Thoughts on Wolves?

[BigHornRam]

Here's one of the more enlightening posts in Ithaca's link of must read wolf info. Remember this one gunner?

YourRoyalHighness
George W. Bush Wannabe Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: North of Phoenix
Posts: 80

I may puke....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gimme a break.....

MT and Greenie doing Art reviews....

Now I know why they say the only thing in Montana is "steers and queers"....


Hey Greenhorn,
Which Monet did you pass on....?


Here's another good one:

Greenhorn
Senior Poster Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,983

Well well, if it isn't wolfhugger #3... aren't you supposed to be banned?

Dissin your favorite ECO group in my last post cause you ass to eat your panties?

 

[JoseCuervo]

.
How come you are not out there killing a bear. Are you getting too old like Moosie?

Since the re-introduction of the "illegal non-native Canadian woof", there aren't any more bears to shoot, as the wolves have ate them all.......

Actually, it is kind of religious.... we are starting on Sunday.

 

[IDHunters]

Jose, thats the million dollar question. If the pie refers to game animals killed annually than predators get 100%. (Humans are a predator...Ha ha).

I don't have the exact numbers, but when non-human predators take more game than humans, and there is an apparent shortage of game, I would rather limit the predator take long before I limit human take (from hunting).

Hunters in Idaho are killing less than 1/2 as many deer as we were killing in the "heyday". There are many, many places where winter range and habitat are basically unchanged from 30 years ago, and there are 1/4 as many deer. There is no question that predator numbers are higher now than when they were targeted by fed trappers and 1080 was legal.

Predators are not the only problem, but we can control them much easier than the weather!

 

[sreekers]

So here is the real question, how can we get the chance to hunt the wolves? What is necessary on our parts to get the feds to let us hunt them?

 

[JoseCuervo]

So here is the real question, how can we get the chance to hunt the wolves? What is necessary on our parts to get the feds to let us hunt them?

Simple, get the idiots in Wyoming to put together a plan that will be acceptable to the Feds, kind of like Idaho and Montana did. You won't go from Federally Protected to Hunting Seasons in 1 year, but you have to start down the path to get where you want.

 

[HONDO]

Erik in AK, outstanding insight into the wolf issue in the Rocky Mountain States.

It should not go unsaid that elk, antelope, whitetail deer, and even mountain lion and black bear populations are higher than they have ever been, they are significantly higher than at the beginning of the twentieth century.

Let me ask a question. How is it that the ungulate population (excluding sheep and mule deer) have managed to grow exponentially even though the human population has quadrupled since 1900 taking away hundreds of thousands of acres of habitat from these animals?

The answer is simple, through proper management. As a country we started regulated hunting with seasons and harvest limits. We became more aware of domestic livestock diseases and the danger they presented to wildlife, so we implemented regulations for raising and transporting livestock. We also commenced mass killing of predators, this included trapping, poisoning, and placing bounties on certain species.

Ithaca 37 you bring up an interesting point. Lions and bears do take their share of ungulates. The problem with wolves is simple. Lions and bears do not reproduce at near the rate of wolves. The survival rate of newborn lions and bears is not near that of wolves. As of 2006 there are a minimum of 1100wolves in Idaho. Consider that the average wolf requires 3.7 pounds of food per day to live. This means that during the year Idaho wolves consume 1,485,550 pounds of Idaho ungulates per year. (1100 wolves x 3.7#/day x 365 days) That could equate to 3,714 elk or 9903 deer. (Obviously a wolf is an opportunist, I used deer and elk to give you an idea of the food requirement)

I realize that the above numbers are somewhat theoretical, we don't know exactly how many wolves there are, does each wolf eat exactly 3.7 pounds per day, however this gives a good representation of the simple food requirements for these animals in our state.

There must be strict state management of these animals. I don't think that giving them trophy status and having a draw is going to be effective enough. A general season, no harvest quota, would be the appropriate thing to do.

Anyway just my two cents.

(In case anyone is wondering, I got my wolf information from "The Wolf- The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species" and my Idaho wolf population from http://www.forwolves.org/ralph/historical.html)

 

[sreekers]

Well said Hondo.

 

[lilbiggun]

I seen this on another site tonight. It kinda has some relavence to the topic.

http://www.ktuu.com/cms/anmviewer.asp?a=4581&z=1

Survey shows wolf population grew in Denali
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 - by Steve Mac Donald
Anchorage, Alaska - It appears the winter was kind to the wolves of Denali National Park and Preserve.


According to a recent aerial survey, the wolf population in the park climbed dramatically from 80 animals last year to 116 now. The National Park Service says it counted the wolves last month using six airplanes and a helicopter. Biologists were also able to radio collar three of the animals.


A spokeswoman for the Park Service says it appears no wolves were caught in traps outside the park boundaries this winter. Trapping is legal outside of Denali.


The Park Service says 18 different wolf packs roam Denali



Now if I do math right, thats 36 wolves in the last year that fins and feathers could count. Grant it some are new births I'm sure and some are other packs that are moving into the park. Why? why are wolves changing areas? Is it cuz there is no food or more dominant packs pushing them out? If theres no food, I gotta ask again why? if they were pushed out, obviously there must be bigger and badder #'s in there old area.

Now this is in AK and you guys are on a smaller scale but its a problem you folks can reighn in now so it doesnt get bad. I know there are always other factors ie: bears, too many hunters, piss poor management. It all factors in.

ANy ideas? I'm not a wolf expert and I'm always willing to learn ( except spelling lessons from moosie lol.)

 

[Cathunt MT]

Simple, get the idiots in Wyoming to put together a plan that will be acceptable to the Feds, kind of like Idaho and Montana did. You won't go from Federally Protected to Hunting Seasons in 1 year, but you have to start down the path to get where you want.

I finale found a post that I think you are right about.

 

[Muledeer4me]

"BTW what's taking Idaho so long getting approval to smoke all those wolves in the upper Clearwater? Jose said it was a slam dunk."

("The sky is falling, the sky is falling"
"Bears and lions eat more elk every year than wolves do. How many of you guys kill a bear and a lion every year?")

Whats taking Idaho so long is that we have to deal with the tree huggers and the fence sitting gronala crunchers that arent sure if they want to be hunters or yuppies.
The hunters I know would love to get the wolves out of here but knowing that won't happen,they would settle for putting the fear into the wolves with a hunting season.

 

[A-con]

When discussing Wolves, the truth and facts are rarely used.

This is a great thread. I even found something I agree with Jose on.

 

[mtmiller]

"BTW what's taking Idaho so long getting approval to smoke all those wolves in the upper Clearwater? Jose said it was a slam dunk."

Was this a quote? Pretty sure (OK, positive) Idaho doesn't have much say. ESA is Federal Law, Idaho Game and Fish doesn't make these decisions. I understand you are passionate about your opinions, but at least educate yourself. I do agree with Jose...whatever the name is this month...it will happen, but probably not next month. Wyoming has a lot to do with the decision, but there are ways around this and it is occurring.

Glad you have heard from "the hunters I know want to get the wolves out of here" but that is obviously not be the best tactic, nor will it happen.

Do wolves need to be managed? Yes, of course they do. Is hunting a good option, yes, MHO.

Instead of blaming everything on "tree-hugger" or "granolas" from the cheap seats, maybe you should be more proactive and help resolve the issue instead of bash without being informed.

Buzz and Gunner play their games here and although they push too hard at times, at least they are very imformed when they spout. If you want to play, bring a better hand...or at least an opinion you can defend.

Upside, I still will be hunting this weekend and will have a better attitude in a couple days.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Hey Cathunt, "1000 wolves
Get your head out of your ass and stop talking to biol. and there #'s"

Hondo uses 1100 wolves for his theory. I got the 1000 number from the trapper the FWS uses on problem wolves in Idaho. The actual confirmed # of wolves in Idaho is lower than that. But let's see what happens when you pull your head outta your ass. How many wolves do you think we have in Idaho?

Now for MD4me. That's why she's on my "idiot" list. Whoops. I meant "Ignore" list.

 

[sreekers]

Really what it comes down to is management. Confirmed number or not the feds kept telling ranchers that there weren't any wolves in Sublette County Wyoming. Kept telling us that there weren't any and the ranchers were getting pretty fed up with it. Thats when the governor hired some bounty hunters to find out. He took out over twenty. Point is there are two distinct sides and the numbers are probably somewhere between the two.

The realistic thing that needs to be done is we all agree there needs to be a season. I am trying to write as many of Senators as I can to get them take action. Those of us who are able should all do the same.

 

[Ithaca 37]

The only thing holding up de-listing wolves is the WY legislature, and that's controlled by WY ranchers.

 

[HONDO]

It sounds to me that we are all in agreement that there needs to be some type of management of these animals. Mtmiller is correct, it is not going to be decided by the state fish and game departments.

Ithaca 37, I certainly don't think there are over a thousand wolves in Idaho. If I were to throw out a number it would probably be 500-600. That is not my concern. My concern is we are going to take so long getting management in place, we are going to have a major problem with wolves. I also think that when we finally get to implementing some type of plan, the plan will not be adequate to control the population at that time. I don't want to see wolves totally extirpated. I believe that wolves when controlled are invaluable to an ecosystem.

