1. Biological Status Review for the Gray Wolf in Oregon and Evaluation of Delisting Criteria April 24, 2015 Russ Morgan Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife

2. Purpose of This Briefing To evaluate the biological status of wolves in Oregon and determine if significant information exists to justify rulemaking to delist the wolf under the Oregon ESA (OESA) ODFW, 4/2015

3. Overview History, Oregon ESA, Wolf Plan History, Oregon ESA, Wolf Plan Biological Status of Wolves Biological Status of Wolves Evaluation of OESA Delisting Criteria Evaluation of OESA Delisting Criteria ODFW, 4/2015

4. History Wolves were intentionally eradicated in Oregon Wolves were intentionally eradicated in Oregon Wolves mostly gone from Oregon by 1930’s Wolves mostly gone from Oregon by 1930’s Last Oregon wolf bounty paid in 1946 Last Oregon wolf bounty paid in 1946 Soldiers Soda Butte Creek-Wolf Pelt YNP 1905 Public DomainPublic Domain ODFW, 4/2015

5. Wolf Recovery Reintroductions in neighboring states Reintroductions in neighboring states Experts predicted wolves would reestablish in Oregon Experts predicted wolves would reestablish in Oregon B45 ODFW, 4/2015

6. Wolf Plan Adopted in 2005, updated in 2010 Adopted in 2005, updated in 2010 Three-phased population approach to address both conservation and management needs Three-phased population approach to address both conservation and management needs Phase II prompts consideration of delisting from Oregon ESA Phase II prompts consideration of delisting from Oregon ESA ODFW, 4/2015

7. Commission Principles for Wolf Plan Development in 2005  Write management plan based on “conservation” as required by State law  No active re-introduction of wolves  Provide relief for livestock producers from expected wolf depredations  Address impacts to deer and elk populations  Flexibility in managing wolves while providing needed protections ODFW, 4/2015

9. Management Flexibility? Wolf Plan (Page 27) “After delisting and removal of ESA protections, if western Oregon has not met the conservation population objective, the Commission will continue to manage wolves in that area under a management regime that replicates Oregon ESA protections for individual wolves” ODFW, 4/2015

10. Population Wolves established in NE Oregon in 2008, and annual counts began in 2009. Wolves established in NE Oregon in 2008, and annual counts began in 2009. Population increasing at a growth rate of 1.41 (2009-2014) Population increasing at a growth rate of 1.41 (2009-2014) 77 wolves in 2014 in 15 known packs or groups 77 wolves in 2014 in 15 known packs or groups Minimum-observed count method Minimum-observed count method ODFW, 4/2015

12. Reproduction and Survival 8 successful breeding pairs in 2014 8 successful breeding pairs in 2014 7 in east zone (all in NE Oregon) 7 in east zone (all in NE Oregon) 1 in west zone (southern Cascades) 1 in west zone (southern Cascades) Estimated pup survival rate of.61 Estimated pup survival rate of.61 Within range of other reported pup survival values. Within range of other reported pup survival values. Oregon uses minimum-observed pup counts, likely underestimates pup survival. Oregon uses minimum-observed pup counts, likely underestimates pup survival. ODFW, 4/2015

13. Dispersal 16 collared-wolf dispersals Half left the state (emigrated) Mean dispersal distance (n=10) was 90 Mi ODFW, 4/2015

15. Habitat Wolves are habitat generalists and use many land cover types if prey is available Wolves are habitat generalists and use many land cover types if prey is available Wolves in Oregon use mostly forested area Wolves in Oregon use mostly forested area Seasonal habitat shifts to open areas usually reflect prey distribution shifts Seasonal habitat shifts to open areas usually reflect prey distribution shifts Wolves use both private and public land, but to date most data locations and den sites have been on National Forest lands Wolves use both private and public land, but to date most data locations and den sites have been on National Forest lands ODFW, 4/2015

16. Healthy Wolves? Few diseases documented in Oregon wolves. Few diseases documented in Oregon wolves. Parvovirus documented in 2013 Parvovirus documented in 2013 Mange not detected in Oregon Mange not detected in Oregon Lice detected on one wolf to date Lice detected on one wolf to date ODFW, 4/2015

17. Human-caused Mortality Factors Most documented Oregon wolf deaths have been human-caused (2000-Present) Illegal take (5) Illegal take (5) ODFW control action (4) ODFW control action (4) Vehicle collision (1) Vehicle collision (1) Capture-related (1) Capture-related (1) ODFW, 4/2015

18. Criterion 1: Geography Criterion 1: Geography (Page 10) The species is not now (and is not likely in the foreseeable future to be) in danger of extinction in any significant portion of its range in Oregon Evaluation of OESA Delisting Criteria ODFW, 4/2015

19. What We Considered Historical Range – Most of Oregon Historical Range – Most of Oregon Contracted Range – Areas no longer suitable Contracted Range – Areas no longer suitable Potential Range – Where wolves could live (habitat, prey, human factors) Potential Range – Where wolves could live (habitat, prey, human factors) Currently Occupied Range – Where wolves are now Currently Occupied Range – Where wolves are now Extinction Risk Extinction Risk ODFW, 4/2015

20. Potential Wolf Range

21. ODFW, 4/2015

24. Conclusion for Criteria 1 Current areas of known wolf activity include about 12% of the state’s potential wolf range Current areas of known wolf activity include about 12% of the state’s potential wolf range Wolves are represented over a large geographic area of Oregon Wolves are represented over a large geographic area of Oregon Nothing is preventing wolves from occupying additional portions of the West Zone Nothing is preventing wolves from occupying additional portions of the West Zone Observed dispersal and movement patterns indicate connectivity Observed dispersal and movement patterns indicate connectivity Wolves not likely to become extinct Wolves not likely to become extinct ODFW, 4/2015

25. Criterion 2: Population Viability Criterion 2: Population Viability (Page 15) The species’ natural reproductive potential is not in danger of failure due to limited population numbers, disease, predation, or other natural or human-related factors affecting its continued existence. ODFW, 4/2015

26. Population Model Individual based model using conservative inputs such as survival, emigration, territory establishment, immigration, human-caused mortality, and reproduction Individual based model using conservative inputs such as survival, emigration, territory establishment, immigration, human-caused mortality, and reproduction Assessed two measures of population viability – conservation-failure, and biological extinction Assessed two measures of population viability – conservation-failure, and biological extinction Validated model by comparing to count data. Results indicates our model is appropriately cautious Validated model by comparing to count data. Results indicates our model is appropriately cautious ODFW, 4/2015

27. Model Results Wolf population projected to increase at a minimum rate of 7% annually Wolf population projected to increase at a minimum rate of 7% annually Overall probability of extinction is low Overall probability of extinction is low Baseline Model: 6% probability of conservation- failure Baseline Model: 6% probability of conservation- failure 1% probability of biological extinction 1% probability of biological extinction No simulations fell below conservation level when using Oregon observed data No simulations fell below conservation level when using Oregon observed data ODFW, 4/2015

28. Important Model Factors Starting population size is important in our model and risk of failure is highest in early years Starting population size is important in our model and risk of failure is highest in early years Human caused mortality also important. Probability of failure was low when human- caused mortality rates (as implemented in our model) are kept below.10 Human caused mortality also important. Probability of failure was low when human- caused mortality rates (as implemented in our model) are kept below.10 ODFW, 4/2015

29. Criterion 2: Other Factors Considered Disease Disease Predation Predation Genetic viability Genetic viability Other natural or human factors Other natural or human factors Habitat connectivity Habitat connectivity ODFW, 4/2015

31. Conclusion for Criterion 2 Population is low but increasing in abundance and distribution. Population is low but increasing in abundance and distribution. Analysis predicts a growing wolf population Analysis predicts a growing wolf population Low probability for population failure Low probability for population failure Rates of disease, predation, and human-caused mortality has been relatively low Rates of disease, predation, and human-caused mortality has been relatively low Wolves are part of a larger population and no barriers to connectivity were identified. Wolves are part of a larger population and no barriers to connectivity were identified. ODFW, 4/2015

32. Most populations are not undergoing imminent or active deterioration of range or primary habitat Criterion 3: Deterioration of Range or Habitat? (Page 19) ODFW, 4/2015

33. Criterion 3: Range Deterioration? ODFW, 4/2015 Wolves were extirpated because of eradication effort, not because of range or habitat loss Wolves were extirpated because of eradication effort, not because of range or habitat loss Wolves are now expanding their range in Oregon Wolves are now expanding their range in Oregon Occur in 4,858 Sq Mi Occur in 4,858 Sq Mi Two geographic regions Two geographic regions

34. Criterion 3: Habitat Deterioration? Human population increase not likely to affect Human population increase not likely to affect Wolves prefer forest cover, mountainous terrain Wolves prefer forest cover, mountainous terrain Future human growth is projected to occur in areas less suitable for wolves Future human growth is projected to occur in areas less suitable for wolves Public land ownership – land use and forest protection regulations Public land ownership – land use and forest protection regulations Prey populations are highly regulated under other state plans Prey populations are highly regulated under other state plans ODFW, 4/2015

35. Over-utilization of the species or its habitat for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is not occurring or likely to occur Criterion 4: Overutilization (Page 20) ODFW, 4/2015

36. Criterion 4: Overutilization Protective framework (Wolf Plan) does not change as a result of any delisting decision Protective framework (Wolf Plan) does not change as a result of any delisting decision Capture/collaring will continue Capture/collaring will continue Phase I-III Phase I-III Delisting does not allow any additional commercial, recreational, scientific activities. Delisting does not allow any additional commercial, recreational, scientific activities. Regulated forest management in Oregon Regulated forest management in Oregon ODFW, 4/2015

37. Criterion 5: Adequate Protection Programs (Page 22) Existing state or federal programs or regulations are adequate to protect the species and its habitat. ODFW, 4/2015

38. Wolf Plan Wolf Plan Phase II in East Zone (Phase III as early as 2017) Phase II in East Zone (Phase III as early as 2017) Phase I in West Zone Phase I in West Zone Federal ESA Federal ESA ODFW, 4/2015

39. Effects of Delisting Near term – little change Near term – little change Wolf Plan phases based on zone population Wolf Plan phases based on zone population Federal ESA Federal ESA Most important when wolf population reaches Phase III Most important when wolf population reaches Phase III ODFW, 4/2015

40. Summary Conclusions Oregon wolves are healthy and the wolf population is increasing and is projected to continue to increase Oregon wolves are healthy and the wolf population is increasing and is projected to continue to increase The likelihood of population failure is very low The likelihood of population failure is very low Wolf range is expanding and is projected to continue to expand – wolves now occur in both east and west zones Wolf range is expanding and is projected to continue to expand – wolves now occur in both east and west zones There are no known conditions which prevent connectivity between existing populations and currently unused habitats There are no known conditions which prevent connectivity between existing populations and currently unused habitats The Wolf Plan will continue to provide conservation and protections for wolves in Oregon The Wolf Plan will continue to provide conservation and protections for wolves in Oregon ODFW, 4/2015

41. Questions?