New documentary about orphaned wolf cub dispels misunderstandings about wolves 

protect the wolves

Green and Li Weiyi on the grasslands Photo: Courtesy of Youth Enlight

Wolves have a complex image in China. On one hand, many Chinese find them scary, which is why there are numerous stories about wolves harming people and other animals in traditional Chinese culture. On the other hand, Chinese also respect these animals because they are seen as being “courageous” and “tough.”

According to the thesis paper Study on the Culture of the Wolf in China by Ma Jianzhang, Yang Guotao and Ma Yiqing, nomadic tribes in North China and Northwest China had great respect for wolves because they needed to fight against the harsh environment of the regions just like the tribes did. Fear of wolves was mainly prevalent in the central parts of China, since the farmers in these regions saw these animals as enemies that were a direct threat to their livestock.

“Chinese have a centuries-long wolf culture,” Zhang Yiwu, a professor at Peking University, told the Global Times. “While people’s impression of wolves was mainly negative in the past, after the publication of Wolf Totem and the film based on that book, people began seeing wolves in an increasingly positive light,” Zhang noted.

Written by Chinese author Jiang Rong, Wolf Totem provided many Chinese a window into the lives of wolves by going into extreme detail about how they live and survive in the wild. The book was eventually adapted into a film by French director Jean-Jacques Annaud in 2015.

Now another film is changing people’s perception of wolves.

On June 16, Return to the Wolves debuted in Chinese mainland cinemas. The documentary film follows Green, a young wolf raised in captivity that is eventually returned to the wild.

The film became the highest-earning Chinese film over its debut weekend, earning 11.69 million yuan ($1.7 million) at the box office.

A true story

 

Cut from more than 1,700 hours of home movie footage, Return to the Wolves tells the story of artist Li Weiyi and how she discovered an orphaned wolf cub, which she names Green after its jade-colored eyes.

First attempting to raise the cub as an ordinary pet, the artist and her friend Yifeng soon realize the cub must be returned to the wild. The two then spend the next 10 months preparing Green for its return to nature by teaching it how to fend for itself and helping it integrate with a new pack.

Li discovered Green during a trip to the Zoige Grassland in the Tibet Autonomous Region in the spring of 2010. Speaking to a local herdsman, he told her how over the previous few days two wolves had attacked his village’s flock of sheep in order to get food for their cubs. With their livelihood threatened, the local villagers killed the adult wolves, leaving the young cubs to fend for themselves.

“After hearing the story, I wanted to find out what happened to the cubs. After three days of searching, I eventually found them in a cave, but only one was still alive,” Li told the Global Times on Tuesday.

Though her friend Yifeng objected, Li made up her mind to bring the dying cub back home with her to Southwest China’s Sichuan Province.

However, while her heart was in the right place, it soon became clear that urban life was no life for the young cub.

They brought the cub back to the grasslands of his birth, but also realized they couldn’t just leave the cub to fend for itself.

Over the next eight months, both Li and Yifeng taught the growing cub how to hunt and fend for itself. Discovering a nearby wolf pack, the two also worked to get Green and them accustomed to each other. Eventually, one day they saw Green on a hunt with the pack, and they knew that he had finally found a home.

Changing perceptions

Li turned her experiences into a book that was published by Changjiang Literature and Art Publishing in 2012. Wanting to reach a larger audience, however, the two decided that they should bring Green’s story to the big screen.

An amateur film director and editor, Yifeng spent six years and two months editing together all the home movies they made of their time with Green.

“Some people have criticized the film saying it doesn’t count as a documentary because it contains too much of my personal feelings. Even those who like the story have also commented that it’s too amateurish,” Yifeng told the Global Times, explaining that he was learning on the fly as he edited the film.

“My original goal was to bring it into theaters so people could see Green’s story. I welcome different opinions on how well I succeeded at that.”

Although Yifeng objected to bringing Green to Sichuan, he said his perception of the animals were changed by his time spent with the wolf cub.

“Green made me reflect a lot. I feel I am inferior to him… he had a humanity that people today do not have any more. We humans really know so little about wolves,” Yifeng said.

Li further explained that “in most people’s minds today, wolves are animals that attack people. But this is not the case. This is the biggest misunderstand people have toward wolves.”

Li said that after their nearly one year with Green, they spent another five or six years living near the wolf pack.

“The wild wolves lived peacefully with us and never hurt us,” Li told the Global Times.

“They do have their wild side, but that does not equate to killing people or wanton aggressiveness,” she explained, adding that when humans run into something stronger than themselves, it is they who tend to attack before they might get hurt.

“This is the aggressiveness of humans.”

While a second book of stories about their time with Green was published by Changjiang Literature and Art Publishing in 2015, Yifeng said they do not have a plan to make a second film yet.

“Making a film is a complicated thing. First, we need to see how the first one fares. At the moment, the future isn’t looking very bright,” Yifeng said, adding that the second book touches more on personal feelings, which is something he doesn’t want to pursue anymore as a filmmaker.

“Personally speaking, if the first one can succeed on its own in raising people’s awareness, I’d rather just leave the second story alone.”

Source: New documentary about orphaned wolf cub dispels misunderstandings about wolves – Global Times

Oregon, Like Washington, To Kill Wolves That Preyed On Livestock 

ban grazing allotments, protect the wolves

Don’t let Wolf Manager Brown, or Martorello pull the proverbial wool over your eyes by leading you to believe that Ranchers have done everything possible as far as Deterrents are concerned!! They Did not! THEY CHOSE TO LEAVE their cattle on a landscape that they have no control over. Why? Because it has been recently reported by a Wa Group that it only costs them $1.69 – $1.83 per month per cow calf pair… per MONTH. Guess who gets to pay the extra Administration Costs? You The Taxpayer! What do you think bout them there apples???

These State Agencies are supposed to manage our Indian and Public resources based on best Science available… are they? No, they are refusing to recognize science, studies that have shown using over 25 years of DATA, that shown targeting wolves one year, results in more Depredations the following year. Both Brown, and Martorello have PROVEN THAT STUDY CORRECT!!! When will they wake up?? Perhaps when they get Fired!! They need the Ranchers taken out of their front pockets steering them around by the Cojones….

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has decided to kill members of the Harl Butte wolf pack in Eastern Oregon in an attempt to disrupt the pack’s behavior and prevent future livestock losses.

The decision comes after Wallowa County ranchers requested lethal control because the pack has attacked cattle seven times in the past 13 months. It marks the eighth time state officials in Oregon or Washington have taken lethal action on wolves that preyed on livestock.

Rather than remove the entire pack, as requested, wildlife officials will kill two adult wolves and then reevaluate. If depredation continues, more wolves could be killed. The approach is similar to a tactic the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife began last week, when it began killing members of the Smackout Pack in the forests north of Spokane.

“In this chronic situation, lethal control measures are warranted,” Roblyn Brown, ODFW Acting Wolf Coordinator, said in a release. “We will use incremental removal to give the remaining wolves the opportunity to change their behavior or move out of the area.”

In Oregon, lethal control can be considered after multiple confirmed depredations by a wolf pack if the livestock producer has taken steps to avoid attracting wolves, like removing carcasses, and documented unsuccessful attempts to solve the problem through non-lethal means, like increased range riding or using radio boxes or fence lining called fladry to deter wolves.

In this case, the state decided ranchers had taken sufficient measures.

“Based on the level of non-lethal measures already being used and the fact that wolves are likely to be in the presence of cattle in this area for several more months, there is a substantial risk that depredation will continue or escalate,” said Brown.

Both ranchers and wolf advocates voiced displeasure over the decision, for different reasons.

“They’re only taking two out. It won’t be effective,” said Todd Nash, chairman of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association wolf committee. “It means more dead and wounded cattle. It means more sleepless nights for the people trying to protect their livestock. This is not an easy area to try and protect livestock.”

In previous public hearings, cattlemen have told state officials they feel Oregon has slighted ranchers by being too hesitant to point to wolves as the culprit for dead cattle and sheep and to take lethal action against packs that repeatedly prey on livestock.

On large, public allotments used for grazing in the eastern portions of Oregon and Washington, cattle carcasses can be hard to find. Ranchers say state biologists are too slow to respond, allowing evidence to deteriorate, ultimately leading them to undercount wolf predation. In some parts of the state, the number of missing livestock blamed on wolves greatly outnumbers confirmed wolf kills.

“The action here is just kind of a punt,” Nash said. “We know they probably won’t change their ways. We’ll put it back on the cattlemen’s back to defend their livestock once again.”

There are at least 112 wolves in Oregon by last count. As the population increased, the state entered a new phase of wolf management that lowered the threshold of attacks on livestock before wolves can be killed. It’s been a point of contention among ranchers, who want the ability to protect their livestock, and environmental groups who push for wolf protections.

Advocates for wolves in Oregon fear killing wolves is becoming a too familiar pattern.

“It appears to us ODFW appears to be capitulating to pressure from the livestock industry to make a wolf-free zone in this part of the state,” said Steve Pedery, conservation director for Oregon Wild.

Pedery said he didn’t consider the evidence showing non-lethal deterrence to be sufficient. He called the lethal action a failure of the wolf plan.

“The reason we have this plan is to try and prevent conflicts between wolves and livestock, and err on the side of protecting wolves and native wildlife. It’s not there to grant kill permits and make it easier for livestock operations to kill wolves on public land,” Pedery said.

Last week, the group sent a letter to Oregon Gov. Kate Brown asking her to intervene, but has not received a response.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife killed the Imnaha Pack in the same area a little over a year ago. The agency also killed wolves in Wallowa County in 2011.

In addition to the current lethal action on the Smackout Pack, officials in Washington also killed wolves from the Profanity Peak pack in 2016 and the Wedge Pack in 2012.

Source: Oregon, Like Washington, To Kill Wolves That Preyed On Livestock | Northwest Public Radio

Colville Reservation: CCT set to vote on North Half wolf hunting season, 

Calling All Tribes to Help Us

CCT I hope you have your ducks in a row, with your i’s dotted and tees crossed. If not, be prepared to hear from Protect The Wolves™ that still carries on your Traditional Elders Beliefs. Some of Your Younger Tribal council members have offended your very own Tribal Elders…. some of which have told us that you have shamed them for not staying on the path of the People….  The True Human Beings! They have gone as far to say you have been infected by the White Mans Greed….. and No you cant just make this stuff up…. Talk to your “REAL” Traditional Elders… you’ll not like their truths We have, and we agree with their want to preserve our Culture, and take care of our environment in a good way! CTFW director Randy Friedlander, is showing just the above mentioned attitude…… hes afraid the white man is going to use up their numbers of slaughtering our Sacred Species…. Tribes do not need people like him watching over Our Sacred Resources….

Justus Caudell/Tribal Tribune

NESPELEM – In January when the Colville Business Council voted unanimously to approve a Gray Wolf Management Plan on the Colville Reservation, wildlife managers had decided to wait on creating hunting regulations on the North Half of the Colville Reservation, according to CTFW director Randy Friedlander.

The Colville tribes had opened gray wolf hunting within the reservation three years previous and only months before, in November, the first wolf harvest was reported.

Now Thursday, CBC will vote on an amendment put forth by CTFW to add a North Half wolf-hunting season to the previously approved plan.

“That will incorporate the ability for a Colville tribal member to hunt wolves in the North Half,” said Friedlander in CBC’s Natural Resource Committee, Tuesday.

The Colville tribes share management of wildlife with state agencies on the North Half of the reservation.

“I think we’re aware of the state. The state has a wolf management plan… Their plan does allow for lethal removal of wolves if they have so many depredations on cows. I think right now there are two packs on the North Half that fall within that category… Potentially, if the state goes up and shoots multiple wolves, they may use up what we consider our allowable harvest.”

The North Half wolf season is similar to the management of wolves on the Colville Reservation. The gray wolf management plan calls for human-harvest quota of wolves to be between 20 and 24 percent of the animal’s annual population.

State wildlife managers have listed the wolf population on the North Half to be 16, CTFW’s Rich Whitney told CBC, but if the state kills any wolves for depredation concerns the quota may drop.

An allocation table attached as an appendix to the plan suggests if the population is between zero and nine wolves on the reservation, no hunting should be permitted, but if there are 10 wolves, CTFW regulations should permit killing one. If there are, 13 wolves, the table suggests an allocation of three, which would be 23.1 percent of the overall population.

CTFW staff suggested the hunt will be similar to other North Half hunts, requiring a transport tag from CTFW.

Source: WA: Colville Reservation: CBC set to vote on North Half wolf hunting season, Thursday | Timber Wolf Information Network

Appeals court backs wolves’ endangered status

protect The wolves We have to figure out how to roll this ruling into all states that contain Wolves. With the assistance of the Indian and Public Trust We believe that this is in fact possible. 1 Reason listed below we have seen first hand in states like Washington. Ruling on our Website

Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq. Because the government failed to reasonably analyze or consider two significant aspects of the rule—the impacts of partial delisting and of historical range loss on the already listed species—we affirm the judgment of the district court vacating the 2011 Rule.

 

Protect The Wolves

Facebook By Weblizar Powered By Weblizar

Categories

%d bloggers like this: