Never Cry Wolf

[Ray Hammond]

But the difficulty, as I see it Steve, is that in Washington things are decided on a political basis.

Things are being decided by career government employees who are more like politicians- within the FWS -without science and common sense as the basis for many of those decisions.

Why did we need predator reintroduction in the West? Mule deer, sheep, moose,goats- most every species save perhaps elk and pronghorns- is not INCREASING in numbers, but decreasing or just holding their own, especially mule deer, so WHY the pressing urgency for super-predators being reintroduced in the West?

Why not reintroduce them to metro Washington, DC, which has an out of control whitetail population?

[OH at work]

First let me say I am happy to see this thread staying so civil given the emotions that this topic sometimes brings out in us     .

Steve, I have a question you may be able to answer.   Below is a quote from Meriwether Lewis:

"We scarely see a gang of buffaloe without observing a psrsel of those faithfull shepherds on their skirts in readiness to take care of the maimed wounded. The large wolf never barks, but howls as those of the atlantic states do." -- Meriwether Lewis

It would appear that the buffalo had been, at least to some degree, a portion of the subsistance for the wolf.  Do you know if there was a study prior to wolf reintroduction to show if the impact on elk, deer, etc. would be higher due to the lesser number of buffalo now existing in the west?  

I have to say that, after hunting in the state of Idaho for several years now, I sympathize with those who have to try to coexist with the wolves.  I know I wouldn't be a happy resident in Ohio if someone reintroduced wolves here to help keep the evergrowing coyote population down.

Joe

[m laughlin]

i am always suprised how worked up everyone gets when wolves come up. i've lived my whole life in montana. the basic cycle of life seems to be about 7 years. at the end of the coyote cycle the deer population is at its high and vice/versa. wolves have lived in montana the whole time i've been here (41 years). my biggest problem with wolves was they didn't need a reintroduction, they were already here and the population was getting bigger by the year. the amount of money that was spent on "bringing the wolf back" in my oppionion could have been used somewhere else. a hunting season for wolves would be welcomed by me but not an extermination. the wolf is a smart critter and would learn to stay away if we could at least shoot at them much the same as the grizzly. the elk, moose, and deer will have a huge learning curve in survival with the wolf with the population exploding like it is. i do honestly believe they will overcome it and the wolf population will once again go down much the same as with the coyote and painter. i sure hope i'm right. right now the hunting isn't what it was a mere 5 years ago. i wish we could relocate a few to central park so everyone could enjoy them.
matt

[Stu]

I've also tried to stay out of this, but just to provide my limited experience:

I have property in Ontario & spend 5-6 weeks/year up there, most of the time in the bush. There is a healthy wolf population. I see them, hear them, and find their kills. They do kill deer, including mature (I mean big) bucks. They also can have a temporary negative impact on your hunt if they are running around your immedate locale. The deer become quite "scarce" for three or four days thereafter. They will also kill a dog; I try to keep mine in sight at all times, not an easy task.

I'll admit that a wolf pack in full howl as you walk to or from your stand is kinda chilling, but IMO we should fear things with more prospects of, well, leveling us, such as cancer, heart attacks, the stuff that's gonna get most of us.

So the wolfs are there, but the whitetails are too, are abundant enough, and get big. I live in MI and have heard many tales of the complete decimation of the UP herd due to wolves. I won't get into that, but will state what I know about my region in ONT: 1) there is an open season on wolves, two allowed per hunter 2) they will venture further north for moose when available 3) the provincial government has (I've been told) trapped or killed problem wolfs and 4) many hunters probably shoot them on sight, tag or no tag. I am not for (4) at all, anywhere or anyplace, and I also know loggers and others who have no interest in shooting 'em, including one whose dog was torn up pretty good by one. Some consider them part of the scene up there. Agrees with me.

According to locals ranging in age from 30's to 80's, the wolves have been there "forever", but coexist with the deer. The deer have actually become more numerous (and moose, less so) as the landscape has changed with massive poplar and bam cuts. In my humble opinion, they coexist because they look at 'em not as vermin nor as magical creatures, but as part of the wild that can occasionally require a bit of tempering. I hope the government there continues to allow that framework.

I will not pretend to judge their impact anywhere  else in the world, the above is just my experience, FYI.

[Barney]

I've been wondering since the beginning, how do you re-introduce something that was already here?    

I think if we send 5 or 6 wolves to every other state in the US, it would solve everyone's problems.  

[Brian Krebs]

[QB] "Red wolves native to Idaho??? I've not seen that referenced anywhere in any of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. If you can find me a reference, I'll gladly read. Contrary to popular belief, not all government employees and wildlife biologists fly to work in black helicopters...no matter what their wives say."

