Salmon, Idaho's 1st Annual Wolf & Coyote Derby, Dec 28-29

[villageidiot]

If you guys can't get a perfect shot like one should on a deer then just throw lead.   The whole objective is to thin the packs.  If you don't get a trophy to put on the wall then you might have to settle for a sorry shot that at least thins the pack.   Sorta like shooting at a rapist or child abuser.  You'd love to see him hit the deck but anything is better than letting him get away and rape more kids.

[bearpaw]

Anyone know how many have been checked in?

There were two topics so I merged them.

236 hunters in the field for two days got 23 coyotes and 0 wolves. Look back a few posts to read the results.

[JLS]

If you guys can't get a perfect shot like one should on a deer then just throw lead.   The whole objective is to thin the packs.  If you don't get a trophy to put on the wall then you might have to settle for a sorry shot that at least thins the pack.   Sorta like shooting at a rapist or child abuser.  You'd love to see him hit the deck but anything is better than letting him get away and rape more kids.

Wow, great analogy, comparing wolves to rapists and child abusers.

Comparing natural predation to pedophilia?   

[Dan-o]

If you guys can't get a perfect shot like one should on a deer then just throw lead.   The whole objective is to thin the packs.  If you don't get a trophy to put on the wall then you might have to settle for a sorry shot that at least thins the pack.   Sorta like shooting at a rapist or child abuser.  You'd love to see him hit the deck but anything is better than letting him get away and rape more kids.

Wow, great analogy, comparing wolves to rapists and child abusers.

Comparing natural predation to pedophilia?   

Just curious:  Which do you think is worse?

[idahohuntr]

I expect you would have the same take as other wolf lovers on the forum.

Label me however you want but when I see folks do things that undermine the ability of hunters and states to manage their own wildlife and perpetuate the hunting heritage it pisses me off.   

On the wolf disease thing...there was a pretty good quote/article from an IDFG regional manager a few years ago on reducing human health risks:  "...human health risk is quite low, provided you avoid consuming things like canid [canine] feces..."  Given how full of "feces" most of the extremists on both sides of the wolf issue are I think this is a good reminder.       

[JLS]

If you guys can't get a perfect shot like one should on a deer then just throw lead.   The whole objective is to thin the packs.  If you don't get a trophy to put on the wall then you might have to settle for a sorry shot that at least thins the pack.   Sorta like shooting at a rapist or child abuser.  You'd love to see him hit the deck but anything is better than letting him get away and rape more kids.

Wow, great analogy, comparing wolves to rapists and child abusers.

Comparing natural predation to pedophilia?   

Just curious:  Which do you think is worse?

I am hoping your question is in jest?

Given that one is an animal that has been on this earth for a long time, and lacks any cognitive thought process other than feeding itself and perpetuating its species, and that the other is a human that has full cognitive abilities and preys on helpless children by using intimidation, shame, guilt, and fear to satisfy his/her own sexual fantasies I think you know full well which one is worse.  To try and compare them, is in my humble opinion, a direct insult to anyone that has suffered from rape or child abuse.

[JLS]

Aaah, the good old "wolf lover" shots.  Funny how those always come out of the woodwork from the same folks whenever someone tends to disagree with the anti-wolf rhetoric that can be so pervasive around here.

Call it "kool-aid" or whatever you want Dale.  I won't stoop to making condescending insults at you because that's not my style.  I'm surprised it's yours, but whatever floats your boat.

Once again, you and your homies demonstrate the need to categorized by black and white.  Anyone that doesn't march in lock step with the Lobo Watch mantra is a wolf lover and drinking kool-aid.  If something contradicts that mantra, then it must be a cover up.

Like Idahohunter, I am extremely passionate about passing on my hunting heritage.  It is a never ending quest of mine to expose people to hunting in a favorable light that shows them the true meaning of the hunt, why we do it, and why we care.  It pisses me off to no end also when people do stuff that makes us all look like a bunch of knuckle dragging rednecks.

How you can say the nonsense that "wolves can never be managed", when Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming have all reduced their wolf populations in several years through sport hunting and trapping?  All without the negative publicity that this derby stunt generated all in the name of "educating" people about a disease that can be avoided simply by washing your hands after you touch wolf crap.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I'll stand by my previous statements about predator pits. The evidence shows that wolves have caused predator pits in certain areas of Idaho. Hard winters, halted logging practices, and increased hunting seasons reduced herds and now introduced wolves combined with already present predators are preventing ungulate herds from recovering to carrying capacity. It's really not that hard to understand if you look at the whole picture.

I will also stand by my statements that NE WA is in a predator pit. This is due to back to back hard winters and high predator numbers (cougar, coyotes, bear, etc) mostly caused by WDFW predator management policies. The addition of wolves on the landscape will only lengthen and likely enhance this predator pit.

A predator pit would be a situation where predators prevent a herd from recovering from some other negative natural event such as a bad winter. The winters of 07-08 and 08-09 knocked the NE herd down, but I don't think you can make the case predators are preventing the herds from coming back. Harvest numbers for hunters were up in 2012 and I'm guessing we will see another upward trend for 2013. There would have probably been an increase in 2011 also except the new 4 pt only rule in 117 and 121 caused a corresponding drop in buck harvest numbers. Another reason for lower harvest numbers since 2010 would be the severe curtailing of doe harvest. Barring another bad winter, population trends should be generally up in the 100 units as long as there are no new habitat issues.

Which brings us to this question. Maybe part of the problem isn't a predator pit, maybe there is a habitat pit.

From the "Game Status and Trend Report " for 2013 by the  is this.

"More insidious than occasional bad winters in northeastern Washington is the on-going conversion of farm and forest lands into rural-residential developments along with the loss of alfalfa and cereal grain production on established agricultural ground. Between 1985 and 2008 production of cereal grains and alfalfa hay within Stevens and Pend Oreille
Counties declined approximately 45% (Source:National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA). This change in agricultural production in combination with occasional severe winters and prolonged summer droughts has probably led to a reduction in white-tailed deer abundance but not their overall distribution."

Yes, in hard times predators can cause a temporary decline in cervid populations, but in almost all cases, with good habitat, the cervids will bounce back.

From an Alaska study on wolves and deer.....

"Theoretically, if the fecundity of a deer population declines below a threshold level, a rapid decline in deer density is likely
to result, with predation as the proximate cause (Van Ballenberghe and Hanley1984).

But their recommendation? Do you think it was to concentrate on wolves? You'd be wrong.

"Management practices that lower the carrying capacity of the habitat can initiate population declines. Management to maintain habitat and prevent declines in deer populations seems more logical than trying to reverse deer declines by
controlling wolves (Van Ballenberghe and Hanley 1984).

In other words, protect or improve habitat, and the rest will take care of itself.

[stevemiller]

JLS,I have read thru all the post in this thread and hear both sides pretty clear.The only question I have is do you think it is differant.to hunt wolves than coyotes,or any other game for that matter?Not being a smart --- or anything just want to know thats all.

[JLS]

JLS,I have read thru all the post in this thread and hear both sides pretty clear.The only question I have is do you think it is diff.to hunt wolves than coyotes,or any other game for that matter?Not being a smart --- or anything just want to know thats all.

I can't speak to this directly, as I've not hunted wolves due to time and budgetary constraints.  Randy Newberg from On Your Own Adventures/Fresh Tracks stated that they are very difficult to hunt, which would be my guess. 

If I were going to hunt wolves, I would devise a calling system that sounded like hounds baying at a tree, and I would have a partner (or two) to cover more shooting lanes.  I would use a treestand, and I think this would really change the odds in favor of the hunter.

I would hang stands about 75 yards out from the caller in an arc where the wolves would try to circle downwind of the caller.

I think the mere physical nature and environmental conditions of the hunt are a big factor in reducing hunter success.

[stevemiller]

Sorry not what I meant in my question,I mean ethically.

[JLS]

Sorry not what I meant in my question,I mean ethically.

I fully support hunting carnivores, and I fully intend to shoot a wolf in the very near future.  And when I do, I will be proud of how I did it and make no apologies to anyone.

[KFhunter]

 

[stevemiller]

Thanks that was a straight answer,wow dont get many of them.Thanks.So will I. 

[KFhunter]

I'll stand by my previous statements about predator pits. The evidence shows that wolves have caused predator pits in certain areas of Idaho. Hard winters, halted logging practices, and increased hunting seasons reduced herds and now introduced wolves combined with already present predators are preventing ungulate herds from recovering to carrying capacity. It's really not that hard to understand if you look at the whole picture.

I will also stand by my statements that NE WA is in a predator pit. This is due to back to back hard winters and high predator numbers (cougar, coyotes, bear, etc) mostly caused by WDFW predator management policies. The addition of wolves on the landscape will only lengthen and likely enhance this predator pit.

A predator pit would be a situation where predators prevent a herd from recovering from some other negative natural event such as a bad winter. The winters of 07-08 and 08-09 knocked the NE herd down, but I don't think you can make the case predators are preventing the herds from coming back. Harvest numbers for hunters were up in 2012 and I'm guessing we will see another upward trend for 2013. There would have probably been an increase in 2011 also except the new 4 pt only rule in 117 and 121 caused a corresponding drop in buck harvest numbers. Another reason for lower harvest numbers since 2010 would be the severe curtailing of doe harvest. Barring another bad winter, population trends should be generally up in the 100 units as long as there are no new habitat issues.

Which brings us to this question. Maybe part of the problem isn't a predator pit, maybe there is a habitat pit.

From the "Game Status and Trend Report " for 2013 by the  is this.

"More insidious than occasional bad winters in northeastern Washington is the on-going conversion of farm and forest lands into rural-residential developments along with the loss of alfalfa and cereal grain production on established agricultural ground. Between 1985 and 2008 production of cereal grains and alfalfa hay within Stevens and Pend Oreille
Counties declined approximately 45% (Source:National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA). This change in agricultural production in combination with occasional severe winters and prolonged summer droughts has probably led to a reduction in white-tailed deer abundance but not their overall distribution."

Yes, in hard times predators can cause a temporary decline in cervid populations, but in almost all cases, with good habitat, the cervids will bounce back.

From an Alaska study on wolves and deer.....

"Theoretically, if the fecundity of a deer population declines below a threshold level, a rapid decline in deer density is likely
to result, with predation as the proximate cause (Van Ballenberghe and Hanley1984).

But their recommendation? Do you think it was to concentrate on wolves? You'd be wrong.

"Management practices that lower the carrying capacity of the habitat can initiate population declines. Management to maintain habitat and prevent declines in deer populations seems more logical than trying to reverse deer declines by
controlling wolves (Van Ballenberghe and Hanley 1984).

In other words, protect or improve habitat, and the rest will take care of itself.

You've described one aspect but missed several others that are equally important.

Along about the time all the farms quit raising hay and selling out to California transplants a couple of other things happened at the same time.

trapping.  So many trappers were instantly cut off at the knees with the loss of foot hold traps. There is no ideal way to bring down the coyote population in the mountains and woodlands.  Coyotes won't go in a cage.  Our coyote population has grown but a ton and they eat at lot of fawns.  today trappers would have a heyday with coyotes if footholds were allowed statewide - we can dream right?

hounds.  Houndsmen were driving the bears away from human populations,  anywhere there was a road and easy access there was a strike dog on the hood of an old truck.  This kept bear away from the best deer habitat - farmlands.   Now we got bear everywhere and they're really good at finding fawns.


So you increase predation and decrease feed,  I'm surprised there are as many deer as there are really.