Wildlife Recovery in North America

Pantheraman

Pantheraman

Well-Known Member
Moderator note: Thread split from here - The European Wildlife Comeback Report 2022: Wildlife can return if given chance to recover



The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has Wolf-Livestock Prevention Grant which does the same thing the EU fund does: Wolf-Livestock Conflict Prevention Grants | Minnesota Department of Agriculture

That said, I see no reason for other states to adopt something similar. Especially since they have enough resources to pull off wolf-killing sprees. (Particularly Idaho).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pantheraman said:
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has Wolf-Livestock Prevention Grant which does the same thing the EU fund does: Wolf-Livestock Conflict Prevention Grants | Minnesota Department of Agriculture

That said, I see no reason for other states to adopt something similar. Especially since they have enough resources to pull off wolf-killing sprees. (Particularly Idaho).
Click to expand...

What would the plausibility of a federal law for a nationwide Wolf-Livestock Prevention Grant?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pantheraman said:
This is some of the best wildlife news I've heard in a long time. It also proves that Europe is way better at protecting and conserving large predators than the United States.

For example, and courtesy of the wonderful people at Rewildling Europe.

"Grey wolves, for example, are recovering across Europe and readily recolonise areas where humans allow their presence. The European Union is now strongly encouraging human-wolf coexistence by offering funding for prevention measures such as fences and livestock dogs, as well as full compensation to farmers across member states for livestock lost to wolf predation."

European wildlife comeback: new report shows wildlife will return if we give it space to recover | Rewilding Europe

Where is this kind of thing in North America!? It's non-existent and is up to NGO's to do this type of thing on their own. Why? There are three reasons for this, and I'll get into them later.
Click to expand...

It might not be as well publicized, it seems to function under more of “let nature take it’s course” sort of philosophy (quite effectively once wildlife protections are in place), but “re-wilding” of this nature is actually very successful in the United States.

Look at Wolves, Bears, Alligators, Deer, Elk, Bald Eagles, Wild Turkeys over the last 50 years.

I can see three missed opportunities:
1. Bison - Small managed herds not unlike the methods used with Wisent in Europe have been established. Free roaming animals are still more likely to be encountered with the American Bison, than with the Wisent. Relocating animals to Texas or east of the Mississippi is still in its infancy (and likely not going to lead to free roaming populations…just like Britain and Western Europe)…but, ironically, free roaming animals in southern New Mexico are considered livestock when they wander north from Mexico and absurdly (in my view) as invasive by the NPS on the Kiabab Plateau. I do believe we will probably see new herds, in confined reserves, in the east being established by state wildlife agencies.

2. Wolves. You know the restoration in the west was successful. From a few packs in Montana and stragglers in Washington and Idaho…we now have wild wolves in those states plus Wyoming, Oregon, and California. Utah, Colorado, and South Dakota are probably going to see wolves soon (if not already). Eventually the greatest danger to the Mexican Wolves in Arizona and New Mexico is going to be the arrival of the Northern Rockies Wolf into their range. It’s a bit ironic that the Mexican Wolf will likely be the Red Wolf to the Rocky Mountain Wolf’s Coyote….and face a similar genetic swamping that the Red Wolf faces. In the east Wolves from Minnesota and Montana will probably encounter each other somewhere in North Dakota.
Further east, Eastern Wolves occasionally make it though Quebec’s rivers and farm lands to eventually reach the semi-wilderness of upstate New York and New England. Will they establish packs without human intervention? Probably not. Will they continue introducing their genes into the Eastern Coyote population? Yes. And while it might not be in the course of a single human lifetime…already the Eastern Coyote appears on a path of divergence from the western Coyote and adapting to a more Wolf-like existence (and doing so naturally while also adapting to the human disturbed environment it inhabits)…so overtime…the wolf will win this one.

Red Wolves in the southeast are also a missed opportunity…but one that must bend to biological reality…establishing healthy populations in areas of sparse Coyote populations might help the Red Wolf hold on in its present form…but really the only hope for this animal is to continually interject its genes into the regional Coyote populations and allow natural selection to run its course (I.e. the two species are inter-fertile…so there is not much difference between the two…therefore if the ecology can support a predator of the Red Wolf’s characteristics vis the Coyote…than overtime the Red Wolf will win out and the canid population of the region will become more Wolflike). I love Red Wolves so much I think they should be introduced to Ireland, Britain, Honshu, and Kodiak as proxies for the extinct wolves of those islands…except for Kodiak of course, but with Deer, Reindeer, Mountain Goats introduced on the island…why not?

