Post by: jackelope on July 20, 2017, 09:37:57 AM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/wolf-news/wdfw-to-remove-smackout-wolves-reports-ranchhand-legally-killed-attacking-wolf/
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 20, 2017, 09:43:23 AM
Post by: boneaddict on July 20, 2017, 09:44:42 AM
Post by: Curly on July 20, 2017, 09:45:28 AM
:bash:
Open up wolf hunting. Should be the same rules as coytes IMO.
Post by: boneaddict on July 20, 2017, 09:49:37 AM
Post by: Henrydog on July 20, 2017, 09:50:56 AM
Post by: Bill W on July 20, 2017, 09:51:07 AM
When will the WDFW admit the wolf plan is total garbage and scrap it in favor of a better plan? How much money is the state throwing away on wolves?
:bash:
Open up wolf hunting. Should be the same rules as coytes IMO.
Along the lines of what I was going to say. You spend $$$ to bring in wolves and then not much later you have to spend more $$$ to control the size of the packs or the cattle depredation of the packs. It seems inane to have brought them in and shortly after control the numbers of them.
I say if the "public" wants them then either have the "public" pony up the funds to manage them..... or have the public be satisfied with viewing them in zoos.
Post by: bobcat on July 20, 2017, 09:54:31 AM
Post by: Bill W on July 20, 2017, 10:00:37 AM
I agree it's all a waste of money, and there's no end to killing problem wolves. But, to set the record straight, nobody spent any money to bring wolves into Washington. They walked across the border with no help from us.
I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you.
Post by: nwwanderer on July 20, 2017, 10:22:49 AM
Post by: Special T on July 20, 2017, 10:26:37 AM
And some people wondered why cattlemen were hesitant to sign up for this program...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 20, 2017, 10:40:55 AM
I agree it's all a waste of money, and there's no end to killing problem wolves. But, to set the record straight, nobody spent any money to bring wolves into Washington. They walked across the border with no help from us.
We've been spending buckets of it ever since. And don't believe for a minute we didn't spend money to establish the wolf plan. Studies, experts, hearings, electronics - we spent plenty "letting them come in."
Post by: quadrafire on July 20, 2017, 10:56:24 AM
Sounds expensive to me.
Post by: KFhunter on July 20, 2017, 10:57:42 AM
I thought about doing it, but all you do is ride around looking for dead cattle :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on July 20, 2017, 11:36:14 AM
I agree it's all a waste of money, and there's no end to killing problem wolves. But, to set the record straight, nobody spent any money to bring wolves into Washington. They walked across the border with no help from us.
We've been spending buckets of it ever since. And don't believe for a minute we didn't spend money to establish the wolf plan. Studies, experts, hearings, electronics - we spent plenty "letting them come in."
Of course the state has spent a ton of money on wolf management / wolf studies. No argument there. I was only pointing out that the state didn't bring the wolves here, as many people mistakenly seem to believe.
Post by: JDHasty on July 20, 2017, 11:50:09 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 20, 2017, 11:59:12 AM
I agree it's all a waste of money, and there's no end to killing problem wolves. But, to set the record straight, nobody spent any money to bring wolves into Washington. They walked across the border with no help from us.
We've been spending buckets of it ever since. And don't believe for a minute we didn't spend money to establish the wolf plan. Studies, experts, hearings, electronics - we spent plenty "letting them come in."
Of course the state has spent a ton of money on wolf management / wolf studies. No argument there. I was only pointing out that the state didn't bring the wolves here, as many people mistakenly seem to believe.
Moot point. The spending is astronomical. And, the people who believe wolves were physically transplanted will never be convinced otherwise.
Post by: bearpaw on July 20, 2017, 12:06:45 PM
Anyone know what the cost is to the producer to hire "WDFW contracted range riders"?
Sounds expensive to me.
I think a good portion is funded by WDFW and/or Conservation Northwest.
Post by: bearpaw on July 20, 2017, 12:11:27 PM
Post by: quadrafire on July 20, 2017, 12:15:01 PM
I almost forgot to mention this is the same pack that attacked my neighbor a couple years ago while hunting elk. Several had been flanking him, he heard a noise to one side turned and shot it in mid air jumping at him! Good thing he got off the shot! (this was all quietly confirmed by WDFW and received very little publicity):yike:
Post by: boneaddict on July 20, 2017, 12:30:50 PM
Post by: bearpaw on July 20, 2017, 12:37:07 PM
Been in the middle of them a couple times. They are pretty "hawkie" already. It wont be long before its a two legger that gets nailed.
:yeah: Fortunately I have not been in a bad situation yet, but my son has a few times at night walking out with his dogs in Idaho. But in Idaho they are being hunted now and are much more elusive than they were 5 or 10 years ago. They just need to delist in WA, after a few shots are fired wolves really smarten up!
Post by: Bill W on July 20, 2017, 01:35:23 PM
Moot point. The spending is astronomical. And, the people who believe wolves were physically transplanted will never be convinced otherwise.
[/quote]
Well if wolves weren't transplanted and northern pike weren't transplanted either and just travelled across the border, how come we are netting pike and promoting wolves?
Post by: Curly on July 20, 2017, 01:39:42 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 20, 2017, 01:43:23 PM
Moot point. The spending is astronomical. And, the people who believe wolves were physically transplanted will never be convinced otherwise.
Well if wolves weren't transplanted and northern pike weren't transplanted either and just travelled across the border, how come we are netting pike and promoting wolves?
[/quote]
Because DOW and HSUS aren't trying to increase fishing opportunities. They're trying to eliminate hunting. The WDFW and our esteemed governor are listening to them and doing what they're told.
Post by: wheels on July 20, 2017, 02:42:02 PM
Post by: CGDucksandDeer on July 20, 2017, 03:00:52 PM
The ranchers grazing Smackout told me they were afraid this would be the year they get hit because they lost two cattle last year near the end of grazing season. Looks like the wolves were just waiting for more beef. The ranchers have completely cooperated and have jumped through every hoop since the beginning to satisfy WDFW and Conservation Northwest, they have kept a range rider on the ground 24/7 watching the cattle and hazing wolves.Anyone know what the cost is to the producer to hire "WDFW contracted range riders"?
Sounds expensive to me.
I think a good portion is funded by WDFW and/or Conservation Northwest.
While it differs depending on allotment and pack, in this case that is correct for several of the ranchers involved. More context on that: http://www.conservationnw.org/news/updates/statement-on-smackout-pack
A season of range riding costs about $20k between salary, gas, lodging and food (less in some areas, more in others. Depends on # of staff, equipment and stock needs, acreage, and accessibility of the landscape). That's a big new burden, and it's right to help offset those costs. Especially as in WDFW's case that money comes primarily from revenue from vanity license plate sales, and does not come from hunter or angler license revenues.
There are other ranchers in the Smackout area, as well as across Eastern Washington, that are implementing and financing their own conflict avoidance measures. They prefer to do it on their own dime, and it's basically ramped up cowboy-ing; keeping the cows bunched and monitoring for sick or injured stock with some wolf tracking, biology, and at times, hazing, mixed in. Why do it? Because the stuff works, it just doesn't work 100% of the time, as we're seeing today, and have seen in other states and provinces.
Personally, I much agree there will be less of these incidents, and much more wary wolves, once recovery goals are met and a special permit system is established to provide wolf tags in GMUs with depredating packs. Still a few years out, but it will come.
Post by: bearpaw on July 20, 2017, 03:18:17 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 20, 2017, 04:54:23 PM
The breeding pairs requirement for three consecutive years will hold us up for quite a few years! :bash:
Loading up the wildlife commission with animal rights groups will make it far longer still.
Post by: wolfbait on July 20, 2017, 10:37:39 PM
The breeding pairs requirement for three consecutive years will hold us up for quite a few years! :bash:
Loading up the wildlife commission with animal rights groups will make it far longer still.
What will WA ungulates look like with another ten years of wolves?
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 21, 2017, 06:22:26 AM
The breeding pairs requirement for three consecutive years will hold us up for quite a few years! :bash:
Loading up the wildlife commission with animal rights groups will make it far longer still.
