Free: Contests & Raffles.
Based on photos and sightings, I firmly believe there are currently at least 15 wolf packs in NE WA. Please keep in mind that this will increase each year. http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=79244.0GMU 101 - Malo Pack (sightings and photo)GMU 101 - Barstow Pack (WDFW admitted, photo)GMU 101 - Sherman Pack (photos and sightings)GMU 101 - San Poil Pack (sightings)GMU 105 - Wedge Pack (WDFW confirmed)GMU 105 - East Wedge Pack (photos and sightings)GMU 108 - Douglas Pack (photos and sightings)GMU 111 - Smackout Pack (WDFW confirmed)GMU 111 - Dominion Pack (sightings and photos of tracks)GMU 111 - Ione/Metaline Pack (sightings)GMU 113 - Diamond Pack (WDFW confirmed)GMU 113 - Salmo Pack (WDFW confirmed)GMU 117 - Ruby Pack (WDFW admitted, may or may not be the same wolves that were on Chewelah Creek)GMU 121 - Huckleberry Pack (WDFW confirmed)GMU 121 - Huckleberry Pack (sightings all over the unit suggest at least two packs, possibly 3 packs)
How long before we get some tags
The fact that MONTANA had a season THIS YEAR, and the wolf population still grew %15 should tell you something. If interested in the whole article, I can post it. Its froma biological approach too, not a hunters perspective. They discussed other means to increase the harvest which fell short %25 EVEN AFTER extending it. Introductions of electronic calls, multiple harvest, and trapping are ideas they have thought to introduce for this year.
after we reach 15 breeding pairs{confirmed}could be 20 breeding pairs at least I'm sure.But then the battle will start.money will pour in to halt a hunt,or delisting for yrs..as we seen elsewhere.The state will blow more money on this battle in court....Hoping we have some folks in office by then,a stretch, I know, to put the kibosh on it..
Don't forget, wildlife commissioner Douvia managed to get it in the wolf plan that once 18 packs are confirmed management can begin regardless of which regions the packs are in. There is no doubt enough packs in Washington to totally delist, it's important for us to keep the pressure on WDFW by posting every wolf sighting and especially pictures of tracks or wolves here on H-W and report it to the state.The state will use the wolf reports to determine new areas to confirm wolves. By also posting on H-W we can keep the WDFW accountable for all the sightings and wolf pack locations.
Northway-you underestimate these groups-they have very good leadership for what they want to accomplish, and they have no intention of trying to be effective on a local level (they know that "local level" is always trumped by the Federal level). If we as hunting groups can't band together on a national level we are nothing more than a flea on their rear end. Those "cute" pictures they send out rake in literally millons of dollars a year, much of it from people whose encounters with wildlife are confined to occasional visits to the local zoo. I don't pretend to have any quick answers to the wolf controversy, but I would not for a minute underestimate those groups that are "pro wolf". They've been pretty damn effective at getting their way thus far.
Here's what I pulled from page 69 of the Final Draft Wolf Management Plan:"If, during the 3-year period, a year occurred where there were 18 successful breeding pairs of wolvesand the distribution criteria for delisting were met, then WDFW could begin the process to write astatus review to prepare a delisting recommendation at that time, rather than wait for the 3-yearperiod to conclude. However, wolves would not be proposed for delisting until they had achievedthe delisting objectives for 3 consecutive years."
Quote from: baldopepper on July 17, 2012, 10:15:35 AMNorthway-you underestimate these groups-they have very good leadership for what they want to accomplish, and they have no intention of trying to be effective on a local level (they know that "local level" is always trumped by the Federal level). If we as hunting groups can't band together on a national level we are nothing more than a flea on their rear end. Those "cute" pictures they send out rake in literally millons of dollars a year, much of it from people whose encounters with wildlife are confined to occasional visits to the local zoo. I don't pretend to have any quick answers to the wolf controversy, but I would not for a minute underestimate those groups that are "pro wolf". They've been pretty damn effective at getting their way thus far.As a disclaimer, environmental issues (especially at the local level) have been important me for most of my life. My perspective isn't that of a true hunter, because I've only recently taken an interest in hunting. In trying to determine where I stand personally, over the last few years I've followed a number of groups at the national and local level that are represented mostly either by consumptive or non-consumptive outdoor recreationists. I guess it boils down to what you consider an effective environmental non-profit. If the benchmark is lots of donations and lobbying power, then I agree with you that they are well-led. From a perspective of accomplishing constructive and long-lasting conservation goals however, how can one claim that WDFW, CBD, or HSUS is well led when they bungled the NRM wolf issue so badly? Not only did they get wolves relisted when it was completely unecessary, at the last minute they tried to withdraw from the lawsuit when they saw the writing on the wall - effectively emboldening their opponents. Arguably, there are many other issues national environmental organizations are currently dropping the ball on besides wolves. We'll see if they learn anything from the past when it comes to how they react to the inevitable delisting in Washington State. I'm not overly optimistic about it at this point.......
Northway-I don't mean to bend this thread, but what you are facing is the clash of idealism and reality that is the one of the real issues here. Environmental groups do a very good job of playing to the idealism that nature is fuzzy wolf pups, white baby seals and polar bear cubs playing in the snow. Hunting groups play to the idealism that we are all true sportsman who consistently play by the rules, hunt only to manage the species and live by the "fair play" credo. As we all know, somewhere in between is the truth. The wolf issue is very similar to the "Save the Whale" issue that was the soup de jour of environmentalists a few years back ( still is to a point). The sad truth is that these issues stay alive partly because there are those involved who make a living by keeping the issue alive and baiting those of us who are idealistically pursuing what we beleive is correct. (on both sides of the issue) Non profit does not mean that directors and employees of these organizations are not paid. I took an opposite path from you, was born into a hunting family and grew up beleiving that to go into the woods without a gun was a waste of time. I've mellowed somewhat and lost the "blood lust"- still love to hunt, but can appreciate nature from, as you put it, a non-cosumptive point of view. Not really sure where I actually stand on the wolf issue to be honest, but I do beleive that as hunters we do need better national representation. Ducks Unlimited, RMEf, etc. are specific in their goals and , quite frankly appeal to non hunters as well as hunters-hence the reluctance to jump into something like the wolf issue. It's to bad that the reality is that raising money and hiring lobbyists and lawyers is necesaary to acheive our goals-but again another clash of reality and idealism. I admire your tenacity in pursuing this issue, good to see a few idealists still standing up for what they believe.
