Pend Oreille wolf study UW?

[wolfbait]

To better and more accurately respond to your comments to my post:

"Actually, coyotes account for roughly 80% of fawn mortality in mule deer.  Wolves prefer adult deer.  Wolves decrease the number of coyotes in an area that both inhabit.  This can actually be a benefit to fawn survival for mule deer, and knowing that would help us in managing not only mule deer, but also give us more info to use in the future mgmt. of wolves."

 Replacing coyotes with wolves is not a plus.  "Never said this was a plus."

 Stating that wolves prefer adult deer is not true, wolves kill anything and everything, they are opportunists. In fact wolves will tear the fetus out of cow elk, eat it and leave the cow laying there to slowly die. We have seen deer in the Methow where wolves have killed the doe ate the fawn in her and left the rest. What we have with the addition of protected wolves is just an added predator decimating the game herds and killing livestock.
"Studies have directly shown that, in respect to deer, wolves do, in fact, prefer adult deer to fawns. I didn't say they wouldn't eat a fetus.  That's very well known.  But the study is about fawn survival after birth, not prenatal fetus'."


By preying on the elk, wolves can/will take the more vulnerable mule deer to exceedingly low levels or extinction. The wolves that were turned loose in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming have preyed primarily on elk and there are data on how many elk each wolf kills per year---22 elk/wolf/year---but there is little data from these states or anywhere else on the effect of wolf predation on mule deer. To put it simply, mule decline so rapidly that there is nothing left to study!


Hunter harvest of black-tailed deer on Vancouver island though, gives some idea of what will happen if pro-wolf advocates have their way. Before wolves arrived, sportsmen on Vancouver Island took home around 25,000 blacktails a year. Now that wolves have overrun the island, the figure has plummeted to less than 4,000 deer a year. Moreover,  blacktails are now found in reasonable abundance only where they live in suburbs or cities; i.e., the deer have moved into town to avoid predators
http://idahoforwildlife.com/Charles%20Kay/76-wolf%20predation-more%20bad%20news.pdf

Lets see some links to these studies that show wolves favor adult deer over fawns.

The Denali Caribou herd, which numbered in the tens of thousands for many decades, declined to 10,000 by the 1960s and numbered only about 1,000 by the late 1970s. Studies from the late 1970's indicated that early calf survival was very poor even though adult cows were in good condition and had adequate food resources.

Predation on young calves was concluded to be the major factor in the population decline and, despite some gradual increases during a series of mild winters, the herd has remained well below 10% of its former long-term numbers and remains incapable of recovering from the predator pit without intensive wolf control.
"There is a HUGE difference between a larger, slower, pack animal like caribou than deer.  Especially in areas where there are major differences in escapement cover.  Not saying it's not an issue, but just pointing out the difference makes it hard to accurately compare."

So would you consider the elk of Yellowstone and Lolo to be large, slower pack animals also?


Wolves: when Ignorance is Bliss
http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Website%20articles/Dr%20Geist/When%20ignorance%20is%20bliss.html
"The purpose of studies, whether you agree with them or not, is to avoid the ignorance and learn more about the issue."

I would have to say that another study to study what is already known is where the "ignorance" comes in to play.

"How about taking a look at SE Alaska, specifically Prince of Wales Island and tell me what you think.  There, Black Tail Deer, the largest black bears around, and wolves all co-exist, with huntable populations of all 3 species." 

Wolf management on an island is totally different then on the mainland. On an island wolves can be controlled by their prey base, hunting and trapping.
"Agreed.  And hopefully we will get to the point of mgmt. of wolves and their prey base as needed here to see the ungulate populations survive and eventually thrive again.  The fact is, mgmt. CAN make a difference.  That's what we're hoping to achieve."


UAF Analysis shows Southeast Alaska Alexander Archipelago and Prince of Wales Island wolves not subspecies
http://www.akbizmag.com/Alaska-Business-Monthly/December-2014/UAF-Analysis-shows-Southeast-Alaska-Alexander-Archipelago-and-Prince-of-Wales-Island-wolves-not-subspecies/
"A little off topic, but I'm aware of this one, too.  This was an attempt by the antis to halt the Big Timber sale on Prince of Wales Island.  It's been debunked, and the sale is moving forward now.  Another area we are doing a lot of habitat work for blacktail deer."

Another "study" isn't going to help in the politics of managing/controlling wolves, it's a waste of money.

"As a 501 c3, we aren't allowed by law to lobby in politics, or spend our funds there.  I'm not about politics, and neither is MDF.  We study the science and provide results to agencies to help them make informed decisions.  And the amount of money we put into those studies pales when compared to the amount we put on the ground for habitat work to strengthen mule deer and blacktail populations."[/color][/color]

Do wolves change when they cross state lines. How many studies are needed to once again prove without wolf control there will be no hunting.

Instead of doing another worthless study why not put the money and time into confirming wolf packs/bP's?

[MuleDeer]

Thanks Wolfbait   Go Cougs?, nope, gone to the dogs.  Prince of Wales Island data like comparing a Neanderthal to Hong Kong apartment dweller.  Not many malls, pets, livestock, children, private property, tax base etc. on those islands, and yes I have been there.  If the foundation wants a study area check out the Mill Creek watershed, no recent history of any legal hunting except transplanted elk and a predator/prey base in a 400,000 acre basin with little or no human interaction and the mule deer still have issues.  Good evidence of 'natural' not human caused interactions.  I encourage foundation members to monitor foundation spending.

I encourage MDF members to monitor MDF spending too.  Matter of fact, the local members in their respective chapters are the ones who approve putting THEIR money into whatever projects they choose.  I don't spend their money for them: they spend it.  The national office doesn't spend their money for them either...those decisions are all made by the local chapter.  As far as spending on the national level, it is an open book: if anyone wants that info, they can find it on our website, within our 990 forms, or just ask me to provide it for them.  We don't have any hidden agenda.  Every dollar that is spent is public info.  Every chapter dollar that is spent is on what that chapter wants to spend it on, as long as it fits within our mission statement, "The conservation of Mule Deer, Black Tailed deer, and their habitat."  Simple as that.
As far as study areas that haven't been touched yet, reason is probably that there is no local chapter to push for that.  As the RD for this region, there is no way I can know everything or everyplace that work needs to be done; that is what we need local chapters for.  They provide the leads, projects, and/or contacts locally to get things done.  Want some work done in your area, get involved.

[Special T]

First off a closed loop system like an island provides interesting information about other closed loop systems. you can learn something but it does not necessarirly apply to the general population... Many of the "Island deer" Black tail are pretty darn small. These are also closed loops and do not necessarily relate to the Blacktail I hunt in the 407 GMU wich is "Next Door"

University of Alaska did a study on the impact of hunting on the wolves outside of  Denali NP. (I bet Wolfbait can post it up) That stated that hunting anoly accounted for 3-6% of wolf mortality and to get a "stable" zero growth/Loss you needed a harvest of 50-70% each year...

My bigget beef is that we could have coyote style open season on Wolves and it would not affect numbers much BUT would have the benifit of gaining the support of hunters and other WDFW critics... Wolves have an open season in ID (and many people shot them before there was one) yet there are plenty of them Still in ID. The WDFW does NOT manage wildlife, the manage the actions of PEOPLE especially hunters... Since it appears that hunters dont have a huge impact on wolves in AK, ID, WY, MT MN and else where what makes anyone think Hunters will have a big impact here?


I think the Purpose of the study is interesting Might be of some use... But the fact remains that Mule deer are in decline and Wolves eat deer.

I have done my best to greatly reduce the population of coyotes near my brother in laws farm killing nearly everyone I see yet there has NEVER been a shortage of them... I would make the WAG that wolves will be the same way... Perhaps fewer in numbers, but smart, ellusive, & always present. 

[AspenBud]

Since it appears that hunters dont have a huge impact on wolves in AK, ID, WY, MT MN and else where what makes anyone think Hunters will have a big impact here?

The answer is in the numbers.

The state of Washington claims literally tens of thousands of coyotes exist here but 100 or less wolves. While it's probably safe to assume the small number is wrong it's impossible to sell coyote style hunting of them let alone a regulated season with bag and season limits when the public is presented with that. It's like going to your boss saying there is a problem with no hard numbers to prove it.

But the problem right now is HSUS, the SC, and DoW really don't want people shooting wolves, for ANY reason. That's not just unreasonable, it's downright irresponsible.

[Special T]

I dont disagree with your assement on the orgs or the public perception. Where we disagree is that other states have already done plenty of studies and have lots of experiences to learn from.

IF wdfd had taken the steps to allow people to protect property from the beginning and not cozyed up with those orgs then most people who are skeptics would not be so hostile and second guess thier motives or action.

[bearpaw]

I dont disagree with your assement on the orgs or the public perception. Where we disagree is that other states have already done plenty of studies and have lots of experiences to learn from.

IF wdfd had taken the steps to allow people to protect property from the beginning and not cozyed up with those orgs then most people who are skeptics would not be so hostile and second guess thier motives or action.

   well stated

[timberfaller]

Is this "study" have any of the "Lynx" people involved from THAT study?  YOU know the one with "planted" hairs and DNA from zoo captives!

[mfswallace]

Excellent points MuleDeer.  This is the kind of common sense I wish was more common.  Numerous factors influence the abundance and distribution of ungulates...and very often centers around habitat issues. Whining about the government and spreading conspiracies might be fun for some folks, but it does nothing for improving hunting or the wildlife that we all care about.  Thank you again for your efforts and serving on the WAG.

[WAPatriot]

Hope I'm not the extremist who thinks anti s run the wdfw and government. Anti s meaning anti hunting fishing trapping independence. Only one way to take care of wolves.

[mfswallace]

I dont disagree with your assement on the orgs or the public perception. Where we disagree is that other states have already done plenty of studies and have lots of experiences to learn from.

IF wdfd had taken the steps to allow people to protect property from the beginning and not cozyed up with those orgs then most people who are skeptics would not be so hostile and second guess thier motives or action.

One of the biggest differences in Washington is the smaller amount of open land(yes there are some wide open spaces) and a much larger human population spread over the landscape.

[Special T]

IF you think the WDFW isnt led by Anti's thats OK, but still does not detract from my argument. the ACTIONS of the WDFW show us that they are more worried about Anti groups than the sportsmen revolting...

And they have a hard time figuring out why recruitment is so low. 

[wolfbait]

IF you think the WDFW isnt led by Anti's thats OK, but still does not detract from my argument. the ACTIONS of the WDFW show us that they are more worried about Anti groups than the sportsmen revolting...

And they have a hard time figuring out why recruitment is so low. 

Not only led by Anti's, but also infiltrated by anti's and they just hired a brand new one to lead the department with Unsworth.

[Special T]

WB you may be right, but even if you are it detracts from your argument and all the facts you lay forth. Whatever the reason we agree that the wdfw isnt to concerned with what we sportsmen think.

[MuleDeer]

IF you think the WDFW isnt led by Anti's thats OK, but still does not detract from my argument. the ACTIONS of the WDFW show us that they are more worried about Anti groups than the sportsmen revolting...

And they have a hard time figuring out why recruitment is so low. 

Not only led by Anti's, but also infiltrated by anti's and they just hired a brand new one to lead the department with Unsworth.

How much do you know about Unsworth?  Facts, of course, not just hearsay that you have read somewhere.
How about a direct quote from him: "They quote Idaho Fish and Game deputy director Jim Unsworth on Outdoor Idaho saying: "Right now the overwhelming lion’s share of funds comes from sportsmen. And, you know, sometimes we’re criticized because we manage for sportsman, but, just a reality check, that’s who is paying our bills. That’s who is paying our paycheck and who is paying for the management.”
How about the fact he has been an active hunter and license holder for many years?  Anti?  Guess again.

[wolfbait]

IF you think the WDFW isnt led by Anti's thats OK, but still does not detract from my argument. the ACTIONS of the WDFW show us that they are more worried about Anti groups than the sportsmen revolting...

And they have a hard time figuring out why recruitment is so low. 

Not only led by Anti's, but also infiltrated by anti's and they just hired a brand new one to lead the department with Unsworth.

How much do you know about Unsworth?  Facts, of course, not just hearsay that you have read somewhere.
How about a direct quote from him: "They quote Idaho Fish and Game deputy director Jim Unsworth on Outdoor Idaho saying: "Right now the overwhelming lion’s share of funds comes from sportsmen. And, you know, sometimes we’re criticized because we manage for sportsman, but, just a reality check, that’s who is paying our bills. That’s who is paying our paycheck and who is paying for the management.”
How about the fact he has been an active hunter and license holder for many years?  Anti?  Guess again.

Mitch Friedman of CNW claims to be a hunter also, and yet he fights for wolves and grizzly bears or any other critter that will shut down public lands.

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,168303.50.html