Washington lawmaker proposes moving wolves

[huntnphool]

KFH, Bearpaw, Ridgerat and anyone else, as hunters why do you want more wolves in this state? This is completely illogical to me.

I do not want more wolves in this State but what I do want is to meet the managment goals so we as a state can move forward with a mangement plan to preserve what resources we have!!

As a west sider perhaps you don't have the intimate knowledge of the game populations in eastern washington which in my views are from Ritzville east not as you folks think anything over the pass. I have watched the resource dwindle from 40+ deer in my pasture to this fall 2 does with fawns. Granted we had hard winters during 2008 and then in 2009 but the winters since have been fairly mild and the herd has not recovered. When the WDFW did the aerial gunning of the Wedge wolf pack that was 5 miles due east from my front deck. I ran across the WDFW Wolf Bio about 6 weeks later during Elk season and he shared the fact they had gotten some of them but not all which satisfied both user groups the pro and con. 4 days after that I was standing in fresh wolf scat just about the Diamond M.  The next March I had wolves howling off my back deck in Ferry county.

I know our paths have never crossed but Bobcat's our yours but I do feel honored that the westside Liberals are looking out for the best interests of the folks on this side of the state by not wanting to accelerate the managment plan and get them de-listed so we can move forward.

As I was told by the Jay Shepard he said the locals are just not "Talking" thats where I'm going back to.

Once again, Thank you for opening my eyes.

Thanks for that, it's true, by being silent we capitulate and allow it to happen.

SSS doesn't work and will never work in the NE, there has to be state funded management to lower the wolf population, or we'll see our version of LOLO

I don't want that.

 But what you guys obviously don't understand is to reach the 15 BP number there needs to be a increase in wolf numbers overall. Then, once we have reached that number, it will be maintained, the "management" will not allow the numbers to go below it.

 So you are falling for the politics of the whole thing. They bait you with the promise of "delisting" while hoping you don't realize that this means increasing the wolf numbers, which you guys obviously have fallen for.

 Which is better, the number of wolves we have now, let's just say 100 for example, and not having them "delisted", or 150 and having them "delisted"? Just because they get stamped with the "delisted" label does not mean we can then hunt them to a point of less than that 150 delisting number.

 If you are wanting them to be delisted in this state, you are, by default, wanting more wolves here than we currently have...............think about it!

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

  If you go back and read their posts you will see that they are hoping for delisting, which equates to more wolves, and the reason for my question.

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

 Then there is this example from Bobcat.

[KFhunter]

KFH, Bearpaw, Ridgerat and anyone else, as hunters why do you want more wolves in this state? This is completely illogical to me.

I do not want more wolves in this State but what I do want is to meet the managment goals so we as a state can move forward with a mangement plan to preserve what resources we have!!

As a west sider perhaps you don't have the intimate knowledge of the game populations in eastern washington which in my views are from Ritzville east not as you folks think anything over the pass. I have watched the resource dwindle from 40+ deer in my pasture to this fall 2 does with fawns. Granted we had hard winters during 2008 and then in 2009 but the winters since have been fairly mild and the herd has not recovered. When the WDFW did the aerial gunning of the Wedge wolf pack that was 5 miles due east from my front deck. I ran across the WDFW Wolf Bio about 6 weeks later during Elk season and he shared the fact they had gotten some of them but not all which satisfied both user groups the pro and con. 4 days after that I was standing in fresh wolf scat just about the Diamond M.  The next March I had wolves howling off my back deck in Ferry county.

I know our paths have never crossed but Bobcat's our yours but I do feel honored that the westside Liberals are looking out for the best interests of the folks on this side of the state by not wanting to accelerate the managment plan and get them de-listed so we can move forward.

As I was told by the Jay Shepard he said the locals are just not "Talking" thats where I'm going back to.

Once again, Thank you for opening my eyes.

Thanks for that, it's true, by being silent we capitulate and allow it to happen.

SSS doesn't work and will never work in the NE, there has to be state funded management to lower the wolf population, or we'll see our version of LOLO

I don't want that.

 But what you guys obviously don't understand is to reach the 15 BP number there needs to be a increase in wolf numbers overall. Then, once we have reached that number, it will be maintained, the "management" will not allow the numbers to go below it.

 So you are falling for the politics of the whole thing. They bait you with the promise of "delisting" while hoping you don't realize that this means increasing the wolf numbers, which you guys obviously have fallen for.

 Which is better, the number of wolves we have now, let's just say 100 for example, and not having them "delisted", or 150 and having them "delisted"? Just because they get stamped with the "delisted" label does not mean we can then hunt them to a point of less than that 150 delisting number.

 If you are wanting them to be delisted in this state, you are, by default, wanting more wolves here than we currently have...............think about it!

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Two smaller packs with 1 BP each will out produce one larger pack with 1 BP.  By splitting a bigger pack you do increase the wolf footprint artificially fast.

Once a pack is established and breeding they pump out the pups according to available prey.  In the west side of the state loaded with crippled Elk they'd multiple very fast.

It's a fast track to delisting.


edit:  I didn't see bobcat's explanation, we're on the same page there.

[huntnphool]

KFH, Bearpaw, Ridgerat and anyone else, as hunters why do you want more wolves in this state? This is completely illogical to me.

I do not want more wolves in this State but what I do want is to meet the managment goals so we as a state can move forward with a mangement plan to preserve what resources we have!!

As a west sider perhaps you don't have the intimate knowledge of the game populations in eastern washington which in my views are from Ritzville east not as you folks think anything over the pass. I have watched the resource dwindle from 40+ deer in my pasture to this fall 2 does with fawns. Granted we had hard winters during 2008 and then in 2009 but the winters since have been fairly mild and the herd has not recovered. When the WDFW did the aerial gunning of the Wedge wolf pack that was 5 miles due east from my front deck. I ran across the WDFW Wolf Bio about 6 weeks later during Elk season and he shared the fact they had gotten some of them but not all which satisfied both user groups the pro and con. 4 days after that I was standing in fresh wolf scat just about the Diamond M.  The next March I had wolves howling off my back deck in Ferry county.

I know our paths have never crossed but Bobcat's our yours but I do feel honored that the westside Liberals are looking out for the best interests of the folks on this side of the state by not wanting to accelerate the managment plan and get them de-listed so we can move forward.

As I was told by the Jay Shepard he said the locals are just not "Talking" thats where I'm going back to.

Once again, Thank you for opening my eyes.

Thanks for that, it's true, by being silent we capitulate and allow it to happen.

SSS doesn't work and will never work in the NE, there has to be state funded management to lower the wolf population, or we'll see our version of LOLO

I don't want that.

 But what you guys obviously don't understand is to reach the 15 BP number there needs to be a increase in wolf numbers overall. Then, once we have reached that number, it will be maintained, the "management" will not allow the numbers to go below it.

 So you are falling for the politics of the whole thing. They bait you with the promise of "delisting" while hoping you don't realize that this means increasing the wolf numbers, which you guys obviously have fallen for.

 Which is better, the number of wolves we have now, let's just say 100 for example, and not having them "delisted", or 150 and having them "delisted"? Just because they get stamped with the "delisted" label does not mean we can then hunt them to a point of less than that 150 delisting number.

 If you are wanting them to be delisted in this state, you are, by default, wanting more wolves here than we currently have...............think about it!

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

two BP will out produce one BP, they'd breed more wolves.  Once a pack is established and breeding they pump out the pups according to available prey.  In the west side of the state loaded with crippled Elk they'd multiple very fast.

It's a fast track to delisting.

 Spot on KF

[pianoman9701]

Why would we want wolves moved into areas they may not ever get to on their own? Stupid. I don't want any more money wasted on wolves than what has already been wasted. Wolves will go wherever they want on their own. They don't need our help.

If the wolf plan is determined to need changed in some way, then re-write it. I can't believe anyone would be in favor of this. Those that think it's a good idea, did you agree with what has been done by the USFWS in the past- moving wolves from Canada into Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming? If not, then why would you think this is okay?

To me it's a total waste of money, and the WDFW does not have extra ,money that just needs to be thrown away. If there's money for this then there's money to hire more enforcement officers and try to get poaching under control.

According to the outrageous wolf plan, if they never move their on their own, management doesn't ever begin. Remember that without attaining the outrageous goals, the clock will never start ticking. Because we already know which areas the plan requires, move some of the excess wolves from the NE and let's get this thing moving. The sooner they're everywhere the plan requires, the sooner we can start killing them.

[jasnt]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

yup and those same 2 wolves left where they are will do the same thing, breed.  But who cares it's not your back yard

[TONTO]

KFH, Bearpaw, Ridgerat and anyone else, as hunters why do you want more wolves in this state? This is completely illogical to me.

I do not want more wolves in this State but what I do want is to meet the managment goals so we as a state can move forward with a mangement plan to preserve what resources we have!!

As a west sider perhaps you don't have the intimate knowledge of the game populations in eastern washington which in my views are from Ritzville east not as you folks think anything over the pass. I have watched the resource dwindle from 40+ deer in my pasture to this fall 2 does with fawns. Granted we had hard winters during 2008 and then in 2009 but the winters since have been fairly mild and the herd has not recovered. When the WDFW did the aerial gunning of the Wedge wolf pack that was 5 miles due east from my front deck. I ran across the WDFW Wolf Bio about 6 weeks later during Elk season and he shared the fact they had gotten some of them but not all which satisfied both user groups the pro and con. 4 days after that I was standing in fresh wolf scat just about the Diamond M.  The next March I had wolves howling off my back deck in Ferry county.

I know our paths have never crossed but Bobcat's our yours but I do feel honored that the westside Liberals are looking out for the best interests of the folks on this side of the state by not wanting to accelerate the managment plan and get them de-listed so we can move forward.

As I was told by the Jay Shepard he said the locals are just not "Talking" thats where I'm going back to.

Once again, Thank you for opening my eyes.

Thanks for that, it's true, by being silent we capitulate and allow it to happen.

SSS doesn't work and will never work in the NE, there has to be state funded management to lower the wolf population, or we'll see our version of LOLO

I don't want that.

 But what you guys obviously don't understand is to reach the 15 BP number there needs to be a increase in wolf numbers overall. Then, once we have reached that number, it will be maintained, the "management" will not allow the numbers to go below it.

 So you are falling for the politics of the whole thing. They bait you with the promise of "delisting" while hoping you don't realize that this means increasing the wolf numbers, which you guys obviously have fallen for.

 Which is better, the number of wolves we have now, let's just say 100 for example, and not having them "delisted", or 150 and having them "delisted"? Just because they get stamped with the "delisted" label does not mean we can then hunt them to a point of less than that 150 delisting number.

 If you are wanting them to be delisted in this state, you are, by default, wanting more wolves here than we currently have...............think about it!

Exactly, you don't spread a dissease to find a cure.

[KFhunter]

It's a napalm approach to delisting wolves,  burn it all down.

[bobcat]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

yup and those same 2 wolves left where they are will do the same thing, breed.  But who cares it's not your back yard

No, not really. Did you read KF's post? He explained it better.

[huntnphool]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

But who cares it's not your back yard

 Wow this is a great attitude. Wolves are destroying the deer in my backyard so it's only fair to move some to your backyard and destroy them too.......unbelievable.

[bobcat]

It seems a lot of people keep forgetting that the wolf plan actually does not require any wolves in western Washington. The region that takes in all of western Washington also includes the south central part of the state. So all we need is wolves from the I-90 south to the Columbia River. So basically the south half of Kittitas County, Yakima County, and Klickitat County. I don't think they're very far from being inside the boundary of that region now. So, no need for any wolves west of the Cascade Mountains. And definitely there's no need to have them on the Olympic Peninsula.

[KFhunter]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

But who cares it's not your back yard

 Wow this is a great attitude. Wolves are destroying the deer in my backyard so it's only fair to move some to your backyard and destroy them too.......unbelievable.

It's the same bitter medicine the west side policy makers have used on the folks living with wolves on the east side.

It didn't have to be this way, they could have documented and been open and honest. 

[jasnt]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

yup and those same 2 wolves left where they are will do the same thing, breed.  But who cares it's not your back yard

No, not really. Did you read KF's post? He explained it better.

i did and I agree 100%. What I'm getting at is the NE is already pumping wolves out like crazy. IMO the wolves are here to stay. The entire state will be covered wolf packs at some point! There are NEVER going to be less wolves in wa than there are right now!  They are spredding and they are going to be in sw wa. We want delisting now! Today not next decade. We have enough for delisting just not the proper spred

[huntnphool]

If we move wolves we already have in this state to another part of the state how does that equal more wolves?

Basic biology. Two wolves don't stay two wolves for long. They reproduce and have a litter of pups. Then you get more reproduction, and more pups. That's how moving a couple of wolves to another part of the state would equal more wolves.

But who cares it's not your back yard

 Wow this is a great attitude. Wolves are destroying the deer in my backyard so it's only fair to move some to your backyard and destroy them too.......unbelievable.

It didn't have to be this way, they could have documented and been open and honest.

 These are politicians we are talking about remember.

[KFhunter]

It seems a lot of people keep forgetting that the wolf plan actually does not require any wolves in western Washington. The region that takes in all of western Washington also includes the south central part of the state. So all we need is wolves from the I-90 south to the Columbia River. So basically the south half of Kittitas County, Yakima County, and Klickitat County. I don't think they're very far from being inside the boundary of that region now. So, no need for any wolves west of the Cascade Mountains. And definitely there's no need to have them on the Olympic Peninsula.

I'm not super familiar with that area, but what's to keep wolves from coming north up from mt saint Helens?

[bobcat]

KF, I don't understand your question. There are no wolves at Mt St Helens now. At least no proof that there are any.