Sunday, June 22, 2014

Why I believe that emotionally charged 
direct action, 
(or peaceful civil disobedience), 
will not help to save our Idaho Gray Wolves 
in the long run

I’ve held off from addressing this again, as I have a life, and this seemed like mud wrestling at this point.
But there is a serious concern at play.
There is another protest planned for July 1. 2014, in Boise, Idaho by Howl4Wolves in conjunction with Wolves and Wildlife and Action (WWA).

This comes on the tail of two days of workshops focusing on non lethal wolf control in Idaho, held by Defenders of Wildlife and Wood River Wolf River project, geared at teaching methods towards a peaceful compromise for this siege on wolves.

The bottom line for our war on wolves, is that wolves present a threat to ranchers who raise sheep and cattle for a living. Especially if the livestock are grazing on public lands. But it does not need to be a war, as ranchers have methods of deterring wolves from predation. It is called non lethal wolf control, and you can read about it here:

Defenders of Wildlife have been working peacefully for seven years now on non-lethal predation control methods, to find a long term, co-existence solution to this vitriolic, contentious battle between pro wolves and those whose existence is threatened by the presence of wolves, to their livelihood as ranchers.

Last night, after posting that very positive news about the co-existence workshops, a fellow activist leveled this at me. My replies are non italicized:

Heidi, your Governors might say they are going to protect the Wolf,but people lie, you know! US Fish and Wildlife Services people seem to all belong to the Shooters Party,and they are very strong, that is why Obama can't do anything to help! Protesting not "civil disobedience" is every persons right, at least in Australia and it has worked often here. If I was living in US, I would join the Protestors! Good on them! Being nice, does not work in extreme cases like this! You said, that there are Hunters all over the world. True! To me all of them are insane, like the Serial Killers, murderers, animals matter just as much as people do, if not more! They all have a Soul, same as we do! Do you hunt, do you own a gun, Heidi? I was just wondering, because you sometimes seem to be defending Hunters! To me, they are all Murderers and Evil Monsters!

I do not own a gun.
It is getting late, so I will refrain from responding to you in the same tone that you have addressed me.

I was not blaming you! It's just, that sometimes you have things wrong!:))

No, I don't have it wrong.

We are spending money we do not have in continuous litigation, we are becoming more and more unyielding on either side, be it prowolf or anti-wolf, and now activists are attacking activists who disagree with one another.

Co-existence with the ranching industry is a very positive step in ending wolf deaths, as there will be far less predation, calling for the removal of "problem wolves".

Wolf activism is getting ugly, folks, when activists turn on one another.
I’ve only been entrenched for a year in my second round of activism for wolves, and my life took a hit. My reputation as a legitimate activist was called into question a few times now, the first time because I saw the danger in wolf trap sabotage, and spoke out about it. 
At first, it seemed like a good idea to dismantle a trap, but then my dear friend Janet explained to me what it would result in. Wolf deaths caused out of sheer retaliation by wolf trappers who caught activists illegally dismantling their traps.

This time my wolf activism was questioned by one of the folks who is calling for direct action via civil disobedience. Twice. Publicly. This is the second round, that was published as a comment in the Idaho Statesman online newspaper:

Katsumi, the actions you are advocating worry me for this reason:

I do NOT want Governor Butch Otter to be re elected. He hates wolves. So does Jeff Siddoway. There are politicians in Idaho that make it difficult for pro wolves, but having a faction of pro wolves charge at them sure as hell will not help our cause.

So, the news about the last "civil disobedience" plan is below. 

And for the record? I am not the one to call it peaceful civil disobedience. That is in the post announcing the event, and in the newspaper article documenting the last event. So, for that be thrown at me, as originating from me , is simply ridiculous.
This is the last time I will be posting something like this on this blog, G+, or Twitter. 

Two years of involvement online for our Buddies have taught me a few lessons. 

Activist rage does not stop abuse, hunting, nor turn carnivores into vegans. I can't deal with it, and I'm an activist. People who scream in my direction can be assured that I have tuned them out immediately.

Activists are not immune to ego posturing and hurting one another, in order to feel that they are the more effective activist. That's a shame, as we were supposedly all working towards the goal of helping our Buddies. So the Buddies suffered.

It's a bad idea to be flippant towards your elected government officials, when you are requesting that they change a law. Director Dan Ashe, and Secretary Sally Jewell, I sincerely apologize for my demeanor when I addressed you during the delisting comment period. Not my proudest moments by far.

Other than posting the Monday wolf actions for the week, I am finished with monitoring wolf activism here. 
Enough is enough.
Good luck folks, and Wolves.
Please think about what we are doing, and why we are doing it.

Wolf lovers meet with Otter at Idaho Capitol protest
Posted by Rocky Barker on May 19, 2014 
FacebookTwitterGoogle PlusRedditE-mailPrint

Spiritual leader Jimmy St. Goddard holds lighted wheatgrass in front of the Idaho State Capitol during a small protest against the killing of wolves in Idaho. Monday May 19, 2014
KYLE GREEN — Buy Photo
They back off civil disobedience after he talks to them
National pro-wolf advocates didn’t get the 250 protesters they hoped would join their call Monday for Idaho Gov. Butch Otter’s resignation for allowing Idaho to kill hundreds of wolves.

And they dropped their plans for civil disobedience Monday after Otter’s staff and then Otter himself met with them to discuss wolf policy. Only 19 people showed up at the Capitol carrying signs and howling in protest of Idaho’s policy to reduce wolf numbers by official killing, hunting and trapping.

Led by Blackfeet traditional chief Jimmy St. Goddard, of Montana, the group of mostly Baby Boomers from the Wolf and Wildlife and Action Group, called on Otter to stop the killing of wolves or resign.

The wolves belong to the American people, the indigenous people,” said Clarisa Damron, one of the protest’s organizers from Kansas.

Eventually they worked their way into the Governor’s office where Steve Goodson, Otter’s natural resources specialist met them and brought them to a conference room to discuss their issues. Meanwhile Otter finished a meeting with Secretary of State Ben Ysursa and was chatting with me in the hallway. Damron came over and asked him if he was going to protect animals indiscriminately killed by snares aimed at catching wolves.

Otter suggested she talk to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, then explained Idaho's concerns with protecting endangered species and Otters. Damron didn’t get it right away but then Otter laughed and she laughed with him.

Then Otter told her he and Idaho were keeping their commitments to protect wolves at a minimum number of 150, reminding her he and the state government never wanted the wolves in the first place.

More of the group joined the conversation and Otter remained pleasant, eventually breaking off to return to his office.

I wrote earlier that if pro-wolf advocates wanted to help Otter build his credibility with the anti-wolf elements of the Idaho GOP they couldn’t have found a better way than to plan civil disobedience on behalf of wolves the day before the Idaho primary election.

Since most of the Republican Party in Idaho has opposed in one fashion or the other the reintroduction and the remarkable growth of the wolf population over the last 19 years, the protesters may actually may help Otter in his primary race against State Sen. Russ Fulcher, and now perhaps Harley Brown, the biker whose Idaho Public Television debate performance last week made the nation laugh and may help him to become a factor in the race.

Read more here:

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Wolves Have An Effect On Coyotes, Foxes Across North America 

Fur trapping records across North America have shown that the population of wolves in a given area has a dramatic effect on smaller animals, according to scientists. The study included areas from Alaska and Yukon to Nova Scotia and Maine. 

In areas where wolves are present, red foxes are favored. In areas where wolves are absent, coyotes are favored.

Coyotes outnumber foxes an average of 3-to-1 where wolves are present. However, in the areas where wolves are absent, foxes outnumber coyotes an average of 4-to-1, 500-to-1 in one area. In one 124 mile transition area where wolves are present, there are too few of them to alter the balance between the coyotes and foxes.

Thomas Newsome and William Ripple   
from the Oregon State University Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society conducted the study and published the findings in the Journal of Animal Ecology by the British Ecological Society.

“As wolves were extirpated across the southern half of North America, coyotes dramatically expanded their range. They were historically located in the middle and western United States, but they dispersed all the way to Alaska in the early 1900s and to New Brunswick and Maine by the 1970s. said Newsome in a recent statement. 
So essentially coyotes have been dispersing into wolf and red-fox range in the north but also into areas where wolves are absent but red fox are present in the East,” said Newsome.

Newsome earned a Ph.D. from the University of Sydney, Australia, where he specialized in the study of dingoes. There is controversy in Australia about the dingoes and their role in decimating wildlife. “Over the last 200 years, Australia has had the highest extinction rate in the world. The debate is about whether the dingo can provide positive ecological benefits. Where dingoes have been removed, the impacts of introduced red foxes and feral cats have been quite severe on native fauna,” Newsome explained.

Dingoes are considered to be a pest and to reduce the destruction of livestock, Australia has built the world’s longest fence – 3,400 miles – to prevent the animals access to a quarter of the continent.

Newsome believes that the study on wolves and the affect they have on coyotes and foxes could be helpful to Australia. “Australians can learn a lot from how wolves are managed in North America, and Americans can learn from the ecological role of the dingo,” Newsome said.

The range of coyotes has expanded greatly across North America and has become a major concern in the livestock industry. In 2004, there was an estimated $40 million loss in cattle and sheep. The Wildlife Services of the US Department of Agriculture have implemented a program to reduce the number of coyotes to help cut losses caused by the predator. However, it has gathered criticism from conservation groups.

“This study gives us a whole other avenue to understand the ecological effects of wolves on landscapes and animal communities,” said Ripple. It has shown the huge effect that the removal of top predators has on the ecosystem.
Wolves are also expanding to many areas of the US since their reintroduction into Yellowstone National Park and surrounding areas in 1995. Scientists are studying the wolves’ interaction with other species, especially coyotes and red foxes, to see the impact they have on the populations.

Reposted from Before Its News 

Photo credits:

Wolf Identification - Western Wildlife Outreach

Red fox 
Found on


Dingo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Saturday, June 14, 2014


"Sperm Banking Revives Endangered Mexican Wolf"
Ok. This news is already a couple of months old. It probably got buried in all of the wolf crisis news we have on a weekly basis. But I had to repost it, as it is encouraging and positive. 

And I have something to say about a few other aspects of the situation for our wolves.

Here's the deal, as I see it.
Mexican Gray Wolves and Gray Wolves NEED to have a home in the U.S.A. They were here before we wiped them out, in order for humans and cattle to exist in the land they called home. They play a vital role in the balance of our natural environment.
A tremendous amount of time, effort, and money has been spent to reintroduce the Gray Wolves to North America from Canada, and the Mexican Gray Wolves from Mexico.
North American wolf recovery began in Yellowstone National Park.

And now we find that some say that the wolf populations have recovered to the point where they need to be managed. "Managed" does not have to entail "hunting", "trapping", or "harvesting" however. We do have non lethal means of management.

We humans and cattle are cohabitants in the historic wolf home spots now, and we have to work to find a way to co-exist. Without so much wolf, cow, or sheep bloodshed.
For every single activist that I hear on Twitter or Google+ say that humans are the problem, they need to go? 
Well, those activists are not volunteering to exit the planet, nor am I. 
It's always someone else's problem? 

Until everyone converts to veganism, we are going to have ranches that are populated with cattle and sheep. And wolves will eat cattle and sheep if all other prey have been ruled off limits to them. 

We have to work WITH ranchers, not alienate them. We have so many methods for co-operation available in order to ensure that we do not have to resort to lethal means of predator control. If activists are screaming at ranchers, instead of speaking with them, do you really think they are interested in hearing what we are suggesting? It takes a very sturdy person to withstand a hostile barrage of insults. I can't do it.

We also need legal protections. 
Gray wolves have to continue to be listed or relisted as threatened species under the ESA, as they are under siege by sport hunters. This is not entirely an issue of wolves being killed because of predation conflicts.
We can still request this, in spite of the requested comment period being closed. Please see Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center to take action: 

Both sides of this issue need to compromise.
Wolf activists have to be willing to listen to the concerns of the ranching industry, and maybe be willing to support the folks who are working to develop effective methods of ensuring co-existence.
Ranchers need to be willing to try these methods instead of dealing with wolf predation via shotgun or trap.

