Kudos to Oregon for Funding Non-Lethal Work to Prevent Wolf-Livestock Conflicts
Posted July 23, 2010 in Saving Wildlife and Wild Places
According to a recent article in the Idaho Statesman, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is using part of a federal grant to pay for a special range rider to monitor cattle grazing in northeastern Oregon. The rider’s mission is to haze nearby wolves away from livestock.
The range rider is equipped with a horse, a four-wheeler, and a radio receiver to pick up signals from any of the three radio-collared wolves in the local pack. Oregon’s wildlife agency will also be sharing its wolf location information with him.
This is great news.
Livestock conflicts are the number one source of wolf mortality in the Northern Rockies. When a wolf kills a sheep or a calf, it becomes a dead wolf walking, as the Orwellian-named federal agency Wildlife Services will “serve” that “wild life” in short order.
Therefore, the best way to protect wolves and livestock in the Northern Rockies is to prevent conflicts from happening at all. There are myriad non-lethal prevention methods available (e.g., range riders, guard dogs, electric fencing, night penning, etc.), but each costs time, money, and human resources.
And thus it’s imperative that the Northern Rockies states make funds available to help ranchers implement more non-lethal prevention tools.
Doing so is an uncontroversial win-win opportunity for everybody, which is pretty rare in the wolf world these days.
Comments are closed for this post.
Comments
Crystal G — Jul 24 2010 11:44 AM
I think this is Great but I also think that these Farmers should have to take the initiative to protect heir livestock with simple measures such as a 5000 volt hot wire top and bottom...i know this is a proven method to work...and it is not very costly...Its just as if you own dogs ..you create a pen to protect them...really how hard is this...NOT hard at all..Its their desire to kill is what feeds the intensity to harm the Wolves rather than take the correct method to guard their livestock...I have seen pictures of them being so proud holding a dead wolf up by its legs, just pat them on the back as if good job...that to me is ignorance...man knows no better than to kill what they FEAR...sad!
Ok... this is all fine and good but... what are the wolves supposed to eat if we take all the livestock?? I wonder if any ranchers have ever considered raising a portion of the livestock to give back to mother nature. The wolves have just as much of a right to be here as we do and it also wouldn't hurt to give thanks once in awhile for all we do consume from nature. The Wolves do have intelligence on a higher level than most human beings and they would sense that we are respecting them and then maybe we could bring back some balance in nature.
karl north — Jul 24 2010 08:26 PM
if ranchers would give some of there stock to wolfs they will start thinking that they can kill or get some free food its better to use rubber bullets also it will have the same affect if they shot over the wolfs head with a real gun but the wolf will live on
fishcat — Jul 25 2010 09:59 AM
"What are wolves supposed to eat if we take all the livestock??? What? Wolves only eat livestock when there is no wildlife, their normal food, or if there is something amiss like sickness or weakness due to injuries or loss of the alpha pair... They wouldn't eat livestock if livestock wasn't so darn easy to cathch and eat. Why do you think WE eat livestock...?
Michael Malone — Jul 25 2010 10:01 AM
You people have not a clue as to what it takes to survive as a rancher. You say share with the wolves. Who is going to pay for that? You think ranchers have all the funds in the world to donate a portion of their livelihood to wolves!! If that the case why are we worried about it anyway? Before you all start making judgments of what ranchers should do.. think about the costs of what it takes to sustain a cow calf operation, or sheep operation. Are you willing to donate 2 hours a day of your salary for this cause? I bet not! Wolves are predators. I know ranchers that have lost their guard dogs, horses, and let alone their livelihood to wolves. If you all think they are so sweet why is it you don't want them in your backyard?
Meadow Leibling — Jul 25 2010 02:38 PM
Michael, My answer to you is the government! you know our tax payer dollars already pay you guys, so a few extra bucks to give back to nature would be a good incentive! Right? Of course this would mean you would have to teach your families to get a different thrill out of life other than killing unarmed animals. They do have the right to be here as much as we do.
Mick Johnson — Jul 27 2010 04:49 PM
I agree with Meadow'' They taken'' or money. time to help the planet'' with
wolfs, bears, bug cats, i am part indian
I see things. most dont. I dont like
killing anything;; unless i have to'' its
up to us who care to take care of this
world. Its a good start'' Michael. that
you help'' If you care at all''
Nina Serman — Jul 27 2010 05:33 PM
I think it is a step in right direction, but there is a lot more that can be done. For example, an effective way to protect livestock, be it cattle, sheep or goats, would be to provide the ranchers with shephard dogs whose job has been protecting livestock from woves and other predators through centuries: Ovcharka, Kuvacz, Sarplaninac, Croatian Tornjak... to name just a few. There should be grants and NGOs for such purpose, and certainly there have been articles already written about this solution. As for the wolves' "menu", they will not die of hunger, if their natural habitat is left untouched. They can fend for themselves, have been doing that for quite awhile :-). During harsh winters, it is a different story, though. The carcasses could be left inside their habitat, in areas with woods and shrubs, not on pastures where the cattle is otherwise grazing. Now, that opens a completely new can of worms: whose carcasses would these be and what these were fed with before their death?
Dbellive — Jul 28 2010 01:29 AM
Ranchers should not feed feed the wolves any livestock or leave out a carcass for the wolves. That would be an invite for wolves to feed on livestock. As any predator, they are opportunist. Their hunts are successful 1 out of 4. But that is the way of mother nature. The survival of the packs depends on the survival of the pups--if there is little food source availabe, the population is kept in check naturally. However, ranchers should utitlize non- lethal measures to protect their livestock. The initial efforts and time may be hard work and cost money, but in the long run, aren't the livestock worth protecting? The wolves are protected also.
S Hambley — Jul 28 2010 04:13 AM
why aren't these ranchers taking advantage of the http://www.defenders.org/programs_and_policy/wildlife_conservation/solutions/wolf_compensation_trust/index.php
fund available to replace livestock supposedly destroyed by wolves??????
S Hambley — Jul 28 2010 04:50 AM
Have a look at the records on livestock replacement
http://www.defenders.org/newsroom/press_releases_folder/2004/12_28_2004_defenders_of_wildlife_pays_ranchers_more_than_$100,000.php
Marc Cooke — Jul 28 2010 05:38 PM
Awesome!! This is a step in the right direction. Being educated about wolves and other predators behavior combined with being proactive is largely the answer to depredation.
More power to them!
Susie Smith — Jul 29 2010 03:48 AM
I strongly love wolves. They are beautiful animals. They need to survive by eating. That is in their nature to kill to be able to eat.
They should be able to keep a better track of their cattle so if they do not want the wolves to eat then.
Has anybody ever tried a Vegan diet and felt a stronger connection to animals, especially wolves and dogs? it's funny how they don't feel threatened by you when they know you are not a threat to them.
Great website: International Wolf Center... "Wolves depend on a variety of large ungulates (hoofed animals) for food. Although studies have been conducted in some areas to determine the actual number of prey killed each year, the results are estimates. For example, an estimate for deer ranges from 15 to 19 adult-sized deer per wolf per year. Given the 2008 estimate of 2922 wolves in Minnesota, for instance, that would equal 43,800 to 58,500 deer killed by wolves. In comparison, hunters killed approximately 260,000 deer in the 2007 deer harvest. Additionally, several thousand deer are killed during collisions with vehicles each year." Wow, what a difference in numbers!!
Kay McNeer — Jul 31 2010 07:51 AM
I belong to Defenders of Wildlife and had not heard of this recent good news. Thanks for posting it. A good day to celebrate.