Post by: StacyDave97 on October 19, 2016, 04:52:39 PM
Preaching to the choir I'm sure, but I'm just sooooo frustrated by this and every way they've handled wolves!
WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/
October 19, 2016
Contact: WDFW Wildlife Program, (360) 902-2515
WDFW suspends lethal action against Profanity Peak wolf pack
OLYMPIA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has suspended its pursuit of the remaining members of a wolf pack that preyed on cattle throughout the summer in northeast Washington.
WDFW Director Jim Unsworth today lifted his previous order authorizing staff to take lethal action to stop predation by the Profanity Peak wolf pack now that most livestock are being moved off federal grazing allotments in the Colville National Forest.
He noted, however, that the department will continue to monitor the four remaining wolves – an adult female and three juveniles – and will renew efforts to remove wolves if they resume preying on livestock this year.
"The goal of our action was to stop predations on livestock in the near future," Unsworth said. "With the pack reduced in size from 12 members to four and most livestock off the grazing allotments, the likelihood of depredations in the near future is low."
Since Aug. 5, state wildlife managers have shot and killed seven members of the pack after non-lethal deterrence measures failed to stop the pack from preying on cattle in the grazing area in Ferry County. Another wolf, a pup, is presumed to have died of natural causes.
As of Oct. 3, WDFW had documented 15 dead or injured cattle, including 10 confirmed and five probable wolf depredations.
The Profanity Peak pack is one of 19 wolf packs documented in Washington earlier this year. Sixteen of those packs – including four identified since the previous year – are located in the eastern third of the state, where wolves were delisted from the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2009.
Unsworth said the department's action against the Profanity Peak pack was consistent with both the state's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan and a new protocol for the lethal removal of wolves developed this year by WDFW in conjunction with an 18-member advisory group composed of environmentalists, livestock producers and hunters.
Under that protocol, WDFW can take lethal action against wolves only if field staff confirms four or more attacks on livestock within a calendar year, or six or more attacks within two consecutive calendar years. The protocol also requires ranchers to employ specified non-lethal measures designed to deter wolves from preying on their livestock before WDFW will take lethal action against wolves.
Donny Martorello, WDFW wolf policy lead, said both of the ranchers who lost livestock to the Profanity Peak pack met that requirement by using range riders to help keep watch over their herds, and by removing or securing cattle carcasses to avoid attracting wolves. One rancher, he said, also turned his calves out to pasture at a higher weight to improve their chance of surviving an attack by predators.
Once the number of dead and injured cattle reached the threshold for lethal action, WDFW took incremental steps to remove wolves from the pack, as specified in the protocol.
Key events in the department's involvement with the Profanity Peak pack include:
• Early June: Ranchers arrived with their livestock on federal grazing allotments. WDFW field staff captured two adult members of the Profanity Peak pack and fitted them with GPS radio-collars, allowing the department to monitor the pack's movements.
• July 8: WDFW confirmed the first calf killed by wolves.
• July 12: WDFW documented two probable wolf attacks, one of which was on a second rancher's allotment.
• Aug. 3: WDFW confirmed the fourth and fifth wolf attack on cattle and documented three probable wolf attacks. Per the protocol, the WDFW director authorized staff to remove some members of the pack to deter further depredation.
• Aug. 5: WDFW removed two female wolves from the Profanity Peak pack.
• Aug.18-19: The director ended his authorization for lethal removal after 14 days without a depredation. The next day, he authorized the removal of up to the full pack after field staff documented four more wolf attacks, two confirmed and two probable.
• Aug. 21-Sept. 29: WDFW removed five more wolves from the Profanity Peak pack.
• Oct 3: WDFW documented the last depredation on cattle by the Profanity Peak pack.
• Oct 18: WDFW suspended lethal removal of wolves in the Profanity Peak pack.
Martorello said WDFW will continue to closely monitor the pack and will renew efforts to remove wolves if they return to preying on livestock this year.
Ferry County Sheriff Ray Maycumber said his staff will take a defensive position and monitor the movements of the adult female wolf for signs of conflict with people, pets, or livestock in lowland areas.
WDFW will issue a complete report of its management actions regarding the Profanity Peak pack next month.
