Gardner shutdown

[Pinecricker]

I have a hard time understanding Montana. Why is there so much anti-trapping sentiment when it comes to wolves? And, how did they end up with such a blatantly of pro-wolf commission? Have the demographics of Montana really changed that much? I know there has been a pretty large gentrification effect happening in Montana for the last several decades, but has it really gotten this bad?

One would think that livestock operators would be in favor of an aggressive wolf control program, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Is Ag now a minority voice in Montana, behind the likes of the Buffalo Field Campaigners, and the rest of the eco-activism industry?

One thing that has become clear from wolf management in Idaho is that with out an extremely aggressive trapping program, you just can't produce a meaningful wolf harvest. Heck, even with liberal trapping here (12 wolf tags per trapper), we still haven't made a meaningful dent in the wolf population. They bread so prolifically, and are so difficult to kill, that hunting and trapping just aren't terribly effective. Yet, in Montana they are treating wolves as though they were still listed. Pretty strong indicator of who is controlling policy.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I have a hard time understanding Montana. Why is there so much anti-trapping sentiment when it comes to wolves? And, how did they end up with such a blatantly of pro-wolf commission? Have the demographics of Montana really changed that much? I know there has been a pretty large gentrification effect happening in Montana for the last several decades, but has it really gotten this bad?

One would think that livestock operators would be in favor of an aggressive wolf control program, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Is Ag now a minority voice in Montana, behind the likes of the Buffalo Field Campaigners, and the rest of the eco-activism industry?

One thing that has become clear from wolf management in Idaho is that with out an extremely aggressive trapping program, you just can't produce a meaningful wolf harvest. Heck, even with liberal trapping here (12 wolf tags per trapper), we still haven't made a meaningful dent in the wolf population. They bread so prolifically, and are so difficult to kill, that hunting and trapping just aren't terribly effective. Yet, in Montana they are treating wolves as though they were still listed. Pretty strong indicator of who is controlling policy.

Montana has a much more measured approach than Idaho, true. That approach was developed by citizens sitting down together and crafting a management plan that respects all people, not just one special interest.

You can hunt/trap wolves from Sept. 1st until March 31st, get 5 OTC tags and only districts immediately surrounding National Parks have quotas, which I support. Maybe we're just not as afraid of the big bad wolf as Idaho is.

Most areas in MT are not having a problem getting elk to grow, even with wolves. As folks have said throughout this post, it's poor management, fostered by awful legislation, that has caused the majority of elk crashes. Wolves of course have an effect, but singling them out is simplistic and doesn't get the results we want (more elk) in a long term, sustainable fashion.

 

[shoots-straight]

I have a hard time understanding Montana. Why is there so much anti-trapping sentiment when it comes to wolves? And, how did they end up with such a blatantly of pro-wolf commission? Have the demographics of Montana really changed that much? I know there has been a pretty large gentrification effect happening in Montana for the last several decades, but has it really gotten this bad?

One would think that livestock operators would be in favor of an aggressive wolf control program, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Is Ag now a minority voice in Montana, behind the likes of the Buffalo Field Campaigners, and the rest of the eco-activism industry?

One thing that has become clear from wolf management in Idaho is that with out an extremely aggressive trapping program, you just can't produce a meaningful wolf harvest. Heck, even with liberal trapping here (12 wolf tags per trapper), we still haven't made a meaningful dent in the wolf population. They bread so prolifically, and are so difficult to kill, that hunting and trapping just aren't terribly effective. Yet, in Montana they are treating wolves as though they were still listed. Pretty strong indicator of who is controlling policy.

Pine, we have a fair trapping season, having so many Grizzlies, that are still on the list makes it difficult to get anymore liberal with seasons and type of equipment. Anything with do can be perceived as a threat to Grizzlies, and keep them on the list.

If you read this thread you would know that the livestock industry has a huge effect on game management in Montana. They support more liberal types of take for wolves.

I'll say it again. You could vaporize every predator in Montana and still not be able to raise more game in much of the state. Our livestock Industry, and House bill passed in 2003 seems to be haunting us.

 

[RobG]

I'll say it again. You could vaporize every predator in Montana and still not be able to raise more game in much of the state. Our livestock Industry, and House bill passed in 2003 seems to be haunting us.

I'm starting to hear ya . Clear some space in your PM box.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I'll say it again. You could vaporize every predator in Montana and still not be able to raise more game in much of the state. Our livestock Industry, and House bill passed in 2003 seems to be haunting us.

I agree completely. That is a very difficult paradigm shift for the masses though.

 

[Pinecricker]

So in other words, yes Montana has reached the gentrification tipping point ;-)

Its unusual how the professional eco-activists crowd can argue, with a straight face, that the simultaneous increase in wolf numbers and decrease on elk numbers is entirely coincidental, as if Montana's wolves are vegans, and have had zero impact on elk numbers.

Montana has a much more measured approach than Idaho, true. That approach was developed by citizens sitting down together and crafting a management plan that respects all people, not just one special interest.

You can hunt/trap wolves from Sept. 1st until March 31st, get 5 OTC tags and only districts immediately surrounding National Parks have quotas, which I support. Maybe we're just not as afraid of the big bad wolf as Idaho is.

Most areas in MT are not having a problem getting elk to grow, even with wolves. As folks have said throughout this post, it's poor management, fostered by awful legislation, that has caused the majority of elk crashes. Wolves of course have an effect, but singling them out is simplistic and doesn't get the results we want (more elk) in a long term, sustainable fashion.

 

[1_pointer]

I agree completely. That is a very difficult paradigm shift for the masses though.

I'd say in general, the "masses" doesn't even understand what a paradigm shift is. We might start making headway if we could get The Big Bang Theory to do a show on in.

Schoedinger's Cat...

 

[The Hedgehog]

I wouldn't argue the numbers are much lower, or the fact that the EMP is a total crock.

However, who else here has looked for elk from the air, in mountainous terrain like that around YNP?

FWP has to rely on the only data they have, but it's only worth the paper it's jotted down on. From what I've seen there, the elk no longer hang in big swarms like they used to pre-wolf day, and not just because they are fewer. They act different, winter in different places, and are more broken up. The bulls always stayed higher, and with 4 years of low snowpack, they are going to be harder to locate and count. I don't think they are all gone and the hunting is far from poor there.

But really, does anybody remember the hunters just putting the beat down on those cows, by the THOUSANDS, when there were also new predators running around?

It certainly has very little to do with wolves, in the grand scheme of things.

But the wolf quota over there... man that's gotta go. What a stupid idea.

 

[Ben Lamb]

So in other words, yes Montana has reached the gentrification tipping point ;-)

Its unusual how the professional eco-activists crowd can argue, with a straight face, that the simultaneous increase in wolf numbers and decrease on elk numbers is entirely coincidental, as if Montana's wolves are vegans, and have had zero impact on elk numbers.

I don't think anyone is arguing that. What people who actually look at this stuff beyond the simple view that killing woofs will grow more elk are saying is that until you fix the human aspect of the management regime, not much else will matter. Bad laws that force game agencies to manage at or below objectives which are set based on landowner tolerance more than carrying capacity create situations where thousands of two legged predators smack the chit out of elk.

But yeah, lets worry about a couple hundred woofs.

Speaking of gentrified - I spent last week in N. Idaho. Lots of starbucks and fancy eateries. Lots of skateboarders too. You guys seem like you enjoy the gentrification more than we do.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

But really, does anybody remember the hunters just putting the beat down on those cows, by the THOUSANDS, when there were also new predators running around?

I do. Piles of elk left Gardiner in the backs of trucks. All while it was clearly documented that the average age of cows in the YNP herd was at the geriatric level, and calf:cow ratios were plummeting.

 

[jryoung]

Schoedinger's Cat...

I don't believe in quantum physics when it comes to matters of the heart. [/Crash Davis]

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I think it would be very interesting to look at correlations between several factors. I am willing to bet beer that if one looked at elk numbers in the GNY herd post 1988, you would see some interesting trends if that was compared to overall hunter harvest, average age of cows harvested and calf:cow ratios. I bet it would be even more interesting to then look at this data relative to the average precipitation over that period. Throw in woof and griz population data, and estimated predation over that period just for fun.

My completely uneducated guess is that the results of this might surprise some folks.

 

[HSi-ESi]

Schrodinger's Cat...

Fixed it for you.

Not that this is entirely relevant to the thread, but it is the basis for my avatar....

I think the analogy is pretty spot on though. Are the Elk alive or dead?

 

[RobG]

Here's some long term data to ponder. You can Google up this first image pretty easy. I can't remember when they stopped hunting in the Park, but I remember it as a low point in population.

The second image is from the Park. http://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/elkinfo.htm

Note the population was starting to crash before the wolves were introduced, presumably due to stress over the impending introduction, or perhaps other things were at play. Shoot's point about this being the levels the legislators want is perhaps more important.

 

[katqanna]

Bull elk, bighorn sheep decline in southern Paradise Valley

Bull elk numbers at the southern end of the Paradise Valley and just north of Yellowstone National Park have plummeted.

The most recent survey by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks biologist Karen Loveless, who is based in Livingston, recorded only 2.2 bulls per 100 cows.

“Ten bulls per cow is the red flag to do something,” Loveless said.

“We’ve had pretty good calf recruitment the last three years,” she continued. “We’ve had a good spike (bull) crop and yearling bulls. But the problem is we seem to be harvesting our crop of mature bulls.” ...

Any decline in elk numbers close to Yellowstone National Park immediately brings to mind the plentitude of predators in the region: mountain lions, black bears, grizzly bears, coyotes and wolves.

“Everything is eating those elk,” Loveless said. “They are the foundation of that whole system.”

But elk calf recruitment is climbing, so Loveless said she can’t point to predators as the cause of the recent bull decline.

“So I think harvesting is our current problem,” she said.

 

[shoeghazer]

So are we talking about Gardner, or Gardiner?

 

[katqanna]

Yes. It is Gardiner, just north of the YNP. I dont know if the OP's post was a typo or misspelling, but it is Gardiner.

 

[Chucknduck]

Bull elk, bighorn sheep decline in southern Paradise Valley

Could you imagine hunting somewhere with 10 bulls per cow

 

[BigHornRam]

The unit in question in the original post is an early rifle unit. Early rifle backcountry units like in the Bob and Beartooths have been way too popular for there own good. 16-17 years ago one of the main trailheads had stock trailers parked along the road for quarter mile from the parking lot. Using high powered rifles during the rut with unlimited tags is not sustainable, today. Maybe we should do away with the early rifle season and go to a general season. I understand much of the country would be hard to access do to snow and weather, during the rifle season, but I think that would be way more preferable then limited tags.

 

[RobG]

So are we talking about Gardner, or Gardiner?

The town is a misspelling of an early trapper named Gardner. The town is spelled Gardiner, the river is spelled the Gardner... the hunting district is spelled Gardiner. Prolly more than you wanted to know...

I agree in with BHR about backcountry rifle hunting during the rut is dumb if you have low bull to cow ratio... I wonder if they have considered changing those rules.