Question about wolf management/law???

Status
Not open for further replies.
ohiobob - I sent you a PM explaining my reasoning, I can see where I might have jumped the gun a little, but its a near thing. I hope you understand my reasoning.

Thanks

MJM
 
NONYA - The woman in Bozeman made a big mistake but was honest enough to own up to it. Unfortunately as with other shooting mistakes like this simple honesty will not absolve you from the mistake. She did the right thing and the judge did the right thing in trying to help her out as much as he legally could. Elk and deer and other critters are shot by mistake every day, the honest ones take responsibility for the mistake. She should be proud of herself for how she handled it.
 
Mauser, I know what you mean, and I was only implying what information was given to me, by people in areas with wolves. I do hunting in other states, and that always seems to head the topic when putting in for an area, like Idaho. Believe it or not, with all the bad publicity of the Wolves there are some good coming out of all this. The main reason the Wolves were reintroduced, was to keep the Elk heards in check in Yellowstone. I went there 9 years ago for my honeymoon and could see the damage the Elk where doing. Since they won't let us hunt yellowstone, that was the only LEGAL way to take care of it at the time. As for my opinion on the subject, I will keep that to myself, apparently a good debate is not healthy here.
 
You might want to check on the Moose numbers in Yellowstone? I have no offical numbers but they are reduceded since the wolfs. Mont. is doing something about controlling the numbers better than other states I think.
We are losing new born calves and it is about imposable to be with the cows every minute of the day as a cow will go off by herself and have her calf. If it is gone when you get there the next day you have noway of proving what happened to it. Ranching is a way of life used by a small number of people to feed thier families,make an honest living,pay there taxes and the wolf kills hurt. Most bussiness that have something that causes them to lose money do something to correct it or they are out of bussiness. As for the woman who made a mistake in Bozman she did the right thing, but keep in mind she shoot a wolf and was punished. Our VP shoot his friend in another mistake of accident and no punishment,no tickets or anything. Mauser
 
Montana used to have big late season hunts to control the numbers of the yellowstone elk herds when they migrated out of the park and into MT,now the elk numbers are so low the hunts no longer take place,reintroducing wolves had NOTHING to do with controling elk numbers,they did just fine for almost 100 years without them.It was a pet project designed to keep a bunch of biologists and federal employees busy for 25 years.
 
Haven't we heard all of this before? All of the arguements seem increadably circular to me. Increasing wolf numbers, the loss of cows, the Yellowstone wolf, pet projects by the federal government, all are clearly a frustration for many of you, but it's beginning to sound like I've heard it all before. Is there any new ground to plow on the wolf topic? I'm not shutting this thing down, but it would be nice to attempt to bring something new into the subject matter.
 
Maybe some input by the USF&G with some accrate numbers and what thier intentions are would be nice. Mike you said there was some poeple on this site that where high ranking USF&G. Maybe they could put to rest some of the questions and untrue statements if they are untrue that have been made. This would be somthing new. I am all ears.
Mauser
 
when i hear of a pack of wolves,,,how many wolves are we talking,,AND when these attacks on cattle take place,,is it by a lone wolf or are there a few wolves doing the attacking?i dont live out west so i dont know,,but it seems to me that if there is MORE than 1 wolf people would tend to be quicker on the draw,,or am i wrong,,i meen if you have one assailant yor more apt to just steer clear,,but if 5 guys are starting to circle a person then that person would be quicker in his judgement to draw a weapon to protect himself,,i think the police do this too,,if they pull a car over with 2 or more people the cops hand is on his gun and he calls for backup,,but if there is only the driver in a car the cop usually walks right up to the car and doesnt call backup,,,i only seen 1 wolf in the video,,but was there more than 1 wolf in the area? and does the authorities take the number of wolves into consideration?
Bob
 
Bob Those are all good questions I have asked my self. They run in packs, the most we have seen up close has been 5. What I have seen myself is 3 of them run a calf away from the other cattle into the tress or down a canyon and that was the last we saw it. You have to relize these are big pastures and large areas the stock is in. It is about immposable to get the authoities to tell you how many wolves there are in a area. In Mt you can act if the wolves are harrasing the stock or killing in Wy they see thing a little differently. It isn't just the livestock getting killed it is guard dogs as well. The amount of trouble you get in acting on your own is not good. Most of the time is you find the damage after it is done, Then it is up to you to prove what happened. Many kills are not reported. Nobody whats to hear about as you call tell. When you say stay clear of them remmber they are coming to you on your property so it is hard to steer clear, you also don't know how many there are or when they are coming. Maiser
 
Mauser and others - From what I can gather the information you are looking for is available on several websites. This is far from the way I like to answer questions like those you have asked, but I am far to removed from this subject to give better direction than that. Unfortunately you will find that most of the information is gathered by the very government agencies that you and many others have chosen not to trust.

Some very experienced people have attempted to answer many of the wolf questions that have cropped up here lately. Frankly due to the way they have been treated on this issue they have been left cold and are unwilling to attempt to answer anymore wolf questions. Its hard to blame them, it is their impression that you and others have beaten, belittled and openly insulted their lifes work. Serious and highly educated field personnel don't take it lightly when their entire profession are called liars and incompetent. No matter what they bring to the table for information, no matter what thier own personal field experience may be it is always easy to find a newspaper article or opinion piece or some shadowy statistics to completely dispute what they have seen with their own eyes. These good people are basicly warn out and will no longer respond to this subject. It's a shame that they have been treated in this way, but hey I guess everybody's entitled to their opinion, no matter how informed or uninformed that opinion may be.
 
We saw a pack of 13 this November,6 of them were running right down the side of a well traveled access road going into the Scapegoat wilderness,when we left the next day we stopped at the F%G station and reported our sighting,the female biologist behind the counter whipped out a series of photographs she had taken of that pack right inside a campground on the same road we saw them on,she said every Monday when the hunters broke camp that pack would show up looking for the scraps and garbage left behind,this is one of the packs that the Federal Biologists had passed off as mis-identified coyotes when the locals started reporting it two years ago.Needless to say the elk harvest in that drainage was at an alltime low last year,the F&G biologist that had been working the check station for 20 some years said he had never seen so few elk harvested in that area.
 
Thats fine I am use to the no answer part. The way the USF&G get treated is the same way they treat the poeple on the other side of the issue, no answer, is better than a smoke screen or half truths. Bob now do you understand why there a lot of poeple upset, maybe you don't hear from many of them as a lot of them will correct the problem themselves, some of us still belive the system works. I have not killed a wolf, none of my help have, if they did the would be looking for a job. Mauser
 
Every time my family has contacted them to come look at a dead steer or calf they act like its not part of thier job description.Then the coyote rhetoric starts,usually before they even get an info from us,then they want to know if we haver pics of the wolves actually killing the beef,not just feeding off the carcass because that doesnt prove anything,aparently wolves follow big packs of coyotes around feeding off the livestock they kill,seems that wolves arnt predators at all just opportunists that take advantage of coyote and grizzly kills.The price you would pay for killing one of thier pets is far to high to make it worth risking,in an area with several packs it wouldnt make any difference anyway.Once the state takes control of the managment it will be very interesting to see how they handle it,i hope they give the public a chance to take part,I have a suspicion it will airborn shooters employed by the state,thats how they used to control the lion numbers.
 
Nonya, you know as well as I, the States Game Commission Meetings are for the general public to make their wishes known concerning management of wildlife. If you are so concerned about the future of wolves in Montana I expect you to be at one of the scoping meetings to debate how wolves are harvested. Personally, I would hate to see hunters loose the oportunity to harvest a wolf, but if landowners in this state continue to lock up large blocks of land and prevent the average non-paying hunter access to it, the state will take matters into their own hands. They will be forced into it by ranchers screaming bloody murder. Wildlife Management is a viscious circle, lose one component in the cycle and it goes haywire quickly.
 
I dont think the commision is going to have any leway or control over methods ect,the state of Montana has already drawn up thier managment plan and it has been approved by the Feds,so far that plan hasnt been published anywhere that I can find,I asked a warden about it last fall and he said he hadnt heard anything.The plan has been drawn up and has the federal opproval stamp,there wont be any meetings looking for public input for quite a while.This is the most curent info I can find on the Mt site,looks like it will be 2010 at the earliest before the public will be allowed to help control wolf numbers,maybe then they will allow the F&G commision to regulate a hunt.
It’s been a long time coming, but the people of Montana worked hard over the past 10 years with the expectation that the wolf would one day be delisted and managed among all of the state’s wildlife," said Jeff Hagener, director of Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks "The agreement is confirmation that the people of Montana did their part to restore the wolf in this part of the country. It allows Montana to make wolf management decisions, which puts us in a better position to meet the challenges of living with the recovered population instead of waiting for delisting."

Under the agreement, Montana will conduct population monitoring, research, and public outreach, in addition to determining when non-lethal and lethal wolf-control actions are appropriate to reduce conflicts with livestock. Because wolves in northern Montana are currently classified as "endangered" and wolves in southern Montana are managed under a less restrictive "experimental, non-essential" classification, Montana still must follow federal guidelines related to lethal control.

"While the ultimate vision is delisting the wolf, this is an important interim step that recognizes the commitment and good will of the people of Montana," said Ed Bangs, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s coordinator for wolf recovery in the Northern Rocky Mountains. "We’re enthusiastic about this management transition because it is good for the wolf and for the people who live with them."

The agreement will allow Montana to apply its federally approved wolf conservation and management plan to:

* manage wolf numbers and distribution and maintain the wolf’s recovered status;

* help landowners reduce livestock-depredation risks;

* use wolf-management techniques to resolve wolf-related conflicts, based on a benchmark of 15 breeding pairs of wolves in Montana;

* help establish an independent financial compensation program for wolf-related losses;

* monitor deer and elk populations;

* ensure human safety.

