|
|
Colville, Washington |
Monday, January 5, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
Work on Washington wolf management plan continues |
|
|
|
Wednesday, 07 May 2008 |
Local participants voice concerns
BY JAMIE HENNEMAN
Special to the S-E
The animal is a large carni¬vore with a hunting territory from 50 to 1,000 square miles. The animal consumes up to 20 pounds of meat a day, but can go a week without eating. It feeds on elk, deer, moose, bison and beaver and weighs in from 70 to 115 pounds, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Western Grey Wolf is the carnivore in question. The ani¬mal is currently the subject of considerable planning in the state of Washington.
Although the state does not currently have a wolf population, it is anticipated that a sizeable percentage of the 159 wolves es¬tablished in Montana and the 713 wolves in central Idaho will likely migrate to the Evergreen State. Dispersing wolves have been known to travel as far as 600 miles.
This anticipated dispersal rate has caused the Fish and Wildlife Service to take the Western Grey Wolf off the federal endangered species list for the eastern third of Washington and Oregon, along the boundary highways of 395, 78 and 20 in Oregon, and High¬ways 97, 17 and 395 from the Canadian border to the Oregon border with Washington.
Listed by Oregon and Washington Fish & Wildlife
Although the grey wolf was fed¬erally de-listed in these areas on March 28, the animal is still listed as a state endangered spe¬cies by the Washington and Ore¬gon Fish and Wildlife depart¬ments.
The state designation requires that each state have a manage¬ment plan in place for these car¬nivores with a “social” pack structure.
Oregon completed their grey wolf plan in 2005 and the Washington plan is slated to be completed and presented to the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) Commission in early 2009.
The Washington plan was the subject of a meeting in Colville on May 3. At that session, the WDFW disclosed current details of the wolf management plan.
“We have two items that were set forth by (WDFW) Director Jeff Koenings before we started working on the plan,” said WDFW Wildlife Diversity Division Manager, Rocky Beach. “First, that having no wolves in Wash¬ington state is not a viable alter¬native, but that the department will not reintroduce wolves in Washington. Any populations we deal with will be from natural dispersal.”
Beach also pointed out to his audience that “We are not plan¬ning to try and recover the wolf population to historical levels.”
Historical levels are hard to be precise about, Beach said. But records from the Hudson Bay Trading Company show that 14,810 wolf pelts were traded to the company between 1827 and 1859.
The wolf management plan is currently looking at managing wolves at different levels accord¬ing to population. An endan¬gered/threatened level would be six breeding pairs; a threat¬ened/sensitive level would be 12 breeding pairs and a game/special status level would be 15 breeding pairs.
While the numbers may seem small, the gestation period of a female wolf is only 63 days, and the average litter size is four to six pups, according to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife website (www.fws.gov).
Acceptable controls for wolves in the current Washington plan include lethal kills on wolves caught in the act of attacking livestock or pets near the home¬stead by the homeowner, lethal take of wolves in chronic problem situations by agency personnel and possible translocation of problem wolves.
‘Game/special’ status
Lethal take of wolves by per¬mit to the landowner, as well as possible hunting of wolves if they reach the “game/special” status is also being considered.
Issues that have yet to be re¬solved in the plan include how many breeding pairs need to be present for the different man¬agement levels, the definition of the term “homestead,” specific details on compensation of live¬stock losses and translocation is¬sues.
Colville rancher Jeff Dawson, who serves on the 17-member citizen wolf task force committee that is helping to develop the wolf management plan, said he is also concerned about wolf activity on public lands.
“I think there needs to be a provision in the plan for wolves who are taking livestock off a grazing permit on public land,” Dawson figured. “You don’t want to be riding out in the woods, see a wolf taking one of your calves and not be able to do anything about it.
“I would also like to see other possible livestock losses ad¬dressed like weight loss on cattle because they are too nervous to eat from being harassed by a wolf, or the loss of grazing area if a wolf has established it as a hunting territory.”
Other concerns about the plan include the impact on the local economy.
“The economic impact on deer, elk, moose and livestock in this area is significant,” said WDFW Commission member, Gary Douvia of Kettle Falls. “We can have wolves out here, but we don’t need them in people’s backyards and we sure don’t need a ton of them.”
The WDFW Commission in¬cludes Douvia and eight other members who serve as the su¬pervising authority of the de¬partment. Members to the WDFW Commission are ap¬pointed by the governor and ap¬proved by the State Senate.
The Washington state cost projection for wolf recovery is around $471,000 to $1 million, according to the current rough draft plan.
The Oregon State wolf recov¬ery plan from 2005 projected $400,000 to $500,000 in costs. However, Oregon Fish and Wild¬life Coordinator Russ Morgan said that only $108,000 has been budgeted for wolf management in Oregon so far. Of that $108,000, 50 percent comes from federal government funding to Oregon.
No established wolf population—yet
Oregon, like the state of Washington, does not have an established wolf population at this time, Morgan said, adding that the agency hasn’t had any wolf depredation complaints to date.
But the clock is ticking.
“We haven’t had any losses so far, but we expect to,” Morgan said.
“That is just part of having wolves. The important thing is to be responsive to the needs of producers and periodically review your management plan to make sure it is working.”
The Oregon wolf management plan is slated for review every five years.
“The important thing to re¬member about large carnivores is that there is no simple rule of thumb about their behavior, so no management plan should be set in stone. You have to see what works and fix what doesn’t.”
For more information, or to make a comment on the Wash¬ington State Wolf Management Plan, contact Rocky Beach at (360) 902-2510.
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 14 May 2008 )
|
 |
|
|
