43 Possible YELLOWSTONE Park Wolves Needlessly SLAUGHTERED, 73 total

protect yellowstones wolves, sacred resource protection zone

 

43 Possible Yellowstone Park Wolves Slaughtered in Wyoming 73 Wolves total for the offending state

Together we can establish a Sacred Resource Protection Zone around all National Parks while at the same time putting the Indian and Public Trusts to work protecting your wildlife.

Time is of the essence, every day more park wolves are at risk of losing their life to hunters.

As of December 22nd, 73 wolves altogether 43 from the Trophy Zones around Yellowstone and Teton National Parks 3 of which are already over quota.

We at Protect The Wolves are striving to become THE VOICE that our Wolves, Bison, Grizzlies so desperately need to help insure their safety and continuance of life freely.

With the research that we are doing. We have discovered the necessary tools available to us through the “Indian Trust”. . Tools that no other large NPO has available. With your support, we can stop these crooked politicians and their kill all mentality.

Wolves cannot go to the Capitol to speak for themselves. So with your donation, we can put our lawyers to work by using the Indian Trust and the Public Trust to finally be able to protect our wolves!

We will be able to file our cases in as well as against States and elected federal officials regarding their mandates to operate under DUE PROCESS.

Which will be the beginning of being able to put an end to the slaughter of all things held Sacred.

Please help Protect The Wolves today with your gift.
All donations are appreciated, large or small.
The love behind your donation speaks volumes for the wolves.

Take Back the Power that You as the public hold!

Help us to put The Indian and Public Trusts to work today, before they wipe out the rest of our wolves, grizzlies, wild horses. https://continuetogive.com/protectthewolves   http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/12222017slaughter-750×698.png #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #WolvesInYellowstone

PEER respectfully submits this complaint about USDAS Data Quality

protect the wolves, sacred resource protection zone

It is past Time that We begin to hold  USDA Accountable and rein in their squandering of Taxpayer Funds!

December 20, 2017
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL

Connie Williams, Chief, Program Evaluation and Decision Support
Quality of Information Officer
USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
4700 River Road, Unit 120
Riverdale, MD 20737
[email protected]
(301) 851-3087

RE: COMPLAINT ABOUT INFORMATION QUALITY

Dear Ms. Williams,

PEER respectfully submits this complaint about Data Quality.
Pursuant to Section (b)(2)(B) of the Data Quality Act of 2000 (“DQA”), Section 515 of
Public Law 106-554, and the Correction of Information mechanism of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Information Quality Guidelines, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
(“PEER”) hereby challenges data manipulation and conclusions drawn therefrom by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (“USDA”), as detailed infra. PEER is especially concerned about the government’s
dissemination of faulty research that has been erroneously used to justify harmful, commonplace,
and excessive coyote control and extermination policies throughout federal lands despite more
recent, thorough, and peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrating the importance of large
mammalian carnivores contributing to ecological health and stability. Specifically,
PEER challenges the government’s continued reliance upon the USDA-funded study Connolly, G.E., and
W.M. Longhurst, 1975, The effects of control on coyote populations: A simulation model, University
of California, Division of Agricultural Sciences Bulletin, Volume 1872, 37 pp. (hereinafter
“Connolly and Longhurst study”).

The USDA has consistently used this study for over 40 years, despite its established
flaws and disputed findings, to justify large-scale coyote extermination efforts – even though the
study’s own findings stated that eradication efforts were not an effective means of preventing
depredation. In addition to being used to justify large-scale coyote control (i.e., killing
2
programs), this obscure (i.e., a small agricultural bulletin) and non-peer reviewed study has been
cited and utilized in a variety of USDA documents over the years to justify a variety of agency
actions related to coyote management. See, e.g., Paul L. Hegdal et al., Hazards to Wildlife
Associated with 1080 Baiting for California Ground Squirrels, USDA National Wildlife
Research Center – Staff Publications (1979); Guy E. Connolly, The Effects of Control on Coyote
Populations: Another Look, Symposium Proceedings—Coyotes in the Southwest: A Compendium of Our
Knowledge 23 (1995); Kathleen A. Fagerstone and Gail Keirn, Wildlife Services—A Leader in
Developing Tools and Techniques for Managing Carnivores, USDA National Wildlife Research Center –
Staff Publications (2012); Eric Gese, Demographic and Spatial Responses of Coyotes to Changes in
Food and Exploitation, Wildlife Damage Management Conferences—Proceedings 131 (2005); John L.
Gittleman et al., “References” for Carnivore Conservation, USDA National Wildlife Research Center –
Staff Publications (2001); Gary Lee Nunley, Present and Historical Bobcat Population Trends in New
Mexico and the
West, Proceedings of the 8th Vertebrate Pest Conference 177, 180 (1978); Stewart W. Breck et al.,
Evaluating Lethal and Non-Lethal Management Options for Urban Coyotes (2016); William C. Pitt et
al., An Individual-Based Model of Canid Populations: Modelling Territoriality and Social Structure
(2003); USDA, 5 Year Environmental Monitoring Review for Predator Damage Management in Montana: FY
2002 through FY 2006 (2007).

