collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill  (Read 42131 times)

Offline KFhunter

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34512
  • Location: NE Corner
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #120 on: March 28, 2013, 06:27:02 PM »
Ok, so somebody sitting behind a desk in Olympia told him to say it wasn't a wolf kill.   :o

From what I understand, yes. 
A decision maker in Olympia must approve all confirmend wolf kills.

Offline winshooter88

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 713
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #121 on: March 28, 2013, 06:29:38 PM »
From his comments in the paper and in person the biologist in Wenatchee is very excited to see wolves both in the state and in the local area. He is also reluctant to make controversial calls on his own. And seems very willing to follow Olympia's lead and opinions on wolves in general.

Offline dontgetcrabs

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1900
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #122 on: March 28, 2013, 06:56:18 PM »
those dont look much like wolves to me.

Definitely coyotes.   ;)  :mgun:   :IBCOOL:

Offline NoImpactNoIdea

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 298
  • Location: King County
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #123 on: March 28, 2013, 07:49:46 PM »
Ok, so somebody sitting behind a desk in Olympia told him to say it wasn't a wolf kill.   :o

From what I understand, yes. 
A decision maker in Olympia must approve all confirmend wolf kills.

It will be just like crime stats or any other controvercial subject.  Deny, deny, deny, till they are caught in the act.

Offline Alan K

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 3024
  • Location: Lewis County, WA
  • University of Idaho Alumni
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #124 on: March 28, 2013, 07:50:27 PM »
This one of them?

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=79244.0;attach=151798;image

Did they ever even bother to find these when you last reported them?

Those must be uh . . . Hybrid uh. . . Hybrid wolves that people raised and then escaped and then bred in the wild. . . 

C'mon people! Anymore there is so much damn propoganda out there that you have to take everything with a grain of salt and decide for yourself whether you believe what you're seeing/hearing anymore!  Having just graduated from a natural resources college nearly two years ago I can say that every wildlife major I encountered at the University of IDAHO ( :yike:) was a bleeding heart wolf hugging liberal.  Hell, most of them hated hunting! All they cared about the animals, in the context of fuzzy friendly animals, not conservation.  I have no reservation whatsoever looking at anything any DFW (be it WA, ID, or even WY) announces skeptically because I know the type of crop they're introducing to their departments.

Taking the WDFW's word on anything is just naive.  Look at the facts presented and make your own decision, don't just take someones word for it! No doubt in my mind there is bias within WDFG any for that matter every game department, government, private company etc. in this world!

Offline jackelope

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+29)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 50162
  • Location: Duvall, WA
  • Groups: jackelope
WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #125 on: March 28, 2013, 10:34:36 PM »
So does anyone know the rancher?
:fire.:

" In today's instant gratification society, more and more pressure revolves around success and the measurement of one's prowess as a hunter by inches on a score chart or field photos produced on social media. Don't fall into the trap. Hunting is-and always will be- about the hunt, the adventure, the views, and time spent with close friends and family. " Ryan Hatfield

My posts, opinions and statements do not represent those of this forum

Offline KelseyH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 76
  • Location: Wenatchee
  • Groups: NRA, Sportsmans Association, Ducks Unlimited, RMEF, NAHF,
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #126 on: March 28, 2013, 10:34:54 PM »
Shoot and Shut Up.   

End Rant.



Offline 250savage

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 611
  • Location: Wenatchee
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #127 on: March 29, 2013, 08:15:42 AM »
The article in the Wen. World also says that " Ross Hurd the rancher who Owens the cattle with 2 brothers said he disagrees with the agency's conclusion. he said the agency investigators talked about the path of the struggle over some 30 yards, and the disturbed ground, and the bloody wound on the back of the cow's neck. This was in the article.

Offline Fowlweather25

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 1622
  • Location: Rochester, wa
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #128 on: March 29, 2013, 08:40:09 AM »
Thats what it looks like when something dies naturally due to a hard winter! :rolleyes:


It was wolves. All those who are in denial need to wake up and come back to reality.
What would life be without the thrill of the hunt?

Offline mulehunter

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 3367
  • Location: Hobart, Wa
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #129 on: March 29, 2013, 09:15:03 AM »
I know in my heart,  D.K "Bio" afraid to admit it that wolves did kill it So here easy way out of mess, he said it wasnt wolf kill. I guess he can sleep every night being peaceful from Liberals Bs.

 :rolleyes:

Offline bearpaw

  • Family, Friends, Outdoors
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 38442
  • Location: Idaho<->Colville
  • "Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
    • http://www.facebook.com/DaleDenney
    • Bearpaw Outfitters
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #130 on: March 29, 2013, 09:15:22 AM »
The article in the Wen. World also says that " Ross Hurd the rancher who Owens the cattle with 2 brothers said he disagrees with the agency's conclusion. he said the agency investigators talked about the path of the struggle over some 30 yards, and the disturbed ground, and the bloody wound on the back of the cow's neck. This was in the article.

So here is what I think is going on and I guarantee I am not the only person thinking this. I think WDFW agents conferred back and forth with Olympia and were told to call it something other than a wolf kill. This is why agents must be able to call wolf kills on the spot. If a person requested the cell phone records of the agents involved, I would bet the calls are going to Olympia Managers rather than to other agents who know how to identify wolf kills.

This is the exact same path followed in Idaho and Montana early on. In Idaho they had to figure out who the problem people were within the IDFG and they had to make personnel changes to resolve the problem. Idaho is finally on a better path with wolf management.
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!

http://bearpawoutfitters.com Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf! http://trophymaps.com DIY Hunting Maps are also offered

Offline Northway

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jun 2012
  • Posts: 469
  • Location: Seattle
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #131 on: March 29, 2013, 09:20:16 AM »
Quote
No wolves need to be on the Peninsula or even the westside of the southern cascades for delisting. If I get a chance I'll pull up the .pdf of the wolf plan and quote the verbiage.

Thanks

Bobcat,

From the Wolf Management Plan:

Page 64 of 301

"Mountains contain much of the “significant portion of the historical range” that would ensure the
long-term survival of the population. However, despite the presence of considerable high quality
habitat for wolves on the Olympic Peninsula and in southwestern Washington (Figure 10), wolves
would not need to occupy these areas to achieve recovery if they were present in both halves of the
Cascades and eastern Washington in sufficient numbers to satisfy the recovery objectives for each of
the three recovery regions. Eastern Washington is currently being recolonized from adjacent
populations in neighboring states and British Columbia, whereas the Olympic Peninsula and
southwestern Washington are distant from colonizing sources and separated by additional potential
barriers inhibiting natural dispersal. Recovery is therefore likely to happen more quickly through the
reoccupation of eastern Washington than waiting for wolves to reach far western Washington."

Page 68 of 301

"Recovery Objectives
The following recovery objectives have been identified to transition from one listed status to the
next:
1. The gray wolf will be considered for downlisting from state endangered to threatened
when 6 successful breeding pairs are present for 3 consecutive years, with:
• 2 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region,
• 2 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region, and
• 2 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast
region.
2. The gray wolf will be considered for downlisting from state threatened to sensitive when
12 successful breeding pairs are present for 3 consecutive years, with:
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region,
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region, and
• 4 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast
region.
3. The gray wolf will be considered for delisting from state sensitive when:
15 successful breeding pairs are present for 3 consecutive years, with:
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region,
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region,
• 4 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast
region, and
• 3 successful breeding pairs anywhere in the state.
Or:
In addition to the delisting objective of 15 successful breeding pairs distributed in the three
geographic regions for 3 consecutive years, an alternative delisting objective is also established
whereby the gray wolf will be considered for delisting when:
18 successful breeding pairs are present with the following distribution:
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region,
• 4 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region, and
• 4 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast
region, and
• 6 anywhere in the state."


So the plan doesn't address your questions about southwestern Cascades vs. southeastern Cascades with the level of specificity that you might be looking for, but I do believe it generally answers the question of whether breeding pair benchmarks could be achieved for the Coastal and Southern Cascades region entirely by BP's on the east slopes. 
Which side are you on if neither will claim you?

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9187
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #132 on: March 29, 2013, 09:32:57 AM »
Wolves didn’t kill cow, state says
By Michelle McNiel
World staff writer

Originally published March 28, 2013 at 8:21 a.m., updated March 28, 2013 at 10:17 a.m.

WENATCHEE — State wildlife experts have concluded that a pregnant cow found dead south of Wenatchee on Tuesday was not killed by a wolf.

However they are still worried about the two gray wolves that appear to be establishing territory on or near a cattle ranch in Pitcher Canyon.

“We’re just kind of on pins and needles hoping that this livestock operator doesn’t have any more issues with dead cows,” said Matt Monda, regional wildlife program manager for the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. “Once wolves learn that livestock is a meal, then we will have to go in and take action.”

In extreme cases, the action may require killing wolves, which are protected under federal and state endangered species laws.

“But that’s a very volatile path to take,” he added.

Pictures of the wolves have been captured on remote camera feeding on elk carcasses on the ranch for the last week and a half, though wildlife experts also concluded that the wolves had not killed at least one of those elks.

Monda said if the wolves had just come across a dead elk, they could feed on it for a week or more. So the agency doesn’t know if the wolves are just lingering in the canyon right now because they’ve found dead animals to eat or whether they’ve established a territory that now includes the ranch.

“As long as they have something to eat, there’s no reason for them to go somewhere else,” he said.

State biologists and enforcement officers dissected the dead cow in Pitcher Canyon on Tuesday with the ranchers present. Monda said they did not find any puncture holes, crushing bruises or internal bleeding that are characteristic of wolves or other predators having killed an animal.

“Something did eat the cow, but all evidence indicated that it was fed upon after it died,” he said. “But there was no sign of a scuffle, no torn-up ground, no blood. There was absolutely no sign that it was killed by a predator of any kind.”

Ross Hurd, the rancher who owns the cattle with his two brothers, said he disagrees with the agency's conclusions. He said the agency's iunvestigators talked about the path of the struggle over some 30 yards, and the disturbed ground, and the bloody wound on the back of the cow's neck. He also said he understands that the agency needs specific evidence to confirm it was a wolf kill, but he doesn't understand how the agency can conclude a wolf did not kill his cow.

For now, he's more concerned about wolves still lingering on his ranch. This morning, a wolf came right through their calving area, traveling up through their lowest field from below. They were able to chase it away, he said.

The agency hopes to trap one or both of the wolves this spring. Once the animals are outfitted with tracking collars, the agency can get a better idea of their territory and movement patterns.

Monda said the two closest wolf packs to Wenatchee — the Teanaway pack near Cle Elum and the Lookout pack in the Methow Valley — have very different territory patterns. The Teanaway pack tends to stay at lower elevations year round as it follows the deer and elk populations. The Lookout pack in the Methow Valley moves from lower, more populated elevations in the winter to higher, more backcountry locations in the summer, with the migration of the deer..

“So we don’t know if these (Wenatchee) wolves will move further and further away from Wenatchee as the summer progresses,” Monda said.

Pitcher Canyon is on the fringe of the Colockum elk habitat, “in an area where we would expect a wolf pack to do well,” he said.

Monda said the agency has no prediction on how large a pack could grow near Wenatchee. He said the Lookout pack to the north is “tenuous at best” with just two known wolves right now.

“They are just barely hanging on up there,” he said, adding that while the territory in North Central Washington is prime for wolves, “They aren’t taking off (in numbers) here like they have in other areas.”

The state agency had expected wolves to have established themselves more by now in the area between Wenatchee and the Methow Valley, he said.

