Wolves Eliminate MT Elk Hunting Opportunities

[BigHornRam]

O. K. Buzz,

Let's say Wyoming bows down to you wishes and comes up with an accepted plan. Delisting occurs and the management of the wolves is turned over to the state. Montana's wolf coordinator say's that we have 14 packs. What good does that do for Montana? Now Montana has to pay to manage the wolves instead of the feds, and the mutts are still protected. I don't give a rats rear how many wolves there are total, just how many there are in Montana. And I don't trust the people in charge of doing the counting.

 

[BuzzH]

Paul,

I know you're smarter than you post sometimes...

What good will it do to give MT control? Did you read MT's management plan?

If MT claims 14 packs they can "manage" at least 3-4 packs right into the dirt and still satisfy the federal requirements. Also, they could "manage" individual wolves within the packs. Get it?

Keep control with the Feds and you'll never be able do more than what they want done with wolf management.

Also, the funding will not fall all on the State of Montana...the feds will still be kicking in a pretty large portion, according to the MT wolf plan.

 

[A-con]

So does anyone know if Wyoming is trying to come up with a plan that is acceptable to the Feds ? Whats the time line, will Wyoming drag it's feet and hold this up forever ?

 

[JoseCuervo]

A-Con,
Does Wyomings legislature only meet every two years? I thought last year's stubborn plan from Wyoming was going to be the only thing offered for a long time.... Not sure, Buzz might know. But the articles last year were all about the discussion that the ranchers were going to "hold fast" in order to teach them "jack-booted Federal Agents" a lesson...

 

[Horn Seeker]

Has anyone ever heard how many deer or elk an individual wolf needs to eat a year? I am curious. I know a lion eats about 1 per week, probably either or. Maybe an elk will go a little longer, deer little shorter. Many wolves weigh more than a mature lion, most probably weigh more than most any female lion. Does a wolf need a deer a week? Does a pack of 8 need to kill 8 deer or maybe 4 elk a week?

ANyone hear those numbers before?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Wolves in the wild survive on a "feast and famine" type diet and do not eat everyday. We have recorded wolves going 14 days without a meal with no ill effects. A typical pack of six in the wild will consume on average 800 pounds of meat per month. In Yellowstone, that would average out to two adult elk and maybe a small deer.

When wolves do make a kill, each wolf will consume on average of 21 to 32 pounds of meat. Meat drunk, the wolves then stagger off a short distance and lay down to digest that massive amount of meat protein. The pack then returns to the kill off an on until the carcass has been cleaned.

 

[Horn Seeker]

6 wolves......2 elk, 1 deer......1 month. Wow, that is WAY less than I thought they'd eat. I bet when times are good (as they are in the Yellowstone area) they kill a LOT more than that a month though.

Anyone else got any other info that supports or refutes that?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Horn Seeker,

A wolf weighs 120lbs. You weigh 180 pounds. How much meat would you and 3 of your buddies eat in a month?

 

[The Hedgehog]

Elkgunner, not that I think your sources of data are ever anything other than dependable ...but I think you should read fewer tree-hugger essays and watch more reality TV.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Elkgunner, not that I think your sources of data are ever anything other than dependable ...but I think you should read fewer tree-hugger essays and watch more reality TV.

It just seems like Real World ain't very good since the Las Vegas season....

But I do kinda like the "highlights" of The Simple Life.... hump

But Greenhorn, you are right, the biologists and experts (you call them tree-huggers) can't possibly know what a Wolf will do. Obviously the real experts are the ranchers and big-bellied guys on the barstool that typically get out of breath walking over to the pool table.

You have any comments on Leopold's quote and comments of "Leopold the hunter wrote that the "unit value of the trophy" should not be lowered any longer by our "artificializing it," as we have been doing during all the years we have kept the wolf at bay." Do those big-ass bulls you whack mean more to you because the other 98% of the hunters don't kill that big of critters? Would your animals still be "special", if they were just average, and if they were the results of "artificial" management?

Dire Predictions

What will this mean for hunters in the region, and elsewhere? In perfect candor, nobody knows for sure, or as Bangs puts it, "We all make better historians than prophets." Still, there is no lack of dire predictions about the impact wolves will have on wildlife. Assorted ranching interests and sportsmen's associations envision that without strenuous control efforts, there will be 5,700 wolves by 2010; and each one will kill 100 elk per year, plunging calf-to-cow ratios to zero. Inevitably, the doomsayers maintain, game will be wiped out. They also claim that environmentalists, with the support of the USFWS, will never allow wolves to be hunted, and the ultimate motive is for the wolf to become the principal instrument of big-game management, eliminating any need for licensed hunters and hunting. Is there any basis for these alarming assertions? Without question, those who want to do away with hunting are legion, but very few of the antis seem to be directly associated with wolf restoration (everyone actively involved accepts as a given that wolves will need to be killed, some by hunters). As for the remaining claims, most should properly come under the heading of woods lore, or even tall tales, rather than solid scientific study (see sidebar). Bangs says, "If wolves were going to wipe out the elk, they would have done it 10,000 years ago-why wait till now?"

Hunting and the Wolf

What wolves will do, for certain, is change things. As of now, states are widely using winter cow-elk hunts to bring down populations that are "over objective." Wolves will probably reduce the need for these hunts. Game managers are seeing low calf-to-cow ratios in wolf areas, but for various reasons. In one part of Idaho, "right in the middle of wolf-pack activity," according to a state wildlife biologist, calf-to-cow ratios have increased to 36 per 100. Wolves can carry rabies, but could they also act as a control on diseased ungulates, such as those with chronic wasting disease? They are going to make life very hard for coyotes, which could help lots of ground-nesting birds. Their presence will move big game around to different areas; and each year at least 75 percent of hunters (in Idaho) won't get an elk, just as 75 percent don't get an elk currently. In his influential and well-researched book, The Wolf Almanac, naturalist Robert H. Busch writes, "Wolf predation can accelerate prey declines caused by other factors [lack of feed or hard winters are two].and can delay the recovery of prey numbers." In other words, wolves need to be managed. And to keep wolf numbers down, Busch continues, "wolf kills would have to be continued for years." Hunters shouldn't mind that part at all.

This shows why it is imperative for the states to get their plans approved, put the wolf on the regular list of game animals, establish seasons and bag limits, and take reasonable steps to address the concerns of livestock growers. (The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, for one, seems to grasp this and has urged President Bush to aid delisting.) The sooner wolves come off the endangered list, the sooner we get to hunt them. I look forward to the likelihood of a wolf hunt only miles from my house, and I wager that more than a few other hunters would, too. And there will be another important benefit: the knowledge that with the wolf present, the other game will be worth more.

In the mid-1940s, Aldo Leopold, the father of game management, was one of the first to call for wolf restoration in Yellowstone Park. Years earlier as a young man, Leopold shot a she-wolf in Arizona Territory, as was done without hesitation in those days. Upon reaching her-described in the most famous scene of his posthumously published book, A Sand County Almanac-he witnessed a "fierce green fire dying" in her eyes. The sight began to transform Leopold into a conservationist who recognized the relatedness of all components of the wild. The wolf, Leopold saw, was as important as the deer he thought he was assisting by killing the wolf. He learned, he said, to "think like a mountain" after that. Leopold the hunter wrote that the "unit value of the trophy" should not be lowered any longer by our "artificializing it," as we have been doing during all the years we have kept the wolf at bay.

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

Some Facts About Wolves
With only four canine teeth, and no claws, for weapons, a wolf is not a gifted hunter, merely a dogged one. Wolves risk injury while hunting, and so have little incentive to do it for ?fun.? It should also be recalled that deer and elk evolved by escaping death by wolves. So how many animals can wolves kill?
All in all, in-depth knowledge of wolf predation remains scant. A wolf needs 7 to 9 pounds of food per day (some days they get more, some days less). Wolf expert L. David Mech contends that ?the most extensive [data] yet obtained on the average rate of kill of a wolf pack? comes from an early 1960s study of wolves on Michigan's Isle Royale. There, 15 to 17 wolves took two moose per week in the winter. A 1997-2000 wintertime study in Yellowstone found a rate of 1.8 animals, primarily elk, per wolf per month, and kills are probably at their highest in that season. Spring offers carcasses from cold-weather mortality to scavenge, and also vulnerable fawns and calves. And in the fall, wolves can take advantage of game that has been wounded and lost by hunters.

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

Update on wolves in Idaho as of Nov. 30, 2004
* Population: 419
* Documented number of packs: 44
* Reproductive packs: 34
* Breeding pairs: 28
* Idaho pup count: 112
* Number of new animals fitted with radio collars: 56
* Wolves lethally controlled: 17
* Wolves illegally killed: 10
* Other or unknown wolf deaths: 9
# Update on wolf packs in Idaho during 2004:
* Wolf packs: Bear Valley, Bennett Mountain, Big Hole, Buffalo Ridge, Calderwood, Castle Peak, Chamberlain Basin, Chesimia, Cold Springs, Cook, Coolwater Ridge, Copper Basin, Eagle Mountain, Eldorado, Five Lake Butte, Florence, Galena, Gold Fork, Golden Creek, Gospel Hump, Hazard Lake, Hemlock Ridge, Jureano Mountain, Kelly Creek, Landmark, Lupine Creek, Magruder, Marble Mountain, Monumental, Morgan Creek, Moyer Basin, O'Hara Point, Orphan, Packer John, Partridge Creek, Red River, Scott Mountain, Selway, Soldier Mountain, Steel Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Timberline, Twin Peaks, Warm Springs.
Source: Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and USDA Wildlife Services

 

[sra61]

What this Alt guy with MDFWP fails to mention when he says that wolves haven't effected the elk herds in the NW part of Montana is that there ain't no elk here in the NW part of Montana!!! Not in any real numbers anyway. Most elk hunters who live up here go elsewhere to hunt elk. I have seen wolves here. I think because we have so many grizzlies the wolves don't have as much impact on whatever game has enough moxy to survive. Also our country is very brushy, maybe that effects their ability to greatly diminish game numbers. I don't know for sure.
I can tell you though, that I am not very impressed with our MDFWP, and their apparent lack of interest in the very people who pay their paychecks. This Alt guy talks about the Bison hunt like he is planning for it to fail. He's concerned that the antihunters won't like it! He says that the last time we had the bison hunt, hunters got a real black eye. I don't give a rat's what some non-resident, bunny-huggin piece of offal thinks about it! It's amazing to me why the people of Montana allow these outastaters to rule us! I could make a hell of alot more money elsewhere, but I choose to live here because of the outdoor opportunities for me and my children.

 

[BigHornRam]

sra61,

I met with Kurt one on one 3 years ago and had a long discussion with him about wolves. He is a good guy. He is a bit like a politician though, as his comments adapt to who he's talking with, but living around Bozeman these days, you have to be a bit of a politician. Lots of differnt agendas floating around and as a gummint employee, he gets shot at from all directions. And when you get quoted in a newspaper article, or do an interview for say 60 Minutes, sometimes some important comments get editted out. I know a lot of other good, dedicated MT FWP people as well.

 

[sra61]

I'm sure there are plenty of wonderful people in FWP, but that still doesn't explain why we who through our tax dollars and license dollars have supported all of the programs that got our wildlife where it is today are the ones who get to suck hind tit! I have a loyalty to my employer, because that's who pays the bills. Why is it that when I hear these people that they can't stand up on their own hind legs like the rest of us and support the ones that brought them to the dance? When it diminishes my opportunities to enjoy the outdoors I don't like it, and I'm done being quiet about it! The Yellowstone elk herd was an awesome sight to see. I'm deeply saddened that my children will probably never get to experience what I did down there.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Wolves Screw up our Cheeto-Fed Elk hunts

ElkGunner likes to make fun of these Cheeto-fed elk hunts with good bulls and high-success rates. Not a good time in his opinion.

Here's a couple pictures that show what kind of MT hunts are going away, in addition to the cow hunts which are now conveniently managed by wolves instead of hunters.

First picture is a bull taken on the late hunt, actually inside the Absoraka Wilderness area which had to be taken out by going to the bottom (behind us), then out the trail about 4 miles to the trail head. Bryan Martin (Canadian Mtn Outfitters in British Colombia) also tagged along on this guy's hunt. The other elk was taken at sundown on the final day of the hunt, nearly on the top of a prominant mountain in area. I get to go hunting this weekend, most likely my last chance, even to just tag along is incredible.

 

[MarvB]

Nice animals and even nicer country! Looks like they were "earned" to me hump

 

[Ithaca 37]

Congratulations on the great bulls!

 

[BigHornRam]

Greenhorn,

Was Bryan there to tag along, or to be put to work as a pack mule?! One of Bryan's clients this year has their photo on the cover of the latest Grand Slam magazine. Good luck on the elk hunt.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Brian was along just for fun, we were trying to help out. The guy hunting with us almost didn't want to take that bull because earlier in the hunt we saw several much bigger ones. We just couldn't get on them, as our cheeto baiting didn't work out.

Here's yesterday's cheeto-fed bull.. taken about 45 minutes after sun-up, we'd been hiking for 3.5 hours to get into position. The outfitter on horseback was about 10 minutes too late.

As a bonus, this morning when leaving the elk area, I stumbled into a monster lion track. My friend ended up killing what might be his best ever lion, which is a tall order for him. It was an incredible chase, tough and long through some very rough country, with some great action at the tree, or I should say tree(s).

It was the best 48 hours of hunting I think I've experienced. I guess a nice way to say bye bye to a great hunt. It was good while it lasted. I don't think the wolves will enjoy it as much as some of the rest of us did.

 

[Elkhunter]

Nice bulls. Got any pics of the lion?