Uncategorized

Action alert to save Washington state wolves. WA basically killing wolves for one rancher

By on • ( 9 Comments )

A message from Brooks Fahy, Exec. Dir. of Predator Defense:

Tell Washington Gov. Inslee there is no need for his wolf slaughter.  There are simply places in Washington where cows should not be.

The picture above was taken in the core territory of the Profanity Peak wolf pack, which Washington wildlife managers destroyed in 2016 after a rancher dumped his cows to graze near the wolves’ den and rendezvous sites. As you can see, the terrain is essentially indefensible. It is rugged, forested and remote. It is no place for cows.

Seventeen of the 22 wolves killed to date in Washington State were killed on behalf of this one rancher, Len McIrvin, who refuses to follow science-based, common sense measures to protect his cattle. Other ranchers have had great success in preventing losses. For starters, they are not dumping them in the heart of wolf territory.

But McIrvin, who has been overheard expressing his hatred for wolves, apparently doesn’t believe they deserve a place to live in peace, except perhaps in zoos? He does believe his cattle should be able to graze on and destroy our public lands, lands for which he pays a fraction of market rate. And he obviously doesn’t care about healthy ecosystems, which require the presence of wolves, or the fact that thousands of people want to be able to see wolves in the wild and could bring tourism dollars to struggling rural economies.

Just as egregiously, if Washington’s Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) had listened to the best available science they would have known their very policies are increasing attacks on cattle. Peer-reviewed science shows that killing wolves increases attacks on livestock because it causes social disruption–it disturbs the essential role each wolf plays in its family and how and what they hunt.
So instead of protecting and preserving wildlife, Washington wildlife managers are working to protect cows. It is insane. Wolves need places to live in peace.
Yet just last week WDFW announced they want to kill the remaining wolves in the three packs they’ve already decimated.  This is an outrage!
The ongoing silence on the part of Governor Jay Inslee remains deafening. He needs a HUGE wake up call about how counterproductive, cruel and unpopular his policies are.
No matter where you live, please contact Gov. Jay Inslee and ask him to use his influence to stop all killing of wolves in Washington immediately. Simply copy and paste the sample letter below or write your own.  Send Gov. Inslee an e-message here or call him at 360-902-4111.
 
Sample Letter to Send Gov. Jay Inslee
 
Dear Governor Inslee, 
 
I want you to know how grateful I am that you respect the science of climate change and have taken such positive action to protect our planet and our children’s future. But I also want you to know that I am deeply troubled you are ignoring the best-available science when it comes to wolves.
 
Science increasingly shows that killing wolves increases attacks on cattle because it fractures the pack’s social structure. So by killing wolves Washington wildlife managers are perpetuating the very problem they say they want to prevent. They are also doing this on behalf of one rancher who is refusing to take common sense, preventive measures that have worked for other ranchers.
Healthy, balanced ecosystems are necessary for our future prospects. They require wolves performing their vital roles as apex predators with their strong family units intact, as each member of a pack plays an essential role.
I am outraged that hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars were spent helping wolves recover, apparently just to be killed all over again…and all so ranchers can destructively graze their cattle on our public lands.
This is both a tragedy and a travesty. At the very least wolves should be able to live in peace in remote rugged, indefensible forest, like the area the (now former) Profanity Peak Pack lived.
Please stop Washington’s unnecessary and counter-productive wolf slaughter, put an end to livestock grazing in unsuitable territory, and allow wolves places to live in peace.
 
Then rain fire on WDFW and tell them why you are against them slaughtering Washington’s barely 100 wolves just so the state’s million+ cows can live in places they don’t belong until their own slaughter date. Contact:
Learn More
You can also help wolves by making a donation to support our work. Join us in waking decision-makers up to the fact that wolves deserve places they can live in peace. 

For all that is wild and free,

Brooks Fahy                                                                                                                                                                              Executive Director

Categories: Uncategorized

Tagged as: , , , , , , ,

9 replies »

  1. I seem to remember that this guy put a salt block (?) out near one of the dens before turning out cows. Sure doesnt sound like someone who has a handle on managing his livestock!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  2. Why do wildlife professionals (salaries paid by US taxpayers) kill wildlife to protect someone’s private “sacred cows?” The grazing program loses many millions annually as well as burdening taxpayers with predator killing costs and related but rarely quantified ecological costs. Why is a grazing permit allowed in this area at all since they can be revoked, rescinded or modified by law.

    For a government screaming about the costs of the wild horse and burro program being so high they fixate on killing them as the only solution, killing off predators is a bloodly and costly parallel.

    Why do we keep paying to prop up a grazing system which supports only a few “winners” while everyone else loses? If a wolf kills a wild horse, we consider that a natural act and the public doesn’t expect compensation or killing of wolves, so why does our system encourage private interests to drop vulnerable livestock into harm’s way, then expect us to pay and kill our native predators when they naturally take advantage? As an absurd example, what if I decided to raise a flock of chickens along a public road then claimed damages for every bird killed by a passing fox?

    I agree problem predators killing animals on private land must be controlled, but on our public lands the natural systems and their native species should have primacy.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Gulliford spoke at our local library recently promoting this book. It includes the 1929 treatise by Arthur Carhart but includes a lot more modern and topical matters. He makes a good case for reintroductions in Colorado, though for many reasons this would be problematic (as he understands). A worthy read.

      Interview: “The Last Stand of the Pack” co-editor Andrew Gulliford views writing on wolves an “ecological necessity”

      “Andrew Gulliford, co-editor of the book “The Last Stand of the Pack: Critical Edition,” is a professor of history and environmental studies at Fort Lewis College in Durango.

      He has twice won the Colorado Book Award and the Arizona–New Mexico Book Award.”

      https://coloradosun.com/2018/11/16/andrew-guilford-author-the-last-stand-pack/?utm_source=The+Sunriser&utm_campaign=9c201f6460-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_29_04_29_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_24f7d21cdb-9c201f6460-42081057

      And:

      This critical edition explores the past and future of wolves in Colorado.

      “Originally published in 1929, “The Last Stand of the Pack” is a historical account of the extermination of what were then believed to be the last wolves in Colorado.

      In this new edition, Carhart and Young’s original text is accompanied by an extensive introduction with biographical details on Arthur Carhart and an overview of the history of wolf eradication in the west; chapters by prominent wildlife biologists, environmentalists, wolf reintroduction activists, and ranchers Tom Compton, Bonnie Brown, Mike Phillips, Norman Bishop, and Cheney Gardner; and an epilogue considering reintroduction of wolves in Colorado. …

      Wolves harassed livestock because wild game populations had dramatically dropped. Most of Colorado’s elk had been shot and killed by market hunters who were paid ten cents a pound for elk, deer, and antelope. Today’s elk herds evolved from elk transplanted from Montana and Wyoming. The state’s elk herds are doing fine, but there are rising fears of chronic wasting disease. How to combat the disease? Introduce gray wolves to cull the weak, the young, and the sick. Wolves can help restore our Colorado ecosystems.”

      https://coloradosun.com/2018/11/16/last-stand-of-the-pack-book-wolves/

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    • You asked, “Why do we keep paying to prop up a grazing system which supports only a few “winners” while everyone else loses?”

      The simple answer is because they can. It boils down to greedy money supported by the livestock industry who as I know you know is very rich and powerful.

      A step further would include the thought that since I am a tax-paying, non meat-eating citizen, then why should I have to pay for welfare ranching corporations to profit from raising livestock on MY land? I know you and most others reading this already know about this governmental circle of injustice and corruption, but it deserves to be said over and over.

      It is a clearly an example of completely biased and favored toward special “favored” interest groups. This in itself is illegal and often called “Regulatory Capture”. Regulatory capture is a form of political corruption that occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or special concerns of interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. Regulatory capture is a form of government failure; it creates an opening for firms to behave in ways injurious to the public.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    • Twin Peaks Wild Horse and Burro Herd Area

      The BLM Eagle Lake (NE CA) has filed a CX (Categorical Exclusion) for burro removal in previous years and obviously it has raised it’s dirty head again. This capture/removal was stopped via an IBLA complaint/stay in 2014. The BLM backed off and dropped their plan – at least for that time.

      In 2016, they again filed a CX and succeeded in capturing and removing wild burros from their legal lands due to rancher complaints of burros straying onto the adjoining rancher’s private land. But there is far more to the story. In 2013, approximately 20 burros were captured by the rancher by allowing the burros to follow their feed truck and they admittedly then closed the gate behind the animals causing them to be captured. This enticement is illegal per the Wild Horse and Burro act and punishable by a $2,000 fine and imprisonment but the BLM Eagle Lake field office allowed this violation of enticement and capture of our wild burros.

      This BLM field office is notorious for bending over backwards and looking the other way when it comes to private/corporate livestock tresspass and continually bows down to the wishes of the welfare ranchers in that area this appears to again the BLM’s current plan for removal of the wild burros.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  4. Removal of “Nuisance” Burros from private lands
    EAGLE LAKE FIELD OFFICE

    Allotment or area name:
    STONY CREEK RANCH
    HELLER and BUFFALO RANCHES/TWIN PEAKS GRAZING ALLOTMENT
    TWIN PEAKS RANCH/TWIN PEAKS ALLOTMENT

    Owners of the STONY CREEK AND HELLER/BUFFALO RANCHES have submitted verbal and written requests to Eagle Lake Field Office for the removal of “nuisance” FEDERALLY PROTECT WILD BURROS from their private lands

    Approved and signed
    Kenneth Collum
    Eagle Lake Field Office Manager
    1-11-16

    Click to access Signed_DR.pdf

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. In recent years CA-Rep (known ANTI wild horse and burro rep) has been given a 0% rating by Defenders of Wildlife and the Animal Welfare Institute and others pro-wildlife organizations. I got a response letter from him and about wolves and the endangered species act and this is his attitude about ALL wildlife (Modoc Devils Garden wild horses are in his district too!):

    “Thank you for contacting me regarding certain legislation pertaining to gray wolves.
    H.R. 843, the Western Great Lakes Wolf Management Act, and H.R. 884 both aim to remove certain gray wolf populations from the endangered species list, as their numbers have recovered in recent years. In fact, their populations have grown so significantly that the predatory wolves have become a threat to many farmers and their livestock. With the populations showing no sign of returning to their endangered status, I believe it is time to remove the gray wolf from the protected species list and allow state and local governments to manage the populations.
    For all of its good intentions, the Endangered Species Act is in desperate need of reform. If the law functioned properly, we would be regularly delisting species as populations recovered. Instead, the ESA regularly adds species to the protected list, further hampering economic activity under the guise of protecting them, while failing to deliver meaningful results.
    Again, thank you for contacting me. Please visit my website at http://mcclintock.house.gov to reach me regarding any issue that concerns you or your family .
    Sincerely,
    Tom

    UGH!

    Like

    Reply

Care to make a comment?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.