Northeast Wolf Coalition
Find us
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Members, Mentors, Supporters
  • History
    • 2003-2005 Legal Challenge: Protecting Wolves in the Northeast
    • Henry P. Kendall Foundation Survey, 2002
  • Take Action
  • Northeast News
  • Resources
    • Carnivore Coexistence
    • EASTERN WOLF
    • Hybridization Dynamics
    • Canis Taxonomy
    • Status by State
    • Wildlife Recreation Expenditures >
      • New York State
      • Maine
      • Vermont
      • Massachusetts
      • New Hampshire
    • News, Info., References About Prey Populations
    • The Red Wolf
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • DONATE

National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, 2017

9/8/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
The most current National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation was recently released. It has detailed information on the number of U.S. residents 16 years of age and older who fished, hunted or wildlife watched (fed, observed, or photographed wildlife) in 2016. It also provides information on their expenditures for trips, equipment, and other items.

At the request of state fish and wildlife agencies, the Fish and Wildlife Service has been sponsoring the national survey every five years since 1955. It is viewed as one of the nation’s most important wildlife-related recreation databases and the definitive source of information concerning participation and purchases associated with hunting, fishing and other forms of wildlife-related recreation nationwide.

According to the most recent data, wildlife-watching, in particular, has become ever-more popular, with an estimated 20% increase in the number of people engaged in activities such as photographing and birding from 2011 to 2016.  An estimated 86 million people participated in wildlife-watching, many of them around their own home.

The survey likewise found an 8 percent increase in fishing participation since 2011, from 33.1 million anglers to 35.8 million in 2016.

Overall hunting participation decreased 16 percent from 2011 to 2016, with the preliminary findings released today estimating there were 11.5 million U.S. hunters last year. Total expenditures by hunters declined 29 percent from 2011 to 2016, from $36.3 billion to $25.6 billion.

Presently, there are approximately 305 million people in our nation and less than 6% of them buy hunting licenses; the vast majority of people do not hunt.  86 million people engage in wildlife-watching activities nationwide.   Wolf-populated states are part of the national economy, and non-resident tourism and wildlife watching have become one of the largest growing industries nationwide.  It supports hundreds of thousands of jobs, as well. 

Compounding the effects of these demographic trends is the fact that while hunting is a seasonal activity, wildlife watchers/tourists, photographers, outdoor enthusiasts, etc. can provide states with a much more reliable, year round source of revenue. They comprise a broader base of resident and nonresident consumers who are eager and willing to assist in the funding of state wildlife agencies.

The wildlife in this country is owned by its citizens. This legal concept implies that we all share equal, undivided interests in our wild animals. The government holds wildlife in trust for our benefit and is empowered to manage it for the public good.

Until legislative changes in the structure and funding of hunter-dominated state wildlife agencies are implemented – policies that more appropriately reflect the most current peer reviewed science and the changing demographic trends in our nation – wolves and other predators are doomed to the same fate as when they were exterminated to the brink of extinction.

Picture
0 Comments

Outdoor recreation industry boasts $887 economic billion economic impact

4/25/2017

0 Comments

 
​Outdoor recreation is a growing and diverse economic super sector that is a vital cornerstone of successful communities that cannot be ignored. Most importantly, outdoor recreation is no longer a “nice to have,” it is now a “must have” as leaders across the country recognize the undeniable economic, social and health benefits of outdoor recreation.

Outdoor recreation plays a significant role in American lives. It provides physical challenges and well-being, helps develop lifelong skills, provokes interest and inquiry, inspires wonder and awe of the natural world, and often provides an alternative to daily routines. Recreation contributes greatly to the physical, mental, and spiritual health of individuals, bonds family and friends, and instills pride in natural and cultural heritage. Federal lands contribute significantly, and in many cases uniquely, to the provision of nature-based outdoor recreation opportunities.
Picture
A new report, “THE OUTDOOR RECREATION ECONOMY” shows Americans spend $887 billion a year on outdoor recreation on a range of outdoor activities including camping, wildlife watching, hiking, hunting, fishing and water sports — more than the $770 billion they spend annually on gasoline and prescription drugs, according to the analysis unveiled today by the Outdoor Industry Association.  

