Focus On Fur: protecting endangered or threatened animals on land

Proactive conservation groups come in a wide variety of flavors, focusing on a singular issue or many, working in conjunction with other groups or going it alone. Whatever the strategy, the goal is to achieve results that are meaningful and lasting.

In the past, I have cited the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) as an organization that has chosen the legal approach to advancing the cause of conservation and protection of endangered species. Working with other legal groups like Earthjustice or conservation groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, and others, CBD adheres to a strategy of utilizing the courts to get federal agencies to follow through with laws or regulations already in place or to consider issues that are in line with the agencies charter or mandate.

While this blog gravitates mostly towards issues regarding the ocean, occasionally I like to turn attention to those creatures that reside on dry land. Focusing on fur, here are a few developments announced by the Center for Biological Diversity that caught my attention. Two represent ongoing challenges - of which public support can have an impact - and two are victories that can be savored but require continued diligence if they are to persevere. The Center is not the only the group involved in pushing ahead on these issues; CBD will mention working in conjunction "with others" and I often wish they would list those others groups - all deserve their due credit.

And you can make a difference to - by petition support or financial contribution, if possible.

Wolves' Fate at Stake in Congress -- Take Action
The Center for Biological Diversity and 47 other groups yesterday wrote to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, urging her to oppose legislation that would permanently end federal protections for endangered gray wolves, leaving them open to slaughter. Later in the day wolves caught a slight break when the Senate voted down a House Republican spending bill that, among other anti-environment measures, included a provision to strip wolves of federal protections.

But that doesn't mean wolves are out of the woods. Members of Congress have shown a disturbingly keen interest in stripping Endangered Species Act protections for wolves throughout Montana and Idaho and parts of Utah, Oregon and Washington. If approved, such legislation will bar protection for northern Rockies wolves as "endangered" even if their numbers plummet toward zero. Both Montana and Idaho have long been chomping at the bit to raze wolf populations.

Congress has never taken a step like this before -- and endangered species protection must be determined according to science, as current law prescribes, not through a rider hidden in a gigantic funding bill. In fact, such legislation puts the very Endangered Species Act at risk and sets a terrible precedent for other species hovering on the brink of extinction.

Take action with us now by telling your senators to stop any congressional effort to strip protections from gray wolves.

Read more in E & E News.

Big Oil Sues Over Polar Bear Habitat Protections
Big Oil has filed the first lawsuit challenging the biggest "critical habitat" designation ever made -- and won by the Center for Biological Diversity and allies. Specifically, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association -- representing 15 oil and gas companies, including BP, Exxon and Chevron -- last week sued the federal government for protecting 120 million acres for Alaska's polar bears. The oil companies say that polar bears are too "abundant" to deserve the protected area, and that setting aside the land will be too expensive because it may get in the way of oil and gas development. Other entities, including the state of Alaska, are also expected to challenge the designation.

The Center has been working since 2001 to save the polar bear from the dire threats the species faces -- including oil and gas development. We're the group that originally wrote the petition earning the bear its status under the Endangered Species Act; we're still fighting to earn it the full "endangered" protection it desperately needs. We won't let any critical-habitat challenge succeed. Stay tuned for a polar bear update soon.

Read more in the UK's Daily Mail.

Wolf Massacre Halted in Alaska -- Thank You
Wolves on Alaska's Unimak Island won't have to face the prospect of getting gunned down by aerial shooters -- and you deserve some of the credit. After Center for Biological Diversity supporters sent in nearly 34,000 comments, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this Monday announced it won't let Alaska aerial gunners kill gray wolves on the island as part of a misguided attempt to stop the decline of caribou. (There's little evidence that wolves are at fault.) The Alaska Department of Fish and Game was planning to shoot wolves from helicopters on the Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge. Aerial killing is as inhumane as it is unnecessary, especially during the pup-rearing season. Thanks so much for saving wolves young and old from devastating deaths.

Get more from the Alaska Public Radio Network.

Protection Restored for Tongass National Forest
In another big Alaska victory, a judge has ended a lawsuit brought by the Center and allies by vetoing a decision that exempted the majestic Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule, passed in 2001, is meant to protect pristine public forests from destructive activities like road building and resource extraction. But to boost the timber industry, the Bush administration decided the rule wouldn't apply to the Tongass, leaving the 17-million-acre forest wide open to exploitation.

