While Big Game Herds Continue To Dwindle - Federal & State Wildlife Agencies Hid

[wolfbait]

While Big Game Herds Continue To Dwindle - Federal & State Wildlife Agencies Hide Real Wolf Numbers 
http://www.lobowatch.org/adminclient/WolfControl6/go

[idahohuntr]

I bet this terrifies the hell out of you wolf nut jobs doesn't it?  Wolf numbers starting to decrease or even level off and yet there is still a lot of elk hunting opportunity...Wyoming is having record elk harvests...Idaho and Montana continue to provide abundant OTC opportunities.  How will you continue to dupe less informed hunters into donating money to all your get rich quick schemes if they start to realize all your bs hysteria about elk hunting being over is just, well, bs.    I think its time for you to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$...this wolf thing is probably going to dry up soon.  Although, this could be good news for enviro whack jobs...their fringe base will be led to believe the government is starting to kill off all the wolves and therefore they need to donate $$.  Its sad to see what all these clowns on both extremes will do for money...really makes prostitution look like a noble profession.

[KFhunter]

I don't think the wolf thing will "dry up" in WA where we can't trap, shoot or hunt wolves.

ID is a success story because they're killing *a lot* of wolves and folks like you try to twist Idaho's ability to maintain decent Elk hunting in some areas(by killing so many wolves) to show that wolves don't have the effect "we" anticipated.


left unchecked they'll play hell.  I don't know why anyone would debate that 

[WAcoyotehunter]

I don't think the wolf thing will "dry up" in WA where we can't trap, shoot or hunt wolves.

ID is a success story because they're killing *a lot* of wolves and folks like you try to twist Idaho's ability to maintain decent Elk hunting in some areas(by killing so many wolves) to show that wolves don't have the effect "we" anticipated.

The predicted effect was a total loss of hunting opportunity, total loss of game herds, "predator pit", and wolves killing people with mundane regularity. 

We have not seen any of those things.  In contrast to what many on here believe (spout...) a managed wolf population can exist on the landscape without the doomsday scenario that many like to ramble on about.  They are going to have an impact-no doubt about it- but "no wolves" is not an option for Washington.  We are going to have to deal with them.

WA is getting closer to managing wolves.  Hopefully our side (hunters) are prepared to make an intelligent argument for hunting as the primary management tool.  I'm not sure we are, based on the majority of posts in the wolf section of this forum.

[wolfbait]

I don't think the wolf thing will "dry up" in WA where we can't trap, shoot or hunt wolves.

ID is a success story because they're killing *a lot* of wolves and folks like you try to twist Idaho's ability to maintain decent Elk hunting in some areas(by killing so many wolves) to show that wolves don't have the effect "we" anticipated.

The predicted effect was a total loss of hunting opportunity, total loss of game herds, "predator pit", and wolves killing people with mundane regularity. 

We have not seen any of those things.  In contrast to what many on here believe (spout...) a managed wolf population can exist on the landscape without the doomsday scenario that many like to ramble on about.  They are going to have an impact-no doubt about it- but "no wolves" is not an option for Washington.  We are going to have to deal with them.

WA is getting closer to managing wolves.  Hopefully our side (hunters) are prepared to make an intelligent argument for hunting as the primary management tool.  I'm not sure we are, based on the majority of posts in the wolf section of this forum.

Maybe you could give all of us an estimate on how close we are to managing wolves Wacoyote? How many more years will we have to wait for WDFW to confirm the rest of the BP's?

Tell us what happens when wolves run out of prey? Do they just head off to another county? Or do they start killing more livestock etc..? What happens when a state game agencies protects predators? How long will it take for WDFW to recognize that the uncontrolled predators are having an impact on the game herds and will they then start managing predators or will they shut down hunting in those areas?

[WAcoyotehunter]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

[CAMPMEAT]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

Your box is full of msgs........

[snowpack]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

There are some smaller elk herds that right now are permit only due to size.  It won't take much for the wolves to end those special permits.
Also, even when/if management becomes an option, there are westside herds that tend to be in proximity to land that I can't ever imagine any really effective wolf control occurring on.  The herds in the North Puget Sound area close enough to North Cascades NP that wolf measures will probably just be symbolic.  The herds in the South Sound have Mt Rainer NP.  The herds on the Olympic Peninsula have Olympic NP.  I would think it would be rather unlikely to have wolves brought to a managed number, when they will be doing whatever they want in those parks.

[KFhunter]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

[buckfvr]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

    All honesty and transparency cast aside in favor of meeting the agenda of special interest groups.

