Wolves soon to be huntable in MT?

[Steve Kendrot]

JC- I'm not actually supporting Defenders position,  but trying to educate folks on the comp fund as there seems to be much confusion. Defenders is opposing delisting currently, and I support it. Sooner or later it will happen and wolf proponents will simply have to accept that some wolves will be killed.

Since day one of the reintroduction, the 10J rule classified the wolves as experimental, non-essential and has allowed the shooting of wolves in the act of attacking livestock. Its in the federal register. A year or two ago it was relaxed to allow the shooting of wolves merely harassing livestock. So depending when Brian Krebs had problems with his mules, he could have taken lethal action against the wolves. Undoubtedly, such actions would be closely scrutinized to ensure that the rule wasn't being abused.

It does stink for ranchers suffering losses that they don't recover indirect costs. But hey, you can't call up your insurance company and tell them you got in an car accident and please send me a check for $5,000. They are going to send an appraiser to affirm the claim. There better be some damage to your truck!

To put things in perspective, Check out this report from the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics survey.
 http://www.peer.org/docs/doj/06_9_5_nass_report.pdf

They survey livestock producers every year or two and summarize the losses to all causes of death. In 2006, WY cattle ranchers reported 500 cows and 3500 calves lost to ALL predators, and 10,500 cows and 27,500 calves lost to all other non-predator causes (respiratory and digestive problems mostly though interestingly 900 cattle and 1200 calves were lost to poisoning and theft!). Numbers for ID and MT are comparable.
To quote the report,
"Coyotes and dogs caused the majority of cattle and calf losses (by predators) accounting for 51.1 percent and 11.5 percent respectively." Wolves weren't even analyzed separately because their relative contribution to predator losses was so small.

Similar reports exist for sheep and predators are generally responsible for about 25% of sheep deaths as I recall. but sheep are born to die so its no surprise predators have a bigger impact.

While I don't have a problem with recreational hunting of  predators provided the population can support it, recreational hunting does not reduce livestock depredation because it does not target the offending individuals. That is where Wildlife Services comes in. They provide professional depredation control for livestock producers and have been managing wolves in the northern rockies recovery area since the reintroduction began. So to suggest that wolves are not currently being managed is incorrect. They are being actively and intensively managed where damage occurs...55 were killed by WS in 2006 in WY.

Same goes for coyotes, bears and cougars. Recreational hunting is not protecting livestock as much as the targeted depredation control by WS and some private trappers.

I'm not trying to trivialize the problem wolves cause for livestock producers. While a small percentage of ranchers suffer wolf losses, its often the same producers over and over due to the location of their spread. And for those folks, the financial losses are very real. That's why Defenders came up with the  Compensation program. Its not a perfect solution, but better than nothing.

Oh, and before I get called out on it, I realize that livestock producers need to be there to witness wolves killing or harassing their livestock in order to excersize their right to shoot the wolf. But that's why Wildlife Services exists.

One species? Northern Bobwhite quail.

Just being difficult!  

[Brian Krebs]

Originally posted by Steve Kendrot:
[QB] JC- I'm not actually supporting Defenders position,  but trying to educate folks on the comp fund as there seems to be much confusion. Defenders is opposing delisting currently, and I support it. Sooner or later it will happen and wolf proponents will simply have to accept that some wolves will be killed.

Steve: You really think - you really believe the wolf proponents will accept hunting? REALLY?
   

As to why I didn't kill the wolves- it was dark. I do not shoot when I cannot see what is in range of any weapon I am using. Such was the case.

I think you need to understand antihunters and how they think a bit more. I have been battling anti-hunters since before CBS produced ' The guns of Autumn'.

 In fact my Uncle - I lived with his family after my fathers death- he fell for the CBS lie that the show was about the heritage of hunting in America; and as the President of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs; he made the mistake of trusting their word.

 He was a really smart guy; didn't help him from being fooled by lies.

 Please Steve- if you really think that the fish and wildlife service can control the wolves- check out the situation in Alaska.

Please..........

[Brian Krebs]

[HNTN4ELK]

After sitting through the Montana Tentative Hunting Season sessions in December, February and some local meetings of the 44 held around the state in regard to what I saw as comments from the wolf support groups was just baloney.

In Montana it is stated we have about 570 wolves, with over 45 breeding pairs documented, MT Fish Wildlife and Parks (FWP) set the threshold at 30 breeding pairs, while the USFS wolf minimum was 15 breeding pairs.

The wolf lovers stepped up to to the microphones and offered that the pack behaviour of the wolf will be severely disrupted by hunters taking the alpha males and females. They said also more study was required before hunting should be allowed, as the wolf was a relative newcomer again to the landscape.

Yes they are here, and they are preying on our elk and deer and muliplying, and I believe there are more wolves out there than is stated by the USFS and FWP. I have seen their tracks and heard their howls from my home outside of Missoula.

In the first place there will be very few wolves killed after the second or third season by hunters. The wolves will evolve to become more noctural and will learn to avoid humans.

Since they are a game animal they will not be able to be hunted from aircraft or snow machines like predators.

The wolves are here to stay, and no I do not like it, and yes I will avail my self of every opportunity to kill one when the season opens this fall.

In Genesis, God told man to go forth and be master of the earth and fields. And we were the masters, until a bunch of nitwits decided we needed to restore the wolf to the environment.

I am guessing these same type of people would like to restore malaria to the environment again to return the true wildness to the landscape.

The reintroduction of the wolf will have long term effects on game animal populations and on the opportunity of hunters to pursue those game animals.

Gary Carvajal

[Brian Krebs]

Gary: Well 'spoken'. I like the restoring Malaria argument    

Yeah we need to know the effects of killing the alpha male; and the alpha female; and the delta male; and the delta female; and the first born male of a litter; and the first born female; and the black colored ones versus the white; and the ones that lick their noses most; and ......
 Yeah those antis will give right into logic.
   yep uh huh

[Willow]

I say leave the wolves alone  

They cause damage, yes, but so does every other predator.

They were once the natural predators in North America before we humans messed things up.

Also, I couldnt kill a wolf. They are too close to my best friend.

[Brian Krebs]

If your best friend is a dog; and its out here; your very likely to watch the wolves tear it apart alive.

 They are more than a regular predator; they are one that excels at what they do.

 Please do some reading on this; look at the thread about wolves being delisted. Please.

 I say that to you willow bothwell; as Elfking.

[HNTN4ELK]

Ah, grilled wolf steaks and wild rice, me thinks my canine would like it too....

Coming soon to a grille near you, just like a coyote, only bigger, tastes like...big dog

Garo

[Brian Krebs]

I watched a CNN show with Jeff Corwin escorting CNNs own Anderson Cooper. One trip Cooper took was to the 'successful reintroduction of the wolf in Yellowstone'.
 The guy who got this whole thing going was there for interview; and he is estatic that there are dead everythings everywhere; and that bugs are eating the dead and now are not endangered; and how the brush is growing back from where elk over grazed it; and birds are finding more refuge in that; and how the wolves and bears are fighting... and how the reintroduction is working out better than he planned.
  I like birds and bugs and all things in the wild; but ... wolves will not stop when the food runs out. They will and are taking more than any preditors share.
  Yep I looked at the source of the wolf reintroduction; and I saw everything I detest about those that walk through the woods; and see it as a theatre; a museum; a place where humans should only exist: as observers.
 Elk here in Idaho are introduced they say; if the wolves kill them all then nature: will be returned to its natural state.
 Well; I am an animal too. I am by nature a preditor. I deserve a place in nature too.
  But not to these people that are better than us; that have passed the evolutionary level of needing to kill; and prove it by burning down a rainforest to grow their soy beans in... oH - sorry; I hope I didn't question the authorities intellect......
  That though is what we are going to have to do; to call their bluff. In the long run; they will be seen as fools.
  But when oh when will we the people ever have control again??? I don't know.
 

"The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is a knowledge of our own ignorance."
-- Benjamin Franklin

[Aaron Proffitt 2]

Something I've never understood about the wolf re-introduction program;

Back when wolves were commonplace ,massive herds of bison roamed across the Great Plains. The weak,young and old were most likely enough to sustain the wolves.Now,that we're re-introducing the wolves is their also a plan in place to federalize enormous tracts of land in order to re-estblish the buffalo herds so the wolves will have their food sources in place ? If not,than animals who are not neccessarily accustomed to the predation that is going to occur(especially during calving)will have a very negative impact for decades,if not permanently.

This yet another example of a government program that is going to screw up what already exists in as close to harmony as is possible in this day in age.

Well done,Washington D.C.. Can't wait to see what you can do with my healthcare.  

[HNTN4ELK]

Aaron,
There is a movement to create precisely what you describe as an idea of enormous tracts of land, being at least at this point only a concept in the twinkling of the eyes of the crowd that believes man is the interloper.

The same crowd that hails the wolf believes the entire northern rockies ecosystem---read from central Wyoming to central Alberta and British Columbia should be devoid of all homosapiens, except of course those who study the reclaimed new wilderness.

This would allow the wolf and all large predators to become once again symbiotic with nature and once again a natural balance is achieved or some baloney like that.

If this was 9500 years ago, after the last ice age, the wolf lovers like Willow would be scavanged by those they profess to love. They also would have been cast out from the tribe...the very advancement of civilization which they profess to abhor allows them the time and protection to even ponder such mindless thoughts.

The first amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, it however stops short of guaranteeing that speech is rational.

Garo

[Brian Krebs]

There is a perception by some of these pro-wolf people; that the wolf was sacred to the indians.
 
 Indians had reverence for ALL animals; each animal had a purpose and was part of natures plans.

 But as for the wolf being sacred; the indians used to use wolf skins to wear; so they could crawl up to herds of buffalo - which did not fear a wolves when the buffalo were in a herd.

  The pro wolf people should have to ask themselves how those indians got the wolf skins...... car kills maybe??

[Aaron Proffitt 2]

Holy crap...what's the name of the movement and who's pushing it ?

[HNTN4ELK]

Aaron,
I don't remember the name but it is real, something like: Alliance to Restore the Rockies.

Garo

[Steve Kendrot]

I feel like I should be wrapping my head in tin foil and peering out the window searching for black helicopters. Garo was right...free speech doesn't guarantee rational speech and recently this discussion is living proof. Its a simple thing to educate oneself in this day and age. Learning from ignorant peers tho can't remember the name of something but know its true is not educating oneself.

Yellowstone to Yukon is one conservation effort attempting to bring a landscape perspective to conserving wilderness. Find somewhere on their site where it says their goal is to eliminate humans. I couldn't.

 http://www.y2y.net/Default.aspx?cid=6&lang=1

A 2 second google search reveals these sites below, which I have not reviewed. Selectively ignoring information that does not support your position is no better than what you accuse your "opponents" of doing. And if you were to take the time to understand where your "opponents" are coming from, rather than writing them off as a bunch of wacko's who lack your expansive knowledge of the natural world, you might find you have a lot more in common with them than you think.

 http://www.southernrockies.org/

 http://www.wildrockiesalliance.org/about/index.html

[pdk25]

So much venom, so little time.

[Brian Krebs]

there are lots of helecopters for sale; and a lot in private usage. If a person bought a helecopter; could you tell me what law prevents them: from painting it black?
 When the military sells helecopters to the public or to other governmental agencies; they paint the old markings over with paint.
 Black covers really well.
 There are black helecopters.


As far as y2y-  the use of the word 'conservation' is pretty conceited.

 Conservation in regards to the wild; was defined by a bowhunter- Aldo Leopold ; known as the 'father of conservation'. He said conservation is: " the wise use of our natural resources".
 Let me sharpen my sword - where in the Y2Y plan is there ANY wise use of a resource?

 The southern rockies organization seems like a good one; although unless there are laws; and laws that are enforced: concerning the use of off road vehicles; making more roadless areas... is useless.
 Sounds charming; but I doubt anyone at full throttle has any inclination of making the efforts count.
 I do like the theme of the organization though; I hope they succeed with their goals.

 The wildrockies alliance is a crock of lies. If you want wolves all over join this one !!

 I am seeing that the complete ignoring of the FACT there were wolves in Idaho-before the 'reintroduction': is colostrum for the pro-wolf groups.

 I do not apprecitate your inference to what I know and don't know; with the weight of your sword swing being: that I do not know diddly.

 I have talked with biologists here that verified the presence of wolves here in Idaho BEFORE the 'reintroduction'; and if the Y2Y is accurate with the Pluie study; then how can anyone claiming to be smarter than a donut think that wolves were NOT here?

 Explain that.

 And just because a person has attended schools; and has a job as a wildlife biologist does not make them incapable of being a wacko.

  Right ?

[pdk25]

Thought this thread would die out, but I guess I was wrong.  With the evidence showing that the wolf population in the discussed region is increasing and the effect on the wildlife population is also increasing, sooner or later population control needs to happen.  In the current climate that we live in, the wolf population will need to be controlled. Hopefully the wildlife biologist will come up with an appropriate plan to do that.  I would assume that they are the best qualified to that, even if they may have another agenda.  They have been reintroduced (introduced if you like, it's all the same), now we have to deal with it.  I hope we don't eradicate them, as I said before.  If the population was able to maintained at exactly the level it is now with hunting being allowed, would that be something that everyone could live with even it isn't the ideal solution for everyone?  And Walt, if you read this, can we bury the hatchet?

[Brian Krebs]

pdk25
  I don't think you understand; the biologists say that the elk here are introduced; that they are plains animals. Not mountain animals; so if the wolves kill them all it will only mean that things have returned to a biological normal.

 In Alaska; after Denali Park with the largest population of moose in north america; had every single calf moose killed by wolves; Alaska got mad. They started killing wolves; the federal government be da*ned. Yet still there are too many wolves.
 
 The anti-hunters are happy; because if the wolves kill off everything we hunt; we can no longer hunt.

 The biologists originally were hired and paid for by hunters. They re-established and kept hardy the animals that hunters hunted; and we hunters paid their bills required to do it.

 But now; the treasure is in pleasing the cheap who6es of the anti-hunting crowd. As William Shatner - who was one of the original members of the 'Fred Bear Sportsmans Club' said: ' I stopped hunting and sided with the antihunters; when the harvest of good looking women was easy- that was way more fun than hunting'.

 The governor of Idaho let the wolves be introduced; and then he went to washington and is now the secretary of the interior; and is being groomed for president ( he WAS the only person left in a 'safe place'; when Bush gave his final speach; and all congress was present in one place).

 Butch Otter; our present Governor was fined for damaging the Boise river in Star Idaho; land sales covered the cost of the violation; so he did it again; and was fined even more. He went to Washington and was put in charge of what to do with the fine money he had paid.

 We are in a depression. WE got here by thinking the government is out to do good for us. With wolves or with the price of gas; the cost of living; the mortgage crisis- we are being considered the property of the state.

 Somewhere- sometime we have to stand up to it.

But first we have to see the little men behind the curtains.

 In the case of wolves; we are paying our government to destroy our game populations.

 Of course; the wolf existed where there are towns and cities; as did the grizzly bear. I would like to see a reintroduction of grizzlies in Washington DC.

 The wolf hunts that are planned will in no way effect the population enough. Its of course; not intended to.

[pdk25]

I confess that I don't know how effective hunting will be.  Hopefully someone smarter than I am can come up with a solution to curb the population growth.  I know this makes some people angry, but I don't want them eradicated.  Just controlled.  I just don't know how to do it.  Hunting seems like a good first step.  It just seems like this is a very emotional topic that has us at each other's throats when we should be getting along and planning hunts with each other.