this will be unpopular i am sure

[5MilesBack]

Closed mindedness is not the answer to a problem.

Well, first you have to identify what the "problem" is. They did that decades ago, and eliminated the "problem". Problem solved. Then some liberal whackjobs got a wild hair up their rear and demanded the reintroduction of a species of wolf that isn't even native to that area. And at the same time got them put on a "list" that made it illegal to do anything about the new "problem". Reintroducing wolves is akin to reintroducing smallpox to the human population and then making it illegal to vaccinate against it. Ya, that sounds like a great idea.

 

[wymtnpounder]

I grew up during the hay day of elk hunting in NW Wyoming, You could go to the gas station buy a tag and kill a bull on the weekend. Now your lucky if you can even draw a license. Just the area I am in there were 6 different outfitter camps now there are 3 and the outfitter I have worked for, went from taking 30-40 rifle elk hunters to only having 2 a year. I went to game and fish meetings were they claimed there were 16,000 elk in the Lamar valley and at that time were down to 6,000. Drive through the park now and you hardly see any elk nothing but buffalo. The migration that use to come from Yellowstone was phenomenal, there was a late tag that where you could expect to kill 350 class bulls and hold out for bigger way bigger. The bulls in this area use to be able to winter on high blown off ridges, but the wolfs figured that out quick, and would trot up the ridge and run the elk down into the snow, game over. Until the elk figured out better places to winter they were decimated, which cut there wintering ground significantly. The wolfs prayed on the big bulls that stayed high and were drawn down from the rut. I saw a video that one of the outfitters hunters took on the late hunt, where the wolfs killed eight cows in one small draw, ate a little off the last one and keep on going. Wish I had it, I post it. The moose had it even worse. I lost two dogs to wolfs and know of others. The first year they opened the wolf season I filled my tag right before it closed My advice find em and get rid of em for it's to late SSS.

 

[Jared Lampton]

liberal wackjobs, enviro wackos, wolf humpers, leaf licking tree huggers, chit sandwiches, and my favorite so far...fern fondlers: good stuff guys, very entertaining.

But seriously wolves have invaded all my favorite elk honey holes during the past 5 years and therefore I have had to adapt and find other spots to hunt. I've still been able to consistently find elk (in lower numbers) but they act differently. They move more often and are far less vocal. I find I'm hunting a somewhat "wilder" animal than I had in the past (they are not always as relaxed as they used to be) and it's been challenging. Personally I like having some wolves around, I loving hearing them and hunting them and don't mind the elk and deer hunting being slightly more difficult. I just don't want it to get any more challenging then it is right now but unfortunately the way things are going in Montana, I think it's inevitable. Someone earlier in the thread had it right about it taking too long for Montana to be able to manage wolves. Had Montana been managing wolves since 2002 when the recovery objectives were met, we may not be having this conversation.

 

[5MilesBack]

Even if you remove "hunting opportunities" from the equation, reintroducing wolves was a bad idea. Just ask any rancher. When they took care of the problem the first time, it wasn't because of hunting reasons.

When you find rats in your attic you don't leave them be because your neighbors think they're cute, you eliminate the problem.

 

[Beendare]

....I don't agree that wolves are the main reason the numbers deteriorated. In contrast I do agree that they are the major factor keeping the numbers from recovering. Also check out the neonate calf elk mortality. Number one factor was black bears. Older calves number one factor was wolves....

No doubt we as hunters are more in tune with ecosystems than many of the wannabe ecologists...and I'm sure there are other factors, there always is. The neonatal survival is troubling as that is totally related to predators putting pressure on the herds. I've had this discussion with Idaho biologists and their extreme concerns do no make the "Official" reports. The other issue that doesn't make the reports is elks change in behavior, it might be worth noting if you want to hunt elk in Idaho. It seems that elk spend more time out of bedding timber and out in the wide open flats even bedding out in the open. I asked the biologist about it and he said, yes- they have noticed that, the elk are trying to keep a visual buffer between them and wolves.

Good call, because I figured sighting only two distinct units that were severly mismanaged by creating a population that was grossly unsastanable then plumitted due to combined factors but then blaming it solely on one piece of a very large puzzle was cherry picking....

He says dripping with sarcasm....

Denial.......is not a river in Oregon......is it?

Look, I'm not trying to bust your chops but the fact is Oregon is not as hunter friendly as it used to be. Idaho G&F was mute about the wolf problem for years- partially due to pressure from animal rights and other outside sources. Its not a stretch to think that could happen in Oregon- a much less hunter friendly state than Idaho.

