Conservation news snapshot January 2003

France

21'st December: The prosecution of a 35 year old Alpine shepherd is the first stage in a political battle caused by the gradual re-colonisation of the French Alps by wolves. Hervé Bernardon from the village of Saint-Crépin near Gap in the Hautes-Alpes will make history when he becomes the first shepherd to be prosecuted in France for killing a wolf. Shepherds in the region claim to have lost 8,800 sheep to wolves in the last 10 years and Bernadon's friends are expected to stage noisy demonstrations outside the court house.

The wolf was caught in a metal trap 2 years ago by Bernadon after it was suspected of killing up to 60 ewes. If convicted, he faces a fine of up to 9,000 francs and a possible prison sentence of up to six months.

The French political scene is bitterly divided over the wolf issue with farming and right wing political groups campaigning for France to abandon its commitment to protect wolves under the Bern Convention. The French government is currently setting up a commission of enquiry to decide whether or not to stick to those commitments. One thing is sure; France cannot ignore the question for much longer. Extinct since the 1920's, the re-colonisation of the alps by wolves from Italy has already reached as far north as the Belledonne chain of mountains near Grenoble and the Vercors range near Valence in the Rhône valley.

The French Association for the Protection of Wild Animals does not question that there have been losses of livestock but points out that wolves are responsible for only 1 per cent of sheep losses in France. In 2001, dogs killed more than 20,000 sheep and thousands of others were killed by avalanches and lightning strikes.

There are thought to be only about 40 wolves in France, in five or six packs but the Alpine villagers claim that they are becoming increasingly aggressive and bold.


Sweden
October 29'th: The National Environment Protection Board refused to authorise a hunt for a lone wolf (discovered in January in Norrbotten in the forest and mountain area of the "World Reservation of Laponia") which had probably wandered in from Russia. The scientific community regarded the wolf, which was nicknamed "John", as a genetic lifeline for Sweden's small wolf population. Most wolves in Sweden today are believed to be descendents of a pair which appeared in Värmland in 1982.

The arrival of the wolf in Norrbotten caused bitter debate with representatives of the Lapps in Sirges village demanding the right to kill the wolf in order to protect their reindeer and also citing as justification "mental anxiety" (!!) caused by its presence. Despite receiving support for their campaign from the administrative board in Norrbotten, the Environment Protection Board told the Lapps that the wolf must be allowed to make its way South to join the rest of Sweden's wolves.

Incredibly, the Lapps already receive routine pre-emptive compensation for wolf damage to their reindeer stocks. They were given 50,000 Kroner simply to compensate for the presence of the wolf in the area even before they filed their application for a hunting permit. Another 44 Million Swedish Kronor ($ 4.5 Million) has also been earmarked for compensation for damage. To further underline the selfishness, greed and paranoia which motivated the hunt application, it was filed only a few weeks before the reindeer were due to be moved out of the area completely to their normal winter grazing grounds.

Only a few days after the Board's decision though, the Lapps, with more than 30,000 Euros of pre-emptive compensation already paid and no wolf-damage yet, announced publicly that they would kill the wolf anyway.

No subsequent reports have been received and the wolf was last seen in the lower region of the Ultevis mountain, not far from the reindeer grazing area.

Wolves almost became extinct in Sweden by the end of 1979 and at that time there was only one officially known wolf left in Sweden. Massive hunting and trapping campaigns had wiped out the native population. Since then, a sustained effort by the Swedish government to rebuild the wolf population and educate the public has paid dividends. Today, public attitudes there are mostly positive with anti-wolf sentiments being restricted mainly to the older generation. A public opinion poll in 1997-98 showed that 46 % out of 2,000 people questioned wanted more than 500 wolves in Sweden and 56 % were generally positive about having wolves near their homes.

The worst problem is with the Lapps and their Reindeer. The Reindeer are kept semi-wild and unattended much of the year and the Lapps are unwilling to countenance the presence of wolves, even with compensation. Any wolf heading for Sweden or Norway has to cross Lapland first and needless to say, most die in the attempt and it is this which has slowed the recovery of wolves in Sweden. Oddly enough, the hunting community in Sweden is not particularly anti-wolf - or at least, not at the moment; This may have something to do with the current high populations of game animals and lack of any evidence that Sweden's increasing wolf population has had any impact upon them.