What will WA ungulates look like with another ten years of wolves?
Probably a lot like this.
Post by: birddogdad on July 21, 2017, 07:20:06 AM
I almost forgot to mention this is the same pack that attacked my neighbor a couple years ago while hunting elk. Several had been flanking him, he heard a noise to one side turned and shot it in mid air jumping at him! Good thing he got off the shot! (this was all quietly confirmed by WDFW and received very little publicity)
that story when I originally read, altered my safety position while hunting in WA. I used to carry just rifle with a few rounds, now I have started to carry a pistol for self defense close in if ever required. Son's as well.
Post by: JDHasty on July 21, 2017, 08:58:10 AM
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2017/07/washington_plans_to_kill_some.html#incart_river_home
Post by: wolfbait on July 21, 2017, 12:00:35 PM
Washington plans to kill some members of wolf pack
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2017/07/washington_plans_to_kill_some.html#incart_river_home
"The purpose of this action is to change the pack's behavior," said Donny Martorello, a wolf manager for the agency. "That means incrementally removing wolves and assessing the results before taking any further action."
In other words WDF&Wolves are going with the same failed technique they have used over an over agin, meanwhile their pride and joy will keep killing cattle> WDFW&Wolves will pat themselves on the back for a job well done and wait for the next BS session with their partners on the WAG.
What a cluster..
Post by: bobcat on July 21, 2017, 02:23:13 PM
Post by: bearpaw on July 21, 2017, 02:27:02 PM
Washington plans to kill some members of wolf pack
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2017/07/washington_plans_to_kill_some.html#incart_river_home
"The purpose of this action is to change the pack's behavior," said Donny Martorello, a wolf manager for the agency. "That means incrementally removing wolves and assessing the results before taking any further action."
In other words WDF&Wolves are going with the same failed technique they have used over an over agin, meanwhile their pride and joy will keep killing cattle> WDFW&Wolves will pat themselves on the back for a job well done and wait for the next BS session with their partners on the WAG.
What a cluster..
I'd be willing to bet Martorello knows it's a wasted effort but the WDFW does not have the fortitude to come out and say what they know they need to do, so in the meantime more cattle will likley be eaten and eventually most of the pack will likely be killed anyway! :bash:
In the end more cattle lost, more money spent! :bash:
Post by: wolfbait on July 22, 2017, 11:16:57 AM
Yeah, I sure don't believe killing a few wolves is going to "change the pack's behavior" so they no longer kill cattle." Wolves are wolves and that's what they do, they kill stuff. Whatever's easiest to kill and what's available is what they're going to kill. Can't blame them, they have to eat. But I don't see how the state can afford to continue killing wolves every time they eat a few cows. I don't know what the answer is but I hate seeing all this money wasted for nothing.
I highly doubt WDF&Wolves think it's wasted money, the wolf, G.bear etc. means $$$$$$$ for the employees involved and then when they retire they can trot off to CNW or DoW etc for a job., or perhaps wright another BS book.
The answer to your question is for them to quit lying to the people of WA and confirm known wolf packs and delist, open up wolf hunting with unlimited permits for areas most affected by wolves. But since when have WDF&Wolves been HONEST?????????????????
Washington plans to kill some members of wolf pack
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2017/07/washington_plans_to_kill_some.html#incart_river_home
"The purpose of this action is to change the pack's behavior," said Donny Martorello, a wolf manager for the agency. "That means incrementally removing wolves and assessing the results before taking any further action."
In other words WDF&Wolves are going with the same failed technique they have used over an over agin, meanwhile their pride and joy will keep killing cattle> WDFW&Wolves will pat themselves on the back for a job well done and wait for the next BS session with their partners on the WAG.
What a cluster..
I'd be willing to bet Martorello knows it's a wasted effort but the WDFW does not have the fortitude to come out and say what they know they need to do, so in the meantime more cattle will likley be eaten and eventually most of the pack will likely be killed anyway! :bash:
In the end more cattle lost, more money spent! :bash:
With 22 years of wolf information from ID, MT and Wyoming on wolves killing livestock and WDFW still can't seem to pull their heads out long enough to understand how to stop it?
Yep, I'd have to say it isn't about stupidity at this point, maybe lack of air.
Post by: Bill W on July 22, 2017, 04:07:03 PM
Post by: wolfbait on July 22, 2017, 05:02:48 PM
maybe someone should teach the wolves to eat vegetables.
Aw yes, the dirt nap syndrome, I have heard of it.
I think the technical term is wolf thinning, although as of this time there are many techniques being used that don't make a sound and are very hard to detect.
ID, MT and Wyoming have done several classified studies which have proven to be very successful in areas where wolves predation on livestock have been ignore by the USFWS and state game agencies. According to insider reports it's best not to contact any agencies when performing said studies.
Post by: JDHasty on July 25, 2017, 03:16:03 PM
Post by: kevinlisa06 on July 25, 2017, 05:51:05 PM
I won't be here to see itThe breeding pairs requirement for three consecutive years will hold us up for quite a few years! :bash:
Loading up the wildlife commission with animal rights groups will make it far longer still.
What will WA ungulates look like with another ten years of wolves?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: bearpaw on July 25, 2017, 06:05:54 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/updates/update_on_washington_wolves_20170725.pdf
Post by: quadrafire on July 25, 2017, 06:32:49 PM
Question.... do range riders have authority for lethal intervention?
Post by: bearpaw on July 26, 2017, 12:56:30 AM
Good info Dale. Thanks for posting that.
Question.... do range riders have authority for lethal intervention?
I think so, I'm pretty sure a range rider already killed one wolf this year in the act of attacking cattle.
Post by: wolfbait on July 26, 2017, 07:01:40 AM
Good info Dale. Thanks for posting that.
Question.... do range riders have authority for lethal intervention?
I think so, I'm pretty sure a range rider already killed one wolf this year in the act of attacking cattle.
Just like confirming wolves, WDF&Wolves are slow playing ranchers with wolf predation, too bad All ranchers don't cut WDFW out, and take care of the problem themselves. I realize there are some who thought being up front with WDFW was the way to go, but now seeing their livestock continuing to be slaughtered they might wish they would have went with a different recipe.
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 26, 2017, 07:06:34 AM
Post by: Miles on July 26, 2017, 07:21:33 AM
One rancher's already tried that and it didn't work out well for him. Of course, mailing the bloody pelts to Canada didn't help, either.
What ever happened with that case?
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 26, 2017, 07:34:38 AM
Post by: bobcat on July 26, 2017, 08:14:29 AM
Post by: Miles on July 26, 2017, 08:24:48 AM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/federal-judge-adds-home-detention-to-twisp-wolf-poachers-sentence/
Thanks!
Post by: quadrafire on July 26, 2017, 08:32:02 AM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/federal-judge-adds-home-detention-to-twisp-wolf-poachers-sentence/Dang. That's gotta sting
Post by: villageidiot on July 26, 2017, 08:43:09 AM
Hmmm! Seems like that Lookout Pack the rancher had trouble with has not been doing well since. The numbers seem to have been dropping instead of increasing. The habitat does not appear compatable.One rancher's already tried that and it didn't work out well for him. Of course, mailing the bloody pelts to Canada didn't help, either.
What ever happened with that case?
Post by: CGDucksandDeer on July 26, 2017, 11:28:11 AM
Good info Dale. Thanks for posting that.
Question.... do range riders have authority for lethal intervention?
Yes. As Bearpaw mentioned, under regulations approved by the Commission in 2013, and still in place, ranchers and their employees or agents can shoot up to one wolf "caught-in-the-act" of depredating on or otherwise directly harassing livestock or pets. That one wolf limit is per incident. The WDFW Director can also issue "caught-in-the-act" permits to ranchers and their employees in cases of persistent depredations, such as to aid in an approved lethal wolf removal effort.
The actual emergency rule is buried somewhere on WDFW's site, but this older AP story lays out the details: http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/washington-state-approves-killing-of-wolves-attacking-livestock-pets/article_39fa9934-af33-11e2-938c-001a4bcf887a.html
A cabin owner in southeast Washington utilized this policy last year on a diseased wolf that pursued his dog. An employee of the Smackout-area ranchers also used it in June in response to persistent livestock harassment by the wolves. Both were deemed consistent with state regulations.
Citizens may also use the rule for situations involving wolves caught-in-the-act of attacking pets or personal livestock. And despite what some tinhats may claim, legally we all retain the right to use lethal force in legitimate cases of self defense or reasonable defense of others in our immediate surroundings, including situations involving endangered wildlife species. Such self defense claims related to wolves were made by hunters in the Smackout area and in the Pasayten in recent years, and no prosecution was pursued by agencies or law enforcement.
The family involved in poaching the Lookout Pack was a whole different story, one deemed entirely inconsistent with the caught-in-the-act policy.
Post by: boneaddict on July 26, 2017, 01:44:00 PM
Post by: wolfbait on July 26, 2017, 05:30:25 PM
Good info Dale. Thanks for posting that.
Question.... do range riders have authority for lethal intervention?
Yes. As Bearpaw mentioned, under regulations approved by the Commission in 2013, and still in place, ranchers and their employees or agents can shoot up to one wolf "caught-in-the-act" of depredating on or otherwise directly harassing livestock or pets. That one wolf limit is per incident. The WDFW Director can also issue "caught-in-the-act" permits to ranchers and their employees in cases of persistent depredations, such as to aid in an approved lethal wolf removal effort.
The actual emergency rule is buried somewhere on WDFW's site, but this older AP story lays out the details: http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/washington-state-approves-killing-of-wolves-attacking-livestock-pets/article_39fa9934-af33-11e2-938c-001a4bcf887a.html
A cabin owner in southeast Washington utilized this policy last year on a diseased wolf that pursued his dog. An employee of the Smackout-area ranchers also used it in June in response to persistent livestock harassment by the wolves. Both were deemed consistent with state regulations.
Citizens may also use the rule for situations involving wolves caught-in-the-act of attacking pets or personal livestock. And despite what some tinhats may claim, legally we all retain the right to use lethal force in legitimate cases of self defense or reasonable defense of others in our immediate surroundings, including situations involving endangered wildlife species. Such self defense claims related to wolves were made by hunters in the Smackout area and in the Pasayten in recent years, and no prosecution was pursued by agencies or law enforcement.
The family involved in poaching the Lookout Pack was a whole different story, one deemed entirely inconsistent with the caught-in-the-act policy.
Actually the lookout pack killed one of their yearlings, and WDFW refuse to even acknowledge WA had wolves.
At any rate contacting WDF&Wolves over wolf predation has only proven to produce more dead livestock while WDFW fiddle fart around. First they have to confirm that it was wolf predation, which in many case they have lied claiming they didn't know what it was or it was a coyote etc.. And then after a few more cattle etc. are killed and they are finally forced to react, their first leap is to wait around while several more livestock are killed. Face it WDFW are corrupt, and they are using a fake endangered wolf to further a sick agenda.
So far it hasn't been the environmentalist that have done the most damage to WA through wolves, it has been WDFW.
Post by: boneaddict on July 27, 2017, 07:39:29 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 27, 2017, 12:13:46 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
I would only fault the family on the handling of the remains. Absolutely protect your own. Don't broadcast it afterwards, though. This was a huge error in judgement.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on July 27, 2017, 12:29:44 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
I would only fault the family on the handling of the remains. Absolutely protect your own. Don't broadcast it afterwards, though. This was a huge error in judgement.
Quote
Searches of the White’s computer files turned up photos of at least one other wolf killed by Tom, but differently colored, and other evidence, including a deer and a moose poached in 2007 by William.
These guys are poachers, through and through. Getting behind them is just playing the "enemy of my enemy" game :twocents:
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 27, 2017, 12:47:28 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
I would only fault the family on the handling of the remains. Absolutely protect your own. Don't broadcast it afterwards, though. This was a huge error in judgement.QuoteSearches of the White’s computer files turned up photos of at least one other wolf killed by Tom, but differently colored, and other evidence, including a deer and a moose poached in 2007 by William.
These guys are poachers, through and through. Getting behind them is just playing the "enemy of my enemy" game :twocents:
I don't own a cattle ranch nor have I had my livelihood or home life negatively affected by wolves. Although I agree that, by definition, they poached wolves and I personally wouldn't do it, this is not poaching in the same way as someone killing for thrill or profit. I do try to have empathy for people in different positions/situations from mine. I don't feel I have the right to stand in judgement on that family, except for how they ultimately handled it..
Post by: ctwiggs1 on July 27, 2017, 12:49:36 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
I would only fault the family on the handling of the remains. Absolutely protect your own. Don't broadcast it afterwards, though. This was a huge error in judgement.QuoteSearches of the White’s computer files turned up photos of at least one other wolf killed by Tom, but differently colored, and other evidence, including a deer and a moose poached in 2007 by William.
These guys are poachers, through and through. Getting behind them is just playing the "enemy of my enemy" game :twocents:
I don't own a cattle ranch nor have I had my livelihood or home life negatively affected by wolves. Although I agree that, by definition, they poached wolves and I personally wouldn't do it, this is not poaching in the same way as someone killing for thrill or profit. I do try to have empathy for people in different positions/situations from mine. I don't feel I have the right to stand in judgement on that family, except for how they ultimately handled it..
......how do you respond to the poached deer and moose?
You can't say "I only poached in the name of defending my ranch" when you have a very recent history of poaching. You just don't have a leg to stand on.
Post by: WSU on July 27, 2017, 12:58:48 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
I would only fault the family on the handling of the remains. Absolutely protect your own. Don't broadcast it afterwards, though. This was a huge error in judgement.QuoteSearches of the White’s computer files turned up photos of at least one other wolf killed by Tom, but differently colored, and other evidence, including a deer and a moose poached in 2007 by William.
These guys are poachers, through and through. Getting behind them is just playing the "enemy of my enemy" game :twocents:
I don't own a cattle ranch nor have I had my livelihood or home life negatively affected by wolves. Although I agree that, by definition, they poached wolves and I personally wouldn't do it, this is not poaching in the same way as someone killing for thrill or profit. I do try to have empathy for people in different positions/situations from mine. I don't feel I have the right to stand in judgement on that family, except for how they ultimately handled it..
It sounds like they also poached a trophy mule deer, a moose, and hunted bears with hounds. They agreed to plead guilty to at least some of those charges, apparently, as well as another felony. It doesn't sound like their actions were meant to protect their livestock but I only know what is in the news.
Post by: buglebrush on July 27, 2017, 01:38:20 PM
The real criminals in that case was the wdfw itself. When you are trying to do things by the book but you are getting the runaround because of their agenda. I'd never judge anyone taking matters into their own hands when they are protecting their own.
Exactly.
Post by: bearpaw on July 27, 2017, 07:46:27 PM
Update on Washington wolves
Latest reports on key wolf activities, conservation efforts, and management actions
July 27, 2017
One wolf removed from Smackout Pack
The 2017 Wolf-Livestock Interaction Protocol describes tools and approaches designed to influence pack behavior with the goal of reducing the potential for recurrent livestock depredation while continuing to promote wolf recovery. On July 20, WDFW notified the public that non-lethal deterrence measures were not achieving that goal in the Smackout pack territory, and that the director authorized incremental lethal removal of wolves as another tool to address recurrent depredations.
The department’s approach to incremental removal consists of a period of active removal operations followed by a period of evaluation to determine if those actions met the goal.
The protocol states that once a removal operation has begun, the department will update the public weekly on the number of individuals removed. Lethal removal actions began one week
ago, and during that week the department removed 1 wolf.
The protocol also states that in most situations the period of active removal will be two weeks or less. Removal operations are ongoing, and the department will provide another update in
one week.
Post by: Bob33 on July 27, 2017, 08:09:41 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/updates/update_on_washington_wolves_20170727.pdfOne week, one wolf removed...
Update on Washington wolves
Latest reports on key wolf activities, conservation efforts, and management actions
July 27, 2017
One wolf removed from Smackout Pack
The 2017 Wolf-Livestock Interaction Protocol describes tools and approaches designed to influence pack behavior with the goal of reducing the potential for recurrent livestock depredation while continuing to promote wolf recovery. On July 20, WDFW notified the public that non-lethal deterrence measures were not achieving that goal in the Smackout pack territory, and that the director authorized incremental lethal removal of wolves as another tool to address recurrent depredations.
The department’s approach to incremental removal consists of a period of active removal operations followed by a period of evaluation to determine if those actions met the goal.
The protocol states that once a removal operation has begun, the department will update the public weekly on the number of individuals removed. Lethal removal actions began one week
ago, and during that week the department removed 1 wolf.
The protocol also states that in most situations the period of active removal will be two weeks or less. Removal operations are ongoing, and the department will provide another update in
one week.
Post by: Ridgeratt on July 27, 2017, 08:37:29 PM
Your sportsman dollars at work.
Post by: wolfbait on July 28, 2017, 08:50:59 AM
Better known as the waiting period between livestock predation. Like I have mentioned, including WDF&Wolves in any wolf predation on livestock will only prolong the killings. This is just a game for WDFW, while the rancher etc. loses.
This game will continue until WDFW are forced to kill entire packs involved in the predations on livestock, any guess when that will happen?
Post by: pianoman9701 on July 28, 2017, 08:52:42 AM
Post by: nwwanderer on July 28, 2017, 03:37:47 PM
Post by: Special T on July 28, 2017, 05:07:31 PM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: wolfbait on July 28, 2017, 08:55:56 PM
What's the first rule of fight club?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Special Recipes?
Post by: boneaddict on July 30, 2017, 07:29:57 AM
Post by: bracer40 on July 30, 2017, 09:02:12 AM
Regardless if it is or not, sure don't hear much about this herd on the brink right in the midst of the thriving wolf packs. Ironic.
Post by: jackelope on July 30, 2017, 09:29:59 AM
Post by: Bobvernon2 on July 30, 2017, 11:38:37 AM
Bone, is that a woodland caribou?
Regardless if it is or not, sure don't hear much about this herd on the brink right in the midst of the thriving wolf packs. Ironic.
I believe the great country of Canada just removed a wolf pack that was threatening a population of woodland caribou just across the border since they caribou have a greater threat of extinction than the darned wolves.
Post by: Bobvernon2 on July 30, 2017, 11:41:36 AM
here's one article thats a touch older
Post by: nwwanderer on July 30, 2017, 01:36:45 PM
Post by: bearpaw on August 01, 2017, 12:02:20 AM
Update on Washington wolves
Latest reports on key wolf activities, conservation efforts, and management actions.
July 31, 2017
Second wolf removed in Smackout pack; WDFW evaluating impact on pack’s behavior
Background
WDFW’s 2017 Wolf-Livestock Interaction Protocol describes tools and approaches designed to influence pack behavior with the goal of reducing the potential for recurrent livestock depredation while continuing to promote wolf recovery.
On July 20, WDFW notified the public that non-lethal deterrence measures were not achieving that goal in the Smackout pack territory, and that the director had authorized incremental lethal removal of wolves as another tool to address recurrent depredations.
Protocol and management action
The department’s approach to incremental removal consists of a period of active operations followed by an evaluation period to determine if those actions changed the pack’s behavior.
The protocol states that once a removal operation has begun, the department will update the public weekly on the number of individuals removed. Since July 20, the department has removed two wolves from the Smackout pack. As called for in the Protocol, the department has begun the evaluation period.
Evaluation
The duration of the evaluation period is largely based on the behavior of the wolves. If the department confirms another livestock depredation by the Smackout pack after the removal period (in other words, a fresh depredation, not one that likely occurred during or before the removal period), the department may initiate another lethal removal action.
Meanwhile, both proactive and responsive deterrence measures are being deployed. Range riding activity will continue daily on grazing allotments. The cattle are currently enclosed in a fenced pasture surrounded by fladry (a type of fence with streamers designed to deter wolves). The rancher who experienced the most recent depredation will continue to check his cattle daily. Also, Fox Lights (strobe light designed to haze large predators) have been installed around his private pasture as a further deterrent.
