Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Another view on wolves/predators in MT

Surprised no one has posted this. Interesting statistics on elk populations in Montana that no one has mentioned.

Hatred of predators reaches ridiculous fervor--
In the Hunt by Nick Geovck |

"Conservation is a state of harmony between men and land. By land is meant all of the things on, over, or in the earth. Harmony with land is like harmony with a friend; you cannot cherish his right hand and chop off his left. That is to say, you cannot love game and hate predators."
- Aldo Leopold

Let's kill every wolf in Montana.

Sounds like a popular idea these days among hunters.

While we're at it, let's kill every grizzly bear, every black bear and every mountain lion. Throw in golden eagles, bald eagles, rattlesnakes and coyotes.

We'd be left with a hunter's paradise - a state teeming with game animals and hunting opportunity, right?

That's the sentiment I heard recently at a meeting on the hunting season setting proposals in Butte, where an oft-angry group of sportsmen called for large-scale killing of predators to increase the number of deer, elk and other game species. The suggestions ranged from having government trappers shoot wolves from helicopters to creating a season on eagles so they don't kill mountain goats.

Of course Butte sportsmen aren't alone. Over the past few years anger has been building blaming predators - and in particular wolves - for lower game herds and for less hunting opportunity. Wolf haters throw around words like "annihilation" and "devastation" when it comes to Montana's deer and elk herds. And even some respected conservation groups have gotten in on the wolf bashing through public statements decrying the effects of predators.

What state are these people living in?

Here are a few facts about Montana's wildlife populations and hunting over the past two decades, covering the period during which the much-maligned western gray wolf has been on the landscape.

In 1992, three years before wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks official estimate of the elk herd was 89,000 elk in Montana. Today we have a statewide estimate of 150,000 elk.

In 2003, the state Legislature passed a bill that required FWP biologists bring elk numbers down to the targeted objective populations laid out in the statewide elk plan. They were responding to complaints from ranchers about too many elk on their private land.

Ironically, some of the same lawmakers who supported that bill are among the most vocal wolf bashers. That hypocrisy begs the question: are there too many elk or too many wolves in Montana?

Anyway, the Legislature in recent years has given FWP several tools to kill more elk, including giving hunters the chance to kill two elk per year.

And since then, Montana has on three occasions extended the general elk season to give hunters two additional weeks to kill elk in years when the harvest was slow.

Second elk tags, extended seasons and liberal regulations allowing more cow elk hunting: where's the loss of hunting opportunity?

In truth, elk hunters have had more opportunity than in decades and now we've seen the effects of that.

Over the past couple years we've brought elk back down closer to the target populations or in some cases dropped it below those objective numbers. Accordingly, FWP biologists have gone from liberal to more conservative seasons, allowing fewer cow elk to be killed in many areas and reducing the second tags.

It proves that two-legged predators with high-powered rifles can be extremely effective at killing elk.

Now clearly wolves and other predators have had a hand in bringing down some of Montana's elk herds. People often cite the herd in the northern end of Yellowstone National Park, which topped in the mid-1990s at 19,000 animals and has dropped by more than 60 percent.

What often gets left out of the argument from wolf haters is whether that was a sustainable number of elk that was healthy for the land. It wasn't, and biologists cannot manage wildlife populations for their highest population every year.

And I'd assert that the large turkey shoots on elk just north of the Yellowstone boundary near Gardiner, where hundreds of elk would come out at a time, was a quality elk hunt that was good for the image of hunting.

Do wolves, bears, mountain lions and other predators kill game? Of course they do, and they should be managed to sustain and yet control their populations using sound science, not hysteria.

In the early 20th century, we tried predator control as a cure-all to boost game numbers. It failed, because it didn't take into account the myriad of factors that go into sustaining healthy wildlife numbers.

We only need to look to the father of modern wildlife science - Aldo Leopold - to remember that conservation is much more complicated than killing predators en masse.

He said:

I have lived to see state after state extirpate its wolves. I have watched the face of many a newly wolfless mountain, and seen the south-facing slopes wrinkle with a maze of new deer trails. I have seen every edible bush and seedling browsed, first to anaemic desuetude, and then to death. I have seen every edible tree defoliated to the height of a saddlehorn. Such a mountain looks as if someone had given God a new pruning shears, and forbidden Him all other exercise. In the end the starved bones of the hoped-for deer herd, dead of its own too-much, bleach with the bones of the dead sage, or molder under the high-lined junipers.

Read more: http://mtstandard.com/news/local/ha...1e1-b87a-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz1kdCPNt4f

Yes, but in years past without the wolf, FW&P could just lower the number of licenses in over hunted areas and the game numbers would come back in a couple of years. That won't happen now with big dogs around. FW&P keeps lowering tag numbers and the game numbers keep going down too. Without game to hunt, hunter numbers go down too. So,not as much license revenue collected in license fees. Do you now see the vicious cycle that is going on in much of MT. Wolves are not a good thing if you are a hunter, Believe it. Daryl.

Another example of someone living a thousand miles away thinking they know what's going on in my backyard...

