WDFW Buying More Wolf Habitat

[bearpaw]

One thing that I will add is the wolf thing is a new developement that is easy to point at.

Wildfires, hard winters and habitat loss have been happening for years.  People look at the current low numbers and see the new variable wolves or the change in predator management from using dogs and bait to not being allowed to use those tools.

Low numbers and change in predators and management techniques.  The straw that broke the camels back and the most recent change.

I think changes to need to be made in all areas affecting the herd numbers there is no "one fix" that will get the numbers back up.

I know it sounds good to say that and a guy wants to feel that it's all the factors causing the reduction in numbers but again I have to use Idaho as a point to consider. Idaho is growing fast too, yet there are near record numbers of elk in areas with all the access and growth. Yet in the wilderness where green groups are preventing IDFG from taking helicopters and preventing hired contractors from reducing wolf numbers, the elk are at or near historic lows. Before wolves those wilderness areas were the best elk areas in idaho.

I say this in a friendly manner! 

[bearpaw]

and then there's colorado, growing like mad, developments everywhere, no wolves, record numbers of elk   


let me add again so somebody doesn't say I am only blaming wolves, i understand there are other factors, but there is strong evidence wolves are one of the biggest factors limiting herds

[Bob33]

and then there's colorado, growing like mad, developments everywhere, no wolves, record numbers of elk   

Yes indeed.

1983 mule deer population: 625,000
2018 mule deer population: 408,000
Number of known wild wolves: 0

[bearpaw]

and then there's colorado, growing like mad, developments everywhere, no wolves, record numbers of elk   

Yes indeed.

1983 mule deer population: 625,000
2018 mule deer population: 408,000
Number of known wild wolves: 0

And the big difference is that if you look at deer numbers in CO a few years ago they were lower. CO like most states suffered winter loss, but they changed deer management and deer numbers are climbing. Arguably, in the Idaho wilderness where there are no few humans but there are wolves, and the greenies won't let IDFG reduce wolf numbers, deer herds are struggling.

[Karl Blanchard]

and then there's colorado, growing like mad, developments everywhere, no wolves, record numbers of elk   

but deer herds continue to shrink  I've watched it there for almost a decade.  Development continues to chew up winter range and IT IS hitting the mule deer just like Wyoming and Idaho.  A herd cannot outgrow its winter range.  If it does mother nature resets it.  Fire and development that nukes winter range holding capacity IS the biggest elephant in the room.

  I also blame elk.  Since Yakima was mentioned, elk are taking over our MD winter range.  I spend a considerable amount of time out and about and I see no more bear and cats (visual sightings as well as scat and track) as I did a decade ago.  The exploding predator population is an over hyped think.  At least in my neck of the woods

[jackelope]

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/MuleDeer/ColoradosMuleDeerStory.pdf

[Rainier10]

I can say where my cabin is in the colockum the reason for the massive decline in elk numbers is the game department decided to reduce the herd numbers by giving out tons of permits for cows and bulls.  Now the numbers are lower and I am competing with the predators for less elk. 

Numbers were lowered on purpose by man and now the wolf and other predators are just doing what they have always done, eat elk and elk calves.

20 years ago there was a muzzleloading season up there.  ML area 911.  They cancelled it because herd numbers were under population objectives for the land.  They said the land could carry 7,500 head.  Twenty years later, a few fires and I am sure tons of complaining from the timothy hay farmers about crop damage  and they decide the herd is over objective and say the land can only carry 5,500-6,000 head or something like that.

I think that if we did a poll you would get answers all across the board because each GMU has different variables affecting it at that point.

I am sure the Idaho wilderness is not affected by development is more affected by wolves and predators.

I am sure the people in South Prarie/Bonney Lake would say the elk numbers are affected there more because of habitat loss than predators.

[bearpaw]

and then there's colorado, growing like mad, developments everywhere, no wolves, record numbers of elk   

but deer herds continue to shrink  I've watched it there for almost a decade.  Development continues to chew up winter range and IT IS hitting the mule deer just like Wyoming and Idaho.  A herd cannot outgrow its winter range.  If it does mother nature resets it.  Fire and development that nukes winter range holding capacity IS the biggest elephant in the room.

  I also blame elk.  Since Yakima was mentioned, elk are taking over our MD winter range.  I spend a considerable amount of time out and about and I see no more bear and cats (visual sightings as well as scat and track) as I did a decade ago.  The exploding predator population is an over hyped think.  At least in my neck of the woods

I have to somewhat agree, elk certainly can out compete deer. I don't believe that happens too much in WA, we don't have that many animals. But honestly I'm not a Yakima area expert, if you think there are too many elk there you would know better than me. I was under the impression elk herds were down? Was I wrong about that? If I am wrong I'm willing to bet that changes as soon as there are as many wolf packs as in the NE!

Not being unfriendly, just continuing the conversation. 

[bearpaw]

I can say where my cabin is in the colockum the reason for the massive decline in elk numbers is the game department decided to reduce the herd numbers by giving out tons of permits for cows and bulls.  Now the numbers are lower and I am competing with the predators for less elk. 

Numbers were lowered on purpose by man and now the wolf and other predators are just doing what they have always done, eat elk and elk calves.

20 years ago there was a muzzleloading season up there.  ML area 911.  They cancelled it because herd numbers were under population objectives for the land.  They said the land could carry 7,500 head.  Twenty years later, a few fires and I am sure tons of complaining from the timothy hay farmers about crop damage  and they decide the herd is over objective and say the land can only carry 5,500-6,000 head or something like that.

I think that if we did a poll you would get answers all across the board because each GMU has different variables affecting it at that point.

I am sure the Idaho wilderness is not affected by development is more affected by wolves and predators.

I am sure the people in South Prarie/Bonney Lake would say the elk numbers are affected there more because of habitat loss than predators.

That all makes sense, I agree, but wait till you have more wolf packs, I'm willing to lay a benjamin on the line right here and now that your elk number drop further?
I'm saying this in a friendly manner, please don't take it wrong, just replying back.

[Rainier10]

I can say where my cabin is in the colockum the reason for the massive decline in elk numbers is the game department decided to reduce the herd numbers by giving out tons of permits for cows and bulls.  Now the numbers are lower and I am competing with the predators for less elk. 

Numbers were lowered on purpose by man and now the wolf and other predators are just doing what they have always done, eat elk and elk calves.

20 years ago there was a muzzleloading season up there.  ML area 911.  They cancelled it because herd numbers were under population objectives for the land.  They said the land could carry 7,500 head.  Twenty years later, a few fires and I am sure tons of complaining from the timothy hay farmers about crop damage  and they decide the herd is over objective and say the land can only carry 5,500-6,000 head or something like that.

I think that if we did a poll you would get answers all across the board because each GMU has different variables affecting it at that point.

I am sure the Idaho wilderness is not affected by development is more affected by wolves and predators.

I am sure the people in South Prarie/Bonney Lake would say the elk numbers are affected there more because of habitat loss than predators.

That all makes sense, I agree, but wait till you have more wolf packs, I'm willing to lay a benjamin on the line right here and now that your elk number drop further?
I'm saying this in a friendly manner, please don't take it wrong, just replying back.

I agree with that 100%.

I think it is great that they have the state broken up into GMU's that makes it easier to manage these areas.

Management is what we need and unfortunately I think what the WDFW is having to manage right now is people and the people with the clearest message being relayed to them are the people wanting predators increased and crop damage decreased both very bad things for ungulates.

Hunters and outdoors men are having a tough time coming up with a clear message that we all stand behind.

[Karl Blanchard]

Dale you are correct they are down by about a third from just a few years ago but we had a 3 year season cycle of thousands of additional antlerless permits because the herd was busting at the seams.  Then winter kill of 2016.  Perfect storm of events to really snack our herd on the chin.  Historically though we still have more elk than ever before. 

Another issue our deer face is while I don't think they have lost a ton of habitat over the years the habitat has absolutely changed. We haven't logged anything in decades and we suppress every fire that Sparks up. Our forests are thicker than ever before and nothing grows there anymore. The holding capacity for deer just isn't that high

[woodswalker]

Dale you are correct they are down by about a third from just a few years ago but we had a 3 year season cycle of thousands of additional antlerless permits because the herd was busting at the seams.  Then winter kill of 2016.  Perfect storm of events to really snack our herd on the chin.  Historically though we still have more elk than ever before. 

Another issue our deer face is while I don't think they have lost a ton of habitat over the years the habitat has absolutely changed. We haven't logged anything in decades and we suppress every fire that Sparks up. Our forests are thicker than ever before and nothing grows there anymore. The holding capacity for deer just isn't that high

Karl, Yes the reduction in (/elimination of) logging has had a huge impact on the deer herds in the woodlands.  You get dark forest reprod that is so thick its kills all the undergrowth and will take 35 years to self-thin to where there is an understory again.  No thinning, no opening of new cuts, no new food sources and the deer go away.  ALSO...when the logging/land companies spray broadleaf herbicides to cut down the alder and other broadleaf trees that compete with the desirable conifers, there goes another food source.

[Karl Blanchard]

Dale you are correct they are down by about a third from just a few years ago but we had a 3 year season cycle of thousands of additional antlerless permits because the herd was busting at the seams.  Then winter kill of 2016.  Perfect storm of events to really snack our herd on the chin.  Historically though we still have more elk than ever before. 

Another issue our deer face is while I don't think they have lost a ton of habitat over the years the habitat has absolutely changed. We haven't logged anything in decades and we suppress every fire that Sparks up. Our forests are thicker than ever before and nothing grows there anymore. The holding capacity for deer just isn't that high

Karl, Yes the reduction in (/elimination of) logging has had a huge impact on the deer herds in the woodlands.  You get dark forest reprod that is so thick its kills all the undergrowth and will take 35 years to self-thin to where there is an understory again.  No thinning, no opening of new cuts, no new food sources and the deer go away.  ALSO...when the logging/land companies spray broadleaf herbicides to cut down the alder and other broadleaf trees that compete with the desirable conifers, there goes another food source.

and dont get me started on wood cutting! I was cutting and selling cords of firewood at 15.  In my 20 yards of selling and burning they haven't rotated cutting areas.  I'd say they would rather have it burn in the woods rather than my home but they put out fires in the woods too

[Special T]

I'm surprised no body has pointed this out.

WHY does the WDFW push habitat acquisition over any and all other methods of "managing" game?


1.  They are utilizing a lot of federal $ so very little comes out of thier budget.

2.  Nobody Sue's them over acquiring land.


WDFW reacts from a position of weakness which is why we see the department sell these acquisitions so hard.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[jstone]

I grew up in Wenatchee. There has always been deer in town. Among other things