Post by: wolfbait on August 07, 2010, 07:57:33 AM
A female gray wolf fitted with a radio-tracking collar two years ago has not been heard from for three months and counting.
The missing member of the Lookout Pack dropped out of radio contact in May of this year, and according to Scott Fitkin, biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, there are two likely scenarios to account for the long silence.
“Either the collar has malfunctioned or she has been shot,” speculated Fitkin on Tuesday (Aug. 3), “and I get more pessimistic with each passing day that we’ll even hear from her again.”
The female was collared in July 2008 as one of four adults in the Lookout Pack, Fitkin said, the first confirmed wolf pack in the state in nearly 80 years. That same month, six pups were born bringing the number of adult and juvenile wolves in the group to 10. In early December 2009 the estimated number of surviving animals had dropped to eight. “By May 2009 we were down to three animals,” said Fitkin, “the collared alpha pair and one yearling.”
Forest Service biologist John Rohrer said it was probably safe to estimate the current population of wolves in the valley at six.
The collar in question is one of the more basic VHF types, Fitkin said, and can usually be counted on to transmit a signal for about four years.
http://methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=4006 (http://methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=4006)
Post by: wolfbait on August 07, 2010, 07:59:39 AM
Six works for me, the rest are just bigger than average coyotes, and we can shoot coyotes! ;)
Post by: haus on August 09, 2010, 02:34:15 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on August 09, 2010, 05:46:15 PM
Why is it a gun owners fault that this wolf is missing?
I would love for him to find the damned collar in a pile of bear crap...or better yet, find the decaying carcass hanging from a limb, death caused by the radio collar.
Post by: Axle on August 09, 2010, 05:57:47 PM
:bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: wolfbait on August 10, 2010, 08:16:00 AM
http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2010/07/14/counting-wolves-by-jim-beers/ (http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2010/07/14/counting-wolves-by-jim-beers/)
July 14, 2010
Editor’s Note: Just when I thought Jim Beers couldn’t top some of the great articles he’s written, here comes a man after my own heart in the writing of a classic! Beware environmentalists. Hidden somewhere between the fancy Latin names and descriptions, might be found an insult. I present, “Counting Wolves”.
How to Count Wolves by Jim Beers
Upon my return from a recent speaking tour of the Pacific Northwest I have experienced a great deal of personal scorn and ridicule. Setting aside the references to my parentage and diminished mental capacities, there was only one accusation of substance shared with me by my detractors. That accusation concerns my assertion that you “can’t count wolves”.
In the past two weeks I have read several press releases by state fish and wildlife agencies that “their” state has (insert any ODD number in the hundreds here) wolves and that they will have government animal control agents and/or licensed hunters or trappers kill (again insert an ODD number in the hundreds representing oh say, 20% of your first inserted number). This, we are assured will “reduce the state wolf population” to a level that will allow big game herds to recover to huntable levels, for ranchers’ livestock losses to be tolerable, to assure human safety, to reduce dog
losses for those rural people still persisting to “own” or “use” dogs, and thus allow the “lamb” (i.e. rural residents) to lie down with the “lion” (i.e. environmental and animal rights radicals, government bureaucrats, and politicians).
You are now, dear reader, a certified wildlife biologist just like the new US Fish and Wildlife Service “Science Advisor” who is not only the “former Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Science Center” but also we are told “holds a Ph.D. in biology from Harvard University obtained under the direction of noted professors Edward O. Wilson and Dr. James M. Carpenter (now at the American Museum of Natural History). She has tremendous expertise and experience in invasive species control and the conservation of threatened and endangered species. Scholarly publications include articles on biodiversity, bird conservation, invasive species, entomology and pollinators.” Aren’t we lucky?
So, how do such wolf worthies count these wolves?
-Wolves do not gather in certain spots year after year (like wintering elk or deer or moose) so that you can count many of them consistently year after year and thus obtain a “trend” and approximate numbers.
-Wolves do not breed in the same areas year after year (like mourning doves or woodcock) so that listening for coos or “peents” (the description of the call of breeding woodcocks) on the same roads and time of year like the aerial count of wintering big game animals generates a trend and/or population “estimate” for purposes of setting seasons and limits next year.
-Wolves are not evenly spread out over the landscape at any time of the year. Unlike pheasants (don’t tell the new “Science Advisor” or she’ll be after them as killing every one of them is a moral requisite “May Gaia be blessed” since they are an “Invasive Species”) you can’t have certain mailmen on certain routes count them at certain times of the year to again generate a trend and population “estimates”. No, you can’t count wolves and the farther we get from those dark days when wolves were forced on rural America by government fiat in the 1990′s the less and less anyone will have any idea of how many there are or even where they are at any given time. As we shoot at them and try to trap them and otherwise bother them, the more nocturnal and the more secretive (like coyotes) they will become.
However, in the spirit of “cooperation”, “partnership”, “open-mindedness”, and “biodiversity” I have pored over the literature on wolves and lo and behold up until the advent of the Endangered Species Act people worldwide were counting wolves with all the exactitude of mathematicians. Throughout the Northern Hemisphere, rural people and governments were aware of how many wolves were present and they too reacted accordingly.
The following condensed description of this ancient method from the dim mists of time exposed my ignorance when I mentioned that “you can’t count wolves”.
1. Wolves were at desirable levels whenever you didn’t see any, hear any nor were you aware of humans, livestock, or game animals being killed or attacked by wolves.
2. Wolves were at undesirable levels (and therefore worthy subjects for plans to reduce or eliminate them) when:
Family members or community members were attacked and/or killed by wolves. Livestock was killed or scattered by wolves. Wild animals desired for food were disappearing. Dogs were being killed by wolves. Wolves were seen in or near human habitations.
Of course our forbearers were unaware of the disease carrying capacity of wolves but they knew how dogs brought diseases (where did they get them from?) into homes and to owners’ families so they generally kept dogs out of homes and NEVER kissed dogs or allowed them to lick faces, etc.
The need to reduce wolf numbers today in Europe is restricted by both animal rights laws (like in the US) and strict gun laws. In Asia, it is the lack of gun ownership and the lack of coordinated governments that care about rural residents.
In addition to the foregoing, my “research” into counting wolves revealed a startling discovery. For centuries, there were no humans offering the prattlings of current day wolf “biologists”, “lovers” and “defenders”. There is no evidence of the sort of “Harvard biology” heard today such as:
“Wolves were here first”.
“It was dogs”.
“Wolves only eat the old and sick”.
“You must learn to live with wolves”.
“Wolves are on the verge of extinction”.
“Wolves always” do such and such.
“Wolves never” do such and such.
“Wolves balance nature”.
“Wolves replace hunters”.
“Wolf numbers go down when there is no longer any ranches or game to hunt”.
“Wolves are important and even necessary elements of the ecosystem”.
“Children and the elderly and dogs out alone deserve whatever happens to them”.
“She (he) didn’t behave properly so the wolf attack was their fault”.
The lack of any reference to these New Age “biologists” and their “Science” in the literature merely confirms the specious claims of the Endangered Species’ radicals, bureaucrats, politicians, and their academic “partners”: what we have here is A New Subpecies. I must admit that my past belief that all this nonsense about “Subspecies, Races, Populations, Population Segments, and Distinct Population Segments” was anything other than bio/political chicanery was, like my belief that you can’t count wolves, evidently wrong.
I therefore rush to assert my discovery and as the first one into “the literature” I claim my right to name this new Subspecies. I hereby name her/him as Homo sapiens dufus of the Race urbanus, and Population americanus – Homo sapiens dufus urbanus americanus. She/he is found mainly in wealthy urban settings and she/he is easily distinguished by her/his calls that are silly nonsense delivered in semi-religious reverential tones. When observed for more than 5 minutes they are seen to be outspoken advocates of central (national or international) governments that they control and that rule by fiat enforced by oppression and force.
So I am greatly relieved that federal and state bureaucrats have this problem (that they initiated) so well in hand and that they know how many wolves there are. Oh and as far as this new Subspecies, I have put a “feeder” in my backyard and keep it stocked with suggested “emergencies” and international cooperators that can help them grow federal power and tax us all into penury for their own good and benefit. I keep my binoculars near the window and will hopefully be able to publish a paper soon about all the sizes and colors, etc. of these “bustards” that come to my feeder.
PS You (still) Can’t Count Wolves!
Post by: haus on August 10, 2010, 09:16:32 AM
“Either the collar has malfunctioned or she has been shot,” speculated Fitkin...Irritating isn't it, the same response came from biologists when the alpha male from the pack down in Wallowa County Oregon went missing. There's an unknown number of things that could have happened to the animal yet it being shot is always #1 or #2 mentioned.
Why is it a gun owners fault that this wolf is missing?
I would love for him to find the damned collar in a pile of bear crap...or better yet, find the decaying carcass hanging from a limb, death caused by the radio collar.
Now I understand that its not out of the realm of possibility, but I think that someone in Fitkin's position should think seriously about making such an accusation publicly. :twocents:
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on August 10, 2010, 11:28:49 AM
What happened to death by natural causes?
I wonder if they have heard rumors from locals she was shot but they have no proof.
Post by: KimberRich on August 10, 2010, 11:53:25 AM
Post by: wolfbait on August 10, 2010, 08:54:31 PM
“Either the collar has malfunctioned or she has been shot,” speculated Fitkin...
What happened to death by natural causes?
I wonder if they have heard rumors from locals she was shot but they have no proof.
Fitkin just likes to sell BS in the news paper, happens every year. Kind of looking forward to his line this year after hunting season. Wolf might have gotten hit on the road, like last year when at least two wolves were splattered. :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: Squatch on August 20, 2010, 10:25:04 PM
Post by: high country on August 20, 2010, 11:04:06 PM