Wolves eating all our deer

[boneaddict]

I agree.  I have the information he was asking for from Geist.  I read it last night.  That is if you believe one of the worlds most reknown wildlife biologists.  He brings up a lot of the points Wacoy addressed.  You'd think he had been interviewed by him.  Might even be the blending of both worlds since he says just about what wolfbait has been saying. 

[Kain]

Did Idaho lower the elk population objectives for post wolf numbers?  Are wolves contributing to roadkill and malnutrition by running the animals and stressing them?  I have no proof that this is true but it seems plausible.

[boneaddict]

His reference to roadkill was that the animals felt safer on or near the roads so they were hanging out around them more, thus increasing the chance of auto related deaths.  I would imagine in my small mind that would also contribute to the antis thoughts that there are a lot of deer.  They are hanging around in neighborhoods and are more visible on the road thus offering th eillusion that there are more of them.  Makes sense in my mind anyway, and I know one anti was citing that she almost hits a deer a day on the road as evidence thatthe population is just fine. 

[wolfbait]

Personally I like WAcoyotehunters comments and questions.  He is asking for exactly the same thing that the WDFW and any other organization and public will want.  Facts and proof.  Rumors and personal feelings will have no weight with the government and public.  The AR's will actually use them against you and say you have no proof and are just afraid of superstitions and wives tails.  They will diminish any valid point you have by pointing out any weakness in your argument.

WAcoyotehunter pointed out some credible links and asked good questions.  What do we do when we get two reports from credible sources that contradict each other?  Pete Zager says that elk hunter harvest is down 10000 elk per year since wolves were introduced and they had to reduce the number of tags for 2009.  But the report WAcoyotehunter posted says elk populations are above objectives.  What does this mean?  This is good for us to figure out.

When I first started in on the this wolf issue, People questioned what I said about the wolves. Therefor I spent several hours digging up all the facts that I could to back up what it was I was saying. The same, as is with Wacoyt, brings out new ideas, it is good.

[wolfbait]

The wolf has already been classified as a big game animal in Idaho. The Commission has adopted the Wolf Management Plan that was developed for wolves and is similar to plans used for mountain lions and black bears. This plan sets management objectives at between 500 - 700 wolves in the state. Regulated wolf hunting, as established by the plan, would occur during the fall. Hunters would be required to have a license, tag, and participate in a mandatory check. Limits would be applied to management areas statewide to include wolf mortality from all causes. As with mountain lions and black bears, harvest limits would be highest in areas with documented conflicts with wolves and livestock, and in areas where prey populations have declined below management objectives because of documented wolf predation.

The impact of wolves on elk varies around the state. Some units and zones show increasing elk populations. Other areas are of concern because elk numbers are decreasing rapidly. The Lolo Elk Zone in north-central Idaho is an area where wolves are definitely impacting prey populations. Long-term research on elk in this zone has scientifically demonstrated that wolves are responsible for 79 percent of mortality on cow elk. Wolves kill 67 percent of calf elk over six months of age. Over time, habitat conditions have deteriorated in this zone and management objectives have been reduced to reflect habitat changes. However, the elk population has continued to decline at about 13 percent each year. This zone is an example of an area where more liberal regulated hunting would be allowed to help reduce predation pressure on elk. In addition, control actions may also be implemented.

Depredation control has been used to manage wolves since their re-introduction. This type of control deals with problem animals killing cattle, sheep, or dogs. It does not, however, address the increasing number of wolves in or near the towns and subdivisions found along the edges of core wolf habitat. Prey animals wintering along these edges attract wolves, potentially leading to conflicts with people. Conflicts such as those seen in Sun Valley this winter are bound to be most significant in this type of setting, and will always require some control action. In spite of control actions, the overall wolf population is quite resilient. Last year, 151 wolves in Idaho died through control actions or other causes. Yet the population still increased roughly 15 percent from 732 to 846 because of their high reproductive rate.

The idea of a control action may be viewed unfavorably by some, but it is often the best management tool in some specific instances. When problem animals habitually kill livestock, control is often the only option available. When wildlife become habituated to humans, control may become necessary because habituated animals are a danger whether they are wolves, bears, deer or even waterfowl.

The Canada goose is a good example of a species that has increasingly come into conflict with people. In metropolitan areas, city parks, golf courses, and other open spaces, geese have become habituated and aggressive. In addition, they pose a potential health risk from their droppings. Overpopulations of geese even pose a threat to air travelers as Captain "Sully" Sullenberg can testify.

While regulated hunting can help with wildlife conflict, certain conditions necessitate a stronger management action. Regulated hunting will remain the preferred option because it provides opportunity for sportsmen but also because it is much less expensive. Additionally, regulated hunting can help reduce the need for control actions overall.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/news/fg_news/manage.cfm

[WDFW-SUX]

I think people also need to realize the wolves have been primarily targeting elk in other states because they are the most abundant prey.....in the methow there are no elk which are harder to kill so that leaves the deer hung out to dry...or be eaten in this case.  Think of how awful the damage will be once the wolves really zero in on the areas that the fawns are dropped......I could see a 90% mortality on fawns.

[bearpaw]

Someone asked me to show that elk #'s can sustain a wolf population, that is why I posted that data sheet. 

The data sheet shows that elk numbers are above or within population objectives in 8 of 11 units.  It looks like wolves are pounding them in the Lolo, but all in all there are still lots of elk in ID.

My point is that a managed population of wolves can coexist with deer/elk/people just fine.   I think we'll see more elk units above population goals when the wolves start being killed.

Wacoyote….thanks for the clarification....points well taken…..I’ll put a few comments on my next post….

When I first started in on the this wolf issue, People questioned what I said about the wolves. Therefor I spent several hours digging up all the facts that I could to back up what it was I was saying. The same, as is with Wacoyt, brings out new ideas, it is good.

Wolfbait….you are right….it is good that all this info has been presented….thanks for your research and input….just one question….what happened to your redneck language….

Personally I like WAcoyotehunters comments and questions.  He is asking for exactly the same thing that the WDFW and any other organization and public will want.  Facts and proof.  Rumors and personal feelings will have no weight with the government and public.  The AR's will actually use them against you and say you have no proof and are just afraid of superstitions and wives tails.  They will diminish any valid point you have by pointing out any weakness in your argument.

WAcoyotehunter pointed out some credible links and asked good questions.  What do we do when we get two reports from credible sources that contradict each other?  Pete Zager says that elk hunter harvest is down 10000 elk per year since wolves were introduced and they had to reduce the number of tags for 2009.  But the report WAcoyotehunter posted says elk populations are above objectives.  What does this mean?  This is good for us to figure out.

Kain….you have made some very good statements….that I agree with fully…. 

I've got all sorts of fresh data from geist.  It will jsut take me some time to get it on here when I am not at work.

I think people also need to realize the wolves have been primarily targeting elk in other states because they are the most abundant prey.....in the methow there are no elk which are harder to kill so that leaves the deer hung out to dry...or be eaten in this case.  Think of how awful the damage will be once the wolves really zero in on the areas that the fawns are dropped......I could see a 90% mortality on fawns.

I thank everyone else who is participating in this thread…..it is all good for Washington….

[wolfbait]

Wolfbait….you are right….it is good that all this info has been presented….thanks for your research and input….just one question….what happened to your redneck language….


Sometimes My WIFE types things for me. She is working at getting the way I says things, to be more understandable to the rest of the world. Up to this point I never realized I had redneck language, I am learning so much talkin to y'all

[bearpaw]

No offense was meant, your posts just seemed like they were written by two different people....

[wolfbait]

These states have been trying to manage their wolves for along time now. We are not even close to that point in our newly discovered wolf pack. And yet we have already aquired a very large amount of wolves. So in another 3? years, this will be eczactly what we will be doing, perhaps. Stuides show to even stabllize the wolves a 35 to 50% cut in wolves is needed.
 



Wolf delisting faces new court challenge


 From Staff Reports
June 11, 2009


The Greater Yellowstone Coalition filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging the removal of gray wolves from Endangered Species Act protection in Idaho and Montana.


The lawsuit, filed in Montana, is separate from a suit Earthjustice attorneys filed earlier this month for 12 groups, including the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The state of Wyoming and some livestock and sportsmen groups followed with a lawsuit in Wyoming.


While Greater Yellowstone Coalition officials say they support eventual state management of wolves once adequate standards and safeguards are in place, they say the delisting fails to ensure thriving populations in the northern Rockies and undermines efforts to find sound, science-based solutions to wolf-management issues. Further, the group says delisting lifts wolf protection before achieving the necessary level of connectivity between populations in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and central Idaho. The group also faults Idaho’s aggressive plans to reduce its wolf population



http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=4698

No offense was meant, your posts just seemed like they were written by two different people.   No offense taken, the wife and I both have spent hours working on this wolf issue.

[bearpaw]

I am no lawyer and please correct me if I am wrong, but a lawsuit means nothing unless the judge orders an injunction to prevent the management from taking place until the outcome of the lawsuit or the lawsuit is won.  Am I anywhere right about that?

Has any court injunction been issued yet? 

[boneaddict]

Not sure how that works.  I knwo it sure screws up timber sales say after a burn.  A fire occurs and the timber can be slavaged if done QUICKLY,....well inevetibly they file a suit and it stops the timber from being harvested.  Then by the time the court thing has happened the wood is all buggy or rotting.

[wolfbait]

Not sure how that works.  I knwo it sure screws up timber sales say after a burn.  A fire occurs and the timber can be slavaged if done QUICKLY,....well inevetibly they file a suit and it stops the timber from being harvested.  Then by the time the court thing has happened the wood is all buggy or rotting.

Wouldn't this be the same as tying it up in court? Which would limit what could be done as far as any wolf managment. Which is what I read somewhere would happen when delisting time finally came around.

[boneaddict]

All I know is I hope Idaho passes it because my season is looking pretty bare with no out of state draws.  I think I could occupy my time with a nice wolf hunt.

[wolfbait]

I think people also need to realize the wolves have been primarily targeting elk in other states because they are the most abundant prey.....in the methow there are no elk which are harder to kill so that leaves the deer hung out to dry...or be eaten in this case.  Think of how awful the damage will be once the wolves really zero in on the areas that the fawns are dropped......I could see a 90% mortality on fawns.

They have already zeroed in on the fawns, thats why we have the wolves down here in the valley floor now. There was a fawn servey done last year in the new wolf habitat that show most of the fawns never made it. My thoughts on this, is the wolves were planted in the Twisp River dranage among others, these wolves have been thinning our deer hards for quite some time now. The deer are getting rather few and far between. So they followed the game to the lower elevations which is in our backyards, the same reason that we are seeing more wolves, lack of game up higher. Last winter and this spring really showed just where all of our deer have gone. After this coming winter people will really wake up and see whats, what. The people for the wolves do not care one whit about anything else other than their beloved wolves.

There is one thing that I don't quite understand, and that is the WSGD biologist and the USFS bioligist are both all for the wolves, are they not suppose to care for the other wildlife also. Who is responsible for the deer,elk and so on?