Endangered huh?

[bearpaw]

You guys mentioned Yellowstone as an example....

I think most of our wildernesses that wolves have moved into are great examples of what happens with wolves too. There's no logging or snowmobiling in any wilderness and elk used to thrive. All the feed is still there but now the wolves are there and elk have simply dissapeared by the thousands.

[Kain]

The gray wolf is not now and has never been "endangered" of becoming extinct.  Even the Defenders of Wildlife site list the gray wolf population in North America at over 70,000.  I wont provide a link because I dont want to give them any more traffic. 

Population
There are an estimated 7,000 to 11,200 wolves in Alaska and more than 5,000 in the lower 48 states.

With an estimated population in Canada between 50,000-60,000.

I find is comical that wolf supporter will tell you how the wolf is NEEDED in order to reduce overpopulated elk and deer herds and then turn around and tell us that the deer and elk are suffering because of humans.  Not even smart enough to realize how dumb they sound.

Ask the WDFW how many land owner tags they give out because of problems with deer and elk.  Look at units like Battleground 564 where the WDFW is actively trying to reduce deer and elk number because of to many complaints.  Deer and elk thrive around humans.  Some people really need to get their facts straight before they embarrass themselves in public.

[bearpaw]

You are absolutely correct Kain....

Wildlife is thriving in and around human populated areas, it's the wilderness and parks full of wolves where there are now the lowest game numbers. 

[predatorpro]

look at how hard coyotes are on deer? i could look it up and get some straight accurate number but i thought that about of the 70% of fawns that dont make it like 40 to 50% of those deaths are from coyotes, just think of what wolves will do??

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Boy, like i said before,  trying to have a conversation with you guys is like squeezing jello to hold onto it. You're all over the place.  The OP was commenting about the irony of calling wolves endangered when there are so many in other places in North America. The second poster was basically calling the totals a lie because Alberta which is supposed to have 4,500 wolves is discussing culling  6,000 wolves to protect some caribou herds.  So I went to the article which discusses this, right here on this site and I pointed out that this was over 5 years for starters so at 1,200 a year It's realistic in one sense that they will try to remove about 1/4 of the wolves per year.   But I was pointing out that because of details, it may not be a realistic goal.

And apparently some of you didn't like the fact that I pointed out that it was a habitat issue caused by man, also in the article.  The article didn't say one word about wolves causing the problem that they were being killed for. At least the Canadians are honest in their science.

If you have a point, I'm willing to listen and discuss it. If all you want to do is pile on because my opinion differs from yours or I notice things you don't pay attention to, I don't have the time or energy to respond. It's boring.

[JimmyHoffa]

Well one of the remarks you threw out was implying that game can't exist where humans are because it is no longer 'habitat'.  I hear comments from greenies in my area quite often 'Too damn many deer, they need to do something about them' and the like.  Well there are too many IN TOWN.  There are herds that roam all over town, and any of the populated areas--great nutrition and lack of predators.  I hear people on this forum when comparing to the east coast say 'well whitetails breed like rabbits, that's why they have more deer'.  I see tons of new blacktails in my yard each year--lack of predators.  You can go to the San Juans or Whidbey Island and check out their herds of deer wandering all over, then go look for some predators--see how many you can find.  Not just deer, either.  I see lots of elk in people's yards, an airport, around town in fields, etc.  I can also go away from people in my local GMUs and find very little game sign, but plenty of predator sign and lots of feed for game animals.
I can't speak for eastern WA, but it appears to me (IMO) that western is not even close to max carrying capacity of game. 

[predatorpro]

so what your saying is that they need to "remove" more wolves there because man is destroying habitat for caribou, so by culling a certain amount of wolves that should i guess counteract the negative impact "man" caused to the caribou and their habitat? so its not the wolves right? they havent killed any caribou over there, its just mans fault for causing a habitat issue?

[bearpaw]

Boy, like i said before,  trying to have a conversation with you guys is like squeezing jello to hold onto it. You're all over the place.  The OP was commenting about the irony of calling wolves endangered when there are so many in other places in North America. The second poster was basically calling the totals a lie because Alberta which is supposed to have 4,500 wolves is discussing culling  6,000 wolves to protect some caribou herds.  So I went to the article which discusses this, right here on this site and I pointed out that this was over 5 years for starters so at 1,200 a year It's realistic in one sense that they will try to remove about 1/4 of the wolves per year.   But I was pointing out that because of details, it may not be a realistic goal.

And apparently some of you didn't like the fact that I pointed out that it was a habitat issue caused by man, also in the article.  The article didn't say one word about wolves causing the problem that they were being killed for. At least the Canadians are honest in their science.

If you have a point, I'm willing to listen and discuss it. If all you want to do is pile on because my opinion differs from yours or I notice things you don't pay attention to, I don't have the time or energy to respond. It's boring.

Nice try sitka-blacktail at sidestepping the fact that your comments lacked any facts and were only based on your pro-wolf opinion. You are as slick at avoiding your lack of facts as most other wolf lovers. The articles and quote I cited clearly indicate wolves are a significant factor in the fluctuation of big game, specifically caribou.

I do not find it any coincidence that wherever wolf numbers increase, big game herds suffer.

The Truth About Wolves In Alaska
"Testimony By Concerned Alaskans"
http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/truth_about_wolves_in_alaska.pdf


Van Ballenberghe (1985) states that wolf population regulation is needed when a caribou herd population declines and becomes trapped in a predator pit, wherein predators are able to prevent caribou populations from increasing.


Because Canada has allowed wolves to multiply there are many caribou herds in trouble and close to extintion, wolves are a great part of the problem.
http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/part_1_caribou_extinction_PNP.pdf
http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/part_1_caribou_extinction_PNP.pdf
http://graywolfnews.com/pdf/part_3_caribou_extinction_PNP.pdf

Here's another excerpt regarding caribou:

Wolf Interactions and Impacts in British Columbia
Dr. Tom Bergerud, University of British Columbia

Dr. Bergerud studied wolf interactions and impacts in a multi-ungulate system in British Columbia. Bergerud published a paper in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 1974, which stated that predation by wolves and bears is recognized as a major limiting factor on caribou and moose. If wolf numbers could be managed, game numbers would not decline. Without management, wolves will regulate the ungulates, with the biggest impact being on recruitment.

Studies in western Alberta and Eastern B.C. indicate the canadians are making an effort to monitor caribou so that decision makers can best manage human development, wolves, caribou, and other wolf prey species. After reading through this it is reinforced that human activity benefits many species including moose, elk, deer, and also wolves because the mentioned prey species populations can increase with human activities such as logging and oil exploration.

The wolf population increases when elk, deer, and moose populations increase, as a result, caribou which are not the primary prey of wolves in this area suffer population losses due to the increased predation caused by the increased wolf population. Looking at the research it seems to me the canadians are doing the right thing to protect the caribou in this region.

http://www.cfc.umt.edu/heblab/pdfs/hebblewhite%20and%20musiani%20ptacfinalreport_low_resolution.pdf

10.2 CARIBOU‐WOLF OVERLAP: MINIMIZING IMPACTS IN RISK AREAS
Identifying areas of overlap between wolves and caribou is a key step to minimizing risks to caribou. In
fact, risks might be higher for caribou when development results in more high quality wolf habitat in
overlap areas (forestry) or it increases wolf travel efficiency in such areas (e.g., by providing wolves with
seismic lines as travel routes).
Identification of high overlap areas could be potentially useful to mitigate effects of development by
avoiding high overlap areas. Recent advances in RSF applications to predator‐prey theory confirms that
RSF models can be used to estimate overlap using the product estimator of two independent RSF models
(Kristan and Boarman 2003, Hebblewhite et al. 2005). Because wolf predation is primarily driven by
species like moose, elk and deer in caribou systems (Hebblewhite et al. 2007), the assumption of
independence seems reasonable for wolves and caribou.
We treated RSF models for caribou and wolves as habitat ranking models, and used them to assess
caribou‐wolf overlap by subtracting inter‐species RSFs. Specifically, we subtracted the binned wolf RSF
model from the binned caribou RSF model. This generated a caribou‐wolf overlap index from ‐10 to +10,
73
73 PTACT Final Report
where high values indicate high quality caribou habitat and low quality wolf habitat, and low values
indicate low quality caribou habitat and high quality wolf habitat. We liken this index to a spatial
prediction of caribou “safe zones” (Figures 10.1, 10.2), wherein high values are those likely to be both
preferred by caribou and avoided by wolves.
Our maps can be used by environmental managers, industry and other stakeholders. Decision makers
will evaluate the risk for caribou posed by human‐induced habitat alterations happening in areas with a
low value for the “safe zones” index.
10.3 FUTURE RESEARCH: SPATIAL POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS
Conservation of woodland caribou will depend on our ability to effectively monitor population trends
and population dynamics (and the mechanisms acting upon them) within and among subpopulations
across the species range. We are using existing monitoring data collected in Alberta to assess the
relationships between vital rates and population growth to provide a case study for using spatiallyexplicit
population viability analyses in guiding conservation efforts. This analysis is ongoing, and
discussion herein preliminary.
We are using spatially‐explicit population viability analysis (PVA) techniques to assess: 1) the relationship
between vital rates (adult survival and recruitment) and population growth, 2) the power in our ability to
monitor trends or changes in population growth rates using estimates of these vital rates from currently
established protocols, 3) the effects of misclassification errors in calf‐cow ratio data, and 4) the longterm
viability of woodland caribou in Alberta as a case‐study in using spatially‐explicit PVAs to predict
changes in meta‐population dynamics. We are also considering threats and population growth rates
specific to each local population.
Preliminary results include a literature review of over 40 woodland caribou populations and studies to
develop a population model to assess the relationship between adult and calf survival rates and
population growth rate (Figure 10.3).

