Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 5, 2016)
12 CapitalPress.com February 5, 2016 WAG’s attention is turning toward preventing depredations WOLVES from Page 1 Confirmed pack * Dens Profanity Peak Bellingham Lookout 5 Nc’icn 2 Seattle Teanaway 90 WASHINGTON 90 Vancouver 195 lumb Co Yakima Co l u ia River mb 395 e nak R ive r Pasco 82 N 20 miles Spokane Huckleberry Carpenter Ridge 2 Wenatchee Olympia 5 2 Wenatchee Tacoma Diamond Whitestone 97 90 Pacific Ocean Dirty Shirt Okanogan outside of Washington 101 20 Strawberry 20 S NOTE: Polygons represent Vancouver estimated ranges for Island known wolf packs with radio-collared animals. Circles represent generic ranges for packs that have no collared wolves. Goodman Meadows Smackout Salmo Wedge CANADA Hozomeen Border pack* (As of March 6, 2015) IDA HO The WAG meets every few months around the state. The meetings often straddle two days. WDFW pays for lodging and meals, including “non-working dinners” at which members learn about each other without discuss- ing wolf policies. The idea is that environmentalists will learn what motivates and worries ranchers, and vice versa. The meetings eschew the standard approach to pol- icy-making: List an issue, discuss it and vote. Madden said she focuses on relationships and pro- cesses, not the substance of an issue. Meetings have agenda items such as “Ex- ploring the spectrum of hu- man needs with respect to wolf conflict.” In an interview, Madden likened wolves to a match that’s been struck and put to a barrel of dynamite. The dynamite represents longtime conflicts, such as the rural-urban divide and feelings of being powerless and imposed upon. She said she’s trying to address the dynamite. “Before there were wolves in Washington, these conflict dynamics existed,” she said. “All these things were already at play.” Months into the experi- ment, some WAG members say they see progress. “These past adviso- ry groups were going no- where,” said Diane Gal- legos, executive director of Wolf Haven International, an animal refuge in Tenino, Wash. “All of the members of this group are willing to commit to try to get to know one another as people.” Known Washington wolf packs River Progress reported Don Jenkins/Capital Press Stevens County rancher Dave Dashiell, left, and Washington Cattlemen’s Association Executive Vice President Jack Field listen during a meeting of the state Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Wolf Advisory Group on Sept. 3 in Tumwater. Dashiell has dropped out of the group, saying he lost confi dence that WDFW or conservation groups will accept lethal control of wolves. Field has stuck with the group. “The only way I can ensure I can participate in the outcome is if I’m at the table.” ia So WDFW brought in Madden, who is based in Washington, D.C. As wolf wars in the West continue and lawsuits fly, the new WAG meetings are swaddled in phrases such as “path to peace,” “capacity building” and, above all, “conflict transformation.” “What is conflict trans- formation?” Madden asks. “Conflict transformation is essentially peace-building embedded in social justice.” The terminology can be a bit squishy, but underneath it are hard questions. What are ranchers ex- pected to do to protect their animals from wolves? When will environmentalists ac- cept lethal removal — shoot- ing wolves that prey on live- stock? And will people not on the WAG be at peace with what the panel advises? So far, the jury is still out. Former WAG member Dave Dashiell, a Stevens County rancher, said he doubts the effort will suc- ceed. He was a pivotal figure on the panel, a link to north- eastern Washington, where most of the state’s wolves live. Wolves threaten his livelihood, yet he was ini- tially willing to talk about reconciling wolf recovery with ranching. But he said he left the panel in part because he lost confidence that other inter- ests will ever accept lethal removal as a legitimate tool to control wolves. “I think Francine is do- ing her best, but I think it’s an impossible task when you come down to brass tacks,” he said. Don Dashiell, a Stevens County commissioner and Dave Dashiell’s brother, remains on the advisory group. OREGON Source: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Walla Walla Tucannon Alan Kenaga/Capital Press agement. “I’d like to have every- thing wrapped up, get ev- erything done in a day, but that’s a little foolish on my part,” Field said. “I’m not the most patient person, but right now I don’t see any other way.” Madden said the WAG will take up policy questions soon. “We are going to be div- ing into some of these issues this spring, absolutely,” she said. High bidder Don Jenkins/Capital Press The rules that the Washington Wolf Advisory Group are asked to follow are listed on this poster. The group, composed of represen- tatives of a variety of interests, is trying to come up with ways to manage wolves in Washington state. Jack Field, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen’s Association, said the WAG has a clearer purpose than before. The WAG’s attention is turning toward preventing depredations and clarifying when WDFW will lethally remove wolves in the east- ern one-third of Washington, where wolves are not pro- tected under the federal En- dangered Species Act. Once past those sticky topics, Field said, the WAG can take on other issues, such as reviewing the state’s recovery goals and planning for post-recovery wolf man- WDFW hired Madden a year ago for $82,000 to as- sess the state’s conflict over wolves. She interviewed more than 90 people and submit- ted a 43-page report that observed that ranchers and environmentalists agree that emotions over wolves are in- tense and escalating. The report positioned Madden to win a two-year, $850,010 contract to lead the WAG meetings, train WDFW staff members in conflict resolution and meet with other interested people, including ranchers and envi- ronmentalists. While her work with the WAG is the most visible, Madden estimates she has talked to several hundred people about the conflict. WDFW chose Madden over two firms, Triangle Associates of Seattle and Kearns & West Inc., which has offices in Portland, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Madden’s bid was rough- ly five times higher than the other two bids. Her rates — $8,000 a day for “facilitation service,” $4,000 for “in-person en- gagement” and $400 an hour for “remote engagement” — were also higher. And it was increased by travel ex- penses. The other firms offered the services of several as- sociates with experience in Northwest issues such as salmon recovery, mining and sage grouse protection. Madden’s resume has more of an international fla- vor, studded with work on wildlife issues in Africa and South America. Martorello said three WDFW reviewers scored Madden’s proposal the high- est. WAG member Shawn Cantrell, Northwest director of Defenders of Wildlife, said Madden has defused tension among members of the group. “I think she’s the real hub of this transformation going on,” he said. “I think she’s really good at having people be heard and for a lot of us that’s what we want, to be heard.” Ranchers skeptical The Cattle Producers of Washington, an organiza- tion of ranchers, quit the WAG in September, saying the panel was pointless and a forum for WDFW to talk things to death instead of controlling problem wolves. The group also complained that Madden had fostered a secretive atmosphere by persuading WDFW to close portions of two WAG meet- ings, contrary to department policy. The Cattle Producers’ po- sition hasn’t changed since then, although the group’s vice president, Stevens County rancher Scott Niel- sen, said he was impressed with Madden. “I think peo- ple naturally like her and naturally look to her for solutions,” he said. But he said he can’t see the WAG being anything but counterproductive for ranch- ers. Nielsen said ranchers are already attuned to protect- ing their herds from wolves, without the involvement of conservationists, who he said have an unrealistic con- fidence in deterrence mea- sures. “I don’t want to throw water on everything they have. You can sound so hard- nosed. ... But they’re not inventing the wheel. We’ve been living with predators a long time,” Nielsen said. “If you are a responsible rancher, you do everything you can to protect these animals. If you don’t, then you shouldn’t be in the busi- ness,” he said. WDFW’s policy is that it won’t consider lethal remov- al until at least four cows or sheep have been killed and the rancher has exhausted other ways to protect his animals. The policy — illus- trated by a flow chart with lots of boxes and arrows — leaves room for interpreta- tion. Nielsen said the policy practically requires ranchers to wait for their animals to be harmed. The effect is to force ranchers to move on, he said. “We end up being re- moved from the landscape,” he said. “You should be talking about only one” dep- redation. Lawsuit effective If one is looking for a tan- gible effect on Washington’s wolf policy, environmental- ists willing to sue have been more influential in the past year than the WAG. A federal judge in Decem- ber ruled in favor of conser- vation groups that sought to keep the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Ser- vices from assisting WDFW with the lethal removal of wolves. The judge agreed with environmentalists that even though wolves are not feder- ally protected in far Eastern Washington, Wildlife Ser- vices would have to conduct an in-depth environmen- tal review before shooting wolves at WDFW’s request. WDFW says it also has the ability to shoot wolves, but the department had re- lied on Wildlife Services. Dashiell, the Stevens County rancher, cited the lawsuit as one reason for leaving the WAG. Dashiell estimates he lost 300 sheep to wolves in 2014, and Wildlife Ser- vices, at WDFW’s direc- tion, shot one adult female wolf in response. The out- come upset environmen- talists and spawned the lawsuit. “I always contended that with the first wolf that had to be killed, the cooperation was gone, and this lawsuit proved it,” Dashiell said. “It doesn’t seem like a whole lot of trust-building.” Several conservation groups participated in the lawsuit, including Casca- dia Wildlands, which is not represented on the WAG. Cascadia’s legal director, Nick Cady, said the lawsuit reflected the groups’ enmi- ty toward Wildlife Services’ activities in the West, not an unbending opposition to lethal removal of wolves in Eastern Washington. Environmental groups are watching the WAG, aware that lethal removal is part of the state’s wolf recovery plan, he said. “Nobody’s bailed entirely from the pro- cess yet,” he said. Another environmental organization involved in the lawsuit was the Kettle Range Conservation Group, whose director, Tim Coleman, is on the WAG. He, too, said he can accept the idea of le- thal removal, but he wants robust preventive measures, such as a school for range riders. “Because the wolf is in recovery, the public expects these extra mea- sures be used,” Coleman said. Pacifi c Northwest weather will be warmer than normal in the summer WEATHER from Page 1 California, Nevada, Utah and Arizona will also be wet- ter than normal in May. The Pacifi c Northwest will be warmer than normal in the summer. Douglas said, but also have adequate moisture. “You guys are in really good shape this spring and summer,” he told farmers in the audience. July will be wet, which could cause problems with harvest, Douglas warned. The weather will dry out in August as an enormous ridge of high pressure develops across the U.S. Douglas also said it will be the fi rst hot summer for the Corn Belt in four years, which could impact corn and soy- bean production, depending on the timing. The El Niño condition that has been pumping storms across the Pacifi c Ocean to the West Coast will end this spring, he said. The planet will then enter a tempera- ture pattern similar to 1976 through 1997, which means drier conditions in the Pacifi c Northwest, especially during the winter, due to more high pressure ridges along the West Coast. “The entire period will end up with precipitation any- where from 5 to 10 percent below normal, which may not sound like a lot, but when you start compounding it in terms of the effect on groundwater, runoff, reservoirs and lakes, it becomes a problem,” Douglas said. “It’s encouraging,” farmer Raymond DeRuwe of Day- ton, Wash., said of Douglas’ forecast for this year. “Mois- ture is yield. Every inch of moisture is worth eight bush- els of wheat (per acre).” Kevin Lyle of Connell, Wash., was pleased to hear about the moisture in the spring. It could make for a better crop than in recent years, he said. But rain during harvest could increase sprout dam- age concerns, Lyle said. Farmers receive lower prices at country elevators when their grain has sprout damage,. “Hopefully it’s not too wet into summer (during) har- vest, is the main thing,” he said.
