say goodbye, Best elk hunting in the country

[cantgetdrawn]

http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/PR10jM.cfm

The USFWS announced they will expand the range of Mexican Wolves in AZ and NM with the option of releasing more into the wild wasting more taxpayer money.

Although they did throw sportsmen some bones, wolves who attack domestic animals (including pets) can now be shot. If a 15% decrease in an ungulate population can be proven due to wolves could be managed but the hoops the states would have to go through make that impossible along with the inevitable lawsuits.

I know there are active RMEF members and officers on here. I also know there is legislation to protect Wyoming and Midwest states from lawsuits.

I was wondering what the probability would be to tack on protection for AZ and NM once wolves reach target goals?

 

[BuzzH]

No, there isn't legislation passed, or introduced (yet) to protect Wyoming from lawsuits. Wolves in Wyoming are under full protection under the ESA currently.

Montana and Idaho both have that protection, Wyoming didn't attach itself to that legislation.

 

[cantgetdrawn]

I should have said pending legislation.

So if and when it's introduced what would be the probability of getting protection for AZ and NM built in once target population are reached.

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/loc...cle_77a8d275-6242-588c-8109-b346549fe103.html

 

[BuzzH]

Good question...I don't really know.

I would think pretty low probability until population objectives are met, and considering the MGW are a different species.

Plus, I don't believe the mid-West and Wyoming would want to attach another potential problem to their proposal, in particular with a "new" species.

Also, I'm not 100% sure I would hitch my wagon to anything that has to do with Wyoming on the wolf issue. Wyoming has a poor track record.

I would also suspect that if WY and the mid-West states get their stuff introduced and passed, getting a separate piece of similar legislation passed for NM and AZ shouldn't be that much of a problem, once population objectives are met.

But, that's all a guess on my part.

 

[hank4elk]

I tried to get an answer to that ? from NMG&F and got nowhere,same with AZ. They are backpeddling fast after saying they would enforce controls outside so-called new range.
The wolves are all over now outside,we see them regularly .

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't know that the wolf delisting bill has much of a shot since Senate Rules still allow for 1 Senator to shut down a bill. Sure they could attach it to must-pass legislation, but I'm not sure the Dems in the senate will allow it unless it's worded pretty closely to what SImpson-Tester was. Given this congress, I'm sure the level of overreach is going to be epic.

As for the Mexican wolf saga and losing the best elk hunting in the country, eh.

We're still rifle hunting elk in the rut on a general tag in the Bob long after wolves recovered. I'd be more wary of the political wolves than the ones with real teeth.

 

[Big Fin]

I was wondering what the probability would be to tack on protection for AZ and NM once wolves reach target goals?

A couple issues at play. In the four states where some in Congress are looking to intervene and provide "legislative delisting," the USFWS has already made determinations of recovery being met to the point where the populations are no longer threatened.

As such, the legislation being considered is to make the USFWS delisting decisions for MN, MI, WI, and WY to be the law, thereby nullifying the court decisions that disagreed with the USFWS delisting rulings.

Since NM and AZ have not received delisting decisions from the USFWS with regards to the Mexican Gray Wolf, as have the other four states with regards to the Gray Wolf, it is unlikely that AZ or NM would be added to any legislation currently being discussed in Congress.

As Buzz mentioned, there currently is now law for those four states at this time. To my knowledge, it is not yet a Bill. It is an issue that is being floated in the current Congress for bipartisan sponsorship. I do think it will get introduced as a bill in the coming month. Then, it will probably pass the House and Senate, if allowed to be voted upon.

I suspect the only way the President will sign it would be if it was attached to a bigger bill that he needed for his lame duck legacy. Otherwise, he will probably let it die on his desk without signature.

As you can see, still a lot of steps for the four states of MN, MI, WI, and WY. Even more steps for AZ and NM, given they are considered to still be in "recovery mode" under the USFWS Mexican Gray Wolf Conservation Plan.

Here is a page with history of the issue for AZ G&F. http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/es/wolf_reintroduction.shtml

Here is the recent action by AZ G&F to notify the USFWS of intent to sue over the 1982 Mexican Wolf recovery plan. AZ G&F has two big concerns.

1. The plan is over 30 years old and does not reflect current information that is known about the wolf and what has been learned in the process to try recover wolves over this time frame.

2. Mexico represents 90% of the wolf habitat and the USFWS has not done anything to involve Mexico in the long-term recovery, as was originally part of the recovery plan.

http://azgfd.net/artman/publish/New...-Mexican-wolf-recovery-plan-development.shtml

AZ G&F is the lead on this effort, with hunter-conservation groups waiting for what assistance is requested by AZ G&F. It is my opinion that the best thing hunters can do is to support the AZ G&F efforts. Contacting the AZ Congressional delegation to keep this on their radar screen will be very helpful. Nothing gets action from Congress more than a bunch of vocal and well-informed folks back home.

 

[ric]

We're still rifle hunting elk in the rut on a general tag in the Bob long after wolves recovered. I'd be more wary of the political wolves than the ones with real teeth. Very well said Ben L! We are still hunting elk in north central Idaho too, and we have 6 months of elk hunting, starting in August thru Jan. with the right tags. And we are in wolf central! Oil and mineral leases will do worlds more harm to big game than some wolves. If you want to worry, worry about habitat, that is the real cause for concern. And little 5 acre "ranchetts" covering up winter range.

 

[hank4elk]

We're still rifle hunting elk in the rut on a general tag in the Bob long after wolves recovered. I'd be more wary of the political wolves than the ones with real teeth. Very well said Ben L! We are still hunting elk in north central Idaho too, and we have 6 months of elk hunting, starting in August thru Jan. with the right tags. And we are in wolf central! Oil and mineral leases will do worlds more harm to big game than some wolves. If you want to worry, worry about habitat, that is the real cause for concern. And little 5 acre "ranchetts" covering up winter range.

I agree , they come in many shapes and colors.
I am in ranch land/public mix. Big ranches mostly,not dinky 140ac places like mine.
It does make a difference in who's side your on and not know it.
I just don't like who the leaders in this project are,never have. And what they represent in a bigger threat to hunters and true outdoors persons.
But I guess it's better to keep your enemies close and know tho.....I wouldn't mind Ferrets being relocated here.Darn coyotes here are vegitarians except during fawning. Damn rodents.

 

[hnt4life]

I will have to let the 150 head of elk who spent almost a month on my 8 acre "ranchette" know that, my place is a bigger threat than the largest population of wolves in Montana who now occupy their traditional winter grounds.

 

[James Riley]

I've hiked and camped in wolf and grizzly country but I've never hunted elk in it. Personally, I'd like to do so. There is a gradient, or a continuum for sure, but in my personal opinion, the less "natural" a country is, the more of a canned hunt it is. You've got 100,000 years ago on the one hand, and a zoo on the other. I figure we are somewhere in between. Elk under pressure from wolves steps them up. And situational awareness in grizzly country steps you up some too. Especially when all you carry is a stick bow. I think that is a good thing.

 

[shoots-straight]

CGD, I think your being a little dramatic here. Those Mexican Wolves have had a tough time getting their recovery act together. I'm not sure they ever will, although could be wrong.

I live in wolf central (Western Montana) and although we have had some major pains here, much of what we went through was because of lack of response by the department on what effects the wolves would have on the game.

You can still have great hunting around wolves, you just need to be attentive to population changes.

 

[AZBridger]

my family owns a ranch in the heart of the blue range wolf recovery area. i don't think these wolves will ever really get off the ground or have much of an impact on game animals. my only concern is them trying to close parts of the forest. these wolves are nothing like their cousins to the north. they are almost all part domestic and not much larger than a coyote. i've seen my fair share of them and you REALLY have to pay attention to them to positively ID them as a wolf. they survive mainly on roadkill, cattle and handouts given to them by the "wolf people". they do not seem to be a very tough animal and really have a hard time surving. i am 99% sure however, that there are twice as many as they claim to be. i see more wolves without a radio collar on than with. they get shot by hunters quite often out of confusion because they so much resemble a coyote. i am a 29 year arizona resident and have lived right in the "impact zone" since the day they were first released. the wolves do not pose much of a concern to me, so you guys should breathe easy, especially since nothing has passed yet. for 20 years they have been trying to pass laws that would allow more wolves to be introduced and nothing has stuck. it is becoming obvious that in 20 years of failure in trying to reintroduce these creatures that they are probably never going to make it

 

[hank4elk]

That's the rub bridger, how far will the wolfie folks go.And who they are linked too and the agenda at large.
I hunt and hike in the NM Blue Range side quite a bit and am not too worried about them,didn't see any in the wilderness on my deer hunt this year.I have on previous elk hunts.
I see way more outside the zone.

 

[AZBridger]

i had 2 of them walk into my camp in unit one this year. they looked like they were looking for a handout, i am talking about wolves not wolf people. the wolves themselves pose no threat to me, it's the people pushing for further reintroduction of the species. i just see the whole thing as a dying case these days and after years of failure i find it hard to believe that anyone with any authority still supports the cause

 

[sagebrush]

Randy is spot on as usual. The one thing he left out is the action by the AZG&F was brought because the USFWS completely rejected their input and refused to take it under consideration in development of the rule revision.

The rule revision is already in place. It does not require the approval of any legislative body. The main changes are reclassifying the Mexican wolf from a "non-essential experimental population" to a "recovering population", expanding the area in which they can be released and moving southern boundary of the MWEPA to the Mexican border. In other words, the USFWS wants more control over what happens in AZ & NM.

http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/pdf/NR_Mexican_Wolf_f10j_FINAL.pdf

While the Mexican wolf is different than the Canadian wolf, AZ elk live in a different environment than elk in ID, WY, MT and CO. Our elk live in isolated small pockets of habitat that don't have travel corridors to move between them. The USFWS is planning on introducing wolves into more of those small areas and it won't be good for the elk, mule deer and coues deer. And the thing that really burns my butt is the USFWS is doing it without concern for the input provided by the local game management and the local people effected by their actions.

 

[James Riley]

Our elk live in isolated small pockets of habitat that don't have travel corridors to move between them.

Is the absence of corridors due to nature (desert or?) or people/development? I don't know squat about Arizona (just driven through a few times). I've read a little about Merriam's Elk but I guess they were extinct before any good studies were done. I assume they were in Arizona.

 

[cantgetdrawn]

+1 sagebrush.

The USFWS basically ignored the wish of locals. The only remedy I see which seems unlikely is a legislative one.

I do not believe elk hunting will end with the introduction of more wolves. They will however reduce the quality of hunts in SW NM and SE AZ, which is the best elk country in the US right now. Just look at the amount of record bulls taken out of Catron County, NM. In 20 years when elk quality and numbers have declined I'm sure we will hear the same voices saying wolves are not to blame.


There are other issues.

Trapping has remained legal on public land in NM. Antis will use wolves to end that, all it will take is one documented case of a wolf accidentally trapped for antis to reintroduce their lawsuits. With the increased wolf area that will cover over 50% of the state.

Like spotted owls, Lobos will be used in an attempt to further reduce logging, grazing and other uses of public land.

All of this will cost taxpayer money and antis will get reimbursed even when they lose.

 

[jryoung]

The super-woofs from Canadia leverage winter, snow depths, and concentration of herds to kill elk the vast majority of their elk. Without the same winter leverage, coupled with the smaller size of the Mexican Wolves, I wonder what the actual impact will be. Also with their increase in numbers what would the impact on cat numbers be (not sure if cats down there have the same impact on calves as they do proven by the Bitterroot Elk Study).

 

[tjones]

Mini vans, the answer is mini vans. Lots of them, the smaller wolf would not stand a chance.

Sorry to the OP, carry on.