Yellowstone National Park wolf biologist Doug Smith (Quote) said there is no scientific evidence wolves are driving off elk and moose.

"We have no data anywhere in the park that wolves are driving elk and moose to extinction.
In fact, wolves rarely kill moose".

Mr. Smith if you would get off your fat $ss and get out in the real world from behind your desk you would have your scientific evidence.

The elk population has dropped over five thoudsand head the last couple of years. The cow/calf ratio is less than 5% what more evidence do you need.

Scratch

Well what the hell do they eat in northern Canada? Burger king?

Seriously though, wolves will eat what ever the pack is strong enough to kill. You won't see a wolf killing a moose but you will see a pack take them down.

In the kispiox Valley the wolves(and indians) have cleaned up the moose pretty damn good. It's to the point that you will see more wolves then you will see moose and deer combined most of the time during hunting season. Now the wolves have focused on the deer herd. But notice I said deer after the moose.

If you go furhter north there is no deer, just moose and caribou. There is sheep and goat but not realy a target for the wolf very often. The wolf packs tend to be larger so then does the prey. I've also found wolf skulls that have had a hole bashed thru them and I can only assume that a moose has kicked him in the head.

Make no mistake, if the wolf packs get big enough in the yellowstone area, the bigger prey will fall.

Right On Guys, we Alaskans know better. Who's ass do they think they are blowing smoke up?

Right on, Aaron!

I agree that wolves do kill moose, but I find it hard to believe the widly held belief that wolves and (indians) are the sole reason(s) for declining animal populations. These animals don't live in a vaccuum. There is a complete ecosystem out there that plays a role and effects us all. Focusing on one aspect leaves you with a pretty narrow view of the rest of the situation.

Turok

Turok

That goes with out saying. Only the ignorant could believe wolves and indians are the only ones that contribute to the decline in big game.

Where I live on the other hand moose are on a rapid increase. Logging and Limited Entry Hunting has only helped the moose. In 2001, hunting deer, I seen over 40 bulls in close proximity to my house. No draw though. I seen far less this last season but I'm still waiting for winter.

A few years ago the moose tics put a real beating on the moose. They cleaned up pretty good but mild winters could give the tics a leading edge again. We'll see. There is wolves around here but indians are few and far between. Where the indian reserves are in the area, the hunting is still pretty good. They don't have to totally count on sustanance around here even with the salmon runs not anywhere near here.

Some areas up north are totally spent. If indians ate wolves then there might be a ballance. It can't be blamed on them but they could find a more reliable way to survuve. Work comes to mind.

Boilerroom,

Good post,

except, a lone wolf can,will and do kill moose.(ussually a cow or a calf) Most often they do this as a pack.

and wolves do hunt sheep and goats. Wolves are quite good at hunting sheep and goats and are ussually only effective when they are hunting as a pack.
I have actually had this happen to me. I was guiding a client for moose. I had climbed nearly to the top of this mountian so I could get a 'birds eye view' of several valleys. I was way up in the rocks and shale. All I had to do was walk 4 or 500 yards one way or the other and I could cover alot of ground. Anyways, above me, I heard rocks falling and rolling briefly. I turned and glanced up but did not see anything. I thought mabe sheep or something. And rocks sometimes just trickle down on their own. A good while later I heard rocks falling again. So I took a better look but saw nothing. I started thinking sheep. I was up pretty high and nothing but rock and shale. About 5 minutes later, a god dam wolf howls just above me. I could hardly believe it. Now I knew what was making the rocks fall. I had to climb about 30 yards to see all of the slope above me. That is when I saw the wolf and the wolf saw me. The wolf turned and literaly started climbing and went back over the top of the mountain. I did not have my gun with me and my hunter was to fat to climb the extra 30 yards in time to bring his. I recall thinking that, that wolf would have been screwed if I would have had my gun cause he was having a hell of a time climbing back up those rocks. When I went back down to my hunter and on the lookout, we spotted more wolves down below us about 5-600 yards. We heard them howl and in short order they disapeared. We were surrounded.