"This is a victory for the wolves, bears, deer, goshawks and other unique species that rely on the untouched old-growth forest of the Tongass for their survival," said the Center's Alaska Director Rebecca Noblin. "The Tongass never should have been exempted from the roadless rule, and this court decision provides valuable respite for old-growth-dependent species that have been hammered by unsustainable logging practices in the Tongass."

Read about the Tongass victory in the Los Angeles Times.

Predators and Posion Control: group questions USDA's use of powerful toxins

Over the years, government wildlife agencies have found themselves in the difficult situation of dealing with encroaching predators. Environmental changes to habitat or food supply or urban development have often pushed predators like coyotes into greater proximity with other animals and humans. It's not the predator's fault, but what to do when a coyote is feeding on local pets or commercial livestock?

Catching the animals in traps or hunting them to anesthetize and then relocate them can be logistically complex and sometimes meets with limited success as the predator often returns because the conditions that brought about the encroachment have not changed.

Poison has been a measure of last resort, but it brings with it tremendous risk to other unintended victims including endangered species like wolves and condors, not to mention domesticated pets and even humans. The Defenders of Wildlife is bringing the issue to the EPA as the poisons that have been used are extremely toxic and there is a question as to how well the placement and management of bait traps has been handled. The non-profit group - which focuses primarily on wolves, bears, and other threatened predatory mammals - has initiated a campaign to get the EPA to halt the use of two of the most common toxic compounds used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services: sodium cyanide and sodium monofluoroacetate (known as Compound 1080).

Here is an excerpt from their write-in campaign:
"As someone who is concerned about the safety of people, pets and wildlife, I strongly urge your agency to ban sodium cyanide and sodium monofluoroacetate (commonly called Compound 1080).

Sodium cyanide and sodium monofluoroacetate are considered to be some of the deadliest toxins known to humanity. Yet, Wildlife Services, a program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), regularly uses these two poisons to kill coyotes and other predators. In 2009, the two poisons killed an average of 1.5 animals every hour. In many instances, these deadly poisons are deployed on public lands.

But these poisons don't just threaten their intended targets. They can also poison any threatened or endangered species, people or pets that happen to come into contact with them.

Sodium cyanide is used in M-44 trigger traps, which kill more than 10,000 animals each year, including domesticated dogs and a whole host of other non-target species including kit foxes, ringtails, javelinas, and swift foxes. M-44s have also killed California condors and wolves.

Compound 1080 is classified as a chemical weapon in several countries. It is deployed in poison collars placed on sheep and goats and is highly toxic to birds and mammals. Carcasses with Compound 1080 must be handled as hazardous waste and, if ingested, can kill wolves and other animals. Compound 1080 has even been used to illegally kill wolves and people's pets.

The continued availability of these poisons poses a threat to people, pets and homeland security. Government reports have concluded that Wildlife Services has been unable to account for stockpiles of the toxins, which leaves the hazardous materials vulnerable to undetected theft and unauthorized use.

There are effective alternatives to these poisons, including a wide range of proactive, nonlethal methods for protecting livestock such as fencing, guard animals, fladry, non-lethal ammunition and improved animal husbandry.

For the safety of our people, our pets and our wildlife, I strongly urge you to ban the use of sodium cyanide and Compound 1080."

You can visit the Defenders of Wildlife website to learn more about this situation and how you can participate in voicing concern of the use of these poisons.

Victory for the Northern Rocky Wolves: judge returns dwindling numbers to endangered status

The wolves of Greater Yellowstone and the Northern Rockies have won an important reprieve in the courts. On Thursday, a federal judge ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had illegally stripped the gray wolves of the northern Rockies in 2009 of their protections under the Endangered Species Act by using political, rather than scientific-based, reasoning. The judge ordered the wolves be placed back on the endangered species list, which effectively halts the hunting of wolves that was taking place in Montana and Idaho.

The ruling was the result of a lawsuit brought by The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Defenders of Wildlife and other groups, and defended by Earthjustice, a major environmental legal firm. It is a prime example of the importance of utilizing the power and effectiveness of the courts on behalf of conservation issues - as equally important a component as is generating public awareness and support.

"Yesterday's ruling will also help other wildlife because it strikes a down Bush-era policy adopted by the Obama administration allowing the government to protect only small populations of endangered species instead of the entire species. Reliance on this anti-environmental Bush policy has been one of the many low points of Interior Secretary Salazar's management of endangered species," said Kieran Suckling, executive director of CBD.

Wolves - like sharks, tigers, and other apex predators - serve an important function in maintaining a healthy ecosystem. I commented on the importance of this predator vs. prey relationship and the consequences that have transpired over the years with the on again, off again eradication of wolves. This new ruling will hopefully put the natural balance back on a steady course.

But the wolves are not totally out of the woods yet, as there are pockets of wolf populations that are at risk from reduced habitat and conflict/poaching potential with ranchers. Roger Schlickeisen, president of the Defenders of Wildlife, noted, "We must continue our on-the-ground efforts to prevent conflicts between ranchers and wolves, counter anti-wolf misinformation in the media and work with all stakeholders to ensure these wolves fully recover and can then be legitimately delisted."

Read press release from the Defenders of Wildlife.
Read article from Montana's Missoulian.

Meddling With the Predator vs. Prey Relationship: man must pay up in sometimes surprising ways

When we selectively eliminate critical species from ecosystems, there is a price to be paid not only by the animal itself and the ecology. Man too must pony up - but our price may not be so obvious. It may be a price that is paid years down the road or is one we choose to ignore in the face of immediate personal or commercial gain.

This is what was once faced by cattlemen with regard to the hunting of wolves in the northern United States. Whatever was gained by cattle ranchers in eliminating a key predator, it ultimately came back to haunt them when the deer and varmint population exploded and competition between nature and the cattlemen for suitable grazing land necessitated bringing back the wolf population. But now the pendulum seems to be swinging back and the hunt for wolves is once again beginning in earnest - with no lessons apparently learned.

Many commercial fisheries stand on the brink of collapse, but sometimes the reason is not the obvious one: overfishing of a particular species. In some cases, it is rather the domino-like effect of our actions - as in the case of the hake fishery in Chile which has been severely impacted by the expansion of the Humboldt squid population, a voracious predator whose numbers have grown because of the commercial elimination of the squid's primary natural predators: sharks, tuna, and billfish.

This secondary effect is now being seen in other regions along the eastern Pacific coast: in the Sea of Cortez, where catches of grouper are in decline; and Northern California, where local fishermen are switching from catching rockfish to hauling up huge quantities of squid.

Here's a short video from my recent assignment in the Sea of Cortez.



The filming was for an important future program about which I have to be tight lipped for the time being. But the issue regarding Humboldt squid, which represents one of the multiple effects of disrupting once-balanced marine ecosystems, is an ongoing and growing one.

You fish. The fish are all gone. You move on. It's not that simple anymore.

CITES Conference: one week until important conservation meeting

The CITES Meeting is now only one week away. Scheduled for March 13-25 in Qatar, this meeting is shaping up to be the "Copenhagen Conference of endangered species." Let's all hope the end results are more productive and substantive.

I've mentioned CITES in several past postings, but for those of you who are unfamiliar with this international organization, it stands for Conference on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. And although there are some who would be concerned over any organization that would seem to be involved in regulating trade in endangered species rather than eliminate it altogether, it has become an important body because that very position has enabled it to include a large number of member nations. Through its program of Appendix ratings (Appendix I being the most severe: a labeling of "endangered" for the particular species and often a complete curtailment in trade - no hunting, no buying), CITES has become a recognized force in worldwide conservation of flora and fauna.

The CITES web site has been completely revamped in anticipation of the meeting and you can look at a program of all the amendment proposals, which include adding species to their list or moving a species from Appendix II (a threatened species with with regulated or restricted trade) to Appendix I and, in some cases, proposals for the reverse based on some measure of improvement. Unfortunately, all of the species are listed by their scientific names, so you will need to pull out your biology and botany books or spend time Googling the Latin names. But here's a list of those that have received a lot of attention:

• Bluefin Tuna
• Grey Wolf
• Bobcat
• Polar Bear
• African Bush Elephant
• Nile and Moreletii Crocodiles
• Great, Scalloped, and Smooth Hammerhead Sharks
• Great Hammerhead Shark
• Sandbar Shark
• Dusky Shark
• Oceanic White Tip Shark
• Porbeagle Shark
• Spiny Dogfish

And that's not all. You can look at the entire list and download the complete proposals (15MB Zip file), or look at comments from member nations to get a feel for the mood regarding any one proposal. While I do not want to take away from the importance of any proposed amendment, I personally will be watching what is decided regarding the tuna, wolf, bobcat, polar bears, and sharks.

This will be the "Fifteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties." And it's one to watch.

Wolves & Sharks: key predators at risk from sport

From time to time in this blog, I have cited the role that ocean predators such as sharks play in maintaining a balanced ecosystem - whether we personally care for the animal or not. In fact when I would speak to groups about sharks, I would acknowledge the fears and distaste that some people in the audience might have but would then focus on the critical importance of the shark. You may not love them, but they are indispensable.

And from time to time, I have mentioned the ongoing situation regarding endangered wolves in the U.S. The designation of wolves as endangered in the Yellowstone and Rocky Mountain areas has been a flip-flopping issue with certain populations faced with extinction at the hands of hunters, backed by the support of concerned ranchers who have lost cattle to predation.

There are strong parallels between sharks and wolves both socially, with their interaction with mankind, and ecologically. First, ecologically, they serve the same functions as apex predators, maintaining a proper balance of fauna and even flora within their respective ecosystems. Without sharks, the numbers of their primary prey would increase, feeding on smaller prey that are often herbivores. And so there is a potential shift in a marine community and a potential increase in vegetation and algae that can threaten other life forms like coral - all part of the non-linear cascade effect.

Wolves serve a similar function, maintaining balance between prey ranging from small "varmints" to deer, elk, and moose. In the past when the wolves were not provided protection as endangered species, there was both an explosion in the small animal or rodent population and a decline in grazing land as more and more large animals like deer and elk would de-nude the grasslands.

Secondly, sharks have been exposed to senseless hunting through "shark tournaments" wherein large numbers of both juvenile and mature breeding sharks were hauled in, often times the catch being sharks of no tournament or commercial value. With organizations like the Shark-Free Marinas Initiative, there are efforts being made to at least alter the decisively fatal outcome generated by shark tournaments through the implementation of catch-and-release techniques. With the current state of regulations and protections for wolves being in somewhat disarray (see prior post), there are now similar tournaments, "wolf-killing derbies," that leave dwindling populations of wolves in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Rocky areas, including Idaho and Montana, at great risk.

The Defenders of Wildlife, through their www.savewolves.org campaign, are working to protect these threatened land predators by educating people to their importance and by focusing public awareness towards the businesses and corporations that sponsor or support the wolf-killing derbies.

According to Defenders of Wildlife president, Rodger Schlickeisen, "Since wolves were reintroduced to Greater Yellowstone and central Idaho fifteen years ago, we’ve seen local ecosystems rebound as these top predators helped prevent overgrazing of foliage by elk and deer. According to the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, there are 150,000 elk in Montana, compared to 90,000 in the mid 1980s when wolves started to make their way back to the state. Wyoming's elk population is up 35% since then to 95,000, while Idaho's is up 5% to 115,000."

Sharks and wolves - critically important predators that bring balance to nature's ecosystems but whose image, from Jaws to Little Miss Riding Hood, have placed them on a collision course with man - are at risk of extinction. And, because of the complexity of nature's web, man's attempts to artificially achieve balance (eliminate the predator, then control the increasing prey populations) have not been particularly productive. The challenge is to find methods not to control nature's balance but to work with it, allowing it to flourish in it's infinitely more successful ways.

To learn more about the campaign to save the wolves, click here.
To learn more about the campaign to eliminate wolf-killing derbies, click here.

Weekend Update: wolves, corals, and more. . .

Here is a Weekend Update on several direct or related issues that have appeared in previous posts - some good, some not so good. Click on the subject heading to see the original posting.

Wolves - Endangered Status:
This past week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service put the Great Lakes wolf back on the endangered species list. This action bodes well for the pending court action to place the nearby Northern Rocky Mountain wolves residing in Idaho and Montana, which are currently subject to state-sanctioned hunting, back on the list also.

Copper Mine Expansion Stopped:
An Appeals Court voided a land trade between the Bureau of Land Management and the Asarco Corporation which would have traded 7,300 acres of private land for 11,000 acres of public land destined to allow the expansion of the Asarco copper mine. The court ruled that the trade was "arbitrary and capricious" and did not consider the environmental impact. Verizon Wireless gave a tepid response to 81k email protests regarding their support of a pro-mountaintop-removal mining rally held this past Labor Day, claiming the sponsorship was not an expression of mountaintop removal coal mining.

Desert Tortoise Relocation Thwarted:
Due in large part to public protest, the Bureau of Land Management halted the controversial relocation of over 1,000 desert tortoises, originally as part of an expansion of the Fort Irwin Army base. Relocation efforts in the past have proven fatal for many of the tortoises, but Fort Irwin is hoping to get approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to move 90 tortoises, thereby defying the Bureau's action.

