WOLVES..."Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?..."

[MuleyFever]

Source that provides information/opinion that agrees with your own: "See, wolves are the problem. They will wipe out the elk!!"
Source that disputes your source with science: "That source is biased. Obvious shills for the pro-wolf enviro lobby."

Okay.

Funny how that works huh?

 

[airlocksniffer]

Obviously, airlock. I'm not going to sit here and claim I don't have a bias. That's as dishonest as you can get. I've arrived at my position after a number of years of exposure to and much research regarding this topic. You?

Agree fully, we all have some sort of bias. I just don't think wolves should be vilified by one side and glorified by the other. They're just critters doing what critters do. Do they have an impact on elk? Absolutely. Do they have the biggest impact on elk? Not likely. Crappy management has a way bigger impact (see MT Shoulder Seasons). Full disclosure-I buy and carry a wolf tag with me when hunting. I will hunt wolves like any other species. I've yet to kill one a it's more of a "just in case" tag. We did see a white wolf the day before opening rifle season this year but didn't want to deal with reporting it, etc when we were looking for elk. And yep, we saw a lot of elk in wolf country.

 

[tipsntails7]

I see you do work or worked for WDFW. Small world.

"but neither is the world going to end because they are". Isn't that a bit extremist?

I think extremist would be the sky is falling because there are wolves.

 

[Josh Wright]

I've seen a wolf where I hunt in unit 551. We also have a lot of mountain lions. And we have a lot of mule deer and elk. I don't want more wolves here than there already are, but it's not the end of the world. I did send an email opposing it.

 

[mtluckydan]

It's pretty clear where the lines are drawn on this post - similar to the Obama gun control post. One of the issues of introducing wolves into the landscape is the parasites they bring with them. Here is one link - there are others if you don't like the source -

http://www.skinnymoose.com/bbb/2010...-have-thousands-of-hydatid-disease-tapeworms/

It's funny how the decline of moose populations in Montana has somehow mysteriously coincided with the rise in wolf populations. It's also funny how the decline in elk populations in Yellowstone National Park has coincided with the rise in wolf populations. I'm sure they are not related. After all, it's far more complicated than that with poor management and everything.

It's interesting that Montana FWP, as part of their hunter survey, asks hunters if they have seen any moose and also if they have seen any wolves. As soon as you mention anything about wolves or wolf sign, they never ask another question about game animals harvested. This has happened at least two times when they surveyed me.

It would be interesting to see the reaction of those that spent decades restoring game populations to these western states when told that the Federal Government, with approval from state game agencies, reintroduced wolves into the landscape.

 

[airlocksniffer]

It's interesting that Montana FWP, as part of their hunter survey, asks hunters if they have seen any moose and also if they have seen any wolves. As soon as you mention anything about wolves or wolf sign, they never ask another question about game animals harvested. This has happened at least two times when they surveyed me.

Me too. This year they asked me about wolves, moose and deer but not a single question about elk. I did see 5 moose in the area I was elk hunting and saw the white wolf. Given moose have slower birth rate and is probably a sitting duck in deep snow, I wouldn't be surprised if wolves are having a bigger impact on the population. Another link from Montana Outdoors. Interesting read:

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2012/MooseStudy.htm#.VpR-1-fnsR0

 

[TraderMike]

If you consider Lobowatch a viable source of unbiased information then there is no need to debate things any further. No offense, just telling it like it is.

Your condescending insinuation couldn't be more clear. And what source of information on this particular subject matter would you consider to be unbiased? Would a person who took an obviously pro wolf stance have any merit if they were on the record challenging the science that the Feds were basing their actions on? I am referring to Cat Urbigit and the lawsuits she filed attempting to save the NATIVE subspecies of wolf.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Me too. This year they asked me about wolves, moose and deer but not a single question about elk. I did see 5 moose in the area I was elk hunting and saw the white wolf. Given moose have slower birth rate and is probably a sitting duck in deep snow, I wouldn't be surprised if wolves are having a bigger impact on the population. Another link from Montana Outdoors. Interesting read:

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2012/MooseStudy.htm#.VpR-1-fnsR0

That's an old article, any updates on what they've determined?

