New Wolf Forum

[Big Fin]

Since we are starting to see some wolf hunts and pics show up, thought we would start a new forum about wolves and wolf hunting.

Thinking anyone who posts a pic of their wolf might be entitled to a Season Three DVD. Those are being stamped and shipped in the coming week.

Hope I am one of those guys who gets to post a wolf pic. Plan to film a wolf hunt, if things work out with cameras, etc. And if we don't get one on camera, I plan to continue hunting them until the season closes or the quotas fill.

 

[ismith]

Good luck Fin, Im planning on chasing wolves over Thanksgiving weekend myself.

 

[drahthaar]

Come on Larry!!! Post that bad beast up, or do I need to do it for ya!!

 

[DHaffner]

I'm just sitting here with a smile on my face because people get to go get them, instead of complain about them with their hands tied. Hope to see lots of pics!

 

[DavidKeenan]

Good luck kill all those Ba$$2#*$

 

[shoots-straight]

That the animal I'm looking for right now. Came real close last weekend.

 

[mixedbag]

I'm hoping to see a few pics posted.I would have given them a shot if the NR tag in Mt. wasn't so expensive.Hope you guys fill up the quota

 

[jore07]

I am hoping to get out in December sometime with a buddy. Hoping that it works out.

 

[notellm]

Come on Larry!!! Post that bad beast up, or do I need to do it for ya!!

I will soon a bit tired...LoL

 

[thecrittergitter]

Got a few moving in on my property. Literally shooting distance from the house. Dad is gonna have to keep a close eye on the dog or he might become wolf bait

 

[highmountian]

Good luck to all that chase them. Thanks randy for giving everyone more insentive to go kill one!

 

[Ben Lamb]

Got a few moving in on my property. Literally shooting distance from the house. Dad is gonna have to keep a close eye on the dog or he might become wolf bait

Remember, Gallatin county is closed. Taking of wolves in defense of property is still allowed.

 

[fowladdict]

Ben,

In your opinion were the wolf quotas in MT reasonable? Were the quotas enough to actually help control the population from growing?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben,

In your opinion were the wolf quotas in MT reasonable? Were the quotas enough to actually help control the population from growing?

I think they were reasonable in that we're still learning how to manage wolves through hunting and other methods. 220 was a good number. I'd like to see further bifurcation of some of the big hunt districts so that we can focus harvest in areas of high conflict both on the livestock end and the wildlife end. Places like the North Valley of Helena have a lot of elk, and a lot of wolves, but we also have a lot of livestock conflict w/ wolves. We got tied in with Park and Gallatin County, and so only a couple of wolves came from Lewis and Clark county. I'd like to see a sub unit for L&C simply due to the abundance of critters, increased opportunity for hunters, and the desire to reduce livestock conflict. We'll also be looking at ways to keep hunters in the field longer (season extentions, etc) so that we can hit that quota.

The modeling I've seen from FWP and Scott Creel have shown that if we can hit the quota, then we will have about a 13-24% decrease in the overall wolf population. On the ground, that probably means about a 15% decrease, which is biologically and socially sustainable. This first (second) hunt is not going to be the end all-be all of getting wolves back under control, but it's the right and prudent first step. We have an opportunity to prove that we can manage wolves, elk and all other critters, while maintaining high hunter opportunity. I think we can do that. but it's going to take a few years to get the mechanics of wolf management down. We're still under the watchful eye of the Fed, and if we go too far, too fast, we end up listed again. If we go too slow, and do this half-assed, then we lose even more elk in areas that need help. It's a balancing act.

I would also expect to see trapping come in to the management discussion in the next year. The Trappers have been great allies in the wolf debates. They voluntarily said no to trapping the first season, and this season. They get the issue of public perception, and want to keep wolves delisted. Having said that, I think we're getting close to where we need trapping as a tool for management.

I would hope that next year, further refinements of the WMU's would lead to greater opportunity in areas where there are an abundance of woofs, and less opportunity in areas where there are no woofs.

This is still a learning process. We have to be a little patient (which I think we all have been as patient as Job waiting for the boils to pass) and keep engaged in the process.

 

[tjones]

I think they were reasonable in that we're still learning how to manage wolves through hunting and other methods. 220 was a good number. I'd like to see further bifurcation of some of the big hunt districts so that we can focus harvest in areas of high conflict both on the livestock end and the wildlife end. Places like the North Valley of Helena have a lot of elk, and a lot of wolves, but we also have a lot of livestock conflict w/ wolves. We got tied in with Park and Gallatin County, and so only a couple of wolves came from Lewis and Clark county. I'd like to see a sub unit for L&C simply due to the abundance of critters, increased opportunity for hunters, and the desire to reduce livestock conflict. We'll also be looking at ways to keep hunters in the field longer (season extentions, etc) so that we can hit that quota.

The modeling I've seen from FWP and Scott Creel have shown that if we can hit the quota, then we will have about a 13-24% decrease in the overall wolf population. On the ground, that probably means about a 15% decrease, which is biologically and socially sustainable. This first (second) hunt is not going to be the end all-be all of getting wolves back under control, but it's the right and prudent first step. We have an opportunity to prove that we can manage wolves, elk and all other critters, while maintaining high hunter opportunity. I think we can do that. but it's going to take a few years to get the mechanics of wolf management down. We're still under the watchful eye of the Fed, and if we go too far, too fast, we end up listed again. If we go too slow, and do this half-assed, then we lose even more elk in areas that need help. It's a balancing act.

I would also expect to see trapping come in to the management discussion in the next year. The Trappers have been great allies in the wolf debates. They voluntarily said no to trapping the first season, and this season. They get the issue of public perception, and want to keep wolves delisted. Having said that, I think we're getting close to where we need trapping as a tool for management.

I would hope that next year, further refinements of the WMU's would lead to greater opportunity in areas where there are an abundance of woofs, and less opportunity in areas where there are no woofs.

This is still a learning process. We have to be a little patient (which I think we all have been as patient as Job waiting for the boils to pass) and keep engaged in the process.

Sorry Ben, but I don't agree.

Montana hunters have been more the patient while this thing has played out. Pedal to the metal and hit ALL the quotas. The Feds can watch all they want, but as long as we don't go over quota or drop below the agreed pack and population numbers there is not a damn thing they can do.

I may be a little bitter but hunters in Montana and especially here in the Bitterroot have been taking it on the chin for far to long. In my back yard hunter opportunity is going away fast. Not all because of the wolf, but they have played a factor.

By next year elk hunting in both HDs in the upper Bitterroot will be LE. Antlerss harvest is all but gone. Mule Deer hunting in the entire Bitterroot is by very LE only. Whitetail hunting has been reduced. Moose permits in HD 270 have been reduced from 20 permits to 3. Big cuts in moose in the other HDs also. Goats in HD 240 next year will go from 9 HDs with a total of 12 permits to 3 HDs with a total of 3 permits. Sheep opportunity has been cut way back also, due to the die off, yet still gone.

Bear, lion and wolf huntin is the only oppportunity that has increased or stayed the same.

I realize in the scheme of things on a statewide level the Root is small, but when its your backyard and your HD lost opportunity hits hard. Patience are wearing thin and for damn good reason. The average Bitterroot hunters falls some where behind wolves, lions, bears, poachers and the Native Americans.

Hunters have given till they bleed, its time to step it up on all predators.

 

[mdunc8]

I don't think you want to get too crazy especially when the scientists are still arguing over whether the current quota is sustainable.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Tony,

Montana hunters have been more the patient while this thing has played out. Pedal to the metal and hit ALL the quotas. The Feds can watch all they want, but as long as we don't go over quota or drop below the agreed pack and population numbers there is not a damn thing they can do.

No disagreement there.

I may be a little bitter but hunters in Montana and especially here in the Bitterroot have been taking it on the chin for far to long. In my back yard hunter opportunity is going away fast. Not all because of the wolf, but they have played a factor.

By next year elk hunting in both HDs in the upper Bitterroot will be LE. Antlerss harvest is all but gone. Mule Deer hunting in the entire Bitterroot is by very LE only. Whitetail hunting has been reduced. Moose permits in HD 270 have been reduced from 20 permits to 3. Big cuts in moose in the other HDs also. Goats in HD 240 next year will go from 9 HDs with a total of 12 permits to 3 HDs with a total of 3 permits. Sheep opportunity has been cut way back also, due to the die off, yet still gone.

What I was trying to say is that you can't expect to hit quotas, and within one year return a bunch of opportunity and critters. That's patience piece. It's going to take a few years to bring wolf numbers back in line with what can be reasonably managed and what can be reasonably sustained on the social level as well as the biological level.

I realize in the scheme of things on a statewide level the Root is small, but when its your backyard and your HD lost opportunity hits hard. Patience are wearing thin and for damn good reason.

If it wasn't for the root, we wouldn't have been in such good shape to get S/T done. Small comfort, I'm sure, but all eyes are on the Root when it comes to wolf management. I've been with you 80% of the way on how to get the root back to some kind of shape.


I'm going hunting. Be back in front of the computer on Sunday.

 

[fowladdict]

Great reply from both of you. I appreciate it. One thing that led me to the question is the fact that some of the MT quotas were met fairly quickly. It makes me wonder if the numbers are somewhat underestimated? IMHO These dogs are not easily seen and hunted. I'd like to think the Idaho hunters are hunting these dogs just as hard as the MT boys, yet we are no where near our quotas as of Nov 17th.

Ben you brought up trapping and the decision to hold off in MT until next year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Idaho is able trap wolves. Why wouldn't MT follow suit? You stated that this has to be played right so the Feds don't list the wolves again. Does that imply that the protection of wolves now varies state to state? If Idaho "oversteps" their bounds will the feds re-list in Idaho and not MT?

You also mentioned that a 15% decrease in overall population is biollogically and socially sustainable. Not to be a PITA, but can you elaborate? I don't know MT wolf counts, so for the sake of the conversation lets say it is 600. Wouldn't reducing that to 300 to 400 be more acceptable? Your 15% estimating leads me to believe that it would keep the present population number roughly the same this time next year. Isn't the objective also to help increase our elk and deer numbers as well (kind of as Tjones stated)? It seems to me that 15% does nothing more than keep things "as is".

I'n no biologist, but I do like to play with numbers so that is where my thinking comes from.

 

[mdunc8]

At the end of 2010, the estimated population was 566 in Montana. Removing 220 using hunters and an additional 50 or so due to depredation will result in a harvest rate much greater than 15%.

 

[tjones]

At the end of 2010, the estimated population was 566 in Montana. Removing 220 using hunters and an additional 50 or so due to depredation will result in a harvest rate much greater than 15%.

Estimates are different then actual.