Good factual documentary on wolves

[backstrapsaregood]

Does anyone know if timber lands such as Potlatch and stimpson counts as private when it comes to hunting wolves in Idaho?

 

[BuzzH]

Guys chiming in saying they have never seen a wolf....and Buzz saying read the reports...both insinuating wolves are not a problem?

Seems to me this video is legit- wolves can be a huge problem in some areas- a serious economic impact.

There is no denying the devastation to elk. It seems the best guess is a mature wolf will eat apps 22 elk a year based on F&G comments.

It seems elk populations are finally stabilizing though the F&G tempers their comments with the fact there are HUGE inaccuracies in their observations. Its absolutely stunning how many elk that wolves eat; Wyo files-wolves

From the link;
Yellowstone wolves may kill up to 2,156 elk in the park each year and as many as 11,600 in the Greater Yellowstone region, figures derived from 20 years of wolf study in the park indicate.

After 20 years of wolves occupying Yellowstone National Park, biologist Doug Smith has suggested the answer to a long-asked question: how many elk do Yellowstone wolves eat?
.....


To answer the question of how many elk an average wolf eats in a year, Smith teased out a figure from seasonal estimates. In early winter, for example, he estimates a wolf will kill and consume 1.4 elk every 30 days.

In late winter that number goes up to 2.2 elk per wolf every 30 days. Over the entire winter season, the average comes out to 1.8 elk per wolf in 30 days.

But that rate doesn’t persist. In summer, wolves turn their attention to deer and even rodents, Smith said.

Over the course of a year, an average wolf will kill — mostly with other pack members — and consume 16 to 22 elk a year, Smith said. “That’s a rough estimate.”

Beendare,

Not sure what would lead you to believe I'm "insinuating" anything...only asking that before people on both sides of the wolf issue start making unfounded, sensationalized comments, that they look at the data. You know, gather information, look at the information, analyze the information before you break your leg jumping to conclusions.

Perhaps I'm a product of the scientific community, or my natural instincts to not trust, but verify, everything and anything. I don't get my information from bar stools, guessing, or have a bias before I research most anything.

As one example, look at elk hunting. If we believe everything we read, a person would have to be some super-athlete, training 365 days a year to kill elk. No elk live within 10 miles of road. You have to wear high priced gear and shoot a custom rifle out to 1k yards, and of course it better be chambered in a magnum! To kill big bulls you have to be on private or go guided. Yet, all that is pure bullshit, nothing based on reality, just chest thumping by the crowd that push their beliefs on everyone else. Their way/idea/thoughts on elk hunting are the ONLY way.

I view the wolf issues the same. Those that make claims that the "wolves ate all the elk" are full of crap. Those that bury their head in the sand and deny wolves impact big-game, small game, livestock and even other predators...yeah, they're full of crap too.

The most interesting thing about the wolf issue, is that if you take a pragmatic look at the data, and compare that with what you're seeing on the ground...you're an A-hole to both camps. Like many issues in life, the answer isn't always so black and white as people lamely attempt to make them. Its tribal thinking, you're either with us or against us...and middle ground is not attainable.

Well, I don't fall in line with loudmouths or the ridiculous and unfounded rhetoric by same. Wolves are what they are, they impact the ecosystem around them...some positives, some negatives. No differently than any other animal that's part of the world, humans included.

So, I think you better check yourself before running around accusing others of "insinuating" anything...when it appears the face in your own mirror does more than its fair share.

 

[juan trueno]

The most interesting thing about the wolf issue, is that if you take a pragmatic look at the data, and compare that with what you're seeing on the ground...you're an A-hole to both camps.

 

[Beendare]

Buzz, facts show that elk populations have gone from 19,000 before wolves to the 5,000-6,000 now.

The fact is; its due to wolves, I dunno anyone arguing it wasn't besides yourself. A huge factor is uncontrolled wolf populations....some of the minor factors are constants or have not fluctuated near as much as the explosion of wolf packs.

Its pretty easy to extrapolate that the depleted elk populations in other areas are due to the uncontrolled expansion of wolves. Its much harder to study these huge areas of public land with limited resources. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out especially now that we have exerted controls on wolves and now in some of those areas the elk population has stabilized; Less wolves = more elk.

