one wolf dead!

[AspenBud]

And wolfbait wonders why the state keeps buying land...   

If there is a bigger threat to hunting in this state than wolves it is limited land access. Weyerhaeuser has already priced a lot of people out of the game on the west side. That said, they still allow access to public lands via roads on their property.

[AspenBud]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.   

Big time slippery slope to mandate that a private landowner has to give access of any kind.  BAD IDEA!   My family owned several hundred acres backed up to NF growing up, and it was a constant battle keeping people out.   I am a huge proponent of property rights.  They are already screwing landowners enough with building permits, property taxes, etc....  However, if you have some property you have worked your butt off and poured your money into for the past forty years, and want to allow public access be my guest.  Just don't try to force your view on those of us who have worked our butts off building what we've got.   

If you buy/own a chunk of private land you must have legal access to your property...that is, your neighbors can not landlock you out of your property.  So in a private/private land ownership situation, a private landowner does have to give access...that is law...so there is no slippery slope...its already mandated.  All I would like is for that same right to extend to publicly owned lands.

IE: blaze roads through private property.  (I'll let the readers decide if I'm the liar here)


We should get back to talking about the sheep farmer and his wolf problem.

Indeed, I think a one way ticket to hard feelings with many hunters is for landowners who want their help with wolves to say "please help us out with wolves, just don't come asking for land access to hunt."

[pianoman9701]

Wolves and Coyotes SHOULD have one thing in common!  Open season year around

Canada will always have enough to share.  Those who want to hunt them can and those who think the lovely and cuddly can go and take pictures too.

Unfortunately, by the time there's open season on wolves in WA it'll be because there's no season for anything else we want to hunt.

[idahohuntr]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.   

Big time slippery slope to mandate that a private landowner has to give access of any kind.  BAD IDEA!   My family owned several hundred acres backed up to NF growing up, and it was a constant battle keeping people out.   I am a huge proponent of property rights.  They are already screwing landowners enough with building permits, property taxes, etc....  However, if you have some property you have worked your butt off and poured your money into for the past forty years, and want to allow public access be my guest.  Just don't try to force your view on those of us who have worked our butts off building what we've got.   

If you buy/own a chunk of private land you must have legal access to your property...that is, your neighbors can not landlock you out of your property.  So in a private/private land ownership situation, a private landowner does have to give access...that is law...so there is no slippery slope...its already mandated.  All I would like is for that same right to extend to publicly owned lands.

IE: blaze roads through private property.  (I'll let the readers decide if I'm the liar here)


We should get back to talking about the sheep farmer and his wolf problem.

Access does not mean road KF.  Access is a different word than road.  A road is a driveable surface for a motorized vehicle.  Access is a means of entering a place...including on foot.  Stop intentionally lying about what I say and confusing the two...words mean things. 

Good point Aspen on why depredation claims may not be a priority in the future...its kind of like the bear/tree damage proposal we are seeing from wdfw.  You have problem bears but you want to charge hunters to access your land?  Let us know how that works for ya!

[wolfbait]

One legally taken wolf gets more press than all of the dozens of privately owned, valuable, cattle, sheep, guard dogs, and pets combined.  Timberfaller has it right, 365 and 24/7 wolf take on private land.  If the feds and DNR can garner public support for different management on there land, more power to them.  Grazing on millions of acres of public land is a tool that has benefit if used properly.  State owned wildlife on private land is becoming more and more a risk and cost that the state talks about but does little.  Ask the land owners in the Skagit Valley about elk, private land grazers in Stevens county about predators, grain farmers about deer, elk and turkey losses and the performance of the agencies involved rarely gets a passing grade.  The solutions require communication and understanding of complicated systems and issues not control mentalities.

 "Ask the land owners in the Skagit Valley about elk, private land grazers in Stevens county about predators, grain farmers about deer, elk and turkey losses and the performance of the agencies involved rarely gets a passing grade. " The solutions require communication and understanding of complicated systems and issues not control mentalities."

As wolves impact the game herds, the herds move down into private land, and refuse to leave causing ranchers etc. problems that use to only occur during heavy snow years, and yet the USFWS and state game agencies refuse to acknowledge the reason is wolves.

Farmers, ranchers etc. have tried to communicate with the USFWS, and state game agencies over these problems, look at the input to the WDFW wolf plan, ranchers wanted six BPS we ended up with 15. Now according to WDFW the wolves are populating WA faster then they anticipated, and yet known wolf packs are still not being confirmed.

After 18 years and every study that could be thought up has been studied to death and WDFW want to continue with new studies? And After 18 years many of the problems are not complicated at all, all fingers point at wolves, but the solution does not fit into the narrative of the USFWS and some state game agencies. Look at WDFW wildlands plan and the players involved. http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,150293.175.html  http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00727/cwcs_executive_summary.pdf

The problem is not "communication and understanding of complicated systems and issues", the problem is the the solutions do not fit in with the USFWS and WDFW agenda, or the lawyers that make up DoW, CNW, and other groups that make money suing the USFWS and receiving federal grants for studies that have already been done numerous times.

The nature conservancy etc. buy up private lands and then resell the land to the feds at huge profit, in other wards the "environmental groups" are the middle men for the feds, so it doesn't look like the feds are buying up as much land as they are. Look at WDFW and their land purchases, it has nothing to do with conserving habitat with wolves in the picture, because with uncontrolled wolves there will be no game.

How long will it be before WDFW confirms enough wolf packs to delist, and what kind of impact will the wolves have had on our game herds and livestock by then? Does WDFW care? Six years later with a wolf plan that calls for 15 BPS and where are we today?

Six years for ID, MT, and Wyoming:

2002
Estimated 663 wolves including 43 breeding pairs in tri-state area. Third year of 3 year countdown. USFWS announces
wolves are recovered in tri-state area.

2003
Estimated 761 wolves including 51 breeding pairs in tri-state area. Wolves downlisted from endangered to threatened in the
tri-state area.

WDFW said they are waiting until after the labor day weekend, before they continue to drag out their wolf predation management, 33 wolf killed sheep later.

After 18 years there are no secrets.

Stevensvill Montana Ranching & Agenda 21-How wolves are used as a tool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX4wpTSszFQ

[rim_runner]

The nature conservancy etc. buy up private lands and then resell the land to the feds at huge profit

Can you provide some examples of where the Nature Conservancy has sold lands to the feds for a huge profit?

[wolfbait]

The nature conservancy etc. buy up private lands and then resell the land to the feds at huge profit

Can you provide some examples of where the Nature Conservancy has sold lands to the feds for a huge profit?

Check this thread out, should be plenty of info. scroll down to the bottom


http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,150293.475.html

[wolfbait]

Huckleberry Pack attacks more sheep in Stevens County

ENDANGERED SPECIES — Even though two more sheep were found injured from wolf attacks this week, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Department is planning to suspend trapping and ground helicopter gunners through the Labor Day weekend to avoid conflicts with recreationists and hunters out for the Sept. 1 opening of grouse hunting season.

At least 24 sheep have been killed in eight confirmed wolf attacks on a flock of 1,800 sheep grazing private timber company land in southern Stevens County since Aug. 14

One wolf was killed by a helicopter gunner on Aug. 22.  Although officers and ranch crews have been authorized to shoot up to four wolves in the pack of up to 12 members, no others have been killed.

Meanwhile, rancher Dave Dashiell of Hunters apparently is making plans to move some or all of his sheep flock to other pasture he's secured.

Here's the latest update, through today and looking at plans from next week, from Nate Pamplin, WDFW assistant wildlife program director:

WDFW staff, along with the rancher, a contracted range rider, and four guard dogs continue to provide on-going presence to protect the flock of 1,800 sheep.

Two injured lambs were found by the operator yesterday.  This morning, one lamb died of its injuries, the other was euthanized.  Investigators attributed the injuries to wolves, making this confirmed depredation event #8.  The attack likely occurred a few days ago.

As of this morning, no wolves were trapped/euthanized.  Trapping will cease after tomorrow morning.  Also, there will not be further aerial operations this weekend (the last flight was Tuesday morning).  We want to avoid conflicts and possible public safety issues with Labor Day weekend recreationists and Monday’s grouse and archery deer hunting opener.  Department staff and the rancher will continue to have authorization to lethally remove up to two wolves observed in the vicinity of the flock, and we will not exceed a total of four wolves removed under the current authorizations for all lethal methods being utilized.

We learned that the rancher will likely be able to move his sheep off of this allotment and to an interim pasture next week.  We appreciate his efforts to expedite the move and will continue to offer and provide assistance where it is needed.

We have discussed compensation for sheep injured and killed by wolves with the rancher and will continue that dialogue with him at a later date, once the more immediate issues are resolved.

In addition to continued work with this operator, Department staff will reach out to neighboring livestock owners.  Our focus is to ensure awareness of this wolf pack, and to offer technical and cost-share assistance to in an effort to avoid and minimize potential depredations to these adjacent operations.

Attached is a chronology of activities associated with the Huckleberry Pack.  We will update it next week, once sheep are removed from the allotment.  It has been a dynamic situation, with information coming from the field, often times as new events are unfolding.  We understand the intense interest in and the desire for us to get information out to all interested parties.  Thus the chronology may have additional technical edits as field staff review and update. http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2014/aug/28/huckleberry-pack-attacks-more-sheep-stevens-county/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[villageidiot]

So WDFW gives a go ahead to kill 4 of the 12.  What's the difference if you are diagnosed with cancer and the doctor says he will only remove one third of your cancer and see if that will stop your detoriation?
Brilliant!

[wolfbait]

So WDFW gives a go ahead to kill 4 of the 12.  What's the difference if you are diagnosed with cancer and the doctor says he will only remove one third of your cancer and see if that will stop your detoriation?
Brilliant!

The longer WDFW drag this out the better the fund raising for DoW, CNW etc..

[wolfbait]

Pro-wolf groups pressure Gov. Inslee to curb wolf control

ENDANGERED SPECIES — Environmental groups who've been unable to persuade Washington wildlife officials into letting wolves eat as many sheep as they like in southern Stevens County are pressuring Gov. Jay Inslee to clamp down on wolf management when it comes to lethal control efforts.   Here's the story just moved by the Associated Press:

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — Environmental groups on Thursday asked Gov. Jay Inslee to push for the creation of strict rules limiting when wolves can be killed in response to livestock depredations.

Their petition sought to limit when the state Department of Fish and Wildlife can kill wolves. It would also require ranchers to use nonlethal measures to protect their livestock.

Rules similar to those requested by the petition are in place in Oregon.

The groups made the request as the state was in the process this week of trying to kill four wolves in the Huckleberry Pack in an effort to protect a herd of sheep. One wolf has been killed so far.

Wolves were hunted to extinction a century ago in Washington. Since the early 2000s, the animals have started to make a comeback by entering Washington from Idaho and British Columbia. The state is estimated to have 52 wolves in 13 packs.

“All we’re asking for are some very reasonable standards on what ranchers need to do to protect their livestock and when the state can step in and kill an endangered species,” said Amaroq Weiss of the Center for Biological Diversity.

The governor’s office has 45 days to respond to the request. The office has received the petition and will review the request, Inslee spokeswoman Jaime Smith said.

In 2012, the state killed seven wolves in the Wedge Pack despite the fact that the rancher had taken little action to protect his stock, the environmental groups said.

They contend the situation is similar with the Huckleberry Pack.



However, the Department of Fish and Wildlife has said the owner of the sheep herd has taken numerous nonlethal steps to protect his 1,800 animals. But wolves keep killing the sheep.

Conservation groups filed a similar petition in 2013, but they withdrew it based on promises from the Fish and Wildlife to negotiate new rules governing lethal methods of wolf management. No negotiations have taken place, the environmental groups said.

The groups appealing to Inslee also include Cascadia Wildlands, Western Environmental Law Center, Gifford Pinchot Task Force, The Lands Council, Wildlands Network, Kettle Range Conservation Group and the Washington State Chapter of the Sierra Club. http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2014/aug/28/pro-wolf-groups-pressure-gov-inslee-curb-wolf-control/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[nwwanderer]

reread  my post after wolfbait response.  it did sound like I was looking for more agency meetings and hand wringing.  not the case, concerning wdfw, wolfbait is spot on

[pianoman9701]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=358787190944333&set=vb.102919199864468&type=2&theater

[wolfbait]

Stevens County ranchers move sheep after wolves kill 24

A Stevens County family moved 1,800 sheep off private grazing land over the weekend to protect their flock from wolves that have killed at least two dozen of the animals this summer.

Dave and Julie Dashiell decided to get their sheep to safety rather than wait for state wildlife officials to track down and kill up to four wolves from the Huckleberry Pack, which is at least six strong and hunts north of the Spokane Tribe reservation.

The ranchers tried everything to thwart the attacks, said Jamie Henneman, spokeswoman for the Stevens County Cattlemen’s Association, which is working on behalf of the Dashiells. They had a full-time herder, four guard dogs, range riders and extra help from state employees, but confirmed wolf kills kept mounting, Henneman said Monday.

“There’s a point where you’ve got to decide, do you leave and hopefully stay in business, or do you stick around until there’s just nothing left,” she said.

The Dashiells know of 24 sheep they lost to wolf attacks the past few weeks and fear the actual toll could be twice that number.

On Sunday they pulled their remaining sheep off rangeland they leased from Hancock Timber Co. northeast of Hunters in southern Stevens County. The animals were moved, with assistance from state employees, to a temporary pasture and soon will be trucked to their winter range, about six weeks earlier than planned, Henneman said.

The Washington Fish and Wildlife Department shot one of the wolves, an adult female, from a helicopter on Aug. 23 and set out traps in hopes of removing up to three others from the pack. But the agency pulled its traps before the Labor Day weekend to avoid conflicts with recreationists and grouse hunters.

The state responded quickly to assist the Dashiells once it was clear wolves were attacking the flock, said Donny Martorello, carnivore section manager for Fish and Wildlife.

When wolves start preying on domestic sheep, losses can add up quickly, Martorello said Monday. “The alarm bells went off for us,” he said, and the agency worked with the rancher daily on preventing more attacks.

Now that the Dashiells have removed the sheep, the state will re-evaluate what to do next, Martorello said.

“We’re certainly concerned about the behavior, the repeated depredations,” he said. “We did remove one wolf; we don’t know if we’ve broken that pattern of depredation, that prey-switching from natural prey to sheep.”

Henneman said the cattlemen’s association sees this as a case of the state falling short of protecting livestock producers.

“If this is the precedent – that Fish and Wildlife refuses to control their animals, that the rancher has to leave – we have a private property rights crisis here,” she said. “That means anyone that owns land out here … it means you’re going to get kicked out, the predator has precedence.”

Henneman also noted that other land and livestock owners in that area may be at risk from the Huckleberry Pack.

“As soon as that pack figures out that their 1,800 sheep are gone, they’re going to move on to the next site,” she said. “This is not the end to these troubles.”

Until recently the pack had spent most of its time on the Spokane reservation but now is more active north of the reservation. The Dashiells did not know the pack was that close until the attacks began, Henneman said.

Fish and Wildlife plans to reach out to neighboring livestock owners to discuss the pack and offer help to try to prevent more attacks. The agency also is evaluating compensation for the Dashiells for the sheep injured and killed by wolves.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/sep/02/stevens-county-ranchers-move-sheep-after-wolves/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml