Yellowstone National Park

quote:

Survey finds young elk the preferred prey over bulls,

said Doug Smith, Yellowstone's lead wolf biologist.

Nice, the future of the herd seems to be very tasty. Go figue!

I thought they only eat old, sick animals. Now we have the oldest herd in history with the lowest number of calves per 100 cows and a total herd count under 7,000.

And this surprises you? Where ya been?

Bears love to do this too - better kill them all too.



What a hoot.
Brent

There's some excellent video I saw on TV of a grizzly running down an elk calf.The big lumbering bear turns out to be an excellent runner !

Wow, that's news. I thought they were only after the old, feeble, sick, and crippled.

No, that can't be! Wolves (that is, the ones who are not vegetarians) that prey on young animals are the exception! I have this on the best authority of our local PETA representatives. They should know, shouldn't they?

You should see what a pack of wolves can do to a herd of caribou in the winter, pretty disgusting sight.......

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
You should see what a pack of wolves can do to a herd of caribou in the winter, pretty disgusting sight.......

Dang, I bet they eat them! gees

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
You should see what a pack of wolves can do to a herd of caribou in the winter, pretty disgusting sight.......

Yea, it has been going on between those two for eons...what is your point?

MG

Point is they don't eat everything they kill, it's been documented what they do to caribou cows and unborn calves.

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
Not exactly.....

No? Then what HAVE those cute little wolfies been chowing on all this time? Salad?

Wolves eat meat and that makes white snow red.

Get over it already!

Brent

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
Point is they don't eat everything they kill, it's been documented what they do to caribou cows and unborn calves.

And that hasn't been going on for eons? Oh my

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
Point is they don't eat everything they kill, it's been documented what they do to caribou cows and unborn calves.

Arctic foxes don't eat everything they kill either, nor do bears, lions, squirrels, elephants or people for that matter....I know a lot of folks who post here don't give a rats butt about the meat on the animals they harvest. Other than the "trophy", they have no intention of consuming their quarry before or after they kill it. Maybe these folks should be eliminated along with the wolves...

It is called survival of the fittest...sad, but mother nature has put wolves and caribou together on the tundra for a reason much bigger than we will ever know.

MG

Geeezus, who the hell pissed in your cornflakes this morning? Only good wolf is a dead one.

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:

Only good wolf is a dead one.

That's a pretty ignorant attitude, bud.

Oh well.

WHAT!!!

Wolves eat elk calves??

You must be kidding!!

Hey, wait a minute--- I bet they eat cows and bulls too!!

(Oh...jeezz....whats going on here???...... I eat elk also......I must be a wolf!)

This all getting to confusing... first they say they eat bulls only...then they say they eat calves....

quote:

Originally posted by Snapper:
Yellowstone National Park

quote:

Survey finds young elk the preferred prey over bulls,

said Doug Smith, Yellowstone's lead wolf biologist.

Nice, the future of the herd seems to be very tasty. Go figue!

I thought they only eat old, sick animals. Now we have the oldest herd in history with the lowest number of calves per 100 cows and a total herd count under 7,000.

Wasn't it you who told me how wolves targeted the big bulls?? Wasn't it you who told must have skipped class??

Hmmmmmmm....

What was it you said????.... on the other thread???....A while back?????.... about wolves....and what they prefer to eat.....

Oh! Here it is.....

quote:

Originally posted by Snapper:

An article in our local paper stated the wolves were indeed targeting the large bulls in their weakened state after the breeding season.

I thought this was well known that bulls spend all their time breeding and fighting off other bulls and generaly enter winter in a weakened state. Could it be you skipped class that day?

A rancher in WY stated "Harassment by wolves has resulted in stress and weight loss to cattle". As a biologist, this may not mean much, but to cattlemen it means abortion in cows as they are stressed and eat less and overall less income as fewer and lighter weight cattle going to market.

To the common wolf loving, city slicker, tree hugger, it will mean higher food prices like hamburger/hotdogs.

To find such knowledge, just read the posts by the yellowstone biologists posted on this site and in the local papers in these Western states. It would help to take notes!

Interesting stuff.

Maybe I SHOULD "skip class".....

IV

IdahoVandal

I just report what the "expert Biologists" report in our local paper as I stated. I'm sure you could could see that.

Some things remain the same:
1. Elk numbers continue to drop in the Northern herd.
2. Calves per 100 cows continue to be lower than normal.
2 Age of this herd is older than normal.

LMN's

IV:

quote:

Originally posted by stillbeeman:
Wow, that's news. I thought they were only after the old, feeble, sick, and crippled.

I believe this is what was fed to us as the reason to re-introduce the wolf. As we have seen over the years, wolves will and do take down anything they come across. This has fueled their population growth to well over 4 times the 325 animal target.

Best news yet! Read it and weep brent! But another year, then the law suits by iowans, and the haggleing, don't buy your permits yet!

End result with the time factor, several thousand more dead elk!

Wyoming might be excluded but the Govenor is working on it!

Gray wolves to leave endangered list By MATTHEW BROWN, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 50 minutes ago



BILLINGS, Mont. - Wolves in the northern Rockies will be removed from the endangered species list within the next year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Friday, a move that would open the population up to trophy hunting.



Federal officials are expected to announce the plan Monday, said Sharon Rose, a spokeswoman for the service. The agency also will finalize removal from the list of a separate population of wolves in the Great Lakes region.

Federal officials for months have been readying a proposal calling for Montana, Idaho and Wyoming to assume management of the 1,200-plus wolves in their states. The plan would go into effect following a yearlong comment and review period, Rose said.

If the proposal for the Rocky Mountain gray wolf skirts expected legal challenges and becomes law, it would open wolves there to trophy hunting for the first time since an intensive restoration effort began in the late 1980s. The Great Lakes wolves would be protected from public hunting for at least five years.

A similar proposal made last year to take about 4,000 wolves off the endangered list in Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin is being finalized, Rose said.

Gray wolves were virtually eliminated across the West by the 1930s following a prolonged, government-sponsored eradication effort. The animal was declared endangered in 1974, shortly after passage of the Endangered Species Act.

Federal and state biologists previously have said that each of the Rocky Mountain states would be required to maintain a minimum of 100 wolves, including 10 breeding pairs, or the animal would again come under federal protection. Before reaching that minimum, hunting restrictions would kick in if the number of breeding pairs dropped to 15.

"We have no concern about the long-term future of wolves," said Ed Bangs, coordinator of the Northern Rockies wolf recovery program for the Fish and Wildlife Service. "The numbers will remain safely above that (10 breeding pairs per state), and the states have guaranteed that."

But Jamie Rappaport Clark with Defenders of Wildlife said that with the exception of Montana, the state plans come up short.

"We are absolutely certain removing northern Rocky Mountain wolves from the endangered species list at this time will only jeopardize their continued recovery," Clark said.

Others claim the federal government is not moving fast enough. Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd, based in Montana, is seeking state assistance for a planned lawsuit to make the delisting effective immediately because wolves are preying on the elk herd and hurting its population.

Fish and Wildlife officials are still negotiating with Wyoming over its proposed management plan. Wyoming wants more latitude to kill wolves when necessary to protect livestock and wildlife.

If the dispute with Wyoming is not resolved before the Fish and Wildlife Service delisting proposal is final, federal officials have said they may exclude Wyoming from the delisting program.

kudu,I don't have the money to run a lawsuit - sorry to disappoint. Not sure any other Iowans do either.

BUT, I did manage to scrape of the funds to put in for an elk tag. This should be my lucky year.

Brent

quote:

Originally posted by Kamo Gari:

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:

Only good wolf is a dead one.

That's a pretty ignorant attitude, bud.

If wolves are around I find M70Nut's opinion to be quite popular. If you've ever hunted an area and the wolves move in, you know how skittish the deer become. And when the wolves are in your corral carrying off your calves that attitude isn't ignorant. Got many wolves in Boston?

quote:

Only good wolf is a dead one.

I'll second that one. There is a reason they were erradicated. Lets not get started on what they are doing to our moose herds.

quote:

Originally posted by kw3126:
Got many wolves in Boston?

And yet another genius enters the foray...

And your credentials are? Those of us that live among the wolves get to actually see and experience what they can and will do. You location says it all, anothe Democrat boohooer. When 26 experienced whitetail hunters go to hunting camp in Northern Wis and see 1 deer between them while hunting all day both days of opening weekend, something just might be amiss.The other camp that i go to in Southern Wisconsin, where we usually see about a dozen apiece between the four of us, we saw one deer also all weekend.The only difference has been the resurgent population of wolves. I think we need to trap some and send 'em off to the east coast so you liberal crybabies will get to experience the grand sight of a wolf...... and little else.

Seems the Wis dnr found 8 or nine dead wolves after the 9 day deer gun season. Lead poisoning it seems. Wonder how many they didn't find?

quote:

Originally posted by Kamo Gari:

quote:

Originally posted by kw3126:
Got many wolves in Boston?

And yet another genius enters the foray...

you forgot to answer my question.

quote:

Originally posted by brucek:
And your credentials are? Those of us that live among the wolves get to actually see and experience what they can and will do. You location says it all, anothe Democrat boohooer. When 26 experienced whitetail hunters go to hunting camp in Northern Wis and see 1 deer between them while hunting all day both days of opening weekend, something just might be amiss.The other camp that i go to in Southern Wisconsin, where we usually see about a dozen apiece between the four of us, we saw one deer also all weekend.The only difference has been the resurgent population of wolves. I think we need to trap some and send 'em off to the east coast so you liberal crybabies will get to experience the grand sight of a wolf...... and little else.

what a bunch of cry babies you are. Credentials? That anyone has them is only relevant if they are on your side of the equation no? The same for location.

Anyone with credentials - real ones. And who knows something about the place for wolves in any system from whence they came, falls out in favor of a wolf population that is viable and functional.

Brent

quote:

Originally posted by kw3126:

quote:

Originally posted by Kamo Gari:

quote:

Originally posted by kw3126:
Got many wolves in Boston?

And yet another genius enters the foray...

you forgot to answer my question.

No, I didn't. I chose to ignore it.

quote:

Originally posted by brucek:
And your credentials are? Those of us that live among the wolves get to actually see and experience what they can and will do. You location says it all, anothe Democrat boohooer. When 26 experienced whitetail hunters go to hunting camp in Northern Wis and see 1 deer between them while hunting all day both days of opening weekend, something just might be amiss.The other camp that i go to in Southern Wisconsin, where we usually see about a dozen apiece between the four of us, we saw one deer also all weekend.The only difference has been the resurgent population of wolves. I think we need to trap some and send 'em off to the east coast so you liberal crybabies will get to experience the grand sight of a wolf...... and little else.

Uhhhhh....I live among the wolves (Idaho).......I have seen (firsthand) what they do. I am not a "Democrat boohooer" (I have voted Republican nearly 99% of the time over the last 20 years) I woudn't call them a "grand sight"; certainly they fill a role and need to be managed just like anything else-- not extirpated.

And yes, I agree 100%-- they were killed off 50 years ago for a reason-- people were idiots and did not understand predator/prey dynamics.

One thing that always amazes me about the anti-wolf crowd is that they can understand and explain why all of the various parts of an engine work together and function and that maintenance of one part is required to keep the whole thing running. But when you try to explain that the ecosystem is just as (if not more complex) and that the removal of too many large carnivores is akin to letting the maintenance of an engine go to shit-- they just don't get it.

When you try to reason with them, its like trying to reason with the idiots on the other side of the coin who think the wolf should never be hunted and that they don't have an effect on game numbers etc.

Its really not rocket science-- we need a some healthy large carnivores in the ecosystem-- not 2000 but not 20 either. Of course, when you poin this out, the whack job anti-wolf people twist you into a "flaming liberal" and the whack job pro-wolf people think your a blood thirsty rural redneck dumber than a sack of hammers......

Amazing.....

quote:

Originally posted by Brent:
kudu,I don't have the money to run a lawsuit - sorry to disappoint. Not sure any other Iowans do either.

BUT, I did manage to scrape of the funds to put in for an elk tag. This should be my lucky year.

Brent

Idaho or Wyoming??

IV

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal

Idaho or Wyoming??

IV

Wyoming.
Brent

I recall when the wolves were caught up by Hinton to be transplanted in and around yellowstone. Seems to me the price per head transplanted was extremely high and we all thought that the whole idea was a little off. Many of us up here like to hunt things like elk,moose,deer and sheep and we find the hunting gets better the more wolves are thinned out.
There is sort of a rule or code we have concerning the matter, the three S rule.
1.Shoot
2.Shovel
3.Shut up
It works pretty good. The third part is the hardest.

quote:

Originally posted by bwest:
There is sort of a rule or code we have concerning the matter, the three S rule.
1.Shoot
2.Shovel
3.Shut up
It works pretty good. The third part is the hardest.

That would work pretty good!
I would agree #3 would be the hardest.

With similar felonies (child rape, murder etc.) the criminals committing such acts usually get caught because they open their mouths.

How many wolves have you killed in the United States in the last 10 years?

IV

quote:

One thing that always amazes me about the anti-wolf crowd is that they can understand and explain why all of the various parts of an engine work together and function and that maintenance of one part is required to keep the whole thing running. But when you try to explain that the ecosystem is just as (if not more complex) and that the removal of too many large carnivores is akin to letting the maintenance of an engine go to shit-- they just don't get it.

IdahoVandal & Brent -

I am a large carnivore. (Perhaps too large )

I don't want wolves in or around my favorite hunting places (which happen to be mostly prime elk habitat) for this reason;

If large wild carnivores control game populations to be within the managing agency's population guidelines then there is NO reason to issue hunting tags. The game populations are being controlled without me the hunter.

I am NOT anti-wolf. I would love to be able to occasionally see wolves, just like I enjoy seeing red ants, stink bugs, or whatever else God put on this earth. I love seeing and being a part of wildlife. Part of that enjoyment is all that goes along with being a hunter or a large carnivore. But with the wolf situation like it is and as proposed by the USF&G I am the one which will be eliminated. That is MY fear and why I am "emotional" about this subject.

Brent: It may be EASY for you flatlanders in "Iowa USA" "to get over"! But for those of us that live in and love to Hunt Moose, Elk, Bighorn Sheep and other Big Game in the Rocky Mountain states well lets just say ITS NOT EASY TO GET OVER!
Your head in the sand (up your ass!) attitude is ignorant, naive and unbecoming a concerned sportsman!
If you are not aware of the damage these transplanted Canadian Wolves are doing to OUR hard fought for Hunting opportunities and to related business then - shut the fuck up!
You are simply to ignorant to add anything objective to this discourse!
Snapper is RIGHT ON with his pointing out OTHER ignorant and naive dipshits (like the Wolf biologist and his comments!) and maybe he should now include you in his posts?
Thanks for NOTHING rmWf!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

quote:

Originally posted by Elkslayer:
If large wild carnivores control game populations to be within the managing agency's population guidelines then there is NO reason to issue hunting tags. The game populations are being controlled without me the hunter.

I am NOT anti-wolf. I would love to be able to occasionally see wolves, just like I enjoy seeing red ants, stink bugs, or whatever else God put on this earth. I love seeing and being a part of wildlife. Part of that enjoyment is all that goes along with being a hunter or a large carnivore. But with the wolf situation like it is and as proposed by the USF&G I am the one which will be eliminated. That is MY fear and why I am "emotional" about this subject.

OH WOW!! Somebody here, finally, is starting to get it! Now that is an argument I could respect (If I were a pro-wolf lovin' hippie--which really I'm not.... but anyway)

There is no way a pro-wolf group or person could defend against that argument. If they tried they would lose with the general public, much the same way we lose when we make claims of "extirminated for a reason" or "the only good wolf is a dead wolf" etc.

My hat is off to you sir!

If more hunters looked at this reasonably rather than extremely--we might get the high ground back.

IV

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal:

quote:

Originally posted by brucek:
And your credentials are? Those of us that live among the wolves get to actually see and experience what they can and will do. You location says it all, anothe Democrat boohooer. When 26 experienced whitetail hunters go to hunting camp in Northern Wis and see 1 deer between them while hunting all day both days of opening weekend, something just might be amiss.The other camp that i go to in Southern Wisconsin, where we usually see about a dozen apiece between the four of us, we saw one deer also all weekend.The only difference has been the resurgent population of wolves. I think we need to trap some and send 'em off to the east coast so you liberal crybabies will get to experience the grand sight of a wolf...... and little else.

