Hershell the Sea Lion......I grew up in Bothell...I remember Hershell very well.....

Just remember it was not the scholars and academics who did this they do not set policy, they merely present the facts. Its the policy makers and politicians who distort the facts (along with their friends in the media) All I am saying is that remove the politics and look closely at the science of wolves and as a hunter who wants to have a healthy ecosystem for the next 100 years, wolves are not a bad thing. Current wolf management (none) is where the problem lies, and until hunters stop the "rednecking" of this issue the greens and liberals will keep winning.....

IV

Well, I guess if actually living and hunting in wolf, grizzly bear, lion country isn't enough experience for a slob gopher choker like yourself, there is not much I can do the eh? At least those who read this post are smart enough to see through your bullshit when they read it (do you also moonlight for the Weekly World News?).

I won't hold it against you that your family tree looks like a stump, but unfortunately it is very easy to see you have very little if any formal education and all your banter is simply being an armchair quarterback. It is sad acutally, seeing someone trying so hard to make an argument about something they know so little about...only what they have been fed from some closed minded reporter that never made it past the 8th gradeand writes for the Hillbilly Journal. THESE are the people you trust to inform you and make the decisions for you. How sad to see, very sad.

I'm sure you'll come up with some more garbage to feed us with.

MG

IV, you hit the nail on the head..I agree completely.


MG

Okay VG I am back now, had to go do some intellectual stuff! Now, first off I see you have had bad experiences with scholars and intellectuals. I wont be offeneded if you call me one, I will take it as a compliment. But before you disregard what I have to say, I could just as easily label you a redneck from Montana and approach this discussion based on stereotypes, but I find it disrespectful and rude. As you have pointed out personal attacks are entertaining but I just like having valid discussion with people no matter what their viewpoint, often times I hear things that change my mind on different issues. I hope something you say will change my mind because if it does than I have been given a gift. (Intellectual jibberish I know...but thats how I see it)If entertainment was what I was after we have 10 different cable news outlets, various newspapers and radio. 95% of what they do is try and influence the middle 30-40% of undecided America. They do this with bullshit that sounds good. Not with facts. Thats not to say that their is bullshit science out there also. But given the choice of the bullshit leftwing media or the bullshit leftwing scientists- I'll take the scientists any day. (They are not as left wing as you probably think -but lets not digress. Stay with me here.) So,that being said, in a mutually respectful manner I will address some of you points:

1) I have no friends in the government. If the government said 325 I would expect 3250 based on the fact that when the government says anything it usually means 10 times higher. i.e "This tax will only be .1% and will phase out after 3 years" usually means 1% and 30 years.To think otherwise is naive. I hope you don't pin your argument on politicians and policy makers. Politicians lie. Moralists will never approve of hunting and scientists make lousy politicians because most (like me) love having their minds changed (based on facts of course)

2)"Wolf populations are now harming elking herds and this is costing us in hunter opportunity." In the short term I agree, wolves are doing quite a number on various local populations. In the long term, they may be a great benefit. We do not know. Please find any published and peer--reviewed scientific jouranl article that states what the effects of wolves over a 10-20-50 or 100 year time period is. I would love to see it. Maybe you are correct. I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying we DO NOT KNOW.

3) You asked if I was a hunter. Yes I am, thank you. I believe I posted my hunting related activities. I suppose some people may come to these forums and represent themselves as something they are not so your question is not unwarranted. I find I agree with you in the idea of QUESTION EVERYTHING. (probably another intellectual fault)

4) Birth rate and/or litter size of wolves are a poor indicator of population growth dynamics. You must factor in Birth, Death, Immigration and Emigration. Studies of coyote (I mention coyotes as a relative in Family Canidae- I recognize we are talking about wolves) populations as you may know, have shown that the more you kill, the larger the litter size. It was one of the factors that makes the coyote so resilient. This was not really well understood until the mid-nineties. For years people wondered why the coyote population kept growing despite the exterminatin efforts of the USFWS. Part of this was also the opening created by the loss of Wolves, wolves will more than likely displace a number of coyote home ranges. So when you take the equivalent bio-mass figure of 1.8 elk per month, you must subtract the amount of coye dsplacement. What that amount would be is a key question. Now none of this means anything when your local herd (North Yellowstone) has been reduced significantly. 3000 permits down to 148 is significant locally. On a broader scale it means nothing with respect to the overall ecosystem.

5) "Wolves kill and eat a lot of animals." Yes, they do. We are in agreement about that.

I do not think we are that far apart in the issue of the wolf. You are obviously fustrated at the local lowering of elk numbers. As a hunter who has his own favorite spots to hunt, I would be just as upset. In 1984 the area that I had grown up hunting in was switched to a spike-bull only hunt. I had rarely seen any bulls bigger than that but it was fustrating nontheless. During the years after I began to see more and more large bulls 5's 6's and even a few 7's (This is very rare in the Wenas area outside of Yakima) I believe that had things not changed I would not even have seen them in the first place.(Granted I could not kill any of them without a draw permit-) Years later, science showed that the spike only season did not accomplish the objectives it was supposed to -namely increased calf to cow ratios. The limitation is still in effect- not because of the scientists- because of the politicians and policy makers. But I am getting off the subject again and must attend to different intellectual amtters.
I look forward to your comments.

IV

IV, would you shed some light on your personal findings and thoughts on decling mule deer herds. I am passionate about hunting mule deer, #1 in my book. I am a member of the MDF and support them second only to the NRA.

[

How do I answer that in a nutshell? Well to be brief, first off, I am no expert on the Mule Deer.(Some day I hope to be!! ) I am writing a lengthy literature review on what is/has been done with respect to Mule Deer managment and conservation. It is not yet complete but, I believe one of the greatest overlooked possibilities in mule deer populations is the genetic introgression from their cousin odocileus virginianus (whitetail-mule deer hybridization) Of course this is limited to geographic areas where the two overlap. I believe that the overall decline is attributible to many small interactions. By many accounts the whitetail evolved about 3 million years ago and contains 27 classified sub-species. By contrast, the mule deer is thought to have evolved about 10,000 years ago- but it already has between 7-11 subspecies (depending on whose criteria you believe) that is an amazing amount of speciation in such a short time period. One of the biggest questions is where did the mulie come from? Some say it evolved from whitetails and then blacktails evolved from mulies (black tails are commonly referred to as a sub-species of the mule deer (odocoileus hemionus hemionus-Rocky mountain mule deer-odocoileus hemionus columbianus- Columbian Blacktail and o.h. Sitkensis- the Sitka Blacktail) others speculate that the mule deer is a hybrid offshoot of whitetails and coastal blacktails, the significantly larger body size is attributable to evolutinary theory in which animals that disperse into open niches generally have larger body sizes. The most recent "niche" to open up was when the last glaciations receded and exposed the Rocky Mountains, thus the RM mule deer is morphologically on average much larger than the other hemionus sub-species. Hybridization is known to occur between wt's and MD but very little has been done to understand the extent or implications of it.
I realize this is getting long winded and I could go on for hours, but basically my research is going to look into the possibility that mule deer does are being bred by whitetail bucks and the resulting F1 offspring are disproportionally preyed upon by coyotes and cougars. (My proposed study area is going to be in NE Washington state) As you may know, hybrid deer have little to no chance for survival as hybrids typically fail to display either of the parental anti-predator strategies (whitetail flee rapidly at the first sign of danger and mule deer bunch up or "stot" away.) Hybrids in captivity seem to do neither. I am in the process of soliciting funding from the NSF and other places, mule deer seem to be a hot topic right now and I plan on using fairly new DNA technologies as well as applications in GIS and NSF tends to favor new technologies but also tends to not fund areas where "hunter dollars" are already going. So we'll see. This is running again, I love talking about mule deer but others may not want to hear me ramble anymore, when I am done with my literature review you are more than welcome to a copy.

IV

daddyslittlegoat: I see you still refuse to answer direct questions put to you and still rely on immature tactics to try and make a point. You are a failure at that also!

Idaho Vandal: Nothing wrong with a person educating themselves - indeed that is a good thing! Its when one is so impressed with ones own newfound intellect and then thinks others should be also! And then these intellectuals figure that others should fall in line behind their often faulted opinions (and go right along with their often absurd and ridiculous schemes etc) is when intellectuals become dangerous and harmful!

I hope you are not forgetting I have as yet not labeled you an intellectual idiot and thus just as useless as tits on a bull or as useless as hadagoat is!

Some retort for your consideration:
#1: If the greens and intellectuals in Berkeley, Missoula, (Seattle!), Manhattan, Los Angeles and from the usfws are NOT to blame for these game eating, overpopulated Wolves then WHO IS?!?!
You claim you have no friends at the usfws then I believe that! And I am proud of you in that regard!
Are you declaring as NON-FACTUAL the horrific decimation of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd from 19,000 Elk down to 8,500??? I repeatedly ask waddedgoat this but he hides behind name calling and other simpleton like diversions!
Can you address the loss of Elk there in that large area of Montana more specifically than "its OK"! I would like to know when that decimation will be halted, or how, or do you want it to?
By the way I have Hunted the Wenas before myself and you need to include in your description of that Hunt that just 25 or 50 mature Bull Elk tags are given out in that area (by drawing)! I forget the numbers specifically but I know it is a very small number!
#2: I disagree with ANY contention that the Wolf problem as it stands now and will for the foreseeable future do anything but allow 1,000 times 1.8 Elk bio-masses to be unrightfully removed from our hard fought for and hard to maintain Elk herds. If you disagree please provide THE DATE that those Wolves will be brought into check! On which date will the Wolves allow the Elk in the Norhtern Yellowstone Elk herd to regenerate to their former numbers and allow for the former Hunting opportunities to be available again?
I am certain that for the rest of my lifetime (I am 57 now) Hunters will be troubled with diminished game numbers, Elk numbers, Elk Hunting opportunities and loss of jobs in the Rocky Mountains! I do not see the feds allowing a reduction in Wolf numbers to the level they promised! I blame this on the intellectual idiots and scholars that came up with this grandiose plan in the first place!
I do not think a search for peer based opinion is going to lessen the impact the Wolves are having now on our Elk and game herds. See, this is where intellectuals become dangerous (very dangerous!) is when they take reason out of a situation and interject blather and tripe and diversion!
The Elk are being decimated by the fucking Wolves in many areas NOW, Idaho Vandal, do you understand that - yes or no please?
#3: Yes question most everything - even the obvious. I have done that and I find that the Wolves that were introduced in 1995 went to work right away on the Northern Yellowstone Elk herd! They did a good (bad?) job of it as I have beecome convinced! They decimated that herd from 19,000 animals the year the Wolves were brought in down to 8,500 Elk last year and that number will further decrease due to the Wolves predation and such low calf survival as they are having now! At what point do the scholars think that Elk herd will bottom out? Thats right the scholars and the intellectuals and the greens at the usfws and the rmef are all circulating happy words and placations! "Every thing will be fine guys just let Bambi fend for himself"!
Happy blather and BS is what I am hearing and seeing from the greens these days!
Meanwhile each month that slips by your cuddly friends the Wolves are eating the bio-mass equivelent of 1,800 Elk!
Does your intellect allow you to respond to that fact? How do you respond to that? "Things will be fine" "Its okay". "They are just Wolves being Wolves you know"! I have heard that kind of tripe way to many times to be persuaded by it!
Do you have diversion in mind to cover for the Wolves as they gnaw away at our Hunting opportuniites and game herds down to.. say... endangered species levels?
I have friends that have Hunted the Bighole Valley of Montana for 60+ years! They are so disgusted with the Wolf predation on Moose and Elk there that they are considering not buying Hunting licenses this year! Is that what the intellectuals and the scholars and the greens really want? I would tend to say yes that is exactly what a lot of these intellectual idiots are "gunning" for! Destroy or impeding sport Hunting in any way they can!
I would say to you in non-intellectual terms get your head out here in the sunlight IV and assess what has factually happened with these over-populated Wolves so far and then go to work and make sure to get after your elected officials (Patty Tennis Shoes anymore - or did you move to Idaho? I forget) and make sure they know how you feel about the Wolves and their now triple promised population status!
#4: I will not argue birth rates for Wolves with you. That may or may not be a diversionary attempt on your part - but I will not let you get away with diverting me away from spreading the word that Wolves are coming to a neighborhood near most every Hunter who enjoys his sport in the Rocky Mountains!
Remember these numbers gentle folks the feds (intellectual idiots, scholars, and the greens) promised us that once 325 Wolves were reached population wise then the three main states affected by the Wolves could control them as they saw fit! That has now been proven a lie (or do I need a Masters Degree in Law to assess that situation?) and now we have between 850 and 1,000 Wolves here in the three states!
What those significant losses of Elk and Elk Hunting opportunities means (contrary to your opinion!) is that the Wolf problem is real and will spread unless pressure is brought to bare on the decision makers (the intellectual idiots and the scholars and the feds). This is a task that must be undertaken in order to save our herds of game and our Hunting opportunities!
Remember that the loss of those 2,800 Hunting opportunities has and will occur every year until the Wolf problem is solved. You do not think those opportuniites are coming back any time soon do you? I contend as long as the Wolves are so overpopulated these opportunities (and soon more!) will be lost for that long also. Contradict this if you (or if xadgoat can he is welcome to!) can?
#5: Yes Wolves do kill a lot of animals! I personally think that a number in the range of 200 Wolves in the Yellowstone Ecosystem would still be a few to many. I will rejoice the day that the states allow folks to "drive by in their pickups and shoot the Wolves out the window"!
Now the mind that came up with that bit of tripe is not really a full bore sporting Hunter at heart! Now, THAT is just my opinion but I hold it and proudly proclaim it! Some folks who say they are pro-Hunting (I have learned the hardway!) are in reality - not!
Your closing comments on sound Game Management Practices meets with my approval! Long live the Wenas, and the Clockum and the Cascades and the Olympic Penninsula and the Willapa Hills and other places where our most treasured game resides and where I have Hunted them by the way.
But introducing Wolves and allowing them to achieve much higher numbers than even the greens and the intellectual idiots and the feds WANTED is NOT sound Game Management! Do I need a PHD to post that?
I do so want to commend you for your civil tone in mounting your contentions up next to mine! I wish young sadgoat could learn by your example!
There was an old saying that for the first 30 years of my life I used a lot - "you are a gentleman and a scholar". My lifes experiences since then have led me away from using that phrase due to my distrust and low esteem regarding scholars - so I will sign off for now with - you Idaho Vandal are a gentleman!
Good luck in your draws and Hunts this year!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

IV thanks for the reply on mule deer. In our area I think the cross breeding isn't having to much of an effect on numbers. I do think it is a combination of lions, coyotes, drought, and over hunting. To damn many doe fawn tags. And maybe a cycle thing. I wish I knew! LOL! I love to hunt them but prefer antelope to eat.

Couple of points:
Dr . Rolf Petersons 1982 Alaskas Kenai Peninsula study found......
"The average kill rate in winter was 1 moose per pack every 4.7 days." I think that is 77 moose each year, per pack.
He also says, wolf numbers can remain stable with a harvest of from 30 to 35%.
It's an excellent wolf study, and anyone who in interested should get a copy.

Ok, Varmitguy…all insults aside I’ll try to explain to you WHY I do not believe that wolves will eliminate elk from the GYE. Why not take a minute and actually read what I have to say? I’m not trying to convince you of anything, just present facts based upon actual scientific study.

a) Basic predator-prey relationships. Do predators typically regulate a prey population? There is an important distinction between “regulate†and “limitâ€. If forage availability, weather, or something else (drought, disease, hunting) besides predation affects the prey population so that it varies despite the predators (which these other factors do), predation might serve as a partial check on those normally occurring oscillations that would occur if the predators were absent.
If certain population limiting factors were exaggerated (like the current drought, quality habitat degradation from years of over browsing) like they are now, it would appear as if the predators were having a greater influence than they actually were.
If you think man has kept these elk in check you are wrong. For years this elk herd has been growing, at the cost of destroying their own winter habitat which they so desperately need to survive. This destruction is additive over time, heading the elk into a head first dive without the wolf. We did this on our own, just ask a guy hunting off a four wheeler how many elk he has seen that day!

b) Selection of different age classes. Obviously, the wolves in the GYE would select animals from the early and older age classes. This has several effects on the population as a whole. For one, it changes the structure of the population towards a larger proportion of middle aged animals. Well what does this do? Essentially, animals within the population with the lowest fecundity are the very young and very old. What is left is those animals in their reproductive prime. This usually does little to change the reproductive rates of the population, and in many studies it has shown that it increases recruitment as the survival rates for that segment of the population increase.
What does this mean? Animals that are left are in their breeding prime. They are in better condition physically because those “old†animals are removed, thus less competition for limited resources between prime elk and older elk.

c) Functional response to prey numbers. It is no secret; elk in the GYE are and have been for years, WAY past their historic numbers. Heck, during many winters in the ‘50’s, the NPS would regularly go out and “cull†elk within Yellowstone. They have not done this in many years, and as a result the elk herd has grown substantially. Predators also take more than one species of prey. When one prey item is substantially larger than the others (GYE elk), a functional response occurs, and you have predators focusing in on one item of prey. Also tying into this is habitat quality. It is no secret that elk have POUNDED the winter ranges around the GYE. This is the “fox vs pheasant†scenario. When the pheasant has 40 acres of tall grass around him, she and her offspring will have a better chance to outwit the fox, and will be in better physical conditions which correlate to the available habitat. Hiding cover is increased (especially important when young elk need a substantial amount of cover to hide in the spring time-easier to see a calf on a pool table than in an alfalfa field) When the farmer mows the field (we are in that stage right now after 9 years of below average moisture) the only place for the pheasant is in the row next to the irrigation ditch. All the fox has to do is walk down that ditch to find the pheasant.

d) Wolf biology. Wolves are incredibly territorial. They maintain group territories which in and of itself limit wolf numbers in a given area. They also defend their territories from other packs. Territory sizes depend on the availability of forage. When forage is plentiful, wolf packs will have smaller territories…when forage isn’t, they must roam over larger areas to find forage. Within Yellowstone and the surrounding areas, packs quickly dispersed and defined their territories accordingly. The last 5 years these packs have essentially stayed put, with very few new packs forming in Yellowstone due to the wolf’s own biology. Where wolf numbers are on the rise (the basis for this entire argument and thread) is on the fringes of the GYE, expanding out on to other areas away from the GYE. There really hasn’t been all that much of an increase in wolf numbers in Yellowstone or surrounding areas. This is why you find wolves dispersing to Utah and Colorado…they got their asses kicked and were moving out to find other suitable areas to start new packs. The increase in wolf numbers is not in or around Yellowstone, but new areas along the fringe of wolf’s range.

All in all, wolves and elk coexisted on this continent for thousands and thousands of years prior to the white man screwing it all up. Predators do not overexploit populations of prey animals that they have evolved with (except when man is the predator). If you look at case studies of Isle Royale, both populations of wolves and moose fluxuate widely over time. Despite the inability of wolves and moose to get off the island, moose are found in greater densities here than darn near anyplace else! The moose population does not follow the stable “line†that you would like to see (but nothing in nature is this way), but fluxuates with habitat conditions and wolf predation. Granted, the two populations clearly influence one another, though there are many other factors that play into this equation. It is these factors which are tough to differentiate, and monitor as many are subtle and occur seasonally.

Wolves are killing elk. They will have an influence with the natural oscillations the Yellowstone elk herd makes, and will change it some. However, there are many other factors that come into play. I can go on and on like this all day with examples. I do feel that wolves need to be controlled to keep their expansion in check, but overall believe that our elk herds are healthier than they have been in 75 years.

It sure is easy to point the finger at something you and many other’s don’t understand like the wolf, but just remember you’re pointing three fingers back at yourself.

MG

Madgoat: Your contentions (and your thinking) are simply so wrong and wrong headed (going in the wrong direction) that its easy to blast you out of the water!
I will now, easily, blast your contentions out of the water!
Point by point!
A: You use the ambiguous word in this contention "typically"!
This is diversionary, ambiguous and accomplishes nothing specific! The Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd is being decimated by the overpopulation of Wolves in the area of this particular herd! In the very near future other Elk herds in the Rocky Mountains will suffer this same fate!
Yes I contend this overpopulation is spreading!
It is proven out by the governments own censusing of the Wolves! Do you think our Elk herds can stand at present levels for very long with THREE TIMES the Wolves that even the greens wanted! Three times the number the greens thought would be the most Wolves in the tri-state area that would not harm the Elk?
We now have three times as many Wolves as your friends the greens even wanted and guess what! The Elk herd is being decimated and the Wolves are doing it!
Its not the drought, its not housing starts, its not over-Hunting by humans its over-Predation by your friends the Wolves! Period! Even the game and fish biologists are admitting that!
I have yet to see an Elk die of lack of water! An Elk can walk a long long ways to get to water and in all the areas I Hunt Elk in there are countless springs and flowing creeks and rivers! The dirt is dry and the trees are drier than kiln dried lumber but the Elk know where water is and bed and feed accordingly close to it.
By the way I want to relay this to you as I have been very busy lately and did not get a chance to relay it previously. It is a refutation of your boast that there are lots of sick, scabied, wounded and dying Elk in each herd for your buds the Wolves to nibble on!
I have in the last 7 days had occassion to view several different Elk herds on their traditional wintering slopes! One herd of 1,200 Elk was on Fleecer Mountain about 25 miles north of my home (I was checking for dropped antlers!). I saw not one, NOT ONE set of ribs (sickly Elk) among them, not one limping Elk, not one scabied coat or even one Elk carcass lying near this herd! I viewed them with my 48 power spotting scope from about a mile away!
Then on another day I had a chance to view 3 herds east of my home. The first herd was 7 miles from my home and consisted of 125 Elk. Again not a sickly creature in the bunch. I was close to these and they could only be described as robust! The next herd was 12 miles east of me and it consisited of 160 Elk. Again not a sickly appearing Elk to be seen! Continuing on this same road I came to the main wintering herd in my area it had in excess of 2,000 Elk in it and they were in mid day chewing the cud mode so I can not say that they all were limpless but I can say they all looked very healthy and content! No scabied coats and no ribs showing! This herd is off limits to shed horn Hunters until May 15th each year when this wintering game range is then again open to human entry! I viewed them from the boundary road. This vast area of wintering ground was acquired by the F&G people decades ago and the Elk have always liked to winter in this huge area. By the way your buds at the rmef did buy a plot of land adjacent to this huge wintering ground but as far as I know the Elk do not winter on that new section. I have only been able to get to that side of this vast wintering ground on one late winter occassion when I was Coyote Hunting 2 years ago. No Elk on the rmef section what so ever then.
B: What in the world does this do for an Elk herd that has been decimated to less than half its former 19,000 animal number and there are NOT enough calves to replace the dying off adults! This by the way is not my contention it is the specific declaration of the surveying biologists over the last several years!
C: One reason the feds have not had to go mow down Elk in Yellowstone like they did in the 50's is because we are a much more mobile society now and plenty of Hunters who apply for the special tags that the Montana F&G people offerered until 1995 anyway!
You are plain wrong in your premise here! The grass in Yellowstone Park has been cropped pretty well but no mass starvations have occurred to my knowledge and I am sure I would have heard of this! The Elk in this herd do not all live in Yellowstone park! Many or most live outside the park! And the food supply in that vast area is far from being overgrazed!
Yeah the new high populations of Elk are a wonderful and hard worked for objective! When the herd gets to a point that it needs to be thinned out at a faster pace - guess what? The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks folks had the power and authority to issue more Elk tags!!!
Thus giving humans the opportunity to Hunt under special tag regulations! These were (notice I said WERE!) coveted tags by many Hunters. And remember the human commerce that goes along with say... 3,000 additional travelling Elk Hunters!!!
Those tags once numbered near 3,000 per year!!! This year they number 148!!! Imagine the economic loss that this yearly reduction represents - or do you care? Or would you prefer that the Wolves eat these Elk down to nothing? I repeatedly ask that question of you and you REPEATEDLY DODGE IT! Please answer this simple and direct question: Do you prefer the area of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd offering 3,000 additional special Elk tags for human Hunters (and having the Wolves controlled population wise) each year, like it was in 1995, OR do you prefer that herd being decimated by the introduced Wolves and the herd being cut down from 19,000 healthy Elk (I seen em!) to 8,500 Elk with Wolves everywhere and only 148 special tags being issued to human Hunters?
Answer please!
Somehow I think in your arrogance you will not answer that question - again! That is why I declare that you madgoat are part of the problem real Hunters face in the Rocky Mountains!
D: If you are saying that Wolves are not over-populated in many areas you are wrong! Simply witness the losses of Elk, Big Horn Sheep and Moose in many areas! The Wolves are over-predating on our game! Why, you ask, can this be when you had the promise of your green buddies this would not happen, its simple! They lied, you are gullible and our game herds and human Hunting opportunites ARE suffering!
It sounds like to me madgoat that you have given up on holding our government officials accountable for their promises and mistakes! If you want to give up and let the Wolves run wild and destroy our game herds thats your business and I kind of expected that from you!
But I won't give up and I profess that no one else should tolerate what you are tolerating! The decimation of our hard fought for Elk and game herds! I ask of you the same silly sounding question that I asked of Idaho Vandal - on what date will your friends the Wolves quit decimating our game herds? When will they allow the Northern Yellowstone Elk herd to return to its former healthy population of 19,000 animals! In your happy word frame of mind do you think the Wolves have now eaten enough of this herd and they are gonna quit killing them soon and just move on! Yeah Colorado is gonna be a real Wolf banquet once the Wolves get overpopulated down there!
You can't answer these simple questions because the Wolves are not gonna stop out of kind heartedness and happy thoughts - they are going to destroy this herd and other herds that surround it! If you are sure the Wolves won't destroy more herds please provide the date when the Wolves told you they will quit decimating Elk herds!
Its puzzling to me why a person who profess's to be a Hunter would even consider standing by and allowing the Wolves to explode to over 3 times what the feds and the greenies promised and said "Hunter" stands by and makes excuses why a perfectly healthy herd of Elk is decimated from 19,000 Elk down to 8,500 Elk?
I have my own idea why you are taking this puzzling position but I will keep it to myself until such time as I have proof!
Thanks for nothing rmef!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

quote:

I saw not one, NOT ONE set of ribs (sickly Elk) among them, not one limping Elk, not one scabied coat or even one Elk carcass lying near this herd!

Just a side question: Was this in the same area that the elk permits are being reduced? If so, you mention that you did not see one carcass, you would think you would have seen a wolf kill in the area with so many wolves?

IV

Varmitpud, I more than answered your questions...now I have some for you.

Describe to all of us how you came up with 19000 elk as being considered a "healthy" population? What experience do you have monitoring habitat conditions and making determinations of carrying capacity? Do you have any formal training or education that would make you qualified to make these kind of outlandish remarks? What criteria do you use in making these types of determinations?

