WY wolves

D

DougW

Guest
Hey guys...my posts are rare but I can't let this one go. Another media-based fiasco on this topic that I just can't let go.

Earlier this week the Denver Post did a SHORT blurb (always dangerous) about Wyoming's rejected proposal for management, as part of the quest for delisting.

Well, the last paragraph stated specifically that Wyoming's plan was to simply have the wolves shot on site.

I just about puked. I think the truth is a bit different from this statement, and the Post is only practicing poor journalism at best and unethical politicking at worst.

If I recall correctly (don't have time to go through the entire 100-pager from the Governor's office) shooting would be just about a last resort, and in only parts of the state where the presence of wolves would be an obvious fiasco towards the livestock community.

Am I correct?

Thanks,

Doug
 
The wolves in Wyoming are killing everything in sight. My buddy and I have found countless winter kills. They are really taking a toll on the elk, deer and moose. Something needs to be done to lower the population on wolves.
 
TRIPLE S them mutts!! SHOOT, SHOVEL, SHUT UP!!!


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
Was watching OLN this morning and someone was hunting Deer with an Outfitter up around Cody somewhere. Was getting ready to shoot a Buck when the Outfitter told him to wait, he just spotted some other hunters. The cameraman turns and there are two Wolves watching the deer too.
The cameraman got some good close up shots before they left the area, must have been someone that got them to leave.

Had a hard time understanding the talking but guess it is a real problem up in that area.

Brian
 
DougW,

You are absolutely correct. The media bias is so apparent it amazes me that more people aren't outraged.

Another commonly mistaken statement being proliferated throughout the media conglomerates; Wyoming lost it's case in the courts. This is hardly the case. Both courts have stated that until the USFWS takes final agency action Wyoming can not pursue legal actions against them. Mid-July the USFWS will let us know whether or not the process will start all over again or whether Wyoming (Idaho & Montana) will finally be able to manage wolves according to their plans.

Another glaring truth the media continue to miss is that although Idaho & Montana supposedly have management authority over wolves they still must obtain permission from the USFWS before they can take any lethal actions against wolves to protect our wildlife resources.

The media is also staying away from information coming from Isle Royal. This area has been held up several times as an example of the fact that wolves will not eliminate their prey base, which in this case is moose. Sources I have read show that the normal ratio of wolves to moose has been between 40-50 moose per wolf. Currently, there are approximately 15 moose per wolf. Unless someone intercedes, those with an agenda may loose their show case expermiment. Everyone needs to watch this closely as I am certain they will not want anyones attention when they take actions to recover this area.

I can not advocate breaking the law but when you contrast what has happened in the tristate area (ID, MT, & WY) with our neighbors to the South you must wonder which approach has worked out best for those of us which have chosen to hunt.
 
i am from wyoming and i am seeing the problem, elk herds down in the crapper. just like the glaicier elk herd went from 19000 thousand to 9000 head. its terrible, you cant even archery hunt anymore cause they dont even bugle back to you.
also as a horn hunter i have found more winter kills than i have horns, it sint pretty up here. now we have wolves coming out of the moutains and ending up in other mountain ranges like the bighorns.
when you look at our elk herds we have no calves, they just all get killed during calving season and they blame on a dumb golden eagle. they found some 40 dead calves in an area in yellowstone and they brought it on the eagles,
also our moose herds have vanished, i dont even see them anymore, the wolves finshed them off to.
as soon as they leave the park than boom, its our territory now,, yellowstone wanted them back well lets let them keep them and let yellowstone deal with the problem. we got rid of them for a reason, they didnt even intorduce the same wolves that were here before.
i just hope they get there crap together before it is to late.

THE NORTH FORK HUNTER
 
nfh
I couldn't have said it better, without a doubt wolves are the biggest problem hunters will face for the future. some will still argue about it but just wait.
 
Thanks for clearing that up, smokestick.

I agree with you all that the reintroduction was a horrible idea. Now there are at least 3 times as many wolves in WY as in the original reintro. goals.

Now, having said that, it's pathetic that when WY writes a good plan to actually manage the situation from a sound biological standpoint, the USFS says no, and the media blames WY.
 
nfh,
""down in the crapper"
"19000 thousand"
"it sint pretty up here"
"they just all get killed during calving season and they blame on a dumb golden eagle."
"they found some 40 dead calves in an area in yellowstone and they brought it on the eagles,"
"as soon as they leave the park than boom, its our territory now"
"they didnt even intorduce the same wolves that were here before."
"i just hope they get there crap together before it is to late."

Now how can I argue with that logic?.. Open and shut case... I guess we just need to do a better job managing our golden eagle herds...(damn wolves)
 
So I have got a question? I just looked on wyoming game and fish website and looked at the harvest report for 2004 for elk, and the amount of money it takes to put in for a resident and non-resident license (so here are some rough numbers) in 2004 there were
10,739 non-resdient hunters and
48,113 resident
now say the elk herds get pretty bad to the fact where they have to reduce tags by, say, half for both resident and non-resident. Throw those numbers together with the tag prices and get an estimated $3,681,818 that the Game and Fish along with the state will not get.
So if the Game and Fish does not get this money how will they get funding for big game management to help out the herds?
I know my numbers are most likely off but i just see a problem. Because if there is less big game, then there will be less licenses, then there will be less money coming into the state for big game management or other things.
 
While theres no disputing wolves impact elk...I just cant get past this "logic"...

"i am from wyoming and i am seeing the problem, elk herds down in the crapper. just like the glaicier elk herd went from 19000 thousand to 9000 head. its terrible"

This post is just so full of holes I dont know where to begin.

First of all, the elk being referred to is not glacier, but Yellowstone.

Second, the herd in question was way, way, way over carrying capacity at 19,000 elk. At that time the MTFWP was issuing nearly 3,000 antlerless permits for late hunts, another 2K antlerless permits in the areas surrounding yellowstone in an attempt to control elk numbers.

Third, the yellowstone herd is heavily skewed right now to older age class animals. Meaning, reproduction is low. On top of that you have grizzly bears that kill many times more calf elk than wolves by a long, long, long shot.

Also, its just pure BS to beleive that elk hunting opportunities are vanishing because of wolves in MT, ID, or WY.

I grew up hunting elk in Western Montana, and a good portion of the areas I hunt now offer 2 elk tags...one has to be antlerless. I NEVER thought I'd see the day that would happen.

I recently moved to Wyoming and I cant believe how easy it is to kill elk there. We can also take 2 elk per year, one of which has to be antlerless. Typically there are surplus cow elk tags in a majority of the units as well as the second reduced price cow/calf tags. Opporunities abound.

In the last 5 years in Wyoming I've hunted elk with a rifle 6 days and killed 5 elk. I bowhunted one year, and had to spend a total of 3 days before I bagged one.

If anyone is whining about a lack of opportunity to hunt elk in WY, MT or ID, I strongly suggest getting off the porch.

Wolves are a nice scapegoat, but the reality is we've never had more opportunity than we have now.
 
Appreciate you tootin your horn Buzz, you must be a great hunter.

The fact remains that if the wolf population goes unchecked, the good ole days will be gone all too quick.
 
also last year while hunting i was on top of a ridge and called in 3 wolves, the next night i was calling and got a bugle to go off from a bull it didnt take long for a wolf to howl and mess up my hunting and that bull shut up. i know there is a lot of older class bulls i think its becasue there smarter and the little guys get killed by wolves. there is no reason to argue, there is a problem and the bears so are they
next year bears will be off the list, i was talking to the game and fish and they were think about 12 bears a year to be shot, 9 males and 3 females.

THE NORTH FORK HUNTER
 
The good old days are NOW.

Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho all allow a hunter to kill 2 elk per year.

IF the wolves are ripping the elk so bad...why are the respective G&F agencies in the three states allowing 2 elk PER hunter?

It just doesnt add up.

I'm all about killing some wolves as well, but I just think too many people are crying wolf when they fail as elk hunters...

Oh, and as to "tooting" my horn...if you grew up hunting elk around Missoula Montana...you'd find Wyoming an absolute elk hunters "piece of cake".

I had to use most of a 5-week rifle season to kill an elk each year near Missoula.
 
I don't care what anyones success or failers are, all I know is what the old timer ranchers say and the stories I've heard about the days when wolves roamed most of the West. that's enough for me to know that we don't need wolves anywhere in the states!!
If we want to see wolves, go where they were transplanted from!! TRIPLE S them mutts!!!



Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
I really have to laugh at all the roughy toughy "3 S" idiots...

Risking a large fine, you're hunting license in 22 states, possibly your job (although most of the "3 S" crowd likely never get off a bar stool long enough to hold down a job), etc. just isnt worth it.

The correct way is to get Wyoming to come up with an acceptable plan, get them delisted and control them THROUGH LEGAL HUNTING/TRAPPING.

All this trash talk about illegally killing wolves is not helping anything. It just makes all legal/ethical hunters look like a bunch of alcoholic redneck bubbas who tell their best hunting stories from a bar-stool.

I also wouldnt be listening to many "old timer ranchers" as most of them likely have never seen a wolf in their life-time.

A late federal government hunter friend of mine from White Sulphur Springs Montana, who died several years ago at the ripe old age of 93...trapped EXACTLY ONE wolf in Montana during his 35+ year career. Not to mention his entire life spent trapping many thousands of coyotes, bobcats, etc.

Most "old timers" dont have a clue about wolves as they likely never saw a track...let alone a wolf.
 
BuzzH-

So you say the old timers don't have a clue, well what about the people RIGHT NOW! I'm pretty sure they have a pretty dang good idea as to what is going on right now. Also when did Noah build the ark? He did it before the storm! So why wait for the storm? let's do something now!
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-06 AT 10:13PM (MST)[p]Okay Mr. Peta!! I have to laugh!! I think you would be surprised to know who I work for and what I do!! I believe we don't need wolves for any reason at all here in the states!! It's really that simple!!! And I really don't care at all how they disappear!! And about your genius statement about your late federal hunter buddy, the mutts aren't stupid, why do you think they went to shooting them on site to remove them any way possible!! Ranchers and hunters went after the wolves, put bountys on them, they did whatever they needed to do to drive them to extinction here in the states!! Their reasons were better than any reason you could come up with as to why we need to have them in the states!!
Federal Government Hunter,Come on please!! We don't have Federal Government Hunters!! They were and still are called Trappers!!
One more thing, I won't refer to the Triple S anymore. You do what you would do to make you feel all good inside, and I'll do whatever I feel like doing. I really could care less about your doings,feelings,or thoughts!! why are you so concerned with mine? don't like it don't reply to it!! Simple really!! Public forum x public sportsmen = Open Thoughts!!


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
I'm not sure what BUZZH is talking about becasue elk hunting in wyoming is not cake. Maybe if you have a lot of time it's cake , but for the average person its tough. BUZZH also said that the elk population is full of over aged bulls...well then why am I finding wolf kills of young bulls, young cows and calves. Looks like to me like the older bulls are seldom found anymore and all thats left are the young that will soon be wiped out.
 
Buzzed,

I think its time to stop inhaling that stuff!

You can state all you want how much easier it is to kill elk in Wyoming but what happens when one area is forced into a quota unit? Do you realize how quickly the rest will have to follow? There is alrady talk about needing to limit hunters in some areas. Once this occurs, even residents will be impacted. The best days may be now but they won't last for long. Most areas where additional elk permits are available don't have wolves.

Your ignorance is exposed when you claim that the correct way is to get Wyoming to come up with an acceptable plan, get them delisted and control them THROUGH LEGAL HUNTING/TRAPPING. If it were that simple, it would have happened by now. Smarter people then you have been working hard to return management authority back to the states. The truth is that the USFWS has lied so many times they don't even know what to believe. They keep claiming that Idaho & Montana have management authority over wolves within their states yet they (ID & MT)must obtain permission from the USFWS before any actions can be taken. Yep, they sure are managing wolves according to their approved plans aren't they.

I can not believe that someone that claims to be a hunter can not understand that wolves eat red meat 365 days a year, unlike bears which eat primarily vegetation and insects. They even sleep for 3-4 months out of the year. When no more surplus elk are available, hunting will stop. Some have already called for hunters to recognize that licenses will and must be cut in order to feed all of these marvelous wolves and bears. To add insult to injury, most of these rabid wolf lovers never contribute a nickel to wildlife management. They only use them to raise money to further their agenda; that of ending hunting and taking away your guns.

You can sell it all you want BUZZ, but I'm not buyin' any of it. Those dumb old ranchers and trappers certainly don't know anything about the impacts of large, uncontrolled predators running around the mountains. Ever wonder why Lewis & Clark had to kill their stock at times? Yes, we have more abundant big game animals then ever before. Take note, cause those days are rapidly coming to a close. When the uncotrolled, large predators require your elk for sustenance you'll know what I am talking about.
 
Mr. Peta...now thats funny.

Its obvious you like to talk out your sphincter...

Yes, they were called government hunters/trappers.

My friend in question ran by the name Bud McCauley...lived in White Sulphur Springs MT for over 70 years. He trapped ONE wolf in the late 20's early 30's (just SW of White Sulphur) and he said there were damn few wolves around MT then. He was surprised to trap one, even then. He sold it with a bunch of coyotes he trapped and was paid the same price as a coyote. I would have to guess that if there were many wolves around...in a life-time of trapping and working as a government hunter/trapper for the "outfit" he would have trapped more than one. He did kill 86 bears in that time frame...but only one big-bad wolf. I trapped quite a bit in MT myself all through the 80's and 90's and talked in length with many ranchers, government hunters, and other trappers. Bud was the ONLY person I knew/talked with that had ever trapped or shot a wolf in the lower 48. I personally trapped every fur-bearer in Montana with the exception of wolverine.

He called the USFWS..."the outfit" but he made no mistake that he was a government hunter. He routinely shot animals for control including ELK in Yellowstone N.P., golden eagles, and basically any predator that got in his way.

I will bet good money you've NEVER talked to a rancher that has collected a bounty on wolves. Most were poisoned off around the turn of the century and I just dont think you're talking to many "old timer ranchers" who are 120 years old...maybe...but I doubt it.

I can also tell by your writing style you dont work for "hooked on phonics"...although you could stand a good course on the subject.

I'd guess a comprehension course is also in order as you either:

1. Failed to read what I wrote.

or

2. Just dont comprehend the written English Language.

I said, "I'm all for killing wolves...legally".

If that makes me "Mr. Peta"...then so be it.

Kindly blow your unethical behavior out of the orifice your head seems to be lodged in...
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-06 AT 10:44PM (MST)[p]Hey BUZZH, Bar stool comes to mind, do you have a lot of time on your hands?
I was also wondering how much of an elk do you think a wolf will eat and actualy consume from each kill? Not enough to justify the kill!!(not even close) It's just the chase,destruction, and a snack the wolves persue,young or old it doesn't matter to them. My thoughts is they prefer the young, (they run faster and longer).
I will always feel the same way about the wolves and their reintroduction!!! Shot and killed from long distances and then watch them rot and waste!! Who's doing the shooting? does it matter? I could care less!! That's my management thought of the day!!!
BUZZH, if your for killing the wolves legally, then don't concern yourself with how they disappear!! People who care about our kids future of hunting and the opportunity to hunt the best elk and deer country the United States has ever seen we will be the ones to speak out about the wolves and we will also go unspoken and do what we can to control and handle the wolves!! Even if it's a small bite in the wolf population, it's still a good bite!!


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-06 AT 10:40PM (MST)[p]Elk hunting in Wyoming is cake, thats a fact. If you cant find an elk in a half day of hunting...you need to get out of the truck or off the seat of an ATV. This last season, on opening day...I passed 8 branch antlered bulls and 3 spikes before 11:00 am. Finally killed a bull about 1:00 in the afternoon...in a general unit.

I didnt say that wolves were killing old elk...maybe you also need that hooked on phonics lesson.

Call Tom Lemke of the MTFWP and ask him about the age structure of the Yellowstone elk herd. I've talked to him several times. The Yellowstone herd is OLD. Old herds mean low recruitment. Old herds arent very productive, that was obvious in Yellowstone even before the wolves were reintroduced.

Also, theres been a bunch of articles written where Mr. Lemke has been quoted with what I just posted above.

Theres also been a 3 year study just completed in Yellowstone that gave a break-down of elk calf mortality...60-70% are killed by grizzly bears, 20% by wolves (or close to those numbers).

I'll round up the articles and post them for the "reading impaired"...
 
Post what he had to say I would like to read them, but there is no way the wolves are killing only 20%, plus those people who study them can say what they want on their studies to make them sound the way they want. I sure would like to know where you hunt if its that easy. Where are you from anyways BUZZH.
 
For your reading pleasure:

From the Idaho Stateman:

"The wolves were expected to take a bite out of the northern herd, but the decline is greater than expected, says biologist John Vucetich of the Michigan Technical University in Houghton.

Hunters, who target elk that leave the park, have blamed the wolves. But researchers, including Vucetich, say the problem isn't that simple.

In an analysis in the current edition of the ecology journal Oikos, for example, Vucetich and park service colleagues examined weather, hunting and wolves as factors in the elk decline. Yellowstone has had seven years of drought and a severe winter in 1997 that killed many elk.

They found that weather and hunting are mostly to blame.

Biologist Mark Boyce of Canada's University of Alberta and colleagues reach similar conclusions in an upcoming paper in the journal Ecological Modelling. Montana increased the "hunter harvest" quota on elk that leave Yellowstone grounds, issuing a record 2,882 hunting permits in 2000. A decline in the elk herd was thus guaranteed, Boyce says, even if wolves were not present.

A review in the September Biological Conservation journal comes to a somewhat different conclusion. Authors P.J. White of the Park Service and Robert Garrott of Montana State University in Bozeman say wolves and hunters share the blame.

And the wolves influenced the behavior of Yellowstone's northern elk, Boyce says. For example, they have adopted protective strategies, such as moving more often and in larger groups.

Like every good mystery, a little-suspected culprit may be hiding in plain sight: bears.

In the Yellowstone Science journal, U.S. Geological Survey ecologist Dave Mech and his colleagues concluded this summer that "grizzly and black bears, rather than wolves, are having a greater impact on neonatal elk calf mortality than any other predator."

Zigzagging through fields where young elk lie, bears kill roughly six times more calves than wolves do, the ecologists found. Elk calves are uniquely vulnerable: They tend to stay in place near danger instead of running. In May and June, bears hunt through Northern Range calving areas for them, looking for an easy meal.

Grizzly bears are another Yellowstone-area success story that might have come at the expense of elk, Mech says. Since 1987, the predators' numbers have increased from 150 to more than 600 in the region, according to federal estimates, and many converge on the park's northern calving areas
 
BUZZH, tell me your not quoteing from federal agencies or employees, or the so called studies that they conduct!! You have got to be kidding? Who do you think helped in the reintroduction? When have you ever heard of a Federal agency admit to a wrong? They were wrong on this one, they got bullied by non-sportsmen private groups and proably with your support,(as long as they manage them right, and legaly)!!Come on buzzh!!
We will pay the price, and they will come up with every report and study they can to justify themselves!! They got you!! I'm glad the fools are few and far between when it comes to so- called sportsmen like you!!
Hey you know what everyone? We all should be hunting Wyoming, it's like hunting at a zoo!! Elk behind every tree, and under every bush!! What were we thinking?


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
Interesting logic BUZZ, wolves killing LOTS of elk = GREAT elk hunting? hmmmmm, I don't know.
 
Heres what Tom Lemke had to say...

"The nationally known Northern Yellowstone elk herd, numbering about 9,500 animals, is notably smaller, about half the size it was in the mid-1990s. Wildlife managers recently learned that its members are notably older, too.
Elk incisor teeth, collected from past harvests and analyzed for age, indicate that for the first time, 50 percent of the population is 9 or more years old. That makes it an exceptionally old elk population compared to others in the state.

?The northern herd is fast becoming a geriatric elk population, which may reduce the herd?s productivity and its ability to recover from recent population declines,? said Tom Lemke, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks biologist in Livingston. ?The aging of this population, and the smaller number of elk calves we're seeing survive, will continue to influence management decisions and to reduce hunter opportunity in this area.?

The Northern Yellowstone elk herd migrates to a winter range on about a 590-square mile area along the Lamar, Gardiner and Yellowstone river basins inside Yellowstone Park and north of the park in southwestern Montana. A portion of these animals that migrate into Montana provide hunting opportunities during the popular Gardiner late season elk hunt set this year for Jan. 6-30, 2006.

Teeth from the harvested elk have been studied since 1996 by a small laboratory in Milltown, near Missoula. There technicians carefully section, stain, and count the cementum annuli rings they see on the roots of the incisor teeth to determine the accurate age of each animal. The rings in the elk teeth are analogous to the rings on a tree, each ring marking a year of growth.

Recent analysis shows that the average age of elk harvested in 2005 during the Gardiner late season elk hunt hit record highs ? 8.2-years old for cows, and 9.1-years old for bulls. Ten years ago, the average was 6.2 and 5.9 years of age, respectively.

Average ages in other Montana elk populations are generally in the range of 4 to 5 years.

?The aging of the Northern Yellowstone elk herd is an additional factor that could make it more difficult for this herd to expand,? Lemke said. Other factors include the high number of elk calves taken by predators, and losses of calves and adult elk to severe winter weather.

The new statewide Elk Management Plan uses the number of elk calves that survive their first year of life to be recruited into the herd as one guideline to determine if liberal, standard or restrictive hunting is appropriate.

Here again, the Northern Yellowstone elk are struggling. Aerial surveys indicate that, for the past four years, only 12-14 calves per 100 cow elk survived the first year of life and joined the herd. Recruitment of about 30 calves per 100 cows is more typical for northern Yellowstone elk.

Recent studies in Yellowstone National Park show that about 70-75 percent of newborn radio-tagged northern Yellowstone elk calves are dead within a year of their birth, mostly due to predation. Predators include primarily bears, wolves, and coyotes ? with bears accounting for 55-60 percent of the mortality and wolves and coyotes with another 10-15 percent each.

Wildlife managers have gone from liberal, to standard, to conservative hunting quotas over the past six years, trying to keep pace with dynamic changes affecting the herd. Lemke said antlerless elk permit quotas have been reduced from 2,880 in the year 2000 to 100 in 2006.

?There will probably always be debate about how many elk people want to see in this herd. But for its overall health and viability, we know calf recruitment needs to increase in order to see the age structure of the herd return closer to the norm,? Lemke said.

?We?ve reduced antlerless elk harvest quotas in an attempt to conserve cow elk. With more adult cow elk, we hope to see an improvement in calf recruitment, but there is a lot in this mix that we can't control,? he said.

In the meantime, studying the teeth of harvested elk to determine the average age of the population will continue. It may seem the scientific equivalent of reading the ?tea leaves,? but it is one way for wildlife managers to evaluate over time how the Northern Yellowstone elk herd is doing in adapting to changes in weather, habitat, predators, and hunting pressure.
 
Those are great BUZZH but you only anwered half the question. Where are you from and where in wyoming is it so great to hunt elk. Send me a PM or something. Thanks for the posting the research articles.
 
Wolves will never be delisted in our lifetimes.......not a chance.

JB

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
--Benjamin Franklin 1759
 
bigbrink, I live in Laramie Wyoming.

liv4hunt, place your index fingers in your ears and pull real hard...now your head should be dislodged from your butt...

Tom Lemke is a MTFWP biologist, not a fed.

You've been doing nothing but lying and making crap up since you started posting on this subject. First you're talking to 120 year old wolf bounty hunters and "old timer ranchers" about imaginary wolves...now you're calling state biologists "feds".

You really should look into that hooked on phonics class, seriously.

Huntindude...you're conclusions are not only flawed, but irrational and not what I said. Linear logic is not your strong-point.

I repeat...if wolves are killing all the elk in WY, MT, and ID...then explain why NOW 13 years AFTER reintroduction...can we legally take 2 elk per year in each of ID, MT, and WY???? If wolves were hurting elk populations in these states...we wouldnt be SEEING MORE OPPORTUNITY...but LESS.

Pre-93 (before wolves) I know for sure MT and ID were ONE elk per year per hunter...and I'm pretty sure WY was the same.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-06 AT 11:38PM (MST)[p]Oh, and Smokestick...

Arent you the SFW dude?

Maybe I'm thinking of someone else...

Either way...glad to see your grass and berry eating bears arent having a 6 fold impact over wolves on elk calves...

As to the reason why Lewis and Clark had to eat their livestock is because there was very little game to be found at all in the Western part of Montana and the Lochsa country of Idaho. The lack of game had nothing to do with bears or wolves. That combined with their timing for crossing that country made for some tough times.

But, in the plains (breaks country really), where WOLVES and GRIZZLIES were abundant along with elk, deer, and pronghorn...they werent dining on many mules or horses. Tough times hit when they reached the Lolo country.

I recommend you read "undaunted courage"...or the L&C journals.
 
Wow Laramie? Are you a big time college kid or some bad ass professor that requires all of your students to read hooked on phonics before they set foot in you class room? But I must say Laramie is quite a few miles away from Yellowstone. And if you hunt elk around Laramie then it may stand to reason why you see so many elk, but the fact remains that you are quite aways from Yellowstone posing the fact that you really don't have an idea as to what is going on! Go to the shed antler forum and look at bigbrinks' and nfh posts and see what is going on. And your argument saying that old timers are liars, come on! I believe everything the old timers said and I believe all that is said now, because I have family members and friends that have seen what the wolves have done and I know they are not LIARS! Go back to Montana!
 
You are a true peace of work buzzh!! They are the same damn beasts!! You buy what they say, that's your business!! Tom Lemke is yours and the wolves hero, not mine!!He needs backing from everyone invovled in his/their agenda. It's people like you that make sure the wolves future become more important than sportsmens future!! You should be proud!! Believe what you want and I'll do the same!! I'll sleep better tonight knowing I'm right though!!
And as far as the Ranchers,wolf bountys and the old timers stories are concerned, I happen to love hearing old timers and present time ranchers talk, and hearing their stories of themselves and their fathers. I have no reason not to believe what they tell me about what they did or what their fathers did, And how much of hard time they had with the wolves, and how bad they wanted them destroyed, I wouldn't even question it!! You think I'm the only one that's heard these stories? Did you concern yourself with any of the public meetings that took place with the Ranchers and state,feds.,etc.? No you proably were on a bar stool somewhere, reading your state and federal summaries,reports,etc. If you did you would of heard these stories yourself! Any doubt or questioning from you about these stories and your clock would have been cleaned!! No doubt!!

You can take your cleaver "Linear logic", "Phonic" educated, little brain, and pull the freaking trigger!! You must be in a mental hospital to have this much time to read bogus reports and call and talk to all these people, just to find out that they do and say whatever they need to to make sure they don't have to admit the reintroduction was wrong, and that it needs to be reversed any way possible!! You buy it, I never will!!

Good night BuzzH,I need to get up at 4:30 am. and go to work, You need to get up and take your medication, and go to therapy, then make some phone calls, and read some reports!!All from that bar stool you talk so much about!! So get some sleep!!


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
NOOOO antlerfool I'm from Montana, my whole family still lives there!! I know we don't need him here!! You got him in Wyoming now!! Ship him to the east, maybe try Rhode Island?
I honestly can't believe he's from Montana, what a sad representative of my home state!! At least his views are narrow, and not widely viewed among other montana sportsmen!! Rest assured of that!!

Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
Buzzed,
In your last post you said there were wolves in the breaks region so there was game there. but in western Montana there was little game so was that do to lack of wolves? or did the Nez Perce issue to many tags ? I'm one of the dumb ranchers you talk about and cattle prices are pretty good right now, if I use your logic and buy some wolves then dump them in my herd in a year or two I should be rich. now if I can just keep my neighbors from shooting them.
 
Buzzed
I forgot to ask what mistake I made in " linear logic" ? you seem to think the game herds are doing great with the wolves. I'll ues some simple logic here, you need to get off the weed.
 
Buzzed,

Great information. Do you understnd what you have posted? It is obvious that wolves are having an impact. The fact that the average age of elk is getting older proves it. As the young of the year keep being eaten, you have little if any recruitment. That is one factor contributing to the older ages of elk. You can quote the study about percentages of kills by bears, wolves, coyotes, etc all you want. It is flawed. They have only recently admitted that they have confirmed bears taking wolf kills. How long do you think it takes a bear to find and take a wolf kill? How long can a bear feed on a wolf kill before the evidence would suggest that the bear killed the animal in question.

You quoted Tom as having said ?We?ve reduced antlerless elk harvest quotas in an attempt to conserve cow elk. With more adult cow elk, we hope to see an improvement in calf recruitment, but there is a lot in this mix that we can't control,?. If large predators are taking so many of the calves, how does reducing cow elk permits help? It would seem that the only way to increase the productivity of the elk numbers would be to reduce the number of factors affecting calf mortality. Not too many calves are taken on anlterless hunts. Meanwhile, the average age of the elk herd will continue to increase. Doesn't that also reduce productivity of the herds according to your sources? Hmmm!

Here is your quote from Tom; ?The northern herd is fast becoming a geriatric elk population, which may reduce the herd?s productivity and its ability to recover from recent population declines,? said Tom Lemke, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks biologist in Livingston. ?The aging of this population, and the smaller number of elk calves we're seeing survive, will continue to influence management decisions and to reduce hunter opportunity in this area.?

I think that sums it up pretty clear. More wolves = less calves. Less calves = less hunting opportunity. One thing that should be noted; less (elk) hunting does not equal less wolves.

Take another hit. While your thinking about it. Yes I am the SFW "dude".

Another of your quotes: Wildlife managers have gone from liberal, to standard, to conservative hunting quotas over the past six years, trying to keep pace with dynamic changes affecting the herd. Lemke said antlerless elk permit quotas have been reduced from 2,880 in the year 2000 to 100 in 2006.

Whats next? No antlerless elk hunting! Then what? Average age of cow elk will continue to increase. When they can no longer sustain themselves, which most biologists will tell is lees than 30 calves per 100 cows, hunting must be reduced or stopped. I don't know if it can be reduced much further so I would bet that hunting will stop. That is the same outcome the anti-hunting community has been pursuing for several generations.

They take until there is nothing left to take. Here a little, there a little. I have raised the question once before; once there is no wildlife available to hunt who will pay for wildlife management? Anti-hunters never have, nor will they.
 
i tell you what, when the wolves take out our game herds then they can come to your honey hole for elk hunting and kill all your elk than after that they can come and take you children from your sandbox after they kill all the elk.

just like what smokestick said with all everyone responding there is a impact, a big impact

THE NORTH FORK HUNTER
 
Every time a post comes up on wolves, I like to get my C.D. player out and listen to the sounds of a banjo as I read all the comments!!

S-ay how you feel
S-tart working towards solutions
S-top whining

Nothings changed in the last 11 years and still the majority want to gripe about these damn wolves, very few want to be a part of a workable solution looking towards the future.. I've read some posts in the past from individuals who really dislike wolves here and I have to say they have some really good ideas. Yet, most people want to cry about everything going wrong because of wolves and don't want to compromise. That's fine, it's a free country. In the meantime, I'm going to enjoy seeing wolves, hearing them howl, go elk hunting, pick up sheds and be grateful I live in a place which is wild enough to allow us the opportunity to argue over this stuff. I personally like wolves. Am I PETA, hell no. Do I enjoy seeing wolves and Grizzly, you bet. That's what wilderness is to me. I for one believe there is enough elk to be shared with wolves, IF we come up with management plans to control wolf numbers.

I feel better--- now, continue the bickering...... he,he,he
 
WIDEONE,

your making me sick, i dont know if you remember me but i was at the campground with bigbrink and talking to tuc, we had the black truck with the white trailer, but anyway my point is that where we were horn hunting there is a pack of 14 wolves, did you see the problem there, there has been about 20 mature bull elk killed from wolves and countless numbers of cows and who knows what hasnt been found yet. its a slaughter house in that one little area.
the only way i want to hear them howl is when they feel the bullet. im not your enemy here but i figured you would see the problem. happy horn hunting and goodluck.

THE NORTH FORK HUNTER
 
Wideone...
I agree with you... There must be management!!! That seems a given though, but it seems like no one wants to embrace it. Management to some people is "kill them all" and to others it's "not manage them at all" Of course the proper course of action is somewhere in between, and that's what the majority of people think. The sad fact, though, is that those voices of moderation are seldom mentioned. The ideals that make headlines are the extremes from both sides of the issue.
The funny thing about a debate on a topic such as this is that everyone thinks they're the experts on the subject, and from most of the posts on this topic...that's clearly not the case.
I am no expert in wildlife biology... and I have no problem saying that..
Therefore, I am open-minded as to listen to what those people who are wildlife biologists have to say.
Do I take everything they say as truth.. Of course not..to do so would be narrow-minded, but I do listen to their points. Also there is something called scientific evidence...data.. that backs an a good sound scientific ideal... Anyone who has something to say on this topic should provide sound scientific evidence to back their statement. For those of you who have spoken so strongly about this subject, let's see some data. Oh and by the way, when I say data, that's not the same as saying: "I've found more winter kills this year than any other", or "you just don't see elk where you used too", or "there are more elk than before the introduction of wolves." I'm talking about studies.. results.... I know that many people think that scientific studies are some sort of conspiracy and can be manipulated to achieve desired resules... These such experiments do exist, but they do not make it into scientific journals such as the Journal of Wildlife Management, without being precies and unbiased. This is top of the line science, and the evidence is real.
Are there any REAL wildlife biologists on this site? If so, let's hear what you have to say and why. For those of us who aren't wildlife biologists, let's research some data and get it posted. I think we as hunters and members of society should stop throwing back and forth empty statements made on emotion. We should put emotions aside, look for evidence and make the best environmental decisions based on that evidence....Let's raise the creditability of this post...let's bring science into this!
Tanner
 
Guys...I had no idea of where my original post would head, but I guess I was nieve.

Anyways, there are some scientific facts available, according to the WY proposal: there are now at least 900 wolves in WY, while the original goal of reintroduction was 300ish.

The USFS' latest response is to reject a plan to manage this situation, a plan proposed by WY. It is primarily the residents of WY that are being directly affected by 1000ish wolves.

What's wrong with this picture?

It stinks of politics. Compounded by irresponsible journalism (e.g. Denver Post article).

I'm open to other points of view or corrections, just speak up and tell me what I'm missing. Thx.
 
Wow, I never thought I'd see the Idaho Statesman cited as a scientific reference. I believe the article ran originally in the USA today last fall. The article is entitled "What's Killing the Elk in Yellowstone" by Dan Vergano. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2005-11-21-elk-yellowstone-mystery_x.htm I don't know if Dan Vergano has any wildlife management background. I will add what I thought was an interesting paragraph, "More years of watching wolves are needed to get a handle on the elk's decline, says Ken Hamlin of Montana's Fish, Wildlife & Parks department. He's inclined to blame the wolves, noting that elk in areas with few, or no, wolves, seem to do better. And species that wolves prey on far less often, such as mule deer and bison, haven't seen big drops in numbers, he says, despite going through the same drought and severe winters."

I don't think we will ever get a clear picture of the impact wolves are having on the elk herds as everyone who does a study has a bias. Same with salmon and dams.

Science aside, the politics of wolf introduction is what scares me. I cannot speak to the elk herds of Wyoming, but the elk herds in some areas of Idaho were not in great shape before the wolves were introduced. Further, Idaho Fish and Game was adamantly opposed to wolf introduction. No matter, the feds decided that the health of native game takes a back seat to federal policy. So, by extension, our future hunting priviliges are subordinate to the goals of special interest groups who further thier agenda's primarily throught the courts. Healthy big game herds are to a great extent the result of management paid for by sportsmans' dollars (Pittman Roberts, license sales, etc.). If and when elk number fall so will the number of tags. When the number of tags is reduced so also will fall revenues and sportsmen's voice in management. Personally I take pride in the fact that my dollars have improved the health of big game herds and other wildlife. The fact that this success has been used by special interests to encroach on hunting privileges should be an affront to all sportsmen.
 
wideone-
Glad to hear your comments! It amazes me how many "hunters" on this site advocate the SSS policy, while beating their little "ethical sportsmen" drum. Shooting a wolf is illegal, but its not an elk or deer , so who cares? People have always had a real bad attitude about any predator eating their elk or their deer. It gets to the point where they hate wolves, coyotes, eagles, etc... Ridiculous. Seeing any animal in the wild gets me all fired up. That is what nature is all about. The idea of simply eliminating any obstacle to our wonderful hunting experiences is just plain short-sighted. The answer always lies somewhere in the middle. I do agree, however, with management. Man has had such a controlling influence on our environment for long enough that we can't just throw up our hands and let the chips land where they land. Without management of any kind we probably wouldn't have any game. This is a tricky issue because it has been completely polarized. You hate them or you love them. We won't get very far with an attitude like that.
 
Not sure who it was, but someone wanted some science and numbers...here you go:

From the Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks...lots of good info on that site:

With Montana?s elk numbers over objective in half of the state?s 44 elk management units, wildlife officials hope consolidating the state?s traditional general hunting season?and offering expanded opportunities to hunt bull or cow elk in areas that exceed population objectives?will restore general public hunting as Montana?s primary big game population management tool.

"This is old school elk management in the modern era," said Gary Hammond, chief of FWP?s wildlife management bureau. "We have lots of elk in Montana, but in some areas we're not getting hunters to those elk, and that's creating problems. By focusing on Montana?s traditional five-week season, we hope to produce more hunting opportunities in many hunting districts, simplify hunting regulations, and provide game managers, private landowners, and hunters with the tools needed to harvest more elk."

Montana?s elk population grew from 55,000 in 1978 to as many as 145,000 today. In addition, elk occupy about 60 percent more habitat than they did 40 years ago.

Yep, those wolves are ripping the elk herds apart...thats why they're over objective in 22 management areas and why second cow tags are having to be issued.

Yet, according to the bar-stool biologists on MM, the elk are in the tank in Montana...seems the MTFWP disagrees.

I think I'll believe the MTFWP biologists like Lemke, Hammond, Jonkel, etc.

I dont put much credibility into broke-back MM bar-stool biologists.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 05:22PM (MST)[p]"Montana?s elk population grew from 55,000 in 1978 to as many as 145,000 today. "
And you couldn't find an elk when you hunted up there? Maybe you should get out and walk, it's amazing what you may find!
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 05:43PM (MST)[p]In about 5 more years the Old and getting older Yellowstone Elk herd will be down to a thousand or so.
The Wolves will need one more winter to just about finish them up.

The Defenders of Wildlife( I mean USFWS) will say there were too many Elk anyways or they will blame it on the Elk going into the winter in poor condition or some B.S. or maybe they will still try to blame it on Wyoming.

Those Wolves will spill out into the Tri State area and we should have well over 3,000 by then.
Elk tags may be Controlled hunts by then. Tags will probably be reduced by well over 50% or more in the surrounding area and some areas might not even have an Elk season.

The USFWS is the biggest joke I've ever seen. Here we have a Government agency who continuosly gets their asses handed to them in court in a Country they run by a bunch of Pro Wolf Liberals.
Doe's that seem funny to you? They sure don't seem to be trying to hard to help in Delisting or delisting certain segments of the population. They can't even write a petition to get Wolves reclassified.
They blame it all on Wyoming's unwillingness to bend over like Idaho and Montana did.

The USFWS has been infiltrated by the Anti's as if they weren't already. It's really not in their interest to delist.

Lets look at the facts here. Their goals 300 wolves, 30 breeding pairs in the Tri State area and the Wolves were to be considered recovered. Everyone involved with the Wolf introduction and recovery has deemed it a huge sucess, even the pro Wolfers.

Now we have 700+ Wolves in Idaho alone and 60 packs and who knows how many breeding pairs.

That's 600 too many as far as I'm concerned. A Deal is a deal as far as I'm concerned and it's time for Wolves to Die.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 05:34PM (MST)[p]fool,

Where did you come up with that?

Between 1980-2004 I killed 24 elk in Montana, one each year. It was way tougher in the earlier years...partly because I didnt know what I was doing as a 12-year old kid. Also, the lower Blackfoot river country never has contained high populations of elk...where I spent nearly all my time hunting. Spend some boot leather and be patiant though...good things happen.

I had a MT tag last year but didnt kill one...already had enough meat and found no reason to kill any of the raghorns or cows I passed.
 
Excaliber,

Its plenty obvious from your post you never attended any of the scoping meetings or have read the EIS.

In the years leading up to wolf reintroduction there were 3 open commment periods and meetings held all across the nation. In particular there were many, many, many scoping meetings held all through-out Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.

The EIS is very clear. In that document, it states that before wolves are delisted...all 3 states...Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho MUST, and I repeat MUST come up with a plan that ensures wolves will be kept off the Endangered Species List. That plan, per the EIS, has got to be acceptable to the USFWS. Wyomings plan is not acceptable.

MT and ID have acceptable plans, but that doesnt mean squat for delisting. All 3 states were fully aware of the EIS and the preferred alternative and also the reprocusions of ignoring it. All three states are not in compliance and because of that...delisting will not happen...ever.

Its also fair to note that a vast majority of the written and verbal comments received on this issue prior to reintroduction were in favor of wolf reintroduction. Even in towns across the tri-state area, over-whelming support for reintroduction.

I only attended scoping meetings in Missoula (3 meetings), Butte, and Helena, but in those places, I'd say 90-95% of the people responding with verbal testimony were in favor. Pretty much in line with the written comments received.

The USFWS acted on the comments they received in the 3 open comment periods...and like I said, a majority of those comments favored reintroduction.
 
one wolf was hit on the hiway between sundance and spearfish this is about to become a south dakota problem too.
after testing the wolf proved to be 100% wolf.
three s's is the only answer with the tree huggin feds.
they wont them catch them and take them to washington dc
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 06:18PM (MST)[p]No, I've never been to any Wolf Meetings but I've written letters to every Senator in the tri-state area, called Big Game Biologists in Idaho. Talked to S. Nadeau and I badger Ed Bangs every chance I get.
Wyoming's plan is more than adequate to ensure Wolves will be kept off the endangered list.
Peer reviews were conducted looking into the feasability of accepting Wyoming's plan to manage Wolves. All but one Biologist said that the Wyoming plan was acceptable and guess what the USFWS used that one Pro-Wolfers report as their basis to disallow Wyoming's plan.

The USFWS are the ones holding up Delisting.

As far as to your 90-95% of comments for goes, The Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club and The Humaine Society are very good at getting their followers to email , write letters etc.
Hunters are not motivated at all to get involved and that too bad.

These Wolves were going to be introduced whether the vote was 90% against.

Were getting screwed by the USFWS plain and simple.
 
Excaliber,

I agree that its too bad hunters cant organize to have a voice.

It seems like when hunters do organize its to further hunting opportunities for the wealthy...but thats another subject.

Hunters were not PRO-active at all in the entire wolf deal and now they're RE-acting like a bunch of whiney children. We'll never know what would have happened if 90% of the comments were against reintroduction.

Its too late now...now we have to focus on whatever it will take to get the wolves off the list, control to the states and hunting/trapping to control wolves at an acceptable level to satisfy the EIS, ESA, and also to ensure theirs game for us to hunt.

Having a state (WY) playing hardball will only continue to keep that very thing from happening, wolf numbers increasing, and also keeping them listed.

Thats a fact.
 
We're screwed now any way you look at it. Wyoming is doing what they feel is right. The USFWS doesn't want to delist anyways.

If they did they would take their case before a judge they know would accept their plans to Reclassify and to allow delisting of certain segments of the population.
We will just have to agree to disagree on Wyoming's plan.

It was good enough for all but one of the people who reviewed their plans to manage Wolves.

The USFWS are the ones who are delaying everything now.

With the number of Wolves we have today we would have a hell of a time trying to manage them even if we started tomorrow.
They are smart and they breed like dogs.
The USFWS new this and so did all the anti hunting groups. They all knew this would be tied up in court foreever and no management would occur until the Wolf population is beyond management.
The Wolf is the best anti hunting tool ever introduced and it will have their desired effect unless we do something now.
 
nfh,

I appreciate your passion on this subject, I know you spend many days in the hills.. In your opinion(and within the laws of the land) how do you feel we should go forward. SSS is obviously a hillbilly answer, but I'd like to hear ideas. I agree we have too many wolves, we need to manage them. What do you feel we can do to move forward and get the ball rolling?? You say there are 14 wolves up there. How many cougars are up there and how many elk do they kill and why tha heck isn't everyone moaning and crying about them?? I've seen firsthand while doing a wolf predation study last year that cougars in the area were killing as many elk as a pack of 12 wolves.. Should we kill all the cougars and all the grizzly too?? While were at it, should we just kill of anything we don't like? Come to think of it, we are WAY overpopulated as a human species, maybe we should thin out the american population a little??
One last question... Have you ever had the opportunity to just watch wolves being wolves, and if so, did you enjoy the experience??
Wideone
 
>
> The Wolf is the best
>anti hunting tool ever introduced
>and it will have their
>desired effect unless we do
>something now.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


This is the most important thought this thread has produced.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 09:21PM (MST)[p]wideone,

for your first question to move forward, we already are, the feds just keep putting us off, but i like our plan if they leave the park than its our problem, i think we should be able to shoot them,its our land and have a right to manage it, but then all the wolves would stay in the park and kill all the elk and there would be very few elk in the park but there is a few elk in the park anyhow. also if they wanted 300 wolves in the first place than lets bring it down to that.if we do get a plan it could take years for it to happen, with all the courst cases and for it to take effect.

it wont be long until the park burns again, its coming, the north fork is all dead, the beetles have killed all the trees, so its going to kill a lot of animals in and outisde of the park . there you can blame the feds again they let it happen, they had the chance to log cedar mountain but they turned them down,

i dont see very many cougars up there and i hardly see there tracks but they are being manged up there, a lot of guys hunt up there and are very successful and there you could thank the outfitters mostly for getting the cougars. im not going to worry about bears becasue hunting season is very soon for them.

for your last question i have watched them, i have watched them come into my elk bugles while archery hunting, i have wathced them come down even to ralston wyoming, i have seen there damage, i have seen them put an elk down, matter in fact when we left saturday morning last week we saw some wolves put down an elk next to the road, the elk seem like they have given up also, they just stand there cause its almost like they know they are screwed.

im getting tired of finding more dead bulls than actual horns. we took my grandpa up there the first week in march it was his first up there for 5 years and he was disgusted with what he saw.

i also know that my opinion doesnt matter to the game and fish and feds. i also went to a wolf meeting not to long ago and got to talk to the wolf biologist, he to is sick with the wolves, he thinks they should be here but not out of control, we both agreed that we would hate to see it be to late.

not to much longer we will be transplating elk, also now there is wolves in the bighorns, the game and fish said it themselves and some people have them on video.

also i beleave that they reintoduced the wrong wolf in the first place, but its still a killing machine, heck i hear people are done going to the mountains, they are scared to camp anymore.

another thing i would like to throw into the air is that they wanted to control bison in the park, they dont even touch the bison they just group up and prtoect the young, the bison numbers have shoot up way to high.

it wont be long until the park burns again , its coming, the north fork is all dead, the beetles have killed all the trees, so its going to kill a lot of animals in and outisde of the park . there you can blame the feds again they let it happen, they had the chance to log cedar mountain but they turned them down,
 
I've heard everything now...people are afraid to camp because of wolves?

What a joke!

When was the last time anyone was killed by a wolf in North America?

I can hardly wait for this list.

If you're afraid of wolves and using that for an excuse not to camp...you dont belong in the woods in the first place. The drive from your home to your camping spot is many, many, many times more likely to get you hurt or killed. Having an allergic reaction from a peanut butter sandwich is many, many, many times more dangerous.

Wow, grown men afraid of being attacked by wolves...that has got to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

What a bunch of pansies...

I guess you all must have believed Little Red Riding Hood...Gee grandma what big teeth you have...

Good grief...
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 09:34PM (MST)[p]im talking about old people that cant even enjoy the outdoors cause there scared, i know its pathtic but true, but im scared of what the future will be like with them.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-06 AT 09:48PM (MST)[p]I tell you what scares me...

Retired old men/women driving huge motorhomes down the highways...

Now that really IS scarey....
 
NFH,

I totally agree with your post and your plan. There are wolves in the bighorns now and I am one of those people that have video of them. The Game and Fish recently came out and said it themselves that wolves are now in the Bighorns, the funny thing is that we had video of wolves 3 years ago in the bighorns and they weren't suppose to be there, but somehow they made it over there. Personally I think the government was transplanting up there without us knowing, but it is possible that they made it there by themselves also.
 
Some of you guys crack me up, you think you're in some vast wilderness when you step out of your Subaru and hear the wolves, give me a break. the only thing I agree with some of you granola munchers on is we need to figure out how to deal with the wolves because they are here to stay. I don't think there is an answer and that brings out the red neck in some otherwise good people. thinking the wolves wont have a very adverse impact on game herds is nothing short of stupid no matter how many " facts" you make up.
 
