Elk Foundation Calls Out Motives of Wolf Groups


MISSOULA, Mont.—In letters to legislators and newspapers across the West, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is calling out groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Western Wildlife Conservancy and others for their disingenuous use of data on wolves and elk.

The RMEF action was prompted by each group’s recent op-ed articles in the media, as well as testimony before Utah lawmakers by Western Wildlife Conservancy Executive Director Kirk Robinson. All cited RMEF statistics to argue that restored wolf populations have somehow translated to growing elk herds in the northern Rockies.

“The theory that wolves haven’t had a significant adverse impact on some elk populations is not accurate. We’ve become all too familiar with these groups’ tactic of cherry-picking select pieces of information to support their own agenda, even when it is misleading,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We will not allow that claim to go unchallenged.”

RMEF population data, which come from state wildlife agencies, show that elk populations are expanding the most in areas of the northern Rockies where wolves are not present. However, where elk share habitat with wolves, such as the greater Yellowstone area, some elk populations are declining fast. In fact, since the mid-1990s introduction of gray wolves, the northern Yellowstone elk herd has dropped from about 17,000 to 7,100 animals—a 58 percent decline. Other localities in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming also are documenting precipitous downward trends.

Additionally, some research shows that elk remaining in areas of concentrated wolf populations are suffering nutrition loss, lower body weights and decreasing birth rates.

Allen said, “Every wildlife conservation agency, both state and federal, working at ground zero of wolf restoration—Idaho, Montana and Wyoming—has abundant data to demonstrate how undermanaged wolf populations can compromise local elk herds and local livestock production. There’s just no dispute, and emotion-over-science is not the way to professionally manage wildlife.”

RMEF continues to support state-regulated wolf management to include hunting and other viable methods. This position is supported by new reports of diseased wolf populations in the Yellowstone area.

“When wolves are too abundant, they’re more susceptible to diseases, just like all wildlife. The viruses and mange now spreading through wolf packs is another sign of way too many wolves,” said Allen. “Defenders of Wildlife would like to spin sick wolves as a reason to end hunting. But real conservationists know that diseased wildlife populations need better management. Hunting as a management tool delivers that, period.”

He added, “Remember, pro-wolf groups make their living by prolonging this conflict. There is no real incentive for them to admit that wolves are overly recovered. Fundraising is their major motive and they’ve built a goldmine by filing lawsuits and preaching that nature will find its own equilibrium between predators and prey if man would just leave it alone. That’s a myth. The truth is that people are the most important part of the equation. This isn’t the Wild West anymore. People live here—actually quite a lot of us. So our land and resources must be managed. Wildlife must be managed. Radical spikes and dips in populations show that we should be doing it better. It’s not profitable for plaintiffs, but the rest of us would be better served if the conflict ended and conservation professionals were allowed to get on with their business of managing wildlife, including a well regulated hunting strategy.”

In 2009, RMEF got involved in the ongoing wolf litigation, supporting defendant agencies by filing legal briefs used in federal court to help delist wolves and proceed with hunting—“facts conveniently ignored by groups who misuse our name, data and credibility to prolong the conflict. We stand for elk and other wildlife and what is happening right now is simply not good wildlife management,” said Allen.

See Allen’s letters to editors, Utah Senator Dennis Stowell and more at www.rmef.org.

Good for them, it's about time.

HOOOOLY SH!!!!T It's about time the RMEF pulled their head out of the sand.

I might have to rejoin the membership!

Steve

They've supported managed wolf populations since the beginning.

Good luck fighting the wolf lovers groups now! I'm not surprised to hear them lie and twist the facts to support their position.

RMEF should never have endorsed the reintroduction to begin with.

We're up to our armpits in wolves now and no end in site.

it'll take the RMEF and a whole lot of others to help, before us in the Mt.west get any relief
we've been fighting this battle since before the introduction.
but it is nice to have some backup'
i fear it may be too little too late.
all our nightmares have come true....
where once there were thriving populations of big game....we got piles of wolf shit

I keep hearing RMEF members saying that the RMEF has been for wolf management all along. I have not heard anything “publicly” from RMEF until last year.
RMEF has been so into habitat for so long that they have overlooked the fact that there are millions of acres of habitat that is now going unused because of the reduction in population of elk due to the reintroduction of non-native wolves.
It is my opinion that RMEF was looking at state F&G data. The States not wanting a drastic loss of revenue have published data that I am sure has been altered to appear that there are larger numbers of elk than what there really is. State F&G like to publish hunter success data in percentages. Harvest Percentages are like a $hit cupcake. When you have the frosting and the sprinkles it is tough to see what is in the center unless you take a bite and see what is in there. One of the things I have seen here in Idaho is last years hunting season was one of the worst in recent history. Still F&G is saying that the harvest percentages were high. This leads a lot of people to believe that elk and deer are fine come to Idaho to spend your money! Fact is state F&G agencies have helped to promote the total annihilation of game in the state by covering up the REAL data. They don’t want to loose the revenue. If the State F&G agencies would have came clean from the start maybe we would not be dealing with such a drastic issue. Maybe RMEF would have came out sooner and said we need to stop this slaughter of our wildlife to non-native wolves. What we have now is herds that are in trouble. In the short term State F&G agencies will try to keep the number of tags sold as high as they can. They will continue to sell tags until the public demands something happen to save our big game. When that happens. The Hunters dollars will no longer keep F&G agencies in the black. State F&G agencies will have to get State tax dollars from the general fund to operate. We will see Fish and game commissioners selected from a pool of people that more accurately resemble that taxpayers of the state.
Hunting not just in Idaho but anywhere wolves are allowed to roam is in jeopardy. We will loose this war to the wolves and the Federal government unless something is done. Ron

Here is a $hit cupcake. Ron

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/c...onresSurvResults.pdf

In my experience, which I admit is a little bit dated, Idaho elk hunting has been absolutely ruined by wolves. It was one of my favorite spots, now the howl of a wolf means change your hunting area. Unfortunately the wolf free elk hunting areas are largely on private land!

Good to see they flip-flopped in the right direction this time.

About time, but it's all about self preservation.

No elk, no RMEF.

They will just have to change their name to RMHF. Rocky Mountain Habitat Foundation. Without hunter's dollars, there goes the RMHF.

They are in prime postion to become a leader in this wolf fight, and probably get unprecedented revenues in return. But time will tell, and my money is staying right where it's at for now.