Poachers more problematic than wolves?

[pianoman9701]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

[jay.sharkbait]

:

I don't have a problem with someone saying that poachers are a problem, because they are. Even one animal to a poacher is one too many. But to attempt to say "look at this big problem over and quit looking over there" is wolf propaganda. That's exactly what I believe the OP was trying to accomplish. If not, then the OP shouldn't have posted it under the Wolves section. If it's not meant to deflect the 'wolves are decimating our ungulates' argument, then it should have been posted under Elk or the WDFW section. It has absolutely nothing to do with wolves. But it was meant as a deflection. That's precisely why the OP posted it under wolves. In that light, it's a poorly-masked attempt to minimize the impact of wolves on ungulates.

 
You guys crack me up...you talk like anyone with any real decision making authority even reads stuff on this forum.  I assure you they do not...particularly decision makers outside of Washington State.  But mostly you continue to prove exactly what is in the article...people blow a gasket over wolves, they want control boards, increased funding, action plans to reduce wolf numbers, they want it discussed at every commission meeting, they vote for politicians that play the anti-wolf card etc.  However, if anybody mentions other limiting factors like poaching, habitat, whatever...its "a deflection to take the heat off wolves"    :chuckle  You are well trained lemmings I will give you that...watch out for the cliff       

PS - I posted it in the wolf section because the major point of the article related to wolf vs. poaching impacts to ungulates in N-C Idaho.  But I'm sure you can spin that into some kind of secret conspiracy led by DOW/CNW to throw you guys off...good thing you are so clever and caught on before total damage was done 

If you don't like what's posted or think it's stupid for us to discuss the incredible damage wolves are doing and will continue to do, please feel free to stop posting in this forum. We'll figure out a way to recover from the loss.

Nice comment to the guy who started the thread.

[snowpack]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

That was a thought of mine too.  Also the difference in what and where.  Poachers are likely focusing on trophy animals (but do take others) in areas near roads or agriculture.  Wolves tend to hit the back country hard taking the fawns/calves or slower (pregnant) females.  Different impacts on the herds.

[idahohuntr]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

Nobody said poaching is new...just that wolves get all the fanfare and knowledgable wildlife officials are simply reminding folks that poaching is as or more significant than wolf predation.  Why folks are so blinded by wolves they cry foul anytime people bring up other issues like poaching or habitat is hard to understand.

[Elkaholic daWg]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

Nobody said poaching is new...just that wolves get all the fanfare and knowledgable wildlife officials are simply Diverting  folks that poaching is as, or more significant than wolf predation.  Why folks are so blinded by wolves they cry foul anytime people bring up other issues like poaching or habitat is hard to understand.

Fixed it for Ya!

[pianoman9701]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

Nobody said poaching is new...just that wolves get all the fanfare and knowledgable wildlife officials are simply reminding folks that poaching is as or more significant than wolf predation.  Why folks are so blinded by wolves they cry foul anytime people bring up other issues like poaching or habitat is hard to understand.

I don't believe at all that poaching is anywhere near as significant as wolves in affecting ungulate populations. But regardless, even if it were (in whatever fantasy land in which you live), the wolves are a new, added strain on ungulates. We call foul because 1. we don't need them to control ungulate populations (we humans do that just fine when we're allowed), 2. these are not the same wolves that lived here before, and 3. the wolf plan in WA is irresponsible and not tailored to our specific human population density. Apparently, none of the problems that MT, WY, and ID were experiencing were considered in formulating this extreme plan for WA. I will call foul until we can start killing them and will continue after. They don't belong here. They belong in northern remote Canada.

[bearpaw]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

Nobody said poaching is new...just that wolves get all the fanfare and knowledgable wildlife officials are simply reminding folks that poaching is as or more significant than wolf predation.  Why folks are so blinded by wolves they cry foul anytime people bring up other issues like poaching or habitat is hard to understand.

Guess I'll repeat myself! 

   As easily as they made their statement "not an attempt to downplay wolves", I can make the statement "not an attempt to downplay poaching." Facts are facts, wolves kill more than poachers and it's documented. When you have a valid argument and something more than here say please enlighten us. 

[idahohuntr]

the only variable idahohunter that i have is did poaching just start up in 1995? My guess being around n-c idaho the last 40 years is that what the game dept. classifies as poaching has been going on in the regions for 100 years but now all of a sudden it has a big effect on the ungulate herd? I understand that yes it sounds like we only blame the wolf and there are alot of varibles in the equation, but the only new varible is the wolf so that has to be a huge factor!

This is a very good point, one that I missed entirely. Not to excuse poaching at all, but poaching isn't a new strain on the resource and wolves are. So, I guess if we get rid of all the poachers, then the wolves are OK then? Bwahahaha! Yeah, right.

Nobody said poaching is new...just that wolves get all the fanfare and knowledgable wildlife officials are simply reminding folks that poaching is as or more significant than wolf predation.  Why folks are so blinded by wolves they cry foul anytime people bring up other issues like poaching or habitat is hard to understand.

I don't believe at all that poaching is anywhere near as significant as wolves in affecting ungulate populations. But regardless, even if it were (in whatever fantasy land in which you live), the wolves are a new, added strain on ungulates.

The article discussed in this thread refers to poaching effects in N-C Idaho.  The gentlemen interviewed for the article are senior officers with decades of experience and familiarity with N-C Idaho ungulate herds, habitat, predators, hunting, and poachers.  They are all life-long hunters who want to shoot an elk as much as any of us.  Given their substantial experience in wildlife abundance, mortality, poaching, and hunting in N-C Idaho they are very qualified to speak to relative mortality factors IMO.  They are not suggesting that wolves do not have an impact.  So, please share what experience you have that qualifies you to speak more knowledgeably than those 3 officers of the factors influencing wildlife in N-C Idaho?  Wait, let me guess...wolfbaits posts??             

We call foul because 1. we don't need them to control ungulate populations (we humans do that just fine when we're allowed), 2. these are not the same wolves that lived here before, and 3. the wolf plan in WA is irresponsible and not tailored to our specific human population density. Apparently, none of the problems that MT, WY, and ID were experiencing were considered in formulating this extreme plan for WA. I will call foul until we can start killing them and will continue after. They don't belong here. They belong in northern remote Canada.

None of your points above pertains to anything in the article that is the topic of this thread...nobody is talking about "needing" wolves, or where the wolves came from or what the WA wolf plan is.  Did you even read the article?  You probably don't even know where Idaho is...fortunately you don't let your ignorance stop you from speaking up    

[pianoman9701]

Self-loathing must be a real problem for you, then.

[Buzz2401]

I don't support wolves in any way but I don't feel this article has some underlying theme of wolf support.  I also have to laugh when folks believe that WDFW has anything to do with the wolf populations in washington.  They have to follow what is set by the feds and then by what is set by our lawmakers.  The majority of WDFW is on our side but at the same time they have to enforce what the people vote for.  I have never met a wdfw officer that was in support of bear bait bans or using dogs for cougar, but it was passed into law so they have to do their job.  I think the WDFW does a great job with what they are given.  We have a state with a ton of hunters and a limited amount of game and then split by 50% non-hunters and 50% hunters, their job isn't even close to easy.

[popeshawnpaul]

Poaching and wolves will always be there.  Probably easier to control wolves.  More and more penalties won't stop it because, just like DUI, someone does it anywhere between 10-100 times before caught.  It doesn't stop most though because they figure they got away with it so many times and only got caught when they made a stupid mistake they won't make again.  It's just life.

[stevemiller]

I read this article then reread it,I then went and did some research on the subject of Idaho,Lots of pictures of half eaten carcases found they are checking the bodies for any lead with metal detectors...............No specifics on what was found as far as bullets go but a lot of evidence of predation in the photos.No police reports or arrest stats given.Now I would hope we could all agree on the number of deer or elk it takes to sustain 1 wolf.That being said I would think that there would be a lot of news on poachers being caught if they are killing so much more than the wolves.Now Im not saying your wrong maybe the poachers do kill 10 times more than wolves,Im open to that concept no prob.But if thats true in my op that blows the crap out of your theory that these officers are top notch,know all,scientifically superior ETC.If they cant catch more of the poachers then they are far from superior in their evidence gathering skills.

[idahohuntr]

I don't support wolves in any way but I don't feel this article has some underlying theme of wolf support.  I also have to laugh when folks believe that WDFW has anything to do with the wolf populations in washington.  They have to follow what is set by the feds and then by what is set by our lawmakers.  The majority of WDFW is on our side but at the same time they have to enforce what the people vote for.  I have never met a wdfw officer that was in support of bear bait bans or using dogs for cougar, but it was passed into law so they have to do their job.  I think the WDFW does a great job with what they are given.  We have a state with a ton of hunters and a limited amount of game and then split by 50% non-hunters and 50% hunters, their job isn't even close to easy.

My sentiments exactly...well said.  We as hunters have to provide comment/direction/opinion to wdfw on what they can do better or change, but I think we also need to keep in mind what you said and not alienate or denigrate them in ways that become detrimental to sustaining good sportsmen-agency relationships.  They are very much on our side in general and whether you like them or not we have no bigger ally when it comes to protecting the hunting in this state.

I read this article then reread it,I then went and did some research on the subject of Idaho,Lots of pictures of half eaten carcases found they are checking the bodies for any lead with metal detectors...............No specifics on what was found as far as bullets go but a lot of evidence of predation in the photos.No police reports or arrest stats given.Now I would hope we could all agree on the number of deer or elk it takes to sustain 1 wolf.That being said I would think that there would be a lot of news on poachers being caught if they are killing so much more than the wolves.Now Im not saying your wrong maybe the poachers do kill 10 times more than wolves,Im open to that concept no prob.But if thats true in my op that blows the crap out of your theory that these officers are top notch,know all,scientifically superior ETC.If they cant catch more of the poachers then they are far from superior in their evidence gathering skills.

I appreciate that you read this with an open mind and certainly can understand your point about these officers.  I think it points to resources (number of officers and time they have to committ) more than their capabilities.  Like most states you've got one or 2 wardens per county or something 

[bearpaw]

I don't support wolves in any way but I don't feel this article has some underlying theme of wolf support.  I also have to laugh when folks believe that WDFW has anything to do with the wolf populations in washington.  They have to follow what is set by the feds and then by what is set by our lawmakers.  The majority of WDFW is on our side but at the same time they have to enforce what the people vote for.  I have never met a wdfw officer that was in support of bear bait bans or using dogs for cougar, but it was passed into law so they have to do their job.  I think the WDFW does a great job with what they are given.  We have a state with a ton of hunters and a limited amount of game and then split by 50% non-hunters and 50% hunters, their job isn't even close to easy.

Not exactly correct. Wolves have been delisted in the eastern 1/3 of Washington for a few years. It's the Washington self inflicted wolf plan and lack of hiring adequate wolf trappers to prove wolf numbers that is holding up management in this area. 

I definitely agree that WDFW has quite the balancing act with WA demographics and politics.

[Buzz2401]

Sit and think for 60 seconds about a plan for poaching that you were gonna do yourself and then tell me what exactly law enforcement could do to stop you.  Some poaching is very blatant but the bottom line is that we have thousands of miles of roads and getting away with poaching an animal isnt that hard, even if you multiple game officers by 10 fold.  But it would be alot easier to control wolf populations cause then you have thousands of people out there doing the work.  Maybe some day we will get to do that in washington.  Might take a few wolf lovers getting mauled or them loosing their precious little dog.