You posted that you provided information for the reintroduction of wolves- but you didn't say what that was.

Did you account for how uncontrollable these predators actually are?

Di you account for all of the unintended consequences that was factually presented in this video?

Did you account for the fact we have an unbalanced eco system with one predator running amok?

Did you account for the fact that animal rights outfits would stymie the Wildlife agencies attempt to manage these predators?

Did you factor in the huge economic strain wolves would put on the economy?

I've never seen the stats on how much resources that wolves have literally sucked out of the different state wildlife agencies with lawsuits, EIR's, man hours etc.....that takes away from managing ungulates for human advantages.

I will admit to a bias against the huge negative economic impact of wolves....which it seems was never considered before reintroduction. It seems silly to me that all of these resources would be devoted to wolves when anyone that can read a history book knows the problems. Every elk a wolf kills could have gone to feeding someones family.

..

..

 

[Okhotnik]

Buzz, facts show that elk populations have gone from 19,000 before wolves to the 5,000-6,000 now.

The fact is; its due to wolves, I dunno anyone arguing it wasn't besides yourself. Of course this is due to uncontrolled wolf populations.

Its pretty easy to extrapolate that the depleted elk populations in other areas are due to the uncontrolled expansion of wolves. Its much harder to study these huge areas of public land with limited resources. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out especially now that we have exerted controls on wolves and now in some of those areas the elk population has stabilized; Less wolves = more elk.

You posted that you provided information for the reintroduction of wolves- but you didn't say what that was.

Did you account for how uncontrollable these predators actually are?

Di you account for all of the unintended consequences that was factually presented in this video?

Did you account for the fact we have an unbalanced eco system with one predator running amok?

Did you account for the fact that animal rights outfits would stymie the Wildlife agencies attempt to manage these predators?

Did you factor in the huge economic strain wolves would put on the economy?

I've never seen the stats on how much resources that wolves have literally sucked out of the different state wildlife agencies with lawsuits, EIR's, man hours etc.....that takes away from managing ungulates for human advantages.

I will admit to a bias against the huge negative economic impact of wolves....which it seems was never considered before reintroduction. It seems silly to me that all of these resources would be devoted to wolves when anyone that can read a history book knows the problems. Every elk a wolf kills could have gone to feeding someones family.

..

..

I’ve asked Buzzh twice how well wolf introduction works if states are not allowed to manage exploding wolf populations. He refuses to address or ignores this very important issue.

So we have Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington and Oregon who cannot manage wolf populations are we are told by Buzzh that everything is working great in regards to wolves. He cites states that allow very aggressive wolf management with use of very long wolf seasons,liberal tags and allows trapping( very useful in wolf management) aerial wolf control and poison. Those states appear to finally get a handle on their populations. BUT there is always a possibility of judge shopping and a lawsuit ( like in Wisconsin, Minnesota Michigan Washington Oregon and see the Grizzlies in Montana) by rich anti hunting progressives and wolf management will be shut down in Montana Idaho and Wyoming

Looks like Colorado will be getting their wolves too. Of course they will follow Oregon and Minnesota and allow no hunting or management. Tags and seasons with be greatly reduced in Colorado based on well established history ( progressives love ignore or rewrite history to suit their agenda) and Buzzh will criticize hunters who ask why this is happening and state they’re not intelligent enough to understand his limited studies where aggressive wolf management is allowed. Seems disingenuous to me.This the proverbial man pissing on another man’s leg and tells him it is raining.

BTW we all know that Canada and Alaska have had very large wolf populations and there was no need for reintroductions into areas in the US that already had viable populations.

Looks like he cherry picks his controlled studies and is biased. But that’s just my view. Buzzh understands full well that very well funded rich anti hunting organizations dripping with cash - this is a very well established fact- will never allow wolf management so his cited studies are basically worthless. Looks like being played for fools but I welcome his response to this and some personal attacks thrown in as usual.

This wolf reintroduction movement appears to be a cult where basic science and logic is not permitted

 

[BuzzH]

I’ve asked Buzzh twice how well wolf introduction works if states are not allowed to manage exploding wolf populations. He refuses to address or ignores this very important issue.

