Facebook users needed! Please vote and help the Wildlife Science Center win!

The Wildlife Science Center is a private non-profit organization that cares for over 100 wild animals as well as providing outdoor environmental education programs for people of all ages-scouts, schools, colleges, and more. We NEED your help-please vote and ask family/friends to vote too!!

Vote here: http://www.facebook.com/KARE11?sk=app_153284594738391 DAILY until November 16th to help us win-we are 1 out of only 11 entrants!

Vote here: http://t.co/8GtzGVjT only ONCE, but make sure to share this one with your friends and family because this is a national contest and we need to finish in the top 100!

Matching Grant Opportunity

There have been countless times I have heard squeals of delight from visiting high school students. Other times, I have heard the subdued awe of young adults seeing rare behavior. The gasp of amazement when a raptor decides to look at an individual taking a photo. I have watched adults and children alike transfixed on a pack of wolves eating naturally. I have been part of the presentations our staff gives. Tell me what you remember of your high school science courses, because honestly all I can remember is hours of tedious note taking, not the subject.

Please consider supporting the Wildlife Science Center today. Ask your friends to do the same!

http://www.wildlifesciencecenter.org/directors-corner/matching-grant-opportunity/

Mobile Wildlife Education Program for the Wildlife Science Center

This non-profit organization needs you to vote Vote VOTE for the Mobile Wildlife Education program at Pepsi Refresh.

During these times video games, television mega-madness, and endless amounts of movies to watch, it is very important to get our children to recognize the wonder of the creatures they share this world with. Many schools and programs at education facilities would love to incorporate off site adventures into their curriculum, but for some places the expenses that come with these programs are financially impossible.

The Wildlife Science Center wants to ease this burden on schools by being able to bring the programs that would help children learn about their wildlife to where the children are – school!

Please help us accomplish this dream by voting for us at Pepsi Refresh.

http://www.refresheverything.com/wildlifemobile

There are three ways to vote – through your Facebook account, by texting in your vote, or by signing up with Pepsi directly. All three of these ways are painless if you have the means!

Please vote daily during the month of June! We need your support!

Thank you!

Please visit the Wildlife Science Centers webpage at: http://www.wildlifesciencecenter.org/

The Gray Wolf (of Minnesota)

 The Gray Wolf

            The history of the Minnesotan wolf encompasses two countries, and deals with several states. The wolf of Minnesota has known ideals from two continents and arguably tens of cultures. Through environmental studies done the world over, the definition of “wolf” changes continually, while genetics gives wolves many names and lines of descent. When dealing with the wolf bound to the land called Minnesota, it is difficult to be able to give a history of the animal without drawing from aspects that comes from outside of our borders. Wild and domestic animals in general, often including the human, do not understand territorial boundaries the way legal paperwork and treaty signings would have them defined. When people or animals move into an alien environment, they adapt while keeping teachings of old culture when applicable.

In studying the wolf of Minnesota, one must keep in mind that the wolf knows no boundaries of what humans feel it should be doing, and parallel to that, the human knows no boundaries to the extirpation or survival of the wolf, whichever they put their minds to. In understanding the wolf that calls Minnesota home, one must draw from European, Native American, and early American culture, along with biological aspects of the animal, and the land known today as Canada.

Until the advent of written language, much of the historical theories are just that – theories. When working with animal body types, population, and food source basically most theories are good theories. One theory states that wolves and our human ancestors shared the Great Lakes region for at least 10 postglacial millennia. ¹ Both the human and wolf species are very old, though stemming from two completely different biological backgrounds. It can be argued that the wolf is one of man’s greatest comrades, considering the theory that dog – or man’s best friend – is a domesticated version of its wild counterpart. Many other animals have become the tools of man, but none are celebrated as much as the dog. David L. Mech, a world-renowned wolf biologist, speculates that, historically, Minnesota held a population of between 4,000 and 8,000 wolves. ²

In all of the histories of cultures, the wolf is probably not more celebrated than among the Native American tribes, one of which call Northern Minnesota home. In a part of the Ojibwe creation story, the Original Man is the last creature to be created. He is given the task of walking the world to give names to all of the life forms that came before him. One of the many things he noticed was that all of the creatures came in pairs, while he himself was alone. The Creator responded by not providing a lover, but a brother: the wolf (Ma’iingan in the Ojibwe language). These two creatures then traveled the world together, and during their time together they became very close and grew to realize their unique brotherhood. When the travels were over, the Creator said that Original Man and Ma’iingan must separate their paths. Despite their physical separation, Original Man and Ma’iingan would be forever linked and The Creator told them, “What shall happen to one of you shall also happen to the other. Each of you will be feared, respected, and misunderstood by the people who will later join you on this Earth.” ³

There are dozens of species of wolves in the North American continent. Many are found in relatively small geographical areas, while some are found in huge territories. Many of these wolves appear to be similar at a distance, but at the microscopic level they are very different animals. In the Minnesota region it was widely believed the wolf that lived here was called Canis Lupus Lycaon (Eastern Timber Wolf), but today it is known to be Canis Lupus Nubilis (Great Plains Wolf). Scientists generally use the term “Gray Wolf” to refer to the animal of Minnesota, while laymen refer to it as the “Timber Wolf”. ⁴ Both of these species enjoy a relatively large area of homeland, basically splitting Canada in half and spilling over the man made border into the northern states, including Minnesota.

The emotional responses elicited by the wolf have two general beginnings one in the old world and the other in the new world. Europeans brought with them an all out hatred for the wolf, considering them to be “vermin” and “varmints.” ⁵ On the other hand, in the new world, American Indians owed thanks to the wolf, as the Indians learned about hunting techniques, social organization, and how to manage territories from the wolf. ⁶ These clashes of what the identity of the wolf was were problematic for those who came from the old world where extirpation was a common solution to predation. Those who lived in the new world and had learned to live alongside many of the life forms they shared their territories with, ranking the wolf as part of their spirituality.

As history played out, and as we know today, the old world overwhelmed the new world and generally “won” the battle of cultures. In 1849, a bounty system for wolves was instated in Minnesota, and each pelt brought a trapper $3. ⁷ By 1965 all bounties ended in Minnesota, and by this time a wolf pelt brought $35. ⁸ During the time between 1849 and 1965 hundreds of small events around the nation, and within Minnesota itself, helped turn the table for co-existence with nature and the rehabilitation of populations of all sorts of flora and fauna. Beginning in 1914, predator control became a national policy. ⁹ In all respects, it had been a non-legislative national policy before hand. In Minnesota from 1945 until 1964 it was legal under the bounty program for citizens to obtain permits to shoot wolves from airplanes. But, in the 1950s aerial shooting was eliminated over the Boundary Waters Canoe Area (BWCA). ⁹ This can be considered a pre-cursor to management, as ecologists, biologists and some of the private citizens were calling for strict policy to protect the dwindling natural beauty of Minnesota, and the sportsmanship found here. Several factors in the history of Minnesota wolf eradication are exclusively Minnesotan. While wolf populations in the southern prairie areas had been hunted drastically due to the excellent line of sight for hunters, by the 1900s only some wolves could be found in the area. ¹⁰ Though, most of the population was found in the northern Coniferous forests. ¹¹ Other factors present that affected the wolf populations in Minnesota at the time, while in other places they had been eradicated, were due to the industries of northern Minnesota. Farming was uncommon in the forested areas while mining, tourism, and logging were the big businesses, and these types of industry do not have special reasons to kill wolves, as compared with farmers. ¹³

In 1966 a pre-cursor to the Endangered Species Act (1973), called the Endangered Species Preservation act, classified the wolf of Minnesota endangered in 1967. ¹⁴ Because of the previous laws banning aerial hunting in the BWCA, the fact that federal lands were now havens for wolves was not too much to ask from the Minnesotan people – partial protections had already been in place, and fairly accepted for more than a decade. Minnesota Legislature authorized a predator control program in 1969, which is unlike the bounty program in that authorized agents are allowed to remove wolves only from certain areas under certain conditions. These trappers were paid $50 per wolf. ¹⁵ Wolf management zones soon cut the state into two areas. The first or Zone A is found in northeastern Minnesota, the Arrowhead region, considered to be prime wolf habitat, and wolves are protected to the fullest extent. The second or Zone B is the rest of the state where wolves can live, but are not necessarily desired. Both areas allow private citizens to protect their own lives, livestock, and pets, but Zone A only allows for short windows of state administered wolf control, whereas Zone B has licensed trappers to remove problem wolves lethally. ¹⁶ Decades of population studies have occurred in since the Endangered Species Act. These studies are important for many factors including the need to know how wolf populations are doing, how the prey populations are doing, how disease and parasites are moving through the populations, and to be able to manage conflicts between humans and wolves.

