Multiple wolf packs in the Methow Valley?

[Skyvalhunter]

Here in lies the problem:
WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. 

Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.

[bobcat]

Breeding pair. Yeah, that's the term I was trying to think of, but I'm no biologist.

[Boss .300 winmag]

Here in lies the problem:
WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. 

Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.

We’ll have to see the harvest numbers, but I bet the Methow is probably already there.

[bigmacc]

Here in lies the problem:
WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. 

Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.

Good info Skyvalley but they will probably blame the drastic reduction of the Methow herd on everything but wolves I,m afraid, heck I saw a lot of camp robbers and crows this year, probably a study going on to pin it on them..

[Skyvalhunter]

Well everyone that knows anything about the Methow knows it can sustain WAY more deer than it does or has done. I didn't look up the States objective for the area but you cant tell me it has come anywhere close to what it can sustain. With that in mind the state should be able to address the predator situation weather it be Wolves, Cougars, Bears, Coyotes whatever it needs to wake up and address this.

The statewide management goals for deer are:
1. Preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage deer and their habitat to ensure sustainable populations.
2. Manage deer for a variety of recreational, educational, and aesthetic purposes including hunting, scientific study, cultural, subsistence, and ceremonial uses by Native Americans, wildlife viewing, and photography.
3. Manage statewide deer populations for a sustainable annual harvest

Not accomplished

[bigmacc]

We everyone that knows anything about the Methow knows it can sustain WAY more deer than it does or has done. I didn't look up the States objective for the area but you cant tell me it has come anywhere close to what it can sustain. With that in mind the state should be able to address the predator situation weather it be Wolves, Cougars, Bears, Coyotes whatever it needs to wake up and address this.

Yes it can sustain more and did for many, many years. A lot of us remember that herd holding steady at around 30k to 40k and it wasn't that long ago, now its at most half of that and dropping fast.

[HighlandLofts]

When dealing with any government agency you very rarely get a straight answer.
You guys in that region can see first hand the damage that is taking place. You can see it better then some clown sitting in a office in Seattle.

[Humptulips]

Here in lies the problem:
WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. 

Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.

All they have to do is reduce the population objective and voila, they can do as they want to.

[Skyvalhunter]

Which needs scientific backing one would think

[WAcoyotehunter]

Which needs scientific backing one would think

Indeed.  Remember though, lots of the folks here don't believe in science.

[huntnphool]

Which needs scientific backing one would think

Indeed.  Remember though, lots of the folks here don't believe in science.

 When the results of "science" are directly related to the political views of the scientist......not so much.

 I'll give you our current cougar "plan" as a example.

[bobcat]

Deer and elk population objectives in this state aren't based on science but more on how many animals the private landowners will tolerate.

[wolfbait]

Wolves and Chaos

http://tomremington.com/tag/wolves/

[Special T]

Good article.
The beurocracy is smothering everything.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[buckcanyonlodge]

Here in lies the problem:
WDFW is monitoring big game populations, predator-prey relationships, and hunter harvest closely. If any ungulate population falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years, WDFW may consider reducing wolf abundance in affected areas, where applicable with federal law.As prescribed by the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, if wolf predation became a primary limiting factor for an “at risk” ungulate population in a wolf recovery region that had at least four successful breeding pairs of wolves, WDFW could consider reducing wolf abundance in the localized area. An “at risk” ungulate population is any federal or state listed species (Selkirk Mountain woodland caribou, Columbian white-tailed deer) or any ungulate population that falls 25 percent below its population objective for two consecutive years, and/or if hunter harvest decreases by 25 percent below the 10-year average harvest rate for two consecutive years. 

Their population objective is WAY, WAY below what it should be.

We’ll have to see the harvest numbers, but I bet the Methow is probably already there.

Any way to verify their numbers? ...Add a couple here ..a few there.. still no harvest decrease...Call me crazy but my tin foil hat says it might be possible. I'm working on a tin foil suit to go with my hat.