CO2 at 350 ppm Emphasized by UN Scientists:
Member scientists of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change again emphasized the need to establish a level of 350 parts per million for carbon dioxide emissions as the base level if we are to make any real progress. They warned that any legislation, like the current U.S. global warming legislation being considered, that sets CO2 limits above 350 ppm will lead to catastrophic effects on coral reefs and other ecosystems. The U.S. bill, passed by the House, sets the limit at 450 to 550 ppm. Over 350 organizations have urged a level of 350 ppm to be the goal in the U.S. Senate's version of the bill.

Endangered Species Waiting List:
And, as a final aside, according to the Center for Biological Diversity, there is a waiting list for species in need of Endangered Species List protection. Held back because of bureaucratic inefficiency or "higher priority" federal programs, the list includes 100 species that have been waiting for more than a decade and 73 have been waiting for more than a quarter-century. And apparently this bureaucratic quagmire has contributed to the extinction of 83 plants and animals between 1974 and 1994. The new Obama administration has said it will address a current backlog of over 250 species, but the proof will lie in the results.

Thanks to the proactive Center for Biological Diversity for the photos and info.

Northern Rockies Wolves: once again under the gun

Wolves are under the gun again, literally.

Until recently, Northern Rockies gray wolves had been on the Endangered Species List and therefore protected from extermination. While their numbers had been recovering, many conservation organizations felt the the government's decision to remove the wolf from the endangered species list was premature. It was questionable as to whether there are sufficient number of breeding pairs. But, with the increasing numbers there is the inevitable occasional loss of livestock, and so the future fate of the wolf was put into question once again as pressure mounted to find a way to placate ranchers with some sort of "acceptable" sustainable population figure.

Unfortunately, it was decided that the magic number was to be less than the current population. In August, it was reported that Idaho was issuing over 10,000 hunting licenses for the taking of 220 wolves - out of a population reported to be somewhere between 846 and 1,000. Conservation organizations rallied their legal forces to reinstate the wolves' former status and a final decision is in the hands of a judge as to an injunction against the Idaho hunt.

But in the meantime, the hunt has begun and the first kills have been reported.

And the issue is spilling over into other states. Montana is preparing to open up wolf hunting on September 15th. And there has been concern emanating from Oregon where a very small number of wolves exists, a fledgling splinter group from the larger Northern Rockies population. Conservationists are concerned that, with the reduction of wolves through open hunting, the populations ranging across all these states will be threatened due to a lack of mating prospects and lost continuum of a healthy genetic pool.

Interestingly, this is the same issue expressed regarding the loss of oceanic predators like great whites - that the loss of one population can impact another population many miles away, perhaps a population even in so-called "protected" waters, due to a loss of the gene pool mix within these migratory animals.

According to Suzanne Stone, Northern Rockies representative of the Defenders of Wildlife, "Idaho hosts the core of the Northern Rockies wolf population, with approximately 1,000 wolves. By wiping out 220 wolves, the state will cripple the regional wolf population by isolating wolves into disconnected subgroups incapable of genetic or ecological sustainability."

"It's only a matter of time," warned Stone, "before Idaho's state legislature enforces their demand that all wolves be removed 'by whatever means necessary,' which is still the state's official policy on wolves."

Read story in Environmental News Service.

Wolves, Seals & Tuna: some encouraging news

My apologies for my not keeping up with new postings. I have been immersed in some video & editing assignments. So let's see what's been going on lately . . .

Some good news:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has placed the wolves of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin back on the endangered species list. Once protected, these wolves of the Great Lakes were demoted from endangered to threatened by the Bush Administration and then all protection was removed in 2007. Following legal action by several NGOs, protection was reinstated but then it was removed by the new administration just this past April. New legal action again by NGOs has now once again reinstated the wolves endangered status.

It could continue to seesaw back and forth as the anti-wolf lobby, headed by cattle ranching interests, fights back. But the potential loss of these wolves has consequences, as seen in the past when open hunting of wolves caused a spike in the deer population and throughout a wide range of small animals and rodents. Cattle ranchers, in protecting their herds, now had a whole new set of problems to deal with as deer grazed on the lands and small animals ran amok in numbers. Nature demands that we keep our top predators to insure a balanced ecosystem.

Hawaiian Monk Seals have long been considered one of the most endangered of all marine mammals. Their existence in the Hawaiian Island chain, particularly in the northern islands, has been tenuous at best.

But the National Marine Fisheries Services has recently agreed to extend protection for the seals across the entire chain with federally protected habitat, thereby hopefully improving the seals chances for survival. This particularly important in the northern islands where the seals have had the greatest difficulty due to starvation, disease, and entanglement with fishing nets and gear.

Populations of tuna have been decimated worldwide as market demand for this seafood continues to grow. Realizing their future industry is at stake, several of the world's leading tuna processors have formed the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF). Included in the foundation are Bumble Bee, Starkist, and Chicken of the Sea.

The foundation's goals are to commit to processing only tuna that:

• Comes from well-managed, non-depleted stocks
• Can be verified as to being legally caught
• Has not been caught using methods that generate unacceptable levels of bycatch
• Has not been transshipped (offloaded) at sea

All of these news items are good news but will require vigilance on the part of NGOs and government watchdog agencies or organizations to insure that they are properly carried out.

Still, it's nice to start the week on an optimistic note.

Black Wolves: fur color suspected acquired from domesticated dogs

An interesting follow-up to my recent posting on timber wolves, research cited in the journal Science indicates that black wolves get their coat from cross-breeding with domesticated dogs - animals originally descended from wolves - that were bred for their dark coat some 50,000 years ago.

As the first humans crossed the Bering land bridge into North America some 15,000 years ago, they brought with them their dogs - the black dogs carrying a mutated gene, beta-defensin, that is part of a family of genes thought to aid in fighting infections. Apparently it was easier for the dogs to mingle with wild animals in North America than in Europe and so the black wolf has been exclusive to the forested Canadian Arctic and icy tundra.

More black wolves occur in the forested areas than in more open icy areas (67% occurance vs. 7% respectively), and that is thought to be because of the black fur's ability to help the wolf catch prey in the forest and the added help the beta-defensin gene provides the wolf in fighting infectious agents that occur primarily in the forest.

It serves as an interesting example of Darwin's theory of natural selection - once introduced into the species from domesticated dogs, the black fur trait slowly diminished where it did not serve to enhance survival of the species (black fur not necessarily being an advantage in the icy tundra and its infection-fighting ability being of less value in that region).
Read L.A. Times article.

Gray Wolf out in the cold: endangered status in question

In the last days of the current administration, controversial environmental decisions are still being made: the latest being a proposal to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list in several northern Midwest states. Environmental groups have promised a swift reaction, with a legal suit as one possible reaction as has been done several times in the past.

The number of gray wolves has been slowly increasing since its earliest protected status during the Clinton administration and there have been several unsuccessful attempts in the past to remove the wolves from the list. The gray wolf is a perfect example of the importance of top predators. While a bane to cattle ranchers, when wolves were heavily hunted then populations of animals ranging from deer to the smallest rodents exploded - trading a rancher's problem for new problem's for farmers and flora in wooded areas.

Organizations including the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Center for Biological Diversity have said they will be taking action, both political and legal, to stop the proposed change in status for the gray wolf.




On the West Coast, the State of California has filed suit against the federal government, charging that the Bush administration illegally changed provisions in the Endangered Species Act when they mandated the elimination of independent scientific review of projects subject to federal review and, specifically, the new rule imposed that eliminated consideration of the effects of greenhouse gases on protected species and their habitat. California has taken on the federal government in the past regarding environmental issues and has won practically every case.

The Cascade Effect: more accurate than the domino theory

There was a time when the term "domino effect" was used to describe everything from conservation issues to world domination. When talking about adverse effects on the ecology, scientists today prefer the term "cascade effect" as it more accurately reflects what is happening. Rather than one change affecting something else which affects something else, and so on (like dominoes), the cascade effect reflects how one change affects several others, which affects several more, broadening its overall impact over an entire eco-system.

The once precipitous decline of timberwolves in the U.S. and Canada is a typical example. Heavily hunted because of concerns over cattle losses, the decline in the wolf population caused an increase in the deer population which, in turn, encroached on the cattlemen's grazing land. But also, there was an explosion in the rodent population (also part of the wolves' diet) which impacted insect populations and birds (through loss of bird eggs and chicks) and so on and on . . .

Mankind has a tendency to look for simple cause and effects and simple solutions. Nature is much more complex than that and so we must be constantly aware of the wide-ranging impact of our actions.