Legislation aims to drastically reduce Idaho wolf population

[Ridgeratt]

Legislation aims to drastically reduce Idaho wolf population


BOISE, Idaho (AP) — A house panel on Tuesday introduced legislation allowing the use of snowmobiles, ATVs, powered parachutes and other methods to hunt and kill wolves year-round and with no limits in most of Idaho.

The House Resources and Conservation Committee cleared the way for a public hearing on the proposed law backers say is needed because Idaho has too many wolves.

Wolves could be hunted year-round in the state with no limits in all but a rugged area of central Idaho extending from about Challis to Grangeville. Specifically, the legislation reclassifies wolves outside of that area from game animals to predators.


“When you make that reclassification to a predator, you still have to have a hunting license to shoot that predator, but there are no seasons, no limits,” said former Republican Sen. Jeff Siddoway, filling in for a senator who is out with COVID-19. He said wolves could also be hunted from helicopters and airplanes.


Siddoway said the plan is to reduce Idaho’s wolves from about 1,500 to 500.

The legislation says that once 500 wolves or fewer remain in the state, the Idaho Fish and Game Commission would be authorized to review wolf management policies to make sure there are at least 500 wolves and 50 packs.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game tracks wolf numbers using various methods, including cameras, and listed the 2020 population at 1,556 wolves, about the same as in 2019.

Wolves were protected in Idaho under the Endangered Species Act until being delisted in 2011.

Wolves are managed by Fish and Game under its Idaho Wolf Conservation and Management Plan.


https://www.theintelligencer.com/news/article/Legislation-aims-to-drastically-reduce-Idaho-wolf-15974114.php

[huntnphool]

 Good for them, law suit on its way!

[pianoman9701]

Another good reason to live in ID.

[highside74]

This makes sense if the proposal is to have 500. Kill them til they reach 500 unlike the story that is also on here about Wisconsin putting a limit of 200 when they need to kill 650.

[Skyvalhunter]

 
As Phool said I expect law suits also

[Mtnwalker]

Man, shooting wolves from a powered parachute sounds like fun to me!

[JimmyHoffa]

Changing their status and allowing new methods might allow for thinning their numbers in the backcountry, where I've heard that they have done the most damage.

[ThurstonCokid]

Man, shooting wolves from a powered parachute sounds like fun to me!

Ya, sign me up too!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[huntnphool]

 How about Idaho following suit with sanctuary cities, simply refuse to prosecute!

 Problem solved...regardless the law suits brought!

[Fl0und3rz]

ID is looking better every day.

[Cougartail]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

[hunter399]

Although I have no idea if it will happen or not.
Good for Idaho for stepping up.
We will never see wolf hunting or trapping in this state.
Wolves are growing at such a slow rate,that's BS .
WDFW is fully aware there are Alot more wolves in this state than they say there is. Ohh ya there special deer regulations for NE Washington is no antlerless harvest and shorten late season. Because of there ignorance to confirm true numbers of wolves ,soon you will have to have a permit to hunt deer or elk. OTC will be the past as we make way for wolves,and don't worry it will happen all over the state,coming soon to your hunting grounds.  I can hear it now, deer and elk population is declining for the past 15 years, We must of had 15 bad winters and habitat is suffering, ticks that have been here longer than people have.......... Just when you think you have heard every excuse in the book ,you'll hear a new one.
What do you think is going on with moose right now,every excuse ,except wolves. I hope some people draw moose tags soon ,cause those permits will be gone soon.
This is what's happening in NE Washington right NOW ,but it's all on the down low . That's one reason some hunters was pushing the 4pt APR . I would rather have some OTC opportunity ,then have to draw permits to hunt.

With all that said...............
Proof is in the pudding,you only have to look at moose numbers to see our future. WDFW was already trying this year to turn late season deer into permit only hunt for NE Washington. This is our future in Washington.
Wolve will not be hunted or trapped in this state.
Hunting will be stripped away very slowly until the whole state is permit only ,and WDFW can maximize profits off of the very little opportunity that is left.

THATS THE WAY IT IS.

[Skyvalhunter]

The problem with WDFW wolf plan is they believe this as stated in it:

The effects that wolves will have on elk, deer, and other ungulate populations and hunter harvest are difficult to predict. In Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, where wolf populations currently number more than 1,600 wolves, most elk and deer populations remain at or above management objectives. Wolves have contributed to declining elk populations in a few areas, but are usually one of several causes, including declining habitat conditions, past high human harvest, severe weather conditions, and predation by other predators. In the Great Lakes region, where there are about 4,000 wolves, white-tailed deer populations are thriving and often above local management goals, and annual hunter harvest has remained high. These data suggest that when wolf populations in Washington are in the initial stages of recovery, they could have some localized impacts on elk and deer abundance or habitat use, but little to no effect would be expected on overall ungulate populations in the state. Impacts would be somewhat greater during the latter stages of recovery, but are still expected to be relatively small on a statewide level.

WDFW makes their management objectives are so low.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00001

[hunter399]

The problem with WDFW wolf plan is they believe this as stated in it:

The effects that wolves will have on elk, deer, and other ungulate populations and hunter harvest are difficult to predict. In Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, where wolf populations currently number more than 1,600 wolves, most elk and deer populations remain at or above management objectives. Wolves have contributed to declining elk populations in a few areas, but are usually one of several causes, including declining habitat conditions, past high human harvest, severe weather conditions, and predation by other predators. In the Great Lakes region, where there are about 4,000 wolves, white-tailed deer populations are thriving and often above local management goals, and annual hunter harvest has remained high. These data suggest that when wolf populations in Washington are in the initial stages of recovery, they could have some localized impacts on elk and deer abundance or habitat use, but little to no effect would be expected on overall ungulate populations in the state. Impacts would be somewhat greater during the latter stages of recovery, but are still expected to be relatively small on a statewide level.

WDFW makes their management objectives are so low.

I have no doubt that your right. WDFW always try to compare themselves to other states. That's why half the hunters in Washington pay up to hunt other states.Because Washington does a great job at management of our game.
The above statement compares us with other states is just another excuse in the book of many to be lazy and do nothing.

Like said earlier ,put in for your moose tag now cause that will be gone first. Proof is in the pudding, you just gotta read the writing on the wall.

[JimmyHoffa]

The problem with WDFW wolf plan is they believe this as stated in it:

And they also believe that the greenies will adhere to the plan.  Once it gets close to the plans objectives, WDFW will have goal posts moved on them and a flood of lawsuits.  The reality of what will happen is different than the plan because greenies will use WDFW and flip on them in due time.

[Skyvalhunter]

We probably will never see this either:


•To reclassify from state endangered to state threatened status: 6 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 2 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions.


•To reclassify from state threatened to state sensitive status: 12 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 4 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions.


•To delist from state sensitive status: 15 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 4 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions and 3 successful breeding pairs anywhere in the state.


•In addition to the delisting objective of 15 successful breeding pairs distributed in the three geographic regions for 3 consecutive years, an alternative delisting objective is also established whereby the gray wolf will be considered for delisting when 18 successful breeding pairs are present, with 4 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region, 4 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region, 4 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast region, and 6 anywhere in the state

[Loup Loup]

hunter399 has pretty much spelled it out for everybody.

[Special T]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

Im curious to see where this goes.  Expanded hunting and trapping will do nothing to curb wolves.  You you have to kill 50-75% of the population each year just to maintain! No way to do that without arial gunning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Cougartail]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

Im curious to see where this goes.  Expanded hunting and trapping will do nothing to curb wolves.  You you have to kill 50-75% of the population each year just to maintain! No way to do that without arial gunning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I'm pretty sure aerial means were not used to rid them the first time. It can be done with the right motivations. Like money!

