Oregon Wolf Management Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, January 2016

Similar documents
Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management 2014 Annual Report

Bailey, Vernon The mammals and life zones of Oregon. North American Fauna pp.

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan 2010 Evaluation STAFF SUMMARY OF POLICY ISSUES RAISED BY STAKEHOLDERS August 6, 2010.

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management 2012 Annual Report

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management 2017 Annual Report

Evaluation of the Proposal on Developing Ranch and Farm Specific Gray Wolf Non-Lethal Deterrence Plans

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management 2018 Annual Report

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management 2016 Annual Report

OREGON WOLF CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN (DRAFT)

Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery 2010 Interagency Annual Report

A California Education Project of Felidae Conservation Fund by Jeanne Wetzel Chinn 12/3/2012

Dirk Kempthorne, et al. Page 2

Mexican Gray Wolf Endangered Population Modeling in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Part 1. December 2015

Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan 2011 Annual Report. Summary

Structured Decision Making: A Vehicle for Political Manipulation of Science May 2013

Oregon Grey Wolf Reintroduction, Conservation and Management Evaluation

ODFW LIVESTOCK DEPREDATION INVESTIGATION REPORTS January - March 2019

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION

Wolf Recovery Survey New Mexico. June 2008 Research & Polling, Inc.

Report to the Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board: Off-leash Dog Areas. Background

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Area-Specific Wolf Conflict Deterrence Plan Snake River Pack 10/31/2013

Judging Approval Process Effective March 1, Questions & Answers

Loss of wildlands could increase wolf-human conflicts, PA G E 4 A conversation about red wolf recovery, PA G E 8

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Area-Specific Wolf Conflict Deterrence Plan Silver Lake Wolves Area 10/24/2016

THE WOLF WATCHERS. Endangered gray wolves return to the American West

Re: Proposed Revision To the Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf

[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES ; FXES FF09E42000] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision to the Regulations for

DOG BYLAWS. 3. There will be a late charge per dog for licensing after March 31 st. There will be no exceptions to this requirement.

November 6, Introduction

PROCEDURE Dog Handler Assessment, Selection and Training. Number: I 0202 Date Published: 22 March 2018

Service and Assistance Animal Policy

A Conversation with Mike Phillips

Trilateral Committee Meeting May 16-19, 2016 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Sonoran Pronghorn Recovery Update

ODFW Non-Lethal Measures to Minimize Wolf-Livestock Conflict 10/14/2016

TOWN OF POMFRET DOG ORDINANCE Originally Adopted May 22, 1984 Amended December 19, 2012 Amendment adopted October 1, 2014 Effective November 30, 2014

Animal Services By-law Update Presentation

Criteria for Selecting Species of Greatest Conservation Need

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Revision to the. Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf

LEGISLATURE

1 Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Inc. v. Servheen, 665 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2011). Heather Baltes I. INTRODUCTION

ODFW LIVESTOCK DEPREDATION INVESTIGATION REPORTS June - August 2018

Legal Supplement Part B Vol. 53, No th March, NOTICE THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE SPECIES (OLIVE RIDLEY TURTLE) NOTICE, 2014

TOWN OF WOODSTOCK ORDINANCE REGULATING DOGS AND WOLF-HYBRIDS

Executive Summary. DNR will conduct or facilitate the following management activities and programs:

Gopher Tortoise Minimum Viable Population and Minimum Reserve Size Working Group Report

Whose side are they on? Four States Efforts to Derail Wolf Recovery

2009 WISCONSIN ACT 90

Re: Petition to amend the Washington Administrative Code to codify certain portions of the Washington Wolf Conservation and Management Plan

Wolf Reintroduction Scenarios Pro and Con Chart

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF APACHE COUNTY P.O. BOX 428 ST. JOHNS, ARIZONA TELEPHONE: (928) FACSIMILE: (928)

Administrative Rules GOVERNOR S OFFICE PRECLEARANCE FORM

OVERVIEW OF EMERGING ANIMAL DISEASE PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE PLAN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTHERN DIVISION NO. 2:15-CV-42-BO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project Monthly Update May 1-31, 2016

ARTICLE FIVE -- ANIMAL CONTROL

ODFW LIVESTOCK DEPREDATION INVESTIGATION REPORTS June - September 2018

1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY

ISLE ROYALE WOLF MOOSE STUDY

( ) Page: 1/8 COMMUNICATION FROM THE WORLD ORGANISATION FOR ANIMAL HEALTH (OIE)

Administrative Rules GOVERNOR S OFFICE PRECLEARANCE FORM

Wolf Reintroduction in the Adirondacks. Erin Cyr WRT 333 Sue Fischer Vaughn. 10 December 2009

POLICY. Number: Animals on Campus Responsible Office: Administrative Services I. PURPOSE & INTENT

Antimicrobial Stewardship in Food Animals in Canada AMU/AMR WG Update Forum 2016

Dog Off Leash Strategy

Protecting People Protecting Agriculture Protecting Wildlife

October 29, Chair Finley and members of the Commission:

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP. Primary Qualities of An Effective Leader

14th Conference of the OIE Regional Commission for Africa. Arusha (Tanzania), January 2001

Mexican Wolf Experimental Population Area Initial Release and Translocation Proposal for 2018

Cyprus biodiversity at risk

1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.

Chapter 3 ANIMALS* ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL. (a) Title. This chapter shall be known as the Animal Control Ordinance.

Snowshoe Hare and Canada Lynx Populations

Limits to Plasticity in Gray Wolf, Canis lupus, Pack Structure: Conservation Implications for Recovering Populations

Original Draft: 11/4/97 Revised Draft: 6/21/12

Speaking notes submitted by Dr. Duane Landals. on behalf of the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA)

HAT HILL DOG OFF-LEASH AREA MODIFICATIONS

Wolves and ranchers have a long history of conflict. Ranchers need to protect their animals and wolves need to eat.

July 5, Via Federal erulemaking Portal. Docket No. FWS-R3-ES

Project Timeline

Steps Towards a Blanding s Turtle Recovery Plan in Illinois: status assessment and management

Maureen Hackett: Leading the pack

All rights reserved. For more information or to order this book, please visit OSU Press at

RESOLUTION: BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED That the City of Shelton adopt the Vicious Dogs "Gracie's Law" Ordinance as follows following Ordinance:

A1 Control of dangerous and menacing dogs (reviewed 04/01/15)

Dog-mediated human rabies elimination in the Oshana region-control Pilot Project

DISCUSSION ONE: Competent Voice Control

Stakeholder Activity

Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Project Monthly Update March 1-31, 2015

Service and Assistance Animal Policy

September 10, David E. Williams State Director USDA APHIS Wildlife Services 6135 NE 80th Ave., Ste. A-8 Portland, OR 97218

Mexican Gray Wolf Reintroduction

ASSEMBLY, No STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 217th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2016 SESSION

OIE Aquatic Code and Aquatic Manual: What is new?

Iguana Technical Assistance Workshop. Presented by: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Wolves. Wolf conservation is at a crossroads. The U.S. Fish and. A Blueprint for Continued Wolf Restoration And Recovery in the Lower 48 States

CITY OF LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

Department of the Interior

Transcription:

Oregon Wolf Management Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, January 2016 Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan Wolves in Oregon are managed under the Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan (Wolf Plan). The Wolf Plan was originally adopted by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) in 2005 and was updated in 2010. The original plan was a result of one of the largest public involvement processes undertaken by the Department at that time. The 2-year planning process included the following: Four Commission-sponsored workshops. Twenty-nine people were invited to each of these, representing a variety of public and private interests. Fifteen town-hall meetings held in cities across Oregon. Approximately 2,000 people attended these meetings. A 14-member advisory committee was established with representatives from all sides of the wolf issue. This group met thirteen times while drafting the plan. Approximately 6,000 written and verbal comments were received from the public. As a result of the extensive public review, the Commission made over 200 changes to the draft before adopting the Plan. The current Wolf Plan can be viewed at http://www.dfw.state.or.us/wolves/management_plan.asp The Wolf Plan uses a three-phased approach to address both conservation and management needs as the wolf population increases. Phase 1 is the conservation phase in which actions are directed toward achieving the conservation population objective of four breeding pairs of wolves for three consecutive years. That objective was reached in January of 2015 in eastern Oregon and the east wolf management zone entered Phase 2 of the Wolf Plan. This phase calls for the evaluation of state criteria to delist wolves from the Oregon List of Endangered Species. Management actions in Phase 2 are directed at achieving the management population objective of seven breeding pairs in eastern Oregon. The third and final phase of the Wolf Plan is Phase 3 and this is known as the management phase. In this phase, management activities will be directed toward ensuring that the wolf population does not decline below Phase 2 levels and that wolves do not climb to unmanageable levels and cause conflict with other land uses. Based on current population growth predictions, Oregon wolves may enter Phase 3 of the Wolf Plan (in eastern Oregon) as early as 2017. Conservation phase management continues in the west wolf management zone. Oregon Wolf Population Winter wolf population counts for 2015 have not been completed at this time. However, as of July 2015 there were 16 known packs or groups of wolves in Oregon and a known adult population of 84 wolves (Figure 1). At the end of 2014 there were more than 81 known wolves among 10 packs in Oregon and nine of those were breeding pairs. Annual winter counts of wolves were initiated by the Department in 2009 and Oregon s wolf population increased in all years since with a mean population growth rate of 1.43 (± 0.15 SD). Wolves are rapidly expanding their range in Oregon. Approximately 42% of Oregon is considered potential wolf range; wolves now occupy about 12.4% of this area (Figure 2). Wolf collar data shows that wolves move freely between the eastern and western management zones (Figure 3) and that they traverse the entirety of the Cascades within western Oregon. Wolves have proved capable of crossing all types of potential barriers in Oregon (e.g. rivers, highways). Delisting from Oregon ESA Oregon wolves were listed as endangered under the Oregon Endangered Species Act when it was created by the Oregon Legislature in 1987. The Wolf Plan contains a conservation population objective of four breeding pairs for three consecutive years in eastern Oregon, based in part on the requirements for delisting the species under the Act. The conservation population objective was achieved in January of 2015 and as called for in the Wolf Plan, the Department initiated a biological status review for wolves in Oregon. The Department s biological status review found: ODFW BACKGROUNDER January 2016, page 1 of 5

Wolves are represented over a large geographic area of Oregon, are connected to other populations, and nothing is preventing them from occupying additional portions of Oregon. The wolf population is projected to continue to increase. The overall probability of extinction is very low and genetic variation is high. Wolf habitat in Oregon is stable and wolf range is expanding. Over-utilization of wolves is unlikely as the Wolf Plan continues to provide protections for wolves and any commercial, recreational or scientific take in the future is regulated by the Commission. The Wolf Plan ensures protection of wolves in the future, regardless of ESA status. Delisting a species from Oregon ESA requires a public rulemaking decision by the Commission on the basis of scientific information and other biological data to evaluate the biological status. Specifically, as outlined in Oregon ESA statute, if the Commission makes the following five determinations it may remove the species from the endangered species list: 1. The species is not now (and is not likely in the foreseeable future to be) in danger of extinction in any significant portion of its range in Oregon or in danger of becoming endangered; and 2. The species natural reproductive potential is not in danger of failure due to limited population numbers, disease, predation, or other natural or human-related factors affecting its continued existence; and 3. Most populations are not undergoing imminent or active deterioration of range or primary habitat; and 4. Over-utilization of the species or its habitat for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is not occurring or likely to occur; and 5. Existing state or federal programs or regulations are adequate to protect the species and its habitat. After review of the biological status of wolves in Oregon the Commission approved the delisting of wolves on November 9, 2015. Supporting information related to the Commission s delisting decision is available at: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/15/11_november/index.asp On December 31, 2015 a petition for judicial review challenging the Commission s decision was filed in the Oregon Court of Appeals by three environmental groups; Cascadia Wildlands, Center for Biological Diversity, and Oregon Wild. Effects of Delisting Delisting resulted in no immediate changes to wolf management in Oregon and wolves remain protected in all of the state. Their protection is not based on ESA listing status but on the Wolf Plan and its associated technical rules. The Department is currently implementing Phase 2 of the Wolf Plan in eastern Oregon. Intensive monitoring of Oregon s wolves will continue and the 2015 year-end count information is generally completed by March 2016. Other management activities continue in the western management zone, unchanged per the existing Wolf Plan. The Wolf Plan continues to emphasize non-lethal protective measures to deal with wolf-livestock conflict and allows no general season sport hunting or trapping of wolves. In Phase 3 of the Wolf Plan, controlled take of wolves could be allowed in some situations of chronic livestock depredation or wolf-caused declines of prey populations. Wolves west of Oregon highways 395-78-95 in Oregon are still listed as federally endangered and managed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Figure 4). Plan Evaluation The Commission requires periodic evaluation to formally assess the effectiveness of the Wolf Plan s implementation. The results of any evaluation could include rulemaking by the Commission to amend or update the Plan and the next review of the Wolf Plan is scheduled to begin in early 2016. Though the level of detail of the upcoming Wolf Plan review is unknown at this time, the Commission did express a strong commitment to maintaining a Wolf Plan with a conservation focus. To complete the evaluation, the Department will conduct an internal review of the Wolf Plan and then will meet with stakeholder groups to receive specific input on the plan s implementation and opportunities for improvement. The public will also have full opportunity to provide input to the Commission through the normal public hearing process. ODFW BACKGROUNDER January 2016, page 2 of 5

Figure 1. Oregon minimum wolf population growth from 2009 through 7/2015 (2015 population does not include pups of the year) Figure 2. Areas of known wolf activity through November, 2015 ODFW BACKGROUNDER January 2016, page 3 of 5

Figure 3. Pathways of dispersing collared wolves in Oregon 2010 through November 2015 ODFW BACKGROUNDER January 2016, page 4 of 5

Figure 4. Wolf management zones in Oregon ODFW BACKGROUNDER January 2016, page 5 of 5