of finding an eastern cougar is exciting.

"They are not very abundant and we never know for sure. We have good sighting reports but a lot of time we lack proof," she said. Wildlife officials confirm another horse was attacked by a big cat in the town of Asbestos last week. Prints that resembled cougar paws were also found in the area.

Wood Bison were part of the native fauna of Alaska well into the 1800's prior to going extinct due to overhunting and habitat alteration.............The USFW Service has been seeking to restore the Bison to Alaska have over the past 3 years and acquired pure animals from Canada(there are no Woods Bison alive in the USA) waiting, waiting , waiting for the proper "political" moment to put them back into the wild.............Release dates have come and gone and are now stalled while the state waits for the Fish and Wildlife Service to approve a special rule, called a 10j rule, that would not prohibit resource development, i.e. oil and gas drilling, in areas where the bison may be released. The snag at this point is over a provision in the 10j rule that will allow future hunting of wood bison after they are released, assuming the population increases to allow for that. Bottom line is that the Bison cannot impede resource extraction and must also be available to hunters................Guys, lets get several hundred of the Buffalo breeding and reproducing and then allow the hunt...........And let the biologists determine if drilling will impede the bison recovery,,,,,,,,,,not allow the oil and gas folks to run amuck in Bison terrain if it will crater their population..................Lets us employ the Fox News expression of "FAIR AND BALANCED" in getting the Bison back on the ground rather than giving in to the "my way or the highway" mantra that the Energy and Hunting folks are demanding be the basis to determine if restoration is to occur

Release of bison into Alaska wilderness put on hold again

by Tim Mowry

FAIRBANKS — The re-introduction of wood bison in Alaska has been delayed for at least another year, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is paying for it.

The federal agency recently forked over $200,000 to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to maintain a captive herd of more than 100 wood bison for another year at the Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center in Girdwood south of Anchorage.

The hope is it will give federal and state agencies enough time to negotiate a special rule that will make the animals exempt from the Endangered Species Act when they are finally set loose in Alaska. The state has been holding the bison at the AWCC for more than three years as part of a plan to restore the shaggy beasts to the Alaska landscape. The Department of Fish and Game imported 53 bison from Elk Island National Park in Alberta, Canada, in June 2007 to complement a herd of 33 wood bison that were already being held at the AWCC.

The herd size has since grown to 103 with the addition of calves the past four years.

The Fish and Wildlife Service gave the state $200,000 to maintain the herd for another year "because we support the reintroduction and believe that it is clearly in line with our missions and mandates," agency spokesman Bruce Woods wrote in an email. The money will cover food and veterinary costs for the herd for the next year.

Release stalled
The department's original plan was to release at least 40 of the animals in one of three locations — the Yukon Flats, Minto Flats or the Innoko River Flats — in spring 2010. The most recent plan, after concerns were raised about releasing the animals in the Yukon Flats (national wildlife refuge) and Minto Flats (oil and gas development), was to release a small herd into the Innoko River Flats in western Alaska in spring 2011.

But that release has been stalled while the state waits for the Fish and Wildlife Service to approve a special rule, called a 10j rule, that would not prohibit resource development, i.e. oil and gas drilling, in areas where the bison may be released. The snag at this point is over a provision in the 10j rule that will allow future hunting of wood bison after they are released, assuming the population increases to allow for that.

"The main obstacle we are dealing with is a lack of inclusion of general hunting in the special rule," Doug Vincent-Lang, a special assistant to ADF&G commissioner Cora Campbell and the state's endangered species coordinator, wrote in an email.

Wood bison existed in Alaska in the 1800s before becoming extinct because of a combination of hunting and changing habitat.

There are no wood bison in the United States but they are still listed as endangered because they are listed as threatened under Canada's Species at Risk Act, that country's equivalent of the Endangered Species Act in the U.S. Wood bison were downlisted from endangered to threatened in Canada in 1988 but they were not downlisted in the U.S.

The fact there are no wood bison in the U.S. and they are still listed as endangered is "simply amazing," Vincent-Lang said.

Hunting is integral
The Fish and Wildlife Service gave the state the option in March of publishing a proposed rule in the federal register by the end of April without a provision allowing future hunting or waiting for several months until the issue could be discussed further and, hopefully, resolved.

Releasing the animals without a clause that would allow hunting down the road was not an option, Vincent-Lang said. "Hunting is a "critical element for the long-term conservation of wood bison when we put them on the landscape," he said. The Fish and Wildlife Service recognizes that, spokesman Bruce Woods at the Anchorage regional office said, but has yet to figure out a way to incorporate such language into the 10j rule without compromising legal requirements. The provisions of the ESA that allow designation of nonessential experimental populations are legally complex, he said. "The service has always known that hunting would be among the ultimate goals of this re-introduction, but 10j rules are designed to aid the recovery of species listed under the Endangered Species Act and the agency is focusing on this goal," Woods wrote in an email. "While the Fish and Wildlife Service remains committed to and supportive of the reintroduction and ultimately the hunting of wood bison in Alaska, the agency wants to provide assurances to the state that the rule establishing the population of wood bison is within the legal framework."

Hunting is an integral part of wood bison restoration and management in Canada, where the population of wood bison has increased to approximately 4,400 animals in seven disease-free, free-ranging herds. "Even though they're listed in Canada as a threatened species, Canada recognizes the need for hunting," Vincent-Lang said. "We are working closely with the USFWS to resolve this issue and remain confident that we can reach a solution."

Bison Timeline

1991 After numerous meetings with Native villagers in the Yukon Flats to document the existence of wood bison in Alaska in the 1800s, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game begins working on a wood bison re-introduction plan.

1997 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces it cannot support the wood bison restoration effort because of concerns that doing so would not be compatible with the purposes of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. The project is put on hold.

2000 ADF&G re-evaluates the re-introduction effort and determines it is an outstanding wildlife conservation opportunity for Alaska that should be fully examined in an open, public decision-making process. Still unsure if the feds will go along with a release in the Yukon Flats, ADF&G begins looking at other possible release sites.

June 2005 ADF&G forms the Wood Bison Restoration Advisory Group, a consortium of environmentalists, Native subsistence hunters and trophy hunters, and holds a two-day public meeting to determine if there is public support for the project. The group endorses the plan and comes up with three possible release sites — the Yukon Flats, Minto Flats and Innoko River Flats.

2005-06 Local advisory committees in the Minto and lower Innoko-Yukon River areas endorse the wood bison restoration plan after meeting with ADF&G. The Eastern Interior and Western Interior federal subsistence advisory councils also endorse the plan.

August 2006 DF&G initiates an evaluation of the wood bison restoration plan according to the state's wildlife transplant policy and determines "that wood bison are an extirpated indigenous species and are native to Alaska."

January 2007 A wildlife transplant policy review committee concludes that wood bison restoration will not likely effect a significant reduction in the range, distribution, habitat, or preexisting human use of other species in Alaska.

June 2008 ADF&G imports 53 wood bison — 27 females and 26 males — from Elk Island National Park in Alberta, Canada. The state used a $100,000 grant from the Turner Foundation to transport the animals by truck to Alaska, where they were released into pens at the Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center to serve a two-year quarantine.

January 2009 After meeting with officials from Doyon, Ltd., who expressed concern that releasing wood bison on the Minto Flats could jeopardize the Native corporation's plan to drill for oil and gas in the Nenana Basin, former state Sen. Gene Therriault, R-North Pole, introduces a resolution calling for a halt to the wood bison introduction until Alaska gets the federal reassurance it wants.

April 2009 Former half-term Gov. Sarah Palin asks the departments of fish and game and natural resources to look for places other than the Minto Flats to release the wood bison because their release there could endanger oil and gas or mineral exploration, production or development under the Endangered Species Act.

February 2010 A notice of the state's intent to develop a "10j rule" that would establish wood bison as a "nonessential experimental population" is published in the federal register.

March 2010 In a presentation to the Board of Game in Fairbanks, ADF&G officials say the Innoko River Flats is now the preferred release site because of concerns over the Yukon Flats and Minto Flats. Game Board chairman Cliff Judkins directs ADF&G to come up with a harvest plan for both subsistence and sport hunting before any bison are released.

July 2010 The state delivers its version of the proposed 10j rule to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for review.

November 2010 ADF&G announces the wood bison have been given a clean bill of health by state veterinarians after being tested multiple times for tuberculosis and brucellosis. The only thing preventing their release is the adoption of a 10j rule to make them exempt from the Endangered Species Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tells the state it hopes to have the final rule in place by the end of July 2011.

April 2011 Rep. Alan Dick, R-Stony River, introduces a bill — HB 186 — that would require legislative approval before the bison could be moved into the Interior. Dick says environmental groups would sue the state to make money and ensure the land where the bison are is off limits to human use. The Alaska House Resources Committee refers the bill to the Alaska House Rules Committee, where it is still sits.