collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: While Big Game Herds Continue To Dwindle - Federal & State Wildlife Agencies Hid  (Read 7586 times)

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

Unfortunately there are some people that I think are a little naïve to the political climate in Washington. While Idaho and Montana are working to reduce the wolf population after delisting (an agency stated fact in ID/MT/WY), Washington has adopted one of the most liberal wolf plans putting the most wolves on the least amount of landscape with the highest human population. It's certainly possible I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet the end result will be more wolf problems.

Here's the million dollar question:

Are wolf groups and the urban population in western Washington going to allow wolf management in Washington once the wolf numbers are reached for delisting?

Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA.

As for urban WA and whether they'll allow management, I think that depends, oddly, in some ways on Idaho. If the governor there is overly successful, and so far he has had more of an impact than the gloom and doom folks predicted, people may look at that and feel wolves can't handle hunting pressure like coyotes.

If Idaho gets below 200 wolves it will be a hard sell to get anything more than the right to protect yourself and livestock and a strict hunting season. You may as well forget about trapping except for limited situations.

I've said this before, what is going on in Idaho, if overly successful, will likely have a negative impact in more wolf friendly states. Don't expect much unless wolves start attacking people as much as dogs.

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3534


What in the heck are you talking about, exactly the opposite is true.

Let me simplify it: The fringe nutjobs on both sides of the wolf issue are both dead wrong - Wolves will not be the end of all hunting, nor will wolves be exterminated from the landscape.  The information posted by the OP describing how wolf numbers are leveling off/declining slightly (but not dramatic declines) is great evidence that our state agencies are capable (if they are given the opportunity) of managing both deer/elk numbers as well as wolf numbers.  This is really bad news if you are one of those blood sucking leaches that gets your money by drumming up bs like wolves will end all hunting or that states are going to exterminate all wolves.  That is why I strongly suspect stable/declining wolf numbers in the face of continuing good OTC elk hunting opportunity just terrifies the hell out of the wolfbait/lobowatch/defenders of wildlife etc. crowd...their doom and gloom scenarios are not coming to fruition.   

Your statement about whether westside groups will allow wolf management is spot on and exactly the point I try to make when hunters on this forum start spewing conspiracy garbage that leaves any reasonable person wondering about the mental stability of such folks.  If those non-hunting, voting west-siders think hunters in WA are just wanting to kill off every wolf in WA to stop some illegal government conspiracy to end rural living and ranching....well...that's not going to go so well now is it?  Idaho and other states demonstrating successful predator management (maintaining viable predator and prey populations) is a good thing...it nullifies the whack jobs on both sides. 
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline bearpaw

  • Family, Friends, Outdoors
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 37051
  • Location: Idaho<->Colville
  • "Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
    • http://www.facebook.com/DaleDenney
    • Bearpaw Outfitters
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB


What in the heck are you talking about, exactly the opposite is true.

Let me simplify it: The fringe nutjobs on both sides of the wolf issue are both dead wrong - Wolves will not be the end of all hunting, nor will wolves be exterminated from the landscape.  The information posted by the OP describing how wolf numbers are leveling off/declining slightly (but not dramatic declines) is great evidence that our state agencies are capable (if they are given the opportunity) of managing both deer/elk numbers as well as wolf numbers.  This is really bad news if you are one of those blood sucking leaches that gets your money by drumming up bs like wolves will end all hunting or that states are going to exterminate all wolves.  That is why I strongly suspect stable/declining wolf numbers in the face of continuing good OTC elk hunting opportunity just terrifies the hell out of the wolfbait/lobowatch/defenders of wildlife etc. crowd...their doom and gloom scenarios are not coming to fruition.   

Your statement about whether westside groups will allow wolf management is spot on and exactly the point I try to make when hunters on this forum start spewing conspiracy garbage that leaves any reasonable person wondering about the mental stability of such folks.  If those non-hunting, voting west-siders think hunters in WA are just wanting to kill off every wolf in WA to stop some illegal government conspiracy to end rural living and ranching....well...that's not going to go so well now is it?  Idaho and other states demonstrating successful predator management (maintaining viable predator and prey populations) is a good thing...it nullifies the whack jobs on both sides.

The people I see making the most money off wolves are the wolf groups taking in memberships and winning lawsuits against agencies that pay hefty salaries to their management. RMEF and other groups supporting wolf management mostly have a high rating for using dollars taken in for on the ground wildlife projects rather tan for salaries.

Please show us how wolfbait or anyone else on this forum is making money by opposing wolves.  :rolleyes:
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!

http://bearpawoutfitters.com Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf! http://trophymaps.com DIY Hunting Maps are also offered

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3534
http://biggameforever.org/endorsements-and-sponsors.php

This is one I could find in 3 seconds...I don't care to go look for the myriad of wolf nut job donation links that exist.  Same is true for the enviro fringe.

My main point is very clear: The fringe nut job sides are only interested because there is a profit to be had, and so stabilizing wolf numbers and concurrent large OTC elk opportunity is bad for business..  Just pointing out how all these whackos have incentive to make up bs like wolf or elk numbers being distorted or manipulated without providing any evidence of such blatant wrong-doing.

Guys like wolfbait seem more interested in using hunters as pawns for anti-government/personal occupation benefits...not sure if he has ties to one of these groups that makes money drumming up support from the anti wolf crowd or not...he spreads their distortions so frequently it makes one wonder.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline bearpaw

  • Family, Friends, Outdoors
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 37051
  • Location: Idaho<->Colville
  • "Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
    • http://www.facebook.com/DaleDenney
    • Bearpaw Outfitters
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB
http://biggameforever.org/endorsements-and-sponsors.php

This is one I could find in 3 seconds...I don't care to go look for the myriad of wolf nut job donation links that exist.  Same is true for the enviro fringe.

My main point is very clear: The fringe nut job sides are only interested because there is a profit to be had, and so stabilizing wolf numbers and concurrent large OTC elk opportunity is bad for business..  Just pointing out how all these whackos have incentive to make up bs like wolf or elk numbers being distorted or manipulated without providing any evidence of such blatant wrong-doing.

Guys like wolfbait seem more interested in using hunters as pawns for anti-government/personal occupation benefits...not sure if he has ties to one of these groups that makes money drumming up support from the anti wolf crowd or not...he spreads their distortions so frequently it makes one wonder.

I didn't think you could prove that wolfbait or anyone else on this forum was/is making money opposing the lack of management of wolves.


I bet this terrifies the hell out of you wolf nut jobs doesn't it?  Wolf numbers starting to decrease or even level off and yet there is still a lot of elk hunting opportunity...Wyoming is having record elk harvests...Idaho and Montana continue to provide abundant OTC opportunities.  How will you continue to dupe less informed hunters into donating money to all your get rich quick schemes if they start to realize all your bs hysteria about elk hunting being over is just, well, bs.  :dunno:  I think its time for you to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$...this wolf thing is probably going to dry up soon.  Although, this could be good news for enviro whack jobs...their fringe base will be led to believe the government is starting to kill off all the wolves and therefore they need to donate $$.  Its sad to see what all these clowns on both extremes will do for money...really makes prostitution look like a noble profession.

That was your reply to wolfbait's first post and you clearly suggest to wolfbait  "to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$"! You don't know if wolfbait or anyone else on this forum makes money by opposing wolves yet you make that accusation.

Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue?  :twocents:
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!

http://bearpawoutfitters.com Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf! http://trophymaps.com DIY Hunting Maps are also offered

Offline buckfvr

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Posts: 4508
  • Location: UNGULATE FREE ZONE UNIT 121
 it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue? 

 :yeah: And among other things................... :twocents:

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue?  :twocents:

You're both right about one thing, a lot of the complaints have a lot more to do with money than any impacts the wolf has had.

I would, and do, look very skeptically at any economic down turns in those areas that have occurred since 2007. Washington got off lucky compared to a lot of other states in this recession, states that normally sent out of state hunters to Idaho et al. That doesn't even include general belt tightening that occurred by those who still went hunting there be it from Idaho or outside.

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9112
I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

Unfortunately there are some people that I think are a little naïve to the political climate in Washington. While Idaho and Montana are working to reduce the wolf population after delisting (an agency stated fact in ID/MT/WY), Washington has adopted one of the most liberal wolf plans putting the most wolves on the least amount of landscape with the highest human population. It's certainly possible I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet the end result will be more wolf problems.

Here's the million dollar question:

Are wolf groups and the urban population in western Washington going to allow wolf management in Washington once the wolf numbers are reached for delisting?

Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA.

As for urban WA and whether they'll allow management, I think that depends, oddly, in some ways on Idaho. If the governor there is overly successful, and so far he has had more of an impact than the gloom and doom folks predicted, people may look at that and feel wolves can't handle hunting pressure like coyotes.

If Idaho gets below 200 wolves it will be a hard sell to get anything more than the right to protect yourself and livestock and a strict hunting season. You may as well forget about trapping except for limited situations.

I've said this before, what is going on in Idaho, if overly successful, will likely have a negative impact in more wolf friendly states. Don't expect much unless wolves start attacking people as much as dogs.

"Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA."

 the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association (IOGA) supported the 2002 Idaho Wolf Conservation and Management Plan and fought to be involved and recognized as stakeholders in subsequent state and federal bureaucratic processes and,

 the USFWS recovery goal of 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves in three separate recovery areas for a period of three consecutive years was reached in 2002 and,

 the USFWS de-listed the gray wolf population from the Endangered Species List in March of 2008. A lawsuit was filed in Federal District Court in Montana by a group of Plaintiffs challenging the Service’s delisting. On August 6, 2010, U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy’s ruling returned wolves in Idaho to ESA protection, thus precluding continued implementation of Idaho’s Wolf Conservation Management Plan. The 2008 delisting allowed Idaho and Montana to implement a wolf hunting season for 2009. With the August 2010 ruling, there will be no further wolf hunting until and if the wolves are once again delisted and,

 IOGA thinks it is disingenuous and shameful on the part of certain wolf advocate groups to employ the moving goalpost strategy regarding the accepted goals of wolf recovery and

 Idaho’s wolf population continues to grow and expand at an average annual rate of 20 percent. based upon the best available science, the 2009 population is more than 835 wolves in Idaho, 94 packs and 49 breeding pair, 8 times the minimum Federal recovery level with 1,600 in the Northern Rocky Mountain population which is a 400-mile southern extension of the vast Canadian and Alaskan populations whose numbers are estimated to exceed 60,000 animals and,

 many IOGA Hunt outfitter members believe 2009 Idaho wolf population numbers are significantly underestimated and,

 wolf predation has and continues to have a substantial adverse affect on elk populations in certain areas, particularly in northern and central Idaho where management population objectives are no longer met and have created a predator pit and,

 hunt outfitters are also very concerned with the additive impact of wolf predation on Idaho’s moose population and,

 wolf predation has prevented elk population objectives from being met in several management zones and has necessitated reduced opportunities for hunters, outfitted and non-outfitted, negatively affecting Idaho’s economy, as well as Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) revenues


http://ioga.org/member-information/resolutions/wolf-management-and-control/
« Last Edit: April 17, 2014, 05:35:37 PM by wolfbait »

Offline idahohuntr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3534

That was your reply to wolfbait's first post and you clearly suggest to wolfbait  "to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$"! You don't know if wolfbait or anyone else on this forum makes money by opposing wolves yet you make that accusation.

Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue:twocents:
Nor have you provided any evidence he isn't connected to these myriad of groups making money stirring up hysteria and non-sense about wolves...The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue  :tup: 
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood..." - TR

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9112
More blubber from you, not a big surprise :beatdeadhorse:

Offline notawolffan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Posts: 11
  • Location: castle rock
The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue  :tup: 

What idahohuntr is not addressing is the personal aspect of the wolf vs human confrontation. This situation is not about who is giving money to what group but about which people are coming face to face with these animals. The people who are funding the environmentalist groups like conservation nw are NOT the ones who are forced to live with these animals. I don't know about you but my life was difficult enough before I had to deal with face to face confrontation with a 100+ pound feral predator. If you enjoy dealing with that kind of situation on a daily basis well congratulations to you. Personally I preferred the time BEFORE I realized that I need to be constantly looking over my shoulder to be sure there's not a wolf lurking there about to pounce on me, my kids or my dogs.

Offline Elkaholic daWg

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 5956
  • Location: Arlington Wa / Rock n Roll-Kelly Hill
   Wolfbait, Feeding trolls never works out   :chuckle:......
Blue Ribbon Coalition
CCRKBA
SAF
NRA                        
Go DaWgs!!

Offline AspenBud

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1742
  • Location: Washington
The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue  :tup: 

What idahohuntr is not addressing is the personal aspect of the wolf vs human confrontation. This situation is not about who is giving money to what group but about which people are coming face to face with these animals. The people who are funding the environmentalist groups like conservation nw are NOT the ones who are forced to live with these animals. I don't know about you but my life was difficult enough before I had to deal with face to face confrontation with a 100+ pound feral predator. If you enjoy dealing with that kind of situation on a daily basis well congratulations to you. Personally I preferred the time BEFORE I realized that I need to be constantly looking over my shoulder to be sure there's not a wolf lurking there about to pounce on me, my kids or my dogs.

You see many wolves running through Castle Rock? If they are there, they are living where people who fund environmentalist groups like Conservation NW live and they will expand their range.

I see this argument a lot and I don't buy it. People who fund such groups already deal with cougars and bears, they're even crazy enough to walk into the woods unarmed with them around and sometimes they get attacked, wolves will just be another animal to them.

Now, if you want to say the majority of those people don't have to deal with wolves as it relates to livestock, I wholeheartedly agree. Be it livestock or plants, the majority of the population has forgotten what it's like to try and earn a living off the land and the dirty details that go with it. It's not all sunshine and happy days.

Offline smittyJ

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 532
  • Location: Allyn
If Wolfs are "managed" like the state has "managed" the central wa. Elk herd for the last 20 years, we should not have a problem. My 2cts!

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Springer Fishing Opportunity 3/29 & 3/30 by xXLojackXx
[Today at 10:13:39 AM]


Bearpaw Season - Spring 2024 by Machias
[Today at 09:19:44 AM]


SB 5444 signed by Inslee on 03/26 Takes Effect on 06/06/24 by hughjorgan
[Today at 09:03:26 AM]


Walked a cougar down by 2MANY
[Today at 08:56:26 AM]


Springer 2024 Columbia River by WSU
[Today at 08:31:10 AM]


Average by lhrbull
[Today at 07:31:56 AM]


Let’s see your best Washington buck by Pathfinder101
[Today at 07:22:11 AM]


CVA optima V2 LR tapped hole for front sight by Remdawg
[Today at 07:09:22 AM]


Which 12” boat trailer tires? by timberhunter
[Yesterday at 08:22:18 PM]


Lowest power 22 round? by JakeLand
[Yesterday at 08:06:13 PM]


1x scopes vs open sights by JakeLand
[Yesterday at 07:29:35 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal