Elk will be gone in Idaho by 2012

[KFhunter]

Rockholm66 couldn't have predicted 5 years ago Idaho would be so aggressive in wolf management, allowing us all to "laugh" at this prediction today.  Back then Malloy was a big factor, Idaho was judicially limited in protecting Elk. That Idaho is where it is today with hunt-able Elk is a testament to the amount of money, time and effort Idaho has spent in protecting their Elk herds.
.


Since you like to laugh at predictions laugh at this one: 
Washington will not be as aggressive in protecting our Elk numbers as Idaho has been in protecting their Elk.

[DIYARCHERYJUNKIE]

Good luck over there, if you need any help let me know, I've spent quite a bit of time over there hunting them. 

I'd could use a pm as to where to go in Idaho.  And I don't believe in that global warming crap so  !

[Machias]

Good luck over there, if you need any help let me know, I've spent quite a bit of time over there hunting them. 

I'd could use a pm as to where to go in Idaho.  And I don't believe in that global warming crap so  !

   Shoot me a PM anytime.

[idahohuntr]

Rockholm66 couldn't have predicted 5 years ago Idaho would be so aggressive in wolf management, allowing us all to "laugh" at this prediction today.  Back then Malloy was a big factor, Idaho was judicially limited in protecting Elk. That Idaho is where it is today with hunt-able Elk is a testament to the amount of money, time and effort Idaho has spent in protecting their Elk herds.
.
Since you like to laugh at predictions laugh at this one: 
Washington will not be as aggressive in protecting our Elk numbers as Idaho has been in protecting their Elk.

It was clear when he made his prediction the direction IDFG was taking wolf management. The only uncertainty was around judicial rulings.  However, between state and feds, even with ESA protection afforded for most of that period 804 wolves were killed in Idaho between 2003-2010.  Even if Idaho put an armed guard to protect every wolf pack in the state from harm there would still be a bunch of elk in Idaho today making his prediction dead wrong no matter what happens.

As for your "prediction"...how bold...     

[WAcoyotehunter]

Ummm..... How do you figure wolf reproduction but forget totally about elk reproduction?  I'm sure he has adjusted his numbers to forecast out another year or two.

[wolfbait]

I just came across this 5 year old thread, and find it a bit humorous.

The prediction is that there will be no elk left in Idaho by 2012.

It's now 2015... are there any elk in Idaho?   

You find it humorous while most of us consider it good news.

And your point was?

[bobcat]

I just came across this 5 year old thread, and find it a bit humorous.

The prediction is that there will be no elk left in Idaho by 2012.

It's now 2015... are there any elk in Idaho?   

You find it humorous while most of us consider it good news.

And your point was?

My point? Isn't it obvious? The point is, the prediction was wrong. There are still elk in Idaho.

[Dan-o]

I just came across this 5 year old thread, and find it a bit humorous.

The prediction is that there will be no elk left in Idaho by 2012.

It's now 2015... are there any elk in Idaho?   

You find it humorous while most of us consider it good news.

And your point was?

My point? Isn't it obvious? The point is, the prediction was wrong. There are still elk in Idaho.

Are you sure??

[wolfbait]

I just came across this 5 year old thread, and find it a bit humorous.

The prediction is that there will be no elk left in Idaho by 2012.

It's now 2015... are there any elk in Idaho?   

You find it humorous while most of us consider it good news.

And your point was?

My point? Isn't it obvious? The point is, the prediction was wrong. There are still elk in Idaho.

How long has this prediction been eating at you?

[wolfbait]

I just came across this 5 year old thread, and find it a bit humorous.

The prediction is that there will be no elk left in Idaho by 2012.

It's now 2015... are there any elk in Idaho?   

You find it humorous while most of us consider it good news.

And your point was?

My point? Isn't it obvious? The point is, the prediction was wrong. There are still elk in Idaho.

How long has this prediction been eating at you?

Do these predictions bother you as well or do you find them "humorous"?

Wolf impacts underestimated

According to the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service grossly underestimated the impact of a reintroduced population of wolves.

• The wolf population in the Greater Yellowstone area in 2005 was at least 3.3 times the original environmental impact statement prediction for a recovered population.
• The number of breeding pairs of wolves in the GYA in 2005 was at least twice as high as the original EIS prediction and the number of breeding pairs in 2004 was at least 3.1 times the original EIS prediction.
• In 2005, the wolf population in Wyoming outside Yellowstone National Park exceeded the recovery criteria for the entire region and continues to increase rapidly.
• The estimated annual predation rate (22 ungulates per wolf) is 1.8 times the annual predation rate (12 ungulates per wolf) predicted in the EIS.
• The estimated number of ungulates taken by 325 wolves in a year (7,150) is six times higher than the original EIS prediction.
• The percent of the northern Yellowstone elk harvest during the 1980s currently taken by wolves (50 percent) is 6.3 times the original estimate of eight percent projected in the EIS.
• The actual decline in the northern Yellowstone elk herd (more than 50 percent) is 1.7 times the maximum decline originally forecast in the EIS.
• The actual decline in cow harvest in the northern Yellowstone elk herd (89 percent) is 3.3 times the decline originally forecast in the EIS.
• The actual decline in bull harvest in the northern Yellowstone elk herd is 75 percent, whereas the 1994 EIS predicted bull harvests would be “unaffected.”
• Since wolf introduction, average ratios of calf elk to cow elk have been greatly \depressed in the northern Yellowstone elk herd and in the Wyoming elk herds impacted by wolves. In the northern Yellowstone elk herd and in the Sunlight unit of the Clarks Fork herd, calf:cow rations have been suppressed to unprecedented levels below 15 calves per 100. The impact of wolves on calf recruitment was not addressed by the 1994 EIS.

WG&F stated: “Despite research findings in Idaho and the Greater Yellowstone Area, and monitoring evidence in Wyoming that indicate wolf predation is having an impact on ungulate populations that will reduce hunter opportunity if the current impact levels persist, the Service continues to rigidly deny wolf predation is a problem.”

The 1994 EIS predicted that presence of wolves would result in a 5-10 percent increase in annual visitation to Yellowstone National Park. On this basis, the EIS forecast wolves in the region would generate $20 million in revenue to the states of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. WG&F reports that annual park visitation remained essentially unchanged after wolf introduction, and has decreased 2.6 percent since the wolf population reached recovery goals in 2000.

“ Since park visitation did not increase as originally forecast, the Service cannot legitimately conclude presence of wolves has had any appreciable effect on net tourism revenues,” WG&F stated.

WG&F stated: “Wolf presence can be ecologically compatible in the GYA only to the extent that the distribution and numbers of wolves are controlled and maintained at approximately the levels originally predicted by the 1994 EIS –100 wolves and 10 breeding pairs.” WG&F maintained that FWS “has a permanent, legal obligation to manage wolves at the levels on which the wolf recovery program was originally predicated, the levels described by the impact analysis in the 1994 EIS.”

http://www.pinedaleonline.com/wolf/wolfimpacts.htm

[Dan-o]

Those stats/predictions are just ugly.

I fear we're in for the same or worse.

[wolfbait]

Those stats/predictions are just ugly.

I fear we're in for the same or worse.

We don't have to make any "predictions" for WA, all we have to do is look at Idaho and their past history, compare WA's ungulate population to Idaho's at the start of "wolf recovery" and then look at where we are right now.

According to WDFW wolves started "migrating" into WA in 2002, that makes 13 years worth of wolf recovery. Look at where IDFG was 13 years into wolf recovery.
(of course WDFW are ignoring the wolves of the 1970's-1990's)

Monitoring

Our 2008 annual report on Wolf Conservation and Management in Idaho is available on our website at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/manage/. The minimum year-end population estimate for 2008 was 846 wolves, 88 packs, with 39 documented breeding pairs. The 2009 annual report is being prepared and will be available in March.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/reportMonthly09.pdf

Monitoring

Our 2009 annual report on Wolf Conservation and Management in Idaho is available on our website at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/manage/. The year-end minimum population estimate for 2009 was 835 wolves in 94 packs with 49 breeding pairs confirmed (breeding pair is defined as an adult male and female with at least tow pups that survived to December 31). The 2009 year-end minimum estimate of 835 wolves compares to the 2008 year-end minimum population estimate of 856 wolves in 88 packs, with 39 documented breeding pairs.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/reportMonthly10.pdf

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission, Monday, August 17, 2009 set harvest limits for Idaho's first public wolf hunting season this fall.

Fish and Game models indicate Idaho now has at least 1,000 wolves. The population increases at a rate of about 20 percent a year, without hunting.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/news3.pdf

August 5, 2010 - Gray wolves in Idaho, and the Northern Rocky Mountains are returned to endangered species status. U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's delisting rule does not comply with the Endangered Species Act.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/ruling1.pdf

[idahohuntr]

Wolfbait - Have you considered incorporating the magnitude of your error in predicting wolf impacts to Idaho elk numbers into some of the rhetoric on impacts of wolves in other states? 

[jasnt]

Despite being wrong they had the best intentions and it's obvious they care about our wildlife,and our future of hunting........most people are only right less than 50% of the time

 

This is all funny as heck unless you live and hunt or had a business in one of the many Idaho zones significantly impacted by wolves. The wolf promoters love to say there are over 100,000 elk in Idaho and try to advertise that wolves have not harmed herds, what they avoid telling you about are the herds that were significantly reduced and the many businesses in small towns near these areas that no longer exist and there is little mention of the ranchers who lost thousands when hungry packs of wolves devoured their livestock because there wasn't enough wild game to be found. The wolfers also do not mention that it has taken nearly year around hunting seasons, trapping seasons, and government arial gunning to stop the increase of wolf numbers and reverse the decline of Idaho's big game herds. If aggressive wolf management not taken place it is very arguable that many more herds would have been impacted.

RMEF has made strong statements for managing wolves and IDFG has acknowledged the damage in numerous units by wolves. As a result IDFG implemented the needed management to reduce wolves, bear, and cougar numbers to save herds. This is all mentioned in the Idaho state management plans.

If some of you are foolish enough to believe wolves did not cause any damage to herds in Idaho and will not cause any damage to any herds in WA then so be it, have a great day. 

A reduced population of wolves might fit in the lower 48 if numbers are prevented from getting too large in any area. After all there have been wolves in Alaska and Canada all along. But the Alaskans and Canadians manage wolves heavily at times with extensive culling efforts when needed and essentially that is what Idaho is doing to save their herds. Idaho has implemented heavy predator control for all large predators with multiple cougar, bear, and wolf tags on sale and very long seasons in the zones where herds have been decimated. This has resulted in some of those game herds beginning to bounce back. Yes, wolves might fit in if predator numbers are reduced like has occurred in Canada and Idaho.

It sure seems pretty intentionally misleading for anyone to suggest that wolves did not harm Idaho's game herds or that more herds would not have been damaged if Idaho had not started significant lethal management of all large predators to reverse the declining trend of many Idaho herds.

FACT: IDFG has published data supporting the fact that wolves and other large predators did impact Idaho big game herds.

[Special T]

The prediciton was wrong... Fortunatly. Since some dont seem to like what statements he makes, look at his posts. While some of you whine about his source...  Many are taken from state or federal documents, and his oppinion is based of of those facts.
Fact is hunting is not nearly as good in ID as it was even 5 years ago.
ID has many more tools at its disposal than WA, and many people in ID resent the Feds and the IDFW for forcing this on the people. MANY Id residents shot wolves despite how illegal it was. I would bet the general feeling about wolves was negative in ID

WA has no real trapping. WA has a huge block of people who have no vested interest in the game herds or the rural way of living. The overall political climate favors those who wish to protect wolves in this state. As a % of the population Wa has WAY less hunters and trappers than ID.