In November the AWS wrote to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency to protest at the granting of a license to hunt a "problem" wolf. We received a lengthy, friendly and informative reply. Here it is:

Dear Sir,

You have written to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency about controlled hunting of wolves. In response to your letter we send you this summary of our decisions on wolf management 2002. You will find a text on the Swedish policy for large predators on our website and also an FAQ-text on controlled hunting of wolves on http://www.internat.naturvardsverket.se/documents/nature/predator/predator.htm

Best regards, Suzanne Kolare Information, Natural Resources Dept. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency

During 2002, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency approved the culling of two wolves. However, neither of the wolves was reported killed by the end of the hunting period. A number of applications for controlled hunting have been refused, including a much-publicised case concerning a wolf that dispersed to northern Sweden from Finland. The Swedish EPA is highly restrictive when it comes to issuing permits for controlled hunting of wolves. Only three permits have been issued in the past ten years, resulting in only one wolf being killed in Varmland in 1993.

The restrictive attitude is completely in line with the strict conditions for culling set out in the Riksdag (Parliament) resolution on a Unified Policy on Predators, 2001. Until the interim target of "20 reproductions per year, 200 wolves", has been reached, stringent requirements must be met before culling is permitted. A wolf must have caused serious damage, there must be no satisfactory alternatives, and the development of the wolf population towards a favourable conservation status must not be threatened. The policy is based on the Bern Convention and the EU Habitats Directive.

In the winter of 2001-2002 there were approximately 100 wolves in Sweden and Norway. They originate from three wolves that in the last 20-25 years dispersed from Finland and Russia. Wolves are mainly found in central Sweden and are slowly dispersing from the counties of Varmland and Dalarna.

Wolf in Norrbotten:- Early in 2002, a male wolf was discovered in the very north of Sweden. DNA testing revealed that it originated from Finland or Russia. The wolf was radio-collared, and the hope was that it would move south in the search of a female and thus come in contact with wolves in central Sweden. But so far (December 2002), the wolf has mainly remained around the low mountain range of Ultevis close to the Laponia World Heritage Site, where the Sami people take their reindeer herds for autumn grazing. The herds are moved through the area in spring and autumn. Sami communities in Gallivare and Jokkmokk wanted the Swedish EPA to allow the translocation or killing of the wolf. The application was refused on May 21 on grounds that the wolf had not caused serious damage. The County Administrative Board received extra funds to track the wolf at regular intervals and inform the Sami communities of its whereabouts. In this way, reindeer herders may prevent attacks by e.g. guarding the herds more closely. A new application was received from one Sami community, but was refused by the Swedish EPA on the same grounds on 29 October. The Sami community had not been able to document serious damage to their herds. The County Administrative Board was allocated extra funds to work together with reindeer herders to develop improved documentation methods to prevent damage. The Sami community started moving reindeer from the area in early November. It is believed the wolf may disperse when the mating season starts in January-February. This could involve a journey of up to 1,000 kilometres.

Other livestock:- On 16 July, Swedish EPA permitted the culling of a wolf in Varmland that had attacked cattle. Protecting cattle in the area through predator-proof electric fencing was not believed to be enough, even if the Swedish EPA allocated an extra SEK 500,000 to the county for this purpose. The permit has been renewed once, but the wolf has not been reported killed. Attacks on cattle have stopped and the time limit for the permit has now expired.

Another wolf in northern Uppland, north of Stockholm, attacked sheep and other domestic animals in May-June. Attacks ceased in July, and on 14 August the Swedish EPA refused an application for controlled hunting. The damage was not considered sufficiently serious and extensive. Sheep farmers should protect their flocks by means of electric fencing. Some sheep farmers erected electric fencing. Later, renewed depredation occurred in sheep pastures in Northern Uppland. On 3 October, the Swedish EPA judged the damage to be serious enough to permit culling. By then some 120 sheep had been killed or injured. The County Administrative Board was also allocated funds to prevent future depredation. This is an area where it has become increasingly common for dispersing predators to pass. Attacks have stopped and the period for permitted hunting has expired and will not be renewed.