So we have Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington and Oregon who cannot manage wolf populations are we are told by Buzzh that everything is working great in regards to wolves. He cites states that allow very aggressive wolf management with use of very long wolf seasons,liberal tags and allows trapping( very useful in wolf management) aerial wolf control and poison. Those states appear to finally get a handle on their populations. Looks like Colorado will be getting their wolves too. Of course they will follow Oregon and Minnesota and allow no hunting or management. Tags and seasons with be greatly reduced in Colorado based on well established history ( progressives love ignore or rewrite history to suit their agenda) and Buzzh will criticize hunters who ask why this is happening and state they’re not intelligent enough to understand his limited studies where aggressive wolf management is allowed. Seems disingenuous to me.This the proverbial man pissing on another man’s leg and tells him it is raining.

BTW we all know that Canada and Alaska have had very large wolf populations and there was no need for reintroductions into areas in the US that already had viable populations.

Looks like he cherry picks his controlled studies and is biased. But that’s just my view. Buzzh understands full well that very well funded rich anti hunting organizations dripping with cash - this is a very well established fact- will never allow wolf management so his cited studies are basically worthless. Looks like being played for fools but I welcome his response to this and some personal attacks thrown in as usual.

Contradict yourself much?

First you say I haven't commented on the WA, MI, OR, and WI wolf issues...then you make claims I have? Which is it?

Show me where I ever said that things were going fine in WA, MI, OR and WI with regard to wolf management. You put my quote up stating "So we have Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington and Oregon who cannot manage wolf populations are we are told by Buzzh that everything is working great in regards to wolves."

I'll save you the trouble, you wont, primarily because you cant and I never made such a claim. I smell rags burning, its your pants on fire.

I also never made a claim regarding anything to do with CO dealing with its wolf management, other than they better get their crap together and have a management plan it place.

As to the well funded groups trying to get a ballot initiative going...yeah they probably are. Hunter apathy, hunters ignoring science, hunters not showing up to meetings, hunters not voting, hunters not having their elected officials on speed dial, hunters not being organized...all have consequences.

I believe you live for the feud and if anyone looks at wolves from the standpoint of just another predator to manage on the landscape...they're a wolf loving, liberal hippie, commie.

I see wolf management no differently than management for black bears, mountain lions, fur bearers, deer, elk, moose...all need to be managed.

BTW, did you see that the Wyoming GF is going to be a lot less "aggressive" with wolf quotas this year? Probably not...I'll let you know the why's after I attend the next commission meeting in July.

Carry on...

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, facts show that elk populations have gone from 19,000 before wolves to the 5,000-6,000 now.

The fact is; its due to wolves, I dunno anyone arguing it wasn't besides yourself. Of course this is due to uncontrolled wolf populations.

Right...its all wolves that crashed those elk in the GYE. Have you bothered to look at the harvest data from the MTFWP in the years after reintroduction? Care to comment on the number of late cow permits issued in the mid 90's-early 2000's north of Gardiner? What happened with lion management in Montana about the same time frame? Grizzly bears increasing or decreasing in those years? Winter have any effect on big-game? Drought play a role? I wonder if the 1988 fires had any effects? Ever looked at the bull to cow ratio's? How about cow/calf ratio's?

Ever spent any time looking at the long-term populations of elk around Yellowstone? Say, I don't know, back in the late 60's, 70's, 80's when there were no wolves? Wonder what they blamed for a population of less than 3k elk on in 1967/68 when there were no wolves in the GYE?

Ever given any thought to the fact that 19k+ elk could have been an anomaly? I don't know, but all those things are worth more than a casual thought...at least IMO.

For your viewing pleasure, with facts:

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks :: Montana Statewide Elk Management Plan

History of Montana Elk Management and background information on plan creation process.

fwp.mt.gov

Its pretty easy to extrapolate that the depleted elk populations in other areas are due to the uncontrolled expansion of wolves. Its much harder to study these huge areas of public land with limited resources. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out especially now that we have exerted controls on wolves and now in some of those areas the elk population has stabilized; Less wolves = more elk.