My guess is they must have seen me from a distance and mistook me for a caribou. Then they planned thier stock. The wolf was a suprised to see me as I was to see him. My point of this story(hope I didn't bore you) is I have hunted sheep and goats on easier ground than this. I already knew that wolves will try to surround and chase sheep into a trap and I got to see it first hand.

Although very rare, I have heard of 3 personal acounts of wolves hunting humans, the wolves apparently knowing thier prey were humans.(Not in my case) Two of these stories are published. The other story was told to me by a local fellow. He does not know "shit for fat meat" when it comes to wolves or any other wildlife. I believe him, for when he describes what happend and how it happened, I figure it did happpen. He would have to have alot of knowledge about wolves to fabricate a story like he told me.

I really like how the greenies portray wolves. You know, like rolling around, cute and fuzzy, frolicing about, smell'n the flowers, chasen butterflies and all. They are kind of cute. Sometimes they will show them baring teeth fighten over a bone. What they don't normally say is wolves will kill each and eat each other as well.
A friend of mine who is snaring wolves on his trapline is having problems. When he gets several in a set up, the remaining wolves in the pack are eating the snared ones.
IMO, when wolves(and indians ) have to work hard for prey, they eat everything. When prey is plentiful, they eat little and continue to kill. They are a kill'n machine.

Daryl

Daryl

I've seen wolf shit in the alpine on more than a few occasions. I would expect goats and sheep to have the advantage over mountain caribou but the wolf is by far the most inteligent pred. out there besides us of course.

On Vancouver Island, in towns like Gold River, the wolves are taking pets right out of people's yards. Sounds much like the coyote problem in the greater Vancouver area. The biggest varmint without a doubt.

One thing my friends north of here complain about is the sustanance hunters leave the front end of the moose laying on the side of the road to rot. They take the rear end home with them. That's just lazy and damaging to their image. This is a minority of sustanance hunters I believe and hope I'm right.

I find it a bit odd that a wildlife biologist, doesn't have any data on this subject.
Resent norwegian studies shows that a small wolf pack can take out approximatly 76 moose per wolf per year. I got these numbers from a field study in Hedmark, Norway.

Where I live in northern alberta the moose population has been decimated by wolves and poachers.Last year a large poaching ring was busted by the wardens and it was discovered that a single poacher had been killing more moose than all hunters combined in one area.It turns out that the poachers were natives using subsistance laws to hide the fact that they were poaching and selling the carcasses.If anyone would like more information they can look up "operation tamarack" at the alberta game warden website.

Torjus

That because he works for the US Fish and Wildlife Service and not for the state.

Before they reintroduced the wolves, the (Feds) stated that there were no wolves living in the west prior to the 1995-96 release. I cut two wolf tracks in fresh snow while elk hunting back in 1992 on the East Fork of the Wind River.

The way they came up with this statement that there were no wolves, is that they went out one full moon night and tried to howl, to see if they would get a responce.

Just like this whole wolf program, WHAT A JOKE!!!

Scratch

Anybody ever try hunting on or near a reservation? Considering how much the residents claim to respect the earth mother, there certainly is not any evidence of game overpopulation.

kk

[ 02-21-2003, 22:16: Message edited by: kk ]

As we in Alaska say " Eat moose, 10,000 wolves can't be wrong". Bear in Fairbanks

Right on KK; here on the Algonquin P boundry, we used to see & get a lot of moose, now the Tradition hunters shoot them from the window of their tradition 4 wd hunting trucks & pull them out with their tradition 4wheelers while the MNR has declared a no hunting wolf zone, the only thing I see anymore are wolves & deer kills??? I guess some armchair resercher has got it all figured out??? Oh ya, I have seen single wolf moose kills.

I recently hunted wolves in Alberta. On the third day of the hunt, while sitting near bait, I heard a lone wolf, then two wolves, then a number of howls all togather. They were within one mile of me. My guide said that night when he picked me up that I had heard a pack take down an animal. The last day of a six day hunt, while tracking a wolf I had hit, we found the take down site. A mature Cow Moose, that had been cleaned down to the skeleton. What amazed me is they ate the hide, leaving only the hair. For 50 yards around the kill site there were areas where tufts of hair were conscentrated, indicating where a wolf had eaten his fill. My guide explained that the Moose does not kick backwards to protect itself, like a Horse or Mule. They rare up and use their front feet, kicking and frailing forward. I, with my limited experience can attest to the fact the wolves take down Moose, and I am certainly no wildlife biologist. Good shooting.

I always get a kick out of the idea that Natives are responsible for killing all the animals, when both historically and currently, non-aboriginal hunters have been responsible for decimating entire populations of bison, grizzly bear, caribou, salmon and cod. The only animal non-aboriginal people seem to have bred in abundance is 'scapegoats' i.e. wolves, bears, coyotes, and (Indians).

So here's a little food for thought:

"The hunting territories that lie beyond all roads and trails are comparatively untouched by white hunting. Those that are now within easy reach of four-wheel drive vehicle are hunted very intensively. The new frontier has allowed hundreds, even thousands, of Whites to hunt or fish deep inside the heartlands of many Indian hunting territories and trap lines."

"The Indian moose harvest is small when measured alongside the numbers taken by white sports hunters. In the Halfway Reserve territory, for example, Whites take in two months, a little over four times the number of moose the Indians take in the whole year"

The above was taken from an ethnography called �Maps and Dreams� by Dr. Hugh Brody, p 235. This study was done in Northern British Columbia. Dr. Brody ACTUALLY accompanied the bands on their hunting trips ensuring that the Native numbers were accurate. At the same time, the numbers for non-aboriginal hunters could very well be higher due to the reliance on �good non-aboriginal� hunters actually reporting what they took during the season to the provincial government. The non-aboriginal numbers do not include animals that were poached.

When we look at other non-aboriginal factors, agriculture is responsible for the destruction of millions upon millions of acres of animal habitat. The same goes for logging. The same goes for commercial fishing. How about we look at the pollution in the Great Lakes and St Lawrence waterway.

The PCB level in the ground around the Great Lakes has been found in quantities of up to 40,000 ppm. PCB levels in the water have been measured in quantities of up to 5,700 ppm. The sad part of it all is that Health Canada states that acceptable levels are 2 ppm/fish and 3ppm/poultry. On top of this, there have been 362 toxins identified, of which 42 were labelled Persistent Toxic Substances (toxins that take decades to dissipate). All of these were put out by big business, namely GM and the two Aluminium plants in the area. If you would like to read about the pollutants in our waterways yourself, get a copy of Local Fish Consumption and Serum PCB Concentrations among Mohawk Men at Akwesasne� in Environmental Research, Vol. 80, No. 2, pp S97-S103

I�m not even going to get into the mass environmental destruction of the James Bay dam in Quebec, and the Williston Lake reservoir in British Columbia. The list could go on. Seems to me that 3% of the total Canadian population is taking the lions share of the blame for decimating animal populations while 97% of the total Canadian population convince themselves to sleep well at night. I suggest the mother earth loving non-aboriginals fess up to their role in decimating the animal populations instead of pointing fingers. Perhaps then we can do something to improve the situation.

Turok

Turok

It's a nobel cause defending the Natives and the arguement you posted is a great point. How could you blame the decline in wildlife since Europeans came on the natives. But I didn't read any accusation like that on this thread.

I think what some people here are pointing out is hunting practices and overhunting. Some indian bands have worse reputations then others. I hear the complaints from indians themselves pointing fingers at other bands because of an overlapping hunting territory. The Deas indians are burning hunting vehicles of the Kispiox hunting parties because they are well out of their territory. They complain that they are finding wasted game and they are upset by the respect they are getting. The non indian hunters in the Hazelton area complain of the kispiox band leaving the front end of the moose to rot because they are lazy. Locally here the Dog creek band has the bad reputation and the Canim band complains about them also.

I'm seeing a reversal in the attitude of the non indian people when it comes to wildlife and the enviroment. It seems to me the reversal is happenning with the natives going the other way. I can't say all of them though because there are pretty good numbers that are involved with enhancement programs. It's been the case on more occasions that if there is only ten fish left in a run, the will kill them.

It seems locally here some natives are running a pretty lucrative cattle rustling ring. There is no arguement for that. Also the fish poaching on lakes that never had kokanee ontil we stocked them has no arguement. If I was ever allowed to live tax free I would make the best of it but it seems that the lazyness is too chronic on these reservations.

It's fustrating when you get up in the morning before light and drive to your spot and see the natives just finnishing their hunt. It's worse when later that day you find an animal that they had shot and didn't bother looking long enough for it. Then when you get back to your truck they have ransacked and stole everything. Then you have to buy it back off them in town later when they claim that they found it laying on the ground and it's theirs.

Alston Chase wrote a fascinating book on Yellowstone in the mid-80s titled "Playing God in Yellowstone". One of Chase's important themes [apart from the Park Service's general mismanagement of the Park] is that it is massively over-populated and thus over-browsed/grazed by ungulates [viz., elk]. Chase observed that there is much less bio-diversity within the park than without. There are almost no beaver in the park and very few Whitetail. Why? As to Beaver, it is because elk over-browse the stream banks, killing off new willow growth. Beaver are everywhere outside the park but rare within the Park. The Park has been managed like a giant zoo, over-stocked with elk and buffalo [when City folk see large fauna such as elk and buffalo, they tend to become more committed the Park service and its budget needs].

There are very few Aspen stands within the Park, but they are everywhere outside the park, Why? Chase and others argue that it is because the Park is over-grazed by ungulates. Aspens provide an important food source for deer.

The problem is the environmentalist assumption that Yellowstone is a self-contained, self-regulating ecosystem, which humans have not historically influenced [very much] and which we must not influence today. Chase shows that this is environmentalist nonsense. The Park has always been heavily impacted by human activity---whether native Americans thousands of years ago or Americans of european ancestry today.

So, on balance, I am in favor of wolves in the Yellowstone ecosystem and beyond. I'd like to see the elk and bison herds reduced to the Park's carrying capacity and the system brought back into balance. Elk numbers have been artificially inflated for political purposes way beyond their historical averages. Obviously a reduction in over-all elk numbers will mean fewer hunting opportunities outside the Park. It will also mean more Whitetail within and without the park, more mule deer, a return of more Beaver to the Park with a whole host of attendant benefits.

For what it is worth, I am in favor of artificially inflating grizzly numbers in the Park by supplementing their diet with additional protein [such as bow-killed Elk and carcass piles within the park]. I'd like to hunt a grizzly in the lower 48 and I don't agree with the environmentalist nonsense spouted by persons such as Chris Servheen to the effect "if we cannot have grizzly's naturally, we won't have them at all." Translated, this means we must choose between people and bears, rather than have people and bears.

Sorry to ramble....

Jordan

Has any one read the Lois and Clark jurnals?

They made some observations on the wild life populations on their journey to the west coast. At times the game was rich and plentiful. But in some areas where the natives were, they could not feed themselves. It was no different for the natives. Some of these villages were starving because they over hunted the area. The hunting parties had to travel farther and farther.

This is pre white man. No hydro dams, no white hunters, no 4X4's, and lots of indians.

I know this a little off the wolf topic but Turok's comment got me to thinking, why can't the natives take some blame for once?

I think what this guy real means is that the moose real die of blood loss. That the poor wolves just give them a few love bites and it isn't real the poor mistreated wolves trouble that the poor moose dies from them.

Jordan

I respect your point of veiw and your opinions. And I agree that Yellowstone is a large zoo however, I have hunted all around the park and there just isn't that much aspen growth anywhere and for the beavers I have yet to see very many inside or outside the park.

Since you don't live in Idaho, Montana or Wyoming you have not seen the damage and the area the wolves are now calling home.

A pack of wolves went throught the Dubois area near Union Pass killing everything in sight and leaving the carcass untouched to rot.

I,m not one who want to kill the wolf off completely but, they due need to be managed like deer and elk herds.

Many be we should turn a pack or two loose in your area and want the mountain lion hasn't killed the wolf sure will.

