Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Wolf Hunting
Wolf scoreboard.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HARPERC" data-source="post: 630099" data-attributes="member: 30671"><p>Idaho continues to add on to a good season: 248 hunters-114 trappers=362 wolves that won't be a problem next year. I'm would have never thought the Panhandle would be in the lead coming down to the wire, Dworshak was the unit I had picked. Densities must be higher than I ever expected. </p><p>I just posted on Broz's "Montana wolf hunting news" thread, so I"ll spare you the details here, but the Panhandle and NW Montana share some wolves. Given some of what came out in this study it should not surprise us the numbers coming out of there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HARPERC, post: 630099, member: 30671"] Idaho continues to add on to a good season: 248 hunters-114 trappers=362 wolves that won't be a problem next year. I'm would have never thought the Panhandle would be in the lead coming down to the wire, Dworshak was the unit I had picked. Densities must be higher than I ever expected. I just posted on Broz's "Montana wolf hunting news" thread, so I"ll spare you the details here, but the Panhandle and NW Montana share some wolves. Given some of what came out in this study it should not surprise us the numbers coming out of there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Wolf Hunting
Wolf scoreboard.
Top