Wolf populations max out

[BigHornRam]

What pack did the wolves that left the tracks on the State Line Trail south of Nez Perce that I crossed this past August belong to? Selway? Or were they one of Montana's "10" breeding packs (saw at least 3 seperate young wolf tracks in the group so yes it was a breeding pack)? How about the 6 wolves that a freind watch attack a cow and calf moose in the middle of a lake, on a pack trip into the Idaho part of the Selway Bitterroot this fall. Also the Selway pack? I'm guessing that this list of wolves is far from accurate.

 

[Ithaca 37]

BHR, See, that's why they only report the packs and numbers they can verify. Understand? If you expect them to be able to document and verify the location of every single wolf every day of the year maybe you should try keeping track of every bat in your belfry every day all year long and see how well you can do. Impossible, huh?

 

[JoseCuervo]

What pack did the wolves that left the tracks on the State Line Trail south of Nez Perce that I crossed this past August belong to? Selway? Or were they one of Montana's "10" breeding packs (saw at least 3 seperate young wolf tracks in the group so yes it was a breeding pack)? How about the 6 wolves that a freind watch attack a cow and calf moose in the middle of a lake, on a pack trip into the Idaho part of the Selway Bitterroot this fall. Also the Selway pack? I'm guessing that this list of wolves is far from accurate.

It's a conspiracy..... Sometimes the wolves even fly them Black Helicopters you see circling your house....

If you know there is a "new" pack established, why not report the information to the people managing them. Your new discovery is the type of information needed in order to manage them and learn more about their distribution.

I am guessing that, based upon your location, that it would be impossible for any of the known wolves to travel that small a distance...

 

[ELKCHSR]

It's a conspiracy..... Sometimes the wolves even fly them Black Helicopters you see circling your house

I think it is you that is more concerned with this as it is you that hides behind many walls to protect your fragile life from the intrusions of those you bash...
I see we are getting a little good info out of all the name calling though, that is a little possitive...

 

[BigHornRam]

Gunner,

The last 5 black helicopters that flew over my house, I shot down with my 358. Now there in a big heap in the backyard. A less enlightened individual such as yourself would call them "black" helicopters. Up close you'll find that they are actually more of a dark grey color. Well at least after the fires went out. I'm hoping to bag a couple more soon so I can get them out of my yard. That way I can get the volume discount to haul them to the scrap iron yard.

I told the Idaho fish cop that stopped by our camp to chat, about the wolf sign I saw. He said "yep we got a lot of wolves in Idaho."

 

[JoseCuervo]

Gunner,
I told the Idaho fish cop that stopped by our camp to chat, about the wolf sign I saw. He said "yep we got a lot of wolves in Idaho."

My guess is that you talked to an Enforcement officer. He doesn't care too much about wolves, in all likelihood. And IDFG does not manage the wolves. You need to talk to the Nez Perce.

See if you can read a little bit closer on all the good information that is posted here, so you don't keep looking as stupid as ElkCheese.

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

Wolves in Idaho
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) reintroduced fifteen wolves into Idaho in 1995. At that time, the Idaho Legislature strictly limited Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) involvement with wolves and wolf recovery. The USFWS proceeded with recovery and contracted with the Nez Perce Tribe to implement wolf management in Idaho. In 1996 an additional 20 wolves were reintroduced. Since that time, the number of wolves in Idaho has increased, and in 2003 we have approximately 362 wolves, 25 verified breeding pairs and approximately 33 documented packs well distributed from the Canadian border south to I-84.

In April, 2003, Governor Kempthorne, Fish and Game Director Huffaker, and the Idaho Legislature negotiated and passed a bill into law that allows the State to participate in wolf management. The bill, H0294, allows IDFG to assist the Governor's Office of Species Conservation (OSC) in implementing the State of Idaho's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan (PDF Format, 662 KB), as well as participate in wolf management with the USFWS and the Nez Perce Tribe. Wolves are still listed as threatened and as an "experimental non-essential population" in central Idaho, and therefore are under management authority of the Federal Government. Idaho cannot conduct management that is not in coordination with and under the authority of the USFWS while wolves are still federally listed. Federal management of wolves in Idaho remains essentially the same even though they have been reclassified. The only difference is that IDFG may now legally participate in management activities.

What does down-listing mean?
Wolves reached the Federal biological recovery goal in December 2002, that is "30 breeding pairs of wolves well distributed throughout the 3 states of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming for 3 consecutive years". Recently, the USFWS has reclassified, or down-listed wolves from endangered to threatened in north Idaho and northern Montana, and everywhere within the western Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (see Down-listing Rule, (PDF Format, 470 KB). This change does nothing to change wolf management in Idaho except in the upper Panhandle region north of Interstate 90. The next step is delisting wolves in the western DPS. The DPS includes Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Washington, Oregon, Northern Utah and Northern Colorado, Nevada and California. A recovered population in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming means the entire western DPS has achieved recovery.

When will the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delist wolves?
Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) the USFWS will delist wolves when the combined policies of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming provide an "adequate regulatory mechanism" to govern wolf management. To be "adequate" means to assure that if the states took over management, the wolves will be protected and maintained as a viable population sufficiently distributed among the 3 states. The USFWS interprets the ESA to mean that the 3 states have to provide wolf management plans and establish state laws that satisfactorily provide these protections. Currently, the states of Idaho and Montana have completed their plans and they were deemed acceptable by the USFWS. Wyoming's plan was not acceptable to the Service, therefore delisting will be delayed until Wyoming makes adjustments to their plan. Other legal delays are anticipated as well. It will take at least a year to delist once Wyoming's plan is accepted.

What does state management mean for wolves?
The state wolf plan requires that a minimum of 15 packs of wolves be maintained in Idaho. Currently Idaho has about 40 packs well distributed across the state. The state has begun planning and coordinating with the USFWS, the Nez Perce Tribe, and Wildlife Services to transition into the primary management role. Once delisted, wolves will likely be managed similar to black bears and mountain lions. The state will likely propose hunting wolves to provide opportunity for harvest of wolves, as well as to attempt to reduce problems with livestock and to maintain a balance between wolves and their prey. (However, if the state allows hunting of wolves, they will be managed at a level that allows a harvestable surplus, which will likely be higher than the minimum required for delisting).

What will the other agencies be doing?
Once wolves are delisted, the USFWS will be monitoring wolf management in the 3 states for 5 years. The states will be required to verify and report wolf pack activity.

Wildlife Services will be the primary agency responsible for wolf depredations. They will be working closely with IDFG and livestock operators to assure wolf problems are minimized.

The Nez Perce Tribe and the State are in negotiations and hope to sign an MOU that would outline a significant role in wolf related activities for the Tribe in North central Idaho, as well as provide the Tribe with a wolf harvest agreement.

Land management agencies like the Forest Service and BLM will be responsible for their regular land management duties, but IDFG will request their assistance in monitoring and management of wolves.

Other states will be implementing their state wolf plans and assuring a minimum of 15 packs of wolves survive in each state.

Please report wolf sightings!
Part of the requirements for cooperators is to assure the public is well informed and populations are well monitored. This website is a repository for the latest information regarding wolf recovery in Idaho and in the Western DPS. We've also made a wolf reporting form available that will immediately be sent to Idaho Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Nez Perce Tribe. Biologists may follow up with questions, so please fill out the report form as fully and accurately as possible.

We are particularly interested in information regarding wolf pack activity, reproductive activity, and wolves frequenting new areas. If you believe you have a wolf related incident, depredation, wolf mortality, or other incident that requires immediate attention, please contact your local Fish and Game Officer, Fish and Game Regional Office, USFWS, or the Nez Perce Tribe at the following links and phone numbers.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/wildlife/wolves/

 

[Hemorrhage]

Ithaca:
You are casting your pearls before swine. You're obviously well educated and have taken time to study the issues with data and facts to back you up. You are very rare in the hunting community. Remember: these hunting sites are great for info on hunting and killing but leave much too be desired when it comes to intellectual debate. It's like trying to teach 1st graders multi-variate statistics.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Hemorrhage, Almost everyone here contributes something worthwhile at least once in awhile. Many of them contribute a lot. The rest just show us where the worst areas of ignorance are so we can work on their education. Mostly, though, this is a good place to sharpen our arguments for the more important public forums when we testify or submit comments to government agencies. Overall, lots of good information and viewpoints get aired. That's why I like SI. Besides, it's usually good for a laugh, too. I hope everyone enjoys it as much as I do.

 

[Moosie]

You edjicated guys git a Room..................

 

[cjcj]

Hey i saw a wolf run across the hwy 2 months ago...it was 1 mile south of hannigan meadows...should i "report" it?

 

[Hemorrhage]

Moosie: You better not be callin' me educated, you bastard. Those are fightin' words. I can't wait to see you face to face in a couple weeks.

 

[The Hedgehog]

This thread has got me thinking. First, it makes me want to be more proactive in personally assisting in the management of large predators. hump Second, it uncovers a hidden market for one-click cut & paste software that can manage large amounts of useless data.

 

[JoseCuervo]

But it never got you laughing??? Even when BHR posted his "conspiracy theory"?

Or when Elkcheese busted out the "showen" word??? I am still looking that one up, and can't seem to find it.......

I think we are all waiting to "manage" the wolves. But let's be honest, how many guys do you think will ever actually see a wolf, let a lone be able to shoot it??? I have spent plenty of time in the Frank Church, right in the middle of all the "flesh eating carnivores" (as our Gubernor described them), and I have yet to see one. I have seen plenty of tracks, and spent plenty of time laying in a sleeping bag listening to them, but I typically don't take "sound shots", so no management would have been possible.

Wolf predation on the rise

By SCOTT McMILLION, Chronicle Staff Writer

The number of cattle and sheep killed by wolves in the West has more than doubled this year.

"We did have a good jump" this year, said Suzanne Stone, Northern Rockies Representative for Defenders of Wildlife, the group that pays ranchers for confirmed or probable losses.

The 2004 rate also is triple what was predicted ten years ago by the federal government.

However, wolf numbers are also a lot higher than predicted when the big carnivores first were released in Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in 1995.

And when wolf numbers increase, individuals and packs spread out from core national parks and wilderness areas, leading to more depredations, said Ed Bangs, head of wolf recovery for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Helena.

As of Tuesday, wolves were listed by Defenders as the confirmed or probable cause of death for 110 cattle, 442 sheep and six other animals this year. Almost all of those losses were in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. A handful were in Washington, Utah and the Southwest.

In 2003, the tally was 55 cattle, 210 sheep and 15 other animals.

Predations have climbed steadily.

In 1996, the second year of the wolf reintroduction program in Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho, wolves killed eight cattle and 42 sheep.

The wolf kills get a lot of attention, but Stone pointed out they amount to a tiny fraction of all predations on cattle and sheep.

In Montana, for instance, coyotes killed 17,700 sheep and lambs in 2003, according to the Montana Agricultural Statistics Service, which polls ranchers every year.

The ranchers in that survey blamed wolves for 500 dead sheep and lambs, though only 210 were listed as confirmed or probably wolf kills by federal specialists.

Defenders paid ranchers $139,000 for this year's sheep and cattle losses.

That doesn't cover everything, but it helps "take the sting out" of losing livestock, Bangs said.

"I think everybody realizes the compensation is only partial compensation," he said.

Studies have indicated, Bangs said, that actual losses could be from two times to eight times higher than confirmed losses. The higher figure is a "worst case scenario" that might apply in extremely isolated grazing pastures where animals are rarely checked.

Bangs predicted that predation is likely to increase, but said more wolves also will be killed as time goes on.

Places where wolves have full protection -- like Yellowstone -- are filling with wolves. Numbers there have declined slightly this year, partly due to fights among packs. When wolves wander it means wolves are likely to "end up in areas where they have more potential for getting in trouble," Bangs said.

And when wolves cause trouble, they often die. Ranchers are routinely given kill permits and federal specialists often track down wolves and kill them after they attack livestock.

"We expect we'll be killing more wolves and we'll have more (livestock) depredations," Bangs said.

The 1994 environmental impact statement that outlined wolf reintroduction predicted wolf populations of about 129 animals both in greater Yellowstone and in Central Idaho by 2002.

The same document predicted those wolves would kill up to 32 cattle and up to 110 sheep annually in greater Yellowstone and up to 17 cattle and 92 sheep in central Idaho.

This year, confirmed and probably losses were more than twice those predicted levels, which were based on the number of livestock killed per 100 wolves, Bangs said.

With nearly 300 wolves in greater Yellowstone and more than 400 in central Idaho, the predations grew accordingly, he said.

If you calculate in the higher wolf numbers, the livestock losses are less than had been predicted mathematically, he said.

"That's the price you pay when you have more wolves running around," he said.

The federal government is transferring more of its wolf management authority to state governments. However, complete removal of Endangered Species Act protections has been stalled indefinitely.

Montana's wolf plan calls for maintaining wolf numbers at roughly the current levels. It also allows for killing more wolves when they cause trouble.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Elkgunner, there you go again making assumptions. Who said anything about shooting at wolves?? If I was trying to find wolves, I'd see a lot more of them, but I have seen wolves on a 5 different occasions and find tracks more often than not. It could be from spending more time outside as opposed to reading deep thought from the Defenders of Wildlife. May I suggest some light reading by Ann Coulter?

There you go with that cutting and pasting again.... I'm going to make miiillllliiiioooonnnnnssssss..................

 

[JoseCuervo]

Greenhorn,
Sorry, I forgot that you would probably use "non-lethal" means of controlling the wolf population. If you would, please post videos of you sneaking up on the Alpha male and slipping the ol' Trojan on him....

My guess on the participation rates for "wolf management" comes from the fact that bears and lions eat more elk and deer, and very few hunters actively go hunting for bears and lions. Why they would suddenly put down the Pabts Blue Ribbon and go looking for wolves is unknown to me.

And I don't know if it is really a million dollar idea. You have to beat my "right-click,ctrl-C, ctrl-V".

 

[MarvB]

First, it makes me want to be more proactive in personally assisting in the management of large predators.

Greenhorn...LMAO on that one ...but you'll probably have to stand in line.

The whole issue of delisting the wolf seems/smells a lot like a Kalifornica problem we have with the lions. Course we aren't waiting on any other states to help with resolving the problem...Cal DFG and our voting populous are perfectly capable of keeping it fugged up all by themselves... |oo

 

[Michaelr]

maybe we should send some wolves to Californicata to help them with the Kitty problem

 

[The Hedgehog]

ElkGunner. I said large predators, not wolves. But bring on the wolves, they'll be fun too...

Here's 2 pictures I took today.

 

[cjcj]

Wow those are some big cats, thanks for the pic`s