Released Wolves

[wolfbait]

I wonder if these were some of WDFW wolves of the 1980's?

[Bigshooter]

I've read the same arguement before.  Pretty sad.

[NoImpactNoIdea]

Interesting read.

[Wenatcheejay]

Thanks wolfbait, I agree with the blundering of the wolf train wreck that was put upon the West by USDFW. However, I have no doubt from their perspective and WDFW, the program is right on track. Yellowstone is exactly what they want for all ungulates in all the West. If they could do the same to humans they would IMO.

[boneaddict]

I agree with his viewpoint and observations.

THe first wolves I encountered......circa 80-82 I am guessing.  A breeding pair with offspring in the high cascades, were a completely different animal than I am encountering now.   

I encountered one and had an altercation with circa 1990, a decade later, he was a killing machine.  Thats when YOU and I were both told to LIE about the presence of wolves in the valley.   We were both instructed to deny their presence or risk losing our job.  At that time it was refered to as the Libby Creek pack.  We were both employed by the federal government at the time.   I had that one encounter in all that time.  This also coincides with when they dropped the general hunt and coyote hunting during the fall season.  I believe that experiment failed.   

[CementFinisher]

I've heard all that before. Bone who are you referring to as we ? IF you don't mind my asking, what was your job and under which agency

[Curly]

Very interesting read.  And by a guy that should have lots of credibility. 

Seems like a lawsuit could be filed, with info from that letter, against the feds and get all the damn wolves removed.

[Curly]

BTW - what does "GYE" mean? 

[JLS]

So he asserts that the native Rocky Mountain Timber Wolf lived in harmony with tame livestock animals?  Really?  So is that why they were eradicated?  And you think this guy is credible?

[JLS]

BTW - what does "GYE" mean? 

Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

[CementFinisher]

this info was brought up to delist in Montana and Idaho. it was brought up when writing the washington wolf bill, and the info was scoffed at. around the 1995 introduction  there was a trend of eliminating subspecies of wolves and lumping them together. Now there are only a few recognized species. These are not native wolves.

[CementFinisher]

JLS i don't think he was trying to portray that they lived in harmony, but it is thought that the rmtw were far less aggressive and didn't breed at such high rates, and were much more elusive. All leading to less conflicts

[Curly]

BTW - what does "GYE" mean? 

Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Thanks.  I missed that the first time I read the article.

Yeah, it seems like he should be credible.  He has pretty good credentials anyway.  A phd and worked for OES and OSA from '79 - 97.  Seems to have a lot of knowledge of the history of wolves. 

I'd like to hear some of the current bios from USFW refute his claims. 

[buckfvr]

I still think there should be a class action law suit..................

[JLS]

JLS i don't think he was trying to portray that they lived in harmony, but it is thought that the rmtw were far less aggressive and didn't breed at such high rates, and were much more elusive. All leading to less conflicts

If he wasn't trying to portray them living in harmony, why did he say they did?

[CementFinisher]

perhaps he was, wether he is credible or not does not change that these were different subspecies and were recognized so. until REintroduction started.

[JLS]

So if all of this evidence of a wrong species exists, and there were so many illegal acts committed, why haven't the SFW crowd along with their crony Toby Bridges of LoboWatch sued the US Fish & Wildlife Service?

[wolfbait]

I agree with his viewpoint and observations.

THe first wolves I encountered......circa 80-82 I am guessing.  A breeding pair with offspring in the high cascades, were a completely different animal than I am encountering now.   

I encountered one and had an altercation with circa 1990, a decade later, he was a killing machine.  Thats when YOU and I were both told to LIE about the presence of wolves in the valley.   We were both instructed to deny their presence or risk losing our job.  At that time it was refered to as the Libby Creek pack.  We were both employed by the federal government at the time.   I had that one encounter in all that time.  This also coincides with when they dropped the general hunt and coyote hunting during the fall season.  I believe that experiment failed.

The WE would be Bone and I.

I guess I should tell you about the 99.99% chance of a grizzly bear sighting on a timber sale up on Thompson Ridge?

Back in 1991/92 I was cruising timber for the USFS, we were just finishing up a good size sale. At lunch time if we were in a safe area, meaning along ways from anywhere, and we were in good rock country, we would roll a few rocks.  One day we hit just such a spot, there was this one rock about the size of a volkswagon that was just ready to roll, we worked on that rock with jilt poles till lunch was over and finally had to give up.

Next thing we know we are seeing pictures of our rock with the jilt poles stick out all over and where the other rocks we had rolled tore things up a bit. Pretty soon the biologist who come in and look for endangered speices in the sales were saying there was a 99.99% chance sighting of a grizzly bear in our timber sale.

Of cource we were confused, we had hiked that whole country several times and never saw any big bears, so we never said anything. Few weeks went by and biologist were collecting like flies on a fresh cow pile, come to find out they were saying that they had a 99.99% chance of a grizzly bear digging for glacier lillies right where we were rolling rocks.

So, one day here come all the big wigs from Portland for their photo shoot around a big rock with jilt poles sticking out all over. They had plans to throw the whole sale out, so the crew talked it over and decided we had better fess up, which we did.

What surprised us the most is we never got in trouble, our bosses thought it was funny as hell. Later on we did get in trouble for saying; "Are you 99.99% sure"when we asked about a certain road on the big radio.

They still threw out a hundred and some acres of the sale just to save face.  99.99% chance of a grizzly bear sighting with no bear hair, no tracks, no scat and jilt poles,    Remember that Bone?

[CementFinisher]

LMFAO!!!!     thats some good stuff right there!

[carpsniperg2]

Good stuff right there

[Simcoe hunter]

That is some funny stuff.  Another misguided adventure by liberal biologists who think they know what is best for the world.  Although most of the elk around the lower 48 came from the Yellowstone herd.  Still, I'm not impressed with this whole wolf recovery thing.  The letter from the first post was very interesting.

[boneaddict]

I do remember that.  Nicole was part of that.  I thought for sure you guys were busted.

There were some good spotted owl stories in there too.   I was eating lunch with one of the biologists when they joined up with us thinning a section.   We were sitting there and all of a sudden her eyes got big.  She had just "heard" a spotted owl.  I listened (bare in mind this is at noon), and I heard a magpie, and she said "There it is again".  Long story short, she was going to shut us down.  We argued about it, which apparantly attracted the magpie.  That or my cheetos.   I stil think she thinks she heard a spotted owl, even with that magpie sitting there staring her in the face.

[Sawbuck]

Interesting read, especially about the black wolves. One of the ones that I saw in the high country of the southern cascades in 2000 was all black.

[Special T]

not surprised

[WAcoyotehunter]

So he asserts that the native Rocky Mountain Timber Wolf lived in harmony with tame livestock animals?  Really?  So is that why they were eradicated?  And you think this guy is credible?

you beat me to it. 

So, what kind of data exists from GYE about this harmonious little wolf?  how many were there? 

[Curly]

I can't get the link to work for the video:

Richard Mitchell, Ph.D., from Alder, MT was also a guest speaker. As a retired U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service senior staff biologist, his message on the wolf population had the crowd’s attention. “I was in Washington D.C. during the wolf debacle. The reintroduction of the gray wolf into Montana was illegal and in violation of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.” He was very deliberate in his message and had several interesting takes on how the wolves were brought into Montana. Mitchell claims the USFWS was not protecting the endangered timber wolf by importing the gray wolf but rather violating the law. The Endangered Species Act forbids the introduction of a “non-essential experimental species” into the habitat of an existing endangered species. Mitchell encouraged agricultural groups to challenge the illegal transfer of gray wolves and shouldn’t stop until every one of the imported wolves and their progeny have been removed. Click on the link above to watch a video clip of Mitchell’s talk.

http://mfbf.org/on-the-trail/2011/07/grizzlies-wolves-oh-my/

[Curly]

Looks like Dr. Mitchell has been trying to get people to listen to him for a little while now.

