IDFG announces 2009 wolf season (Hayden: home, buy, live in)

[509]

Originally Posted by NorCalHiker

Agreed. There is no reason to hunt this majestic creature. Nature will find a way to keep the packs in balance.

"Hunting wolves will undoubtedly be a challenge, in large part because the animals are wary of humans, possess a keen sense of smell and are highly intelligent. Baiting and the use of hounds will not be allowed, Hayden said, but drawing wolves into range with a prey-imitating call — a common method for hunting coyotes and other predators — will be legal."

Anyone who thinks that a wolf is at the top of the food chain and wont be obliterated by a redneck with a cause, is sorely mistaken.

Sorry, but the theory of ecological balance went out in the 1970's. Nature is a lot more dynamic than city folks realize.

It is only in balance if you do not understand ecology.

[Clark Fork Fantast]

Boy, we sure get passionate whenever the wolf question comes up! There are a couple of hot buttons on this forum, and this is certainly one of them!!! I've learned a lot from reading previous threads. I'm trying to find the perfect happy medium between loving the idea of wolves in ID/MT and understanding the reality of living with them next door...I'm already adjusting to reality about mountain lions...love the idea of them, in the wilderness, love the way they look, the way they move, their hunting skills--but not crazy about finding out that one has been prowling our property every winter!!! NIMBY, literally!

We can't roll things back to the natural state. We/I don't want to have to make excuses for humans living in the ancient wildlife habitat, with human needs--that"s our whole frontier history. But we don't want to give up on a semblance of wild nature, either, even if it's not original--so the answer seems to be management....

[MooseRiverView]

Originally Posted by 509

Sorry, but the theory of ecological balance went out in the 1970's. Nature is a lot more dynamic than city folks realize.

It is only in balance if you do not understand ecology.

I think you are correct, that city folk have no understanding of nature and its Dynamic ebb and flows. Thats why I have never lived in one and have never lived on property that was less than 150 acres.

I think that the U of I, Udubb and being reared without electricity and running water untill 1975 taught me a great deal on the subject of ecology. So much that I decided to teach it at Udubb and Sac State.

I'd be willing to be that you have a small parcel of land and use conveyances of one sort or another to enter the woods, therby making you a subject matter expert, ehh??

[Toyman at Jewel Lake]

Originally Posted by NorCalHiker

...Anyone who thinks that a wolf is at the top of the food chain and wont be obliterated by a redneck with a cause, is sorely mistaken.

If you didn't resort to name calling with regard to anyone that doesn't share your narrow opinion, you would perhaps be better received.

My opinion is that wolves are just like any game animal, populations should be managed for a suitable balance between predator and prey populations. Mountain lion are somewhat similar apex predators, managed hunting seasons has done little to hurt survival of the species. As a matter of fact, populations are expanding in spite of(actually because of) hunting, to the point that other endangered species (mountain caribou) are threatened by them. Hunting has also done nothing to threaten the survival of black bear in Idaho.

Wolves are prolific breaders, from what I've read populations are increasing 20-25% per year. Nature will limit that in time-when the prey population crashes. At that time, wolves will suffer losses through disease and starvation. I believe I read that parvo is already overtaking packs in Yellowstone, where no effort has been made to manage them. That's a death that no animal this majestic deserves. What's more, once the native prey population crashes, the incidents of human/wolf interaction can be expected to increase as they expand their hunting areas.

Wolves are unique amoung apex predators (at least with regard to NID) for several reasons. First is that they hunt in packs. Ungulates are defensless against wolf packs in winter snows. Even when they are not killed outright, the expenditure of energy to escape can cause them to fall prey to starvation and cold.

Second, wolves, like all canines, are noted for "sport killing". The wolf lovers will try to deny this, but there are way to many documented cases of entire pockets of deer, elk and livestock being killed by wolf packs and left to rot. I've seen one positive kill near Hayden, the only thing eaten from a pregnant cow elk was the fetus. Since the wolf reintroduction I've seen many other elk carcasses on the St. Joe, in places I had never seen them before. I can't positively say they were due to wolves, too old and not enough sign for this amature tracker.

Third, with regard to elk, wolves go for the easiest targets, which is pregnant females and calves. Herd survival requires a certain percentage of calf survival. In many areas with thirving, unmanaged wolf packs, cow-calf ratios are below that level. Human hunters generally prefer and in most cases are limited by regulation to taking bulls (males). Since one bull can service many cows, the loss of one, or even several bulls doesn't hurt the reproductive capacity of the herd. With the loss of a cow, particularly a pregnant one, that's not so.

I think wolves are a majestic species and don't want to see them hunted to extinction in our area. However, with management of the population, there is every reason to expect them to survive and thrive, the same as all other game populations in this state. I also feel that the elk is also a majestic species, there is nothing like the sound of a bull elk bugling in the high country in the fall. Unfortunately, the unmanaged expansion of the wolf population in this state is making that a much scarcer sound. The message of the wildlife experts in Idaho's fish and game department is being overruled all too often by the feel-good emotionalism of those that have no understanding of wildlife management. Too many people can't think of wolves as anything other than pretty dogs, and regard all other wildlife as suitable for nothing more than dog food.

[boiseguy]

I'm all about population control... the issue is.. wolf populations are not out of control.. what's out of control is human population encroaching upon their habitat.. if you wish to live up in the mountains and have livestock.. it doesn't warrant you the right to blast up the side of a mountain at everything that moves... living there means you must learn to live with wolves.. if that's too much to ask.. then don't live there and think you deserve the right to kill them in the face of making them extinct...because that is what we have done in the past... just sayin..

[Fisherman 100]

I agree with Toyman. Management is the key to a successful predator prey triangle. Destruction of all top tiered predators would be insane as would the wanton destruction of an Elk Herd with a machine gun.

Controlled hunting and herd management policy will insure future survival of both Lupine and Ungulate. The irrational use of the term "redneck" depicts vulpine featured Troglodytes shambling about the forest killing everything that moves.

Try and keep the name calling to a minimum and the discourse civilized. One poster wrote that we should not move into the mountains near the wolves, that we should leave them untouched. Perhaps one hundred years ago this would have been possible. However today the only way to do that is to keep most of the land in government hands. I am for this as long as hunters have access. We cannot make everything a state park as some folks would like.

Excellent thread Toyman

[brokencrayola]

I try to look at it from both sides, but that is not always easy. It was not all that long ago that the wolf was considered an endangered species. Coyotes could not keep down the elk and deer populations like wolves can, and since they were endangered at that time they decided to re-introduce them. The problem is wolves reproduce well and have litters of 4-7 or more and can even have 2 litter a year. Wolves can kill a lot of animals and meat is meat to them, whether it be an elk, sheep, or the family dog. Mother nature tends to work out these problems herself, when LEFT ALONE, but when we interfere it doesn't always work out so good. So now the wolves are off the endangered species list and have grown in such numbers as to be causing problems, so now they want to do a hunt across the state to thin the numbers down. If they do not do the hunt the numbers of wolves will keep rising and will greatly affect the elk and deer nymbers, but when does it all stop?

[Need2Leave]

Originally Posted by brokencrayola

but when does it all stop?

When the Biologists are allowed to manage Elk and Wolf numbers without all the outside political pressure. Just like they do in management of all the other wild species in the state.

[509]

Originally Posted by NorCalHiker

I think you are correct, that city folk have no understanding of nature and its Dynamic ebb and flows. Thats why I have never lived in one and have never lived on property that was less than 150 acres.

I think that the U of I, Udubb and being reared without electricity and running water untill 1975 taught me a great deal on the subject of ecology. So much that I decided to teach it at Udubb and Sac State.

I'd be willing to be that you have a small parcel of land and use conveyances of one sort or another to enter the woods, therby making you a subject matter expert, ehh??

No, a degree in natural resource management from UC Berkeley. Plus 35 years professional experience in managing wildlands.

Do you teach ecology? or environmentalism?? They are different. One is a science the other a religion.

[brokencrayola]

Originally Posted by Need2Leave

When the Biologists are allowed to manage Elk and Wolf numbers without all the outside political pressure. Just like they do in management of all the other wild species in the state.

My ex husband works for Fish and Game, there will always be politics when working for a state or federal agency.