Montana 1 upped by Idaho in Wolf take shenanigans.

[Sytes]

800% over min is meaningless and ignores the reality of large carnivore population dynamics and actual management prescriptions as well as the myriad of other issues goin on with wildlife habitat across the west.

First 800% is MEANINFUL in excess!

Ben, you, Robert, Tony, etc were Instrumental in the fight to place wolves in State management. I am sure it burns you to see politics run the wolf theme into the political football though that's exactly what it is.
If you want to portray the D's as uninvolved political players in this tug a war while the R's are the evil politicians, well...

And you say small areas for quota? One hellofa large swath along GNP is not small for a district with a whopping 2 wolf take quota.

Why is it a quota of 1down south... and 2 in R1 where our few elk suck the left nut dry? Because the eco-extreme asserted demands adjacent to national parks... meanwhile, a quota of 2 wolves annually in my area SHRINK the territories further, per R1 fwp biologist. If they manage to set their pack, the various wolf territories reduce size and room is made for another pack.

Them where do elk find some refuge? PRIVATE land. Not much exists though drive the highways of R1 and elk are meandering PRIVATE land.

Shoulder season supported.

Biology shot to shit because eco-extreme organizations backed by Patagonia clothing wearing outdoors people demand non biologically based reasoning for shit quotas.

And areas w/o quotas? Drive the highways of Thompson falls, etc... where are masses of elk congregated? PRIVATE land.

 

[shoots-straight]

First 800% is MEANINFUL in excess!

Ben, you, Robert, Tony, etc were Instrumental in the fight to place wolves in State management. I am sure it burns you to see politics run the wolf theme into the political football though that's exactly what it is.
If you want to portray the D's as uninvolved political players in this tug a war while the R's are the evil politicians, well...

And you say small areas for quota? One hellofa large swath along GNP is not small for a district with a whopping 2 wolf take quota.

Why is it a quota of 1down south... and 2 in R1 where our few elk suck the left nut dry? Because the eco-extreme asserted demands adjacent to national parks... meanwhile, a quota of 2 wolves annually in my area SHRINK the territories further, per R1 fwp biologist. If they manage to set their pack, the various wolf territories reduce size and room is made for another pack.

Them where do elk find some refuge? PRIVATE land. Not much exists though drive the highways of R1 and elk are meandering PRIVATE land.

Shoulder season supported.

Biology shot to shit because eco-extreme organizations backed by Patagonia clothing wearing outdoors people demand non biologically based reasoning for shit quotas.

And areas w/o quotas? Drive the highways of Thompson falls, etc... where are masses of elk congregated? PRIVATE land

Is what you continually fail to understand about the 800% over minimum wolf relisting numbers of population of wolves, is that even if that number was reduced by 1200 it wouldn't make a pinch of poo for you to find more elk in the hills. Those public lands elk have cross hairs on them the likes of which you've never seen. Wait until those extreme R's get done with you elk. You're really going to like what coming here shortly. Lots of good dialog but we hear this is only place it will matter as the big dog R's in Helena aren't going to listen to you nor I, and are ordered as such.

What it will do, is give the serial wolf litigants hope. They didn't have much until recently.
The reason the R's are jumping on the wolf hard line is because people love it. They love to talk tough to reduce anything that's in competition with them harvesting game. Let me tell you, Predators are going to be the very least of their problems here shortly.

 

[Wildabeest]

First 800% is MEANINFUL in excess!

Ben, you, Robert, Tony, etc were Instrumental in the fight to place wolves in State management. I am sure it burns you to see politics run the wolf theme into the political football though that's exactly what it is.
If you want to portray the D's as uninvolved political players in this tug a war while the R's are the evil politicians, well...

And you say small areas for quota? One hellofa large swath along GNP is not small for a district with a whopping 2 wolf take quota.

Why is it a quota of 1down south... and 2 in R1 where our few elk suck the left nut dry? Because the eco-extreme asserted demands adjacent to national parks... meanwhile, a quota of 2 wolves annually in my area SHRINK the territories further, per R1 fwp biologist. If they manage to set their pack, the various wolf territories reduce size and room is made for another pack.

Them where do elk find some refuge? PRIVATE land. Not much exists though drive the highways of R1 and elk are meandering PRIVATE land.

Shoulder season supported.

Biology shot to shit because eco-extreme organizations backed by Patagonia clothing wearing outdoors people demand non biologically based reasoning for shit quotas.

And areas w/o quotas? Drive the highways of Thompson falls, etc... where are masses of elk congregated? PRIVATE land.

I’m confused here on the connection between wolves and elk congregating on PRIVATE (you’re emphasis, not mine). My experience is the elk congregate on PRIVATE because of better habitat/graze and less human hunting pressure, not because of wolves. What am I missing?

Second question: Is it legal for wolves to corner hop to stay on public since apparently they aren’t allowed on private?

 

[BWALKER77]

I’m confused here on the connection between wolves and elk congregating on PRIVATE (you’re emphasis, not mine). My experience is the elk congregate on PRIVATE because of better habitat/graze and less human hunting pressure, not because of wolves. What am I missing?

Second question: Is it legal for wolves to corner hop to stay on public since apparently they aren’t allowed on private?

Wolves do tend to push elk out of the mountains and on to private land in some areas.

 

[Sytes]

I’m confused here on the connection between wolves and elk congregating on PRIVATE (you’re emphasis, not mine). My experience is the elk congregate on PRIVATE because of better habitat/graze and less human hunting pressure, not because of wolves. What am I missing?

Second question: Is it legal for wolves to corner hop to stay on public since apparently they aren’t allowed on private?

I tried to link the specific post though it would only capture the words and not the poster's link. Next best is a screen pic. Sometimes better to read from another's take related to the specific question you raised.

it wouldn't make a pinch of poo for you to find more elk in the hills. Those public lands elk have cross hairs on them the likes of which you've never seen.

Wolves have effected the "Public land" hunters in R1. (As noted in the screen pic and unintentionally, your specific thumbs up for the post from '19).
Many aspects, as I've shared in the past, affect elk in R1 as other areas... though take the other areas and ADD wolves... the increased difference will be noticeable.

Speak directly with R1 biologists and they will share wolves have made an impact on elk, specifically in the Whitefish area ---> Eureka / Canadian Border (quota 2 wolves)

Increase w/ the mass influx of non-resident soon to turn Resident of this area... and even more pressure on the limited elk.

Keep elk seasons super sized... Maintain 800% over minimal with the highest wolf population w/in any MT district... God forbid biologists manage our quota vs eco-extremist organizations...

 

[FI460]

Keep elk seasons super sized... Maintain 800% over minimal with the highest wolf population w/in any MT district... God forbid biologists manage our quota vs eco-extremist organizations...

I think where a little bit of the argument over the 800% number comes in is the scientific management aspect here.

I agree that the wolf harvest quotas in regions near you could biologically be much higher. I wish they were and would support raising them. They're set at 1 and 2 wolves due to silly social issues.

The same can be said for the Montana war on elk. Elk population objectives could be much higher, but land owner tolerance, a mostly silly social issue, demands that they be reduced.

I also don't believe that the MT legislation will reduce wolf populations to the point of re-listing, BUT, the serial litigation groups are now going to he more successful in painting it that way.

Elk won't ever get the same consideration. Everyone has seen elk. Most folks haven't seen wolves. It's a recency bias with the public, and while elk numbers have been reduced, it's really another social issue that managers have to tip toe around. Hunting just happens to be a social issue that we're passionate about.

 

[shoots-straight]

Sytes, show me anywhere on any forum where I have said "Wolves don't impact Elk"?

You still don't get it. Not sure you ever will.

 

[Ben Lamb]

First 800% is MEANINFUL in excess!

Ben, you, Robert, Tony, etc were Instrumental in the fight to place wolves in State management. I am sure it burns you to see politics run the wolf theme into the political football though that's exactly what it is.
If you want to portray the D's as uninvolved political players in this tug a war while the R's are the evil politicians, well...

And you say small areas for quota? One hellofa large swath along GNP is not small for a district with a whopping 2 wolf take quota.

Why is it a quota of 1down south... and 2 in R1 where our few elk suck the left nut dry? Because the eco-extreme asserted demands adjacent to national parks... meanwhile, a quota of 2 wolves annually in my area SHRINK the territories further, per R1 fwp biologist. If they manage to set their pack, the various wolf territories reduce size and room is made for another pack.

Them where do elk find some refuge? PRIVATE land. Not much exists though drive the highways of R1 and elk are meandering PRIVATE land.

Shoulder season supported.

Biology shot to shit because eco-extreme organizations backed by Patagonia clothing wearing outdoors people demand non biologically based reasoning for shit quotas.

And areas w/o quotas? Drive the highways of Thompson falls, etc... where are masses of elk congregated? PRIVATE land.

Biology got shot to shit when the Legislature disallowed the agency from deciding if those units should be closed or not. Because someone asked for the ability to have a 0 quota around the parks, the legislature eliminated the ability for the agency to make a decision relative to those units, or any units by eliminating their ability to have buffer zones anywhere. Do you remember the issues around bison and the slaughter that led to BFC throwing blood on Racicot? That kind of negative PR hurts the MT tourism economy and honestly, makes western states look pretty grim to a lot of people. As we often talk about, wildlife is a public trust resource for all citizens. Does only your view matter here?

The quotas around the parks are absolutely for social issues, but there's a biological component as well in that those two parks provide the only consistent refuge for wildlife, including wolves, in the GYE. They're the production factories and we've seen that those populations go up and down based on a variety of issues.

Elk on private is a pressure issue as well as habitat. Absolutely, wolves change the behavior of elk, and those elk find sanctuary where they can. That includes from the 6 months of bipedal wolves chasing them. But it should be acknowledged that those irrigated hay fields provide much better sustenance than sparse forage on public lands, and those private lands provide escape from fire as well.

Your issue isn't lack of elk, based on your post, it's lack of success and lack of access to them. Robert did yeoman's work explaining why killing all the wolves won't bring back your spots. You know I think the world of you Charles, but we're just gonna end up wildly flailing our arms on this one.

As for Democrats being too far to the left on this, I'm still waiting to see where MT, ID or WY dems did anything other than support state management and follow the wolf management plans everyone agreed to in the 90's. Nationally, yeah, there are some that are ridiculous on all wildlife issues, but they're not winning any policy wars on this issue. The AG of MI just filed a brief to relist the GL wolves, and that's a bad idea all around. CO voters approved the introduction of wolves, backed by some dems, so is that what your upset about re: politics? We used to have great agreement with moderate republicans and democrats on this issue, at least in MT. Guys like Kelly Flynn, whom we all did battle with on elk management and other issues, lived his ethics and supported state management plans when he was in the Legislature. He killed more anti-wolf bills than anyone else in the state. Plenty of R votes for the right thing in both the senate and the house, but politics became more important than actual management. I've literally told dem legislators not to bring specific bills forward because it just feeds the frenzy. Follow the plan, let the agency & commission make the decisions, and even if I disagree with them, at least the political influence will be reduced (never eliminated).

Is it maddening to watch people with no understanding of biology or the law enact laws that put state management at risk? You bet your ass it is. So many people bled for decades to make this happen, then the moron patrol comes in and undoes all of that work, putting state management in jeopardy over emotional claptrap.

At this point, if the wolf gets relisted, it's the state legislatures and Governors of MT & ID who are at fault. But that's what they want. They want this conflict and they want to be able to run on taking a tough stand against woofs and the federales. Make no mistake, if Dems were in power and doing this kind of crap, I'd be working to end their influence as well. Wildlife management is best served under the state agency/commission model. Empowering those bodies to make the correct decisions and not allow politicians to interfere with that management is the only way to bring some sanity back for every species.

 

[tjones]

Wolves do tend to push elk out of the mountains and on to private land in some areas.

So in those areas do the wolves constantly patrol the boundary between public and private 24/7 never allowing the elk to return to public?

My 50 years of hunting elk on public has shown elk go where elk want to go and any attempt to herd them or push them for any length of time is useless.

Why don't wolves hunt elk on private? Do wolves know the difference between public and private?

If there are no elk on public and wolves kill all the elk why won't wolves go to private where there is elk?

