OverlordBear
Well-known member
I wish we could trade grizzly numbers for wolves. Let’s knock wolves down to about 750 and put grizzlies to 4500 in the lower 48. It would be better for elk and make the landscape way more interesting.
Judge orders Wisconsin DNR to start wolf hunt this month
- Thread starter cheeser
- Start date
Thinking poison will ever be a legal and/or viable option is pure fantasy land.
Sadly it is and that's a shame. Short of that aerial gunning should be made legal. Wildlife services already does that. FWP should get in the game as well private individuals. Wellnregukated of course to keep populations at levels agreed to in the original reintroduction plan.
Carl 9.3x62
Well-known member
I’m quite thankful it’s not legal.
Hydrophilic
Well-known member
In what way would it be better for the elk? Idaho recently had the second best stretch of elk harvest in the state's history and Wyoming is at or above MO for 29 of the state's 35 elk herds, both have had wolves for some time now. They are trying to decrease elk numbers according to WGFD. Similar stats can be found for other states. We can give it some more time I suppose but I don't see the elk vacuum everyone was screaming about. How many elk do you want?
Attachments
Hydrophilic
Well-known member
'Decade of the elk' for hunters as herds top goals by 32%
September 15, 2020 by Angus M. Thuermer Jr., WyoFile As elk hunters begin the general rifle season they’ll pursue animals that the Game and
capcity.news
Out-competing deer
While the public generally enjoys bountiful wildlife, there’s a downside to having an overabundance of elk, Brimeyer said.
“When you look at these winter ranges across Wyoming, there’s only so many mouths that can be fed from the forage that’s there,” he said. Because elk and mule deer share the same winter range in many places, “something’s got to give,” he said.
cheeser
Well-known member
your prediction of not having enough time to complete a drawing and a full blown season has failed terribly. lotta wolves killed on first day, 6 days left.
Attachments
BrentD
Well-known member
I'm sorry don't measure success in wildlife management with body counts. Obviously, you do.
I'll stand my my earlier statement.
When the goal is to reduce populations predators how else do you propose you measure success.
cheeser
Well-known member
Your original statement "It's Feb 11 - the 12th tomorrow. In 2 weeks they have to come up with a management plan, a lottery system, distribute the tags and all the while being fair and objective. " was blown out of the water. Not only did WDNR pull off a registration\drawing\licenses\hunt in two weeks, they had a highly success full hunt. Your prediction was a failure.
cheeser
Well-known member
done in three days with quota exceeded.
Hechterooskie
Member
I have trouble believing the population estimate of about 1,000. Over 10% of the population was harvested in three days? All during weekdays? Tough to believe. Before I moved out of the state in 2015 I had a bear hunt in zone 1 and saw more wolves than deer baiting that summer.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
So do tell, what population levels were agreed too?
If it's anything like Montana's alleged minimal count - That is the basis they go by to ensure USFWS is not concerned about our #'s anywhere close to the ESA level for the Feds to pull the plug...
The problem - What is the true "estimate" for the total population of wolves within each designated area? That is the true Bullchit going on in MT. Yet hey... add an apex predator into the mix and continue with relatively the same minimal quotas and other ridiculous quotas to falsely appease wuff lubbers whose only appeasement equates to zero State wolf population management...
MTLabrador
Well-known member
The quota areas in Montana do have ridiculously low harvest quotas, but there’s only 3 small districts in the entire state that are on a quota system. And of those, only 313 is currently closed. I’d say being able to kill up to 5 wolves in 98% of Montana right now is a pretty generous season... Knowing the exact number of wolves in the state won’t mean killing any more wolves, unless you want FWP to put out strychnine or fire up the helicopters.
Agree... Yet the population continues to grow w/o MT able keep with early based quotas. The incentive is not strong enough to maintain our added apex predator to assist unglate populations that face challenges even w/o the added predator.
We tried to assist our trappers with funding by offsetting their expenses for the successful trapping of wolves - however, opposition felt it breached MT's no "Bounty" law. I disagree. It works pretty well for Idaho - however, they also allow snares.
Without an accurate number of wolves... People complain about elk populations in R1 yet disregard the coincidental timing between reintroduction of wolves - specific to R1 and the elk count. Multiple issues - for certain though to ignore our inability to manage such apex predator is silly. Example: 2 quota tags merely because it's adjacent to Glacier?
Quotas unable to fill because it's a royal bitch to crack one. The vast majority of hunters who purchase wolf tag(s) are mostly due to opportunistic chance during elk/deer, etc hunt.
The vast majority of hunters don't look at a coyote for the drooling rump roast. Same with wolves. It's not freezer food. No wanton waste for wolves for a reason. Thus the goal is strictly the opportunity for a wolf pelt for the vast majority.
We need contract hunters to mitigate predators in conjunction with ungulate population management.
Montana - don't want to rain on the fantastic results of Wisconsin's FINAL break through of the bogus ANTI ESA ECO- Extremists. Very happy to see them finally able to attempt regulation of these predators.
johnp
Well-known member
The new total for the wolf harvest is 182 as of 3:00 pm today. Still some time left to register.
10 breeding pairs and 100 animals for each the state ID, MT and WY.
What's wrong with helicopters? USDA Wildlife Services does it all the time.
Similar threads
