If you  come across interesting wildlife news, please post it as a comment below.

About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University. He was a Western Watersheds Project Board Member off and on for many years, and was also its President for several years. For a long time he produced Ralph Maughan's Wolf Report. He was a founder of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He and Jackie Johnson Maughan wrote three editions of "Hiking Idaho." He also wrote "Beyond the Tetons" and "Backpacking Wyoming's Teton and Washakie Wilderness." He created and is the administrator of The Wildlife News.

420 Responses to Have you come across interesting wildlife news. Feb. 18, 2013?

  1. Snaildarter says:

    Coyote Meeting – Tuesday, January 29, 2013 – Church of the Epiphany – Atlanta
    by Phil Brane on January 25, 2013
    The Druid Hills Civic Association is sponsoring a meeting on January 29, at 7:30 p.m., for a discussion on coyotes living within intown communities in Alanta.
    The meeting will begin with three speakers:

    Chip Elliott, a coyote trapper who has been working throughout the metro Atlanta area for over 20 years. He was recently hired by private citizens to trap coyotes in Druid Hills.

    Chris Mowry, an associate professor and head of the biology department at Berry College. A former resident of Druid Hills, he has studied coyotes in the southeast and Yellowstone National Park, and he’s currently talking with local and state officials about a proposal to study coyotes in Atlanta.

    Mary A. Paglieri, a consultant with Little Blue Society in the San Francisco area. The Society specializes in human-animal conflict resolution, and Mary is the Director of Program Design and Implementation.

    The speakers will be followed by a generous Q&A period.

    I attended this meeting and the particpants were quite divided. Evidently urban trappers can make a good living in Georiga. A lot of people there thought their children were in danger.

  2. Mike says:

    How a single coyote changed the life of a trapper/hunter.


    It’s amazing what actually hanging out with an animal can do for your mindset.

    • Nancy says:

      Great story Mike 🙂

    • Immer Treue says:

      Great story, but… A Bear fan in Wisconsin?

      • Louise Kane says:

        Immer what do you think of the bill that Howling for Wolves is working on?

        • Louise Kane says:

          you are the kind of constituent they need to attend these meetings…….

        • Immer Treue says:


          I don’t know. Once money begins rolling into DNR coffers, it will be difficult to reverse the trend.

          I’m very interested in this from a number of points. I don’t want to sound like I’m shrugging it off, but currently my focus is concentrated on aging family members, and some real estate issues thanks to the banks and the mess they made of things.

          If things work out over the next week or so, I will look into it, as currently I feel like a fish out of water. Thanks so much for the information.

      • Harley says:


        I know! What an oddity! Are they sure this coyote is like all the rest? I mean, I’d expect a Wisconsin Coyote to like Green Bay…

        Ok, now a more serious question. I’ve read that wolves, even taken as pups, don’t turn out like this little guy. Not that they turn out vicious but a wild animal is, well it’s wild and they aren’t supposed to make good pets. While this story is really really cool, could it also be sending a wrong message about making a wild animal a part of the family? Just playing devils advocate here!

        • mikepost says:

          Harley you are correct. There is an old saying; “crazy as a pet coon” that reflects the inability of the vast majority of wild critters to adapt to captivity as a pet, particularly males, after puberty sets in. Lets be honest, having a wild animal as a pet requires captivity, the very antithesis of being wild. Lots of well known exceptions, but then you only hear about those, not the ones where the animal turned on its captor and was dealt with in some quiet way. I have seen this happen with pet squirrels up to farm raised elk…one day its like nature flips a switch and they become aggressive.

        • Immer Treue says:


          ” While this story is really really cool, could it also be sending a wrong message about making a wild animal a part of the family? Just playing devils advocate here!”

          Simple answer, yes. And as Mike Post said below, “crazy as a pet coon.” you just don’t know when that switch is going to flip. If the novelty wears off, and continued socialization ceases, so will the “trusted” sociability of the animal. I would presume, that the acre enclosure will becomes more and more the coyotes home. Wonder if it ever became house/chew broke?

          • Harley says:

            Interesting question Immer. I heard a story of someone who ‘owned’ a wolf. It did not end well for his furniture!

          • WM says:

            Stay tuned if Wiley gets horned up, assuming he still has his goodies. No mention of whether he is still “intact.”

            On the other hand maybe he is…..uh… “special.”

            • Harley says:

              Ooo good point WM! I hadn’t even thought of that. It usually is the males that have a more difficult time isn’t it.

          • Louise Kane says:

            several people have well publicized examples of coyotes as pets – I have not heard of one becoming aggressive to the contrary they are usually fearful of new people and won’t come out. Where is Jon Way when you need him!

            • savebears says:

              I have a good friend here in the area that had a coyote for a pet, she also was in charge of a pretty famous place that had exotic animals that have been photographed and shown in many films, the coyote she had, was great until such time as they had a baby, the baby was attacked and she almost lost her. The state cited her for having a wild animal, the child was removed from her care for over 18 months, she lost her job, by the time it was all over, the coyote was put down, the baby has lost use of one arm an she now enjoys weekly visits from the Child Welfare dept. Leave them in the wild.

              • Barb Rupers says:

                According to my mother, when my older brother was about three the neighbor’s german shephard used to “tend” to him and keep him from the creek and other dangerous places. Shortly thereafter the neighbors had a child that this dog killed while the kid was sleeping in its crib.

                As a result of being a biology teacher I have had a number of “wild” animals in my care (killdeer from an egg, fox, raccoon, great horned owl, red-tailed hawk, rufous hummingbird, bob cats, and a barn owl come to mind) most of the adult ones made it back to the wild, the youngsters, for various reasons, all died except for the Killdeer.

                This coyote is perhaps on of those exceptions – but generally I agree with savebears.

        • Mike says:

          It’s funny how these posts always go off on dopey tangents.

          The point is, it’s better that the coyote is alive than dead.

          • Harley says:

            *eye roll*
            Ok Mike. Dopey Tangent. Yes, the coyote is alive. Yes, very cool story. Do you really think that it’s beneficial, overall, for people to believe they can just go out and take in any wild animal as a ‘pet’? Oh, maybe it’s the Bears/Green Bay comment you’re referring to. At least I’m hoping that’s what you’re referring to.

            • Immer Treue says:


              Great video, and sequence with hand  raised wolf pup portrays  what will happen.


              • Harley says:

                Thanks Immer, I’ll check out the video later on this evening.

              • Harley says:


                That was pretty interesting. I loved that Boarder Collie!!

              • Immer Treue says:


                Glad you liked it. The BC was something, but what got me was the dogs, like people, focusing on the right side of a persons face. Wolves don’t do that. They are the poster child for canine ADHD. The process of domestication has altered innate canine behavior.

                If you’re still teaching, try to incorporate the look to to the left/the right side of a persons face.

              • Harley says:

                Ooo… that one will be difficult. As a general rule, autistic kids avoid eye contact like the plague…

              • Harley says:

                Eye contact and any face contact.

            • Nancy says:

              Harley – while many of our species are conditioned to expect and accept the callous damages/after effects, resulting from our need to hunt other species, Wiley obviously and fortunately, IMHO, got a break from all that, don’t you think?

              Athough the article should of been followed by a “don’t try this at home” disclaimer.

              Go Wiley 🙂

          • JB says:

            It’s neither “dopey” nor tangential to note that having wild predators as pets can lead to some very bad outcomes for people. I know of two people that keep wolves that were attacked, and another who kept a coyote that was attacked.

            Does it happen with dogs? You bet! Just this week we had a friend who rescued a dog only to be attacked and bitten (and the dog went back to the shelter). Upside: her 5 year old is no longer pressuring her for a pet.

    • Paul says:

      For all inquiring, Mr. Hanestad, a former trapper, hounder, and predator hater, reached out to us (Patricia Randolph specifically) to help save Wiley from the DNR whom he was afraid would kill him. While Rick was not allowed to keep Wiley as a “pet,” the DNR allowed him to be kept as “captive wildlife” for a $24.00 fee and a requirement to build him an enclosure. Wiley is also neutered and has helped to change the views of everyone who meets him. Rick has also been gracious enough to share with us his experience as a hounder/trapper and described the unspeakable things that hounders and trappers are doing to wildlife in Wisconsin. He has strong regrets about how he treated coyotes and other wildlife in the past. He is also among a growing number of hunters who are strongly against Wisconsin’s plan to allow the use of dogs against wolves. This is what he shared with us today:

      “Please remember that I grew up hunting and trapping; selling many furs to market so i see both sides of the fence which prior to Wiley I only seen the one side. I personally dont think some type of humane animal control can stop; without it many animals would suffer a much worse fate starving to death; however the photo of the redfox in a trap on the home page of this article is for sure not a one time deal; that I have seen many times. After Wiley I wouldnt think of setting a trap; I cant imagine my friend struggling for days to only get shot or hit over the head with a stick. As for hound hunting I think its horrible; prior to Wiley I gave that up just because I couldnt watch what others viewed as entertainment.

      Right now I am struggling with my personal feelings over hunting; I have taught my 16 yr old son everything my grandfather and my uncle taught me; from setting snares to hunting big game in the western states. Honestly Wiley has changed my opinion, and I hope that I can use this situation to create at least some awareness to others like me. I really believe that if people knew what I now know that wild animals wouldnt be treated like they are today.

      I told this to Patricia, but my Uncle has trapped more, hunted more than most people on the outdoor channel and 2-weeks ago his hounds were chasing a coyote. To make a long story short when the coyote came out to the road it stopped and looked eye to eye with him as he has his barrel of his rifle pointing at it. Im not saying my uncle will never hunt again, but because of Wiley he put down the gun and watched it run off. The next day he got rid of his hounds. This was only a few weeks ago. He told me the coyote looked just like Wiley and he just couldnt shoot it.”

      If this man can change other predator haters can as well. And for the record he doesn’t let his 8 year old daughter and Wiley play unsupervised. Obviously coyotes are not pets, but they are also not the demons predator haters make them out to be.

      • Nancy says:

        Thanks Paul for adding to this great story 🙂

        • Louise Kane says:

          yes Paul thank you. All of the stories I’ve read of people that have rescued coyotes have been similar, amazingly smart, loyal, fun, and handsome. this is a great story especially because someone so entrenched in killing has a new philosophy about living beings that deserve to live unmolested.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Thank you, Mr. Hanestad. 🙂 I do think wild animals should be left wild, but rescue and rehabilitation is commendable.

      • jon says:

        That’s good that he finally regrets his wicked ways. Does he still kill coyotes do you know? I think it’s a sad state of affairs when you have a bunch of hunters and trappers becoming predator haters. More people should start putting their guns down and actually respecting wildlife by not shooting it.

    • I wrote that coyote story and helped the hunter save the life of his coyote. If he had not gotten to sympathetic media ( and that is NOT the outdoors pages) , likely the Wisconsin DNR would have confiscated and killed his coyote. Hunters and trappers can take any coyote from our commonwealth and drag him or her into a fenced enclosure and loose dogs to tear them apart. Coyotes have dogs run on them night and day year-round to kill them without reporting. That means that ALL wildlife is at risk, harassed and killed by dogs and their runners anywhere, anyway, all the time. Dogs and mobs of armed men do not discriminate. Do not retire to Wisconsin – there is no peace, there is no quiet, there is no harmony – just suffering with wildlife being killed out as fast as they can trap ( on all public lands including state parks – 100%). There is no place to get away from this killing cartel.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Ugh. It is just so repulsive. What is wrong with people. How did we let this happen?

