Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting MT Late Season Elk Hunt Cancelled Due to Predation From Wolves

Sorry, SSS hasn't shown up so far, but it was only a matter of time.

The problem that most people aren't realizing is that in order to be able to continue to manage the wolves, we need to keep the numbers high enough to stay off the ES list, which is right where they are now. Chances are, if we drop the numbers down to where they're re-listed, we aren't getting management back for a very, very long time.
The numbers of wolves within the park are already leveling out, and it'll happen in other areas too. We need to understand that we will have, and need to have, the amount of wolves that exist in the state right now in order to keep them at any sort of constant.
Yeah, it sucks, some elk herds took a nose dive. The herd I hunt is about 15% of what it was ten years ago. But populations are a very liquid asset, they're going to go up and down.
It's not like there aren't going to be enough elk to sustain a hunt in these areas though, I still killed a bull this year, and know many others that killed elk near the park. My fiancee had a Gardiner tag last year, passed on more bulls than either of us will likely ever see in our lifetime hunting.
Yeah, there's less elk, but it ain't exactly the doomsday situation everyone keeps trying to convey online.

That happened to be the largest wolf ever weighed in Yellowstone NP. The article went on to say the 80 to 85 pound wolves have better chances at catching elk. That doesn't bode well for the large wolf theory.

What are they doing(to decrease elk calf recruitment)?

Ding ding, 4100fps just stuck his dick in the hole, priority number one needs to be figuring out a way to shoot down the god forsaken elk management plan they adopted.

I was fortunate enough to draw an either sex late tag for the Gardner area 7 or 8 years ago and if the 360 class bull I shot saw his brother about to be eaten alive by a pack of wolves he owes me a big smooch for putting him down with one shot. There is nothing more cruel than the way a wolf kills. Coincidently, the local TV stations ran a several day segment on wolves in Montana this week and a group of puppy lovers from D.C. were here saying tourism created just by the wolves generated $53mil in revenue for the state while livestock kills only cost the state app. $67,000. Anyone who participated in the late hunts knows how busy Gardner was in Jan/Feb. Now with the hunt over they ought to ask the motels/restraunts/outfitters/taxidermists/butchers/gas stations/fish & goose dept. license/application fees, etc. and it's obvious the media and canine lovers don't want the rest of the populous to know the whole story. Sad,Sad,Sad

As far as doing something about it, I and several hunderd other Montanan's attended and spoke against reintroduction at the EIS hearings. Out of over 500 people, I only heard one speak in favor of it yet when the U.S.F.W.S. announced they were moving forward with the project they announced with "Overwhelming support from the people". I queried several friends that attended other meetings in Montana and Wyoming that I couldn't make and they all reported the same results as I'd seen. So it is our opinion that the hearings they held in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho was their way of checking a box and bowing to the desire of those not having to make a living in this economy.

I have heard that in recent years that Colorado is having an elk issue. If I were you, I'd keep my mouth shut about that and just take care of it or the easterners are going to pick up wind of it and all they'll hear is "Alpo on the hoof" and you'll be dealing with it next.

There is no doubt that we need to manage elk habitat better (ie. better winter range) but these issue have been circulating for many many years. The wolf just greatly added to an existing problem!!!!!


ddj

Sam, if you don't have the cows then your not going to have the calves. The Montana Stock Growers Ass. Through SW Montana Legislator Debbie Barrett, passed a resolution about 8 years ago. What it did, was direct the MDFW&P's to come up with objective numbers for elk in each district in the state of Montana. These numbers were greatly influenced by the livestock, and ag communities. Most all of these districts were given population numbers that were less than they were at the time, and were totally social, influenced by tolerance from those communities. Then the same person got another resolution passed that mandated the MDFW&P's, to get all those elk management units at or below the objectives by 2009. They did, along with the help from all the predators we were protecting. In most cases, over on the west, and around the part, they over did it. We don't even have any livestock community to speak of anymore.

The thing to do is revisit the EMP or Elk Management Plan, and get the numbers up to support the hunters as well as the predators that we have on the landscape. We know we have to limit the predators to do that. Bears, Lions, coyotes, and wolves all need some killing. We'll have to save every cow we can until we start getting back up the hill.

Yep.
Wolves certainly aren't helping the situation. I can see where they are beneficial inside the park but outside, not so much.

Sam
It seems as though the solution would be to let the wolves live in Yellowstone Park, and have an open season on them outside the park. That's too simple a solution to ever be put in place, I guess.
Fred

These wolves look pretty large compaired to that bull elk. Having an 80 pound dog at my feet, I would guess these four wolves are in the 100 pound range and seem to be having no trouble chasing this big elk.


80 to 85 pound wolves "Have a better chance" at catching Elk, not that larger wolves like those in the picture don't kill Elk on a regular basis.

The genetics are there for big wolves.

I gotta add on the size thing, that they really do look a lot bigger than they are.
I don't know exactly why that is, but my guess is just how thick of a coat they have when they're most visible in winter.
The two guys that I talked to that killed them (one last week, get on it Idaho and fill those quotas already!) were both really surprised how small the actual bodies on the wolves were, compared to how they looked on foot.
The couple I've seen in the summer though look more like lanky coyotes than wolves.

I believe the same problem has happened in Alaska with wolf packs just decimating moose populations in some areas. I don't know what makes wolves so great that another species has to suffer just so some ass can feel good about re-introducing wolves. I understand that they are part of an ecosystem and play their part, but if they get out of control they need to be brought back in to control.

Au contrare--try to defend the existence of wolves and watch the name calling begin in an attempt to shout down anything that may smack of science or conservation.

Wolves were supposed to reduce the number of elk--it was only reported about, oh.....a thousand times in the run-up to wolf restoration.

But if nothing else, selective memory prevails in the wolf threads.


Casey

But your trying to attach human morals and standards to wildlife that eat each other--personally I leave Walt Disneyism to Hollywood.





Wolves indeed generate a lot of revenue--and the same Gardner businesses that opposed wolve restoration are now selling wolf T-shirts---but I've only written that at least a half dozen times in the past year......




The late season Gardner hunt was created as a depredation hunt--which are supposed to be temporary. But like any government program, once a constintuency is created, it's sometimes harder to kill than it was to start.

Same thing is happening in Colorado--the days of easy, plentiful cow tags are over. The elk herds have been reduced closer to objectives in many areas--and man, you should hear the bitching and moaning.......it's all a communist/terrorist/environmenatist/socialist plot........


Casey

Seems like one of the astute law firms could find a way to make those who pushed for wolf reintroduction help bear the burden of the loss of hunting revenue.

But can it feed my kids?

Right here, watching you troll me up by making up stuff about me and calling me names. Good job. Good little troll.

I've never said wolves were "nice." 4100 and others have summed it up well.

Have you learned what they look like yet, dumbass?
Don't put yer wolf tag on somebody's pet.

Folks around here, in NE MN where there have always been wolves, have opinions that seem to be like folks in other places that are used to the wolves; pretty much just "what's the fuss all about." And of course with "threatened" status: "Just wish we could legally protect our pets." We even wonder what the other animals (like bears) think about the "special" status that wolves hold. Like this cartoon in this week's local newspaper :

I remember when Outdoor life called the Gardener hunt a Blood Bath. If we as hunters continue to call the elk predation devastating the anti's wil use the same word for the hunter harvest.

Only your kind of "dog" Dtroll!!

It continues to amaze me how we can not find a common ground on the wolf/ elk management issue.

Before the reintroduction of the wolf. Landowners were begignning to see the value of their elk herds as another possible form of income. Landowners North of Yellowstone were open and some even excited to learn how to increase forage base by prescribed burns. The federal ground had already been doing this for increased winter range and "pull" elk off the private ground for more hunting opportunities. Instead we brought in wolves which are going to limit our hunting opportunities instead of enhancing them.

Not my idea of stewardship!!!


ddj