 Steve: I am quite sure you do not know about the red wolves in Idaho. If you knew about them; you probably ( as a well intentioned biologist;person; and hunter) would have objected to the introduction of gray wolves.
 The FACT is that a gag order was put on this issue so that YOU and others could not put the existance of the red wolves into your decision about introducing the wolves.
 Call some Idaho biologists at the fish and game and ask them questions about the wolves - as a biologist; and see what reaction you get.
 A gag order gags. We do live in a free country; and there is a 'sunshine law' here; there is the freedom of information act- try to find out what the gag order is about through those actions; and then please tell me just how open to discussion the wolf issue is.
 When I was securing signatures for a wolf season petition ( in THE Salmon grocery store) - I met the wives of several biologists. I saw the husband of one that I recognised standing several steps behind her when she talked about the gag order; other times the husband was not there at all.
  Steve: get back to me on what the gag order was about- and then tell me about black helecopters.
  By the way- there is no law that says a helecopter can not be black.
  If you go to sites to look into buying helecopters; you will see that Black: is a very  popular color.
  Steve I know your really trying to be logical here; and seem to be interested in facts.
  Seek them out- see what you come up with- find out about existing wolves in Idaho before the introduction.
  Please don't ask me to produce what the biologists have a gag order over- how can I produce facts that are under a gag order?
  I live in the middle of the area that is effected by the wolves.
  Your own link stated that wolves can exist with a 40% reduction in population each year.
  Why then are we not allowed to do that?
One thing you said sticks in my craw; and that is that it is nice to see preditors in the woods. I could not agree more. But wolves kill all the other preditors; they force mountain lions off their kills; they drag bears from their dens; they kill coyotes; they eat racoons and .... it is kinda hard to see the preditors in the woods now Steve- except the wolves.... are you supporting a 'one preditor in the ecosystem' policy?
  If you note where people are from; and those that experience being in the woods with wolves while bowhunting: are pretty much fed up with the idea of letting the wolves eat their way through everything.  
 While people that do not live where the wolves are - are either scratching their heads and wondering what is going on- or think wolves should be allowed and normal controls should  exist to keep them from exceeding the expected role of a preditor in todays world.
 Except for the radical pro-wolf - ignore every other species clan.
 I do not think it unreasonable to hunt wolves and control their numbers as we do with other species.
  I worry by the time serious biologists figure out what is going on - it will be to late for our elk and deer- and that will effect bowhunting.
  Black helecopters...... geesh.  :rolleyes:

[Steve Kendrot]

Brian, I do not think it is unreasonable to control wolf numbers like every other species either. In fact, I think it is absolutely necessary for the long term conservation of wolves. So it seems we are on the same page...however, I beleive the arguments so frequently used to support massive reduction of wolf populations will only slow down the goal which you seek. The feds have no evil intentions here, its just that they are accountable to ALL Americans and as such have to balance the needs and desires of all stakeholders. So the louder the wolf haters scream, the louder the wolf lovers will scream, and the extremists will dominate the discussion and the decision will become a stalemate, leaving the moderate majority waiting a long time for needed relief. The extremists on both sides use rhetoric, hyperbole, and fear to push their agendas. They speak in absolutes such as "Wolves have NEVER attacked a human." or "Wolves kill ALL the elk, or ALL the predators." Neither statement is true, and neither statement moves the discussion closer to common ground where a solution can be reached. Yet, it seems to be all you hear. The consipracy theories such as this gag order only derails the conversation further. I am not aware of a single shred of scientific evidence that red wolves were ever a part of the northern rockies ecosystem. And I spent two years trying to get wolves restored to my own backyard in Upstate New York, so I know the wolf issue in great depth. Why would the ID game department have a gag order forbidding them to talk about red wolves, when the state fish and game agencies in ID, MT and WY opposed wolf recovery - on the record - from the beginning. You argue that state F&G biologists suppressed the existence of red wolves against their will, so they could bring in gray wolves, but they didn't want the gray wolves to begin with either....   Huh? Who issued the gag order? The feds? If so since when do states listen to the feds??? I'm sorry, but the whole story holds no water for me.

I think I enjoyed Stu's comments the most. His real experience with a long term perspective is probably the most valid brought to the table in this thread. Once the northern rockies sytem adjusts to the dramatic changes in the past decade, this whole debate will seem like a waste of breath. I really don't think living with wolves needs to be the challenge its made out to be. After all, they are just another critter.

[JBiorn]

Steve-------BS!!!, You are in freaking MARYLAND!! Please tell me how much you know about what is going on in the Rockies again. It's NOT rhetoric, These non-native species have to compete now with the packs of gray wolves that were already living in the area. I have been in the hills my whole life my friend, and the wolves never really went away, they just learned how to stay out of sight. Now, explain to me how introduced wolves are supposed to compete with the natives for territory and food supply?
 This all happened on account of some Easterners who thought it would be a "good idea" to make sure we had wolves again. What they fail to realize is the fact that the Human species are part of the ecosystem, too! The Human species has multiplied to a point that there is no more room for the wolf in the mountains. We have cattle ranches, sheep ranches, pig farms. You know? Listen----what is it going to take before the greenies realize that these introduced species aren't a solution to anything? Whats it going to take? A child packed off by a wolf that has been forced into the land of Humans? These wolves have been handled by humans, they have learned that the humans will just set them free--so they HAVE NO FEAR OF HUMANS!! We are just another link in the ol' food chain.
 On our elk hunt last year there was absolutely no way you could call an elk in. In fact, when I bugled a bit I had a wolf standing not 10 yards from my hide. This is a problem when the elk aren't even doing their natural thing-----the woods were dead silent DURING THE RUT!

 Tell me again how cool it is to have the damn wolves.....


 Jeff
"

[JBiorn]

Why don't they "introduce" a few Canadian wolves into the hills of Maryland? I wonder what the result would be? It's the same here-------I'll be damned! People actually live in the mountains!


 Jeff

[vermonster13]

Nothing is being accomplished in this thread anymore so I'm shutting her down for a bit to let heads cool off.