- Our next speaker
is
David Ruid
from, uh, USDA-APHIS.
And he's gonna talk about
integrated predator
management concepts.
Thank you, David.
- Thanks, Otto.
Thanks for having--
having me here today.
Thanks for coming here today.
Probably the bluegills
are moving up
into the shallows right now,
and...
[audience groans]
[laughing]
[indistinct chatter]
It'd be a good day
to be out there.
I want to recognize my colleague
Eric Fromm.
Eric Fromm does
the lion's share
of wolf and bear work
in northwest Wisconsin,
including Washburn County.
So, Eric, raise your hand.
Thank you.
Yeah, so we'll get going,
uh, lickety-split.
So when we're talking
about livestock predators
in the state of Wisconsin,
pr
imarily we're dealing
with wolves, black bears,
an
d coyotes.
Very rarely
we
'll have bobcats maybe kill
a lamb or domestic fowl,
bu
t typically speaking--
this is Cow-Calf Workshop,
when we're talking about
co
w-calf wildlife predation,
we're dealing with wolves,
bl
ack bears, and coyotes
in the state of Wisconsin.
And I'm primarily gonna talk
ab
out gray wolves today
and-- and our program
in dealing with--
wi
th gray wolf conflicts
in Wisconsin.
This is a-- this-- this map
of
the U.S. represents--
those green areas represent
wh
at most people feel
is suitable wolf habit
in
the 48 states.
The black polygons represent
th
ose suitable habitat areas
that currently
ar
e occupied by wolves.
And most recently,
wh
at we have seen is,
there is now
a
breeding pack of wolves
that have moved
in
to California.
Eastern Washington, Oregon
have recently
been colonized by wolves.
So we're getting upwards
of ten states
that have wolves in them,
and there is
some unoccupied
suitable habitat
that still exists
up in the Northeast.
But as you can see,
our population of wolves
is contiguous
with the three states.
And keep in mind,
from a biological perspective,
our gray wolf population
is classified
as a federally endangered
specie.
Remember, this is a contiguous
population of wolves
that extends
to the Arctic Circle.
That population
is 70,000 to 80,000,
maybe 90,000 animals
that exists
from central Wisconsin
up into the northern latitudes
of Canada and Alaska.
So we-- we'll talk about
nonlethal abatement techniques
to try to resolve predator--
predator problems,
and one of--
you go back in time,
this isn't a relatively
recent phenomenon.
You go back to 1717;
in the Cape Cod region
of
Massachusetts,
there was
a
proposed wolf fence
to protect livestock
fr
om predators,
and that would have been
be
ars, wolves, and coyotes,
but in 1717,
pe
ople were thinking about,
"How do I exclude my livestock
fr
om predators?"
And interestingly enough,
this proposal
th
at was put forth,
it failed from complaints
from the unprotected neighbors
ou
tside the fence
who didn't want the wolves
sh
ut out on them,
and the proposal was
a
six-foot-high board fence.
Another technique that was used
wa
s vegetation management.
Woods burning was used
to reduce vegetative cover
ne
ar livestock.
There's an example of that
in
the literature from 1928,
uh, in Arkansas.
And I would imagine
a
lot of these techniques--
they were used in conjunction
with lethal control,
but nevertheless, these were
some nonlethal efforts
to separate livestock
from predators.
Some of the most early
scientific literature
pertaining to this topic was
from the USDA Forest Service
in 1908
when they developed
a
predator-proof fence
in Oregon
on
a 2,500-acre pasture,
and their results found that
they could successfully
fe
nce livestock
from pre-- from coyotes,
bu
t it was unsuccessful
in dealing with grizzly bears
an
d black bears,
and I would suspect
th
at this
was probably in an era
when wolves had likely
be
en extirpated
from this particular region.
And how about this
fo
r a farm labor rate?
Um, three bucks a day
pe
r eight hours.
[indistinct chatter]
And what we've seen, folks,
when wolves began to colonize
the state of Wisconsin,
they colonized some of
the best suitable wolf habitat
in the state,
and these were big blocks
of contiguous public land
that had very, very little
agriculture in it,
and there was
very little conflict
between wolves and livestock
in this earlier era
of wolf recovery--
recolonization in Wisconsin,
you know,
which was occurring
from 1980 to, oh, the mid 1990s.
