Well I know this isn't directly trad related but it is interesting to see what some are trying to sell concerning the reintroduction of the wolf to the west. Admins delete if needed. This is pretty unbelievable to me.
Would love to hear what you western guys have to say about this.
http://themetapicture.com/when-they-brought-these-wolves/
I seen that clip back in the spring, it is pretty remarkable. Something to think about. I do not think all western bow hunters are against reintroduction. I know Dick Robertson is happy, it gives him another predator to hunt. So design, he made a Wolfer bow.
Wool has some most desirable applications except when pulled over one's eyes.
Yellowstone used to be a great place to watch elk and moose. Wolves have decimated both populations, and it has bled over well past the borders of the park. If you go to Yellowstone now, be prepared to see very few elk, because they are all wolf crap.
I believe that the reason the tree huggers wanted wolves introduced was that in time, prey populations would shrink to the point that human hunters would be stopped from hunting them, and for sure, elk hunting has suffered greatly where ever wolves have been allowed to run amuck.
Wyoming had a 'trophy' season on wolves in the Yellowstone ecosystem, and considered them predators in the rest of the state, and now the tree huggers have got that stopped, at least for now.
I know personally of wolves taking out 30 plus domestic sheep overnight in the Bighorns a couple of years ago. They don't just take the 'weak and the sick', they kill everything they can.
An argument that I have heard from wolf huggers is that the aspen groves are much healthier since the elk populations are down, and I suppose that is true. Aspen trees or elk? I will take elk every time.
How this guy can use the yellowstone zoo as a template for success shows how the myths have become facts.
This thread may get pulled and I understand completely. Anyone is free to contact me if they would like some boot on the ground insight of what has taken pace in my neck of the woods.
Watch what happens to Colorado in the next ten years...........
Some more food for thought....
http://blog.eastmans.com/the-predator-death-spiral/
Wow, so wolves are the answer to everything, just introduce a few to the area and miracles begin to happen - every other form of plant and wildlife will flourish.
The guy has a sophisticated British accent - it must be true.
QuoteOriginally posted by Burnsie:
The guy has a sophisticated British accent - it must be true.
So does Piers Morgan.
And when the wolves have decimated the deer and elk herds what will the Brit say then? There has to be control by hunters be it wolves or elk. But as stated above the anti's want to us the wolf to stop humans from hunting. Here in Oregon it is well underway also. They came over the Snake River from Idaho. We already had a predator problem with cats and bears because the good citizens voted for NO hunting cats with dogs and NO baiting bears. Now we have wolves.
I'm not sure there is much to "sell" ecologically. What the video describes has been widely observed and reported on for some time. Its also been quantitatively measured by biologists.
Here in the west, what's actually being SOLD are opinions on the qualitative side of the return of the wolf. People are evaluating how they feel about the reduction in numbers of deer, elk, and coyotes, the significant growth of a new wildlife tourism industry, and the age old conflict between ranchers and predators.
Some opinion falls along predictable political lines; it appears that all hunters are NOT singularly opposed to it; many feel as Aldo Leopold (an avid bow hunter) did that the presence of wolves helps make what we all love more complete.
Since wolves were once indigenous to Great Britain, New York City, Boulder and Berkeley, it seems only fair that we reintroduce them in those places so they can regain their original habitats.
I can still remember when there was a $25.00 bounty on wolves.
Basically what this guy is saying is Wolves are good and Deer are bad? Deer ruin rivers and make them meander. meandering streams kill beavers, fox and birds. Deer are the demise if all living beings.
I like how one can make a huge assumption then fill it with crap to support a hypothesis.
Then again, its on the internet so it has to be true.... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Full Disclaimer: I live in a place where we can hunt wolves.
And i do.
Having said that, we live in the age of information. We as hunters are on shaky ground with the non-hunting (not anti) public when we are unwilling to acknowledge the role of alpha predators in an eco-system.
Any first year university biology student will be able to roll out evidence to support the necessity of such predators, and the out-dated "we need to kill them all" mentality will only serve to cast a shadow over hunting collectively.
Is hunting tougher in areas where there are more alpha predators? Of course it is. That in and of itself is not a valid reason to John or Jane Q. Public for their removal.
Don't kid yourself. It is those average folks, not the raging hardcore anti's that will determine the future of our outdoor endeavours. If we cannot show good, evidence based management strategies for entire eco-systems then we will be branded as the problem, not the solution.
Each State should have the mandate to manage predators to numbers that reflect carrying capacities for healthy populations of all species, not just those upon which we can hang a tag.
IMO picapica & Daz have it correct, and I believe Aldo Leopold described a healthy predator/prey relationship as "trophic cascading". An interesting read for those interested.
I do not live in a State that has wolves or will probable ever have them. But, as a hunter that would like to someday travel to hunt Elk and Moose in the west am alarmed to hear from folks that are seeing [what sounds like] their states run over by wolf populations destroying their Elk populations. Thanks for putting your views and experiences in this website. All easterners hear are the tree hugger views on this topic. Lately have seen a lot more concern about humans being attacked by Mountain lions, Black Bears, Grizzleys , coyotes, and wolves. Maybe we are seeing why our grandparents thinned these animals out many years ago with hunting seasons and bountys. Thanks, Roy
I know some friends of mine that has a HUGE problem with them here in Wisconsin
We now have wolves in Washington and have had our share of controversy ... in the area I hunt whitetails there was some major problems with wolves eating sheep this year and I have seen their tracks in places I hunt.
