Free: Contests & Raffles.
I'm surprised you would use a "wolf lovers" website link for your reference. Ralph is a widely known wolf lover from Pocatello Idaho who regularly files lawsuits to stop ranching and wolf management in Idaho. Many Idaho hunters consider him one of the hunter's worst enemies. It's pretty convenient how his information you used ends in 2005, that's exactly when wolf impacts began getting the worst. (see IDFG graphs below)
Quote from: Bob33 on February 24, 2014, 04:45:42 PMLet's stick to the original topic.Sitka and others; can you truthfully state and factually confirm that wolves have had no negative impact on businesses in Idaho and Montana?Correct me if I'm wrong, but has anybody argued that wolves have no negative impacts? I sure have not seen any argument like that.But I've got a better question for ya bob- can you truthfully state and factually confirm that other (non-predator) factors have had no negative impact on businesses in Idaho and Montana
Let's stick to the original topic.Sitka and others; can you truthfully state and factually confirm that wolves have had no negative impact on businesses in Idaho and Montana?
Quote from: Sitka_Blacktail on February 24, 2014, 04:03:42 PMI'm sorry my friend, but the results don't agree with your hypothesis. Can predators combine to affect game populations where other conditions are poor? Yes. But will they wipe out healthy populations of game that have the right natural conditions to prosper? Definitely no.Hunt and trap wolves to your heart's content where legal. But unless the other limiting factors are addressed, the results will still be disheartening.QuoteEarly 1900s.— European settlement brought changes to the landscape. Millions of sheep, cattle, and horses were brought into southern Idaho. Black bear (Ursus americanus) and mountain lion (Puma concolor) populations generally received little or no protection and gray wolves (Canis lupus) were functionally extirpated by the early 1900s. In southern and parts of central Idaho, extreme overgrazing combined with fire suppression efforts turned what was primarily perennial grass ranges into shrubfields. Unregulated harvest and conversion of grass dominated ranges to shrubfields likely resulted in fewer elk in southern Idaho.Similarly, landscape-level changes occurred in northern Idaho during the early 1900s. However, the impact was likely more positive for elk habitat and populations. Extensive wildfires created a mosaic of grass, shrubfields, and forested habitats. Nearly extirpated local elk populations were augmented with elk from Yellowstone National Park (YNP) following the large wildfires. Timber harvest also contributed to moving large portions of the forested landscape back towards a more early seral condition. Under these conditions elk flourished in northern Idaho.Mid 1900s.— In north-central Idaho, elk populations probably peaked in the 1960s. As the newly created seral habitats aged and succession continued to move towards a climax state, habitat potential declined. Fire suppression efforts resulted in forest habitat advancing to later seral stages and preventing natural regeneration of early seral stages more favorable to elk.By the 1970s, hunter numbers and access had increased to the point where restrictive seasons were necessary to reduce elk vulnerability to harvest. Either-sex bag limits throughout most of Idaho were replaced by antlered-only bag limits in 1976. Elk populations responded, and by the late 1980s elk were once again abundant enough to support more liberal antlerless opportunity. Predator populations were likely reduced or suppressed during the mid-1900s, but had some localized effects on elk in remote areas.Late 1900s.— In portions of northern Idaho, the mid-1990s witnessed another downward cycle in elk numbers. Declining habitat potential in forested habitat, black bear and mountain lion predation, and the localized impacts of hard winters (1996 and 1997) all played a role. With protection and harvest restrictions implemented during the 1970-1990s, black bear and mountain lion populations likely stabilized and began to flourish, particularly in central mountain areas (commonly referred to as backcountry) where hunting access is difficult. Wolves became re-established in Idaho during the 1990s through USFWS reintroduction, and through wolves from southern Canada and northwest Montana naturally re-occupying historic wolf habitat. Wolf predation on elk has further accelerated declines in elk herds in many parts of northern Idaho.In other portions of the state, including much of southern Idaho, elk numbers actually increased during this same timeframe. A change in grazing practices that promoted grass production, farming practices that favored resting farmland, and continued timber cuts that favored early seral habitat stages all enabled southern Idaho elk populations to grow to all-time record highs during the latter half of the 1900s. Today.— Elk herds in the southern part of the state are mostly robust and limited more by sociological constraints, such as damage to agricultural crops and property, than by habitat suitability. Elk herds in the central and northern mountains continue to be suppressed by predators and habitat declines. Elk herds in the prairies and agricultural areas of northern Idaho are mostly robust and population levels are constrained by crop and property damage. In total, Idaho’s elk population in early 2013 was estimated at approximately 107,000 animals.
I'm sorry my friend, but the results don't agree with your hypothesis. Can predators combine to affect game populations where other conditions are poor? Yes. But will they wipe out healthy populations of game that have the right natural conditions to prosper? Definitely no.Hunt and trap wolves to your heart's content where legal. But unless the other limiting factors are addressed, the results will still be disheartening.
Early 1900s.— European settlement brought changes to the landscape. Millions of sheep, cattle, and horses were brought into southern Idaho. Black bear (Ursus americanus) and mountain lion (Puma concolor) populations generally received little or no protection and gray wolves (Canis lupus) were functionally extirpated by the early 1900s. In southern and parts of central Idaho, extreme overgrazing combined with fire suppression efforts turned what was primarily perennial grass ranges into shrubfields. Unregulated harvest and conversion of grass dominated ranges to shrubfields likely resulted in fewer elk in southern Idaho.Similarly, landscape-level changes occurred in northern Idaho during the early 1900s. However, the impact was likely more positive for elk habitat and populations. Extensive wildfires created a mosaic of grass, shrubfields, and forested habitats. Nearly extirpated local elk populations were augmented with elk from Yellowstone National Park (YNP) following the large wildfires. Timber harvest also contributed to moving large portions of the forested landscape back towards a more early seral condition. Under these conditions elk flourished in northern Idaho.Mid 1900s.— In north-central Idaho, elk populations probably peaked in the 1960s. As the newly created seral habitats aged and succession continued to move towards a climax state, habitat potential declined. Fire suppression efforts resulted in forest habitat advancing to later seral stages and preventing natural regeneration of early seral stages more favorable to elk.By the 1970s, hunter numbers and access had increased to the point where restrictive seasons were necessary to reduce elk vulnerability to harvest. Either-sex bag limits throughout most of Idaho were replaced by antlered-only bag limits in 1976. Elk populations responded, and by the late 1980s elk were once again abundant enough to support more liberal antlerless opportunity. Predator populations were likely reduced or suppressed during the mid-1900s, but had some localized effects on elk in remote areas.Late 1900s.— In portions of northern Idaho, the mid-1990s witnessed another downward cycle in elk numbers. Declining habitat potential in forested habitat, black bear and mountain lion predation, and the localized impacts of hard winters (1996 and 1997) all played a role. With protection and harvest restrictions implemented during the 1970-1990s, black bear and mountain lion populations likely stabilized and began to flourish, particularly in central mountain areas (commonly referred to as backcountry) where hunting access is difficult. Wolves became re-established in Idaho during the 1990s through USFWS reintroduction, and through wolves from southern Canada and northwest Montana naturally re-occupying historic wolf habitat. Wolf predation on elk has further accelerated declines in elk herds in many parts of northern Idaho.In other portions of the state, including much of southern Idaho, elk numbers actually increased during this same timeframe. A change in grazing practices that promoted grass production, farming practices that favored resting farmland, and continued timber cuts that favored early seral habitat stages all enabled southern Idaho elk populations to grow to all-time record highs during the latter half of the 1900s. Today.— Elk herds in the southern part of the state are mostly robust and limited more by sociological constraints, such as damage to agricultural crops and property, than by habitat suitability. Elk herds in the central and northern mountains continue to be suppressed by predators and habitat declines. Elk herds in the prairies and agricultural areas of northern Idaho are mostly robust and population levels are constrained by crop and property damage. In total, Idaho’s elk population in early 2013 was estimated at approximately 107,000 animals.
That chart is pure BSIt doesn't take into effect how many people just went out and shot and Elk when they needed one back in the 30's and 40's doesn't take into effect more roads being built and improved access, better vehicles equipment and gear over the years either.
Quote from: bearpaw on February 24, 2014, 09:26:15 PMI'm surprised you would use a "wolf lovers" website link for your reference. Ralph is a widely known wolf lover from Pocatello Idaho who regularly files lawsuits to stop ranching and wolf management in Idaho. Many Idaho hunters consider him one of the hunter's worst enemies. It's pretty convenient how his information you used ends in 2005, that's exactly when wolf impacts began getting the worst. (see IDFG graphs below)It was the most complete set of harvest stats I could find Dale. On the Idaho Hunting site you can get the numbers, but have to total up each unit and by method of harvest and add in the draw hunts. Too much work for me with 76 units and three methods of harvest and then the draw tags. Do you have a problem with the harvest numbers posted? If not, why does it matter where I find the info I'm looking for? And if you have another source that shows these numbers, I'd be happy to quote them instead.
ya, I'm sure a lot of them old timers just emerging from the great depression went out and purchased a metal tag to hang on their winter meat
Quote from: Bob33 on February 24, 2014, 04:45:42 PMLet's stick to the original topic.Sitka and others; can you truthfully state and factually confirm that wolves have had no negative impact on businesses in Idaho and Montana?Bob, the graph I posted showing the ups and downs of hunter success in Idaho relates to this thread in this way. Dale is arguing that because of wolves, businesses are suffering because lower harvest has lead to less hunters coming to Idaho and spending money. But as the graph shows, hunting has gone up and down since records have been kept. In fact, THAT is the nature of wilderness and wild things and hunting, even without wolves. 1976 was the worst year for elk since 1945 and the worst for deer since 1950. And wolves weren't a part of that equation, habitat and weather were. So what happened then? Did people quit hunting in Idaho temporarily then? Yes they did. Did people lose money over that sudden downturn? You bet they did. But life went on and as things improved so did hunting and the crowds it draws. And eventually things went to all time highs in Idaho. One can not count on all time highs being continuous with wildlife. If you put all your eggs in that basket, you will eventually get burned. Is it sad that people are having a hard time at present? Yes it is. Do I believe it will get better again? Yes I do. But these lows of today are three times better than they were in 1976. You have to have some perspective. Are there problem areas where wolves are combining with other factors to keep cervid populations down? Yes. If other factors improve and wolf populations are maintained or lowered slightly will deer and elk come back in these depressed areas? I'm sure of it. It's happened over and over. And there will be opportunities for the locals to make money off of the non locals who come hunting. In the mean time, some will persevere like they did in 1976 and some won't. But the downturn also gives people like Dale an opportunity to branch out into new areas that weren't available to them when things were up.