I disagree, its never easy to extrapolate anything with regard to wildlife, in particular when there are many, many, many things that can lead to population peaks and valleys. Its not new science that habitat and weather are the biggest influencers on ungulate populations...both in a positive and negative way. Some short term, some long term.

You posted that you provided information for the reintroduction of wolves- but you didn't say what that was.

I provided comments for the DEIS and FEIS, part of the public record...did you?

Did you account for how uncontrollable these predators actually are?

If wolves are so uncontrollable, how is it that their numbers are NOT continuing to grow in Yellowstone, and have, in fact, declined? How is it that Wyoming is looking to slash quota's on wolves this year in the trophy areas, if they are so uncontrollable?

Di you account for all of the unintended consequences that was factually presented in this video?

Apparently you having read the FEIS and preferred alternative, the USFWS and various GF agencies absolutely stated, right there in black and white, that there would be financial consequences. Livestock losses, potential loss of big-game hunting opportunities, etc. Read it...its all in there. When you do, get back to me on what the livestock estimates were and if they're lower or higher than predicted.

Did you account for the fact we have an unbalanced eco system with one predator running amok?

Please explain what an "unbalanced ecosystem is". What other predators in WY, MT, or ID are "running amok"? They are all being managed, including grizzly bears...hunters aren't the only thing that manage predators.

Did you account for the fact that animal rights outfits would stymie the Wildlife agencies attempt to manage these predators?

Absolutely. We live in a world of constant litigation, its how do battle...for better or worse. Again, if you were involved at all, and paying attention, everyone knew there would be litigation. The one thing that caught me by surprise was Wyoming's refusal to classify wolves as trophy game statewide and the cause of holding up delisting for ID and MT. I think if ID and MT would have known Wyoming was going to be the cause of wolves being delisted and management turned over to them, they probably wouldn't have agreed to the tri-state management idea. In fact, I assure you they never would have. Exactly why ID and MT asked Simpson/Tester to provide a rider to get them out from under Wyoming holding up the delisting.

Did you factor in the huge economic strain wolves would put on the economy?

Depends on your definition of economic strain. Some positives, some negatives to the economy. It was factored in on the FEIS.

I've never seen the stats on how much resources that wolves have literally sucked out of the different state wildlife agencies with lawsuits, EIR's, man hours etc.....that takes away from managing ungulates for human advantages.

Its all there, again part of the public record and why I research first...here's Wyoming's annual report.

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/About%20Us/Commission/WGFD_ANNUALREPORT_2016.pdf

For the record, if we're going to look at what agencies (Wyoming for an example) pay to manage, and the only consideration is "positive economic out-put" then we wouldn't be hunting moose, sheep, pheasant, or fishing in Wyoming. All of those cost the agency wayyyy more than they bring to the agency.

I will admit to a bias against the huge negative economic impact of wolves....which it seems was never considered before reintroduction. It seems silly to me that all of these resources would be devoted to wolves when anyone that can read a history book knows the problems. Every elk a wolf kills could have gone to feeding someones family.

Any facts to back up your claim of "huge negative economic impact of wolves"? I find conflicting data depending on several factors.

I also wont ever believe that every last ungulate on planet earth needs to end up as human shit or decorating someone's trophy room. I like the idea of having furbearers to trap, lions to hunt, black bears to hunt, and even wolves to hunt. If that means giving up one of the 3 elk tags I can have in Wyoming and Montana each year, in both of those states...so be it. I can get by on less than 6 elk a year...

YMMV.

Carry on...

 

[Okhotnik]

Would you be willing to wait ten years to draw and wait an elk tag for wolves if A lawsuit shut down aggressive wolf management Wyoming?

 

[BuzzH]

Would you be willing to wait ten years to draw and wait an elk tag for wolves if A lawsuit shut down aggressive wolf management Wyoming?

A lawsuit isn't shutting down aggressive wolf management in Wyoming.

 

[Beendare]

Pardon the short response but you are essentially saying that you and the documents presented for Pro wolf reintro predicted all of the BS that has happened since reintro? Right. How many decades of man hours and $$$ for lawsuits did you have in there? Cmon. This was a steamroller that flattened everyone- thanks for that.



