JoseCuervo
New member
Greenhorn,Greenhorn said:
Help get the cowboys in Wyoming to pull their heads out, and the spanking can begin. Otherwise all one can do is whine or poach. |oo
Economic Benefits of Wolves
- Thread starter JoseCuervo
- Start date
Help get the cowboys in Wyoming to pull their heads out, and the spanking can begin. Otherwise all one can do is whine or poach. |oo
Ithaca 37
New member
BHR, Maybe I'm mistaken. I always thought the Montana Wildlife Federation was a chapter of the NWF. Maybe not. This is the group that seems to be the most politically active in MT, isn't it?
http://www.montanawildlife.com/index.html
Is this a good group or not? If not, why not?
http://www.montanawildlife.com/index.html
Is this a good group or not? If not, why not?
cjcj
New member
ringer said:
That is some funny,funny , stuff...LMAO.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
IT,
I was a member of the Montana Wildlife Federation for awhile but found the overall tone of it to be just like you, too extreme. They are dividers for the most part, not uniters so I stop being a member. Like all organizations, they have good individuals, and they have kooks. I don't know what their organizations public policy is towards the wolf. I'm sure as individual members it varies from person to person, just like it does here on this board. Your view is not the same as mine, or Buzz's, or Greenhorn's, or Moosie's, or Pointer's, ect...
I'm not going to tell Wyoming how to manage it's wolves. That's up to them to decide whats best for them. If it was up to me, any wolf leaving the Park is fair game year round. No poisons or killing at their den sites however. Even at that we will still have a healthy population of them. So in my personal opinion, Wyomings plan is pretty wimpy as well. I also relieze that MY PLAN would have a snowballs chance in hell of being implemented.
I was a member of the Montana Wildlife Federation for awhile but found the overall tone of it to be just like you, too extreme. They are dividers for the most part, not uniters so I stop being a member. Like all organizations, they have good individuals, and they have kooks. I don't know what their organizations public policy is towards the wolf. I'm sure as individual members it varies from person to person, just like it does here on this board. Your view is not the same as mine, or Buzz's, or Greenhorn's, or Moosie's, or Pointer's, ect...
I'm not going to tell Wyoming how to manage it's wolves. That's up to them to decide whats best for them. If it was up to me, any wolf leaving the Park is fair game year round. No poisons or killing at their den sites however. Even at that we will still have a healthy population of them. So in my personal opinion, Wyomings plan is pretty wimpy as well. I also relieze that MY PLAN would have a snowballs chance in hell of being implemented.
Ithaca 37
New member
Good idea, BHR. Do nothin' and then bitch all the time. That's the way to get things accomplished. 
Just a question about the winter range around Gardiner; is it lack of amount or lack of good quality range? I've read a few studies by Dr. Wambolt (MSU) that show that the abundance of elk are a causing a decline in the forage condition of the browse, primarily sagebrush. IIRC these were published in the early to mid 1990's.
BHR- Thanks for including me in such good company...
BHR- Thanks for including me in such good company...
JoseCuervo
New member
1_Ptr,
That is funny that you were lumped in with Moosie.... Kind of sounds like you need to get a spine.... or at least off the fence....
____________________
Hey Paul,
Why wouldn't you be up for poaching the wolves at their Den sites or by poison?
That is funny that you were lumped in with Moosie.... Kind of sounds like you need to get a spine.... or at least off the fence....
____________________
Hey Paul,
Why wouldn't you be up for poaching the wolves at their Den sites or by poison?
BigHornRam
Well-known member
"Hey Paul,
Why wouldn't you be up for poaching the wolves at their Den sites or by poison?"
Because I'm a sportsman and like shooting the fuggers better. But being the piss poor hunter you are and knowing you'ld like your token trophy wolf to brag about at the gay bar you like to hang out at, I would make a one time acception for you.
Why wouldn't you be up for poaching the wolves at their Den sites or by poison?"
Because I'm a sportsman and like shooting the fuggers better. But being the piss poor hunter you are and knowing you'ld like your token trophy wolf to brag about at the gay bar you like to hang out at, I would make a one time acception for you.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Greenhorn,
Speaking of Gardiner, does that guy on the way to Gardiner still have that big ass sign on his barn saying "Clinton don't inhale, he sucks"? I always liked Gardiner.
Speaking of Gardiner, does that guy on the way to Gardiner still have that big ass sign on his barn saying "Clinton don't inhale, he sucks"? I always liked Gardiner.
That is funny that you were lumped in with Moosie.... Kind of sounds like you need to get a spine.... or at least off the fence....
Are you saying that Moosie is a spineless fence rider ?
The thing that pisses me off most about the whole wolf debate is, the loss of big game always seems to get lost, Yet you hear a ton about sheep and cows :BLEEP:,
The loss of Big game is going to have dire consequences for all of us, and especially our fish and game departments. We will all end up paying out the ass for our tags, to make up for lost revenue.
Are you saying that Moosie is a spineless fence rider
?The thing that pisses me off most about the whole wolf debate is, the loss of big game always seems to get lost, Yet you hear a ton about sheep and cows :BLEEP:,
The loss of Big game is going to have dire consequences for all of us, and especially our fish and game departments. We will all end up paying out the ass for our tags, to make up for lost revenue.
Michaelr- The price of tags (at least in Montana) will not go up because of the lack of game. The prices are set by the legislature. The amount of tags (#'s) for special drawings may go down in some areas with some consequence but the dollar amount will not be significant. The lost revenue will be in hunters from out of state not lodging in an area, hiring an outfitter etc.
While I agree that wild herd populations are somewhat lost in the debate, there is a specific portion of the new program that is earmarked just for this purpose.
Honestly, I have seen the wolves in Lamar Valley and I wasn't really impressed. I have seen grizzly bears and haven't been real impressed either. That's just me, others are quite impressed and felt the need to have both. All I know is their here and controls should be put into place. Some population control has been implemented but their needs to more.
While I agree that wild herd populations are somewhat lost in the debate, there is a specific portion of the new program that is earmarked just for this purpose.
Honestly, I have seen the wolves in Lamar Valley and I wasn't really impressed. I have seen grizzly bears and haven't been real impressed either. That's just me, others are quite impressed and felt the need to have both. All I know is their here and controls should be put into place. Some population control has been implemented but their needs to more.
JoseCuervo
New member
michaelr said:
Michael,
Do you feel just as strongly about the loss of Salmon and Steelhead (and associated revenue from tag sales?)
Does that piss you off the Bush Administration refuses to help restore Salmon and sTeelhead to Idaho?
Ithaca 37
New member
EG, Good question. I bet he doesn't answer.
Horn Seeker
New member
Hey Buzz, I totally agree that the bears, wolves, range and FWP management have all had a major effect on the elk herd, but I'll bet right now that if all those other problems were corrected the elk herd would still get hammered by the wolf numbers (well, mainly because the "range" problem cant really be solved since there are houses built all over a lot of it. Without a vast, unsegmented range there is no way an elk herd is going to flourish the way I want it to with uncontrolled wolf numbers.
FWP's hands are tied on most of these issues...bears, wolves, and winter range (due to Livestock Assoc. power).
Sucks!
FWP's hands are tied on most of these issues...bears, wolves, and winter range (due to Livestock Assoc. power).
Sucks!
BuzzH
Well-known member
Horn Seeker, I dont know and I wouldnt even want to say one way or the other.
All I do know is the MTFWP and the commission is a reactive and short sighted bunch. If there were biologists 10 years ago preaching this predator pit theory, why did they continue to issue thousands of late antlerless hunts for cows?
You're about to see the commission in full glory on this Bison issue, they'll drop the ball on this one too...and the MTFWP will sit there while it happens being spoon fed their mush...
All I do know is the MTFWP and the commission is a reactive and short sighted bunch. If there were biologists 10 years ago preaching this predator pit theory, why did they continue to issue thousands of late antlerless hunts for cows?
You're about to see the commission in full glory on this Bison issue, they'll drop the ball on this one too...and the MTFWP will sit there while it happens being spoon fed their mush...
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Buzz,
There were a lot of people in Paradise Valley that were say that the FWP elk numbers were inacurate. No one in charge listened to their comments just like you poo pooed them as well. The biologist in charge of this herd is a pro wolf guy and was fugdeing his counts for sometime. So based on his numbers, which you never disputed, the late season hunts were merited. Finnally a couple years ago, he could not fudge the counts anymore, and we are where we are today. No one can win with you. We cry wolf several years ago, you laugh and call us kooks. Now we have a problem, and you ask why nobody did anything to stop the late hunts sooner.
A couple items you failed to include in your earlier post concerning todays elk populations that are relevent.
We have not had a real winter since 96-97.
There is a growing amount of private land that is off limits to hunting and the elk take refuge there during the hunting season.
Lot's of recent fires have improved the habitat for elk in the west allowing for the herds to expand.
The extended season in S. W. MT was due to a very mild weather hunting season which resulted in a lower than hoped for harvest. Last year had more snow and we had a better harvest.
There were a lot of people in Paradise Valley that were say that the FWP elk numbers were inacurate. No one in charge listened to their comments just like you poo pooed them as well. The biologist in charge of this herd is a pro wolf guy and was fugdeing his counts for sometime. So based on his numbers, which you never disputed, the late season hunts were merited. Finnally a couple years ago, he could not fudge the counts anymore, and we are where we are today. No one can win with you. We cry wolf several years ago, you laugh and call us kooks. Now we have a problem, and you ask why nobody did anything to stop the late hunts sooner.
A couple items you failed to include in your earlier post concerning todays elk populations that are relevent.
We have not had a real winter since 96-97.
There is a growing amount of private land that is off limits to hunting and the elk take refuge there during the hunting season.
Lot's of recent fires have improved the habitat for elk in the west allowing for the herds to expand.
The extended season in S. W. MT was due to a very mild weather hunting season which resulted in a lower than hoped for harvest. Last year had more snow and we had a better harvest.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Paul,
Who's job is it to monitor populations? A professional biologist? mine? Yours? Who's job is it to supervise biologists, ask questions of numbers? Mine? Yours?
I'll blame this whole thing on you, as you "knew" the biologist was fudging the numbers, yet still sat on your fat ass and let them issue all those late cow tags.
Thanks Paul, way to look out for the hunters in MT.
I personally think the numbers were not "fudged" but rather calculated with MTFWP's ridiculous populations models described in their latest piece of trash elk management plan.
Did you read that thing?
I did, confidence intervals of +/-40% in total elk populations are acceptable???? WTF, I could pull a number out of a hat and be within that number.
The undisputable fact is that elk hunting opportunities are not declining in Montana, not by a long shot...face reality and jump into 2005.
Who's job is it to monitor populations? A professional biologist? mine? Yours? Who's job is it to supervise biologists, ask questions of numbers? Mine? Yours?
I'll blame this whole thing on you, as you "knew" the biologist was fudging the numbers, yet still sat on your fat ass and let them issue all those late cow tags.
Thanks Paul, way to look out for the hunters in MT.
I personally think the numbers were not "fudged" but rather calculated with MTFWP's ridiculous populations models described in their latest piece of trash elk management plan.
Did you read that thing?
I did, confidence intervals of +/-40% in total elk populations are acceptable???? WTF, I could pull a number out of a hat and be within that number.
The undisputable fact is that elk hunting opportunities are not declining in Montana, not by a long shot...face reality and jump into 2005.
Similar threads
