Montana 1 upped by Idaho in Wolf take shenanigans.

TheTone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
3,580
Location
ID
What did you expect? Of course it is.
Another reason for the public to hate hunters. Or maybe hunters will come out against this :)
Judging by what I’ve seen on other sites it’s purely IDFG’s fault hunters haven’t been killing more wolves but now those guys making those statements are really going be getting after it. Unless each wolf has a case of keystone around its neck I have my doubts
 

RobertD

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
515
Location
Southwest Georgia (GA)
Judging by what I’ve seen on other sites it’s purely IDFG’s fault hunters haven’t been killing more wolves but now those guys making those statements are really going be getting after it. Unless each wolf has a case of keystone around its neck I have my doubts
I know one of the sites you're referencing and saw the threads. Guys consistently arguing that 150 is the IDFG target and that they've "failed" to achieve it so the legislature had to "step in."

Same guys all laughed at the idea of this stuff motivating lawsuits to get wolves relisted. Just breathtaking really.
 

elkmagnet

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
3,805
Location
Hodale, Idaho
Judging by what I’ve seen on other sites it’s purely IDFG’s fault hunters haven’t been killing more wolves but now those guys making those statements are really going be getting after it. Unless each wolf has a case of keystone around its neck I have my doubts
Its unfortunate and true.
 

Trap

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
93
No where does Idaho’s bill say Idaho will kill or even attempt to kill 90 percent of wolves. It accurately points out that the minimum is 150 and we have at least 10 times that number. Increased opportunities won’t get close to 90 percent reduction . 1,000 wolves with the new rules would be best case scenario. As hunters let’s all buy in to the liberal headlines that’s going to help 😂 politicians shouldn’t be passing laws regarding wildlife but they just accelerated what Idaho fish and game was already doing. They shouldn’t have done it but the headlines are pure bull crap. A few on here seem to agree with the headlines and that’s shocking to me but whatever carry on. Try to kill and trap 5 or more wolves in a year and then ask yourself how “unlimited “ tags makes any difference than the current 30 maximum. That’s one example that they are extrapolating into “Idaho orders killing 90 percent of wolves.” It’s all emotional hype short of poison Idaho won’t ever get close to 150 wolves. I don’t think they should have passed the bill mainly because of the hysteria it’s allowing antis to create and I hate the precedent of politics and game management it sets. Current seasons ARE NOT reducing the wolf population and Idaho is at least 10 times the minimum number. That’s the FACTS. you can blame it on the guy with the “smoke a pack a day”sticker that’s never set a trap or stepped out of his truck to hunt a wolf. You can blame fish and game. (I think they were doing great and intelligently slowly increasing opportunities). or you can blame the antis who delayed management way beyond stated goals and allowed management AFTER wolves were way over objective. Doesn’t matter the facts are current seasons were not controlling the wolf population. I can’t believe any avid hunters wouldn’t understand that. If you’ve killed a few wolves in the last ten years you did nothing to even slow the expansion of wolves. Once you let wolves out of the bag I don’t feel you will ever really reduce their numbers with recreational hunting and trapping. Best case scenario is maybe keep numbers even with year around seasons. I don’t want wolves gone and I like hunting and trapping wolves. Idaho’s numbers still need to be reduced and this bill was a fumbled attempt to make that happen.
 

shoots-straight

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,223
Location
Bitterroot Valley
No where does Idaho’s bill say Idaho will kill or even attempt to kill 90 percent of wolves. It accurately points out that the minimum is 150 and we have at least 10 times that number. Increased opportunities won’t get close to 90 percent reduction . 1,000 wolves with the new rules would be best case scenario. As hunters let’s all buy in to the liberal headlines that’s going to help 😂 politicians shouldn’t be passing laws regarding wildlife but they just accelerated what Idaho fish and game was already doing. They shouldn’t have done it but the headlines are pure bull crap. A few on here seem to agree with the headlines and that’s shocking to me but whatever carry on. Try to kill and trap 5 or more wolves in a year and then ask yourself how “unlimited “ tags makes any difference than the current 30 maximum. That’s one example that they are extrapolating into “Idaho orders killing 90 percent of wolves.” It’s all emotional hype short of poison Idaho won’t ever get close to 150 wolves. I don’t think they should have passed the bill mainly because of the hysteria it’s allowing antis to create and I hate the precedent of politics and game management it sets. Current seasons ARE NOT reducing the wolf population and Idaho is at least 10 times the minimum number. That’s the FACTS. you can blame it on the guy with the “smoke a pack a day”sticker that’s never set a trap or stepped out of his truck to hunt a wolf. You can blame fish and game. (I think they were doing great and intelligently slowly increasing opportunities). or you can blame the antis who delayed management way beyond stated goals and allowed management AFTER wolves were way over objective. Doesn’t matter the facts are current seasons were not controlling the wolf population. I can’t believe any avid hunters wouldn’t understand that. If you’ve killed a few wolves in the last ten years you did nothing to even slow the expansion of wolves. Once you let wolves out of the bag I don’t feel you will ever really reduce their numbers with recreational hunting and trapping. Best case scenario is maybe keep numbers even with year around seasons. I don’t want wolves gone and I like hunting and trapping wolves. Idaho’s numbers still need to be reduced and this bill was a fumbled attempt to make that happen.
It's safe to say that more wolves are going to get killed as a result of this legislation, NO?
Will the pendulum swing too far? That remains to be seen.

I do know this. Hunters and trappers in both states were, are, getting better at both techniques to kill wolves. The population graphs in both states are static, or slightly heading downward. I feel that people using the old season structures would probably start to reduce the populations farther. A twinking of season lengths, and relaxing some rules would be nice too. I'm not so sure that the directions downward at a faster rate will help us in court. I've seen this whole thing work itself out and don't feel so confident as you. There's going to be push back. Hope that our legislature and Idaho's planned for that and are preparing for the eventual battle that will surely happen.
 

Trap

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
93
It's safe to say that more wolves are going to get killed as a result of this legislation, NO?
Will the pendulum swing too far? That remains to be seen.

I do know this. Hunters and trappers in both states were, are, getting better at both techniques to kill wolves. The population graphs in both states are static, or slightly heading downward. I feel that people using the old season structures would probably start to reduce the populations farther. A twinking of season lengths, and relaxing some rules would be nice too. I'm not so sure that the directions downward at a faster rate will help us in court. I've seen this whole thing work itself out and don't feel so confident as you. There's going to be push back. Hope that our legislature and Idaho's planned for that and are preparing for the eventual battle that will surely happen.
I agree the legislation is flawed at best.You’re right, It’s going to ignite some kickback that wasn’t necessary. I agree with longer seasons and more opportunities since our hunting and trapping is actually getting more difficult in my area as wolves are getting educated. We are definitely learning a lot but the wolves are learning faster😂This was the wrong way to do it as I have said but our fish and game was going here eventually. Doing it overnight was stupid in my opinion but it needed to happen. Slowly would have given more opportunity to really gauge what was effective and maybe even what we shouldn’t do. I support the new rules but not how it was done. As hunters and trappers I don’t think we should support the emotional arguments and headlines from people who want NO wolf management that’s all. I will hope for the best I guess we will see.
 

shoots-straight

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,223
Location
Bitterroot Valley
I agree the legislation is flawed at best.You’re right, It’s going to ignite some kickback that wasn’t necessary. I agree with longer seasons and more opportunities since our hunting and trapping is actually getting more difficult in my area as wolves are getting educated. We are definitely learning a lot but the wolves are learning faster😂This was the wrong way to do it as I have said but our fish and game was going here eventually. Doing it overnight was stupid in my opinion but it needed to happen. Slowly would have given more opportunity to really gauge what was effective and maybe even what we shouldn’t do. I support the new rules but not how it was done. As hunters and trappers I don’t think we should support the emotional arguments and headlines from people who want NO wolf management that’s all. I will hope for the best I guess we will see.
I see just as much emotional arguments against wolves than I do for them. I think that goes with the territory.
 

Trap

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
93
Why not just give a Wolf tag to everyone who buys any hunting license at no cost resident or nonresident ?
It’s been talked about I don’t think that makes any difference to overall wolf population. Instead of getting people intentionally hunt or trap wolves you’re hoping for people to make incidental kills by bumping into one while doing something else. I don’t think that happens often enough to make any reduction in population. In Idaho you can already use deer or elk tag to take wolves,lions or bears. Plus nr tags are only I think around 30 bucks and resident is 10 I think lol I have 6 this year and can’t remember I think it’s 10.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
14,017
Location
Cedar, MI
Where were these so called biologist at when it came to ballot box biology forced introduction in Colorado!? I didn’t see any petitions put out by them...

A fair number of them were supporting that initiative. So yeah, they're hypocritical.

This kind of legislative malfeasance in ID & MT only plays into their hands, and it will hurt other states looking to manage large carnivores. It's certainly going to stop the effort to delist nationally.
 

URHO

Active member
Joined
Sep 10, 2017
Messages
65
I only wish we had a season here. Today track 150 yards from my house. Had them in the yard chasing a newborn fawn one year. See as many as 3 together.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20210518_081751712_HDR.jpg
    IMG_20210518_081751712_HDR.jpg
    4.8 MB · Views: 5

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
94,563
Messages
1,409,826
Members
29,657
Latest member
Heysel
Top