Anti Hunters Trying to Disrupt Wolf Hunts

[robby denning]

I got an email from BGF on this (We already know some of you don't like BGF, this about the anti's trying to stop wolf management)

http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_82a01d64-7e4e-5f17-a8bb-34e7b1193c06.html

The second to the last paragraph sums up the whole article. If the anti's get is buffer zone, then what's next?

This happened a few days ago, does anyone have any updates?

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

Nothing really new other than people see how political this really is. The commission caved because one popular wolf got killed, it really is ugly.

I think we all knew that new creative attempts were going to be made to get more protection for the wolves. Get on the phone and email, make your voices heard.

I will see if I can dig up who to email in Montana.

 

[bigeasygator]

There's a lot of chatter over on Hunt Talk about it (lots of Montana guys on that forum). Seems to be just what sreekers said...political caving to the vocal national minority after a popular wolf got killed. Seems pretty kneejerk and gives the antis something to grab onto IMO.

 

[pyroducksx3]

"Wildlife advocacy groups are pressing state officials to impose a protective buffer zone around the park to protect a species that serves as a major draw for the Yellowstone's 3 million visitors annually. Hunting and trapping are prohibited inside park boundaries, but wolves range freely across that line."

Read more: http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...e4e-5f17-a8bb-34e7b1193c06.html#ixzz2Erk4SeYn

Its because of the wolf that I am less likely to go take a vacation there. I want my children to see the vast wildlife not a bunch of wolves that are destroying the herds.

 

[dotman]

They really do not have a chance at big change now that it is in the states hands but they make a big voice on little situations, just keeping their views in the media and acting like they have power, hopefully it turns into nothing and fades with time. I think their focus will change in the next year once the griz debate gets going.

 

[bigeasygator]

They don't have a chance? From what I understand the management plan is in the hands of the Commission and they just showed a willingness to cave to the antis. You can argue that it's a small area and the hunt is still going on, but it's clear this latest decision was purely political and where does it stop? What happens when the next collared wolf gets shot outside this new buffer zone?

 

[hunthard]

If everyone thinks that wolf management is now in the hands of the states and it's all over your crazy. This is gonna get worse for game numbers before it gets any better, it's obvious by the seasons set in MT that the states have little interest in reducing wolf population. The wolfs killed in MT last year and this year won't even count for the young to come this year. I have heard that it took 20 years last time to get rid of wolves, with no seasons and no limits. People used to go to yellowstone to see other animals besides wolves and I have no doubts that they still would if there was no wolves. Having a buffer zone around the park is the dumbest idea I have heard in a long time, the park is the park, we don't need to expand it. I think I'm goin on a wolf hunt next weekend, any advice?

 

[Lukem]

I'll probably get flamed for this, but here goes. I really haven't read anything about the buffer zone and somewhat doubt that it'll happen. However, the reaction of closing the season in response to too many collared wolves getting killed is actually a proactive response for the longterm benefit of the season. To continue, these seasons need incredible amounts of data to continue. Montana will need to show in court (it will come to that again) whats going on and these collars are the best data they have to do so. If they lose the collars, they lose the data and we lose the season. Pretty simple.

It's about the seasons long term. We can kill wolves this year or we can hunt them for the next 30.

 

[bigeasygator]

I'll probably get flamed for this, but here goes. I really haven't read anything about the buffer zone and somewhat doubt that it'll happen. However, the reaction of closing the season in response to too many collared wolves getting killed is actually a proactive response for the longterm benefit of the season. To continue, these seasons need incredible amounts of data to continue. Montana will need to show in court (it will come to that again) whats going on and these collars are the best data they have to do so. If they lose the collars, they lose the data and we lose the season. Pretty simple.

It's about the seasons long term. We can kill wolves this year or we can hunt them for the next 30.

I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment. I'll also be the first to say that I'm nowhere near as close to this fight as some people nor do I pretend to be some wildlife biology expert. That being said, there's some things that really get me fired up about all this. First off, the buffer zone did happen. The Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Commissioners voted 4-1 to put it in place. Not only that, with the exception of the one who voted against the buffer zone (his reason was there was no evidence that the taking of collared wolves put the long term viability of the wolf in question), the four commissioners said this decision is purely political. Being proactive would have been discussing collared wolves or "famous" wolves before these seasons went into effect (and they probably were). It doesn't get much more reactive than this!

This was caving to political pressure from people who live everywhere but Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming -- pure and simple. To me that's intolerable. Reading the media reports on this thing make me even more sick and crystalize how much of a battle we have over not just wolves, but our hunting rights in general. I'm not trying to flame or start a fight or amp up the emotions but from what I've seen out there the last couple of days it's hard not to!

 

[robby denning]

This just came to my inbox from a friend. I don't know who the author, Virginia Morell, is. I would guess that this a is a blog or something. By the tone, you can tell that they are targeting the redneck hunters as those who kill, steal, and destroy. This is what most of the nation hears about the wolves and hunters.

The last paragraph says that Montana did close two areas adjacent to the park. Were these closures in response to the anti's or did they meet their established quota? The author doesn't say, which is advantageous to their cause as it sounds like they won the debate where it may have been a normal closure. Anyone know?

Hunters Kill Another Radio-Collared Yellowstone National Park Wolf

by Virginia Morell on 11 December 2012, 3:10 PM| 12 Comments

Before the hunt. Hunters last week killed a radio-collared female wolf (832F, right), that had been part of a study of packs in Yellowstone National Park since she was a pup. Her brother, 755M (left), is still alive. Hunters have killed an estimated 8% of Yellowstone's wolves this year, leaving about 81.
Credit: Courtesy of Doug McLaughlin
A wolf that researchers in Yellowstone National Park have followed since she was born 6 years ago, and was unusually popular with visitors and photographers, was shot last week by a hunter in Wyoming. The wolf, known to the park's wolf researchers as 832F, was wearing a radio collar, like several others that have died in this season's wolf hunt. She was also the third—and last—of the projects' wolves outfitted with a specialized GPS collar that collected data every 30 minutes, allowing the scientists' to track her movements in fine detail. The GPS data are important to understanding the effect of wolves on the park's elk population, says Douglas Smith, a wildlife biologist and the wolf project's leader. "We don't have any wolves with these GPS collars now," Smith says.

Beyond the loss of the GPS data, the death of 832F affects the project's study in other ways, Smith adds. The project, which is partly funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, is designed to understand the natural life cycle of wolves unexploited by humans. But this season alone, hunters have shot seven wolves—including 832F—that primarily used the park, and were part of the study.

Because 832F was the alpha, or breeding, female in the Lamar Canyon Pack, her death is also likely to have "important social impacts" on the park's wolves, Smith says. Wolves in the park do attack and kill one another, and in some of these cases, the alpha female has died—an event that can lead to the pack's break-up. 832F had joined with two brothers, 754M and 755M, to form the Lamar Canyon Pack, and almost immediately began drawing attention to herself, Smith says. "She was probably the park's most famous wolf, very popular with wolf-watchers, because she was odd. Usually the males are the best hunters and killers. But she went against the norm. She was the best hunter in her pack, and was clearly in charge. She killed many elk, and ran roughshod over those two brothers."

One of the brothers, the beta-male 754M, was also shot dead by a hunter in Wyoming earlier this season. He, too, wore a radio collar. Both wolves were far from the Lamar Valley—and about 15 miles beyond the safety of the Yellowstone park boundary. "They came back to the park after the death of 754M," Smith says, "and then they went right back to the same area in Wyoming, probably to hunt elk."
Although only one wolf pack from Yellowstone has ever been found killing livestock outside of the park, they do hunt elk beyond the park's borders. Still, for this pack, the excursions were unusual; it had never ventured outside of Yellowstone until this year.

Smith does not yet know how the surviving wolves in the Lamar pack are responding to the death of their alpha female, 832F. The pack still has its alpha male, 755M, with whom 832F had three litters. Several young females are also still alive, but they are the daughters of 755M. "For the pack to produce pups, they'll need to get a new alpha female from outside," Smith says. The Lamar pack may also have trouble surviving because it lost two of its best hunters.

Yellowstone's wolves now number 81, "which is still a healthy population," says Smith, who adds that the park has lost about 8% of its wolves to hunters this year. He estimates that the population can withstand losses of 15% to 20% before its demographics are affected.

Wyoming's Game and Fish Department had set a quota of eight wolves for hunters in the wolf hunting trophy zone where 832F and 754M were killed. With the death of 832F, that quota has now been reached, and the area is closed to such hunts until next year.

The Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Commission, which oversees the wolf hunts in that state, has also just closed two wolf-hunting zones adjacent to Yellowstone National Park's northwestern boundary for the remainder of the season. Five wolves, including three others that had radio collars, were killed in these areas in recent weeks. The two zones will also not be open for the wolf trapping season, which begins on 15 December.

 

[bigeasygator]

Robby, the closure of those areas was strictly in response to the killing of collared wolves, which has been getting more press thanks to 832F. I'll try and find some links to some different articles when I get back to my computer.

 

[bigeasygator]

This thread would be a good place to start if you want to get caught up. The closures were in Montana, even though this particular wolf was shot in Wyoming. Various media outlets have run the story on 832F being killed (NYT, National Geographic, etc). Like I said, you really want to get fired up? Read the comments from people from the wilds of NYC, and Los Angeles, and Philadelphia describing how barbaric the killing of wolves is and how we should just let all the animals get along.

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=253206

 

[Kevin Root]

Putting wolves in Yellowstone was never about saving wolves or balancing ecosystems. It goes way beyond just wolves. It was more about removing our hunting rights and removing us as humans from being the stewards of our wildlife. It was using the endangered species act yet again to trample over our rights. I'm glad states around Yellowstone finally delisted them so hunters could help managed them but the fight is not over.

 

[JP7]

I find it interesting that all the wolf 'experts' think that since two wolves that were collared got shot, that they can't put a new (or old) collar on a different wolf. I agree with Kevin, the introduction of wolves into Yellowstone wasn't about bringing back the wolves or balancing the ecosystem, it goes way past that. I also am shocked at how the mass media acts like no one will go to the park if there aren't wolves there. Yellowstone has been getting around 3 million visitors per year for a very long time. I used to go to the park a lot with my family, and one of the things I enjoyed most was seeing elk everywhere. But that was the 90s.

 

[robby denning]

bigeasygator, thanks for the links.

"the wild of NYC" hilarious.

 

[hunthard]

I think they should fine people for NOT shooting wolves.