Seems to me your facts and science claim is tainted. You Casually disregard the economic impact. A few sheep eh and a few lost elk tags? Im not going to argue....you have said nothing that refutes my initail comment- a factual video.

 

[Okhotnik]

A lawsuit isn't shutting down aggressive wolf management in Wyoming.

Just like there would never ever be anti wolf management lawsuits in Wisconsin Minnesota Michigan Washington and Oregon and anti grizz management lawsuit s in Montana

You sure like to play with your facts to suit your agenda

 

[BuzzH]

Read the Simpson/Tester rider...educate yourself.

 

[OleWI21]

From what I am seeing, two quotes come to mind here, "Deer make people stupid" and "Wolves make people crazy"

 

[chukar_chaser]

I moved to Idaho 3.5 years ago from Utah. I was told over and over again how the wolves have completely devastated the elk herds in Idaho. I was told that I would never hear an elk bugle as the wolves have shut them down and the hunt would be hard and brutal. My first OTC archery elk hunt in Idaho was better than the 3 LE archery elk hunts in Utah that I had while I lived there. My OTC zone is in the thick of the wolf area. We see TONS of elk every day and very vocal elk. Had numerous close calls on mature bulls with no luck. It is easily the best elk hunting I have ever had. I have watched people on Rokslide complain about the zone I hunt and how the wolves have slaughtered the elk.

I also bird hunt and spend time all over Idaho from October to Feb. I hunt Hells Canyon clear to the Utah border and everything in between. And all we ever run into is ELK. We see them everywhere we go, and not just a scattered few but hundreds and hundreds of elk, in areas where the internet says there are none. I am completely fine with wolves on the landscape as long as they are managed by the states.

 

[Beendare]

Yeah simpson/ tester legislation was a good thing- 16 YEARS after all of the BS during reintro-

Seems to me something like that should’ve been initiated on the front end in 1995 - THATs anticipating problems.

Excerpt

“The bi-partisan Tester/Simpson amendment passed because of the continued use of litigation, rather than the use of collaboration to solve a controversial problem. Tester and Simpson listened to hunters, conservationists and wildlife professionals and did what they were elected to do: serve the best interests of all Montanans and do what’s right for all wildlife.

 

[BuzzH]

Maybe Wyoming should have just classified wolves as trophy game statewide, with a 365 day season outside the recovery area.

The predator zone in Wyoming is what held up delisting for both ID and MT and created the need for the S/T rider.

 

[Beendare]

Buzz,
I'm in the camp wolf reintroduction was a bad idea....from the start. There are many such as yourself that disagree. We will never agree on that.

I dunno who is right....and I don't want to be an "I told you so" guy...it is what it is now and hopefully we can agree we have to find a balance as we cannot let one predator overwhelm an ecosystem.

The "Self Balancing" crowd is full of it. Yeah it will balance but at such a Low level humans get left out in the cold. We are already seeing that in some areas with moose. [and yes, I understand there are 'other" factors but wolves are literally the straw that broke the camels back.

We have to favor the human benefits of utilizing Deer/Elk for feeding our families- and yes....our hunting heritage. Hopefully we can agree on that too.

I appreciate the contributions in a gentleman-ly manner....thanks for that- have a great hunting season.

...

 

[Newtosavage]

Came across this today fwiw -

https://wildlife.org/jwm-wolves-red...tm_content=This+Week's+eWildlifer+&+TWS+Talks

 

[huntTX2Eat]

thanks for sharing. a lot of good podcasts from MeatEater crew on this topic as well

 

[BuzzH]

Came across this today fwiw -

https://wildlife.org/jwm-wolves-reduce-elk-survival-but-theyre-not-alone/?utm_source=getresponse&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=current_members_tws&utm_content=This+Week's+eWildlifer+&+TWS+Talks

Who would have ever guessed that lions kill elk, maybe even more elk than wolves, I mean other than the exact same results found in the Montana Bitterroot elk mortality study? Or that habitat and weather influence calf survival?

Its not all just the big bad wolf?

Fake news...