Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(40,366 posts)
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:28 PM Jan 2013

Fish and Game to spend more on reducing wolf population

Source: NWCN.com


Fish and Game to spend more on reducing wolf population

Posted on January 17, 2013 at 5:16 PM
Updated today at 5:35 PM

BOISE -- The Idaho Department of Fish and Game will put more resources into keeping down the wolf population. The decision was made Thursday morning and Fish and Game Director Virgil Moore says it's a way to complement what has been effective management of the animals. But others say it's only more killing, and not management at all.

The first wolf hunt in Idaho was more than three years ago, and Idaho Fish and Game officials say hunters and trappers have done a good job controlling the population in and around farms and ranches.
But Moore says the wolf population is increasing in remote areas in north and central Idaho where hunters can't get to.

"These are backcountry zones that are difficult to access," Moore said.
That's resulted in the elk population, which was already dropping, to drop at a quicker pace in those spots. Fish and Game commissioners decided to move $50,000 from funding research that's almost done, to killing and trapping of more wolves in areas like Clearwater, Lolo and the Selway.


Read more: http://www.nwcn.com/home/?fId=187383641&fPath=/news/local&fDomain=10227

Thank you for the straight talk, firearms and hunting industry dudes! :Sarcasm:

Keep in mind the forces behind the hunting of this animal that has just been taken off the endangered species list.


Sarah Palin must be thrilled..
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fish and Game to spend more on reducing wolf population (Original Post) G_j Jan 2013 OP
Hi, I hunt. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #1
Wild boar are a nuisance where you live? Where do you live? ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #2
Where do you live? XemaSab Jan 2013 #3
I live in Western Montana. ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #4
They haven't gotten across the columbia river into WA yet. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #12
Wild pigs wreak havok on ecosystems. alarimer Jan 2013 #5
They're not indiginous? Where are they from? nt ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #6
brought here by Europeans Kali Jan 2013 #7
So the people who hunt them generally eat them? ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #9
yes but Kali Jan 2013 #10
You can, and some people do. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #11
Not here, no. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #8
one reason it is easy to 'collapse a wolf pack' G_j Jan 2013 #14
That was a sad article. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #16
They ruin the habitat for native species. Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #18
not ALL ranchers Kali Jan 2013 #13
Good point. Thank you. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #15
I forget where but G_j Jan 2013 #17
you can probably imagine how well that works out Kali Jan 2013 #19
is it direct knowledge of this G_j Jan 2013 #21
not direct for me, no Kali Jan 2013 #22
I say, if you have a dead and half eaten cow, Volaris Jan 2013 #23
I absolutely agree. Owl Jan 2013 #24
Wanna-be apex predators hate competition = humans. flvegan Jan 2013 #20


(33,982 posts)
1. Hi, I hunt.
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:34 PM
Jan 2013

And this issue is bullshit. Let the wolves alone. They are critical to keeping GAME ANIMALS managed, and herds healthy. To say nothing of the water table, the health of the forest, even the damn beavers. (No pun intnd.)

They are endorsing killing those wolves for two reasons:

1. Suppressing the predators results in over-stock of elk and deer, prompting more hunting tags.
2. Ranchers hate wolves.

You might say 3. Another animal to hunt. Some people like hunting wolves and coyotes.
Personally, I only hunt stuff that will make a meal or two, or nuisances like wild boar, or coyotes. Wolves aren't even a blip on the 'nuisance' chart.

Some science behind how wolves affect everything, right down to the water table, positively.


(29,047 posts)
2. Wild boar are a nuisance where you live? Where do you live?
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:37 PM
Jan 2013

Is the life a coyote or wild boar less valuable than the lives of wolves?


(60,212 posts)
3. Where do you live?
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:04 AM
Jan 2013

Parts of the country, huge areas of land are torn up by them.

They're a pest species.


(29,047 posts)
4. I live in Western Montana.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:07 AM
Jan 2013

I think we may have wild boar, but I have never seen one, or heard of anyone seeing one.


(33,982 posts)
12. They haven't gotten across the columbia river into WA yet.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:34 AM
Jan 2013

But they do exist in some parts of Montana. They get around.

Here, we have nutria. Another invasive species. Smaller, like rabbits. They ruin berms and earthen dams. Always fun to discover come flood season.


(16,245 posts)
5. Wild pigs wreak havok on ecosystems.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:09 AM
Jan 2013

As an invasive species, they are incredibly destructive. It's better to control them through hunting, but it won't be possible to eradicate them entirely.


(55,007 posts)
10. yes but
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:30 AM
Jan 2013

I know they trap and feed them corn for a short while in Texas and the south east, and many eat them as hunted as well.

My understanding is in some places they are so numerous and destructive that they are just destroyed and not utilized.

There are rumors of wild pigs along the nearest river to me, but we have javelinas, the natives (which are also seasonally hunted for food and trophy) around here (Arizona)


(33,982 posts)
11. You can, and some people do.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:31 AM
Jan 2013

Most people in the 'business' just kill them and leave them where they lay, which I find abhorrent. It's a waste of meat. They are rarely clean kills. Needless suffering.

Some people bait and poison them, which has knock-on effects in other populations, like carrion birds, coyotes, etc.

Some troll popped in here a few days ago to extoll the virtues of shooting them from helicopters. He didn't last long, and the video was infuriating.

I prefer people hunt them, kill them as humanely as possible, and actually utilize the meat and hides. Waste not, want not. There's a guy that actually hunts them with the Cold Steel boar spear, which is double tough, and uses a thermal imaging homemade UAV to scout them out. Funny mix of old and new.


(33,982 posts)
8. Not here, no.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:24 AM
Jan 2013

We have no wild boar in WA. LOTS in the south. Some states the season is year round, no tags required.

Free free-range bacon!

Edit: I didn't read your whole post. Coyote aren't fighting back from the brink of extinction. Wolves are. Near Yellowstone, they had a 'hunt', and as luck would have it, every single wolf with a radio collar for the purposes of studying the herd, died. Now we don't even have data on what's happening out there.

Couple hunts could collapse the wolf populations entirely.

Wild boars are an invasive species.


(40,366 posts)
14. one reason it is easy to 'collapse a wolf pack'
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:44 AM
Jan 2013

‘Famous’ Wolf Is Killed Outside Yellowstone
Published: December 8, 2012

Yellowstone National Park’s best-known wolf, beloved by many tourists and valued by scientists who tracked its movements, was shot and killed on Thursday outside the park’s boundaries, Wyoming wildlife officials reported.

Doug McLaughlin

The wolf that researchers called 832F, left, was shot on Thursday. The alpha female of the Lamar Canyon pack, she wore a tracking collar. The wolf with her, known as 754, was killed last month.

The wolf, known as 832F to researchers, was the alpha female of the park’s highly visible Lamar Canyon pack and had become so well known that some wildlife watchers referred to her as a “rock star.” The animal had been a tourist favorite for most of the past six years.

The wolf was fitted with a $4,000 collar with GPS tracking technology, which is being returned, said Daniel Stahler, a project director for Yellowstone’s wolf program. Based on data from the wolf’s collar, researchers knew that her pack rarely ventured outside the park, and then only for brief periods, Dr. Stahler said.


(33,982 posts)
16. That was a sad article.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:47 AM
Jan 2013

I would never take a shot at a wolf, unless it was being predatory toward ME. Pretty rare thing.


(16,020 posts)
18. They ruin the habitat for native species.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:04 AM
Jan 2013

They are considered a nuisance here in Fl. Nonnative species. I just finished making sausage from one my husband got with his bow. He does not hunt anything he won't eat.
I am just beside myself over the wolf situation in this country. I have written a gazillion letters over the past decade, sent a gazillion donations to defenders of wildlife and other organizations. All that work to reintroduce them and then watching them being destroyed just tears me up.


(55,007 posts)
13. not ALL ranchers
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:35 AM
Jan 2013

but will give you a "most"

lions and wolves can do a number on a herd pretty quickly, so there is an understandable dislike of these big predators by people who's livelihood are dependent on an annual crop of livestock. Other rural peoples fear them mostly due to myth (though coming face to face in the wild on foot and unprotected might make most anybody a little nervous).


(55,007 posts)
19. you can probably imagine how well that works out
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:17 AM
Jan 2013

remote, rugged country make finding and proving a carcass - if anything is left by the time it is discovered - as being a wolf kill, then documenting and contacting authorities etc etc etc

better than nothing and obviously a certain loss to predators is or should be expected, but the proud waiving of the compensation flag is complicated by reality, I am sure.


(40,366 posts)
21. is it direct knowledge of this
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 04:29 AM
Jan 2013

that makes you so sure?

here is one example I found,

On June 24, 2011, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3560, which directed the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) to establish and implement a wolf depredation compensation and financial assistance grant program, using moneys in the Wolf Management Compensation and Proactive Trust Fund, to provide grants implement county wolf depredation compensation programs:
Compensation is paid to persons who suffer loss or injury to livestock or working dogs due to wolf depredation.
Financial assistance is provided to persons who implement livestock management techniques or nonlethal wolf deterrence techniques designed to discourage wolf depredation of livestock.
The bill appropriated $100,000 of the state General Fund to implement the grant program.

ODA's wolf depredation compensation and financial assistance grant program complements and supports Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's Wolf Conservation and Management Plan in the area of developing and maintaining a cooperative livestock producer assistance program that proactively minimizes wolf-livestock conflict and assists livestock producers experiencing wolf-related livestock losses.



(55,007 posts)
22. not direct for me, no
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:12 PM
Jan 2013

some third hand info for New Mexico

I live along a major transportation corridor and between a small town and another hamlet, so large predators are not really a problem for me. We get an occasional lion kill and bears wander through but this isn't suitable wolf habitat due to the level of highway traffic and human population. Most of my losses are due to trains and motor vehicles. (those claims are bad enough to collect LOL!)

the grant program you linked sounds much more proactive and I would guess may get better results for all concerned (without reading it too carefully). My understanding of the New Mexico program is that they were just paying for confirmed kills and not really motivating folks to learn non-lethal protective measures.

Though 100K would only cover between 100 and 200 head of cattle, provided none of that money was used for any other purposes than claims such as administration or inspection etc. No idea what the wolf numbers or losses are there.

re-reading that, it says the 100K is for setting up grant programs, so it isn't clear how much money is actually used in compensation or even training


(10,270 posts)
23. I say, if you have a dead and half eaten cow,
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 09:23 PM
Jan 2013

you should be able to fill out a form at the local Federal Land Management Office, and let the Taxpayers re-imburse the price of the killed livestock (per that day's Market Price, plus maybe 10% for the pain of filling out the paperwork). In 10 days, no rancher in America would care how many cows the wolves eat, and it wouldn't be that many anyway, because there arent that many wolves LEFT.

To me it seems like an excuse to kill off a top preadator, and not much else.


(64,407 posts)
20. Wanna-be apex predators hate competition = humans.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:01 AM
Jan 2013

And "hunters" LOLOLOL, don't even get me started.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Fish and Game to spend mo...