3. Jaguars. These animals should be reintroduced to New Mexico and Arizona (and I think it’s possible they will)…natural expansion of this animal (and most of North America’s animals outside Bison and Brown Bears) is tolerated. I believe eventually there is a fair chance USF&W will take action. I’d like to see them in south and west Texas as well. The wild hog population would ensure the Jaguar’s success…roads and by-kill by hunters and ranchers might be difficult for the cats to overcome.

honorable mention: Brown Bears. Even natural expansion has been problematic for people. They seem to do well near people in Alaska…but there are huge areas of Wilderness…so the urban and suburban bears that are killed in conflicts don’t affect the overall population and the refuges outside the cities are a source for new urban bears. Outside of Alaska…this might not be possible. Even here bears kill people and are destructive to agriculture…we just have room for them. I don’t know that California or Kansas do. The bear’s natural expansion along the west shore of Hudson Bay is interesting. I expect Brown Bears in Ontario within 25 years and maybe sometime next century the Ungava Grizzly will return…to the detriment of the emergent Barren-ground Black Bears who’ve moved into the Ungava Bear’s niche.

You know…the greatest rewilding experiments in America…the reintroduction of wild equids…have largely been opposed by USFW due to “invasive species” orthodoxy…no doubt influenced by agricultural interest and land developers. Same can be said to a lesser extent for Capybara (in the early stages of establishment) in Florida and Rocky Mountain Goats on the Olympic Peninsula. Exotic Deer and Antelope and Primates and Birds…forget it from a USF&W and NPS point of view..those organizations have a hard time looking further into the past than 1491 when imagining what a wild North America should look like…and sometimes not even that far. Those organizations were foot dragging Wood Bison reintroduction in Alaska for years and then continued to put up obstacles as the project to reestablish a wild free roaming population in Alaska moved forward.

I’ve said a lot there. But…if we can smartly design our road networks and limit sprawl. And get out of natures way (most south Florida mammals have populations elsewhere that regularly encounter large constricting snakes…they will adapt) America will rewild itself. It just takes a bit. Cougars are currently in the process of doing this now.
 
Last edited:
Pleistohorse said:
It might not be as well publicized, it seems to function under more of “let nature take it’s course” sort of philosophy (quite effectively once wildlife protections are in place), but “re-wilding” of this nature is actually very successful in the United States.

Look at Wolves, Bears, Alligators, Deer, Elk, Bald Eagles, Wild Turkeys over the last 50 years.

I can see three missed opportunities:
1. Bison - Small managed herds not unlike the methods used with Wisent in Europe have been established. Free roaming animals are still more likely to be encountered with the American Bison, than with the Wisent. Relocating animals to Texas or east of the Mississippi is still in its infancy (and likely not going to lead to free roaming populations…just like Britain and Western Europe)…but, ironically, free roaming animals in southern New Mexico are considered livestock when they wander north from Mexico and absurdly (in my view) as invasive by the NPS on the Kiabab Plateau. I do believe we will probably see new herds, in confined reserves, in the east being established by state wildlife agencies.

2. Wolves. You know the restoration in the west was successful. From a few packs in Montana and stragglers in Washington and Idaho…we now have wild wolves in those states plus Wyoming, Oregon, and California. Utah, Colorado, and South Dakota are probably going to see wolves soon (if not already). Eventually the greatest danger to the Mexican Wolves in Arizona and New Mexico is going to be the arrival of the Northern Rockies Wolf into their range. It’s a bit ironic that the Mexican Wolf will likely be the Red Wolf to the Rocky Mountain Wolf’s Coyote….and face a similar genetic swamping that the Red Wolf faces. In the east Wolves from Minnesota and Montana will probably encounter each other somewhere in North Dakota.
Further east, Eastern Wolves occasionally make it though Quebec’s rivers and farm lands to eventually reach the semi-wilderness of upstate New York and New England. Will they establish packs without human intervention? Probably not. Will they continue introducing their genes into the Eastern Coyote population? Yes. And while it might not be in the course of a single human lifetime…already the Eastern Coyote appears on a path of divergence from the western Coyote and adapting to a more Wolf-like existence (and doing so naturally while also adapting to the human disturbed environment it inhabits)…so overtime…the wolf will win this one.