Anyone that is completely and utterly against wolves in our Rocky Mountain States should read Aldo Leopolds "Thinking Like A Mountain".

 

[4XHOSS]

i think wolves should have a leagel season, along with grizzlies in mt and wy and we should put the lions on the predator list here in mt instead of trophy.

 

[Roadtrip]

My thought on wolves.....

A 130 grain Barnes MRX would be perfect

-Cheers
Roadtrip

 

[Muledeer4me]

MtMillers quote,
"ESA is Federal Law, Idaho Game and Fish doesn't make these decisions. I understand you are passionate about your opinions, but at least educate yourself. "

----"Under recently modified Endangered Species Act rules, states have the option to lethally remove wolves if “predation is having an unacceptable impact on wild (game) as determined by the state.” "-----


The quote I was answering was "Whats taking Idaho so long to smoke the wolves in the clearwater zone."
I think my answer was pretty clear.I don't believe its the hunting public thats slowing it down.
My MHO is that it has more to do with the tree huggers and gronala crunchers.The same people that brought the dang things back in the first place.
You don't agree ,thats fine.


"If you want to play, bring a better hand...or at least an opinion you can defend. "



("In January, federal authorities signed over control of the state’s entire wolf population from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Now the state must wade through the public comment process before a management plan approved by Idaho Fish and Game can go into effect.

At a February 2 public meeting set to hash out the details of the state management plan, hunters called the eradication of the predator long overdue, while environmentalists and wildlife defenders questioned the state’s research and called for commissioners to reject the plan.
Federal fish and wildlife officials say concerns about wolf extinction have been answered, thanks to federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and the 1995 reintroduction of 35 wolves as an experimental population in parts of Idaho. In 2005, an estimated 600 wolves were well-distributed from the Panhandle to southwest Idaho.

Some folks–hunters mostly, and a few ranchers–told commissioners another story about those same wolves. They painted them as bloodthirsty predators with an insatiable appetite for elk meat–an appetite hunters share, but say they aren’t able to satisfy, thanks to the wolves. Idaho hunters told commissioners that the success of wolves put big game heard populations in a slump and cut the amount of tourism dollars and hunting-tag revenues coming into the state.

“They are thriving using Idaho’s hard-earned and highly valued game populations . “How many wolves are enough?”

Too much equals about 43 wolves, or 75 percent of the Lolo area wolf population, according to state research. That number of wolves would be killed under the proposed state management plan. After the initial reduction of 75 percent of the Lolo wolf population, Fish and Game would maintain the wolf numbers at 25 to 40 percent of pre-removal abundance for five years, when the removal efforts are set for re-evaluation. Under recently modified Endangered Species Act rules, states have the option to lethally remove wolves if “predation is having an unacceptable impact on wild (game) as determined by the state.” ")


"Upside, I still will be hunting this weekend and will have a better attitude in a couple days."

MtMiller, I hope you bring along the little woman ,I doubt that attitude will be fixed by a hunting trip alone.
Have a good one.

 

[mtmiller]

----"Under recently modified Endangered Species Act rules, states have the option to lethally remove wolves if “predation is having an unacceptable impact on wild (game) as determined by the state.” "-----

True, but.....

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 4 / Thursday, January 6, 2005 / Rules and Regulations

States and Tribes can lethally take wolves to resolve significant ungulate management issues, but only after submitting a scientific, written proposal that has undergone peer and public review. The State or Tribal proposal must define the issue, history, past and future monitoring and management and describe the data indicating the impact by wolf predation on the wild ungulate population, what degree of wolf removal will occur, and why it believes wolf control is appropriate. The proposal must discuss other potential remedies. The Service will review the State’s or Tribe’s proposal once it has undergone peer and public review. The Service will only approve wolf take for ungulate management after we determine that the proposal scientifically supports wolf removal and does not compromise wolf recovery objectives.

Sounds like the Feds are still involved to me. Do you agree?

I think Idaho made their proposal to the Feds last month. I don't know if the Feds have made a decision, but I would be surprised if they have. The State of Idaho has done everything they can in the process to this point.

Here is some info if you are interested.
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/wolf_qa.cfm

Sorry if I came off bitter in my post, I had a couple G&T's in me last night.

MtMiller, I hope you bring along the little woman ,I doubt that attitude will be fixed by a hunting trip alone.

Apparently you don't know me very well, I like the burley ones.hump