Should all Wolves be delisted?

[Hud]

As reported by CNN (not an endorsment) 19 elk were slaughtered by Wolves at a feeding station near Jackson, WY. Most were calves.   http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/25/us/wyoming-wolf-pack-elk-slaughter/index.html

A number of news agencies are reporting this as a rare event, or "surplus killing".  I did not realize there was a surplus of elk?  Who sees the ones killed in the backcountry, at night?

[pinky]

The wintering population objective is 5,000 elk. However, the size of the wintering herd generally reaches 6,000-7,000 elk or more. Refuge managers continue to work with the Wyoming Game & Fish Department and Grand Teton National Park to bring the number of wintering animals closer to established targets as outline in the Bison and Elk Management Plan. This is for the Jackson area National Elk Refuge.

this is from the US Fish and Wildlife web site.
The wolves have their place.

[Chad Orde]

Deer population has plummeted in the UP of Michigan few hard winters combined with the wolf and black bear predation. My opinion is just treat them like coyotes let's face it back when there was huge bountys on them they where eradicated that won't happen again and we don't have to worry about killing them off they are back to stay now. I grew up with them in Northern MN and only ever seen two, never having a open season on them they where not even scared of me. I love wolves and glad we have them would also love to be able to hunt them.

[Thumper Dunker]

What Chad said.

[Hud]

Perhaps, but the Government was behind the introduction of Canadian Wolves, and they are hardly objective. Secondly, the RMEF and other groups, like the OHA are in favor. The Government's plan was to delist when the population of Wolves was sustainable. Wolves have established packs in WA, OR, and have been reported in other states (CO, AZ and CA). Their expansion into new territory suggest they are sustainable in MT, WY, ID. Oregon (OHA) got the State to delist, but the other side has filed a lawsuit.

[Michael Arnette]

What chad said as well...wolves are the missing link in a natural ecosystem and provide the balance needed to eliminate the need for human hunting.
We have to understand as hunters that if we are not necessary we may lose the privilege. Anti-hunters know this well

[northener]

Mn. Has the largest wolf pop in the lower 48 with over 2400 animals and 470 packs. All I know is deer and moose numbers are way down where wolf is present.

I am not against the the wolf, in fact I am fascinated by them.

I do think wolf should be managed by each state and not by the federal government. There certainly is huntable numbers in Mn. Wi and Mich.

[northener]

I should note here as well. I have hunted deer in northern Mn. Since the early 80's I have yet to see a wolf, only heard their mournful cries. Deer gut piles are always gone by next mourning.

Mn could open archery wolf and deer and run together for the same period of time and never put a dent in the wolf population.  Many would pay good money for the opportunity though.

[wingnut]

Bow hunting for wolves will not make a dent.  Actually rifle hunting does little to control an out of control population.  Starvation works after all the game animals are gone and they finish eating the livestock.

If you want huntable populations of elk, deer and moose, wolves are a big problem.  

I've watched the elk and moose populations in Idaho plummet since the wolves showed up to a level that very few non resident licenses are sold each year.  It's a huge economic hit the states that have wolves.

Delisting, trapping and aerial control will work like they do in Alaska.

Mike

[Paul Cousineau]

Was out turkey scouting this afternoon and found a deer carcass and wolf tracks. I saw two in the woods last fall. We really badly need liberal hunting and trapping seasons to reduce wolf numbers.

[centaur]

What we have in NW Wyoming is a surplus of wolves, not a surplus of elk. Since wolf "reintroduction" in Yellowstone, elk and moose populations have fallen sharply, and the wolf huggers love to talk about how well the aspen forests are doing since there are less elk. I would much rather hear, smell and see more elk than have elkless aspen forests.

[Burly]

Yes, they should be delisted. They need to be managed.

[catman1]

The only good wolf is a dead wolf, they produce like rabbits.
They are #2 in the animal food chain next to a grizzly in N America, but they kill more numbers, they kill in packs and are very good at it.

[NEB]

Guys, I am a wildlife biologist and have been fortunate to work on predator reintroduction studies.  With that background out of the way I have to say as hunters we are part of the conservation tool, but we must also try to understand the entire ecosystem and not just the portion we admire the most.