How many bighorn sheep have you witnessed dead as a result of wolf predation?

So you think that all the documentation by actual scientists and wildlife biologists is wrong when they state "wolves are a very territorial animal". You disagree? You think that wolf packs tolerate one another, when essentially they are in competition for the same resources?? Explain this?

You said yourself that while chasing elk around on their winter ranges looking for shed antlers:
"I have in the last 7 days had occassion to view several different Elk herds on their traditional wintering slopes! One herd of 1,200 Elk was on Fleecer Mountain about 25 miles north of my home (I was checking for dropped antlers!). I saw not one, NOT ONE set of ribs (sickly Elk) among them, not one limping Elk, not one scabied coat or even one Elk carcass lying near this herd! I viewed them with my 48 power spotting scope from about a mile away!"
So what you're saying is that you do agree, that wolves make a more robust elk herd, taking out the sick and the weak?quote "Then on another day I had a chance to view 3 herds east of my home. The first herd was 7 miles from my home and consisted of 125 Elk. Again not a sickly creature in the bunch. I was close to these and they could only be described as robust!"

What I find the funniest remark you have made yet, is when I refered to the drought as having an impact on elk (habitat conditions, forage quality and quantity, winter range conditions, selectivity amongst forage items by elk) and you thought it had to do with them drinking water?? YOU'RE AN FREAKING IDIOT!! AND THE FUNNY THING IS YOU KEEP ON PROVING THAT OVER AND OVER!! Every time I read your post and see the logic behind it I get a great laugh..thanks for the entertainment!

I do think wolves are in need of control. I have stated this MANY times (do you actually read other's posts??), but think many people are over reacting to this whole deal because they don't have a firm grasp of predator-prey relationships. Saying the wolves are going to eliminate the elk is like saying the coyotes are going to eliminate the cottontail...get a life man!


MG

decimate: from the latin decim, or one tenth. To decimate means to reduce by one tenth. The Romans used to punish their soldiers for doing poorly in battle by killing one of every ten in the ranks. To decimate 19,000, one removes 1,900.

Oh, I just can't help myself.

Regardless if the wolf is having a negative effect on elk or not, (which they are) the bottom line is that the wolf was dumped in Wyoming's, Montana's, and Idaho's lap, by the federal government, with little or no management or control. Promises based on lies, and States rights ignored and pretty much thrown out the window. Much the same as the fiasco, that George Taulman has created with his lawsuit against western states over states rights to manage wildlife.

While I agree that the wolves are having an impact on the elk populations, and we need to get control of them ASAP... I really don't think the sky has fallen just yet. I'm a little more opptimistic than most, but I don't think that the population is going to dip all that much more either.

Just this last fall, I was hunting in my old stomping grounds, which I'm sure we've hunted for far longer than VG and family has been in the state, this area just so happens to be less than 20 miles from the Park... I saw more elk this year in bow season than I have seen in a long long time. Maybe the most ever... There are wolves in this area and in some places pretty thick! I believe in our valley there are 4 packs right now. I'll be back there again next week to do some antler hunting. It will be interesting to see just how many elk I see. I saw a pile of em at Xmas, before the real migration even started.

I guess I have a diffrent philosophy on the loss of "opportunity" than you do. My take on is that if you're such a fugging sissy that you can't kill an elk during the existing 3 month bow/rifle season then I don't feel sorry for you "needing" a late season tag. Fugg in most states the season is only a week long! What you continually fail to mention is that these "late season tags" are just an extention of the OTC tag that every Tom, Dick, and Harry can obtain. Jezzus christ, do we really need to streach the season from the first week of September to the end of fugging February anyway??? Where is this loss of "opportunity"? Those guys with the late season tag, probably all ready spent a month and a half+ chasing a bull and coudn't get it done, so they fall back on their cow tag to fill from the road. I personally am glad to see those late season "hunts" go away. Its not hunting its shooting fish in a fugging barrle!

I do have a couple questions though...

What is the historic population of the Northern herd, Say 1970 to present, what was the count this last winter?

Lastly, with all your elk hunting knowlege, have you noticed that the elk now behave diffrently and you just can't run up the road and shoot one from the back of an ATV?

My family has been hunting elk for a long, long time. We hunted elk before the wolves where wiped out the first time... From the mid 80's to late 90's the elk were fuggn thick as chit! Before that we had years when we woudn't so much as see more than a handful of elk, and there were no wolves then, and we still managed to fill our tags. I guess we must just be better hunters than the pussys that run the hills these days, that need thousands of elk to pick from. I really don't think we're all that special of hunters, but I guess we must be!

Interesting, the authors family, were the ones that videod wolves in Wyoming and released it to the news. And it was before the feds released the canadian wolves.. Of course the USF&W said there were no wolves in Wyoming and went ahead with the release.

Feds kill five wolves

By CAT URBIGKIT
Star-Tribune correspondent Saturday, April 02, 2005




PINEDALE -- Federal wildlife officials killed five wolves in Sublette County earlier this week in response to chronic livestock depredations.

Mike Jimenez of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said the wolves were members of the Daniel wolf pack, which has been implicated in the killing of at least 21 head of livestock in the last few years. Five members of the pack were killed last year as well, and federal officials do not know how many members of the pack are still roaming.

One night last week, the wolf pack entered a Daniel-area ranch pasture where pregnant cows were located, bringing two of the animals down. One of the cows was alive but severely wounded when found early the next morning and was destroyed by the ranch owners. Both of the cows were due to give birth, as calving in the herd had already begun, doubling the losses for the ranch.

The wolves then moved to another ranch, killing a yearling cow there.

Federal wildlife officials investigated and determined that wolves were responsible for the cattle deaths, all of which occurred in private lands, Jimenez said. The Fish and Wildlife Service granted authority for the entire pack to be eliminated.

Jimenez said that on Monday, a USDA Wildlife Services crew flew the area of the last confirmed kill, spotted a pack of five wolves and was able to shoot and kill all five.

Although the Daniel pack has been in the news recently because of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department's concerns with the pack harassing elk on elk feedgrounds, control actions were undertaken based solely on the pack's livestock depredations, Jimenez said.

Rancher Stella Taylor said she and other local ranchers believe there are more wolves in the area.

"They are hanging in here," Taylor said. "There could still be more in here."

Bar W Bar Ranch Manager Merrill Dana agreed: "They only got about a third of them. We all know there are more than five wolves in the Daniel pack."

Dana said last week was the third occasion in which elk from a nearby feedground arrived on the ranch with a pack of wolves in tow.

"Every time the elk leave the feedground and come down here -- every time -- the next night, you're going to get the wolves in on you," Dana said.

Wyoming Game and Fish Department elk feedground manager Gary Hornberger said, "That particular pack was working the (nearby) Jewett elk feedground pretty hard in late February and March."

The wolves would harass the elk so much that all 678 head of elk repeatedly fled the feedground, Hornberger said.

"They were hitting them nightly," Hornberger said.

If the elk fled to the north, there wasn't much problem, according to Hornberger. But if the elk ran to the south, they ran to the private lands of Bar W Bar, increasing the possibility of elk transmitting brucellosis to cattle, in addition to bringing a pack of wolves to the cattle herd.

Aggressive action by the ranch kept the cattle and elk separated, and Hornberger added that the Game and Fish Department pushed the elk back to the feedground on several occasions.

Wolves have made their presence known on at least five other elk feedgrounds in Sublette County this winter as well, he said.

Hello all!

Heres some more for you to chew on (and comment, of course as you deem proper...)

1) In 1970 there were an estimated 4000 elk in Yellowstone. In 2002 there were estimated 12000. Populations have fluctiuated widely here are some examples:
1970-4000
1979 10,500
1988 18,000
1993 12,000
1995 18,000
2000 14,500
2002 12,000

Obviously in the short term since wolf reintroduction populations of elk are going down, Does that mean WOLVES are the cause? If you answer yes to this question you probably think GW Bush also caused the economy to tank in 2002 and beyond based on a simple correlation. Is that really the case? or is it more complex than just a simple correlation?
Just something to think about- wolves are definetly eating elk, I dont think anyone will deny that.

2) So why then has hunter opportunity decreased as VG has expressed? Ivan makes a very good point, units 313 qnd 316 offer a very long OPEN GENERAL SEASON (I have not read all of your posts VG as this is a huge thread, but I think that fact should have been disclosed in your argument.) I do not see any lost "opportunity" so I am sorry VG but I have to disagree with you on that. Perhaps hunter success has decreased, and I believe Ivan addresses that very well so I wont restate what has already been said. ( By the way things must be looking up because unit 313 offers 189 permits above and beyond the GENERAL OPEN SEASON for 2005.)
I think this can be explained very simply, EXTRA hunter opportunity (via DRAW- remember they still have an extensive GENERAL season) has decreased because populations of elk are now being influenced by wolf predation. Participation in hunting in America during the 90's actually shrunk. During that same time, rancher/farmer relationships with the hunting public deteriorated because of the irresponsible actions of a few pisspoor assholes who called themselves hunters. These same landowners responded to surveys conducted in the late eighties and early nineties that they felt big game such as elk were damaging to their crops, almost by a 4 to 1 margin! Elk herds needed to be reduced below the 15000-20000 level. At the same time the wolf stuff started happening. So now we are in a situation where hunters and wolves are competing for the harvestable surplus of elk. We get some, they get some and if we want to compete we had better sharpen our hunting skills.

3) So I have to agree with Ivan in the sense that Elk hunting opportunity is not decreasing, it is that we are now unable to drive up a logging road and pick one out of the herd- the wild lands are actually becoming wild again....

IV

Idaho Vandal: Your arrogance in denying reality is beyond sensical explanation!
You simply are so berift of the ability to formulate rational thought that you have become hopeless!
How can you deny that in a relatively small area of Montana the special tag allotment has fallen from right at 3,000 opportunities per year back in the year the Wolves were introduced to 148 this year? And then have the audacity and unmitigated gall to claim those are not LOST Hunting oppotunities. I believe, FINALLY, Idaho vandal that you have achieved the status of INTELLECTUAL IDIOT!
You are so smart that you are stupid!
Yes there are general license opportunities like you state but for christs sake man what kind of opportunity is that now that the herd in that area has been decimated from 19,000 Elk the year the Wolves were planted to 8,500 Elk now! And THAT herd is no longer able to sustain itself! The calf to cow ratio is so low that the herd will die off EVEN if the Wolves were somehow to stop themselves from EATING!
Sad new status you have achieved idaho vandal - INTELLECTUAL IDIOT!
Digest this if you CAN idaho vandal from the Dillonite Daily paper dated Friday, April 8, 2,005!
News snippit titled - Wolf Research!
"Wolf research in the Yellowstone Park AND surrounding areas has revealed that the Wolves are dining on big bull Elk with racks! Seems like the Wolves have figured out that the bulls that have been so busy with the rut that they have disapated (correct spelling I think should be "dissipated") their strength and ability to run (evade the Wolves).
One big bull can become the father of many little Elk. The cow, only mother of one calf Elk a year. Perhaps thats another reason hunters didn't see a lot of calves during the season". End of story.
Again I feel that even the simplest of realities go over the heads of some (intellectual idiots & greens), and these ignorances by them puzzles me! Why are they ignoring facts and realities? What is their agenda in ignoring facts and realities?
To ignore the facts does not change the facts!
The shame is that some who claim to be pro-Elk and pro-Elk Hunting are obviously more concerned about Wolves who have now trebled their appropriate and promised populations!
Whats up with that? 1,000 Wolves is simply way to many Wolves and they are destroying game herds and Hunting opportunities.
Again these greens and intellectual idiots strive to sidetrack, dance around and deny real facts and figures and claim their own perceptions and happy feelings are more "factual" and these happy feelings will protect our Hunting opportunities!
These types are simply full of shit and will be remembered and enumerated with each lost Hunting opportunity!
Intellectuals, I will repeat, seldom if ever get anything positive done!
So much for the sick and old only Elk being eaten by their furry buddies, the Wolves, theory from the greens and the intellectual idiots!
Thanks for nothing rmef!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

This is the thread that never ends.................it just goes on and on my friends...........some people starting posting here not knowing what it was, and now they'll just keep posting here forever just because.............this is the thread that never ends...........

Hello sir! (Varmintguy) I see you have been varmint hunting- with .204 Ruger nontheless, I hope it was fun!I think I am going to go with a .20 Tac- not because it is better (or worse) but because it is different. But that is another thread.

Now lets dispense with the pleasantries- for the rest of you sit back, relax and enjoy as this INTELLECTUAL IDIOT teaches this STUPID REDNECK (meant of course with the due respect...) about common sense and logic. I know, I know, you can't teach an old dog new tricks etc. etc. I had hope to avoid such a personal banter back and forth, but after debating with you VG, I see how it is, no harm- no foul. Its all in good fun so... Buckle your seatbelts.... and keep your arms and hands within the vehicle at all times. I'll write slow that Mr. VG can keep up, this might get a little complicated but I'll try and keep it simple (simple things for simple minds)You are probably not used to someone BESTING you, and I see in the multiple times it has happened you keep up with the same banter- so I will address your post one item at a time, and if you do not see it still- then I guess you are one of those who still believes the moon is made of cheese, that Elvis is still alive and Al Gore really won the 2000 election. I really don't expect to change your mind- that would be like teaching a rock how to swim.

You said:
"How can you deny that in a relatively small area of Montana the special tag allotment has fallen from right at 3,000 opportunities per year back in the year the Wolves were introduced to 148 this year? And then have the audacity and unmitigated gall to claim those are not LOST Hunting oppotunities."

Well, here you contradict yourself, If I did in fact deny that special tag allotments had fallen (which I did not deny and do not deny) then how could I have had the audacity to claim they were not lost hunting opportunities? Do you see?....Is this slow enough for you?

Now, AGAIN- explain what opportunity is lost- the old fat rednecks who cant manage to kill an elk in a month long general season? If that is your idea of LOST opportunity, then I concede the point.

"TAGS FOR OLD, FAT, REDNECKS who can't kill an elk during the general season HAVE DECREASED from 3000 to 148 since the wolf was reintroduced. This is LOST HUNTING OPPORTUNITY for the OLD, FAT, REDNECKS who can't kill an elk during the month long general season." There, we agree. Happy.

You said:
"...the herd in that area has been decimated from 19,000 Elk the year the Wolves were planted to 8,500 Elk now!"

Well, again, I know you can read. I know you can type. That has been clearly established. In 1970 the herd of which you speak was near 4000 animals. I guess you don't understand population dynamics and that's ok. It is complicated and does take some time and effort. But I don't want you thinking I disagree with your statement so I'll clear that up as well:

THE HERD HAS BEEN decimated from 19,000 elk to about 8,500 elk during the same time period that the wolf was reintroduced. There you go. Does that mean anything? NO. Do wolves influence the population structure YES.
Happy? We agree.

You said:
"Wolf research in the Yellowstone Park AND surrounding areas has revealed that the Wolves are dining on big bull Elk with racks! Seems like the Wolves have figured out that the bulls that have been so busy with the rut that they have disapated (correct spelling I think should be "dissipated") their strength and ability to run (evade the Wolves).
One big bull can become the father of many little Elk. The cow, only mother of one calf Elk a year. Perhaps thats another reason hunters didn't see a lot of calves during the season". End of story."

Now, that is funny!!!! HA!HA!hA!HAAAAAAA!....HAAAAAAA. WoW! You are good! (I think I spilled on my computer that was so funny when I read it.) Yes, wolves will eat elk with big racks- especially right after the rut ( WE AGREE---do you see this?---WE AGREE) but to claim that reproduction is down because wolves eat bulls is like trying to explain to someone why we can't build an elevator to the moon. You simply do not want to get to the truth.

Now, all insults (made in fun of course) aside- It amazes me how people can get so stuck on one idea that they believe is so right that no matter what evidence suggests, they refuse to believe it. Let me reiterate something to you: I DO NOT KNOW IF WOLVES ARE A HEALTHY ADDITION TO THE GYE. But, I am open minded enough to give them a chance. To merely object to something because "liberals or greens" suggested it, is exactly why they are going to eventually get their way. They will win, and if hunters don't stop REDNECKING everything they do by becoming CONTRARIAN- we will lose. And it will be because hunters like you choose POLITICS over sound logical ECOSYSTEM management. I know I will never get you to change your mind, but I bet there are people who will read this and at least consider the idea. If it turns out they are more damaging than the MAJORITY of voters decide they are willing to accept, then kill them all (the Wolves) and burn the cocksuckers to the ground. I beleive we should at least give the idea of wolves in the ecosystem, some credence.

Good day to you sir!

Idaho "THE INTELLECTUAL IDIOT" Vandal

quote:

Originally posted by Mauser96:
This is the thread that never ends.................it just goes on and on my friends...........some people starting posting here not knowing what it was, and now they'll just keep posting here forever just because.............this is the thread that never ends...........

btt

idaho vandill pickle: Here I will briefly state the corrections that need be made to your post and your continued "avoidances" of reality!
You claim that nearly 3,000 Hunting opportunities are in fact NOT LOST! You are wrong! They are gone not only this year but in previous years and in future years! This is one of the reasons you recently won INTELLECTUAL IDIOT status! Just check the Montana regulations!
And your claim that only fat lazy people put in for those tags in absolutely assinine and stupid! I know plenty of people that preferred to Hunt Cow Elk on those nearly 3,000 tags (some of them prefer Cow Elk as table fare!) and some that put in for a chance at those few of those nearly 3,000 tags that were covetted chances at Bull Elk! I know plenty of non-fat, nonsmokers who put in for Cow Elk tags! You immature and ineffectual attempt at smearing those that Hunt Cow Elk is beneath the dignity of a true sportsman! Indeed the 40 year old Cow Elk Hunter that was killed by a sneaky Grizzly year before last here in Montana while cleaning his Cow Elk was in great shape! His apparent fine physical condition was apparent from the pictures that accompanied the news stories and obituaries in our Montana papers!
One of your previous postings suggested that those nearly 3,000 lost Hunting opportunities can just be absorbed in other areas! This again is stupid and foolishly flippant! Those are lost Hunting opportunites due to your furry friends the Wolves! yeah people can go elsewhere to Hunt but many have Hunted that area for decades and learning new areas is often a slow and tedious undertaking. Lost Hunting opportunities in other words. And your refusal to admit that over 10,000 fewer Elk to Hunt (for everyone) in that one area - is just that 10,000 fewer Elk! Maybe your happy words can somehow reconcile that fact to you but to those of us that are in the midst of these over-populated Wolves its is glaring, sad and real!
Now you are saying "YOU DON'T KNOW IF WOLVES ARE A GOOD IDEA"! Good God man! You simply keep proving my point that you, as an intellectual idiot, do not know if you are coming or going bored or stroked!
The Wolves have decimated one Elk herd, affecting many others and are working on other specie of Game! And you want to give those furry little friends of yours MORE time to explode population wise and damage more Hunting opportunities! Get you head out of your ass vandill pickle and absorb some reality and fresh air! This is a unique and tragic situation, this ruination of the Northern Yellowstone Elk herd and you have provided nothing positive in the way of correcting the loss! Nothing! Nothing but happy words and avoidance! Typical of intellectual idiots. This sorry situation is simply going to get worse and spread to other areas and states!
So you are claiming that lowered numbers of breeding bull Elk will HELP increase Elk herds???
I would tend to agree with the research that lesser and stressed and/or lower numbers of Bull Elk would NOT HELP the Elk population!
I did not do the research and I do not know this for a fact but, your continued apologizing, for the over-populated Wolves is suspect in my mind! Very suspect!
Sound ecological management you blather! What in the hell does a triple over population of Wolves that we have now, have to do with sound ecological management! Does decimating a healthy herd of 19,000 Elk down to 8,500 Elk by over-populated Wolves qualify as sound ecological management to ANYONE but you and a very few other Wolf apologists? I say no!
It sounds stupid, wasteful and self defeating to me! Do you remember how long and hard we Hunters fought and paid for healthy Elk herds! The solution has nothing to do with politics but much more to do with sound game mangement practices and keeping promises! The Montana, Wyoming and Idaho (I have Hunted all of these states many times by the way!) Game Departments had done a very good job of (not perfect but very good!) over the last several decades!
Politics only enters into the solution to this problem in that government agencies must be forced - politically - to enforce previously made promises!
The promised number of Wolves (325!) is better for our game herds and Hunting opportunities than 1,000 Wolves or is that concept to difficult for an intellectual idiot to understand?
Yes I am "good" in this respect idahole vndyke, I only relate true facts, printed reasearch and when I interject my personal experiences they are noted as that! I could care less if an intellectual idiot believes printed research findings! And I do not think that anyone else cares one way or the other if an intellectual idiot denies or decries printed facts and figures! Such is the lot of intellectual idiots!
Ignoring a problem does not make a problem go away! Another trait of intellectual idiots is an ability to dance around and try to redefine a problem! Well tens of thousands of dead Big Game Animals killed by an amazing over-population of Wolves is gonna necessitate a lot bigger dance than you are capable of, to make it go away!
Again intellectual idiots getting next to nothing done and about as useful as tits on a boar!
Thanks for nothing rmef!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Mauser 96: If you feel that this thread has no merit or redeeming value then you should simply quit perusing it!
But let me relay to you that a whole lot of people feel that the loss of Elk Hunting opportunities due to introduced and now way over-populated Wolves is important and worthy of discussion and solving!
Does the length (or brevity?) of a discussion have anything what so ever to do with the worthiness of a discussion?
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

VG: ( And all other who find this thread one of the most entetaining here)

I thought you could read, I apologize. You regirgitation of everything is humorous. I think I'll continue to post here just for the entertainment value. I have received more private post messages about this subject than you could count. (Unless you can count on your toes as well, but I am not sure.) Most are from hunters who have seen how you name call, berate and argue everything posted under the sun, and most agree that common sense should dictate what is done on FEDERAL LAND. And most have told me arguing with you is like arguing with a rock. That is AWESOME! I think my posts are to long for you to grasp, so lets deal with one or two issues at a time. (oops, sorry....1 or 2.)

3000 hunting opportunities lost. I already posted twice that I UNDERSTAND THAT TAGS WENT FROM 3000 TO 148. You can keep posting that if you want to but it kind of slows the debate down when you can't come up with anything better. I think I made my point, and so did you. (Hell, I can argue AGAINST the wolves better than you can if that is all you can come up with!....it must be amateur night in Montana.)

Next, you don't care or believe research papers etc. I assume because they are from "Intellectual Idiots" like me. So, let's try a different route. Lets go to a forum and see what people who live in Montana have to say about the elk herds they personally observe.
And I know you won't believe anyone but yourself, so lets see what.....hmmmm.....lets see...what....I KNOW!

Lets see what Varmintguy wrote just the other day.....that would be swell! He is an expert!

You posted earlier:

"By the way I want to relay this to you as I have been very busy lately and did not get a chance to relay it previously. It is a refutation of your boast that there are lots of sick, scabied, wounded and dying Elk in each herd for your buds the Wolves to nibble on!
I have in the last 7 days had occassion to view several different Elk herds on their traditional wintering slopes! One herd of 1,200 Elk was on Fleecer Mountain about 25 miles north of my home (I was checking for dropped antlers!). I saw not one, NOT ONE set of ribs (sickly Elk) among them, not one limping Elk, not one scabied coat or even one Elk carcass lying near this herd! I viewed them with my 48 power spotting scope from about a mile away!
Then on another day I had a chance to view 3 herds east of my home. The first herd was 7 miles from my home and consisted of 125 Elk. Again not a sickly creature in the bunch. I was close to these and they could only be described as robust! The next herd was 12 miles east of me and it consisited of 160 Elk. Again not a sickly appearing Elk to be seen! Continuing on this same road I came to the main wintering herd in my area it had in excess of 2,000 Elk in it and they were in mid day chewing the cud mode so I can not say that they all were limpless but I can say they all looked very healthy and content! No scabied coats and no ribs showing!"



Again, Varmintguy (I could come up with some cute plays on your member name, but that seems to easy...) you saw by your own admission 3485 elk within about a 25 mile radius of your home? 3485?
And you claim the elk herd is now reduced to 8500.
Thus, almost half of the elk live within 25 miles of your home? (Thats pretty cool!)
And you claim you have lost hunter opportunity? Oh, wait. They must have been all bulls. Cows are better table fare and now you can't kill a cow. (With 3485 that close to your home and you can't kill a cow? Maybe you ought to try knitting or crochet?)
Wow!

Also, you claim to have not seen (and I quote again from your previous post)"NOT ONE set of ribs, not one limping elk, not one scabied coat, or even an elk carcass lying near this herd!"

This "intellectual idiot" is now quite confused?
But I thought wolves were eating them all?
You would think if you saw so many elk, certainly the wolves would be dining on these? But, as you claim, no carcasses.....hmmmmmm....something sounds fishy here.
Maybe you could clear this up.

For us "intellectual idiots", I mean....

Idaho "Whose the Intellectual Idiot now?" Vandal

Well, Varmintguy seems to busy to respond, so lets see how close I can guess his next response, this will be fun!

“Idahovandamsalindeistress: Let me hereby refudiate your constant enumerations and distortions of the truth. Once again, you deny the loss of hunting opportunity.
Did you know elk tags were lowered from 3000 to 148? Yet, Idahovandyke, you continually deny this as lost opportunity.
What kind of assinine sportsman are you?
Do you think your research papers and fact misquotations will get you anywhere? That is what the intellectuals, liberals and greens think will fool us. I will not be fooled! You continue to distort the facts Idaham Vandam! Did you know tags dropped from 3000 to 148? 19500 elk down to 8500! How do you explain that? What does your research say to that? Have you lost your mind? And yet you refuse to admit that you have lost your mind! How do you answer that? YOU have lost your mind!
Somewhere along the way you seem to forget that hunting opportunity was lost! Why do you hide? Why can’t you admit that Idahoak Vandyke? I will correct you again because you and self proclaimed intellectual idiots like you distort and distort! The elk herd went down from 19500 to 8500. Your furry friends ate them and now there are no more elk! Do you not see that? I do not trust anyone with higher than a 3rd grade education. I have said it and I say it again because I won’t be fooled. The elk are being eaten by the wolf! The liberals and greens want it that way. Don’t you see that? NO! YOU DON’T!
So Idahole Vandicksucker, why don’t you explain to me how the elk herd went from19500 animals down to 8500? You can’t? Because you apologize for the wolf! You are weak! We must extirpate the wolf! The wolf must go! And as soon as the wolf is gone, why, we will get rid of the cougar and the grizzly bear too! They are eating the possums! Didn’t want to hear that did you Idahak Vandumb. No, I bet you didn’t…..â€
Thanks for nothing ACLU!
Piss into the wind….

Idaho “Too much time on my hands†Van….dyke? Dickhead? Dumb?...dal

Idaho Vandal: I am enclosing a link for you to peruse regarding the "EXTINCTION" caused by the intellectual idiots and the predators near the City Of Seattle that I made reference to in an above post! The purpose is to add credence to my contention that while intellectual idiots are sometimes slow to acknowledge things that are right before their eyes they are even worse at solving problems!
Here is the link and I will destroy your posting in a subsequent posting of my own. yes sorry I have been busy.

Link: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002241109_damlion14m.html

Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Idaho Vandal: Now to destroy your latest posting!
You claim the Elk I saw near my home are part of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd - they are not!
That NYE Herd is way east of me. These Elk near my home are just regular old Montana Elk with no special all encompassing designation!
A pilot and an avid Hunter did take pictures of one of the herds I referred to as being real healthy. The pictures were made from an airplane last winter and showed Wolves wading into the middle of this herd and taking down a couple of very healthy, very adult Elk! No skin and bones sicklies these! They were just the chosen ones that day!
I will continue to refer to these lost Hunting opportunities til you and your ilk all understand that the happy words fed to us by government types, greens, intellectual idiots and the useless band of money movers at the rmef were simply lies and intellectual tripe! In just this one herd of Elk (The Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd!) Hunters have lost nearly 3,000 Elk Hunting opportunities this year alone! And do not forget the Hunting opportunities lost in recent previous years and in the future! Even worse than these lost opportunities is the devastation caused to the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd by the amazing over-population of Wolves in this area! Remember we were promised only 325 Wolves and the "scientists" now estimate there are between 850 and 1,000 Wolves! Of course the promises made by these intellectual idiots of turning over control of the Wolves to the individual states of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming once the 325 Wolf number was reached have gone up in fumes! Just like the Wolf farts that go up in the air after they have decimated some more Elk!
Deny or dance around or admit to this fact Idaho Vandal I DO NOT CARE! But do not defend in any way the intellectual idiots, greens government bureaucrats and the wimps at the rmef that got us into this mess in the first place! Yeah and I almost forgot! That Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd numbered 19,000 Elk the year the Wolves were transplanted and this year they numbered only 8,500!!! You and your offline buddies refute that if you can!
I do not want every Wolf killed or anything near that I just want the Wolves to be held in strict check as to the numbers that were promised us and that number needs to be assessed often to make sure our herds of Moose, Elk, Deer, Antelope and Bighorn Sheep are remaining at sustainable high numbers and continue to offer humans the traditional Hunting opportunites we had before the Wolves were transplanted back here!
Is that to much to ask?
So Idaho Vandal if you and your offline E-mail buddies can refute ANY contention - in public - that I have made - DO SO! If you can't and its obvious none of you can then go ahead and try and bemoan my arguments as "just to argumentative" and berating! Now hear this Idaho Vandal I NEVER berate ANYONE until they have first done so to me! So heres a bit of advice from a blue collar guy that has been around the block so to speak - IF YOU CAN'T TAKE IT - DON"T DISH IT OUT!!!
Who said I do not believe all scientific papers? I read them and take them with grains of salt, consider the source (the AGENDA!) and match it up with my extensive outdoor experiences! If it jives correctly I often learn from them give more creedence to the source and the contentions therein. Usually I am unimpressed with the intellectual tripe! I am now studying a large phone book size government issued "Elk Management" plan that I got from the Montana Fish and Game. It is filled with double talk and intellectual blather till it over-runs its pages! Still I am studying it and will report to you and interested parties once I "grasp" it all!
Copies are available from the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks if you are interested.
As an example of intellectual tripe printed as "scientific" a study was recently done near my home here in SW Montana! The study cost over 1/2 million dollars! The specific study was to check and see if the wild Lynx in my area were afraid or intimidated by crossing a particular paved road in a high remote valley during the winter - as opposed to a part of this road that is gravel!!!! Yes the feds were gonna unpave this road if their study upheld their "worries" This road is closed to vehicles in the winter only because the snow is so deep on the road that it would take a herd of snowplows to keep it open and no one but snowmobilers use the road course anyway! No one lives along this high remote road except at each end. Its about 45 or 50 miles long. Well I have already given some hints to you intellectual idiots that put faith in this type blather! What do you think we got for $500,000.00? Nothing is the answer! The road is COVERED with snow (often 3, 4 and 5 feet deep) in winter and the Lynx can't possibly know (or care!) if they are crossing a paved road or a gravel road!
You call it scientific I call it a waste of money that could have been spent much better somewhere (anywhere!) else!
I will tell you Idaho Vandal what sounds fishy is your back and forth concessions and denials! First you defend then you disclaim the Wolves. You are difficult to pin down - this being and attribute of intellectual idiots world wide though so no surprise to me there!
So please state your position regarding the now overpopulated Wolves here in the Rocky Mountains!
I will state mine clearly and concisely for all to see (no offline E-mails needed to hide behind for me)!
I wish they had not been transplanted here in the first place but that decision is past! I feel the Wolf numbers should be held in ABSOLUTE compliance with the promised population of 325 (not 1,000!) and the states should be allowed to issue Hunting tags for Wolves as seen fit by them! Further more I feel the federal government has now foisted upon Hunters the costs of overseeing these now triple overpopulated Wolves! An unfunded mandate!
Thanks for nothing rmef (or should I call it the rocky mountain wolf fart foundation?).
It seems your green friends are getting a bit tired of re-imbursing ranchers for the losses of domestic animals caused by Wolves! A bill was introduced to shift the costs from the private green organization onto the Hunters of Montana! More on this later!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Well that’s good advice! I have a copy of the Montana Elk Management Plan as well. I’ll save you some time.

But in the meantime, here is some more “Intellectual Idiocyâ€:

1) Antlerless seasons (such as the one that has dropped from 3000 to 148, are only intended to meet population objectives. In many areas of Montana, these are being increased. So any correlation between “lost hunter opportunity†and wolves is not because “wolves are killing all of the elk†it is because wolves are reducing the population to a point that extra cow only seasons are no longer needed in THAT AREA ONLY. Follow the link dircetly from The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks website and see:
http://fwp.state.mt.us/news/article_3204.aspx
“Antlerless Elk Seasons Extended In Some Districts To Address Elk Population Objectivesâ€
Southwestern Montana—Region 3
* Hunting Districts 300, 319, 321, 322, 323,324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 341.
Any hunter with a valid general season elk license can hunt antlerless elk in these districts.The portion of hunting district 323 that includes the Wall Creek Wildlife Management Area will only be open to individuals currently holding special permits for this area. The permits will be valid for antlerless elk only.â€

2) The STATE of Montana is managing the elk herd as the citizens of the state of Montana want it to be managed, not how some locals around N. Yellowstone want it managed. I can see why some are upset that elk permits in ONE LOCAL area FOR ANTLERLESS animals are down, but overall management objectives for elk population are being met statewide. Again, the problem is not wolves are eating everything in sight, they are just forcing the elk herd to a lower equilibrium than locals want. Here again is a link to the State of Montana Elk management report for 2005:

http://fwp.state.mt.us/publicnotices/notice_678.aspx

“Statewide Elk Population Management Objective
Maintain elk population numbers at levels producing a healthy and productive condition
and that also reduces elk conflicts on private and public lands.â€
“Statewide Elk Recreation Objective
Provide for a diverse elk hunting opportunity within, as much as possible, a 5-week
general season and a 5 to 6-week archery season. Further, provide for quality viewing
experiences and general enjoyment of elk by the public.â€
Here are page numbers that once you download the Report from the State of Montana you can again, see for yourself:
(p. 272)
North Yellowstone Elk Management Unit (EMU)
“Recreation Provided: This EMU provides longer and more diverse elk hunting opportunities than any EMU in Montana. Opportunities include a 6-week archery elk season, (HD 313, southern portion of HD 314), a 6-week early backcountry rifle season beginning 15 September in HD 316, a 5-week general rifle elk season (HD 313, southern portion of HD 314), and a very popular 6-week limited access Gardiner Late Hunt from early January to mid-February (HD 313, southern portion of HD 314). These diverse seasons provide approximately 8,000 days of hunting recreation to about 3,200 hunters annually.â€

WOW! More OPPORTUNITIES than ANY OTHER EMU!

(p. 273)
“Management Challenges: Wolf reintroduction and subsequent predation will reduce elk numbers and influence elk distribution and behavior. Elk management decisions and hunting opportunities are impacted by the effect of wolves on elk populations, movements, and behavior. When wolves are delisted and Montana assumes management authority for wolf populations, FWP will attempt to balance the needs of a healthy wolf population and a viable elk population, with the interest of hunters, non-hunters, and landowners. Until then, FWP can only manage the elk component of the equation and not the wolf component.â€

WOW! More people have a say in this than just us hunters? AGAIN, I say, the solution is not to keep bitching and moaning that the wolves are going to eat the population down to zero. Saying that is completely untrue. THEY WILL EAT ELK, but only to the point that population numbers are lowered to a different equilibrium. The solution is to focus energy on getting the WOLF DELISTED so that the state can manage the wolf part of the equation and then reach predator-prey equilibrium that satisfies ALL PARTIES INVOLVED!

(p. 274)
“Note: Management goals and objectives for the Northern Yellowstone EMU are somewhat different from most EMUs in that, (1) this EMU does not include the entire year-round home range of the Northern Yellowstone elk herd, (2) the majority of the Northern Yellowstone elk are seasonal migrants, spending only 4-5 months during the winter/early spring in the EMU,(3) a large proportion of the total elk population is not available to sport hunting, and the majority of elk that are available to hunters, are hunted during special winter restricted access late hunt, and (4) the Northern Yellowstone elk herd is subject to higher natural mortality than other EMUs. This natural mortality includes periodic major winterkill events and high predation rates from a full complement of major predators, including grey wolves in recent years.â€

WOW! AGAIN! The population estimates only include that portion that crosses out of the PARK! So, maybe the population is just being redistributed? What?

Again, I know this is the thread that wont die, but if your not interested, you probably wouldn’t even be reading this far. I know I will never convince some people that wolves MIGHT be good for the ecosystem, and that we should give them a fair shake. But the best solution for those of us who really want to increase our hunting opportunity is to focus on wolf management through scientifically managed recreational hunting. NOT BY REDNECKING EVERY THING.

IV

As far as the sea-lions go, I deal with a number of fisheries biologists on a daily basis, to say that they are the "intellectual idits" who are causing this problem is the most ridiculous thing I have heard. Ask any one of them and they would say- "Shoot that fucking thing" in a heartbeat. It is the politicians who decided this, the article you cited even declares this:

"Even when the sea lions aren't snatching fish, anglers said, their presence scares away the chinook. A few said they wished they could dispatch the sea lions with live ammunition, which is prohibited by federal marine-mammal-protection laws."

Marine mammal protection laws. Not the biologists. They do not make LAW.

As far as my position on the wolves I don't know why you can't understand it but you asked mwe to clear it up (again) for you.

Wolves should be hunted under a biologically sound program. They should not be extirpated from the NYE. They should be at a population level that is a compromise to all interested parties. I have said it over and over and over and over.....
1) Hunt the wolf. (I am looking forward to the day that we can)
2) The interactions between wolves and elk are far more complicated than you profess.
3) The focus from hunters as a group should be on accepting them into the ecosystem and managing them through hunting. Not bullshit theories and redneck rhetoric. Otherwise the "greens" as you call them will keep the debate focused on how we are a bunch of paranoid rednecks and they will sell their argument to the public by saying:

"If "hunting" is allowed by this group of paranoid "rednecks." They will not follow the law, and they will extirpate the wolf."

It wont be the intellectual idiots that you will have to worry about. It is the 50-60% of undecided America and the politicians that represent them that will keep Wolf hunting from ever happening. I know some "greens" as you say, I advocate the hunting of the wolf and they laugh that it will never happen, because they are winning the media war with respect to the public. You can fight me on this (and probably will) until the cows come home. But hopefully others will read this and give the idea some thought.

The one thing I can say VG is that you at least care enough to debate, it seems in America anymore everyone just chooses a side and everything else is wrong. Free speech and open debate are critical to this. I,m sure I'll hear form you soon....

Idaho "Beat those damn WSU Cougars" Vandal

I bet grizzlys will be hunted before wolves ever get on the list. And I doubt either will happen in my life time. I hope both do but I wouldn't bet on that one.

There was nothing wrong before they were introduced, now they are here and we have to live with them. I still see no good in the wolf, and all the bitching in the world won't cure a thing. Fewer opportunities will exist and less access and more restrictions. "Sa la vie"

Well, I don't know how old you are KUDU, but wolves were declared a "Big game species" by the state of Idaho, 1 year and 2 days ago. Wolf hunting is still far off, but at least it is moving that way here.
Wolf designated "Big Game" in Idaho

IdahoVandal

It is a start.

The wolf was declared a preditor here and we know how far that got! It is silly and just more millions of $ will be wasted. Like I posted many many moons ago, the origanal packs released cost tax payers, on average, 1 Million bucks per wolf! How many kids go to bed hungry at night? How many people have no health insurance? How many elderly folks lost their retirement or have no retirement at all?

And we spend a million bucks for a damn wolf that is and will only cost millions more.

Frivality will catch us one of these days!

Not even I am foolish enough to argue the priorities of the federal government....

IV

Some interisting facts just published by are wolf person in northeern Wis.

He stated we have 108 packs in the state they have a avg of 5 pups a year thats 540 pups per year. He also stated that 70 percent of those die that leaves 162 more each year that live.

But he still said we have had 400 wolves last and we have 400 wolves this year. Well next year well he say we have 562. I dought it he said we had only 350 for about 5 years.

Using his figures we are increase at around 40% but even given that 62 adult wolves die off each year that leaves a 25% increase in the over all wolf population. So in 5 years we have very close to 1000 wolves.

We are most likely very close to that now but the DNR had been holding at a zero growth statement for years. The figure for them was 350 for years now it 400 I wonder how long they well stick to that one.

Just when you thought I had went away!

Wolves den on lambing ground

By CAT URBIGKIT
Star-Tribune correspondent Wednesday, April 27, 2005




FARSON -- Members of the Thoman Ranch family, with headquarters just below Fontenelle Dam north of Kemmerer, know what it's like to have large, federally protected predators preying on their domestic sheep flocks.

The Thoman sheep are trucked to the Upper Green River region in July and graze the mountains through September before moving back to lower elevation rangelands for the remainder of the year. The Thomans have had both grizzly bears and gray wolves kill their sheep while on the Bridger-Teton National Forest grazing allotments in recent years.

This time, it appears the wolves are coming out to meet the flocks, months ahead of any anticipated confrontation.

A pair of wolves is expected to begin denning in the middle of a domestic sheep lambing ground northeast of Farson any day now, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. There are three migratory sheep outfits that use the area for lambing, which begins in early May in western Wyoming.

Dick Thoman said Tuesday his family is slated to move two bands of sheep into the area next week for lambing. The notion of a pair of wolves feeding pups in a den amid the sheep begs the question of what food source the adult wolves will use. Thoman is confident of the answer: his sheep.

"If sheep are in the area, sheep are food, and they are going to eat them," Thoman said. "It's not if, it's when. It's a given they are going to eat some sheep."

Federal officials reported that a USDA Wildlife Services field specialist saw a pair of wolves feeding on a moose calf kill in the area last week.

"The female was very pregnant and expecting to den any day," Fish and Wildlife reported in its weekly wolf update. "The area is in the middle of a sheep lambing area and the local producers were contacted about the situation."

Mike Jimenez of Fish and Wildlife said in an interview Tuesday that Wildlife Services has been authorized to trap and radio-collar wolves on site so the pair can be monitored.

"It's not in the mountains, it's on the flatlands," Jimenez said. "And there's a lot of sheep."

Fish and Wildlife has no plans to move the wolves, despite their presence amid a lambing ground.

"We don't move things proactively," Jimenez said.

Jimenez said the wolves have not yet caused a problem with the domestic sheep.

Two of the three sheep producers in the region said they had not been contacted about wolves denning in the area.

Thoman said he had not been contacted about the wolves as of Tuesday. Fellow sheepman Pete Arambel, who will trail his domestic herds into the region the first week of May, confirmed that he hadn't been contacted about the situation either.

The third domestic sheep producer using the area is Wyoming Stock Growers Association executive Jim Magagna. He said he had received a message from Jimenez, but had not yet returned the call Tuesday afternoon. His flocks will also enter the area within the next week to 10 days, he said.

"I think we're all at risk," Magagna said.

Magagna questioned why Fish and Wildlife would wait until the wolves had pups and the "almost inevitable conflict" with sheep would occur before taking action. He suggested that because efforts were being made to trap the wolves, the wolves should be captured and moved to another location "where the wolves and their pups would have a better chance of not causing a conflict."

All three sheep producers use livestock guardian dogs and have herders with the flocks around the clock, but even with these precautions, wolves often succeed in killing domestic sheep.

This is the southernmost pair of wolves known to Fish and Wildlife in Wyoming at this time.

The thread that will not die!

Hallelujah!!!

IV

Maybe a record?

The eveready post! Where is that pink rabbit?

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal:
The thread that will not die!

Hallelujah!!!

IV

Well, it won't die, so maybe we can just use it as a "bitch about whatever" thread. I'll start.

What the hell is it with all them stupid barrel stampings on guns nowdays? Some have just WAY TOO MANY! My 38-55 has stamped on the barrel:
"THE MARLIN FIREARMS CO. NORTH HAVEN CT. U.S.A."
"****MODEL 336CB - CAL 38/55 WIN.****"
"WARNING misuse can cause injury or death - follow warnings and instructions in owners manual"
"NEVER RUN WITH SCISSORS"
"ALWAYS WEAR YER CONDOM"
"NEVER BATHE IN THE SAME WATER TWICE"
"BUCKLE UP, ITS THE LAW"

I MEAN, WHAT'S UP WITH THAT?