Post by: Humptulips on March 16, 2012, 09:26:30 PM
The thing that struck me was I thought they were supposed to balance the enviroment and live in perfect harmony when man was out of the picture. Apparently not.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46756568
By JOHN FLESHER
AP Environmental Writer
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) - Isle Royale National Park's gray wolves, one of the world's most closely monitored predator populations, are at their lowest ebb in more than a half-century and could die out within a few years, scientists said Friday.
Only nine wolves still wander the wilderness island chain in western Lake Superior and just one is known to be a female, raising doubts they'll bounce back from a recent free-fall unless people lend a hand, Michigan Tech University wildlife biologists Rolf Peterson and John Vucetich said in a report obtained by The Associated Press. There were 24 wolves - roughly their long-term average number - as recently as 2009.
"The wolves are at grave risk of extinction," Vucetich said in an interview.
Their crash apparently results from a run of bad luck rather than a single catastrophe. A shortage of females has cut the birth rate, while breakdown of several packs boosted inbreeding and weakened the gene pool. Other troubles include disease and starvation from a drop-off of moose, the wolves' primary food source.
Their population is the smallest since biologists began observing their interactions with moose in 1958, beginning what became the world's longest-running study of predators and prey in a single ecosystem, Vucetich said. Previously, the closest they came to extinction was during a parvovirus outbreak in the 1980s when their numbers plummeted from 50 to 12.
Unless the wolves rebound quickly, the National Park Service will face the thorny question of whether to intervene. Officials could bring in reinforcements from the mainland to salvage the existing population. Or they could let nature take its course and, if the wolves die, start over with a new group. They also could leave it to the wolves to repopulate the island if they can.
Advertise | AdChoicesAdvertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
.Agency experts have begun analyzing their options, Isle Royale Superintendent Phyllis Green said.
"We don't want to make a decision based on a single species without evaluating the effects on other species that have been a part of the ecosystem through time," Green said.
Scientists believe the island's first moose swam there from the Canadian mainland, 15 miles away, in the early 20th century and were so prolific that the island's balsam firs, aspens and other trees were severely overbrowsed. Wolves crossed an ice bridge to the island around 1950 and eventually formed packs that helped keep moose numbers in check.
Although wolf sightings are rare, their presence is treasured by park visitors who hope to catch a glimpse on a backcountry trail or hear their eerie howls at night.
"People like to know the wolves are there," said Peterson, who joined the study team in 1970. "It could be argued that this is the wolf's greatest refuge in the world. It's the only place they've never been killed by human beings."
Because Isle Royale is a federal wilderness area, hunting and trapping are prohibited.
Vucetich, Peterson and other scientists spend seven weeks on the island each winter, monitoring the wolves and moose by air. During their recently concluded visit, they discovered the wolf population had dropped from 16 last year to nine. The only intact pack had six members. One wolf wandered alone, while a couple - including the only known female - staked out territory and apparently mated.
The wolves' best hope may be that the female will bear a healthy litter of pups next month and help form a new pack, Peterson said. Another positive sign: moose numbers rose from an estimated 515 last year to about 750. But a shortage remains of elderly moose that are easiest for wolves to kill.
Prospects are increasingly remote that more wolves will find their way to Isle Royale without help, Vucetich said. A male is believed to have made the crossing on an ice bridge in the late 1990s and sired offspring, temporarily reinvigorating the gene pool. But a study published last week found that Great Lakes ice cover has declined 71 percent over the past 40 years.
Vucetich and Peterson said they'd prefer to let the wolves determine their own fate - even if it means extinction. But if that happens, the park service should airlift more wolves to the island to prevent moose from running rampant and damaging the ecosystem, they said.
Otherwise, "we'd be taking a vital wilderness and turning it into an overstocked barnyard," Peterson said.
Restoring wolves also would enable continuation of the study, which has yielded a wealth of discoveries about both species, he said.
Advertise | AdChoicesAdvertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
.In an essay scheduled for publication next month, Peterson and Vucetich acknowledge some scientists consider it unethical for humans to manipulate wildlife populations in wilderness areas. But they contend people have already changed Isle Royale's environment and the primary consideration should be protecting the ecosystem, for which wolves are essential as long as long as there are moose.
David Mech, a wolf expert with the U.S. Geological Survey, advocated a hands-off policy unless the wolves die out. Even in their diminished state, they could last a decade or more and may pull a surprise comeback, he said.
"This is a really unique opportunity to see what they can do," Mech said. "If there's any intervention, it destroys that potential."
But if more wolves were brought in before the existing ones disappear, they could interbreed to the benefit of all, said Philip Hedrick, an Arizona State University conservation biologist.
"Having the wolf eliminated for some period of time may result in secondary effects that would make it difficult to re-establish a population," he said.
Post by: denali on March 16, 2012, 09:47:03 PM
did the moose drown/ what happened to them ? :rolleyes:
"It could be argued that this is the wolf's greatest refuge in the world. It's the only place they've never been killed by human beings."
if its so great, then the wolves should be fine, they balance nature, don'tcha know
Post by: villageidiot on March 18, 2012, 08:09:25 PM
"We don't want to make a decision based on a single species without evaluating the effects on other species that have been a part of the ecosystem through time," Green said.
In the northwest they definitely don't do anything but "single species mgmt" . If they did they would of never allowed them back in the first place.
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:02:00 PM
disease and starvation from a drop-off of moose, the wolves' primary food source.
did the moose drown/ what happened to them ? :rolleyes:
"It could be argued that this is the wolf's greatest refuge in the world. It's the only place they've never been killed by human beings."
if its so great, then the wolves should be fine, they balance nature, don'tcha know
Well, the island is, well, AN ISLAND. It's common sense that these problem would occur, and it's also common sense that this situation doesn't reflect other wolf territories that aren't closed off.
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:06:22 PM
disease and starvation from a drop-off of moose, the wolves' primary food source.
did the moose drown/ what happened to them ? :rolleyes:
"It could be argued that this is the wolf's greatest refuge in the world. It's the only place they've never been killed by human beings."
if its so great, then the wolves should be fine, they balance nature, don'tcha know
Well, the island is, well, AN ISLAND. It's common sense that these problem would occur, and it's also common sense that this situation doesn't reflect other wolf territories that aren't closed off.
well,.. the continents are,.. well giants islands too, its a bigger picture though, but same thing will happen if preditors go unchecked. only the consequenses will be alot worse.
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:14:00 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on March 23, 2012, 01:15:38 PM
Well, the island is, well, AN ISLAND
Seven months of the year. All winter long it is surrounded by a plain of ice
Just saying
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:16:43 PM
Eh... you could be right. Time will have to tell, won't it?
why wait for time to tell when it all can be prevented by responsible population control
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:17:18 PM
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:18:19 PM
Eh... you could be right. Time will have to tell, won't it?
why wait for time to tell when it all can be prevented by responsible population control
By responsible control, do you mean poaching? As much as I hate how the system works, breaking the law will only hurt us hunters.
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Eh... you could be right. Time will have to tell, won't it?
why wait for time to tell when it all can be prevented by responsible population control
By responsible control, do you mean poaching? As much as I hate how the system works, breaking the law will only hurt us hunters.
what part of poaching is responsible?? :dunno: :dunno: oh... welcome to the site!! :hello: :yike: :hello: :chuckle:
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:28:24 PM
I'm just trying to see what fellow hunters are saying elsewhere, because what I have seen and heard at the wolf meeting, like the recent one in Spokane, I heard alot of murmuring from other hunters about committing illegal acts that I feel is a greater threat to our hunter priviledges than the wolves themselves. I actually heard someone say that they will be looking for a strychnine source under his breath to someone. So I feel I should try to sway fellow hunters from damaging our tradition and skills by breaking the law.
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:35:20 PM
Thanks for the welcome.
I'm just trying to see what fellow hunters are saying elsewhere, because what I have seen and heard at the wolf meeting, like the recent one in Spokane, I heard alot of murmuring from other hunters about committing illegal acts that I feel is a greater threat to our hunter priviledges than the wolves themselves. I actually heard someone say that they will be looking for a strychnine source under his breath to someone. So I feel I should try to sway fellow hunters from damaging our tradition and skills by breaking the law.
couldn't agree more,.. except i think you have a very low view of hunters... and commiting illegal acts is a great danger for the indaviduals,.. the iresponsible management is thre greatest threat... almost any given hunter cares more for the wildlife than any of you tree huggers any day...
and its people like you that are a big threat to our hunting heritage, :tup: i doubt that you are a hunter, and if you are, then by talking about hunter as if they are some horrible law breaking idiots, you are painting an untrue picture of hunters. there are a few bad apples, but mostly i'd say 95-99% are all law abiding people that just want responsible management that we pay for. :tup:
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:36:55 PM
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:38:00 PM
I am a hunter. I hunted deer and bear on the other side of the Nisqually last season and am muzzle-loading this year.
well if you are a hunter and care for our hunting rights,.. then have a little more faith in your felow hunters, not bag on them and make hunters look bad. :tung:
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:39:44 PM
Tree-hugger? Really? Thats funny, because I know people who usually call me Ted Nugent for hunting and such.
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 01:42:55 PM
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
But yes, I do care about our rights, but as someone who always seems to be stuck in the middle, I want wolves here as well. I have my complaints on the management thats being done, but thats what the public meetings are for and the way you have to play the system. I seriously think that them having a hands-off approach to the east side situation is a bad idea. They need to relocate some of the wolves to the area's that haven't met the number requirments so that this time-line of theirs can get started so that we can reach the recovery goal and eventually, better management. Letting the east side become over-populated while they wait on the west is stupid.
Post by: BIGINNER on March 23, 2012, 02:00:51 PM
Pics of what? I did not get a kill last year, so I haven't gotten my first kill yet. I have not hunted bird yet, though I'd like to go for duck hunting sometime. I took a shot at a grouse, but that was with a long-bow and I'm really not a good shot with that.
But yes, I do care about our rights, but as someone who always seems to be stuck in the middle, I want wolves here as well. I have my complaints on the management thats being done, but thats what the public meetings are for and the way you have to play the system. I seriously think that them having a hands-off approach to the east side situation is a bad idea. They need to relocate some of the wolves to the area's that haven't met the number requirments so that this time-line of theirs can get started so that we can reach the recovery goal and eventually, better management. Letting the east side become over-populated while they wait on the west is stupid.
agreed, but it think translocating is stupid too, why not just start management in areas that have met and exceaded the goal? wouldn't that be smart? whay wait till its too late to start management? why not start management right away? little by little. its pretty stupid to wait till all hell breaks loose to try and start fixing things,... management isn't about fixing,.. its about maintaining.
and since you seem to like pointing out mistake of other hunters'...
Quote
I took a shot at a grouse, but that was with a long-bow and I'm really not a good shot with that.
if you're such an ethical hunter,.. why are you taking shots at wildlife with a weopon you're not good with?? :dunno: :dunno:
i'm far from an angel,.. but you decided to start pointing. :tup: :sry: :drool: :chuckle: :chuckle: :IBCOOL: :hello: :yike:
Post by: humanure on March 23, 2012, 02:09:05 PM
You make some good points as well. I heard these get brought up and Spokane and thought they were valid. Apparently the powers at be thought otherwise. Also, I am one of those who think re-writing the whole management plan at that point would have been extremely ineffective and costly. Thats why I said we should move forward and correct the plan on the move. To get the scientists back to the drawling board would have put the east side in a far worse spot as we wait another 4 or more years for the plan to be written. Thats why to me it seemed best that if they are dead set in state recovery/management as a whole, then lets do what we can to get it started asap before the east gets out of hand. I also said that farmers should be given the permits to harass/kill if they catch a predation in the act no matter where we are in the recovery.