Hunt will probably end below quota; but many more wolves killed in state’s wolves-are-just-vermin-zone-

Wyoming first wolf hunt ends Dec. 31. 2012.  Wyoming opted for a much less ambitious/less-destructive-to-wolves hunt compared to neighboring Idaho and Montana. Unlike its neighbors, Wyoming has a wolf maximum kill quota and a relatively short hunt. However, Wyoming also has (probably) far fewer wolves than Montana or Idaho.

As of Dec. 28, 41 wolves had been killed in the hunt. That is eleven short of the quota of 52.  The state also has sub-quotas by means of quotas for wolf hunt areas. Most of the hunt areas are already closed.  At the end of last year (2011), it was estimated there were 328 wolves in Wyoming. However, hunting in Yellowstone and Grand Teton Parks is not allowed. Neither is hunting allowed on the large Wind River Indian Reservation unless the tribes set a hunt, and they didn’t.  In principle that left about 200 wolves subject to the hunt in NW Wyoming where most of the wolves live.  As a result the loss of 41 or so wolves would not seem to reduce the wolf population after pups are born next April. However, there is an important caveat.  An unknown number, but at least 44 additional wolves had already been killed by Wildlife Services for real or imaginary livestock depredations and from poaching and accidents, plus natural deaths of wolves.

There is much more to the story, however.  Yellowstone Park’s wolf population has recently dropped precipitously by natural means and then two Park wolves were shot in the Wyoming wolf hunt when they moved outside the Park.  A number of wolf packs use parts of Grand Teton National Park, but none use it entirely because it is so small when one considers wolf movements.  Some argue ten or more  wolves that used Grand Teton were killed.  See previous story on Grand Teton.

The death of national park wolves has aroused a lot of controversy, especially considering that at least 7 more Yellowstone Park wolves were killed in Montana’s wolf hunt, prompting Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks to close hunting along the most relevant parts of the northern boundary of the Park for the rest of season. The Montana wolf hunt continues in most of the rest of the state.

Most troubling to wolf conservationists is the deal Wyoming swung with the federal government’s not-so-wolf-friendly Department of Interior. The federal government allowed Wyoming to make about 85% of the state a continual free fire zone on wolves, with no protections whatsoever.  The feds allowed the state to turn what was an threatened species in Wyoming into mere vermin, just like that.

The official line was that  the rest of Wyoming was not good wolf habitat and inappropriate for wolves. Few wolves lived there anyway, officials argued.  The facts contradict much of the official line because 23 wolves have been killed since October in rest of the state.  That is almost half of the quota, although the quota does not apply to this “wolves-are-vermin-area.”  Easy, but crude, extrapolation then suggests the wolf population in this unregulated zone might be about 100 wolves, not the state’s estimate of 32 wolves.  Anyone with passing knowledge of the Salt River and Wyoming Ranges just south of Jackson Hole knows these mountains are packed with deer and elk. They are where most of 23 “vermin”  wolves were killed.

When Wyoming finalized their wolf hunt plans, conservation groups immediately filed “intent to sue notices.” They would have sued immediately, but federal law prevented this.  When the mandatory 60 day wait was up, two groups sued. One group was led by Defenders of Wildlife and second composed of the following: Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, Conservation Congress, Friends of Animals, Friends of the Clearwater, National Wolfwatcher Coalition, Western Watersheds Project and WildEarth Guardians.  Later the National Humane Society sued.  On Dec. 21, a federal judge joined the first two lawsuits.  Much of the conservation argument concerns the 85% of the state where all the wolves can be wiped out.

Wyoming seems to have held a cautious wolf hunt, yet most of the sparsely populated state, which officially claims to have an excess of elk, is wiping out the wolf.

– – – – – –

Season’s End update. Jan. 2013. The season ended Dec. 31 with an official tally of 43 wolves killed. 

 

 

 
avatar
About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides.

82 Responses to Wyoming’s first wolf hunt soon to close (update)

  1. avatar Robert R says:

    The wolves that reside in Yellowstone Park are not the property of the Park. If there is a legal hunt and these wolves fallow the prey it’s not rocket science what is going to happen
    I don’t think either side will ever be satisfied weather the wolf is protected or hunted one thing is clear. If the population is up or down different solutions for management will be needed for the long term.
    The wolf is here to stay and will adapt and has adapted to hunting pressure.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Robert R,

      Of course, the wolves don’t belong to Yellowstone Park when they are outside the Park (except while they are in the Park? Then I think they might?).

      More importantly to me, anyway, is that the Park wolf experience provided a rare case study of what happens if you do not lethally or otherwise manage wolves — if you let them live and grow or decline as if humans did not exist.

      What happened (so far?). The wolf population did not grow forever, as some people suggested. I have to call them “fools” because nothing grows forever.

      The wolf population grew rapidly, but grew at decelerating pace (the classic “S” curve). Then they declined, and significantly so. I am saying that the population seems to have self regulated, contrary to all the predictions of the Fish and Game Departments and the anti-wolf groups.

      Now human intervention is making the Park wolves subject to hunt mortality. Therefore, one of the few unmanaged wolf populations we can study is becoming accidentally impacted by human mortality.

      My cynical guess is that there are interests that don’t want information gathered in a scientific way about unmanaged wolves or large carnivores in general because they already have all the answers.

      • avatar Mark L says:

        Could not agree more to your observation. I’m sure there are biologists/ecologists that are taking note, it’s just a question of how to get the word out now.

      • avatar Robert R says:

        Ralph

        Is not all wildlife, public domain and state and federal agencies are only responsible only for the management of them and their habitat?

        • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

          Robert R,

          State ownership of the wildlife is true for private lands, national forests and BLM lands, but I don’t think it is for most national parks.

          I need to research the matter, or maybe someone knows here?

      • avatar Gina Fife says:

        No animal “belongs” to the park. It is not a zoo.

  2. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    Let’s not forget the contribution by the SSS Reverse Conservation League and the Poacher’s Guild…numbers we can never know.

    One consern I have is getting hard facts from Wyo G&F and Wildlife (Dis) Services on the extent of their wolf ” control” efforts. For one thing, I would like to know the extent of the radio collaring that has been done and is ongoing. For another thing would like to know where wolf control actions have taken place, rather than merely ” west of Cody ” which can be anywhere in a map box 60 miles N-S and 30 miles E-W containing a large number of cattle operations abutting the trophy zone or contained in it.

    Good point Ralph about the 23 wolves known to have been killed outside the trophy zone but mainly in SW Wyoming near that hazy ” Flex Zone” established to allow some pseudo-connectivity opportunities for wolves wanting to visit Idaho.

    Will anyone outside of a few secretive wildlife agency folks ever get to see the Big Picture about the totality of wolf management in Wyoming in sufficient detail on an accurate timeline across seasons ?

    • avatar Leslie says:

      Cody, now that the USF&W is no longer managing wolf control year round, do you know what site posts their control numbers? I don’t see it on the WG&F site, only the hunt numbers.

    • avatar Rancher Bob says:

      Cody
      Again with the illegal SSS, what’s the current reason for SSS? Killing wolves is legal, why shovel, why shut-up. Unless your talking Shooting, Smile for the camera, Show the photos.
      There’s always some evil plot afoot with you.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        RB there is no conspiracy theory at work here
        real demonstrated bias, hatred and desire to kill, maim and torture wolves. Not all people feel this way but certainly enough to find some credible evidence in many places.

        • avatar Rancher Bob says:

          You need to tell cody that there’s no conspiracy not me.

          • avatar Leslie says:

            I do have to wonder how do they know that the predator zone wolves were not killed inside the trophy zone? Besides someone reporting poaching, that person would just bring in the head etc. 10 days later, and say it was from the predator zone

      • avatar jon says:

        People who hate wolves and don’t care about breaking the law are going to kill wolves with tag or no tag.

