Washington wolf population continues to grow

[emac]

This might be a stupid ? But in 2015 we have 18 packs and 8 breeding pairs. How do you have a pack without a breeding pair in in it. The only thing I can come up with are bachelor packs looking to break off and still a female

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[wolfbait]

Next year, the year after, the year after that, and so forth, we should expect the wolf population to grow by roughly 30% each year.

According to our wolf plan, delisting cannot occur until WDFW has proven there are 15 breeding pairs with pups till the end of the year for three consecutive years, spread across all three wolf recovery zones, or 18 breeding pairs for at least three years. Then if WDFW does delist don't expect any meaningful management to reduce wolf populations for at least three years because WDFW will be afraid to manage. I doubt we see any attempt to delist for at least 6 to 10 years, and I doubt there will be any meaningful management for at lesat 9 to 13 years. WDFW simply is not efficient enough to expect results any sooner.

These minimum counts show at least 30% increase each year!
(there are probably many many more wolves than they have confirmed)

KNOWN WA COUNTS (showing at least 30% population increase annually)
2013......52 wolves, 13 packs, 5 breeding pairs
2014......68 wolves, 16 packs, 5 breeding pairs
2015......90 wolves, 18 packs, 8 breeding pairs

PROJECTED WA WOLF COUNTS (30% annual population increase)
2016......117 wolves, 23 packs, 10 breeding pairs
2017......152 wolves, 30 packs, 14 breeding pairs
2018......198 wolves, 40 packs, 18 breeding pairs
2019......257 wolves, 51 packs, 23 breeding pairs
2020......334 wolves, 66 packs, 30 breeding pairs
2021......434 wolves, 87 packs, 39 breeding pairs
2022......565 wolves, 113 packs, 50 breeding pairs
2023......734 wolves, 147 packs, 65 breeding pairs
2024......954 wolves, 191 packs, 85 breeding pairs
2025......1240 wolves, 248 packs, 110 breeding pairs

Graphs show historic wolf population growth in numerous states and in Yellowstone (YNP is only a small portion of Wyoming)

“Every year, most wolf populations almost double in the spring through the birth of pups [Mech 1970]. For example in May 2008, there will not be 1,500 wolves, but 3,000! (Wolf population estimates are usually made in winter when animals are at their nadir*. This approach serves to provide conservative estimates and further insure that management remains conservative).”



“70% Kill Needed to Reduce Wolf Population”

Mech continued, “As indicated above, 28-50% of a wolf population must be killed by humans per year (on top of natural mortality) to even hold a wolf population stationery.



Read more @ http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Website%20articles/George%20Dovel/The%20Outdoorsman%20No.28%20May%202008%20FWS%20Biologist%20Says%20Wolf%20Numbers%20Underestimated%20Mech%20Says%203,000%20Wolves%20Exist%20in%20ID,%20MT%20&%20WY.pdf

 

[bearpaw]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

   It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

I know that sounds insensitive to hunters in the pugetropolis counties and it's not meant to sound that way. I don't know what the answer is for hunters in highly populated western counties. Even if you could somehow escape WDFW management you will get the same or worse management from county government. But just because there is likely no possible good outcome for hunters in highly populated western WA counties does not mean it should be that way in every county of the state.

[bearpaw]

Next year, the year after, the year after that, and so forth, we should expect the wolf population to grow by roughly 30% each year.

According to our wolf plan, delisting cannot occur until WDFW has proven there are 15 breeding pairs with pups till the end of the year for three consecutive years, spread across all three wolf recovery zones, or 18 breeding pairs for at least three years. Then if WDFW does delist don't expect any meaningful management to reduce wolf populations for at least three years because WDFW will be afraid to manage. I doubt we see any attempt to delist for at least 6 to 10 years, and I doubt there will be any meaningful management for at lesat 9 to 13 years. WDFW simply is not efficient enough to expect results any sooner.

