Wolves gone wild.

[jmden]

You should check things out better you can draw a line pretty much across minnesota from east about halfway down and angle it up to the northwest and there are wolves.
And I am one of the best stewards of the land, we spend countless hours working for habitat on state land as well as our own.

You take hard evidence from you own state showing where the wolf populations are and then come up with your own vastly different interpretation.

Back up your statement.

 

[Swamphunter]

You take hard evidence from you own state showing where the wolf populations are and then come up with your own vastly different interpretation.

Back up your statement.

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/animals/mammals/wolves/wolf_management_zone.pdf
Well we find wolf tracks and scat all over the place, we find dead deer that have been killed by wolves, and we see wolves

 

[GoArmy]

I have hunted Montana 6 times in the past 11 years, I have always seen alot of game, Deer, Elk, Moose, etc, mostly hunted Southwest Montana, I did a hunt in the Gravely, Snowcrest range this past Nov,,,, 4th week of rifle. Never saw a Elk the entire week, not even a Track, and only saw a handfull of deer, no more then 10 muley does, 2 spikes and a 3x4 muley that i shot. only myself and one other hunter that was staying at the lodge we were at, got a deer, he also got a 5x5 elk, There was 27 hunters at that lodge. No one else seen any Bulls, and only a small herd of about fifteen cows were seen by another hunter. I could see the frustration on the outfitters, and their guides, They know the Wolves are destroying their livelyhoods, and wiping out the elk and deer. And there is no doubt, Wolfs are hated in Montana. Something better get done soon, or every outfitter in Montana will be out of Business.

 

[jmden]

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/animals/mammals/wolves/wolf_management_zone.pdf
Well we find wolf tracks and scat all over the place, we find dead deer that have been killed by wolves, and we see wolves

What you posted is a map showing a general 'Gray Wolf Zone'. What was already posted (on page 9 of that .pdf) was a much more observation and data specific map that what you just linked to.

I think I'd tend to go with the what was first posted for the more specific location information, wouldn't you?

So, it's likely you are in an area not nearly as heavily inhabited by wolves as other areas, wouldn't you agree?

What are the deer harvest numbers for he last several years in the area you hunt? Any changes?

 

[royinidaho]

Here's a post I made on another forum back in '06.

The last line is as today as it was then.

royinidaho 06-14-2006 02:45 PM Fabs,

Not quite bull headed. Just don't or didn't fully understand your comment regarding a hunting season.

When I joined the Navy to see the world and was stationed in southeast Idaho for just about 4 years. Thought I died and went to heaven. BTW before that I spent my life in western PA, Butler county. I really liked the 2 deer tag areas in the south end of the State.

The "western" culture really impressed me. The people were/are severly independent and will stand on their own two feet when their back is against the wall.

A western cattleman is way more bone headed than I could ever be. But I respect their culture. They have a tough life.

The natives to the area, those whose forefathers settled the area generations ago can tell you who shot the last wolf shot in Bingham county. They really didn't get 'em all, however. But the ones left were never a bother and the coexisted quite well with hunters/sportsman/tourists and cattlemen.

The statue quo just wasn't good enough for the feds/whoever.....

Now 'we' have a major imbalance in the system and it will take some sorting.

Actually in my area there are more cattle lost to low life humans than to wolves. But the elk numbers are definitely down, way down.

I think that all of us sitting around the same table could pretty much come to an agreement/understanding regarding the woofs.

 

[Swamphunter]

What you posted is a map showing a general 'Gray Wolf Zone'. What was already posted (on page 9 of that .pdf) was a much more observation and data specific map that what you just linked to.

I think I'd tend to go with the what was first posted for the more specific location information, wouldn't you?

So, it's likely you are in an area not nearly as heavily inhabited by wolves as other areas, wouldn't you agree?

What are the deer harvest numbers for he last several years in the area you hunt? Any changes?

Well I didn't see any page numbers on that article, but at the bottom it showed three different maps with squares dots etc and where we hunt is well in the wolf areas.
3000 of them by their count. We think there are more because they said there are 3000 ten years ago. But will go with "their" official number. The map I showed is the proposed management zone where the wolf kill (if successfully delisted) will be managed. And while I am not sure I believe anything outside that zone will have no management tag attached, whether that means any wolf can be killed outside that zone I don't know.

Deer hunt numbers have been about the same for the last several years.
Moslty because we have had mild winters.
The DNR claims that wolves take 18 to 20 deer per year. That would equate to 60000. I have no way to confirm nor dispute that number. Wolves also eat beavers, coyotes, moose, cows, sheep, turkeys and on and on, whatever they can catch. I know that we have some farmers in the area that have taken matters into their own hands due to the fiasco it has been to get the wolves off the endangered and more recently threatened list. I just saw that they are to be returned to state control this week, so that will hopefully mean a hunting season on them.

At any rate this doesn't change my opinion that we not wipe them out.
They can be controlled.

 

[jmden]

Well I didn't see any page numbers on that article, but at the bottom it showed three different maps with squares dots etc and where we hunt is well in the wolf areas.
3000 of them by their count. We think there are more because they said there are 3000 ten years ago. But will go with "their" official number. The map I showed is the proposed management zone where the wolf kill (if successfully delisted) will be managed. And while I am not sure I believe anything outside that zone will have no management tag attached, whether that means any wolf can be killed outside that zone I don't know.

Deer hunt numbers have been about the same for the last several years.
Moslty because we have had mild winters.
The DNR claims that wolves take 18 to 20 deer per year. That would equate to 60000. I have no way to confirm nor dispute that number. Wolves also eat beavers, coyotes, moose, cows, sheep, turkeys and on and on, whatever they can catch. I know that we have some farmers in the area that have taken matters into their own hands due to the fiasco it has been to get the wolves off the endangered and more recently threatened list. I just saw that they are to be returned to state control this week, so that will hopefully mean a hunting season on them.

At any rate this doesn't change my opinion that we not wipe them out.
They can be controlled.

Again, very few here a saying to wipe them out, yet you keep mentioning that. Get over it.

Yes, they can be controlled historically, but by poisoning and helicopter gunning only. Study what Alaska and Alberta are having to do right now.

You need to understand that hunting alone does not control wolves.

If you are for controlling wolves, you'd better learn how it's done.

 

[bigngreen]

Swamphunter, you've completely missed what has happened in MT, ID and Wyoming with this wolf!! Your claiming to be a good steward, well how does introducing a NON NATIVE apex predator into a native population work, I grew up with native wolves around and had less troubles with them than from bears and lions and certainly less that coyotes and it's been that way for generations prior to mine. Us wanting to eradicate this non native predator from our lands is us protecting it and being good stewards of the land we are fortunate to be in. I'm not telling you how to protect your land and I would certainly take your word for it if you said you have an issue in your area cause you know your area, it would be nice if you would at least listen to those who have lived here all our lives and who have 5 or 6 generations in the the land!! I've always taken both predator and prey animals and have all ways tried to maintain a balance in my hunting and trapping. There is not going to be a balance point with a non native predator, period. Look at the history of introductions of non native species!!!!!

 

[HARPERC]

At any rate this doesn't change my opinion that we not wipe them out.
They can be controlled.[/QUOTE]
Well Swamprat here's your opportunity enlighten me as to what level would you control them at, and by what methods would you exert this control?

 

[Swamphunter]

Everything Wolf Forum

How many the state can support or endure whatever you want to call it is for your state dept of natural resources to determine. that is what ours will be doing. I am of the opinion that trapping them should be included as well as hunting. I talked to a federal trapper a few years ago that was trapping problem wolves and he says they are not that hard to trap.
I think you should all check out this link, now THAT is the enemy. And there are more out there like them. They are keeping track of the hunt numbers too lol.

Incidentally you all gang up on me just because I don't think ALL wolves should be wiped out. have received PMs that say they agree with me but don't want to get involved. Can't say as I blame them.

 

[Coyboy]

Boys we are all a dying breed. What these wolf lovers don't realize is hunting will be brought to an end.

On average MN kills 200,000 deer a year. pretty low numbers for such a large state.
pre-high wolf densities, WI averaged 450,000 over about a 15 year period. Last 3 years it has been lower much lower, now nearing 290,000. Soon we will be in the MN numbers.

This is going to be a cause and effect relationship. in the next 20 years if things don't change your going to see many hunters leave the ranks, fathers will have little motivation to start there kids hunting. Regardless of what the eco-hippies say the majority of hunters, do it out of tradition and sustenance.

Our 600,000 WI hunters will turn to 500,000 than 400,000. and in 20 years we will have the anti-gun/anti-hunters asking why we even exist. because we are no longer effective.

