News Bite
Petition Calls for National Wolf Recovery Plan
By Bea Gordon, 7-22-10
 |
|
 | |
|
A petition filed this week by the Center for Biological Diversity asks for tens of thousands of gray wolves to be reintroduced across the United States, including in New England, California, the Great Plains and the desert West.
The gray wolf, which was pushed to the brink of extinction with a mere 500 animals left in existence by the 1970’s, has only just begun to make significant progress in population recovery. Federal protections have brought the population up to about 6,000 wolves in the United States today.
While environmental groups cite the fragility of these recovery efforts as incentive for further protections, particularly in the Northern Rockies, opposition to increased protection has been vocal, to say the very least
The petition filed on Tuesday asks for a national recovery effort for the wolf, instead of the regional approaches the federal government has taken thus far.
“The act requires that wolf populations be recovered across a significant portion of their original range, and that isn’t close to happening as yet,” the Center’s Michael Robinson told the Duluth News Tribune. “We need a national wolf plan and policy.”
The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, has sought to give population control of the gray wolf back to individual states.
The push for a nationalized wolf management plan comes in direct response to Minnesota and Wisconsin’s efforts to eliminate federal protections for the animal. This would allow states to manage wolf populations according to their own regulations and would also allow for more aggressive culling of wolf populations.
As Matthew Brown reports for the Associated Press, wolf experts say, wolves could most likely survive in almost any region of the country if it were open to reintroduction. But the problem isn’t just biological or geographic anymore—it’s political.
The question of a population’s survival in a region now depends on its reception, says David Mech, a senior scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey. He tells the AP: “In areas where they are not acceptable, they will be killed out—illegally if nothing else.”
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
the CBD lacks any credibility by asking for this reintroduction. anywhere that the wolf has been reintroduced the great majority of people want the wolf managed , translation hunted. not eliminated but managed.
the fringers want the impossible.
The lack of any "grassroot" enviro movement to reintroduce the wolf to Vermont or California only highlights their inane hypocracy. It highlights the fact that Montana and Wyoming are seen by such people as merely environmental colonys suited only for playing out their "old west wilderness before white man" fantasies. It's environmental imperialism. The beautifull people are no different than the British RAj.
The truth is, that when faced with reality, Vermont, birkenstock capital of the world, really doesn't want Fifi to disappear into the night. They don't want their school children to see mutilated dairy cows. They're simply afraid of the wolf. California is nothing but Wolf habitat, and yet I can recall no serious effort by any of the "grass roots" gray ponytails to reintroduce the wolf. Suddenly they get more pragmatic than a Republican.
And while we're at it-why not reintroduce the Grizzly bear to California. Isn't it on their state flag? I'll let Vermont slide on that one. I'm no Bear expert, but I would think Colorado has huge wilderness areas suited for reintroduction. Why no grassroots movement ? Because the beautifull people don't want to round the corner and run into Horiblus Maximus on their favorite day hiking trail. No, It's best not spoken of. I feel more comfortable shoving it down a bunch of white trash Montanans who need a good lesson in enviro correctness anyway. Ever notice that Enviros never shove anything down the throats of other enviros?
This is nothing but a propoganda ploy to show CBD's "street cred". So they can run around and demonstrate to everyone their commitment to the environment. It will quietly go away. The last thing they're gonna do is shove the wolf down the throats of the donors who pays their salary.
One time I popped up over a ridge and the whole Wind River range lay before me. My first thought was this must have been incredible to see in the Mountain man days. My next thought was I'd be to busy looking over my shoulders for Indian War parties and Grizzly bears. There was a reason you didn't travel alone and everyone was heavily armed. It would be like walking down a street in Bahgdad. Talk about a buzz kill. The point is-you gotta take the bad with the good in your wilderness fantasies. Lewis and Clark didn't come back to your BP heated home after a couple days roughin it in the wilderness area. Enviros don't want the bad in their fantasies.
And for what? Where's it all at now? Yup, right here again. Same muddle, same imbalance, same scarcity or excess of whatever species.
I can only characterize the overall results of this continuous meddling as the incompetent fumbling, consistently failed attempts by non-profit and government bureaucrats who spend most of their time in delusional planning sessions and whose primary concern seems to be the perpetuation of their organizations and reassuring cheers of their supporters.
Back before the white people came to town, large uncharted tracts existed where the animal populations remained pretty much self-regulated. But there are lots of people inhabiting these areas now. It ain't ever gonna be like it was. The lady jogger in Alaska isn't alive to remind you of this truth because a wolf pack ate most of her not far from her hometown.
You also need to understand that wolves don't bother killing their prey before they start eating them. Yes, most of their "kills" (larger than mice) are still alive when their several sets of sharp teeth are tearing chunks of flesh away while the animal lies writhing in unimaginable agony. Picture it happening to you . . . I dare you. Or happening to an elk or deer or cow or sheep. Picture it in detail. Then tell us where you'd like the next wolf pack inserted. In your backyard?
No, we can't change how animals behave (unless we capture and cage them all). But we can change the ridiculous, ever-changing arm-chair policies made by nature theorists and do-gooders who want to introduce more animal cruelty to an already tough lifestyle out there beyond the roads.
Which is why I wish these meddlers would just leave things be. If herds of anything get too large, they should be opened to hunting (as they've been hunted for thousands of years). Besides, for an animal, a relatively quick death by hunters is a far more humane form of "management" than hours of indescribable torture while it's being eaten alive by these naturally cold-hearted killers. I guarantee you, their cuddly charm disappears really fast when you gaze into those abyss-like black eyes as they size you up for dinner.
No, wolves should not be exterminated. But neither should they be re-populated anywhere, anytime. If the way people manage wildlife is anything like the way people manage themselves (and it is), we're all in deep trouble!
I gather from that comment Greenkeeper, you're a vegan?
If not, when you pick up those nicely wrapped packages of beef, chicken or pork from your local store, ever done any research into what kind of agony those animals went thru in slaughterhouses or on factory farms to satisfy your hunger? Or how about that hunter who shoots and wounds an animal but is too lazy or too incompetent to follow it?
Google Earthlings - I dare you to watch it.
This is just another ploy by the greenie whackos to force us off the land, to be herded into big cities like cattle. Organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity...Defenders of Wildlife...or the Humane Society of the United States have never spent one red cent on real conservation. They have not really saved one darn species/subspecies of wildlife. All of their efforts are to keep issues such as this tied up in court. And in that regard the wolf has been a very lucrative "cash cow" for them. Not only have they milked an unknowing, wolf uneducated American public out of hundreds of millions of dollars annually (under the disguise of saving wolves), these organizations have also learned how to bilk the U.S. justice system of even more money - abusing a little known act called the "Equal Access to Justice Act". Being so-called "non-profit" organizations, this act allows them to be reimbursed (with your taxpayer dollars) for the cost, time and effort for their court/legal involvement, such as "fighting for" continued protection for wolves. And they have certainly learned how to pad their claimed "expenses".
Back during one 6-year period during the mid 2000's, these organizations/groups filed more than 1,500 such lawsuits (mostly against a willing U.S. governemnt)...and banked nearly $5-BILLION of your tax dollars.
That's exactly why they line up to be plaintiffs in any wildlife/environmental case - especially if it is against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Department of the Interior. Go to the Center for Biological Diversity's website, and take a look at the long list of issues they claim is their goal to intervene into. What you will really see is where this organization will profit hundreds of millions of dollars as we head on into the future.
Unplug this financial cash cow, and get the Equal Access to Justice Act repealed, and watch how quickly these not-so-environmentally friendly groups disappear...or become extinct.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
P.S. - Stock up on ammo...you're gonna need it!
Yup, a few wounded game animals are left in the field, the result of a few irresponsible hunters. But they are exceptions, and they are not policy-generated incompetence. I've seen all the videos, from Google to PETA to Food, Inc. Outrageous each in its own way.
Toby (above) covers it very well. While some environmental groups are sincere and well meaning, way too many--Sierra Club and CBD et al--have become hostels for tax-exempt con artists and perpetual meddlers, flying the flag of self-righteousness. I detect a huge void of sincerity where they live. They are the worst because their hypocrisy hides behind do-gooder press releases and mailing-list rip-offs of unsuspecting supporters and taxpayers. What a racket!
There were lots more Indians on the ground pre 1492 than most people understand. Eurodisease did a lot more killing than commonly thought. But the timeline is such that game populations were probably a lot lower in general pre-1492. Then, a couple hundred years of Indian-vacated landscape, or the remainder thin on the ground (think Oregon between 1800 and 1850, basically the era between significant contact and settlement), and you'll have huge, unobserved shifts in populations and densities.