In October, two Siberian huskies where shot in this region when attacking sheep in a pasture. Inspectors dismiss suspicions that dogs, not wolves, were responsible for the previous attacks in the area. Swedish EPA said "no" to controlled hunting of a wolf that killed and injured sheep in the Kalmar region, south east Sweden. That wolf later moved further north and killed some sheep in Ostergotland. A wolf was killed on the island of Graso in Northern Uppland later in the summer. The district attorney is now investigating the incident.

Intimidation:- The fearless behaviour of another wolf has worried livestock owners in Dals-Ed in south western Sweden. Wolf experts in Skandulv engaged in trying to frighten the wolf by firing warning shots, etc. In the short term this was successful. On November 14, The Swedish EPA refused an application for controlled hunting. The fact that the wolf had killed 35 sheep in the area was not seen as sufficient grounds for a culling permit. Sheep farmers had not taken sufficient precaution, e.g. by putting up electric fencing, despite information from the County Administrative Board about state grants for preventive measures in predatory areas.


Norway
September 11'th: Two pairs of wolves in the Osterdalen area have probably had cubs. No direct evidence has been seen but tape recordings of howling seem to have caught the sound of young voices. Wolf expert Petter Wabakken at Hedmark College is also convinced that a newly formed wolf-pair in Koppangkjolen has had cubs this summer and he is waiting for the winter snow to provide proof in the form of tracks. The new pack is however, outside the protected wolf zones and could easily be killed by the government.

Wabakken also thinks that there are cubs in the Gråfjell and Halden areas as well. The Moss pack may well have disappeared though. In mid December, our co-founder, Runar Naess wrote "In the pack closest to me (the Moss pack) we had over 10 animals last winter, possibly 16 with the 2002 pups. So far this winter we have had good tracking conditions, but we can only find tracks of one animal. There have been two more tracks spotted in the area, so the best we can hope for is three animals total - although that's not official. It's no longer the Government who is doing the killing, it's illegal hunting and poisoning."


Alaska
September 8'th: A Superior Court judge upheld a Tok jury's decision to award damages to a trapper who claimed that biologist Gordon Haber broke state law by freeing an injured 2 year old black wolf from his trapline in 1997.

Judge Richard Savell ruled that damages, awarded in the 2000 court case, exceeded the amount that could be awarded and reduced the payment to the trapper to a mere $140,000. The trapper, who led a "subsistence life-style" - died in June 2002 and the money - which could have done so much to help Alaska's wildlife - will be given to his relatives. The wolf was recaptured several weeks later about 20 miles from the snaring site with wire still embedded in its foot. An attempt was made to amputate the foot but the wolf died the next day. Haber video'd the freeing of the wolf as part of a campaign to stop abusive trapping techniques. He claimed that the snaring site was littered with at least four dead caribou caught in snares. If wildlife troopers had prosecuted Johnson as they should have in 2000, then the trapper would not have been able to file a civil suit against Haber.

October 11'th: The Alaska Board of Game voted unanimously to prevent the protection of the Toklat wolves in Denali National Park from expiring this year. The wolves, one of Alaska's strongest tourist attractions, are now protected in perpetuity from hunting and trapping. The Toklat pack were the first wild wolf pack to be studied and are probably the most photographed and studied pack in the world.

Alaska's fun-trapping community (what the Board of Game describe as "recreational trappers") have pressured heavily to be allowed to destroy the Toklat pack in the same way that they have completely wiped out three other packs on the Eastern border of the park in the last 20 years. The trappers were originally outraged by the move to grant protection to all of Toklat's five wolves (although they still have every opportunity to kill them every winter when they venture outside the Denali park boundaries in search of food). In anticipation of the expiry of protection, adverts had already appeared on the internet by hunt outfitters offering people the chance to "hunt the world's most famous wolves". Strangely enough, the main factor in their desire to kill the Toklat wolves seems to be simply their fame - Alaskan trappers seem to be of the opinion that it's even more thrilling to kill an animal that thousands of people have photographed.

The Board also awarded some protection to the tourist-attracting "Margaret" pack on the Eastern edge of the park. Following the two decisions, the hunters and trappers, realising that their case was lost, publicly and grudgingly agreed that it's probably a good idea not to kill tourist attractions and have given up their campaign. In all, the Board designated some 55 square miles as no-hunting / trapping country.

29'th December: Selection of a new commissioner for the Alaskan Department of Fish and Game is under way and a number of new people are due to be appointed to the various game Boards. An article appeared in the Alaska Daily News lamenting the fact that, over the last eight years, the Board seems to have drifted away from their previous, wholesome slash and burn approach to wildlife and is becoming more concerned with monitoring and conservation. The author also complained, following the Toklat decision, that "…meanwhile, when it came to 'viewable' wolf populations that range in and around Denali National Park, the state's hunters and trappers were shut out so tourists from Outside would have a better chance to see a wolf." The sheer oblivious selfishness of this statement is almost beyond comprehension - but then so is everything else the Alaskan "hunting" community does.


Wyoming
September 17'th: With the wolf population in the combined, three-state region of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming approaching the level at which Federal protection is to be removed, Wyoming has to draw up a management plan before it can assume responsibility for managing its own wolves. (Idaho and Montana have already presented their plans and the Federal authorities will not turn over management to the three states until all three have approved plans in place).

The Federal government requires a mere 30 breeding pairs to be established in the region before federal protection can be removed. The region is big cattle country though and anti-wolf feelings run high. So far Wyoming has produced nothing but blatant designs for re-extinction of the species and Federal authorities are running out of patience. The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission finally decided that it would seek "dual classification" for wolves in the state. In a few forest wilderness areas they would be designated as trophy game and subject to hunting rules but in the rest of the state they would be classified as "predators" and could be killed any time.

This still didn't satisfy the Fed's though as the plan amounted to no more than another extinction agenda given the fact that the wolves don't always stay in the trophy game areas. There is also - and, as usual - a money motive behind the decision. While the wolves are under Federal protection, ranchers are always compensated for livestock loss by the government, in the new "predator" areas no compensation would be payed by anyone but in the "trophy" areas, the state itself would have to foot the bill. It is therefore not difficult to guess how small the proposed "trophy" areas are. The plan is viewable on http://gf.state.wy.us/html/wildlife/wolf/wolfmanagement.htm.

The Wyoming plan has been submitted and a Federal decision is expected during January 2003.


Idaho
The following extract from an article by Dan Gallagher of Associated Press should give you a taste of the sort of ignorance, stupidity and selfishness which the wolf conservation community in the USA has to contend with. Here are some claims by Ron Gillett of the Central Idaho Anti-Wolf Coalition and responses by federal wolf recovery coordinator Ed Bangs:

Gillett -- The wolves introduced into Idaho, Wyoming and Montana are exotic Canadian gray wolves. Idaho's gray wolves are extinct. The Canadian strain is larger and more aggressive.

Bangs -- Wolves travel across the border all the time. Canadian and American gray wolves are the same creature.

Gillett -- Each wolf kills up to 24 game animals a year, kills twice that many for the sport of it, and also follows elk herds, killing calves immediately after birth.

Bangs -- Each wolf kills the equivalent of 12 cow elk a year. In Idaho, that would be about 16 ungulates -- elk and deer. Wolves very occasionally kill more than they eat, but sport killing is a popular myth. Some wolves are killed each year by being kicked by elk.

Gillett -- Wolves kill the big-game animals in an area, then other predators and finally cannibalize other wolves.

Bangs -- Wolves kill enough to eat. They limit their concentrations to about 10 wolves in 300 square miles. They move to new areas rather than crowd one place. They are not cannibals.

Arizona & New Mexico
November: A Federal Wildlife Service hunt for two of the only 37 Mexican grey wolves left in the wild (re-introduced there by the government) was called off after everyone - except the rancher who requested it - pointed out that when you've only got 37 of an animal left in the world, it is not wise to kill two of them because someone carelessly left a herd of cows unattended.