You can throw out sarcastic comments all you want but the fact is- the MAIN factor [yes there are others] in elk herd decline is due to wolves- belatedly, all of the experts agree. And now they are discovering many unintended consequences of the wolf reintro they never factored in. Is it any shock to us hunters that they are having a hard time managing this highly evolved predator??????????????

Someone else said it best, be careful what you wish for....



...

 

[airlocksniffer]

I don't personally think this has to be either all wolves, no management or kill 'em all. I'm for wild wolves but also sound management to keep numbers in check. Let's face it, wolves and other predators were here in greater numbers long before humans and I'd be willing to bet that elk and deer were as well. Sure, when you reintroduce an apex predator into an environment, the prey will need some time to adjust. Prior to the reintroduction in Yellowstone, the riparian areas of the waterways were totally hammered and lacking the necessary vegetation to keep erosion in check due to the over-population of elk. The wolves came in and yeah, took out a lot of elk but also allowed other parts of that environment to recover and achieve a balance. Now with the top two apex predators (us and wolves) both wanting in on the elk harvest, there will also be some time to adjust. Were we not part of the picture, the wolves and elk would also achieve their natural balance. Because we are here, proper harvest and management of the wolf population is necessary.

Lastly, I joined this forum for good info and respectful threads. Wishing the side that doesn't agree with you to burn in hell makes this go the way of Archery Talk.

 

[littlebuf]

I love how complicated guys like to make this issue. Let me break it down to simple math from how it will affect a hunter.

Wolves eat deer and elk
No wolves in an area= more or status quo population
Wolves in an area = less deer an elk, why? Because they eat them.
Hunter wants to hunt deer and elk -
Area with wolves = less deer an elk to hunt by default, why? Again wolves are eating deer and elk where if there wasn't a wolf those particular deer and elk would not be getting eaten by........??? Yup you guessed it a wolf.

Man that's complicated

 

[Shrek]

They whole erosion thing was a political failure. The elk were not managed using proven game management but allowed to propagate without an apex predator to control. A national park is a political construct and a flawed one at that. I advocate for the total extinction of wolves for political reasons and not because I think it would be physically impossible to manage them. I think it will be politically impossible to manage them. Ignorant urbanites will increasingly dictate management to satisfy fantasies of wild places. When you support wolves you support environmental fascism.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Lastly, I joined this forum for good info and respectful threads. Wishing the side that doesn't agree with you to burn in hell makes this go the way of Archery Talk.

I agree. It's sad how some people can't just agree to disagree without making hateful and vindictive statements.

 

[Jared Lampton]

I love how complicated guys like to make this issue. Let me break it down to simple math from how it will affect a hunter.

Wolves eat deer and elk
No wolves in an area= more or status quo population
Wolves in an area = less deer an elk, why? Because they eat them.
Hunter wants to hunt deer and elk -
Area with wolves = less deer an elk to hunt by default, why? Again wolves are eating deer and elk where if there wasn't a wolf those particular deer and elk would not be getting eaten by........??? Yup you guessed it a wolf.

Man that's complicated

The fact that wolves eat elk and deer isn't up for debate. It's not really the issue here. The discussion goes further than that: How do we as hunters deal with that reality? What does the future hold and what if anything can we do about it? That discussion isn't so simple... imo.

 

[littlebuf]

The discussion may not be ,the issue is. I aways love the " what the problem with having wolves around " approach like how this thread started. The problems a matter of pretty simple arithmetic , that's all I was pointing out. Of course the politics of it all convoluted things as always. But shrek pretty much nailed the appropriate stance one should have OnThat

 

[gelton]

I have mixed feelings about this because I live with a 50% wolf hybrid and they are majestic, highly intelligent animals - very different from a domestic dog. I definitely dont think that we should hope for their extinction. I also dont think they should be re-introduced or protected either though. They should be treated like coyotes are in TX and CO - shoot all you want.

Anyone that wonders what wolves do to elk populations should watch a program that recently ran on Sportsmans Channel - Skullbound - Wolfbound. They talk with a documentary maker about the wolves impact on elk and they show video of a wolf pack totally decimating a bachelor herd of about 30 elk. 1 at a time. They would even bite out their hindquarters so they couldn't run anywhere and would leave that elk for later when they finished the one they were eating. They stayed there for days, decimated the herd, and its all on video (not propaganda as some would say).

