Washington lawmaker proposes moving wolves

[jasnt]

This is why I'm all for this bill of course it will be denied and have to be re written and submitted but at least it's a push in the right direction. We need to make hunting and fishing and trapping our right. Not a privilege slowly taken away

The representative's proposal is based on earlier declassification of wolves. That's the whole point of it. I'm sure it would be spelled out in the legislation.

I edited my post to be less confusing.

[jasnt]

On the other hand it could backfire, they could be relocated, nothing could change, and then the argument of "easy for people without skin in the game" argument dies.

Careful what you wish for.

   Where do some of these guys get their logic, what gamble? When wolves move in livestock/pets get eaten!

You're betting that people will run to the hills demanding an all out season over night once some wolves get relocated. Good luck with that.

Northeast Washington has howled about cougars since the hound ban and to date this state has not voted to lift it...and cougars are on boths sides of the mountains so the "skin in the game" argument holds little weight with people.

I just think you guys underestimate peoples' tolerance for predators this side of the mountains.

You may well be right on that one. It's like a whole different country over those mountains

[KFhunter]

What happened to the Profanity Pack ? WDFW took them and transplanted them someplace illegally I bet. We have not heard one word about that pack since they were confirmed, nothing, nada, zip, zilch.....

Cattle were removed = no more problem

until next summer

[Curly]

In 1995 were you guys hoping for wolves to get transplanted all over the west so that they would be federally delisted quicker?      Didn't think so. 

[ipkus]

The initial re-introduction plan in 1995 wasn't set up like Washington State's is = invalid argument.

This much is fact...Washington State's wolf plan looks like it does because of the liberal base that resides in large majority on the west side of the mountains.

This much is fact...whenever the criteria to de-list in the current wolf plan is reached, the greenies will argue/cry/sue to change the rules and stop de-listing/actual management from occurring and the wolf problem will grow further out of control.

There really isn't a valid argument for not giving all of those who desire wolves the joy of living amongst them.  It won't change anyone's mind overnight, and it won't ever change a lot of people's mind.  But at least it's harder for KING TV and the Seattle Times to ignore the truth when it's happening in your backyard instead of ours.

YOU wanted them.  YOU should have them. 

I've got gas money for you KFhunter! 

[vandeman17]

I will pitch in for gas money, trailer rental, pit stops snacks. You name it and I will be there. Heck, I will even drive

[Curly]

The problem is, those that wanted wolves are mostly city living folks who still won't have to contend with wolves if they get transplanted to the west side.  Most of those wolf huggers probably live in Seattle.  The people who will be hurt by the transplants are ranchers, farmers, and rural people of western Wa.........just like the rural people affected in E WA. 

If we could just get more voter turn out, then some real change could happen in this state by getting a good governor and reps elected. But everyone seems to sit on their a$$ and can't seem to get the energy to put a stamp on a ballot or drop it off in a drop box.  It's very frustrating.

[pianoman9701]

In 1995 were you guys hoping for wolves to get transplanted all over the west so that they would be federally delisted quicker?      Didn't think so.

Maybe you're coming in late or something. The NE part of the state is now completely saturated with wolves, to a point where ranchers and communities are suffering. Our outrageous wolf plan calls for 15 breeding pairs, but the distribution of those breeding pairs must include distribution across several different zones. Until there are enough breeding pairs in the other zones, the three-year timeclock for management won't even start ticking. So, we could wait for perhaps another 10-20-30 years and let the folks in the NE suck wind while the wolves eat them out of business and our ungulates out of game status. Or, the WDFW could be proactive and move some surplus packs to those areas around the state so that delisting and killing will happen much sooner. It's important to remember that the outrageous wolf plan says specifically that all the goals must be met before the three year waiting period starts leading up to delisting and game management of the species.

I'd be all for it. I'd actually like to see more wolves on this side of the state - the closer to Thurston, King, and Pierce Counties, the better. Unfortunately, the WDFW would put up as many roadblocks as possible. The fact that their plan calls for distribution to those specific zones yet Ware says that to move wolves to those zones would require an environmental impact survey is mind-numbingly mentally challenged thinking. Let's get them dispersed properly and start killing them ASAP, anywhere in the state they can be found.

[Curly]

Ware is an idiot and the sooner he retires the better off we will be in this state.

I'm not late to the discussion.  I don't think you understood what I was getting at.  I don't have time right now to explain better.

[kentrek]

Isn't there a saying about two wrongs don't make a right ? This is not how things should be ran...

[Curly]

In 1995 were you guys hoping for wolves to get transplanted all over the west so that they would be federally delisted quicker?      Didn't think so.

Maybe you're coming in late or something. The NE part of the state is now completely saturated with wolves, to a point where ranchers and communities are suffering. Our outrageous wolf plan calls for 15 breeding pairs, but the distribution of those breeding pairs must include distribution across several different zones. Until there are enough breeding pairs in the other zones, the three-year timeclock for management won't even start ticking. So, we could wait for perhaps another 10-20-30 years and let the folks in the NE suck wind while the wolves eat them out of business and our ungulates out of game status. Or, the WDFW could be proactive and move some surplus packs to those areas around the state so that delisting and killing will happen much sooner. It's important to remember that the outrageous wolf plan says specifically that all the goals must be met before the three year waiting period starts leading up to delisting and game management of the species.

I'd be all for it. I'd actually like to see more wolves on this side of the state - the closer to Thurston, King, and Pierce Counties, the better. Unfortunately, the WDFW would put up as many roadblocks as possible. The fact that their plan calls for distribution to those specific zones yet Ware says that to move wolves to those zones would require an environmental impact survey is mind-numbingly mentally challenged thinking. Let's get them dispersed properly and start killing them ASAP, anywhere in the state they can be found.

The point I tried to make (poorly I might add) was that when the USFWS transplanted wolves into Yellowstone we weren't all hoping that they would transplant them all over the place so that they would be federally delisted any quicker.  Anyway, to get back more to the point of this proposal by the politician.......

Wouldn't it serve the people in this state better if instead of this proposal, they tried to get the stupid state wolf plan revised?  Instead of forcing wolves into areas where they may never get to on their own, they could revise the plan to let us hunt them in the eastern third of the state and get that 15 number down hopefully at least in half.  Seems like there is a lot of scientific data to show that the plan isn't working and needs to be revised.  With a new WDFW director, it might be a good time to call for wolf plan revision.

(I do have one idea on transplanting though.  If you look at the wolf map in the link below, you can see that the Yakima Indian Reservation is a large land area in the SW wolf zone.  Why not plant a pack or two in there and let them take care of all those wild horses?  Those wolf huggers are probably also horse huggers; that would serve them right). 

http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/graphics/draft_pack_map_2-27-2014.jpg

[pianoman9701]

Sorry Curly. It wasn't my intent to sound sarcastic. The problem I have is that neither the Wildlife Commission nor the WDFW working on its behalf have shown any interest in deviating from the outrageous plan one bit, regardless of how far under the surface of the water their heads become.

You pointed the transplant of the wolves into the GYA in 1996 and that no one proposed placing them everywhere. That's correct. At that time, we in WA were still more than a decade away from having our own established plan. I don't think at that time, any of us hunters or the ranchers actually believed that we, as a state, would adopt a plan so monumental in its scope as it eventually became. I know the greenies wanted it but they were just blithering idiots that no one was going to listen to anyway. Fast forward 14 years or so. The Wildlife Commission, now stacked with greenies from decades of liberal governors, votes in a wolf plan that makes those of ID, WY, and MT look like child's play. Not only was the number of breeding pairs off the charts, but the actual distribution was purposely done so that it would be decades before any real and measured management could take place. Then, on top of all off that, a three year waiting period after all goals have been met to begin game management. This is the result of a concerted effort on the part of some to use wolves and the ESA to end hunting and if possible, ranching in WA. The Commission and the WDFW fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Fast forward to today. We've been under the wolf plan now for about 4 years I think. The wolves have been allowed to migrate "naturally" from the GYA through ID and MT into WA. The problem is that they're not doing so according to the outrageous wolf plan. They're congregating mostly in the NE in a relatively small area. And, instead of the wildlife managers actually reaching down and finding anything at all substantial in their pants to allow them to go to the commission and say "Hey, we really need to adapt and make some changes.", they sit dumb and impotent, and say nothing. meanwhile, as you're well aware, screw the folks and wildlife in the NE corner. All in the name of the cuddly, uncooperative wolf.

The proposed legislation could at the very least point out that the plan is very problematic. At best, if it actually passed, we'd get the distribution we need to move delisting along and start killing these critters. Especially if regional management of wolves was then allowed, at least the ranchers and communities of the NE would feel a little better about the situation. As it is now, the rest of the state has completely forgotten them.

[bearpaw]

On the other hand it could backfire, they could be relocated, nothing could change, and then the argument of "easy for people without skin in the game" argument dies.

Careful what you wish for.

   Where do some of these guys get their logic, what gamble? When wolves move in livestock/pets get eaten!

You're betting that people will run to the hills demanding an all out season over night once some wolves get relocated. Good luck with that.

Northeast Washington has howled about cougars since the hound ban and to date this state has not voted to lift it...and cougars are on boths sides of the mountains so the "skin in the game" argument holds little weight with people.

I just think you guys underestimate peoples' tolerance for predators this side of the mountains.

Your argument is faulty, cougar are being hunted throughout Washington by boot hunting and by dogs in certain problem areas, you are comparing apples with oranges since wolf numbers are not being controlled in any way.

[bobcat]

The proposed legislation could at the very least point out that the plan is very problematic. At best, if it actually passed, we'd get the distribution we need to move delisting along and start killing these critters. Especially if regional management of wolves was then allowed, at least the ranchers and communities of the NE would feel a little better about the situation. As it is now, the rest of the state has completely forgotten them.

The wolf plan already has the option of moving wolves from one part of the state to another. The proposed new law would change nothing.

[Curly]

Sorry Curly. It wasn't my intent to sound sarcastic. The problem I have is that neither the Wildlife Commission nor the WDFW working on its behalf have shown any interest in deviating from the outrageous plan one bit, regardless of how far under the surface of the water their heads become.

But, could they be forced to with some legislation?    Probably as likely to pass as this proposal we're discussing though, I know, but just seems like something else could be done other than forcing wolves into other areas that also don't want them.

Why doesn't somebody sue the State and/or feds for this wolf fiasco?  I suppose I'm naive and don't know how this political stuff works, but I just hate the idea of wolves infesting much of our state and seeming like nothing can be done to stop the bleeding.

I also think that if transplanted wolves start eating livestock or worse.......a human, then whoever is responsible for transplanting said wolves will be in a world of hurt from lawsuits.   Maybe I'm wrong here too.