Wolf Wars have moved to Washington

[Special T]

Hmmm I remember the article that the much maligned Wolfbait posted that talked about this very issue a long time ago.... In summery it said that outside the Denali NP in AK only  a small percent.... 5 % ? of wolves were harvested once aerial gunning was outlawed. Normal hunting season had ZERO affect on wolves. approximately 50-60% of wolf population mortality was necessary to FREEZE wolf numbers... I also think its interesting that some who had faith in the WDFW and Pro wolf crowd would negotiate in good faith have come to the realization that is not the case.... Let us remember that the wolf is today's ESA pet. Yesterdays ESA pet was the Spotted Owl, and when the wolf is proved a saboteur there will be another pet.... Who knows what it will be? The wolverine?
I know it seems very conspiracy theory, but follow the money.... The animals are the tool and the ESA is the weapon that many non profits use to make Coin!

[Jack Roscoe]

Ten breeding pairs was more than enough in Montana.  Why 15 here?  Makes no sense. 

[Wenatcheejay]

http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2011/jun/18/poached-past-the-brink/

[ErikN]

Thats how it started in idaho, and in 5 years I have gone from selecting the best buck out of 20 I might have seen, to shooting the only legal buck I can find, because thats all there is left. Wolves destroy everything. We don't need them here at all.

[bearpaw]

Ten breeding pairs was more than enough in Montana.  Why 15 here?  Makes no sense.

You are exactly right and additionally there is no federal mandate to even have 10 bp's in Washington. This whole 15 bp's theory is all homegrown right here in the evergreen state. 

[Wenatcheejay]

Ten breeding pairs was more than enough in Montana.  Why 15 here?  Makes no sense.

You are exactly right and additionally there is no federal mandate to even have 10 bp's in Washington. This whole 15 bp's theory is all homegrown right here in the evergreen state. 

That's what is so frustrating. People I talk to have been led to believe it is the Fed's that are doing it. It's not.

[bearpaw]

Eastern Washington has been delisted by the feds. We must have an approved wolf plan in order to manage wolves in Eastern Washington. There is no federal recovery plan for western Washington. This need to put wolves all over Washington is something that wolf advocates within our own state agencies are pushing.

Utah's wolf plan calls for wolves in only one mountain range in northern Utah and the rest of the state is not going to managed for wolves. I think Washington could do the same type of plan if our WDFW and other state agencies would pursue that route.

[BIGINNER]

Eastern Washington has been delisted by the feds. We must have an approved wolf plan in order to manage wolves in Eastern Washington. There is no federal recovery plan for western Washington. This need to put wolves all over Washington is something that wolf advocates within our own state agencies are pushing.

Utah's wolf plan calls for wolves in only one mountain range in northern Utah and the rest of the state is not going to managed for wolves. I think Washington could do the same type of plan if our WDFW and other state agencies would pursue that route.

[bearpaw]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 22, 2011
Contact: Steve Wagner, Blue Heron Communications, 800-654-3766 or steve@blueheroncomm.com

RMEF Moves to Protect Appellate Rights in Wolf Decision
MISSOULA, Mont.—U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy will decide whether Congress
acted within Constitutional bounds when it delisted wolves in parts of the West. The
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has filed notice of its intent to appeal any decision that
adversely affects states’ rights to manage fully recovered wolf populations.
Molloy is expected to hear arguments soon from animal rights groups and environmental
extremists who sued to challenge the legality of Congress’ recent action.
An unfavorable ruling could stop wolf management hunts planned for fall in Idaho and
Montana—even though elk calf survival rates in some areas are already too low to sustain
herds for the future.
“We are protecting our right to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals any
decision that results in another setback for conservation and science-based wildlife
management,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “Our notice of intent to
appeal includes a motion to stay any unfavorable outcome pending our appeal process.”
As he did with other conservation groups, Molloy recently denied an RMEF motion to
intervene in the lawsuit. At least two groups filed a second motion asking the judge to
reconsider. RMEF opted for a different response.
“We’re hoping for the best but preparing for the worst,” explained Allen. “A decision
could go either way because the laws being challenged leave too much to interpretation.
This built-in gray area is the inherent problem with federal rulemaking on wildlife that is
not endangered or threatened. All the science shows that wolves are recovered. But as
long as the federal government is involved, there will be more lawsuits and, potentially,
more unfavorable rulings. The new motion we filed prepares us for that scenario.”
“We will continue to fight until all states, from the Rockies to the Great Lakes, have true
state management authority unfettered with federal oversight,” he added.

[Humptulips]

Eastern Washington has been delisted by the feds. We must have an approved wolf plan in order to manage wolves in Eastern Washington. There is no federal recovery plan for western Washington. This need to put wolves all over Washington is something that wolf advocates within our own state agencies are pushing.

Utah's wolf plan calls for wolves in only one mountain range in northern Utah and the rest of the state is not going to managed for wolves. I think Washington could do the same type of plan if our WDFW and other state agencies would pursue that route.

Oregons Wolf management plan calls for 4 breeding pairs in only eastern Oregon to reach recovery goals. Seems like WDFW is the only State agency in love with wolves.

[bearpaw]

They have people buffalo'd into thinking we have no choice... 

[bearpaw]

http://lmtribune.com/content/tncms/live/lmtribune.com/northwest/article_35a5ad03-f2f6-5796-a6f9-3e2a67051cfd.html

Attempts to kill wolves are showing few results
By ERIC BARKER of the Tribune

Efforts to reduce wolf numbers around Elk City and in the Lolo Elk Hunting Zone have been largely fruitless more than a month after being implemented.

Idaho County deputies have not shot any wolves in the Elk City area, and hunting outfitters have been unable to kill wolves in the Lolo country. An Idaho Department of Fish and Game conservation officer shot one wolf near Powell last Saturday.

"I would have thought we would have had more, but that is it," said Dave Cadwallader, supervisor of the department's Clearwater Region.
In May, shortly after wolves were removed from federal protection, Cadwallader authorized deputies in the Elk City area to shoot wolves. He made the move after months of complaints by Elk City residents about wolves that had frequented the remote hamlet for much of the winter and spring. Cadwallader said wolves are still seen there but not as frequently.

"I think it's the time of year," he said. "The elk have moved out and are calving and the wolves have moved on."

Cadwallader also authorized hunting outfitters who operate in the Lolo Zone to shoot wolves while guiding clients during spring black bear hunting trips. At the same time, he gave authority to his conservation officers working in the Lolo Zone to shoot wolves. Wolves sometimes are attracted to black bear hunting baits, but that has not happened this year.

"Most of the outfitters I have talked to just aren't seeing any wolf activity."

When the state took over wolf management last month, it attempted to reduce wolf numbers in the Lolo Zone through aerial gunning. Five wolves were shot, far short of the goal of killing as many as 50.

While wolves were still under Endangered Species Act protections, the department had sought permission to help declining elk herds in the Lolo by reducing wolf numbers. Its plan had gone through peer review and public comment and was awaiting a final decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service when wolves were delisted. The plan was intended to be carried out during the winter, when wolves can be more easily shot from aircraft.

At the end of 2010, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated the Idaho wolf population to number at least 700. Idaho officials believe the population is higher, but they don't know how high it might be.

A lawsuit filed by a handful of environmental groups claims Congress infringed on the powers of the judiciary when it passed a bill that included language that delisted wolves in Idaho, Montana and parts of three other suits. The case is pending before Judge Donald Molloy of Missoula, Mont.
---
Barker may be contacted at ebarker@lmtribune.com or at (208) 848-2273.


Reader Comments


Make it worth a hunter's effort and they will bag wolves. The biggest issue is keeping the wolves away from human settlements with their domestic and farmed animals and that is happening. Wolves have an aversion to gunfire and bullets zinging past.

   
"The elk have moved out and are calving and the wolves have moved on."
should really read:: "The elk have moved out and are calving and the wolves are following them."

   
What was that libby? "the wolves are gone" in one sentence. And in the next sentence, "it will take eons to rid ourselves of the wolf overpopulation." I wonder if libby even knows what kind of time frame an eon really is, especially in light of the fact that it took us less than 100 years to nearly eradicate wolves from the area in the first place.

   
Too Late!!! The food is gone. So are the wolves. It will take years to rid ourselves of the wolf overpopulation and eons to rebuild the elk population.

[bearpaw]

Kain posted this audio transcript of the last Commission Meeting regarding the Wolf Plan, I thought it should be posted in this topic too..

http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2011/06/audio/20110616_a.mp3

[CementFinisher]

Thank you for posting that dale. After listening it seems there is a huge dissconnect between the commission and the study group. How was the group chosen and become so heavily weighed to one side? how is the cap issue coming along? Do you feel your voice is actualy being heard or are the people speaking to the board for youfull of crap?

[WAcoyotehunter]

the last few minutes with (i think it was) Whecker speaking are pretty telling... the at risk ungulate conversation