Take this serious!

[wolfbait]

You say that the wolf hunts in Montana and Idaho is a start in wolf management, if you knew anything at all about wolves you wouldn't have said that.

So wolfbait what is your wolf management experience or even wildlife management for arguments sake?
Brandon

Still waiting!!

Brandon

Wolf management now should be shoot on site, just like coyotes. If the USFWS, AKA  the environmentalists would have stuck to their word from the start we would not be at this point. Now their are way to many wolves and expanding as we talk about them. These wolves should be afraid of people they are not, I have actually gotten closer to these wolves than I have with mule deer that eat my hay every winter when I am feeding my broncs, and thats is wrong. These are suppose to be the elusive wolves, and they would be if they were shot at enough. I wonder what you will say when these wolves kill someone, somebodies child? What will you say then? lets make a deal? Like David Mech said a long time ago wolves need to be managed very carefully, very carefully means the wolves need to be kept at a number, not "Well we planted six pair here and eight pair there and we will just see what happens.

[luvtohnt]

 I know the hoops you are talking about, they are the same hoops that Montana and Idaho jumped through. Better known as the bullsh$it hoops,

Again ID, and MT dropped the ball because they waited 5-8 years after wolves were brought into their state before they even started trying to come up with a management plan! We have 2 possibly 3 BP already and as fast as they reproduce it won't be long before we hit our goal. We need the management plan passed asap so there will be no hoops to jump through. Once there is an approved plan the pro wolf people will have no ground to stand on.

do you really believe "The Hunters" will be the ones deciding how many wolves will be up for hunting

Yes I do everything that this state does goes to some sort of public hearing, if there is enough opposition they will lower the number of wolves in this state. There is no permanent objective to uphold in the wolf management plan!

Yes, we finally smoked one of those guys out that want to work for the DFW. Says the WDFW has a plan that is way ahead of Idaho and Montana. :chuckle:I am wondering if the DFW has a plan that's ahead of other states then whats the hold up

You should want me to work for them I am on your side when it comes to the wolf issue, other than some of the blown up propaganda that wolfbait shows everyone here. We are ahead of all the other states. Like mentioned above ID, and MT waited 5-7 years after wolves were introduced into their state.

Why aren't they admitting to how many wolf packs  we really have

They are, if you read all the wolf studies in the world you will see the most common way to count is by BREEDING PAIRS. If they are not producing pups they are not considered a pack. They are considered singles, doubles, etc.. I am sure they factor some sort of error in counting into their reports. As far as I am concerned I would drather see them hide the true number so that the pro wolf guys won't get any ideas. Follow me here if they knew we had xx wolves and there was minimal impact to the game herds they would think " oh if xx amount doesn't affect hunting then maybe we should push to double or triple that number." Just a thought I have had numerous times.

Do you really think that the folks on W-H actually believe anything that our environmentalist game department has to say anymore?

What makes them any more credable then the biologists that work with animals for a living?

Also if you didn't notice I put DFW ( department of fish and wildlife) I never specified which state. Just so you know ID, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV are some of my top choices. Hell I would even work for the USDFW before I was employed by WDFW!!

I know of at least 6 wolf packs in this state.

LETS SEE SOME PROOF!!!

I wonder what you will say when these wolves kill someone, somebodies child? What will you say then?

I feel for people who live around them now. I agree something needs to be done, but people need to be proactive not reactive when it comes to management.

That's all for now but I am sure there will be more.

Brandon

[luvtohnt]

You say that the wolf hunts in Montana and Idaho is a start in wolf management, if you knew anything at all about wolves you wouldn't have said that.

So wolfbait what is your wolf management experience or even wildlife management for arguments sake?

Brandon

Forgot to ask, again what is your experience?

Brandon

[wolfbait]

 I know the hoops you are talking about, they are the same hoops that Montana and Idaho jumped through. Better known as the bullsh$it hoops,

Again ID, and MT dropped the ball because they waited 5-8 years after wolves were brought into their state before they even started trying to come up with a management plan! We have 2 possibly 3 BP already and as fast as they reproduce it won't be long before we hit our goal. We need the management plan passed asap so there will be no hoops to jump through. Once there is an approved plan the pro wolf people will have no ground to stand on.

do you really believe "The Hunters" will be the ones deciding how many wolves will be up for hunting

Yes I do everything that this state does goes to some sort of public hearing, if there is enough opposition they will lower the number of wolves in this state. There is no permanent objective to uphold in the wolf management plan!

Yes, we finally smoked one of those guys out that want to work for the DFW. Says the WDFW has a plan that is way ahead of Idaho and Montana. :chuckle:I am wondering if the DFW has a plan that's ahead of other states then whats the hold up

You should want me to work for them I am on your side when it comes to the wolf issue, other than some of the blown up propaganda that wolfbait shows everyone here. We are ahead of all the other states. Like mentioned above ID, and MT waited 5-7 years after wolves were introduced into their state.

Why aren't they admitting to how many wolf packs  we really have

They are, if you read all the wolf studies in the world you will see the most common way to count is by BREEDING PAIRS. If they are not producing pups they are not considered a pack. They are considered singles, doubles, etc.. I am sure they factor some sort of error in counting into their reports. As far as I am concerned I would drather see them hide the true number so that the pro wolf guys won't get any ideas. Follow me here if they knew we had xx wolves and there was minimal impact to the game herds they would think " oh if xx amount doesn't affect hunting then maybe we should push to double or triple that number." Just a thought I have had numerous times.

Do you really think that the folks on W-H actually believe anything that our environmentalist game department has to say anymore?

What makes them any more credable then the biologists that work with animals for a living?

Also if you didn't notice I put DFW ( department of fish and wildlife) I never specified which state. Just so you know ID, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV are some of my top choices. Hell I would even work for the USDFW before I was employed by WDFW!!

I know of at least 6 wolf packs in this state.

LETS SEE SOME PROOF!!!

I wonder what you will say when these wolves kill someone, somebodies child? What will you say then?

I feel for people who live around them now. I agree something needs to be done, but people need to be proactive not reactive when it comes to management.

That's all for now but I am sure there will be more.

Brandon

 300 wolves was the original experimental plan. I really think the experiment has hit the end of the rope.

[luvtohnt]

If ID, and MT hadn't dropped the ball there wouldn't be a problem like this!!

Brandon

[wolfbait]

(Again ID, and MT dropped the ball because they waited 5-8 years after wolves were brought into their state before they even started trying to come up with a management plan! We have 2 possibly 3 BP already and as fast as they reproduce it won't be long before we hit our goal. We need the management plan passed asap so there will be no hoops to jump through. Once there is an approved plan the pro wolf people will have no ground to stand on.)

Once again I have to call BS. Idaho did not have a choice, USFWS drop them in to flex their muscles. Idaho was under the endangered joke list, same as Washington is up to a point, and that point is about to be run strait up USFWS ass.

[mountainman1]

(Yes I do everything that this state does goes to some sort of public hearing, if there is enough opposition they will lower the number of wolves in this state. There is no permanent objective to uphold in the wolf management plan!)
 That's just dandy, we already seen how that has worked out, They came with armed guards they lied then they left.

[luvtohnt]

(Again ID, and MT dropped the ball because they waited 5-8 years after wolves were brought into their state before they even started trying to come up with a management plan! We have 2 possibly 3 BP already and as fast as they reproduce it won't be long before we hit our goal. We need the management plan passed asap so there will be no hoops to jump through. Once there is an approved plan the pro wolf people will have no ground to stand on.)

Once again I have to call BS. Idaho did not have a choice, USFWS drop them in to flex their muscles. Idaho was under the endangered joke list, same as Washington is up to a point, and that point is about to be run strait up USFWS ass.

Wolves were introduced into YNP wich is in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho in 1995. If they would have started with the management plan then they would not be up against the problems they are having now. We started before our first confirmed pack was announced, so to me that shows we are ahead of the game compared to ID, and MT!

Brandon

[mountainman1]

(You should want me to work for them I am on your side when it comes to the wolf issue, other than some of the blown up propaganda that wolfbait shows everyone here. We are ahead of all the other states. Like mentioned above ID, and MT waited 5-7 years after wolves were introduced into their state.)
 
 
 
Very funny,  Wolfbait has shown us how much you know, I would rather have Wolbait run the wolf program.

[luvtohnt]

(Yes I do everything that this state does goes to some sort of public hearing, if there is enough opposition they will lower the number of wolves in this state. There is no permanent objective to uphold in the wolf management plan!)
 That's just dandy, we already seen how that has worked out, They came with armed guards they lied then they left.

If I had to try and give a presentation in a room with some of the people from this site I would feel threatened and want to leave also. Not saying anyone from this site is bad but some times people here are so one sided, and have their mind set that even if presented the truth they find ways to contort it into a "your just a liar" mentality. The meeting I attended was well run and full of both positive and negative feedback. Every question that was asked was answered thouroughly, and thoughtfully.

(You should want me to work for them I am on your side when it comes to the wolf issue, other than some of the blown up propaganda that wolfbait shows everyone here. We are ahead of all the other states. Like mentioned above ID, and MT waited 5-7 years after wolves were introduced into their state.)
 
 
 
Very funny,  Wolfbait has shown us how much you know, I would rather have Wolbait run the wolf program.

Wolfbait hasn't shown you anything other then scare tactics, and garbage journalism and that is not any kind of sound biology.

Brandon

[mountainman1]

(They are, if you read all the wolf studies in the world you will see the most common way to count is by BREEDING PAIRS. If they are not producing pups they are not considered a pack. They are considered singles, doubles, etc.. I am sure they factor some sort of error in counting into their reports. As far as I am concerned I would drather see them hide the true number so that the pro wolf guys won't get any ideas. Follow me here if they knew we had xx wolves and there was minimal impact to the game herds they would think " oh if xx amount doesn't affect hunting then maybe we should push to double or triple that number." Just a thought I have had numerous times.)
 
 
 
Well shoot Brandon, may I call you Bradon? Because you sound a lot like an environmentalist from the fulla----fitkin factor. I been reading up on some information that Wolfbait sent to me, according to this info. Most of the wolf packs in the lower 48 have been having two to three litters of pups per pack, an I looked it up an its true. One other thing is the WDFW don't want people to know how many wolves there real is. How long can the WDFW keep claiming there are only two packs of wolves in the state of Washington?  why do you think your buddies are suing to keep helicopters from collaring wolves in the wilderness? Thats right they don't want the added wolves to the count. And one more thing did you know that even if a pack has three litters of pups due to the recovery they only count one litter. Whats up with that?

[mountainman1]

(Yes I do everything that this state does goes to some sort of public hearing, if there is enough opposition they will lower the number of wolves in this state. There is no permanent objective to uphold in the wolf management plan!)
 That's just dandy, we already seen how that has worked out, They came with armed guards they lied then they left.

If I had to try and give a presentation in a room with some of the people from this site I would feel threatened and want to leave also. Not saying anyone from this site is bad but some times people here are so one sided, and have their mind set that even if presented the truth they find ways to contort it into a "your just a liar" mentality. The meeting I attended was well run and full of both positive and negative feedback. Every question that was asked was answered thouroughly, and thoughtfully.

(You should want me to work for them I am on your side when it comes to the wolf issue, other than some of the blown up propaganda that wolfbait shows everyone here. We are ahead of all the other states. Like mentioned above ID, and MT waited 5-7 years after wolves were introduced into their state.)
 
 
 
Very funny,  Wolfbait has shown us how much you know, I would rather have Wolbait run the wolf program.

Wolfbait hasn't shown you anything other then scare tactics, and garbage journalism and that is not any kind of sound biology.

Brandon

Oh, for sure, you sure don't want to hear any truths, you would ruther run to mommy. Tell her what the bad old Wolfbait said about fitkins wolves. maybe you should take a little look at saveelk.com or are you like Wacoyotehunter and would rather hide under the covers?

[wolfbait]

First off Mountainman1, Thanks for the compliments, I would really enjoy saying "shoot any wolf you see". Around my part of the country that is just common sense.

(What makes them any more credable then the biologists that work with animals for a living?

Also if you didn't notice I put DFW ( department of fish and wildlife) I never specified which state. Just so you know ID, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV are some of my top choices. Hell I would even work for the USDFW before I was employed by WDFW!!)

Well shoot, lovetosavethewolves, thats great why don't you go some place where they want wolves, do a google search. I hate to have to tell you this, and was a bit surprised that you didn't see it for yourself, W-H folks have a mind of their own, each one of them thinks for them selfs. Most of them have seen the destruction that these wolves have caused, have hunted in the states where these wolves have ruined the game herds and you want them to believe the biologists on the ground, who say the wolves are balancing the ecosystem. Are you sure you wouldn't rather run for president?

[mountainman1]

Wacoyote , theres one thing I can count on from you, and that is you never surprise me, same old sh$t just a different day. You must be a real winner in your own eyes because you can't seem to expand your own knowledge.

Luvtohunt, the deparment of ecology is getting to be as curupte as the USFWS, run by environmentalists, another agency that should be sh$t canned and started over with a bit of common sense added.  

I will give you a short history lesson. When the Canadian wolf introduction was being considered, biologist who were working on the ground told the USFWS that they did not need to import the Canadian wolves because the lower 48 already had its own wolves and if given 30 years they would repopulate to a viable population on there own. The USFWS who are mostly made up of environmentalists did not want to wait that long because they had other agendas lined out. Their excuse was they want to study the wolves and they could do that better if they had and experimental population to work with.

Some of the experts on wolves told USFWS not to introduce these wolves, but they were ignored. David Mech who has studied wolves for many years saw no problem as long as the wolves were managed once the population of 300 wolves was reached for the YNP which was the goal at that time. You can see how well that has worked out. Mech has since said that due to lack of management in the end, wolves being wolves will ruin any true management as public tide will turn against the wolf. There has not been any management of wolves so far. I talk to Will Graves the other day in a conference call, he said right now in order to save Idaho's elk herds 90% of the wolves would have to be killed, thats how bad the wolves have been managed. The wolf population has been under estimated on purpose from the start, and the same is happening here in Washington state. I know the Methow has lost to the wolves already, our deer herd will not recover in my life if ever. Even if it was open season on wolves today not enough wolves would be killed in the Valley to amount to a hill of beans. I can give you my management plan for wolves, but it wouldn't matter to you because you haven't taken enough interest in the wolves to even understand them, you just spew.

Wolfbait

Thanks Wolfbait, that sheds a new light on the wolf issue 

[Lowedog]

wolfbait and mtnman1, where did you learn to debate?  You two sound like you took lessons from some left wing liberal school of debate.  If someone doesn't agree and actually seems smarter than you, then you just ridicule them.

I would bet that neither one of you have ever seen a wolf.  You just read some stories on the net and some guy said them wolves are going to kill everybody so it must be true! 

The more you cry wolf with out any proof of the conspiracy you claim the more ridiculous you become.