Furthermore, USDA has relied upon this study for justification of coyote eradication efforts or
large scale control (i.e., killing) programs in numerous Environmental Assessments
and Findings of No Significant Impact under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §
4321, et seq (“NEPA”). This includes, but is not by any means limited to, Final EA: Predator Damage
and Conflict Management in Idaho (2016); Final EA: Reducing Coyote Damage to Livestock and Other
Resources in Louisiana (2016); EA: Mammal Damage Management in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
(2015); EA: Reducing Mammal Damage in the State of North Carolina (2015); EA: Mammal Damage
Management in the State of Rhode Island (2014); EA: Mammal Damage Management in Arkansas (2013);
Decision and Finding of No Significant Impact: Reducing Mammal Damage through an Integrated
Wildlife Damage Management Program in the State of New Jersey (2004); Decision and Finding of No
Significant Impact for Management of Coyote, Dog, and Red Fox on Livestock in the Commonwealth of
Virginia (2002); Environmental Assessment and Decision/Finding of No Significant Impact for
Predator Damage Management in the College Station Animal Damage Control District Texas (1997).
While USDA guidelines limit challenge of material used in NEPA documents to the public comment
period for each NEPA document, it is evident from the recent and continued use of this study in
justifying coyote eradication and control efforts that the study is being disseminated by the USDA
and is clearly influential in both state and federal wildlife agency decision and policy-
making, despite its faulty nature.

 

[gview file=”http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/12_20_17_PEER_DQA_Complaint.pdf”]

  http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/electedofficials-750×498-750×498-750×498.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #RestoreWolvesToESL #WolvesInTheNews #WolvesInWashington

Governments in CO/UT/NM/AZ Deliberately Derailed Mexican Wolf Recovery, Documents Reveal (Investigative Report) 

Our Attorneys are waiting for Us to Raise Funds to get them in Court for Phoenix the Mexican Gray Female that USFWS should have relocated to a breeding program instead of Killing. Especially after the News led people to believe The Tribe requested it, when in fact we found out that they did not!

 

(EnviroNews Colorado) — After decades of deliberation the final revision of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan (the Plan) was released at the end of November, but former USFWS officials tell EnviroNews it strays far from scientists’ minimum recommendations for recovery of the gray wolf subspecies.

Meanwhile, a series of documents reveal lawmakers and agencies in Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona — the four states central to recovery efforts — have been deliberately hamstringing wolf revival efforts for years.

David Parsons, former Mexican Wolf Recovery Coordinator for the USFWS from 1990 to 1999, told EnviroNews Colorado that instead of working to expand and stabilize wolf populations, the agency watered down the Plan and “essentially turned its mission over to the states” of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona — states that have repeatedly opposed many aspects of wolf recovery.

The Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi), a.k.a. “el lobo,” was hunted to near-extinction during the late 1800’s and 1900’s. In 1976, it gained protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and by 1982 the USFWS launched the original Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan to keep the keystone predator from being wiped off the face of the earth.

The agency’s captive breeding program released three lineages of Mexican wolves into the wild in the U.S. starting in 1998, with Mexico releasing wolves in 2011. Today, 113 of these creatures inhabit central and southern Arizona and New Mexico while 31 wolves live in the northern Sierra Madre Occidental of Chihuahua and Sonora in Mexico.

Despite this modest rebound in numbers, poor genetic variability and limited high-quality habitat free from human encroachment means the future of the Mexican wolf remains bleak.

In 2014, Parsons joined a coalition of conservation groups in a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona against the USFWS for delaying completion of the Plan. In 2016, a court settlement required the agency to finish the plan by November 2017.

To achieve full recovery, the final Plan recommends the release of more captive-bred specimens in an effort to establish two “genetically diverse Mexican wolf populations distributed across ecologically and geographically diverse areas in the subspecies’ range in the United States and Mexico.” The estimated $178 million cost of recovery is to be borne by federal and state governments and NGOs.

The Plan’s ultimate goal is to increase Mexican wolf populations in the U.S. to 320 wolves and 200 in Mexico over the next 25 to 35 years, at which point the USFWS would remove the subspecies from the Endangered Species List.

In late 2011, the USFWS convened the Science and Planning Subgroup of the Recovery Team (the Subgroup) — staffed with independent scientists — which recommended a minimum of 750 wolves in the U.S. and 100 in Mexico, with three separate populations of 200 to 300 wolves, before delisting.

Parsons said that faced with these numbers, ranchers “just went ballistic.” Though stakeholders were sworn to secrecy, the Subgroup’s internal working draft was leaked and pro-ranching and hunting voices, including U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), pushed back hard against the Plan.

“They just blew the thing up in the media,” said Parsons. “Fish and Wildlife Service, true to fashion reacted by just quitting — they canceled the next meeting of [the Subgroup]… and never held another one.”

In November 2017, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southwest Region’s Biological Report for the Mexican Wolf determined that wolf numbers wouldn’t be based on science alone, but also what is “socially acceptable in light of the expected ongoing issues around livestock depredation and other forms of wolf-human conflict.”

“They essentially asked the states how many wolves they could tolerate,” Parsons said. “They called it a social tolerance limit based on their perception of social tolerance and not backed by any science whatsoever.”

Parsons also pointed out that, aside from the special interests associated with ranching and hunting, polls have shown the vast majority of the public in ArizonaNew MexicoUtah, and Colorado are in support of Mexican wolf reintroduction and recovery.

Another bone of contention within the Plan is the way it limits the Mexican wolf’s range to south of Interstate 40, which runs east to west across northern New Mexico and Arizona.

The Science and Planning Subgroup recommended including sections of eastern Arizona and New Mexico, the Grand Canyon region of northern Arizona and southern Utah, and the Southern Rockies area of northern New Mexico and southern Colorado as “three major core areas of suitable habitat… capable of supporting Mexican wolf populations of sufficient size to contribute to recovery.”

A 2015 study published in Biological Conservation concluded that “most of the [Mexican wolf’s] historic range in Mexico is currently unsuitable due to human activity” with a high probability of wolves in those regions being killed by people.

However, due to “geopolitical reasons,” the USFWS chose to leave out the Grand Canyon and Southern Rockies regions in the Plan, according to notes from an April 2016 Mexican Wolf Recovery Planning Workshop in Mexico City, Mexico.

Source: Governments in CO/UT/NM/AZ Deliberately Derailed Mexican Wolf Recovery, Documents Reveal (Investigative Report) – EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Mexican-wolf-Held-Captive-at-Minnesota-Zoo-for-Captive-Breeding-Photo-Wikimedia-Commons-1024×681.jpg #CutOffUSDAWildlifeServicesFunding #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves

Thank You Capital Press for pointing out the Cost of Welfare Ranchers

oppose welfare ranching, protect the wolves

Thank You Capital Press for pointing out the

Cost of Welfare Ranchers

It is beyond time that we wean Welfare Ranchers from the teet, and keep them out of our National Forests.

In 2014, $143.6 million was directly appropriated to the grazing program (an amount that’s been consistent over the last 10 years). Some quick math reveals that, on average, public lands ranchers paid just $376 for what cost taxpayers $6,838 last year.

Please Consider Joining Protect The Wolves™ Movement to end Welfare Ranchers receiving Taxpayer subsidies.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife spent $15,097 to kill a wolf last summer in the Sherman pack, about one-tenth the amount that was invested in keeping the pack from attacking livestock, according to a department report released Dec. 15.

WDFW paid $134,170 for range-riders and other preventive measures in the pack’s territory in northeast Washington. Conservation Northwest, an environmental group, contributed another $12,880 for range-riders.

The report does not tally costs or losses incurred by ranchers, but some of the state’s spending was dependent on producers employing additional safeguards.

WDFW might have spent more on deterrence, but it ran out to money to enter into cost-sharing agreements with ranchers, according to the report.

WDFW wolf policy coordinator Donny Martorello said Monday that there is no way to know whether more spending could have prevented the pack from killing calves.

“Certainly, we’d like to be able to help as many individuals with the uptake of those non-lethal tools,” Martorello said. “The demand is starting to exceed the resources.”

Washington has a growing wolf population, particularly in northeast Washington. The report details efforts to safeguard up to 1,300 cow-calf pairs on 10 grazing allotments that overlapped the Sherman pack’s territory in Ferry County. Chronic depredations led the WDFW to shoot one of two wolves in the pack Sept. 1.

The pack formed in 2016 when a female left the Profanity Peak pack and paired with a male wolf. The female was hit and killed by a vehicle March 20, 2017. By the time the grazing season neared, the surviving male, who was wearing a radio collar, was traveling with another wolf.

The two wolves moved into territory occupied the summer before by the Profanity Peak pack, which was linked to 15 depredations in 2016. The department responded by shooting seven of the pack’s wolves. The lone surviving adult left the territory last spring, according to WDFW.

Before the grazing season began, five range-riders hired by WDFW began patrolling the grazing allotments to look for wolves. Patrols increased after WDFW determined June 12 that the Sherman pack had attacked a calf.

The pack attacked three more calves between July 12 and Aug. 23.

WDFW Director Jim Unsworth authorized killing one wolf Aug. 25. Initially, the department hoped to trap and euthanize a wolf. But the pack attacked a fifth calf Aug. 28 several miles from where WDFW was trapping.

WDFW shot the male wolf from a helicopter Sept. 1. The helicopter cost $9,868. WDFW staff time and travel made up the rest of the operation’s cost.

Martorello said the department believes wolves are still overlapping the grazing allotments.

“We have had reports of wolves in the area. I would fully expect there to be wolf activity,” he said.

In addition to hiring range-riders, WDFW spent $35,000 to help four producers pay for preventive measures. At least four other producers were interested in the cost-sharing agreements, but the department had exhausted the funds, according to the report.

WDFW also killed two wolves last summer in the Smackout pack in Stevens County. WDFW policy allows for possibly culling a pack after three depredations within 30 days or four depredations within 10 months.

Source: Washington spent $15,000 to shoot wolf, much more to avoid it – Washington – Capital Press http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/howlingpup-1-1.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #WolvesInTheNews

MN Farmers believe wolves are attacking their cattle but is it Rustlers?

Calves disappear Ranchers immediately blame wolves without any proof/ Perhaps they be better on track if they blamed the 2 legged Predator!! It is poor Ranchers like this one that give good Ranchers, those that have proven they can live with Predators a Bad name!

KITTSON COUNTY, Minn. (Valley News Live) Wolves are hunting down cattle in northern Minnesota and it’s costing small communities hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Some environmentalists say it’s not a problem at all. It’s a rebounding wolf population.

Others say the problem is due to big government regulations in Washington D.C. and Minnesota farmers, are saying something’s got to change.

Joe Wilebski has been farming on land in northern Minnesota his entire life. But The last few years, his cattle have struggled.

“It’s so disheartening. They don’t care about us.” Said Wilebski.

Farmers in Kittson County feel the federal government has left them behind.

Wolves in Minnesota were once on the endangered species list, but protective laws helped them rebound. So much so there was even a hunting season on wolves, but in 2014 a federal judge ended that. Farmers can’t even legally shoot wolves, unless they themselves feel threatened. As a result their bottom line is feeling threatened.

Kittson County Sheriff Steve Porter says, “It’s basically a thief stealing from them, stealing right out of their pocket.”

Source: MN Farmers believe wolves are attacking their cattle http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/GrayWolf-MGN.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves

Tongass in Transition: Wolves and logging both cut into Prince of Wales deer

 

We have to question With only 89 wolves living in the unit — less than half of what was there 20 years before, would seem impossible to a prudent Individual to blame Wolves for the depletion of Deer! Hunters are the cause of the depletion. When will people wake up to the truth?

This deer season has been the worst in recent memory for a lot of hunters on Prince of Wales Island. In the past, large-scale industrial logging damaged important winter habitat, and some locals believe there’s another reason there’s so few deer on the island: too many wolves.

Go anywhere in Craig and you’re likely to overhear bits of conversation about the deer season.

That includes the local diner, the kind of place that displays its homemade pies behind glass. Mike Douville has just returned from a long day of hunting.

Over sips of coffee, he explains how he bagged one deer today. But it’s taken him longer to fill his freezer this year. He remembers more plentiful seasons, and that’s not the only change he’s seen on the island during his lifetime.

Douville says nearly all the big trees were standing when he was young. The first logging camps were just getting started.

“The island was pristine. There was no clear cuts on it,” he says. “So I’ve watched it turn from what it is today.”

Large swaths of trees have been logged here since the 1960s. It’s left poor habitat for deer and the other wildlife. Without a canopy of old growth, snow can easily fall to the ground — obscuring important feeding spots.

Douville serves on the regional advisory council that makes recommendations to the federal subsistence board and the state.

He says finding fewer deer on the island is affecting people’s livelihood.

“This is rural Alaska. It’s bush Alaska,” Douville says. “We don’t like to buy meat. It’s eight or nine bucks a pound.”

Still, he says logging is just one factor. The other is a rapidly growing wolf population. The wolves are devouring the deer.

A wolf on Prince of Wales Island, as captured by a trail camera. (Photo courtesy of the Alaska Department of Fish & Game)

“If you’re going to harvest deer, you have to harvest wolves,” Douville says.

But not everyone agrees killing wolves is a good idea.

In 2011, conservation groups petitioned the feds to protect the Alexander Archipelago wolf under the Endangered Species Act. Around that time, it was estimated there were about 89 wolves living in the unit — less than half of what was there 20 years before. But the wolves didn’t wind up receiving additional federal protections.

Instead, there have been joint-efforts with the state to stabilize the population, and the numbers of wolves has been increasing. Estimates from 2016 suggest there are 231 wolves in the unit.

Still, it’s not easy getting a handle on how many wolves there are.

Mike Kampnich is driving his pickup truck to the top of a snowy ridge. He makes this rough ride regularly to collect hair samples from the Alexander Archipelago wolf.

Kampnich used to be a logger when he arrived on the island more than 30 years ago. But now, he works for the The Nature Conservancy.

“You know, some of the guys I worked for in the past. They’re like, you work for who?” he says with a chuckle.

We stop at one of the hair board sights. Essentially, a piece of plywood nailed to the ground and rigged with barbed wire. A stinky goo is placed on top. The wolves like to rub up against it, so it’s the perfect comb for capturing their fur.

Kampnich is careful to cover his tracks as we walk over to it.

He puts on his glasses to get a better look. But there are no strands tangled in the barbwire. This is just one of 21 locations he’ll check on the island over the course of two days. When he does hit the jackpot, the hair is sent off to a lab to be analyzed by the state.

Mike Kampnich from the Nature Conservancy setting up wolf lures to get population estimates. (Photo by Elizabeth Jenkins/Alaska's Energy Desk

Mike Kampnich from the Nature Conservancy says he likes working at the local-level to bring people together. (Photo by Elizabeth Jenkins/Alaska’s Energy Desk)

The Alaska Department of Fish & Game uses the individual animal’s DNA to calculate the wolf population, and a percentage of that becomes the wolf quota — the number of wolves that can be trapped or hunted each year.

Kampnich says it can be a touchy subject, locally. On a couple of occasions, he’s seen hair boards vandalized and trail cams disappear.

“It’s really frustrating,” Kampnich says. “But you know, some people will mess with your stuff.”

He doesn’t think it’s all related to tensions over the wolf population. Sometimes it looks like petty crime.

“It’s probably a little of both,” he says.

But Kampnich says wolf hunters have helped him, too. They’ve shown him good spots to place the hairboards.

“I’ve helped him quite a bit because I’ve lived here. I’ve trapped wolves,” Mike Douville says.

Douville wants there to be accurate wolf population estimates. And although he’s helped Kampnich in the past, he thinks using just the hairboards misses the mark.

The wolf population, he says, is bigger than the science alone suggests. So the wolf quota should reflect that.

Douville thinks anything above 175 wolves should be a harvestable surplus. Below that, hunters should be able to take up to 20 percent of the population.

“I don’t think anybody here is interested in wiping them out,” Douville says. “We’ve always got one or two that might think that way. But for the most part, they’re OK with wolves. Just not so many.”

Douville would like to see more traditional knowledge factored in to how the state gauges the number of wolves. But he says getting the wolf population figured out isn’t the only step to securing a future for the island’s deer.

He thinks big timber sales on Prince of Wales should become a thing of the past — even if that means the last remaining sawmill dries up.

“I’m not willing to sacrifice this island to keep it running,” Douville says. “I think there’s a limit on how much you donate to the cause and I think that we’re there.”

Douville says he wants to live on the island from his childhood. It includes a healthy forest for humans, deer and wolves.

Tongass in Transition is a series about trees told through the stories of people. Reporting for this was made possible by an award from the Institute for Journalism and Natural Resources.

Logging from the Big Thorne Timber Sale. (Photo by Elizabeth Jenkin/Alaska's Energy Desk) 12/18/17

Logging from the Big Thorne timber sale. (Photo by Elizabeth Jenkins/Alaska’s Energy Desk)

Source: Tongass in Transition: Wolves and logging both cut into Prince of Wales deer http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/MFDC1014-830×467.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #WolvesInTheNews

As of noon today, 105 wolves Slaughtered in the state of Montana

UPDATE ON MONTANA WOLF TROPHY SLAUGHTER SEASON:

As of noon today, 105 wolves in the state of Montana have lost their lives to trophy hunters.

Unit 101 has 18 kills;

Unit 390 17 kills;

Unit 290 with 14,

The other units range between 1 and 8.

Too many of our beloved wolves of Montana are losing their lives just to appease the trophy hunters and livestock industry. Where is their coexistence management tools? Why arent they being used more, we know that there are good Ranchers that in fact know how to coexist in Montana.
It is beyond disappointing that MFWS Commission and Agency have turned a deaf ear to how essential the Grey Wolf would be in their state in controlling Chronic Wasting Disease in the state, the added income from Yellowstone’s Visitors. An immediate moratorium on wolf trophy hunting should have been put in place at their meeting last week. It is also Very Disappointing that MFWS Ignored our Petition to add our  Proposed “Sacred Resource Protection Zone”. They could not even be bothered to Respond!
Beginning tomorrow the Grey Wolf not only has rifle hunters to deal with, they will now have to beware of traps and snares as the legal trapping of the Grey Wolf starts and runs through February 28,2018. This barbaric practice needs to stop. There is no justification for it to continue in modern time.

National Park Wildlife are in dire need of our Proposed “Sacred Resource Protection Zone”. Help us get this much needed conservation tool to come to pass by Joining our Voice.

Thank You

Patricia and Roger

Protect The Wolves™ http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/mtwolf-1.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #WolvesInMontana

Where is Oregon’s most famous wolf now?; OR-7, famous for long journey, settles in as pack leader

protect oregon wolves, protect the wolves,

In the approximately six years after his well-documented journey across Oregon, which included Deschutes County, the gray wolf best known as OR-7 has established new wolf populations in Southern Oregon and Northern California. As the nearly 9-year-old wolf settles into old age, he’s remembered as a patriarch, a grandfather and a pioneer for Oregon’s burgeoning wolf population.

“He’s been a great ambassador for the species,” said Rob Klavins, Northeast Oregon field coordinator for Oregon Wild, a Portland-based environmental nonprofit.

Today, OR-7 is the alpha male of the Rogue Pack, a group of 11 or 12 wolves that spends much of its time in the Rogue River National Forest in Southern Oregon. OR-7 and his long-time mate — who doesn’t have a radio collar or a designation — produced a litter of pups this spring, according to John Stephenson, wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Bend office.

“Most of the biologists thought he’d never find a mate,” Stephenson said.

Moreover, several of OR-7’s earlier pups have built upon his legacy, as one pup traveled to Northern California, establishing the beginnings of a wolf population there.

Gray wolves are native to Oregon, but as human populations increased in the state at the beginning of the 20th century, wolf populations decreased. For much of the second half of the century, there were no confirmed wolves in the state. However, wolves were reintroduced to Idaho in the 1990s, and gradually made their way to Oregon. By the end of 2011, Oregon’s wolf population had grown to 29 known wolves, according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, concentrated in the northeastern corner of the state.

OR-7 — nicknamed “Journey” following an online contest put together by Oregon Wild — was around 2 years old when he left the Imnaha Pack in far Northeastern Oregon in 2011. Stephenson said 2-year-old wolves often break away from their packs in order to find mates and start new families. While wolves require a lot of territory, Klavins said how far wolves travel while “looking for love and adventure” is very dependent on the individual.

OR-7’s travels, which spanned thousands of miles, took him from the Wallowa Mountains in Northeast Oregon toward Burns, through parts of Crook and Deschutes counties and eventually toward the spine of the Cascade Mountains. The gray wolf wandered into California in search of a mate, making him the first wolf confirmed in the Golden State in nearly a century. By crossing the Cascades, he also became the first confirmed wolf in Western Oregon in more than 60 years.

While Klavins said Southern and Eastern Oregon have plenty of good terrain where OR-7 could set up a territory, no other wolves lived in the area, so he kept wandering in search of a mate. Stephenson added that his travels took him across Interstate 5 in California near Yreka, not once but twice.

“That’s no small feat,” he said.

Stephenson said the combination of the wolf’s long, possibly unprecedented journey and a radio collar allowed viewers to track the wolf’s progress as it traveled across the state.

“It was the first time we could document that he made this incredible journey,” Stephenson said.

Like so many wanderers before him, OR-7 eventually found a mate and settled down. Stephenson said not much is known about OR-7’s mate, a black wolf believed to be slightly younger than he is, though she is believed to be part of the Oregon population of wolves. The state’s population numbered at least 112 wolves in 2016, according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Stephenson added that the duo has had pups in April for each of the past four years, though their litter of six pups this April was the pair’s largest litter to date. Stephenson added that the snowy winter, which favors wolves over their prey, could have helped them produce a larger litter than normal.

One of OR-7’s pups from a prior litter arrived in Lassen County, in northeastern California, according to Kent Laudon, wolf specialist for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Laudon said OR-7’s pup, along with a female wolf whose origins are unknown, are the first pair of wolves to establish territory in that portion of California in years.

The pair had pups in April, and Laudon said photos in June show the wolves accompanied by four pups. In California, where the known wolf population is under 10, a large litter could help the species develop a foothold, according to Laudon.

“Once you have a breeding unit on the land, that makes a big difference,” he said.

Still, OR-7’s legacy is marred somewhat by a couple of incidents. Last October, ODFW investigated an incident where Southern Oregon wolves killed two calves on private land and injured another. Michelle Dennehy, wildlife communications coordinator for ODFW, confirmed that the Rogue Pack was responsible for the attacks.

Separately, Laudon said the pack in Lassen County was tied to two attacks — one confirmed as a wolf attack and one probable one — in a span of two weeks this fall.

The battery in OR-7’s radio collar died in 2015, leaving researchers without a consistent way to monitor the wolf. Still, a trail camera caught a photo of the famous wolf earlier this year, and Stephenson said there’s no reason to believe OR-7 isn’t still alive in Southern Oregon.

While stories inspire for different reasons, Klavins said one reason that OR-7’s story took off — spawning a website, attention from fans on every continent except Antarctica, and a documentary film — is that it came during a time when wolves were becoming increasingly politicized, but ultimately transcended those politics.

“What was nice about the story of OR-7 is that it was a story about a real wolf doing real-wolf things,” Klavins said.

— Reporter: 541-617-7818, [email protected]

Source: Where is Oregon’s most famous wolf now?; OR-7, famous for long journey, settles in as pack leader http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/or7-750×533-1.jpg #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #ProtectWolvesInOregon

Wyoming killing 41 possible Park Wolves 71 altogether to Date

sacred resource Protection zone, protect the wolves

POSSIBLE YELLOWSTONE WOLVES ARE DYING

At an Alarming Rate!!!!

AS OF 12/13/2017 at 3pm

Please Consider Joining Our Voice to establish a “Sacred Resource Protection Zone” Surrounding National Parks in the Blood thirsty state of Wyoming a total of it appears 71 wolves altogether 41 from the Trophy Zone, 20 from the general Slaughter Zone in this Bloodthirsty State!
Please consider becoming a Paid Member so We are able to call these crooked states out in COURT. We have the Research, the tools, the Attorneys, only missing Ingredient is 57,000 plus followers.

Take Back the Power that You as the public hold! Help us to put The Indian and Public Trusts to work Today, before they wipe out the rest of Your wolves, grizzlies, wild horses. https://continuetogive.com/protectthewolves

We asked for your support back in May to Help Yellowstone Wolves with our Sacred Resource Protection Zone…  Wolves are dying, crying out for us to help them. http://protectthewolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/12132017.png #OpposeWelfareRanchingNotWolves #ProtectTheWolves #SacredResourceProtectionZone