[wolfbait]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

I know they are not hiding any wolf packs, as Okanogan county residents have seen several, which WDFW continue to ignore or claim to be part of the lookout pack. As far as WDFW not shutting down hunting how far do you think they will let the game herds drop before they decide on some kind of action to remedy the decline? Once agin will they start managing predators? Look at the Lolo elk herd as an example, will WDFW continue to pretend that WA wolves are a different wolf and do study after study?

Do you think when wolves run low on prey they will just move to a different county, or will they start to kill more livestock?

I remember the wolf working group, which was stacked with pro-wolf people, I don't think WDFW really care what the hunters, ranchers etc. think, after all look at WDFW's thirty year Wildlands plan,  they don't mention anything about hunting or hunters.

[4fletch]

I find it hard to believe the gov. Would lie to us. By the time wa figures that we have enough wolves it will be to late too many elk will be long gone

[timberfaller]

  Government LIE to us?

[bearpaw]

I bet this terrifies the hell out of you wolf nut jobs doesn't it?  Wolf numbers starting to decrease or even level off and yet there is still a lot of elk hunting opportunity...Wyoming is having record elk harvests...Idaho and Montana continue to provide abundant OTC opportunities.  How will you continue to dupe less informed hunters into donating money to all your get rich quick schemes if they start to realize all your bs hysteria about elk hunting being over is just, well, bs.    I think its time for you to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$...this wolf thing is probably going to dry up soon.  Although, this could be good news for enviro whack jobs...their fringe base will be led to believe the government is starting to kill off all the wolves and therefore they need to donate $$.  Its sad to see what all these clowns on both extremes will do for money...really makes prostitution look like a noble profession.

 

What in the heck are you talking about, exactly the opposite is true. Millions have been spent by the US Government, state agencies, there are millions in documented livestock losses, and losses of hunter opportunity have cost local economies millions in Idaho and Montana. Most people simply wanted wolves managed so our quality of life, livestock and pets, big game herds, and local Washington economies don't suffer the same fate that's been documented in some areas of Idaho and Montana where wolves were allowed to overpopulate.

Make no mistake, the people of Idaho have reduced the wolf population in some wolf impacted areas and that's specifically why more elk and deer are surviving in those areas, yes, herds are beginning to recover in some wolf impacted areas, this is due to the activists who have worked hard for wolf management, I'm happy to see the fruits of their success in countering the wolfers.

[bearpaw]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

Unfortunately there are some people that I think are a little naïve to the political climate in Washington. While Idaho and Montana are working to reduce the wolf population after delisting (an agency stated fact in ID/MT/WY), Washington has adopted one of the most liberal wolf plans putting the most wolves on the least amount of landscape with the highest human population. It's certainly possible I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet the end result will be more wolf problems.

Here's the million dollar question:

Are wolf groups and the urban population in western Washington going to allow wolf management in Washington once the wolf numbers are reached for delisting?

[AspenBud]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

Unfortunately there are some people that I think are a little naïve to the political climate in Washington. While Idaho and Montana are working to reduce the wolf population after delisting (an agency stated fact in ID/MT/WY), Washington has adopted one of the most liberal wolf plans putting the most wolves on the least amount of landscape with the highest human population. It's certainly possible I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet the end result will be more wolf problems.

Here's the million dollar question:

Are wolf groups and the urban population in western Washington going to allow wolf management in Washington once the wolf numbers are reached for delisting?

Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA.

As for urban WA and whether they'll allow management, I think that depends, oddly, in some ways on Idaho. If the governor there is overly successful, and so far he has had more of an impact than the gloom and doom folks predicted, people may look at that and feel wolves can't handle hunting pressure like coyotes.

If Idaho gets below 200 wolves it will be a hard sell to get anything more than the right to protect yourself and livestock and a strict hunting season. You may as well forget about trapping except for limited situations.

I've said this before, what is going on in Idaho, if overly successful, will likely have a negative impact in more wolf friendly states. Don't expect much unless wolves start attacking people as much as dogs.

[idahohuntr]

What in the heck are you talking about, exactly the opposite is true.