The only way this will change is to get the wolf numbers inline with what the recovery plan called for. In WI that is 150 animals not 1500-2000.

swamphunter likes to stir the **** pot with bias and opinion, he can't find a link or post a fact, He has not rebutted a single question I have posted with anything relevant, I hardly believe a thing he says about himself, because of his lack of proof in anything he post.

I have said all I'm going to on this thread, I feel like His intellect, or lack of, will start rubbing off on me if I continue with this debate.

 

[SBruce]

Again, very few here a saying to wipe them out, yet you keep mentioning that. Get over it.

Yes, they can be controlled historically, but by poisoning and helicopter gunning only. Study what Alaska and Alberta are having to do right now.

You need to understand that hunting alone does not control wolves.

+1

As a long time coyote hunter and trapper (even some done professionally) and additionally a rancher and long time hunting guide. I concur with this statement.

In the western states, coyote numbers have been largely controlled by a combination of shooting/hunting, trapping/snaring, m44s and Getters, denning, dogging, poisoning, hunting/trapping competitions and arial gunning. Due to all these measures; we've managed to keep the numbers in check in the west, and predation on healthy big game animals by coyotes has been minimized.

Even with all these control measures in place, both in the private and professional sector; coyotes have expanded their territories and are now found coast to coast..............why will the wolves be any different.

Out here, we loose way more big game animals due to weather, food supply, disease and loss of habitat than we do to coyotes. Although coyotes sometimes get the blame for a kill just because the carcass is surrounded by coyote tracks (which are only there because they fed on the already dead carcass).

Now, some eastern states are having some issues with coyote predation. Their coyote populations are quite unchecked in comparison to our coyote control measures here in the west. Additionally, the eastern coyotes are quite a bit larger than our western ones and the deer numbers are high in the east; so the coyotes pack up more often to make taking down deer easier and safer.

Similar differences between east and west can be said of the wolves, both the original native to the rockies and plains wolf and the eastern or great lakes area wolf vs the larger and more aggressive canadian gray wolf.

The new wolves are not what was here originally, and they don't act the same. If we're going to control the wolf numbers to a point that there isn't a huge decrease in big game numbers, then the same methods we've used for coyotes will have to be implemented, and soon. If not, our big game numbers will not recover in our lifetimes, if ever.

 

[Coyboy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swamphunter
I am all for killing excess wolves, and I am also for killing any other animals that get beyond their carrying capacity.


Yes finally you showed your true colors and this is why you don't get it.

Who determines the wolves are in excess???, the game depts? when the wolves are starving?

Wolves don't starve as long as there is game, if they are low on feed their reproduction slows. And they continue to control the population of big game animals.

You want to hunt only animals that are above the carring capacity of the land. YOUR WORDS.

There won't be any the wolf will take care of that.


ITS NOT UP TO THE HUNTER TO DECIDE WHEN ENOUGH WOLVES ARE ENOUGH IT IS SOCIETYS AND SOCIETY PREDOMINENTLY IS FULL OF TREE HUUGGERS WHO WANT THE WOLF.

Hunters have been the number one tool for game managment for nearly 75 years that is coming to a end. swamphunter YOU just don't get it.

WOLVES NEVER GET OVER THEIR CARRYING CAPACITY, LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT WILDLIFE SYSTEMS BEFORE POSTING!
__________________
Jim See

 

[jmden]

Everything Wolf Forum

How many the state can support or endure whatever you want to call it is for your state dept of natural resources to determine. that is what ours will be doing. I am of the opinion that trapping them should be included as well as hunting. I talked to a federal trapper a few years ago that was trapping problem wolves and he says they are not that hard to trap.
I think you should all check out this link, now THAT is the enemy. And there are more out there like them. They are keeping track of the hunt numbers too lol.

Incidentally you all gang up on me just because I don't think ALL wolves should be wiped out. have received PMs that say they agree with me but don't want to get involved. Can't say as I blame them.

We are not 'all' ganging up on you for the reason you state. That's been communicated many times over and you refuse to admit it. It's like you're holding a grudge with little reason. You're being 'ganged' up on because of your continual defense of your indefensible positions.

Those that you say PM you with similar thinking should get on here and state their case and show their evidence. Let's discuss it and hopefully we'd all become a little better educated.

Folks that are living with what the wolf is doing out west and/or have done (and many have every right to hate the imported wolf and the way the it was introduced--many livelihoods, ways of life have been devastated due to this imported wolf, not to mention much more frequent empty freezers...and for what?) their research on the issue, realize what is going on and the complete farce it is.