Do we want wolves relisted?

Iowan

Active Member
Messages
424
Doing stupid **** like this will almost guarantee that wolves will be relisted as endangered! If I wanted to get wolves relisted this is a dream come true.

I am all for using hunting to control their numbers but using bounties is only providing ammunition to the people that want them listed as endangered. Bounties are the tool that drove them to extinction in these states - people remember this kind of stuff.

I know it is not hunters leading this charge but we will be the ones hurt when the wolves are protected again.

I think a better solution is simply say that you can hunt wolves on any big game tag - you simply have to report the kill within 24 hours. Another option would be to make the wolf tags $1 to residents and non-residents. Or even better - make a couple premium hunts available to only those that have harvested a wolf the previous year.

For the record I have harvested exactly one wolf.

 

JPickett

Active Member
Messages
834
Re list them all you want. They’ll keep dying in Idaho but no, we don’t want them delisted and yes this is ammo for the idiots that don’t live in states with wolves to use against us.

I really don’t understand why the state is having a hard time with how to kill more wolves. It’s called poison. Boys in the old days killed way more that way then trapping and shooting.
 

elkassassin

Long Time Member
Messages
27,210
You'd Kill a Magpie or Two if You Used Poison!

Might Even Take out a BLACK BIRD or Two! (Crow/Raven!)

The Greenies Wouldn't Like That!



Re list them all you want. They’ll keep dying in Idaho but no, we don’t want them delisted and yes this is ammo for the idiots that don’t live in states with wolves to use against us.

I really don’t understand why the state is having a hard time with how to kill more wolves. It’s called poison. Boys in the old days killed way more that way then trapping and shooting.
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,529
Re list them all you want. They’ll keep dying in Idaho but no, we don’t want them delisted and yes this is ammo for the idiots that don’t live in states with wolves to use against us.

I really don’t understand why the state is having a hard time with how to kill more wolves. It’s called poison. Boys in the old days killed way more that way then trapping and shooting.
Funny. mtmuley
 

JPickett

Active Member
Messages
834
I Think You're Right JP!

But F'It!

I'm Sayin it anyway!

BLACK BIRD!
Oh man. Now you gotta apologize twice. Once here and probably once on face book
1633995588024.gif
 

bullskin

Very Active Member
Messages
1,079
Fortunately, the question of listing or delisting is not entirely political. But, if the antis ever find it within their power to place like-minded people on the state commission, then we hunters could be in tough shape. It may seem unlikely, but it was not that long ago that Ricky Ricardo went hunting, on I Love Lucy, in California, and no one batted an eye.
 

elks96

Very Active Member
Messages
2,677
So here is the truth. The antis no matter what we do will try everything in their power to relist. The bounty has almost no power at all on the issue. I highly doubt the vast majority of those who are antihunting care if there is a bounty or not. They are anti hunting. The overwhelming vast majority that have no issues with states managing wildlife, are going to be fine with the bounty.

The bounty has almost no weight on the vast majority. As their opinions are already formed long before this issue.
 

eelgrass

Long Time Member
Messages
27,676
The bounty has almost no weight on the vast majority. As their opinions are already formed long before this issue.
That's certainly true but the headlines that will read "Hunters paid $2000 for ever wolf they kill" will not look good to the average soccer mom. It's just another nail in our coffin.
 

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
The bounty has almost no weight on the vast majority. As their opinions are already formed long before this issue.
I'd bet the ranch that after the HSUS, Center for BD & the other alphabet AR organizations get done with their ad campaigns, they will have greatly influenced a major part of the 'vast majority.'
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,529
N
So here is the truth. The antis no matter what we do will try everything in their power to relist. The bounty has almost no power at all on the issue. I highly doubt the vast majority of those who are antihunting care if there is a bounty or not. They are anti hunting. The overwhelming vast majority that have no issues with states managing wildlife, are going to be fine with the bounty.

The bounty has almost no weight on the vast majority. As their opinions are already formed long before this issue.
No, here is the truth. Wolf management in the West has worked well since the initial delisting. No basis for "antis" to file suit. The more aggressive measures to kill wolves just kick start the "antis" up again. It's a balance. And a so called bounty and all the rest will tip it the wrong way. mtmuley
 

newhunter

Active Member
Messages
165
"Wolf management in the West" Has NOT worked well.
They have been allowed to populate well over scientific objectives in almost ever case.
 