In the mid 1980's I hunted a fabulous ranch just outside Gardiner MT. The hunting was what dreams are made of, today it is not the same place when thinking of elk. My partner on that trip returned there this year on his way to another area to elk hunt and he was shocked at the difference. The pre wolf population of elk in Yellowstone was around 19,000 elk, today it is closer to 6,000. I strongly feel that the states should have the right to manage their own game programs and populations, I am not anti wolf but they need to be managed to the benefit of the entire state program / ecosystem.
As for that film, how can you believe a British accent that doesn't know deer from elk. It wasn't credible to me from the first sentence. I'm sure there were meandering rivers in Yellowstone before wolfs came along.
I don't live in a state with wolves but I can really understand the frustration of guys who do. I mean the reintroduction of wolves might be OK but they need to be managed. Hearing a wolf howl now and then and occasionally seeing one might be cool from time to time but not at the expense of greatly diminished big game herds.
When I was a kid, coyotes were just beginning to show up in my part of Illinois. The first time I saw one, I thought it was the coolest thing ever. These days I wish they had never come here. They eat an incredible amount of deer fawns. Seeing does with doubles and even triplets used to be the norm and now I most commonly see does with only one fawn. Not good in my opinion. I can't imagine what it would be like in an area where wolves can run around killing unchecked.
Wolves cannot be managed by hunting and trapping. Therefore we will have an imbalance. Furthermore we (the western states) had them forced on us with the inability to manage them, at the state level,as their populations grew. Once the populations reached what the initial EIS deemed sustainable, lawsuits filed by pro-wolf groups kept our hands tied for several more years.
All one needs to do is look at the cow/calf recruitment for units 7,9,and 4 in Idaho. Tell me how that is sustainable.Look at the Clearwater, Selway, Lochsa and the Frank Church. Same thing. In response biologist are now creating longer seasons for Lions and Bears to alleviate the impact made by the Sacred Wolves. There are some units that are now 2 Bear units. Why is that....are they eating more Elk?
Read Outdoor Pastimes of an American Hunter and Tell me what Wolf Theodore Roosevelt hunted extensively in the West. It was not the Canadian Gray Wolf.
Do I hate Wolves? No I dont. I hate the fact that the public was lied to about creating healthy herds by taking the old and weak and like lemmings bought it. The Feds forced these on Idaho and Idaho now has to pay to manage them. And no we do not get to manage them the way British Columbia does. It is not apples to oranges
The video leaves out a very important, more impactful event in Yellowstone....the great fires of 1988.
Those fires destroyed thousands of acres of mature timber. This opened the ground to more sunlight and rain. Burned trees provided nutrients to the soil. Then early successional growth of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and young trees began to flourish. These brought in more and diverse bird populations, small rodents, etc. The fire had far more impact on stimulation of early growth than the reduction in herbivores like elk and bison by wolves.
This video is mostly BS from a tree hugger (I'm a retired wildlife biologist and forester by the way) that wants to give the wolf far more credit than is due.
I'm for the restoration of as many wildlife populations as possible as long as man isn't removed from the equation. If the author of the video wants to be honest he will remind people that the top of the food chain, Man hasn't been restored to the Yellowstone ecosystem.
Funny...my uncle from TX asked me what I thought about this very clip. Here is how I answered him in an email....
Good photography. Although I respect the narrators viewpoints (David Attenborough, I think), much of which may be true, there is a lot of underlying facts not told. The "deer" he refers to, mainly consist of elk.
Yellowstone was one of two of the last herds of elk left in the country at the turn of the century. It contained the only real herd of buffalo, as well. Virtually ALL the elk and buffalo that now exist in the lower 48, can be traced genetically to these herds. To save and grow these herds, the govt. eradicated wolves from the park.....it took the governments best trappers, at a time when they could use poisons on carcasses...40 years to do it. By mid-century, wolves were gone from Yellowstone. The herds rebounded. And, consequently, America's elk herds were replenished via transplants from these herds. Buffalo too, but their fate was more controlled by ranching, private property, etc. Buffalo are just mostly unmanageable, without killing them.
The Park's northern herd of elk, near Gardiner, where I live, hovered somewhere between 20 and 30 thousand animals.....surviving drought, harsh winters, and all the predators that existed already in the area (including some of the native Timberwolves, that were already coming back on their own...I saw one personally in the Park about 1980). Moose, mule deer, and antelope were plentiful as well. Grizzlies were also making a comeback of sorts.
The Federal Government, despite the concerns of locals that live around the Park, re-introduced Grey Wolves....a non-native species to the ecosystem here. It costs taxpayers millions of dollars.....and still does. By doing so, they also violated their own rules on many counts....that's another whole discussion. Now don't get me wrong, I like wolves. I just don't like how THESE wolves were shoved down our throats. Fast forward to today....not twenty years after the first wolves were brought to us from Canada.
