Wolves Kill 154 Cows In Just One Northwest Minnesota County

[HighlandLofts]

As far as believing what the government tells you as being true I call BS on that.
Back in the 80s there were a bunch of rapes going on in the Philadelphia are where college students lived, the the city would not let the statistics out about them to the public because it would cut down on tourism to that historic district. How many decades did it take for that fact to come out? over twenty-five years.

The government does as they please and cover up their tracks. I have 0% trust in government operations,there is to much corruption in the system.

Look at all of the people in the Clinton circle that came up dead.

[elkchaser54]

I love how anything involving the government always has a giant conspiracy behind it.  We go from elk to rapes in Philadelphia to un-corroborated Clinton stories.  I'm sure the WDFW was involved in both of those as well as UFO landings and the moon landing hoax. 

[WAcoyotehunter]

I love how anything involving the government always has a giant conspiracy behind it.  We go from elk to rapes in Philadelphia to un-corroborated Clinton stories.  I'm sure the WDFW was involved in both of those as well as UFO landings and the moon landing hoax. 

Unfortunately that's the type we're dealing with here.  If it doesn't fit their ideals, it's "fake news" and conspiracy. 

[JimmyHoffa]

I love how anything involving the government always has a giant conspiracy behind it.  We go from elk to rapes in Philadelphia to un-corroborated Clinton stories.  I'm sure the WDFW was involved in both of those as well as UFO landings and the moon landing hoax. 

Unfortunately that's the type we're dealing with here.  If it doesn't fit their ideals, it's "fake news" and conspiracy.

So people like Weilgus and Friedman don't have agendas?  Look back at Jamie Rappaport Clark too.

[ribka]

remember mitch friedman spent over 20 years in the eco terrorist group earth first and they had an agenda that cost victims millions of dollars and injured loggers by spiking trees

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/271-earth-first/

He reinvented himself many times but he is still the same guy who wants to shut down sport hunting

But as one of posters above said before on here we need to trust Friedman because he is a good guy? He has no agenda

Who is dumb enough to believe this crap

I love how anything involving the government always has a giant conspiracy behind it.  We go from elk to rapes in Philadelphia to un-corroborated Clinton stories.  I'm sure the WDFW was involved in both of those as well as UFO landings and the moon landing hoax. 

Unfortunately that's the type we're dealing with here.  If it doesn't fit their ideals, it's "fake news" and conspiracy.

So people like Weilgus and Friedman don't have agendas?  Look back at Jamie Rappaport Clark too.

[wolfbait]

And remember Minnesota has more wolves living there then Washington, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Wyoming... COMBINED! and there still is deer there.  I am not some wolf conservationist but I think the wolf impact is a little over stated.  I feel we do need to allow hunting on them just like we do with all other predators, to control numbers. 

I agree with your take, elkchaser.  For the most part, wolves don't change things hunting-wise. There are other factors that have a bigger impact.  When they do prove to be a big part of the problem, deal with them. Manage them just like other species.  Focusing strictly on wolves means a lot of the other factors get ignored. And you walk around pissed off all the time.

One should remember the Yellowstone elk herd etc. when the devastation of game herds is brought to the forefront.

To say that "wolves don't change things hunting-wise",  is utter BS, and shows extreme ignorance.

https://qcnr.usu.edu/labs/macnulty_lab/files/MacNulty%20et%20al%202016a.pdf

I'll play with you wolfbait.  Here is a well written and documented article about the decline in the Yellowstone herd.  And wolves had a part in it although probably not in the way you would thing or as big a part as you maintain.  For starters, the decline started before wolves were reintroduced. The December 1994 count was 2,254 less elk than the previous winter. Then right after the first wolves were released, the winter of 1997 happened on top of the largest hunter harvest ever in the late hunt. That winter had a record winter kill. But here is where it is probable that wolves added to the decline combined with the late hunt.   And the reason is the way wolves hunt and the way humans hunt. Wolves take a good % of calves out of a herd. About half the elk they kill are calves. But interesting enough, of the cows they take, 89% ate over 10 years old. So in other words, once a cow elk matures, they are fairly safe from wolves, statistically until they get past their prime breeding age.  So the prime breeders make up for calves lost to predators.  But humans on the other hand tend to take prime breeding aged cows. See the graph in the article. With the late hunt continuing after the winter crash of 1997 and a growing wolf population, it was a triple whammy on the herd.  With the end of the winter hunt (which was mostly about keeping damage down on surrounding farms and an attempt to keep the elk in Yellowstone from completely devastating their habitat.) and a falling wolf population, the population of the herd seems to have stabilized and is growing again.

But before you lay it all on the wolves, look at the very first chart of the elk population in Yellowstone. There was another crash in recent history which culminated in the lowest number of elk in recent history and it had nothing to do with wolves as were weren't any wolves in Yellowstone in 1967-1968. After that crash, the herd grew rapidly, probably too rapidly and too large and another crash was bound to happen, wolves or no wolves.  And the herd will climb again in spite of wolves.

Meanwhile, hunters in Montana harvested Between 20,000-30,000 elk per year between 2004 and 2016, with 30,000 taken in 2015.  In 1995, the year wolves were reintroduced Montana had roughly 95,000 elk. New newest population estimate I can find is for 2013 and it is 150,000 elk. So it doesn't appear to me that wolves are hurting hunters' ability to hunt in Montana.

In Wyoming, in 1995, the year wolves were reintroduced, hunters killed 17,695 elk. In 2016, they killed 25,852 elk. Tell me again how bad wolves have slaughtered elk herds.

I tried to read some of the crap article, I really did, anything with Doug Smith in it is usually tainted:

"Despite uncertainty about the northern Yellowstone elk data, there is little doubt that wolves have contributed to the recent decline of the northern elk herd. What is in doubt is the size of that contribution. How much of the decline is due to wolves? The basic biology of wolves suggests that they have a modest influence on elk dynamics. The wolf has the bite force, body size, and cooperative behavior to kill a wide array of ungulates ranging from diminutive deer to one-ton bison (Mech et al. 2015). But it lacks the massive size, retractable claws, supinating muscular forelimbs, and specialized skull configuration (Peterson and Ciucci 2003) that would allow it to be a consistently high-success hunter of any one particular prey species. Instead, the wolf is a consistently low-success hunter of a wide range of prey. Its strategy is to find the easy mark: a prey animal that is easily killed because of its small size, old age, poor health, or treacherous surroundings. The problem is that easy marks are generally rare and often inconspicuous. Wolves find their mark by relentlessly sifting through the available prey pool, testing prospective victims. Wolves cast a wide net and test many more prey than they actually kill. This is why the success of wolves hunting elk in northern Yellowstone has rarely exceeded 20% (Smith et al. 2000, Mech et al. 2001) and drops to less than 10% when only adult elk are considered (MacNulty et al. 2012)."


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.  s:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Back to the BS line of "Wolves only kill the old, the sick and the weak".


Do you remember the LoLo elk herd, IDFG finally had to admit wolves were the reason for decline.

Those of you who are not agenda driven pro-wolf will get a great benefit of knowledge from the info. in the link below.


The Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd

http://idahoforwildlife.com/files/pdf/georgeDovel/The%20Outdoorsman%20No%20%2017%20Feb-Mar%202006%20The%20Northern%20Yellowstone%20elk%20herd.pdf

[wolfbait]

A simple FOIA request could prove your case... Why would the agency risk tampering with harvest data? 

The more realistic scenario is that the seasons are changed around and harvest data comparisons get difficult.

"Why would the agency risk tampering with harvest data"?....The same reason they inflate herd sizes AND balloon forecasts, sell more tags, make more money, support other critters other than our ungulates which we all know have not been tended to like they once were...

 The fraud and corruption of the wolf introduction continues on from state to state......

Predicted Wolf Impact Based on False IDFG Data

 IDFG biologists Kuck, Nelson, Ra provided the 1993 FWS Wolf EIS with wild ungulate prey numbers for the 20,700 sq. mile Central Idaho Primary Analysis Area. The claimed average post-season elk and deer populations were six times higher than the numbers counted by helicopter and recorded by IDFG biologists in any unit in the PAA. In a September 24, 1993 draft letter to Wolf Project Leader Ed Bangs, IDFG Director Jerry Conley admitted that IDFG personnel had provided the data lysis in the Wolf EIS concerning the impact of introducing 100 wolves into central Idaho. His letter claimed a recovering wolf population “will rarely cause unacceptable impacts” and stated, “We believe these analyses provide a realistic picture of the probable environmental consequences of a recovered wolf population (about 100 animals) in central Idaho based on the best available data.” (emphasis added)

http://idahoforwildlife.com/files/pdf/georgeDovel/The%20Outdoorsman%2026%20January%202008%20full%20report.pdf


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.  s:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[WAcoyotehunter]

I love how anything involving the government always has a giant conspiracy behind it.  We go from elk to rapes in Philadelphia to un-corroborated Clinton stories.  I'm sure the WDFW was involved in both of those as well as UFO landings and the moon landing hoax. 

Unfortunately that's the type we're dealing with here.  If it doesn't fit their ideals, it's "fake news" and conspiracy.

So people like Weilgus and Friedman don't have agendas?  Look back at Jamie Rappaport Clark too.

?  Yes I think they do.  However they are not "government" and a conspiracy theory involving a conservation group doing conservation things is not all that exciting. 

This was in reply to the previous post about totally stupid conspiracies

[HighlandLofts]

No conspiracy theory, Just stating facts about government reporting of facts.
If they have an agenda they produce facts to corroborate with what they want to do.
Some where in the ranks is a bunch of liberals who want WOLVES, PERIOD.
They can have them, but there are people on the other side that will mistake their pet project as a coyote and eliminate it as such. No intent to kill a prized wolf like these top government officials didn't intend to mislead the American people.

I will not hunt this State, The deer numbers just are not here.
You can see a ton of deer on posted property on the East Side, but what I see for deer here on the Wetside and what I see for deer else where in the Country I choose to hunt elsewhere, plus the cost of licenses elsewhere is cheaper then the hunting license here. Which you are being raped on.

I have no personal interest in the works of this liberal trade off, I just state facts.

One fact being there is already enough predators for the wildlife that inhabit this State with out importing others for a personal agenda. If the wolves are so ROMANTIC import them to King County, Pierce County and the Islands.

Anybody mistake a wolf for a coyote lately?
San Juans, Whidbey, Anacortes, Bainbridge and others.