How Wolves Change Rivers (eye opening video & more)

[G_j]

Last edited Tue Feb 18, 2014, 06:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Published on Feb 13, 2014
Visit http://sustainableman.org/ to explore the world of sustainability.
For more from George Monbiot, visit http://www.monbiot.com/ and for more on "rewilding" visit http://bit.ly/1hKGemK

"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir

When wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park in the United States after being absent nearly 70 years, the most remarkable "trophic cascade" occurred. What is a trophic cascade and how exactly do wolves change rivers? George Monbiot explains in this movie remix.

Narration from TED: "For more wonder, rewild the world" by George Monbiot. Watch the full talk, here: http://bit.ly/N3m62h

------
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/opinion/the-world-needs-wolves.html

Why the Beaver Should Thank the Wolf
By MARY ELLEN HANNIBAL
Published: September 28, 2012


THIS month, a group of environmental nonprofits said they would challenge the federal government’s removal of Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in Wyoming. Since there are only about 328 wolves in a state with a historic blood thirst for the hides of these top predators, the nonprofits are probably right that lacking protection, Wyoming wolves are toast.

Many Americans, even as they view the extermination of a species as morally anathema, struggle to grasp the tangible effects of the loss of wolves. It turns out that, far from being freeloaders on the top of the food chain, wolves have a powerful effect on the well-being of the ecosystems around them — from the survival of trees and riverbank vegetation to, perhaps surprisingly, the health of the populations of their prey.

An example of this can be found in Wyoming’s Yellowstone National Park, where wolves were virtually wiped out in the 1920s and reintroduced in the ’90s. Since the wolves have come back, scientists have noted an unexpected improvement in many of the park’s degraded stream areas.

Stands of aspen and other native vegetation, once decimated by overgrazing, are now growing up along the banks. This may have something to do with changing fire patterns, but it is also probably because elk and other browsing animals behave differently when wolves are around. Instead of eating greenery down to the soil, they take a bite or two, look up to check for threats, and keep moving. The greenery can grow tall enough to reproduce.
..more..

-----
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6310211.stm

Wild wolves 'good for ecosystems'

------

http://m.livescience.com/43213-unsettled-science-gray-wolf-peer-review.html

By Megan Gannon, News Editor
Date: 07 February 2014 Time: 04:07 PM ET

The drawn-out battle over the fate of gray wolves in the United States continues.

An independent panel of experts said Friday (Feb. 7) there is wide disagreement about some of the science the Fish and Wildlife Service used to make its case for ousting gray wolves from the Endangered Species list. The review could hinder the FWS proposal to lift federal protections for the animals throughout much of the United States.

"It was a very clean process and we got a unanimous result," said Steven Courtney, one of the scientists charged with setting up the independent panel at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

The panel was not taksed with deciding whether or not the gray wolf should be removed from the Endangered Species list. Rather, they were charged with determining whether the FWS recommendation to do so was supported by the best available science, explained Frank Davis, director of the NCEAS.

The experts' main complaint was that the FWS proposal relied too heavily on a 2012 study (published in the FWS's own journal North American Fauna), which determined wolves that once occupied the eastern part of the country were likely a genetically distinct species (Canis lycaon) from the gray wolves in question (Canis lupis). If this were the case, the FWS would not be responsible for ensuring the gray wolf's recovery in the eastern United States.

But scientists on the panel said the results of the 2012 study are not universally accepted or settled. The group decided that FWS officials "had interpreted the science that they used fairly, but there has been a lot of new science on the question of wolf genetics, and that science needs to be brought into that discussion," Davis told Live Science.

The FWS has now reopened its public comment period on the proposal, which it hopes to make a decision on by the end of the year.

..more..

Full Report:
http://www.fws.gov/home/wolfrecovery/pdf/Final_Review_of_Proposed_rule_regarding_wolves2014.pdf

Photo Essay:
link:http://m.livescience.com/40137-photos-gray-wolves-endangered-status.html|

```````````````````

TELL SECRETARY JEWELL TO DO WHAT THE SCIENCE SAYS & PROTECT WOLVES

http://action.endangered.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16490&sp_ref=28752327.61.2579.f.0.2

Secretary Jewell has said she doesn't have a choice in delisting wolves. She says, "It’s about science and you do what the science says."

The panel of scientists commissioned to review the proposal has spoken and we now know that this plan is not supported by science.

In their words,"There was unanimity among the panel that the rule does not currently represent the ‘best available science'."

Tell Secretary Jewell to "do what the science says" and immediately withdraw the draft rule to delist gray wolves

http://www.fws.gov/news/ShowNews.cfm?ID=0D493E53-AC54-99DD-52400A7BAA5A6085
Press Release
Service Reopens Comment Period on Wolf Proposal
February 7, 2014

Contacts:
Gavin Shire, 703-346-9123, [e-mail]


Independent scientific peer review report available for public review

Following receipt of an independent scientific peer review, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is reopening the comment period on its proposal to list the Mexican wolf as an endangered subspecies and remove the gray wolf from the Endangered Species List. The Service is making that report available for public review, and beginning Monday, February 10, interested stakeholders will have an additional 45 days to provide information that may be helpful to the Service in making a final determination on the proposal.

The independent scientific peer review was hosted and managed by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS), a highly respected interdisciplinary research center at the University of California – Santa Barbara. At the Service’s request, NCEAS sponsored and conducted a peer review of the science underlying the Service’s proposal.

“Peer review is an important step in our efforts to assure that the final decision on our proposal to delist the wolf is based on the best available scientific and technical information,” said Service Director Dan Ashe. “We thank the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis for conducting a transparent, objective and well-documented process. We are incorporating the peer review report into the public record for the proposed rulemaking, and accordingly, reopening the public comment period to provide the public with the opportunity for input.”

The peer review report is available online, along with instructions on how to provide comment and comprehensive links relating to the proposal, at http://www.fws.gov/home/wolfrecovery.

The Service intends that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on the best available information. Comments and materials we receive, as well as some of the supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, are available for public inspection at http://www.regulations.gov under the docket number FWS–HQ–ES–2013–0073.

The Service will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means the agency will post any personal information provided through the process. The Service is not able to accept email or faxes. Comments must be received by midnight on March 27.

The Federal Register publication of this notice will be available online Feb. 10 at http://www.fws.gov/policy/frsystem/default.cfm by clicking on the 2014 Proposed Rules under Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.

The Service expects to make final determination on the proposal by the end of 2014.

[Sunlei]

1. First Salazar and now Jewel, both ignore science. Took only a short couple hundred years.....

for the lands, wildlife and water to turn from pristine to today.

[G_j]

2. I hear ya

When Obama appointed Salazar, my heart sunk.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

7. Mine too

[XemaSab]

3. All but one of the "deer" in the video are elk

but aside from that, K&R!

[Eleanors38]

6. Elk are members of the deer family. I support re-introduction

of wolves where ever they can sustain a wilderness population. And when their numbers become to large for the land to sustain them, regulated hunting should be used to keep numbers within the carrying capacity of the land.

De-listing from the ESA should occur when and where wolf populations are well established.

[Victor_c3]

4. Interesting

A perfect example of how increased biodiversity in an ecosystem means a healthier ecosystem. I'm going to have to repeat many of the points from the article.

[G_j]

5. so true

yet wolves are so misunderstood. I hope and pray science wins out in this situation.