The northern elk herd in Yellowstone has plummeted from 30 thousand to less than 5 thousand. Moose are very rare to see anymore, and largely non-existent....and by the way, this is not just happening in the park, but 60 miles north of it where I live, and a big chunk of Southwest MT, and also ID. Mule deer numbers are very low right now....to the point that hunting for does has been stopped pretty much statewide. There are still lots of coyotes. Lots.
I'm not saying that wolves are doing the killing firsthand...but they certainly are the straw that has broken the back of one of the key strongholds of ungulates in the country and surrounding areas. Lots of questions and cherry picking of facts...on both sides of this issue.....going on here. Here are a few more for you. Grizzly bear numbers have skyrocketed. They easily take over a wolf kill. Many don't even hibernate anymore....there is plenty of food for them all winter. Mt. Lions, which kill one deer/elk each week per cat....suffer the fate of having their kills taken by the wolves....and so they must kill even more. Wolves themselves have to kill more to make up for the bear takeovers. If one cat has to kill a deer or elk a week to survive, imagine what a pack of 20 wolves will kill, and then add in more to make up for the ones the bears take. I'm not sure about this number, but I think there are well over 70 or 80 packs of wolves. And by the way, hunters are no longer killing anything around the park...since numbers have plummeted so drastically. Whole economies built up around hunting elk on their yearly migrations are gone. Many of these are family businesses passed down for generations. Of course the "wolf watchers" are supplementing that somewhat....but the cost is greater than most of the country knows. Again....these are not even native wolves, but a much bigger, more aggressive species.
You can buy 5 wolf hunting tags in Montana. You can shoot them, or trap them. Pretty much the same thing in Idaho.....but we are not even putting a dent in the number of wolves. They just keep expanding their territories, way beyond what was ever envisioned. Initially the Feds wanted to establish 10 viable packs of wolves, and then de-list them. Again.....there are about 70 plus packs in the Yellowstone and surrounding areas.
There is a lot more to this issue. Personally, I think it's cool to hear a wolf howl. I also think they are one of the most amazing animals out there, and via their social nature, also at the top of the food chain. But putting wolves back into an ecosystem that was no longer "right" for it, was probably a mistake. We have squandered successful management that took decades...nearly a century really, and lost a whole lot for "wolf" sake. Sure there is a few more aspen trees....whoopee! Not enough to change a rivers course. The Yellowstone river this spring washed away an acre and a half of my property that we have been paying taxes on for nearly 40 years here....add that the 2 or 3 other acres we've lost since wolf re-introduction.....giant cottonwood trees, vegetation of any kind....anything in it's path, and all. There is no stopping a big river....so I'm not buying the premise of the film quite yet. Not enough time has passed, even at the rivers headwaters, where it is somewhat smaller.
Sorry for the diatribe....but be careful what you hear about this topic...either side of the issue. The truths lie somewhere in between. We will now have to deal with wolves on a big playing field for years to come, so that some New York or California yuppie can drive his family into Yellowstone and see a pack of them devouring an elk. Oh yeah.....too bad wolves don't kill and eat buffalo, much. The Park service will now be forced to kill about a thousand of them this winter, as
they have exceeded their carrying capacity. Be prepared to hear the eco's yell about that one soon!
The key to this discussion is really what we are managing for. If you want nature to take it's course and for man not to be in the equation you have the right situation. The alpha predator will eat itself out of house and home and die down eventually.
Unfortunately we don't live in a that world. Here the alpha predator is man and the states make a decision to manage the game as a crop or not. Idaho for one has taken the not line and as a result loose tens of millions a year in out of state hunting revenue. Alaska on the other had sees the light and controls the predators where they can and reaps the reward of hunter dollars.
If you think that the "green" dollar from the wolf lovers off set the hunter dollar you are very naive. We will see how this turns out but my prediction is not very good. I can say that Idaho has seen it's last dollar from me and that Alaska will see a lot more.
Mike
as much as i hate this topic i will add just a bit...
take what stickbow and mark baker said and times it by 2 (me)
that said here is what is going on with the regs...
you can hunt bear (2 tags) in unit 7 and 9 from spring till fall except for august...why it's closed in aug is beyond me...the problem is access is very limited in both units...unit 4 and 4a arent much better...cats are also over populated.
also fish and game has dropped the price of n/r elk and deer tags by 100 bucks each...res can by n/r tags starting the 1st of aug...why...cuz there aint no elk to hunt and n/r dont want to spend the money to go camping...whitch is what it has come to for me most of the time.
we in the panhandle lost all cow hunting a couple of years ago and we also lost 1 full week off our bow season...what does that tell ya
we can kill 5 wolves and trap 5 each year...fish and game have tryed to kill them from the air with limited success...
for those of you who want to hear a wolf howl come on out (fish and game needs your money) BUT for those of you who want to hunt elk save your money and time and buy beef.
the next step is a draw system for res and non res
All good points above.
A couple of points not mentioned are that wolves run elk on their winter ranges, mostly closed to humans, at their most difficult survival times 24/7. This is when seasons are closed to let them regain strength but they can't survive non stop pressure. Even legal seasons have closed night hours.
Next point is that our own hunter dollars via Pitman Roberts Act is hijacked by loopholes in the ELJA or Earth Liberation Justice Act to fund the anti lawsuits.
Yellowstone is not natural and is one of the most strictly managed ecosystems in the country...by humans.
Also most antis hate ranchers. Realize most quality migratory big game winter range is on the lower elevation ranches or game ranges. Make ranchers lives more difficult and too often the habitat becomes condos void of elk.
The antis are master politicians, media savvy, well funded.Take them seriously folks.
once you have them, they become like a cancer! They're the fat guy at a buffet that the shop has to kick out for eating to much, they don't quit. They'll move on to the next buffet!
Even up here. Some years we rarely see moose in our valley we trap, which is very near Bryan and Kevin Dills moose area, actually its one drainage away, and a good buddy traps the parallel drainage to use which all ends at the valley of death, or whatever Monty called it. They think its a giant secret ;) . I drew a cow tag for their valley and was blown away by the wolves in the upper drainage a couple years back.....Its no wonder Bryan killed that nice blackie. I believe a lot of those wolves are part of the same pack we're trapping as well. We've tried getting in on a bowhunt for moose but found to hit the headwaters of where we're at is almost impossible. We've got idears, works in progress. My buddies getting up in years however.
Anyways......
Someone posted on here, healthy. That is the main goal. Though I'd like to say none, the first time you're days alone up here in a tent, on a river bank wondering when the next bruins screwing with your gear and a wolf lets loose...the initial guttural growl that transforms into a howl will make your skin crawl. I've had them near my tent doing this, and it will curl your toes! There is no serenading to sleep I'm looking for the closest weapon I can get my hands on lol!
As a trapper, we can trap/hunt 60% of a pack yearly! and not, repeat NOT reduce its population on an annual basis! A wolf is a phd level trapping game up here. You may catch one or a couple but putting any dent on them unless you're good and have the time/resources (lots of miles and traps) you're not going to get it done.
Good luck with your wolves and finding a healthy balance, it doesn't exist unfortunately! And if it did that healthy balance cannot be maintained. The ecosystem WILL come to a balance on her own. Think early 1900 game numbers, where deer were scarce, the giant goose herds didn't exist.
Alaska for you guys wanting to hunt moose, is targeting to reduce its moose numbers drastically! The last 5-7 years we've had significant moose hunts, targeting cows. I'm NOT a wildlife biologist. But it's pretty plain to see when you kill the cows, numbers drop. You guys down south have seen this with deer! Try southeast PA, or central Mn on for size. It happens fast! It started with the QDM movement. From se pa almost the hole way to the raystown lake area, it was a common story amongst hunters I've met. There's deer but nothing like a few years ago. Mn was no different, 5 deer gun tags no draw, puts the hurtn on a population. I remember growing up getting all goofy when I'd draw a doe tag the first 2 years, by year 3 I was bowhunting deer on my own, buying a 2nd doe tag for cheap. Had a woods full of deer including some monsters! Little did I know than what a special woods that was. Now a development is going in on the adjacent large track, the deer populations as a hole are significantly reduced. Coyotes were rare are a regular critter, and possum enmass.
Get it while the getting's good fellas, our way of life is about to significantly change in our lifetimes, stating the obvious I know....its going the wrong direction fast!
Wolf= Human hunter replacement unit. Introduce wolves and eliminate hunting.
There is only one choice for hunters.
God bless, Steve
(http://***********.bowsite.com/tf/pics/00small21976137.JPG)
The Feds were unprepared for the reintroduction of the wolf. They were told it would be good for the balance of nature.
They were happy to see a few wolves move into northern Montana, and eventually establish a pack (Wolfer by Carter Niemeyer). However, they were not prepared for the success of their reintroduction programs, or the unintended consequences, the rapid expansion of the wolves territory and decline in wildlife populations.
Wolves breed and kill to feed their young, the young leave the pack to establish a new pack, then another and another. The wolf does not recognize boundaries of any kind, it goes where it wants to find a mate. As wildlife numbers drop, they will feed on whatever is available.
The problem was dumped onto the States to manage, but it will become increasingly difficult to find funding to control wolves. A drop in revenue can be expected as licenses and other fees increase and numbers of hunters decline, due to the lose of seasons and hunting opportunities.
Eventually, it will be difficult to control the wolves territory and numbers. The States will lack the funding and resources to manage the increasing numbers of wolves.
License fees and other fees are on the increase in the West. What will the market support? How much will you pay? Anti-hunters won't pay.
Coyotes are found in metropolitan areas throughout the west, will wolves be next? Time will tell.
(http://i.imgur.com/kMySdMb.jpg)
"One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land is quite invisible to laymen. An ecologist must either harden his shell and make believe that the consequences of science are none of his business, or he must be the doctor who sees the marks of death in a community that believes itself well and does not want to be told otherwise."
― Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac
Hud , I don't live in remote alaska. Until last year I ran multiple lines including one from my home. I ran between two major cities traveling a swamp. The first year he showed up I was stunned. That line is a couple of pockets of cats. Initially I thought giant cat. It wasn't long before I figured out why he picked off my sets and avoided them. Year two I caught him. This wolf and another smaller wolf, was living in folks back yards picking the occasional moose off. The easy pickings were the dogs on leashes ! The dogs allowed to roam had a chance but not much !
Here recently we've had issues with hole packs taking large breeds off chains! Yes they will come in! This male was big and toothless. The pack that checked him out from time to time was neither old nor toothless. To bad they didn't linger a little longer.
Food will dictate their territory not man! Good will dictate the pack size as well. When they're done with wild game, the farmers are really going to be in for it .
A lion is a sniper of the animal kingdom. Cunning, personal, stealthy. The ultimate predator
Wolves are in a pack also an extremely intelligent sophisticated hunter! There is nothing they can't take down on this continent if they want it! Nothing!!!!
I can't believe for a millisecond that a educated wildlife manager who had major tape to cut didn't know what could and likely would happen! And now..... They need to be held accountable!
Lots of good discussion. Love the picture "magpie".....probably my favorite one of Leopold. I don't mind wolves in moderate numbers, along with coyotes and other predators. Just more things for me to chase after. Of course with politics and mismanagement the hunting part becomes lost in the shuffle. As someone who earned a degree studying raptors I've heard all the arguments before. I tend to sit in the middle. I like predators but for many there needs to be some kind of 'control'. I won't sit here and tell you that they don't have an impact, because they do. How much depends on how many wolves and how much prey there is. We could argue back and forth all we want on how many wolves there should be, how many elk, how many moose, etc. There is no 'right' answer...it's mostly just opinion.
We have wolves here, lots of them, and yet our elk populations have been expanding over the last several decades. Where I hunt elk, I've seen wolves chasing them and I plan to go back this winter and hunt them. I grew up hunting animals for their fur. In fact I paid for a considerable amount of my education with fur money. I'd love to get a crack at a wolf but I hold no malice against them. They're just another neat part of the ecosystem.
For those who dislike predators so much, I've often wondered why that is? I've come to believe it's because we often see some of the worst of ourselves in them.....don't know.
I do know though that I'll trade you wolves for 'CWD Management' any day. Good hunting, Rick.
(http://i60.tinypic.com/kej0ck.jpg)
(http://i61.tinypic.com/vzf13a.jpg)
Rick, I have no hate for wolves. When you (I) first seen(n) one everything stops. You don't forget it.
The main issue in this case is the predator pray cycle vs healthy game herds and human conflicts mostly with pets and farm animals. My only point of even posting is to depict the 2nd ultimate predator for what it is, which I know most here understand.
You brought up a very good point. What is the magic #. The problem with it is this. Even with hunting seasons there will never be enough control to maintain it. That's years down the road. Who sets it is whose driving the bus. This is what bothers me the most! Out own states game dept as mentioned has gone quite a ways beyond the status quo few hear about.
My family homesteaded in Jackson, WY south of Yellowstone National Park. I am in my late 50's. My father is almost 80. He tells me that in the early days in Jackson, they had timber wolves. These timber wolves were smaller than the wolves brought in from Canada that are now in this area. According to my father, these larger Canadian wolves have decimated the elk and deer populations unlike anything in the early days in Jackson. They are large, fast, run in large packs, and are very efficient hunters.
A sheepherder from the Wind River reservation named Leo Cottenoir has been credited with the last verified Greater Yellowstone wolf kill in May of 1943 (prior to the wolf killed south of Yellowstone in 1992.) Leo estimated it weighed 70 to 80 lbs and the photo shows him holding its mounted head.
(http://i.imgur.com/vI8oB29.jpg)
One is left to wonder how deer and elk evolved before we did them the favor of killing off all the predators?
QuoteOriginally posted by Cyclic-Rivers:
Basically what this guy is saying is Wolves are good and Deer are bad? Deer ruin rivers and make them meander. meandering streams kill beavers, fox and birds. Deer are the demise if all living beings.
I like how one can make a huge assumption then fill it with crap to support a hypothesis.
Then again, its on the internet so it has to be true.... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
You are right Cyclic. Just look what Abraham Lincoln said about it.
"Everything on the internet is true"
- Abraham Lincoln
Wouldn't mind the wolves introduced in NY, they would do a hell of a better job than our own DEC.
I have really mixed feelings about wolves. True, they are a natural predator, and in times past, they helped maintain a balance of wildlife. However, the number of prey animals, and the space they live in is much diminished from the old days due to the increased human population in many of the areas where they have been introduced. In these more contained areas, I fear they can easily overrun the prey animals. All I know is that LOTS of people have reported dramatic decreases in deer and elk in the areas of reintroduction.
As a resident of Northeast Washington I have heard the wolf debate ad nasium and have really lost my appetite for it. I have not read every post in this thread; however, thought I'd pose the simple question. How ever did ungulates survive for thousands of years alongside wolves prior tu human intervention? We cannot perfectly know the numbers of game animals prior to European colonization of the Americas, but can agree they have been reduced dramatiacally since that time, and furthermore we can agree this was caused ONLY by excessive hunting and habitat destruction by humans.
I'll also point out that Yellowstone is not the ideal place to study the triangle between Elk/Wolves/Human hunters...I trust you guys are sharp enough to figure that one out.
This is a touchy subject for sure...you fellas that do not live/hunt in an affected area, make sure you take any wolf reintroduction "news" with a grain of salt.
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool born and bred hunter, usually vote hardline right, ect ect, but still feel the need to point out that when game management was left to the discretion of white hunters in America it did not go very well. Just about every game animal was hunted to extinction from its pre-Columbus range.
Check out this map.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk#mediaviewer/File:Wapiti.png
Read your history guys. The Lewis and Clark expedition almost starved to death and lived by purchasing and trading for dogs from Native Americans to eat when they got into the western portion of the continent.
Elk and deer were practically non existant and the Indians survived by yearly bison hunts that required a tremendous undertaking.
Could it be that wolves had already decimated the herds to the extent that there were only a few breeding animals left? At that time even wolves to the large degree lived on bison.
Our present or past present huntable herds of game animals exist due to game management largly provided for by sportsman revenus.
These revenues are way down due in large part to present policies that are driven politically instead of by biological science. Laws passed by public sentiment , (anti Hunting and anti gun) no bear hunting or couger hunting by use of dogs, re-intro of another major alpha predator (wolf) have decimated the game population in many places to the point that sales of liscenses and revenue have and are dropping off.
This only amplifies the lack of proper game management by reducing patrol revenues, research,planting , ect in many western states.
There is no room for wolves and hunters unless predator populations are reduced across board in order to accommodate human hunters. That sirs is not part of any of the present agenda. The sooner we recognize this the more probable the hope of our maintenance of hunter opportunity will be assured.
I do not see that happening when even the so called hunting community is divided and partially ignorant of the facts and the agenda of those that wish to eliminate hunting and institute gun control which is actually what is driving this to a large extent.
God bless, Steve
Another thought provoker-
Ever wondered how it is the area of the world with THE MOST Grey Wolves (Alaska/Canada) also has an extremely large and healthy herd of Caribu, Moose, Deer, Bear, Sheep, Goats, ect ect ect?
Humans are tasked with caring for lesser species, regardless of what your religious beliefs or lack thereof are. My view of this does not include eradication of a species because I do not see the utility of its existance. God, nature, evolution, whatever you think, put creatures in place for a reason. Yes, wolves will kill sheep and calves, and heck they might go so far as to kill enough Elk to mandate that hunters get off their ass and work to get a kill of their own. That does not justify eradication of the species.
I wasn't around during the early 1900's, but I'd bet the farm hunters back then were crying conspiracy when the first game laws were enacted.
Quote
There is no room for wolves and hunters unless predator populations are reduced across board in order to accommodate human hunters. That sirs is not part of any of the present agenda. The sooner we recognize this the more probable the hope of our maintenance of hunter opportunity will be assured.
I do not see that happening when even the so called hunting community is divided and partially ignorant of the facts and the agenda of those that wish to eliminate hunting and institute gun control which is actually what is driving this to a large extent.
God bless, Steve [/QB]
What Steve has said is the way things are and will be. Years ago before the wolf introduction I hog hunted with a fellow from Montana. We were discussing the pending introduction and he was all for it saying "I would just love to hear a wolf howl in the wild". My argument was, "if wolves decimate the elk/deer herds and the states have to eliminate a predator, which predator do you think will be reduced first?" The answer then and now is the human hunter.
Truthfully I think you guys have a solid argument in that if wolves control the deer/elk population why would you need human hunters, they wouldn't even need to pass any legislation for it, hunters will be discouraged by lack of game that the reduction of hunters will follow the reduction in game. Trust me if my NY legislators can get wolves in NY they will, simply to get us out of the woods.
Charlie,
You might want to check your facts before you post them. Alaska has extensive predator controls so that they have healthy huntable herds of caribou and Moose. They don't have deer in wolf areas.
The caribou herds are in decline as a result of predation. Hunters take a very small number of the animals compared to the wolves, bear, etc.
Moose numbers are inversely proportional to the amount of wolves in the area. Last year in the area we hunt the harvested 110 wolves during the winter.
Again if you want a huntable population of game animals you need to manage to that end. Today's management is to remove the human hunter from the equation.
Mike
AK still has far more wolves than in the lower 48, yet game numbers are high enough to hunt. Obviously we do not have enough data prior to European settlement to accurately guage how things were when wolves were not controlled or hunted by man compared to today.
I have chosen to believe that 300,000,000 and counting humans in the US have more to do with declining game numbers than less than 10,000 wolves in the lower 48 and Alaska combined.
Grrr I always get sucked into this arguement. I will stop. I respect those who disagree with me, but believe what I do after considerable thought, reserch, and first-hand observation through the eyes of an avid bowhunter and outdoorsman.
The REAL problem is a lack of common sense management. How can it be, that "we the people" have been FORCED to allow the obvious RECKLESS behavior by a relatively few to accept something that is OBVIOUSLY so wrong.
As with many things in the United States today, what was once right, is now wrong, and vice versa
Wolves are killing family pets in their own backyards. Tax dollars by the truckload are being spent in protecting wolves. The next week, Conservation officers are being PAID to kill problem wolves.
I guess we have to "hit bottom" before "we the people" will not stand for this any longer.
We have no wolves here in Nevada per our game department. I guess the animal I saw last fall was a coyote with a thyroid problem and a thick black coat. Only 20 air miles from ID, where they have huntable numbers. A guy hunting up in area 7 saw a small pack.
I am old enough to remember deer seasons of a week, buck only. Poaching during the depression probably the cause, but numbers rebounded during good management. Emotion will not sell the argument and there is no way to get a balance number without research. What is that number? How about this. Sterilize all but a few males (ouch), have a regulated season like they have bears here. Target number identified, limited tags issued, call in as soon as you get a bear. Once the target number isvreached, season ends, all tag holders notified.
QuoteOriginally posted by Charlie3:
Another thought provoker-
Ever wondered how it is the area of the world with THE MOST Grey Wolves (Alaska/Canada) also has an extremely large and healthy herd of Caribu, Moose, Deer, Bear, Sheep, Goats, ect ect ect?
Have you ever been there?
http://www.adn.com/article/20130306/17-wolves-killed-aerial-control-program-interior-alaska
It might be helpful to understand, that game herds and most wildlife species have increased in the Continental USA since the 1800's.
Wildlife benefited from the new conservation promoted by Teddy Roosevelt, modern day sportsman, and groups like the RMEF. Secondly, game laws and seasons are a fairly recent development. Finally, the wolves found in the west were smaller than the Canadian wolves that adopted northern Montana as a home, and then were reintroduced in other areas of Montana, WY, ID, WA, and OR.
Early settlers hunted year around and game numbers were far below present day levels. Wolves were held in check by the limited food supply and from being hunted. Over hunting was a problem as herds of buffalo, elk and deer were killed in large numbers.
Fast forward to today. The deer and Elk in these area, had never seen a Canadian wolf until the reintroduction, because the Timberwolf was killed off in the 40's, and the only predators they knew were mountain lions and bears. The deer and elk had an extremely difficult time learning to adapt to this new predator. The wolf was a different predator, it hunted in packs and could run down its prey.
Mountain lions and bears do not hunt in packs, and they do not pursue their prey until it drops from exhaustion. Canadian Wolves were larger, faster and skilled predators. They had little problem killing their prey.
Game animals in Canada, NW Territories, Yukon and Alaska have lived for centuries with wolves, they have learned to adapt, but control hunts are still needed to reduce the population of wolves, that lack natural enemies.
It has been documented that deer and elk under extreme pressure from the larger wolves moved into open terrain, towns and residential areas to escape the pressure from the wolves. It has also been reported that wolves have followed.
I would compare the current situation, to lessons learned, but forgotten. The story occurred a number of years ago; a Fish & Game Dept., in a state, decided to introduce muskie into a lake where there was a good population of large lake trout. The problem they thought was the trout were getting smaller and there were too many for the lake to support. They reasoned, the muskie would eat some lake trout and reduce the number of trout. The plant and insect life would flourish and the trout would get bigger. The F&G fellas had not planned for the growth and increase in population of muskie. The muskie was a different kind of predator.
Unfortunately, in a few short years they discover the trout are all gone. Oh well, the fisherman now have muskie. This is not meant to demean muskie, they are great fighting fish, I've been told. :knothead:
admin test
I also am a longtime observer of nature. Way over 50 years of bow hunting and still going . I have seen wolves where no wolves were according to DFG. I have even reported the first collered wolf in the state of Oregon. It was a young female on the Middle Fork of the John DAy river. DFB live trapped her and sent her back to Idaho. Again I saw a wolf just three days ago that was unseen until this time in a place where no wolves have been reported. It was on the edge of a field off of the Keno Access Road between Keno and Ashland. Or it could have been a dark grey 100 lb coyote.
Wolves have a bad habit of quicky and effectively repopulating far from the areas last reported. For instance the Oregon male wolf that went into Northern California came back into Oregon and mated and has pups that are being camera surveiled by ODFG.
Question is, Where did the mate come from? I may know. I saw a huge black wolf in the 70s cross the road about 20 yards in front of my truck within a few miles of where I just saw the wolf three days ago.
I believe that we have had a small population of wolves for years but that they have been SSB by hunters and kept in check. One thing is sure. Over 50 years of spending countless hours in the woods and in bowhunting Oregon I have seen five wolves and seen them spread over this time. I cannot tell you how many bears and cougers I have seen during that same period.
Now a breeding population of wolves has been introduced and formed packs. The wolf has come into his own because he is by nature a pack hunter. As previously stated by another poster a wolf pack in a death sentence of any game animal that they decide to take. It operates as a military precision killing machine. It is unlike any of the other predators except the African Lion which hunts in coordinated prides.
Previously the heavily predated wolves opertated mainly as isolated unites but now they are operating in a far more effective way and already making large inroads on the elk and deer population in areas already way overpredated by bear and elk.
So here is my problem and our problem. When game populations reack a natural low due to overpredation human hunter will begin to stop hunting simply because it becomes untenable logistically and financially. I already know many hunters complaining that they have not made a kill in several years. These are really good hunters too. I have personally not made a kill in Southern Oregon for over five seasons. I have previously killed elk and deer with a bow every season before that.
I owned a bow shop and know the hunters. I talk to them and know that they are unsuccessful. I also know the guides and outfitters and they are having little success.
Soon this reaches the point that they either stop hunting altogether or go to a state where there is still a little game left.
That is my experience and this thread is informative and important to bowhunters because it directly effects the immediate future of bowhunting in the west.
I say this because we are the bottom of the hunting totem pole. Bowhunters do not have the lobby that gunhunters have. Guess whose seasons the overpredation effects first?
Well here in Southern Oregon we have had bull and buck only seasons for the last two years. With bull and buck percentages at an all time low it is nearly impossible right now to kill an animal in this country.
Wolves are simply the straw that has broken the camels back, In a couple of years they will be a log that crushes the camel completely.
God bless, Steve
A fella I know was hunting elk in the Walla Walla unit of northeast Oregon last month. He woke up one morning and there were several bull milling around in the meadow next to his camp, so he grabbed his video camera and took a short video.
Little did he know until later, there was a wolf in the background and the elk were staying in the open for a reason.
This is a still photo off his video...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/treekiller/10639430_639775149454838_2597045961229699606_n_zpsc1a6d3c9.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/treekiller/media/10639430_639775149454838_2597045961229699606_n_zpsc1a6d3c9.jpg.html)
Ok, so maybe alpha predators are needed for a healthy eco-system, and maybe the numbers of elk, deer, buffalo...etc that we've become accustomed to have been artificially sustained by management practices meant to provide hunters with something to hunt. It always seemed like a good trade off, hunters provided millions of dollars via license and fees and hunt-able numbers of animals were maintained. And as a side benefit many areas of prime habit were maintained and expanded with these funds. Federal lands were set aside, along with myriad other conservation projects.
I'm thinking all revenue streams derived from hunters should be pulled from any areas that re-introduce wolves. Why should hunters have to pay to maintain areas that basically become unhuntable, let all the pro wolf and eco-tourist who want to see the wolves fund these areas. We'll see what happens when states have to start limiting conservation projects, laying off employees, closing parks..etc because their major source of revenues dry up when hunters say the heck with it.
Make no mistake, the reintroduction of wolves in the West is a vital aspect of a step-by-step plan for the elimination of human hunting in wilderness areas. I'm calling BS...These folks would love for our hunting rights and especially the need for hunting to be eliminated. The Wolf will help them meet this goal...it already! As hunter dollars decrease due to low game populations and discouraged hunters, so does our political power
The presence of wolves isn't the problem but the inability to control them properly is. If they were huntable they would control populations in wilderness areas and be thinned out in rural areas where hunting replaced them.
Taxpayer funded reintroduction of predators is out of line
Burnsie:Ok, so maybe alpha predators are needed for a healthy eco-system
Humans are alpha predators. What you are suggesting is replacement of human hunting by introduction of another alpha predator (wolves)
After posting this I went back and reread your post. I agree with you 100 percent and apologize for my misread.
This statement changes it all.
Burnsie:
I'm thinking all revenue streams derived from hunters should be pulled from any areas that re-introduce wolves. Why should hunters have to pay to maintain areas that basically become unhuntable,
Steve:
However the entire re-introduction process will still eliminate hunters and although right the revenue loss would only hasten the demise of human hunting.
Again I apologize for my misread and I only left what I said to show how wrong I was.
God bless, Steve
You cannot control wolf population with out aerial hunting. Not only western states have too many wolves they have the wrong kind of wolf. For the person that's comparing Alaska to the western states you are comparing apples to oranges. Alaska dwarfs the home range of the wolves in the western states. Not scientific by any means but I would bet that per capita there is more wolves in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming than there is in Alaska. If you actually looked at there roaming area. I hope I said that right. The state of Alaska also shoots the hell out of the wolves from the air. It pisses the Feds off and often causes a fight between the two. I actually like wolves but they cannot be given a loose reign. I don't golf so I would like to see more Elk and Deer.
I think it's important for folks to recognize that this is not the States reintroducing wolves, but rather being forced to "deal" with the consequences. Even in MT there are groups of "hunters" suing the state F&G over the reintroduction and management, when it's really the Federal Govt. and Fed regulation and control and protections that the states must abide by (or else, they are told). While the politics of dealing with wolves varies, it is a result of states being forced to manage by a directive of US Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered and Threatened Species directives, and outside (the state) political pressures. So while you may not agree with how your state deals with it, make sure you assign the blame to where it belongs...
Good point Mark.
While hunting eastern oregon this year I saw a black wolf, and a day later I saw 2 gray wolves pull down a cow elk. I found 4 dead deer carcuses. never saw a live dear in the woods. just last year there was a bunch of deer and no wolves. Talked to a fish and game guy and he said my advice to you is to take up bird hunting. really sad to see the impact first hand on a area i have been hunting for 20 years
This documentary is interesting, because it about the reintroduction of wolves into the Yellowstone and how efficient they are as predators. Approx. 49 min. with 1-2 min. intro.
Wolves vs Grizzly Bears Extreme Fighting - National Geographic WILD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wcezkx4wu4