WDFW Offers Reward for info ................wolf killing

[AspenBud]

WDFW LE watch hunting-washington.com. I would advise discretion in the things you report or pass on here. Just sayin'. 

I agree!

I have heard that many WDFW LE feel the same as many of us, where wolves are concerned, that being said they still have a job to enforce the the laws. Remember IDFG and their LE? Look the other way boys.

The problem is WDFW refuses to confirm livestock killed by wolves useless they have no other choice. I think WDFW LE take a lot of heat for WDFW's poor decisions over wolf killed livestock. Remember in the past WDFW sent the info to Olympia to see whether to call it a wolf kill or not.  If that isn't enough WDFW's biologist go out of their way to blame everything but wolves. It was a cougar, a coyote, the eagles did it, etc..

In the past most confirmation of wolf packs have come from wolves killing livestock, so if WDFW refuse to deal with problem wolves, why would ranchers call them for help? I think this suits WDFW just fine. DoW, CNW, etc. don't want the wolves delisted, and it sure seems WDFW feel the same.

The problem is you guys have been crying wolf since before wolves set foot in this state.

Seriously, the second it was confirmed that a wolf was walking around near Wenatchee photos started popping up on here (like within days) of a "wolf kill" near there that looked more like a cougar kill. No one was posting "wolf kill" pictures of dead livestock from that area until word got out that they were there.  That's not suspicious or anything.    

If no one listens when kills are called in there is a good reason. EVERYTHING is called a wolf kill now. It's a nice way to try and skim a buck while also pointing blame at a predator you don't want.

They should stop compensating anyone for wolf kills.

I knew you were Humanure. Now it's all but confirmed. Your reply is no surprise. Wolves were forced down our throats and you don't think anyone should be compensated because you personally have nothing to lose. You have no dog in this fight but the hell with the ranchers. They deserve what they get, right?

Dale, humanure's back and it's AspenBud.

No, I'm not, and you need to grow some thicker skin.

Actually I made the comment because...

A. People are just going to shoot them anyways.

and

B. I honestly think people are trying to game the system. Not all, but enough.

I see no reason to compensate people who are ultimately just going to shoot the animals anyhow and if the state really isn't paying in legit cases they should not be in the business of making promises they can't keep.

[RG]

It's interesting how WDFW can fail do its duty by hiding behind the no money excuse when it's convenient. When they closed the catch and release steelhead season on the Sky I asked the biologist why they thought there was a shortage of wild fish since everybody who spent time on the river knew better. She said "we don't know how many there are we don't have any money to study it. We closed it just in case". Now they say wolf studies are too expensive.

Curiously enough, with fish and wolves, they refused to accept assistance from groups who were willing to do the studies. By making sure the true facts are only held by those they can manage or censor they can control the path of management they choose with nobody to prove them wrong. It would be interesting if sportsmens groups got together and funded an independent wolf count and assessment for comparison.  I believe most of the people with boots on the ground at WDFW are good well-meaning people.  The work they do and the information they compile is often manipulated or totally changed by the powers in the upper levels of the agency. I've heard this in the past from people who write these reports.

[pianoman9701]

My skin's plenty thick. If the system is being gamed, it's a fault of how the system was set up in the first place, much the same as the overall wolf plan. It's not the fault of the ranchers who are losing cattle and sheep. But again, it's really easy for you to sit and pass judgement and say they're gaming the system. You've got no skin in the game. You can sit back at your computer and type the ranchers into being the bad guys. Regardless of how it turns out, you've still got your Seattle apartment and 9-5 job, while they get screwed out of a living.

[AspenBud]

My skin's plenty thick. If the system is being gamed, it's a fault of how the system was set up in the first place, much the same as the overall wolf plan. It's not the fault of the ranchers who are losing cattle and sheep. But again, it's really easy for you to sit and pass judgement and say they're gaming the system. You've got no skin in the game. You can sit back at your computer and type the ranchers into being the bad guys. Regardless of how it turns out, you've still got your Seattle apartment and 9-5 job, while they get screwed out of a living.

The problem is if they are really losing that many sheep and cattle to wolves in this state and if they are really not reporting any of that as Wolfbait suggests they are, because as he puts it, it's a waste of time, then no one outside of the ranchers involved has the foggiest idea of the toll/what's going on out there.

Here's a great idea, everyone (ranchers) should start photographing every single kill, what killed it doesn't matter, and document it. Gather numbers year by year to show that many more livestock are being killed than in years past. At the very least it should show that the state and public has a predator problem and at best it might show a correlation between wolves arriving. To date, as it relates to the state of Washington, I have yet to see any such thing but I admit I haven't really looked either.

[pianoman9701]

My skin's plenty thick. If the system is being gamed, it's a fault of how the system was set up in the first place, much the same as the overall wolf plan. It's not the fault of the ranchers who are losing cattle and sheep. But again, it's really easy for you to sit and pass judgement and say they're gaming the system. You've got no skin in the game. You can sit back at your computer and type the ranchers into being the bad guys. Regardless of how it turns out, you've still got your Seattle apartment and 9-5 job, while they get screwed out of a living.

The problem is if they are really losing that many sheep and cattle to wolves in this state and if they are really not reporting any of that as Wolfbait suggests they are, because as he puts it, it's a waste of time, then no one outside of the ranchers involved has the foggiest idea of the toll/what's going on out there.

Here's a great idea, everyone should start photographing every single kill, what killed it doesn't matter, and document it. Gather numbers year by year to show that many more livestock are being killed than in years past. At the very least it should show that the state and public has a predator problem and at best it might show a correlation between wolves arriving. To date, as it relates to the state of Washington, I have yet to see any such thing but I admit I haven't really looked either.

They've been documenting and the DFW bios have told them they're coyote kills or cougar kills even with all of the evidence pointing at wolves - tracks, kill characteristics, etc. It's not been until recently that the bios have been directed to start telling the truth. This whole plan has had BS from the start and with the government lying to the citizens. Since 1996 it's been complete BS and that includes the USFWS and the lies they fed to Congress.

[buckfvr]

In a nut shell.........every agency involved has repeatedly lied with in their professional capacity involving wolves.  Most, if not all, continue to lie.  They can/do and will because there is no consequences what so ever.

[AspenBud]

My skin's plenty thick. If the system is being gamed, it's a fault of how the system was set up in the first place, much the same as the overall wolf plan. It's not the fault of the ranchers who are losing cattle and sheep. But again, it's really easy for you to sit and pass judgement and say they're gaming the system. You've got no skin in the game. You can sit back at your computer and type the ranchers into being the bad guys. Regardless of how it turns out, you've still got your Seattle apartment and 9-5 job, while they get screwed out of a living.

The problem is if they are really losing that many sheep and cattle to wolves in this state and if they are really not reporting any of that as Wolfbait suggests they are, because as he puts it, it's a waste of time, then no one outside of the ranchers involved has the foggiest idea of the toll/what's going on out there.

Here's a great idea, everyone should start photographing every single kill, what killed it doesn't matter, and document it. Gather numbers year by year to show that many more livestock are being killed than in years past. At the very least it should show that the state and public has a predator problem and at best it might show a correlation between wolves arriving. To date, as it relates to the state of Washington, I have yet to see any such thing but I admit I haven't really looked either.

They've been documenting and the DFW bios have told them they're coyote kills or cougar kills even with all of the evidence pointing at wolves - tracks, kill characteristics, etc. It's not been until recently that the bios have been directed to start telling the truth. This whole plan has had BS from the start and with the government lying to the citizens. Since 1996 it's been complete BS and that includes the USFWS and the lies they fed to Congress.

Yes, but humor me and give me numbers. What was the rate of loss (not dollars, I want number of animals killed) for livestock in 1990 versus today. I want them for Washington, not Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. They are only relevant as it relates to what could happen and has, not what is happening today, in Washington.

I can tell my boss I need more people, but I won't get far if I can't quantify why. The same principle applies here.

I know you hate wolves, but what the heck does it matter what killed the livestock if the state and the public doesn't even know the magnitude of the problem overall with predators? Losses are losses. You can extrapolate a lot with data, including a jump in losses that correlates with wolves wandering into the state, but you have to have numbers and you need proof and to have it documented by someone other than the owner of said livestock.

[pianoman9701]

I have no interest in humoring you. The numbers are there if you want to look for them. Ask the Stevens Co. Cattleman's Assn and they'll give you all the numbers you need. Ask Jim Beers and he'll give you whatever you need.

[AspenBud]

I have no interest in humoring you. The numbers are there if you want to look for them. Ask the Stevens Co. Cattleman's Assn and they'll give you all the numbers you need. Ask Jim Beers and he'll give you whatever you need.

In other words you don't know. Fair enough, I don't either.

But that's the problem. Take McIrvin for instance, he came out and complained about wolves eating his cows, and that's definitely not in doubt, but for the life of me I don't think I've seen a single verified year over year set of numbers from the guy regarding how many cattle he has lost in the last 25 years to predation in general. Maybe he has it, maybe every single rancher in Washington who wants rid of wolves does, but I can guarantee that's not widely known or seen in the general public.

If they do, what do those numbers really say when looked at objectively? That's the stuff that potentially changes minds.

[AspenBud]

Without statistics it's kind of hard to prove anything. Sure, wolves may get to a point where they eat babies out of mothers' arms, but so far the statistics between Canada and the lower 48 don't show that. We do have, however, bear attacks reported every year with the most recent to make headlines of a woman in Florida being attacked and dragged out of her garage by one.

If ranchers in Washington are losing more cattle, sheep, whatever every year to predators, and if there is a real spike in the last 5, that says something. Particularly in Stevens County. But if the average over the last 25 years is about the same year over year, well...

It's one thing to get all wound up emotionally over the issue, that goes for both sides, it's another to look at hard numbers for what they really are.

[wolfbait]

It's interesting how WDFW can fail do its duty by hiding behind the no money excuse when it's convenient. When they closed the catch and release steelhead season on the Sky I asked the biologist why they thought there was a shortage of wild fish since everybody who spent time on the river knew better. She said "we don't know how many there are we don't have any money to study it. We closed it just in case". Now they say wolf studies are too expensive.

Curiously enough, with fish and wolves, they refused to accept assistance from groups who were willing to do the studies. By making sure the true facts are only held by those they can manage or censor they can control the path of management they choose with nobody to prove them wrong. It would be interesting if sportsmens groups got together and funded an independent wolf count and assessment for comparison.  I believe most of the people with boots on the ground at WDFW are good well-meaning people.  The work they do and the information they compile is often manipulated or totally changed by the powers in the upper levels of the agency. I've heard this in the past from people who write these reports.

 "I believe most of the people with boots on the ground at WDFW are good well-meaning people.  The work they do and the information they compile is often manipulated or totally changed by the powers in the upper levels of the agency. I've heard this in the past from people who write these reports."

Very true RG, I know folks who work for WDFW who told Fitkin of different wolves packs in the Okanogan, and it stopped right there. I also know of people on the westside who wanted to start confirming wolf packs over there and they were told NO.

[RG]

It's a tragedy that our political system has degenerated to the point of paybacks for political favors and shady back-room deals being what drives many of the decisions.  "Green" money flows quite freely to support the causes that then influence many of the decisions that are made.

In my experience I've had opportunity to see a little of this from an inside view and it totally surprised me. If we could look past the curtain and see it all working I'm afraid it may be an ugly sight. Not all of those in positions of influence are involved in shady deals but there most certainly are a number of them.

This in my mind explains why some of these decisions seem to defy reason and don't follow what I call the normal flow of the universe. Why would biologists be told to lie? By would information be suppressed?  On the surface it doesn't make sense that an agency would do that unless there's another agenda they are trying to hide. I don't know but it sure makes me wonder.

Aspen Bud I agree to some extent with a little of your premise. If a free ranging wild animal wanders in and kills my cow its my problem. If somebody takes away my right to protect my cow then it's their problem the way I look at it.  WDFW says the wolves wandered into Washington from elsewhere, they never put them here. If that's true it's not their fault a wolf killed my cow. If WDFW prevents me from protecting my cow then the loss is on them. They don't prevent me from killing other predators which attack my cow.

[Broker]

Without statistics it's kind of hard to prove anything. Sure, wolves may get to a point where they eat babies out of mothers' arms, but so far the statistics between Canada and the lower 48 don't show that. We do have, however, bear attacks reported every year with the most recent to make headlines of a woman in Florida being attacked and dragged out of her garage by one.

If ranchers in Washington are losing more cattle, sheep, whatever every year to predators, and if there is a real spike in the last 5, that says something. Particularly in Stevens County. But if the average over the last 25 years is about the same year over year, well...

It's one thing to get all wound up emotionally over the issue, that goes for both sides, it's another to look at hard numbers for what they really are.

As much as you may not like it, emotion is what moves people to action.  You get video of somebody's cocker spaniel getting dragged off a porch in Sammamish or a mom and kids menaced by a wolf on their daily walk to the bus stop in Redmond and things will change real quick. 

[bearpaw]

Without statistics it's kind of hard to prove anything. Sure, wolves may get to a point where they eat babies out of mothers' arms, but so far the statistics between Canada and the lower 48 don't show that. We do have, however, bear attacks reported every year with the most recent to make headlines of a woman in Florida being attacked and dragged out of her garage by one.

If ranchers in Washington are losing more cattle, sheep, whatever every year to predators, and if there is a real spike in the last 5, that says something. Particularly in Stevens County. But if the average over the last 25 years is about the same year over year, well...

It's one thing to get all wound up emotionally over the issue, that goes for both sides, it's another to look at hard numbers for what they really are.

In one year McIrvin's lost more cattle to wolves than they've ever lost to any other predators. That's why that pack was mostly killed. Old News... 

The data is proven on wolves and they are being managed heavily in other states where the wolf lovers don't control the Fish & Game. 

This isn't even an intelligent discussion. 

[AspenBud]

Without statistics it's kind of hard to prove anything. Sure, wolves may get to a point where they eat babies out of mothers' arms, but so far the statistics between Canada and the lower 48 don't show that. We do have, however, bear attacks reported every year with the most recent to make headlines of a woman in Florida being attacked and dragged out of her garage by one.

If ranchers in Washington are losing more cattle, sheep, whatever every year to predators, and if there is a real spike in the last 5, that says something. Particularly in Stevens County. But if the average over the last 25 years is about the same year over year, well...

It's one thing to get all wound up emotionally over the issue, that goes for both sides, it's another to look at hard numbers for what they really are.

As much as you may not like it, emotion is what moves people to action.  You get video of somebody's cocker spaniel getting dragged off a porch in Sammamish or a mom and kids menaced by a wolf on their daily walk to the bus stop in Redmond and things will change real quick.

I like it fine. I just don't think it will be anymore earth shattering than the numerous cougar, bear, and coyote incidents that have occurred for years. It will however snap many back into reality. Oh well.