Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Idaho/Montana Wolf Update

That's not what I remember...

Ok Brad, i will bite, you where there what do you recall?

I recall exactly as I said... elk population is Jellystone was far too high (it was)...

Yes you are right and that was true, Yellowstone was overgrazed, there was dispute as to what was the culprit of the overgrazing and if I recsll correctley bison where a bigger problem than the elk?

It's a shame they just couldn't have opened the park to hunting instead of throwing Wolves in to screw everything up. Hunting is a great management tool.

Idaho has more Wolves than Montana because Idaho Elk taste better.It has to be the reason!!

Jayco

Now they want to throw Wolves into New England and wreck a flourishing Moose population. This insanity needs to end!

"It's a shame they just couldn't have opened the park to hunting instead of throwing Wolves in to screw everything up. Hunting is a great management tool." moosemike

That would have been a very bad idea. No National Park is more visible than Yellowstone and to even try that would have meant a lot of publicity. The overpopulation of elk in Rocky Mountain National Park and the prospect of hunters was talked about a lot down in Colorado, with opposition to it. With Yellowstone the entire world would have been against the idea. Every gutshot elk would have been on display for tourists and in the end I think it would hurt hunting.

Its been mentioned that the reason for introduction of wolves was to curb the bison population. I read a book on the reintroduction of wolves written by a Defenders of Wildlife member so that I could have multiple perspectives for a project. While the reduction of the bison population may have been mentioned, I remember that it was mostly about reducing the elk population.

To the enviro greeny wack jobs, they really don't about the wolf. Its about its predation abilties on ungulates that they like. The greenies know they can't stop hunting, but they can control it via the exploding wolf population. They also knew that once the wolves reached their max numbers, they could delay an implementation of a controlled hunt. They could burden and suffocate states with endless "studies and meetings" to decide if a limited season should be granted. They profile judges and rely on supportive feds to lend them help. I used to run in their circles and know how they think. They have time, money and support from the clueless public.

I respectfully disagree with that statement. I have spent countless hours over the last 14 years in meetings with these people--both wolf advocates and jaguar advocates. They not only love these animals, but despise anyone who doesn't and they attribute similar kinds ulterior motives to those who question their desire to restore these animals to their presumed prehistoric ranges. They have this Pollyanna-ish idea that restoring presumed historic populations of the large predators will cure everything that they think is wrong with the existing natural world.

I will concede that they would rather that no wild animal would die a death other than one that meets their concept of what is "natural". They dislike hunters because they don't recognize predation by humans as natural unless it is practiced by "indigenous" peoples with primitive weapons, living a subsistence lifestyle. They basically have no understanding of animal population dynamics, habitats and carrying capacities or the realities of predator/prey interactions.

Had they understood the habitat and the nature of the Wolf,they would have put constraints into the introduction of these foreign predators from Canada...

Idaho already had Wolves as did Montana yet they introduced these new wolves and tied the hands of game management in both states to control them until they were way over the original goals of the original plan..

Now the local Cattlemen/Sheep men and hound hunters not to mention just a local family with dogs,that have had to pay the price of not thinking it through from day one.

What happened to States rights?

Jayco

The enviro greenie whack jobs use to be us (hunters)
ie ducks unlimited.
Bring on the wolves just allow for state management.

From an Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner...

�I think there�s a pretty good chance we�re going to see a ruling in the next few months that may find further flaws with the delisting, and we may be turning it back over to the federal government,� he said. �My fear is if the plaintiffs succeed in getting the wolves back on the Endangered Species list, we�re going to see a relatively high level of intolerance from Idaho sportsmen who will then begin to ignore the law and have a �hunting season� anyway, just an illegal one rather than a legal one.�

In closing, Budge said the recovery of wolves �should have been hailed as one of the greatest success stories that ever existed under the Endangered Species Act, but instead we�re mired with controversy and conflict and a lot of stress and strife over who has responsibility and control, the state or the federal government.�

Jayco

There should have been an illegal hunting season for Wolves being carried out all along. The Federal Gov't forced Wolves on the Rocky Mountain states. When the King of England forced his taxes on us we didn't just stand around and complain. His tea was dumped into the harbor for starters. Gov't tyranny comes in all forms and this one is an assault against sport hunting.

I was in a gun shop in Wyoming just after the the initial release of the wolves and was looking at the then new .17hmr and the salesman said thats a wolf gun! I said what? he said you shoot them with this and they run off and die somewhere else and the bullets explodes in them, no ballistic evidence! now I am just asayin and certainly would never condone such activity!

I sleep with my 4X Leupold scoped .22 Henry Levergun and really like the Aguila Super Max ammo chroned at 1600 fps out of my levergun.That puppy is accurate, but it is made in America...

Seems like a good choice out of hunting seasons for fun around camp.


Jayco

Incorrect! What I don't care about is how many wolves, elk , deer, etc. Idaho manges for. Its their business. That's what I wrote...several times. You twisted it to your statement that I don't care about the "locals"; a pure fabrication. I certainly "understand" the situation and I have sympathy for those involved. Some of you fellows need to stop making shiite up about other posters and stick to your own opinion; another statement I've made many times. You musta missed that.
FUBAR, indeed.

Yup. And you presented that well in your first post, with your quote of the radical pro-wolf meeting attendee.

Reduction of elk numbers, which may actually boost bison numbers, is only a benefit of the wolf intro. The entire yellowstone ecosystem has been affected. Just look at before and after photos of a yellowstone aspen stand to see what is happening. Beaver are coming back because streamside vegetation is growing. The streams will start accumulating elevation in their headwaters instead of gullifying from overgrazing, making better habitat for stream dwellers as well as streamside dwellers. Grizzlies have more food. Some bears are not hibernating because they have so much food during winter. Some bears are actually following wolf packs and stealing kills as soon as they are made. That's one reason the number of elk killed per wolf is so high in yellowstone. Hell, even several species of rare beetles are reappearing in the park. A full ecosystem, including all the top predators, is what managers were trying to accomplish. The effects of wolf predation are only by-products. Wolves were introduced to have wolves.

Its refreshing to actually post a reply to a reasonable poster, instead of continually having my boot up troll butt.

Gotta go work on our dragon boat now. About two weeks of party around here to go to. See ya'll.