      • avatar CodyCoyote says:

        No conspiracy , Rancher Bob.
        The power of observation is called Cynicism or Conspiracy-mongering by those who do not have it.

        To Wit:
        Considering all its permutations, the playing field for Wolf Management in Wyoming is about as level as the Tetons…

  3. avatar Sam Parks says:

    Wyoming’s wolf population (outside YNP) declined slightly between the end of 2010 and the end of 2011. That year, 51 wolves were known to have died. This year, at least 112 wolves have been killed: 64 by hunters, 44 died before the hunting season (management removals, natural causes, etc.), and 4 have died during the hunting season that aren’t counted towards the the quota (3 natural, 1 hit by car). At the end of 2011, the minimum population estimate was 230. 112 out of 230 is a big hit, especially considering 51 known wolf deaths the previous year was enough to cause a slight decline. Let’s hope pup survival was excellent this year.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Sam Parks I think I should add a paragraph to the story. Damn, I totally forgot about the large poaching and control take when I was writing it.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Sam,

      So, I updated the story to add this critical data and correct my mistake.

      Thanks again!

  4. avatar Sam Parks says:

    Killings in the predator zone keep going up. Two more have been reported since this was posted. The number is up to 25. Unbelievable.

  5. avatar Ida Lupine says:

    The feds allowed the state to turn what was an threatened species in Wyoming into mere vermin, just like that.

    This is extremely troubling to me. How does classifying a formerly endangered species as “vermin” even qualify as a legitimate species management in any way? How can anybody seriously present a plan like that?

    Yellowstone Park’s wolf population has recently dropped precipitously by natural means.

    This is another troubling issue as fars as coming up with a population number. We’re lead to believe that with historical studies and data that we can predict with certainty, but we really can’t.

    How will this affect hunting numbers in future hunts? How long does it take a pup to become a healthy adult and not what would qualify as just a ‘number’ to be eliminated as soon as the especially loooong hunting season comes about? There isn’t much time allowed in between hunting seasons.

    • avatar Ralph Maughan says:

      Ida,

      Almost all wolf females are ready to have pups at age 2.

      I think a few have had them at one. I know some wolf males have been sexually mature at one.

    • avatar Louise Kane says:

      Ida the idea is to eliminate all wolves in the areas they are considered “vermin” and thats what they will do unless stopped.

      • avatar Ida Lupine says:

        That is not management, and it does need to be stopped. Basically, the delisting has given the states carte blanche to do anything they like. Classifying an animal as vermin is not management, it is extermination, and the American public is being lied to. I can hardly wait to see what’s gonna happen in January re cabinet appointments – will it be better? Or worse?

  6. avatar Richie G says:

    Ralph we agree but for different reasons,once in 2006 I was driving in the tenton village,by the big boardwalk for people to walk,with the mountains in the backround.I thought, what a beautiful place for wolves and bears. But for a person like me to hear of outright hunts I do not know if I can live their,forget the cold climate.I love the mountains way more than the water,and I love wolves,bad or good. Let nature take it’s course,if wolves die because of natural causes so be it. Nature is cruel but to no extent what man brings to the table.

    • avatar ramses09 says:

      I agree with you whole heartily! Nature takes care of it’s own. I to would like to see wolf hunting gone, as far as that goes, all apex predator hunts should be banned. jmho.

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Let nature take it’s course,if wolves die because of natural causes so be it. Nature is cruel but to no extent what man brings to the table.

      Yes, that’s my philosphy too. I would like to see wolves in our national parks totally exempt from hunting – if a buffer zone is the answer, or if collaring is the answer, etc. It’s not much to ask for, since the states have a totally no-compromise stance on it, completely the opposite of their being protected. Stakeholders sounds like a corporation, which living things are not – oh wait….. :)

  7. avatar Snaildarter says:

    We just need to keep fighting for a sustainable solution and I’d love to see a permanent ban on hunting wolves and Bison in the greater Yellowstone eco-system. I know that’s not completely realistic is today’s politics but it should be the goal.

    • avatar Robert R says:

      Think about what you wish for by eliminating hunting and trapping of wolves !

      Should wildlife services and or the it becomes managed by the government it’s probably going to be same or worse. When wolves get in trouble for livestock deprivation sometimes whole packs are eliminated. Hunters and yes trapping is only taking in most cases one wolf at a time. The wolves are adapting to hunting and trapping and learning how to survive better, where as if whole packs are eliminated that cannot happen.

      • avatar Connie says:

        Pray tell, how does a wolf adapt to trapping?

        • avatar Robert R says:

          As does any animal, by scent, seeing another and learning what is good and bad.
          Being that a wolf is so intelligent they learn what to avoid. If they get shot at they learn to avoid, human scent,motorized sounds, trucks,truck doors shutting,airplanes and anything associated with humans.

          • avatar Louise Kane says:

            Traps next to streams where wolves need to drink, in the paths, roads and byways they use to travel, snares in trees and near fences and both baited just in case some fortunate animals manage to escape the areas littered with these abominations that are places near their required and necessary habitats. A truly fair and humane way to “harvest” beings. Disgraceful

            • avatar Leslie says:

              Peeing around traps is a good way to minimize animals from coming near them and you’re not touching the trap, which is illegal.

          • avatar Immer Treue says:

            And cammoflaged scent neutral Walloons 100 yards + from gut piles with high powered rifles. HITF do you learn from that?

            I’m sorry, if they are to be hunted, well hunt them. I do not subscribe to the “they’ll learn, because they’ll be dead.

            • avatar Rancher Bob says:

              Immer
              I know you don’t like the wolves learn from being hunted line, so you’ll have to just believe those who have hunted and trapped wolves. Talk with your local wolf biologist they will tell you wolves learn very fast from their experiences and experiences of other pack members. The other way is for you to take up hunting and trapping easy choice for you.

              • avatar Leslie says:

                RB, I do think wolves learn when hunted because they are pack animals and when they observe one of their own dead from a human’s gun, they’ll figure it out. BUT, these Park wolves are quite different. We now have park wolves roaming our environs and they have not figured out that humans are bad.

              • avatar Rancher Bob says:

                Leslie
                We have had park wolves roaming since 95 what has change is that now they are hunted outside the park. Many animals quickly learn which land is a safe zone, do you really think wolves can’t learn what other animals can learn?
                Let’s not forget they reproduce at more rapid rate than many other animals.

              • avatar Leslie says:

                “Many animals quickly learn which land is a safe zone, do you really think wolves can’t learn what other animals can learn?”

                I think there may be a difference between private and public lands which elk/deer use for protection during hunting, and the vast territories that wolves use. wolves are much more territorial than prey animals. The wolves that move in here from the park–how do they know there is a void left by hunters killing wolves off? They scent it and they also are following their prey.

                I highly doubt that wolves are going to figure out that YNP is ‘safe’ while everywhere else is not. I do think they’ll figure out that people are not safe. But Park wolves might not have enough time for that between hunts. But take for instance ’06. I think she was killed here quite easily, in a field near Crandall out in the open, because she was habituated to humans.

              • avatar Rancher Bob says:

                Leslie
                Thanks for the answer, time will tell the answer.

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                Rancher Bob,

                When a field biologist traps a wolf, they don’t kill the wolf. Learned avoidance behavior is feasible in that scenario. When in a trap and or snare and death is the outcome, learning ends.

                Unless they attend school like fish

                http://touch.dailymotion.com/video/xpi1bj_educated-fish-1937-fleischer-studios_shortfilms

              • avatar Immer Treue says:

                RB,

                “The other way is for you to take up hunting and trapping easy choice for you.” :-)

                Sorry, no.

    • avatar Leslie says:

      It would be great if they would start next year with a buffer zone adjacent to YNP and no hunting in GTP areas. Also, I would venture to guess that more wolves from the park were killed than the reported collared ones and can be identified by G&F authorities working with Park officials. They know those numbers and are not revealing them.

      From those incredibly high predator zone numbers, seems like they could easily do a successful hunt zone there (by re-listing them as trophy) and create a buffer zone.

      • avatar Louise Kane says:

        Leslie, it would be great next year if every organization that is dedicated to better wildlife and predator management policies would get their shit together, to work collaboratively to advertise the slaughter of wolves under these BS state plans using a directed national strategy. Its late, I’m cranky and sick of seeing dead wolves. I keep seeing the coward trapper go up to execute the wolf in the film Brooks Fahy, George W and others made. Even the measly buffer zone that was asked for was fought against and prevented by Big Game Forever and other anti predator groups. Getting the buffer zone in the park would be a start but its a sad statement about the miserably low expectations most have when it comes to protecting wolves now….Talk about setting the bar low. To conduct atrocities like those that are inflicted on most predators with federal and state money while these animals live within millions of acres of public lands is a sad testament to the corrupted state of wildlife management. I find it especially disgusting that so called experts argue with authority, without shame or embarrassment that its perfectly sound to kill off all but 100 – 150 wolves per state, in these enormous tracts of public land. Its so f’d up its hard to believe sometimes.

        • avatar savebears says:

          Problem is Louise, over 65% of Montana is private land, and many of those public tracks are not good wolf habitat.

          • avatar Louise Kane says:

            problem is none of of Montana, Wyoming or Idaho is good wolf habitat anymore

            • avatar SaveBears says:

              No Louise, all three states have good habitat, but at this time, the powers that be are going to do what they can to prevent them from moving into those areas

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                SB, all states do not have good habitat. Habitat when its littered with traps, snares and paroled by hunters, ranchers, and wildlife managers using helicopters, ATVs, snowmobiles, bows and arrows, rifles and baits is not good habitat. I’d like to see anyone willing to brave the odds of surviving the hunting season while trying to raise their small children having to dodge the number of human induced dangers and lengths of seasons. The only places suitable for wolves are now war zones. So where is the safe or good habitat for these animals? Oh yeah as soon as spring comes those that survive get to give birth and then 5-6 months later their pups get to learn the hard way how to loose their family members even before they are adults or many of them are killed even before they are of mating age or get to finish their adolescence. I wonder who among us would subject their family to that kind of environment, would consider this good “habitat” to live in. This is what wolves live in now, that they lost federal protection. I am heartsick over it and I’m not alone by any means.

              • avatar savebears says:

                Louise,

                Did you even read what I posted? The habitat is there, we are not lacking habitat. One thing I find interesting after this whole thing with a buffer zone, now our legislature is pushing a bill that would prevent the Game commission from establishing a buffer zone around both Yellowstone as well as Glacier.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                SB my argument is that its not good habitat if the ability to survive is reduced by extreme hunting pressure. Its not literal of course. anyhow you knew what I meant, I would think

              • avatar savebears says:

                I know the point you are trying to make, I am simply pointing out, that we do have the habitat, but it seems as if the harder the states are pushed, the harder they are pushing back. The real possibility exists that there will not be buffer zones around either park, and it could and likely will become state law.

      • avatar savebears says:

        Leslie,

        I seriously doubt you will see a buffer zone around the park, at least not on Montana’s part, the FWP stated today, they will not pursue it any further and there is a bill in the legislature, that would make it permanent. So I don’t see it happening.

        We also know that Wyoming is not going to institute a buffer zone, as they have their trophy zone right next tot he park.

        Idaho, is going to think of new ways to kill wolves over the next 6 months.

        So I just don’t see it happening.

  8. avatar Richie G says:

    I would also like to add, keep the government out of it also, they are the caretakers of the ranchers,this is bad for the wolves. By far wild dogs kill more cattle,mountain lions etc,. But it is always the outcry to kill the wolf. Ralph had a headline of an article in a local paper, wolf kills a cow,while their own dogs killed many, that tells the story.

  9. avatar IDhiker says:

    Well, Rancher Bob,

    There was the infamous poisoning in the Bob Marshall last May near Big Prairie which killed four wolves and six eagles. This was after a year of hunting, so I guess some people still felt SSS was necessary!

    • avatar Rancher Bob says:

      The whole point of SSS is hiding the fact it happened. Use of poison is a bold in your face statement.

      • avatar IDhiker says:

        And quite cowardly.

      • avatar josh says:

        RB you know its no wolf ever killed! Starts with a buffer zone, then a bigger buffer zone, then the “buffer zone” is the United States! :)

        • avatar Louise Kane says:

          Josh should we be so fortunate to hope for this for wolves. There is no need for hunters to kill wolves. The states were already doing this.

          • avatar Savebears says:

            Louise,

            What you don’t seem to realize, either way, wolves are going to be managed, in other words killed. If the state does it or the Fed’s do it, it will cost them a lot of money, if you allow hunters to do it, the state is actually going at least break even

            But as soon as you realize, they are going to be killed, you will be better off.

            • avatar Louise Kane says:

              SB obviously I realize they will be killed, I don’t agree with the policies and I intend to keep voicing my displeasure, and disagreement any time I can. They were being “managed” just fine under federal management and the feds need to step in again and or we need to insist they do. This state “management” is all out war. It sucks SB and its not in the best interest of most, nor is it defensible from any number of viewpoints.

              • avatar JB says:

                SB, Louise:

                I think the long term test will be to see if per capita wolf-human conflicts actually decrease or increase under state management. If per capita conflicts increase (like some claim) then wolf advocates will have a strong pragmatic case for eliminating hunting and trapping of wolves. If not, then SB’s argument holds: it’s a whole lot cheaper to let hunters and trappers kill them then pay WS to remove offending individuals. Of course, none of this addresses the ethics issue.

              • avatar Louise Kane says:

                JB I think its a great deal more complicated then that. There are some very dedicated advocates who really want to change the anti predator policies of the west, and elsewhere. The vagaries of politics played into the hands of anti predator establishments this last round. I’m hoping/betting with some exposure and a lot more attention to the issue we could see a call for federal intervention. Wyoming is making a good case for it. And I know some of the NGOs are working on a case against updating the recovery goals and plan. Certainly other pragmatic arguments such increase or decrease of wolf/human/livestock conflicts will provide ammunition for either side. But the all out war on these animals has got to come into play, at some point. I see this as a national tragedy and a poor reflection on our inability to advance past outdated, inhumane and scientifically unsound wildlife policies. I think many others do as well.

              • avatar Rancher Bob says:

                Louise
                I call this wolf lovers lie number 4.
                First your against hunting and trapping by the public, and your against WS killing problem wolves. If wolves are relisted you’ll be the first to object to the removal of wolves by any agency.
                Because of that stance public management is very defensible, remember the Wedge pack?

  10. avatar CodyCoyote says:

    At Bureaucratic Quitting Time on the last day of the year and the last day of Wyoming Wolf Season , the reported ” harvest ” was 43 wolves in the Trophy areas, and 26 additional wolves shot in the free-fire zone, for a total of 69. It’s possible few more may be reported in coming days.

    Now the proverbial ” Long Season ” opens.

  11. avatar Richie G. says:

    But as soon as you realize they are going to be killed,you will be better off. In who’s world will you be better off ,yours?

  12. avatar Richie G. says:

    But as soon as you realize they are going to be killed,you will be better off. In who’s world will you be better off ,yours? wrong e-mail address sorry.

    • avatar Savebears says:

      Richie,

      You may be living in a fantasy world, because wolves will be killed, even without legal hunting, they will still be killed by poachers and government hunters. The states are going to manage them one way or another for the levels they have set for their states.

  13. avatar Richie G. says:

    I know they will be killed, my only fantasy is I wish people would see what they must endure in the wild just to survive without being hunted,that is my fantasy and my reality.

  14. avatar Richie G. says:

    P.S. Like Ralph stated about the wolves in the park can be taken for all wolves inside or outside the park, the S curve will transpire. I think this could be called natural selection.

  15. avatar Sam Parks says:

    A wolf was poached in hunt area 8 after the season was closed, meaning the quota for this area was exceeded by two wolves. It was already one over quota.

  16. avatar Cody says:

    Webmaster note: this person is a new Cody on the forum, not Cody Coyote.

    i am overjoyed to hear the quota was almost filled (only 7 wolves short). However, i believe that they should either make the hunting season longer so the quota is filled, or give people free tags and just open the season until the quota is filled.

    my preference would be that we just keep the wolves off of the endangered species list and kill them like we are allowed to kill the coyote. all the people that care about the wolves are not the ones suffering from the growing population of the wolves. the farmers and ranchers that have to make their living off of selling their livestock are the ones suffering. the wolves are killing their livestock and basically robbing the farmers of their money. also the hunters are suffering from the growth of the population of wolves. some people, like my family, depend on the elk and deer meat to last us through the year. if the wolves are chasing away, not necessarily eating them, then we cant depend on those animals because we cant eat them if we cant shoot them, and we cant shoot them if they are not there. and yes, us hunters can adapt to the places the elk are being chased to. but with more and more people leasing out property to big shot out fitters or turning against hunting, we cant really adapt to that except the fact of maybe going without those animals to eat.

    • avatar Nancy says:

      Hi Cody!

      New here and I’d suggest you spent some time looking at the threads, topics etc. on the site, before blow your “wad” on thinking that the destruction of wolves/predators in general, is “a good thing”

      • avatar Nancy says:

        Ken- what happened to the edit button??

        Ment to say before you blow your “wad”

        Some of us females are quite familiar with the term though :)

    • avatar Louise Kane says:

      Ralph thanks for the heads up because it would have been shocking to think that Cody Coyote would ever write such trash. He would not

    • avatar jon says:

      Cody, the wolves also depend on the elk and deer. It is obvious you are against wolves.

    • avatar Immer Treue says:

      Cody,

      “i am overjoyed to hear the quota was almost filled (only 7 wolves short). However, i believe that they should either make the hunting season longer so the quota is filled, or give people free tags and just open the season until the quota is filled.”

      I guess one is entitled to their opinion. Overjoyed though, eh? Not a way to win friends and influence people on a “wildlife” site. Why not do a bit of real research, or shut up and “listen” here for a while before shooting the proverbial “wad”.

    • avatar Leslie says:

      Cody, here is a good place to start your research. 2012 study finds historic overpopulation of ungulates, and low levels of top predators, affecting ecosystem health

      http://www.cof.orst.edu/leopold/papers/OSUPress_Apr2012.pdf

  17. avatar Leslie says:

    Cody, perhaps you should read up a bit on what wolves do for habitat and the landscape, how much wolves actually affect elk movements,and the actual numbers of elk. Since I assume you live in Cody,WY, the WG&F has been giving out extra elk tags in certain areas where there are too many. Those are areas close to Cody

  18. avatar Leslie says:

    Cody, if you had your way, WY would be relisted in a heartbeat!

    • avatar Ida Lupine says:

      Fingers crossed! ;)

      • avatar savebears says:

        Based on talking to a couple of the upper management people at Wyoming Game and Fish, I don’t think if the USFWS attempts to re-list, it would be in a heartbeat. Wyoming has their paperwork in place to file with the courts if the attempt is made.

        No, I am not taking a side, but I don’t think it will be as easy as everybody seems to think it will be this time around.

  19. avatar Dirt Bomber says:

    Long before humans came on the scene wildlife was managing just fine. All of this talk about “management” is a smoke screen for extermination. Like “managing” the Rock Springs area for gas/oil development. Management is another term for destruction especially when applied to wolves in western states. The only criteria used was the “shoot-on-sight” measure some times referred to as the “Brown-and-down” method.

Calendar

December 2012
S M T W T F S
« Nov   Jan »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey