Counties discuss wolf re-introduction to recovery area
By John Kamin, staff writer
Ranchers, environmentalists and government employees met in a public forum
last week to discuss the reintroduction of the Mexican Gray Wolf to the
Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area.
A public meeting for the Adaptive Management Work Group was held last
Friday. The group is a committee that was created to include local
government officials in the decision-making process for the reintroduction
of the wolf. Private meetings were also held on Thursday afternoon and
Friday morning. The Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area is the name for the wolf
reintroduction area in Arizona and New Mexico.
Arizona Game and Fish non-game and endangered species chief Terry Johnson
said the Memorandum of Understanding for the reintroduction for the wolf
is being finalized and will be available to the public on Nov. 2. County
officials from New Mexico and Arizona will review the MOU until that date
to ensure the language does not violate any rules pertaining to their
county.
Graham County Supervisor Mark Herrington said the county’s official stance
opposes the reintroduction of the wolves. Graham County’s social, cultural
and economic interests are now part of the MOU, which Herrington said made
the 11 hours of meetings worthwhile.
“We need to stop putting wolves where they interface with people and
cattle,” he said. At the public meeting, it was acknowledged by all that a
wolf did come as close as 22 miles from Safford. The wolf migrated south
through the White Mountain Apache Reservation.
Herrington said officials told him that news at the private meeting, but
because the MOU required so much work, other topics regarding the wolves
were not discussed.
Johnson acknowledged public requests for more wolf warning signs in the
Gila National Forest, two nominations for environmental agencies on the
stakeholder recovery team, and more information to the public when wolves
are near populated areas. The next AMWG meeting will be held on Jan. 30 in
Socorro, N.M.
One of the topics of concern at the meeting was the four wolves who were
shot recently near Silver City, N.M., and in Arizona. In Silver City,
sightings were announced over the radio.
Shortly after, a wolf was found dead near the edge of the Gila Wilderness.
The wolf is suspected to have died of a gunshot wound, but the cause of
death is still unconfirmed.
Jean Ossorio of the Southwest Environmental Center in New Mexico asked
Johnson about government involvement in the radio announcements.
Chuck Hayes of the New Mexico Game and Fish Department said information
was given to the radio station that called without any knowledge that the
information would be used on the air. Other officials agreed that no
government agency ordered any kind of announcement.
Ossorio said that broadcasting knowledge about a wolf’s location endangers
the wolves because the public could use that knowledge to harm the wolf.
The safety of the wolves should be a primary concern after so many wolf
deaths in the last month, she said.
Johnson said investigations on the wolf deaths will continue as the cause
of death is determined by biologists in the Game and Fish Department’s lab
in Ashland, Ore.
Rancher Carol Manuz said announcements need to be made to protect
children. She questioned whether wolf advocates were really concerned
about children.
When Michael Robinson of the Center for Biological Diversity asked
everyone in the room how many children have died from wolf attacks in the
last 100 years, he received no response.
Rancher Rocky Manuz said he is unable to receive payment for dead and
missing cattle because the recovery teams do not investigate wolf deaths
as quickly as they need to. He said he had only one confirmed wolf kill
despite losing four cattle to what he suspects were wolf attacks. The
kills cannot be confirmed to be caused by wolves unless investigated
within 24 hours of the time of death.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service field coordinator John Oakleaf said the
wolf field teams try to notify humans near the wolves about their presence
as soon as the wolf’s location is confirmed.
Manuz said wolf supporters have a right to their opinion, but that he
would like more notice of approaching wolves so he could move his cattle
in advance and warn his grandchildren.
Greenlee County Super-visor Hector Ruedas said he is neither for nor
against the wolves, but wants to create a system to consider ranchers’
opinions in the future. Greenlee County Manager Kay Gale also attended the
meeting to gather legal information for Greenlee County Attorney Derek
Rapier.
Oakleaf, the communication liaison between the wolf field teams and the
governmental agencies, said there are 53 known wolves that are alive. He
presented statistics that said the leading cause of wolf deaths is by
humans. Out of all the human-related deaths, wolf shootings were the top
cause of death, followed by disease and vehicles.
He said wolf populations are highly dependent on pup production and pack
formation.
Pup production in the Blue Range Recovery Area is lower than other wolves
in the country because of smaller litter sizes.
Oakleaf thinks the population will continue to grow through the fall as
wolves and pups feed off dead animals found in the forests. He presented
statistics from graduate student Janet Reed that said wolves feed off elk
more than any other kind of animal.
Reed studied about 100 wolf scats for food content, Oakleaf said.
As the wolf population increases, wolf releases will decrease, according
to Oakleaf. He also said the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area has higher
depredation rates than other areas of the country except for the Northern
Rockies.
Depredation rates are more likely to be higher in the Blue Range area
because of a smaller recovery area, closer proximity to cattle and no
central protection area.
“Our area has more competing factors,” Oakleaf said. The Blue Range area
has 394 square kilometers, compared to Idaho’s recovery area that has
1,296 square kilometers.