Uhhhhh....I live among the wolves (Idaho).......I have seen (firsthand) what they do. I am not a "Democrat boohooer" (I have voted Republican nearly 99% of the time over the last 20 years) I woudn't call them a "grand sight"; certainly they fill a role and need to be managed just like anything else-- not extirpated.

And yes, I agree 100%-- they were killed off 50 years ago for a reason-- people were idiots and did not understand predator/prey dynamics.

One thing that always amazes me about the anti-wolf crowd is that they can understand and explain why all of the various parts of an engine work together and function and that maintenance of one part is required to keep the whole thing running. But when you try to explain that the ecosystem is just as (if not more complex) and that the removal of too many large carnivores is akin to letting the maintenance of an engine go to shit-- they just don't get it.

When you try to reason with them, its like trying to reason with the idiots on the other side of the coin who think the wolf should never be hunted and that they don't have an effect on game numbers etc.

Its really not rocket science-- we need a some healthy large carnivores in the ecosystem-- not 2000 but not 20 either. Of course, when you poin this out, the whack job anti-wolf people twist you into a "flaming liberal" and the whack job pro-wolf people think your a blood thirsty rural redneck dumber than a sack of hammers......

Amazing.....

I don't have a problem with several packs here in Wisconsin, either. Trouble is, now instead of several packs, we have a lot of packs and no way to manage them. I live in dairy farm country in the middle of the state. A large woods around here is 100 acres. We have wolves here. They belong in the large wooded tracts in Northern and Southwest Wisconsin where they were originally supposed to be. Trouble is, when there are too many for the habitat, some leave. So now what? I think we need to send some to Iowa for the bunny huggers, too, the way it sounds.

quote:

Originally posted by Brent:

quote:

Originally posted by brucek:
And your credentials are? Those of us that live among the wolves get to actually see and experience what they can and will do. You location says it all, anothe Democrat boohooer. When 26 experienced whitetail hunters go to hunting camp in Northern Wis and see 1 deer between them while hunting all day both days of opening weekend, something just might be amiss.The other camp that i go to in Southern Wisconsin, where we usually see about a dozen apiece between the four of us, we saw one deer also all weekend.The only difference has been the resurgent population of wolves. I think we need to trap some and send 'em off to the east coast so you liberal crybabies will get to experience the grand sight of a wolf...... and little else.

what a bunch of cry babies you are. Credentials? That anyone has them is only relevant if they are on your side of the equation no? The same for location.

Anyone with credentials - real ones. And who knows something about the place for wolves in any system from whence they came, falls out in favor of a wolf population that is viable and functional.

Brent

Brent,sometimes it is best to keep your mouth shut and be thought an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt.

Elkslayer, I understand where you are coming from, but I think you will find that you and the wolves and hunting will all coexist. The odds are pretty high that you can have wolves and still have hunting. Note that there is mighty fine hunting - strangely though it seems - happens to be where the are wolves. Alaska, Alberta, Ontario, Minnesota, and even Northern and SW Wisconsin. All really fine hunting.

In fact, most people would love to hunt in places that coincidentally happen to have wolves. And there is not a single place that I know of where hunting is no longer legal - because there are wolves.

There will be some rollercoater rides for a while, and hysteria everywhere, but in the end. I think you will still be hunting.

Unfortunately, hunters long ago could have seen the inevitable coming and jumped on board the wolf-wagon to claim credit for the single most visible conservation/reintroduction of wildlife yet in North America. But they didn't and the animosity that hunters have generated in the name calling, the threats, the SSS bragging, the poisonings, etc have really burned a lot of bridges between hunters and the hunting-neutral crowd. That group is the biggest bunch of folks out there. They are the voting block that holds the future of hunting in their hands. And, for the most part, they are beginnig to find reason to dislike us more and more.

The assinine crap that passes for the anti-wolf stance these days is not doing any hunters any favors and it is not getting rid of wolves either. All it is doing is alienating a few folks that didn't really mind hunting at all. Now Varmintguy and folks like him and burek give them all the information they need to make up their minds.

Good luck,

Brent