wolf #'s down in Yellowstone

[Dipsnort]

I spoke for a while with a retired wolf bio from Alaska abou this time last year.  What he said is that wolf introduction follows a predictable cycle:
1.  Wolves are introduced
2.  They eat all the available food
3.  Their packs grow
4.  young males are forced out and some form new packs
5.  the food runs out
6.  wolves resort to wolf-on-wolf violence
7.  wolf numbers stabilize
8.  Game animals repopulate and their numbers stabilize
9.  With some fluctuation, both populations remain fairly stable

That "biologist" doesn't know what he's talking about.  Any self-respecting hunter knows that wolves will kill all game animals, women and children.  And when those food sources run out they will begin hunting men and Volkswagens.  I guess all of those people who like bashing wildlife biologists are right after all!

[bearpaw]

There are some variables that could put WA in a different position than ID/MT/WY.

WA State has wolves listed on the state list, but the feds have delisted the eastern 1/3 of WA already. So it will be harder for the wolf lovers to sue to stop hunting in the eastern 1/3.

However, is the western 2/3 of WA still federally protected, if so, management is not a possibility anyway in the rest of the state until the feds delist.

Recently, I spoke with someone who would know what's happening, and he told me he though it was looking like something more along the lines of the "minority position" will be adopted.

I think it is very important to keep the pressure on until a plan is adopted.

[bearpaw]

I also know that SCI was meeting with the WDFW this week about wolves, and the WA cattlemen are meeting I think this week. Both these groups are pushing hard for fewer wolves.

[WAcoyotehunter]

I agree- just because the comment period is closed does not mean that this thing is decided.  Keep the letters and emails going!

[bearpaw]

I posted a letter yesterday that I sent to the commission about Hytadid Disease. I recieved a message back saying it was distributed to the commission members. http://washingtonwolf.info/diseases.html

More letters need to be sent letting the commission know that people are not going to take this lightly. Copy all letters to legislators and county commissioners in affected areas too.

[Pathfinder101]

I spoke for a while with a retired wolf bio from Alaska abou this time last year.  What he said is that wolf introduction follows a predictable cycle:
1.  Wolves are introduced
2.  They eat all the available food
3.  Their packs grow
4.  young males are forced out and some form new packs
5.  the food runs out
6.  wolves resort to wolf-on-wolf violence
7.  wolf numbers stabilize
8.  Game animals repopulate and their numbers stabilize
9.  With some fluctuation, both populations remain fairly stable

That "biologist" doesn't know what he's talking about.  Any self-respecting hunter knows that wolves will kill all game animals, women and children.  And when those food sources run out they will begin hunting men and Volkswagens.  I guess all of those people who like bashing wildlife biologists are right after all!

Keep in mind that this was not a newly graduated WA Game Bio from a "green" college...  This was an old-school Alaska guy, who hunted and trapped wolves up there for years, both for his job, and for fur.  He had retired about 10 years ago and moved here.  He was dreading wolf introduction in this state, because as he said; "we don't have a moose population to support them".

[Shootmoore]

I spoke for a while with a retired wolf bio from Alaska abou this time last year.  What he said is that wolf introduction follows a predictable cycle:
1.  Wolves are introduced
2.  They eat all the available food
3.  Their packs grow
4.  young males are forced out and some form new packs
5.  the food runs out
6.  wolves resort to wolf-on-wolf violence
7.  wolf numbers stabilize
8.  Game animals repopulate and their numbers stabilize
9.  With some fluctuation, both populations remain fairly stable

That "biologist" doesn't know what he's talking about.  Any self-respecting hunter knows that wolves will kill all game animals, women and children.  And when those food sources run out they will begin hunting men and Volkswagens.  I guess all of those people who like bashing wildlife biologists are right after all!

Keep in mind that this was not a newly graduated WA Game Bio from a "green" college...  This was an old-school Alaska guy, who hunted and trapped wolves up there for years, both for his job, and for fur.  He had retired about 10 years ago and moved here.  He was dreading wolf introduction in this state, because as he said; "we don't have a moose population to support them".

I actually agree with this Bio's overview of the how the wolves regulate themselves vs the prey population.  However the big question is #8 and #9.  Both of which in my unscientific guestimation are at numbers that will be LOWER than what will allow hunting by Washington State hunters.  This 9 steps is probably very accurate, and I believe that this 9 steps is known by the pro-wolf, anti-hunter groups (They are one in the same).  The problem with #8 and #9 is it pushes humans out of the equation.  There is where the problem lies in my opinion.

Instead of EarthFirst how about a little PeopleFirst thrown in for good measure.
Shootmoore

[Pathfinder101]

Actually, in my estimation (and the bio that I was talking to), the "problem" is the "15 to 20 years of pain that it will take to get to that point" ( His workds, not mine).  He was talking about it like there might not even be available tags for deer or elk between 5 and 8.  (by the way, those "numbers" are mine, he didn't number them, he just told me the general process).

[Shootmoore]

Actually, in my estimation (and the bio that I was talking to), the "problem" is the "15 to 20 years of pain that it will take to get to that point" ( His workds, not mine).  He was talking about it like there might not even be available tags for deer or elk between 5 and 8.  (by the way, those "numbers" are mine, he didn't number them, he just told me the general process).

I think that is a very accurate assumption.  In the short term I think that will be the area where hunting ends at least as we know it here in Washington.  #8 and #9 will be the continuing reason for no return to hunting.  As the deer and elk populations will stabailize vs the wolves never again growing in large enough numbers to allow for human hunting of those animals.  I guess you could say in the area of #5 or #6 as the end of hunting and #8 and #9 as the final nail in the coffin.

Shootmoore

[Pathfinder101]

Actually, in my estimation (and the bio that I was talking to), the "problem" is the "15 to 20 years of pain that it will take to get to that point" ( His workds, not mine).  He was talking about it like there might not even be available tags for deer or elk between 5 and 8.  (by the way, those "numbers" are mine, he didn't number them, he just told me the general process).

I think that is a very accurate assumption.  In the short term I think that will be the area where hunting ends at least as we know it here in Washington.  #8 and #9 will be the continuing reason for no return to hunting.  As the deer and elk populations will stabailize vs the wolves never again growing in large enough numbers to allow for human hunting of those animals.  I guess you could say in the area of #5 or #6 as the end of hunting and #8 and #9 as the final nail in the coffin.

Shootmoore

Point taken.  In his experience, that didn't happen, but then again, we are talking about Alaska, not WA.

[Shootmoore]

That is the wrench in the comparison there 101.  Comparison of the Alaskan habitat area vs what we have here in Washington.  The prey as well as the wolf population has a greater area to spread out to allow for recoupment of the prey species.  Here in Washington State with the limited habitat available due to population numbers, it is kind of like fish in the barrel for the wolves.  The wolf and the deer and elk MUST share the same limited area.  Where in Alaska there is room for the game animals to avoid the wolf packs, here there is only so much habitat.  I would argue the same thing applies to Canada.  There is just much much more prime habitat for the prey species to spread out to avoid the wolves.

Here in Washington State, especially on the east side of the state, there is only so many wintering area's available for the deer and elk.  With the numbers of wolves that are wanted, there will be enough wolf packs to cover all of those area's.  You will either have predation by wolves or the wolves will drive the deer and elk to less quality wintering grounds causing a higher rate of winter kill.

Think about 15 breeding pairs of wolves in Washington, then think about the elk feeding stations.  Any bets that the wolves WILL be around the feed stations in the winter once they get established in sufficient numbers.  Basically what you will have is an end of elk feeding programs.  Now you will not only have predation reduction in the elk herds, but winter kill from lack of winter range.  It's a downhill spiral either way you look at it.

Thanks for the discussion, I enjoy it but I am beginning to ramble off the topic. 

[whacker1]

It will be interesting press when we get to the first Wolf in the feeding station environment and I sadly can say that we will see that within my lifetime.
 

[Pathfinder101]

That is the wrench in the comparison there 101.  Comparison of the Alaskan habitat area vs what we have here in Washington.  The prey as well as the wolf population has a greater area to spread out to allow for recoupment of the prey species.  Here in Washington State with the limited habitat available due to population numbers, it is kind of like fish in the barrel for the wolves.  The wolf and the deer and elk MUST share the same limited area.  Where in Alaska there is room for the game animals to avoid the wolf packs, here there is only so much habitat.  I would argue the same thing applies to Canada.  There is just much much more prime habitat for the prey species to spread out to avoid the wolves.

Here in Washington State, especially on the east side of the state, there is only so many wintering area's available for the deer and elk.  With the numbers of wolves that are wanted, there will be enough wolf packs to cover all of those area's.  You will either have predation by wolves or the wolves will drive the deer and elk to less quality wintering grounds causing a higher rate of winter kill.

Think about 15 breeding pairs of wolves in Washington, then think about the elk feeding stations.  Any bets that the wolves WILL be around the feed stations in the winter once they get established in sufficient numbers.  Basically what you will have is an end of elk feeding programs.  Now you will not only have predation reduction in the elk herds, but winter kill from lack of winter range.  It's a downhill spiral either way you look at it.

Thanks for the discussion, I enjoy it but I am beginning to ramble off the topic. 

Oh, I completely agree with you Shootmore.  I wasn't comparing WA and AK, I was contrasting them.  I agree that AK and WA are completely different, that's why I said "but then again".  
Alaska actually controls their wolf population by hunting them...

[Shootmoore]

That is the wrench in the comparison there 101.  Comparison of the Alaskan habitat area vs what we have here in Washington.  The prey as well as the wolf population has a greater area to spread out to allow for recoupment of the prey species.  Here in Washington State with the limited habitat available due to population numbers, it is kind of like fish in the barrel for the wolves.  The wolf and the deer and elk MUST share the same limited area.  Where in Alaska there is room for the game animals to avoid the wolf packs, here there is only so much habitat.  I would argue the same thing applies to Canada.  There is just much much more prime habitat for the prey species to spread out to avoid the wolves.

Here in Washington State, especially on the east side of the state, there is only so many wintering area's available for the deer and elk.  With the numbers of wolves that are wanted, there will be enough wolf packs to cover all of those area's.  You will either have predation by wolves or the wolves will drive the deer and elk to less quality wintering grounds causing a higher rate of winter kill.

Think about 15 breeding pairs of wolves in Washington, then think about the elk feeding stations.  Any bets that the wolves WILL be around the feed stations in the winter once they get established in sufficient numbers.  Basically what you will have is an end of elk feeding programs.  Now you will not only have predation reduction in the elk herds, but winter kill from lack of winter range.  It's a downhill spiral either way you look at it.

Thanks for the discussion, I enjoy it but I am beginning to ramble off the topic. 

Oh, I completely agree with you Shootmore.  I wasn't comparing WA and AK, I was contrasting them.  I agree that AK and WA are completely different, that's why I said "but then again".  
Alaska actually controls their wolf population by hunting them...

I know we were agreeing it just gave me an excuse to expound on my idea's 

I am a blue living in a sea of red over here in Western Washington.  Do to my job I don't get to express my opinion much so I take FULL advantage of it here on the forums to you all's suffrage 

Shootmoore

[whacker1]

sounds like it is time for a new job