To answer the post directly, the answer is no.  The red wolf population in the southeastern U.S. is still in need of conservation efforts.  The gray wolf seems to be the most controversial species, so I will try to offer another point of view.  There is scientific support that shows the destruction of fish habitat and water quality from stream bank erosion caused by over grazing by western wildlife (primarily elk and bison).  Biologist are using sound predator/prey science and we as hunters are a small tool in the management of this relationship.  The wolves are native creatures and we need to try to coexist with them as predators after the same prey.

We are also experiencing a decline in wildlife from the explosion of coyotes in the southeast.  The studies I am reading are interesting, and right now no one has an answer.  Some studies even suggest hunting/trapping is leading to increased litter sizes (feral hogs are showing a similar relationship).  There will be growing pains as we learn how to manage the modern predator/prey relationship.

As a biologist, the hardest thing to manage is the wildlife/human conflict.  All that I can offer is to be vocal about your opinion to game biologists and respect their efforts to find an equilibrium of predators, prey, and economics.  There is a bigger picture than just the game we hunt.  As traditional bowhunters, we are more tuned in to our surroundings than the typical commercialized hunting we see on TV.  We should all take the challenge of learning how all of God's creation works in harmony and find our relationship with it before we pass judgement.

[Cory Mattson]

existing stable populations should be delisted - none of the populations in the lower 48 are being managed anywhere near correctly - I see a basic problem when introduced wolves have more "rights" than humans. I see wolves being introduced where no one is asking for them. NC is a good example. Nobody wants wolves re introduced. Might be some support from anti hunters. The governing agencies are so zealous to introduce wolves they are using blood lines that are mixed with coyotes. The tame zoo stock too seems to be a problem. We were feeding Red Wolves in the early 90s and most of those dogs couldn't figure out how to live in the wild.
Bottom line is are you willing to give up your elk tags and deer tags so wolves can hunt year round? And many of today's hunters are not even aware of the potential opportunities already lost to support wolves. A study of tags available 20 years ago - 15 years ago - 10 years ago - in units saturated with wolves tells the story.

Riparian damage is done way way way mostly by cattle - that would be another introduced species living on "your" land.

I've been around enough wolves to make my own judgement.

[Angus]

Washington doesn't want to delist them, so I'd propose that several new packs be established in or near, say...Bellevue?  Maybe Whidby Island.  Why not spread the wonder of wolves and help those who can't get over the Cascades in their electric cars(no charging stations rurally).  Of course, i AM being sarcastic here.  One pack's already under a death sentence for working over a rancher's cattle, and those involved with this reportedly have received death threats from apparent members of Defenders of Wildlife and the like.

I view them as an invasive species.  Yes, they were here--a century ago.  No living forest creature has ever encountered a wolf.  How is this not (now) an invasive species?

[bobman]

I love them and hope they stay listed.

I kill plenty of deer in Northern Wisconsin but would enjoy seeing a wolf more than a big buck.

[LB243]

Yes de list them. Allow states to regulate as they see fit. Between the wolves and yotes michigans upper pennisula deer herd is in very poor shape. Open them to trapping as well. For those who say they help keep the herds in check, allow more game to be taken by people who will use it! More revinue for the state, more meat for those who need it and more opportunitys for those seeking it. The wolves in the great lakes area were gone for decades. We did just fine! Heck we once had a moose population.

[LB243]

Yes de list them. Allow states to regulate as they see fit. Between the wolves and yotes michigans upper pennisula deer herd is in very poor shape.

[Bowwild]

I'm a retired wildlife biologist. I'm fine with wolves as long as a management plan is developed that iNCLUDES man. Man is a part of nature, not apart from it.

Too often the USFWS secures informed consent for a plan that includes finite numbers (packs/numbers) and then IGNORES it when the goal is reached.  I know that anti-management individuals go to politicians who then apply pressure to the USFWS to ignore solid science.

When the goal is reached, delist!  

The ESA is undermined when objects are set, met, and then ignored. I won't go into details, but when I was working, I headed up a 30-person group (Conservation Agreement) to prevent the need to list a certain snake.

After 5 years we determined the snake was secure, the project was successful and didn't need to continue its work.  The USFWS asked me to continue the group as a "good example".

My response was it would be a better example if we declared the species secure and moved on.

We did just that.,