If you read through the entire report, it's obvious that wolf predation is a primary factor in caribou predation in this region and even though human activities can be credited with increasing the wolf prey base and ultimately the wolf population, it's painfully obvious that wolf population control can likely reduce the threat to caribou in this region. Essentually if we shoot, trap, and/or poison wolves, the caribou are going to benefit. Only by doing wolf control will it be proven that such control will or will not mitigate the caribou population decline occurring in specific herds.

[boneaddict]

look at how hard coyotes are on deer? i could look it up and get some straight accurate number but i thought that about of the 70% of fawns that dont make it like 40 to 50% of those deaths are from coyotes, just think of what wolves will do??

and, we hunt them 24/7/365 LITERALLY and look where their population is at.  I believe we have already reached a pivitol population density where if we hunted them the same as coyotes, we couldn't control them, yet we are trying to protect them. 

Can anyone suggest a reason why deer are in town or on your porch?

[seth30]

look at how hard coyotes are on deer? i could look it up and get some straight accurate number but i thought that about of the 70% of fawns that dont make it like 40 to 50% of those deaths are from coyotes, just think of what wolves will do??

and, we hunt them 24/7/365 LITERALLY and look where their population is at.  I believe we have already reached a pivitol population density where if we hunted them the same as coyotes, we couldn't control them, yet we are trying to protect them. 

Can anyone suggest a reason why deer are in town or on your porch?

Bone come to the island, the hippies here feed them like pets

[boneaddict]

Well if I was a deer, I'd stay behind a no trespassing sign during hunting season, and if there were wolves and cats hunting the area I'd stand on Boneaddicts porch as its probably a fairly safe spot.

[canyelk48]

If you have a point, I'm willing to listen and discuss it. If all you want to do is pile on because my opinion differs from yours or I notice things you don't pay attention to, I don't have the time or energy to respond. It's boring.

That's probably best that you don't respond or post any more since there's no getting through to someone as close-minded as you appear to be given that other posters have given you plausible facts that you refuse to acknowledge.

[Kain]

Can anyone suggest a reason why deer are in town or on your porch?

Thats where I would be since predators are out of control.
Out of 228 fawns

http://access.nwifc.org/wildlife/documents/makah-fawn-report-final-201102.pdf

[SpringerFan]

I think its good to see both views.  Its a great way to learn.  It also generally is what makes "us" different.  Many and I mean MANY of the hugger kind would NEVER open their minds up to hearing someone elses opinion. Thats the difference between true outdoorsman and radicals.    Most outdoorsman are actually conservationists.  MANY and again I mean MANY "huggers" are very far from being conservationists although thats what they claim to be.   Many have no clue about what really occurs in nature.    As long as its not abrasive then I am sure it will be tolerated.  In fact the more that you can convey the message, the more hope there is.

Agreed Bone. But what facts is he presenting? You all have been posting nothing but data in all these threads.

At work, we make decisions based on data (facts). In a relationship, decisions are sometimes made with emotion.

If Sitka was dealing with facts, then we all could learn something. But he posts stuff to get people going playing on the emotions. Which you all quickly back up with facts.

I think that is the difference you outlined in this post. "Most outdoorsman are actually conservationists.  MANY and again I mean MANY "huggers" are very far from being conservationists although thats what they claim to be.   Many have no clue about what really occurs in nature."

So true. That is what I like about the people on this forum. You do know what happens.

And, I am getting educated by both data and how the huggers act.

Thanks all.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Remember this quote in the article about Alberta doing a wolf cull?

""Much of the habitat in question overlaps with the oilsands region -- although experts and the federal report alike don't hold the oilpatch solely responsible for the destruction of the caribou habitat. Rather, they say it's a culmination of decades, even centuries, of industrial development in the region that has upset the delicate balance caribou need to thrive.""

Well here's what's going on there in the tar sands region.

http://www.grist.org/oil/2011-12-28-satellite-photos-illustrate-dramatic-expansion-of-canadian-tar-s

and  http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/kunzig-text/1

This is the real reason the caribou in this region are becoming endangered, not wolves.

Another reason that THIS hunter is a tree hugging greenie.