There is also another documentary on the subject called crying wolf that I havent seen yet but has great reviews - http://cryingwolfmovie.com/

 

[DWarcher]

I'd have shot wolves first and elk second and yep , you would be on your way to hades.

Very classy.

 

[wymtnpounder]

I have a conspiracy for you.
Wolfs are to aid in getting our guns. Wolf eats elk, deer, moose etc. everything is self regulated no need to hunt to control populations, one less reason to own a gun.
That's what my crazy old neighbor says. Or maybe he's not so crazy after all?

 

[tipsntails7]

I love how complicated guys like to make this issue. Let me break it down to simple math from how it will affect a hunter.

Wolves eat deer and elk
No wolves in an area= more or status quo population
Wolves in an area = less deer an elk, why? Because they eat them.
Hunter wants to hunt deer and elk -
Area with wolves = less deer an elk to hunt by default, why? Again wolves are eating deer and elk where if there wasn't a wolf those particular deer and elk would not be getting eaten by........??? Yup you guessed it a wolf.

Man that's complicated

It's really not that simple but I'm not gonna bother to explain additive vs compensatory predation to you. I doubt you would listen anyway.

 

[littlebuf]

please do explain how adding more predators to a controlled area (face it our "wildernesses" have boundaries of human population) could possibly raise the number of prey species. im all ears

 

[patty59]

Wolves are killing machines, it's what they do, they're better at it than a horse is at eating hay. In Alberta we can hunt them basically 10 months a year and there is no limit on how many you can kill. We can trap them too and there are still problems with them killing ungulates. We even have areas in the province that offer a bounty on them. We have no 'wolfies' trying to save them politically our laws encourage killing them and still they're a problem.

No one really has an answer on how to manage them properly, I was at a fish and game annual meeting a couple years back when some guy from U of A proposed catching the alpha's and sterilizing them, can you believe that shit? And this is from a province that allows you to kill them almost year round, imagine in a place that's run by tree hugging fools?

I couldn't even begin to imagine what the success rate would be if you had to draw a tag to hunt them? I'm guessing less that 5%.

They aren't even that fun to hunt, imo, I have shot 2. You pretty much have to catch them crossing a clearing and be really lucky.

If you have no wolves, be thankful, don't wish for them.

 

[Buglebrush]

Wolves are killing machines, it's what they do, they're better at it than a horse is at eating hay. In Alberta we can hunt them basically 10 months a year and there is no limit on how many you can kill. We can trap them too and there are still problems with them killing ungulates. We even have areas in the province that offer a bounty on them. We have no 'wolfies' trying to save them politically our laws encourage killing them and still they're a problem.

No one really has an answer on how to manage them properly, I was at a fish and game annual meeting a couple years back when some guy from U of A proposed catching the alpha's and sterilizing them, can you believe that shit? And this is from a province that allows you to kill them almost year round, imagine in a place that's run by tree hugging fools?

I couldn't even begin to imagine what the success rate would be if you had to draw a tag to hunt them? I'm guessing less that 5%.

They aren't even that fun to hunt, imo, I have shot 2. You pretty much have to catch them crossing a clearing and be really lucky.

If you have no wolves, be thankful, don't wish for them.

couldn't agree more

 

[Buglebrush]

Also, along with the elk they kill they have a definite effect on elk behaviour. Let's face it that the reason we are elk crazy is all the Bugling etc.... Wolves definitely cramp that style big time.

 

[wyelkhunter]

Uneducated is the incorrect word Littlebuf. You may disagree with my opinions which is your right but that's all your statment is. Opinion. The decline in elk populations that were present in Yellowstone is not the norm. That is an outlier. Will there be a decline I'm sure, but I personally do not invision a complete massacre of ungulate populations. California may be another story because they continue to ignore the cougar problem that is growing rapidly every year.

Wyoming: 120,000 elk estimated statewide, 50 percent above objective; the state of Wyoming continues to manage for a reduction in elk population.
Montana: 150,000 elk estimated statewide, 14 percent over objective. Montana has the second highest elk population of any state.
Idaho: Estimated population: 101,100, slightly below objective; 23 of the state's 29 game management zones have elk numbers within targets or above.

These are facts. Will behavior change yes, will elk and deer become extinct? No

your numbers for WY are correct for the whole state but when you look at just the areas that have wolves in them it tells a different story. WY has a lot more hunting areas with out wolves than we do with wolves. I wish I could find them again to post the exact numbers but when you look at elk, deer and moose numbers in areas that have wolves they are on the decline.