  3. Louise Kane says:

    From Howling with Wolves
    Immer take note: and please everyone forward to your friends! This woman is a powerhouse. I hope this bill is successful. thanks Maureen H!


    We have been busy meeting with state legislators and are pleased to report that a bill will soon be introduced to the Minnesota State Senate Environment and Energy committee that would impose a five-year waiting period on recreational wolf hunting, trapping and snaring.

    We need constituents to join us for meetings we already have scheduled with lawmakers. Lawmakers ask us to have constituents at meetings with them. If you are represented by one of the lawmakers listed below (confirm who represents you) we are asking for your help to join us for the scheduled meeting. These meetings are the most impactful way to influence Representatives and Senators to help stop the wolf hunt. If you are willing to attend a meeting with Howling For Wolves please email us at respond@howlingforwolves.org. Also, let us know if you have an upcoming meeting with your legislator. We would be happy to join you if you wish. We are making more meetings every day and we will keep you posted with other actions you can take as we move through this rapidly evolving legislative session.

    Upcoming Meetings
    Rep. Raymond Dehn – Tuesday, February 19th 1:30pm
    Rep. Roger Erickson – Wednesday, February 20th at 2pm
    Sen. Kent Eken – Tuesday, February 26th at 2pm
    Rep. Jason Isaacson – Wednesday, February 27th at 11am
    Sen. Susan Kent – Friday, March 1 at 10am
    Rep. Erin Murphy – Tuesday, March 5th at 9:30am
    Sen. Julie Rosen – Tuesday, March 5th at 4:15pm
    Sen. David Brown – Wednesday, March 6th at 3:30pm
    Rep. Barb Yarusso – Wednesday, March 13th at 1pm
    Rep. JoAnn Ward – Thursday, March 14 at 10am

    Click here for more ways you can take action or make a donation to support our efforts.

    Howling For Wolves
    Follow Us on Twitter
    Like Us on Facebook

    • Immer Treue says:


      Got in touch. Nothing scheduled for my reps at this time. This could work out for me.

  4. CodyCoyote says:

    I post a few articles here about the value of satellite imagery and spaceborne data collection for studying earth resources issues and geophysical dynamics.

    High Country news has a new article along these lines , keying in on western water issues and even glassing Wyoming.


    I’m glad the article mentioned how the invaluable LANDSAT images were privatized by the Reagan administration ( who feared they were being used willy-nilly for surveillance purposes ) , and the price for an image went from $ 50 for any one to $ 4,000 with scrutiny applied to purchaser . Thankfully , that was rescinded in 2001, one of the few things the G. H.W. Bush administration got right about science. All LANDSAT imagery going back 41 years is now available online , free, open source.

    By the way , last week’s excellent NOVA documentary , the 2-hour ” Earth From Space” film is now posted for free viewing online at pbs.org.

    Well worth the watching.

    • savebears says:


      I agree the Nova show was quite interesting, explaining a whole bunch that people speculate about.

  5. Lee Rockwell says:

    News in the making! Inviting you, on March 11th, to a day of remembrance in honor of Yellowstone’s Lamar Pack Alpha female called ’06. We also meet for the 1,200 other wolves who were wantonly slaughtered in 2012 in the lower 48 states. We will gather between
    1-5 on the west side of the Capitol buliding in Sacramento, CA. We’ll be praying aloud, that our voices be heard by the government. We want our wolves to be saved and demand the killing be stopped!

    Bring rhythm instruments, flutes, and your favorite wolf pictures, or images of whatever wildlife you want honored on this day. Come stand side by side, hand in hand. We hold the killers accountable for what they have done.

