Yeti GOBOX Collection

Gray wolf on the Kaibab confirmed

Great! There goes what's left of the Mule deer hunting on the Kaibab if wolves get established there.
 
I wasnt a fan of them planting packs in the state and now they are just wandering in on their own. Its going to be a long time until these have a season on them. It doesnt take long for these to put a hurting on any decent herd in this state.
 
If it wandered in, maybe someone can help it "wander out".

I'm cashing my deer points on the Kaibab next year while there are still deer.
 
The sun will come up tomorrow, and things change. Most instances mule deer are not the effected preferred prey for wolves. (According to a huge study in Idaho)
 
shoots - I'm not sure what else would be the wolf's primary food source in that area - Kaibab squirrels? Not good news to me that one wandered up there.

I've been tossing around the idea of working up a documentary on wolves in AZ - the plans for expansion of numbers and territory - so this is very interesting info in any case. Thanks for sharing it, Biscuit!
 

In this case the hunter was out after coyotes, and reported the situation with the wolf immediately. They're still deciding whether or not to file charges.

One bit of interesting info from the article I linked that I don't remember seeing before was that the wolf was originally collared in January, 2014, outside Cody, WY. That's a long walk from AZ.
 
I thought that the original plan was to reintroduce wolves to a couple of national parks, not to the entire U. S. I'm ok with having them in the parks - you have to admit they are a pretty cool animal. But, when they wander out of the parks and state a federal wildlife people apply the same protection to those animals I think they are over-stepping the original plan and common sense. The issue should have been addressed in the beginning instead of waiting till they show up where they aren't welcome. I don't claim to know details of the original wolf plan, but this is my opinion.

I think when a problem like this comes up it is wrong to run to the jurisdictional authority and ask them what to do, because in so doing we empower them in the matter and give up our right to act as we see fit. If I put up a birdhouse and a starling moves in, and I run to ODFW and ask them to come up with a plan on how I can handle the matter, then I give them the authority to decide (which they are willing to accept), and I give up my right to go get the .410 and clean up the problem myself. I don't care if its a wolf or a starling - when they move in/cross a state line - don't ask - take care of the problem - SSS.

After my rant I'm sure someone will tell me that wolves outside the park are protected by the same federal laws that apply inside the park, and I'll be left to wonder how did that happen. Hmmm.

Wolves moved into N. E. Oregon several years ago and there is a lot of time and money spent on making sure they are protected, even encouraged. Now we've got them on Mt. Hood, and I expect in a few years they'll be in the Coast Range, and spreading north and south into Washington and California. Sharing is so fun to do, one for me and one for you. What a mess.
 
I thought that the original plan was to reintroduce wolves to a couple of national parks
Central Idaho is not a national park, and I don't think anyone from the beginning thought that they'd be confined to Yellowstone.

But, yes it is frustrating that the original goal was met, then the goal post was pushed back. The extremists on both sides are complicating the issue.

Do you adhere to game take laws? Or is that empowering your state authorities?
 
Back
Top