The department will provide a final report to the public on the wolf-livestock interactions in the Smackout pack, including details about the lethal removal action, after the summer grazing season ends.
Post by: bearpaw on September 15, 2017, 08:33:18 AM
Post by: Duckslayer89 on September 15, 2017, 09:23:55 AM
WDFW Update on Washington wolves: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/updates/update_on_washington_wolves.pdf
Funny the proactive deterrent section. Sounds really expensive doing all these study's and tests. Glad my money is going to a good cause :rolleyes:
I was thinking the exact same thing, they mention numerous employees acting as range riders too. The cost of wolves is astronomical! :yike:
Post by: nwwanderer on September 16, 2017, 03:25:58 PM
Post by: CGDucksandDeer on September 20, 2017, 11:37:50 AM
Not saying that wolf management work isn't expensive, in both agency dollars and staff time, but the Department has on multiple occasions confirmed that they aren't directly spending hunter and angler license dollars on wolves.
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 20, 2017, 11:50:12 AM
Funds for wolf conflict reduction activities and research come from WDFW's general fund revenue (particularly from revenue from special license plate sales) and federal grant allocations, NOT from fishing and hunting license revenues.
Not saying that wolf management work isn't expensive, in both agency dollars and staff time, but the Department has on multiple occasions confirmed that they aren't directly spending hunter and angler license dollars on wolves.
Anything coming out of the general fund for wolves isn't going toward other projects, new LE hires, conservation. We know that PR funds have gone into wolf hugging, at least by the feds. Any salaries for gamies working on the wolf hugging aren't going into poaching reduction and investigation. Whether or not you believe hunter and angler dollars aren't being directly spent on wolf hugging directly (I don't), the rest of the department's programs suffer as a result.
Post by: bearpaw on September 20, 2017, 11:56:44 AM
Post by: ribka on September 23, 2017, 08:04:06 AM
Funds for wolf conflict reduction activities and research come from WDFW's general fund revenue (particularly from revenue from special license plate sales) and federal grant allocations, NOT from fishing and hunting license revenues.
Not saying that wolf management work isn't expensive, in both agency dollars and staff time, but the Department has on multiple occasions confirmed that they aren't directly spending hunter and angler license dollars on wolves.
Youre not winning many folks over here when you refer to them as "tinhats" because they dont hold the same views
you mentioned you helped author an article with conservation nw head Mitch Friedman on another website regarding the reintroduction of wolves to WA and co existing with them
What are your and Mitch Friedman's target numbers for wolves in Washington? Please give real numbers and how to manage the future populations. Wildlife managers in Idaho, Nontana WI advised that wolf numbers cannot be controlled by limited sport permits. Idaho can sure attest to this
Anyway you stated before that were against trapping to control wolf populations. Why?
What are your credentials that you speak on the reintroduction of apex predators such as wolves and grizzly bears?
Is your organization conservation NW pro hunting because the few articles I found made it look like an anti hunting organization
I encourage people on here to look up Friedman, the director of conservation NW, radical background. He was a long time member of Earthfirst! a radical group classified as eco terrorists by the FBI before he started conservation nw. members of earthfirst! have been convicted of arson, spiking trees that injured lumbermen, major property damage, vandalism on large amounts of personal property, terrorizing people and their families whose views they do not agree with etc
http://www.targetofopportunity.com/earth_first.htm
Mr. Friedman, because of his background, is the last I would contact when it came to wolf management but I may be wrong and feel free to convince me otherwise
i look forward to some of your feedback
Post by: ribka on September 24, 2017, 08:43:28 AM
Funds for wolf conflict reduction activities and research come from WDFW's general fund revenue (particularly from revenue from special license plate sales) and federal grant allocations, NOT from fishing and hunting license revenues.
Not saying that wolf management work isn't expensive, in both agency dollars and staff time, but the Department has on multiple occasions confirmed that they aren't directly spending hunter and angler license dollars on wolves.
Where are you getting this information from?
On another forum you came accross as speaking like an expert on grizzly bears
Do you have a close association with Mitch Friedman?