Selkirk Caribou Herd officially declared extinct

[KFhunter]

I'm sure the logging and habitat loss played a certain part in their downfall, but there are plenty of other mountain (woodland) caribou herds throughout Canada that are doing extremely well these days and they don't have 1/100th the forests of this particular herd.

I dunno, there's massive amounts of untouched forests in Canada. I think of them like the Canadian lynx, here the lower 48 is the outer fringes of their range, and we're trying to protect them down here when they're doing just fine a bit north, deeper in their home ranges, like the Caribou are doing much better further north.


It would be like Canada trying to protect Pronghorn in Alberta and Saskatchewan, when really they only went a little ways into Canada anyways and there's plenty down here in the US.

Really, we only ever had a small pocket of them to begin with.  The fringes of any species's habitat is where you'll find them struggling first.

[KFhunter]

Still, it would have been nice to keep them down here by knocking back the predators.  The logging already happened, be we could have kept the wolves trapped and cats at bay.

[WAcoyotehunter]

How do you explain wolves and Caribou living in the same general area for the last 10000 years?

Habitat change has occurred from the valley bottoms through the mid elevation forests all the way to the high country. What that has done is removed the old growth forest where the Caribou lived (basically alone) and replaced it with new growth, which is what elk and moose prefer. 
The population expansion of elk and moose into higher elevation areas is what allows wolves to make a living at higher elevation than they would have historically.

So, while wolves can't sustain themselves on just a few Caribou, their interaction rates are higher than they ever would have been due to habitat change and the small, less fecund population of caribou can't support that kind of predation.

It's habitat change.

I don't buy the idea that logging is the main problem. There is no logging in the Frank Church or the Bob Marshall yet wolves are impacting herds in those backcountry areas. Isle Royale is a park but it's been an up and down cycle for both moose and wolves. Considering that Alaska and Canadian provinces have done wolf control to help herds in certain areas on numerous occasions, I think if hound hunters had been used to remove cougars and trappers used to remove wolves, that we might still have caribou in the Selkirks?

We'll never know if predator management could have worked because wolves were held above all other wildlife as being the most important specie, all other species were expendable to promote wolves.

I agree that we could have kept caribou on the landscape and recovering if we would have been heavy handed in predator management.  Actually, I have no doubt that that's the case.  But that does not mean that predators are the cause of decline.  They are a symptom of the larger issue, which is habitat change.  We could have killed all the wolves and lions out of the Selkirks and kept caribou on the landscape, but it would not be sustainable unless we were managing a number of other factors, including logging, winter access, and hwy mortality...not to mention genetic bottleneck.

Moose and caribou are very different animals.  Caribou did not adapt/evolve with many predators and their predator avoidance tactics do not work in the current situation.  They don't reproduce as early in life as deer/elk/moose and caribou only have one calf per year. 

Caribou are a victim of habitat change.  (the habitat is still there, it isn't lost  but it is better suited for other species due to logging)

indirectly.

The logging made the new growth timber better suited for elk and moose, which brought in wolves and exposed the caribou to them. 
The caribou never went hungry due to habitat change and logging so it didn't affect them directly, there was always more old growth timber than they could utilize ( I know, I seen miles and miles and miles of it!) growing more moss and lichen than they could ever eat, and that's still true, if there were any left to eat it that is.

yes

[KFhunter]

The hwy mortality is in another country, Canada.

The logging was already done and scaled way back in later years

access (motorized) was greatly restricted and completely eliminated in a lot of area.



Really the only thing left that could have been done was predator management. Without predator management I wasn't in favor of re-location.  No since taking animals out of Canada and feeding them to our predators, that would be dumb.

[WAcoyotehunter]

That's mostly right- the habitat is pretty beat up, but protections are adequate on our side of the border.  In
BC logging is still happening in the caribou recovery area, but there are some big pieces of protected habitat.

Since this is a transboundary herd we are inclined to help wherever we can.  The HWY issue is in BC, but the Tribes worked pretty hard to get reader boards and signs to alert motorists when caribou were near.

I'm sure the logging and habitat loss played a certain part in their downfall, but there are plenty of other mountain (woodland) caribou herds throughout Canada that are doing extremely well these days and they don't have 1/100th the forests of this particular herd.

That's not true.  Most of the mountain caribou herds are in decline.  The only ones that are increasing are being pretty intensively managed. 

[KFhunter]

protections are adequate on our side of the border.

Thank you. 



We did our part with habitat protections here in WA, but without predator management.......the herd didn't stand a chance.


As for what goes on in BC and greater Canada we can't help that, the tribes have way more pull than most so I applaud their efforts for sure.

[buglebrush]

" I agree that we could have kept caribou on the landscape and recovering if we would have been heavy handed in predator management.  Actually, I have no doubt that that's the case.  But that does not mean that predators are the cause of decline. "  - WACoyotehunter

The final sentence is a true head-scratcher.  Why do people like you feel you have to add this?  Why is aggressive predator management never pushed?  Let's be honest.  Groups like Conservation Northwest are more interested in power above all else, and aggressive predator management simply doesn't fit their end game. 

My family moved onto our property in North Idaho in 1989, and we occasionally saw Caribou on our property the first few years.  Moose & Mule Deer were extremely plentiful!  Many of our neighbors surprised us by their attitude towards predators.  If you saw a bear, coyote, or mountain lion it died.  Nobody cared about seasons, tags, etc...  The attitude was that people were doing their part in management.  When we first moved in Wolves were unheard of.  Now it's super rare to see moose, haven't seen a mule-deer on that property in many many years, but we do have wolves, cougars, black bears, and grizzly bears regularly on all our game cameras.  Can't spend a weekend hunting anywhere in the Selkirks without running into wolf sign.  Wolves were the tipping point that pushed us into a predator pit, and it's largely the fault of government & conservation groups who have continually lied and blamed the minor side issues when we could've tackled the issue head on with aggressive predator management.  I wonder what they'll use to try and control us now that the Caribou are no longer a viable option?

[bearpaw]

protections are adequate on our side of the border.

Thank you. 



We did our part with habitat protections here in WA, but without predator management.......the herd didn't stand a chance.


As for what goes on in BC and greater Canada we can't help that, the tribes have way more pull than most so I applaud their efforts for sure.

 

[WAcoyotehunter]

" I agree that we could have kept caribou on the landscape and recovering if we would have been heavy handed in predator management.  Actually, I have no doubt that that's the case.  But that does not mean that predators are the cause of decline. "  - WACoyotehunter

The final sentence is a true head-scratcher.  Why do people like you feel you have to add this?  Why is aggressive predator management never pushed?  Let's be honest.  Groups like Conservation Northwest are more interested in power above all else, and aggressive predator management simply doesn't fit their end game. 

You didn't put the entire quote... the wolf population there is a symptom of the highly altered habitat. 

Imagine for a second that we had never logged NE WA, N Idaho and South BC, do you think caribou would be in the same situation?  Do you think we would have as many wolves, or deer/elk/moose, which are the primary prey for wolves? 

It is a bit of a head scratcher.  Lots of issues are complicated and simple answer (blame wolves) doesn't address the underlying causes of the problem.  "People like me" add this to invoke some real thought into the issue, which is more complicated that people generally realize.

[KFhunter]

We could have done responsible logging AND had Caribou, plus additional Elk, Moose and other big game - with proper management. 

[buglebrush]

" I agree that we could have kept caribou on the landscape and recovering if we would have been heavy handed in predator management.  Actually, I have no doubt that that's the case.  But that does not mean that predators are the cause of decline. "  - WACoyotehunter

The final sentence is a true head-scratcher.  Why do people like you feel you have to add this?  Why is aggressive predator management never pushed?  Let's be honest.  Groups like Conservation Northwest are more interested in power above all else, and aggressive predator management simply doesn't fit their end game. 

You didn't put the entire quote... the wolf population there is a symptom of the highly altered habitat. 

Imagine for a second that we had never logged NE WA, N Idaho and South BC, do you think caribou would be in the same situation?  Do you think we would have as many wolves, or deer/elk/moose, which are the primary prey for wolves? 

It is a bit of a head scratcher.  Lots of issues are complicated and simple answer (blame wolves) doesn't address the underlying causes of the problem.  "People like me" add this to invoke some real thought into the issue, which is more complicated that people generally realize.

By the late 80's the majority of the logging had already happened.  Even if what you say is true, by then the best and most necessary action was/is aggressive predator management.  You're simply strengthening my point. 

[WAcoyotehunter]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? 

Lions were shown to be a problem in the 90's collaring project.  Wolves re appeared in 2009.
After logging was done and the habitat was screwed we should have killed predators to make up for that?  Ok.

[Jake Dogfish]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? 

Lions were shown to be a problem in the 90's collaring project.  Wolves re appeared in 2009.
After logging was done and the habitat was screwed we should have killed predators to make up for that?  Ok.

Yes we should have.  Wether it would have helped is a different question.
One problem we have is the big money in environmentalism is selling support for top predators while Caribou, rabbits, plants and insects face a quiet extinction.