MV, McKenzie Valley. I don't mean you. I just read about 7 different forums and that is what keeps getting mentioned, that these non native wolves are 3x bigger or weigh 200 pounds. I know you see it, don't play me.
"Don't play me." Not playing you, just making it clear who communicated what.
I have no intent so to speak. I just don't take everything I read as gospel without doing a little reading on my own. I find it interesting how many will take the word of one phD over the word of another because they just agree with their position. Many many guys on hunting forums discredit any govt. official or biologist and their numbers, or studies, etc, when they disagree with their position, but then find a few guys like in that link(which I have read before) and hang onto it as total gospel.
I just like discussion.
Yes, I read all your links. And that is what I was trying to explain. Similar SUBSPECIES will act, live, eat, etc very differently in different ecosystems. Wolves out on the tundra living next to thousands of caribou, vs, wolves running around in the jungle brush of NW MT, I argue that if you just swap a pack from here and drop it there, it can and will change immediately to the environment. It wouldn't take long, if you dropped irremotus in the MV with lots of food, they would grow larger, have bigger litters, etc within a couple generations. Canids have the ability to have smaller litters when food is scarce and visa versa. Here is one study, it is a known phenomenon.
http://www.arctic-predators.uit.no/biblio_IPYappl/TannerfeldtOikos98 litter size arctic fox.pdf
Also, if you take a McKenzie Valley pack, drop it in NW MT, it will quickly disperse and start taking a lot of time digging bunnies out of brushpiles and holes, because game is so few and far between comparatively.
Here is one link I read a couple years ago, when one of the local politicians that was running for election tried to bring up E. granulosus, scaring the hell out of all the soccer moms in the area. I started reading about the disease, its prevalence worldwide, and how possible it was to get this affliction. Treatments, etc.
Echinococcus granulosus in Gray Wolves and Ungulates in Idaho and Montana, USA
This link certainly seems to tell me that the majority of wolves have this parasite in them and that it was not known that this parasite existed in this area before wolves were introduced. Do you disagree?
Here's the quote at the very top of the article/study. Isn't this just further cause for concern?:
"We evaluated the small intestines of 123 gray wolves (Canis lupus) that were collected from Idaho, USA (n=63), and Montana, USA (n=60), between 2006 and 2008 for the tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus. The tapeworm was detected in 39 of 63 wolves (62%) in Idaho, USA, and 38 of 60 wolves (63%) in Montana, USA. The detection of thousands of tapeworms per wolf was a common finding. In Idaho, USA, hydatid cysts, the intermediate form of E. granulosus, were detected in elk (Cervus elaphus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and a mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus). In Montana, USA, hydatid cysts were detected in elk. To our knowledge, this is the first report of adult E. granulosus in Idaho, USA, or Montana, USA. It is unknown whether the parasite was introduced into Idaho, USA, and southwestern Montana, USA, with the importation of wolves from Alberta, Canada, or British Columbia, Canada, into Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA, and central Idaho, USA, in 1995 and 1996, or whether the parasite has always been present in other carnivore hosts, and wolves became a new definitive host. Based on our results, the parasite is now well established in wolves in these states and is documented in elk, mule deer, and a mountain goat as intermediate hosts."
CDC - Echinococcosis - General Information - Cystic Echinococcosis (CE) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Two quotes from right at the top of this link above stand out for me:
"By petting or handling household dogs infected with the Echinococcus granulosus tapeworm. These dogs may shed the tapeworm eggs in their stool, and their fur may be contaminated."
and
"How is cystic echinococcosis (CE) spread?
The most common way of becoming infected with CE involves contact with infected dogs. Dogs that eat home-slaughtered sheep and other livestock become infected and Echinococcus granulosus eggs can be found in their stool and in dog hairs. Direct contact with infected dogs, particularly intimate contact between children and their pet dogs, leads to human infection. Indirect contact through soil, water and contaminated vegetables may also lead to infections. Echinococcus granulosus eggs can survive snow and freezing conditions. Risk factors for human infection include uncontrolled dogs living closely with people, uncontrolled slaughter of livestock, and unsanitary living conditions."
Dogs certainly seem to be something the CDC is concerned about here. More wolves = more dogs, obviously.
I don't have links to say there were packs of wolves here before introduction. All I can say is I grew up in Eureka and walked around in a lot of wolf tracks around Fortine, Trego, Pinkham, etc. sp's word seems to be good enough for folks here.
Here is an article that mentions the Pleasant Valley pack in Marion in 1989.
Wolf Reintroduction: How the Wolves Came Back - Natural Recolonization
I don't know that anyone is disputing this. However, other areas in the region certainly appeared to have had their own wolf before introduction of Canus lupis occidentalis with differnent morphology and habits that perhaps what you had up there. Is that a possibility you will consider? Your specific situation, while valid, may be quite different from someone else's, say in central Idaho.
You are probably confused because while I think we should have been hunting them long ago, I just don't fall in line with the thinking of every anti wolf dude on the internet.
In saying that, I guess, my intent is to get people to look at the east kootenai elk herd in s.e. BC. I put up a whole bunch of links in the "end the quotas" thread about them. I just see the Canadians literally doubling their elk herd there, enjoying incredible hunting in the face of these superduty CANADIAN wolves. Go there and read it. Then explain to me how they can do so well just across the 49th parallel. Nobody seems to want to acknowledge what they have done. I have put that out there many places and in many conversations. So, yeah, I guess my intent is to get our game agencies and land agencies to look at them and see what they are doing. Obviously something right. I see no reason why we can't have the same. We have the same wolves they do.
