Wolves eating all our deer

[WAcoyotehunter]

First off we are already past the 100 wolf count as they well know. We are already at the point of no deer. And now this is just the begining of the wolf recovery. This was written for the people who have no idea what has really been going on with the wolves here in the valley. most people don't know that these wolves started being released in the Methow Valley in the 90's. The only thing that I get out of these statments is that the locals really don't count, it is what they pitch to the people that know nothing, that counts.

Hmmm...I thought this thread was getting somewhere... No one knows the wolf numbers in WA.  IMO we are not at 100, or even close.  We're also backpedeling on the unfounded (read also unproven, hearsay, rumor, lie, Bull$hit, untrue...) account of wolves being released in WA.  That hasn't happened, you have no evidence that it has happened, yet somehow you still post it like gospel.   

Again, to be as clear as possible, there is no evidence of any wolf release in WA....ever... how much more clear can that be?

[WAcoyotehunter]

One thing thats for sure is its going to be 10 years before the first wolf is legally killed in this state.

I think that really depends on how one see's the law. First off the USFW brought these wolves into the lower 48 illegally. I will leave it right there!

It was not illegal, You (and I) might argue that it was foolhardy, but it was not illegal.  They went through the proper permiting procedures and had their ducks in a row as far as the law is concerned.  i guess you're supporting poaching the wolves in this comment?? 

[wolfbait]

One thing thats for sure is its going to be 10 years before the first wolf is legally killed in this state.

I think that really depends on how one see's the law. First off the USFW brought these wolves into the lower 48 illegally. I will leave it right there!

It was not illegal, You (and I) might argue that it was foolhardy, but it was not illegal.  They went through the proper permiting procedures and had their ducks in a row as far as the law is concerned.  i guess you're supporting poaching the wolves in this comment?? 

I think you need to take a gander into saveelk.com, broaden your horizons a bit. I don't beleive in poaching, I do beleive in managing predators.

[wolfbait]

First off we are already past the 100 wolf count as they well know. We are already at the point of no deer. And now this is just the begining of the wolf recovery. This was written for the people who have no idea what has really been going on with the wolves here in the valley. most people don't know that these wolves started being released in the Methow Valley in the 90's. The only thing that I get out of these statments is that the locals really don't count, it is what they pitch to the people that know nothing, that counts.

Hmmm...I thought this thread was getting somewhere... No one knows the wolf numbers in WA.  IMO we are not at 100, or even close.  We're also backpedeling on the unfounded (read also unproven, hearsay, rumor, lie, Bull$hit, untrue...) account of wolves being released in WA.  That hasn't happened, you have no evidence that it has happened, yet somehow you still post it like gospel.   

Again, to be as clear as possible, there is no evidence of any wolf release in WA....ever... how much more clear can that be?

BLAW,BLAW,BLAW

[WAcoyotehunter]

I think you need to take a gander into saveelk.com, broaden your horizons a bit. I don't beleive in poaching, I do beleive in managing predators.

I've seen the SaveElk site.  I'm not sure it broadened my horizons; there are some interesting bits of info and lots of links.  I agree that wolves need to be managed, in States where recovery goals are met.  Until we can show that WA has met those goals there will be no legal management.   So, again...we're back to showing an accurate population estimate.  Until we can prove (with evidence) that WA has met recovery the wolves will continue to do what they do. 

[deaddog]

And we all know that the damn tree huggin idiots that run our game dept would never lie to us , right? I mean at least about wolfs,right? Naw, never. surrreee

[wolfbait]

I think you need to take a gander into saveelk.com, broaden your horizons a bit. I don't beleive in poaching, I do beleive in managing predators.

I've seen the SaveElk site.  I'm not sure it broadened my horizons; there are some interesting bits of info and lots of links.  I agree that wolves need to be managed, in States where recovery goals are met.  Until we can show that WA has met those goals there will be no legal management.   So, again...we're back to showing an accurate population estimate.  Until we can prove (with evidence) that WA has met recovery the wolves will continue to do what they do. 

What ever you say, Wacoyote!

[bearpaw]

I want to remind the many readers of this thread that everyone is entitled to their opinion in this country, we can still express ourselves as we wish.

We don't all agree about managing wolves and no one knows just how many there are. It has been suggested in this thread there are over 100 in Washington, at the same time it has been suggested that there isn't 100 yet. The fact is, no one knows. It's also a fact that the DOW does not know that there are not more than 100 in this state and I would like to see the proof that there are less than 100 wolves in WA.

I agree with wacoyotehunter that there is a lot of heresay, etc. in this thread. But I think most of the readers are smart enough to weed out most of the heresay. This after all is simply the nature of forum talk. I do think there has been more good evidence shown here concerning the arguments agaist wolves than I have ever seen anywhere else. I would ask where else is there more info?

I also agree with those that said management will not occur anytime soon in WA. Greenie politics and lawsuits will be the major reason for that lack of management in this state. Remember WA had a permit-draw system that worked well for cougar and the greenies messed it up. So what chance is there for any legal wolf management even if the DOW decides we have too many wolves??

This really is a deeper problem than wolf management, the control of the country by the greenies who have little idea where their food and goods come from, what is involved to get food and goods to the supermarket, or what life is like in rural America. The greenies make political decisions for rural America based on emotion fueled by their hatred of the mere existance of man. The wolf is really only a means to accomplish their green political goals for America. Wolves, spotted owls, it's all the same. The greenies don't want anything to happen, logging, mining, manufacturing, hunting, trapping, and the list goes on....and wolves are just a means to accomplish that goal.

So where am I going with this.....I think as more and more regulation is forced on people you are going to see more and more people rebel.....If you want people to live by the law, you have to have laws people can live by.

In a nutshell, as wolf numbers grow to unresaonable levels and the greenies do not allow management then I think you are going to see more and more people rebel. That is occuring in central Idaho right now, there are people and small towns whos income has been destroyed by wolves. What about the 100+ sheep killed by that wolf pack down near Riggins, were those sheep replaced. What about the loggers and outfitters going broke, has their income been replaced?

Don't get me wrong there's no way I would dare to do anything illegal. But if greenies and wolves destroy peoples lives like they have in Idaho, can anyone blame those people for simply trying to survive.......give those people a management plan and watch how the people and the wolves learn to coexist in Idaho. The greenies are defeating themselves with their inability to allow reasonable management and the people of Idaho are beginning to react in the only way they know how.......

If government agencies don't like that then I suggest they get their $$$$ together and quit allowing management by greenie politics and greenie lawsuits.

I still believe the main reason that Idaho has it's current governor is because he said, "I want shoot the first wolf in idaho". Those words got that man elected.

[wolfbait]

Well said bearpaw, you hit the bullseye!

[Elkaholic daWg]

Well said bearpaw, you hit the bullseye!

 As does his signature,which many on these forums don't understand.

[denali]

Other Idaho Wolf News
- Wolf steals blaze orange highway cone: Idaho Fish and Game wolf biologist Michael Lucid and his crew of helpers were trying to capture and collar a wolf in the Timberline pack recently, they saw a wolf run across the road carrying a blaze orange highway cone. They did not speculate why the wolf might have been carrying the cone.

ok now things have gotten completely out of hand !!     try too lighten things a little  

arm the DOT, SSS

[bearpaw]

Wolf steals blaze orange highway cone

that's definitely toooo funny 

wonder what part tastes like elk??

[bearpaw]

Just so everyone knows i wasn't try to launch a personal attack on wacoyotehunter.....if he took it that way, I apologize!!!   

Wacoyotehunter makes some extremely good points and seems to bring an angle to this debate that not everyone considers....I definitely would not want to offend him to the point that he left the duscussion....this discussion needs all the input it can get from eveyone.

I was trying to point out that the Agencies are not necessarily the know-alls that we all wish they were. The bio's have far too many projects forced upon them. Often times local residents actually have opportunities to make observations that the bios don't get.

The other important point I was trying to make is that you can only pressure people and wild animals so far and you start getting reactions to the pressure. I think we are seeing reactions from the people of idaho who have taken a serious hit to their lifestyle and reactions from an unmanaged wolf population that is outgrowing its prey base and having to pioneer into new areas or go hungry.

Again I want to emphasize that i meant no disrespect to anyone.   

[wolfbait]

The info. below could be the reason for dumping these wovles on us. This site has a ton of info. and brings out alot of very good points.

There objective is to reintroduce, beside wolves, Jaguars and other exotic animals in North America. These nutjobs want large portions of the Americas to be untouched by humans. This is their goal. Their ultimate goal, however, is to reduce the worldwide human population.


Bill Duval said this in 93:
Quote:
An associate of mine suggests the optimal human population in the long run in North America is the number of people who can comfortably use the hot springs in North America. The carrying capacity of a hot spring is the number of people who can sit together in a hot spring during cold winter nights. An empirical estimate of the optimal human population based on this criteria would involve fieldwork. My associate suggests that we form several teams of volunteers to explore hot springs in various bioregions of the continent. This "research" would certainly be an imaginative way to solve the problem of identifying the number constituting the optimal population of North America. 

Imagine that!

Here's another article everyone should read...

Rewilding Megafauna: Lions and Camels in North America?

This is an excerpt:
Quote:
What do you mean by “rewilding” North America?

Rewilding is about restoring biodiversity.

Barlow: Rewilding is a concept that works with restoration ecology and evolution combined. One type of rewilding deals with restoring lost biodiversity. Restoration ecology is when you look at a landscape and ask how we can bring it back to conditions that are more natural, say, before Europeans arrived in North America. Another type of rewilding has to do with climate change, for example, creating a park corridor from Yellowstone to the Yukon to give movement to animals as climate changes.

Rewilding also attempts to replace species that have gone extinct in North America. In 2005, a top science journal published an article by a dozen prominent conservation biologists proposing a shift in the benchmark that is commonly used for restoring lost wildlife to former habitats.1 Most parklands and wilderness areas in North America will continue to be restored to conditions that prevailed just prior to the arrival of Columbus in 1492 [the “pre-Columbian” benchmark]. But what about rewilding a small portion of America’s natural heritage to conditions just prior to the first human incursion on the landscape some 13,000 years ago? This idea of rewilding from a deep time perspective is going back to a time before the first humans began to migrate to the Americas in the late Pleistocene [about 10,000 years ago] and asking how we can restore the ecological landscape.

Current trends in rewilding North America have to do with restoration of species displaced or endangered since the first European settlers arrived, for example, bringing back gray wolves to Yellowstone, reintroducing the lynx to Colorado, and bringing the peregrine falcon to the Midwest. That is standard practice restoration ecology. What I would like to address is the controversial subject of rewilding North America as proposed a few years ago by looking at a deep time perspective and saying lets not just stop with the wolves. What species were here before humans invaded the landscape, and is it still possible to bring them back? 

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=344456&page=2

__________________
We will be known forever by the tracks

[Elkaholic daWg]

Barlow: Rewilding is a concept that works with restoration ecology and evolution combined. One type of rewilding deals with restoring lost biodiversity. Restoration ecology is when you look at a landscape and ask how we can bring it back to conditions that are more natural, say, before Europeans arrived in North America. Another type of rewilding has to do with climate change, for example,

 creating a park corridor from Yellowstone to the Yukon to give movement to animals as climate changes.


 


As the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act would begin the process.............................
.