Don't think it's possible? Look at what has happened in Yellowstone just since 1994.
CBD's petition might be just the ticket, however, for making the case that the ESA (as well as the whole federal court system/environmental laws) is in need of serious structural reforms. Give all those shiny new Republican legislators something to sink their teeth into, ya know.
Have you ever taken the time to read the Lewis & Clark journals. Their almost daily entries make very little mention of wolves...because they did not encounter wolves very often during that long trek from Missouri through the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean...and back. And they were travelling through a truly wild America, one that few if any white people of European ancestry had ever travelled and seen before.
The earliest humans to inhabit North America (the American Indian) relied heavily on elk, moose, bison, deer and other big game to keep their people fed. And the wolf was competition for that food source. One reason why the Corps of Discovery very rarely encountered wolves during their journey was likely because those early Native Americans were wise enough to keep wolf numbers as low as possible - probably practicing "shoot on sight" management even then. Something we will most likely have to resort to in order to get wolf numbers down to a very low acceptable number.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
It does my heart good to know that we're getting under the skin of you and other out of touch with reality wolf lovers.
Are all of those elk, moose, deer, bighorn sheep, and other big game animals, not to mention the loss of livestock, indiscriminantly killed by non-native invasive Candaian wolves, brought here illegally by USFWS, on your conscience?
I know it isn't on the conscience of money grubbing environmental groups like the Defenders of Wildlife or the Humane Society of the United States or the Center for Biological Diversity. Those groups are all frauds, milking people like you across the country out of hundreds of millions of dollars every year, plus bilking the U.S. justice system of far more with their fraudulent frivolous lawsuits.
Donnie, I'll bet you've never even seen a wolf in the wild, or watch them pull down an elk and eat it alive - when they don't just kill it for sport, and leave it without eating anything. Believe me, those who have truly supported conservation in this country have had their fill of this idiocy - and wolves are going to die, whether or not Judge Molloy leaves them delisted or returns them to the protection of the ESA. In fact, if he does the latter, even more wolves will feel the bite of the bullet this fall. Many, many, many angry hunters will take our their anger and frustration on any and all wolves that step out in front of them.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
No, Toby that is called nature and it's perfectly natural and normal. Please, get some help with your wolf hatred you old fart you.
So, it's natural for NON-ENDANGERED wolves from 1,500 to 2,000 miles north of the U.S. - Canadian border to walk down from northern British Columbia, the Yukon, and northern Alberta to Montana, Idaho and Wyoming???
Not!
They were brought here illegally by USFWS...brought across the border without the required paperwork...and all of that was financed with money USFWS embezzled from Pitman-Robertson funds.
And that was just the start of the lies and deceit that plague the Wolf Recovery Project of the Northern Rockies. And someone at a top level position with USFWS during all of this is now coming clean and exposing just how criminal and totally wrong this fiasco has been. Pressure is now being put on our legal system to shift from the idiocy presented by Earthjustice to try getting wolves back under the protection of the ESA...to spotlighting the theives within USFWS who stole $60- to $70-million dollars and those who broke the law by actually smuggling those wolves across the border, without filing the proper paperwork.
Ol' Donnie Boy...things are going to get a whole lot more interesting during the course of the next 3 or 4 months. And yes...wolves will die.
My Mom is 80 years old, and I'll bet she could kick your Mom's butt. Heck, I'll bet she could kick your butt! You don't seem to have much to fight with...other than the same old malarky the pro-wolf side has used to death. You're firing blanks.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
Wanna bet?
Wolves are gonna die. They are already. And it it isn't even wolf season.
Like I said, hunters have had enough. Those who have had reservations about pulling the trigger on ol' Canis lupus occidentallis or Canis lupus columbianus in the past...won't even
hesitate this coming season. Hell, some are already hunting.
MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks as well as ID Fish and Game have absolutely no idea how many wolves are out there...and they likewise have no idea how many are already being eliminated.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
P.S. - Mark Hebblewhite is an idiot. A student of the Dr. Robert Ream school of wolf management. Wolves did not walk here from northern British Columbia or northern Alberta...they got a free ride from USFWS.
when the wolves were initially introduced they were listed as a non essential experimental species, and they were to be held at 150 wolves with 10 breeding pairs, no more no less. through some fancy footwork and some legal shenanigans by some high priced environmental lawyers and biologists. the mandates set out by congress under the direction of the scientific community stating that the reintroduction of wolves should not impact communities,hunting or the grizzly bear recovery. the wolf reintroduction is still listed as a non essential experiment and will be open for review soon enough, if it is found that the experiment has failed in one or more of these areas it can be considered a failure, then the fun will begin :).
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=wolfrecovery
Agreed.
Sure a few wolves have come across the border from Canada. There is no barrier to keep them out...just as there is no barrier to keep wolves from crossing back and forth between Minnesota and Ontario. Those are the same wolf. Still, USFWS took it upon themselves to designate the wolves on the Minnesota side as a "Distinct Population Segment"...and threw them on the Endangered Species List back in 1974. Then there were 700 to 1,000 wolves in that state...now there are 4,000+,
and still no management. Deer and moose are disappearing rapidly.
The wolves that USFWS used stolen money to illegally smuggle into this country for dumping into the Northern Rockies DID NOT walk across the border on their own. And they are not the same
subspecies of wolf that did live in Montana. Likewise, those Canadian wolves are not endangered or threatened in their home range...which is 1,500 to 2,000 miles north of the U.S.-Canada border.
The Wolf Recovery Project of the Northern Rockies is, without a doubt, a failed experiment. Now, we need to eliminate as many of those wolves as possible, and hold a few of the USFWS thieves and liars responsible for the destruction of more than 75 years of wildlife conservation in many parts of the Northern Rockies.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
Wolves were supposed to have been pretty much eradicated from the Northern Rockies during the 1930s...with only a few small pockets known to exist in western Montana before the release of Canadian wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Area in 1995-96.
So, with so many wolves in Canada, please tell me why they didn't migrate south until AFTER those wolves were released.
Dr. Robert Ream, and his pro-wolf cohorts at the University of Montana (Missoula) had one hell of a time finding wolves during their 1974 study. There may have been 12-14 known wolves in Montana at that time - even though they had had more than 40 years to migrate down from Canada.
We've listened to enough of that hogwash. It is now very clear that the high number of wolves we now have, since 1995, did not walk down from Canada (just as they did not walk down during the '30s, '40s, '50s, 60s, '70s, '80s and early '90s).
Those wolves were dumped here...and now we have one hell of a lot more wolves than USFWS, MT FWP and IDFG are admitting to.
Face it, your side has simpy run out of ammo to defend all of the illegal activity associated with the Wolf Recovery Project of the Northern Rockies.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
Hey, you wouldn't be Donnie Molloy, would you? If so, I heard you slapped a nun while in high school. You bad boy.
Northern Rocky Mountain wolves, a subspecies of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), were native to Yellowstone when the park was established in 1872. the grey wolf was never native to wyoming, the wolves found in 1974-1975 were the rocky mountain wolves. virtually every wolf reintroduction website on the net lists this information so it is readily available. their is ABSOLUTLY no natural migratory grey wolves in the lower 48. period. just transplants.
actually Valerius Geist is very much in favor of hunting the wolf to a more moderated population, pushing the numbers back to a managable number is not hating the wolf, simply a means of managing their population numbers so they don't end up eating and spree killing themselves out of house and home. i have been a fan of Valerius Geist's work and don,t recall seeing him stating they were moving south, in fact i have always read the opposite.
donney, i am afraid you are very wrong and would love to see where geist published this information.
http://www.wolvesgonewild.com/?p=106
GEIST: It may be worth mentioning that the wolves were actually well on the way from coming all on their own from Canada into the western states. There were wolves killed already south of Yellowstone and that was well before the re-introduction ever took place into Yellowstone. So they were coming on their own and the re-introduction just simply speeded things up.
I guess you feel stupid now zbiker. It's alright, run along wolf hater.
Kind of like using an accelerant to burn down a house, eh?
Then, tell us ol' wise one, why didn't those thousdnds of wolves move south into the Northern Rockies during the mid to late 1930s on through the mid 1970s?
I don't disagree that some wolves did migrate down...just not to the degree that they were the basis for the thousands of wolves that are here now. And, the wolves that would have come across the border from southern British Columbia are not the same wolves here now. These are the off-spring of the wolves brought here from northern British Columbia, northern Alberta, and the Yukon. Also, even though USFWS denies it, there are trappers in northern Saskatchewan who claim to have provided wolves for the illegal USFWS wolf dump. And some will very likely be stepping forth in the not so distant future to share what they know.