I got asked about moose at a check station I stopped at. I saw a number of moose while I was bow hunting, none while I was rifle hunting.

 

[airlocksniffer]

That's an old article, any updates on what they've determined?

I got asked about moose at a check station I stopped at. I saw a number of moose while I was bow hunting, none while I was rifle hunting.

Haven't seen anything at least in MT Outdoors. According to the article moose are much more difficult to count than something like elk so making informed management decisions would probably be more of a crap shoot. In addition to the 5 I saw down in SW MT (which had no moose tags available), I saw a bull up in the Elkhorns and a cow in the Sweetgrass Hills (first time I'd ever seen one up there). Most moose I've seen in any hunting season.

EDIT: This may be more current info (2014 I think)

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...BPbKdtv7wu39MOgGg&sig2=QT8gtiYnmOD-NiD6iffZ_Q

 

[jmden]

Agree fully, we all have some sort of bias. I just don't think wolves should be vilified by one side and glorified by the other. They're just critters doing what critters do. Do they have an impact on elk? Absolutely. Do they have the biggest impact on elk? Not likely. Crappy management has a way bigger impact (see MT Shoulder Seasons). Full disclosure-I buy and carry a wolf tag with me when hunting. I will hunt wolves like any other species. I've yet to kill one a it's more of a "just in case" tag. We did see a white wolf the day before opening rifle season this year but didn't want to deal with reporting it, etc when we were looking for elk. And yep, we saw a lot of elk in wolf country.

Just critters doing what critters do? How did the get here? Doing what critters do...transported from many miles north in Canada by humans. Oh, right. And, forced down our throats by a run amok ESA used to extremes by a leftist environmental philosophy.

60 million dollars was stolen by USFWS ultimately under Clinton leadership from the Pittman Robertson fund to make this happen after congress denied funding for it. (You watched the documentaries I mentioned to you?) Money that's supposed to go to managing wildlife not unloosing a non-native, invasive subspecies when the Northern Rocky Mountain wolf was already here and there own information said so, as I linked way above! If there's already wolves here, wasn't every effort made to bring those back? They said there was one knows pack and several loners of this native sub-species in their own report but that there was no viable population? What? Is that what we decided about the California Condor? This thing is and has been as political and crooked as you can get. You either do not know the history or refuse to see it or haven't done the research.

Here's the link again: take a look at page iv of the Preface. So a whole subspecies gone now. That's good wildlife management. There's many other crooked things about this whole introduction of non-native, invasive subspecies as well.

EDIT: Forgot to add the link. Sorry: http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/northernrockymountainwolfrecoveryplan.pdf

Do you know that until just recently when congress closed the loophole, these environmental groups were suing about the wolves left and right and that when they won, we the taxpayers go to foot their huge legal bills? Look it up. More crookedness. Economic benefit. The wolf is big business for some of these groups. If it becomes less so, they'll find another critter to champion (not that some don't need it) and the donor will contribute.

I can't hunt wolves in WA yet and in this liberal state, I may not be able to ever do it. I drew a cow tag a couple of years ago on the eastside and inserted myself well before light a ways back in the snow. All I saw was tons of wolf trax in the snow for miles, no deer, no elk trax. I've had may close encounters with wolves, mostly on Vancouver Island where there is a very healthy population. BTW, why don't you guys look up the work on wolves by Dr. Valerie Geist, now retired and living on Vancouver Island where local to him they are having routine trouble with wolves even there. He is know around the globe as a wolf biologist and has some interesting things to say about them.

I do have a degree in biology, so know a little bit about some of this stuff. Been awhile, but...

 

[tipsntails7]

Just critters doing what critters do? How did the get here? Doing what critters do...transported from many miles north in Canada by humans. Oh, right. And, forced down our throats by a run amok ESA used to extremes by a leftist environmental philosophy.

60 million dollars was stolen by USFWS ultimately under Clinton leadership from the Pittman Robertson fund to make this happen after congress denied funding for it. (You watched the documentaries I mentioned to you?) Money that's supposed to go to managing wildlife not unloosing a non-native, invasive subspecies when the Northern Rocky Mountain wolf was already here and there own information said so, as I linked way above! If there's already wolves here, wasn't every effort made to bring those back? They said there was one knows pack and several loners of this native sub-species in their own report but that there was no viable population? What? Is that what we decided about the California Condor? This thing is and has been as political and crooked as you can get. You either do not know the history or refuse to see it or haven't done the research.

Here's the link again: take a look at page iv of the Preface. So a whole subspecies gone now. That's good wildlife management. There's many other crooked things about this whole introduction of non-native, invasive subspecies as well.

Do you know that until just recently when congress closed the loophole, these environmental groups were suing about the wolves left and right and that when they won, we the taxpayers go to foot their huge legal bills? Look it up. More crookedness. Economic benefit. The wolf is big business for some of these groups. If it becomes less so, they'll find another critter to champion (not that some don't need it) and the donor will contribute.

I can't hunt wolves in WA yet and in this liberal state, I may not be able to ever do it. I drew a cow tag a couple of years ago on the eastside and inserted myself well before light a ways back in the snow. All I saw was tons of wolf trax in the snow for miles, no deer, no elk trax. I've had may close encounters with wolves, mostly on Vancouver Island where there is a very healthy population. BTW, why don't you guys look up the work on wolves by Dr. Valerie Geist, now retired and living on Vancouver Island where local to him they are having routine trouble with wolves even there. He is know around the globe as a wolf biologist and has some interesting things to say about them.

I do have a degree in biology, so know a little bit about some of this stuff. Been awhile, but...

If you know a little about biology then you would know better then to trot Yellowstone and Lolo out as the whipping boy for wolf hate...

 

[jmden]

Agree fully, we all have some sort of bias. I just don't think wolves should be vilified by one side and glorified by the other. They're just critters doing what critters do. Do they have an impact on elk? Absolutely. Do they have the biggest impact on elk? Not likely. Crappy management has a way bigger impact (see MT Shoulder Seasons). Full disclosure-I buy and carry a wolf tag with me when hunting. I will hunt wolves like any other species. I've yet to kill one a it's more of a "just in case" tag. We did see a white wolf the day before opening rifle season this year but didn't want to deal with reporting it, etc when we were looking for elk. And yep, we saw a lot of elk in wolf country.

Again, how much research and for how long have you researched this topic?

 

[Jason Snyder]

Your condescending insinuation couldn't be more clear. And what source of information on this particular subject matter would you consider to be unbiased? Would a person who took an obviously pro wolf stance have any merit if they were on the record challenging the science that the Feds were basing their actions on? I am referring to Cat Urbigit and the lawsuits she filed attempting to save the NATIVE subspecies of wolf.

Her lawsuit (part of the Wyoming Farm Bureau vs. Babbit) was overruled in the 10th Circuit Court, so I'm not sure what merit it has.

Also, I apologize if you take my comment as condescending. It's certainly not meant to be. I do not consider Toby Bridges' and Lobowatch to be an unbiased source of information any more that I would consider Howling for Justice to be unbiased. Both groups operate on emotional appeal, misinformation (both direct and indirect), and propaganda. If you don't believe me, look up Toby's antics with his minivan and the wolf he allegedly ran over. Or, his attacks on the federal government because of their "abuses of Cliven Bundy".

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/st...ds-wolf-investigation-charges-filed/16670549/

Neither extremist side is conducive to objective management of wolves and that is why I have no use for either of them.

 

[jmden]

If you know a little about biology then you would know better then to trot Yellowstone and Lolo out as the whipping boy for wolf hate...