Homer

Long Time Member
Messages
10,411
Wyoming was the bad guy while trying to delist......now Montana and Idaho are the bad guys after delisting.....comical really
 
Last edited:

Tristate

Long Time Member
Messages
6,730
Why do yall keep using logic in these arguments. The opposition uses no logic and pads their arguments with lies.

Here is the truth. The states need to do whatever they plan on doing no matter what the feds say. What can the feds do???? Damn near nothing. The wheels have come off the wagon folks. Look around you. This bull5pit they have been pushing has broken this country.

They can't even clear a shipping container full of cheep Chinese plastic anymore.

THEY CAN'T ENFORCE THEIR RULES.
 

elkassassin

Long Time Member
Messages
27,210
CHEAP!


Why do yall keep using logic in these arguments. The opposition uses no logic and pads their arguments with lies.

Here is the truth. The states need to do whatever they plan on doing no matter what the feds say. What can the feds do???? Damn near nothing. The wheels have come off the wagon folks. Look around you. This bull5pit they have been pushing has broken this country.

They can't even clear a shipping container full of cheep Chinese plastic anymore.

THEY CAN'T ENFORCE THEIR RULES.
 

highfastflyer

Very Active Member
Messages
1,239
That was also true of the bald eagle years ago when almost none remained in the lower 48.
Quite different as back then it was a pesticide called DDT causing threatened or endangered status in Alaska and Canada though differing Canadian rules in effect. DDT also ravished Canadian and Alaskan birds and Eagles. Canada was a little slower to ban it and suffered even more until 1985 but the US banned it in 1972. Wolves in Alaska and Canada are very prolific as they are now in Idaho and Montana. https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/article/throwback-thursday-ddts-history-canada
 
Last edited:

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
Quite different as back then it was a pesticide called DDT causing threatened or endangered status in Alaska and Canada though differing Canadian rules in effect. DDT also ravished Canadian and Alaskan birds and Eagles. Canada was a little slower to ban it and suffered even more until 1985 but the US banned it in 1972. Wolves in Alaska and Canada are very prolific as they are now in Idaho and Montana. https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/article/throwback-thursday-ddts-history-canada
The bald eagle was listed only in the lower 48. Alaska's population was never "ravished" or listed as endangered, and neither was Canada's. In fact, the US imported many eagle chicks from the latter.
 

highfastflyer

Very Active Member
Messages
1,239
The bald eagle was listed only in the lower 48. Alaska's population was never "ravished" or listed as endangered, and neither was Canada's. In fact, the US imported many eagle chicks from the latter.
Actually they did seriously decline both in Canada and Alaska. Most of those northern Bald Eagles winter in the lower 48, many in the Great Lakes where DDT ravished the birds. Northern, non-coastal bald eagle populations including those in Alaska, generally migrate south for the winter between August and January. Bald eagles in the Great Lakes region and adjacent areas in Canada may migrate eastward to winter along the Atlantic Coast from Maine and New Brunswick to Chesapeake Bay. All of Ontario as late as 2012 had only 71 pairs nesting in the core stronghold of Southern Ontario. The point here is wolves are not endangered in Idaho, Montana and the Great Lakes states seem to be doing very well, far from endangered status and Canada and Alaska are bastions for wolves. https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/bald-eagles-ontario-1.3725126
 

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
None of Alaska's eagles migrate to the lower 48 states. "South" is southeast AK for them. In fact, the Chilkat River eagle reserve is prime spot for winter viewing. (See below)The population cited in lower Ontario was merely a microcosm of the large numbers elsewhere in Canada. At the same time that population was declining, other birds from Canada were being given to the U.S.

BaldEagle.jpg
 

eelgrass

Long Time Member
Messages
27,676
When the ESA was passed back in the 70's the Bald Eagle was used as a Trojan Horse. Who didn't want to save America's symbol? As soon as it passed "environmentalists" started turning over rocks to find an excuse to hamper economic progress.
 

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
When the ESA was passed back in the 70's the Bald Eagle was used as a Trojan Horse. Who didn't want to save America's symbol? As soon as it passed "environmentalists" started turning over rocks to find an excuse to hamper economic progress.
Not sure where you're going with that, but the bald eagle had already come under all sorts of protection prior to the ESA of 1973. They had already been declared an endangered species in the late 1960s.

Now the spotted owl is another...well you know.

