Post by: fireweed on January 05, 2013, 09:28:02 AM
(from National Park and Conservation Assoc)
By Sharon Mader, Senior Program Manager, Grand Teton
She was graceful and photogenic. She was a good mother. She was widely admired for her strength and beauty. But earlier this month, a hunter killed one of Yellowstone’s most famous canines just 15 miles outside the park boundary in Wyoming—the gray wolf that led the Lamar Canyon Pack in the northeast region of the park.
Researchers dubbed the alpha female 832F, though her admirers commonly refer to her as “06” for the year she was born. And she had many admirers—from wildlife photographers to weekend tourists to the researchers who tracked her movements with a sophisticated $4,000 collar.
Gray wolves have had a complicated history in Yellowstone. People eradicated them from the area in the 1920s and they were gone from the landscape for decades until the Park Service successfully reintroduced them in 1995. In the 17 years since, research in Yellowstone has shown the positive impact that wolves have had on the park’s plants and wildlife. But with the success of the wolf reintroduction, these iconic creatures have just recently been removed from the endangered species list and hunting has ensued in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Although hunters cannot shoot the animals within Yellowstone’s boundaries, the wolves themselves do not recognize lines on a map and frequently roam outside the park.
It has been just two years since state officials removed gray wolves from the endangered list in Montana, and only two and a half months since the animals were delisted in Wyoming, but already this year’s hunting season has taken a significant toll on the wolf populations in national parks. To date, hunters have killed five wolves in Yellowstone that were wearing expensive scientific research collars to help researchers study their behavior. Hunters killed at least two other collared wolves at Grand Teton as well.
The loss of these “research wolves” takes a significant toll on ongoing Park Service efforts to monitor and study the wolf population in both Montana and Wyoming. In response, the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission voted 4-1 to put certain areas around Yellowstone off-limits to wolf hunts in an effort to protect park wolves. While this is a temporary measure, we believe that the state commission should set in place a permanent area adjacent to Yellowstone and Grand Teton that will protect park wolves that occasionally leave the park’s boundaries.
We applaud the commissioners for this action. Wolves are a well-established part of the economic engine of Yellowstone, a place that draws millions of visitors each year who spend money in our towns and want to see a wide variety of wildlife, including the gray wolf. We also urge Wyoming, which opened up hunting to gray wolves just this past October, to exercise caution in hunting these animals.
Wyoming officials should use Montana’s situation as a lesson and create appropriate space around the park that is off-limits to hunting. The Wyoming Game and Fish Department has the ability and duty to establish protected regions around parks in Wyoming and greatly limit the toll on wolves to ensure that both Grand Teton and Yellowstone wolf packs are better protected.
As for the rest of the Lamar Canyon Pack, their future is uncertain. The pack may end up splitting into smaller packs or breaking up altogether—though the animals’ behavior is difficult to predict. What’s certain is that NPCA and other wildlife enthusiasts and park lovers around the country will be watching and advocating for the safety of these iconic creatures.
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 05, 2013, 09:38:01 AM
Post by: bearmanric on January 05, 2013, 09:54:24 AM
Post by: Axle on January 05, 2013, 09:56:12 AM
Quote
Oh boy, sounds like someone just opened a big 'ol can of worms.
Maybe there will be maggots instead of worms. Then again - the wolves are infested with different kinds of worms. The wolf huggers should hug her goodbye.....and kiss her goodbye.....
Post by: hillbilli on January 05, 2013, 10:04:15 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 05, 2013, 10:10:51 AM
Post by: lokidog on January 05, 2013, 10:23:56 AM
Post by: Jingles on January 05, 2013, 10:29:56 AM
Post by: NWBREW on January 05, 2013, 10:33:18 AM
Here's an idea, add an invisible fence receiver into those tracking collars and then put a wire around the park.
:chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
Don't want the Yellowstone Pack killed? Keep them within the Yellowstone boundaries anything outside the boundaries is fair game:yeah:
Post by: Wenatcheejay on January 05, 2013, 10:53:05 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 05, 2013, 12:53:38 PM
Quote
her admirers commonly refer to her as “06” for the year she was bornI would've called her "06" for a different reason..... ;)
Post by: Bean Counter on January 05, 2013, 12:59:25 PM
I owe that hunter a beer.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on January 05, 2013, 01:05:31 PM
Post by: asl20bball on January 05, 2013, 01:13:12 PM
Post by: predatorpro on January 05, 2013, 01:34:30 PM
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 01:38:36 PM
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/7772544ff89a48d0a7a6d3f843925829/MT--Yellowstone-Wolves (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/7772544ff89a48d0a7a6d3f843925829/MT--Yellowstone-Wolves)
Post by: Austrian Hunter on January 05, 2013, 01:57:59 PM
Post by: longrangekiller on January 05, 2013, 02:43:41 PM
Post by: lokidog on January 05, 2013, 03:13:33 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 05, 2013, 03:14:44 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on January 05, 2013, 03:21:21 PM
Post by: GUscottie on January 05, 2013, 03:26:24 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 03:47:51 PM
a "positive impact" on the park's wildlife/plants? What the??? Last I checked yellowstone park went from 20k elk to less than 5k. Yellowstone is dying thanks to a disease we introduced into the park called the wolf. This narrow minded approached from the pro-wolf folks is sickening. All they are about is the wolf...not any other animals.
That was my thoughts exactly! Where the hell does this b@#$% get her info from anyways! :stup: I mean just go ahead and make some crap up to push your agenda on people! Montana, Idaho and Wyoming keep doing what you're doing! Kill all them mongrels! :mgun:
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 04:56:46 PM
a "positive impact" on the park's wildlife/plants? What the??? Last I checked yellowstone park went from 20k elk to less than 5k. Yellowstone is dying thanks to a disease we introduced into the park called the wolf. This narrow minded approached from the pro-wolf folks is sickening. All they are about is the wolf...not any other animals.
Actually, from a broad ecosystem perspective the wolves have helped the Northern Yellowstone range. The elk numbers there in the 90's were incredibly high, and you could see the overgrazing. That's why Montana was able to shoot hundreds of elk every year in the Gardiner late hunt, the numbers were way out of whack.
Yellowstone is not dying from the wolves any more than it died from the '88 fires. They each have their place and have an ugly side to them too.
I won't lose any sleep over this wolf being shot outside the park, collared or not. We shoot collared elk, deer, and sheep every year and I've never heard anyone complain about that.
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 08:50:46 PM
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 09:01:40 PM
Yes, those wolves have saved thousands of Montana people from having to take the time to go hunting and put meat in their freezer, thankfully we have those wolves to trim our herds by up to 90%. Wolves are our savior!
If your quote was directed at me, I don't think wolves are our savior, and I never said that they were.
I doubt that it was a goal of the National Park Service to maintain an overinflated elk herd so that Montanans could shoot them for two months in the winter. By saying that, I'm not taking a jab at the hunt. It was unique and neat in it's own way and was part of the Gardiner culture.
My point was, that wolves have not been completely detrimental to the Yellowstone ecosystem if you are looking at it from a big picture point of view.
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 09:07:02 PM
a "positive impact" on the park's wildlife/plants? What the??? Last I checked yellowstone park went from 20k elk to less than 5k. Yellowstone is dying thanks to a disease we introduced into the park called the wolf. This narrow minded approached from the pro-wolf folks is sickening. All they are about is the wolf...not any other animals.
Actually, from a broad ecosystem perspective the wolves have helped the Northern Yellowstone range. The elk numbers there in the 90's were incredibly high, and you could see the overgrazing. That's why Montana was able to shoot hundreds of elk every year in the Gardiner late hunt, the numbers were way out of whack.
Yellowstone is not dying from the wolves any more than it died from the '88 fires. They each have their place and have an ugly side to them too.
I won't lose any sleep over this wolf being shot outside the park, collared or not. We shoot collared elk, deer, and sheep every year and I've never heard anyone complain about that.
Are you kidding me? I really don't understand your reasoning on this at all. So you're basically saying the wolves did what no other Montana resident could do, bring the population down? The fires were temporary and the wolves are permanent, so you can throw that comparison out the window!
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 09:12:02 PM
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 09:13:40 PM
Now that wolves have over eaten the park elk, they are moving out of the park and devouring surrounding herds that never entered the park. This has turned into a disaster for game management.
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 09:16:50 PM
I was merely pointing out that wolves have had a beneficial impact within the park whether one wants to admit it or not. I'm not saying I like them or anyone else should either. But, to say the park is dying because of wolves is a rather misinformed statement.
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 09:31:51 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 09:39:13 PM
So the elk would summer in the park and winter at the edge of the park/out of the park in the Yellowstone Valley. The only way Montanans could put a dent in the numbers was to shoot them in January and February when they came out of the park for lower winter range. There actually is quantifiable range data to show the improvements inside the park, but I'll let you look for them if you wish. I am guessing you don't want to see it and that's fine.
Actually I've read quite a bit about this topic thank you very much. I know about the theory of Trophic Cascade and its affect on the park. Your saying that wolves have had a positive affect on the park as a whole but what I'm saying is they are devasting the elk herds. If not for hunting wolves outside of the park in recent years the numbers of elk left in the park might be very much lower than they are right now. And then when all the elk are gone what will the wolves do then? Turn their attention to other game and deplete them.
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 09:47:34 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 09:58:12 PM
I am guessing that the number of wolves killed around the perimeter of the park has a very negligible affect on the number of wolves inside the park.
:dunno: I wouldn't be so sure about that!
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 10:11:44 PM
I am guessing that the number of wolves killed around the perimeter of the park has a very negligible affect on the number of wolves inside the park.
:dunno: I wouldn't be so sure about that!
That's right, because the park wolves are moving out of the park more often and even staying out of the park for extended periods hunting seasons have had a big impact on park wolves, that is why the MFWP Commission shut down wolf hunting in areas near the park, because the hunting season was having a big impact on park wolves. However, a judge reopened the season.
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 10:14:56 PM
I am guessing that the number of wolves killed around the perimeter of the park has a very negligible affect on the number of wolves inside the park.
:dunno: I wouldn't be so sure about that!
That's right, because the park wolves are moving out of the park more often and even staying out of the park for extended periods hunting seasons have had a big impact on park wolves, that is why the MFWP Commission shut down wolf hunting in areas near the park, because the hunting season was having a big impact on park wolves. However, a judge reopened the season.
They shut the season down as a knee jerk reaction to the collared female that was shot in WY. The number of wolves was not over any established quota, nor was it endangering a population. The commissioners even acknowledged that it was a political decision.
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 10:23:04 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 10:47:01 PM
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 10:49:43 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on January 05, 2013, 10:55:32 PM
I still maintain that wolves were not needed to reduce the elk population, the agencies could have increased permit numbers for the migrating herds to reduce elk numbers. That is how wildlife management used to work.
I wholeheartedly agree with you bearpaw!
Post by: Special T on January 05, 2013, 11:01:59 PM
What this should show is that if we want to maximize the amount of benefit from a resource they need management. If left to "balance itself out" it will, at a much lower level with a much lower level of benefit.
Post by: bearpaw on January 05, 2013, 11:06:12 PM
Post by: Scottystyle on January 05, 2013, 11:09:50 PM
I like how the wolf killed 15 miles from Yellowstone was "one of 5 killed in Yellowstione Park"...
Good catch!! I saw that too, and my first reaction was " WTF? A$$@&()s!!! ". It was harvested legally outside the park... Not somebody hunting in the park.
Post by: JLS on January 05, 2013, 11:14:03 PM
I'm gona go out on a limb and guess that what JLM meant by wolves being beneficial to the park is directed a t the over grazing.
What this should show is that if we want to maximize the amount of benefit from a resource they need management. If left to "balance itself out" it will, at a much lower level with a much lower level of benefit.
Yes, that was my main point about wolves being beneficial. And yes, I'll certainly agree that wolves have put a huge dent in Yellowstone elk numbers. No one can deny that. Yes, calf rates are atrociously low. The number of wolves that the park will be able to sustain in the future will likely decrease.
I would wager that if you compared the northern Yellowstone range now versus that 20 years ago, you'd see a marked improvement. If you could care less, that's fine. I don't think that my life is better because of it, I was merely pointing out that whether you want to admit it or not, wolves have had a beneficial impact on the park ecosystem. It is more in balance and is healthier from a holistic standpoint, which meets with the goals of the National Park Service.
Post by: pianoman9701 on January 06, 2013, 11:54:44 AM
Post by: jthurs on January 06, 2013, 02:20:16 PM
Post by: villageidiot on January 06, 2013, 09:28:48 PM
It's funny the wolf lovers didn't think of this since it was their idea originally and it works so well.
Post by: flatbkman on January 07, 2013, 07:23:11 AM