But what we started to see is,
this wolf population expanded.
They started to set--
establish territories
in
areas
that were becoming
mo
re fragmented.
It wasn't the big blocks
of
contiguous forestland.
As you can see--
th
is black polygon represents
a wolf pack territory,
and those open areas,
th
at's agriculture.
The north end of the wolf pack
wa
s forested public land,
and the southern fringe
of
that particular pack,
um, started to--
[s
tammers]
It was fragmented
an
d had livestock production,
so around the mid to late '90s,
we
were starting to see
wolf packs establishing
in
these areas,
and we really started to see
a
consistent trend
in wolves
ki
lling livestock annually.
And then,
as
late as 2010, 2013,
this is an actual example
of a wolf pack territory
in
Marathon County,
and you can see,
pr
edominately,
that pack's territory
is
agricultural land,
a lot of it being row crop,
but there is livestock
pr
oduction included in that.
So as this-- as this
really suitable habitat
ha
s been saturated,
we're starting to see
wo
lves spilling out
of the northern forest,
ce
ntral forest,
and establishing territories
in
this--
what we would call
un
suitable habitat,
because generally speaking,
when we do see wolves
colonize areas like this,
there's going to be conflicts
with livestock.
When we're investigating
wolf complaints,
we have to put these complaints
into four categories.
And this comes from the--
the Wisconsin
Wolf Management Plan,
and state law drives
compensation in the state,
and so we have to package
wolf complaints
that we received from you
into these four categories,
and they're confirmed,
probable,
confirmed non-wolf--
th
at would--
a confirmed non-wolf complaint
wo
uld be, for instance,
a farmer calls us out
ab
out wolves killing a calf,
and the evidence suggests
it
was coyotes
that caused the depredation.
Or unconfirmed.
It doesn't mean we don't know
th
e reason the calf died.
It just means we know
wo
lves didn't kill the calf.
The interesting thing
ab
out this photograph,
if you notice,
th
ere's a magpie in it.
Eric took this picture
wi
th a trail camera,
and it has a magpie
in
Douglas County.
- [chuckles]
Th
at is rare.
[indistinct chatter]
- So when we're
in
vestigating complaints,
if you call us out to
in
vestigate a wolf complaint,
the policy says:
Ca
ll you back in 24 hours,
and if there is
a
livestock animal
in reasonable condition
to
examine,
we have to investigate it
within 48 hours.
Generally speaking,
by the time
we receive a complaint
and we have boots on the ground
looking at whatever it is
that was called in
is within the day--
oftentimes,
less than three to four hours.
In the summer months,
especially now
when things
are starting to heat up,
it's very, very important
for us to get there
as quickly as possible
so we can assess that evidence
before decomposition
is occurring.
Scavenging-- you know,
eagles and ravens and crows,
they consume an awful lot of
a depredated livestock animal,
and every time they consume
that carcass,
we're losing evidence
to classify it
into one of those
four categories.
So every complaint
has a very detailed report
that accompanies it.
And while we're out there,
we have to make sure
we're actually
looking at predation.
You know,
was the calf stillborn
and simply scavenged
by predators,
or was it born alive
and killed?
So things we're looking for
is manure on the hoof,
maybe its ear tag,
it has a emasculating band,
so we know that
th
e animal was born alive
and we're actually dealing
wi
th predation
and not just scavenging.
'Cause producers aren't paid
for wolves
sc
avenging on livestock,
only if they depredate
li
vestock.
While we're there
in
vestigating complaint,
the evidence we're looking for,
you know, are-- are wolf--
or
predator tracks.
Wolf tracks,
ge
nerally speaking,
they're 4 inches long
by
3 1/2 inches wide.
Coyote tracks are much smaller.
Uh, wolf scats--
th
ere's a big difference
between wolf scat biomass
and coyote scat,
and generally speaking,
when we're dealing with bears,
there's a lot of vegetation
in bear scat
and not so much
in predator scat.
You know, we're looking at
where the animal was attacked.
