Never Cry Wolf-

[mtnmollie]

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Abandons Its Wolf Delisting Rule

On September 22, 2008, the United States Department of Justice filed a motion for a voluntary remand of the final rule by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to designate Northern Rocky Mountain gray wolves as a distinct population segment and remove them from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife. If U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula grants this request, the agency would reconsider and revise the rule in response to issues raised in the lawsuit brought by Bozeman-based Earthjustice on behalf of twelve conservation organizations including Friends of the Clearwater. Concerned that even greater numbers of wolves would be killed without Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections, these plaintiffs secured a preliminary injunction from Judge Molloy on July 18, 2008 that influenced the present agency position reversal, temporarily reinstated wolf ESA status, and halted transfer of wolf management from the USFWS to state wildlife departments while the case proceeded. In his opinion and order, Molloy noted that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on the merits of their claims that: 1) the wolves had not met recovery criteria due to a lack of genetic exchange between their greater Yellowstone and other populations in northwest Montana and central Idaho; 2) Wyoming’s 2007 management framework was an inadequate regulatory mechanism; and 3) fall 2008 public wolf hunting seasons planned by Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming posed immediate potential harm for wolves. When the USFWS delisted gray wolves in the Northern Rockies on March 28, they asserted that wolf populations and distribution had exceeded reintroduction goals since 2002.

Even though gray wolves in the region are relisted as endangered, the insidious provisions of the ESA 10(j) clause, revised before delisting and again in effect, could greatly increase wolf susceptibility to extinction. As sanctioned by Secretary of the Interior and ex-Idaho Governor Dirk Kempthorne and the USFWS, this recent ESA re-interpretation permits wildlife officials of the three states to kill more gray wolves in certain circumstances because they are only protected as “experimental, non-essential populations” under the 10(j) rule. An earlier version of this exclusion from the usual, rigorous safeguards of the law eased wolf reintroductions in 1995 and 1996 and the subsequent conflicts that occurred between expanding wolf numbers and livestock interests. Under pressure from Idaho, Wyoming, a minority of hunters, and the Bush administration to further relax ESA restrictions and thus minimize wolf numbers, the USFWS on January 28, 2008 extended killing of gray wolves beyond those caught killing livestock to include state-agent hunting, even by aerial gunning, of wolves supposedly reducing the elk, deer, and other ungulate herds whose populations are above state objectives. Although elk numbers are at an all-time high throughout the region and wildlife studies have never found wolves to be the primary cause of big-game declines, each state can nonetheless kill all but 200 of the approximately 1,455 wolves that inhabit the Northern Rockies, even without public wolf hunts. Regional wolf populations are currently declining: humans have killed over 500 wolves since 66 of them were initially released and another 100 this year under the new 10(j) rule.

As demonstrated by an overwhelming majority of the comments submitted on the draft 10(j) rule by citizens and scientists, public support for wolf protection and recovery recognizes that wolves restore overall balance to ecosystems. By killing weak and sick animals and allowing recovery of riparian vegetation over-browsed by ungulates, wolves improve the strength and vitality of big-game herds and their habitat. To bolster the viability of wolf populations in the Northern Rockies, six conservation organizations and Friends of the Clearwater filed a lawsuit in January challenging the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for revision of the 10(j) regulations. On July 23, only days after halting the reclassification and delisting rule, Judge Molloy denied the federal government’s motion to dismiss this case. His order also granted the government’s request for a 60-day stay of the case until September 22, to give the involved parties time to determine how to proceed.

[Gypsy Rose]

Breaking that down in simple English, the best I understand it, it's basically becoming an all out battle as to whether the wolves are still to be protected or not.

I simply don't understand why the bigwigs that sit in their office chairs think they know what's best for all.

As your article points out, the wolves have not fully regained a sustainable population, yet they want to do ariel hunts? That's not even sortsmanship, for crying out loud!

I just love how there are groups that are spending plenty of time and effort into finding out the true facts, and they're trying to be swept under the carpet, IMO.

If I'm way of base, let me know- I have a hard time breaking down and understanding such a complex situation, lol!

All I do know is that one of our small animal vets quit her job here to be a part of some kind of veterinary study concerning these wolves, and the impact they are having in Yellowstone National Park. The best I understod it, their goal is to prove that the wolves are esential to the wildlife population, and that they have not reached acceptable numbers to be taken off the protected list.

I would love to learn more, and understand all of this better.

[mtnmollie]

The goal was 300 or more and we have 1,400 plus. (900 3 years ago- then 1, 200, now 1,400 plus. The Yellowstone wolf- Montana, Wyoming and Idaho are all related, because they were all shipped in from Canada; around 1995 or so in Idaho.

But we have an Idaho wolf- he is smaller and different from the Canada wolf.

And when I came to Idaho, I thought a wolf was just a wolf- silly me.

Game Warden Gene said our grizzly is different too- smaller and more timid.
...and I thought a grizzly was a grizzly... silly me. :)

[JackieB]

Thanks for posting this article, Mollie. I'm glad that the wolves continue to receive important protection.

From a biological and genetic perspective, all wolves are essentially the same animal - Canis lupus. So there is some truth to that. They're the same species anyway. However, I understand what you are saying about the Idaho wolf although I had not heard of it before you wrote about it here.

The same with grizzly bears - Ursus arctos. I've often thought it kind of funny that if a bear crossed a particular mountain divide in Alaska (not sure which one), it would go from being a grizzly bear to an Alaskan brown bear at that point.

[JackieB]

Hey Gypsy, you and I need to form a "Fans of Mollie" club on this forum.:) We're always eagerly awaiting her next post.

[mtnmollie]

I went fishing for Jackie B and caught him in my wolf thread- LOL> :cowboy:

Before the Canadian wolves came, we had a black wolf who visited us for 4 years.

He was an Idaho wolf.

He was tall and lean and he was my friend.

He caught mice in the field next to my home.

Gene told me the local people loved our wolves and protected them.

This was before we had wolves in Idaho- official Canadian wolves that is.

[Gypsy Rose]

Hey Gypsy, you and I need to form a "Fans of Mollie" club on this forum.:) We're always eagerly awaiting her next post.


You start it, I'll join!:D

I have heard about the black wolves before- they are very beautiful, but not that common. Would be neat to see!

[mtnmollie]

We got a picture of him- but by the time we got the camera out- he was a long way off- black speck. he he .

[mtnmollie]

When I was young I read about wolves in books and on Walt Disney,
I lived in the city and saw them in zoos and on chains in people's driveway.

Then I went west. I first heard about wolves in Colorado. All good city people know there were no wolves in the west in 1976. And if someone said they saw a pack eating the elk they shot, what does that mean? Nothing in the real world.

I went west and married the Game Warden and found one day,

we live in a paperwork picturebook world. Not the real one.
The real world does not exist- unless its on paper. LOL>

And when Rod Cook saw a pack of wolves eating the elk he shot in the San Juan Mountains just north of Durango- offically it never happened at all.

[Gypsy Rose]

So what did he do- leave the elk for the wolves, I assume?!

[mtnmollie]

Yes; he did.

Mollie we have wolves- carry a gun.
But how do you know we have wolves?

I asked the right question that day.

[mtnmollie]

Then I moved to Idaho. The Feds started bringing wolves into Idaho about 1995; but we have/had wolves. They did not care.

I had 3 wolf pups in my horse pasture, about 7- 8 months old.
I screamed and ran towards them and they just stood and watched me.

I saw a young dead fresh killed bambi as a wolf snackie by Mex Mountain out riding one day.

I saw a wild wolf up Kelly Creek. He just stood and watched us; about 2 pm. He looked like a grey big boned husky dog.

Hubby Gene walked into a den of wolf pups in Fish Creek. That was when we learned they can bark like dogs.

We saw a Canadian wolf in our driveway as we were hauling hay.

I saw one below the house, as I was out riding one other day.

Most of our "siteings" are done by the doggies, saying" Mommie, wolffie is near.

Cougars are much more elusive than our Canadian imported wolffie.
The Idaho wolf - which is smaller - can hardly compeate with his Canadian neighbor. Larger wins the fight most times.

[mtnmollie]

And silly me, I thought a wolf was a wolf. But no there is the red wolf running in Tennessee- failed re- intorduction, the mexican wolf in Arizona and New Mexico- failed re- introduction,

The Canadian wolf brought into Wyoming, Montana and Idaho-

We told the Feds we had wolves, (hubby is back country Game Warden for North Fork of Clearwater for 30 years)

but they did not believe us. Now there is an endangered Idaho wolf- not many will ever know about him... they are smaller- they dont run in packs-

and the locals got along with them. Not no more though-things have changed.

We have a grizzly bear on the Clearwater too- he is more timid then the Yellowstone grizzly and smaller - and more elusive. Hubby Gene spent his entire career trying to get him protected, but officially he is not here. LOL>

Our central Idaho grizzly might interfear with timber sales yah - know.

And our Idaho wolf? He is the wolf who never was.

[Gypsy Rose]

yeah, riiiiight!

We have the brush wolf here, but I think their numbers have seriously dwindled. I think I've maybe seen one in my entire lifetime.

The coyotes are disappearing, as well.

[mtnmollie]

The endangered wolf in Idaho is the Idaho wolf- not the one
shipped in from Canada, by the Feds.

But the Idaho wolf does not really exist- except in the woods and fields of Idaho.

City people and game managers in the office dont know about him, and he is not officially recognised.

He is a lost wolf.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

The government reintroduced the wolf to Idaho, Montana and Wyoming with out consideration to the people who live there. They said the wolf was all but extinct so they reintroduced the Canadian Grey Wolf. As Mollie said, this is not a native to the USA and not representative of the wolves that were here. The Canadian wolf is huge, weighing well over 100lbs and more often over 130lbs. They run in packs averaging 12 adults. They are aggressive, territorial and will kill any canine in their territory, including your dog. The Idaho wolf is smaller, less aggressive and no match for a Canadian Grey.
The original plan was to establish approx 60 (?) packs in Idaho. They are now into the 100's, documented packs, that doesn't count undocumented packs.
Up in Elk City, Idaho the ranchers didn't turn out their cattle this year because of the constant killing by the wolves. The outfitters didn't even set up camps this year because of the lack of elk, deer and moose up there.
The Canadian Grey has established itself and laid claim to the backcountry. They are prolific breeders and whelp large litters.
The bad part is that some people 2500 miles away living in the asphalt jungle made this decision for us, not with us. Now we have to put up with the results.
I'm afraid to take my dogs camping, not only because they could be killed but they are a draw to bring wolves close to camp.
You will read all kinds of veiwpoints about this and quite probably are sympathetic to the wolf cause, but it's a whole different story when you have to live with them.

[Gypsy Rose]

I wonder if that's why that study is being done in Yellowstone then- at least part of the reason, maybe? Because they're not native to the area?

[rocknK]

Very sad....Elk City without no elk. Guess they'll have to change the name to Wolfville!

[cheval]

It mostly halted because the state agencies (including ours) did not have a wolf management plan in effect. I'm sure once those are completed it will move forward.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I know that Wyoming was uncooperative and didn't want a 'wolf plan'. They finally drew one up that the Feds accepted along with Idaho's and Montana's. The 'study' has been going on since mid 1990's in these states and not isolated to Yellowstone. I honestly don't know what type of wolf inhabits Yellowstone but they have been there all along, even before this 'save the wolf' stuff began.

[qh trail rider]

Interesting post. I know that there are always two sides to every story, so I would be curious to hear more from the "other side". The people who live around Yellowstone who have seen an increase in the wolf population. The ranchers whose livestock have been affected by wolf. The hunters who have seen a decline in the moose and elk population in that part of the country.

[mtnmollie]

Well I dont live around Yellowstone, but the wolf numbers in Idaho outnumber Montana and Wyoming combined.

The ranchers whose livestock have been affected by wolf.

"We were gathering cattle near Whitebird and were surrounded by wolves. I am concerned for my childern when we gather now. " - Whitebird rancher.

"I came home and my kid's horse was killed and eaten in my home corral. The wolves drove him from the pasture to my house- the good old horse was looking for help from us; but we were not home." -Arizona rancher.

" The wolves came through- we saw 4 on the road and our goat and dog dissapeared. They run our cattle through fences also. " - rancher neighbor I buy hay from.

"I saw the wolf kill our cattle right at our house, and we were not allowed to shoot them and protect our livestock. We sold out. " - rancher north of us.

"One day a wolf is going to kill some one- maybe a child at a school bus stop?"

[mtnmollie]

The hunters who have seen a decline in the moose and elk population in that part of the country.

Our hunting camps were full when in got here in 1988. Our elk population kept dropping.
WE had a goal of 25 bulls per 100 cows but had 17 then 9 then the Fish and Game advertised Central Idaho as the best elk hunting in the state, then after that we brought in wolves from Canada; even though we had an Idaho wolf.

Then after that Outfitters started complaining about no elk to hunt- and hunters quit comming- business dropped off. Outfitters went out of business.

I sawa baby deer killed by wolves- ranchers complained about calves being eaten as they were delivered- and the maooma cow being part eaten as she delivered.

Wolves are messy killers. Sometimes they may take a bit or two, sometimes they slaughter just to kill at will- or maybe 1/2 the hindquater is eaten and the cow or steer is left alive; to suffer and die.

Idaho locals loved our Idaho wolf- my husband told me. We got along with him, he lived with us and caused no trouble. But now the tide has turned and ranchers and hunters and outfitters no longer love the wolf. The wolf from Canada changed the mind of the people who live on the land in my neighborhood.


Even the wolf lovers ought to want to protect the endangered Idaho wolf.

This might be a pretty diffucult task at this point in time; saving the not- recognised unofficial but real live Idaho wolf.

[mtnmollie]

Wyoming drew up a wolf plan to shoot wolves; year long.

This was an un- acceptable plan- according to the Feds.

Our Canadian wolves who are " non- essential expermental" (not endangered)

were almost de- listed except each state ( Idaho, montana , Wyoming) - had a kill (hunt) wolf plan- Federal Judge in Montana
decided not to de- list the wolf.

We hunt elk and we still used to have an elk poputation.
We hunt deer.

I am from the city, but people in my neck of the woods live to hunt.

[mtnmollie]

It mostly halted because the state agencies (including ours) did not have a wolf management plan in effect. I'm sure once those are completed it will move forward.

They tell me our " Idaho? " wolf from Canada has crossed the Snake River and been sited in Oregon.

[rocknK]

I know several folks who like to "study" wolves through the scope of their deer rifles.

[Gypsy Rose]

What I don't understand is that if there was such a worry about local wolf populations dropping, why weren't the local wolves just protected and allowed to multipy? Why bring in wolves from Canada?

[cowgirlup@idaho]

GR, there was no worry about the native wolf here. They lived way out and avoided humans. They didn't run in large packs and if you were lucky enough to see one it was a thrill. Up in the Kelly Creek district above the North Fork of the Clearwater River is where you might find one...for a second. These wolves lived as reclusive as possible. Who knows who decided it was necessary to reintroduce the Canadian Grey substitute, I guarantee it wasn't an Idaho, Montana or Wyoming native. People who like to "think" about how wonderful and pristine it would be to reintroduce predators to someone elses backyard is what happened. Most of those people will never even come to our state!
Like I already said in a previous post, the Canadian Grey is aggressive and doesn't hesitate to eliminate any canine not of it's individual pack, including the smaller more isolated native wolf. You can guess what has happened to our native wolves, killed by the new Canadian wolf! Kinda like shooting yourself in the foot, if you are worried about an animal population going extinct. :nono:

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I know several folks who like to "study" wolves through the scope of their deer rifles.:hysterical: but it's still against the law, so don't get caught and never, never ever brag about it! ;)

[Gypsy Rose]

Just proves that most of these decisions are made by bigwigs who do nothing but sit behind a desk. How much you want to bet very few of them, if any, have ever even seen a wolf?

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Interesting post. I know that there are always two sides to every story, so I would be curious to hear more from the "other side". The people who live around Yellowstone who have seen an increase in the wolf population. The ranchers whose livestock have been affected by wolf. The hunters who have seen a decline in the moose and elk population in that part of the country.
There are two sides I'm sure, it's just that the 'other side' doesn't have to live with the mess they've made. I have never been to Yellowstone and what I speak of has nothing to do with Yellowstone, they weren't introduced there, it was up here! Since Sept of 07 I have seen 4 wolves at 3 different times in 3 different areas. A pair running through my friends back 120 acres 12 miles up from Kamiah, then a hundred miles away in Elk City sitting on a salt lick, then over in Latah County up in the Kendrick area about 50 miles from where I live and I live 87 miles from the Kamiah sighting and Kendrick is about 200 miles or more from Elk City. This was not the same pack at each sighting. 3 yrs ago up in the Dixie/Red River area (remote Idaho) fish & game counted over 40 moose carcass in 3 different drainages in Nov. officialy identified as wolf kills. None were even close to being consumed.
I'm not very good with research on the internet but there have been numerous dogs killed by wolves in the Grangeville, Idaho area. The last one in the news this late summer, 6 dogs were killed by wolves as they were out hunting with their owners who could not stop the wolves. It was in the news, just one of many. My husband spoke to a rancher last year, up in Elk City, who got permission to shoot on sight any wolves because his cattle had been so predated upon. It takes quite a bit to get that kind of permission.
Elk City is a very remote town with a population of less than 100. The closest main town is Grangeville, an hour drive. I keep referring to Elk City because that is where we camp and hunt and visit. I would never bring my horse there to ride because of wolves, which is sad because it is a beautiful place.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Just proves that most of these decisions are made by bigwigs who do nothing but sit behind a desk. How much you want to bet very few of them, if any, have ever even seen a wolf? :hysterical::clap: now you're getting it!