Here is a link to something he wrote a couple years ago:

Wolf reintroduction illegal, species should be removed

August 21, 2011


In 1973, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service listed the gray wolf as endangered in the Lower 48 states except Minnesota. This listing included the Rocky Mountain timber wolf which inhabited the greater Yellowstone ecosystem (GYE).

The Service's Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan called for the reintroduction of gray wolves into the GYE. In their Environmental Impact Statement, the USFWS failed to address the status of the already listed timber wolf in the GYE and the difference in subspeciation of the wolves to be released.

In 1995, the USFWS released 66 gray wolves taken from the Yukon into the GYE (Montana, Idaho and Wyoming). The Secretary of the Interior determined this population of wolves to be a "non-essential experimental population" and this population was to be treated as a "threatened species."

This reintroduction was highly illegal and in violation of the Endangered Species Act (Sect. 10(g) of the Act) itself. For the purposes of this subsection of the act, the term "experimental population" means any population (including any offspring arising solely therefrom) authorized by the secretary for release, but only when and at such times as, the population is wholly separate from non-experimental population of the same species. The USFWS took a different subspecies of gray wolves from the Yukon and released them into the already occupied range (GYE) of the "endangered timber wolf".

Today, it is estimated that 1650 wolves consisting of 244 packs and 111 breeding pairs are now widespread throughout Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Since the 1996 reintroduction was illegal and in violation of the act, every last wolf and all of their offspring therefrom should be removed from Montana

Richard M. Mitchell

P.O. Box 131

Alder

[wolfbait]

So he asserts that the native Rocky Mountain Timber Wolf lived in harmony with tame livestock animals?  Really?  So is that why they were eradicated?  And you think this guy is credible?

you beat me to it. 

So, what kind of data exists from GYE about this harmonious little wolf?  how many were there?

There was a study done prior to the wolf introduction, if I remember right there were 56 bps documented in Idaho, the USFWS ignored these wolves as they did everything else to reach their goal, just as WDFW is doing.

The Rocky MT wolves didn't run in huge packs, and there were very few wolf/livestock confrontations. They were a smaller wolf and not as aggressive, I think over the years these wolves had learned to respect people do to flying lead.

Honest biologists want to let the wolves recover on their own without the illegal wolf introduction, this way they would stay educated as they grew.

[boneaddict]

I think we should introduce 60 yukon moose into the selkirks to enhance the shiras population a little.  Why not........(sarcasm font)

I wouldn't have chosen the word harmoniously either, but that is just me.   Its pretty descriptive though.   There were a whole lot less problems that were easily manageable.

The definition of Living harmoniously .......  Sort of like today, prior to the event of dumping a bus load of child molesting pedophiles in the school playground during recess with no rules and letting them have a free pass because its "natural".  

[sled]

I think we should introduce 60 yukon moose into the selkirks to enhance the shiras population a little.  Why not........(sarcasm font)

I wouldn't have chosen the word harmoniously either, but that is just me.   Its pretty descriptive though.   There were a whole lot less problems that were easily manageable.

The definition of Living harmoniously .......  Sort of like today, prior to the event of dumping a bus load of child molesting pedophiles in the school playground during recess with no rules and letting them have a free pass because its "natural".

[JLS]

There were a whole lot less problems that were easily manageable.

Managed using strychnine. 

[wolfbait]

There were a whole lot less problems that were easily manageable.

Managed using strychnine.

"Managed using strychnine"

I wonder how much fun it is for the wolves to be run with a helo and shot? From what I have read shooting from the air isn't to accurate. Hunting these wolves as a big game animal will never control them. what do you think will be the end results in controlling wolves once they really start to cause problems in WA?

Wolf Recovery: The Exploitation of a Species http://outside.away.com/news/specialreport/wolf/mader.html
T.R. Mader, Abundant Wildlife Society
"All we learn from history is that we don't learn from history," so goes a well-known saying. How true!

It's claimed the wolf's history is one of exploitation, readily condemned by the self-acclaimed saviors of the wolf. Those greedy ranchers, thinking only of dollars and personal gain, trapped, shot and poisoned wolves until they were no more. Thoughts of wildness, wilderness, ecosystems and ecological balance never once entered their minds.

Yet, in reality, little has changed. Today the wolf is used for such selfish desires as job security (federal biologists, radio collars, kennels, studies), emotional satisfaction (wolves are the symbols of wildness, aren't they?), and, yes, personal gain -- $$$$$$$$$$$$.

Wolf recovery is big money for both government and private organizations. The government has spent millions on wolf-related studies. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has radio-collared more than 500 wolves in Minnesota alone and that project is still on-going.

We've all received those tear-jerker letters on wolves, how we can save them from extinction, etc., etc. Pick up your local wildlife catalog and you'll find all kinds of wolfie gifts. There are paintings--the kind to show wolves' "gentle qualities," or as "wilderness guardians;" Knives with wolves etched on the sides; wolf blankets, rugs and doormats; ties with wolves; wolf jackets, sweaters, sweatshirts, T-shirts; wolf belt buckles; wolf lapel/blouse pins; wolf stamps for your letters; wolf stationary and notes; wolf shopping and tote bags; wolf mugs; wolf door chimes; wolf key rings; wolf bookends; stuffed wolf pups; even wolf furniture--coffee and end tables with wolves etched in glass. The selection seems endless. This writer counted 28 such items in one catalog.

What does all this mean? Dollars! Wolves sell! They make money. And they guarantee job security for federal biologists and similar ilk. They mean big dollars in the coffers of wolf promoters.

But we're saving the wolf, aren't we? No, we're not! We're simply exploiting them in a new politically correct way.

Wolves are not biologically endangered. They never have been, nor will they be in the foreseeable future. They are politically defined as endangered in the Endangered Species Act. (Politically defined as endangered: The government sets artificial standards by which they can term a species endangered.) Yes, it's true we drastically reduced wolves' range, but they are not endangered. Biologists estimate wolves number over 50,000 in North America.

Now look what we did to them in the Yellowstone Recovery!

First, we aerial gunned them with tranquilizer darts (we even killed one doing this) and kidnapped them from their native habitat in Canada. Second, we imprisoned them in steel cages. Third, we drew blood, eartagged, radio collared and vaccinated these wolves. Fourth, we transported them to foreign soil and placed them in kennels. (Eyewitnesses state many cages were bloody from the wolves attempting escape by the time they reached Yellowstone.) Fifth, we turned them loose in this foreign place where more than 3 million people visit, drive, hike, camp and who knows what else. Do we have the wolf's best interest in mind here?

We must also note this area of release, i.e. Yellowstone National Park, is surrounded on all sides by people who have adamantly voiced their opposition to wolves so strongly that even state legislatures went on record repeatedly opposing this program, an area where the three S's--shoot, shovel, and shut-up--have become sort of unwritten law. An area where wolves have been naturally migrating for 15 years and only number about 85 now, concentrated in and near a national park.

Example: The nine-mile pack (also known as the Tragic Pack) in Montana. The mother was illegally shot, the father killed by a vehicle. FWS kept the pups alive by artificial feeding. These pups killed some cattle. They were then harassed by helicopter until captured, undoubtedly scared out of their wits during this ordeal. They're relocated to unfamiliar country. They disperse--one heads for livestock country, is re-captured and permanently locked up in a sanctuary in Washington State. Two are illegally killed and the third is simply missing--later found shot, too.

We have insisted all along that if the pro-wolf/pro-recovery people bullied this recovery on the western states, it wouldn't work and the wolf will be the loser. We've been prophetic.

So exploitation continues. The wolf loses, but that really doesn't matter anymore since it isn't the greedy ranchers who profit.

T.R. Mader, who grew up on a ranch in Wyoming, is research director of Abundant Wildlife Society of North America, an international wildlife organization opposed to the exploitation of wolves through recovery.