Coloradans unleash wolves on their neighbors: A fitting metaphor for COVID

[vandeman17]

Mt Emily is gonna be a desert soon. Mark my words.

A unit we have drawn 3 times now in NE Oregon, first 2 years were about 5 years ago and on those trips we saw multiple herds of 10+ elk during our hunts. This last year in the same area, we only saw one herd that was over 4 elk. Talked to a guy while he was stocking one of the little trout ponds that was born and raised in the area. He said the wolves have been hammering his normal areas

[KFhunter]

I have it from a verifiable source -with much data to prove it- that a wolf herd has negligible effect on elk packs. 

[headshot5]

I have it from a verifiable source -with much data to prove it- that a wolf herd has negligible effect on elk packs.

That made me laugh pretty hard. 

[vandeman17]

I have it from a verifiable source -with much data to prove it- that a wolf herd has negligible effect on elk packs.

Follow the science

[idahohuntr]

People refer to Yellowstone because its a slam dunk example of what wolves do to ungulate populations with all other variables staying relatively constant. Wolves have destroyed ungulate populations everywhere they go. I saw the populations change firsthand out around the Clearwater and up the Joe, and now in NE Washington. The stress from running them in the winter has a terrible impact along with the obvious killing. I'm sure there's research out there to show otherwise, done by someone who loves wolves.

That's a blanket statement, and clearly not true. You don't have to cite research but please cite F&W quality data from the respective states. You will need a lot of it. Without data your assertions mean nothing, and you can dislike me saying this but it doesn't change the fact it's true.

One of my favorites is when a hunter proclaims they have seen a lot of (insert predator here) kills and tracks in their unit and therefore management is badly needed. Most of the time when pressed on the issue they can't even cite management objectives, the estimated game population, or estimated predator numbers for the particular unit, let alone other factors. That's akin to me walking into the units I hunt, not seeing any predator sign, seeing lots of elk sign, and proclaiming we need to cull the elk to boost predator numbers. That's emotional and irrational, there is no data involved. That's ridiculous.

For starters, one of the units I hunt in Oregon has had wolf activity for at least 8 years. It is not a pack on record with ODFW, who knows why, despite photo evidence of adults and offspring. This unit has a better estimated elk population than it did decades ago. It exceeds MO, even with Oregon's healthy cougar population. 2019 harvest was essentially right on par with pre wolf 2004 data. Why is this? 

I've attached historic annual bull elk harvest provided by a previous ODFW document. 2019 total bull harvest (archery and rifle) was 9,597 ( out of 15,299 total elk harvested). Plot the point on the figure I attached and evaluate the data. How does it look in comparison? Have the wolves destroyed everything in their wake? These numbers were possible in conjunction with heathy cougar populations and a high antlerless harvest rate, both can decimate given the right situation. A correct response isn't to ignore everything I've just said and to say "oh, give the wolves more time". That may or may not be true but, again, it isn't based on meaningful data and therefore means nothing.

Also, as I requested earlier, please post the data to backup your initial claim of wolves destroying ungulate populations everywhere they go. Thats a big statement so make your case to me with data from all western states please.

https://myodfw.com/articles/big-game-hunting-harvest-statistics

Per your own proclamation, you will need to show us where ODFW says there are wolves in that unit or they aren't there! Your suggested data and assertions are useless and unverifiable!

So you already confirmed (and advertise on your outfitter website), using state verified/provided elk harvest data, that the Panhandle of Idaho is Idaho's top producing elk zone.

We also know the Panhandle has a HUGE number of wolves, of which some portion are harvested annually, likely a small portion, because there are an absolute ton of wolves in the Panhandle.

Not directed you at bearpaw, but I have a hard time with people wanting to personally attack hydro and call him a troll when he questions a member who says wolves have destroyed ungulates everywhere they go.  Especially when you in this very thread have demonstrated unequivocally that is not true.

Maybe folks want to argue that allowing hunters to kill a small fraction of wolves is what it takes to prevent such destruction, or maybe by 'destroy' folks mean something else? 

Either way, I see hydro pushing for more informed debate on these matters and that is a good thing.  If hunters sound like a collective bunch of uninformed folks who exaggerate impacts, that will not lead to improved predator management...it makes it easier for people in power to dismiss us as a bunch of idiots.  If we collectively can discuss these issues with supporting data and examples that withstand some level of scrutiny we can better make our case.   

[hughjorgan]

I have it from a verifiable source -with much data to prove it- that a wolf herd has negligible effect on elk packs.

Follow the science

Can you guys please sight your sources, maybe take a picture of a textbook and post it on an online forum so you can show your verifiable source to the rest of us that these wolf herds are having an impact. It will make you look really smrt!

[Buckhunter24]

Lots of animals pushed low into visible ag and cut over private land help with harvest numbers and perceived population is skewed because of it. I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing here. My posts are opinions not facts, but they are based on 15 years of working in these woods 250 plus days a year.

[Skyvalhunter]

I have it from a verifiable source -with much data to prove it- that a wolf herd has negligible effect on elk packs.

Follow the science

Can you guys please sight your sources, maybe take a picture of a textbook and post it on an online forum so you can show your verifiable source to the rest of us that these wolf herds are having an impact. It will make you look really smart!

[buckfvr]

No need to reinvent the wheel here.
To paraphrase Dr. Valerius Geist: When wolves move into an area, they vacuum that area clean of game.

If you dont believe Dr. Geist,  chances are you are beyond help.   

[highcountry_hunter]

I think the reason wolves in Washington cause such heated debates such as this one is that they are just the icing on the cake concerning deer and elk numbers. I do not have the facts and figures on paper nor can I provide numbers from WDFW (not that anybody should trust any data or statements made by WDFW; they have proven their dishonesty to both sportsmen and environmental groups time and time again). However if anyone who spends any amount of time in the outdoors of eastern Washington was to describe the ungulate numbers of today to 20 years ago in complete honesty, whether they are pro-wolf or anti-wolf, they would have to agree that numbers are down. Way down.
I grew up in Ferry county with my parents house bordering the Colville  national forest. From our back door I could have walked from Lake Roosevelt to Republic and only crossed 1 maintained road. As a teenager in the early 2000’s I would wander aimlessly throughout hunting season, often times making way too much noise, rarely paying attention to the wind, and practically 0 scouting; I tagged out every year. In fact if I didn’t run into at least 20 deer a day then something was off. Fast forward to today, I have multiple cameras out for scouting year round, I watch the moon cycles like a werewolf, I pay more attention to the wind than any sane person should, I sneak through the forest like a ninja at snails speed and sit for hours on end like a statue; if I see more than 5 deer in a day it is considered a success.
In my opinion the odds are stacked so greatly against deer and elk it’s amazing any of them reach maturity.
In the late 80’s the USFS decided to listen to extremist groups on how to manage our forests and bring logging and prescribed burns  on forest service land to an abrupt halt which in turn has resulted in thousands of acres of uninhabitable land, lodgepole thickets that are so dense that there is absolutely no undergrowth of grasses and brush that deer and elk thrive on. The enormous timber sales you see today on forest service land, paired up with Vaagen Brothers Lumber, is a catch up game that cannot be won. They let it go for too long (tho I applaud Vaagens for working with USFS on harvesting a large amount of this otherwise useless ground. Their mill is set up to handle smaller logs, the land is healthier, and they are keeping a large portion of the community in steady work).
In the 90’s voters (which is how this entire thread began) decided with their hearts instead of their heads, that managing predators with the use of hounds and bait should be illegal. I have a sneaking suspicion none of them were aware of how difficult it is to harvest a lion or mature black bear without the aid of dogs or bait. Therefore, lion and bear numbers flourished having a great impact on not only adult ungulates but especially fawns and calves.
We also have development. I can’t count how many of the large farms and ranches (100+ aces) in Stevens and Ferry county have been bought by banks and split into 5 acre lots so that Sally City Girl can live “the country life”. More houses in the country=less places for game to feed. What was once a 50 acre alfalfa or grass hay field is now full of 2 story houses with a Suburban in the driveway and 2 dogs in the back yard.
And then to top it all off, the wolves arrived (all on their own as we have been told over and over...). With the odds already stacked against the deer and elk, an apex predator that was protected at all costs by state and federal government was thrown into the mix. Nobody can reasonably expect game numbers to maintain their current status or ever flourish in these conditions.
Look at it like this; lock 10 deer into a 100 acres of grass, timber and brush. 2 months later you will likely have 10 healthy deer. Now cut it down to 50 acres. Now kill half of that grass. Now add 1 cougar, 1 black bear, 1 coyote and 1 wolf. How many deer will remain in 2 months?

Who knows, maybe I’m dead wrong. I haven’t scoured numbers and books, I’ve just lived here for 32 years. The animals were already fighting an up hill battle, and then another enemy joined the fight against them.

[Hydrophilic]

Folks - can we stop with the baseless personal attacks that too frequently creep into these discussions?  Hydro is expressing an opinion and supporting it with data...feel free to rebut but lets drop these ridiculous personal attacks and accusations he's not a hunter.   

A member who recently joined and has only posted on this particular thread with old data while demanding people with opposing views produce new data... color me skeptical. If it walks like a troll and acts like a troll... 

What old data am I using? Historical bull elk harvest? That’s the point, and I gave a new data point to plot for comparison, do you want more? Because I can provide it, just let me know.

[hughjorgan]

Folks - can we stop with the baseless personal attacks that too frequently creep into these discussions?  Hydro is expressing an opinion and supporting it with data...feel free to rebut but lets drop these ridiculous personal attacks and accusations he's not a hunter.   

A member who recently joined and has only posted on this particular thread with old data while demanding people with opposing views produce new data... color me skeptical. If it walks like a troll and acts like a troll... 

What old data am I using? Historical bull elk harvest? That’s the point, and I gave a new data point to plot for comparison, do you want more? Because I can provide it, just let me know.

I am sure this data they have says elk and deer numbers are doing so great that they need to limit the amount of hunters in Oregon with controlled hunts for deer and elk during general seasons. Has nothing to do with more predators like wolves on the landscape. Sounds like NE Oregon is just fine.

[Hydrophilic]

Well since someone here mentioned Oregon wolves I will chime in with my first hand experience.  I have hunted the same unit for the last 15 years in Eastern Oregon.  About 4-5 years ago wolves moved in and decimated the elk numbers.  Found an ODFW trail cam with pack 47 or 49 written on it.  In the same area found 3 fairly fresh wolf kills in a .5 mile square area.  Got wolves on my own trail camera.  To say that wolves will not decimate an area of deer and elk is just a lie.  I called ODFW and left a message to talk about the wolf impact but no return call.  I emailed them the pictures of the elk kills and info about the elk numbers since the wolves moved in.  You would think that they would want to know first hand knowledge about what a wolf pack has been doing to the elk and deer numbers, but it does not appear that they do.

Walla Walla
2002: 1,500
2005: 1,450
2008: 1,500
2011: 1,500
2014: 1,690
2016: 1,700
2019: 1,700

Minam
2002: 1,800
2005: 2,000
2008: 2,100
2011: 2,100
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,500
2019: 2,500

Wenaha
2002: 1300
2005: 1350
2008: 1,600
2011: 1,600
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,600
2019: 2,700

These units all have wolves, some for over 10 years. Data is directly from ODFW, contact them if interested. I have more data of interest but have no inclination with sharing it further because the users on this thread are incapable of having a factual, reasonable discussion without personal attacks that go unmoderated by a biased moderator. Beyond the research I have provided, the articles, the data, and now a direct contact line to find the data yourselves, I can't do much more.
Thank you for your time.

[KopperBuck]

You do know where those elk spend their time right? ODFW is fighting a battle now with ag damage, but at the same time trying to protecting migratory herds. News flash. They ain't migratory anymore. Ag is always going to help inflate those numbers, and in those units specifically.

[KopperBuck]

I also ponder about why WDFW/ODFW/insert agency gets a more of nod to their numbers than our observations. Is it because they're scientists, or professionals? I also spend more time pooping in the woods than some of these experts spend their entire work life. I didn't and don't need a degree to observe the obvious. Although, given the current state, I could charge good money for it.