These minimum counts show at least 30% increase each year!
(there are probably many many more wolves than they have confirmed)

KNOWN WA COUNTS (showing at least 30% population increase annually)
2013......52 wolves, 13 packs, 5 breeding pairs
2014......68 wolves, 16 packs, 5 breeding pairs
2015......90 wolves, 18 packs, 8 breeding pairs

PROJECTED WA WOLF COUNTS (30% annual population increase)
2016......117 wolves, 23 packs, 10 breeding pairs
2017......152 wolves, 30 packs, 14 breeding pairs
2018......198 wolves, 40 packs, 18 breeding pairs
2019......257 wolves, 51 packs, 23 breeding pairs
2020......334 wolves, 66 packs, 30 breeding pairs
2021......434 wolves, 87 packs, 39 breeding pairs
2022......565 wolves, 113 packs, 50 breeding pairs
2023......734 wolves, 147 packs, 65 breeding pairs
2024......954 wolves, 191 packs, 85 breeding pairs
2025......1240 wolves, 248 packs, 110 breeding pairs

Graphs show historic wolf population growth in numerous states and in Yellowstone (YNP is only a small portion of Wyoming)

“Every year, most wolf populations almost double in the spring through the birth of pups [Mech 1970]. For example in May 2008, there will not be 1,500 wolves, but 3,000! (Wolf population estimates are usually made in winter when animals are at their nadir*. This approach serves to provide conservative estimates and further insure that management remains conservative).”



“70% Kill Needed to Reduce Wolf Population”

Mech continued, “As indicated above, 28-50% of a wolf population must be killed by humans per year (on top of natural mortality) to even hold a wolf population stationery.



Read more @ http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Website%20articles/George%20Dovel/The%20Outdoorsman%20No.28%20May%202008%20FWS%20Biologist%20Says%20Wolf%20Numbers%20Underestimated%20Mech%20Says%203,000%20Wolves%20Exist%20in%20ID,%20MT%20&%20WY.pdf

  definitely agree

[Dan-o]

I'd be worried about county control.

What if I lived in a county that said no wolves...... and the 6 counties surrounding me voted for minimum of 15 breeding pairs per county??

My no-wolf county would be overrun with wolves!!!!

[Dan-o]

In my nightmare scenario, they all import HUGE mega-wolves from the far north.

And as quickly as I can eradicate them, they import more.

[pianoman9701]

I'd be worried about county control.

What if I lived in a county that said no wolves...... and the 6 counties surrounding me voted for minimum of 15 breeding pairs per county??

My no-wolf county would be overrun with wolves!!!!

That would seem unlikely in NE WA.

[bearpaw]

In my nightmare scenario, they all import HUGE mega-wolves from the far north.

And as quickly as I can eradicate them, they import more.

That's sort of how we feel here in the NE! 

[bigtex]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

Well for your USFWS statement that wouldn't apply to the eastern third of the state since USFWS has no authority over wolves in that part of the state since wolves have been delisted. And it's not as if USFWS doesn't handle cases on their own, there are tons of USFWS cases being investigated that states don't know about. USFWS busted a bear gall bladder smuggler a couple years ago, WDFW had no clue about the investigation. But vice versa, states work cases that could go federal but don't notify the feds.

And as far as the political positions that's all they are. People in politics say things to get them elected. There hasn't been a bill in WA in the past 10 years that would give counties some type of predator control, why? Because numerous laws say that's a state responsibility, and it's respected. If there were rumblings of a change there would at least be a test bill. Yet we have bills that would allow your dog to be buried in your casket.

I love it when a Sheriff questions a natural resource related issue yet they do nothing to protect natural resources. There are many county/city LE agencies that actually prohibit their officers from enforcing fish and wildlife laws. Why? Because in the opinion of that agency they're are bigger things to worry about. But hey if I was running for Sheriff in NE WA I would say I hate wolves too 

[jackelope]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

   It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

I know that sounds insensitive to hunters in the pugetropolis counties and it's not meant to sound that way. I don't know what the answer is for hunters in highly populated western counties. Even if you could somehow escape WDFW management you will get the same or worse management from county government. But just because there is likely no possible good outcome for hunters in highly populated western WA counties does not mean it should be that way in every county of the state.

Seems odd to me that all you care about is the place your business is in.
What ever happened to Washington for Wildlife?

[bearpaw]

Since Idaho started actively managing wolves, 5 per hunter and I think 3 per trapper, double cougar tags and double bear tags in many areas, wildlife is bouncing back fast in areras where wolves are being removed! All we expect is honest management in WA!

But here we cant even get a 2nd bear tag or august 1st opener like the west side has.  Go figure.

ANOTHER FACT:
I just had a conversation with IDFG last fall. With double bear tags in most units, hounds and bait legal, bear hunting open to harvest every month bear are out except July and August, bear are still above objective in many areas!

ANOTHER FACT:
Cougar hunting is open in most units Aug 30 to March 31. Two tags in many areas, hound hunting open Dec 1 to March 31. Some units have seasons open until June 30.

MORE IDAHO FACTS:
Per IDFG Regs: 5 wolf tags for hunters, 5 wolf tags for trappers. Most seasons open Aug 30 till March 31, many private land areas are open year around. Any hunter with a non-resident deer or elk tag can also use the tag on a bear, cougar, or wolf.

But the good news is, in spite of all that, deer and elk herds continue to grow.

Exactly, proof that we need more hunting of wolves, cougar, bear! 

[Special T]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

   It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

I know that sounds insensitive to hunters in the pugetropolis counties and it's not meant to sound that way. I don't know what the answer is for hunters in highly populated western counties. Even if you could somehow escape WDFW management you will get the same or worse management from county government. But just because there is likely no possible good outcome for hunters in highly populated western WA counties does not mean it should be that way in every county of the state.

Seems odd to me that all you care about is the place your business is in.
What ever happened to Washington for Wildlife?

It would seem to me that the people in the NE are doing a better job of banding together because they have more in common with each other than we do on the west side. IMO there will be no real changes that benifit hunters until there is a republican,a dn hopefully a hunter in the Governors mansion. Everything else is wasted effort. 

[jackelope]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

   It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

I know that sounds insensitive to hunters in the pugetropolis counties and it's not meant to sound that way. I don't know what the answer is for hunters in highly populated western counties. Even if you could somehow escape WDFW management you will get the same or worse management from county government. But just because there is likely no possible good outcome for hunters in highly populated western WA counties does not mean it should be that way in every county of the state.

Seems odd to me that all you care about is the place your business is in.
What ever happened to Washington for Wildlife?

It would seem to me that the people in the NE are doing a better job of banding together because they have more in common with each other than we do on the west side. IMO there will be no real changes that benifit hunters until there is a republican,a dn hopefully a hunter in the Governors mansion. Everything else is wasted effort. 

I wouldn't disagree with that, but that doesn't make it right either.  For a guy that hunts all over the state as lots of hunters in this state do, how would this be of benefit to the average Washington state hunter?
Sure, if you live and hunt in the same area and never leave that part of the state, I can see how that would benefit you...but... that's not the case for lots of  hunters.

[bearpaw]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

   It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

I know that sounds insensitive to hunters in the pugetropolis counties and it's not meant to sound that way. I don't know what the answer is for hunters in highly populated western counties. Even if you could somehow escape WDFW management you will get the same or worse management from county government. But just because there is likely no possible good outcome for hunters in highly populated western WA counties does not mean it should be that way in every county of the state.

Seems odd to me that all you care about is the place your business is in.
What ever happened to Washington for Wildlife?

Seems odd to me that all you care about is the place your business is in.

Actually my business operates in four states and I offer hunts in numerous Washington counties. My residence is in Stevens County, that is where I was born, I spend considerable time here, that is where I vote, I think I can make the most difference here, that is where I'm the most involved. But, I do many things with my time.

I spend a fair amount of time on this site.

Last month I met with IDFG and local business leaders in Pocatello, Idaho to discuss ways to increase funding for IDFG which has been making budget cuts that impact hunters and fishers across the state. Hatchery production has been reduced 15%, I suggested ideas to increase funding and hatchery production. Please note, my business is primarily a hunting business.

In 2014 I served on Governor Inslee's Recreation and Parks Task force. We held meetings across the state and then met with the governor and provided input regarding ways to improve recreation opportunities across the state and fund state parks in Washington. I made sure hunting was always mentioned in our meetings and NE Washington certainly was not the focus of the task force.

Today the Washington Conservation Commission toured the Colville Fish Hatchery, while the students led the tours, I met with city and county officials regarding ecology issues on the hatchery grounds and the proposal to move the Stevens County Conservation District office to the hatchery grounds.

What ever happened to Washington for Wildlife?

I'm not sure what this has to do with this discussion but I will answer your question.

Not as much has happened with WFW as I would have liked but we are doing good things. We have a small group of active members facilitating the continuing existence of the Colville Fish Hatchery and Learning Center. After facilitating the purchase of the hatchery from WDFW by Stevens County we then leased the property and hatchery from the county with a 20 year lease term, in that time we will pay WDFW for the hatchery with fish raised by the students while learning and gaining school credits. One of the accomplishments I'm happiest with is that we have students furthering their education for a career in fisheries science.

Please use the following links to see more:
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,98741.75.html
https://www.facebook.com/ColvilleFishHatchery/

[bigtex]

It would never happen with our current governor, but I would personally support a position similar to what Idaho's Governor Otter took, preventing Idaho wardens from providing info to the USFWS to prosecute individuals for killing wolves. I would also fully support any sheriff or county commissioner candidate who promised to try and open his county up to responsible predator management!

So your position is that, law enforcement should ignore or abet illegal activity?

State of WA seems out of touch with hunters, ranchers, and rural residents. My personal position, I would strongly support any county that creates their own hunting regulations! Local control by local government! Exactly as I strongly supported Governor Otter. 

Yea - lets have each county set their own hunting regulations, sell their own licenses, run their own good-ol-boy clubs...that would be a disaster far more damaging to hunter opportunity in this state than any level of predators that will ever exist here.

Typical response I bet you love big government also

  It's obvious what the status quo WDFW has gotten us!

I agree that status quo WDFW hasn't gotten us the best possible result, but, Bearpaw, would you actually support county by county control??

Why not township by township?

Why not private land owner by private land owner?

I know our county commissioners and Sheriff, they are good people. The county commissioners have a county wildlife advisory board of which I am a member, I've sat in our meetings, I've seen the wisdom of our members. I know this advisory board would create much better management and hunting opportunities in Stevens County. The members of our advisory board have a vested interest in the outcome, it seems WDFW's interest is mostly monetary and pleasing the I-5 masses.

It's very much like education, do you think Washington DC makes better education policies for your local school or do you trust your local government and school board to make better decisions?

So your county would do a good job with it. Whose to say that all the other 38 counties in Washington would do a good job?

I don't know and I'm not concerned about all the other counties. Your county is your business, if you prefer to keep WDFW that is your business, I am advocating for my county. I would absolutely support Stevens County to opt out of state management!

If that happened in my county you would likely see deer more carefully managed, predators managed, trapping and hound hunting like there used to be!

Counties have no authority to manage wildlife.  There will be no opting out.  This WILL NEVER HAPPEN. 

But just for the heck of it - think of some possible outcomes.  Many western Washington counties ban all hunting - they have very liberal elected officials who are anti hunting.  So - all those folks now have to head east to the remaining open counties - overwhelming your little county.  Since your local slick talking politicians want to get re-elected they do the next sensible thing and severely restrict or stop all non-county residents from hunting in their county because it upsets their voters.  So your county by county management just screwed a huge number of hunters in this state. 

Just one small example of how short sighted this idea is.  In general, I do not support the further politicization of wildlife management, even if I support/agree with the views of those in political power at the time.

So I would assume we would then need county hunting/fishing licenses?? Oh damn I just crossed the county line, well I guess I need to buy a different license...

I guess each county would have to have their own county fish and wildlife officers, biologists, etc.. Where is the money for that going to come from? Let us not forget that just 28% of WDFWs funding comes from license/tag sales.

There is a reason why fish and wildlife is managed by the state in EVERY state.

I have no problem with counties wanting to become involved, similar to what I posted with how each county in California has a county fish and game board which are advisory boards to the CA Fish & Game Commission. But the overall management needs to be at the state.