Kudu56,

Thanks for the explanation. So to paraphrase, the elk calves are getting eaten by the wolves because the elk cows are pussies (unprotective mothers) when compared to bison cows. That is pretty much what I figured.

Brent,
Am I imagining this or did I hear correctly that there are now wolves being spotted in Iowa and Nebraska? The Great Lake states still have multiple times the wolf population of the Rocky Mountain states, and for the most part an over abundance of deer.

Yeah, they are coming. I can't wait.

Had a running wager on this for years, but no one would take me up on it.

Too many groceries to be ignored. Yet, we have no shortage of deer here or anywhere else that has lived with wolves since the beginning.

Brent

There are other forces at work in the Rockies reducing elk populations than just wolves. These other forces are more significant as well. The wolf, as history teaches us, just makes for a convenient scape goat.

Yeah, there are a multitude of factors. I was in the Absoraks and Wind River ranges for the last couple of weeks doing my thing.

Elk are scarce because of (in no particular order):

Drought
Cattle ranchers
Bears (absolutely unbelievable numbers of bears)
Hunting
Houses on winter range
and of course, wolves
and probably many more

Somehow no one complains about anything but wolves.

I didn't know Iowa had a wolf population. I lived with them for 30 years and in my area wolves did play a part in the deer population's decline. In the BWCA the deer had to learn to climb trees to survive. When a bad winter did hit the deer were kill wholssale, all deer suffered not just the old or the sick..I'm sorry to disagree but I have been there and odne it, most people in the US have not lived with wolves, I have had their tracks on my sidewalks and heard their howling many nights.

That's funny. When I lived on the edge of the BW I never saw a deer in a tree. I know full well that mature conifer forest and heavy snows left little food and winter die-offs were common. Doe condition in spring was poor. Since then, both wolves and deer have increased dramatically.

No, we don't have a wolf population in Iowa yet. Wanna make a wager when that will happen?

Soon I hope.

Just load your beemer up with some and take them back to iowa! It's a good place for them!

As for your's and scott's assumption that drought plays a more significant role than preditors, go read your grimms fairy tales.

The same drought is in effect in NW wyoming as south central. Yet elk numbers flourish in non bear, non wolf areas, and are increasing in numbers. But in the NW numbers are declining. You should not listen to your liberal boy friend biologist, ask a game warden. It is interesting, that the game wardens have a different take on the wolves than do the biologists. The only difference that I find is one is liberal in thinking and one is conservative. Which one is which?????

I'm in the northeast part of the state and we've been in drought since 1997 and the elk population is still expanding. No wolves and no bears. The drought is the biggest bunch of bullshit around.

Biologists are always predictable and have some of the best findings money can buy. Depending on who's providing the grant money and wages,decides what findings a biologist will come up with.

Well said Kudu

Reading all this moaning and bitching with the greenies is geting old. Just go Shoot, poisen, and trap the Wolfs it the Goverment is educated beyon it's inteligence which is obvousily the case here. Take maters in your own hands.

Dr B

Better yet sue the bastards!



Wyoming sues federal government over wolf plan
By The Associated Press

CHEYENNE - Wyoming on Tuesday sued the federal government over its rejection of the state's proposed wolf management plan.

The federal government in July rejected Wyoming's petition to remove wolves in the state from the federal list of threatened and endangered species. State officials argue that the federal government rejected the state's proposed wolf management plan because of political considerations, not because of its scientific merits.

The state filed the lawsuit on Tuesday and it has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson in Cheyenne.

Wyoming's proposed plan for managing the estimated 309 wolves in the state generally calls for leaving the animals alone in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks. The state proposes to allow trophy hunting for them in areas next to the parks. The state proposes allowing wolves to be shot on sight as predators elsewhere in the state. "The wolf management plan adopted by state agencies and the Wyoming Legislature has solid science behind it," Gov. Dave Freudenthal said Tuesday. "It's unfortunate that we have to go to court to see that fact get the weight it deserves, but we have not been left a choice by the federal government's topdown approach."

I grew up in the NW part of MN and never saw or heard wolves or coyotes. That could explain for the increase in deer numbers. Only in the far North by Beltrami Island State forest did we see tracks and hear them at night.

I go back every year to deer hunt the Little Falls area and still don't see wolves.

Out here in MT, it is easy to see why wolves can run down big game on the wide open plains. In Minnesota, deer can escape wolves in the dense woods and swamps very easily. I can seldom tell which member of my hunting party has shot a deer because of the heavy woods absording the sound of the shot.

If wolves make it to Iowa, they maybe coming from Wyoming, not Northern MN.

Wolves will always be in Yellowstone because no hunting is allowed in the park. I think WY has the right idea with their proposal to allow hunting of wolves that leave the park. They aren't endangered anymore, never were.

It will be a sad POS world when all of the other predators are gone. Having said that I think that since we try to control game animal numbers through hunting we should be doing the same with wolfs. People will pay big money to hunt. The more different things there are to hunt the better off we will all be in the long run. Blaming all your problems on one thing is usually wrong. Most likely there are more things going on to hurt the elk/deer populations than just the wolf. The wolf just happens to be at the top of the pole where he is being watched harder than the rest.

quote:

Originally posted by sledder:

Biologists are always predictable and have some of the best findings money can buy. Depending on who's providing the grant money and wages,decides what findings a biologist will come up with.

This seems to be the biggest problem with wolf re-introducement world wide. The so called scientists are funded by liberal city people who like to sit in cafés downtown drinking frothy cappacinos, and rarely actually use or are dependant on the nature they are fooling around with. And the scientists provide them with exactly what they want to hear, in order to justify their own existance...

The same thing is going on over here.

I have a cousin who's income from selling moose meat and small game hunting has been reduced in the last decade by about US$15,000. This is due to his moose quota being halved because of re-introduced wolves. And no hunters wanting to let their dogs run loose in this wolf inflicted area after lots of them getting eaten up. I wonder what would happen if government tried to reduce a group of city dwellers income by that amount. Bet you they wouldn't be allowed to get away with it, and there'd be a big stink in the media. But since the victims are just a bunch of dumb farmers and foresters...

quote:

Originally posted by kudu56:
....It is interesting, that the game wardens have a different take on the wolves than do the biologists. The only difference that I find is one is liberal in thinking and one is conservative....

There are other differences as well, of the wildlife students I went to school with, more of the ones who got C's and D's went on to become enforcement officers; more of the ones getting A's and B's went on to grad school or became biologists and managers.

Now, I have every ounce of respect for enforcement, without them wildife wouldn't have a chance. If I see someone breaking the law, poaching or other violations I dont call a biologist; I call a game warden, thats why they are there.

At the same time, if you want the truth about predator-prey cycles--- don't ask a game warden, unless you'd rather "hear what you want to hear" than get good information. It makes sense to ask a biologist.

IV

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal:
There are other differences as well, of the wildlife students I went to school with, more of the ones who got C's and D's went on to become enforcement officers; more of the ones getting A's and B's went on to grad school or became biologists and managers.

That pattern is repeated at every school I have been to as well.

quote:

At the same time, if you want the truth about predator-prey cycles--- don't ask a game warden, unless you'd rather "hear what you want to hear" than get good information. It makes sense to ask a biologist.IV

I think just about everyone in any Game and Fish Department feels that they are considered amongst the lowest forms of life when it comes to public perception. And not wanting antagonize folks when they don't have to, they do tend to tell you what they think you want to hear. It gets old being verbally beaten up everytime one walks into town in a red shirt (official uniform of WY G&F).

I agree with you 100%.

Brent

Not true when they start the conversation.,

quote:

Originally posted by kudu56:
Not true when they start the conversation.,

If that's what you want to believe.

I was in Jackson last weekend, and the game wardens condemn the wolf, the head of the G&F condems the wolf.


Thats enough for me! And as for you flatlander, wanna be's, go pound sand in your ass! The wolf has done no good, will do no good, and never will do any good! Except to give you a woody,so enjoy! When the dust settles, it will be open season, any that leave the park, and are seen, will be shot, the same as a coyote, no, more extreme than a coyote!


Dream on! In the end, we will win! Look who is backing the shoot on site! Game wardens, senators, county commmisioners,hunters, and the govenor!

Well they have gone wolf crazy. Looks like before long all states will have a wolf population. Then you all knowing wolf specialist that dont live here can worry about your side of the world.

http://www.fws.gov/ifw2es/mexicanwolf/

http://www.fws.gov/alligatorriver/redwolf.html

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho_Elk_Hunter:
Well they have gone wolf crazy. Looks like before long all states will have a wolf population. Then you all knowing wolf specialist that dont live here can worry about your side of the world.

Great! Can't wait.

Brent

A lot of wolves have been shot by FW&P in MT in addition to the large pup loss last year and we still have a growing population wolves and a decreasing population of elk.

The deer herd in MN keeps growing because of the mild winters and lack of any deep snow. I believe many wolves are shot in the woods and because they are not collared, no one knows.

When the -35 below and deep snow returns to MN, the wolves will have a field day.