Scratch

I know I am a little late getting into this one! But this is a very emotinal and controversial topic in Wyoming. Wolves were present in Wy. before the re-intorduction. The Urbikits proved it with video and a plumber from Worland Wy. shot one and had the USF&W test it. It was a wolf. But the USF&W knew that if they admitted to there being wolves in Wy. these two confirmed cases would derail their multi million dollar relocation plan. True fact, first group of released wolves cost US tax payers over one million per wolf. Fact wolves have devastated elk and moose numbers in NW Wy. confirmed lowest winter count since 1968, USF&G claim it is due to the drought, fact, bison numbers in the park record highs, hmmmmmmm wouldnt the drought also affect the bison? Hell no, a wolf isn't stupid, they will kill a calf elk before taking on a calf bison. I can go on and on.

There needs to be some management NOW, some say it is to late already. I think the Wy. G&F is hiding facts and truths so as not to scare off non-resident hunters. What a game these people are playing with Wy, Id, and Mt. future game. Also the RMEF is not saying a word about the wolf. They have actually came out in defense of the re-intorduction. So much for them being the steward of the elk.

[ 02-22-2003, 19:28: Message edited by: kudu56 ]

I live here not in California. I live in a real world not disney land. I have and can find no evidence of there ever being whitetail deer in Yellowstone. In fact in years gone by we never had hardly any state wide.

I don't want to see all the wolves wiped out either but we need some management soon if not now. Leave them in the Park but outside of it they are fair game. Truthfully, if a wolf season was opened today, with no limit, outside of the park, you could not kill all of them. Just to much country and to many places to hide. It isn't even safe to take your bird dog into the mountians to do some grouse hunting. It has gotten way out of hand and the USF&W sit on their hands and laugh. This was a reintroduced population not a natural occuring population of wolves. One count puts them at 280 in Wy. and 700 in Wy, Id, & Mt. all in one area. In and around Jellystone! How many elk can 700, one hundred pound canines eat in one day or week or month? Now how about in a year od the last 5 years? Thousands I am sure. Some wolves in the park is fine but outside of the park they need controlled. One was shot in eastern Nebraska in Dec. One was trapped in utah at the same time. So they are moving.

[ 02-22-2003, 19:42: Message edited by: kudu56 ]

Turok -If you read my earlier post you will see that I mentioned one native poacher had been found guilty of killing more moose in one wildlife unit than all white hunters combined.He killed in excess of 50 moose in an area where less than 40 moose were killed by sporthunters.He won't be poaching for a couple of years though as he is currently behind bars where he belongs.The alberta gamewarden website and magazine have good coverage on the sting(operation tamarack).27 people were charged with almost all being natives.The only non-natives charged were charged with buying the animals from the natives who poached it.Surveys conducted by fish and wildlife after the sting showed that the moose population in this area was totally decimated and it would be many years for the populations to recover if they ever did.

I just discoverd this site and it is great to see posts from folks who have been in or live in real wolf territory. We have our hands full here in Wy. with the wolf issue. Mainly due to the USF&W service. And there lack to be realistic or use common sense. You have to remember they are Clinton era type people!!!!!

Not meant to hijack this thread, but here in Alaska the bears (both black and grizzly) are contributing to the decline of the moose population - hunt more bears KMule

Your not hijacking at all! You just are giving insight into what has always been known to man kind. You can have lots of predators or you can have lots of game! But you can not have lots of both. Here in Wy the G&F claim the gizz is killing more moose calves than the wolves are. I don't doubt it, they are pretty smart animal. But they are all opportunists. Not selective Walt Disney types like some folks think.

Gight on KMule, For those who don't know, the moose population here in AK is in really bad shape. Hopefully now that we got rid of our liberal governor and his board of game this will improve. They are already instituting pred. control in some places.. Although I think they are doing it wrong, they are hiring a helicopter and shooter rather than reinstating land and shoot hunting. Why pay someone rather than letting thousands of Alaskans do it for free or possibly even make a little money on it. Now hopefully they will work on habitat, They have been puting out too many fires in the bush. Ungulate populations hate climax forrests. They love clearcuts and burns. I think logging is still not going to be done much but prescribed burns and letting some of the natural burns go would help alot.

By the way Mule, I plan on takin 2 griz this year, since I didn't take one last fall, I can get one this spring and fall since the regulatory years run july 1 to june 31 for griz in AK. I'll be hunting units 13 and copper river delta in 6 there area way too many griz in these units. There has even been talk of allowing baiting in 13 altough I don't think it will happen. I also plan on taking a couple blackies and as many wolfs as I can get my grubby little hands on which probably won't be many 'cause I don't have a plane..

Northern Minnesota is experiencing a similar decline in the moose and deer population since the reintroduction of wolves. The Minnesota DNR has reported a drop in the moose population for the third straight year. It's already common knowledge that the northern whitetails are under stress, and the hunting "up north" isn't as good anymore as it was a few years ago.

The wolves have spread from Minnesota into Wisconsin, the U.P of Michigan, and now there are reports of a pack in the S.P. as well. Farmers in North Dakota near the Canadian border are reporting hearing wolves at night as far as 200 miles away from the Minnesota border.

It is only a matter of time (I've no doubt it happens occasionally as it is now) before hunters begin shooting wolves on sight in the lower 48. Someone has to manage their numbers, and the federal government seems unwilling to do so.

Info on the original post.

In 00-01 I was teaching in Nulato up on the Yukon. For shear boredome in the winter we ran a trap line south along the river part way to Kaltag. Since freeze up till break-up in the spring, we found 11 wolf moose kills just along the river system within 1/2 mile of the river.

Some of the kill sites were very active and the wolves were all over them. One in impaticular, the wolves just killed the cow and left her there, only returning once to eat from the carcus. We found the cow immediately after the kill. She was killed my one wolf grabbing her by the nose. There was no way to roll her over to check for any abdominal damage on the opposite side. The wolves never returned to eat until break-up and we weren't abble to check.

As best we could determine, there was only a pack of maybe 5-6 wolves in the group. The only ones that were shot were very young.

There will be no killing of wolves until they reach the population size to be taken off of the endangered list. This means 2500 animals in each location they were intorduced, and that many in each location at the same time. These are a foreign species that no busines be where they are. The animals that they prey on are different and more able to avoid them. The animals that are after now have never seen a wolf and have no idea of what to do to avoid them. Now think of at least 7500 wolves before they are able to be controled, might as well sell your rifles now and beat the rush.

I can assure you that the current estimate of 280 here in Wy is doing plenty of damage. Elk numbers are way down and no relief in sight. The management that is proposed is only a bandaid, but it is a start. The Wy. G&F legislative bill calls for a $15 license which is cheap but lots of people won't buy one just for a chance. Time will tell! Thank the Clinton administration and their clones the USF&W.

One thing I hadn't noticed is anyone considering the amount of calves/fawns that Bears and or Mt. lion are responsible for. Predators are predators and they do eat meat. In order to preserve a healthy herd of huntable species there needs to be control of the "varmints"! Wolves and Bears have decimated some of the moose populations in some areas of SW Alaska. I believe that the ADF&G are now under new orders (from our new and realistic administration) to do somthing about it. I like wolves and bears and think everyone should have a couple of hides hanging in their homes. A few years ago there was a pretty good bumper sticker out it read "Eat Moose" 10,000 Wolves can't be Wrong!
John

We had bears and Mt lions for years before the "re-introduction" of wolves in MT, ID, and WY.

We must ask ourselves, "Gee, what has changed since the year before they let those wolves loose and now"?

The only answer is the wolves are free to roam and reproduce.

I'm convinced all it take to figure this one out is plain ol' logic and common sense.

What has changed is the cow calf ratio has plummited! This winters count was the lowest since 1968. All of those years and millions of dollars spent increasing the elk herds in Wy and in 5 short years the wolves have decimated them. Ask a guide, outfitter, or an honest non-tree hugging G&F employee. There is a pack of 7 and two singles within 35 miles of town. The entire drainage is devoid of elk. That is the elks wintering area, now they are forced to move out and be more stressed. The government trapper flew the area last week in a helicopter and said there is twice as many as people had thought. Also the G&F is worried about people hunting antlers and stressing the elk, well what about a pack of wolves??? There needs to be some management soon but just a hunting season won't begin to affect the population. Ask the guys from up north, trapping, aireal gunning, and hunting might.

[ 02-24-2003, 06:27: Message edited by: kudu56 ]

boilerroom:

you're on target with your post of 2-22-2003. living in Oklahoma, i get a really close look at the "respect" paid to nature by the Indians.

Indians have more respect for the environment than whites....what a load of crap.

come to Oklahoma to see the truth.

I believe I heard somewhere that a pack of wolves (10 per pack?) will eat a moose per week..... figure that out over a year, with people reporting up to 20-25 wolves in some packs around here, and the slaughter of moose and caribou is HUGE! I live in N.E. BC, and I believe we have a wolf problem. We had a Rod and Gun Club meeting with the regional biologist a couple years back, and he said if ya see a wolf, shoot it. Period. We're allowed 3 on our tag.
As for the debate on our "Indians" or natives or whatever they wish to be called these days, YES, they are raping Mother Earth hard. I don't buy into the poor hard-done-by Walt Disney views on Natives. Would you shoot a cow moose with 2 calves? Saw it last October. Would you shoot 4 cows that were rutting with 1 bull, and not shoot the bull? Saw it last September. Would you drive up and down the Alaska Highway from Ft.Nelson to Pink Mountain at night, using a flood light to shoot cows, calves or bulls (moose and 'bou) just because your skin is redder? It's happening. With that in mind, us whitey's are left to shoot spike/fork/tripalm, in which you need to be a lawyer with Zeiss binoculars just to judge, before you pull the trigger. "I think that's a spike....no wait, that's it's ear....no, could be...crap, I can't tell...". Fun.

CampX

Doesn't it get worse the farther north you go. The Cassiar hwy is the same. They have gone as far as to make a closier corridore on the hwy but that doesn't apply to them. Think how many are out at night on that hwy.

There has to be a better way.

Doug Smith writes a report every year about the progress of the wolf project. The most recent one posted on the Yellowstone website can be seen here:

Wolf Study by Doug Smith- 2001
(http://www.nps.gov/yell/nature/animals/wolf/wolfrpt01.pdf)

A quote from the report regarding what ONE pack of wolves killed (NOT ALL OF THE WOLVES) during one of Doug Smith's short observations (Pages 9-10 of report):

"Composition of Wolf Kills
Project staff detected 161 definite and 196 probable kills made by wolves in 2001, including 311 elk (87% of total), 6 bison, (2%), 6 deer (2%), 6 coyotes (2%), 1 moose (less than 0.5%), 1 pronghorn (less than 0.5%), and 26 unknown prey (7%). The composition of elk kills was 33% calves (0�12 months), 36% cows, 17% bulls, 4% elk of unknown sex, and 10% elk of unknown sex and age...

During winter, wolves residing on the northern range killed an average of 1.8 elk/wolf/30-day study period."

You be the judge on the consequences of the wolf reintroduction. Remember that this report is composed by a Bill Clinton era biologist with his lips firmly attached to Bruce Babbit's ass (former Secretary of the Interior). Call it "job security" if you will.

On pages 11 and 12 of the study you will find proposed research pertaining to the elk population and the wolf conducted soley by graduate students working in conjunction with the Doug Smith's wolf project and therefore support their reintroduction. There is a major conflict of interest here. How serious are the findings by these junior researchers going to be taken? Who knows for sure, but I think we all have an opinion on this.

It's okay to do a little bitchin' and whinin' on here, but you might also want to email Douglas Smith with some of your comments:

Doug_Smith@nps.gov

Here is another one page project summary that you might find very interesting. It is Doug Smith's and the Univ. of Montana's $12,000 project (your tax money) to redo the estimate of the elk population which they predict will drop 5-30% after wolf reintroduction. It openly admits that "wolves will ultimately regulate the elk population at a level sharply lower than that established prior to wolf reintroduction."

The researchers beg for more money to "defend park policies/practices, and respond to criticisms regarding the alleged effect of wolves on the Yellowstone ecosystem."

Project Summary- Effects of wolf on elk, deer, bison,

If you're really feeling ambitious, you could read this: (Notice Doug Smith is an author on this too)

Mech, L.D., D.W. Smith, K.M. Murphy, D.R. MacNulty. 2001. Winter severity and wolf predation on a formerly wolf-free elk herd. Journal of Wildlife Management 65:998�1003.

Getting to know your adversary better helps you concentrate your fire in the right direction!

Good luck,

Kenati