The wolves are like our lake trout. They're an example of an idea that looked good on paper to someone, but that person didn't have a whole bunch of foresight. Sure, their numbers will decrease when there is not enough prey for them. All potential prey species will decimated in the process and the ecosystem will be out of balance - to say nothing of local and state economies. Also, in the past wolves needed to be poisoned in order to remove them. Hunting is not an effective population control for wolves.

We have the "Mac Attack" fishing tournament to try to keep lake trout numbers down. Will we have something similar for wolves? Perhaps even returning to shoot on sight (legally ). Just look to the coyote to see the effectiveness of that plan - we have no shortage of those.

Bears and cats have done plenty to control the elk herds with the regulated help of two-legged predators. I know in one area I hunt that many of the ranchers complaining about too many elk are severely restricting hunter access to their land. They are part of block management, but you need to get on a restricted daily numbers list at the local NFS office. I don't imagine they are too happy about wolves as a solution to their problem, though.

There's a romantic sentiment to hearing wolves howling out in the woods - especially for those who don't have them. The reality is that when Lewis and Clark came through this area there was little game in the mountains. Most of the game animals lived on the prairie and in the valleys. The problem with trying to return to that type of "balance" in our ecosystems is that we (people) have turned much of that into "real estate", so the elk have nowhere to go when the snow gets deep in the mountains.

Western gray wolf...What happened to the Canadian imported wolf.

Boy Mudhen, you're living dangerous on the Campfire......


Nobody believes me when I try to tell them these things.



Casey

Doesn't exist.

FNG,
The difference is Lake Trout aren't indigenous, or native, to most of the areas where they have been introduced. Wolves have been restored to the Northern Rockies, restored themselves in the upper Great Lakes region (as they were slowly doing in the Northern Rockies anyway) and are indigenous to the entire northern tier of states. It has been demonstrated time and again the introduction of non-native/exotic species generally does more harm than good.

Ironically, it has been state wildlife agencies who have been some of the biggest purveyors of non-native species.....Rainbow, Brown, Lake, and Brook trout are some good examples here in the Rockies.

Casey

One of these days the powers that be will realize that wolves cannot be tolerated in certain areas. Decimating an elk herd in one area of the state while other herds in other areas where wolves aren't a factor are above objective does not create the "balance" we hear so much of. mtmuley

The writer of the article apparently lives in Butte or thereabouts, not a thousand miles away. His sources were apparently from reports done by MT FWP.

I posted the article because it contained information that has not been mentioned in some of the "dialogue" dealing with wolves and their impacts on hunting opportunities. This is a subject that interests me. I also enjoy learning people's views these subjects and often learn things that I don't know.

If you read the technical literature, you will find wildlife managers saying again and again that the numbers of large predators and their ranges are ultimately constrained by how many, and where, people will tolerate them. This is especially true of wolves and grizzlies.

Mudhen, I find you post most interesting. I haven't hunted Montana in the past forty years. However, I have reqularly for the last five or six years helped out locally (Portland,OR) at the Pacific Northwest Sportmans Show which will occur again next month in Portland. Because of my past hunting in Montana and my desire to return, I have spent alot of time talking to Montana guide/outfitters who rent space at the show to sell guided hunting trips. I can tell you that the number of the guides for Montana hunts has diminished considerably. The guides who remain are not very optomistic about the chances of a "trophy bull". I have however made several trips to B.C. hunting moose. Canadians seem to have a very simple view of wolves. It would make the wolf lovers cringe. As for the person who wrote the Montana Standard article, I did a little research. I do not beleive that he is anything other than prowolf. As for targeted game herd levels, those are set by politics more than biology.

NW Montana has never not had wolves. Their range is large enough that they have always crossed the border and spent time down here. Our elk, therefore have retained the skill set to survive with the wolf. My comparison with the non-native lake trout was to point out how the intentional "reintroduction", and especially protection, of the wolf has gotten out of hand. I don't mind the wolf on principle - I just wish our hands would be untied so we could keep them under control.

It doesn't matter if you blame the wolves, bears, mountain lions or humans, the local and state economies are going to lose money due to lack of tag filling opportunity. I travel all over western Montana to hunt elk. I spend money in all those areas. You won't catch me down in the 'roots looking for elk, though which means I'm not spending money there (and I'm not the only one).

Just for the record (and apropos the thread title), I was in an all-day meeting on Thursday over in Arizona. Among other things, a representative from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service gave us an update on the status of the Mexican government's release of five Mexican wolves south of us in Sonora. These wolves were released on privately owned land without the consent of the landowners (who are neither pro-wolf nor anti-wolf).

Four of the five animals released have died: three were poisoned and one was hit by a vehicle on Mexico Hwy 1 just south of the International Boundary. The lone remaining wolf (a female) apparently has not roamed far from the release site about twenty miles south of the line--probably one reason that she is still alive. The three animals that were poisoned were most likely not targeted but simply consumed 1080-laced baits that are widely used in prophylactic predator control by ranchers in northern Mexico.