It is totally different in the Western states.

May Iowa be blessed with more than their fair share of wolves.

I went with a co-worker this weekend, 4 days, and we hunted Sunlight Basin, I didn't have a tag but went along for the enjoyment. 3 1/2 days of hunting, on foot, we never seen an elk, a moose, or a deer. My buddy was quite discouraged to say the least, as he has been hunting there over 30 years. He is 51.

We stopped at a check station and asked the "biologist" what was going on. His reply, wolves, bears, and antler hunters running the elk in the spring causing abortions,, in that order. He said that the local herd is down to 7 calves per 100 cows, and that the G&F is discontinuing the late season and all cow tags for Sunlight next year. I disagreed with him, and told him it had to be aliens that were taking all the elk! The wolves could or would not kill them!

3 wolves killed in Madison Valley
By Gazette News Services

BOZEMAN - Three wolves from the Wedge pack were killed on private land in the Madison Valley last week after wolves injured three yearling heifers, the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department said Wednesday.

The two pups and an adult wolf were killed on Oct. 11.

FWP authorized the USDA Wildlife Services to kill the wolves. The agency investigated the attacks in late September. The landowner had to euthanize the three heifers. FWP also issued a shoot-on-sight permit to the landowner, which was not used.

The Wedge pack is known to live on and around the property where the depredations occurred. Two wolves from the same pack were killed in July after two confirmed livestock depredations and one probable livestock attack.

Kudu

I thought you would like that stat!

Terry used be a biologist, then a warden, and now the head of the Wyoming G&F! What say "ye pro-wolf hunting, anti-hunters"?

G&F chief: Wolves threaten hunting
By DUSTIN BLEIZEFFER
Star-Tribune staff writer Saturday, November 18, 2006





SUNDANCE -- Wolves have a taste for elk in the greater Yellowstone region, which has worked out well for both species -- for the time being.

However, if there's no resolution to the state's dispute with the federal government over removing the animal from protection under the Endangered Species Act, the wolf's taste for elk may diminish hunting opportunities, according to Wyoming Game and Fish Department Director Terry Cleveland.

"Let there be no doubt: If we don't get wolves delisted, the elk hunting opportunity in this state is going to decline," Cleveland said.

Cleveland discussed wolf issues at a Wyoming Game and Fish Commission meeting here Friday. He said under current federal protections, wildlife managers may kill wolves to protect livestock. But the state must receive special permission to kill wolves to manage elk numbers.

Cleveland said making the case that wolves are the primary reason for declining elk populations is difficult when there are so many other factors, such as drought and disease. Idaho recently tried to make that case to the federal government, but didn't succeed.

"The only way to protect elk is to get the wolves delisted and put the state in control," Cleveland said.

So far, biologists who study ungulate populations in the region have not determined that wolf predation alone threatens the elk population. If such a determination is made, however, the state's only existing option is to relocate wolves away from elk herds, which is a very ineffective management strategy, said Mike Jimenez, Wyoming wolf recovery project leader for the federal government.

Jimenez said elk make up about 90 percent of the wolf's diet in the greater Yellowstone region. The prolific predator has grown in numbers from 41 during reintroduction to the region in 1994 and 1995 to about 1,200 now, spanning northwest Wyoming and parts of Idaho and Montana.

The current annual 20 percent growth in wolf population is kept in check by a 20 percent kill rate related to livestock control, Jimenez said.

"When wolves kill livestock, we respond," Jimenez said.

Wyoming's plan for wolves once they're delisted calls for leaving the animals alone in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks, while killing of wolves in nearby areas would be regulated by the state. Wolves elsewhere in Wyoming could essentially be shot on sight.

That plan has been rejected by the federal government and is the subject of continuing litigation.

About five enviromental groups have taken sides with the pro-wolf (anti-hunting) USF&W service. They are pledging funds, legal support, and numbers of members to join the USF&W service, in the suit filed by Wyoming. Two Wyoming counties, some ag groups are on Wyoming's side.

There is a movement from hunting groups and idividual hunters to send funds to the state and support them in the suit. Very interesting!

Question,

It is not uncommon for states with excess populations of wildlife to trade another state for something they need to get rid of the excess.

Since we have more than 3 times the population objective of wolves in Yellowstone, I would like to trade the excess to Iowa for pheasants.

If possible, I would like to see Brent spearhead this effort because he would like to see wolves in Iowa and we would like to see him happy.

We could continue this with other states that support our growing wolf population. We have enough to go around and help these states start their own viable populations of wolves.

quote:

Originally posted by Snapper:
Since we have more than 3 times the population objective of wolves in Yellowstone, I would like to trade the excess to Iowa for pheasants.

If possible, I would like to see Brent spearhead this effort because he would like to see wolves in Iowa and we would like to see him happy.

We could continue this with other states that support our growing wolf population. We have enough to go around and help these states start their own viable populations of wolves.

I would be happy to make the trade but we generally trade turkeys for other species. On the other hand what do you need more turkeys for when you already have kudu? Pheasants are fine by me though.

Unfortunately, for you, wolves are coming here w/o your help, so I suspect we really wouldn't be bothered with trading much for your wolves since we will have them anyway. At least one or two have been here already. One of them perhaps even on my land.

Yup, wolves are a good thing. Be glad you have them. I'll be heading back out to WY next fall for elk if I can draw a tag - so I can pick up the wolves and drop off your pheasant or turkey.

Brent

quote:

Yup, wolves are a good thing. Be glad you have them. I'll be heading back out to WY next fall for elk if I can draw a tag - so I can pick up the wolves and drop off your pheasant or turkey.

Isn't that an oxymoron, a turkey dropping off a turkey? You won't draw, as the tags are being reduced pretty much all over the western part of the state. Why? Who knows? Preditors maybe? Nah wolves are vegetarians, one good thing, hunters, true hunters, are joining hands with the state to sue the USF&W!

quote:

Originally posted by ScottS:
You know what kills more elk and moose than wolves? I give you a hint they are currently whining about the competition from wolves! That is right, humans!

Heck there is an island in Lake Superior that is inhabited by only wolves and moose (excluding birds and small mammals) and it has been that way for centuries. This island has NO human population, if it did there would be no moose or wolves.

The island habitat in Superior with wolves is a fairy tale about coexistance the damned wolves have killed most of the herd and migrated elsewhere.

quote:

The island habitat in Superior with wolves is a fairy tale about coexistance the damned wolves have killed most of the herd and migrated elsewhere.

You can come up with all the stats, all the truths, all the evidence, that human kind can derive, and the prowolf, limp wirsts, much the same as the fags of kalifronia, will dispell it! Common sense is all you need, a 100# dog will eat meat, and lots of it, you can have lots of preditors or lots of game, but you can and never will have lots of both. I can only hope the limp wrist, dick suckers from iowa, never draw a tag in Wyoming because of wolf depridation. !

kudu, you are starting to loose it again. Your spelling is falling apart and your name calling is really pretty unimaginative again.

But you are so entertaining nonetheless. Like a B grade movie.

Brent

I would tell you to go lick my nuts, but I am affraid you would come do it!

You hate it when you are an egotystical maniac and never right, and on the wolf issue you are wrong, AGAIN! Stay in iowa, where the liberals of the liberals belong!

MMMM.... Lets see....

I hunted 15 days for elk in Idaho....

Saw NO elk.....

But I did see 9 wolfs.....

Me thinks I was hunting the wrong animal....

Brent

Good luck drawing a permit next year... Wyoming Game and Fish dept. issued 1200 extra cow/calve tags for areas 67,68 and 69 this year no extra tags. Explanation from local game warden, too many bears and to many wolves. The calve rate to 100 cows has dropped to below ten. The herds can not maintain growth much less keep up with natural death.

Would'nt you feel bad if you came out here and shot a elk, you would deprive a wolf his/her dinner. Like I mention ealier good luck drawing a tag.

Steve

kudu, keep working at it. You might learn to spell egotistical eventually.

But you will have to keep your nut-licking fantasies to yourself, sorry I can't help - maybe you could try that former senator Foley....

quote:

kudu, keep working at it. You might learn to spell egotistical eventually.

But you will have to keep your nut-licking fantasies to yourself, sorry I can't help - maybe you could try that former senator Foley....

Truth hurts huh? I know I have the right guy, it is pretty obvious! But I won't tell your college buds, but maybe they know.

Soon when Wyoming wins the suit, we will be able to hunt, and legally kill at random your beloved pet wolves. You and your crybaby G&F buddy will be whinning and protesting all the way.

quote:

Originally posted by scr83jp:

quote:

Originally posted by ScottS:
Heck there is an island in Lake Superior that is inhabited by only wolves and moose (excluding birds and small mammals) and it has been that way for centuries. This island has NO human population, if it did there would be no moose or wolves.

I don't think we can compare the small brush wolves on your island with the large timber wolves released in Yellowstone. It would also not be fair to compare the moose and its abilty to fight back to Elk which aren't not fighters.

Lets put our lg. wolves and Elk on your island and see how they do.