Donald Molloy needs to get off his rear end and do some real justice work, calling for a comprehensive investigation of the entire project - from the theft of the Pitman-Robertson monies to fund the project...to the illegal manner in which those wolves were brought here by Ed Bangs, without the required paperwork...to the false predictions and claims of the Environmental Impact Statement filed...and all the lies to cover up the damage wolves were dealing wildlife and livestock.
Rest assured, there will be a serious thinning of the wolf population this coming fall and winter - whether Molloy allows the management hunts to take place or not. Like I said earlier, if he denies the states to conduct these hunts, Molloy will likely be the cause of a whole lot more wolves to die. The percentage of hunters here who have had enough continues to grow at an astounding rate. Any wolf that walks out within range during the big game seasons will very likely take a hit. More and more Montana hunters now keep a rifle in their truck or SUV any time they travel through wolf country. For many...the wolf season is already open.
And this war will get even hotter. Only a fool would think that the sportsmen who have paid for all wildlife conservation in this country are just going to quit hunting. They're going to take care of the problem.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
I hope judge Molloy applies the law; so the FWP can apply the full force of the law to scofflaws like Toby Bridges.
I'd like to see a few potsmokers and illegal immigrants get early release so there is plenty of room for animal assassins.
What is your response to Geist's comments about what I said zbiker?
read the whole section like you were sitting in on a round table and
(earlier fanning had stated:)
FANNING: It’s simple. There is no “re-introduction” because the wolf introduced into Yellowstone Park is not native to this geography and had never naturally been here to begin with. The Gray wolf is ironically enough, a human introduced invasive species. You see, the original wolf inhabiting the geography of the Park was a much smaller animal, the Rocky Mountain wolf or Canis lupus irremotus. The Canadian Gray Timber wolf, Canis lupus occidentalis, is also known as the Alaskan Tundra Wolf. It was introduced at significant cost to the U.S. taxpayer and is a super size predator with a rapacious appetite and lust for wanton killing"
(then hope and beers made these statements:)
"HOPPE: You know, well, what they’re saying is there are 500 in the State of Montana, and I think 600 in Wyoming. And the rest of them are supposedly in Idaho. They’re saying there’s like 1600 wolves. That’s the last number that I saw.
AAP: So, is this an accurate number?
BEERS: No, the real number could be an order of magnitude larger. I don’t think you’ll ever find out."
( then beers said :)
BEERS: I believe that the upper Rocky Mountain population of wolves that we look at now spans from Oregon over to Montana and down to and spilling across Wyoming and this population derives almost entirely from that release in Yellowstone National Park, although there were some remnant populations of wolves, populations or packs, in and out of the Alberta and British Columbia borders up there for sure
( At which point geist made the statement you are referring too.)
-"GEIST: It may be worth mentioning that the wolves were actually well on the way from coming all on their own from Canada into the western states. There were wolves killed already south of Yellowstone and that was well before the re-introduction ever took place into Yellowstone"
(At which point beers and hoppe explained why the wolves were there and it wasn't from migrating down from canada.)
-"HOPPE: In the mid to late 60s’, Yellowstone Park tried to put wolves in here at that time. In 1968, my dad, my brother and I saw a wolf here above the house. The story was always circulated around that the park had tried to bring in 12 wolves. In later years, probably 1970 or ’71, I worked in the Park for a few summers, and I saw the cages where they were stored in a building up there above Mammoth. The cages had Canadian stickers on them and had dog feces in them. So it all made sense. A rancher I knew, who’s since passed away, in 1969 said he killed two wolves on his ranch here in the Paradise Valley."-
BEERS: A year before I graduated from Utah State in 1963, I took a big game management course that had a one-week field trip up to Yellowstone National Park included in the class. At that time, the National Park Service biologists that talked to us and took us around the park were trying to deal with a problem.They talked about how they really needed to get wolves in there to reach a balance of nature.
if read in it's full context i think they expertly explained to geist that his theory was flawed by the fact that the wolves were their at the behest of the park, as well as the fact that the majority of the wolves that were killed were not the grey wolves that are from alberta. they were the smaller subspecies that were native to wyoming and idaho. i think if geist had absolutely convinced his theory was correct he would have tried to defend his position but he didn't. i get the feeling he had not considered that an alternative, that these were not all canadian wolves and that the few that were were not breeding pairs.
Keyword..."theory".
You never did address why all those wolves in Canada did not show up in force until USFWS illegally dumped them here. Why did they not come across the border in the numbers we have now...until after 1995?
Greenie Greene...
You apparently don't get out in the wild much. It's big country here in the Nothern Rockies. Even during the elk and deer seasons, one can often go days without seeing another hunter. Likewise, one can hunt every day of the season...and not see one single game warden the whole season. It isn't as if there's a conservation officer behind every tree. In fact, as hunters buy fewer and fewer big game tags...those game departments are going to have less and less revenue to operate with...and there's sure to be some personell cuts...meaning there will be even fewer game wardens out there.
Save An Elk Herd - Kill A Wolf!
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:b9B42ACOUpwJ:ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/bitstream/1957/10548/1/Wol_Yel.pdf+1974+wolf+killing+south+of+yellowstone&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjhqSm3uzF9dthCyQof2wAgs654gRpzC6N_FLmRcvA4jbUPdhk9QU3LuXZ64JBJyqjIhsZM4ZhMFlhdQ1HNAmgKUfVs1esCqUwh5OBpXNf2A1Uap_Un3M-UeMfhRx8wwuINFs2L&sig=AHIEtbREgmZxpVA3X_spMzfFxe5mxO3Jsg
zbiker, I think the problem lies in you not wanting to accept that a biologist on your side has admitted that wolves were going be coming down here on their own whether we humans helped speed the process up or not"
ha ha not a bit donney, i actually understand what he was trying to put forth, when read in the full context of the round table discussion. i am fairly sure he has not read the "THE WOLVES OF YELLOWSTONE report put out by the department of the interior in 1978. page 1- 15 plainly shows that we had WYOMING wolves that were a subspecies, not grey wolves even as late as 1977.
this report was produced by : JOHN WEAVER
Department of Wildlife Science Utah State University, Logan and Environmental Research Institute Moose, Wyoming. yep, it was a theory that was put forth from a fella that had great intentions, no more no less.
"GEIST: It may be worth mentioning that the wolves were actually well on the way from coming all on their own from Canada into the western states. There were wolves killed already south of Yellowstone and that was well before the re-introduction ever took place into Yellowstone"
This does not sound like a theory the way he is speaking zbiker.
So, you think he is wrong and it's just a theory of his? You also act like the others in the roundtable discussion are somehow experts on wolves. zbiker, what about the others in the roundtable discussion? aren't where they saying just their own theories as well? Clearly Geist knows something that people like you don't want to admit and that is wolves were coming down on their own. All people did as I said was help speed the process up. You see, in Florida, humans brought snakes in and they are considered a non invasive species. Wolves have been in the northern rockies for many many years and they were brought back to where they once roamed. It has been proven and documented wolves coming down on their own, so they are not considered an invasive species. An invasive species is one humans bring in. Wolves were on their way down here naturally and all people did was help speed that up. This has more to do with hunters not wanting wolves in their states because they eat the game they want to hunt. I know this frustrates those who hunt, but you people have had years of good harvest rates. That has changed with all of the other predators in the ecosystem.
please read the report i gave you donney, especially the pages i referred too.
now back to the issue at hand, personally i think this petition would be great, it would do a lot of good as far as dispelling some of the wolf being viewed as a fluffy preciouses puppy if they were dispersed along the east coast and allowed the same protections as they are here. it would make an interesting paradox to say the least lol
of coarse their would always be some that care little for historical facts and still argue the attributes of the wolf whether he is a native species or not, but their would be far more that after living within their proximity for a while would be a lot more enlightened as to what having a wolf in your midst is really all about. yep, i think it's a grand idea and we should help promote it for our own benifit if nothing else.
all you've proven is that your terrified of wilderness.
LMAO at you looking over your shoulder for Grizzlies. Newsflash logger there are a few grizz left in thw winds.
Your lame attempt at enviros wanting wyoming and MT to be "wildenress before the white man colonies" ios such utter right wing crazy babble it's laughable.
Amen logger...wow this site is NUTS.
Absolutely pathetic logger...wow your afraid of the woods what a baby.
Also logger vermont never had many if any Grizz so I guess they're off your hook. The grizz roamed as far east as Ohio for certain.
All you've demonstarted is that you don't what the heck your talking about, you hate enviros and people from any coast, AND YOUR A AN UTTER RIGHT WING LOON.
i've worked in the last known area of Grizz habitattion in Colorado.
I would be more than happy to see them back there if they're really all gone.
Grizz are not the monstrous man stalkers you claim they are nor were all the Native americans.
Your just a scared bigot. Scared of wild country, scared of Bears scared of Indians etc.
Please don't post your nonsensical banter on this site especially when the topic here is WOLVES NOT GRIZZ.
Greenkeeper- I cannot beleive you "amened" Derek (logger) for his lunatic rnats and raves.
I guess new west really is just a forum for absolute right wing nut jobs who claim they have no political affiliation to rant and rave about whatever they want and impressionable fools will follow them off the cliff.
a forum for bigots to spread their hatred and fear....pathetic.
That' some response Derek...you absolutely pathetic bigot.
Have you noticed how the pro-wolfers have simply run out of ammo to defend wolves? That's because wolves couldn't read the script "of fitting in with minimal impact" that the likes of Ed Bangs or Dr. Robert Ream wrote for them...or those folks just outright lied in the first place.
Why would wolves here be any different than wolves anywhere else in the world? Perhaps these guys and gals need to stop watching old Walt Disney programs and spend some time reading a book that took several decades of research to compile, a book that details what wolves are...what wolves do to all other living things...and how wolves have to be controlled (not managed as game). That book is "Wolves in Russia", by Will Graves.
But, they would rather just be obnoxious, crude and profane. Those blanks are all they have left to fire in this war.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
BTW Logger-
i've worked in the last known area of Grizz habitattion in Colorado.
I would be more than happy to see them back there if they're really all gone.
Grizz are not the monstrous man stalkers you claim they are nor were all the Native americans.
http://travel.usatoday.com/destinations/dispatches/post/2010/07/bear-attck-campers-grizzlies-montana/101635/1
BTW Logger-
Grizz are not the monstrous man stalkers you claim they are nor were all the Native americans.
now keeping in mind that most of this was done during the early settlement of wyoming and montana around the late 1800's, at the time only the crows were friendly to whites, all others were man stalkers and considering the times, were quite proficient at it.
this is not a slam on the native americans, simply the way things were back then and it is a part of both the red mans and the whites heritage.
i think Baerh would do well to actually recite facts rather than try to simply voice an inaccurate opinion.
http://www.wyomingbnb-ranchrec.com/History.1865War.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_Box_Fight
there were many killings on both sides, white and red, both are guilty of being monstrous man stalkers.
fighting derek's battles are we.
Newsflash there's been more black bear attacks this summer than griz, all are tragic.
Don't defend Derek for his ludicrous babble concering looking over his shoulder for griz and Indians.
Newwest is saturated with right wing nutjobs period.
have you read the billings gazzette article by the woman that was attacked, quite interesting how she says she was definitly being hunted.
"“It was a brutal attack. It wasn’t like, ‘Oops, I made a mistake.’ He was out to get me and the other people,” Freele said. She described the bear’s attack as silent and methodical, giving her the feeling that she was being hunted."
http://www.billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/article_b7689ca0-9b0d-11df-8c1d-001cc4c002e0.html
my uninformed post, how about derek's with his claims that grizz used to roam vermont.
when you try to defend morns zbiker you look likeo ne yourself.
Yes bears are wild, dangerous animals, whats your point?
so we should kill them all?
that guy knew he was camping in griz country in a national park and he took the risk period.
hlow about derek's claims that enviros want to make mt "before the white man colonies"
you and hi a re utter right wing nut job bigots period and toby 2.
Cooke City is bear heaven even with all the human activity. Dense population of the, black and grizz both . There are probably bears in or near Cooke and Silvergate every night. They used to 'dine' at the landfill transfer station south of town till it was closed ( shades of Yellowstone's old public grizzly feeds at the Old Faithful and Canyon dumps ) , or Cooke City's ad hoc garbage truck parked on main street a few years ago.
What is very important at this point is that IF the FWP-IGBC have trapped the perp bear, they must do a full fine tooth post-mortem to find anything unusual about this bear. The can't just kill her and farm out the cubs and say " problem solved, go on about your business" in the shockwave and shadow of last month's grizzly -human fatality on Kitty Creek 40 miles due south of Cooke City. The agencies are still dancing on hot coals over that one..
Not with August and hunting season looming.
This is a teachable moment. I hope Schwartz and his teams do a full investigation of why this bear had a sudden urge for some man-flesh. Highly irregular. A lot needs to be ruled out.
The Bottom Line is we need to expand grizzly range beyond the artificial Primary Conservation Area that surrounds Yellowstone , expand it in all directions. Pryor Mountains, Big Horn Range, Wind Rivers, Wyoming-Salt River Ranges, central and eastern Idaho , and especially the bear corridor along the Continental Divide northwesterly of Yellowstone. I sincerely doubt that trophy hunting grizzlies will do much to change bear behavior , not when there are elk gutpiles and camps everywhere in Griz Country in September and October , but some hunting needs to be in the mix, too. If for no other reason than to appease the outfitters and gun crowd to get them to pipe down by appeasing them.
A gun would almost certainly not have helped the Cooke City victim. Pepper spray in a tent ? Not a good idea, either. Sometimes there are no remedies . Not when the the Grim Reaper is dealing the cards."
If you knew anything about the history of GYE bears zbiker you'd know habituated, garbage eating bears become very dangerous while bears out in the wild with room to roam tend to leave homo sapiens alone.
not to take this further off the original thread than what it has already strayed, have you any thoughts on the evidence i presented in my links ??
One quick question for you as well, do you support the idea we should treat the wolves as the native Americans did before and during the Europeans arriving here ??
" If you knew anything about the history of GYE bears zbiker you'd know habituated, garbage eating bears become very dangerous while bears out in the wild with room to roam tend to leave homo sapiens alone."
you assume of coarse that i don't know anything about the history of the gye period. and you assume as well that their is no historical record indicating that bears in the wild will not avoid homo sapiens when they have room to do so.
the truth is grizzlies are extremely territorial, unlike polar bears who have a wanderlust, the grizzlies work a territory and in their mind everything in that territory is theirs. i think this quote from pepper power says it best.
"• Some bears, mostly young bears unfamiliar with the dangers of human contact, have been known to actually stalk humans. If you believe this is the situation you are in, and have not just surprised the bear, it is recommended that you defend yourself aggressively."
although i am sure you fancy yourself as the resident expert on the the subject, much of which you are dispelling as truth is in fact just the opposite. please do a little more research on the subject. it is suspected that this sow griz attack was neither habituated or provoked, but even if it were either never forget that it is in the grizzleys nature to hunt for food, if that means stalking prey ( humans or ungulates) it will do so.
LMAO!
continue your prejudice that grizz are human stalking onsters and not acknowledge the history of GYE human bear encounters.
Derek (logger) is a bigot no way around it.
You might be, I know i'm not despite what you claim.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P3a9zgzEgk
even you should be able to understand what this fella was feeling.
not to point out the obviouse but you never answered my question from before, do you support the idea we should treat the wolves as the native Americans did before and during the Europeans arriving here ??
WTF is your point, I never claimed bears don't stalk humans.
The point is you have no point and no i'm not going to anser your question. I do know euros killed wolves as did NA but not to extinction like you and bigot logger condone for the grizz.
i could have swore you said:
"Grizz are not the monstrous man stalkers you claim they are"
after repeated attempts to get the point across it is obvious all your after is an argument, much like a small child.
look, i know how hard it must be for you to reason and type at the same time but feel free to give it your best try. we have had quite a few laughs here at your expansive knowledge ( or the lack there of ) and have had fun digging through are archives to give you the information to help you form a more rounded view of the world. but in the end i got out voted and we must move on to bigger fish to fry, so it is with much regret that i must say from one bigot to another ....
good-by and good luck, may your left wing views never lead you to the right :)
"Sick and psychologically disturbed” – bears have more “rights" than humans - must be like preaching to the choir for you - please look in the mirror!
won the arugment what?
had quite a few laughs...you look at this w your friends?
all you've done is attempt to defend derek (bigot logger) for his outrageous claims.
Dont tell me bout bears son, I know from field experience.
I said grizz are not the monstrous man stalkers you make them out to be.
Your using a rare, recent case in the GYE thats just happened to attempt to proove me wrong.
No where did I say bears dont stalk humans.
If you and your buddies sit around and think you know my experiences and laugh the jokes on you.
Reality22 your not even worth repsonding to your just an utter nutball. You have no concept of habitat availability obviously. PETA WTF u talking about you right wing nutjob? RMEF and SCI protecting bear habitat
Have fun obcessing over some comments I left here show your buddies and drink your beers.
LMAO @ you sorry losers.
Now I must return to the "before the white man fanatsy state of MT"
LMAO most a derek (logger bigot) just read his comments and tell me I doint have a right to call him a bigot.
We win hhaha
you two need a lesson in ecology, biology an evolution.
All i'm after is an argument, that's soo deep zbiker.
Later nutters, do you guys ever actaully og in the woods?
Face it, you are dealing with children here. Their posting here is probably all part of their "Greenie 101" class they're taking for summer school.
These are basically the "same people" as those attacked by the grizzly at Soda Butte this past week...idiots who would go camping in the heart of bear country without a gun. (I'll be ol' bear lover would be the first to run screaming and crying if a cub stuck its head into "its" tent.)
Forget using pepper spray...instead use Raid "Hot Shot" wasp and hornet spray. It shoots 30 feet, and will not only stop a bear in its tracks, it'll permanently blind them...making it easy to find the threatening bruin. It'll be the one bumping into all the trees it can't see.
Me, I just pack my .44 Magnum. It puts their lights out as well.
I've got a lot of friends and business associates in Wisconsin. One of the magazines I write for regularly is also located there, and for years I gave seminars at the annual Deer Classic held in Madison.
Great State!
When doing the Deer Classic, I met a number of custom meat processors who turned out some great "Slim Jim" type meat sticks. Bear was always one of my favorites, and I've had several bears entirely processed that way. My kids loved them...and so did all of their friends.
But, I doubt if there's any way that a wolf can be made good to eat. I guess we'll just have to settle for the fact that they make good targets.
I'll bet some of the folks posting on this thread think that meat is manufactured down at the meat factory.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
" In the majority of Native American hunter-gatherer societies, wolves were usually killed for body parts used in rituals, or to stop them raiding food caches,[33] though some tribes would raid wolf dens for pups when wolf populations became too large for the Natives to live with. This also served as a method of acquiring food, as wolf cubs were considered a delicacy. " I think bear is ok, but a tad grissly for my taste althou i must confess i have not tried black bear , it may be better.
Sorry buddy, they've tried several times...and always puked me out. Guess I'm too tough of an old bird.
zbiker...I'm not real crazy about bear meat, unless it is turned into meat sticks or summer sausage. I've found fall bears toy be better eating than spring bears (here in this country). The do have a lot more fat in fall, and for the meat to be edible, that fat has to be completely removed. One 300-pound fall bear I took with a bow in Ontario during the late 1970s was excellent eating.
Don't know if you've heard, wolves here in the Northern Rockies have started to crawl down into bear dens before the bears come out of hibernation, and are killing bears - especially cubs...which they must find very tastey.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
This article & others were originally talking about adding another 10000 wolves to the mix across the US. Here are my predictions on what will happen.
=Do to the fact that most of the good and marginal wolf habitat is full of wolves they will start to take up in poor habitat.
=Altercations between wolves & humans will sky rocket.
=Depredation dollars will increase with wolves in poor habitat...
=Resentment towards will increase with additional depredation...
=More locals will feel the uneasiness around wolves and change their feelings on wolves from mild to hardcore…..
=Right now with the gray wolf only about 3000 of the 6000 live in areas that minimize conflict, so if 3000 of the current wolf population can cause the current ruckus on wolves an additional 10000 would be at least three times the trouble this high maintenance non-endangered non-threatened killer could cause.
=With additional wolves in places they should not be …. I’m sure it won’t be long and we will see our first (Candice Berner) case in the lower 48…..hell it may happen without an additional 10,000.
=Game herds will not flourish and be at the levels that the anti-hunting community wants…
I'm 61 years old, and the outdoors have been the biggest part of my life since I first went fishing with my father back when I was 3 or 4. Through my lifetime, I've watched as sportsmen were the sole financial supporters of the conservation programs that built wildlife populations from near nothing into an unbelievable bounty - which both hunters and non-hunters can and have enjoyed. Now, we have folks who have not spent one red cent on real conservation wanting to dictate how all of this will coninue to play out.
And "their" wolves are now destroying all of that conservation work. And those who say that's not true, are far removed from where the damage is being done. Here in Montana, in the places where I once would watch 4...5...6 moose every evening, right from camp, now it takes 4...5...6 days just to see a moose. And as often as not, you don't. They're not there any more. They have been wiped out by the wolves.
Where I used to hike up into the back country, I once could glass elk on just about any morning. But, there are no elk up in those back country areas any more. The herds have been destroyed by wolves. One of my favorite hiking areas was in the Lolo National Forest, about 25 miles from Missoula - right along the Idaho line. On the Idaho side, that area was once home to about 13,000 elk. Now the elk numbers there are barely 2,000 - due to wolf depredation. And what few elk are there no longer live in the back country...they hang close to town and to ranches, where they realize some safety from being pursued by wolves.
Deer numbers here are also plummeting...and the wolves have also taken a toll on some bighorn populations, especially in winter when they come down to feed in grassy meadows.
These are some of the things I now worry about.
I also worry about the safety of my dogs when I go on those hikes. So much so, I never leave the truck without strapping on my .44 Magnum...or slinging a semi-auto 12-gauge loaded with buckshot.
And that worry just isn't about them being killed by wolves, but also the diseases that wolves are spreadng far and wide. Scoff at the Echinococcus granulosus tapeworm all you want...but it is a serious threat. And runnng the trails, and sniffing all those piles of wolf crap, puts those dogs at risk. It also puts any human that pets a dog that is a hiking companion at risk.
I also have a lot of friends in the ranching business, and I worry about their losses, and their ability to continue making a living at raising cattle or sheep. I hunt and fish on a lot of those pieces of private property. If they go under due to not being able to make a living, thanks to wolf depredtion and the impact wolves make on livestock reproduction (fetuses aborted due to the stress created by wolves) and the loss of cattle weight (again due to stress)...I worry about losing those special places to hunt and fish, and possibly to lose a friend who may be forced to move elsewhere to support a family.
I won't even go into the idiocy of the "Wildlands Project"...but I also worry about that, about forcing people off the land, forcing people away from the way of life they chose. And, allowing wolves free rein of this country is just an initial step to reach that goal.
I worry that so far the Wolf War has been little more than opposite sides meshing words, along with some very idle threats. But if the lunacy continues, it will escalate to the point of violence.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
If it's a serious threat, why aren't there any cases of it happening in Idaho, MT, or WY? Answer me that. Wolves have been here for 15 years and there have been no cases of it. Is that considered a serious threat or just some more anti wolf hysteria on your part?
Be careful listening to Toby Bridges….he is a nut. Just google his name and you will see he got fired from several blackpowder rifle companies and although he will claim he has been hunting the wilderness of MT for 40 years, he just moved there and cannot provide a single photograph of an animal he killed in montana in the last 20 years.
When Toby got run out of Missouri he looked around and found a new place with the same 4 first letters..Missoula. The Show Me State showed him the door. The Big Sky State gave him plenty of blue sky to howl at. We in the Rockies suffer his imported nonwisdom greatly.
Briefly ,
1.Wolves are having ZERO negative effect on bighorn sheep , or a positive effect because they are mitigating other predators such as cougars that do take a sheep now and then . Wolf wranglers in Wyoming have yet to document a single case of wolves taking bighorns . Score: + 2 for wolves.
2. The E. g. tapeworm is not now nor ever have been a threat conveyed by wolves, any more than a parasite conveyed by any host. That disinformation is such a piece of fecal matter, a blind grope at something --anything---to blame wolves for not of their doing. Score: Wolves +1
3. Toby's 61 years apparently is not long enough for his slow firing neurons to detect how conservation programs are funded and how wildlife recovery really works. It ain't just sportsmen. The hunters are taking more credit than they earned.
4. The negative impact of wolves on livestock is statistically closer to zero than anything measureable. Losses of livestock due to wolves is exaggerated beyond belief by the cattle barons and sheepers who still thinks it's the 19th century and their fecal matter is solid gold. About 45,000 cows or calves dies in Wyoming last year from All Causes. Wolves took about 50 , give or take. Wyoming had 1.4 million cows afoot at some point during the year. Do the math, Toby. I know the numbers are big and have a lot of zeroes in front of them , or behind them , but try to do-the-math. Then get back to us on those huge losses to the industry. Why is it ranchers losing 0.002 percent of their stock to wolves caused Wildlife Services to eradicate 32 percent of the roaming non-Yellowstone wolves in Wyoming, a reciprocal ratio of 16,000 to One, give or take.
5. The Lolo...a hot topic and a seething cesspool of disinpormation.. The Idaho Fish and Game released a study this week showing that it's not wolves that ripped down the Lolo elk unit numbers. Wolves played their secondary part, for sure, opportunistically taking elk made more vulnerable by other ecosystem factors. Anti-wolfers like Toby refuse to see anything other than a wolf and an elk in their calculation. That a few thousand species sort of a load...before we even get to physical and heterogenic factors affecting the biosphere at all levels.
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/news/fg_news/10/aug.pdf
6. I hate to break the news to Ole Toby, but wolves are not undoing all this ( alleged) conservation success that hunters ( ellegedly) are responsible for restoring. Moose populations were shifting downwards long before the wolves got here; ditto some elk stands . This is because of habitat , not predation. I doubt Rocky Mountain Elk and Boone and Crockett can do much about global climate change and large scale vegetation decline with their limited funds and monstrous egos. If Toby and the hunting community at large would bother to get smart, they would realize that the elk hunter and the wolf are on the same side of the equation ; the wolf is your ally , not your adversary, Toby . Good wolf habitat is better elk habitat. The wolf will improve your hunting opportunity, but it will not necessarily be in greater numbers of the slower dumber fatter elk you have been spoiled by. You are actually going to have to hunt now. Take a lesson from the Master , Canis lupus if you can. Hunters will actually have to hunt now. What a radical notion. And isn't it funny how elk numbers are increasing in Wyoming right alongside the wolves they coexist with ? There are plenty of elk for man and wolf out there. Plenty . So adapt!
I could go on , but I won't. I do want to address Toby's last pnt above, which to my mind sounds like a threat . He says ( quote) " I worry that so far the Wolf War has been little more than opposite sides meshing words, along with some very idle threats. But if the lunacy continues, it will escalate to the point of violence. " ( Endquote".
I wonder where that implied violence would come from , if it happens ? I sincerely doubt it will be shots fired or fists flung by enviros or the real conservationists of the West . It will come from the Toby Bridges' of the West , the disgruntled illiterate irrational rabblers. And they have guns....
Toby may make a lot of noise and blow a lot of blue smoke, but that's just his big blackpowder musket full of powdered dried elk droppings going off. What a statesman and spokesperson the Anti-Wolfers have in the disenfranchised Toby Bridges.
And listern to Dewy if you want, but where the wolves are...the game is disappearing.
We had all the other predators before the wolf. And we had periods of bad weather...but the herds continued to grow...and quickly recover form occassional down turns. What's different now is that we have wolves...and idiots defending them. Google ol' Dewey, and likely all you'll have pop up is a photo of him with his quack brothers...Huey & Louis.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
Among the more heinous actions for which we can take credit was the eradication of wolves from the norther Rockies.
Now we are witness to one of the most virulent of the species--one toby bridges--as he attempts to once again rouse the great beast to decimate a species.
Onlyh a cretin would say such a thing.
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/news/fg_news/10/aug.pdf
I read the article / web pages twice.... and I encourage any and all readers of this to do so...... I would imagine that all but the (never the wolf crowd) is going to say, "we need to do something about the wolf in some of these area's" & "I didn't realize what effect they were having" when they read this. Dewey It looks like a new ploy that I need to watch for..... Refer to a report that is more damming to my cause and say it's just the opposite - nice one!
For the rest of you here’s what Dewey is doing. He is using every cow in the state to say, hey the percentage that wolves kill is .002 % of cattle. It’s real easy to dilute the numbers when you look outside of where they currently are to water down the numbers . A simple look at even an old study (let’s say ) JOHN K. OAKLEAF study of 1999. Even back then (1999) we have a study showing of wolves killing collared calves at 1.7% in the heart of wolf range…… If Dewey wants to do some more debating on this subject we can move on to other studies. Some people are not willing to give up 1.7% of their lively hood……. Yet, Mr Dewey the wolf lover thinks it’s their obligation! Mr Dewey if you really want to have your wolf lover buddies have some good numbers to spread, why don’t you include the Nebraska and Colorado cattle to! You are fooling no one! 1.7 %is a far cry from .002%. Like I’ve always said … It’s all in how you play with the numbers….. Surely we can all see through Mr Dewey!
Here in Wisconsin our Clam Lake herd tells the story of the wolf! Dr Anderson (May he rest in peace) thought that the 1995 restoration of Elk to our Northwoods would have a huntable Elk population by 2004 / 2005… Dr Anderson with some help from RMEF $ had some very successful early years…. Then guess what showed up. These highly studied Elk (almost half are collared) are an example of what canis lupus do ….. a simple look at the similar Kentucky herd that was introduced a few years after WI give you a close picture of what we could have here without wolves! Mr Dewey thinks that the RMEF dollars spent on this project are wolf fodder for him and his wolf buddies!
I've come to hate the wolf because of the greenies. At first, I kind of liked knowing there are a few wolves here and there, and seeing one on a rare occasion. And at the start of the Wolf Recovery Project, like so many today, I was not entirely against it. But the manner in which the greenie groups keep moving the goal line, and the manner in which a sorry old federal judge allows them to do that, to bring wolf numbers to nearly 10 times what was proposed (and pretty much accepted) has become extremely unacceptable. The greenie groups have pushed the wolf pendulum way too far to the excessive side, and those who want our elk, deer, moose and other big game back are now going to push it back to the other side.
When wolves begin to die, you hardcore greenies only have yourselves to blame.
Greenie Greene...learn to read. When it comes to Xylitol, I only shared what Snopes had published on that marvelous sweetener.
Believe me, there are plenty of other things that will get rid of wolves just as well. Keep pushing, and you'll see.
Reality 22 - Kentucky's herd is doing great. I read somewhere that now, after this year's calf crop (of which about 80-percent survive), there are now more than 13,000 elk in an area of the state that's about 1/3 the size of Yellowstone National Park. There are now more elk in a smaller area of Kentucky than in all of what was once America's wildlife showcase. Now that's a sad epitaph.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
You accuse others of telling outright Lies. Really...you. that has to be the greatest joke of the decade. you lie as soon as your jaw starts moving. Please tell us you have not passed any genes along or if so apologise.
You have such a way with words. You're not much when it comes to facts...but you sure like to obnoxiously attack people, make profane accusations, and do quite a bit of truth bending and stretching to paint a totally false picture of wolves fitting in nicely.
And, that's about all the ammo you have.
Too bad those wolves can't read the script the likes of you keep writing for them. Every time your kind makes a claim or prediction about what wolves will do...they prove you wrong...again!
A) I'm wondering if you know where I can get this information.
I was reading somewhere regarding the introduction of the Canadian wolves into the park & they had one of the packs that were let go leave the park almost immediately.... and was near cattle. They darted / trapped that particular group & returned them to the holding pens.
1 What was the amount of hours it took for some of those first groups to leave the park? (hours)
2 Then where is that information so that I can quote what was written.
B) Did you know that most of our northern County Boards here in Wisconsin have passed resolutions that support leaving our population goal at 350 wolves.... Wydeven (Wisconsin wolf Biologist) is trying to slip the goal on the State wolf plan from 350 to 500.... The resolutions obliviously don't hold much water .... but, it is sure sending a message to the state on what the locals think of wolves! I believe that town boards have been doing the same!
Go to my LOBO WATCH website, where you'll find my e-mail address...and send me an e-mail asking for the same info...and I will get it to several people who can address that for you.
Toby
I despise treadwell, troll your the biggest one here!
your the right wing equiv of treadwell
have fun in the skinhead valley ya bitter old cook you.
Where I used to hike up into the back country, I once could glass elk on just about any morning. But, there are no elk up in those back country areas any more. The herds have been destroyed by wolves. One of my favorite hiking areas was in the Lolo National Forest, about 25 miles from Missoula - right along the Idaho line. On the Idaho side, that area was once home to about 13,000 elk. Now the elk numbers there are barely 2,000 - due to wolf depredation. And what few elk are there no longer live in the back country...they hang close to town and to ranches, where they realize some safety from being pursued by wolves.
Deer numbers here are also plummeting...and the wolves have also taken a toll on some bighorn populations, especially in winter when they come down to feed in grassy meadows.
Toby, here in MY part of Montana (the southwest corner) I watched over 300 elk migrate in this spring from Idaho, came right down the hills behind me, they looked like they'd wintered well, the word fat came to mind)
Also this spring I caught more than a few glimpses of cow and bull moose over on the ranch across from me. Had not seen them there for quite awhile because its usually "under" cattle by early May. (The ranch sold and the land is now leased out and the cattle don't come in til later) ** The elk also took advantage of the lack of cattle, lingered much longer on the pastures. Close to a hundred Mulies also worked their way up the valley and spread out, those in addition to the ones that hung around thru the winter.
I've lived in the same spot for close to 20 years Toby and I worry about the hysteria you are trying to create because of the re-introduction of wolves (and by the way, hunters - same as you - except for all the high tech "kill em from 1/2 a mile away" weapons you have available) There's no doubt wolves have made it alittle more difficult, uncomfortable and challenging when it comes to finding game but I gotta say Toby, it ain't and shouldn't be all about the human species. Planet Earth, have you taken the time to see the series??
Dewey - thank you for taking the time to share the real facts regarding wolves.
much like the nw wyoming herds they can rebound if the offending wolf pack disbands or dies out , as long as it happens before it is too late for them to recover.
"it is good to see nancy is still seeing game in the areas that are less effected by the depredations"
Less effected ZB? Wolves have been present here for quite awhile.
absolutely nancy, even here in wyoming we have pockets that are less effected by roving wolf packs than in others, alot depends on pack strength and terrain for them to hunt in. take for example the elk herds around cody, they are making a great comeback since the demise of the druid pack and their is a limited hunting pressure now from wolves.
if you will examine the map you will notice that their are wolves present , but if you check with the university of montana's pack count you will see they are in limited numbers and are relativity isolated into small numbers of pack members.
http://fwpiis.mt.gov/content/getItem.aspx?id=42232
just remember that what you are seeing last winter may be the last time you will get to see those numbers of ungulates, as the the wolves gain in numbers they need to eat more and feed more pups, then things will change dramatically in your area as well. try to protect as many elk as you are able too as they may need them to help restore the lolo herd back to a survivable number.
My guess is that you're male and not female...
You know, it's not all about wolves either.
Where I turkey hunted this spring, during one four day hunt, I encountered close to 350 elk - all down in the valleys, close to ranches and town...where they felt safe. They weren't about to go back up the mountain...where the wolves waited.
You greenie whackos sure like to misrepresent things. You ought to climb outta that front porch rocker of yours and take a walk up the mountain. Perhaps you'd have a bit more realistic view of what's happening. But, I guess its just easier to play greenie politics, and sing along with the Defenders of Wildlife or the Center for Biological Diversity choirs.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
Reality22 - I haven't forgotten to get an e-mail to you. Been busy getting out a press release on a new campaign just launched to get the wolf completely removed from the protection of the Endangered Species Act. Will send it to you tomorrow.
Where's some of that so-called "science" your side is always crying about. Everything the so-called experts promised, claimed and predicted about the wolf impact and how they would fit right in has all been proven either ignorance on their (the experts) part...outright lies...or just b.s. to pull the wool over the public's eyes. Let me ask, are you as ignorant as you come off...just stupid...or, like most greenies, you simply don't have a clue about wolves.
Where the heck do you live...New York City???
Hey Ron, if Xylitol were a "poison"...you couldn't run down to the greenie "Good Food Store" and buy it right across the counter. I hear the sales have been skyrocketing. We use it in our iced tea.
not onyl are you a poacher you lie about hunting in MT for over 40 years.
You sure have a knack for words. I haven't lied about anything...perhaps you just don't know my real name either. Toby is a great nickname I acquired when I was 3...and have used it most my life...and write under that pen name.
But, since you want to talk about lies...let's take a look at the lies and manipualtion of science to dump wolves here.
USFWS acknowledged that there were not enough of the wolf subspecies Canis lupus erremotus remaining in Montana to reach their desired "recovery"...so they simply decided to change science to fit their need. And that meant making the decision that all gray wolves of the world were the same wolf.
Now that's pure b.s.
The gray wolf of northern Canada (Canis lupus occidetallis or Canis lupus columbianus) are not the same wolf of Montana. Just as the elephants of Africa are not the same elephants of Asia...and to a lesser degree, the pronghorn or Wyoming is not the exact same pronghorn of Sonora, Mexico. (The latter is also
considered endangered.) If USFWS is now the world determinator of species/subspecies - then nothing is truly endangered any longer. We could ship about 20,000 Wyoming pronghorn to Mexico - and the problem would be solved. No more endangered Mexican pronghorn.
Likewise, why not ship some big, robust and stronger Wisconsin whitetails down to the Florida Keys to help out those endangered little devils they have there? Same with the Florida "panther"...we have way too many cougars here...so let's send them some of ours.
Not the same you say? No different than what that agency did with wolves.
All of this crap is now catching up with them. Notice how conspicuously quiet ol' Ed Bangs has been lately? If anyone had broken the law as much as he, I guess it's best to shut up and hide.
Hang on, this ride is going to get very bumpy.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
PS - I've actually done far more wildlife photography in Montana than actually shooting things.
"ZB & Toby, when you & the boys start wrestling game down with just your legs, teeth and wits, I may work up some sympathy for your plight but until then, stop the whining and name calling"
this is relevant how ?? just because we as homo sapiens have two thumbs and the ability to reason and to grow and advance our selves and our hunting techniques to put ourselves at a distinct advantage over our food source we should feel bad for exercising that ability.
by your reasoning should the elk not have canine teeth, claws and shots of testosterone to develop their defense abilities to make it a fair playing field against the grizzly and the wolves as well ?? perhaps you would feel better if each elk were issued a 30:06 and taught to use it to even the playing field, would this be ok in your eyes ?? lol
".Wolves were native to the landscape long before your ancestors made the voyage over. If you can't accept alittle competition - stay out of the woods!"
if simply having been here before my ancestors were a factor then the game biologists connected to the recovery would be promoting the fact. that is not why the wolf was reintroduced. When wolf recovery was proposed in 1988, Congress appropriated monies to study the proposed experiment. Congress instructed those who made the request to introduce wolves that: hunting should not be hurt, the local economy should not be hurt, and the Grizzly Bear should not be impacted. With these marching orders from Congress, a team of 15 PHD’s [Delphi 15], who specialized in Predator/Prey biology, came back and published “Wolves for Yellowstone? A Report to Congress and the Department of Interior Vol. 1” in 1991.” They said the 250 square miles in and around Yellowstone could hold 78-100 wolves at full capacity if it was done over a 10-20 year period. This esteemed body of scientists insisted in 1991 and again in September 1995, because no one knew for sure what impact a new keystone predator would have on the unadapted prey species, that intensive monitoring of the prey should be done, otherwise the Yellowstone Ecosystem would be forever and irreparably harmed.
if it were simply a matter of a little competition that would be great, but now with the wolf numbers reaching an epidemic, it has turned from "just a little competition " to " a war against the ungulates to feed the wolves" scinareo.
as mentioned so many times, wolves at any cost is a cost to high
BINGO! We have a winner.
Toby
if one reads the Gray Wolves Under the Endangered Species Act:
Distinct Population Segments and Experimental Populations published in 2008, they will find that the wolf is not necessarily here to stay and if things keep going wrong
"Members of an experimental population are considered to be threatened under the act, and thus, can have special rules written for them.40 In fact, Congress referred to special rules for experimental populations as a way to reduce public opposition to
the release of certain species, using the red wolf as an example.41 Congress suggested in a report that the special regulations could allow killing members of the species:"
it also states:
"The committee fully expects that there will be instances where the regulations allow for the incidental take of experimental populations .... The committee also expects that, where appropriate, the regulations could allow for the directed
taking of experimental populations. For example, the release of experimental populations of predators, such as red wolves, could allow for the taking of these animals if depredations occur or if the release of these populations will continue to be frustrated by public opposition."
http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/08Feb/RL34238.pdf
often the facts are simply unknown to many, they simply get so wound up in the emotion of a subject they loose all perspective and have no desire to learn the truth, they are right and they know it, period.....damn the facts
When this fiasco is finally declared a FAILED EXPERIMENT (which it already is)...wouldn't it be great for the shooting & hunting industry...sportsman organizations around the country...major conservation organizations like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation...and even state wildlife agencies to file lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit to recoup the lost billions of dollars spent on the rebuilding of the elk, moose, deer and other big game herds that the wolves have destroyed. Those suits could name USFWS as the defendant, and all their buddies in this collusion at Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, Humane Society of the United States, and others who have intervened in the control of ever growing wolf populations as co-defendants.
Maybe if it ever got to that point, our legal system would go all the way to hold some of those who have committed illegal activities to push wolves down the throats of those who live in the Northern Rockies legally responsible, and hand them some stiff prison time.
Jamie Rappaport Clark, v.p. at Defenders of Wildlife is one who needs to be seriously investigated...to find out just where the $60-million plus stolen from Pitman-Robertson really went. Ed Bangs is another. He hasn't exactly played by the rules...and a few of his "oversights" and the manner in which he has conducted the wolf recovery project have been in violation of the law.
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
You're certainly a good one to say anything about libel.
Let me ask, where did USFWS get the money to fund the Wolf Recovery Project? It certain wasn't from Congress...they denied the funding.
Rest assured, ol' J.R. Clark sure doesn't want the theft of Pitman-Robertson funds going to court for any reason...because it will open doors she would rather be left closed.
And since you have all the answers...where is all the paperwork Bangs was supposed to file (3-177 Forms) to bring those Canadian wolves into the U.S.???? There are a lot of folks who would like to know the answer to that one. Since those forms would have established exactly (or should) where the wolves being imported came from...the species/subspecies...the true number brought across the boreder...and the cost of the project...could it be that they did not want to create a paper trail that would make folks (then) ask where all the millions came from to capture, transport, handle and care for NON ESSENTIAL EXPERIMENTAL wolves (also non-endangered and non-indigenous to the U.S. Northern Rockies).
These are the things that Donald Molloy needs to concentrate on, not what the likes of Defenders of Wildlife would like for him to do.
I'm still waiting for a whole lot of that "proven" wolf scinece to kick in...along with a little truth. How about you?
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
before we get that far first we need to concern ourselves with a recovery plan for the ynp ecosystem as a whole now that things are beginning to fall out of balance even further. i suspect that it will take a sever catastrophe to a segment of a particular species within the greater yec to wake some folks up, but both predators and prey are showing many of the signs already so maybe we can prevent it early if we work together. luckily their are game biologists making rumbling along these lines already, as long qs they are allowed to keep gathering the information they need they may be able to make headway in the courts to curtail what we are seeing.
My advice would be to wait till the dust settles, then if you still want to, sue their pants off :)
Since you are obviously a fountain of information, would you please give me alittle background on the reasons for wildlife conservation?
Like it or not, game such as elk, deer, moose, etc. are a renewable resource, that provides sustenance for millions of American families. Not everyone is content to gum tofu, or suck on salad greens and call it a meal. Humans are ominvores.
Man is also a hunter, has been since first standing upright and running down something to kill and eat. Modern wildlife conservation provides for an abundance of game, opportunities for man to harvest surplus game, and for millions of other humans to simply enjoy seeing elk, deer, moose, and other wildlife.
Here in western Montana, wolves are quickly destorying the past 75 years of wildlife conservation - which brought big game populations back from nearly being lost forever. And that loss was not due to sport hunting, it was due to market harvest by those who simply were into shooting as much as they could to make the almighty dollar.
How much do you think you've personally spent on wildlife conservation?
Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/PubsTV/Bugle/2004/SepOct/Features/SevenSisters.htm
i think it pretty well covers all the bases
Choke on this Toby Bridges and zbiker, you scumbags!!! :)
And WHO exactly brought those game "big" numbers down, about a 100 years ago, Toby?
http://www.ktvb.com/news/local/Federal-judge-puts-gray-wolves-back-on-endangered-species-list-100071859.html
http://www.defenders.org/newsroom/press_releases_folder/2010/08_05_2010_federal_protections_restored_for_northern_rockies_wolves.php
Choke on this Toby Bridges and zbiker, you scumbags!!! :)
ha ha, have you read and understood what the ruling is pertaining too mickey, this ruling was predicted to be forwarded just as it has been. basically it says:
"By Mickey, 8-05-10
"U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy said in his ruling that the entire Rocky Mountain wolf population either must be listed as an endangered species or removed from the list, but the protections for the same population can’t be different for each state."
how could he rule any different, just because one pack lives 10 miles to the north does not mean it is not endangered any more or any less than the pack 10 miles to the south, that being said until all wolves are either delisted or remain listed as a whole can this be a no brainer situation. i am actually surprised it took him so long to come to the decision, seems he could have made this ruling in just a few hours at the bench.
but be that as it may.....this will actually (if given a chance) bring things closer to a head. as the wolves increase in number, so will the deaths of ungulates, their calves and livestock as well as bring added pressure to the other keystone predators in the gye. the game is afoot, their is a chance that even with wyomings current wolf status and numbers being what they are we may be able to force a favorable decision in the courts to get the wolves in wyoming delisted, after all, if the wolves in montana are not endangered anymore then why are wyomings ?? :)
Have a good night tobwy and ztrikey.
I mean we all know you will continue to poach and poison but hey m,aybe you'll gop to jail where you belong
BAAHHAAAAAHHAA!
"Carolyn Sime, wolf program coordinator for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said Montana has done everything it's been asked to do in developing its state management program but now will have to apply federal law and regulations once more.
"This puts a spotlight on Wyoming and seeing what can be done with Wyoming," Sime said.
The increase in the wolf population brought livestock losses for ranchers and competition for hunters for big game, such as elk. Molloy's decision means ranchers in northwestern Montana will no longer be able to haze, harass or kill wolves that prey on their livestock, Sime said.
Wolves in southwestern Montana will revert to their "experimental population" status and ranchers there will still be able to kill wolves that attack their animals, she said."
yep i would say this puts wyoming back in the game.
"If the rule is vacated, there's a question that Judge Johnson has to consider of whether or not there is something for him to decide," said Bruce Salzburg, Wyoming attorney general."
Livestock losses have been minimal and Wolves have caused Elk to act like Elk which you call increased competition.
This is what you get for demading these ludicrous state's rights dribble applied to wildlife.
The law was violated period.
"Nate Helm, a board member for Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife said it had not yet decided on whether to appeal. His group is considering even more sweeping action: changing the Endangered Species Act itself.
"The ESA is the source of the challenges to each state's ability to manage her wildlife under the direction of her citizens, and we think it is time to begin an effort to correct that injustice," Helm said.
Read more: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/08/05/1558768/a-federal-judge-ends-idaho-montana.html#ixzz0vqChl0xZ
guys, i think this is what we have been looking for
ztrikey is gonna be on-line alllll day obcessing over wolves.
They are managed by a federal agency, they are interstate creatures who observe no boundaries.
LMAO @ your pleas to change the endagered species act.
Personally a more conservative wolf hunt could've been beneficial but Idao and MT and WY got greedy and now your paying the price.
Ztrikey this not what you were waiting for and quit kidding yourself about changing the ESA.
you and tobwy are just gonna have to deal with it ha!
yep, ole malloy did wyoming a great favor........
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2565933/posts
Wyoming :
"Because of the national interest in wolves, their presence in the GYA was expected to increase tourism in the area. However; overall visitation to YNP has decreased for unknown reasons since wolf reintroduction."
Montana :
"The net benefits of wolf recovery alone were estimated at $10 million per year. In 1999, these attributes attracted 9.4 million visitors to Montana who spent an estimated $1.6 billion on goods and services".
Whoever wrote this and approved this for the Montana Wolf plan needs to be removed from anything wolves!
even the montana legislators are trying to figure out what the net benefits of wolf recovery were, especially when compared to the cost of managing them. most agree it cost them more than the state took in.
ahh the ultra bigoted prejudiced fool skinner.
Actually I despise Tim treadwell and his stupi movie.
I prefer the Bear Man of Kamchatka who actaully worked with threatened grizzly populations.
You on the other hand skinner want to remove all federal wilderness protections for all critters.
Oh your the king of the bigoted, right wing nut jobs skinner.
http://randywakeman.com/HowToBlowUpASavage10ML.htm
"The one thing that can be stated with 110% cetainty is that Toby Bridges is a proven and documented liar, thief, poacher, and wife beater. His word, written or spoken, is wisely taken with ah very healthy dose of skeptism and suspicsion, as it is most of the are likely to be a flat out lie. Toby has been fishing on the internet for a single photo of another blown Savage 10ML-II, besides the one he intentionally blew, in an attempt to exort myself and Savage Arms. If you think this is bravo sierra, I would be more than happy to display the e-mails and faxes from Toby Bridges's to back this up. "
http://www.nchuntandfish.com/forums/showthread.php?p=351363
And I have photos of at least 6 Savage rifles that blew up and injurred shooters...you lose.
Just got photos of another this week. That makes at least 10 that I know of...so that means there were quite a few others. And, for the record, Savage has pulled this dangerous muzzleloader off the market.
But...isn't his supposed to be about wolves?
I see, you want to talk about muzzleloaders...because you don't know anything about wolves. Well you apparently don't know anything about muzzleloaders either.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Years.