Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?

[Jerky]

Big game tags are still available in AK and BC, where the wolves have been all along.  Same with MN, so I don't intend on giving up my deer and elk hunting anytime soon.  I will acknowledge there are likely fewer ungulates to kill with wolves around but I also belive their behavior can make them much more sparse than they actually are and thus more difficult to tag.  Chronic artificial feeding indiactes exceedence of carrying capacity and a system out of balance.  I do agree ranchers bear the brunt of the issue in the pocketbook, unfairly so but I also believe to some extent it has become part of the cost of doing business if and when grazing on public lands managed for multiple uses.

[pianoman9701]

If translocated are larger and are not adapted to be here, Bergmann's rule will asure that only the small survive eventually, especially with climate change overlaying everything.  It may take a few generations though.  So riddle me this...if all of the misappropriated funds were reapproriated, any disease issues were eliminated, folks were held accountable for past actions, and lost revenue was paid to ranchers then all of you guys would be good with wolves, even if it meant reduce tag numbers for deer and elk?  I beg to differ and I think many hide behind these issues.  I don't see you guys complaining about spread of CWD, west nile, or bird flu, misappropriation of other funds, and loss of crops from deer/elk and other wildlife in WA.

I can see you're certainly very concerned for your wolves. But, your question is strawman argument. That's like asking "if the President weren't a lying, treasonous criminal who supplied arms to ISIS, and is undermining our Constitution and economy, would you support him?". There's no way to separate the existing problems and create the fairy tale scenario that you suggest. The corruption problems do exist. The diseases do exist. The damage to our ranchers and ungulates do exist. The complete lack of management does exist. The purposeful deception of Congress to pass this plan exists.

[Eli346]

The anti's are playing the game way better than we are, bottom line we loose.

The antis are playing a better game than us because they have an unlimited supply of government money to sue the government with. How stupid is the grant system in this country?

[BOWHUNTER45]

Sounds like you guys have some New Blood to put in line ....hahaha

[wolfbait]

Sounds like you guys have some New Blood to put in line ....hahaha

Jerky wrote:"I have hunted all of my life and still do.  I don't believe our wild lands should be managed as an eternal ungulate farm for us hunters


I am educated as a wildlife ecologist and have studied the works of many of the founders of conservation and wildlife management.  I have worked for several state and federal agencies as a wildlife professional during my career.  I have been an avid hunter all of my life (>35 yrs) and have also followed wolf issues for many years.  I understand principles of population dynamics among wild animals and I too have concerns and issues with management and our legal system, but don't hold the same beliefs as many do here." http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,188697.0.html

Naw, I don't think any education we might give him would stick, my question would be "which environmental group does he represent? DoW or CNW etc..

[JLS]

The article posted if ripe with incorrect statements.

Wolves did not cause the collapse of elk herd numbers in the Bitterroot Valley.  Lion predation and very liberal antlerless elk seasons have been directly identified as the reasons that herd crashed.  We can sure attribute it to wolves though, if it makes people feel better.  Why worry about correctly identifying causative issues and resolving them when we can make stuff up to suit our biases?

Also, Wyoming Game and Fish have done some very interesting and informative studies on elk numbers in and around Yellowstone Park.  Not everything fits the narrative stated as fact in this article.

Lastly, the Northern elk herd is AT the objective that FWP has decided it should be at.  An objective that was largely influenced by stockgrowers in the Paradise Valley.  So, regardless of how many predators one wishes to kill, the state of Montana is forbidden by law to manage that herd for any more elk than are currently in it.

[ribka]

I have hunted all of my life and still do.  I don't believe our wild lands should be managed as an eternal ungulate farm for us hunters.  I know I am in the vast minority here, so hate away...and don't believe everything you read on the internet even if it supports your views.

How should lands be managed?

As an ecologist did you believe everything while studying to get your degree at the university?


Have actually spent any time in n Idaho or new Montana? Do wolves only kill to eat?

How does introducing more wolf packs into a densely populated state with limited hunting opportunities help highly stressed elk and deer herds?

You referenced climate change. Please enlighten me about climate change and wolves. I'll get out the jiffy pop

[Jerky]

BH45-I'm perfectly fine in the line I'm in just as you believe you are as well.  I can respect that.

