WOLF - UNGULATE INTERACTION DATA

[sebek556]

how many of these wolf loving hippies will actually be affected by them? probably high estimate of 10% the rest will get a warm and fuzzy feeling of they did a good deed for the wolves. How many hunters,farmers,ranchers and outdoors people will be affected by them 90% low estimate. but DFW will take these hippies word just as strongly as mine. They hippies will drive their hybrid and drink their lattes and be smug. I will be on look out because I live where they want wolves, have three kids, 2 dogs , a cat, and a assortment of farm animals depending on the time of year. Hippies will go on each others facebook pages and look at the one of them who actually will walk into the woods photos of a wolf, I will guard my family and animals from them.
second all we will need is one or two bad winters, deer and elk populations will plummet and the wolves population will explode, wolves will over run game, then tell me what will be on the menu?

[whuppinstick]

so who are you?  which side of this issue are you on?  just kinda curious  I'm a girl we are nosey like that....I been around a while you can figure out who I am pretty quick....

I'm on the same side as you and everybody else on this forum.  My wolf tag is currently in the mail and I will be hunting them in Idaho in eight days.

[whuppinstick]

Folks it is not outside the realm of possibility of it taking 10-12 years before delisting begins.

Your scenario is assuming that no new breeding pairs are discovered along the way.  Yes, it is possible that 15 are found and the waiting period begins and two years later one B.P. dies and we're back to 14 and the process begins again.  But if this is happening then that more than likely means the wolf population has stabilized at ~15 breeding pairs.  That would be great!  But I don't think any of us believe that will happen.  No, the population will continue to rise unchecked until hunters are allowed to hunt them. I will repeat what I said earlier that the best thing we can do right now (short of getting the Wolf Plan changed) is to support the WDFW employee whose job it is to tally breeding pairs.  Get as many of them on record as possible so that as soon as we hit 15 we stay there.

But your point is taken - I have not read the plan and I did not know about the waiting period.  And I also agree that the delisting process could take time. I think I am hoping that ID, MT, and WY have taken one for the team and set a precedent which we can follow. 

[sebek556]

id,mo, and wy may have set the trail for delisting but i think if you add all three states  population wa would still have 3 times that amount, so the problems that they have faced delisting we would get 3 fold...

[whuppinstick]

id,mo, and wy may have set the trail for delisting but i think if you add all three states  population wa would still have 3 times that amount, so the problems that they have faced delisting we would get 3 fold...

Yeah, you're right.  Let's hope they don't figure out a way to put it to a vote..

[high country]

My numbers are straight from idahos plan, I can post a link if you think I am inflating numbers.

Idaho's actual numbers are irrelevant (it's a different state, different number of biologists, different amount of prey base, different terrain, etc.), it's their ratio between breeding pairs and total wolves that I am using to calculate how many wolves we'll have on the ground in Washington when we achieve 15 breeding pairs. 

The best thing we can do right now is to support WDFW's request to add that wolf-specific biologist/tracker that was noted in the other thread.  With that person on the ground collars can start being attached and breeding pairs can begin being tracked and counted.  The sooner WDFW can allot resources specifically to counting wolves, the better for all of us.

I understand Idaho's numbers are not exactly the same as ours as they have tons more open land and many more animals to feed on. That is why I used 50% as a common divisor. If you think wa wolves will eat less than 50% as much as Idaho's wolves, than you must be one of the theorists who believe wa transplanted all our wolves........most of our wolves ARE Idaho's wolves.

[whuppinstick]

I understand Idaho's numbers are not exactly the same as ours as they have tons more open land and many more animals to feed on. That is why I used 50% as a common divisor. If you think wa wolves will eat less than 50% as much as Idaho's wolves, than you must be one of the theorists who believe wa transplanted all our wolves........most of our wolves ARE Idaho's wolves.

Sorry, I wasn't even looking at the number of deer/elk each wolf would eat, I was only concentrating on the total number of wolves calculated by the number of known breeding pairs.  I see no reason why elk killed/wolf wouldn't be very close to the same as it is in Idaho?  I agree they are probably the same wolves so they will have the same diet.