Red Wolves in the southeast are also a missed opportunity…but one that must bend to biological reality…establishing healthy populations in areas of sparse Coyote populations might help the Red Wolf hold on in its present form…but really the only hope for this animal is to continually interject its genes into the regional Coyote populations and allow natural selection to run its course (I.e. the two species are inter-fertile…so there is not much difference between the two…therefore if the ecology can support a predator of the Red Wolf’s characteristics vis the Coyote…than overtime the Red Wolf will win out and the canid population of the region will become more Wolflike). I love Red Wolves so much I think they should be introduced to Ireland, Britain, Honshu, and Kodiak as proxies for the extinct wolves of those islands…except for Kodiak of course, but with Deer, Reindeer, Mountain Goats introduced on the island…why not?

3. Jaguars. These animals should be reintroduced to New Mexico and Arizona (and I think it’s possible they will)…natural expansion of this animal (and most of North America’s animals outside Bison and Brown Bears) is tolerated. I believe eventually there is a fair chance USF&W will take action. I’d like to see them in south and west Texas as well. The wild hog population would ensure the Jaguar’s success…roads and by-kill by hunters and ranchers might be difficult for the cats to overcome.

honorable mention: Brown Bears. Even natural expansion has been problematic for people. They seem to do well near people in Alaska…but there are huge areas of Wilderness…so the urban and suburban bears that are killed in conflicts don’t affect the overall population and the refuges outside the cities are a source for new urban bears. Outside of Alaska…this might not be possible. Even here bears kill people and are destructive to agriculture…we just have room for them. I don’t know that California or Kansas do. The bear’s natural expansion along the west shore of Hudson Bay is interesting. I expect Brown Bears in Ontario within 25 years and maybe sometime next century the Ungava Grizzly will return…to the detriment of the emergent Barren-ground Black Bears who’ve moved into the Ungava Bear’s niche.

You know…the greatest rewilding experiments in America…the reintroduction of wild equids…have largely been opposed by USFW due to “invasive species” orthodoxy…no doubt influenced by agricultural interest and land developers. Same can be said to a lesser extent for Capybara (in the early stages of establishment) in Florida and Rocky Mountain Goats on the Olympic Peninsula. Exotic Deer and Antelope and Primates and Birds…forget it from a USF&W and NPS point of view..those organizations have a hard time looking further into the past than 1491 when imagining what a wild North America should look like…and sometimes not even that far. Those organizations were foot dragging Wood Bison reintroduction in Alaska for years and then continued to put up obstacles as the project to reestablish a wild free roaming population in Alaska moved forward.

I’ve said a lot there. But…if we can smartly design our road networks and limit sprawl. And get out of natures way (most south Florida mammals have populations elsewhere that regularly encounter large constricting snakes…they will adapt) America will rewild itself. It just takes a bit. Cougars are currently in the process of doing this now.
Click to expand...
Bison are extremely destructive non-natives on the Kaibab Plateau.
 
birdsandbats said:
Bison are extremely destructive non-natives on the Kaibab Plateau.
Click to expand...
I think more studies are needed.

Bison have lived in the area in the past. Any new animal in any range will cause changes. What those changes mean are mostly a value judgement.

Anti-wolf folks went straight to that argument when they opposed the introduction of the invasive “Northern Canadian Wolves” larger and fiercer than the long extinct “Central Rocky Mountain Wolf”. And those wolves disrupted the environment…for sure. Where they destructive? Some would say so. It’s just about values.

Outside of isolated environments (mostly islands…including Australia) that is.

I will let it go with that though…this is a European thread.


;-)
 
Pleistohorse said:
I think more studies are needed.

Bison have lived in the area in the past. Any new animal in any range will cause changes. What those changes mean are mostly a value judgement.

Anti-wolf folks went straight to that argument when they opposed the introduction of the invasive “Northern Canadian Wolves” larger and fiercer than the long extinct “Central Rocky Mountain Wolf”. And those wolves disrupted the environment…for sure. Where they destructive? Some would say so. It’s just about values.

