Lawmakers: $2M aimed to kill more than 500 wolves

[jon.brown509]

Fun times for Idaho here's an answer many of you have been waiting for
http://www.krem.com/news/northwest-news/242296221.html

[CAMPMEAT]

Idaho is smarter than Washington State by leaps and bounds.

[snowpack]

Good luck to Idaho trying to manage those vermin.  Though, I feel they'll probably be looking at more than $2 million just in lawsuits from the eco-freakos.

[Wea300mag]

It seems the wolf promoters didn't learn from history, now it costs millions to get rid of them.

[Wea300mag]

That's $4000/wolf, quite a bounty on their heads now.

[sagewalker]

Good step in the right direction!

[KFhunter]

Wrong approach.

ID needs long term predator management,  not a $2 million temporary band-aid.

I love the co-op idea, let the hunters/trappers create their own economy rather than blow that kind of cash down the toilet for a temporary reprieve.  In the meanwhile Elk populations will boom drawing in more wolves as they disperse from neighboring states, which in turn will boom then you're looking at another 2 million dollar wolf removal project.

Haphazardly killing them down to 500 total isn't the correct approach,  you'll destroy established packs and create a vacuum.  Any stabilization of ungulate/predator relations will be on a roller coaster and impossible to stabilize.   I'd rather see wolves dispersed state wide but pack sizes very small and heavily controlled by trapping/hunting.

At $4000 bounty per wolf you'd have so many trappers in the woods you couldn't turn around without bumping a trap, a smaller bounty would suffice and you could increase/decrease on the needs of the state.  If the population ever drops where USFWS start threatening action ID could drop the bounty to nothing.  As they start gaining raise it.

[sagewalker]

at least they are taking action!!!

[jon.brown509]

  Couldn't have said it better KFhunter
This is what every "I wanna kill all the wolves to save my hunting " logic is wanting now there going to get it.Just the after effects well be far worse with juveniles leading new packs instead of mature dogs guess they'll have to blow away more money to fix it.Sad thing is no one well try to defend Idaho fish and game anymore because of stuff like this.

[sagewalker]

KFhunter and jon.brown509, you two should write to Idaho fish and game, help them out and lend them some knowledge!! 

[JLS]

Wrong approach.

ID needs long term predator management,  not a $2 million temporary band-aid.

I love the co-op idea, let the hunters/trappers create their own economy rather than blow that kind of cash down the toilet for a temporary reprieve.  In the meanwhile Elk populations will boom drawing in more wolves as they disperse from neighboring states, which in turn will boom then you're looking at another 2 million dollar wolf removal project.

Haphazardly killing them down to 500 total isn't the correct approach,  you'll destroy established packs and create a vacuum.  Any stabilization of ungulate/predator relations will be on a roller coaster and impossible to stabilize.   I'd rather see wolves dispersed state wide but pack sizes very small and heavily controlled by trapping/hunting.

At $4000 bounty per wolf you'd have so many trappers in the woods you couldn't turn around without bumping a trap, a smaller bounty would suffice and you could increase/decrease on the needs of the state.  If the population ever drops where USFWS start threatening action ID could drop the bounty to nothing.  As they start gaining raise it.

Actually, it sounds like it will be funneled into wildlife services and will not go as a $4k bounty per wolf.

I do agree with you, that it would make much more sense to greatly broaden the trapping season and let that be the mechanism by which numbers are reduced.

Should this money be authorized, there is a very good chance that a lawsuit will be filed and I think a very substantial chance that the wolf delisting could be jeopardized because Idaho is supposed to go five years under their approved plan without substantially altering it.

I think this is as much playing to Otter's constituency and a political show as anything.

[splitshot]

  could they have a hunt where hunters buy a tag for $100 or $200 or whatever and sell 1000 or whatever tags  and create some money and some recreation.  everyone gains, except the wolf.   mike w

[bearpaw]

If wolf numbers are dropped elk, moose, and deer numbers will rebound. License sales will increase again and the state will take in far more money than 2 million each year. They are losing more than that each year by having the wolves.

Smart economics! 

[mkcj]

 

[WA hunter14]

when would this start?