Wolf hunting is off for Montana (Plains: live in, law, legal)

[Stephan_K]

Originally Posted by Lunabell

It seems to me that the wolf issue is more complex than states rights, elk numbers and hunting.

I am not anti-hunting at all. In fact, my husband is an avid hunter and I enjoy the fruits of his efforts. It just seems to me that the wolf issue is very complex and the entire ecological situation, of which we are a part of, needs to be weighed. For a plan to work, it needs to include the human stakeholders needs within the context of the ecosystem.

Nothing complex about it whatsoever...... the Canadian Grey Wolf is NOT NATIVE to this area and in turn DOESN'T BELONG HERE ! What is so complex about that ?! Everything gets screwed up royally when man things he knows better than mother nature......

[Lunabell]

Originally Posted by Stephan_K

Nothing complex about it whatsoever...... the Canadian Grey Wolf is NOT NATIVE to this area and in turn DOESN'T BELONG HERE ! What is so complex about that ?! Everything gets screwed up royally when man things he knows better than mother nature......

That argument is fairly shallow when every single thing we do has an impact on nature. Every decision we make to change a landscape shows that we think we know better than mother nature. Every literal step we take has an impact. Wolves aside, we as a species prove through our daily actions that we assume we know better than mother nature.

[MTSilvertip]

Lunabell,

The major problem with wolves in the park was not that they were in the park, but that they don't recognize the boundaries of the park.

Yellowstone is just like any other park that is mismanaged for numbers of animals that exceed carrying capacity of the available feed, water and resources needed by the large ungulates.

Grizzlys, black bears, cougars and coyotes were the primary predators in the park for many years.
Because people couldn't believe bears were dangerous, and fed them from their cars, the bears became a big problem and were moved away from the areas frequented by humans, or killed.
This meant that the primary predator of the elk calves was removed and the elk herds and buffalo flourished.

Because the buffalo herds passed the carrying capacity of the range, they started migrating north along the Yellowstone River. As the herd is infected with brucellosis, Montana created a hunt to thin the herd.
This action met with unending court cases.
The buffalo are still far above carrying capacity and each year we have to round them up, test them for disease, and either slaughter them or if someone like one of the indian reservations will take them, then they go there. But last year nobody wanted them so Ted Turners buffalo ranch took them and got free stock to sell and breed.

The wolves were ostensibly supposed to thin the buffalo herd so hunting would not be necessary, however, buffalo are large dangerous animals that evolved techniques to protect their calves so the wolves soon learned to leave them alone. The elk were easier to kill.

As the elk ran for their lives, the wolves followed them and the infection spread rapidly as a canadian wolf can travel up to 50 miles a day. They have been found as far south as Colorado and west as far as Washington. Both of which were outside the orignal designated "recovery" area.

As they moved into areas where livestock were held, sheep and cattle are much easier to kill than elk. Wolves are opportunists that take what is easiest to kill so last year while our hunting season took 72 wolves, over 200 were killed by the fish and game for livestock depridations.

It isn't that the people here simply hate wolves, they hate the damage and associated problems the wolves bring when uncontrolled.
Originally, we were told the wolves would be delisted when there were 100 wolves in each of the 3 affected states, and 10 breeding pairs.

We have nearly 2000 of them by most accounts, and we are still held with a knife to the throat by the federal courts to keep us from protecting our wildlife and livestock while the wolves run rampant.

Yes, the riparian areas are better in the park, and yes there is more grazing. But that is because there aren't any elk deer or moose left to use the grazing or watersheds.

Total devistation of native species for the introduction of an alien species is not an acceptable solution.

[Lunabell]

Originally Posted by MTSilvertip

Lunabell,

The major problem with wolves in the park was not that they were in the park, but that they don't recognize the boundaries of the park.

Yellowstone is just like any other park that is mismanaged for numbers of animals that exceed carrying capacity of the available feed, water and resources needed by the large ungulates.

Grizzlys, black bears, cougars and coyotes were the primary predators in the park for many years.
Because people couldn't believe bears were dangerous, and fed them from their cars, the bears became a big problem and were moved away from the areas frequented by humans, or killed.
This meant that the primary predator of the elk calves was removed and the elk herds and buffalo flourished.

Because the buffalo herds passed the carrying capacity of the range, they started migrating north along the Yellowstone River. As the herd is infected with brucellosis, Montana created a hunt to thin the herd.
This action met with unending court cases.
The buffalo are still far above carrying capacity and each year we have to round them up, test them for disease, and either slaughter them or if someone like one of the indian reservations will take them, then they go there. But last year nobody wanted them so Ted Turners buffalo ranch took them and got free stock to sell and breed.

The wolves were ostensibly supposed to thin the buffalo herd so hunting would not be necessary, however, buffalo are large dangerous animals that evolved techniques to protect their calves so the wolves soon learned to leave them alone. The elk were easier to kill.

As the elk ran for their lives, the wolves followed them and the infection spread rapidly as a canadian wolf can travel up to 50 miles a day. They have been found as far south as Colorado and west as far as Washington. Both of which were outside the orignal designated "recovery" area.

As they moved into areas where livestock were held, sheep and cattle are much easier to kill than elk. Wolves are opportunists that take what is easiest to kill so last year while our hunting season took 72 wolves, over 200 were killed by the fish and game for livestock depridations.

It isn't that the people here simply hate wolves, they hate the damage and associated problems the wolves bring when uncontrolled.
Originally, we were told the wolves would be delisted when there were 100 wolves in each of the 3 affected states, and 10 breeding pairs.

We have nearly 2000 of them by most accounts, and we are still held with a knife to the throat by the federal courts to keep us from protecting our wildlife and livestock while the wolves run rampant.

Yes, the riparian areas are better in the park, and yes there is more grazing. But that is because there aren't any elk deer or moose left to use the grazing or watersheds.

Total devistation of native species for the introduction of an alien species is not an acceptable solution.

I don't disagree that the states should be able to manage their wolves and I can certainly see how people with a vested economic interest in livestock would be less than happy, to say the least.

I am confused about one thing. I know wolves were extirpated in the region nearly 100 years ago. But, I thought the wolves that were brought in were from the same type, but part of a different population from Canada. I looked for a good link to explain the difference, but everything I found essentially said that the wolves that were introduced were northern rocky gray wolves from Canada and were reintroduced into their historic range. Is there a marked difference between the wolves of then and the wolves of now?

BTW-last time I was in Yellowstone, it seemed like the entire elk population had moved into Mammoth. I supposed the cars are safer than the wolves!

[MTSilvertip]

The information you have is a little flawed, the native wolves were mostly removed by the 1930s, they weren't exterminated.

There was still a small population of Rocky Mountain Timber wolves in the remote areas of the state, but they were not acknowledged by the FWP.

The argument that all wolves are the same is also severly flawed.
Yes all wolves belong to the species Canis Lupis, but there are multiple subspecies.
There is only one species of dog as well, Canis Familieris, but few people would argue there is no difference between a Rottweiler and a Pommeranian or a Pit Bull and a chiuaua.

If there was only one species of wolf, then the argument to reintroduce Red Wolves to the South East or Mexican Greys to the Southwest or Eastern Timber wolves to the Smokey Mountains are negated. We could simply send them some of these Canadian Greys because they are all the same.

The Rocky Mountain Timber wolf rarely grew larger than 75-80 lbs. These imports are nearly twice the size at 150 maximum. The closest native wolf was commonly called the Buffalo Wolf that also grew to that large size.

This is not the native range of what are basically Arctic Wolves. In fact, when the wolf was removed from the picture, Coyotes had more or less moved into that niche.
But now the canadian greys kill every coyote they find, the remnants of the Timber wolves that still remained, and any dog they can find.

These are not a nice animal, and I don't care if I hear them howl. I prefer Elk Bugles myself.

Oh, BTW, Elk have moved to populated areas to escape the depredations of the wolves, that is why you will see them in towns now where they would have never gone before, Although they have always used Mammoth and Gardiner historically.

[Lunabell]

MTSilvertip-

Thanks for the explanation. I knew all wolves were not the same, but I didn't realize how many differences there are/were within your region. I appreciate the education.

[strudel42]

According to this lengthy but interesting article, one of the reasons given for wolf introduction in Yellowstone was to reduce the elk herd.

Wolves in Yellowstone: A Short History | wolves | issues

And this, from Oxford Scholarship Online: Yellowstone's Destabilized Ecosystem, suggests that the pre-National Park (and pre-wolf-control) elk population was only a little lower than it is now. (7,109 in 2009 according to the Billings Gazette). The population ballooned after the elimination of wolves and after park-sanctioned culling of the elk herds ended.

The reconstruction of the northern-herd population trajectory places the herd at a hypothetical 5,000-6,000 before 1872; rising to a censused 27,800 in 1914; declining to a censused 3,172 in 1968; increasing during natural-regulation policy to a censused 12,859-19,045 and estimated 21,071-25,920 in the 1980s-1990s; and declining in the early 2000s. Major forces driving population trend were (hypothetically) aboriginal hunting and large carnivores maintaining low numbers prior to park establishment; park protection from 1872-1920s allowing a major increase; park control and outside hunting from 1920s-1968 reducing herd size; natural-regulation policy (no park control) from 1969-present, again permitting increase.

[Mt-7]

Anyone know about this fellow, seems he is running for congress.
Mark French for Congress 2010

Seems he understands the gray are not native.

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by Mt-7

Anyone know about this fellow, seems he is running for congress.
Mark French for Congress 2010

Seems he understands the gray are not native.

Concise list of his positions: Mark French for Congress 2010

Seems we've got a lot to agree about. And his positions as stated are consistent with a "small government Constitutional Republican". Sensible local management of wildlife (wolves included), to meet local conditions, falls under that philosophy. It isn't something that can be sanely directed from a comfy chair in D.C. If it were... hey, there used to be wolves on the east coast, too. Let's re-introduce them to D.C.!!

If we were directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we would soon want for bread.
-– Thomas Jefferson

This applies to anything where on-the-spot expertise is the key, not just to farming.

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by MTSilvertip

There was still a small population of Rocky Mountain Timber wolves in the remote areas of the state, but they were not acknowledged by the FWP.
<snip>
But now the canadian greys kill every coyote they find, the remnants of the Timber wolves that still remained, and any dog they can find.

Occurs to me that introducing the Canadian Greys may actually cause the final extinction of the Rocky Mountain Timber Wolf -- precisely the opposite of what the wolf-proponents claimed to want.

Goes to show how acting on well-meaning ignorance is often worse than doing nothing at all.