It is apparent that the industry is testing its newfound political clout in an emerging battle over public lands.  President Trump is expected to announce an executive order on April 25th that will direct the Interior Department to conduct a review of at least 50 national monuments to determine whether existing boundaries should be changed. The data could be a factor in future policy discussions on infrastructure investment and reform as well as debates over public land use.

According to the report, 
“From our national parks to local green spaces, from alpine lakes to transcontinental rivers, America’s outdoor recreation assets are its citizens’ common trust. Our public lands and waterways belong to every American, and they are the backbone of our outdoor recreation economy. They hold the promise of prosperity and well-being. It is as much our responsibility to invest in them as it is our right to enjoy them. From the smallest rural towns to the most densely packed cities, outdoor recreation powers a vast economic engine that creates billions in spending and millions of good-paying American jobs. Likewise, it is an underappreciated and underfunded weapon against crime, poor academic performance and rising health care costs. We are fortunate to live in a nation of iconic natural beauty, inspiring landscapes and bountiful waters. Going outdoors to hike, bike, camp, fish, hunt or just walk around the neighborhood orients us to the natural world. In the outdoors, we come together with friends and family, make lasting memories and find solitude and contemplation.  And a growing body of research shows that being outdoors delivers health benefits that are, in many cases, on par with pharmaceutical treatments. By enjoying these places, we invest in our own well-being and affirm our shared history. In challenging times, when disagreements appear sharper and differences seem harder to bridge, it is the outdoors that reconnects us.”
According to the Outdoor Industry Association, the $887 billion outdoor recreation economy is a mandate.  If we are to turn America’s natural resources over to the next generations increased, not impaired, in value, today’s policy makers must:
  1. Protect America’s lands and waters, the assets that are the foundation of the outdoor recreation economy.
  2. Invest in local and federal recreation infrastructure and programs to ensure all Americans have access to public lands and waters.
  3. Promote outdoor recreation as part of community and public health policy and programming
0 Comments

Big-game jitters: Coyotes no match for wolves’ hunting prowess

4/21/2017

0 Comments

 
STUDY SUGGESTS LOSING WOLF POPULATIONS COULD DESTABILIZE ECOSYSTEMS
PicturePhoto courtesy from John Benson with wolf pups
Without wolves, coyotes have become the de facto top dog throughout the Midwest and East Coast. But new research suggests coyotes lack the hunting prowess to fill the ecological void left by the eastern wolf.

The research, led by John Benson, an ecologist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, fits into the larger scientific effort to understand the roles predators play in shaping habitats and maintaining ecological balance. 

Benson, who authored the study with former doctoral adviser Brent Patterson, a research scientist at the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry; Karen Loveless of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; and Linda Rutledge of Trent said, “Our work suggests that there’s an ecological role that wolves play that won’t be played by other animals. That’s probably a role that’s worth conserving on landscapes, even outside protected areas. If we’re interested in restoring landscapes to a more natural, functioning ecosystem, this would be an important part of that.”

Benson's work, while just a start, has highlighted the unique role of the eastern wolf.  "We've shown that these wolves and coyotes exhibit different kill rates on deer and moose, and identified some key factors that influence this predation," Benson said. "The next steps will involve linking these predation patterns to the population dynamics of both predator and prey to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the relationships between these species."

Ecological balance is the product of thousands of years, and should be preserved for its intrinsic and extrinsic values. But policy makers and wildlife officials often demand numbers to help make management decisions. Benson and his fellow wildlife scientists won't ever be able offer certainties, but scientists are getting better at modeling predator-prey interactions and measuring the ecological impacts of specific species.

"The good news is people are trying to do these things -- asking bigger and better questions," Benson said. "And the technology we use in the field and the quantitative methods we use to build the models are improving every day. So as with much in science, the goal will be to keep asking the right questions, collecting the best data we can, and finding the most informative way possible to analyze the data."

Article originally posted by Scott Schrage, Mar. 22, 2017 from University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
"Big-game jitters: Coyotes no match for wolves’ hunting prowess"
0 Comments

Newly Formed Vermont Wildlife Coalition Works for the State’s Wildlife

3/7/2017

0 Comments

 
News Release — Vermont Wildlife Coalition
March 6, 2017

Contact:
Walter Medwid
Vermont Wildlife Coalition
info@vtwildlifecoalition.org
(802-624-4954)

Derby, VT — Vermont residents from around the state have announced creation of a new organization called the Vermont Wildlife Coalition (VWC). The VWC will use education and political action to engage a broad citizenry, including many who have been previously under-represented, in the shaping of wildlife policy. The VWC is committed to promoting a 21st Century conservation ethic, grounded in science, which supports the health and protection of wildlife. The Coalition also seeks to ensure that the public at large has a real voice in decision-making about Vermont’s wildlife.

There’s no question that Vermonters value the state’s wildlife. Vermont ranked first in the nation in 2001 in percentage of residents who actively observed wildlife. It’s also the case that as more Vermonters get caught in the trends of urbanization and digitalization, giving attention to wildlife becomes more challenging. This is especially true for our children who are increasingly distanced from nature because of cultural influences. The Association of Fish & Wildlife Departments (including all 50 states) issued a 2016 report about the impending conservation funding crisis and its implications for the nation’s wildlife. In response, their Blue Ribbon Panel proposed to “examine the impact of societal changes on the relevancy of fish and wildlife conservation and make recommendations on how programs and agencies can transform to engage and serve broader constituencies.” Part of the work of VWC will be focusing on the connections between social change, wildlife conservation and public engagement.

The VWC’s approach includes promoting public participation by multiple and diverse stakeholders in the state’s wildlife governance, and supporting governance that truly generates sustainable benefits for all beneficiaries. One of the Coalition’s first priorities will be building support for House Bill H.336, an act related to adding six seats to the “Fish and Game Board” (H.336’s new name for the Fish and Wildlife Board) for representatives of the public, and to establishing a Wildlife Management Advisory Board that will review new wildlife rules, regulations and policies and advise the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife and the General Assembly on matters relating to the protection of wildlife.

To improve and modernize governance, the VWC will encourage the VT Fish & Wildlife Department to, in the words of the Blue Ribbon Panel, “transition and transform [their governance approach] so they can more effectively serve the needs of all citizens and all fish and wildlife.” The VWC believes such transitioning will require the Department to manage with maximum transparency, and will likely require some structural changes to Department operations. One principle of importance to VWC is that wildlife cannot be reduced to mere “game animal” status. Wildlife has intrinsic value and is vital to our ecosystem and, thus, cannot be viewed as solely a resource to be extracted to serve special interests.

While VWC originated as a grassroots effort by citizens from throughout Vermont, it intends to finalize status as a 501(c)(4) by mid-summer. Spokesperson Walter Medwid states,
“The c4 status is important because while we will prioritize public education, we also plan to pursue political action through direct lobbying, and want the capacity to do that. We also plan to create and publish an annual scorecard to evaluate legislators’ responsiveness to the needs of wildlife.” He continues, “There are a number of issues of concern that point to a need for change, and that change will necessitate new legislation or revision to current legislative enactments. One example is the recent coyote killing contest in Bristol where VWC members joined other Vermont wildlife advocates in protest. That said, we do share some common ground with the Department, for example, the need to protect wildlife habitat. We also recognize that the Department deserves much credit for their work with non-game species. The Coalition is interested in partnering with the Department whenever possible, and, ultimately, the future of wildlife is going to require all parties involved to work together more effectively, and in more areas.”

The VWC invites interested citizens to contact them at info@vtwildlifecoalition.org to get on the organization’s mailing list. Additional information about WVC is available through their website at www.vtwildlifecoalition.org and on their Facebook page.


Picture
0 Comments

Why the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is Problematic for Modern Wildlife Management

9/26/2016

0 Comments

 
 M. Nils Peterson & Michael Paul Nelson (2016): Why the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is Problematic for Modern Wildlife Management, Human Dimensions of Wildlife,
DOI: 10.1080/10871209.2016.1234009
Picture
ABSTRACT

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (NAM) is a slippery construct, used both to explain how North American wildlife conservation developed and as a prescriptive framework. We argue both applications of the NAM are problematic. The roots of wildlife conservation in North America are more complex than those associated with the NAM, and minimizing contributions from diverse sources makes building a diverse wildlife conservation community more difficult than it would otherwise be. The NAM is not inclusive enough of diversity among wildlife species or stakeholders. Principles labeled the bedrock foundation of the NAM exist in flux and at the whim of political systems. Belief that the NAM reflects a foundation of laws more stable than the milieu of governance structures shaping wildlife management can encourage complacency among wildlife conservation advocates. Wildlife management exists in systems too complex to be beneficially defined by a terse list of principles.

Read more: Why the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is Problematic for
Modern Wildlife Management

0 Comments

Wolves Ontario: Threatened Algonquin wolves are unprotected in most of their range

9/20/2016

31 Comments

 
Picture
Urgent News from:  Wolves Ontario

In June, when Ontario’s eastern wolves were renamed Algonquin wolves, their at-risk status deteriorated, changing from Special Concern to Threatened. As a Threatened species, they were automatically and immediately protected across Ontario. 3 months later, most of that protection was removed.


In Ontario, a Recovery Strategy will be due for the Algonquin wolf 2 years from their listing date, on June 15th 2018.  The government has 9 months to develop a Response Statement that will outline actions that will be taken to protect and recover the species.  We will continue to ask for increased protection based on scientific research about the effects of  the 3 new closure areas on the population, and robust monitoring to determine exactly how many wolves are killed each year by hunters and trappers now exempt from the Endangered Species Act protection provisions. At the federal level, consultation is still underway to list them as a Threatened species across Canada.

Tell the government to list the wolves as Threatened across Canada.
  Please use the form to submit your comments in support of this listing. Comments are due by Oct. 4, 2016.

Under Canada’s Species At Risk Act (SARA), Threatened species require a Recovery Strategy that includes plans for all provinces where the species is found.  Algonquin wolves, or eastern wolves as they are known across Canada, live only in Ontario and Quebec.  However, the Quebec government does not have an active scientific committee assessing the status of species at risk and does not formally recognize the eastern wolf or have special regulations to protect it.  Federal listing of the wolves as Threatened will help kickstart this protection.

For more information about Algonquin (Eastern) wolves, visit our website.


Photo: Steve Dunsford, Algonquin wolf, Impressions of Algonquin


31 Comments

Media Release: Ontario plans to allow rare wolf killing

8/15/2016

0 Comments

 
19 organizations call for full protection of Algonquin wolves
Originally posted: Wolves Ontario, Aug. 12, 2016


TORONTO
, CANADA – (Aug 12 2016).  On Friday July 22, the Ontario government announced plans to allow hunters and trappers to kill at-risk Algonquin wolves across the majority of their range.  The plan requires an erosion of the automatic protection that was said to be afforded by the province’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) following the wolves’ up-listing to Threatened status on June 15th 2016.


Over 165,000 people from around the world have attended the “Public Wolf Howls” in Algonquin Provincial Park for a chance to hear the wolves in the only area where they are fully protected. As few as 154 mature animals, or 65% of the global population, inhabit Ontario.

A large coalition of organizations (see Addendum) has gathered together to call for full protection of Algonquin wolves across their entire range. Algonquin wolves are sparsely distributed across Central Ontario. The groups are urging the public to comment on 2 government proposals (EBR #012-8104 & EBR #012-8105) before Aug 22nd 2016 to ensure the ESA is used to recover the Algonquin wolf population as intended. The coalition stresses the need to extend protection to eastern coyotes and their hybrids, neither of which can be differentiated from Algonquin wolves without a genetic test.

Proposal #012-8104 will limit the ban on wolf and coyote hunting and trapping to three disconnected “core” areas around 3 other provincial parks that currently allow trapping. These closures are too small to support family-based Algonquin wolf packs, reduce coyote interbreeding or protect wide-ranging wolves, which naturally disperse to find new territory and mates in surrounding areas.

“Of the radio-collared Algonquin wolves that dispersed from Algonquin Park’s protection, 80% were killed by hunters or trappers within 1 year,” says Sadie Parr, Executive Director of Wolf Awareness Inc. “It is because of hunting and trapping that so few wolves have been found outside of the “core” areas the government has proposed to protect.”

Proposal #012-8105 will erode the ESA to exempt hunters and trappers from provisions that would otherwise prohibit them from killing, harming and harassing Algonquin wolves. This exemption will apply in all areas outside of the three new closures proposed in #012-8104 and existing closures in and around Algonquin Park.

“Ontario is transparently prioritizing a minority of people who profit from the slaughter of wolves and coyotes over the recovery of a species at risk,” says Hannah Barron, Director of Wildlife Conservation Campaigns for Earthroots.  “It is appalling that the government would continue to ignore their own research showing that without more extensive protection from hunting and trapping, the Algonquin wolf population will not recover.”

“These proposals are marketed to the public as a step in the right direction while we wait for the Recovery Strategy now mandated by the Endangered Species Act,” adds John McDonnell, Executive Director of CPAWS-OV.  “However, a Management Plan, required when the wolves were still listed as Special Concern, has been overdue since 2008. We cannot wait forever.”

Remarks Lesley Sampson, Executive Director of Coyote Watch Canada, “Full hunting and trapping season closures for both species are crucial for recovering these rare wolves and essential for conserving intact, family-based eastern coyote populations.”

#######################################################################



For more information about
Eastern (Algonquin wolves)
and
ways that you can take action
to be a voice for their future,
visit our website resource,
EASTERN WOLVES. 



Photo: Eastern wolf by Steve Dunsford,
Impressions of Algonquin

Picture
0 Comments

Promising U.S. Interior Economic Report for Fiscal Year 2015

6/17/2016

0 Comments

 
The US Department of Interior's "Economic Report for Fiscal Year 2015" found that tourism, energy development and recreation at national parks, wildlife refuges and national monuments managed by the agency, as well as investments in wildlife conservation, water management and renewable energy, led to $300 billion in economic output and supported 1.8 million jobs.

The report notes that investments in recreation, wildlife conservation, water management and renewable energy development alone generated $106 billion in economic output and supported 862,000 jobs in fiscal 2015, which ended Sept. 30.

National parks, monuments and refuges hosted a record 443 million recreation visitors in fiscal 2015 -- up from 423 million the previous year. These visitors contributed $45 billion to the economy and supported about 396,000 jobs nationwide, the report says.

The concept of the public trust doctrine implies that we all share equal, undivided interests in our natural resources which include our wild lands and wildlife. Governmental institutions do not own trust resources; rather, they are owned by the public and are entrusted in the care of government to be safeguarded for the public’s long-term benefit.

Wilderness is a vital habitat for wildlife. In addition to providing wildlife with a home, wilderness also provides migration routes and breeding grounds for many kinds of animal species. When wilderness is fragmented and developed, these wildlife are threatened. In the web-of-life, wilderness helps to preserve a wide variety of natural life forms and contributes to more diverse plant and animal gene pools. Without designated wilderness, it would be virtually impossible to ensure the preservation of species.

In addition, wild places are a great source of economic activity. Based on the Dept. of Interior's report (above),  it is evident that America's public lands are indispensable economic engines and outstanding investments for American taxpayers, now and in the future.

Picture
“Defenders of the short-sighted men who in their greed and selfishness will,
if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination
of all useful and beautiful wild things sometimes seek to champion them by
saying that “the game belongs to the people.”

So it does; and not merely to the people now alive, but to the unborn people.
The “greatest good for the greatest number” applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction.

Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us to restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wildlife and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose, and method.”  
~ Theodore Roosevelt (1916)

******************

0 Comments

Feds propose wildlife refuge in eastern Dutchess County, New York

1/20/2016

0 Comments

 
In an effort to stem a decline of species native to shrubby habitats, the federal government is weighing a new wildlife refuge spanning eastern Dutchess County and a smaller portion of northwestern Connecticut.

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced Tuesday it will seek public comment on a plan to set aside 2,000 acres within a target area of more than 37,700 acres stretching from Pawling to Amenia and on into Litchfield County, Connecticut.

The land, it said, would be acquired only from property owners willing to sell or donate. In Dutchess, the federal government would seek to set aside as much as 1,500 acres. The rest would be in Connecticut. By comparison, Mills Norrie State Park is about 1,000 acres.
The goal would be to connect the parcels, officials said, but they would not necessarily have to be contiguous.

"We are in one of the earlier stages of the planning process," spokeswoman Meagan Racey said. "If this plan is approved, we would then be able to seek willing and interested landowners."

The Dutchess County refuge, dubbed the Northern Housatonic Focus Area, would be one of 10 in a necklace of areas running from New York to Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Maine. The larger network would be known as the Great Thicket National Wildlife Refuge.

