Wolves Not the Cause of Hunter Failures Study Proves

[BuzzH]

7x7,

Do a search on wolf topics...you'll find plenty of answers to your questions.

The main thing to focus on with wolves right now is getting Wyoming to adopt an acceptable wolf plan...until that happens, we're dead in the water.

Oh, and while we're talking about common sense...does common sense tell you can work out solutions to the problem WITHOUT dealing with the states and feds?

 

[Deleted member 13457]

I would say that the lack winter weather for the last several years is probably the reason that the harvets declines aren't much different in areas with or without wolves. However, the reason that there are 1/2 the elk in the northern yellowstone herd now as compared to ten years ago is mainly wolves. Same reason that the number of moose tags available in the gallatin is a shadow of itself, same reason the gallatin late cow hunt is basically non-existant, etc. Wolves eat elk and lots of them. The more wolves you have the more elk they eat, the less elk available for hunting. Its about that simple. Anybody who tells you differently is full of shit. How any sane Hunter can not be up in arms about the current situation is beyond me.

 

[JoseCuervo]

The more wolves you have the more elk they eat, the less elk available for hunting. Its about that simple. Anybody who tells you differently is full of shit. How any sane Hunter can not be up in arms about the current situation is beyond me.

Is an Elk that gets munched by a wolf a loss and a waste of an Elk??? Is there no place for ANY wolves in Idaho/MT/Wyoming?

 

[Deleted member 13457]

Buzz,

I have a question for you(and I'm not being sarcastic, I really am curious). Why can't the Feds approve Wyoming's management plan as is. If Wyoming's wolf numbers dropped below the agreed upon number of breeding pairs and they had to return management back to the Feds, wouldn't they have a huge incentive to do a decent job. Then at least the ball would get rolling for the other states involved.

 

[Deleted member 13457]

Jose,
Don't misunderstand me. I realize full well that there are other people in the world than just me and some of them may like wolves. I'm not saying that we should get rid of all wolves, but what they have done in a relatively short time is alarming. I don't feel that they should be left unchecked.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Buzz,

I have a question for you(and I'm not being sarcastic, I really am curious). Why can't the Feds approve Wyoming's management plan as is. If Wyoming's wolf numbers dropped below the agreed upon number of breeding pairs and they had to return management back to the Feds, wouldn't they have a huge incentive to do a decent job. Then at least the ball would get rolling for the other states involved.

I'll answer in Buzz' absence. I think you are suggesting that the Feds turn over the management to Wyoming, let Wyoming Fugg it up, and then take it back??? Why not avoid the failure step, and wait until Wyoming can manage the wolves without the probability of failure. Idaho and Montana came up with plans that were acceptable. Wyoming should be able to do a cut and paste.

 

[Deleted member 13457]

Thanks Jose. I think I'll await Buzz' answer. No offense.

 

[JoseCuervo]

None taken.... But is that what you are proposing? That the Feds let Wyoming try, and if Wyoming fails, the Feds re-take the management? Why not just have Wyoming submit a plan that is acceptable?

 

[Deleted member 13457]

Yes, basically that is what I'm proposing. If I understand it right (and maybe I don't, that's why I'm asking) the biggest problem with Wyoming's plan is that they designate wolves as predators that can be shot on sight w/o a permit in areas away from the vicinity of Yellowstone. What's the problem with this? You'll still have wolves in the park and areas near it. Their populations won't be allowed to expand much further to new areas. As long as the minimum number of breeding pais is met, why not? Also, as a sidenote, I'm betting that even with the shoot on sight designation, wolf numbers would not drop at all. They are too elusive, mobile, and smart. Anyway, my point is that I doubt Wyoming would ever want the Feds to have management control again and would really try not to fugg it up.

 

[BuzzH]

jmcd,

I think we're pretty much on the same page.

Wyomings plan is a joke, as far as the feds are concerned. Whether or not YOU, ME, or anyone else agrees with their plan makes no difference. The EIS must be followed and one of the agreements was a USFWS approved wolf management plan from each of the 3 states. Wyoming chose to play hardball and they're losing their ass...and kicking Idaho and Montana in the head to boot. Its too bad that MT and ID are suffering the idiotic legislature in Wyoming. A good friend of mine was the PR Officer for the FS for the wolf reintro...and he told me in '93 after a scoping meeting in Cody Wyoming...that if there were long term problems it would be from Wyoming. He was right on the money on that issue.

For the record, if the decision were mine, I wouldnt adopt Wyomings plan either. Its piss poor and really affords no real management of wolves. It does no one any good to delist them...then relist them...then delist them....then relist them...all because they can be shot on sight anywhere except Yellowstone or a wilderness area.

As to the Gallatin, I disagree somewhat...not that the wolves dont eat elk, but there were other factors besides wolves that have had an impact on elk there. For one, that herd has been over-objective for nearly as long as the park has existed. For another, the herd age structure was heavily skewed to old animals. Older herds are not productive. I'll be interested to see what happens in the next 5-10 years...I personally think as the herd age structure changes, as wolf numbers plateau (which they already are), and the elk wise up...things will remain pretty constant for a long, long, long time. I could be wrong too...I'm not a wolf biologist. That being said, there is plenty of information out there stating what I just attempted to. Not sure who to believe???

I do agree, and always have, that wolf numbers need to be right at or slightly above the minimum number to keep them off the list.

There is room for a wolf population and still have abundant ungulate populations, IMO.

 

[Erik in AK]

Anybody have an opinion of the likelyhood of wolves being listed in the (near to mid) future as a big game or furbearer species and managed through hunting and or trapping?

Also, vis a vis' the elk decline: isn't there an ongoing study in the Clearwater to determine the impact of black bear predation on elk calves? Have there been any preliminary results based on the data collected do far?

 

[BuzzH]

They wont be managed until the welfare ranchers in Wyoming come up with an acceptable plan...

 

[TheTone]

So the Defenders of Wildlife have more data on elk and elk hunters in this state than IDFG does? Hmmm... crazy. Not saying there data is completely wrong, but please lets consider the source here. Even if wolves killed every elk in this state do you think they would say so?

Erik in AK, as far as I know alot of the research on black bears in the clearwater is still ongoing. I think they have some areas where they are trying to remove alot of bears and others where they are staying with typical harvest trends of bears. From what I have seen though, the data did tend to show that black bears were the major source of calf elk mortality.

 

[Erik in AK]

Although this isn't "my" issue I tend to give state DF&G's the benefit of the doubt when it comes to impartiality on a game/habitat issue.

So I would agree that DoW's data (or any other agenda driven org) is suspect unless its been independantly peer-reviewed.

 

[ZAMBONIMAN]

How come nobody talks about anything but the wolves killing the elk? Could their numbers taken a plunge from drought?, severe winter weather which kills many of the young of the year and old animals?, encroachment of their range by new housing developments? There are many factors that everyone seems to forget about when wolves are involved. We have about 4000 of them here in Minnesota, and by golly they eat deer here too, and livestock, and your family dog if given the chance. And don't forget, wolves get mange too, and that takes out quite a few of them when that comes around. Don't get me wrong here, I'm no wolf lover, but I think a few are getting a little narrowsighted when it comes to wolves...just my opinion of course.

 

[ZAMBONIMAN]

sorry everyone, I missed a page. I see BUZZH has said some of the very same things I did...