Defenders of Wildlife Blog

Kylie Paul, Rockies & Plains Representative 

Wolverines may finally be getting the federal protections they need. In response to well over a decade of successful legal efforts by Defenders and a few of our partners, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced in February its proposal to list the wolverine as a threatened species in the lower 48 states under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Alongside the proposed listing, FWS also announced its proposal to designate the southern Rocky Mountains (southern Wyoming, Colorado and northern New Mexico) as an experimental population area for wolverines, which opens up the possibility of a reintroduction of wolverines to Colorado.

If approved, these proposals will give wolverines a fighting chance for survival in a warming world. There are only an estimated 300 wolverines spread across the entire western United States, and scientists predict they could lose up to two-thirds of their suitable snowy habitat by 2099 due to climate change. That’s why we’ve been busy over the past few months educating wildlife enthusiasts about this amazing critter and encouraging them to support wolverine conservation through the public participation process on this proposal to protect wolverines.

Film Screenings
Defenders of Wildlife collaborated with our conservation partners in Colorado and Montana to introduce the public to these mysterious, cold-loving critters through the PBS award-winning documentary, Wolverine: Chasing the Phantom. This informative documentary highlights the challenges facing the wolverine. These powerful carnivores are specially adapted for winter existence and survive in the rugged, snow-covered alpine environment by scavenging and storing food. Wolverines’ large paws act like snowshoes that allow them to stay on top of deep snow, and their crampon-like claws help them to climb up and over steep cliffs and snow-covered peaks. Unfortunately, these awe-inspiring creatures are not invincible – climate change is expected to melt away much of their snowy habitat over the next several decades.

Wolverines are incredibly rare, and even the researchers that dedicate their lives to studying this remarkable creature can go years without seeing a wolverine in the wild. Many biologists rely on wolverine tracks, scavenging sites and images they capture through remote cameras to learn more about this elusive critter. Fortunately, in Chasing the Phantom, the audience is offered a glimpse into the wolverine’s world through the eyes of researchers with the Glacier National Park Wolverine Project. Viewers also get up-close and personal, following the movements and behavior of two wolverines raised in captivity. They are beautiful, playful and ridiculously cute!

(c) Ken Curtis

Almost 300 wildlife enthusiasts attended the film screenings in Denver, Bozeman, and Missoula. Each screening was followed by a panel discussion and Q&A session with experts from a variety of backgrounds. In Denver, the audience was especially interested in the potential reintroduction of wolverines into Colorado. Bridget Fahey with the FWS and Eric Odell with Colorado Parks and Wildlife explained that some climate models show that Colorado – with the highest average elevation of any state in the Lower 48, including 54 peaks over 14,000 feet – will likely retain the continuous cold temperatures and snow cover necessary for the wolverine to survive, even as the climate continues to change. All of the panel experts, including Caitlin Balch-Burnett with Defenders, emphasized that getting wolverines on the ground in Colorado could be one of the greatest steps we can take to ensure that wolverines survive the effects of climate change.

In Bozeman, the producer and filmmaker of Chasing the Phantom, Gianna Savoie, joined the panel to share her experiences working on the documentary and how she created a film on such a remote creature. Bob Inman with Wildlife Conservation Society discussed wolverine biology and research, and I talked about the proposed listing of wolverines under the Endangered Species Act. The event in Missoula offered Mike Schwartz, a leading wolverine conservation genetics team leader, who discussed many of the incorrect myths about wolverines.

FWS public hearings
The FWS hosted three public hearings on their wolverine proposals in the southern and northern Rocky Mountains: Boise, Idaho; Lakewood, Colorado; and Helena, Montana. We reached out to our supporters in the area and encouraged them to attend – many took the opportunity to speak directly to the federal officials and biologists that will be involved in the final decision to list the wolverine under the ESA.

There was widespread support for wolverines at the public hearings, especially in Boise and Lakewood, where nearly all of the public comments were positive. Alex Marks, a Defenders member who attended the Lakewood hearing, commented:

“I wanted to testify at the Fish and Wildlife hearing about the dual proposals for the wolverine because I wanted to let the agency know how important it was for these proposals to move forward .… The ESA was established to both “stabilize” and “revitalize” any species in need of its protections.”

We were thrilled with the amount of support and positive feedback we have been seeing for the listing proposal and the Colorado reintroduction – it all bodes well for the future of wolverines in the U.S.!

(A special breaking edition of Wolf Weekly Wrap-up)

By Jamie Rappaport Clark

Just as we feared, it appears that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is ready to give up on wolf recovery before the job is done.

The LA Times reports today that the Service is expected to release its proposal soon to strip federal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for most gray wolves in the United States. Under the proposed delisting, only Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest would still be protected by the federal law. The opportunity for expanding wolf recovery to areas with superb, unoccupied habitat in areas such as Colorado, Utah and California would be abandoned entirely, and the future of smaller developing wolf populations in the Pacific Northwest could be serious jeopardy. (See map of current vs. historical range of gray wolves.)

The gray wolf delisting proposal represents a major retreat from the optimism and values which have been the hallmark of endangered species recovery in this country for the past 40 years. Instead, the proposal reflects a short-sighted, shrunken and much weaker vision of what our conservation goals should be. The Service has clearly decided to prematurely get out of the wolf conservation business rather than working to achieve full recovery of the species.  Their decision is the equivalent of getting up and leaving in the middle of a wildlife conservation movie, mumbling “game over – we’re done – let’s get some pizza!”

In its proposal, the Service has made a number of dubious determinations that are worth examining in greater detail.

Federal biologists have decided that Canis lupus, the species of gray wolf that once spanned much of the western and central United States, will no longer be considered endangered. Part of the agency’s rationale is that wolves in both the Northern Rockies and western Great Lakes have recovered and were already delisted. Of course, this ignores the fact that there are still significant areas in states like Colorado, Utah and California with excellent unoccupied wolf habitat but no wolves. Without federal protection and support for wolf recovery, wolves will be at the mercy of rabid, anti-wolf state politics that, unfortunately, is still far too prevalent across the West. Too often extreme rhetoric from ultra-conservative state politicians wins out over sound wildlife management principles.

More troublingly, the Service concludes that protection is no longer warranted since gray wolf populations worldwide are stable. This is a tragic reversal of long-standing FWS policy to protect imperiled species in this country regardless of their status north or south of our borders. By this same logic, grizzly bears, wolverines, lynx, bald eagles and numerous other iconic species would never have been listed and restored in the lower 48 because they exist in greater numbers in another country. The intent of the ESA was to restore these ecologically important animals in the United States. It doesn’t matter that they exist elsewhere. As Aldo Leopold, the grandfather of modern wildlife management once wrote, “Relegating grizzlies to Alaska is about like relegating happiness to heaven; one may never get there.”

The only bright spot in this otherwise significantly flawed delisting proposal is the Service’s decision to retain protection for Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest as a unique subspecies. With the current population hovering at 75 wolves, the agency at least recognized the need to continue protection for this struggling subspecies.

The bottom line, however, is that wolves are still not recovered in key parts of their range, and the conservation work is not done. Apparently the Service thinks it’s good enough to have gray wolves just in the Northern Rockies and western Great Lakes, and they’re ready to call it quits on restoring wolves anywhere else.

But we’re not giving up that easily. There is still time to convince the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to do the right thing and continue the fight for America’s gray wolves. We’re asking all our members and supporters to contact new Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell and demand that she maintain protection for wolves so they may continue to expand into their historic range and fully recover. This includes Colorado, Utah, California and western Oregon and Washington – all of which could benefit ecologically and economically from the return of gray wolves.

Please contact Secretary Jewell today and tell her NOT to throw in the towel on gray wolf recovery. These magnificent animals once roamed from Canada down to Mexico. They can do so once again if we give them a chance!

You can also join a live chat this morning about the proposed delisting and the future of wolf recovery in the U.S. with LA Times reporter Julie Cart at 9 a.m. Pacific/12 p.m. Eastern. Click here for more details.

Read Defenders full press release here.

Jonathan Proctor, Northern Rockies Representative 

Earlier this month, the Montana Supreme Court heard arguments from Defenders of Wildlife and others in a case that will have far-reaching impacts on the future of wild bison restoration across Montana.

Bison herds, once a familiar sight all across the Great Plains, are making a triumphant return at Fort Peck Indian Reservation.

You may recall our participation last spring in the transfer of 61 wild bison to the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, as well as the community celebration that followed. This marked the end of a 130-year absence of wild bison from these tribal lands, home to the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes. It was also the first restoration of genetically pure Yellowstone bison to the Great Plains.

But on the very day the bison arrived at Fort Peck Reservation, bison opponents asked a judge to order the removal of these wild bison. Yes, you read that correctly; bison opponents wanted a forced removal of wild bison from these tribal lands, as was done in the 1880s.

They didn’t get that wish, but they did convince the judge to stop any further wild bison restorations until a full hearing of the issue could be heard in his courtroom. This effectively stopped a planned transfer of half of these genetically pure bison to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, 180 miles to the west, where the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Tribes also planned to start a new wild herd. That move remains on hold.

Meanwhile, Defenders of Wildlife and National Wildlife Federation intervened in support of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (who approved the move), and appealed to the Montana Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s decision.

The Montana Supreme Court heard this case last Friday in a large theater on the University of Montana campus in Missoula so that the public could watch the proceedings. Hundreds attended. Defenders joined with our tribal allies and a drumming group from the Fort Belknap Reservation in a gathering in front of the theater before the hearing to explain to the many reporters and attendees how vital wild bison are to restoring the human cultures and natural landscapes of the Great Plains. This gathering and the court hearing made headlines in newspapers, on television and on radio across the state.

Our attorney, Tim Preso from the Bozeman office of Earthjustice, did a spectacular job during the hearing, arguing that the court should reverse the lower court’s decision and allow bison restoration to continue. His last words made quite an impression on the crowd:

“The reason this case is important and has substantial public interest and the reason this court’s decision is important is highlighted in something the Fort Peck  Tribes wrote in their amicus brief where they described their own receipt of bison and said:

‘The Tribes were finally successful after a 130 year break in the historic relationship in reuniting the descendants of the Assiniboine and Sioux people who survived the 19th century with the descendants of wild bison that survived the bison holocaust of the same period.’

That’s why this case is important… and that’s why it’s important for this court to clear the way for the Fort Belknap Tribes to be able to enjoy that same reunion.”

We await the Supreme Court’s decision.

PausePlayPlayPrev|Next

Traditional Songs

Members of the Fort Belknap Reservation perform before the Supreme Court hearing.

“I came up here today to support the bison.”

Andrew Werk, Fort Belknap Tribal Council member, speaks to the crowd,

Restoration

Mark Azure, Fort Belknap Wildlife Director, explains his tribes’ goal of restoring wild bison.

Supreme Court Hearing

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks attorney Rebecca Jakes Dockter addresses the Montana Supreme Court.

Regional wolf population drops 7%  – The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service released its Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery 2012 Interagency Annual Report last Friday afternoon with little fanfare (see coverage from the Missoulian). As previously reported, state wolf populations were down in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming but up in Oregon and Washington. The overall population and number of breeding pairs across the entire six-state region declined about seven percent, with the steepest drop in Wyoming that lost 16 percent of its wolves and 22 percent of its breeding pairs. Fortunately, at least 1,674 wolves and 103 breeding pairs were counted at the end of the year, demonstrating the species resilience so far in the face of aggressive wolf-killing efforts by the states.

Once again, confirmed livestock losses to wolves were extremely low. A total of just 194 cattle and 470 sheep were killed by wolves in 2012 in a region where more than eight million cattle and about a million sheep blanket the landscape, including vast tracts of public lands that are leased to ranchers.

Montana wolf council offers mixed advice – Offering bounties to kill more wolves was one of the suggestions entertained by Montana’s Wolf Advisory Council last week, according to a news report from the Helena Independent Record.  While there was general consensus that Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks was doing a decent job of balancing competing interests, that didn’t stop some council members from pushing for antiquated management practices similar to the eradication campaigns of the 1930s and ‘40s. Others argued that Yellowstone’s wolves do not deserve special treatment even though they are vital to the region’s economy. We’ll have to wait and see if the council has any influence on rules for the upcoming hunting season to be determined next month.

Oregon online townhall recap – In case you missed it, you can read through Wednesday’s live chat about wolf management in Oregon, hosted by Oregonian reporter Harry Esteve.  There were a lot of insightful comments from wolf supporters who want the state to prioritize nonlethal tools that prevent conflict between livestock and wolves instead of allowing ranchers to simply kill wolves that they think are a threat. Here are a few examples:

Comment From Steve and Joy Mamoyac

HB 3452 would declare open season on wolves. The proposed legislation addresses a false problem and simply caters to those entities that will never accept the fact that wolves are here to stay. It is time to say “enough”. If this bill is enacted expect additional legal measures to be initiated that will provide endangered wolves with the protections they require and deserve. Better this bad bill be dismissed and constructive efforts increased to prevent conflict and promote acceptance.

* * *

Comment From Guest

I support only NONLETHAL methods to control wolves. The proposed legislation relies too heavily on the good faith of livestock producers in reporting whether wolves were in the act of killing or feeding on livestock. There is already a prevalent culture among many producers of “shoot, shovel, and shut up,” and this legislation encourages that mentality.

* * *

Comment From Catchalot

No wolves have been killed for 16 months. Wolf numbers are up in Wallowa County, but loss compensation claims decreased from 2011 to 2012 by around 70%, fatal wolf attacks by 60% (from 15 to 6) and total number of attacks by 20% (from 15 to 12). One major difference in 2012 was the use of $25,000 worth of nonlethal tools and practices. So it looks like nonlethal is working. Why then should ranchers to have the right to kill wolves on their own discretion? Don’t you think this would open the door to widespread abuse by those who want nothing more than to exterminate wolves once again? Wolves are still endangered here, there are certainly less than 100 in Oregon. They need protection.

Wolves help bears survive climate change – Bears and wolves in Yellowstone tend to keep to themselves. While wolves may occasionally chase a grizzly bear off an elk carcass, or vice versa, the species are seldom in direct competition. But that doesn’t mean they don’t help each other out indirectly, from time to time. A paper published this year in The Journal of Wildlife Management suggests that wolves may be inadvertently helping bears adjust to new food sources. As cutthroat trout and whitebark pine nuts become more scarce because of climate change, bears are relying more on alternatives like false truffles and elk, including those killed by wolves. This gives at least anecdotal evidence that diverse ecosystems are better equipped to adapt to a changing climate.

Wyoming wolf population falls 15 percent – Wyoming Department of Game and Fish released their 2012 wolf report this week. At the end of 2012 there were a minimum of 277 wolves in the state compared to 328 at the end of 2011, a decline of about 15 percent. A total of 136 wolves died from all causes during the calendar year: 120 from direct or indirect human activity, 14 from natural causes and two from unknown causes. In just a few months after wolves were delisted in Wyoming in September, hunters killed 41 wolves in the trophy game management area and another 25 wolves were killed in the predator zone. Forty-three wolves were killed by state and federal agents in response to livestock losses, five were killed in vehicle collisions, four were killed illegally and two were killed (mysteriously) by “other” means. The only good news, if you can call it that, is that the state may be forced to lower its hunting quota next year in order to maintain 10 breeding pairs outside of Yellowstone National Park.

The wolf population could not withstand another 52-wolf quota without coming dangerously close to the required minimum set in Wyoming’s delisting plan. — Mark Bruscino, Wyo. Game & Fish large carnivore program supervisor

Legislative updates – Sometimes no news is good news, and most of the bills we’ve been following did not advance any farther. The one exception is SB 397 in Montana, which (thankfully) went down in a blaze of glory last night on a committee vote of 17-4. Earlier in the week, 26 opponents attended a House committee hearing, many of them from different hunting organizations that support fair-chase ethics and do not want to see predators carelessly slaughtered. Further opposition came from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks representatives who said that managers already have the tools they need to keep predator and prey species in check. In fact, the only people who supported the bill were spokesmen for Montana Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, a known anti-wolf group that has long espoused getting rid of predators by any means necessary in order to artificially boost elk and deer populations. But most Montanans know that a healthy, balanced ecosystem relies on sustainable numbers of both predator and prey. And while human hunters play a role in keeping game species in check, they are no substitute for having wolves, cougars and bears on the landscape as well.

Photo of two wolves taken by remote camera.

Meet the Wenatchee wolves – Washington has confirmed its tenth pack and two more wolves, bringing the total number of wolves to at least 53. At the end of last month the state Department of Fish and Wildlife caught two wolves on a remote camera in Pitcher Canyon in the Northern Cascades region. One of the wolves, a 1.5-year-old female dispersed from the adjacent Teanaway pack and the other wolf has not yet been identified. We wish these wolves in central Washington the best of luck and hope at least some of them keep heading west toward the Olympic Peninsula. There’s plenty more excellent wolf habitat to explore!

Farewell, Commissioner Ream – Mark another casualty of partisan politics in Montana. Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commissioner Bob Ream tendered his resignation yesterday after state senate Republicans told him they planned to oppose his confirmation. Rather than suffer through a “sham hearing,” Ream decided to leave his post. He announced his decision in a letter to Gov. Bullock outlining his impressive credentials and many accomplishments, including 28 years at the University of Montana and 16 years in the Montana House of Representatives. Ream was always a voice of reason and a strong advocate for using sound science as the basis for wildlife management decisions; he will be sorely missed.

Californians in cahoots – Two of our colleagues in California teamed up with a pair of excellent op-eds this past week. Lauren Richie, formerly Defenders national wolf coexistence coordinator and now associate director with the California Wolf Center, wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle that the return of wolves to California is a testament to the success of the 40-year-old Endangered Species Act. Restoring wolves in the Northern Rockies under the Act has allowed populations in Washington and Oregon to recover as well, including the dispersal of OR-7 to northern California. But Lauren argues that California now has the opportunity to chart a different course by laying the groundwork for peaceful coexistence with wolves. By fostering collaboration instead of controversy, wildlife managers can help ranchers find ways to share the landscape with wolves rather than killing them unnecessarily, as is the case in the Northern Rockies.

Amaroq Weiss, also a former Defender and now with the Center for Biological Diversity, picked up on a similar note in the Sacramento Bee, noting that Oregon’s recent experience can be instructive for California. She writes that livestock conflicts in Wallowa County, Oregon, which had been a hotbed of wolf attacks, have decreased 60 percent even while the wolf population has continued to grow. The reason? Ranchers have been forced to adopt nonlethal management strategies because of a lawsuit that has temporarily prevented the state from killing wolves. Meanwhile, livestock losses in Idaho have increased substantially even though more than 700 wolves have been killed there in the last two years. Biologists have suggested that killing wolves only disrupts pack structure and makes it more difficult to hunt wild game. As a result, the remaining wolves are more likely to opt for easier prey like livestock than try to chase down an elk or deer, making it even more important for ranchers to take extra steps to protect their animals and deter wolves.

Montana wolf council meeting now – Montana residents, don’t forget that today is the first meeting of the Wolf Advisory Council in more than five years. The meeting starts at 8:30 a.m. at FWP headquarters in Helena. Live video streams will be available at FWP regional offices, and an audio stream will be available online. Public comment will begin at 2 p.m. Click here for more details.

©Eyeliam/Flickr

Anderson Shepard, Conservation Planning Associate

Instead of wilderness and wildlife, could visitors to Glacier National Park soon be passing fields of wine grapes as they drive up to the gate? Not long ago, I helped author a study that suggests that by 2050, this could very well be the case. In the paper, titled “Climate Change, Wine, and Conservation” and published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), we looked at how rising temperatures and changes in rainfall patterns are affecting the delicate balance of temperature and moisture – the primary elements for growing high-quality wine grapes.

This map shows how the change in wine-producing country will overlap with wolf habitat. ©Anderson Shepard

Using climate models and an analysis of the current distribution, temperature and moisture requirements of high-quality wine grape varieties, we project that climate change will shrink the area suitable for wine production in some of the most famous wine-producing regions in the world, while opening up wine production in some unusual places. Alarmingly, we found that climate change could soon drive a massive expansion of agriculture into some of the most intact wildlife habitat in the U.S., impacting dozens of species.

Although I performed this research before coming to Defenders, its message is still wildlife-focused. Agriculture can be a huge driver of habitat loss and degradation, and Defenders has spent an enormous amount of time and energy advocating for policies and actions that would promote habitat conservation and coexistence between farmers, ranchers and wildlife, putting solutions in place to protect animals like bears and wolves. Climate change threatens to take this issue to a whole new level. Not only will it change the biophysical landscape and cause shifts in the existing natural assemblages of plants and animals, but, as this paper shows, it is expected to open a great deal of new land to agriculture, causing more natural areas to be developed and more wildlife habitat to be broken into pieces.

Canada lynx, ©Ken Curtis

The Northern Rockies is a region where we focus much of our work at Defenders. The region is flush with extensive tracts of wildlands, and it is the last remaining area in the Lower 48 that hosts a complete set of large carnivores – one of the few places you can find animals like bears, wolves, lynx and bobcats all together. Our study found that between 2000 and 2050, the land in the Northern Rockies suitable for viticulture (growing grapes for wine) will increase by more than 58 million acres. The next 50 years will likely be a trying period for species such as the Canada lynx, gray wolf and grizzly bear – these species are likely to see vineyards popping up all over their range over the next few decades. Wolves attempting to roam across long-established territory will find acres of it replaced with land that is useless to them. Bears, often captured or killed when caught taking advantage of orchards or other fruit crops, will be sorely tempted to wander into new vineyards looking for a meal, only to put themselves in danger. Combine that with the region’s continuing surge in development, and we see impacts on a scale that could dramatically alter these species’ ability to thrive in the region.

Grizzly bear, ©Michael S. Quinton, National Geographic stock

We could see these impacts on an even broader scale if the shift in lands suitable for vineyards also holds true for other agricultural crops. This could put even more species in danger, caught between a changing climate and the ever- expanding human footprint on the land. For the conservation community, the key is to spot these issues early on and help the relevant industries to plan carefully so that we can minimize the damage to wildlife. In fact, this is already happening in some regions where wine growers are working closely with conservationists to confront the environmental, cultural and economic challenges posed by a changing climate. It is up to individuals and organizations like us to ensure a future for wildlife despite the challenges of a changing climate.

You can read more on this study in The New York Times, CBS News and The Guardian.
You can also read the full report at PNAS.