Poachers more problematic than wolves?

[bearpaw]

I know 2 of the guys in this article pretty well...they know North-Central Idaho as good or better than anyone.  They very clearly acknowledge that wolves have some impacts, but they also very accurately point out that poaching has more impact to ungulate herds than wolves.  I've always had a more optimistic view on the amount of poaching...but these guys know N-C Idaho and they spend a lot of time in the field...I will take their word for it...and I will sure as heck take their math over some of the absurd guessing by others in this thread.

My absurd guess was based on government documented statistics arrived upon by researchers investigating wolf kills. Like it or not, those numbers were not a guess, they are a statistical fact. Wolves in the study killed on average the equivalency of 17 elk or 44 deer per year.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT! 

[bearpaw]

How Much Do Wolves Eat?

The amount of meat a wolf eats each year can vary. During a study in Yellowstone Park, 24 wolves were observed for 1 month in 1997 and 57 wolves were observed for 1 month in 1998. A total of 81 wolves were observed for a one month period and 114 kills were observed. This included 106 elk, 6 moose, 1 mule deer, and 1 bison. The average kill rate was 1.4 elk per wolf per month. That study indicates that 1 wolf will eat  17 elk per year. It would require 44 deer to equal the same body mass as 17 elk. So at that rate, 100 wolves will eat about 1700 elk or 4400 deer per year, and 1000 wolves will eat about 17,000 elk or 44,000 deer per year...(USGS Study)

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/mammals/severity/results.htm#table1

So at that rate, 100 wolves will eat about 1700 elk or 4400 deer per year.

Because wolves are obviously taking a mix of animals and there are roughly 300 wolves in north Idaho, the real toll is probably more like 2200 elk, 300 moose, and 6600 deer which obviously is several times worse than the poaching problem.

I'm not trying to say poaching is not a problem, but I am saying that wildlife agencies tend to water down the impacts of wolves and other predators when there are numerous studies that clearly indicate the real impacts of these predators.

The math in the quoted story simply doesn't add up. 

[JLS]

I read the article and I certainly don't get where some of you think that this in continued confirmation of agencies watering down, downplaying, or making excuses for wolf impacts.  Rather, I see it as a shot at the hunting culture that continues to excuse or rationalize poaching as no big deal, or something that is not worth taking their time to report.

I'm not going to argue numbers.  It's pointless. 

Sadly enough, this just goes to show how little objectivity there tends to be in anything that involves the word "wolves".  Instead of reading it for what it is, it appears that some just like to use it in some way to confirm their biases.

Myself, I found the estimates surprising and disconcerting.

[BOWHUNTER45]

I do not buy any of it .. just another way to cover up a bunch of BS ..Surprising how many fall for it ..just another positive for the Anti groups to add to their agenda  Not saying we have a poaching problem but I see it getting a lot worse once people get tired of the wolf issue ...

[bigtex]

There was a study done by Oregon St U. about 15 years ago which found for every legally taken animal, there is an illegally taken animal.

[buckfvr]

Yes, but thats not to say that some of those illegal animals were taken under the premise of being legal........

In other words, that study is not indicative of for each legal animal, an ADDITIONAL animal was taken illegally.

[KFhunter]

poaching is a big problem,  but I don't see how this has anything to do with wolves other than overall factors in herd pressure.


Agreed with JLS - it's just a smear on real hunters and I'll add it's a deflection to take the spotlight off wolves a little bit.

[buckfvr]

My same thought...........take some of the focus OFF the wolves..............

[JLS]

Why would the COs in question care one bit about taking the focus off of wolves? 

Of course, that theory supports all of the cover up conspiracies that are so en vogue nowadays.

[bearpaw]

Why would the COs in question care one bit about taking the focus off of wolves? 

Of course, that theory supports all of the cover up conspiracies that are so en vogue nowadays.

I provided the link to the research data showing the proven impact by wolves, no conspiracy theory, just factual data showing an average wolf eats 17 elk or 44 deer per year. Pretty hard to dispute printed data from the research study. 

On the other hand, I see lots of estimates/guesses at poaching impacts. Again, I agree poaching is a significant problem, but the data doesn't indicate poaching is near the problem that wolves/cougars/coyotes/bear are known to be. 

[JLS]

I provided the link to the research data showing the proven impact by wolves, no conspiracy theory, just factual data showing an average wolf eats 17 elk or 44 deer per year. Pretty hard to dispute printed data from the research study. 

I wasn't refuting the numbers nor was I referring to your posted study.

[idahohuntr]

Wolves hunt year around, every day! How long before there will be any wolf control in WA? I ask Wacoyote and he didn't have an answer, do you DoW=ID

With people like you running around spewing garbage conspiracies and making hunters look like complete fools to non-hunting voters...I don't know if there will ever be a wolf season in Washington.   

My absurd guess was based on government documented statistics arrived upon by researchers investigating wolf kills. Like it or not, those numbers were not a guess, they are a statistical fact. Wolves in the study killed on average the equivalency of 17 elk or 44 deer per year.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT! 

Oh, so now you are willing to trust the governments numbers eh?  The government can't count how many wolves there are but when they report how many deer and elk are killed they are "GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT"   

Anyways, I'm going to stick with info. being reported by the guys in the article...not you internet research/armchair biologist folks.  I also do not see this article as downplaying wolf effects in any way...its just pointing out very correctly how people "blow a gasket" about wolves but not so much when it comes to poaching.  The majority of the responses in this thread just further validate the points made by these great officers.

[snowpack]

Weren't those the old numbers?  The bios in YNP revised the wolf take to 24-26 elk per wolf per year. 

[stevemiller]

Wolves hunt year around, every day! How long before there will be any wolf control in WA? I ask Wacoyote and he didn't have an answer, do you DoW=ID

With people like you running around spewing garbage conspiracies and making hunters look like complete fools to non-hunting voters...I don't know if there will ever be a wolf season in Washington.   

My absurd guess was based on government documented statistics arrived upon by researchers investigating wolf kills. Like it or not, those numbers were not a guess, they are a statistical fact. Wolves in the study killed on average the equivalency of 17 elk or 44 deer per year.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT! 

Oh, so now you are willing to trust the governments numbers eh?  The government can't count how many wolves there are but when they report how many deer and elk are killed they are "GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT"   

Anyways, I'm going to stick with info. being reported by the guys in the article...not you internet research/armchair biologist folks.  I also do not see this article as downplaying wolf effects in any way...its just pointing out very correctly how people "blow a gasket" about wolves but not so much when it comes to poaching.  The majority of the responses in this thread just further validate the points made by these great officers.

Where do you get off,Everyone on this forum blows a gasket,boils over,when poaching is even mentioned.Poachers are held to a much lower regard than wolves on this forum.You sir are speaking out of both sides of your face,Poachers are garbage and should not be protected in any way,Wolves are hazardous to our herds and should be limited enough to stop detrimental damage to the herds while being protected from extinction.Do you get that now,what is being said by me now.I have not seen any where on this forum that all wolves across this state should be killed,I have not read anywhere on this forum anyone defending poachers either. 

[KFhunter]

Wolves hunt year around, every day! How long before there will be any wolf control in WA? I ask Wacoyote and he didn't have an answer, do you DoW=ID

With people like you running around spewing garbage conspiracies and making hunters look like complete fools to non-hunting voters...I don't know if there will ever be a wolf season in Washington.   

My absurd guess was based on government documented statistics arrived upon by researchers investigating wolf kills. Like it or not, those numbers were not a guess, they are a statistical fact. Wolves in the study killed on average the equivalency of 17 elk or 44 deer per year.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT! 

Oh, so now you are willing to trust the governments numbers eh?  The government can't count how many wolves there are but when they report how many deer and elk are killed they are "GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTED STATISTICAL FACT"   

Anyways, I'm going to stick with info. being reported by the guys in the article...not you internet research/armchair biologist folks.  I also do not see this article as downplaying wolf effects in any way...its just pointing out very correctly how people "blow a gasket" about wolves but not so much when it comes to poaching.  The majority of the responses in this thread just further validate the points made by these great officers.

Where do you get off,Everyone on this forum blows a gasket,boils over,when poaching is even mentioned.Poachers are held to a much lower regard than wolves on this forum.You sir are speaking out of both sides of your face,Poachers are garbage and should not be protected in any way,Wolves are hazardous to our herds and should be limited enough to stop detrimental damage to the herds while being protected from extinction.Do you get that now,what is being said by me now.I have not seen any where on this forum that all wolves across this state should be killed,I have not read anywhere on this forum anyone defending poachers either. 

Almost true,  read the wolf poaching threads with polls.  80% +/- supported wolf poaching.

Other than that carry on