In the meantime, until we can achieve that equilibrium?
We absolutely need wolf sanctuaries, conservation minded zoos, and scientists who are working to preserve endangered species, while the rest of us battle it out with politicians, trying to win a balance for our wildlife in the midst of an ever expanding sprawl of humanity, and livestock.
Not all zoos, and sanctuaries are the "enemy" to the wild Buddies they are working to preserve.

Frankly, I've about had it with the "all or nothing" attitude I see in many of my fellow A.R. activists. Do we think a few petition signatures alone will solve this? 
So many activists won't write an email, or place a call to their representative or senator, yet feel the need to constantly squeal online about the wolf enemies ..... the government who has not magically fixed the problem, the wolf hunters who legally hunt wolves after purchasing tags from state wildlife services, or ranchers who use lethal predator control.

Well, some government folks never even heard from us, if we did not send a comment, an email, or make that phone call. Some of these single person petitions I see in circulation online have no delivery date, and they have been around for years. How useful is a petition if it is not yet been delivered?

There is no such thing as "lazy activism"....either do it, or don't, but enough with the finger pointing and online ranting to fellow activists. 
"Preaching to the choir" ring a bell here?

We humans are here. Carnivores and vegans.
And our population growth is threatening wild spaces, we are encroaching on more and more wilderness.

But if I suggest that humans can indeed alter that reality? By using....ummmm....birth control?
I'll be crucified.

More humans means more humans. We humans tend to take up wilderness space with our housing and shopping mall needs, and that wilderness is where the wild Buddies, like our wolves live. 
Let's just save that debate for another day, face reality head on, and learn how to be effective proWolf activists in the meantime.

Send your representatives and senators firm but polite emails.
Email contacts for our USA Government representatives and senators.

Find United States Senators here:

Find United States House of Representatives here:

Make phone calls when an organization suggests it would be appropriate, comment to USFWS about the decision to delist our wolves as endangered species, 

Support the organizations that are working with ranchers to bring about a cooperative co-existence environment for wolves using non lethal predator controls.

Just please don't call ranchers vulgar names online, threaten harm to wolf hunters, suggest we sabotage personal property, or start cat fights with activists who don't agree with such a vitriolic approach.
We are all in this together, and we certainly cannot afford to be labeled as lunatic radical proWolves at this point.


One of the male Mexican gray wolves at Brookfield Zoo. They can be seen at the Regenstein Wolf Woods exhibit. 
(Photo credit: Jim Schulz/Chicago Zoological Society)

Posted by Jordan Carlton Schaul of University of Alaska; Grizzly People on April 5, 2014

Earlier this week, the USFWS announced that a pregnant, captive born, female Mexican wolf reared at Chicago’s Brookfield Zoo will be released next week into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area of Arizona as a part of the Mexican wolf recovery effort in the United States.

F1126, known as “Ernesta” to zoo staff, has been paired with a male (M1249) who was captured during an annual survey of the wolf population. Another pair was already released into Apache National Forest this month.

“We anticipate the release of these two pregnant females from captivity will have a higher chance of success because they are paired with males that already have extensive wild experience,” said Benjamin Tuggle, the USFWS’s Southwest Regional Director. “The genetic value of the two females will help us as we move toward establishing a more genetically robust population of wild wolves.”

Besides supplying reintroduction candidates, zoos have been instrumental in the restoration effort for the endangered subspecies through genetic management of the captive gene pool.  A collaborative effort between the St. Louis and Brookfield zoos has also demonstrated that assisted breeding technology is closer to becoming a reality for frequent use in the wolf conservation effort. Artificial insemination (AI) can be a tool of great value once the genetic management of the captive wolf population is enhanced with the help of gamete banking—the storage of semen and ova from living or deceased wolves.

New developments in cryonics, specifically the banking of vitrified oocytes, may be a game changer in the conservation of genetic diversity for endangered species. The technique ultimately eliminates the reliance on existing embryo cryopreservation and subsequent transfer technology.

Vitrification of oocytes, which is unprecedented for an endangered species recovery program, refers to the complete removal of lethal ice crystals within the oocyte. Vitrification differs from standard cryopreservation in that the oocytes are moved through solutions that pull the water out of the oocyte to prevent ice formation. Along with the preservation of semen, the vitrification of oocytes will serve to optimize genetic management of the captive population.

Sathya Chinnadurai, DVM, DVM, MS, Dipl. ACZM, Dipl. ACVAA, associate veterinarian for the Chicago Zoological Society, and Cheryl Asa, Ph.D., director of research for St. Louis Zoo, look at the quality of the Mexican gray wolf sperm under a microscope. (Photo credit: Jim Schulz/Chicago Zoological Society)

Dr. Cheryl Asa, the director of research at the St. Louis Zoo, indicated that semen banking is just as integral to the genetic management of Mexican wolves as egg cell banking because they can match ova with sperm from more males than those that are living. Dr. Asa said, ”Currently our focus is on banking genes. Although, animals will age and eventually die, their genes will still be available.”  So for now, she said, “Components of cryopreservation, from freezing protocols to post-thaw analysis of sperm and egg quality, will be important to assisted breeding applications (e.g. artificial insemination).”

The St. Louis Zoo has maintained a frozen semen bank under the auspices of the USFWS Mexican wolf recovery program since 1991. St. Louis Zoo is one of the few sophisticated captive wildlife facilities in the world with the capacity to bank genes and develop complementary assisted reproduction technologies. Advances in reproductive physiology and theriogenology are increasingly being used in the ‘sorta situ’ (ex situ and in situ) approach to conservation. They offer more than just a means to artificially propagate founder stock for field conservation programs.

As far as gamete banking is concerned, zoos can pinpoint specific genes that will benefit the reintroduction program. Joan Daniels, Associate Curator at the Brookfield Zoo said, “In addition, these techniques can permit the selective breeding of individuals representing specific genetic lineages.” She added that they can also use cryogenics to preserve gametes for future reproduction efforts if they are not needed for current breeding plans. Zoo populations also provide backup stock in the event that a reintroduced individual becomes a casualty.

As a result, the zoos involved with the Mexican Wolf Species Survival Plan have made it logistically possible and feasible to continually augment reintroduction populations with genetically sound and redundant individuals, fine-tuning science to make recovery efforts more efficient and more resilient.

An egg yolk extender has been added to the Mexican gray wolf semen.
This protects the sperm cells during the freezing process. The semen is placed in a water bath that will provide a controlled cooling rate period in the refrigerator. After the semen is cooled little straws are filled with it and then placed over liquid nitrogen. (Photo by Jim Schulz/Chicago
Zoological Society)

From the type of semen collection method (i.e. manual or electroejaculation), to the storage method (i.e. fresh, chilled or frozen) to picking the right donor, to choosing surgical or nonsurgical insemination procedures, many options exist in terms of biotechniques to choose from. Of course, these living institutions are committed to animal welfare as much as their mission is to conserve. So they practice the least invasive techniques, and often without the risk of surgery, when it comes to the genetic management of captive wildlife.

Although gray wolves were once the most widespread mammals on the planet, the extant population now occurs in one-third of its historic range, including three states in the southwestern U.S. where it was once extirpated.

Thanks to the development of reproductive strategies such as sperm banking, along with a highly coordinated management of the living population, the Mexican wolf—one of 27 subspecies of gray wolves—is making an impressive comeback. Mexican wolves have been and will continue to be released in designated U.S. recovery zones in the Apache and Gila National Forests of New Mexico, through a rigorous selection and acclimation process.

This subspecies has been functionally extinct (extinct in the wild) in the United States for many decades. It was nearly extirpated in Mexico, but occasional sightings in the 1970’s confirmed that the wolf was still free ranging across the Mexican border. Its U.S. range included—Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico—and new research suggest the subspecies may have occurred further north.

But it is the captive management and captive population, now comprised of 300 wolves in 45 U.S. and Mexican facilities that have saved the endangered canid from absolute extinction. In fact, conservation breeding of Mexican wolves, which are also the smallest and rarest subspecies of grey wolf, has been an integral part of the restoration program since its inception in the late 1970s.

Specifically, a species survival program was established in 1977 for the subspecies recovery effort.  This bi-national breeding program was launched with the capture of the entire wild population and it has undoubtedly saved the Mexican wolf.

Jump ahead to today. Nearly 40 years have passed since the founding stock of five wild individuals was first placed in captivity. On March 29, 1998, almost 16 years ago exactly, the first 11 captive reared wolves were released into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area, which includes the aforementioned National Forests in portions which extend through parts of New Mexico and Arizona.

Last year marked the third consecutive year in a row that the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program saw a 10 percent or greater increase in the population size of this subspecies of gray wolf, which is comprised of 15 packs. Fixed wing aircraft and ground census work confirmed this increase for an extant population of wild born wolves. It is significant that these wolves are wild born. The founder stock of captive wolves has perished since the inception of the recovery program. However, their offspring and that of subsequent generations of Mexican wolves, all born in the wild, continue to flourish and produce their own litters. This is a testament to the success of the reintroduction program and is suggestive of just how genetically robust the wolf population has become.

In the future, zoos will be able to transport semen instead of their resident wolves and coordinate “breeding” activities between institutions through the AZA’s nationwide Mexican Wolf Species Survival Program and even internationally.

According to Joan Daniels, a curator at the Brookfield Zoo who has oversight over the institution’s Mexican wolf management program, “Having future capabilities to use advanced reproductive procedures with wolves such as artificial insemination will greatly enhance the ability to manage zoo populations. Individual wolves might not need to be moved from one zoo to another for breeding if genetic material could be exchanged instead. Wolves are highly monogamous and socially bonded in captive packs, so not having to disrupt the social groupings to manage the genetics would be of great benefit.” As mentioned, semen can also be stored and utilized from animals well after they have expired which will allow for the preservation of genetic lineages until space is available to allow for selective reproduction.

As a note, the Regenstein Wolf Woods, which includes the Mexican wolf exhibit at the Brookfield Zoo, includes “design implementations to cultivate natural behaviors” conducive to animals being released in to the wild. These include the following husbandry practices and enclosure design features:

Wolves socialize only with each other. Keepers do not interact directly with wolves.
Wolves receive native prey species such as elk hide, bison meat, and whole prey items.
Climbing logs, a pool, heated rocks, and loose dirt encourage natural behaviors like playing, lounging, and digging.
Buildings blend in with the natural surroundings so that the wolves don’t associate manmade structures with shelter or food.
“We are committed to the highest level of animal care, and Regenstein Wolf Woods ensures that wolves participating in the release program will be successful in their transition into the wild,” Daniels said.

In 2012, I reported on the first attempted release of Ernesta. I also reported on the advances in clinical care and study of Mexican wolves, made possible by the Brookfield Zoo’s sophisticated diagnostic imaging suite in this earlier piece.

Dr. Jordan Schaul is an American zoologist, conservationist, journalist and animal trainer based in Los Angeles, California. He is a regular contributor to Nat Geo News Watch. For more of his posts, please visit his profile page on this website.

Keywords:artificial insemination assisted reproduction technologies AZA Brookfield Zoo canids Cheryl Asa Chicago Zoological Society Ernesta gamete banking Joan Daniels Jordan Schaul Mexican gray wolves oocytes semen semen banking SSP St. Louis Zoo
More »

Kris Hill

April 10, 8:24 pm
As you can see from the first comment- Sam has thrown a lot of numbers and statistics at us. That is a very common technique used to confuse people and to make him sound more informed and professional. The key word I want you to read is in his last sentence- “assumptions”.
Obviously Sam doesn’t care if this rare wolf goes extinct. He’s obviously more concerned about ranchers who can’t keep track of their own cattle and keep them safe. While this is a very small problem- there are a lot of very viable solutions to keep wolves at bay. It’s proven that wolves will stay away when guard dogs are keeping watch on the herd. There are also other low cost solutions that you can view at . For the pet side of the conversation- if you love your pets, you will keep them safe inside and safe inside a fenced in yard. If not, and a coyote or wolf gets them, it is you fault and no one elses. Please, lets all use some common sense and passion and help these wolves make the comeback that they need and deserve.

Sam Lobo

April 7, 6:35 pm
Success of the Mexican grey wolf will be dependent on how ranchers are treated…. which is not good! It’s sad that so much money is spent on litigation for this animal….Habitat is the key and any betterment of the environment for wolves should be on preserving the habitat that is there (which is almost non existent). The current environment allows for some pretty disgusting numbers …

They say there were 19 confirmed depredations….BUT they do not tell you how many NON-Confirmed cattle are killed. Wolf Loving biologist Dr David Mech testified in court that only one in six TRUE depredation are ever confirmed. So that 19 confirmed depredations in 2012 was really 114 of which RANCHER took the hit for 95 animals….

Then they do not mention depredations on pets / dogs. The ratio of livestock (cattle & Sheep) to dog depredations in Wisconsin is around 50 percent of what the CONFIRMED depredation are SO if they had 19 confirmed depredation that means their were 9 that were probably confirmed …. and 54 pets (pet horses, cats lama’s & chickens) that were actually killed taking in consideration the .NON-confirmed depredations

When keeping in mind that the 2012 population was JUST 58 animals …. We can safely assume that:
58 wolves (estimated population)
19 Confirmed livstock $14,300
95 Non-confirmed livestock (per ratio above $71,500) paid for by ranchers every year…!
9 (estimated) Confirmed dogs/pets
54 Non-confirmed dogs / pets These animals are worth more than a dollar value BUT even at the ratio above the are worth $47,415 paid by the ranchers and pet owners … every Year!

So a total of 174 domestic animals were killed by these Mexican wolves…

So based on these facts and assumptions the ON AVERAGE chance of the Mexican Gray wolf to kill or maim someone’s livestock or pet over JUST ONE year is 174 / 58 .IS 300% …..

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

Please sign and share, 
from Endangered Species Coalition:

About the petition:
Following the removal of Endangered Species Act protections from gray wolves in 2011, the state of Idaho has waged an increasingly ugly assault against these animals.

Just this year, it passed into law the setting aside of nearly half a million dollars to exterminate 500 wolves. In December 2013, it hired a trapper to go into a federal wilderness area to kill two wolf packs, and it has announced that it intends to kill more. In February, the state gunned down 23 wolves from a helicopter to artificially bolster an area elk herd.

Idaho's Governor Otter famously said in 2007 that he wanted to be the first to kill an Idaho wolf after federal protections were taken away. Since then, almost 1,000 wolves have been killed.

Tell Governor Otter that these wolves were entrusted to Idaho, and that trust is being betrayed.

Photo Credit: Jen St. Louis Photography/Getty Images

Reposted from The Timberwolf Information Network
Tuesday, June 3. 2014


Posted on June 3, 2014 by TWIN Observer
Posted by Harrison Berry

A national wildlife conservation group is taking aim at Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter’s wolf policy.

In a two-week ad campaign, Defenders of Wildlife
hopes to reach out to Idaho voters and political leaders to rethink what the organization is calling a “statewide war on gray wolves.” The radio ads, which feature Idahoans expressing concern about the state’s wolf population, will air in the Boise and Spokane media markets over the next two weeks.

“We hope that by exposing what residents of Idaho really think of this war on wolves, Governor Otter might change course and start treating wolves like other wildlife,” wrote Defenders of Wildlife senior representative Suzanne Stone in a press release.

According to the 2013 winter wolf count, Idaho’s wolf population has declined from 856 individual wolves in 2009 to 659 in 2013. According to some elected officials and Idaho’s Wolf Control Board
created during the 2013-14 legislative session, that number of wolves could be further reduced to 150 individuals by 2018.