HELENA, Mont. – Could wolves and other large predators be border guards in the fight against Chronic Wasting Disease?

One biologist believes so, as CWD, an infectious neurological disease that affects deer, elk and moose populations, spreads in the Mountain West.

Biologist Gary Wolfe, a former Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks commissioner, says large predators such as wolves have an innate ability to sense disease in prey populations.

He says halting recreational hunting of large predators like cougars or wolves in areas with emerging CWD outbreaks could curb the disease.

"I think it'd be worthwhile to curtail the recreational hunting for those large predators if, at the same time, you're trying to address a[n] emerging outbreak of Chronic Wasting Disease and see whether or not those large predators could assist in containing that disease," he states.

Wolfe says a study on mountain lions found they selectively prey on CWD-infected mule deer, showing that predators likely would target diseased animals.

But he adds that there would be major pushback from hunters if recreational hunting were cut back.

Currently, the main approach for containing the disease in many states is recreational deer hunts in areas where CWD has been identified to reduce the deer population and its chance of spreading.

Wolfe says the fact that predators tend to sniff out the weakest prey, and also hunt around the clock, would make them better candidates for selecting infected animals.

"Those predators can be more effective at taking out weakened animals from the population than the hunter will be by randomly taking animals out of the population," he states.

Wolfe says there's some evidence that wolves might already be helping prevent CWD's spread.

He says if you place a map of wolf population distribution over areas where the disease has been detected in the Mountain West, you'll find there's very little overlap.

"That's circumstantial evidence, but to me that's a piece of circumstantial evidence that says that wolf predation can help slow the spread of the disease," he states.


get more stories like this via email

Colorado lawmakers could add buffalo, also known as bison, to a long list of wildlife that have been restored to their natural habitat across the Centennial State. Senate Bill 25-053 would classify wild roaming buffalo as wildlife, to be managed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife the same as deer, elk, moose and other big game species.

Nick Gevoc, Northern Rockies campaign organizing strategist with the Sierra Club, says under current Colorado law, when members of wild buffalo herds from southeastern Utah cross a border they can't see, they are not protected.

"Just a handful, maybe four to six animals a year, are making their way into western Colorado. And those animals are being shot now," he explained. "And they can do that legally because they are not recognized as wildlife in the state of Colorado."

Colorado is seen as a leader in the Rocky Mountain region for restoring wildlife, most recently with the reintroduction of wolves, a move opposed by some cattle producers. Efforts to protect buffalo as wildlife in Montana have been strongly opposed by the livestock industry. Senate Bill 25-053 would protect existing free-range buffalo, and does not direct wildlife managers to bring more animals into Colorado.

Before they were hunted to near extinction in the late 19th century, between 30 million and 60 million buffalo roamed North America. In recent years, efforts by Tribal Nations to recover buffalo as a wildlife species have gained momentum. The keystone species provides food and habitat for birds, insects and small mammals, and increases biodiversity.

"They create little depressions that often store water. They selectively graze on the landscape differently than cattle, they hit some areas harder than others," Gevoc continued. "They tend to stay away from waterways. They bring tremendous ecological benefits to a shortgrass prairie."

Gevoc believes the measure will boost Colorado's economy as people come to the state for a chance to see buffalo, America's national mammal, in the wild.

"They are deeply important to Native American people, and they're a symbol of pride to the people of Colorado and all over the country. We recovered elk, deer, antelope, moose, all kinds of other species. But for some reason we left this one behind," he concluded.

A bill to exempt any Colorado livestock producer's personal information from the Colorado Open Records Act when they collect public dollars for livestock lost to wildlife is swiftly moving through the General Assembly.

Proponents said the law is necessary to prevent potential harassment and scrutiny over how ranchers are working to keep livestock safe from wolves.

Ryan Sedgeley, Southern Rockies field representative for the Endangered Species Coalition, said hiding the names of anyone who receives taxpayer money is not good policy.

"Senate Bill 38 invites the opportunity for fraud and abuse," Sedgeley contended. "Because when there is no accountability or transparency for who's receiving taxpayer money for damage, anybody can take advantage of that."

The measure has cleared the Senate. The House Ag, Livestock and Water Committee is scheduled to hear the bill today. Supporting the bill are 25 registered lobbyists representing livestock interests. The Center for Biological Diversity and Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition are lobbying in opposition.

Sedgeley pointed out most Coloradans support living alongside wolves and have doubled down on financial compensation for lost livestock, especially for family-scale producers. In addition to state and Colorado State University, Sedgeley noted new "Born to be Wild" license plates have already brought in $650,000.

"That directly goes to helping ranchers do this work," Sedgeley emphasized. "We also have a lot of nonprofit partners who are actually out in the field helping ranchers, getting them the materials and supplies they need. And there's a range-riding program that's been stood up."

Sedgeley added the actual threat wolves pose to livestock is very low.

"Less than 1% of cattle mortality is a result of wolves in places where there are actually significant amounts of wolves, like up in the Northern Rockies," Sedgeley observed. "And to put that in context, dogs kill about 11.3%; weather is responsible for 9.3%."

The push to reintroduce southern sea otters to greater sections of the California and Oregon coast is getting a big boost from a $1.56 million grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, part of the America the Beautiful Challenge program.

Over the next three years, tribes and nonprofit partners will build public awareness of the need to expand sea otters' range.

Robert Kentta, elected member of the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians' tribal council and board member of the Elakha Alliance, said his group is focused on helping sea otters thrive.

"Sea otters are an ultra-keystone species because they don't just maintain the habitat of the near shore ecosystem, they create that kelp forest habitat, which leads to abundance and diversity," Kentta outlined. "That's always been recognized by our tribal stories."

The animals once ranged along the entire west coast up to central Oregon but were decimated by the fur trade in the 18th and 19th centuries. Now they are mainly hemmed in by white sharks between Santa Barbara and San Francisco.

Advocates are encouraging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to launch a public scoping project in the next few years to support a resurgence of sea otters in Northern California and Oregon, possibly with donor animals from the northern sea otter populations in Washington and points north.

Andy Johnson, California representative and sea otter program lead for Defenders of Wildlife, said since sea otters eat shellfish, any reintroduction program will need to address the concerns of the shellfishing community.

"We're already working on some meetings with the fishing community, trying to get to a point where we all understand that the impacts to them will probably be minimal," Johnson asserted. "Maybe they don't need to oppose it, just on principle."

When the southern sea otter was listed under the Endangered Species Act in 1977, there were only around one thousand animals left, down from a historical population of 16-thousand.