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.

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.

Central for Biological Diversity: legal eagles getting the job done

So recently, I put up two postings (Fri. 2/20 & Sat. 2/21) on different conservation organizations, commenting on the different strategies or tactics taken by groups who feel their efforts would be best served by either educating the next generation or partaking in eco-terrorist activities. In the end, nature is best served when there are concrete results.

One organization that I have mentioned in the past, is gaining more and more influence and attention by focusing on the strategy of legal engagement, through legal petition or law suit. The Center for Biological Diversity has been affecting change through legal means and their results to date have been impressive. Cases in point, from their latest e-newsletter:

For the threatened Canadian Lynx, its federally protected habitat in the U.S. was increased from 1,841 to 39,000 square miles. CBD, along with Defenders of Wildlife, filed suit to protect the lynx under the Endangered Species Act (it's limited protection was initiated by a now disgraced former official influenced by commercial timber interests).

CBD and other organizations filed numerous suits regarding the 11th hour moves by the previous administration to gut the Endangered Species Act. A bill has now been introduced in Congress that will allow the Obama administration to more quickly rescind those moves - in particular those that denied the use of global warming as a cause for listing a species, like the polar bear, as endangered.

Even the little guys get some attention: the Northern Rockies Fisher, a rare relative of the weasel whose numbers have dwindled due to logging and trapping is receiving CBD support with a scientific petition filed to gain protection under the Endangered Species Act.

CBD, along with over 20 other groups, submitted a petition with over 19,000 signatures in support of measures to protect Arizona's Verde River from proposed pumping for new large development projects. Petition requests the consultation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine and counter potential negative ecological effects.

The Center for Biological Diversity is one of a growing number of organizations that are taking a decidedly proactive position and do so not by fighting the legal system but by getting it to work for them. The challenges can be clearly identified, the actions can demonstrable, and the results can be clearly measured. Now that's progress.

Go get 'em, CBD!