And I'm done for the day..time to cook. ;)
 

highfastflyer

Very Active Member
Messages
1,239
None of Alaska's eagles migrate to the lower 48 states. "South" is southeast AK for them. In fact, the Chilkat River eagle reserve is prime spot for winter viewing. (See below)The population cited in lower Ontario was merely a microcosm of the large numbers elsewhere in Canada. At the same time that population was declining, other birds from Canada were being given to the U.S.
Many of the birds in Alaska do migrate South but more importantly South East Alaska one of their strongholds was also ravished as was Canada as they also sprayed heavily DDT to stop initially mosquitoes but later use for stopping timber infestations of parasites and pine beetles and other ag. uses. Even today 50 years later many Canadian lakes still hold concerning amounts of DDT. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-06-13-ddt-levels-canada-lakes

The migration of eagles moving southwards is also well documented.

do bald eagles migrate from alaska​

Bald eagles are often found along Alaska’s coast, offshore islands, and Interior lakes and rivers. Many bald eagles winter in southern Alaska but many leave the state during cold months. … https://solsarin.com/when-do-bald-eagles-migrate/

Alaska also sprayed heavily using DDT before the ban. The bigger issue still remains here in the fact the Grey Wolves are certainly not endangered as 4000 wolves roam the Great Lakes states and both Montana and Idaho are above 1000 wolves each, not counting growing numbers in Wyoming and other western states. Listing them as Endangered when they are not is just plain Not true at best and a bald faced lie at worst.
 

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
Many of the birds in Alaska do migrate South but more importantly South East Alaska one of their strongholds was also ravished as was Canada as they also sprayed heavily DDT to stop initially mosquitoes but later use for stopping timber infestations of parasites and pine beetles and other ag. uses. Even today 50 years later many Canadian lakes still hold concerning amounts of DDT. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-06-13-ddt-levels-canada-lakes

The migration of eagles moving southwards is also well documented.

do bald eagles migrate from alaska​

Bald eagles are often found along Alaska’s coast, offshore islands, and Interior lakes and rivers. Many bald eagles winter in southern Alaska but many leave the state during cold months. … https://solsarin.com/when-do-bald-eagles-migrate/

Alaska also sprayed heavily using DDT before the ban. The bigger issue still remains here in the fact the Grey Wolves are certainly not endangered as 4000 wolves roam the Great Lakes states and both Montana and Idaho are above 1000 wolves each, not counting growing numbers in Wyoming and other western states. Listing them as Endangered when they are not is just plain Not true at best and a bald faced lie at worst.
With few exceptions, Alaska's eagles do not migrate to the lower 48 states. And the population there and in MOST of Canada was never "ravished." They already were "ravishing" beauties. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
6,273
Speaking of wolves....
--------------------------------------------------------------

Judge issues injunction blocking Wisconsin fall wolf hunt


TODD RICHMOND
Fri, October 22, 2021

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A judge on Friday halted Wisconsin's fall wolf season two weeks before hunters were set to take to the woods, siding with wildlife advocacy groups who argued that holding the hunt would be unconstitutional.

Dane County Circuit Judge Jacob Frost issued a temporary injunction halting the season, which was set to begin Nov. 6. The order comes as part of a lawsuit that a coalition of wildlife advocacy groups filed in August seeking to stop the hunt and invalidate a state law authorizing annual seasons.

Among other things, the coalition argued that the season is illegal because the Department of Natural Resources hasn't updated its regulations setting up season parameters and has been relying on an emergency rule put in place shortly after then-Gov. Scott Walker signed a law in 2012 authorizing annual seasons and a wolf management plan that hasn't been updated since 2007.

Frost said the law creating the wolf season is constitutional on its face, but that the DNR failed to create permanent regulations enacting it. The law gives the DNR great leeway in setting kill limits, hunting zone hours and the number of licenses making it all the more important that the department following the regulatory process to ensure it doesn't violate the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches, Frost said.

“I’m not overruling the wolf hunt law. In fact, I’m saying it has to be enforced as it was written and intended,” Frost said. “The DNR is currently not following the law or following the constitution. Its decisions are built on a faulty basis, meaning they can't stand, either.”

The judge said the injunction will remain in place until the DNR implements updated regulations on determining quotas and the number of licenses it issues and updates its wolf management plan with new wolf population goals for the state.

Hannah Jurss, an assistant attorney general representing the DNR in the case, asked Frost to stay his ruling pending appeal, calling his ruling “unquestionably a dramatic decision.” Frost refused, saying the DNR could still hold a season this year if it can move quickly on new regulations.
 

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