Idaho Wolf Management

[idnative1948]

I just received this invite yesterday. Could be some lively discussion for those of us around the Treasure Valley. Note the bio on Jon Rachael. Hopefully he is a scientist type and not a political type.

City Club of Boise and Idaho Environmental Forum present
“After the Hunt: Wolf Management in Idaho”
Cal Groen, Director, Idaho Department of Fish & Game
Jon Rachael, State Wildlife Manager, Idaho Department of Fish & Game
Monday, August 30, 2010
11:45 a.m. – 1:15 p.m. The Grove Hotel, Boise

Last fall and winter, Idaho conducted its first public wolf hunt since Endangered Species Act protection was lifted in 2009. But controversy continues. Wolf advocates have filed suit in Montana to re-list the wolf; some hunters complain that wolves are reducing Idaho elk and deer herds. Meanwhile, wildlife officials are planning a second hunting season, and in May wolves killed sheep in the Boise Foothills. We’ll explore the facts and myths as we hear from the director of Idaho Fish & Game and his chief wildlife manager. They’ll talk and answer audience questions about how they are trying to manage gray wolves in an ever-changing ecological and political landscape.

Cal Groen became the director of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game in January 2007. He served nine years as supervisor of the IDFG Clearwater Region, six years as IDFG Natural Resources Policy Bureay chief and as an assistant director at Washington and Kansas wildlife agencies.

Jon Rachael began working with wolves as a graduate project at the University of Montana in 1988. He has worked for IDFG since 1992 and helped write the Idaho portion of the EIS that re-introduced wolves into Idaho and Yellowstone National Park in 1995. He supervises the management programs for all game species, including elk, deer and gray wolves.

Forum chair: Dick Gardner
Forum moderator: Marcia Franklin
Forum underwriter: Exergy Development Group

 

[IdahoRob]

Damn, I'll be out hunting for a sheep during this, or I'd gladly attend. I've attened other "wolf" meetings that didn't amount to a hill of beans. Lots of talking and pointing fingers, but thats about it. Still I'd make the effort.

Hard to believe one judge can rule over millions of people against their will.

 

[Brentster7189]

Sounds interesting. I've never attending one of these before. Is this open to the public, how did you get an invite?

 

[mtmiller]

Hard to believe one judge can rule over millions of people against their will.

It's call interpreting the law. If you want to point a finger, you should first look at WY, ESA or FWS.

 

[tjones]

My finger is pointing straight at Wyoming, they are the fly in the ointment.

 

[idnative1948]

Sounds interesting. I've never attending one of these before. Is this open to the public, how did you get an invite?

A guy in my office who knows of my *LOVE* of woofs, sent the info to me. I went back to the email and missed some info on the copy/paste, so here it is.

Reservation deadline: Thursday, August 26 at noon.


REGISTRATION:
You can register for forums by calling City Club at 371-2221, or by mail with your payment to City Club of Boise, Post Office Box 6521, Boise, ID 83707 two business days in advance.
You can also register by email to: [email protected]
Please include the following:
Name:
Member (yes or no):
Phone:
Guest Name(s):
Payment information: (delete unwanted methods)
Use credit card on file. Amount to be charged is $ _____
Call me for credit card information.
Check will be mailed (at least 48 hours in advance)
Pay Pal

Lunch reservations or cancellations must be made two business days in advance in order to receive a refund of payment.
Cost: $16 for City Club members, $23 for non-members, $5 for listeners (speaker only - no meal) $10 for students with valid student ID.

Or register online: http://www.cityclubofboise.org/2010/100830/index.php

 

[----]

My finger is pointing straight at Wyoming, they are the fly in the ointment.

You don't think some of the blame is on the original plan itself?
I mean it just doesn't seem right that something as political as this whole situation is can hold up the de-listing.

It seems that maybe it'll serve as a good guideline for the future about how not to write out a management plan.

 

[TOM IN TENNESSEE]

MT FWP annonced it will appeal Molloys decision today or yesterday.
And mtmiller hit the nail on the head again!
Don't forget, the wolves reintroduced were not even the Rocky Mtn sub species....

 

[tjones]

The ESA and wolf plan may or may not have been flawed from the beginning, doesn't really matter. All three states knew the had to have an ACCEPTED plan in place before delisting. Montana and Idaho have for the past 3 years, Wyoming has not for the past three years. Not hard to figure out where to point. A technicality,,maybe, but law none the less.

The whole "not native" wolf specie is just plain trash. Not even a worthy point.

 

[----]

The ESA and wolf plan may or may not have been flawed from the beginning, doesn't really matter. All three states knew the had to have an ACCEPTED plan in place before delisting. Montana and Idaho have for the past 3 years, Wyoming has not for the past three years. Not hard to figure out where to point. A technicality,,maybe, but law none the less.

Yeah I understand. It's just that the fact that Wyoming being in their own little world shouldn't affect us. I know it does, and it's plain as day in the management plan, and why Malloy had no choice but to rule the way he did, but it still doesn't seem right.

The whole "not native" wolf specie is just plain trash. Not even a worthy point.

It always baffles me how people choose to ignore the fact that the vast majority of wolves in MT, and a certain number of wolves in Idaho, came down completely on their own, before and after the reintroductions.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Don't forget, the wolves reintroduced were not even the Rocky Mtn sub species....

As soon as you get a barstool biologist claiming the wrong species, you just have to laugh at their ignorance.

 

[montanadogs]

The wolves in Yellowstone were brought in from Northern Canada. However wolves were already on the move into Northern Montana long before Yellowstone reintroduction. There was established packs in the North Fork of the Flathead river and in the Yaak river area.(As a matter of fact it was never proven that they even were eradicated from those areas. There have been reports years ago from the Mc Ginnis Meadows Cattle Ranch that they were loosing calves to wolves. Biologists went in to investigate and concluded that it was coyotes. Not long after pictures appeared but they still denied that they were wolves just large coyotes.)

Jose this is for you.......
All American Patriot (AAP): Drs. Geist and Kritsky, Messrs. Fanning, Hoppe, Graves, and Beers, welcome to the AAP roundtable. Gentlemen, we’ve assembled to talk about the re-introduction of the wolf into Yellowstone, but first, there are many who take issue with the term “re-introduction” [Editors note: see the thorough treatment of this issue in the accompanying articles authored by Lynn Sutte .] Why is that?

FANNING: It’s simple. There is no “re-introduction” because the wolf introduced into Yellowstone Park is not native to this geography and had never naturally been here to begin with. The Gray wolf is ironically enough, a human introduced invasive species. You see, the original wolf inhabiting the geography of the Park was a much smaller animal, the Rocky Mountain wolf or Canis lupus irremotus. The Canadian Gray Timber wolf, Canis lupus occidentalis, is also known as the Alaskan Tundra Wolf. It was introduced at significant cost to the U.S. taxpayer and is a super size predator with a rapacious appetite and lust for wanton killing – killing far in excess the number of ungulates (hoofed animals: deer, antelope, elk) claimed by authorities. There are hundreds of cases of man monkeying around with the balance of nature and screwing things up. One of the best examples is the introduction of the Mongoose into the Hawaiian Islands as a means for dealing with a huge and troublesome rat population. Those conscientious biologists however neglected to realize that the rat is a nocturnal animal while the Mongoose preys during the day. Their paths simply never cross, so today Hawaii not only still has its rats, but it has 100s of thousands of Mongooses creating mayhem with rare ground nesting birds and other native species. This is just one example of the law of unintended consequences in dealing with wildlife. The unintended consequence to the Rocky Mountain States of the non native Gray wolf is much, much more serious and not simply the consequence of a couple thousand extra wolves roving the countryside, but rather a much greater problem caused by the level of depredation of native species – Elk and deer, than originally claimed. It’s all about wolf “densities” and who gets to control those densities. Federal and state biologists have failed colossally in their claims every step of the way and the impact is economically huge.

Taken from..... http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/20...dian-gray-wolf-introduction-into-yellowstone/

 

[montanadogs]

tjones Randy11 and Jose:

canis lupus columbianus: a large wolf found in the Yukon, British Columbia, and Alberta

canis lupus irremotus: a medium-sized, light-colored wolf from the Rockey Mountains

All it takes is a little research and a phone call to the biologists that were involved with the reintroduction. To me it looks as if the wolves in Yellowstone most likely are the canis lupus columbianus.

Forgot to add the website I found this on. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/animals/mammal/calu/all.html. Imagine that, it's a legit gov website.

 

[shoots-straight]

montanadogs, I guess the fact that packs of wolves had recolonized as far south as Ninemile by Missoula before the "re-introduction" took place means nothing. Also that wolves never traveled more than 300 miles in say 11,000 years of habitation from the last ice age. Wolves are wolves, dogs are dogs. If there's any difference they will evolve back to what mother nature had here when Lewis and Clark showed up. BTW, those fellas that explored here in early 1800's talked about how huge the wolf of Montana was compared to others. Use your common sense. You really believe that different wolves lived that close to each other and never interbred?

 

[BuzzH]

I'm not buying the two sub-species arguements...doesnt make sense.

For starters...is it the Canada border that seperates the two sub-species?

Is Fanning trying to tell me that wolves 50-200 miles into Canada didnt/cant disperse into Montana/Idaho?

Theres no genetic exchange between the wolves in Canada and the U.S.? Never has been?

I knew an old Government hunter from White Sulphur Springs MT and he had some old pictures of wolves he and other GH's trapped in the early 1900's...they sure as hell didnt look "medium" sized to me...and I can assure you, those wolves didnt get into MT via airplane or truck.

There is absolutely nothing that prevented wolves from dispersing from Canada to Montana/Idaho in the past and presently nothing to prevent same.

I think Shoots-Straight had some info on the average size of the wolves killed in Idaho and Montana last year...no super-sized wolves.

 

[shoots-straight]

montanadogs, another thing to chew on. If the relocation effort hadn't taken place. The recolonizing wolves would have made great headway. More than likely they would have colonized where they are now. The thing with the relocation was the fact that all the wolves south of I-90 were managed under the "experimental, non-essential" population status, and that afforded heavy handed culling of wolves. over 1600 of them where killed by government hunters and trappers before 2010 started. More this year for sure before Molloy's decision. Anyway they would have received full ESA protections. Their population would have grown as fast, if not faster than what we have now.

Buzz, I did have that info somewhere. The largest wolf killed in Montana weighed 117 lbs. Most weighed in the 70 to 90 lb range. That doesn't really make a good story though.

Here's a article from the Spokesman Review. It talks about the Idaho wolf weights.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/feb/17/actual-wolf-weights-often-skimpier-than-hunters/

 

[WV Hunter]

Who is going to see the new kids movie about two wolves in love who are relocated to Idaho?

http://alphaandomega3d.com/

Let it load all the way and watch the trailer if you don't believe me.

 

[tjones]

My guess would be then the average Canadian wolf didn't have a passport and was turned back at the border while the re introduced wolves were given work visa's and allowed to do their jobs in Yellowstone.

Montanadog,,google Mark Hebblewhite if you want quality wolf info.

 

[montanadogs]

So a fox is a fox, there is no red fox or desert fox. A bald eagle and a golden are the same, all Canadian geese are the same. And more importantly there is only one species of ELK. I guess no subspecies like the Roosevelt,etc. Read the top of my last post, there have always been wolves in Montana. There always will be. I don't think they were ever eradicated like they say. Yes the wolves that have been killed captured etc have been big before the reintroduction. I'm not saying that there were no big wolves. That would be like saying only the biggest elk come from AZ, but you can find big elk in Idaho. They may not be as common as in AZ but they do have some. Lewis and Clark did comment on how big the wolves were here in Montana however if you were to go back and look at the dates they had in their journals most of their sitings were around the buffalo herds, so that would put them in eastern Montana and western ND were the Timber wolf was most predominate. I believe that if they were to have left it up to mother nature wolves would have made it down to Yellowstone with no problem. We all know that animals adapt to their environment over time. If you looked at what the wolves in the captured area in Canada had to go through you would see that in order for them to survive they would have to evolve in order to eat one of there primary food sources, the Northwestern Moose. (if we go by other logic there is no sub species of moose) In order to have a sub species of a particular animal there has to be a difference in their genetics. They found those differences in wolves. I do not believe that the wolves here would be as big if they were left alone and allowed to move southward at their own pace. Yes there would be a few big ones. I also believe that there wouldn't be as many as there are now. I'll have to check out Mark Hebblewhite but with cation after all he is in hippieville, Missoula.
Thanks tjones, SS and buzz for actually having a civilized argument instead of going off half cocked like some have a tendency to do. Makes for a good argument instead of one were everyone is pissed off and won't listen. I appreciate it fellas.

 

[shoots-straight]

I will say this. Golden Eagles don't interbreed with Bald ones. Grey fox and red fox are totally different and don't cross breed. Elk would but their ranges are long ways apart and herds didn't come in contact with each other. Usually for species to be different they have to separated by some sort of ice sheet, island, major river, moutain range or maybe a desert. Wolf species living side by side with none of these barriers wouldn't be different. Coastal Griz (Brown bears) and interior Griz and basically the same bear genetically. They just grow bigger on the coast because of the abundant food supply. Bears on Kodiak might be a separate species because of isolation, and they might have evolved differently because of this fact.
Black bears on Vancouver Island are genetically different than our black bears because of this isolation trait.