The refuges would be modeled after other early-stage forest habitats, including the Shawangunk Grasslands National Wildlife Refuge in Ulster County.
The effort is spurred by an alarming drop in the Northeast of more than 65 species needing grasslands and young forests for habitat. They include songbirds, mammals, reptiles, pollinators and other wildlife.

Scientists believe the decline is because the younger forests have given way to two other kinds of habitat — areas cleared for development and older, more mature forests.

NY ramps up effort to save Peter Cottontail: The New England Cottontail rabbit, monarch butterflies, ruffed grouse, the threatened bog turtle and blue-winged warblers are among the species that would benefit from more open habitat.

One scientist believes the effort could have an impact on the prevalence of Lyme disease nearby.

Monarch butterflies are among the species that would benefit from a wildlife refuge in Dutchess County, according to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. (Photo: Tom Keoner/USFWS)
Richard Ostfeld, a disease ecologist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, said a wider array of animal species could regulate abundance of white-footed mice, which are seen as one of the most efficient propagators of infected ticks. Ostfeld said more species could deflect ticks away from the mice.

The refuges, Ostfield said, could also discourage developers from "plunking new housing developments right in the middle of risky habitat."

"It would be interesting," he said, "to monitor Lyme disease risk and incidence before and after protection, or comparing protected and unprotected areas."

If the plan is approved, the Fish & Wildlife Service said it could be decades before all of the land is acquired.

In its announcement, the federal government stressed that all of the land would come from willing property owners. Racey, the spokeswoman, said the emphasis was not in response to land management controversies in the west, including the occupation of a wildlife refuge in Oregon by antigovernment protesters.

"We have had a lot of experience in our own region with putting together conservation plans," Racey said, "and have recognized through those experiences that there is sometimes a miscommunication and misunderstanding about the process."
Picture

By: John Ferro: 845-437-4816; jferro@poughkeepsiejournal.com; Twitter: @PoJoEnviro
Article originally published in the Poughkeepsie Journal, Jan. 20, 2016

0 Comments

Thomas Newsome: When shooting a coyote kills a wolf: Mistaken identity or misguided management?

9/11/2015

0 Comments

 
An ongoing issue in the United States is that endangered wolves are often mistaken as coyotes and illegally shot by hunters. Yesterday, with two other co-authors, I published a commentary article in the journal Biodiversity and Conservation highlighting this issue. See below for a copy of the abstract and link to the paper.

Abstract The recovery of wolf populations in the United States (U.S.) is hampered by ongoing human-wolf conflicts. In particular, the illegal killing of grey wolves (Canis lupus), red wolves (Canis rufus), and Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) protected under the U.S. Endangered Species Act has contributed to relatively high mortality rates in some areas. One issue is that wolves are often mistaken as coyotes (Canis latrans) and illegally shot by hunters. To minimize cases of mistaken identity, stricter regulation of coyote hunting is being adopted in some areas where endangered wolves exist. Here we argue that such management should be adopted more widely, and especially in areas where wolves are at low densities or recolonizing new areas. Such a proposal may face opposition, particularly where coyote hunting is common, or where coyotes are perceived as a threat to human enterprises such as livestock ranching. Appropriate education and training is needed to ensure that the public is aware that (i) wolves and coyotes are difficult to distinguish from a distance and (ii) coyotes are far too resilient to be affected by most periodic eradication programs, let alone from derbies or recreational hunting. We conclude that recreational hunting of coyotes could restrict wolf recolonization while providing little benefit to animal agriculture. Consideration of new management strategies is therefore required to assist with wolf restoration efforts and to minimize ongoing human-wildlife conflicts.

Link to paper in Biodiversity and Conservation.
Originally posted in Thomas Newsome's Blog - University of Sydney/Oregon State University

A WOLF OR COYOTE?
DISTINGUISHING THEM AT A DISTANCE CAN BE DIFFICULT.
Picture
The answer: Coyote
0 Comments
<<Previous

    Northeast
    Wolf Coalition

    Periodically, members of the Coalition and interested stakeholders will share their thoughts about wolf recovery in the Northeast.

    Archives

    April 2017
    March 2017
    September 2016
    August 2016
    June 2016
    January 2016
    September 2015
    July 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    Christina Eisenberg
    Northeast USA Wildlife
    Predator Conservation
    The Carnivore Way
    Wolf Conservation

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly