Whoops, or is it WSU?

[timberfaller]

More breeding pairs equal more attacks on livestock study only of the last 25 years    NOT as many wolves back then    MY guess is they can't correlate MORE wolves NOW(then before) will equal MORE attacks NOW. 

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/12/04/study-finds-killing-wolves-results-in-more-livestock-attacks-following-year/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

There is a thread here about the WDFW and there "continuing" money woe's,  gee I wonder how much WSU got from the WDFW   WSU couldn't get some of their "endowment" dollars?  Maybe they shouldn't be paying their coaches so much or their flunkie Profs. IF they couldn't have helped out!!!

[wolfbait]

Washington doesn't have to worry with the pretenders at WDFW running the show, remember WDFW will blame wolf killed stock on everything except wolves. And if they are forced to confirm a wolf kill they will then pretend to hunt said wolves down until the rancher decides he can't afford it any longer and moves his stock to different pasture.

 Ranchers in WA are learning it is cheaper and with better results to take care of wolf problems themselves.

[idahohuntr]

WDFW did not fund that study.  Their staff were fairly critical of the conclusions.

[WAcoyotehunter]

Ranchers in WA are learning it is cheaper and with better results to take care of wolf problems themselves.

Cheaper?  Because it eliminates any chance of reimbursement??   I don't follow that logic?  I suspect the Whites would argue it's not cheaper either.

[wolfbait]

Ranchers in WA are learning it is cheaper and with better results to take care of wolf problems themselves.

Cheaper?  Because it eliminates any chance of reimbursement??   I don't follow that logic?  I suspect the Whites would argue it's not cheaper either.

As you well know, there is NO reimbursement when WDFW blame wolf kills on coyotes, as for ranchers taking care of wolf problems, thanks to ID, MT and Wyoming recipes, ranchers don't have to pull the trigger to get great results.

[timberfaller]

"John Pierce is chief scientist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, which funded the study"

   Am I reading that statement wrong!??

[Old Man8383]

Wow! Did anyone actually bother to read the Fox News article cited or even the abstract of the actual article you're so excited about:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0113505 

The article clearly contained in the lower section:

Funding: Funding for this research was provided solely by a research grant from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

A fair question might be should WDFW have better oversight of research they fund?  And for those that scream for objective independent research no that does not mean controlling the results. 

[idahohuntr]

Wow! Did anyone actually bother to read the Fox News article cited or even the abstract of the actual article you're so excited about:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0113505 

The article clearly contained in the lower section:

Funding: Funding for this research was provided solely by a research grant from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

A fair question might be should WDFW have better oversight of research they fund?  And for those that scream for objective independent research no that does not mean controlling the results.

WDFW was simply the vehicle the state legislature used to fund the study.  As I already stated, WDFW was fairly critical of the study and findings.  Its not correct to place blame on wdfw as some in this thread have.