Post by: turkeyfeather on January 16, 2013, 06:52:24 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 16, 2013, 08:21:04 PM
Post by: haugenna on January 16, 2013, 08:33:44 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 16, 2013, 08:49:11 PM
Post by: whacker1 on January 16, 2013, 09:41:23 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 16, 2013, 09:50:11 PM
some interesting information, but I didn't learn much that I didn't already know. It was a long evening, and we left about 15 or 20 minutes into the q & aHoly crap, I'm glad I didn't stay any longer.
Post by: dscubame on January 16, 2013, 09:53:59 PM
some interesting information, but I didn't learn much that I didn't already know. It was a long evening, and we left about 15 or 20 minutes into the q & a
Fill us in Whacker1
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 16, 2013, 09:56:03 PM
Yes, I'd like to know what I missed and if you had a different take than I did.some interesting information, but I didn't learn much that I didn't already know. It was a long evening, and we left about 15 or 20 minutes into the q & a
Fill us in Whacker1
Post by: whacker1 on January 16, 2013, 09:59:49 PM
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 16, 2013, 10:01:23 PM
I left before the Q&A's started also. But I did watch the ladies screen all the questions that were submitted. I wonder if they weeded out any of the real controversial ones. They read every one then put them into sorted piles.
Post by: denali on January 16, 2013, 10:08:00 PM
Gota love it, Carter is all for trans location to the westside, so you to can enjoy the ecological benefits of wolves.
Post by: whacker1 on January 16, 2013, 10:08:52 PM
but this time 200-250 people showed up
notable items:
8 confirmed packs, and 3 more suspected packs.
They recently colored a wolf in the Blue Mountains, which they are referring to as the Walla Walla suspected pack.
The tracking of the Wedge pack and the steps they took to use non-lethal means was the most interesting. According to WDFW they worked very well with the two ranch owners, and ranch hands. The wolves from that pack killed or injured like 10 livestock animals in a short period of time, which is why they were eliminated.
Post by: runningboard on January 16, 2013, 11:37:46 PM
Where were you sitting from him?I was thinking the same thing as I watched her go thru them, & the very 1st Q was a no answer? it was worded funny & I didn't understand it either but just to "let's get another 1" had me wondering what it said or was meant to say.
I left before the Q&A's started also. But I did watch the ladies screen all the questions that were submitted. I wonder if they weeded out any of the real controversial ones. They read every one then put them into sorted piles.
when we were cramped in that 1st room I stepped out before that guy was done talking because the lady next to me started to steam from all the body heat in there & she was emitting odor! :chuckle:
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 05:30:36 AM
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 05:46:26 AM
I asked for a copy of the powerpoint presentation....If they send it to me, i will post a copy. The host of the meeting seemed like it was realistic that they would send me a copy. However, I am not holding my breath.
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 05:47:33 AM
Where were you sitting from him?
I left before the Q&A's started also. But I did watch the ladies screen all the questions that were submitted. I wonder if they weeded out any of the real controversial ones. They read every one then put them into sorted piles.
looking at the stage Quadrafire and I were sitting in the 3rd or 4th row on the left side closest to the windows.
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 17, 2013, 06:01:20 AM
I'm glad to see that at every meeting the crowd does get larger.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 17, 2013, 06:07:16 AM
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 06:25:44 AM
Post by: Landowner on January 17, 2013, 06:46:23 AM
Nothing really new, and it was more than a bit repetitive between presenters. Here's three things I took from it:
1. Wolves are here to stay-----come hell or high water;
2. Wolves killing livestock are supposed to be a priority by the agencies----but after the Wedge kill it will be slow and with as much non-lethal tactics and compensation to ranchers as can be garnered; and
3. Wolves are going to kill a LOT of elk and deer, and the agencies are fine with that under the guise of the natural order of life in the woods. (slide presentation stated that 12 to 22 elk are killed per year per each individual wolf)
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 07:01:15 AM
Drove to Spokane for the meeting last night.
Nothing really new, and it was more than a bit repetitive between presenters. Here's three things I took from it:
1. Wolves are here to stay-----come hell or high water;
2. Wolves killing livestock are supposed to be a priority by the agencies----but after the Wedge kill it will be slow and with as much non-lethal tactics and compensation to ranchers as can be garnered; and
3. Wolves are going to kill a LOT of elk and deer, and the agencies are fine with that under the guise of the natural order of life in the woods. (slide presentation stated that 12 to 22 elk are killed per year per each individual wolf)
yep.
the one item that wasn't asked or discussed, which is the most controversial: They talked about 70% of Idaho being above target populations for ungulates, but they failed to mention that in many of these areas hunting seasons have been shortened, so it is at the expense of sportsman that the state is able to remain above target.
I know that it is ever changing, but it seems like the faster WA reaches delisting the sooner we will be able to hunt them as part of the management plan.
Carter Niemeyer also did elude to the fact that WA has different politics in play with Western Washingto making this an emotional issue and it may take longer for delisting. ID, MT, WY do not have a Western Washington to contend with as part of the political landscape.
Post by: Rgrady35 on January 17, 2013, 07:32:35 AM
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 07:57:19 AM
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/jan/17/landers-tough-decisions-loom-for-wolves/ (http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/jan/17/landers-tough-decisions-loom-for-wolves/)
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 17, 2013, 08:03:05 AM
I would say that it seemed to be 50/50I would agree with that. There were a lot of teenage girls there though.
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 08:10:56 AM
The power point presentation GPS spots that were updated every 6hrs on the alpha male, so assuming the pack was with him, they spent the vast majority of their time in WA, crossing a few times into BC.
What was really interesting to me was the documentation of them following the cattle herd from range land to private pasture land, and WDFW documenting that with the GPS data.
The big point of the night........ Wolves are here to stay (Deal with it), and in this politically fired state it will be a challange to keep both sides happy. The other is that 20% of the wolves cause all of the problems (at least with domestic animals)
They really didn't spend much time talking about what they will do with the ungulate population. They are more worried about domestic/farm animals, IMO.
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 08:11:33 AM
Must have been school projects?I would say that it seemed to be 50/50I would agree with that. There were a lot of teenage girls there though.
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 17, 2013, 08:20:46 AM
The WDFW canine specialist, Danny Martorello, was the last speaker of the night. He did go into detail about the wedge pack and how that all played out.This is what I took from the evening as well. This was the.first time I had been to one. Did I understand right, that Carter basically said that the population probably can't be restored to initially planned levels by hunting. And that their wouldn't be such a large population if the pro-wolf people would quit tying it up in court.
The power point presentation GPS spots that were updated every 6hrs on the alpha male, so assuming the pack was with him, they spent the vast majority of their time in WA, crossing a few times into BC.
What was really interesting to me was the documentation of them following the cattle herd from range land to private pasture land, and WDFW documenting that with the GPS data.
The big point of the night........ Wolves are here to stay (Deal with it), and in this politically fired state it will be a challange to keep both sides happy. The other is that 20% of the wolves cause all of the problems (at least with domestic animals)
They really didn't spend much time talking about what they will do with the ungulate population. They are more worried about domestic/farm animals, IMO.
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 08:35:02 AM
Did I understand right, that Carter basically said that the population probably can't be restored to initially planned levels by hunting. And that their wouldn't be such a large population if the pro-wolf people would quit tying it up in court.This is what I heard as well.
Mr. Martorello basically said the same thing on the hunting. They thought the wedge pack would be easy to hunt from the ground, but found out differently. Helos are a big help, but obviously expensive.
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
Did I understand right, that Carter basically said that the population probably can't be restored to initially planned levels by hunting. And that their wouldn't be such a large population if the pro-wolf people would quit tying it up in court.This is what I heard as well.
Mr. Martorello basically said the same thing on the hunting. They thought the wedge pack would be easy to hunt from the ground, but found out differently. Helos are a big help, but obviously expensive.
yes, Carter basically laughed at hunting and trapping to get back to Idaho's desired 152 wolves and 15 breeding pair. He said that won't happen. They are too difficult to hunt, cover too much wilderness terrain, and disperse quickly to other wilderness areas. Essentially I heard that they cover too much terrain to be culled to the 152 wolves currently 745 as of December 2012 numbers if I remember the data right.
He did elude to the fact that the Hunting and trapping will be here to stay as a matter of management and that the pro-wolf people need to get used to it, just as the anti-wolf people need to get used to the fact that the wolf is here to stay. He was very middle ground in my opinion. I didn't like everything he had to stay, but I feel that he is pretty honest about his experiences.
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 17, 2013, 09:14:53 AM
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 09:17:09 AM
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 09:44:52 AM
just read landers article and yes it is on par with what I heard. Westside politics will dictate some of our future wolf dealings. I think it should be a requirement that every legislator attend the meeting we sat through last night as I don't think they have a clue what wolf and/or game management really is.Good point Neil
I think by keeping the middle of the road, it kept each extreme from getting out of hand. Was a very subdued crowd for the size. LOTS of head shaking, but that is about it.
Post by: turkeyfeather on January 17, 2013, 09:59:22 AM
Post by: Northway on January 17, 2013, 10:19:12 AM
Wolves will be managed here regardless, but they are going to have to be smart & creative about how they do it or it's going to turn into a political mess. Just keeping things under the radar enough to avoid some national campaign by HSUS, DOW, or the CBD would be a coup in itself.
I'm going to try and make it to the Seattle meeting.
Post by: whacker1 on January 17, 2013, 10:25:21 AM
As far as translocation goes, all they would have to do is throw a couple of packs into the Southern Cascades and in two or three years we'll be talking about delisting. Originally I would have said 4 years at least, but the Teanaway pack caused me to re-think those kinds of timelines. Did they have any kind of serious discussion about translocation?
Wolves will be managed here regardless, but they are going to have to be smart & creative about how they do it or it's going to turn into a political mess. Just keeping things under the radar enough to avoid some national campaign by HSUS, DOW, or the CBD would be a coup in itself.
I'm going to try and make it to the Seattle meeting.
No discussion about relocation or translocation at this time, but some comments about the possibility existing.
Post by: quadrafire on January 17, 2013, 10:29:52 AM
Post by: denali on January 17, 2013, 12:23:26 PM
SPOKANE VALLEY, Wash. -- Washington state's top carnivore manager says he probably should have put a helicopter into the air much sooner to kill a problem wolf pack.
That was one of the lessons Donny Martorello, the carnivore section manager for the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, learned from the state's handling of the Wedge Wolf pack, which had been killing cattle from the Diamond M Ranch in Laurier, Wash.
"That was a failure for us," Martorello said.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rocky Mountain wolf coordinator Mike Jiminez said 80 percent of wolves don't cause a problem. But he stressed the need to deal quickly with the 20 percent that attack livestock.
Jiminez called for a balance between tolerance of wolves and for lethal control methods.
"You have to have tolerance of wolves in order for wolves to survive," Jiminez said. However, "some wolves will always kill some livestock, and those conflicts have to be addressed efficiently and effectively."
The wolf experts spoke before roughly 300 attendees at a state Department of Fish and Wildlife public meeting Jan. 16. Other meetings are set for Seattle and Olympia.
They estimated that between 51 and 101 wolves are now in the state, with eight confirmed and three suspected packs, Martorello said. He called the population growth "unprecedented, phenomenal" and comparable to wolf recovery efforts in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.
Retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wolf specialist Carter Niemeyer covered the pros and cons of nonlethal methods, like removing of bone piles, placing flags and range riders, but cautioned that there are no pat solutions to handling predation.
"I don't know of any non-lethal method that works all the time," he said.
Wolf supporters and opponents have voiced support for relocation, which Niemeyer said is an option for surplus wolves, before there's a problem.
"If a wolf starts killing sheep or cattle and that behavior is established, that's a bad animal to move to another part of the state," he said. "Once they learn that behavior of killing livestock, I don't see many things you can do to stop (it) once it starts."
Niemeyer also spoke of the need to support ranchers and share their expenses in handling wolves.
"If you want wolves on the landscape, there needs to be ways to fund the protection of livestock to minimize the impact on people," Niemeyer said.
Most ranchers don't want the money, he said.
"I don't think compensation necessarily buys goodwill," he said.
Martorello said there will be additional meetings to focus on livestock issues in northeastern Washington in January and February.
The department is also working to make public a website to keep track of every wolf alert call it receives.
Martorello said the department is working with a livestock subcommittee to establish compensation for the indirect effects of wolves on livestock, such as weight loss by livestock that wolves harass or animals that are not recovered.