If the two wolves spotted near Wenatchee are establishing a pack here, then Wenatchee would be the largest city in the state to have a wolf pack so close. However, many smaller communities do have wolves routinely nearby, including Winthrop and Twisp.

If the wolves hang around, Monda said the agency will make a “concerted effort” to educate people in the area about them.

The most likely interactions between people and wolves are either ranches or people who are hiking or working in wolf territory.

But Monda said it’s no different than the expectation that you might encounter a black bear, coyote, cougar or bobcat in the same areas.

“Is there any added risks with the wolves? I would say probably not,” he said. http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2013/mar/28/wolves-didnt-kill-cow-state-says/



"State biologists and enforcement officers dissected the dead cow in Pitcher Canyon on Tuesday with the ranchers present. Monda said they did not find any puncture holes, crushing bruises or internal bleeding that are characteristic of wolves or other predators having killed an animal."

“Something did eat the cow, but all evidence indicated that it was fed upon after it died,” he said. “But there was no sign of a scuffle, no torn-up ground, no blood. There was absolutely no sign that it was killed by a predator of any kind.”

 Top wolf managers in Olympia have made their minds up, not wanting to go with "it was probably a cougar" again, Conservation NW and WDFW have concluded "anything but their wolves killed the cow"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“By the time we got to the carcass it was too old for me to say yay or nay if it was killed by a wolf,” said Scott Fitkin, wildlife biologist with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. “It was clearly fed on by something, but not much was left but a lot of maggots.” Fitkin and a USDA Wildlife Services agent inspected the carcass on Friday (May 22).
http://www.conservationnw.org/pressroom/press-clips/proof-of-wolf-kill-may-elude-investigators

When experts examined the decomposing cow May 22, it had been so worked over by scavengers that there was little left but hide and hip bones.

Even so, "there was nothing about the carcass to indicate that wolves had anything to do with it," said Doug Zimmer, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009307261_wolves06m.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Ross Hurd, the rancher who owns the cattle with his two brothers, said he disagrees with the agency's conclusions. He said the agency's iunvestigators talked about the path of the struggle over some 30 yards, and the disturbed ground, and the bloody wound on the back of the cow's neck. He also said he understands that the agency needs specific evidence to confirm it was a wolf kill, but he doesn't understand how the agency can conclude a wolf did not kill his cow.

Offline Northway

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jun 2012
  • Posts: 469
  • Location: Seattle
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #133 on: March 29, 2013, 09:33:28 AM »
The article in the Wen. World also says that " Ross Hurd the rancher who Owens the cattle with 2 brothers said he disagrees with the agency's conclusion. he said the agency investigators talked about the path of the struggle over some 30 yards, and the disturbed ground, and the bloody wound on the back of the cow's neck. This was in the article.

So here is what I think is going on and I guarantee I am not the only person thinking this. I think WDFW agents conferred back and forth with Olympia and were told to call it something other than a wolf kill. This is why agents must be able to call wolf kills on the spot. If a person requested the cell phone records of the agents involved, I would bet the calls are going to Olympia Managers rather than to other agents who know how to identify wolf kills.

This is the exact same path followed in Idaho and Montana early on. In Idaho they had to figure out who the problem people were within the IDFG and they had to make personnel changes to resolve the problem. Idaho is finally on a better path with wolf management.

I would agree that they will probably be conservative in how quickly they list this pack as depredating. To bios this pack is much more important than the Smackout Pack because of it's location and contribution to recolonising the Cascades. It's the same thing with the Teanaway pack; they wouldn't remove either pack until **** really hit the fan in terms of depredations. 

For a specific example in a nother state: The ODFW has given the Imnaha Pack a lot more leeway that maybe it should have because they believed it to be a cornerstone of Oregon wolf recovery.
Which side are you on if neither will claim you?

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9187
Re: WDFW Claims cow was not wolf kill
« Reply #134 on: March 29, 2013, 09:40:38 AM »
It doesn't matter which pack is preying on livestock, WDFW have to be forced into call it a livestock kill, as has already been proven with two other packs.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal