Wolves do affect business

[bearpaw]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

So eastern WA doesn't matter? I see the way it is all the time! 

[pianoman9701]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

You don't think that when wolves comes west more (because they've already started) people will find out they're not as great to have around as they originally thought? You're a dreamer.

[bearpaw]

Former IDFG Wildlife Commissioner
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,147923.msg1962541/topicseen.html#new

An information paper prepared by IDFG’s Deputy Director, Sharon Kiefer, titled, “Idaho hunting license sales and revenue changes due to wolves”, dated December 7, 2010 was submitted to the Senate Natural Resource Committee. The purpose of the paper was to address the 2009 calendar year Idaho big game license sales decline by 2,634 nonresident elk tags, 4,460 nonresident deer tags and 4,405 nonresident hunting licenses compared to 2008 sales. Hunter concerns about the effect of wolves on their prospects of success and the reduction of specific big game populations combined with the Nation’s economic down turn and a nonresident fee increase were the reasons for decreased sales. In 2008 IDFG’s elk tag sales were 13,035 and in 2013 they were 8,020 a loss of approximately 40%.

This paper went on to discuss “Economic Impact Analysis of Gray Wolf Reintroduction-State Wide Assessment. “Using the most recent estimate from Cooper et al. (2002), a day of elk hunting in Idaho is worth $127.40/day for direct expenditures in 2008 dollars. The 1994 EIS estimated that between 14,619 and 21,928 hunter days would be lost due to wolf reintroductions in central Idaho. If the reduction in hunter days was linearly related to wolf populations then the loss of hunter days associated with 824 wolves (minimum number reported in 2008) would be between 120,400 and 180,686 resulting in an estimated value of the foregone benefits to hunters of between $15 and $24 million.” This $15 – 24 million represents loss income to the State of Idaho for the 2008 calendar year.
 
Assuming Idaho lost millions associated with the decrease in nonresident hunters coming to Idaho who suffered the loss? To answer this question one must look at areas of Idaho where wolves have severely impacted deer, elk and moose populations. Start in the Panhandle Region of North Idaho at St. Maries and move east across hunt units 6, 7 and 9. According to the Regional Biologist, Jim Hayden, elk numbers have been reduced 70% over the past five years in these units primarily as a result of wolf predation.  IDFG was forced to terminate the general cow season that the Panhandle had been able to sustain for the past 40 years due to depressed elk number in these units. Turn south to the two Zones mentioned by RMEF’s David Allen and you cross Big Game Managements Units (BGMU) 10/12 referred to as the Lolo Zone. The Elk population in this Zone has been reduced by 90% (16,000 to 1,500) over the past 10 years  again, primarily due to wolf predation.

Continue south through along the Idaho/Montana boarder through the Selway, Middle Fork, Salmon, Sawtooth portion of the Southern Mountains, Beaverhead and Island Park Zones then move west back across the center of the state through Fairfield to Idaho City to Cascade, Council, Riggins, Grangeville, Orofino and back to St. Maries to complete the circle. This circle describes what was at one time, prior to introduction of wolves, the premier elk hunting area in the country. It is now an area that, in some portions, is devoid of elk with cow/calf ratio’s among those that remain in the single digits.

If the area described above is the where the majority of the nonresident hunters who once hunted in Idaho, but now no longer return to Idaho, what has been the economic impact of their absence?  I had a discussion with the owners, David and Tina of Banderob’s Wild Meat Processing Plant located in St. Maries, concerning the damage that wolves had caused to their small business. In 2005 the Banderob’s processed 205 elk, the majority for nonresident hunters. In 2013 they processed 31 elk for mostly resident hunters. Tina reported that nonresident elk hunters have quit coming to St, Maries because the elk are gone. The dollar cost to their meat cutting business comparing the two years of 2005 to 2013 is (174 X $250) $43,500. The state share of this loss at 6% was $2,600.Modify message

The St. Marie’s motel, gas stations, restaurants, grocery, sporting goods stores and local outfitters were similarly impacted. Assuming a 20% hunter harvest rate, the 205 nonresident hunters in 2005 came in groups of four and spent on average $127.43 per day for their 10 day elk camp experience in the St. Maries area. The overall dollar loss to small business in the St. Maries area becomes more significant and understandable. Apply the same analysis to similar businesses in Avery, Kellogg, St Regis, Lolo, Salmon, Rexburg, Stanley, Challis, McCall, Council, Riggins, Grangeville, Orofino, and back to St. Maries and you begin to understand that the negative economic impact and real cost of wolves to Idahoans is huge, in the range of $60 to $120 million over the five year period from 2008 to 2013.

[KFhunter]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

You don't think that when wolves comes west more (because they've already started) people will find out they're not as great to have around as they originally thought? You're a dreamer.

I'd like to know how private land holders can keep WDFW from conducting wildlife operations on their lands....

[bearpaw]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

This is a typical response that we see from too many people in Puget Sound, it's so obvious all too often they feel that Eastern WA doesn't really matter. 

[AspenBud]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

You don't think that when wolves comes west more (because they've already started) people will find out they're not as great to have around as they originally thought? You're a dreamer.

I don't think I said that, no, I know I didn't.

I said that for some it will be no skin off their nose if wolves kill off some elk and deer. In some cases it would be financially beneficial. If you doubt that you have your head in the sand.

[pianoman9701]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

You don't think that when wolves comes west more (because they've already started) people will find out they're not as great to have around as they originally thought? You're a dreamer.

I'd like to know how private land holders can keep WDFW from conducting wildlife operations on their lands....

I don't think they can. The wildlife belongs to the people of WA. Managing wildlife necessitates going where the wildlife is.

[AspenBud]

Actually where the wolves are located it's mostly public land and the land owners mostly support wolf control. 

You're talking about right now. When they come west it's another ball game.

You don't think that when wolves comes west more (because they've already started) people will find out they're not as great to have around as they originally thought? You're a dreamer.

I'd like to know how private land holders can keep WDFW from conducting wildlife operations on their lands....

I don't think they can. The wildlife belongs to the people of WA. Managing wildlife necessitates going where the wildlife is.

Please tell me when the last time was that the state told a land owner to buzz off and walked in to shoot a wild animal on their property without permission or a court order.

How many times have I seen the great conspiracy theories here about how wolves are perfect because they know no laws and obey no property boundaries.

You're getting silly now.

[idahohuntr]

Yes, Washington has very limited options.  I dont see them as being completely ineffective because I don't believe wolves will completely annihilate all of the prey around them.  They certainly won't improve hunting, but neither do I think they will end it.

We have different philosphies here.  I can accept that.

KF is trying to oversimplify the issue and wants to make it a black and white "wolves are going to end the world" argumnet and it just is not realistic.

Nearly 20 years after wolf re-introductions even Bearpaw and I can agree there is still good elk hunting opportunity in Idaho and Montana and Wyoming.  Certain areas have been impacted quite severely, but there is not some mass destruction of elk herds statewide as has been predicted by the doomsday crowd. 

Now, NE Washington is not ID, MT, WY...there are going to be difficulties in harvesting wolves if they are EVER de-listed in WA.  Nobody disputes that...but it is not unreasonable to think that wolf hunting would not help, even in NE Wa.  More importantly, even without hunting my experience tells me that it may reduce some opportunity and certain areas may not do as well but it will not be an end to all elk hunting in NE WA.  It may require more flexibility and adjustment in how you hunt elk (or deer) but it will not be the end of all hunting or completely wipe out all deer and elk and moose.  Last...I understand KF's frustration and fear...areas I grew up hunting in N. Idaho I was also frantic that wolves were going to destroy the hunting in areas I cared deeply about...but reality has been better than what I feared.  Time will tell...but I think you are seriously underestimating elk if you think wolves are going to push their numbers down to a level you can no longer hunt them.  Could it be better?? Yes...but hell, is there ever enough elk when you are out hunting?   

[bearpaw]

The worry is that NE WA with it's fast growing wolf population is going to end up like the Lolo which has had more than an 80% loss of elk or like other heavily impacted areas. Additionally it should be noted that many units in Idaho still have a growing wolf population, unless IDFG can prevent further growth of wolves in new Idaho areas there are many units in Idaho that could still experience an over population of wolves.

Please remember, when they started hunting wolves in the Panhandle, half the wolves taken came from packs that IDFG did not know existed. 

[bearpaw]

Former IDFG Wildlife Commissioner
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,147923.msg1962541/topicseen.html#new

An information paper prepared by IDFG’s Deputy Director, Sharon Kiefer, titled, “Idaho hunting license sales and revenue changes due to wolves”, dated December 7, 2010 was submitted to the Senate Natural Resource Committee. The purpose of the paper was to address the 2009 calendar year Idaho big game license sales decline by 2,634 nonresident elk tags, 4,460 nonresident deer tags and 4,405 nonresident hunting licenses compared to 2008 sales. Hunter concerns about the effect of wolves on their prospects of success and the reduction of specific big game populations combined with the Nation’s economic down turn and a nonresident fee increase were the reasons for decreased sales. In 2008 IDFG’s elk tag sales were 13,035 and in 2013 they were 8,020 a loss of approximately 40%.

This paper went on to discuss “Economic Impact Analysis of Gray Wolf Reintroduction-State Wide Assessment. “Using the most recent estimate from Cooper et al. (2002), a day of elk hunting in Idaho is worth $127.40/day for direct expenditures in 2008 dollars. The 1994 EIS estimated that between 14,619 and 21,928 hunter days would be lost due to wolf reintroductions in central Idaho. If the reduction in hunter days was linearly related to wolf populations then the loss of hunter days associated with 824 wolves (minimum number reported in 2008) would be between 120,400 and 180,686 resulting in an estimated value of the foregone benefits to hunters of between $15 and $24 million.” This $15 – 24 million represents loss income to the State of Idaho for the 2008 calendar year.
 
Assuming Idaho lost millions associated with the decrease in nonresident hunters coming to Idaho who suffered the loss? To answer this question one must look at areas of Idaho where wolves have severely impacted deer, elk and moose populations. Start in the Panhandle Region of North Idaho at St. Maries and move east across hunt units 6, 7 and 9. According to the Regional Biologist, Jim Hayden, elk numbers have been reduced 70% over the past five years in these units primarily as a result of wolf predation.  IDFG was forced to terminate the general cow season that the Panhandle had been able to sustain for the past 40 years due to depressed elk number in these units. Turn south to the two Zones mentioned by RMEF’s David Allen and you cross Big Game Managements Units (BGMU) 10/12 referred to as the Lolo Zone. The Elk population in this Zone has been reduced by 90% (16,000 to 1,500) over the past 10 years  again, primarily due to wolf predation.

Continue south through along the Idaho/Montana boarder through the Selway, Middle Fork, Salmon, Sawtooth portion of the Southern Mountains, Beaverhead and Island Park Zones then move west back across the center of the state through Fairfield to Idaho City to Cascade, Council, Riggins, Grangeville, Orofino and back to St. Maries to complete the circle. This circle describes what was at one time, prior to introduction of wolves, the premier elk hunting area in the country. It is now an area that, in some portions, is devoid of elk with cow/calf ratio’s among those that remain in the single digits.

If the area described above is the where the majority of the nonresident hunters who once hunted in Idaho, but now no longer return to Idaho, what has been the economic impact of their absence?  I had a discussion with the owners, David and Tina of Banderob’s Wild Meat Processing Plant located in St. Maries, concerning the damage that wolves had caused to their small business. In 2005 the Banderob’s processed 205 elk, the majority for nonresident hunters. In 2013 they processed 31 elk for mostly resident hunters. Tina reported that nonresident elk hunters have quit coming to St, Maries because the elk are gone. The dollar cost to their meat cutting business comparing the two years of 2005 to 2013 is (174 X $250) $43,500. The state share of this loss at 6% was $2,600.Modify message

The St. Marie’s motel, gas stations, restaurants, grocery, sporting goods stores and local outfitters were similarly impacted. Assuming a 20% hunter harvest rate, the 205 nonresident hunters in 2005 came in groups of four and spent on average $127.43 per day for their 10 day elk camp experience in the St. Maries area. The overall dollar loss to small business in the St. Maries area becomes more significant and understandable. Apply the same analysis to similar businesses in Avery, Kellogg, St Regis, Lolo, Salmon, Rexburg, Stanley, Challis, McCall, Council, Riggins, Grangeville, Orofino, and back to St. Maries and you begin to understand that the negative economic impact and real cost of wolves to Idahoans is huge, in the range of $60 to $120 million over the five year period from 2008 to 2013.

In 2005 the Banderob’s processed 205 elk, the majority for nonresident hunters. In 2013 they processed 31 elk for mostly resident hunters.    

[KFhunter]

Yes, Washington has very limited options.  I dont see them as being completely ineffective because I don't believe wolves will completely annihilate all of the prey around them.  They certainly won't improve hunting, but neither do I think they will end it.

We have different philosphies here.  I can accept that.

KF is trying to oversimplify the issue and wants to make it a black and white "wolves are going to end the world" argumnet and it just is not realistic.

Nearly 20 years after wolf re-introductions even Bearpaw and I can agree there is still good elk hunting opportunity in Idaho and Montana and Wyoming.  Certain areas have been impacted quite severely, but there is not some mass destruction of elk herds statewide as has been predicted by the doomsday crowd. 

Now, NE Washington is not ID, MT, WY...there are going to be difficulties in harvesting wolves if they are EVER de-listed in WA.  Nobody disputes that...but it is not unreasonable to think that wolf hunting would not help, even in NE Wa.  More importantly, even without hunting my experience tells me that it may reduce some opportunity and certain areas may not do as well but it will not be an end to all elk hunting in NE WA.  It may require more flexibility and adjustment in how you hunt elk (or deer) but it will not be the end of all hunting or completely wipe out all deer and elk and moose.  Last...I understand KF's frustration and fear...areas I grew up hunting in N. Idaho I was also frantic that wolves were going to destroy the hunting in areas I cared deeply about...but reality has been better than what I feared.  Time will tell...but I think you are seriously underestimating elk if you think wolves are going to push their numbers down to a level you can no longer hunt them.  Could it be better?? Yes...but hell, is there ever enough elk when you are out hunting?

The way I see it you two are hunting states with aggressive wolf controls and coming to a WA hunting forum to let us all know that hunting is just fine, no need to worry, we been down this road, the world didn't end, it'll be just fine.......... blah blah blah

Well WA doesn't have the Elk herds that MT/ID/WY has, nor do we have the means to even initiate effective wolf controls.
You think hunting will be good enough to control overpopulated wolves. I would laugh at the galling ignorance of that, but I'm saddened by it. 

The wolves in the NE will obliterate our small herds of Elk, calf recruitment will be `nil.  If the wolves miss a calf or two one of the overpopulated cats will be sure to get it. Furthermore, those guys who've been buying OIL moose tags are about to get cut off at the knees when WDFW figures out how many are dying.
What do you have to say to the guy maxed out in preference points for his OIL moose?     tough luck.

So ya, I run around like chicken little screaming the sky is falling trying to educate and drum up public outrage so perhaps we can gain more effective means of wolf control in the future. Controls like MT/ID/WY enjoy, and you enjoy as well by having a few Elk to hunt thanks to their pro-active measures while WDFW sits on their laurels.


Your efforts at tamping down and tempering public outrage and calls for more wolf control is counter to my ramping it up.


Depending on which version of chicken little you prefer he's either ate by a fox or turns out to be a hero.
apt don'tcha think?

[Sitka_Blacktail]

My parents have had deer living on their near acre for years. Every Spring a doe shows up with a fawn or two (twins). Wolves are nowhere near the town they live in. Roosevelt elk moved into the Longview Country club years ago, wolves are nowhere near there. Lots of food however.

it ain't over by a long shot give it a few years and you'll be screaming for wolf management too

maybe I'll bake you a nice crow pie

I don't recall anyone one here ever saying we shouldn't manage wolves.

There is no management options available in WA for wolves.

WDFW will never gun them down via helicopter
WDFW will never have a bounty
Trappers cannot use body gripping traps
Poison is illegal everywhere
recreational hunting is ineffective


what wolf management are you talking about JLS?  I'd like to hear your ideas for managing wolves in WA.

You left out no leg hold traps and snares too.

But, Through a permitting process, padded jaw foothold traps, conibear type traps set under water and non-strangling foot snares are still legal for animal damage control. So maybe they will be trapped under a damage control permit.

But I think a real effort needs to be made to repeal the hound ban and the trap ban. Those two things have hurt management of predators in Washington more than anything. Those two things won't be overturned without a a change of attitude by hunters.  All the hyperbolating and emotional outbursts and bravado in the world won't change non-hunters' minds. Hunters will have to make their case with real information and facts in an intelligent, reasonable manner. The hotheads aren't doing hunters any favors.

[JLS]

In 2005 the Banderob’s processed 205 elk, the majority for nonresident hunters. In 2013 they processed 31 elk for mostly resident hunters.    

Wolves have certainly affected local businesses and I feel for the people like the Banderobs.  Out of state hunters spend a lot of money through motels, restaurants, bars, processing, taxidermists, etc.  I am not rich and am on a tight budget, but I always make a point to spend money in the community where I am hunting.

So answer this.  Am I doing more to help local businesses by perpetuating the myth that the elk in Montana and Idaho are decimated, or do I try and tell people the truth that there is still very good hunting there?  It amazes my how many people simply think there are no elk left and that's not true.  I have no agenda and nothing to gain here, other than trying to help folks see that they can still hunt Idaho and Montana and have a good hunt.

Signed,

A wolf lover

[KFhunter]

Dear WDFW:

I would like a permit to set "conibear type traps set under water and non-strangling foot snares"
Sitka-Blacktail said they were legal for damage control.
Also could you send me a pamphlet describing these types of traps and how they work for wolves because I have no clue how an underwater conibear is suppost to capture a wolf, and don't even know what a "non-strangling foot snares" is....


~Thanks

KFhunter