Montana 1 upped by Idaho in Wolf take shenanigans.

shoots-straight

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,304
Location
Bitterroot Valley
Shoot Straight, I shared the big picture of the exact same extremist organizations listed in your earlier post. You may view that as what this thread relates to since the very beginning however, I disagree. it deals with the same shenanigans' performed by the same extremist organizations involving wolves.

In essence, a lawsuit a year for the past 6 years in MT/ID is a pretty healthy sum by the collective extremes discussed throughout this thread... 2021 is over 1/2 and this is their... next full blown lawsuit. 7 for 7?

Par for the course, imo... though, Idaho's political push IMO, will directly supply those extremists with a boost in funding as Democrat anti gun yipping boost 2A organizations.
Not sure where you're getting 6 cases filed in Montana or Idaho to relist wolves. I see zero in the last 6 years and are you now justifying the actions of the legislature because of what Wild Earth Guardians are doing?
 

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
9,198
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
“ the best management of grizzlies is no management at all” rough paraphrase of article. Crazy philosophy but I thinks that’s how these groups feel-remove humans entirely from the picture. You all need to get your butts into the city and leave nature alone!!! 😂 That’s the basic sentiment I get from these groups. They have never and will never quit suing. No matter how much they get there way it’s still not enough.
Same guy, Erik Molvar, fear-mongering.

“Wolves remain completely absent from suitable habitats or perilously close to extinction in many western states, and the handful of states surrounding Yellowstone National Park are now driving the larger populations toward extinction — endangered species listing — by ramping up wolf killing and stripping away hunting and trapping regulations in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming,” said Erik Molvar, Western Watersheds Project executive director."
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
292
Has anyone asked them(serial litigators )why the hyper focus on just Montana,Idaho and Wyoming? What about mountain lions in ALL of there historic range? If they really want predators back why not all predators in every state they existed? Or is it just Montana, Idaho and Wyoming that should exist as there personal “national park” and science experiments. We successfully reintroduced elk into Kentucky,Pennsylvania and others? Do they only get the elk but can force feed us predators? I love hunting all predators, wolves included, so I am not a hunter who wants all wolves or any predator dead. It’s just disgusting to see game and predator balance so mismanaged in SOME areas.
 

shoots-straight

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,304
Location
Bitterroot Valley
Has anyone asked them(serial litigators )why the hyper focus on just Montana,Idaho and Wyoming? What about mountain lions in ALL of there historic range? If they really want predators back why not all predators in every state they existed? Or is it just Montana, Idaho and Wyoming that should exist as there personal “national park” and science experiments. We successfully reintroduced elk into Kentucky,Pennsylvania and others? Do they only get the elk but can force feed us predators? I love hunting all predators, wolves included, so I am not a hunter who wants all wolves or any predator dead. It’s just disgusting to see game and predator balance so mismanaged in SOME areas.
I didn't see where the Mountain lion had been on the Endangered species list. Then of course there's the process of determining existing habitat for a recovery effort and so on. Of course I see how our legislature made this mistake. Some Hunt Talkers would have passed this legislation too.
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
292
That case had zero to do with wolf delisting or relisting. So still zero.


I see that is grizzlies but they never quit suing. Still don’t understand what strategy you feel should be used? If wolves are way above objective, don’t do anything because we might be sued? How does that work? I learned that to these groups no amount of wolves is ever enough. Just look at the original AGREED upon recovery numbers required for management. Once said numbers were reached they moved the goal posts. For years and years. At some point you just have to make the right choices for wildlife. They will never be happy or quit filing lawsuits. Not making the right decisions because we are scared of some sue happy groups is not a solution. I don’t want wolves gone, I like having wolves, I just want them managed at an appropriate level. Some areas are great right now with wolves, many have been devastated by too many wolves. We should expect our states to make the right decisions regardless of these groups and definitely not cower down to them. Wolves are amazing animals which makes them extremely hard to trap or hunt. Anybody who thinks Idaho will eliminate 90 percent of wolves with the new rules is smoking crack or hasn’t seriously hunted or trapped wolves. They won’t win this lawsuit but they will raise tons of money to lie some more and clog the courts with more lawsuits.
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
292
I didn't see where the Mountain lion had been on the Endangered species list. Then of course there's the process of determining existing habitat for a recovery effort and so on. Of course I see how our legislature made this mistake. Some Hunt Talkers would have passed this legislation too.


Ok grizzlies then there historic range went to the Great Plains states, close to Dallas and into Mexico 👍 reintroduce them. Wolves too. I feel like most monetary contributors to these groups live outside Montana, Idaho and Wyoming why not bring them back to their states of residence? Too heck with suitability studies they moved into those animals territory a long time ago and need to learn to live around them. Why are largely non resident groups of people dictating how we manage wildlife? I am not arguing it’s a serious question. Why the hyper focus on our 3 states? We have more room yes but I’m guessing not a lot of defenders of wildlife’s major contributors live in Idaho. Why not their backyard? Leave us alone we have recovered populations of wolves, were good. Let’s focus on their extinct predators. Idaho, Montana and Wyoming already has healthy populations of wolves,lions, black and grizzly bears. I say leave us alone and manage your own mess center for biological diversity! East coast has almost no biological diversity. I need to go I just got an idea for a lawsuit
 

shoots-straight

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,304
Location
Bitterroot Valley
I see that is grizzlies but they never quit suing. Still don’t understand what strategy you feel should be used? If wolves are way above objective, don’t do anything because we might be sued? How does that work? I learned that to these groups no amount of wolves is ever enough. Just look at the original AGREED upon recovery numbers required for management. Once said numbers were reached they moved the goal posts. For years and years. At some point you just have to make the right choices for wildlife. They will never be happy or quit filing lawsuits. Not making the right decisions because we are scared of some sue happy groups is not a solution. I don’t want wolves gone, I like having wolves, I just want them managed at an appropriate level. Some areas are great right now with wolves, many have been devastated by too many wolves. We should expect our states to make the right decisions regardless of these groups and definitely not cower down to them. Wolves are amazing animals which makes them extremely hard to trap or hunt. Anybody who thinks Idaho will eliminate 90 percent of wolves with the new rules is smoking crack or hasn’t seriously hunted or trapped wolves. They won’t win this lawsuit but they will raise tons of money to lie some more and clog the courts with more lawsuits.
The "Strategy" that was in place was working. Trappers have a learning curve to go through and we, us, were getting better and better. Hunters too!. Wolf populations have been headed in the right direction for awhile in both states.

How's that population trend going to move with an injunction in place? How's the wolf population going to respond to being put back on the list?

I liked what was going on and many other wolf trappers I know did too.

I think they might of went too far. We will see if that happens. I hope not!

If it does, I'm sure you're going to complain about too many wolfs then, just as you do now. Only then we'll have no recourse other than SSS, which really hasn't done much so far.
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
292
The "Strategy" that was in place was working. Trappers have a learning curve to go through and we, us, were getting better and better. Hunters too!. Wolf populations have been headed in the right direction for awhile in both states.

How's that population trend going to move with an injunction in place? How's the wolf population going to respond to being put back on the list?

I liked what was going on and many other wolf trappers I know did too.

I think they might of went too far. We will see if that happens. I hope not!

If it does, I'm sure you're going to complain about too many wolfs then, just as you do now. Only then we'll have no recourse other than SSS, which really hasn't done much so far.


The interesting part is I don’t think i disagree with you on that much. I liked the current trapping and hunting season we had. I also really like the new lengthened trapping seasons only because of our crazy weather when dealing with leg hold traps.Going from 2 feet of snow to rain and ice and back to 3 feet is pretty frustrating to deal with. I am not a “smoke a pack a day” guy nor do I want the sss method. I think some areas of Idaho could have more wolves, some are just right but many areas the elk are on life support due to wolves. I don’t think there is always too many or that 1 wolf is too many. We need more tools here to manage wolves in certain areas. These new laws are unit specific in Idaho. We still have areas in Idaho CLOSED to wolf trapping where there is plenty of wolves. My disagreement is one, I don’t think they will win this lawsuit because of how Idaho is administering the new rules. I know we both hope I am right on that. Mostly I think at some point you just have to make good decisions and not cower down against what are basically litigious bully’s. They were coming anyways ,at some point ,why let them bully us legally into bad decisions. Let’s sue them for biological diversity in their states 😂 I get really frustrated when I think about where the majority of these groups supporters live and realize they are basically dictating our wildlife management through the courts. I’m sick of our states running scared from these groups. Montana and Idaho bent over backwards to appease them after re introduction and they just kept moving the goalposts. There was never going to be enough wolves for them and I think we should learn from that experience. They don’t want to work with anybody only their agenda matters. Their agenda is frankly hard to understand. What is there end goal? We will see what happens-I hope I am right. Have a good season 👍
 

Grepgaston

New member
Joined
Jul 27, 2021
Messages
23
Perhaps this is a “controversial” view point but Elk herds seem to do pretty decent in areas with wolves in Yellowstone, Canada, etc. I think that Mother Nature will find a balance if we allow that to happen. During the first 10plus years of Wolves repopulating I think the Elk were “Wolf dumb”. Now, as time goes on some form of balanced equilibrium should be the norm. Predator prey relationships are typically cyclical. In Northern Idaho the issue that the Elk are facing is reduction in good habitat. Fire suppression has created forests that are not nearly as productive as they have been previously. Timber stands are reaching maturity and those stands provide little, if any habitat value for ungulates. I don’t claim to know the solution but healthy habitat will support more deer and elk thus there would be more to go around for all predators. As it can be frustrating to be on elk and have them blown out by Wolves, it’s still pretty cool to know that our public lands contain the natural species that should be there! Just my $.02
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
292
Perhaps this is a “controversial” view point but Elk herds seem to do pretty decent in areas with wolves in Yellowstone, Canada, etc. I think that Mother Nature will find a balance if we allow that to happen. During the first 10plus years of Wolves repopulating I think the Elk were “Wolf dumb”. Now, as time goes on some form of balanced equilibrium should be the norm. Predator prey relationships are typically cyclical. In Northern Idaho the issue that the Elk are facing is reduction in good habitat. Fire suppression has created forests that are not nearly as productive as they have been previously. Timber stands are reaching maturity and those stands provide little, if any habitat value for ungulates. I don’t claim to know the solution but healthy habitat will support more deer and elk thus there would be more to go around for all predators. As it can be frustrating to be on elk and have them blown out by Wolves, it’s still pretty cool to know that our public lands contain the natural species that should be there! Just my $.02

Yellowstone really? Hmm elk are doing pretty decent in Yellowstone? Maybe you should pull up a few elk population graphs on the northern Yellowstone herd pre wolves and post wolves. 19000 elk 1994 wolves introduced and elk plunged to less than 2000. They sit at 6000 roughly today after eliminating a number of late hunts for migrating elk and shortening seasons outside the park. Also wolf hunting has been in place for a decade surrounding the park. That’s just an absurd statement. Yellowstone elk herd is the poster child for anti wolf arguments. North Idaho elk are losing habitat because too many people are moving here and displacing their winter range with house’s . Those mature timber stands we have could have been logged but some people thought it was better to let Mother Nature take her course there too. I like having wolves in north Idaho also but we need the right numbers. Certain units are way overpopulated and need aggressive control. How does an elk become so smart he suddenly out runs a pack of 12 wolves? So the elk 20 years ago was wolf dumb and couldn’t out run a pack of wolves but now he is wolf smart and can ? Please explain that’s fascinating. Did you move from Oregon or California? I ask because only transplants from those states seem to understand wolves at your level.
 

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
9,198
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
Yellowstone is poor example of a thriving elk herd. The Selway has had plenty of fire in the last 20 years, with no positive growth in elk numbers. Too claim that Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana wolf management policies will lead to population levels meriting re-listing is absurd.
 

TheTone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
3,708
Location
ID
Yellowstone is poor example of a thriving elk herd. The Selway has had plenty of fire in the last 20 years, with no positive growth in elk numbers. Too claim that Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana wolf management policies will lead to population levels meriting re-listing is absurd.
I would actually be curious about the Selway. I don’t think IDFG has flown it in a long time and my understanding is those hunting it actually aren’t doing too bad, they just kinda keep it quiet. I don’t think it’s what it once was but maybe some uptick? You’re right about a bunch of it burning in the last decade or so. I’m hopeful the current lochsa-st joe fires can see some more growth
 

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
9,198
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
I would actually be curious about the Selway. I don’t think IDFG has flown it in a long time and my understanding is those hunting it actually aren’t doing too bad, they just kinda keep it quiet. I don’t think it’s what it once was but maybe some uptick? You’re right about a bunch of it burning in the last decade or so. I’m hopeful the current lochsa-st joe fires can see some more growth
I know a guy that spent a couple weeks clearing about 50 miles of trail in the Selway a couple years ago. Good hunter. Never cut an elk track. It's not all that bad. I wouldn't go in where he cleared trail though.
 

Dakotakid

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
215
Earthjustice sent the notice on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Footloose Montana, Friends of the Clearwater, International Wildlife Coexistence Network, Nimiipuu Protecting the Environment, Sierra Club, Trap Free Montana Public Lands, Western Watersheds Project, Wilderness Watch and Wolves of the Rockies.

Montana footloose and Trap free have been fighting in Montana since their inception.
Public advocacy groups raise funds with headlines.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
14,827
Location
Cedar, MI
Has anyone asked them(serial litigators )why the hyper focus on just Montana,Idaho and Wyoming? What about mountain lions in ALL of there historic range? If they really want predators back why not all predators in every state they existed? Or is it just Montana, Idaho and Wyoming that should exist as there personal “national park” and science experiments. We successfully reintroduced elk into Kentucky,Pennsylvania and others? Do they only get the elk but can force feed us predators? I love hunting all predators, wolves included, so I am not a hunter who wants all wolves or any predator dead. It’s just disgusting to see game and predator balance so mismanaged in SOME areas.

It's focused on the Rocky Mtn population because of the advancement of liberalized seasons. But make no mistake, the goal is to reinstate wolves in all areas where they can be supported. The Great Lakes population is the case study in how the ESA can be misinterpreted based on past litigation issues relative to the specifics within the law regarding what exactly "significant native range and habitat" looks like at a macro level. Those groups are claiming that the Midwest states of Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois and others should have nacent wolf populations as well since that's where they existed. They discount the human factor significantly and focused simply on undeveloped land and sufficient prey base. These same groups successfully got the CO initiative passed, are working diligently to bolster the Mexican wolf populations and they are ardent supporters of Red Wolf conservation on the Eastern seaboard. So it isn't just the west that they're focused on, but because the Legislatures painted such a fantastic target for themselves, that's where the best fundraising is for the serial litigants (I knew I should have copyrighted that freaking phrase).

Yellowstone really? Hmm elk are doing pretty decent in Yellowstone? Maybe you should pull up a few elk population graphs on the northern Yellowstone herd pre wolves and post wolves. 19000 elk 1994 wolves introduced and elk plunged to less than 2000. They sit at 6000 roughly today after eliminating a number of late hunts for migrating elk and shortening seasons outside the park. Also wolf hunting has been in place for a decade surrounding the park. That’s just an absurd statement. Yellowstone elk herd is the poster child for anti wolf arguments. North Idaho elk are losing habitat because too many people are moving here and displacing their winter range with house’s . Those mature timber stands we have could have been logged but some people thought it was better to let Mother Nature take her course there too. I like having wolves in north Idaho also but we need the right numbers. Certain units are way overpopulated and need aggressive control. How does an elk become so smart he suddenly out runs a pack of 12 wolves? So the elk 20 years ago was wolf dumb and couldn’t out run a pack of wolves but now he is wolf smart and can ? Please explain that’s fascinating. Did you move from Oregon or California? I ask because only transplants from those states seem to understand wolves at your level.

It's disingenuous to claim that wolves were the reason that the Northern Yellowstone elk herd died off, and it entirely ignores the political motivations both from the Montana legislature, and FWP in the heavy handed effort to cull the Northern Herd through late season "gut hunts." That hunt, coupled with the rising number of predators across the spectrum, led to the crash. Eliminate the late season hunt, and you'd still have a ton of surplus elk that neighboring landowners would have significant issues with moreso than they do now. Take a look at the Absaroka Elk Ecology Project to see some pretty informative science relative to elk distribution and reaction in heavy wolf presence. Now, the Northern Herrd is within objective, which is what the politicians want.

And as many folks have pointed out, those mature timber stands provide excellent security cover from predators, and from heat. Northern Rockies have a ton of habitat issues ongoing, but mature stands of timber aren't necessarily one of them.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
14,827
Location
Cedar, MI
Yellowstone is poor example of a thriving elk herd. The Selway has had plenty of fire in the last 20 years, with no positive growth in elk numbers. Too claim that Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana wolf management policies will lead to population levels meriting re-listing is absurd.

That's the fatal misunderstanding of the litigation. It's not about what populations level do, it's about the adequate regulatory mechanisms that were agreed upon for delisting to occur under the 2010 delisting rule issued by the USFWS that ultimately was re-issued through the Simpson-Tester delisting rider.

Population is only 1 of 3 criteria for continued delisting. Knowing the folks at Earth Justice, they must feel as though they have a solid case in order to take this up. That should worry folks.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
14,827
Location
Cedar, MI
Interesting study Ben. I had to look it up. Habitat not the problem.
Be sure tp read the actual study and not the articles. There's a mix of issues, but habitat is part of it, especially when you see significant portions of elk populations select irrigated hay fields over high country habitat. Part of it is wolves, part of it is human disturbance and part of it is habitat related. We tend to forget that we've been in drought conditions for about 20 years in the interior west. What used to be a dry year is now considered normal.
 

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
9,198
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
Be sure tp read the actual study and not the articles. There's a mix of issues, but habitat is part of it, especially when you see significant portions of elk populations select irrigated hay fields over high country habitat. Part of it is wolves, part of it is human disturbance and part of it is habitat related. We tend to forget that we've been in drought conditions for about 20 years in the interior west. What used to be a dry year is now considered normal.
Bison in the Lamar continue to thrive and expand. They cope with the out of balance predator numbers better than the elk do. Maybe the bison compete with the elk for grass as well?

Elk laying around on the Mammoth Hot Springs lawn tells me that human disturbance is subjective as well.
 

BigHornRam

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
9,198
Location
"Land of Giant Rams"
That's the fatal misunderstanding of the litigation. It's not about what populations level do, it's about the adequate regulatory mechanisms that were agreed upon for delisting to occur under the 2010 delisting rule issued by the USFWS that ultimately was re-issued through the Simpson-Tester delisting rider.

Population is only 1 of 3 criteria for continued delisting. Knowing the folks at Earth Justice, they must feel as though they have a solid case in order to take this up. That should worry folks.
What are the other 2 criteria?
 
Leupold Banner

Forum statistics

Threads
96,294
Messages
1,455,869
Members
30,276
Latest member
NEOHhunter23
Top