The state's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan is available on WDFW's website at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/mgmt_plan.html
WDFW's protocol for removing wolves that prey on livestock is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/livestock/LethalRemovalProtocolGrayWolvesWashingtonDuringRecovery_05312016.pdf
Post by: Bango skank on October 19, 2016, 07:06:48 PM
Post by: KFhunter on October 19, 2016, 07:14:20 PM
Until next spring
Post by: StacyDave97 on October 20, 2016, 08:09:23 AM
Post by: huntnphool on October 20, 2016, 08:30:31 AM
Post by: Special T on October 20, 2016, 08:38:56 AM
Too bad Julian isn't a hunter!I've thought about this fact for quite a while! Too bad most hackers aren't hunters!
:bash: :bash: :bash:
Preaching to the choir I'm sure, but I'm just sooooo frustrated by this and every way they've handled wolves!
WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/
October 19, 2016
Contact: WDFW Wildlife Program, (360) 902-2515
WDFW suspends lethal action against Profanity Peak wolf pack
OLYMPIA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has suspended its pursuit of the remaining members of a wolf pack that preyed on cattle throughout the summer in northeast Washington.
WDFW Director Jim Unsworth today lifted his previous order authorizing staff to take lethal action to stop predation by the Profanity Peak wolf pack now that most livestock are being moved off federal grazing allotments in the Colville National Forest.
He noted, however, that the department will continue to monitor the four remaining wolves – an adult female and three juveniles – and will renew efforts to remove wolves if they resume preying on livestock this year.
"The goal of our action was to stop predations on livestock in the near future," Unsworth said. "With the pack reduced in size from 12 members to four and most livestock off the grazing allotments, the likelihood of depredations in the near future is low."
Since Aug. 5, state wildlife managers have shot and killed seven members of the pack after non-lethal deterrence measures failed to stop the pack from preying on cattle in the grazing area in Ferry County. Another wolf, a pup, is presumed to have died of natural causes.
As of Oct. 3, WDFW had documented 15 dead or injured cattle, including 10 confirmed and five probable wolf depredations.
The Profanity Peak pack is one of 19 wolf packs documented in Washington earlier this year. Sixteen of those packs – including four identified since the previous year – are located in the eastern third of the state, where wolves were delisted from the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2009.
Unsworth said the department's action against the Profanity Peak pack was consistent with both the state's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan and a new protocol for the lethal removal of wolves developed this year by WDFW in conjunction with an 18-member advisory group composed of environmentalists, livestock producers and hunters.
Under that protocol, WDFW can take lethal action against wolves only if field staff confirms four or more attacks on livestock within a calendar year, or six or more attacks within two consecutive calendar years. The protocol also requires ranchers to employ specified non-lethal measures designed to deter wolves from preying on their livestock before WDFW will take lethal action against wolves.
Donny Martorello, WDFW wolf policy lead, said both of the ranchers who lost livestock to the Profanity Peak pack met that requirement by using range riders to help keep watch over their herds, and by removing or securing cattle carcasses to avoid attracting wolves. One rancher, he said, also turned his calves out to pasture at a higher weight to improve their chance of surviving an attack by predators.
Once the number of dead and injured cattle reached the threshold for lethal action, WDFW took incremental steps to remove wolves from the pack, as specified in the protocol.
Key events in the department's involvement with the Profanity Peak pack include:
• Early June: Ranchers arrived with their livestock on federal grazing allotments. WDFW field staff captured two adult members of the Profanity Peak pack and fitted them with GPS radio-collars, allowing the department to monitor the pack's movements.
• July 8: WDFW confirmed the first calf killed by wolves.
• July 12: WDFW documented two probable wolf attacks, one of which was on a second rancher's allotment.
• Aug. 3: WDFW confirmed the fourth and fifth wolf attack on cattle and documented three probable wolf attacks. Per the protocol, the WDFW director authorized staff to remove some members of the pack to deter further depredation.
• Aug. 5: WDFW removed two female wolves from the Profanity Peak pack.
• Aug.18-19: The director ended his authorization for lethal removal after 14 days without a depredation. The next day, he authorized the removal of up to the full pack after field staff documented four more wolf attacks, two confirmed and two probable.