The calf on the right,
bitten dorsally
ov
er the vertebrae,
that's very classic of wolves
ki
lling young livestock,
calves that are, you know,
le
ss than three months of age.
Coyotes typically
won't do that.
The calf on the lower left
with that ventral neck bite,
that's pretty signature
of where coyotes
might attack
a livestock animal.
And the calf
on the upper left,
that was-- that was
a newborn beef calf--
Red Angus calf
that was attacked by coyotes
in the flank region,
and they-- they simply
ki
lled the animal
by stress, blood loss,
sh
ock, and trauma.
So the--
I mean, when we're out there
and we're looking
at dead livestock,
these are the things
that we're--
that we're looking for
and looking at
to make sure
we classify it correctly.
We also look at
the canine puncture space
in the hide
of a depredated animal.
The lower right, you can see
the spacing of that
is about a inch and 1/2,
in
ch and 3/4.
That's very signature
of
a wolf bite.
Fairly large diameter
pu
ncture holes--
3/8 of an inch
ge
nerally speaking.
Inch and 1/2 or greater is--
is very signature
of a wolf bite,
and you can see
all the hemorrhaging
and shock and trauma
and blood loss.
That's evidence that
obviously this animal was alive
when it was bit.
And that just represents
the canine tooth spacing
of a wolf right there
in
that image.
It's about an inch and 5/8.
Another technique that
we
've used--
sometimes successfully,
so
metimes unsuccessfully--
we can collect saliva or tissue
around those
canine puncture holes,
and submit it to our National
Wildlife Research Center.
And they can actually
try to get genetic material
from the saliva
and classify by specie
what saliva that has came--
what sal--
what specie
that saliva came from.
It's been used successfully.
It's not 100%.
I would say right now,
it's about 50/50.
Carcass location,
consumption, drag trail,
how much of the animal
wa
s consumed.
If we know
wh
en it was killed,
we know when you found it,
ho
w much of it was consumed?
Is it improbable for a coyote
to have consumed that much,
or
a bear?
Or how big--
ho
w large of an animal is it?
And was it dragged?
I mean, coyotes don't have
the ability
to drag carcasses
as well as wolves or bears,
and maybe it was cached.
It's not uncommon
for bears to cover prey items.
Maybe it was a fawn
or a livestock carcass...
[stammers]
Or, uh, a roadkill.
They'll drag a roadkill deer
off the edge of the highway
and then cache it
with vegetation.
Wolves occasionally
will do that
but fairly infrequently.
So when wolf recovery...
[clears throat]
Was occurring from the '80s
into the-- into the '90s
and the early 2000s
is when we started to see
the number of wolf complaints
increasing.
Those blue bars represent
wolf complaints
we
've received
in the state of Wisconsin
where we actually went out
an
d investigated.
Those red bars represent
th
ose complaints
that we classified
as
confirmed or probable.
And obviously,
th
e black line
is the trend
of
the gray wolf population.
So there is a very strong
st
atistical relationship
that says,
as
wolves recovered
and their population increased,
so did complaints
an
d verified complaints.
Some people have argued
th
at necessarily more wolves
does not mean
mo
re complaints.
In the state of Wisconsin,
there's a strong correlation
that it does mean that.
But-- this is important.
These are the confirmed
and probable
wolf complaints
we
've received since 2003.
So 2003, we have 35 verif--
confirmed or probable
wo
lf complaints.
In 2003, the wolf population,
the minimum count
wa
s about 350 animals.
And today, in--
la
st year, in 2015,
we had 91 confirmed or probable
wo
lf complaints,
but if you look at roughly
a
ten-year average,
that trend is beginning
to
stabilize somewhat,
but there's nuances to this
be
cause there's been
on again/off again
ma
nagement scenarios
based on the federal status
of
wolves,
and also the new--
the state had the authority
in '12, '13, and '14
to have a recreational
wolf harvest season,
and we had an integrated program
where we were--
had the authority
to lethally remove wolves
that were causing depredations
on farms.
So in 2015, while investigating
wolf complaints,
we confirmed 46 of those
an
d another 10% as probable.
So over 50%
of
the investigations
that we conducted
were classified
as
confirmed or probable,
and 17% of those
we
re confirmed as non-wolf.
And generally speaking,
wh
en it's a non-wolf complaint,
it's usually, coyotes
ha
ve killed a beef calf.
These beef calves are fairly
vu
lnerable to coyote predation
that first day or two
of their life.
And resource categories--
while we're investigating
complaints, beef cattle
makes up the majority of it
by
over 50%.
50% of the conflicts
th
at we're looking at
relates
to
cow-calf producers.
Dairy cattle is a fairly
si
gnificant portion at 12%,
and then the next biggest
co
mponent
is dogs and hunting dogs.
Someone asked about a map
of wolf conflicts
in
the state.
You know, I get
th
is is kind of a wide scale,
but in 2015,
those larger red dots
re
present
those confirmed
an
d probable conflicts.
The smaller dots represent
th
e confirmed non-wolf
or the unconfirmed complaints
in
the state.
And as you can see, it's mostly
a
northern forest system
in the northern
wo
lf harvest zones,
uh, some
in
the central forest,
and then some scattered out.
Notably is Crawford County
in
southwest Wisconsin.
A pack of wolves
ha
s established themselves
down there, and they have
de
predated livestock
two years in a row now.
Um, in 2015,
we investigated wolf complaints
in 35 counties.
And we verified
or classified them
as confirmed or probable
in 23 counties of the state.
You know, this is-- this is
an important statistic
that we really keep track of
in our program,
and that's the number of farms
in
the state
where we verify wolves
ha
ve killed livestock.
[clears throat]
Th
is excludes fowl.
This is looking at sheep,
cattle-- dairy cattle,
be
ef cattle-- possibly horses.
Horse depredations
ar
e relatively rare,
but, um, in 2010,
wa
s the most farms
that we had ever verified
wo
lf depredations on at 47,
and then you can see
th
at trend started to decline
from 47 to 40
to
32 to 28,
and during--
in
2012, '13, and '14,
we had the recreational harvest
of
wolves in the state,
and our program had
th
e authority
to not only implement
nonlethal abatement on farms
to try to prevent
wolf depredations;
we had the authority
to set equipment on property,
and any wolves captured
would be euthanized.
So in 2012,
we had euthanized 57 wolves
that were causing conflict
on different farms,
and producers,
through shooting permits
and provisions of NR10.02
that allow livestock producers
to shoot wolves that are
actively attacking livestock,
you know, there was
an additional 17 animals removed
in 2012, in addition
to the 57 that we removed.
So we were beginning
to remove wolves
that had become associated
with depredating livestock,
and we started to see
the number of farms
that wolves were
killing livestock on decrease.
2014 was the last year
of recreational wolf harvest
and lethal control
for livestock depredation
protection,
and that number of farms
jumped up to 32 last year.
[stammers]
So as a livestock producer,
there's seasonal variation
in when you might
expect wolves
to depredate livestock,
especially
cow-calf producers.
Beginning in January
th
rough March,
it's a relatively rare event.
You don't have many
sm
all animals on the farm.
All your big animals
ar
e up around the hay ring
near the buildings,
an
d they're just--
they're not very vulnerable.
You know, but what happens,
as
soon as--
as soon as you start to calve
and pasture greens up,
your herds get dispersed
on
pasture;
they're in more remote areas
of
the farm.
You have young animals.
You have wolves
on
the landscape.
We start to see the uptick
in
depredation
starting in end of March,
fi
rst of April,
and then
ar
ound the middle of May,
end of May, it kind of peaks,
and then it starts
to
drop off.
And what's occurring is,
fa
wning has occurred,
and we see a decrease
in the rate of wolves
de
predating livestock
when they switch over
and there's this new
fo
od resource that's available
on the landscape,
an
d that's deer fawns.
And so we see this--
th
is bimodal relationship
where livestock conflicts
get a little slower
in
June, July,
but as soon as we begin
to
approach August,
end of July, first of August,
middle of August,
the wolf pups are weaned;
they're away from the dens.
They're old enough
to travel with the adults,
and you can possibly
end up with
an entire pack of wolves
that are called
"rendezvousing,"
or they have a rendezvous site
near your farm.
The bioenergetics
of the wolf pack
is increased tremendously
'cause you not only have
the two breeders
that need sustenance
for survival;
the pups are also old enough
to where they're depending
on meat for sustenance,
and we see these
depredations increasing
in August and September,
and then towards
the middle to end of October,
it starts to decline again,
and, you know,
pasture could be
froze off by that point;
maybe your feeder calves
have been shipped.
The vulnerability--
the number of vulnerable animals
out there
just starts to decline,
and this rate of depredation
drops off
to where when we get into
November--
late November, December,
it becomes
a fairly rare event.
What we have seen
when livestock producers
do
have wolves
on their farms
la
te in the year
and depredations are occurring,
those can be significant issues
fo
r that producer,
'cause those wolves are--
[c
lears throat]
They're going to spend time
at
that farm hunting livestock
because they've become
ac
climated to doing it.
And, you know,
wh
at predisposes
an individual farmer
to
a livestock depredation--
you know, I said earlier,
th
ere's 32 farms last year
that we verified
wo
lves killing livestock on.
We know that
it
occurs more than that.
[clears throat]
Th
ey may kill a calf,
consume it, and the producer's
ne
ver aware that--
why the calf is missing;
th
at has happened.
So that number of farms
is
higher than 32,
but what predisposes a farm
to
wolf predation
in Wisconsin is, generally,
it
's a larger farm,
usually has, you know,
50 to a few hundred
he
ad of cattle on it,
more remote pastures,
and what happens,
th
ese farms are just
positioned on the landscape
wh
ere they butt up
next to really good
wo
lf habitat.
And this is an aerial image
out of an aircraft
flying from Ashland
down along Highway 13.
So this would be right around
Marengo, High Bridge,
York area
lo
oking south,
and you can see
th
at pastureland right there,
but that blue haze
in
the background
is the Great Divide
Ra
nger District
of the national forest.
There's county forest land
th
ere.
And there's
ab
out a half a million acres
of really good wolf habitat
right up next to
th
is livestock production area,
and there's a lot
of
cow-calf operations
in this area.
And you simply have
fo
ur strands of barbed wire
separating your animals
from some of the best
wolf habitat in the state,
and that's not-- that's not
an abatement strategy.
Your fences are designed
to confine livestock.
They're not designed to keep
predators out of your pastures.
And, you know,
farm size can range--
the biggest producer
we deal with is--
he's got--
uh, about 1,200 acres.
And generally speaking,
on a farm, and, uh--
generally speaking--
there are exceptions,
but the average number of calves
killed per farm
using our statistics
is around two calves per farm.
There are situations,
as you can see,
where one particular farm,
we verify--
we verified
12 calves were killed.
That particular producer
had a fairly large
missing livestock claim
that year also.
[clears throat]
Cattle depredated by wolves.
Um, since they were listed
as an endangered specie
ba
ck in 1975,
we have verified
wo
lves have killed
661 head of cattle
in
the state.
Last year, it was 46.
Something that's not
ta
lked about
but is very important
are these
no
n-depredation impacts
that wolves can have
on
livestock production.
And, you know, Mr. Link
hi
t the nail on the head.
The instance--
in
2015,
there was an incident
on
that particular property
where we didn't have
go
od abatement strategies,
and the best solution was
just to move the cattle
of
f of the--
off of that pasture.
And, to me,
wh
en that is the solution,
the program has failed,
because we weren't able
to resolve that conflict
using just nonlethal techniques.
We need to have
an integrated approach
to resolving livestock
depredations from wolves.
But some of these
non-predation-related impacts
that wolves have had
on livestock production
includes weight loss.
That Ramler et al. 2014 paper
is a scientific
peer-reviewed paper
that looked at ranches
in Montana
and compared feeder calf weights
at the end of the season
on farms that had
wolf depredations
and on farms that didn't have
wolf depredations,
and those farms that had
wolf depredations,
their calf weights
were 26 pounds lighter
than the ranches
without depredations,
and, you know, that year,
if you look at, you know,
26 pounds per calf
at a couple of bucks a pound,
that adds up to real money
really quick.