I didn't trot out either. OP started talking about the Bitterroot, right? And, I don't think I've said anything about Yellowstone?

Care to clarify your comments?

 

[jmden]

I'll be interested to see what tipsntails7 thinks about wolves when they are on his doorstep affecting ungulate populations closeby. Tune might start to change? Perhaps he recently relocated from a high wolf population area though and had direct experience.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Do you know that until just recently when congress closed the loophole, these environmental groups were suing about the wolves left and right and that when they won, we the taxpayers go to foot their huge legal bills? Look it up. More crookedness. Economic benefit. The wolf is big business for some of these groups. If it becomes less so, they'll find another critter to champion (not that some don't need it) and the donor will contribute.

You are absolutely correct it is big business, and they make a lot of money off of their lawsuits. Where did you see that the loophole has been closed?

Edit: Check your inbox, I sent you a PM.

 

[tipsntails7]

WOLVES..."Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?..."

I'll be interested to see what tipsntails7 thinks about wolves when they are on his doorstep affecting ungulate populations closeby. Tune might start to change? Perhaps he recently relocated from a high wolf population area though and had direct experience.

My mistake, it was not you. I've spent enough time around wolves to know what they are... Killing machines.

 

[jmden]

You are absolutely correct it is big business, and they make a lot of money off of their lawsuits. Where did you see that the loophole has been closed?

Been keeping track of it for years and couldn't believe how much money they were charging us the taxpayers if they won a case. Unbelievable.

Here's one many such articles.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...g-green-groups-have-self-serving-bargain-with

The US taxpayer is supporting these groups while the EAJA is being abused to subvert the intent of the ESA. There's been a great deal of thought put into this by leftist thinking and it's working out great for them! I thought I'd read this had been changed in some way for these groups to not take advantage of this in the way they had.

What a great system for these groups. We're going to use Federal Pittman Robertson funds to do our backdoor bidding (since Congress wouldn't give them the money and the affected states all passed legislation saying they were against it) and force this non-native critter down your throats. Then, if you do something we don't like, like trying to un-list them, even though this was called an 'experimental, non-essential population, we'll sue you in a court using a sympathetic judge and then when he says we win, we'll charge large legal fees to the US taxpayer. Perfect.

 

[jmden]

My mistake, it was not you. I've spent enough time around wolves to know what they are... Killing machines.

As you might imagine, I'm a little confused...

 

[TraderMike]

Her lawsuit (part of the Wyoming Farm Bureau vs. Babbit) was overruled in the 10th Circuit Court, so I'm not sure what merit it has.

Also, I apologize if you take my comment as condescending. It's certainly not meant to be. I do not consider Toby Bridges' and Lobowatch to be an unbiased source of information any more that I would consider Howling for Justice to be unbiased. Both groups operate on emotional appeal, misinformation (both direct and indirect), and propaganda. If you don't believe me, look up Toby's antics with his minivan and the wolf he allegedly ran over. Or, his attacks on the federal government because of their "abuses of Cliven Bundy".

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/st...ds-wolf-investigation-charges-filed/16670549/

Neither extremist side is conducive to objective management of wolves and that is why I have no use for either of them.

I don't ultimately know of her merit in this instance either; I do believe she is pro wolf and that in her estimation the scientific basis of the Feds actions in this case was deeply flawed. As to the decision by the court in this issue.... so what? Are we going to start listing how many times a judge legislates rather than interprets? It reminds me of a quote I heard years ago..." You want justice? Go to a whore house. You want to get screwed? Go to a court house." This is obviously a heated topic and I will not forget that you and I likely have much more that we agree on than disagree on if only for the simple reason we both hunt and care about our game animals. I keep coming back to a simplistic view on the matter of wolves... Are they going to improve or degrade the quality of hunting as I have come to know it these last 33 years I have been chasing elk in Colorado? I feel certain I know the answer to that simple question.