Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Wolf Hunting


Reply

Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #50  
Old 02-25-2014, 12:55 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

Quote:
Originally Posted by IdahoCTD View Post
The fish and game just recently announced they intended to lower the wolf numbers down to the 150 animal federal minimum and will hire more trappers to do it. The down side is they waited so long that it will take the rest of most of our hunting lives for the animals to recover unless they do relocations from the areas less effected. Even then it will be many many years before we see hunting like the glory years of the late 90's and early 2000's.
It is not the Fish and Game that is proposing to reduce the wolf population to 150 wolves, it is the governor who intends to do this by creating a "Wolf control board".
In my opinion it is a bad Idea, reducing the population that much would put us in danger of having the wolves relisted and returned to federal management. If that happens I don't think that the feds will be in any hurry to let Idaho take over management again. It would be better to manage wolves in the 550 range that IDFG proposed and that was approved by USFWS by the delisting agreement.

The Gov. is just grand-standing to his constituents, and claiming that the wolf population is rising. IDFG data has shown a decline in wolf numbers every year since hunting and trapping started. We need to just keep hunting and trapping to get where we want. There is no reason to give the wolf-lovers any more fuel for their lawsuits.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-25-2014, 01:36 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maple Valley, Washington
Posts: 247
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

Iíll give you a plan for wolves. I want them ALL dead. I donít want them competing with me for game ever. In a modern world with 7 billion people wolves serve no useful purpose but they do pose a threat to big game. You get wolves in your hunting area and you are the one that is going to have to move. Iím not going to tip toe around this issue and be politically correctand say we should keep a few. Why should we? Because the tree huggers would miss them? Sorry, not a good enough reason.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-25-2014, 02:06 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 102
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

I don't think anyone knows how many wolves are in Idaho. They might know a trend but how do you count them? All I know is that there are too many. Now that the Fish and Game can't sell tags and their revenue is hurting they want to do something about it. When wolves were first brought here many in the Fish and Game thought it a good idea.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-25-2014, 07:05 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 2,077
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

Tiptoeing has been tried and failed. This isn't biology it's politics. Elect representatives willing to attack USFWS budget this fall. Elect animal rights candidates, and it won't matter a diddly damn how many wolves are in the state.

I can remember a time when we were told 100-150 would be the cap for the combined Rocky Mountain states.

The anti's are well funded, and can't be reasoned with or trusted, they want to take it all, anyone tells you different is lying to you, in an effort to make you think you should be tickled spit less to keep a little of what you got.

Some of these elk units could been appropriately closed a decade ago. No money in that, and no political advantage for the game departments to admit they were at the very least wrong.

Tanking tag sales, and targeting revenues is the only thing that has changed the situation, and it will continue to be the only effective tool we have.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-13-2014, 03:45 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineering101 View Post
Iíll give you a plan for wolves. I want them ALL dead. I donít want them competing with me for game ever. In a modern world with 7 billion people wolves serve no useful purpose but they do pose a threat to big game. You get wolves in your hunting area and you are the one that is going to have to move. Iím not going to tip toe around this issue and be politically correctand say we should keep a few. Why should we? Because the tree huggers would miss them? Sorry, not a good enough reason.
That's not going to happen. Every time a hunters says "Kill them all" it galvanizes our opposition and gives credibility to their claims that States (specifically Idaho) cannot responsibly manage predatory animals. IDFG stated that once delisted, they would manage wolves at the 2005 population (580) because that was the year that the original delisting agreement was met. ie, Minimum 150 with 10 breeding pairs per state. That is the threshold that IDFG agreed with USFWS to maintain under the delisting agreement, if we drop below that we will see increased attacks from the wolf lovers.

What will happen if we kill them all or even get close to the number allowed in the delisting? I'll tell, the USFWS will re-list the wolves under a new management plan that will require 2000-3000 wolves before delisting can occur again. 2000-3000 is the number outlined in a study which most wolf lovers point to to support their claims. If you think elk hunting is tough now, just wait until 2000 wolves exist in Idaho alone, and the USFWS has all of the control.

I am not saying that we should bow to the wolf lovers, I am saying that we need to recognize that wolves are never going to be allowed to be eliminated. They are here to stay wheter we like it or not. What we need to do is convince the wolf lovers that we can manage wolf numbers at a level that will guarantee that they are never at risk of being relisted. That number will most likely be higher than we want but lower than they want, but there has to be comprimise. They out number hunters and if they wan tthe can do some serious damage to our lifestyle. Look at California, hunting bans on mountain lions, hunting bans on using hounds. If you don't the same thing can happen in other states you don't realize how much many those tree-humpers have to throw around.

Again I'm not saying back down, I'm saying let's show them that hunters are not knuckledragging backwoods retards.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-13-2014, 04:23 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 2,077
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

IDELKSLAYER,
I've heard this reasonable man theory all the way back to the beginning of this fiasco. It did not work then, won't work now. Going after the USFWS funds did change the conversation for a bit. Cripple the penny ante prima donnas financially. Demand prosecutions for hunter harassment, show up to help cover the guys in the field, make a ruckus, let's at least try it before we're done. Reasonable got us to this point.

1) Wolf management looks exactly the same as extermination, just different endpoints.

2) We are opposed by fanatics that wish our extermination.

What are the sportsmen's groups doing? Having parties, and auctioning tags. I apply in several states, tag numbers in some units have dropped to pitiful numbers in places, should be eliminated in many, and some haven't recorded a kill in years.

Until/unless we get back to the roots of American game management that managed predators at low numbers, it's all gone. Unless we get adversarial with the anti's it's over.

What's left is deciding to go out with a whimper, or a growl.

Last edited by HARPERC; 03-13-2014 at 06:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-13-2014, 07:37 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
Re: Professional Hunter to Remove Idaho Wolves

Quote:
Originally Posted by HARPERC View Post
IDELKSLAYER,
I've heard this reasonable man theory all the way back to the beginning of this fiasco. It did not work then, won't work now. Going after the USFWS funds did change the conversation for a bit. Cripple the penny ante prima donnas financially. Demand prosecutions for hunter harassment, show up to help cover the guys in the field, make a ruckus, let's at least try it before we're done. Reasonable got us to this point.

.
Reasonable has gotten us to the point where Idaho is now calling the shots. Reasonable has given us hunting seasons and trapping seasons, as along as we continue being reasonable we will retain management control. I agree that the wolf lovers ultimately want to end all hunting and they use the predators as a means to that end, but their primary tactic at this point is to prove that the states will not manage wolves for a sustainable population. If they can show evidence that Idaho is slowly and intentionally exterminating the wolves, control will go back to the Feds and Idaho will be SOL.

You are right, we shouldn't have been reasonable back when this whole thing started but that was then, it's a whole different beast now.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
In the last 12 months, what was your longest rifle kill on big game?
0 to 200 yards - 25.85%
1,474 Vote
201 to 400 yards - 32.09%
1,830 Vote
401 to 600 yards - 23.13%
1,319 Vote
601 to 800 yards - 10.01%
571 Votes
801 to 1,000 yards - 3.95%
225 Votes
Over 1,000 yards - 4.98%
284 Votes
Total Votes: 5,703
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC