Inslee meddles with wolf management

[ribka]

Well surprise, surprise the anti hunting pro wolf group Conservation NW supports the left wing Gov

https://www.conservationnw.org/news-updates/statement-on-letter-from-governor-regarding-wolves/

I would be wiiing to bet the eco terrorist ,Mitch Friedman, initially pushed this to the Gov

[Curly]

Department of Fish and Wildlife on Monday saying that the state's wolf management plan does not appear to be working in the Kettle River Range area of Ferry County. 

Finally something to agree with Inslee on.  The wolf plan is not working.

[pianoman9701]

Well surprise, surprise the anti hunting pro wolf group Conservation NW supports the left wing Gov

https://www.conservationnw.org/news-updates/statement-on-letter-from-governor-regarding-wolves/

I would be wiiing to bet the eco terrorist ,Mitch Friedman, initially pushed this to the Gov

No surprises there. CNW has always underplayed their hand with regard to the wolves and control. It's pretty clear now. They're right there with DOW, HSUS, and the rest of the extremists.

[Bango skank]

Department of Fish and Wildlife on Monday saying that the state's wolf management plan does not appear to be working in the Kettle River Range area of Ferry County. 

Finally something to agree with Inslee on.  The wolf plan is not working.

Yeah, but dont expect to agree with him on the solution.

[Curly]

Department of Fish and Wildlife on Monday saying that the state's wolf management plan does not appear to be working in the Kettle River Range area of Ferry County. 

Finally something to agree with Inslee on.  The wolf plan is not working.

Yeah, but dont expect to agree with him on the solution.

Correct. My solution would be to treat them like coyotes.

[KFhunter]

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

I could have a reasonable debate regarding cattle on public lands *if* there was a solution to keeping cattle safe on private lands; but until then..., don't be talking about keeping cattle out of "prime wolf habitat" when there is no such thing. Wolves go where they will and know no boundaries. It's a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[ribka]

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

I could have a reasonable debate regarding cattle on public lands *if* there was a solution to keeping cattle safe on private lands; but until then..., don't be talking about keeping cattle out of "prime wolf habitat" when there is no such thing. Wolves go where they will and know no boundaries. It's a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

“Prime wolf habitat “ is now in people’s back yards where wolves go to eat livestock and families’ pets after killing all the animals in the public forests ( “prime elk ,moose, mountain caribou and mule deer habitat “ that the wolves have destroyed)

A lot of ignorant hatred of ranchers in Washington state

[pianoman9701]

 

Look what WY did? They took the Western 1/3 of the state and designated the wilderness areas as wolf habitat. And the eastern 2/3s as human and cow habitat. Now there's a tag season in the western 1/3 and an open season in the eastern 2/3s. They don't belong there so feel free to kill them. I wish our state had that kind of intestinal fortitude. We just jumped right in bed with the USFWS and believed everything they said.

[Bushcraft]

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

You are overvaluing the worth of your $.02 input on the matter.   

[idahohuntr]

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

I could have a reasonable debate regarding cattle on public lands *if* there was a solution to keeping cattle safe on private lands; but until then..., don't be talking about keeping cattle out of "prime wolf habitat" when there is no such thing. Wolves go where they will and know no boundaries. It's a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I want the state to spend less (preferably zero) resources on wolf/cattle conflicts.  The state is clearly never going to meaningfully hunt or reduce wolf numbers.  Therefore, keeping cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is basically the only viable option at this time to minimize conflicts...unless some vigilantes find effective control methods?? Also, if the conflicts are on private lands, that's a very different narrative than when they occur on public lands - and much harder for politicians to decry lethal removal.  I'm fine with whatever keeps WDFW from spending another dollar on this dumb wolf conflict $**t...but in this political climate, getting cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is probably the most likely successful approach.   

[Bango skank]

The problem is that anywhere the cattle are moved to will then become a high wolf density area.

[Bushcraft]

The problem is that anywhere the cattle are moved to will then become a high wolf density area.

DING, DING, DING...WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

It's amazing what happens when critical thinking skills are engaged instead of making a sacrifice on the Public Land alter. (idahohunter, take note)

[KFhunter]

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

I could have a reasonable debate regarding cattle on public lands *if* there was a solution to keeping cattle safe on private lands; but until then..., don't be talking about keeping cattle out of "prime wolf habitat" when there is no such thing. Wolves go where they will and know no boundaries. It's a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I want the state to spend less (preferably zero) resources on wolf/cattle conflicts.  The state is clearly never going to meaningfully hunt or reduce wolf numbers.  Therefore, keeping cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is basically the only viable option at this time to minimize conflicts...unless some vigilantes find effective control methods?? Also, if the conflicts are on private lands, that's a very different narrative than when they occur on public lands - and much harder for politicians to decry lethal removal.  I'm fine with whatever keeps WDFW from spending another dollar on this dumb wolf conflict $**t...but in this political climate, getting cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is probably the most likely successful approach.   

What you're advocating for (WDFW washes hands of wolf conflict management) would only be workable *if* WDFW also allowed very liberal hunting, trapping and protection of property rights...and ironically enough, that's what the ranchers have been asking for all along.   

[ribka]

Are you saying the tax payer funded extremely successful Conservation NW range rider program is not working???

Mitch Friedman says it is extremely successful

Who’s lying?

The full letter:
https://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Letter%20to%20Director%20Susewind.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The message is pretty clear: Don't kill wolves that eat cows on federal lands...work with federal land managers to minimize overlap between grazing cattle and wolf habitat (i.e., don't have cattle grazing allotments in prime wolf habitat).

If the State isn't going to reduce the wolf population, then I'm in support of reducing the cattle conflicts that result in WDFW resources being expended on mitigating private interests.  Too many bigger things for WDFW to be focused on for hunters and anglers than wasting time on super political/controversial issues that the Governor will meddle in.  If that approach results in widespread poaching of wolves by locals...I'm fine with that.  It will be the outcome of the Governors policy. 

I could have a reasonable debate regarding cattle on public lands *if* there was a solution to keeping cattle safe on private lands; but until then..., don't be talking about keeping cattle out of "prime wolf habitat" when there is no such thing. Wolves go where they will and know no boundaries. It's a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I want the state to spend less (preferably zero) resources on wolf/cattle conflicts.  The state is clearly never going to meaningfully hunt or reduce wolf numbers.  Therefore, keeping cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is basically the only viable option at this time to minimize conflicts...unless some vigilantes find effective control methods?? Also, if the conflicts are on private lands, that's a very different narrative than when they occur on public lands - and much harder for politicians to decry lethal removal.  I'm fine with whatever keeps WDFW from spending another dollar on this dumb wolf conflict $**t...but in this political climate, getting cattle out of high density wolf areas on public lands is probably the most likely successful approach.   

[buckfvr]

Looks to me like the first shot across Susewinds bow..........