[cheval]

Actually there had to have been biologist in the state that felt it was a benefit or it wouldn't have gotten through. These things are reviewed by state fish and wildlife since it's the state that manages the animals - so it wasn't necessarily some unknown entity that got the reintroduction passed. There would have been a lot of input into to the process.

Similar to what we do with reintroductions of fish. There is a lot involved. It can take a long time. It's not just someone decides to put fish or wolves into a place and that's it.

[rocknK]

I think they use the term, "shoot, shovel & shut-up".:nono:

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Actually there had to have been biologist in the state that felt it was a benefit or it wouldn't have gotten through. These things are reviewed by state fish and wildlife since it's the state that manages the animals - so it wasn't necessarily some unknown entity that got the reintroduction passed. There would have been a lot of input into to the process.

Similar to what we do with reintroductions of fish. There is a lot involved. It can take a long time. It's not just someone decides to put fish or wolves into a place and that's it.

Yes, biologists get involved, but it was the federal government that did the reintroduction and then demanded that Idaho, Montana and Wyoming produce a plan that the feds approved before wolf management would be turned over to these individual states. That was finally accomplished and legal wolf hunts were part of all 3 plans. That's when the fed judge in Montana put the wolf back on the endangered list and negated the plans. Our state fish and wildlife people are not happy with the wolf situation. They see what has happened to our wild ungulate herds by the wolf packs. They also say their hands are tied. It's our federal government that dictates what they can and cannot do regarding the wolf situation. The reintroduction began in the early 90's and yes it has been a long time.

[cheval]

We have our Wolf Plan up for anyone interested in reading it. It talks very specific about wolves, predation concerns, conflicts with landowners etc. It's 200+ pages but a lot of our bio's worked really hard with other groups to put this together. It's just draft review, not sure how long the comment process is for.

There's a great section on elk and predation by wolves and what wolves go for. The idea is to manage the elk populations as a prey base for wolves as well as a recreational one for hunters. I don't know what the beginning numbers of elk for the Idaho area were.

To wipe out the population they had to be taking a lot of healthy ones which generally they go for the weak, young and old first.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/diversty/soc/gray_wolf/conservation_plan.pdf

Here is our website with more information on the left side - lots of wolf stuff.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/diversty/soc/gray_wolf/conservation_plan.htm

[JackieB]

Wolves are messy killers. Sometimes they may take a bit or two, sometimes they slaughter just to kill at will- or maybe 1/2 the hindquater is eaten and the cow or steer is left alive; to suffer and die.


What you say above it true Mollie, but perhaps not a fair depiction of wolves. Of course, I understand that the animal being killed doesn't care about what's fair regarding wolves, but wolves were virtually exterminated from the Lower 48 during the 20th century and education is the only thing that has allowed them to recover in some areas. I'd like to just clarify a few things although I'm not disputing your facts.

-Wolves will maim an animal and then leave it alive for days to die. But there really isn't any way to know that the wolves are being cruel from this as we would certainly accuse a human of being if he/she killed an animal in the same way. And there is a very good reason why wolves will do this as well.

Hunting large animals is extremely dangerous for wolves. Necropsies (autopsy, but on an animal) performed on older wolves almost always reveal nasty injuries received from a lifetime of hunting large deer with their teeth. Common (healed) injuries include broken vertebrae, broken ribs, and broken legs. Wolves get the living heck kicked out of them over the years. No surprise there, they are trying to kill a 1,000 lb. animal with just their teeth!

So, it is much safer to mortally wound an animal and then tend it for a few days even until it dies. Some sharks do exactly the same thing when they bite and then wait for their victim to bleed to death so that they aren't injured killing it.

Again, I know this doesn't matter to somone who had his/her horse killed by wolves, but it's important not to impart human characteristics that may not apply to wolves. And when conversations turn to how wolves hunt, we get a lot of gory details that sometimes appear to suggest a malicious character on the part of wolves. Biologists, like Cheval, would simply describe how wolves hunt without adding any emotion or "value" to it.

Secondly, it is true that wolves will kill much of the time that they have an opportunity. But again, this doesn't necessarily mean a wastefulness that we would claim if a human hunter did the same. Wolves in the wild sometimes have to go for a long time without eating. Like perhaps a week or more at least. So, they need to kill when they can, and will come back and feed on carcuses often. Wolves are just programmed to kill when they can, so this can lead to wiping out an entire flock of sheep (for example) if the prey animals are in an enclosed area and domesticated (less able to defend themselves).

I'm not trying to justify releasing wolves in Idaho. Perhaps that was a poor decision, I really don't know. But I just wanted to see if I could shed some light on wolf behavior that might not make people feel any better about the animals wolves kill, but at least helps them better understand wolves.

[cheval]

Jackie is correct. You have to take the emotional part out of it - any predator kiling a prey animal isn't going to sound pretty. At all. It's a matter of keeping themselves alive so, it's all or none with the predators a lot of the times. The predator has to go in and get the prey animal slowed down somehow, which would mean a neck bite or going for the haunch area. But the predator instinctively knows to expect moose elk or deer to right back with antlers so I'm sure there are some animals that are left until they are weak enough where the predator can move in and finish it.

Again, not a pretty thing, but that's nature.

Cougars and bears find themselves going a long time without eating as well which is what leads them into the local neighborhoods looking for garbage cans, cats and dogs.

I didn't see anything on Idaho's fish and wildlife site but again, I'd be interested in knowing if they had baseline data on the elk population prior to the wolf pack moving in and how they determined that the elk being wiped out was completely due to wolves. Did excess weather during the winter factor in? (This always causes severe die offs - we saw this at Mt. St. Helens this year, hundreds of elk were lost). How many elk were taken by hunters, how many by natural causes, how many by other predators (cougars).

I think it'd be tough to blame it (elk population loss) entirely on wolves.

[mtnmollie]

Actually there had to have been biologist in the state that felt it was a benefit or it wouldn't have gotten through.

My husband is a retired State Fish and Game Warden. Wolves were brought into Idaho by the Feds with no state approval, from the people 0f Idaho or the state Fish and Game. Gene retired soon after the wolves were brought in. The new Game Warden said the state game wardens were not allowed to talk about, or have an oppinion on wolves for 5 years.


These things are reviewed by state fish and wildlife since it's the state that manages the animals - so it wasn't necessarily some unknown entity that got the reintroduction passed. There would have been a lot of input into to the process.

This did not happen in Idaho.

[mtnmollie]

What you say above it true Mollie, but perhaps not a fair depiction of wolves. Of course, I understand that the animal being killed doesn't care about what's fair regarding wolves, but wolves were virtually exterminated from the Lower 48 during the 20th century and education is the only thing that has allowed them to recover in some areas. I'd like to just clarify a few things although I'm not disputing your facts.



Thank you for your post, jackie b. :cowboy:

[Gypsy Rose]

Wolves were brought into Idaho by the Feds with no state approval, from the people 0f Idaho or the state Fish and Game. Gene retired soon after the wolves were brought in. The new Game Warden said the state game wardens were not allowed to talk about, or have an oppinion on wolves for 5 years.




Wha.......?

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Cheval and JackieB, good points for debate. I know how and why wolves and predators kill. Cougar and bear are not a threat or a problem here. They live and kill and survive w/o interference or encroachment from either end.
Where I am there has been a drastic decline in the elk/moose population in the last 2 years. Wolf sign is everywhere (tracks and feces) in place of elk/moose sign. When you bugle or cow call, you get a wolf howl instead this year. Cattle ranchers are not turning their cattle out this year specifically due to wolf kills, mostly calves. If a rancher looses 5% of his calf crop it's a finacial devistation for that business year. I guess I just don't see this as coincidence, loss of herd numbers(ungulates), increase in wolf sightings/kills.
Although I admit that yes, it is emotional for me, I'm angry, it's not at the wolf, it's at the reintroduction w/o public approval, w/o public polling (back in the early 90's) and now that admittedly the wolf population has grown way beyond expectation faster than anticipated (lack of knowledge by biologists?), the Feds avoidance of what and how to take care of the problem and actually get the population back to the numbers proposed. In the meantime, all of the above wolf behaviors continue, because they are wolves, but they are encroaching into our habitat. They aren't staying in the back country. Now is this because of the large numbers and the fact that they will kill each other when trespassing into another pack's territory? or is it because they are depleteing their own food source out there, also due to large numbers. I'm angry because I wasn't given the choice to say yay or nay to the wolf reintroduction, but my tax dollars are paying for it. Now the animals themselves are paying because someone thought it wasn't good enough to have wolves just in Yellowstone, Alaska and Canada.

[mtnmollie]

In Idaho, the Feds brought in a non- native non- essiential expermental
Canadian wolf endangering our native smaller Idaho wolf.

This should cause alarm to wolf lovers. ( I woud think or expect. )

This has also caused great damage to the public local view towards the
Canadain wolf we now live with.

Ranchers and outfitters have gone out of business.

Many people now want all Idaho wolves dead.

WE got along with wolves before the Feds intre-viened.

I am not sure how to fix this but city people and desk pushers
do not always know what is in the field. It has been my experience that desk pushers never know what treasures our land holds.

The smaller more timid Idaho grizzly bear is another example. My husband Gene spent his entire careeer trying to get our Idaho grizzly recognized and protected,
but he failed. It did not fit with our timber program at the time.

Gene told me our locals protected our local Idaho wolf. I thought he was nuts-
at the time. But that was back then-

before the Canadian wolf interfeared with our balance of nature.

[mtnmollie]

Wha.......?

Gene told the Feds we had wolves. They told us if Idaho had just 2 breeding pair- Canadian wolves would not be brought in. They told us to call when had our pack sited- so we did.

They never came.

Maybe they needed a job? :cowboy:

Programs and paperwork are more important than truth.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Mollie is right when she speaks about Gene. He is a legend in the Clearwater and well known for his commitment to our forests and wild animals. I think he gave me a ticket for fishing w/o a license when I was 19 :innocent: I know that Mollie lives right in the middle of this, I know where she lives because I used to live there. We know the same people, we just have never met, I left before she came. Small world ain't it? I guess you can read as many government documents as you want and I'm sure they were written with the best of intentions but when has man ever been succussful trying to be the surrogate mother nature?

[Gypsy Rose]

Makes no sense. Maybe that's why my veterinarian friend and her colleagues were asked to do their study? She had told me that eventually, a group would be going out there to see first hand. Trouble is, that might only help the Yellowstone area- does no good for Idaho!

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Cheval and JackieB, good points for debate. I know how and why wolves and predators kill. Cougar and bear are not a threat or a problem here. They live and kill and survive w/o interference or encroachment from either end.
Where I am there has been a drastic decline in the elk/moose population in the last 2 years. Wolf sign is everywhere (tracks and feces) in place of elk/moose sign. When you bugle or cow call, you get a wolf howl instead this year. Cattle ranchers are not turning their cattle out this year specifically due to wolf kills, mostly calves. If a rancher looses 5% of his calf crop it's a finacial devistation for that business year. I guess I just don't see this as coincidence, loss of herd numbers(ungulates), increase in wolf sightings/kills.
Although I admit that yes, it is emotional for me, I'm angry, it's not at the wolf, it's at the reintroduction w/o public approval, w/o public polling (back in the early 90's) and now that admittedly the wolf population has grown way beyond expectation faster than anticipated (lack of knowledge by biologists?), the Feds avoidance of what and how to take care of the problem and actually get the population back to the numbers proposed. In the meantime, all of the above wolf behaviors continue, because they are wolves, but they are encroaching into our habitat. They aren't staying in the back country. Now is this because of the large numbers and the fact that they will kill each other when trespassing into another pack's territory? or is it because they are depleteing their own food source out there, also due to large numbers. I'm angry because I wasn't given the choice to say yay or nay to the wolf reintroduction, but my tax dollars are paying for it. Now the animals themselves are paying because someone thought it wasn't good enough to have wolves just in Yellowstone, Alaska and Canada.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I don't know why this posted again, sorry.

[mtnmollie]

We lived with the Idaho wolf. He killed mice next to our home and I saw him for 4 years, before the Canadian wolf came. Idaho loved our wolf.

All that has changed now.

[cheval]

Hm. I'm gonna talk to our widlife guys and see what they know about the Idaho thing. I find it surprising that there was no state input.

[mtnmollie]

I'm not very good with research on the internet but there have been numerous dogs killed by wolves in the Grangeville, Idaho area. The last one in the news this late summer, 6 dogs were killed by wolves as they were out hunting with their owners who could not stop the wolves. It was in the news, just one of many.

Wolves kill six hunting dogs in attack near Kamiah, Idaho
"24 Jul 2008 ... Wolves kill six hunting dogs in attack near Kamiah: Incident took place Sunday in Smith Ridge Area. The following article ran in today’s ..."
http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2008/07/24/61655.aspx

I live in a war zone. :eek:

[mtnmollie]

Wolves In Idaho
These photos were taken on the Montana/Idaho border near the North Fork of the Clearwater River this winter.

Two different ranchers this week have confirmed sightings of wolves within 2 miles of Grangeville and 3 miles north of Potlatch.

Each pack had between 6-7 wolves.

You tell me if wolves are a problem in northern Idaho…

Do not click this link.
Gene said these 4 pictures haunt him.

http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2007/02/14/49953.aspx

[mtnmollie]

We (Oregon) have our Wolf Plan up for anyone interested in reading it. It talks very specific about wolves, predation concerns, conflicts with landowners etc. It's 200+ pages

I am told through the grape vine the Oregon wolf plan in the field is to shoot every wolf on site. Some Game Warden told me that.

[JackieB]

Thank you for your post, jackie b. :cowboy:

You're welcome, Mollie. Thanks for the nice note earlier today.

[mtnmollie]

You have to take the emotional part out of it

Well tell that to the kids who lost thier horse or dog;

to non- essential, expermental - un- necessarey - Canadian wolfie.


Cougars and bears find themselves going a long time without eating as well which is what leads them into the local neighborhoods looking for garbage cans, cats and dogs.

Idaho does not have a cougar or bear problem that I am aware of.
But California has a cougar problem. When we quit hunting the cougar, the cougar hunts us.

I didn't see anything on Idaho's fish and wildlife site but again, I'd be interested in knowing if they had baseline data on the elk population prior to the wolf pack moving in and how they determined that the elk being wiped out was completely due to wolves.

Idaho State Fish and Game has an opinion- our elk numbers have never been higher.
This is the office opinion, or the office count; or the politically correct point of view; I think. The last game warden who told me this- I did not reply to. :huh:



Did excess weather during the winter factor in? (This always causes severe die offs - we saw this at Mt. St. Helens this year, hundreds of elk were lost).

Yes weather factored in in the 30 or 50's in the great die off- before I got here, to Idaho.

How many elk were taken by hunters, how many by natural causes, how many by other predators (cougars).

Good question, lets study that for another 10 or 20 years.

I think it'd be tough to blame it (elk population loss) entirely on wolves.

I dont know of any one who has done that.

My point was we should take care of our endangered Idaho wolf.
All of Idaho got along with him.

[mtnmollie]

You're welcome, Mollie. Thanks for the nice note earlier today.

You bet buddy. :cowboy:

[mtnmollie]

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Abandons Its Wolf Delisting Rule


... because they are only protected as “experimental, non-essential populations” under the 10(j) rule.

Although elk numbers are at an all-time high throughout the region and wildlife studies have never found wolves to be the primary cause of big-game declines, ...

recognizes that wolves restore overall balance to ecosystems. By killing weak and sick animals and ..., wolves improve the strength and vitality of big-game herds and their habitat.

Notice in the paper world, our elk numbers are at an all time high.

That's just not true in the real world though.

[mtnmollie]

Hm. I'm gonna talk to our widlife guys and see what they know about the Idaho thing. I find it surprising that there was no state input.

They came to Montana (federal Canadian wolves) before they came to Idaho. I remember riding in Pat Wyse clinics, and he lives in Montana. He was not happy about Canadian wolves coming to Montana. I was glad the feds did not bring Canadian wolves into Idaho where we had wolves.

But that is all past history.
Everything has changed now.

[John Boy]

Putting things in perspective - http://news.ufl.edu/2005/08/03/sloths/

If as a society we are going to bring back endangered listed animals , why not bring back the replacement of extinct animals that roamed our lower 48. (evidence now shows that hunters , not the ice age was at fault. Let's correct human error and get nature to work it out for it's self .... isn't that what the wolf program for example is all about .
Or do you draw the line when it means reintroducing the cousins of extinct animals such as tigers , elephants and sloths ...

[cheval]

"Well tell that to the kids who lost thier horse or dog; "

When you are out in the country that is the risk everyone takes. We just had a landowner that had a foal dragged off by a cougar right before his eyes. If people don't want these risks, then they can move back to the city as far as I'm concerned.

You've got to learn to live with wildlife, if you are going to move out into those areas. We have to tell people that EVERY SINGLE DAY. It is very sad. No question about it. But you have to take precautions. Keep your animals indoors at night, including your horses. We have a goat farmer that pens his goats up at night because they are his livlihood same with a couple of alpaca farmers and some of the fancy highland cattle farmers.

You can't not take precaution and then blame predators for doing what they do. They see livestock in the field and they'll go for it if they can. Same as if they saw a deer in the same field.

The wolf plan I posted was for Washington - I get the two mixed up. Live in Oregon, work on Washington - no idea on what Oregon's stance on the plan is.

[cheval]

The info I got seems to contradict the no-input comments on the Idaho situation, but still doing more checking. Should find out more by first of the week.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

"Well tell that to the kids who lost thier horse or dog; "

When you are out in the country that is the risk everyone takes. We just had a landowner that had a foal dragged off by a cougar right before his eyes. If people don't want these risks, then they can move back to the city as far as I'm concerned.

You've got to learn to live with wildlife, if you are going to move out into those areas. We have to tell people that EVERY SINGLE DAY. It is very sad. No question about it. But you have to take precautions. Keep your animals indoors at night, including your horses. We have a goat farmer that pens his goats up at night because they are his livlihood same with a couple of alpaca farmers and some of the fancy highland cattle farmers.

You can't not take precaution and then blame predators for doing what they do. They see livestock in the field and they'll go for it if they can. Same as if they saw a deer in the same field.

The wolf plan I posted was for Washington - I get the two mixed up. Live in Oregon, work on Washington - no idea on what Oregon's stance on the plan is.

Cheval, you are missing the point to a certain degree. The people and situations that I cite are born here, not moved in from the city (except Mollie who makes sure that is known) and are grandchildren of people born here. They do take precautions, they didn't turn out cattle this year, they keep their dogs in at night, they barn their horses at night. Reintroduction of a non-threatened animal (Canadian Grey Wolf) by our Federal Government, not local, not state, created this.
On paper it all looks benign and wonderful, just the way it should look. The government wants to be successful. And to tell you the truth, the wolf reintroduction has been successful beyond their comprehension. Now no one can stick to the original plan of a very specific number of packs to be maintained w/i our state (Idaho). That is where the trouble begins. Too many packs, unmaintained and growing. As the plan for Idaho was approved and about to begin the "hunting" piece to it, the Feds stopped the entire process again for all 3 states. Wolves continue to flourish and pack numbers increase way beyond the specific government requirement.
Please don't say it's the citizen's fault for living where they live, that's simply not fair or true. Rely on paperwork if that satisfies you, but don't minimize those that are in it and living it, and I don't mean biologists, fish/game employees, forest service employees, vet researchers, all who come and look around 'in the field' for maybe 2 weeks.
As you can read, I'm very passionate about this. I respect your right to your own beliefs, and you do sound to me like you want to hear both sides, kudos. I guess I just don't hear anyone supporting those who actually live here and live it. Walk a mile in our moccasins.

[cheval]

I don't see anything unfair about the statement. It's just a fact. And it applies to people who move from the city to the country OR to people who live out there. Which would make one think that the people who've always lived out there would know most of these things already.

I lived in the country for years long with coyotes, deer and elk - back then there weren't issues with bears or cougars that there are now - I haven't lived in Idaho so I haven't walked in their shoes.

I think you mistake about the role of biologists in this sort of thing though. It's not about them going out for two weeks. At least with our agency, these things are very intensive. But we do rely a lot on public input since they are out there every day. Which is why there are intensive public meetings over and over all around the state, not just in the area where the introduction (of whatever animal) might occur.

Don't forget all lobbying fluffy groups that approach the federal and state governments to make these changes. That's what happened with hunting bears and cougars - outside entities got that changed, even over the input of the biologists and we are in a mess right now. So I understand what you are saying about the Feds doing this without any input whatsoever.

The wolf situation will always be a passtionate one. As far as our state goes, the east side wants them kept away and will be more than happy to shoot them if they are introduced and the west side wants them. But, the eastside guys say the westside isn't the one that has to deal with the introduction.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Coyote don't/can't even begin to compare to wolves, apples and oranges. Coyote are non-threatening. Cougar and bear are not an issue even when they occaisonaly show up in a backyard.

Fair or unfair is simply an opposing opinion between us.

Western WA vs Eastern WA is a small window to what I've been saying.

We have public meetings all over the state regarding this issue for the last 2-3 years with no resolution.

It's a hot potatoe for sure. But I still believe that when mankind steps up to play mothernature the mess just gets bigger.

Bottom line, we don't want Canadian Grey Wolves in Idaho. They are a non-native species that has never been close to extinction. They have become a dangerous nuisance.

And it's hard to listen to someone minimize the situation who has not experienced it. It's hard to hear about wolves and how/why they do the things they do. We know this already, we've read up on it all along. It's hard to ask that it be brought under control just to have non-experienced say 'no', live with it or move. It's hard.

[mtnmollie]

WE do not need a Canadian wolf in Idaho when we already had an Idaho wolf.

The Canadian wolf does not belong here anymore than an African lion.

Idaho got along with our Idaho wolf- who was endangered by the act of the Feds' who introduced the not-endangered Canadian wolf.

The non- essential experimental Canadian wolf was introduced with no knowledge from the locals in central Idaho. I was here- I was a local when the Canadian wolf came in.

Even wolf lovers should want to protect the endangerd - rare Idaho wolf,- I would think.

The public opinion towards wolves in Idaho has changed,
since the Canadain wolf was brought in here
and upset the balance of nature in our state.

This is sad.
It has caused Idaho a lot of grief.

The one who has suffered the most from these decisions is the Idaho wolf.

[mtnmollie]

Personally our dogs dont even travel our land anymore. They stay in a fenced yard. Canadian wolves dont just kill at night, and you never know when they will be where.

We went for a hike a week ago and left our dogs at home, and they were very sad; about being left behind.

My life in Idaho has changed, not because of the Idaho wolf - which I can and have lived with-

but because of the non- essential experimental Canadain import.

When I go check my horses in my own pasture, I wonder who or how many will be dead?

I dont ride the places I used to go; the secret places where I found my Idaho wolf.

I wonder if the Idaho wolf has survived the Canadian terror?

[Gypsy Rose]

I wish the local people who live in these areas and are dealing with the wolves could have more of a voice in the management of them.

[42many]

I'm confused on the wolf shooting point - is it legal or illegal to shoot a wolf who is endangering your livestock/animals?

In general, someone living out in the country should be prepared for dangerous animal incursions - and should have the right and capability to kill intruding animals on sight. So, someone who has to witness a foal being dragged off should be able to shoot the taker, right? Would that be legal? Would it depend on what animal was taken and what animal was the taker??

I think there is a definite difference in saying that a person living in the country should take the risks of the animal population currently in existence there vs they should take the risks of any creature someone "in power" chooses to put there, especially when a specially introduced animal isn't native and isn't adequately managed to prevent overpopulation and other issues.

I'm all for people taking responsibility for their own problems, but in a case like this - I would have to say that if "go out and shoot any of them that you see until they are no longer causing you problems" isn't an acceptable answer, then how exactly are they to take responsibility? Do people have to keep moving to the cities because the government chooses to introduce dangerous animals into their fields but refuses to allow them to "deal with" the resulting problems?

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I wish the local people who live in these areas and are dealing with the wolves could have more of a voice in the management of them.

So do we.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

I'm confused on the wolf shooting point - is it legal or illegal to shoot a wolf who is endangering your livestock/animals?

In general, someone living out in the country should be prepared for dangerous animal incursions - and should have the right and capability to kill intruding animals on sight. So, someone who has to witness a foal being dragged off should be able to shoot the taker, right? Would that be legal? Would it depend on what animal was taken and what animal was the taker??

I think there is a definite difference in saying that a person living in the country should take the risks of the animal population currently in existence there vs they should take the risks of any creature someone "in power" chooses to put there, especially when a specially introduced animal isn't native and isn't adequately managed to prevent overpopulation and other issues.

I'm all for people taking responsibility for their own problems, but in a case like this - I would have to say that if "go out and shoot any of them that you see until they are no longer causing you problems" isn't an acceptable answer, then how exactly are they to take responsibility? Do people have to keep moving to the cities because the government chooses to introduce dangerous animals into their fields but refuses to allow them to "deal with" the resulting problems?

It is illegal to shoot a wolf that is endangering/attacking your livestock.

At this time, if you can prove that it was a wolf killing your livestock, you can get permission from fish and game to kill a wolf ON your property. To get that permission is difficult. There has to be more than one kill on a consistent time frame. You have to get someone with the authority from f&g to come and inspect the kills and surrounding area for wolf sign. Then it's the decision of that f&g individual to grant that permission. Then it is only the rancher who has permission to shoot, not employees, and that's only if the f&g don't have the resources to send in a gov agent (trapper/shooter).

The difficulty there is time, convenience, scheduling and maintaining evidence until authority can make it. That could be more than a week. We all know that wild animals don't keep a time frame, they are opportunistic hunters and nomadic.

The Idaho plan had a scheduled season for wolf hunting. The whole procedure was to be monitored, limited tags and a definite season time. It was not a free-for-all kill thing. The wolf would be considered big game animal, not a varmint (like the coyote, rabbits, etc.). This was scheduled to open this Fall of 2008. The fed judge in Montana successfully stopped this by reinstating the placement back on the endangered list. Now we are at ground zero again.

[cowgirlup@idaho]

Also, to this date, I have never heard of anyone allowed to defend their 'pets'. So all of the documented dog killings have been ignored by the authorities, in that they will take no action or grant permission to pet owners to protect their animals.

[mtnmollie]

I'm confused on the wolf shooting point - is it legal or illegal to shoot a wolf who is endangering your livestock/animals?




When I read of a rancher in northern Idaho watching wolves kill his cattle, I wondered why he did not shoot the wolves?

When my county sheriff told us Search and Rescue members he would defend us from the Feds if we had to shoot a wolf, I wondered if the stories we heard about folks being harrased by the wolf Feds were true? ( The people I read about who were harrassed by the wolf Feds had not shoot a wolf; but they had or were near wolf encounters. )

Before Canadian wolves were brought to Idaho, we were never told to carry a gun on a search. That has changed.

This past summer a back country horseman had a wolf encounter with his horses on the picket line. The horses broke loose and ran off and one was never recovered.

My husband told me you can not put horses on a picket line in camp at night any more in Idaho. Things change.

We have an African lion among us.
He is not endangered; but he is protected.

And I thought I had a constitutional right to protect my property and myself?

[mtnmollie]

Also, to this date, I have never heard of anyone allowed to defend their 'pets'. So all of the documented dog killings have been ignored by the authorities, in that they will take no action or grant permission to pet owners to protect their animals.

I have read of people's dogs being killed in the driveway right at the home, so dogs can't go out to go potty anymore in Idaho. When my dogs want to go out at night, I do not let them anymore.

We live in a war Zone. Things change.

Idaho was never this way before the Canadian wolf came.

When we had lots of wolves in the west in the 1880's we were allowed to shoot them.
When a predator is shot at-they fear man.

When they are not shoot at or hunted, they do not fear man.
Thus cougar man conflicts in places like California are on the rise.

[Gypsy Rose]

It's really sad the way things are turning out, all because of ignorance on the part of those in control- sheesh! It's really bad when saving a wolf is more important than your family pet!

[cheval]

Coyotes kills pets, so I'd argue it's not much different than wolves or cougars going after pets or livestock (horses are considered one or the other depending on who you talk to). We get calls everyday about coyotes killing cats.

In Washington you can protect your property which includes pets from predators as long as you are in a no shooting restriction zone.

[John Boy]

Just chatted with a ND buddy - He is now averaging 2-5 sheep killed a week.
:sleep:

[cheval]

That is bad but there are precautions that can be taken. Maybe he's tried them all. Hope it gets worked out soon.