Post by: bearpaw on July 12, 2011, 08:48:53 PM
The most disturbing factor is that there are no provisions in the Washington Wolf Plan to address the potential impact of wolves on this last remaining herd of caribou or potential impacts on endangered Columbian Whitetail Deer.
If wolves prove to be an additive predator on the struggling caribou herd, the continued existence od these Caribou will be questionable? At a minimum, the Washington wolf plan should outline measures to deal with wolf predation on endangered caribou. The plan indicates wolves are unlikely to populate the Salmo, yet one of the first confirmed packs is called the Salmo pack and lives in this area.
In fact 3 of Washington's known wolf packs live in the same county! :dunno:
Wolf Plan, page 118: http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00001/draft_wolf_plan_052311.pdf (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00001/draft_wolf_plan_052311.pdf)
16 C. Wolves and Listed/Candidate Species
17
18 Gray wolves are likely to have few significant adverse impacts on any current federal or state listed
19 (endangered, threatened, sensitive) or candidate species (see Appendix A) in Washington in the
20 foreseeable future, with the possible exception of mountain caribou. Interactions with listed or
21 candidate carnivores and birds of prey (i.e., grizzly bears, lynx, wolverines, fishers, Cascades red
22 foxes, bald eagles, and golden eagles) are briefly discussed in Sections A and B.
23
24 Washington’s only population of mountain caribou, the Selkirk Mountains herd, spends most of its
25 time in the British Columbia portion of its range, with members infrequently entering Washington.
26 The herd increased from 33 caribou in 2004 to 46 caribou in 2009. Distribution in Washington is
27 restricted primarily to the Salmo-Priest Wilderness Area in northeastern Pend Oreille County. The
28 area is characterized by high elevations and extensive closed canopy forests, and therefore supports
29 relatively low densities of other ungulate species. Hence, few wolves are expected to reside in the
30 Salmo-Priest, meaning that predation on caribou would probably occur infrequently. Nevertheless,
31 any wolf-related losses to the herd would have a significant impact on the population.
32
33 Recent declines of woodland caribou populations in British Columbia have been linked to the
34 expansion of moose and the subsequent increase of wolves, which has resulted in greater predation
35 on caribou (Wittmer et al. 2005, Stotyn et al. 2007). To reduce the threat of predation, woodland
36 caribou attempt to isolate themselves from predators and other more abundant prey species by
37 selecting old forests and alpine areas, and avoiding areas near roads during all seasons (Stotyn et al.
38 2007). However, loss of mature forests and fragmentation of winter habitat may compromise this
39 strategy. Habitat overlap between caribou and wolves is greatest in the spring and calving season,
40 resulting in increased risk of predation for caribou. Localized reductions of specific wolf packs and
41 other large predators have been used to reduce the impact of predation on mountain caribou
42 populations in the province (G. Mowat, pers. comm.), but regular use of this type of management
43 may carry unacceptable ethical implications for the recovery of rare species in the United States
44 (Wittmer et al. 2005).
45
46 The population of Columbian white-tailed deer occurring along the lower Columbia River in
47 Washington (in Wahkiakum and Cowlitz counties; Figure 14) and Oregon numbered about 600
1 animals in 2009, including about 235 animals in Washington (Meyers 2009). Coyote predation is the
2 primary cause of fawn mortality and may limit the population (USFWS 2010b). Wolf predation
3 levels that might occur in the future if the two species overlap are difficult to predict, but could
4 potentially harm this deer’s recovery in Washington. However, if wolves were to reduce coyote
5 abundance in the area occupied by the deer, this could result in lower overall predation rates on the
6 deer.
Post by: Machias on July 12, 2011, 09:19:07 PM
The plan indicates wolves are unlikely to populate the Salmo,
When you see stuff like this you really have believe they cherry pick the information they want and ignore or dismiss negative information. >:(
Post by: Goomsba on July 13, 2011, 12:06:07 AM
:yeah: :bash:The plan indicates wolves are unlikely to populate the Salmo,
When you see stuff like this you really have believe they cherry pick the information they want and ignore or dismiss negative information. >:(
Post by: NWBREW on July 13, 2011, 12:19:30 AM
The plan indicates wolves are unlikely to populate the Salmo,
When you see stuff like this you really have believe they cherry pick the information they want and ignore or dismiss negative information. >:(
That my friend is what I believe to be a very true statement.
Post by: CedarPants on July 13, 2011, 06:50:37 AM
The plan indicates wolves are unlikely to populate the Salmo,
When you see stuff like this you really have believe they cherry pick the information they want and ignore or dismiss negative information. >:(
Exactly right
Post by: demontang on July 13, 2011, 07:20:19 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on July 13, 2011, 02:21:23 PM
:yeah:
46 animals, now that is truly an endangered species, worthy of the ESA. I would guess the greenies answer will be to keep as many of us (people, not just hunters) out of there as possible. And with the wolves that would be like a band aid fixing a severed head. As Wolfbait (Hi Todd) would put it, it's Yellowstone to Yukon that is their junk science goal.
Post by: Guy on July 14, 2011, 05:12:33 AM
Guy
Post by: bearpaw on July 14, 2011, 06:58:40 AM
Brought up the issue of the endangered caribou potentially being wiped out by wolves a couple of years ago when the wolves were first suspected of migrating across from Idaho... If a pack gets going up there, it's likely the end of that small herd of 'bou.
Guy
Currently there is the Salmo Pack, the Cutoff Peak Pack, and the Diamond Pack, all in the same GMU 113. The Diamond pack is quite a few miles away, but the other two packs are close to the caribou.
Post by: UBA on July 14, 2011, 09:49:21 AM
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on July 14, 2011, 10:08:44 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 14, 2011, 10:30:27 AM
There is no money to be made saving the caribou.
I've got news for you, there's a lot less in letting the wolf in.
Post by: UBA on July 14, 2011, 11:09:55 AM
Post by: bearpaw on July 20, 2011, 09:12:27 PM
http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/McNay_2009_Temporal_and_spatial_patterns_of_mortality_risk_for_caribou.pdf (http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/McNay_2009_Temporal_and_spatial_patterns_of_mortality_risk_for_caribou.pdf)
Post by: denali on July 25, 2011, 10:12:41 PM
* There is no closed season and no bag limit for wolf hunting in Management Units 5-1 to 5-6 and 5-12 to 5-15.
* There is no closed season for wolf trapping in Management Units 5-1 to 5-6 and 5-12 to 5-14; restricted to private land only and leg-hold traps only from April 1 to October 14.
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/news/ (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/news/)
Bearpaw it looks like BC just liberalized wolf hunting and trapping rules in the units where they are trying to protect woodland caribou.
Post by: deerslyr on July 25, 2011, 10:41:20 PM
Post by: bloodhound on July 25, 2011, 11:20:44 PM
Post by: boneaddict on July 26, 2011, 05:17:08 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on July 26, 2011, 05:48:40 AM
Post by: boneaddict on July 26, 2011, 06:16:51 AM
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 11:32:27 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 26, 2011, 11:45:55 AM
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 11:52:54 AM
Post by: sebek556 on July 26, 2011, 11:54:24 AM
You'll note that for the most part, predator species always seem to be a higher priority to protect than prey species. Hawks, cougar etc. come to mind.anti hunters have figured out that they can never out right ban hunting as much as they would love to. So instead they protect and jack up the predator populations so kill off the prey we want to hunt.
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 26, 2011, 11:55:25 AM
Exactly. Is there a platform available to us (or anyone for that matter) where we can get these concerns out there? People seem to have no problem filing lawsuits regarding wolves, what's to stop the same type of process for caribou? Is there anything in writing from WDFW as to how they plan on addressing the wolves impact on caribou, and if not - how do we demand that from them? I don't think they have the luxury of just taking a mulligan on this one, but I also don't think anything will be done unless we start making some serious noise right now
Write a letter and encourage your friends to, as well. The hearing is next Thursday the 4th.
Post by: 724wd on July 26, 2011, 12:17:38 PM
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 12:29:25 PM
Post by: high country on July 26, 2011, 12:32:41 PM
Post by: high country on July 26, 2011, 12:33:33 PM
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 01:08:33 PM
My point is merely that we need to hold the state accountable for consistent game management. I'm on your side here High Country. Do I agree with the lands being closed because of the caribou? Not really. Since the state closed the lands to protect the caribou, do I think they should now be held accountable for explaining what they intend to do about managing the wolves' impact on this protected herd? Absolutely. Last I checked, recreational snowmobilers didn't hunt down and kill caribou. Wolves do. Only one of us is regulated (managed) though and I'd like some answers
Post by: bearpaw on July 26, 2011, 01:48:00 PM
Exactly. Is there a platform available to us (or anyone for that matter) where we can get these concerns out there? People seem to have no problem filing lawsuits regarding wolves, what's to stop the same type of process for caribou? Is there anything in writing from WDFW as to how they plan on addressing the wolves impact on caribou, and if not - how do we demand that from them? I don't think they have the luxury of just taking a mulligan on this one, but I also don't think anything will be done unless we start making some serious noise right now
I am told we have a problem with trying to manage wolves in that Washington law does not allow the impacts to other animals, livestock, pets, or humans to be considered when managing endangered species.
I like your thoughts CedarPants on filing a lawsuit to save the caribou. After all these years of working to save this last caribou herd it is a shame to just throw them to the wolves (pun intended). I will send out an email to some people who more than I do, and ask if that would be possible to do. If I found out anything good, I will let everyone know. :tup:
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 01:53:54 PM
Post by: bearpaw on July 26, 2011, 01:59:40 PM
Post by: high country on July 26, 2011, 02:00:11 PM
Post by: high country on July 26, 2011, 02:01:42 PM
Post by: CedarPants on July 26, 2011, 02:09:02 PM
Post by: bearpaw on July 27, 2011, 08:57:23 AM
bearpaw, I totally agree, but closing off the trapper burn during the winter makes no sense at all. kepping wolves and grizz out of the relativly small fragile area the bou' are said to inhabit does make sense.
No worries, I think we are all on the same page. :tup: