Casperson wolf vendetta ignores voters’ will

protect the wolves

Find your senator online at

Sen. Casperson and his cronies continue their vendetta on wolves.

Senate Resolution 105 passed through an unelected committee, where Casperson is the chairman, and will very soon be on the Michigan Senate floor. This resolution urges the federal government to take wolves off the Endangered Species List even though the population has declined from 687 in 2010 to 618 in 2016, and leave it up to Michigan for “scientific” management.

There is nothing “scientific” about the management of wolves in Michigan, it means “hunt” plain and simple, through any cruel means deemed “scientifically” necessary – traps, snares, hounding, etc. All for the sole purpose of putting wolf heads on walls and fur coats on women. (I am sure that the wolf hides are sent overseas as 99 percent of American women would not be caught dead in one.)

SR 105 blatantly circumvents Michigan voters, who voted against wolf hunting twice in the 2014 election. Is voting in Michigan redundant when our Legislature simply ignores its constituents? It would seem so. Plus, do we want our taxpayer dollars to continually fund the Casperson vendetta? (We have been funding it since 2011.)

Very soon, SR 105 will be voted on by the state Senate. Please email and call your state senator telling him to uphold the will of the people and vote no on SR 105 when it comes before them on the state floor. Find your senator online at


Macomb Township, Oct. 19

Source: Casperson wolf vendetta ignores voters’ will

IDFG Debunk Hunters stories and Fairy Tales


Perhaps Hunters will stop spreading their myths and Fairy Tales after being proven outright Story Tellers by Idaho Fish and Game . A Prudent individual might liken them to outright Lies… What do you Think?

We will also be publishing another Article showing a Montana Study has shown the same thing. Wyoming is to stubborn, they will continue to allow hunters to slaughter 25,000 Elk a year, then blame it on Wolves… Same Study would most likely apply there as well.

Wildlife CSI – Idaho Panhandle elk mortality study

The Panhandle region placed 172 GPS radio-collars on 6-month old elk calves in the Coeur d’Alene and St. Joe River drainages since 2015.  A couple reasons we collared so many elk was to determine survival rates and for those elk that didn’t make it, find out why they died.

The GPS collars have a signal that activates once the collar hasn’t moved for several hours, indicating a mortality.  Next, the collar sends an e-mail to biologists with the location of the collar.  It’s pretty amazing technology, something that wasn’t available just a few years ago, and it’s giving us new insight into what’s affecting the elk population.  We try to hike out to every dead elk within a day or two of receiving the mortality signal so we have the best chance of figuring out what happened.

Calf elk mortality


It can be difficult to look at a partially consumed elk carcass and determine how the animal died.  The more of the elk that is there, the easier it is to figure out what happened.  We want to find out why it died, or in our language, determine cause-specific mortality.  That’s why we try to get to the elk as soon as possible.

Once we get to the location and find the elk, we take a crime scene approach.  We conduct a careful search around the carcass looking for predator tracks, hair, drag trails in the dirt or snow, broken branches that indicate a chase, and blood on vegetation or the ground.  Next, we perform a necropsy (basically an autopsy for an animal).  We skin the entire animal looking for teeth or claw punctures and bruising on the skin or muscles (which means that something injured it while it was still alive).  We look for broken bones, parasites, and abnormalities of the internal organs.  Lastly, we saw open a femur bone to examine bone marrow.  Bone marrow is normally hard and white and is the last fat reserve the body uses during starvation.  Soft and red bone marrow means the elk was in very poor condition when it died.

Elk bone marrow

Femur bone marrow
Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

The two most common predators that kill older calves in the Panhandle are mountain lions and wolves, but their kill patterns are quite distinctive, hence the crime scene approach.  Lions tend to ambush and bite the neck or throat of their prey.  The attack site and the kill site are often close together.  Lions often drag their prey to a more hidden spot and will cache the animal by covering it with snow, leaves, or needles.  Lions have a habit of shearing hair, which looks like someone cut the hair with sharp scissors.   Lions often enter the chest cavity first and eat the internal organs.

Elk carcass cached by a mt lion

Elk carcass cached with moss by mountain lion
Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

Wolves, on the other hand, are not ambush hunters.  They typically chase their prey long distances, biting hindquarters, flanks, neck, and face.  Wolves will eat the animal where it died and often scatter the carcass throughout the site as each wolf takes its own piece to consume.  Wolves will often chew on all the bones.  The site of an animal killed by wolves is often a much messier scene than that of one killed by a mountain lion.  There’s often very little of the carcass remaining when we get there.

Calf elk killed by wolves

Elk calf killed by wolves
Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

So, what have we learned?  In the normal to mild winters of 2015 and 2016, 80% of the elk calves survived from January to June; 14% were killed by mountain lions, 3% were killed by wolves, 1% died of disease, and 2% were unknown deaths.  A survival rate of 80% for 6 month old calves is very high.

2015-2016 calf mortality graph

Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

In the colder, snowy winter of 2017, 50% of the elk calves survived.  Interestingly enough, the predation rates were similar to the milder winters; 16% were killed by mountain lions and 6% were killed by wolves.  Starvation (16%), heavy parasite loads (2%), and disease (2%) accounted for the difference in survival rates among the winters.  Calves were in worse body condition in 2017 as determined by bone marrow condition.  We could not determine cause of death in 8% of the cases.

2017 R1 calf mortality graph

Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

What do these calf survival rates mean for the elk population?  We are working on some modeling now, incorporating other information like cow survival rates, calf:cow ratios that we get during our winter aerial surveys, and the percent of spikes in the harvest.  Once we get the results of the modeling , we’ll report to you on that.

Our jobs can certainly be gruesome at times, but it rewarding to determine what is happening with our elk populations so we can make informed management decisions.

Mt lion caching elk carcass

Mountain lion caching elk carcass
Creative Commons Licence
Idaho Department of Fish and Game

Source: Wildlife CSI – Panhandle elk mortality study | Idaho Fish and Game



protect the wolves, sacred resources,


 Protect The Wolves™ adds: Today we know that the United States must ensure that the purposes for which reservations were created are not undermined and the fiduciary obligations that arise from the trust responsibility must be met by all federal agencies and in a manner that does not interfere with Tribal rights. The FWS did not take the best course of action in Slaughtering “Phoenix”. She should have been captured and sent back to a captive Breeding Program.

Further it was wrongly reported by some news outlets that the WMAT contacted FWS, After our Investigation, We now know that that is not True after speaking with White Mountain Apache Tribes Game and Fish.

We need all 57,000 plus people to step up so We are enabled to take the needed action against the Crooked elected Officials that are influenced by Special Interest Cattle Groups. It is time that you take the Power back that you have available, and use it through our Voice to put these Government branches into Court!

To gain an overall perspective and appreciation of how Tribes view the ESA as it relates to Tribal interests, it is important to present some discussion on the basis of and the general principles embraced by all Tribal governments, namely Tribal Sovereignty and Federal Trust Responsibility. Tribal Sovereignty The inherent sovereignty of Indian Tribes and Nations has long been recognized by the United States Constitution, the Federal Government, and Federal Courts. See, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831); United States v. Winans (1905) (Indian nations reserve all governmental powers and individual rights not specifically abrogated by Congress, or granted away by the Tribes in their treaties or agreements with the United States). As a result of a constitutionally established government to government relationship, the Federal Government has a responsibility to protect Indian trust resources (Indian trust resources generally include land, water, air, minerals, and wildlife, reserved or otherwise owned or held for the benefit of Indian Tribes and nations). That legal principle has been reiterated extensively in recent years within the context of natural resource management, Parravano v. Babbitt (1995) (Federal Indian trust responsibility extends not just to the Interior Department, but to the entire Federal Government as a whole) and Covelo Indian Community v. FERC (1990). As sovereign nations, Tribes and Tribal lands are not subject to the same public domain laws that govern other lands within the United States, either public or private. It has been legally established that inherent in the establishment of a reservation is the right of Indians to hunt and fish on reservation lands free from state regulations, lawfully exercise substantial control over the lands and resources of its reservation, including its wildlife, and to regulate the use of its resources by members as well as nonmembers. Cases such as the Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States (1968), Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association (1979), New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe (1983), Arapahoe Tribe v. Hodel (1990), and Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (1999), have affirmed this precept. Some of these rights are based on treaty rights, but many follow from the mere establishment of a reservation and the self-governance powers inherent therein. Congress may limit the powers of Indian self-governance, including the denial of treaty established hunting or fishing rights, as it did when it prohibited Indians from hunting eagles under the Eagle Protection Act. But to do so, the Congressional act abrogating those powers must be clear and explicit. See Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903). Tribes retain their rights and powers, comprehensive of all Tribal properties and interests; United States v. Winans (1905), Winters v. United States (1908). In general, however, Congress has not abrogated Tribal interests and utilization of Indian trust resources and the matter has been, for the most part, left to Tribal regulation.

Tribal Perspectives on Mexican Wolf Recovery 6 Trust Responsibility

  It is well established that Indian Tribes in the United States are sovereign entities, and that the U.S. is legally required to protect Indian trust resources for the benefit of each respective Indian Tribe and Nation. Those legal responsibilities are intended to ensure that Tribal lands remain capable and sufficient of serving as viable homelands. In managing trust lands or assisting Tribes in doing so, the government must act for the exclusive benefit of the Tribes, and ensure that Indian lands and resources are protected and maintained for their exclusive use. Tribal lands are not public lands and are not set aside or designated for the purpose of conserving endangered species, critical habitat, or for the primary purpose of conserving flora or fauna, except as it may directly benefit the Tribes. As a practical matter, Tribal lands comprise some of the most remote, wild and scenic places on the continent and Tribal lands often support a far greater biological diversity than surrounding private or public lands. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that Tribal lands (reservations) are first and foremost the homelands to Indian people, established to provide for their respective traditional, spiritual, cultural, social, and economic benefit. As trustee, the United States must ensure that the purposes for which reservations were created are not undermined and the fiduciary obligations that arise from the trust responsibility must be met by all federal agencies and in a manner that does not interfere with Tribal rights.

Wyoming Over WOLF SLAUGHTER Quota in 2 Zones already.

protect yellowstone wolves

Wyoming Over WOLF SLAUGHTER Quota in 2 Zones already.

What will it take for the Government to Realize that Wyoming has once again proven they are incapable of managing The Public’s Federal Resources?


At an Alarming Rate!!!!

AS OF 10/12/2017

We asked for your support back in May to Help Yellowstone Wolves with our Sacred Resource Protection Zone…  Wolves are dying, crying out for us to help them.

Please Consider Joining Our Voice to establish a Sacred Resource Protection Zone Surrounding National Parks in the Blood thirsty state of Wyoming a total of it appears 43 wolves altogether 23 from the Trophy Zones 2 of which are already over Quota., 20 from the general Slaughter Zone in this Bloodthirsty State!
Please consider becoming a Paid Member so We are able to call these crooked states out in COURT. We have the Research, the tools, the Attorneys, only missing Ingredient is 57,000 plus followers.

Take Back the Power that You as the public hold! Help us to put The Indian and Public Trusts to work Today, before they wipe out the rest of our wolves, grizzlies, wild horses.


Protect The Wolves

Facebook By Weblizar Powered By Weblizar


%d bloggers like this: