Yellowstone Park Wolves

[MTGomer]

This guy is going to be a gut pile somewhere between Deckard and Eagle creek by the time Thanksgiving gets here.

He’s used to having cameras pointed at him, as one of the most photographed elk herds in the world.



View attachment 196520

Is this that difficult?

 

[MTGomer]

You seem to be stuck on killing them as a matter of principle - not an actual need to kill them.

There is not much of a NEED to kill hardly anything that we hunt.

I’ve also never viewed being unprincipled as a positive characteristic.

 

[shoots-straight]

Sorry I’m not a wolf hater, I was involved in this discussion back in the early nineties and many of the pro wolf comments came from back east. So where did you get your Montana approval rate for wolf introduction , I would like to read that study. No misconception here and no wolf hating just the fact the lower 48 is not a natural environment anymore.
My point is if they stay in the park then so be it it if they push out of the park then they are impacting sportsman and ranches! That’s where they are and should be in danger ! Natural spreading throughout their former range is great but not this reintroduction such as Colorado is dealing with. My reason is the fact that even if legally killed there is still crying by the wolf loving community and the use of killing puppies as a explanation for why it’s wrong ! Again this is a rigged game forced down hunters and livestock owners throat!

Yes, many of the pro wolf comments came from back east. No argument there, BUT support from the majority of Residents in the effected states was clear. Check this document out. Go to page 6-30 to read the citation. It's from the book/

I also participated and remembered the fact that a majority of residents supported the reintro. Just not ranchers.

Gray Wolves (Canis Lupus) Reintroduction Into Yellowstone National Park (N.P ...​

Gray Wolves

 

[buffybr]

I bet it isn't the end of story. I'm ok either way.

Yes, "end of story" is my personal view, and I agree that it won't end. Buffer zones are worthless! All they do is extend the fireing line.

313 is hunted by draw after Nov 15 and OTC prior.

I believe, but am not positive, that FWP still has the leeway to close down Deckard flats (which for those that are unfamiliar is the area immediately south of the Yellowstone river between Gardiner and Jardine on the park boundary) prior to Nov 15 if there’s a cold snap and a heavy snow pushing elk out of the park and harvest is high through the check station.

I don’t see any reason why they shouldn’t be able to do the same for wolves and wish they would figure that out.

Picky, picky, picky...
Deckard flats is actually NORTH of the Yellowstone river.

 

[MTGomer]

Deckard flats is actually NORTH of the Yellowstone river.

You are correct. I make that mistake so often when referring to the Beartooth and always have.


Here’s why and it’s a stupid reason: when I look at the Beartooth on google earth, which I’ve done way more than I care to admit, I look at it from the face, facing south, looking up the major drainages: Boulder, Stillwater, Rosebuds etc, so I always have the orientation 180 degrees. Yes, I realize this is an inexcusable mistake for a land surveyor to make.

 

[Irrelevant]

You are correct. I make that mistake so often when referring to the Beartooth and always have.


Here’s why and it’s a stupid reason: when I look at the Beartooth on google earth, which I’ve done way more than I care to admit, I look at it from the face, facing south, looking up the major drainages: Boulder, Stillwater, Rosebuds etc, so I always have the orientation 180 degrees. Yes, I realize this is an inexcusable mistake for a land surveyor to make.

WTF is wrong with you. North is up... always.

Isn't that grounds for losing you license? LOL

 

[Pmacc60]

Yes, many of the pro wolf comments came from back east. No argument there, BUT support from the majority of Residents in the effected states was clear. Check this document out. Go to page 6-30 to read the citation. It's from the book/

I also participated and remembered the fact that a majority of residents supported the reintro. Just not ranchers.

Gray Wolves (Canis Lupus) Reintroduction Into Yellowstone National Park (N.P ...​

Gray Wolves

Thank you I read that along with many other arguments and studies. The problem is not wolves on Yellowstone but when they leave the park. Pro wolf groups want more and more concessions and bigger buffer zones. I refer to you seeing residents that supported the wolf reintroduction but I honestly did not see the same thing. Ranchers , hunters were in strong opposition . One guy whom i attended the hearing with from Delaware told me he did not care if ranchers lost livestock and hunters didn’t have big game to hunt . He wanted to spend his two weeks a year seeing wolves ! He was not alone in his opinion. I challenge anyone tp tell me that they believe if one of the Yellowstone wolves is kill anywhere in the state of Montana that there is going to be outrage.

 

[MTGomer]

WTF is wrong with you. North is up... always.

Isn't that grounds for losing you license? LOL

It should be.

It’s the only place I do it with too. It actually drives me crazy how my phone’s navigation or the navigation in my wife’s car rotates the map as you drive instead of leaving N at the top, but for whatever reason I’m always looking at the Beartooth backwards.

 

[Carnage2011]

Good thing that pack was 27 strong! Imagine if it was only 10 and people could be acting like we killed all of them off in one swoop since 30% would have died! Give up the percentage BS. Hell I killed 8% of a pack last year with 1 bullet.

 

[Carnage2011]

Wolves are incredibly intelligent animals. They will adapt and spend more time in the timber or in the park. Once they realize they are being hunted they will make changes. If they didn’t already do this we would kill a bunch more of them in MT every year. We sell a pile of wolf licenses and very few get filled.

 

[Point Creep]

This is the vehicle needed for the Jardine Road. Quota along park border was so ridiculously stupid. Sorry guys.

 

[MTLabrador]

The park superintendent made some interesting comments.

 

[MTTW]

I wonder... when Roosevelt made Yellowstone a national park, did he say " man we can make a shitload of money off this"

 

[Straight Arrow]

I wonder... when Roosevelt made Yellowstone a national park, did he say " man we can make a shitload of money off this"

Nope ... and it's not YNP that is benefitting from wolves, geysers, elk, bison, natural waterways, and other wonderful features. It is Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho for the most part.

Teddy was a naturalist, preservationist, and wildlife advocate wanting to protect YNP and area, not to make a boatload of money. It's we surrounding neighborhood blokes wanting to profit from nature and nature watchers.

BTW, it was actually President Grant who made Yellowstone the first national park.

 

[MTTW]

Learn something every day. I am not convinced that the economics of Yellowstone park's attraction is a benefit to the surrounding area.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I wonder... when Roosevelt made Yellowstone a national park, did he say " man we can make a shitload of money off this"

That's not the case, but you do point to the potential for improved financial support for YNP. If the wolf advocates want additional protections and increased wolf-watching, then perhaps there should be some sort of wolf viewing fee in YNP, with proceeds to go to the Park.

 

[BWALKER77]

So those elk are limited in harvest, right? There's a bull permit, cow permit, etc. The take is highly regulated and in fact, when it was proposed that units north of the Park go to Limited Entry, there was a massive outcry from hunters who didn't want to sacrifice their opportunity, and from outfitters who make their living off of killing park elk. What was the right thing for the elk in that instance?

But yeah, there's some hypocrisy here relative to what's a good buffer zone or low quota area for wolves versus elk. When Montanans were slaughtering elk left & right during the gut hunt, there was never enough opportunity. Then the herd crashed, and so we blamed the woofs for that (without any real evidence) and decided we needed to shoot woofs to help elk. Regardless of that, elk are not endangered in the GYA. Wolves are only 10 years off of being listed, and it took a literal act of congress to get them to a delisted status. I don't think you'll ever see those conditions happen again.

The virtue signaling from the commission on woofs is exactly what some folks want to hear.As a nation that is ruled by law, those actions have equal and opposite reactions. If the elected and unelected leaders spent any time actually discussing the issue with professionals and those with a long history working on this issue rather than catering to the loudest voices in the room, they wouldn't have ignored the actual biologists and adopted rules and regs that make litigation more likely to succeed.

Dislike those anti-hunting groups all you want, but unless they have the counterpart on the right side of this equation to create an opening, they were largely unable to get the kind of changes they wanted.

Wolves are not endangered in the GYE either. Haven't been for a long time.
The park boundary is the line in the sand and bowing to rabid leftist animal rights activists is never a great strategy long term. In fact it's a guaranteed loser.

 

[Sytes]

That's not the case, but you do point to the potential for improved financial support for YNP. If the wolf advocates want additional protections and increased wolf-watching, then perhaps there should be some sort of wolf viewing fee in YNP, with proceeds to go to the Park.

This is the cow patty aspect of kowtowing to extremists...

Now, it's not in their soon to be petting zoo, it's outside the zoo the eco-extremists desire protections.

No matter what, a drawn line in the sand means jack squat to wolves...


27 wolves in ONE pack. Hmmm, according to R1 MT (whose crappy at elk approximations as they are wolves) wonder what the real count is. Last I spoke with a wolf bio, they estimated 5-8 to be a quality managed pack...

27 in a single pack. Either YNP needs to cull the pack (payment can be made to the MT hunters) or their zoo has gone off the legit side of quality pack size due to a single factor... YNP pretends humans don't belong in the ecological cycle of life on earth...

Meh, defend away.

 

[Straight Arrow]

This is the cow patty aspect of kowtowing to extremists...

Not at all the intention, not defending anything, merely pointing to:
1. YNP suffers a backlog of repair needs.
2. YNP is underfunded.
3. Ideas to increase financial support for YNP have potential for positive outcomes.
4. Economic analysis of the fiscal impact of the wolf viewers shows significant amount of monies generated in Montana.
5. Those and additional monies generated could support YNP, reducing fiscal shortfalls.

Bloviating as an extremist seemingly unaccepting of the complexity of issues surrounding wolves in Yellowstone is not helpful.

 

[MTGomer]

Not at all the intention, not defending anything, merely pointing to:
1. YNP suffers a backlog of repair needs.
2. YNP is underfunded.
3. Ideas to increase financial support for YNP have potential for positive outcomes.
4. Economic analysis of the fiscal impact of the wolf viewers shows significant amount of monies generated in Montana.
5. Those and additional monies generated could support YNP, reducing fiscal shortfalls.

Bloviating as an extremist seemingly unaccepting of the complexity of issues surrounding wolves in Yellowstone is not helpful.

If I’m not mistaken the shortfall is because park revenues go to the general treasury and then the park is funded via congressional appropriations. Isn’t that right? (This explains why they close if the government shuts down - they’ll have no money).

If the park could keep its revenues I’m sure it would be far in the black.