Because the wolf is still protected under the Endangered Species Act, hunting is prohibited until the wolf is delisted.

The agreement is effective through June 2010, or until the wolf population in Montana is removed from the threatened and endangered species lists. Federal funding sources will cover work of FWP’s wolf management coordinator based in Helena, and wolf specialists based in Kalispell, Bozeman, Dillon, and Red Lodge. Under the agreement, FWP must prepare annual reports to document the recovered status of the Montana wolf population
 
Last edited:
Here is another piece off the MT F%G website,this one talks about the wolves(coyotes) we were seeing back in the early 80s,when we reported seeing a pack of 7 wolves on our place in 1983 the BLM told us they HAD to have been coyotes or wild dogs because there were no wolves south of the canadian border.

Wolves from Canada began to naturally recolonize northwestern Montana in the mid 1980s. In the mid 1990s, to hasten the overall pace of wolf recovery in the northern Rockies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released 66 wolves into Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho. Since then, wolves have expanded in number and distribution throughout the federally designated Northern Rocky Mountain Recovery Area in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Federal officials estimated in December 2004 that at least 153 wolves, in about 40 packs, and about 15 breeding pairs inhabit Montana.
 
Wyoming was in court again...

Wyoming, federal government in appeals court on wolf dispute
By The Associated Press - 03/06/06
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Lawyers for Wyoming and its livestock industry sought Monday to pre-empt a decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reject Wyoming’s plan for managing gray wolves, in arguments before a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The federal government argued that a 2004 letter written by the agency, objecting to Wyoming’s plan, wasn’t a final action that could be appealed in the courts. Wyoming countered that the Fish and Wildlife Service had all but made up its mind on a decision due within months, and that the agency’s decision was unwarranted.

Justice Department attorney David Shilton, defending the Fish and Wildlife Service, said it had a panel of 11 wolf experts review Wyoming’s and other wolf management plans ‘‘just to be helpful to the states.’’

That doesn’t amount to an official decision subject to court review, he said.

The judges grilled state and livestock lawyers on why the appeals court should get involved before the agency issues a final decision in July.

‘‘We don’t know what they’re going to do — that’s the problem,’’ said Judge Deanell Reece Tacha. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved plans by Montana and Idaho to take over control of the predator, but rejected Wyoming’s plan because of a provision to kill wolves outside the Greater Yellowstone Park area.

The federal government wants to remove wolves from federal protection and turn over control to the states, but contends Wyoming’s failure to draft an acceptable plan is holding that up.

Wyoming is standing by its plan. Outside court Monday, state Attorney General Patrick J. Crank said wolves are overrunning Wyoming, posing a threat to livestock and elk and moose herds.

Crank said Wyoming recognizes wolves in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks should remain protected and would provide a limited take for trophy hunters outside both parks in the Greater Yellowstone area. It’s outside those areas that the state believes wolves should be eliminated, he said.

Regardless of any official action taken on wolves, many Wyoming livestock owners will ‘‘most likely follow the three ’S’ rule: Shoot, shovel and shut up,’’’ said Harriet Hageman, a lawyer representing Wyoming’s livestock industry.

Crank said federal authorities took exception to Wyoming’s calling wolves ‘‘predators’’ outside protection zones. ‘‘They don’t like that word,’’ he said.

Wyoming’s plan calls for the state to manage seven wolf packs outside the parks, where eight more packs could survive, he said. Federal authorities want Wyoming to manage at least 15 packs whether they’re in or outside the parks.

Wyoming defines a wolf pack as five wolves, while federal authorities say a pack should include at least six members, he said.

The Fish and Wildlife Service released wolves from Canada in Yellowstone and central Idaho in 1995. They now number in the hundreds in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho.

The 10th Circuit, based in Denver, is hearing cases from around the region in Utah this
 
Quote:
we were seeing back in the early 80s,when we reported seeing a pack of 7 wolves on our place in 1983 the BLM told us they HAD to have been coyotes or wild dogs because there were no wolves south of the canadian border.



Don't you know that when wolves travel south from Canada they see the border and say, "Oops, can't cross that because USA government officials say we are not supposed to be there". You need to remember those who have the college education know more than those who live and work the land, care for it and its wildlife and observe whats going on there everyday. Pardon me, I think I'll quit before I get thrown out /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif.
 
They made that very clear to us Greg,its amazing how a 7th generation Montana native family can mis-identify coyotes as wolves so many times,but they showed us how we were in the wrong and explained how easy it was to make that mistake.They also made it very clear that thier "education" allows them to make things up as they go,as long as it fits thier agenda.They didnt want anyone reporting the wolves that were here because that would have put a serious crimp in thier reintroduction plan,since it hinged on the lack of wolves in the lower 48.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top