Outside of isolated environments (mostly islands…including Australia) that is.

I will let it go with that though…this is a European thread.


;-)
Click to expand...
The Kaibab Plateau is definitely an isolated environment - it's the the bison are allowed to roam free and not be fenced - because fencing them would be pointless. There are few ways for them to leave the plateau and there's no suitable habitat for them outside it anyway. The bison are absolutely destroying the vegetation on the North Rim and threating the various taxa endemic to the plateau. One of the biggest reasons the bison are even allowed to say is because they've become an important food source for the condors.
 
As I said before, I'd get into why large carnivore conservation in the United States is lousy, and I said there are 3 reasons for it.

1. US Fish and Wildlife Service: This wildlife agency can be described in one word: incompetent. Let us not forget how they handled red wolves prior to the 2020's, how they essentially let the population dwindle and allowed this success story to become a gigantic dumpster fire. And let's also not forget the Florida Panther habitat they keep sanctioning off either. Just two examples of their incompetence.

2. Both State and Federal Governments: Corrupt governments are perhaps one of the biggest threats to wildlife. This is no different here in the US. Both your state and federal governments don't care about your wildlife. The only thing they're interested in is their own power and expanding it wherever possible. Have you ever wondered what the real reason is for there being 2 political parties? The reason is divide and conquer: mention anything in their news media and speeches or whatever that makes us different, that way they can get us fighting each other so they can run off with the money. What does this have to do with our predators?

This means that trying to go after grizzlies, passing wolf-killing legislation has nothing to do with protecting livestock. It's simply two more ways for them to get people fighting each other so that they can keep running with the cash.

3. Exclusive Conservation: Carnivore conservation at the state level is exclusive of people who aren't consumptive wildlife users (hunters, anglers) and the reason for this is that the wildlife management machine of this country doesn't want that.

The machine itself includes the hunting community, the biologists and other staff who work at the state wildlife agencies, the societies that represent management-minded biologists and what they want as well as their associated political connection with gun groups and hunting groups (both advocacy groups and associations).

They have three methods of keeping it exclusive.

1. The political connections mentioned earlier are so strong that they undermine and block attempts to make state wildlife management decision making more inclusive and diversifying funding for the agencies. The minute another group gives the agencies money, the hunting industry would no longer have all the power they currently hold.

2. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. This thing isn't a conservation model, it's a pure hunting model. The purpose of this thing is to give you the idea that hunters are conservationists regardless of an individuals behavior and hatred of predators, that they somehow know more about wildlife, and that they know what's best for wildlife and thus less likely to question anything the hunting orgainizations tell you.

And now, they're going for college students. At Purdue University there's a program that bashes them over the head with the "hunting is conservation" philosophy.

3. "Public Comment Periods" These exist to give you the idea that the state wildlife agency personnel or commission actually care about your opinion on any issue, that way you're less likely to complain about a situation not going your way. In other words, in most states, "public comment periods" are nothing more than comeplete sharades.

And that ladies and gentlemen is why large carnivore conservation in this country is s bad as it is. And before anyone mentions the return of black bears and american alligators, let me give you two points.

1. 95% of the American Black Bear's diet is plant matter, so naturally the machine tolerates them more because of it.

2. American Alligators recovered in a time when the USFWS was actually competent.

And it's why I'm jealous of Europe when it comes to predator conservation. To this day, I still get a great feeling when I look at the recovery of the Iberian Lynx. It gives me hope that at least one threatened predator will make it in the modern world.
 
I give you points on everything but the North American “Hunting” Model of Conservation. I’m not a hunter…but hunting and hunting interests definitely fund conservation projects and by their nature require sustainable wildlife populations and the habitat to support those populations and by extension the habitats of many un-hunted species. You can’t deny that. I can accept that, at least in two areas, hunting interests (where the game animals are more of a commodity) have strenuously argued against predator restoration. Alaska…where subsistence interests support predator control (but not elimination…and no large predator in Alaska is in danger of statewide extinction) and the Sport Hunting Outfitters of the northern mountain states…who argued against wolf reintroduction. It should be noted they were unsuccessful, that wolves continue to expand their ranges and that wolves are not locally endangered in those states. They may not be super abundant…but they are there and unless massive urban sprawl and road building infest the area they will be for a very long time.

And no legally hunted animal population has gone extinct in the United States in the last 70 years and the one that’s closest to possibly being counted as having done so…Desert Bighorn Sheep in Texas…are being restored. Which brings us to Mountain Lions.

The only state that in my opinion woefully regards it’s large predators is Texas (with the exceptions of…American Black Bears and Alligators!)…the only state where they are present in which the Cougar is offered no protection. One area of special concern…the west Texas mountains where they restoring Desert Bighorn Sheep and using Cougar predation of that animal as an excuse to shoot every cougar they see.

But weigh that against the urban sprawl and roads in other areas of special concern. The Florida Panther and Cougars in south-western California are not threatened by hunters or hunting interests, but by development and road building…think about that, they are threatened by the houses and cars of people who are probably smugly anti-hunting. Another thing to consider with cougars and roads is this: The first cougar to be killed in New England since 1938 was hit by a car in Connecticut. That is something to think about when considering restoration. While also maintaining faith in natural expansion as the cat walked to New England from South Dakota.

Had the cougar population in New England, that appears to have gone extinct in Maine in the late 1930’s held on for 30 more years the animals would be thriving, thanks to the North American Conservation Model which restored deer populations and saw cougars in every state but Texas fall under government protections to prevent local extinction. It would be a “qualified” thriving because of roads and human conflict with suburbanites, not legal hunting.

In three states where Cougar expansion has occurred naturally in the last 50 years (South Dakota, North Dakota, and Nebraska) the animals are subject to hunting, but not eradication. Other states (Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin) where the animals will likely fully colonize…still have full protection. Florida is in the same boat (perhaps the only state that has done any cougar restoration when several Texas cougars were brought in to stir up the gene pool), if the animals can naturally expand northward they will be protected…cars, roads and housing will be the deterring factor in there success.

Another state where cougars will likely colonize, Arkansas, declined to accept the reintroduction of the Florida Panther, but has not lifted protections on cats that naturally recolonize the state. We should also note however that the only program to restore Black Bears to an area from which they were extirpated took place in Arkansas.

Other than politics, I wonder if one of the reason's agencies are reluctant to reintroduce animals like cougars into eastern states is the liability that might be incurred when someone was inevitably (even if it’s less likely than a lightning strike) killed by one. A natural expansion doesn’t have that worry.

You know an overlooked large predator restoration (natural) in the United States is that of the Great White Shark in Massachusetts Bay and the Gulf of Maine brought about by the restoration (naturally through conservation actions) of the Gray Seal.

Ultimately I don’t fully agree (aside from Texas Cougars, where is entirely up to land owner interest, except on Military Bases, National Parks, and maybe Aransas NWR) that predator conservation in the United States is woeful.

American Alligators (I know what you said) have naturally expanded in numbers and in Texas in range. I believe the only introductions took place in the Rio Grande Valley. Crocodiles also have expanded naturally.

Cougars: Natural expansion in the Midwest and limited reintroduction in Florida.

Wolves: Reintroduction in the northern and southern Rockies. Natural expansion in the north and midwest.

Black Bears: Natural expansions (too include strict protections in Texas) and reintroduction (followed by natural expansion) in northwestern Arkansas.

Red Wolves: Reintroductions in eastern and western North Carolina. Mostly unsuccessful for biological/ecological reasons. Still ongoing in the eastern region and being re-evaluated elsewhere due to some interesting genetic discoveries in Texas and Louisiana.

Brown Bear: No attempted reintroductions. Natural expansion and recovery with protections (this one will be tough). These animals should be restored at a minimum to southern Colorado (likely persisted into the 1980’s) and northern Quebec (ditto into maybe the early 20th century).

Already talked about Jaguars.

Nobody ever talks about Wolverines. Sadly.

Now this…as something similar to Iberian Lynx. A small predator that feeds mainly on rabbits. In the United States there are a few species that kind of parallel that story.

The Bobcat…very similar animal. The Bobcat as far as I know has never be reintroduced by humans to areas it has disappeared from…but it also held on in most areas until the protections of the North American Conservation Model were implemented…and since has greatly expanded range and numbers throughout the east and midwest. So not a perfect parallel, but only because the Bobcat never reached the perilous position of the Iberian Lynx. That should give you a happy thought.