Let me simplify it: The fringe nutjobs on both sides of the wolf issue are both dead wrong - Wolves will not be the end of all hunting, nor will wolves be exterminated from the landscape.  The information posted by the OP describing how wolf numbers are leveling off/declining slightly (but not dramatic declines) is great evidence that our state agencies are capable (if they are given the opportunity) of managing both deer/elk numbers as well as wolf numbers.  This is really bad news if you are one of those blood sucking leaches that gets your money by drumming up bs like wolves will end all hunting or that states are going to exterminate all wolves.  That is why I strongly suspect stable/declining wolf numbers in the face of continuing good OTC elk hunting opportunity just terrifies the hell out of the wolfbait/lobowatch/defenders of wildlife etc. crowd...their doom and gloom scenarios are not coming to fruition.   

Your statement about whether westside groups will allow wolf management is spot on and exactly the point I try to make when hunters on this forum start spewing conspiracy garbage that leaves any reasonable person wondering about the mental stability of such folks.  If those non-hunting, voting west-siders think hunters in WA are just wanting to kill off every wolf in WA to stop some illegal government conspiracy to end rural living and ranching....well...that's not going to go so well now is it?  Idaho and other states demonstrating successful predator management (maintaining viable predator and prey populations) is a good thing...it nullifies the whack jobs on both sides. 

[bearpaw]

What in the heck are you talking about, exactly the opposite is true.

Let me simplify it: The fringe nutjobs on both sides of the wolf issue are both dead wrong - Wolves will not be the end of all hunting, nor will wolves be exterminated from the landscape.  The information posted by the OP describing how wolf numbers are leveling off/declining slightly (but not dramatic declines) is great evidence that our state agencies are capable (if they are given the opportunity) of managing both deer/elk numbers as well as wolf numbers.  This is really bad news if you are one of those blood sucking leaches that gets your money by drumming up bs like wolves will end all hunting or that states are going to exterminate all wolves.  That is why I strongly suspect stable/declining wolf numbers in the face of continuing good OTC elk hunting opportunity just terrifies the hell out of the wolfbait/lobowatch/defenders of wildlife etc. crowd...their doom and gloom scenarios are not coming to fruition.   

Your statement about whether westside groups will allow wolf management is spot on and exactly the point I try to make when hunters on this forum start spewing conspiracy garbage that leaves any reasonable person wondering about the mental stability of such folks.  If those non-hunting, voting west-siders think hunters in WA are just wanting to kill off every wolf in WA to stop some illegal government conspiracy to end rural living and ranching....well...that's not going to go so well now is it?  Idaho and other states demonstrating successful predator management (maintaining viable predator and prey populations) is a good thing...it nullifies the whack jobs on both sides.

The people I see making the most money off wolves are the wolf groups taking in memberships and winning lawsuits against agencies that pay hefty salaries to their management. RMEF and other groups supporting wolf management mostly have a high rating for using dollars taken in for on the ground wildlife projects rather tan for salaries.

Please show us how wolfbait or anyone else on this forum is making money by opposing wolves. 

[idahohuntr]

http://biggameforever.org/endorsements-and-sponsors.php

This is one I could find in 3 seconds...I don't care to go look for the myriad of wolf nut job donation links that exist.  Same is true for the enviro fringe.

My main point is very clear: The fringe nut job sides are only interested because there is a profit to be had, and so stabilizing wolf numbers and concurrent large OTC elk opportunity is bad for business..  Just pointing out how all these whackos have incentive to make up bs like wolf or elk numbers being distorted or manipulated without providing any evidence of such blatant wrong-doing.

Guys like wolfbait seem more interested in using hunters as pawns for anti-government/personal occupation benefits...not sure if he has ties to one of these groups that makes money drumming up support from the anti wolf crowd or not...he spreads their distortions so frequently it makes one wonder.

[bearpaw]

http://biggameforever.org/endorsements-and-sponsors.php

This is one I could find in 3 seconds...I don't care to go look for the myriad of wolf nut job donation links that exist.  Same is true for the enviro fringe.

My main point is very clear: The fringe nut job sides are only interested because there is a profit to be had, and so stabilizing wolf numbers and concurrent large OTC elk opportunity is bad for business..  Just pointing out how all these whackos have incentive to make up bs like wolf or elk numbers being distorted or manipulated without providing any evidence of such blatant wrong-doing.

Guys like wolfbait seem more interested in using hunters as pawns for anti-government/personal occupation benefits...not sure if he has ties to one of these groups that makes money drumming up support from the anti wolf crowd or not...he spreads their distortions so frequently it makes one wonder.

I didn't think you could prove that wolfbait or anyone else on this forum was/is making money opposing the lack of management of wolves.

I bet this terrifies the hell out of you wolf nut jobs doesn't it?  Wolf numbers starting to decrease or even level off and yet there is still a lot of elk hunting opportunity...Wyoming is having record elk harvests...Idaho and Montana continue to provide abundant OTC opportunities.  How will you continue to dupe less informed hunters into donating money to all your get rich quick schemes if they start to realize all your bs hysteria about elk hunting being over is just, well, bs.    I think its time for you to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$...this wolf thing is probably going to dry up soon.  Although, this could be good news for enviro whack jobs...their fringe base will be led to believe the government is starting to kill off all the wolves and therefore they need to donate $$.  Its sad to see what all these clowns on both extremes will do for money...really makes prostitution look like a noble profession.

That was your reply to wolfbait's first post and you clearly suggest to wolfbait  "to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$"! You don't know if wolfbait or anyone else on this forum makes money by opposing wolves yet you make that accusation.

Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue? 

[buckfvr]

 it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue? 

  And among other things...................

[AspenBud]

Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue? 

You're both right about one thing, a lot of the complaints have a lot more to do with money than any impacts the wolf has had.

I would, and do, look very skeptically at any economic down turns in those areas that have occurred since 2007. Washington got off lucky compared to a lot of other states in this recession, states that normally sent out of state hunters to Idaho et al. That doesn't even include general belt tightening that occurred by those who still went hunting there be it from Idaho or outside.

[wolfbait]

I don't know how long it will take for WA to be ready to manage the wolf population.  I don't think we are there right now, the wolves are not recovered and the state is still scrambling to react to the population increases.  I guess it will be a few years before the state has to start to seriously think about killing wolves for the sake of the herds. 

I do not believe that the state is "hiding" any wolf packs or BP's.  I do believe that they are unable to find them all.  There are a couple up this way that should probably be counted, but are not on the states list yet.  They are on the radar though, and the WDFW will get them caught and collared one of these days.

I don't think the WDFW will shut down hunting in any of the areas due to predators, I'm not sure why that would even be a concern....

Wolves are not going to mean the "end of hunting" in WA, they are likely to cause some change to the ungulate behavior and decrease in the populations.  The fact remains, if hunters intend to be a part of the management scheme we better have a solid, intelligent position.  Torches and pitchforks are not going to get hunters any traction.

"One of these days" isn't going to cut it.   Wolf introduction, reintroduction depending on the camp you're in has got to be the biggest thing to happen to WA's big game since, well since WDFW has existed.   It should be job #1 to document these wolves but they aren't doing it.

It's obvious WDFW is going to have a "hands off" approach to wolves and I can't abide by that.

Unfortunately there are some people that I think are a little naïve to the political climate in Washington. While Idaho and Montana are working to reduce the wolf population after delisting (an agency stated fact in ID/MT/WY), Washington has adopted one of the most liberal wolf plans putting the most wolves on the least amount of landscape with the highest human population. It's certainly possible I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet the end result will be more wolf problems.

Here's the million dollar question:

Are wolf groups and the urban population in western Washington going to allow wolf management in Washington once the wolf numbers are reached for delisting?

Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA.

As for urban WA and whether they'll allow management, I think that depends, oddly, in some ways on Idaho. If the governor there is overly successful, and so far he has had more of an impact than the gloom and doom folks predicted, people may look at that and feel wolves can't handle hunting pressure like coyotes.

If Idaho gets below 200 wolves it will be a hard sell to get anything more than the right to protect yourself and livestock and a strict hunting season. You may as well forget about trapping except for limited situations.

I've said this before, what is going on in Idaho, if overly successful, will likely have a negative impact in more wolf friendly states. Don't expect much unless wolves start attacking people as much as dogs.

"Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming also had bigger populations of wolves by the time delisting came. Much bigger than WA."

 the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association (IOGA) supported the 2002 Idaho Wolf Conservation and Management Plan and fought to be involved and recognized as stakeholders in subsequent state and federal bureaucratic processes and,

 the USFWS recovery goal of 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves in three separate recovery areas for a period of three consecutive years was reached in 2002 and,

 the USFWS de-listed the gray wolf population from the Endangered Species List in March of 2008. A lawsuit was filed in Federal District Court in Montana by a group of Plaintiffs challenging the Service’s delisting. On August 6, 2010, U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy’s ruling returned wolves in Idaho to ESA protection, thus precluding continued implementation of Idaho’s Wolf Conservation Management Plan. The 2008 delisting allowed Idaho and Montana to implement a wolf hunting season for 2009. With the August 2010 ruling, there will be no further wolf hunting until and if the wolves are once again delisted and,

 IOGA thinks it is disingenuous and shameful on the part of certain wolf advocate groups to employ the moving goalpost strategy regarding the accepted goals of wolf recovery and

 Idaho’s wolf population continues to grow and expand at an average annual rate of 20 percent. based upon the best available science, the 2009 population is more than 835 wolves in Idaho, 94 packs and 49 breeding pair, 8 times the minimum Federal recovery level with 1,600 in the Northern Rocky Mountain population which is a 400-mile southern extension of the vast Canadian and Alaskan populations whose numbers are estimated to exceed 60,000 animals and,

 many IOGA Hunt outfitter members believe 2009 Idaho wolf population numbers are significantly underestimated and,

 wolf predation has and continues to have a substantial adverse affect on elk populations in certain areas, particularly in northern and central Idaho where management population objectives are no longer met and have created a predator pit and,

 hunt outfitters are also very concerned with the additive impact of wolf predation on Idaho’s moose population and,

 wolf predation has prevented elk population objectives from being met in several management zones and has necessitated reduced opportunities for hunters, outfitted and non-outfitted, negatively affecting Idaho’s economy, as well as Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) revenues


http://ioga.org/member-information/resolutions/wolf-management-and-control/

[idahohuntr]

That was your reply to wolfbait's first post and you clearly suggest to wolfbait  "to find a new government conspiracy to milk for some quick $$$"! You don't know if wolfbait or anyone else on this forum makes money by opposing wolves yet you make that accusation.

Considering the documented data proving wolf impacts in ID/MT and the known loss of recreational dollars in many small towns that rely on hunters for commerce and the resulting hardships on local citizens in wolf impacted areas, and considering the fact that hunters and IDFG are reducing wolf numbers in Idaho which obviously results in less impact by wolves in those areas where wolf numbers have been reduced, it seems you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue? 

Nor have you provided any evidence he isn't connected to these myriad of groups making money stirring up hysteria and non-sense about wolves...The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue   

[wolfbait]

More blubber from you, not a big surprise

[notawolffan]

The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue   

What idahohuntr is not addressing is the personal aspect of the wolf vs human confrontation. This situation is not about who is giving money to what group but about which people are coming face to face with these animals. The people who are funding the environmentalist groups like conservation nw are NOT the ones who are forced to live with these animals. I don't know about you but my life was difficult enough before I had to deal with face to face confrontation with a 100+ pound feral predator. If you enjoy dealing with that kind of situation on a daily basis well congratulations to you. Personally I preferred the time BEFORE I realized that I need to be constantly looking over my shoulder to be sure there's not a wolf lurking there about to pounce on me, my kids or my dogs.

[Elkaholic daWg]

   Wolfbait, Feeding trolls never works out   ......

[AspenBud]

The real issue here is not where wolfy gets his money though, but rather how wolf nutjobs must be terrified about the notion of stable wolf populations and stable elk populations...it doesn't fit the doom and gloom talking points. If you don't understand how fringe on all sides of the wolf issues are using it to extract a profit and you think all the debate is coming from well meaning hunters and well meaning environmentalists....well, you have a significant misunderstanding of the wolf issue   

What idahohuntr is not addressing is the personal aspect of the wolf vs human confrontation. This situation is not about who is giving money to what group but about which people are coming face to face with these animals. The people who are funding the environmentalist groups like conservation nw are NOT the ones who are forced to live with these animals. I don't know about you but my life was difficult enough before I had to deal with face to face confrontation with a 100+ pound feral predator. If you enjoy dealing with that kind of situation on a daily basis well congratulations to you. Personally I preferred the time BEFORE I realized that I need to be constantly looking over my shoulder to be sure there's not a wolf lurking there about to pounce on me, my kids or my dogs.

You see many wolves running through Castle Rock? If they are there, they are living where people who fund environmentalist groups like Conservation NW live and they will expand their range.

I see this argument a lot and I don't buy it. People who fund such groups already deal with cougars and bears, they're even crazy enough to walk into the woods unarmed with them around and sometimes they get attacked, wolves will just be another animal to them.

Now, if you want to say the majority of those people don't have to deal with wolves as it relates to livestock, I wholeheartedly agree. Be it livestock or plants, the majority of the population has forgotten what it's like to try and earn a living off the land and the dirty details that go with it. It's not all sunshine and happy days.

[smittyJ]

If Wolfs are "managed" like the state has "managed" the central wa. Elk herd for the last 20 years, we should not have a problem. My 2cts!