Idaho and MT can manage wolves now

[Ithaca 37]

Let's hear from all the wackos who said this would never happen! Wrong again! hump

Governor will sign wolf pact Thursday

Gov. Dirk Kempthorne will join U.S. Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton to sign a wolf-management agreement at 11:30 a.m. Thursday at the Statehouse in Boise.

This is the culmination of a federal rule approved a year ago that makes it possible for Idaho and Montana to manage gray wolves for the first time since they were reintroduced into both states in the mid-1990s.

Once the agreement is signed, ranchers will be able to obtain permits from the state to kill wolves preying on livestock.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060102/NEWS01/601020326/1002/NEWS01

 

[Ithaca 37]

BTW, The Idaho F&G Dept. is already working on plans for a wolf season. It will take awhile, as they will have to show the FWS data to support having a wolf season, but they're working on it.

______________________________________________________

Let's hear from all the guys who said it will never happen.

 

[schmalts]

Kill em, kill em all..... :MAD issue more game tags instead.

 

[A-con]

The offer of a bet is still open, Ithaca. I would hope I loose.

 

[TheTone]

Yeaaa! Good news, maybe the best thing Dirk will do for the state?

 

[BigHornRam]

Hey IT,

The ranchers around here can just shoot the mutts, then call the feds to have them come get the carcus. Idaho sure is backwards. How many Idaho tax dollars will be wasted printing permit books and by buying a fleet of meat wagons?

 

[Ithaca 37]

Idaho takes control of gray wolves
From now on, F&G, not feds, will decide when ranchers can kill animals

Edition Date: 01-06-2006
Email This ArticlePrinter Friendly Page
Idaho assumed management authority over more than 500 gray wolves roaming the state's central mountains under an agreement signed Thursday by Interior Secretary Gale Norton and Gov. Dirk Kempthorne.

From now on, state Department of Fish and Game agents, not the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are responsible for day-to-day management, including issuing wolf-kill permits to ranchers whose livestock fall prey to wolves.

Ranching groups heralded the transfer, saying the state will be more responsive than federal managers in controlling wolves that eat their cattle and sheep.

Advocates for the predator, however, fear state control will hurt wolf recovery efforts.

Norton and Kempthorne, who called it a historic event, hope it leads to removing federal Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in the region within 12 months. Since re-introduction to Idaho in 1995, wolf numbers have grown from three dozen animals to 61 packs stretching from the Snake River to the Montana border, according to the state Office of Species Conservation's 2005 estimate.

"These populations have grown beyond anyone's expectations," Norton told ranchers, predator managers and others in Kempthorne's office for the signing. "Together, we will ensure a bright future — both for wolves and the people of Idaho who live near them."

Montana already has assumed similar management authority within its borders.

As part of their new powers, Idaho Fish and Game agents are now the ones responsible for investigating whenever a wolf has been killed in the state.

Even so, the transfer also won't usher in Idaho wolf hunts, at least for now.

For the animals to be treated like other large predators such as mountain lions and black bears, the federal government first must lift Endangered Species Act protections — something Kempthorne and Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, are promoting.

"The wolf has a place here in Idaho. But its place is not supreme," said Craig, who attended the signing ceremony.

Idaho and Montana have federally approved management plans, but Wyoming's effort has stalled. All three states need plans before Norton approves delisting.

Wolf backers, including Defenders of Wildlife, which has paid more than $500,000 to reimburse ranchers across the West who have lost livestock to wolves, fear Thursday's transfer will lift protections that have helped wolves flourish.

They point to the state's management plan, which pledges to maintain at least 15 wolf packs — just a quarter of the existing population.

"The state has a strong record of objecting to wolves," said Suzanne Stone, a Defenders spokeswoman in Boise. "Time will tell how good of wolf managers they become."

Stan Boyd, director of the Idaho Wool Growers Association in Boise, said his members, who run about 250,000 head of sheep in the state, have been eagerly anticipating Fish and Game officials' takeover.

"Nobody is suggesting that we go after wolves in general — just in the areas where they are having problems," he said. "We are having problems. They're having an adverse effect on livestock and wildlife in certain areas."

In 2005, federal wildlife agents investigated 93 rancher complaints, with wolves confirmed or suspected of having killed 181 sheep, 18 calves, six cows and 11 dogs. That compares to 2003, when wolves were blamed for killing 118 sheep, 13 calves and six guard dogs.

"The trend has been, as wolf numbers increased, depredations have increased," said Mark Collinge, director of the federal Wildlife Services office in Idaho.

Still, federal and state wolf managers don't expect significant reductions in Idaho wolves in the near future. That's because wolf numbers are still rising in the state, while their numbers have stabilized in neighboring Montana and Wyoming. Altogether, there are about 950 wolves in the Northern Rockies region.

And even though Idaho will manage its wolves, the federal agency will retain final say over whether wolves could be killed to enhance big game populations.

 

[BigHornRam]

IT,

I heard Idaho was trying to get authorization from the feds to land helicopters in the Frank Church in order to collar wolves. What do you think of that?

 

[Ithaca 37]

BHR, Don't forget, you're on "ignore". I can't see your idiotic posts. Now F&G can issue permits to ranchers so they can kill wolves bothering livestock. How much longer before F&G can issue permits to hunters so they can kill wolves having an impact on elk herds? Seem like a stretch to you? That's what F&G is working on now.

Aren't you one of the assclowns who said it will never happen?

 

[BigHornRam]

IT,

If you can't read any of my posts because I'm on ignore, how do you know what I have, or what I haven't said? So who's the assclown?

 

[BigHornRam]

I'll tell you this Ithaca. Idaho F & G will be broke before they sell wolf tags, bank on it. Why take on the liability and still have your hands tied? Collars, biologist time, helicopter time, livestock damage costs, studies to prove big game impact, who's going to pay for all this? Why is Idaho about the only state with over the counter elk tags, priced at about the lowest of any state, and still can't sell them all out? It's no secret to non resident hunters that Idaho has a wolf problem that's why. Remember, you wanted the mutts, now good luck dealing with them.

 

[Ithaca 37]

BHR, I took you off "Ignore" for a few minutes to see what kind of assinine posts you were making. To answer a few of your feeble minded questions:

"The ranchers around here can just shoot the mutts, then call the feds to have them come get the carcus. Idaho sure is backwards. How many Idaho tax dollars will be wasted printing permit books and by buying a fleet of meat wagons?"

Idiot. If a MT rancher shoots a wolf there will be a big gummint paid investigation. Even you should know that. No Idaho tax dollars will be used to print permit books or meat wagons.

"I heard Idaho was trying to get authorization from the feds to land helicopters in the Frank Church in order to collar wolves. What do you think of that?"

Just part of the process to land helicopters in a wilderness area. You're a fool.

"If you can't read any of my posts because I'm on ignore, how do you know what I have, or what I haven't said? "

Imbecile. When a poster is on "Ignore" we can see that they made a post, we just can't read it. I know the kind of simple minded assinine types of posts you'll make on any subject because you're so predictable. I just think of the stupidest thing anyone could say and then I know what you'll post.

"So who's the assclown?"

You are.

As for Idaho F&G going broke, they'll be compensated for expenses.

"Why is Idaho about the only state with over the counter elk tags, priced at about the lowest of any state, and still can't sell them all out? It's no secret to non resident hunters that Idaho has a wolf problem that's why."

Wrong again. Simpleton. We have surplus elk in many areas and not enough hunters want cow tags in difficult to access areas. Hence the left over tags. You have shit for brains and have no idea what you're talking about. Take a look at the elk harvest for the last ten years before you make a fool out of yourself again.

"Remember, you wanted the mutts, now good luck dealing with them."

Moron. I never said I wanted wolves. I said it was inevitable because of the ESA.
**************************************************************

Now do you understand why you're going back to "Ignore"? You're a feeble minded simpleton and I have no time for idiots. I won't be able to read any more of your posts, so don't bother asking me questions. Back on "Ignore".

--

 

[Michaelr]

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

"Just part of the process to land helicopters in a wilderness area." Wow I can't believe that came from you Ithaca!!! Might as well open up Wilderness areas to fat ass ATV riders then since the F&G can break the law to dart a few wolves. They can trap and collar them you know! Then they don't have to break the law by using motorized vehicles in a legally dedicated to non-motorized use Wilderness.

 

[BuzzH]

WS,

Angencies can petition for the right to use limited mechanized equipment for certain things in Wilderness Areas.

Examples would be using mechanzied equipment (chainsaws, helicopters, etc.) for fighting fires, lookout maintainance, capturing wildlife, etc. etc. in wilderness areas.

So, the state and federal agencies can LEGALLY use mechanized equipment with the appropriate approval.

So, you saying the F&G is breaking the law is unfounded, untruthful, and a flat out lie. They're going through the correct procedures to stay within the guidelines of the Wilderness Act.

Also, if you cant see the difference between unregulated law-breaking by the fat-assed ATV crowd and very tightly controlled ADMINISTRATIVE use of mechanized equipment in wilderness areas...you better seek professional help ASAP.

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

"Also, if you cant see the difference between unregulated law-breaking by the fat-assed ATV crowd and very tightly controlled ADMINISTRATIVE use of mechanized equipment in wilderness areas...you better seek professional help ASAP."


I can see the difference Buzz, I was being sarcastic. But just because they are to lazy to go trap the wolves on foot doesn't mean they should be able to use mechanical equipment in a wilderness area. I understand some times mechanical use is a neccessity, but CONVENIENCE for ADMINISTRATORS is not the intent of the Wilderness Act!

 

[BuzzH]

WS,

Can you show any examples of any agency being allowed to used mechanized equipment in a wilderness area because they want to be lazy?

The reason the agencies need to petition for the exemption is to allow over-sight into WHY they NEED to use mechanized equipment in a wilderness area. I can assure you that just being lazy will not cut it.

Nice try though.

 

[ELKCHSR]

as you would say Butz the Putz....

"I see him calling them as he sees them"

Justify it any way you like, but it is what it is...

 

[BuzzH]

Elkcheese,

Did you say something?

 

[ELKCHSR]

I musta...

You answered...

Putz sure fits...