Another example. The Canada Lynx. Other than environmental differences…maybe the closest ecological comparison (a smallish cat that preys almost exclusively on Lagomorphs). The Canada Lynx of course was never globally endangered…but it was subject to two reintroductions. In Colorado apparently successfully and upstate New York…where it was not successful. This was probably due to environmental conditions (I’ll even let roads off the hook here)…exacerbated by competition with more locally adapted Bobcats and Coyotes. Natural recovery in Maine is going well.

Another success story to use in comparison. The Fisher. Small predator where small rodents and rabbits make up its diet. Very successful reintroductions, followed by natural expansion, in West Virginia and New England. This was an animal nearly extinct in the eastern USA.

Last comparison and a woeful missed opportunity. The Ocelot. Maybe the closest direct parallel to the Iberian Lynx that fully matches your point from an endangered population aspect. The Ocelot has never come close to the risk of global extinction that the Iberian Lynx suffered. But taken on its own…the circumstances of the Texas population are strikingly similar. I don’t know why (I know habitat changes and roads play a part) the Ocelot has not recovered and only barely hung on. It would seem to me that expanding the cats into other areas might be a good idea. I would guess they don’t want to disturb the populations still extant and don’t want to (or can’t) introduce non-Texan cats. In this case…I think you make a good comparison between the two continents, with an example where Spain clearly outperformed the United States.

However, I do think you have more cause for optimism than you think. I also believe you should take another look at the North American Conservation Model as a source of allies and a good staring point (however imperfect) from which to expand its scope and philosophy. Research a little bit about hunting and game management in Europe as well…you might be surprised.

sorry for the typos, I’m over 50 and typing on this new fangled adding machine with two awkward thumbs…I hope you don’t perceive this as attacking your philosophical points…it’s just fun to discuss. And we managed to keep it at least somewhat about Europe. ;-)
 
Last edited:
How Alaska hunters would see or sponsor release of Bison? There must be lots of land – even so-called densely settled parts of Alaska have much more nature than Europe.

I understand this can be difficult, because many Bison are fenced and treated as livestock, and they breed slower than deer, so there must be more self-policing of hunters than deer hunting.
 
@Pleistohorse

Actually, I can deny that. The agencies are pretty much lip service to non-game species, focusing most of their time and energy on game animals, and even then, many have declined in number. It's the entire reason the RAWA was proposed, even if it does have its flaws.

The florida panther situation is due to the incompetence of the USFWS.

Ah yes, the examples you brought up. This, unfortunately, was the past. I'm focusing on the present situation in this country. Just look at what's been happening to wolves and cougars as of late. I remember Mark Elbroch writing an article on the new expansion on less limited cougar hunting across the west.

And as for cougars recolonizing the east on their own, I'll just let John Laundre explain this case: Dead Cats Walking
 
It’ll be a challenge for them for sure. But I’m not as pessimistic. We each acknowledge the problem with roads (outside of every other potential cougar/human conflict)…translocation would require a lot of cats and result in a lot of mortality. As I pointed out the one cougar to make it all the way to New England…was promptly hit by a car. I think natural recolonization (while maybe not the preferable means) is still likely the only viable means to restore the cougar in the east. Maybe if the cats get a toehold…they will be augmented by future releases. One thing is for sure…with the cougar…we have time. Just for fun, where would you propose (and in what numbers) they be released in the east? I’m thinking the southern Appalachians (particularly eastern Kentucky) maybe Central Pennsylvania, and possibly eastern Maine and New Brunswick might be the best areas.

To bring it back to Europe: you mentioned as an example the Iberian Lynx, and aside from the Ocelot situation, I pointed out that we have a few comparable species here in the United States where a similar dynamic played out. If your concern is merely with the restoration of the Cougar in the east…until Germany brings Leopards back to Bavaria or when Greece follows suit…(I imagine Lions in Spain might be asking too much, the Iberian Lynx is after all the size of a smallish Bobcat, biggish Fox, or low end Coyote…and we are comparing that project to speculation involving a predator the size of a cougar, I mean that is the parallel we are talking about…) so, again, until Leopards are restored, I wouldn’t be too discouraged when comparing projects between Europe and North America.

For the record…I’d like to see an attempted restoration of the Cougar in the east…based on what we see in the west…after a period where each species adjusts to the other…they could probably be successful. But just remember if roads are going to be a barrier to colonization…they are similarly a barrier to establishment. Get on google earth and look at the terrain and development of an area and then superimpose on that the average range of a cougar vis the prey density and road density and human development…in most of the east you’ll be seeing cougars chase deer across roads…if not back yards! ;-). On the plus side…deer in the east do currently live in greater densities than they do in many western states. So…it could work.

I’m also a fan of Europe’s rewilding projects. I have a couple of books on the subject. As I’ve mentioned in other threads…my interest specifically arose from when I lived there about 20 years ago and would ride the trains past cattle, sheep, and horses and in my mind see Aurochs, Mouflon, and Tarpan’s. The occasional Wild Boar, Red Fox, and Roe Deer adding to the illusion. Seeing Fallow Deer (mostly confined) and areas where Cattle were being used for landscape restoration or maintenance was thrilling. A highland cow in a woodlot next to a highway interchange south of Eindhoven…you would have thought I was touring the Serengeti.
 
Last edited:
Jurek7 said:
How Alaska hunters would see or sponsor release of Bison? There must be lots of land – even so-called densely settled parts of Alaska have much more nature than Europe.

I understand this can be difficult, because many Bison are fenced and treated as livestock, and they breed slower than deer, so there must be more self-policing of hunters than deer hunting.
Click to expand...

The most recent reintroduction of Bison in Alaska is that of the Wood Bison in the southwest of the state. This project is about 15 years old. We had a subsequent release earlier this year and one planned for next Spring as well. These animals are not hunted, but it the project is successful, they probably will be. First as a subsistence opportunity for the residents of the area (mostly Alaskan Native villages) and then if very successful Alaska resident hunters from outside the area. So far the only Wood Bison shot in Alaska, was poached by a local resident.

Over the last hundred years four other free roaming Plains Bison herds have been established in Alaska. The Farewell herd (off the road system, to the west of the Alaska Range), two small herds in the region of Wrangel-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, and the Delta Herd found near Delta Junction where the Alaska Highway and the Richardson Highway intersect. Kodiak Island has a herd that the state considers feral and the owner considers livestock. There is also a small feral herd on an island near the Aleutian chain. I believe Plains Bison were also recently introduced on Native Lands on one of the eastern Aleutian Islands, and although hunted locally, are considered private property. The island herds are confined by geography, but all other herds are free ranging.

The four Plains Bison herds are subject to hunting, based on the number of animals. The herds near Wrangel-St. Elias are occasionally subject to closed seasons as their numbers are pretty small. The Delta Heard was established 100 years (when Wood Bison nigh have been thought extinct) which is kind of unfortunate because they inhabit some of the prime Bison habitat still available (Fairbanks and the lower MatSu might be even better…but a pretty developed by Alaska standards)…part of the release of the Wood Bison was ensuring they were far enough away from the Plains Bison to prevent interbreeding…I guess.

One of the most prized limited tags in Alaska is an opportunity to harvest a Bison from the Delta herd. Mostly due to it’s proximity to the road system.

The Wood Bison have been stable as they adapt to local conditions, but the numbers have not reason as rapidly as anticipated. The habitat may not be the best weather wise and wolves learned how to hunt them more quickly than expected. The first two proposed sites, the Yukon Charley Preserve and the Minto Flats, we’re shot down by the NPS/USF&W and the local Native Leadership for reasons of…who really knows why on the part of the government agencies and because of concerns resource extraction on the part of the Native group. I’ve read that the Minto Flats might be reconsidered as the landholders there may reconsider the value of the Bison and its comparability with the use of their lands to generate income for their people.

Something to think about when considering the population size of large mammals in boreal habitats as it regards carrying capacity can be summed up with this example (other factors aside):

Alaska has three times as many Moose as Maine (200,000 versus 70,000). Alaska is 19 times the size of Maine.

For an interesting read regarding Bison in Alaska and Bison generally…check out American Buffalo: In Search of a Lost Icon, by Steven Rinella. It’s a great book, that discusses the Bison as a species with great cultural significance in North America, amazing adaptations to life in the north, and is interposed with accounts of Rinella’s Bison hunt after drawing a rare tag to harvest a Bison from the Chetaslina River herd near Wrangel-St. Elias and even some insight into the preservation of Native sovereignty over their traditional lands. Highly recommended.
 
Last edited:
@Pleistohorse

My top 3 release sites for cougars east of the Mississippi are these places.

1. The Northeastern States: The area, in general, has great rewilding potential as the human density in most of these states isn't very high by human standards, and even then, most of these people are living in large towns or cities. Take a look: Northeast States

2. Appalachia: Throughout this region, there aren't as many people as there are in flatter areas and these forests are thick, and full of available prey: wild turkeys, white-tailed deer, feral hogs in some areas such as southeastern Ohio, and even elk. I was in central Pennslyvania back in 2019, there wasn't one time when out on the four-wheelers we didn't see a deer.

3. Northern Minnesota: While not technically considered an eastern state, once again this area doesn't have as many people, but another reason this is here is that I have more confidence in them being protected here than in other places. According to the latest survey, most people like having wolves around, and the game agency of this state, unlike in other states, decided not to have a wolf hunt last year. Showing that when it comes to wolves, Minnesota is the most well-behaved state. And this is when it comes to one of the most controversial species in this country. And in an area with both wolves and black bears, the people here are more accustomed to living with large predators than say, those in Pennslyvania.
 
Pantheraman said:
@Pleistohorse

My top 3 release sites for cougars east of the Mississippi are these places.

1. The Northeastern States: The area, in general, has great rewilding potential as the human density in most of these states isn't very high by human standards, and even then, most of these people are living in large towns or cities. Take a look: Northeast States

2. Appalachia: Throughout this region, there aren't as many people as there are in flatter areas and these forests are thick, and full of available prey: wild turkeys, white-tailed deer, feral hogs in some areas such as southeastern Ohio, and even elk. I was in central Pennslyvania back in 2019, there wasn't one time when out on the four-wheelers we didn't see a deer.

3. Northern Minnesota: While not technically considered an eastern state, once again this area doesn't have as many people, but another reason this is here is that I have more confidence in them being protected here than in other places. According to the latest survey, most people like having wolves around, and the game agency of this state, unlike in other states, decided not to have a wolf hunt last year. Showing that when it comes to wolves, Minnesota is the most well-behaved state. And this is when it comes to one of the most controversial species in this country. And in an area with both wolves and black bears, the people here are more accustomed to living with large predators than say, those in Pennslyvania.
Click to expand...
If people could handle living alongside them, northern Wisconsin and the UP would also be good habitat for Cougars.
 
@Pantheraman

Yep. I pretty agree much with your sites. I really think Minnesota and Wisconsin are likely to be colonized naturally. Manitoba and Ontario already consider the cougar resident…ergo…

Central Pennsylvania and southern Appalachia I believe are the best bets for success. I think Northern New England has the room, but I believe deer densities are pretty low in the wilder areas. Although New Brunswick was probably the last stand of the Eastern Cougar. Knocking down the Moose population in Maine with Cougars taking calves and smaller Moose would probably increase the health overall of the Moose herd by reducing Deer Tick hosts at high densities.

Another possibility for very low numbers of Cougars…what about the Atlantic coast between the Great Dismal Swamp and Okefenoke? If the Florida Panther can break out of south Florida (and frequent hurricanes help slow down or even reverse development*) I can easily see them colonizing that area.

Overall the Cougar has demonstrated it can persist near high population/developed areas relatively safely and without major disruption.

*that comment might trigger some folks…. ;-)
 
As I mentioned earlier, while the RAWA exists to get more money for non-game species, it does have its flaws.
  1. It doesn't do anything to cause a paradigm shift in state wildlife management, if anything it only bolsters it.
  2. Looking at the bill itself (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2773/text) apparently, a state game agency will only have to spend 15% of the funds they receive on a state's endangered species. Yep. Just 15%. Not 90%, not 80%, not 70%, not 60%, not even 50%. Just 15% on a state's endangered species. Since the main priority of game agencies is to cater to hunting interests, it makes you wonder what they'll use the other 85% of the funds for.
You'll notice that many parts of the wildlife management machine in this country are supportive of this bill. This is unlikely due to what the point of the bill is, but likely because the passing of this bill will make the effort of making state wildlife management more inclusive of other stakeholders more difficult, if not impossible. Basically, it'll be like this: "We have this money coming in now, we don't need you to contribute."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top