I'm done arguing points that don't matter to anyone but the ones that are trying to make their point,it's really not solveing anything, no ones listening!! It's not going to take ten years for all this to work out, but look me up then and tell me your thoughts of the reintroduction of the wolves, and what coulda, shoulda, and still hasn't been done!! I just wonder how much opportunity to hunt wildlife will have changed within this 10 year period, and honestly that is what's important to me!! I am a hunter, my voice is small, and pretty much useless when it comes to people advocateing the wolf reintroduction, they have the power!! The States and Feds really aren't making the choices in my oppinion, I believe they are bullied by private groups in many situations!! A management plan would be great, but I have a hard time believeing that it would ever be enough to sway the reproduction of the wolf, or maintain current opportunities for sportsmen! And I know you don't care, and maybe I'm being selfish, but haveing the same opportunities to hunt and enjoy the same success for years to come for me and my kids are very important to me!!
I really hope all the people out there that are either self proclaimed experts, or the real experts can come up with a great management plan that will maintain current opportunites for current and future sportsmen and women!! The States here in the west have worked long and hard for a lot of years to bring elk and other wildlife to the levels they are now, and I really hope one bad choice doesn't ruin it, and take anything away from the average hunter!!

Im going to be a smart *** now!! I have to do it! Here it goes.

"I'm deathly afraid of them there wolves, I think they're going to cover that 300yds in a flash. Oh, by the way I can see there teeth and I think I hear them growling, I better shoot them now!!" BANG!!! Yep, grown man here, and I'm deathly afraid of wolves!!!:p


I'm sorry, I had to do it!!

Oh BuzzH, sorry about the hostility, I really don't want to argue points or critize yours. That's what is so great about our country is that we can have different views!!



Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!!
 
No apology necessary, its important to get the facts of whats going on with wolves on the table.

I'm not as skeptical as some, I still think I'll get the opportunity to hunt a wolf in Wyoming, Montana or Idaho someday.

I think its just absolutely ridiculous for "hunters" to resort to foolishness like illegally killing a threatened species.

You risk losing your license for life in a bunch of states, jail time, fines, etc.

I'd never do anything to risk my hunting license...too important to me.
 
Your absoultly right about the risks, and not being worth it as far as the big picture goes!! And I really doubt I would ever do it, not only because of the risks but because of what I would be teaching my kids about the law and respect for it!!
But I can't really say that I would feel good about just watching them being wolves!! I just don't see any need for them out side of the park!! I'm selfish, I don't want to lose any hunting opportunities for myself or future generations because of the wolves! We already have other issues such as over developing, private clubs, etc. that are slowly taking away opportunities for the average Joe!!
I really hope I'm wrong and that the reintroduction of wolves won't ever take away from our success, or chances of hunting our favorite hunting grounds with our future generations for years to come!!

But again I'm sorry for the hostility, I don't mean to offend any fellow hunters!!


Work to hunt!! Live to hunt!! And the rest spent keeping the wife happy!
 
nfh,

"i dont see very many cougars up there and i hardly see there tracks"
they are there and they are killing.. People choose what they feel is the biggest threat to them at the time and focus in on that one particular thing. cougars are killing just as many elk, yet people don't get their panties in a bunch because they are focused on wolves.. Of course there are wolves in the Bighorns,, wolves travel very long distances and everyone has known that from the beginning. Wolves also kill, they survive by killing. You say the elk being attacked looked like they were hopeless and felt like they had no chance of survival. Do you think they feel any different when a bullet from a .300 win mag takes 'em off their feet??

I'll stop making posts on this because we just run around in circles.. I ENJOY wolves and enjoy hunting. Most people only enjoy hunting. It's our public lands and everyone should have a say and should be able to enjoy it. So, it looks like we need to compromise.. Get Wyoming to come up with a plan, we can control wolves and hunt elk. And they all lived happily ever after......
 
like i said im not here to make enemys, just wheni find kills the eyes are eaten around, and i know that cougars burry there food. and you know what you have a personal opinion to and have mine, like someone said i guess its why they call it amercia. and best of luck to horn hunting to you im sure you will see me up there again.

THE NORTH FOK HUNTER
 
It's only just begun...give it another 10 years of wolf mismanagement and hunting will be shut down in some areas.

For those of you who like first hand information, here's a quote from a guy who feeds wintering elk in a area in Idaho..."Fred Marolf, a real-estate agent from Fairfield, east of Mountain Home, who feeds elk in the winter under contract to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

He has seen elk numbers drop on the feeding sites near Fairfield from more than 700 in past years to about 200 this year. Marolf regularly watches wolves eat elk at the sites.

"It's a horrible-looking sight," he said.

Read the full story here

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060413/NEWS0105/604130359/1019
 
Have any of you hunted central Idaho lately?I have 16 years now...Boy has it changed.We pack in many miles.And we dont see any more people now than before.The Elk and deer herds are declining every year.The one change is now we see/hear
cut wolf tracks about every other day.When it snows,you dont miss much.The elk are harder to hunt now.They definetly move more now..But you can tell when the wolves are around,cause game moves out.Stay in the cover more and stay out less.Dwr guys arnt going to tell you the whole truth.They have to still sell tags.From a hunting aspect,NOBODY can tell me they dont have a major impact,i have seen it.Any body that tells you different is a liar or is just quoting some one else.Hunters pay the way for wildlife and it was shoved down our throats.By the way i have family in the DWR as well as a couple of friends across the border in Mont.They dont like it,but if they speak up they can lose there jobs for not supporting management...If your good enough friends with a warden ask him how he feels.You might be suprized.Wolves threaten their jobs too.No ELK-NO HUNTERS-NO JOB...
 
one question buzz? who is eating the middle age elk? coyotes? bears? think not it is wolves. older elk are wiser and get away more often i think they are bigger and stronger then the one and two year olds where is the study about that?
ok more than one.
calfs are only as importent as there mothers if they are both being killed then the elk are decreesing twice as fast wouldn't you think. have you ever seen a bear take a four year old elk?
it happens with wolves often.
if you take all elk taken by bears wolves and coyotes who is the biggest predator?
give us answers we would like to know.
 

Similar threads

J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky
D
Beware of Guided Mule Deer Hunts in Huntsville UT
Replies
97
Views
5k
wstrntines
wstrntines
money
26 year dream comes to a close!
Replies
42
Views
3k
joesikora
joesikora

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

C02C6539-5902-4172-8044-33110695644C.jpeg
Screenshot_20231111-101840.png
17E8AE77-AD83-4141-B3B6-F5F48B0EACA7.jpeg
IMG_3630 copy.jpg
FA95EC78-760F-4B7E-B4C7-DF0419965640.jpeg
20221003_192037_1.jpg
35E7B191-C200-480F-A091-259C3B12CEB9.jpeg
1691508D-CC26-466C-A252-3BD56E2C2A14.jpeg
IMG_0021.jpeg
IMG_20230206_091956562.jpg
IMG_0763.png
4FA8972B-8BA1-4822-B002-FD0147523DB5.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom