Post by: wolfbait on June 25, 2009, 05:58:12 AM
It would appear that the Lookout pack is not the first wolf pack in Washington, in say 70 years. Please Note the Dates!
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900603&slug=1075265
Sunday, June 3, 1990 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Northwest Briefly
Rare Wolf Pups To Be Isolated, Photographed
Times Staff: Times News Services
Wildlife biologists hope to capture the first wolf pups known to have been born in Washington in decades - but only on film from unmanned, infrared cameras set up near the den site in the North Cascades.
State and federal biologists in May located the gray wolf den containing pups by howling at them and getting distinctive barks and howls in return. It is the first confirmation in 15 years that wolves are living in Washington, says Harriet Allen, state biologist.
More importantly, she said, ``it's the first wolf den, first indication of breeding since the early 1900s. We've always thought there were transient wolves in the Cascades based on tracks.''
Biologists will not attempt to get close enough to see the den in the Hozomeen area of Ross Lake National Recreation Area for another month for fear of disturbing the she-wolf and causing her to move her pups.The road into the Hozomeen has been closed to all traffic until June 14.
Copyright (c) 1990 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved
Friday, April 17, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Gray Wolves' Return Subject Of Monday Meeting
Times Staff
Wolf-watchers, take note: The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service will take public comments and answer questions about reintroduction of the gray wolf to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho at a Seattle meeting Monday.
It's the first step in developing an environmental impact statement for reintroduction to those areas, said Doug Zimmer, Fish & Wildlife spokesman. The EIS will guide federal officials in determining whether the wolf should be reintroduced in those areas, and how it should be managed if it is.
Why should Seattleites care? Aside from being a controversial topic expected to draw comments from friends and foes of the wolf nationwide, the Yellowstone EIS could serve as a model for a plan to manage wolves that are rehabitating Washington state.
State wildlife agents already have identified six packs of wolves in Washington's Cascades, and more are expected to migrate from Canada to the state's protected forests.
Monday's meeting, from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at Shorline Community College's Lecture Hall 1605, is an open house. Biologists will be on hand to show a videotape of wolves in the U.S. and answer questions from the public.
Formal public hearings will take place in May 1993. The Yellowstone wolf EIS will be released in 1994, along with a federal
decision.
Copyright (c) 1992 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920417&slug=1486887
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 06:57:18 AM
6 packs in the Cascades in 1992? How many now? Where and who are the state wildlife agents that reported this in 1992?
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920205&slug=1473981
Wednesday, February 5, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Endangered Gray Wolf Trapped Near Mt. Baker
By Eric Pryne
For the first time in anyone's memory, wildlife biologists have captured an endangered gray wolf in Washington.
State Wildlife Department biologists said they trapped the animal, a healthy 56-pound female, near Mount Baker last Friday. The wolf was fitted with a radio collar and released the next day on national forest land a few miles away.
The capture is an exciting development, said John Pierce, manager of the department's non-game program. "If she's part of a pack, we should know it pretty soon," he said.
The gray wolf, listed as endangered in every state but Minnesota and Alaska, disappeared from Washington in the early 1900s. But reports of wolf sightings in the wild North Cascades have increased in recent years. In 1990 biologists discovered two dens - the first time wolves had been sighted in the state since 1975.
Pierce said the animals probably are migrating south from Canada, where wolves still are hunted.
"It appears we're in the early stages of re-colonization of the former range in Washington," he said. There's evidence the animals are breeding as far south as the Glacier Peak Wilderness Area just north of Stevens Pass, Pierce added.
According to a Wildlife Department statement, the captured wolf, nicknamed "Nooksack," had been seen several times in recent weeks near a winter-cabin community outside Glacier, Whatcom County. After trying for 10 days, biologists Jon Almack and Scott Fitkin succeeded in luring the animal into a fenced swimming-pool area, using a fish carcass as bait.
Once she was inside, the gate was closed. The wolf was tranquilized, and a local veterinarian took X-rays of her skull to verify her species.
Pierce said Almack and Fitkin are participating in a long-range study of the gray wolf's relationship with its environment in Washington, including diet, movement and range.
Copyright (c) 1992 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 07:00:51 AM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 07:12:42 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on June 26, 2009, 07:20:04 AM
6 packs in the Cascades in 1992? How many now? Where and who are the state wildlife agents that reported this in 1992?Good question! If that is true we are further along than we thought previously, but not sure how we would be "way ahead of ID, and MT"? Also sceptical of any idea of a release without some sort of factual information or documentation.
Well I hope someone rubs this in there nose when it comes time to establish the number of breeding pairs in the state.....we should be really close to the objective for a hunt at this point.The tricky caveat to our delisting is that we have to have them in all the recovery zones and for three consecutive years. That is the why the dfw brought up the idea that we could translocate (move WITHIN) washington to meet that goal. There has been no discussion of relocating, and DFW has not moved any wolves at all.