I mean, and these are impacts
that aren't compensated for.
Increased cattle vigilance,
that Kluever paper,
looked at cow-calf herds
in the Southwest,
in Arizona and New Mexico,
that were exposed
to the Mexican gray wolf,
and those animals...
[clears throat]
Those animals
on those allotments
that had
the presence of wolves
spent more time looking for--
presumably for predators
than herds that didn't have
wolves on the allotment.
Meaning,
they spent more time grazing,
putting weight on.
I mean, that's the goal
of cow-calf production.
Cattle--
very difficult to handle,
that have been hunted
by
wolves.
Cattle have been stampeded
th
rough fences.
There's the potential
of
a disease transmitted
between wolves--
ot
her canids.
Coyotes, farm dogs,
fo
xes, and wolves
can transmit
Neospora caninum,
which can result
in
the cow aborting a fetus.
Um, fence damage,
and time spent
se
arching for depredations.
You know, these are some
of these secondary impacts
that folks like you
can have
when wolves start
hunting livestock on your farm.
So some nonlethal concepts.
Disruptive stimuli--
th
is is, you know,
an undesirable stimuli
to
prevent or alter
the behavior of an animal,
to try to frighten it away.
Aversive stimuli--
stimuli that cause
di
scomfort or pain
that's paired
wi
th a specific behavior.
When we talk
ab
out nonlethal concepts,
these are kind of
th
e two boxes that we look at
when we're trying
to
prevent wolves
from killing livestock.
And some of those
te
chniques are fladry--
and we'll go over these
wh
en we go out to--
when we go out
to
the Radzak farm.
Fladry,
ra
ndomly activated lights,
electronic guards,
ra
dio-activated guards,
and scare wires.
The image on the left,
that's a scare wire
on
a cow-calf operation.
It's placed between the ground
an
d the bottom barbed wired,
and it's electrified
with 12-volt fencers,
so
lar Parmak fencers,
or some other fencers.
Fairly high voltage.
It's a technique
th
at we're using
on a particular farm
th
at has
a huge history
of
wolf conflicts
to prevent wolves
fr
om accessing pastures.
The image on the right,
that's some of our staff
in
stalling fladry
on a farm in Douglas County
that had wolf depredations
in
2015.
In 2015, we had 17 major
no
nlethal projects.
We installed 16--
al
most 16 1/2 miles of fladry.
We put these
ra
dio-activated guards--
and you'll see these
th
is afternoon--
out on three different
pr
operties,
installed over six miles
of
electrified poly-tape,
used electronic guards
and various livestock husbandry
re
commendations.
You know, and some
an
imal husbandry practices
that might help prevent
wo
lf depredations--
you know, changing pastures,
ni
ght penning,
changing birthing dates,
an
d fencing.
Some other
no
nlethal approaches
that have been used
in
the past
has been actually
th
e sterilization of wolves.
They felt
if
they weren't breeding
and they weren't raising pups,
the energy demands of the pack
would be suppressed,
and therefore they wouldn't
depredate livestock.
It wasn't proven scientifically
with wolves,
but it was a technique
used in Utah
with coyotes,
where they were able
to actually reduce
rates of predation on lambs
from sterilized coyote pairs.
Translocation
of problem wolves--
that was a technique we used
prior to 2003.
There was
33 different wolves
that were caught from farms
that were suffering
depredations from wolves,
and we moved these
long distances
and released them.
It didn't prove to be
a very successful technique
because the majority
of these animals died
within the first six months
of them being released,
but what it did do is,
it stimulated nine county boards
to pass resolutions
not wanting us or the--
or the state of Wisconsin
releasing wolves
in those counties.
So it-- it was
a unpopular technique.
- [chuckles]
Yeah.
- That's an image
of a radio-activated guard.
It's got a strobe light
an
d some sirens,
and it's activated
by
the presence
of a radio-collared wolf.
So it's more
of
an interactive tool.
It's not going off all night.
We know if the stimuli
is going off repeatedly
and consistently,
animals will habituate to that
fairly quickly.