Wolfbait-I don't currently represent any state or fed agency or environmental group.  Why would you assume I do just because I don't share the prevailing opinion here?  Is there no room in the hunting community for other schools of thought?

ribka-current land use policy mandates multiple use management.  I think wildlife and their habitats should be managed according to the maximum benefit of all stakeholders, of which we hunters may only be one group.  Unfortunately, that might mean lowered harvest quotas.  Removal of apex predators from a landscape simplifies a system and can result in inbalance.  There are many examples of this in the published literature, which is where I get most of my information.  This source is peer reviewed by other scientists before being relaesed for public consumption.  My education taught me to think critically and not believe everything I read.  I have hunted elk in Idaho and elk/deer in Montana.  I saw wolf tracks while hunting.  It depends on what is stressing deer/elk in WA.  If they are hammering winter forage to the extent that the veg does not recover quickly enough, fewer deer/elk would allow veg recovery and maintian the carrying capacity of the land.  Large winter kill is an indication winter habitat may not be adequate to support current population levels.  If WA State did not have adequate resources to support many wolves, then the wolves that came here would not be successful and populations would not grow.  Obviously this does not appear to be the case.  I mentioned climate change with reference to Bergmann's rule which states generally speaking animals that live further from the equator (ie. in colder climes) are larger.  If our climate continues to change, and get warmer in WA, larger critters will not be optimally adapted here.  Smaller ones will ultimately be more successful.  Please realize I speak in general and theoretical terms as it is unlikely we would see results of these changes in one's lifetime due to the generation time needed to effect measurable change in wolf size.

Pianoman-wolves are not mine any more than they are yours.  I apologize if I implied otherwise.

[wolfbait]

BH45-I'm perfectly fine in the line I'm in just as you believe you are as well.  I can respect that.

Wolfbait-I don't currently represent any state or fed agency or environmental group.  Why would you assume I do just because I don't share the prevailing opinion here?  Is there no room in the hunting community for other schools of thought?

ribka-current land use policy mandates multiple use management.  I think wildlife and their habitats should be managed according to the maximum benefit of all stakeholders, of which we hunters may only be one group.  Unfortunately, that might mean lowered harvest quotas.  Removal of apex predators from a landscape simplifies a system and can result in inbalance.  There are many examples of this in the published literature, which is where I get most of my information.  This source is peer reviewed by other scientists before being relaesed for public consumption.  My education taught me to think critically and not believe everything I read.  I have hunted elk in Idaho and elk/deer in Montana.  I saw wolf tracks while hunting.  It depends on what is stressing deer/elk in WA.  If they are hammering winter forage to the extent that the veg does not recover quickly enough, fewer deer/elk would allow veg recovery and maintian the carrying capacity of the land.  Large winter kill is an indication winter habitat may not be adequate to support current population levels.  If WA State did not have adequate resources to support many wolves, then the wolves that came here would not be successful and populations would not grow.  Obviously this does not appear to be the case.  I mentioned climate change with reference to Bergmann's rule which states generally speaking animals that live further from the equator (ie. in colder climes) are larger.  If our climate continues to change, and get warmer in WA, larger critters will not be optimally adapted here.  Smaller ones will ultimately be more successful.  Please realize I speak in general and theoretical terms as it is unlikely we would see results of these changes in one's lifetime due to the generation time needed to effect measurable change in wolf size.

Pianoman-wolves are not mine any more than they are yours.  I apologize if I implied otherwise.

"Wolfbait-I don't currently represent any state or fed agency or environmental group."----Which environmental groups did you represent in the past? If you don't mind me asking.


. "If WA State did not have adequate resources to support many wolves, then the wolves that came here would not be successful and populations would not grow."


If I remember right, when the USFWS brought the first wolves in, they started killing livestock right out of the cages. And as has happened in just about every confirmation of wolves in WA, the wolves were confirmed because they were killing livestock.  Funny how wolves always seem to show up first in the middle of cattle country.

The thing that makes wolves such proficient killers is that they have an unlimited prey base and unlimited boundaries, which only exacerbates with the protection of the USFWS and WDFW.

Back in 2009 I ran into a couple of guys who were doing a wolf/deer predation study, I ask the one guy that seemed to be the know it all, what would happen when the wolves finished off the deer herds and he said they would gradually disperse to new killing grounds, leaving a few behind to keep the livestock trimmed up etc..


"Removal of apex predators from a landscape simplifies a system and can result in imbalance".


What we have now is an imbalance do to the introduction of an apex predator, unless the end result is a new game management program which includes very limited human harvest.

[bobcat]

Jerky- welcome to the forum. It's good to hear the opinions of someone who actually has an education in wildlife management.

Don't worry about answering any questions regarding your past involvement with wildlife or environmental organizations, at least not until the person asking can provide his credentials, and more specifically if he's a hunter or not.   

[idahohuntr]

BH45-I'm perfectly fine in the line I'm in just as you believe you are as well.  I can respect that.

Wolfbait-I don't currently represent any state or fed agency or environmental group.  Why would you assume I do just because I don't share the prevailing opinion here?  Is there no room in the hunting community for other schools of thought?

ribka-current land use policy mandates multiple use management.  I think wildlife and their habitats should be managed according to the maximum benefit of all stakeholders, of which we hunters may only be one group.  Unfortunately, that might mean lowered harvest quotas.  Removal of apex predators from a landscape simplifies a system and can result in inbalance.  There are many examples of this in the published literature, which is where I get most of my information.  This source is peer reviewed by other scientists before being relaesed for public consumption.  My education taught me to think critically and not believe everything I read.  I have hunted elk in Idaho and elk/deer in Montana.  I saw wolf tracks while hunting.  It depends on what is stressing deer/elk in WA.  If they are hammering winter forage to the extent that the veg does not recover quickly enough, fewer deer/elk would allow veg recovery and maintian the carrying capacity of the land.  Large winter kill is an indication winter habitat may not be adequate to support current population levels.  If WA State did not have adequate resources to support many wolves, then the wolves that came here would not be successful and populations would not grow.  Obviously this does not appear to be the case.  I mentioned climate change with reference to Bergmann's rule which states generally speaking animals that live further from the equator (ie. in colder climes) are larger.  If our climate continues to change, and get warmer in WA, larger critters will not be optimally adapted here.  Smaller ones will ultimately be more successful.  Please realize I speak in general and theoretical terms as it is unlikely we would see results of these changes in one's lifetime due to the generation time needed to effect measurable change in wolf size.

Pianoman-wolves are not mine any more than they are yours.  I apologize if I implied otherwise.

Jerky, being New here it might help you to know many of the folks you are engaging on here like Wolfbait etc. believe there is a mass government conspiracy to kill off humans with chemtrails and vaccines.  Something to keep in mind while debating.

[wolfbait]

Jerky- welcome to the forum. It's good to hear the opinions of someone who actually has an education in wildlife management.

Don't worry about answering any questions regarding your past involvement with wildlife or environmental organizations, at least not until the person asking can provide his credentials, and more specifically if he's a hunter or not.

Of course I'm a hunter Bobcat, why just yesterday I killed a pack rat with my slingshot.

 
Note: mistakenly hit modify instead of quote, this post has not been edited by me-bobcat

[Cougartail]

Jerky- welcome to the forum. It's good to hear the opinions of someone who actually has an education in wildlife management.

But certainly not as entertaining..

[bobcat]

Of course I'm a hunter Bobcat, why just yesterday I killed a pack rat with my slingshot.

   Oh, finally, an answer to the question, not a good answer but an answer nonetheless.  It's a miracle for the first day of 2016!   

And not to question your choice of weapon, but don't you think a 30/06 or similar would be a more ethical and effective choice for pack rats?

[wolfbait]

Of course I'm a hunter Bobcat, why just yesterday I killed a pack rat with my slingshot.

   Oh, finally, an answer to the question, not a good answer but an answer nonetheless.  It's a miracle for the first day of 2016!   

And not to question your choice of weapon, but don't you think a 30/06 or similar would be a more ethical and effective choice for pack rats?

The 410 does wonders if you are close enough, actually I like using my 17 WSM with the v-max, scoots along at 3000 fps, and it's good practice. But do to the location of the rat I couldn't use either.

You must be new to rat hunting, Bobcat?