 

[mtmuley]

So in those areas do the wolves constantly patrol the boundary between public and private 24/7 never allowing the elk to return to public?

My 50 years of hunting elk on public has shown elk go where elk want to go and any attempt to herd them or push them for any length of time is useless.

Why don't wolves hunt elk on private? Do wolves know the difference between public and private?

If there are no elk on public and wolves kill all the elk why won't wolves go to private where there is elk?

Hey Tony, I agree, but we both know why the Root has elk on the river bottom. I've noticed a huge decline in the amount of cows over the years where I hunt also. Might be coincidence but I doubt it. mtmuley

 

[tjones]

The ag crops in the riverbottom have improved greatly, my guess is that is the biggest reason.

 

[BigHornRam]

The ag crops in the riverbottom have improved greatly, my guess is that is the biggest reason.

How have the ag crops improved "greatly"? Security from hunters and wolves is why the elk are now hanging out year round in the sub divided river bottoms. They come out nightly around me and feed in the10 acre hay fields and pastures and head back to the river before first light. That's what I would do if I was an elk around here. The wolves have learned to stay away from people now they are hunted. No mystery there either.

 

[Sytes]

In a nutshell, whether you get it or not:
R1 has been sick of the many years of bs excess. Any fwp r1 meeting will share that issue.
I've shared I'm not a smoke a pack a day nutter though I sure as he'll am not an eco-extremist nutter either.
I'm not a fan of either side's political football drama.
I've agreed this aided the eco-extreme's fundraising drama plea. I don't think they have a lick of a chance with legit legal action...
I believe 800% of the minimum is farrr too excessive 3-400% would make me a happy camper.

 

[Ben Lamb]

In a nutshell, whether you get it or not:
R1 has been sick of the many years of bs excess. Any fwp r1 meeting will share that issue.
I've shared I'm not a smoke a pack a day nutter though I sure as he'll am not an eco-extremist nutter either.
I'm not a fan of either side's political football drama.
I've agreed this aided the eco-extreme's fundraising drama plea. I don't think they have a lick of a chance with legit legal action...
I believe 800% of the minimum is farrr too excessive 3-400% would make me a happy camper.

5 otc tags, 6 months of opportunity. Reduced tag prices, increased opportunity, etc.

So few folks out there getting it down when they hold the tools to do it. I'm a little tired of people complaining about woofs instead of hunting them (present company excluded, my friend).

Interesting discussion going on right now relative to the Michigan wolf plan:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1049657062105851

 

[mtmuley]

The ag crops in the riverbottom have improved greatly, my guess is that is the biggest reason.

Yeah, probably. mtmuley

 

[mtmuley]

How have the ag crops improved "greatly"? Security from hunters and wolves is why the elk are now hanging out year round in the sub divided river bottoms. They come out nightly around me and feed in the10 acre hay fields and pastures and head back to the river before first light. That's what I would do if I was an elk around here. The wolves have learned to stay away from people now they are hunted. No mystery there either.

And now several generations have been born in the lowlands. They will never leave as they don't know any better. It hasn't always been this this way here, and I'm sure other areas have seen the same. mtmuley

 

[tjones]

Some of the most successful wolf trappers I know have trapped the bulk of their wolves on private. Considerably more than public. No mystery there, those wolves must not have had ONX.

 

[Ben Lamb]

How have the ag crops improved "greatly"? Security from hunters and wolves is why the elk are now hanging out year round in the sub divided river bottoms. They come out nightly around me and feed in the10 acre hay fields and pastures and head back to the river before first light. That's what I would do if I was an elk around here. The wolves have learned to stay away from people now they are hunted. No mystery there either.

factor in subdivision development, and those 10 acre mcmansions as well here. Human disturbance in the root is massive.

 

[BigHornRam]

Some of the most successful wolf trappers I know have trapped the bulk of their wolves on private. Considerably more than public. No mystery there, those wolves must not have had ONX.

Stock Farm?

 

[tjones]

How have the ag crops improved "greatly"?

Places like the MPG, CB, Double Fork, the place across from Traders Bros, Siebell Ranch, and all the celeb ranchettes in the riverbottom etc,,,did not look like they do now back in the 70's, 80's early 90's.