But this is--
it's an interaction--
it's an interaction
based on proximity
between wolves and this box
from its radio collar
where it sends a signal,
and it activates the device.
Potentially,
calving nearer buildings
might be something--
a recommendation
th
at you might consider.
It doesn't prove
to
be 100% effective.
We've had wolves kill livestock
ve
ry near buildings,
so to say
th
at this is foolproof
would be inaccurate,
but it's something
th
at you might consider.
And Mike will talk
mo
re specifically
about guarding animals.
You know,
I'
ve talked about
the importance of having
an
integrated approach
to resolving wolf conflicts.
And right now,
with the federal classification
of
wolves
as federally endangered,
we can only try
to prevent depredations
for folks like you using
nonlethal abatement techniques.
And this is a scenario
that happened in 2010
in Douglas
and Bayfield County.
This is-- that black line
represents
the summer territory
of a wolf
that Eric had radio-collared
in an attempt to use
a radio-activated guard,
and I'll just walk you through
wh
at happens.
And so the green represents
fo
rested cover.
The beige is-- is some type
of
agriculture,
and the blue's
se
lf-explanatory;
in the top of the screen
is
Lake Superior.
So on May 10th,
we
had wolves kill a calf.
You know, we applied
so
me nonlethal technique
to try to abate that situation,
try to prevent wolves
fr
om killing other calves.
Well, it worked there
fo
r a few weeks,
but over on a neighboring farm,
th
ey killed a calf.
So we applied some nonlethal
ab
atement there.
It's fladry, flashing lights,
or
electronic guards.
And then on the 15th of July,
we had a farmer report
wo
lves harassing livestock.
We verified that, so we did
pr
oactive nonlethal abatement
trying to prevent
an
y depredations
and these secondary effects
that wolves might pose
on
a particular farm.
So on the second of August,
they depredated livestock
on the north edge
of
the summer territory,
so we applied
no
nlethal abatement there.
And then on 8/19,
they actually depredated
li
vestock on the farm
where we had already applied
th
is nonlethal abatement,
so that didn't prove
to
be successful.
And then in September,
another depredation
on
an adjacent farm,
another one
a
couple of days later.
[stammers]
At this point, we're trying
ev
erything that we can try.
This is--
th
is is the era
when wolves
ar
e federally lifted,
and we don't have
th
e authority to remove them,
so...
Another depredation occurs
on
the 30th of September,
the 10th of Oct--
or
the 11th of October,
the 30th of October.
Without the authority
and the ability to have
an integrated approach,
that's not
successful wolf management.
Spreading the problem
from one producer to another
isn't successful.
And at that point, those animals
had become so habituated
to these nonlethal techniques
that none of them
were being successful.
And I would argue,
if you want to talk
about wolf conservation
and these
conservation strategies,
that-- that pack of wolves
did nothing to support
wolf recovery
and wolf conservation
when everybody in the community
is having problems with them.
Eric, would you like
to add anything
to that experience?
- No.
[laughter]
- It was a difficult summer.
- How many of those wolves
died accidentally?
- [laughs]
- Pardon me?
[laughter]
- How many of those wolves
died accidentally?
- Uh, I don't know.
- Do you refuse to answer?
- I forget-- that was W-757,
and I think--
maybe that winter,
it went off of the air.
I forget what happened to it.
But that is-- that is
a real-life example.
I think that's
a fairly compelling story that--
that trying
to resolve these conflicts
with nonlethal abatement
strategies--
although, we can select a farm--
maybe it's a single farm.
It's isolated.
It's relatively small.
We can stop wolf depredations
to livestock
with these nonlethal tools
relatively efficiently,
but there are these scenarios
that occur
where nothing in the realm
of nonlethal is practical.
In northern Wisconsin,
we conduct tribal
co-investigations
of wolf complaints.
The Menominee,
St
ockbridge-Munsee,
and the Ojibwe nations
value,
cu
lturally and spiritually,
wolves very highly.
If we have a depredation
wi
thin six miles
of tribal lands--
of
these tribal lands,
we will co-investigate
th
e complaint
with the tribal biologist.
So we do an on the ground--
boots-on-the-ground evaluation
of
the conflict.
So if we're starting to talk
ab
out abatement strategies,
we have the tribal biologist
on
board,
so when we start talking--
potentially, given the era
in
which we're at,
whether it's federally delisted
or
listed,
they can be part
of
the determination
as to what we're going to do
to
resolve that issue.
We had talked about
ca
rcass disposal,
proper carcass--
proper carcass disposal
te
chniques.
The--
th
e image on the left,
that's an
im
properly disposed of cow,
and those tracks coming into it
ar
e wolf tracks.
That could probably
pr
edispose you
to wolf predation,
wh
en you start
to calve on those pastures
in
the spring.
It's-- it's
a very important topic,
and it's a very difficult issue
to deal with
that you folks have to deal with
in the winter months.
Just a time frame of this
on again/off again
federal status of wolves
in
Wisconsin.
You've seen that earlier.
Wolves captured and killed
fo
r depredation management
by USDA Wildlife Services
an
d the Wisconsin DNR
from 1974 to 2015.
There's been
39
7 wolves captured
for conflict management,
and 335 of those animals
were euthanized.
An integrated site-specific
wolf depredation management
pr
ogram
has nothing to do
with population level control.
It is not our objective
to have any impact
on the overall
statewide wolf population.
It is to resolve your conflict,
not to reduce
the wolf population.
Generally speaking,
when we have a year
of full lethal control,
we will remove
between 5% and 10%
of that minimum estimated
wolf population
from the previous winter.
I would like to also add
to this
that site-specific
lethal control
for wolf conflict abatement
has had nothing to do--
or has had no negative impact
on wolf recovery
in the state of Wisconsin.
You folks
saw this image earlier.
I mean, what it speaks to is,
those years
wh
en we had the authority
to lethally remove wolves
in
2002 through 2008
and then
in
'12, '13, and '14,
you can obviously see that
the population growth line
is
increasing
while we had the authority
to
lethally remove animals.
Some weird wolf conflicts,
you know, some
no
n-predation-related things.
This is a silage bag
in
Marinette County
that a pair of wolves
ha
d ran up the side of,
and their nails had punctured
th
at silage bag.
And you can see where
th
e farmer had taped the bag.
And you all know
wh
at that means to you,
when you have
a
punctured silage bag.
You know, these are
right near the barnyard.
Just-- just some
non-livestock-related
wolf incidences that--
that do-- that do occur.
Um, you know,
so when we go back to 1908,
that first scientifically...
I wouldn't call it
pe
er-reviewed
but an effort
to
demonstrate
predator management tools
ba
ck in 1908,
to today, in 2014,
we still have scientists
th
at work both
for our agency
an
d other agencies
that are trying to develop
th
ese tools and techniques
to prevent
la
rge carnivores--
grizzly bears,
bl
ack bears, cougars,
wolves, and coyotes--
fr
om depredating livestock,
so there is still effort
out there, folks,
that people are spending
a fair amount of time on
trying to develop techniques
to resolve these conflicts.
And this 2014 just represents
another one of those efforts.
Dr. John Shivik has devoted
a lot of his career
to investigating techniques
to prevent
livestock depredations.
I know that's very quick.
It's a lot of information.
We could talk about this topic
for a very long time,
but we can go over some
of the stuff at the field day
with Eric,
but at this point,
before I open it up
to questions,
on the back are some magnets,
and if you want,
grab one of those.
Those have our 1-800
hotline numbers on them.
And so if you suspect
that you have
a wolf or a bear depredation,
it'd be nice for you to
have that on your refrigerator
so you know the number to call.
We monitor those numbers
seven days a week,
365 days a year.
If it's a holiday or a weekend,
there's someone assigned
to call in and check voice mail
every couple of hours
to see if we've received
a wolf or a bear complaint.
So it's
365-day-a-year service.
So grab one of those
on your way out.
And some of the packages--
packets that you got
on your way in,
they just contain
a lot of information
about our agency and program,
not only about bears and wolves
but some of
the other stuff we do
that might be useful for you.
So I encourage you
to grab one of those
and take it home.
So at that,
I've got a little bit of time,
if there's any questions.
[applause]