Each wolf takes between 18-20 adult deer through the year, averaging out at 40,000 a year. Compared to deer hunters who have taken between 60,000-80,000 deer during a similar time span. ¹⁷ Deer populations can be drastically hurt during extreme cold weather years, not only because predators kill them, but also because food becomes scarce and they can starve to death, which makes them better targets. On the reverse side, mild winters do not help wolf populations, because the fawns’ physical conditions are increased and are able to flee attacks by wolves. ¹⁸ Loggers have helped wolf populations grow because they clear areas that becomes prime deer habitat. With expanded habitat, mild winters, and better management, deer populations hit all time record highs in the 1990s, which in effect helped wolf restorations because, not only was there abundant food, but also myths surrounding the idea that wolves would wipe out deer populations were debunked. ¹⁹

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) wolf population survey of 1978-79 estimated a population of 2,450 wolves in an estimated 385 packs statewide. This is up from the mid 1970s population count by David L. Mech, which counted between 1,000 and 1,200 wolves. ²⁰ This is several hundred more than the minimum population goal of 1,600 set by the Wolf Management plan of 2001. Coinciding with these population counts, the Endangered Species Act prohibited the killing of depredating wolves, as an alternative they were relocated, unaffecting the survival of the offending wolves. ²¹

In the year of 1978, not only were wolves in Minnesota reclassified from endangered to threatened, but the Minnesota Legislature also enacted a state compensation program for confirmed wolf depredations. ²² The depredation plans set forth from this act have attempted with all their might to allow humans and wolves to co-exist with minimal lasting hurt to either side. In theory, this is not a complicated idea, but it is complicated in the field. Wolf complaints are categorized as: 1. Confirmed complaints require evidence of wolves with canine puncture marks on the depredated livestock, wolf scat, and wolf tracks. 2. Probable complaints have inconclusive evidence of wolf tracks, scat, or evidence on the kill itself. 3. Confirmed non-wolf complaints are determined that another species took the depredated animal.  4. Unconfirmed complaints do not meet any of the above criteria. Also, complaints about wolves harassing livestock, perceived threats to human safety and property, and nuisance animals have been recorded. ²³ This act of compensation is a symbolic gesture to the heritage of farming in Minnesota. With enough prey, and state of the art animal husbandry techniques, depredations by wolves and other predators can be curtailed. Those who are in charge understand the mentality of the minority, those who have to battle between profits and predators, and also the emotional response given by those who see the wolf as a symbol of the wild – a beautiful creature who should come above humans in the scale of needs. This symbolic gesture does come with a high price. Between 1977 and 2006 in the state of Minnesota, $1,206,228.52 was paid out to farmers suffering from depredation of livestock. ²⁴ The amounts paid throughout the years go up and down as farmers are entitled to fair market payments, and the prices of livestock rise and fall at regular intervals. There is also a correlation between livestock killed in one depredation event and the livestock’s size. During the months of April through October, cattle are put out to pasture to calve and depredation incidents usually range between 1-2 calves. When wolves come in contact with free-ranging poultry, the numbers go up to between 50 and 300 animals lost in one night. ²⁵ During the years of 1975 through 2006, as part of the wolf depredation management, 2,991 wolves were captured and removed from depredation areas, while in 1978 through 2006, 2,656 wolves were killed, ranging from 2 to 216 wolves annually. ²⁶ Even with these high problem wolf removal strategies, this does not mean that wolf depredation on livestock is an epidemic. Some wolf packs live near livestock without ever depredating them, while proportionately few packs cause depredations. ²⁷

The history of the Minnesotan wolf comes from the population of Canadian wolves. Since animals can freely move between our two countries, this has helped the fact that when gray wolves only inhabited 3% of their former range in the lower 48, they still called northern Minnesota home. ²⁸ The Superior National Forest, bordering Canada, has been a huge factor. The revival of wolf numbers in Minnesota prompted Wisconsin officials to draft a management plan, and more or less waited for dispersers from Minnesota packs to cross their border and call Wisconsin home. In 1974, four Minnesota wolves were relocated to Michigan. Within one year all of them were dead, due to human or vehicle deaths. ²⁹ This is when Michigan decided to take the same steps that Wisconsin did – wait until their neighbor had a good sized population and wolves moved in naturally.

Originally, the intent of the Wolf Management Plan of 2001 in Minnesota had very specific goals within it, population, range, and prey abundance near the top of the list, which must be met for five successive years for the federal agencies to return control over the wolf to the state. ³⁰ This has been achieved many times over even with changes made to the plan in the last decade, namely upping the minimal population of wolves within the state. Many private organizations attack attempts at de-listing the wolf and in so giving control back to the states, Minnesota included. While it does seem that Minnesota has its act together and would have a very high success rate if they were in complete control of their wolves, many states are not working in favor of the wolves. It can be theorized, since this history is still in the making, that outside organizations do not have faith in several wolf management areas outside of Minnesota, and that giving one state the right to manage its resources would have a domino effect and states that are not ready for the task would fall into step too soon for their own struggling wolf populations.

A full out war on wolves is not really a Minnesotan style. States further to the west completely resist any predators in their mainly agricultural lands. Their wars have been what some consider unethical. In 1905, Montana cattlemen forced the passage of a bill that mandated veterinarians to infect wolves with mange and release them to infect others. ³¹ A chemical called strychnine was also a common poison used for predators, namely wolves, which killed everything that ingested it. The last wolf that called Wyoming home was killed in 1943, while the last two wolf pups were destroyed in 1924. ³² These simple acts strengthen the opinion that the collective United States mentality is not ready to have complete control over its resource, the wolf. The battle of the future is not only at a state level, but at a cultural level too. Even today, the rebound of the wolf has great meaning to the Ojibwe people, who believe their future is intertwined with that of the wolf. ³³ These people may disagree entirely with Minnesota state management of the wolf, because the animal is not only a resource, but also a spiritual being going back to their creation, and considered a brother.

Even now, there is no real definitive outlook on what will happen to the Minnesota wolf. Recently, federal funding has been pulled for depredation programs, but it is still so uncertain, it is not even credible to cite such sources yet. This cut does not just include the wolf that calls Minnesota home, but many other subspecies are put into complete peril by these budget cuts, and in such a way that speculation says that this could be the end for these animals that still need special consideration. There is still confidence that Minnesota is ready to be given control of their wolves, but as Minnesota is the frontline for much of the research and ideals when it comes to wolf management, it has set very high standards. The plight of wolves in Minnesota has been a long road, and it will continue to get longer. Even though there is a lot of history behind the rehabilitation of wolf populations in the state, it is easy to imagine that the most exciting history is yet to be written.

End Notes

Secondary Sources

1. Curt Meine, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 2.
2. John Erb and Michael W. DonCarlos, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 53.
3. Peter David, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 267-268.
4. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 81.
5. Curt Meine, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 2-3.
6. Peter David, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 268.
7. International Wolf Center, Gray Wolf Timeline for the Contiguous United States (International Wolf Center, website)
8. William Berg and Todd Fuller, Wolf Population Expansion in Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, website)
9. Curt Meine, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 3.
10. John Erb and Michael W. DonCarlos, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 50.
11. International Wolf Center, Gray Wolf Timeline for the Contiguous United States (International Wolf Center, website)
12. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 81.
13. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 82.
14. John Erb and Michael W. DonCarlos, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 49.
15. John Erb and Michael W. DonCarlos, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 51.
16. Minnesota DNR, Minnesota Wolf Management Plan (Minnesota DNR, website, 2001)
17. William Berg and Todd Fuller, Wolf Population Expansion in Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, website)
18. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 280.
19. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 84.
20. William Berg and Todd Fuller, Wolf Population Expansion in Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, website)
21. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 286.
22. International Wolf Center, Gray Wolf Timeline for the Contiguous United States (International Wolf Center, website)
23. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 280.
24. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 290.
25. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 281.
26. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 287, 228.
27. David B. Ruid, William J. Paul, Brian J. Roell, Adrian P. Wydeven, Robert C. Willging, Randy L. Jurewicz and David H. Lonsway Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 281.
28. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 82.
29. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 82.
30. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 83.
31. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 100.
32. Steve Grooms, Return of the Wolf (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005), 101.
33. Curt Meine, Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009), 276.

Bibliography

Berg, William, and Todd Fuller. “Wolf Population Expansion in Minnesota.” International Wolf Center. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources , n.d. Web. 12 March 2011. <http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/intermed/inter_population/mn.asp>.

“Gray Wolf Timeline for the Contiguous United States.” International Wolf Center. International Wolf Center, n.d. Web. 12 March 2011. <http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/wow/regions/United_States_Subpages/History1.asp>.

Grooms, Steve, Return of the Wolf, (Nova Vista Publishing, 2005).

Minnesota. Minnesota Wolf Management Plan. Minnesota DNR, 2001. Web. 11 March 2011. <http://www.fws.gov/midwest/wolf/stateplans/pdf/mn-wolf-plan-01.pdf>.

Wydeven, Adrian P., Van Deelen, Timothy R., Heske, Edward J., editors. Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States, (New York: Springer Science + Business Media, 2009).

March Matchness – dollar for dollar to support the Wildlife Science Center!

The Wildlife Science Center, located near Forest Lake, Minnesota needs your help. Some very generous donors have come together to offer a $15,000 match program. That means for ever dollar you spend, it is matched 100% – up to FIFTEEN THOUSAND!

From their website:

The Wildlife Science Center is an independent non-profit organization located 30 minutes north of the Twin Cities. We were established as a non-profit organization in 1991 after a 15-year history as a federally-funded wolf research center, the “Wolf Project.” When the federal funds ended, some of the existing staff chose to assume financial responsibility for the 30+ wolves living here at the time. Staff increased in number, and the diversity of the animal collection expanded to include black bears, raptors, bobcats, gray fox, critically endangered red and Mexican gray wolves.

http://www.wildlifesciencecenter.org/