[Special T]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

Im curious to see where this goes.  Expanded hunting and trapping will do nothing to curb wolves.  You you have to kill 50-75% of the population each year just to maintain! No way to do that without arial gunning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I'm pretty sure aerial means were not used to rid them the first time. It can be done with the right motivations. Like money!

No it wasnt but the study done outside of Denali NP said that in the normal course of hunting and trapping even with liberal seasons you could only take a very small % of the population. It may not be popular, but there was a reason why most bush piolets had an AR in the plane!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Alan K]

I'm pretty sure aerial means were not used to rid them the first time. It can be done with the right motivations. Like money!

I'm pretty sure it was poison that actually did them in the first time. Sure, boot hunting/bait hunting/trapping took care of some, but the poison did the heavy lifting.

[Special T]

I'm pretty sure aerial means were not used to rid them the first time. It can be done with the right motivations. Like money!

I'm pretty sure it was poison that actually did them in the first time. Sure, boot hunting/bait hunting/trapping took care of some, but the poison did the heavy lifting.

Not that WA or ID will see either but you are 100% correct.

[KFhunter]

How hard is it to fly a paramotor?

Asking for a friend

[Loup Loup]

A friend told me its the landing part thats hard.

[highside74]

How hard is it to fly a paramotor?

Asking for a friend

Better question would be

How hard would it be to shoot a rifle while flying one?

I would think it would be nearly impossible.

[bearpaw]

From what I hear, I think this legislation has a good chance of passing. 

[KFhunter]

How hard is it to fly a paramotor?

Asking for a friend

Better question would be

How hard would it be to shoot a rifle while flying one?

I would think it would be nearly impossible.

They got tandem ones, I fly you shoot.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Cougartail]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

Im curious to see where this goes.  Expanded hunting and trapping will do nothing to curb wolves.  You you have to kill 50-75% of the population each year just to maintain! No way to do that without arial gunning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I'm pretty sure aerial means were not used to rid them the first time. It can be done with the right motivations. Like money!

No it wasnt but the study done outside of Denali NP said that in the normal course of hunting and trapping even with liberal seasons you could only take a very small % of the population. It may not be popular, but there was a reason why most bush piolets had an AR in the plane!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Normal trapping in Alaska is having one trapper with a "claimed" area the size of a Washington county. Also weather and access issues are much different. Apples and oranges.

From my cabin I can walk 400 miles straight north and never cross another road.

[idaho guy]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

 

I’m not sure about that with out of state trapping we already have traps under every tree in the panhandle. I think it’s Educating the wolves  more than any else.  I agree 100 percent better just to go with expanding hopefully to year around trapping and hunting seasons

[KFhunter]

Ya they are, its crazy

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[idaho guy]

When you talk of aerial hunting the bill will be dead on arrival. Even in Alaska it is unpopular. Expanding hunting seasons and more importantly trapping opportunities will fly under the radar and do the job.

A low cost trapping opportunity for out of state trappers would be a win-win for the state.

Im curious to see where this goes.  Expanded hunting and trapping will do nothing to curb wolves.  You you have to kill 50-75% of the population each year just to maintain! No way to do that without arial gunning.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

   

Idaho expands wolf harvest opportunities almost every year at this point. It’s helping and by making little adjustments every year they have been able to fly under the radar and avoid lawsuits. They took the anti playbook and used it. Move the ball a few yards at a time when they make a drastic adjustment they were getting sued constantly initially. We went from 1 or 2 tags to 30 tags where I live a little at a time over time.
The hunting and trapping has helped the deer and elk out quite a bit already at least I’m noticing a difference. Maybe it’s time to include aerial hunting? I’m not sure seems like wolf lovers would go ballistic but it would be great to get it through. Poison won the wolf war back in the day but that will never happen. Plus poison kills everything and that’s not a great plan if you enjoy bear hunting etc.

[nwwanderer]

Yes, poison was the ticket and it still took a very long time and a pile of money, I think it started about 1915.  Still in the tool box today for government agencies.  You might check the stats in the great lakes region of the USA and Alberta