• Aug. 21-Sept. 29: WDFW removed five more wolves from the Profanity Peak pack.
• Oct 3: WDFW documented the last depredation on cattle by the Profanity Peak pack.
• Oct 18: WDFW suspended lethal removal of wolves in the Profanity Peak pack.
Martorello said WDFW will continue to closely monitor the pack and will renew efforts to remove wolves if they return to preying on livestock this year.
Ferry County Sheriff Ray Maycumber said his staff will take a defensive position and monitor the movements of the adult female wolf for signs of conflict with people, pets, or livestock in lowland areas.
WDFW will issue a complete report of its management actions regarding the Profanity Peak pack next month.
The state's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan is available on WDFW's website at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/mgmt_plan.html
WDFW's protocol for removing wolves that prey on livestock is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/livestock/LethalRemovalProtocolGrayWolvesWashingtonDuringRecovery_05312016.pdf
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 20, 2016, 08:47:03 AM
Post by: Bango skank on October 20, 2016, 08:59:11 AM
This is horrible news for cattlemen and private homeowners. The WDFW has broken its word and turned its back on the NE residents of this state
Yup. I guess we need to just pick up where they left off, finish the job for the spineless *censored*s.
Post by: JLS on October 20, 2016, 09:15:48 AM
Sometimes dealing in absolutes only makes things more difficult. I highly doubt we've see the past of lethal removal with this pack, and as such it makes no sense to burn political capitol right now.
Post by: Bango skank on October 20, 2016, 09:35:33 AM
Post by: JLS on October 20, 2016, 09:44:58 AM
The farmer certainly wants the whole elk herd removed, and elk may very well provide nothing for him.
Just my opinion, and worth what you paid for it.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 20, 2016, 09:45:57 AM
So if elk were being killed because of crop damage to garbanzo beans, and the crop was harvested, would you want the remaining elk herd killed even though the crop was now removed?
Sometimes dealing in absolutes only makes things more difficult. I highly doubt we've see the past of lethal removal with this pack, and as such it makes no sense to burn political capitol right now.
All due respects, JLS, I'm not even sure where to begin and your post makes little sense. Elk and wolves think and behave completely differently. Elk are already killed for depredation on crops and unlike for wolves, it's easy for farmers to get permission to kill them. In addition, they don't teach each other the same way or process and retain information like dogs do. If they return to depredate, the farmers kill them. If the wolves return, it takes months for the WDFW to act.
The larger point is that the WDFW decided to eliminate the pack because of cattle kills; the whole pack, because it's easier to kill a cow and once they eat beef, they like it a lot and will favor it over all others. These wolves will breed more wolves and teach them to eat beef in the spring when calving begins. Not wiping out the entire pack means we'll have to expend the money to do it all over again next year. It's very much like when we pulled out of Mosul, Iraq. Now, we have to do it all over again. Freaking stupid!
Post by: JLS on October 20, 2016, 09:49:00 AM
As far as teaching and information retention, I have no idea.
Post by: huntnphool on October 20, 2016, 10:15:28 AM
Wolves provide nothing for us.
Are you sure? I read the wolf proposal, it was estimated that wolves would bring $millions$ in revenues to the state from outdoor/wildlife viewers. :dunno:
Post by: Curly on October 21, 2016, 05:47:41 AM
This is horrible news for cattlemen and private homeowners. The WDFW has broken its word and turned its back on the NE residents of this state in favor of people who have no skin in the game; the wolf huggers, animal rights groups which have infested the WAG and administration, and the ignorant masses of Seattle and Olympia..........and Vancouver, Tacoma, Spokane.......
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 21, 2016, 06:12:01 AM
This is horrible news for cattlemen and private homeowners. The WDFW has broken its word and turned its back on the NE residents of this state in favor of people who have no skin in the game; the wolf huggers, animal rights groups which have infested the WAG and administration, and the ignorant masses of Seattle and Olympia..........and Vancouver, Tacoma, Spokane.......
I would agree except that Vancouver is more conservative than not. I live here, after all! :chuckle:
Post by: Curly on October 21, 2016, 08:04:38 AM
:)
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 21, 2016, 08:13:47 AM
Post by: Curly on October 21, 2016, 08:24:36 AM
Post by: Eric M on October 21, 2016, 08:36:34 AM
Are they counting on people to pay to watch them eat cattle? I wonder who comes up with these fantasy numbers?Wolves provide nothing for us.
Are you sure? I read the wolf proposal, it was estimated that wolves would bring $millions$ in revenues to the state from outdoor/wildlife viewers. :dunno:
Post by: KFhunter on October 21, 2016, 09:49:44 AM
I prefer to deal with things regionally, and in the 101 there's a problem with wolves killing livestock.
That's enough to take action alone and I applaud WDFW for doing so, but I also agree that cows are gone so there's no ongoing depredation at this time which opens WDFW to court injunctions and costly headaches. The problem is next spring there'll be pups on the ground and adult wolves with a taste for beef, so the can is being kicked down the road and the can is getting bigger as well. WDFW wasn't successful in killing the wolves during the grazing season (that's a bummer) either because it was too difficult or the willpower to get it done wasn't all there. Probably a mixture of both.
It isn't easy to kill wolves a brushy as the NE is. It isn't easy to kill wolves when visibility is 1000's of yards either.
2nd issue is there's not enough Elk in the 101 and too much hunter competition for resources. That is another good reason in my book to reduce wolves and more importantly all the predator populations, especially cougar the #1 killer of Elk calves in 101 and wolves is probably the #2 killer of Elk because they take down good breeding cows. Bears take some as well but I'm not sure how many calves they kill each year, it's a small window that bears do their damage. We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
Post by: JLS on October 21, 2016, 10:11:45 AM
There's no garbanzo beans in the 101
I realize that :)
I prefer to deal with things regionally, and in the 101 there's a problem with wolves killing livestock.
That's enough to take action alone and I applaud WDFW for doing so, but I also agree that cows are gone so there's no ongoing depredation at this time which opens WDFW to court injunctions and costly headaches. The problem is next spring there'll be pups on the ground and adult wolves with a taste for beef, so the can is being kicked down the road and the can is getting bigger as well. WDFW wasn't successful in killing the wolves during the grazing season (that's a bummer) either because it was too difficult or the willpower to get it done wasn't all there. Probably a mixture of both.
It isn't easy to kill wolves a brushy as the NE is. It isn't easy to kill wolves when visibility is 1000's of yards either.
I agree with all of these points.
2nd issue is there's not enough Elk in the 101 and too much hunter competition for resources. That is another good reason in my book to reduce wolves and more importantly all the predator populations, especially cougar the #1 killer of Elk calves in 101 and wolves is probably the #2 killer of Elk because they take down good breeding cows. Bears take some as well but I'm not sure how many calves they kill each year, it's a small window that bears do their damage. We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
I too would like to see the elk managed so as to promote herd growth. For many years they've been managed to keep them at a bare existence.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 21, 2016, 10:57:37 AM
There's no garbanzo beans in the 101
I prefer to deal with things regionally, and in the 101 there's a problem with wolves killing livestock.
That's enough to take action alone and I applaud WDFW for doing so, but I also agree that cows are gone so there's no ongoing depredation at this time which opens WDFW to court injunctions and costly headaches. The problem is next spring there'll be pups on the ground and adult wolves with a taste for beef, so the can is being kicked down the road and the can is getting bigger as well. WDFW wasn't successful in killing the wolves during the grazing season (that's a bummer) either because it was too difficult or the willpower to get it done wasn't all there. Probably a mixture of both.
It isn't easy to kill wolves a brushy as the NE is. It isn't easy to kill wolves when visibility is 1000's of yards either.
2nd issue is there's not enough Elk in the 101 and too much hunter competition for resources. That is another good reason in my book to reduce wolves and more importantly all the predator populations, especially cougar the #1 killer of Elk calves in 101 and wolves is probably the #2 killer of Elk because they take down good breeding cows. Bears take some as well but I'm not sure how many calves they kill each year, it's a small window that bears do their damage. We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
This is just what many of us voiced as a fear when the program was first proposed and something the WDFW indicated would never be needed. We were basically told that our fears were unfounded.
Post by: huntnphool on October 21, 2016, 11:13:13 AM
There's no garbanzo beans in the 101
I prefer to deal with things regionally, and in the 101 there's a problem with wolves killing livestock.
That's enough to take action alone and I applaud WDFW for doing so, but I also agree that cows are gone so there's no ongoing depredation at this time which opens WDFW to court injunctions and costly headaches. The problem is next spring there'll be pups on the ground and adult wolves with a taste for beef, so the can is being kicked down the road and the can is getting bigger as well. WDFW wasn't successful in killing the wolves during the grazing season (that's a bummer) either because it was too difficult or the willpower to get it done wasn't all there. Probably a mixture of both.
It isn't easy to kill wolves a brushy as the NE is. It isn't easy to kill wolves when visibility is 1000's of yards either.
2nd issue is there's not enough Elk in the 101 and too much hunter competition for resources. That is another good reason in my book to reduce wolves and more importantly all the predator populations, especially cougar the #1 killer of Elk calves in 101 and wolves is probably the #2 killer of Elk because they take down good breeding cows. Bears take some as well but I'm not sure how many calves they kill each year, it's a small window that bears do their damage. We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
This is just what many of us voiced as a fear when the program was first proposed and something the WDFW indicated would never be needed. We were basically told that our fears were unfounded.
What? WDFW never said that, in fact "necessary adjustment" to the hunting seasons is written into the proposal/plan.
Post by: KFhunter on October 21, 2016, 11:17:37 AM
We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
This is just what many of us voiced as a fear when the program was first proposed and something the WDFW indicated would never be needed. We were basically told that our fears were unfounded.
To be fair, I was screaming this before wolves came to the spotlight in NE WA. Elk have never been managed for the hunter in NEWA, however it still holds water regarding other species (moose) and it is happening elsewhere. Just wanted to point out the fact that ELK in NEWA wasn't managed for the hunter long before wolves. It's a shame, the NE could hold a *lot* of Elk.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 21, 2016, 11:20:01 AM
They sure downplayed the effect down here on the wetside in the meetings. "It'll make the herds healthier. This will ultimately help hunting."There's no garbanzo beans in the 101
I prefer to deal with things regionally, and in the 101 there's a problem with wolves killing livestock.
That's enough to take action alone and I applaud WDFW for doing so, but I also agree that cows are gone so there's no ongoing depredation at this time which opens WDFW to court injunctions and costly headaches. The problem is next spring there'll be pups on the ground and adult wolves with a taste for beef, so the can is being kicked down the road and the can is getting bigger as well. WDFW wasn't successful in killing the wolves during the grazing season (that's a bummer) either because it was too difficult or the willpower to get it done wasn't all there. Probably a mixture of both.
It isn't easy to kill wolves a brushy as the NE is. It isn't easy to kill wolves when visibility is 1000's of yards either.
2nd issue is there's not enough Elk in the 101 and too much hunter competition for resources. That is another good reason in my book to reduce wolves and more importantly all the predator populations, especially cougar the #1 killer of Elk calves in 101 and wolves is probably the #2 killer of Elk because they take down good breeding cows. Bears take some as well but I'm not sure how many calves they kill each year, it's a small window that bears do their damage. We also need to limit hunter take each year and cancel all antlerless Elk hunts.
This is just what many of us voiced as a fear when the program was first proposed and something the WDFW indicated would never be needed. We were basically told that our fears were unfounded.
What? WDFW never said that, in fact "necessary adjustment" to the hunting seasons is written into the proposal/plan.
Post by: JLS on October 21, 2016, 04:33:27 PM
Just wanted to point out the fact that ELK in NEWA wasn't managed for the hunter long before wolves. It's a shame, the NE could hold a *lot* of Elk.
I look at a lot of country in Okanogan, Ferry, Stevens, and PO Counties and wonder at how many elk it COULD support. However, I also remember it being a "brown it's down" season from back into the 80's.
It really is a shame.
Post by: boneaddict on October 21, 2016, 04:37:24 PM
Post by: JLS on October 21, 2016, 04:43:42 PM
Look at the elk the Colville Rez produces.
Yep, world class and lots of 'em.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 21, 2016, 06:06:34 PM