March 27 Colville wolf meeting

[bobcat]

The thing is, the wolf plan has been approved, and is no longer up for debate. It doesn't really matter what Dale, or anybody, says about the wolves at this point.

They're not going to re-write the wolf plan.

[6x6in6]

The thing is, the wolf plan has been approved, and is no longer up for debate. It doesn't really matter what Dale, or anybody, says about the wolves at this point.

They're not going to re-write the wolf plan.

Nor or they going to enact public comment of any sort from either side of the wolf fence.  BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE TOO!

These meetings are required by the wolf plan.  It's in black and white.  It's also in black and white that the WDFW calls all the shots here.

[Curly]

Bearpaw's view is not narrow minded.  I've read much of his research on the wolf issue and he knows his stuff.......(knows the stats and info better than WDFW).

The pro-wolf crowd are the narrow minded ones.  They want to end hunting and replace us with wolves. 

And Dale wants to end wolves in Wa. That is being narrow minded. And I know Dale knows his stuff. I follow him closely and have a ton of respect for what he does and his involvment. But that does not change the fact his presentations are failing and he is losing the battle IMO.

Maybe you started reading the wolf threads after Dale and others had come up with a plan that he tried to convince WDFW to go with.  It was anything but eliminating all wolves.  IMO it even called for too many, but it was a plan that should have been acceptable to WDFW.  He is anything but narrow minded.  You are flat out wrong..........(I've never met him, but just from reading what he posts on here).

[jackelope]

I said BOTH sides of the issue need a mediator to help them find common ground. I never said just let the Pro Wolf people speak and everyone else tuck tail and shut up. Appartently you are not very educated on how many political debates, dissolution of marriages, etc. work. They use MEDIATORS to make progress, because neither side is going to change their point of view or agree.

I think in this situation, the WDFW is the mediator.

Then people like Bearpaw are pretty much screwed. The only suggestion would be to ban everyone together and sit a year or two out from hunting, fishing, etc. Do not purchase anything the WDFW offers. Once they feel it in their pocket book, they will be forced to listen and change the wolf plan. In the meantime it is all USELESS talk and predictible views of everyone involved. In other words, these meetings are being held to show effort on the WDFW part; nothing more....

Perhaps it's you that is not well educated in politics Sky, Dale represents potentially thousands of voters........which in this case should very well demand their attention.

If Dale is doing such a GREAT political job, then tell me why EVERYONE on here that supports him is bitching about the wolf plan, and his presentations at these meetings falling on deaf ears?

And last I checked; the score was about 1000 PRO WOLF to 0 ANTI WOLF, so perhaps Dale needs to remove himself from participating or develop a new strategy. His wolf plan is clearly NOT working...

But I admire his passion and involvement within this issue.

You speak like Dale is "THE" guy in the fight against wolves. Sure he is against wolves, and speaks openly about it, but he is not the only guy in the fight. It is not his "strategy" alone that is or isn't working. It needs to be more than just Dale. What are you doing, Skywalker? What are you doing to help ensure there are elk left in the Blues when you draw your tag? What are you doing to ensure my kids or yours can hunt moose in this state 15-20 years from now? Nothing I bet. Dale is doing something, and he knows what the heck he's talking about. I don't want him to "remove himself" from participating because he's one of the guys on here who actually has a lot of useful knowledge to use in the fight for wolf management on a state level. For someone so outspoken about him needing to remove himself from the fight, surely you must have some better ideas?? Let's hear them.

[bearpaw]

Skywalker I kind of see what you are saying, but does a Rancher not have a financial stake as well as an outfitter.
I think all should be heard regardless of their interest. Some are just better speakers and get their point across better. 

Care to elaborate BearPaw?

I agree with you. I understand what you are saying about Ranchers having a finacial stake. The difference IMO; Ranches are usually handed down from family generation to family generation, as a means of making a living. Their are strong family traditions associated with that. If wolves start killing off their means of making a living, then the wolves should be killed. You cannot just pick up your ranch, family traditions, etc. and move it. I think most listening would understand their point of view, and at least listen.

When a hunter or outfitter speaks it is not going to be as well received. A) Those listening are aganist hunting, hunters, their views, etc. to begin with B) An outfitter is taking advantage of a resource to make money. Whether that be hunting videos, TV shows, guide service, etc. I could see how an anti-hunter/pro-wolf individual would dismiss their credibility from the start. They are coming in pissed off, and likely not going to listen. My point is; choose the path of least resistence; work smart. Bearpaw presenting is not going to capture an audience and get anyone to listen. Perhaps Bearpaw take his information, facts, etc. and turn it over to somebody, who stands on neutral ground.

I don't agree with you at all.
Hunters and guides and outfitters should either  keep their mouths shut or get a puppet to speak for them and we should let the wolf lovers speak out at will because WDFW is more likely to listen?
Come on, man. Get realistic.

We need anyone who is well spoken to get up and speak when WDFW gives the opportunity to give input like at this meeting.  I applaud Bearpaw and the others for standing up and giving WDFW a piece of their mind. 

That the problem. "standing up and giving someone a piece of their mind" and coming from a narrow minded view is not going to go over well and change anyones opinions on the issue. Especially coming from a hunter or outfitter.

Now Dale is narrow minded as well.

Yes he is. I will stand behind that. He view is NO WOLVES IN WA PERIOD! That is being narrow minded. He needs to accept the fact, that they are not going anywhere and he needs to change his strategy or compromise his point of views if he wants to make any progress. Otherwise his presentations are going to fall on deaf ears....like last night.

Skywalker, you are wrong and you do not know what you are saying. I have stated on this forum my position on wolves. Please educate yourself.

[huntnphool]

I said BOTH sides of the issue need a mediator to help them find common ground. I never said just let the Pro Wolf people speak and everyone else tuck tail and shut up. Appartently you are not very educated on how many political debates, dissolution of marriages, etc. work. They use MEDIATORS to make progress, because neither side is going to change their point of view or agree.

I think in this situation, the WDFW is the mediator.

Then people like Bearpaw are pretty much screwed. The only suggestion would be to ban everyone together and sit a year or two out from hunting, fishing, etc. Do not purchase anything the WDFW offers. Once they feel it in their pocket book, they will be forced to listen and change the wolf plan. In the meantime it is all USELESS talk and predictible views of everyone involved. In other words, these meetings are being held to show effort on the WDFW part; nothing more....

Perhaps it's you that is not well educated in politics Sky, Dale represents potentially thousands of voters........which in this case should very well demand their attention.

If Dale is doing such a GREAT political job, then tell me why EVERYONE on here that supports him is bitching about the wolf plan, and his presentations at these meetings falling on deaf ears?

And last I checked; the score was about 1000 PRO WOLF to 0 ANTI WOLF, so perhaps Dale needs to remove himself from participating or develop a new strategy. His wolf plan is clearly NOT working...

But I admire his passion and involvement within this issue.

You speak like Dale is "THE" guy in the fight against wolves. Sure he is against wolves, and speaks openly about it, but he is not the only guy in the fight. It is not his "strategy" alone that is or isn't working. It needs to be more than just Dale. What are you doing, Skywalker? What are you doing to help ensure there are elk left in the Blues when you draw your tag? What are you doing to ensure my kids or yours can hunt moose in this state 15-20 years from now? Nothing I bet. Dale is doing something, and he knows what the heck he's talking about. I don't want him to "remove himself" from participating because he's one of the guys on here who actually has a lot of useful knowledge to use in the fight for wolf management on a state level. For someone so outspoken about him needing to remove himself from the fight, surely you must have some better ideas?? Let's hear them.

+1

[bearpaw]

I feel that the WDFW wolf meeting in Colville was an insult to the intelligence of all who attended. While my following account is not meant to be an exact quote, it's my impression of what took place. Basically a dog and pony show and a darned poor one at that.

At the meeting a few weeks ago participants told the WDFW they would not be split up into small groups, everyone wanted to hear what each had to say. For this meeting the Region 1 Manager called retired Judge Christiansen to facilitate the meeting. We were told we could not talk about livestock or the constitution. I took this as a way of saying WDFW will be in full control of this meeting, they are not doing the meeting any differently or allowing comments other than what they desire. To WDFW's credit they did not try to break us up into small easy to control groups, but it was obvious to most everyone in attendance that WDFW tried to hold control of the floor as long as possible preaching some misleading and much irrelevant data so participants would have little time to comment and ask questions that the WDFW might be uncomfortable answering.

WDFW presented what seemed to be cherry picked information in an effort to pacify local citizens that wolf impacts would be minimal and that WDFW has game management under control and steering Washington's wildlife in the right direction. Near the end of their long-winded presentation discontent and disgust was so widespread the audience openly laughed at numerous WDFW comments. At one point Dave Ware mentioned that one of the collared Smackout wolves wandered into Canada and was shot by a legal hunter in Canada, there was loud applause.

WDFW spent a good portion of their time basically telling local residents all the reasons and excuses they will not control wolf numbers upon a 25% reduction in ungulate populations. In so many words WDFW made it very clear that they do not intend to control wolves when ungulate populations drop by 25%. They made it very clear they plan on taking years to study why an ungulate population is dropping.

(There's little doubt by anyone I spoke to that wolves will continue to increase and ungulate populations will continue to decline while WDFW studies the problem.)

When attendees were finally allowed to comment, several citizens wanted to know why the WDFW has not warned residents about wolf worms. One person mentioned that if McIrvins were Boeing and had a problem with wolves that the state would be taking care of the problem immediately. WDFW was questioned about their response to the dog attack near Twisp. WDFW was questioned about the moose population, the caribou, and there were many comments about elk and deer. Their were comments made to shoot wolves and people were handing out info with SSS in half-page sized letters and info about wolf tapeworms. There were many other comments. Hunting-Washington member Waterdoctor made some great points regarding management and science models being used by WDFW. GREAT JOB.

When I spoke I spoke to the audience, it was apparent the WDFW was there to preach but not to listen to local concerns, when I did ask them questions they actually seemed to not even hear my questions, I had to emphasize "this is a question". I told the audience that WDFW was following the same path that Idaho and Montana followed by using misleading data to hide the damage done by wolves. I told the audience that Idaho had to get rid of certain pro-wolf managers before real wolf management could begin in Idaho. Idaho and Montana increased cow harvest and season length in areas unaffected by wolves to make the elk harvest look stable across the state when in reality many elk herds in wolf infected areas suffered up to 80% losses and I noted specific herds.

I detailed the cougar and wolf numbers in NE Washington and that we probably have at least 500 cougar and probably at least 100 wolves. (Note: Even if we don't have 100 wolves now, we will soon as WDFW has admitted wolf populations doubled during the last year and will continue to increase) I noted that studies done by other agencies indicate documented predation levels for cougars is 25 to 50 deer per year and wolves is 17-22 elk or 44 deer per year. I said for the sake of mathematical simplicity lets say one wolf eats 20 elk or 44 deer and one cougar eats 40 deer. I verified with WDFW personnel that our NE deer harvest by hunters varied from 4000 last year to 10,000 deer in the best previous year and there are roughly 300 elk taken in the NE corner per year. 

I asked WDFW if they knew what a "Predator Pit" is. They did reply with a partial answer, I informed the audience how Dr Charles Kay describes a Predator pit. "When ungulate herds decline for whatever reason to a level where predation by predators prevents recovery, that is a Predator Pit." I explained how Idaho has implemented 2 bear and 2 cougar areas where wolves are having an impact and that is what is needed in NE Washington to offset this predator pit. I estimated that 500 cougar eat roughly 20,000 deer, 100 wolves eat roughly 2,000 elk or 4,400 deer. I explained that is why deer harvest has continued to decline for several years after the bad winters that we experienced 4 years ago and said we need an open spring bear season and we need a 2 cougar limit without quotas to reduce predation on our herds.

With all this predation and knowing what wolves eat, I asked WDFW what their plans were for hunters?

I didn't get much of an answer, but that didn't surprise me, I didn't expect WDFW to have a plan to save hunting. Numerous people thanked me for my testimony and comments.
________________________________

Wolves are going to cause economic impacts on rural economies and lifestyles. The WA wolf plan under estimated wolf population growth, the wolf plan underestimated the cost of wolf management, the wolf plan underestimated livestock losses that have already occurred, the WDFW has admitted that wolves doubled in numbers since last year, the WDFW admitted that wolf numbers are growing faster than they anticipated, the WDFW said in the Colville meeting they do not plan to take quick action to control wolves when ungulate populations drop 25%, 72 US Legislators have submitted a letter prompting the USFWS to delist wolves, and finally it's questionable how wolves were listed as endangered in Washington in the first place. I submit that the endangered status of wolves in Washington should be reviewed and the Washington Wolf Plan needs to be thrown out or at the least revised to correct the many obvious mistakes it contains which has resulted in known inaccuracies in the rational used for delisting and will likely cause numerous impacts on localized areas due to these miscalculations in the plan.

Some steps that might help:

 - WDFW mandate: "Conserve Fish & Wildlife at sustainable numbers while maximizing a fair ratio of recreational and commercial opportunity to all."
 - Replace WDFW Commissioners who do not perpetuate this mandate
 - Replace WDFW personnel who do not perpetuate this mandate or who provide misleading or inaccurate data to decision makers
 - Manage predators based on ungulate herd numbers to prevent a "predator pit", when herds decline manage predators accordingly
 - Scrap or revise the wolf plan to better address the real known wolf population growth and address real known wolf impacts in localized areas

[Kola16]

Thanks for the right-up bearpaw 

[combs338]

Thanks for the right-up bearpaw 

+1

[buckfvr]

I saw it same as Dale......what bothers me the most is the way WDFW continues to deceive us with watered down statistics and graphs, and proceed to misinform us about other states.  They definetly take hunters for idiots, or so it seems.

Everyone who attended the meeting should have been insulted.  It was a waste of our time and they seemed to readily convey that message.  There was/is nothing we can say to change what is inevitable......and that is a rapid decline in ungulates and continual decline in hunter opportunities.  They know it and could care less. 

Thanks WDFW and your employees for being such morons.    :bash

[bearpaw]

Bearpaw's view is not narrow minded.  I've read much of his research on the wolf issue and he knows his stuff.......(knows the stats and info better than WDFW).

The pro-wolf crowd are the narrow minded ones.  They want to end hunting and replace us with wolves. 

And Dale wants to end wolves in Wa. That is being narrow minded. And I know Dale knows his stuff. I follow him closely and have a ton of respect for what he does and his involvment. But that does not change the fact his presentations are failing and he is losing the battle IMO.

Sir, you need to know what you are talking about so I am going to help you.

I have said on more than one occasion that wolves could fit into Washington in reasonable numbers. I actually suggested 6 to 8 BP's as being reasonable for Washington and that wolves which move into inhabited areas should be open season in order to keep them in wilderness where they don't cause problems in our modern ecosystems. What I am adamantly opposed to is the maneuvering by WDFW to fill Washington with wolves and their wolf plan which throws NE WA to the wolves until every wolf zone has 4 BP's for 3 consecutive years. By WDFW's own admission wolf numbers doubled since last year. Is there any proven reason that wolves will not continue to double in population every year in NE WA until 4 BP's successfully breed for 3 consecutive years in all wolf zones.

WDFW is closed minded. They insisted on 15 BP's for 3 years, that's 1.5 times as many wolves as Montana's plan calls for, a state that is twice the size of Washington with a fraction of the human population. The biggest problem is that the F&G agencies do not know how many wolves are out there, WDFW even admits there are likely twice as many wolves as they have confirmed.

If one BP does not have pups at the end of the year the 3 year count will start over again, meanwhile the NE and the Methow suffer.

Please explain again who is closed minded?



oops fixed a number I had wrong

[Ridgeratt]

This is going to be a interesting thread!!!

Somebody get me some Popcorn and a Beer!   

[Elkaholic daWg]

 Thank you Dale...

I feel that the WDFW wolf meeting in Colville was an insult to the intelligence of all who attended. While my following account is not meant to be an exact quote, it's my impression of what took place. Basically a dog and pony show and a darned poor one at that.

At the meeting a few weeks ago participants told the WDFW they would not be split up into small groups, everyone wanted to hear what each had to say. For this meeting the Region 1 Manager called retired Judge Christiansen to facilitate the meeting. We were told we could not talk about livestock or the constitution. I took this as a way of saying WDFW will be in full control of this meeting, they are not doing the meeting any differently or allowing comments other than what they desire. To WDFW's credit they did not try to break us up into small easy to control groups, but it was obvious to most everyone in attendance that WDFW tried to hold control of the floor as long as possible preaching some misleading and much irrelevant data so participants would have little time to comment and ask questions that the WDFW might be uncomfortable answering.

WDFW presented what seemed to be cherry picked information in an effort to pacify local citizens that wolf impacts would be minimal and that WDFW has game management under control and steering Washington's wildlife in the right direction. Near the end of their long-winded presentation discontent and disgust was so widespread the audience openly laughed at numerous WDFW comments. At one point Dave Ware mentioned that one of the collared Smackout wolves wandered into Canada and was shot by a legal hunter in Canada, there was loud applause.

WDFW spent a good portion of their time basically telling local residents all the reasons and excuses they will not control wolf numbers upon a 25% reduction in ungulate populations. In so many words WDFW made it very clear that they do not intend to control wolves when ungulate populations drop by 25%. They made it very clear they plan on taking years to study why an ungulate population is dropping.

(There's little doubt by anyone I spoke to that wolves will continue to increase and ungulate populations will continue to decline while WDFW studies the problem.)

When attendees were finally allowed to comment, several citizens wanted to know why the WDFW has not warned residents about wolf worms. One person mentioned that if McIrvins were Boeing and had a problem with wolves that the state would be taking care of the problem immediately. WDFW was questioned about their response to the dog attack near Twisp. WDFW was questioned about the moose population, the caribou, and there were many comments about elk and deer. Their were comments made to shoot wolves and people were handing out info with SSS in half-page sized letters and info about wolf tapeworms. There were many other comments. Hunting-Washington member Waterdoctor made some great points regarding management and science models being used by WDFW. GREAT JOB.

When I spoke I spoke to the audience, it was apparent the WDFW was there to preach but not to listen to local concerns, when I did ask them questions they actually seemed to not even hear my questions, I had to emphasize "this is a question". I told the audience that WDFW was following the same path that Idaho and Montana followed by using misleading data to hide the damage done by wolves. I told the audience that Idaho had to get rid of certain pro-wolf managers before real wolf management could begin in Idaho. Idaho and Montana increased cow harvest and season length in areas unaffected by wolves to make the elk harvest look stable across the state when in reality many elk herds in wolf infected areas suffered up to 80% losses and I noted specific herds.

I detailed the cougar and wolf numbers in NE Washington and that we probably have at least 500 cougar and probably at least 100 wolves. (Note: Even if we don't have 100 wolves now, we will soon as WDFW has admitted wolf populations doubled during the last year and will continue to increase) I noted that studies done by other agencies indicate documented predation levels for cougars is 25 to 50 deer per year and wolves is 17-22 elk or 44 deer per year. I said for the sake of mathematical simplicity lets say one wolf eats 20 elk or 44 deer and one cougar eats 40 deer. I verified with WDFW personnel that our NE deer harvest by hunters varied from 4000 last year to 10,000 deer in the best previous year and there are roughly 300 elk taken in the NE corner per year. 

I asked WDFW if they knew what a "Predator Pit" is. They did reply with a partial answer, I informed the audience how Dr Charles Kay describes a Predator pit. "When ungulate herds decline for whatever reason to a level where predation by predators prevents recovery, that is a Predator Pit." I explained how Idaho has implemented 2 bear and 2 cougar areas where wolves are having an impact and that is what is needed in NE Washington to offset this predator pit. I estimated that 500 cougar eat roughly 20,000 deer, 100 wolves eat roughly 2,000 elk or 4,400 deer. I explained that is why deer harvest has continued to decline for several years after the bad winters that we experienced 4 years ago and said we need an open spring bear season and we need a 2 cougar limit without quotas to reduce predation on our herds.

With all this predation and knowing what wolves eat, I asked WDFW what their plans were for hunters?

I didn't get much of an answer, but that didn't surprise me, I didn't expect WDFW to have a plan to save hunting. Numerous people thanked me for my testimony and comments.
________________________________

Wolves are going to cause economic impacts on rural economies and lifestyles. The WA wolf plan under estimated wolf population growth, the wolf plan underestimated the cost of wolf management, the wolf plan underestimated livestock losses that have already occurred, the WDFW has admitted that wolves doubled in numbers since last year, the WDFW admitted that wolf numbers are growing faster than they anticipated, the WDFW said in the Colville meeting they do not plan to take quick action to control wolves when ungulate populations drop 25%, 72 US Legislators have submitted a letter prompting the USFWS to delist wolves, and finally it's questionable how wolves were listed as endangered in Washington in the first place. I submit that the endangered status of wolves in Washington should be reviewed and the Washington Wolf Plan needs to be thrown out or at the least revised to correct the many obvious mistakes it contains which has resulted in known inaccuracies in the rational used for delisting and will likely cause numerous impacts on localized areas due to these miscalculations in the plan.

Some steps that might help:

 - WDFW mandate: "Conserve Fish & Wildlife at sustainable numbers while maximizing a fair ratio of recreational and commercial opportunity to all."
 - Replace WDFW Commissioners who do not perpetuate this mandate
 - Replace WDFW personnel who do not perpetuate this mandate or who provide misleading or inaccurate data to decision makers
 - Manage predators based on ungulate herd numbers to prevent a "predator pit", when herds decline manage predators accordingly
 - Scrap or revise the wolf plan to better address the real known wolf population growth and address real known wolf impacts in localized areas

Thank you Dale..

[HUNTINCOUPLE]

  to Dale!!!!!

[CementFinisher]

thank you dale and everyone else who attended, its sad that it fell upon def ears. Only thing we can do is keep the pressure on and make sure our voices are heard.