Post by: docsven on June 26, 2009, 07:41:26 AM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 08:10:35 AM
Post by: boneaddict on June 26, 2009, 08:12:12 AM
Post by: boneaddict on June 26, 2009, 08:12:45 AM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 08:30:43 AM
I like the dates. 1990 versus the first pack in 70 years as of last year. OH BOTHER...... THey can't even keep their own facts straight. What good would it be to expect proof of any being released. Its just a piece of paper (if there is any) that must get lost on someones desk like this information.
How bout these dates?
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19921206&slug=1528536
Sunday, December 6, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Wolves Coming Back To Cascades
By Patty Wren
Wenatchee World
TWISP, Okanogan County - We may not be dancing with wolves, but they're here, their numbers are growing and it is possible to coexist with them in relative peace.
That's the message a Montana wolf specialist and wildlife advocates are trying to get out. .
At a meeting here on grizzly bears in the North Cascades, about 140 residents seemed intrigued.
Particularly when Pat Tucker, a biologist with the National Wildlife Federation, led a full-grown wolf past the audience, sat with her back to it and allowed it to upstage her by chewing loudly on an empty plastic soda bottle.
The presentation was the Okanogan National Forest's way of telling residents that the gray wolf, once slaughtered by the tens of thousands, has been making a quiet comeback in Washington.
In the Okanogan, one or more wolves have been spotted in five separate areas since 1989.
The plan is to let the wolves - moving into old haunts south of Canada after hunting stopped there in the 1970s - reproduce themselves, said Jon Almak, a state Department of Wildlife biologist.
The crowd responded with an audible sigh of relief, then applause and cheers.
Biologists are trying to write a wolf-recovery plan for Washington.
Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were brought in, the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population.
For example, 100 sightings were reported in 1981, and last year there were 200, ranging as far south as Mount St. Helens, Almak said.
Federal agencies have spent $3.3 million on wolf research in the Rockies since 1987.
Efforts in Washington, such as howling to find members of the endangered species, began two years ago.
Almak, chairman of a biological research subcommittee, said guidelines are being written to ensure that management, habitat and prey-base goals are met and hunters and the general public are educated.
Enter Tucker, whose appearance at the general meeting and at three schools also was sponsored by the Methow Valley Citizens Council.
Through a slide show depicting wolves at play, over bloody carcasses, howling in chorus and standing watchfully, Tucker spoke of her love and respect for the charismatic animals.
She began with a tape recording of a lone wolf howling, telling people in the audience to imagine themselves - as she'd been when she taped it - alone in the wilderness at nightfall.
Suddenly a stereo-like chorus of howls erupted. You could almost see the hairs raise on the backs of 140 necks.
Tucker grinned at the reaction. "I enjoy being out there with other animals that are my equals," she said. "It's not that I want to sell wolves to everyone, but that you will go away from this program with at least respect for them."
Wolves feed on large game animals, pose somewhat of a threat to cattle, run in family packs of about eight, breed annually, can travel 500 miles and need about 200 square miles per pack to thrive, Tucker said.
"They don't eat humans," she said. "We have documentation of bears - even white-tailed deer - killing people, and that's more common than wolves killing people."
The predators are equally preyed on by the pitfalls of life in the wild. "It's an old wolf that's 8 years old," Tucker said.
"Those of us who want wolves back have got to realize the emotional trauma" to cattlemen of coming upon a bloody calf, she said.
"But most ranchers are never going to have to deal with it.
"Some believe they eat cattle. Some believe they eat only sick, weak mice," Tucker said. "The two sides will never agree. . . .
Ranchers in British Columbia and Alberta have had some problems with predation, but the losses are not significant to the industry, she said, adding that knapweed poses a worse problem.
If prey habitat can be protected, human attitudes changed and wolves freed from human persecution, she said, "We shouldn't have to put a lot of restrictions on human activities."
Copyright (c) 1992 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 08:35:59 AM
I felt so much better after reading,,,,, :chuckle: :chuckle: :bash:
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 08:42:07 AM
This artical was written in1992, before the wolf introduction,,,, So whats up? Would appear as if they had already planted some wolves in the Nothern Rockies.
Post by: cabin308 on June 26, 2009, 08:45:24 AM
"They don't eat humans," she said. "We have documentation of bears - even white-tailed deer - killing people, and that's more common than wolves killing people."
I felt so much better after reading,,,,, :chuckle: :chuckle: :bash:
Post by: zackmioli on June 26, 2009, 08:47:10 AM
Post by: boneaddict on June 26, 2009, 08:51:37 AM
Quote
"We shouldn't have to put a lot of restrictions on human activities
Is that a threat.
One I often suspect and have talked about.......
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 08:56:09 AM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 09:11:03 AM
(Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were brought in, the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population)
This artical was written in1992, before the wolf introduction,,,, So whats up? Would appear as if they had already planted some wolves in the Nothern Rockies.
(connect the dots) :chuckle: :bash:
Restoring Wolves to the Northern Rockies
The return of wolves to the Northern Rockies was initiated by animals seeking new territory from the north. Wolves from Canada began to recolonize northwestern Montana by the late 1970s, and the first litter of pups to be born in this region in half a century was documented at Glacier National Park in 1986
Although lone wolves had occasionally been sighted in the latter two areas, no evidence of breeding populations had been documented. Thus, in June 1994, after several years of intense political and legal activity, the FWS issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement to reintroduce wolves to central Idaho and Yellowstone. The reintroduction was officially approved after a year of public hearings and an unprecedented show of support from more than 100,000 impassioned Americans
http://www.defenders.org/programs_and_policy/wildlife_conservation/imperiled_species/wolves/wolf_recovery_efforts/northern_rockies_wolves/background_and_recovery/index.php
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 09:13:18 AM
Quote
Although lone wolves had occasionally been sighted in the latter two areas, no evidence of breeding populations had been documented. Thus, in June 1994, after several years of intense political and legal activity, the FWS issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement to reintroduce wolves to central Idaho and Yellowstone. The reintroduction was officially approved after a year of public hearings and an unprecedented show of support from more than 100,000 impassioned Americans
I bet there is somthing in there that allowed them to introduce in washington.
Post by: testar77 on June 26, 2009, 09:32:15 AM
I love it when the feds lie........
Well the do THAT all the time, I would love it if they would actually tell the truth!
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on June 26, 2009, 09:42:26 AM
find it.QuoteAlthough lone wolves had occasionally been sighted in the latter two areas, no evidence of breeding populations had been documented. Thus, in June 1994, after several years of intense political and legal activity, the FWS issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement to reintroduce wolves to central Idaho and Yellowstone. The reintroduction was officially approved after a year of public hearings and an unprecedented show of support from more than 100,000 impassioned Americans
I bet there is somthing in there that allowed them to introduce in washington.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 01:15:35 PM
find it.QuoteAlthough lone wolves had occasionally been sighted in the latter two areas, no evidence of breeding populations had been documented. Thus, in June 1994, after several years of intense political and legal activity, the FWS issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement to reintroduce wolves to central Idaho and Yellowstone. The reintroduction was officially approved after a year of public hearings and an unprecedented show of support from more than 100,000 impassioned Americans
I bet there is somthing in there that allowed them to introduce in washington.
Plan on it. I started out not knowing to much about the wolf issue, or wolves for that matter. I have followed a paper trail over several mountain ranges, and I think I may be closin in :hunter:
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 01:22:27 PM
Post by: boneaddict on June 26, 2009, 01:22:50 PM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 01:42:18 PM
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 01:43:21 PM
Quote
In January 1995, 29 wolves were captured from healthy populations in Canada and transported to reintroduction areas in the northern Rocky Mountains. Upon arrival, 15 of these wolves were released directly into central Idaho (including the Selway-Bitterroot, Frank Church River-of-no-Return, and Gospel-Hump Wildernesses). In March, after several weeks in acclimation pens, the other 14 wolves were released into the Yellowstone area.
In January 1996, an additional 37 wolves were captured in Canada and transported to the same reintroduction areas. Twenty of these were released directly into central Idaho, and, after several weeks in acclimation pens, the other 17 were released into Yellowstone. In September 1996, 10 wolf pups from a population in northwestern Montana were moved to the Yellowstone area. These pups were translocated as a result of repeated depredation of livestock by wolves in their pack that forced authorities to destroy several of the adults. To date, FWS has reintroduced a total of 41 wolves into the Yellowstone area and 35 wolves into central Idaho. The Nez Perce Tribe in Idaho has primary management responsibility, with funding provided under a cooperative agreement with FWS.
The success of the recovery program has exceeded FWS expectations and has prompted Secretary Babbitt to announce that further reintroductions will not be necessary in the northern Rocky Mountain area. While some losses of wolves have occurred, the rate of mortality in the wolf populations has been far lower than anticipated. Several wolves have been killed illegally, with others dying from natural causes or accidents, or being destroyed by FWS and ADC for repeated attacks on livestock. In addition, wolf packs in both Yellowstone and Idaho have produced several successful litters in the breeding seasons since their release. The Yellowstone population now approaches 100 wolves and the central Idaho population has grown to approximately 70 wolves. In northwestern Montana, where populations have naturally immigrated from Canada, FWS estimates there to be 100 - 120 wolves. Thus, recovery goals may be met ahead of schedule and at lower cost.
if there's 100-120 wolves (in 1997) in NW montana that got there on their own from canada, why is everyone so convinced that a dozen or so wolves didn't make it to the methow on their own? or anywhere else in that region???
or are they all lying...
i'm learning as i go here...
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 02:02:19 PM
Post by: Ridgerunner on June 26, 2009, 02:18:22 PM
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 02:33:38 PM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 03:27:51 PM
it'll take a little more than chronological order at this point.Little bity question? If these wolves were already movin in on their own? why jump the gun and slam these other wolves in? Well thats where Money for the feds and agenda for environmentalists part comes into focas. Now lets look at Washington, we already had wolves coming in since 1980, confirmed packs. why all of a sudden do we get more wolves right here in the valley,,via white shwan wolf trucks. It all comes down to the almighty dollar. these people would shoot their own country in the neck for more money.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 03:30:30 PM
They were planted in the methow because a large % of the population is *censored* for brains and loves the idea of magical dogs howling all night.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 03:38:25 PM
Check dates on each article, as you go down the paper trail you might see things that don't quite add up.
Washington's Wolves Are Back
Posted by Eric de Place
07/19/2008 08:00 AM
Wolf-less no longer as Washington's wildlife returns.
A state biologist said Monday that he believes one or more packs of gray wolves are living in the Methow Valley...
Packers have made numerous reports of wolves in the high country in the past couple of years, and there have been increasing reports by residents in lower elevations, he said.
Fitkin said there have been reliable wolf sightings in the Methow dating to the early 1990s, but only sporadic, unconfirmed reports of wolf packs.
"What's changed recently is that we've had repeated observations of multiple animals in the greater Twisp River/Chelan Sawtooth and Libby Creek areas," he said, adding, "My suspicion is, based on the sighting history, its development is very similar to how recolonization in the Rockies occurred. This is looking like we very well may have some wolves on the landscape."--------- (via"White shwans wolf delivery trucks")
http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score/ … s-are-back
Friday, November 1, 2002 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Conservation groups want U.S. to restore gray wolves in state
By Matthew Daly
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Two conservation groups are calling on the federal government to restore gray wolves to Washington state, saying it's time to "hear the call of the wild again" in Western Washington forests.
Defenders of Wildlife and the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance said yesterday they have sent a petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, requesting that the agency restore and protect gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act.
"Gray wolves have an important role to play in the ecological health and character of the Pacific Northwest, and the federal government should start getting serious about restoring the species here," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife. "It's time to hear the call of the wild again in these beautiful forests."
The petition urges the service to establish a category known as a distinct population segment for gray wolves in Washington state.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. … ywolves01m
Wednesday, February 5, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Endangered Gray Wolf Trapped Near Mt. Baker
By Eric Pryne
For the first time in anyone's memory, wildlife biologists have captured an endangered gray wolf in Washington.
State Wildlife Department biologists said they trapped the animal, a healthy 56-pound female, near Mount Baker last Friday. The wolf was fitted with a radio collar and released the next day on national forest land a few miles away.
The capture is an exciting development, said John Pierce, manager of the department's non-game program. "If she's part of a pack, we should know it pretty soon," he said.
The gray wolf, listed as endangered in every state but Minnesota and Alaska, disappeared from Washington in the early 1900s. But reports of wolf sightings in the wild North Cascades have increased in recent years. In 1990 biologists discovered two dens - the first time wolves had been sighted in the state since 1975.
Pierce said the animals probably are migrating south from Canada, where wolves still are hunted.
"It appears we're in the early stages of re-colonization of the former range in Washington," he said. There's evidence the animals are breeding as far south as the Glacier Peak Wilderness Area just north of Stevens Pass, Pierce added.
According to a Wildlife Department statement, the captured wolf, nicknamed "Nooksack," had been seen several times in recent weeks near a winter-cabin community outside Glacier, Whatcom County. After trying for 10 days, biologists Jon Almack and Scott Fitkin succeeded in luring the animal into a fenced swimming-pool area, using a fish carcass as bait.
Once she was inside, the gate was closed. The wolf was tranquilized, and a local veterinarian took X-rays of her skull to verify her species.
Pierce said Almack and Fitkin are participating in a long-range study of the gray wolf's relationship with its environment in Washington, including diet, movement and range.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. … ug=1473981
Copyright (c) 1992 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
Sunday, December 6, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Wolves Coming Back To Cascades
By Patty Wren
Wenatchee World
TWISP, Okanogan County - We may not be dancing with wolves, but they're here, their numbers are growing and it is possible to coexist with them in relative peace.
In the Okanogan, one or more wolves have been spotted in five separate areas since 1989.
The plan is to let the wolves - moving into old haunts south of Canada after hunting stopped there in the 1970s - reproduce themselves, said Jon Almak, a state Department of Wildlife biologist.
Biologists are trying to write a wolf-recovery plan for Washington.
Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were brought in, the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population.
For example, 100 sightings were reported in 1981, and last year there were 200, ranging as far south as Mount St. Helens, Almak said.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. … ug=1528536
Friday, April 17, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
E-mail article Print view
Gray Wolves' Return Subject Of Monday Meeting
Times Staff
State wildlife agents already have identified six packs of wolves in Washington's Cascades, and more are expected to migrate from Canada to the state's protected forests.
|
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 03:40:52 PM
here's another piece that defines that :
Quote
The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan, approved in 1987, stipulated that each of the three recovery areas must maintain a minimum of 10 breeding pairs for three consecutive years in order for FWS to consider delisting wolves in this region. This would provide for a population of approximately 300 wolves. The plan recommended natural recovery (i.e., immigration from Canada) for Idaho and Montana, and reintroduction into Yellowstone using the experimental-population authority of § 10(j) of the ESA. (See section below on "experimental populations".) If two wolf packs did not become established in central Idaho within five years, then reintroduction could be considered for this area.from here if you haven't read thwe whole thing...it's a good read.
http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Biodiversity/biodv-13.cfm?&CFID=6622718&CFTOKEN
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 03:48:29 PM
I think its very unlikely that packs of wolves would just appear in twisp if they were not planted.
They were planted in the methow because a large % of the population is *censored* for brains and loves the idea of magical dogs howling all night.
There are alot of sh-t fur brains that don't live here full time, they have their multimillion dollar houses parked on the ridge tops. I talk to a freind of mine who is a general contractor for building houses, and he thought that this year was going to be his best year ever, but come to find out, it might be his werst year ever becuz people are not wanting to live next to these wolves. He said that one of persons he had planed on building for had spent $40.000 just on the house plans. As of now he isn't working, and he has never not been working. I would imagine as time goes on more people will be head to somewhere wolfless.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 03:52:20 PM
wolfbait-the white schwann's wolf trucks are still rumors. the wolves were relocated to montana and idaho to speed up the delisting process as clearly defined in the EIS study that i'm sure you've read. i just posted a piece of it from 1997...
here's another piece that defines that :QuoteThe Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan, approved in 1987, stipulated that each of the three recovery areas must maintain a minimum of 10 breeding pairs for three consecutive years in order for FWS to consider delisting wolves in this region. This would provide for a population of approximately 300 wolves. The plan recommended natural recovery (i.e., immigration from Canada) for Idaho and Montana, and reintroduction into Yellowstone using the experimental-population authority of § 10(j) of the ESA. (See section below on "experimental populations".) If two wolf packs did not become established in central Idaho within five years, then reintroduction could be considered for this area.from here if you haven't read thwe whole thing...it's a good read.
http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Biodiversity/biodv-13.cfm?&CFID=6622718&CFTOKEN
Yep, I read that quite some time ago, and understand what it says. But don't you think that is sort of past history, since they have not lived up to anything that they have said so far? Where are today?
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 04:02:49 PM
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 04:05:49 PM
Quote
I talk to a freind of mine who is a general contractor for building houses, and he thought that this year was going to be his best year ever, but come to find out, it might be his werst year ever becuz people are not wanting to live next to these wolves. He said that one of persons he had planed on building for had spent $40.000 just on the house plans. As of now he isn't working, and he has never not been working. I would imagine as time goes on more people will be head to somewhere wolfless.
thats wierd. the rest of the entire country is in an economic depression, the housing market is non-existent, contractors and construction workers are out of work everywhere nation-wide...but in the methow it's because of the wolves? is he sure it's not because of the economy?
come on now, wolfbait...let's try and maintain some degree of realism here.
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 04:07:28 PM
Quote
Yep, I read that quite some time ago, and understand what it says. But don't you think that is sort of past history, since they have not lived up to anything that they have said so far? Where are today?
well i think we're delisted in montana and idaho and chomping at the bit for some wolf tags.....
Post by: WDFW-SUX on June 26, 2009, 04:21:28 PM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 04:34:26 PM
QuoteYep, I read that quite some time ago, and understand what it says. But don't you think that is sort of past history, since they have not lived up to anything that they have said so far? Where are today?
well i think we're delisted in montana and idaho and chomping at the bit for some wolf tags.....
I hope you are right, but from past history I don't see it happening, If you do get a tag I know where there is a spare culvert, takes 3 guys to operate, third guy you don't have to like a whole bunch. I could tell you how it works but my realism is shorting out abit. :chuckle: When we goin huntin? :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 04:42:38 PM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 04:53:01 PM
We already had wolves coming in the 1980's, not saying some didn't trot over from Idaho or Montana. But I really don't think after all these years then Ker-blam we have the amount of wolves in the valley that we do now. I don't know half as much that I want to about our wolf situation, we are all still learnin. The thing that stikes me a little bit funny is, the wolves we had around the valley, we hardly ever saw, and they were skitish, these wolves are different that way.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 04:57:28 PM
sadly, i didn't draw my tag.
Culvert idea is still open, live one might be more fun than a dead one, think of the pictures we , you could post. I volunteer to set in tree to take pictures and supervise progress.
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 05:09:40 PM
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 05:24:25 PM
that'd be great. i'll man the pipe, you sit in the tree. maybe we could do a drive and push some out and wrangle them into the pipe.
Well from what I hear they like the canned fish the best. We will be needin someone who likes wolves to dive into the other end of the pipe sorta like a plug, and while he's in there he can calm the wolves abit, that way you can get a rope on one of them. In the mean time I can be sitin in the tree hollarin encouragement and taking pictures. The culvert has a ten dollar rental fee on it, you load n haul. :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on June 26, 2009, 05:25:43 PM
:chuckle: he can get them calmed right down.
Post by: wolfbait on June 26, 2009, 06:17:33 PM
Post by: Kain on June 26, 2009, 11:16:37 PM
National parks service
http://www.nps.gov/archive/noca/wolf.htm
Quote
Are gray wolves reproducing in the North Cascades?
In 1990, adults with pups were seen in the Hozomeen area. This was the first known reproduction of wild wolves in Washington State in at least 50 years! Since 1990, biologists have seen three separate groups of adult wolves with pups in the Cascades. Wolves mate in February or March. About 63 days later a litter averaging six pups is born.
Post by: wolfbait on June 27, 2009, 05:54:13 AM
You forgot to add this to your timeline. It is from the National Parks Service Website.
National parks service
http://www.nps.gov/archive/noca/wolf.htmQuoteAre gray wolves reproducing in the North Cascades?
In 1990, adults with pups were seen in the Hozomeen area. This was the first known reproduction of wild wolves in Washington State in at least 50 years! Since 1990, biologists have seen three separate groups of adult wolves with pups in the Cascades. Wolves mate in February or March. About 63 days later a litter averaging six pups is born.
Another dandy, Thanks Kain, I enjoy reading the other info. they post about their wolves also.
Wolves often eat the sick, weak, diseased, injured, and the very young or old. Removing these animals supports the vigor of the prey species population.
Are wolves dangerous to humans? Is it safe to hike or camp in wolf country?
Wolves in the wild are afraid of humans and generally avoid contact with them. There are no documented instances of healthy wolves attacking humans in North America and only one instance of a rabid wolf doing so. Perhaps some of the widespread fear of wolves is the result of encounters with dogs allowed to run wild. Most places where wolves roam, people are not even aware of their presence.
Post by: boneaddict on June 27, 2009, 06:20:50 AM
Whats that sport down south where you stick your hand in a hole in the riverbank and pull out whatever you happen to grab, (snapping turtle, electric eel, 100 lb catfish). WOnder if that works on wolves. :chuckle:
Post by: wolfbait on June 27, 2009, 07:32:00 AM
What th ehell are you guys volunteering me for.
Whats that sport down south where you stick your hand in a hole in the riverbank and pull out whatever you happen to grab, (snapping turtle, electric eel, 100 lb catfish). WOnder if that works on wolves. :chuckle:
You need to ask jackelope, he volunteered you, I am just taking pictures and renting the culvert, and adding vocal incouragement when I feel you need it the most.
Post by: jackelope on June 27, 2009, 07:40:20 AM
we will already have the bait, bone....
(wolfbait)
:chuckle:
Post by: boneaddict on June 27, 2009, 07:53:31 AM
Post by: PolarBear on June 27, 2009, 08:06:29 AM
Post by: wolfbait on June 29, 2009, 10:23:50 AM
Idaho’s Wolf Hunting Rules Will Be Ineffective, Illegal
January 21, 2009
In addition to the new and illegal Wolf Population Management Plan, which states that the state will manage for 500-700 wolves, are far cry from the 100 the state was told, fish and game has stripped all means of being able to hunt wolves from those wishing to pursue the animal during a hunting season.
Essentially, those wishing to hunt wolves are restricted to a gun, bow or muzzleloader, period. These are not the same rules used in managing other predators such as bears and mountain lions. These kind of restrictions render the notion of hunting as a viable means of wolf population control useless and reeks of a backdoor attempt at more wolf protection by the IDFG.
In Will N. Graves, “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, he writes extensively on methods used over the years in attempts to control wolf populations. Clearly we need to take a few lessons.
Graves discovers in his research into the Russian people dealing with wolves for many, many years that first, it is absolutely necessary to control wolf populations and two, it is extremely difficult to do and has to be done continuously.
http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2009/01/21/idahos-wolf-hunting-rules-will-be-ineffective-illegal/
Post by: bearpaw on June 30, 2009, 08:00:44 PM
Hey what happened to the other thread, there's a lot of good stuff documented on there that i would like to be able to direct people to read????
OK, never mind I found the thread...I'm still learning to find my way around here I guess. :dunno:
Post by: bearpaw on June 30, 2009, 08:07:15 PM
Post by: boneaddict on July 01, 2009, 10:26:18 AM
Post by: jackelope on July 01, 2009, 10:28:14 AM
Last update: June 29, 2009 - 11:06 PM
Minnesota's gray wolves once again will receive federal protection under a settlement announced Monday between the U.S. government and several groups fighting to return the wolves to the list of protected animals.
Pending court approval, gray wolves in Minnesota will return to their previous "threatened species" status, while the gray wolf populations in Wisconsin and Michigan will go back on the endangered species list.
The new designation makes it illegal for Minnesota landowners to kill wolves they catch in the act of preying upon livestock, pets or guard animals.
On May 4, federal officials removed gray wolves in the Great Lakes area from the endangered list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, estimating that gray wolves number about 4,000 in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, concluded they no longer needed federal help.
A coalition of environmental and animal-rights groups then filed a lawsuit challenging the decision, arguing that the government broke the law when it issued its ruling because it did not provide public notice or invite public comment.
In the settlement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed that it erred in not offering a public comment period, as required by law.
The agreement calls for a public comment period of at least 60 days should the government seek to remove the gray wolves from the endangered species list again.
Fish and Wildlife authorities wasted no time Monday in stating their aim.
"We fully expect we'll propose delisting again in a few months or so," said Laura Ragan, a fish and wildlife biologist with the service.
"There are no red flags raising that say that wolves are not recovered," she said. "The main thing is that population numbers have continued to grow, even under state management."
Among the groups suing the Fish and Wildlife Service were the Humane Society of the United States and the Center for Biological Diversity, based in Tucson, Ariz., which celebrated the settlement.
"We're absolutely delighted," said Michael Robinson, a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity. "We were extraordinarily worried about the wolves that were getting killed."
He called the settlement a temporary victory. "We're not so naïve as to believe that the wolves are going to be protected from this point on," Robinson said.
'Tying our hands'
Sam Scott, who manages the Rolling Thunder Ranch in Hillman, in central Minnesota, said he was disappointed by the return to protected status for the wolves.
"It's just tying our hands again," he said. "At least when they were not protected, if and when we did see one [stalking a farm animal], we could try to eliminate it. Now, the damage is done before we can ever get help."
He said he will now have to wait until a wolf kills a calf before he can act, and even then he will have to call the wolf control specialist to handle it.
So far this year, he's lost six calves to wolves, he said.
Gray wolves should have been removed from the endangered list long ago, argues David Mech, senior research scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota.
They've been added and removed and added again to the endangered list for years. "It's always for procedural reasons," he said.
Why the back and forth?
The reason for the constant back and forth, he suggested, is that some environmental groups want to see the wolves as protected as much as possible.
The protections offered under the federal Endangered Species Act are tighter than they are under state management of the wolf population, Mech said.
Dan Stark, a wolf specialist with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, said the state's gray wolf population is thriving.
"Our population is stable and has exceeded recovery goals for decades," he said, adding that the wolves live primarily in the northern third of the state.
Gray wolves were listed as endangered in 1974, after they had been wiped out across most of the Lower 48 in the early 20th century by hunting and government-sponsored poisoning.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. Allie Shah • 612-673-4488
Post by: boneaddict on July 01, 2009, 10:37:13 AM
300 wolves is too few
And over the past several decades, scientific evidence has mounted that underscores the need for more wolves to ensure their viability. In a letter sent to FWS in 2007, nearly 250 leading scientists stated that "by any measure, a population of 30 breeding pairs (300 wolves) is insufficient to achieve an effective population size large enough to maintain essential genetic diversity."
Even FWS wolf recovery coordinator Ed Bangs conceded in a 2008 article in Science that the recovery goal of 300 wolves and 30 breeding pairs is too low.
In approving the recent delisting rule, FWS turned a blind eye to imminent wolf-killing plans by the states. Of particular concern is Idaho. Its fall 2009 wolf hunt is likely to resemble or exceed its 2008 approved plan, which allowed the killing of over 300 wolves. In addition, the "shoot, shovel and shut up" culture is alive and well in Idaho, where the state estimates over 100 wolves were killed illegally in 2008. Idaho's hostile approach to wolf management is symbolized by Gov. Butch Otter's 2007 announcement at a hunter rally: "I am prepared to bid for that first ticket to shoot a wolf myself."
With wolves being killed at a higher rate in Montana than any other state in the region, the state has a long way to go to make peace with wolves. Unfortunately, Montana is considering a proposal to kill as many as 165 wolves by hunting - more than a third of the current Montana wolf population.
Trigger mechanisms
Because of such fierce animosity toward wolves, combined with excessive wolf-killing plans by the states, legally binding standards that rely on the best available science are essential to long-term wolf recovery. Additionally, FWS should establish trigger mechanisms in the delisting rule that mandate prompt corrective action should wolf numbers fall below biologically sound levels.
These are some of the reasons why NRDC and other conservation groups are challenging FWS' delisting rule. It's time to commit to concrete actions to maintain a healthy wolf population on this world-class landscape. It's also time to redouble the challenging work with livestock operators to find new, creative solutions to the conflicts that can arise between livestock and wolves.
Louisa Willcox, senior wildlife advocate for The Natural Resources Defense Council, based in
Livingston, has been working to
conserve wildlife in the Northern Rockies for 25 years.
Posted in Guest on Monday, June 1, 2009 12:00 am Updated: 9:20 am. | Tags: Louisa, Willcox, Wolves, The, Natural, Resources, Defense, Council, Fws, Nrdc, U.s., Fish, And, Wildlife, Service
Post by: jackelope on July 01, 2009, 10:45:50 AM
We're absolutely delighted," said Michael Robinson, a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity. "We were extraordinarily worried about the wolves that were getting killed."
He called the settlement a temporary victory. "We're not so naïve as to believe that the wolves are going to be protected from this point on," Robinson said.
'Tying our hands'
Sam Scott, who manages the Rolling Thunder Ranch in Hillman, in central Minnesota, said he was disappointed by the return to protected status for the wolves.
"It's just tying our hands again," he said. "At least when they were not protected, if and when we did see one [stalking a farm animal], we could try to eliminate it. Now, the damage is done before we can ever get help."
He said he will now have to wait until a wolf kills a calf before he can act, and even then he will have to call the wolf control specialist to handle it.
So far this year, he's lost six calves to wolves, he said.
Gray wolves should have been removed from the endangered list long ago, argues David Mech, senior research scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota.
They've been added and removed and added again to the endangered list for years. "It's always for procedural reasons," he said.
Why the back and forth?
The reason for the constant back and forth, he suggested, is that some environmental groups want to see the wolves as protected as much as possible.
The protections offered under the federal Endangered Species Act are tighter than they are under state management of the wolf population, Mech said.
Dan Stark, a wolf specialist with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, said the state's gray wolf population is thriving.
"Our population is stable and has exceeded recovery goals for decades," he said, adding that the wolves live primarily in the northern third of the state.
Gray wolves were listed as endangered in 1974, after they had been wiped out across most of the Lower 48 in the early 20th century by hunting and government-sponsored poisoning.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on July 01, 2009, 10:46:43 AM
Post by: wolfbait on July 01, 2009, 01:55:12 PM
Do ya really think that they didn't know, SH_T. The USFW are riding this dyin horse to death. Its just like bangs said this will be tied up in court till the end of forever.
Post by: wolfbait on July 01, 2009, 03:04:40 PM
Bringing Wolves Home: Ed Bangs
Wolf Recovery Coordinator
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
"Wolves are a top-line predator. They have a major influence..."
NOVA: I understand you helped direct the program that reintroduced wolves to the United States, after years of extinction. Where did you get the wolves?
EB: Well, we needed wolves that knew how to make a living in an area like Yellowstone National Park. And so we began to think about where to get wolves that would know what an elk is, how to find one, and how to kill one—and where to get wolves that are used to living in cold mountainous terrain. All you have to do is look north of the border and you find that next to Banff National Park in Alberta, and a little bit farther north in British Columbia, you have such wolves. So we contacted the governments of Alberta and British Columbia and asked if they had any wolves to spare. And they said, "We think so, but first we'd like you to come up and tag some wolves and do some preliminary looking to make sure we've got enough." So we did that and sure enough, there were a lot of wolves. The first year, 1995, we got 29 wolves from Alberta, and shipped them into Yellowstone and Central Idaho, and the next year, 1996, we went up to British Columbia and I think we took 37 wolves and brought them down.
Biologists are trying to write a wolf-recovery plan for Washington.
(Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were( brought in,) the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population.
For example, 100 sightings were reported in 1981, and last year there were 200, ranging as far south as Mount St. Helens, Almak said.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. … ug=1528536
Friday, April 17, 1992 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
Post by: wolfbait on July 01, 2009, 05:01:18 PM
Monday, July 14, 1997 - Page updated at 12:00 AM
Norm Dicks Puts Gray-Wolf Study On The Fast Track -- Reintroduction Wasn't Priority For Agencies
By Jim Simon
Hank Fischer, who heads the wolf program for Defenders of Wildlife, shares concerns about how spending priorities for endangered-species recovery are set. Like many critics, he worries that the federal government spends far more energy deciding what animals and plants to list as endangered rather than on actual recovery.
But he notes that wolves already are repopulating the North Cascades, with or without government help.
The Olympic Peninsula presents what he considers a low-cost opportunity to place wolves back in an area where they were systematically wiped out by settlers and the federal government more than 60 years ago.
"What we're looking at is a specific opportunity in a specific location," Fischer said. "In this business, there are biological opportunities and political opportunities. You have to find where the two things merge." Study money for wolf restoration still must survive a final budget agreement between the House and Senate.
Washington Republican Sen. Slade Gorton, who chairs the Interior Appropriation Committee, is publicly noncommittal on the project. His aides say Gorton has heard lots of complaints from residents and local officials on the Olympic Peninsula, who argue wolves could threaten livestock and scare away tourists.
Federal studies will look at questions on whether there is an adequate prey base of elk and deer on which the wolves can survive and whether there is enough suitable habitat to accommodate them.
If the studies pan out and local opposition is quieted, Dicks has envisioned airlifting wolves from British Columbia and Alaska within the next few years.
There is, of course, nothing unusual about a congressman hopscotching the priorities of federal scientists. Of the $39 million budgeted nationwide this year for plant and animal-recovery programs, about one-third of that was earmarked for specific projects by Congress.
Vicki Finn, an assistant manager in the Fish and Wildlife Services Western regional office, said the big money is reserved for the "glamorous" creatures - wolves, bears, California condors - that stir the public's imagination. "You won't see any member of Congress pulling in an appropriation for Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly," Finn said, referring to a Southern California insect that made the news recently when its endangered designation forced changes in the design of a new hospital.
Copyright (c) 1997 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19970714&slug=2549520
Post by: bearpaw on July 02, 2009, 11:46:14 AM
Post by: mulehunter on July 14, 2009, 08:23:36 PM
Mulehunter :)
Post by: woodswalker on July 14, 2009, 10:26:52 PM
The Spokesman-Review reports biologists were able to confirm the presence of at least one adult wolf and three pups by playing digital recordings of howling. The wolves, then, howled back.
Motion-detection cameras had captured photos of the pack earlier this year, but biologists needed confirmation of their presence.
Gray wolves were nearly hunted to extinction in the 1930s but have lately had a population resurgence in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Last summer, adult wolves were confirmed in Okanogan County.
State department of Fish and Wildlife biologist Dana Base says the next step is to put GPS collars on the adults. A motion-detection cameras had captured photos of the pack earlier this year, but biologists needed confirmation of their presence.
Post by: wolfbait on July 15, 2009, 06:35:47 AM