From Little Red Riding Hood to the Halloween thriller "Wolf Man," stories often paint wolves as scary creatures but conservationists argued it is the wrong view.
Most gray wolves across the contiguous U.S. are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. An exception includes the Northern Rocky Mountain population in parts of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, where states are in charge of managing wolf populations.
Eric Clewis, senior Northern Rockies representative for Defenders of Wildlife, said wolves have proved polarizing in recent years but they do not need to be.
"The preferred outlook really is just wolves as a native wildlife species on the landscape, rather than treating it as either this pure icon of wilderness or this just bloodthirsty animal that's out there trying to reduce elk or deer populations or decimate livestock," Clewis urged.
The gray wolf was one of the first species listed under the 1973 federal Endangered Species Act, when he said the population was "pretty much wiped out." He believes people should "take pride" in the recovery of the wolves so far.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees endangered species, announced a first-ever National Recovery Plan for the species, with an expected completion date at the end of next year. The agency said in a news release it plans to continue to work with tribes and states to "craft enduring solutions."
Clewis argued recent actions by state agencies have been misguided.
"We've had a whole suite of bills passed in all three states that are aimed more at reducing the wolf population than actually managing it based on any biological justification or recent science," Clewis explained.
The Fish and Wildlife Service noted Idaho and Montana had recently passed laws "designed to substantially reduce" the wolf populations there, "using means and measures that are at odds with modern professional wildlife management."
Disclosure: Defenders of Wildlife contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species and Wildlife, Energy Policy, Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
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%."
Disclosure: The Endangered Species Coalition contributes to our fund for reporting on Endangered Species and Wildlife. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
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.
Disclosure: Defenders of Wildlife contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species & Wildlife, Energy Policy, and Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A critical fish species in the Chesapeake Bay, the Atlantic menhaden, could be declining rapidly.
Or its numbers could be growing.
There is no data on Atlantic menhaden populations in the Bay, and fishing and conservation groups say that's the problem.
A bill in the Virginia General Assembly looks to shed light on menhaden populations in the Chesapeake.
Steve Atkinson, chairman of the Virginia Saltwater Sportfishing Association, said Atlantic menhaden is a keystone species and may be overfished in the Chesapeake Bay.
"They're extremely important as a forage fish because they feed fish, like our iconic striped bass, bluefish and trout," Atkinson explained. "But they also feed mammals and also seabirds, like our iconic osprey. For years, there's been concern that they are being overfished in the Chesapeake Bay."
The bill would provide $3 million for the study of menhaden populations in the Chesapeake Bay. The Virginia Institute of Marine Science has developed one study but Atkinson noted funding for the research has been elusive.
Tyler Nonn, owner and operator of Tidewater Charters, takes people fishing on the Bay every day. He said his business relies on healthy Atlantic menhaden populations. He pointed out there are times even the best commercial fishermen are unable to catch adult menhaden.
"Even those guys have trouble getting them," Nonn observed. "The consistency is not there. You know, we'll have a couple years where it'll be good. A lot of that has to do with environmental factors, but taking hundreds of thousands of pounds of them out of the Bay does not help the cause."
Studies indicate about 30% of the striped bass diet is Atlantic menhaden.
Atkinson emphasized oftentimes, their advocacy faces circular reasoning, when if there is no evidence of shrinking Menhaden populations, why fund a study? But he argued the health of the species is worth checking.
"When we raise these issues, the industry usually comes back and their comment is the same, which is, 'There's no science to support your concern,'" Atkinson noted. "We need to get additional science to show them once and for all whether or not there's a problem with menhaden in the Bay."
Atlantic menhaden are not considered overfished across the entire Atlantic coast, but local depletion may be threatening Chesapeake Bay populations.
get more stories like this via email