    There will be Indian drumming for which we are most grateful…

    (event creator Kim Richard)

    • Atlas says:

      Why in Sacramento? and not in Idaho, Montana or Wyoming

    • Snaildarter says:

      We are going back to Wolf Week at the Lamar Buffalo Ranch in March this year. I hope there’s something left to see. Losing Alpha 06 broke my heart. my girl friend took it worse than I did. I wrote the governor of Mountana, Idaho and Wy and told them that we spent about 2000.00 on our trip last year and we came to see wolves not hunt them.

      • JEFF E says:

        I fully sympathize with you but it must be understood that the Gov’s of the three respective states are “fully” owned by the livestock industry.

        it is just the way it is.
        they will not even deny it.

    • rork says:

      Thanks for pointer.
      I’ve been against most stocking decisions in WA for a long time, as a clear example of putting recreation over science. Not sure they’re sane even now.
      I highly commend these dam removals though.

      • WM says:


        This wasn’t so much aa recreational hatchery non-native fish supplementation. It was for the Elwha tribe to have a fishing source during dam deconstruction and habitat reclamation. They are not a rich tribe, made worse by poorly thought out investments in casino gambling, and now this.

        By the way, that hatchery was paid for with federal dollars, your tax dollars, and maybe now wasted if they don’t utilize it as much as contemplated, absent some of the non-native fish programs. So much for the front end federal planning and construction $$$ that was to spur tribal prosperity and bring more fish to the river sooner for tribal economic benefit.


        Who is right the native fish conservation organizations, comprised of some recreational fishers, or the feds trying to meet obligations in Indian Country while balancing the ESA. Seems FWS and other Interior Dept. agencies can’t win whatever they do.

        • rork says:

          Thanks WM, particularly for link.
          Now the predictable thing: I get defensive.
          I was mostly grousing about the past, though I’m still not happy about stocking for reasons anything less than avoiding extinctions. Financial necessity is the plea for all kinds of stupid. Perhaps could have bought the Elwha tribe off (we’ve done that with some Michigan fisheries – sometimes the fish are too valuable to harvest commercially).

          I don’t think recreational fishers supporting my view (that genetic diversity of the population is the most important thing, by far) are doing it for any self-serving reasons – under my methods, when there are problems, recreational fishing can go straight to hell first. It is true that I can be accused of being insensitive to human needs (not just food, but also financial benefits of tourism to many communities). We are privileged – being able to live without needing to fish. I do take points about that to heart.

          • Elk275 says:


            “We are privileged – being able to live without needing to fish. “”

            I need to fish, I love to fish and no radical environmentalist is going to have a damn thing to say whether I can or can not fly fish.

            • Rancher Bob says:

              Exactly, my thought Elk, there is something for the soul others will not understand about Montana life. After reading their post they might benefit from some of our recreation if only they would allow themselves.

            • JB says:

              “I need to fish, I love to fish and no radical environmentalist is going to have a damn thing to say whether I can or can not fly fish.”

              You do, of course, realize the absurdity of this statement? Fishing as a recreational activity is in even less danger than hunting of disappearing anytime soon (which is to say, none). I would point out, however, that I (and many others) would put the conservation of endangered fishes above your “need” to fish if and where the two come into conflict.

              • Elk275 says:

                You do, of course, realize the absurdity of this statement? There is no absurdity to that statement I will go fishing (fly fishing) according to the regulations.

                ++I would point out, however, that I (and many others) would put the conservation of endangered fishes above your “need” to fish if and where the two come into conflict.++

                I have thought about that when fishing the Big Hole River and catching grayling. But I still love to fish the Big Hole River.

              • JB says:


                You’re welcome to come here to Ohio to fish for steelhead? Our stocking efforts are second to none. Better hurry though, a few more warm years and we might well pass the thermal threshold for these fish. Of course, the walleye fishing on Lake Erie is great…well, for the time being anyway. If the phosphorous the farmers in NW Ohio are dumping into the watershed keeps increasing along with temperatures, we may just kill off the walleye as well.

                Hmm…maybe these “radical” environmentalists are actually on to something. 😉

            • Robert R says:

              Elk going steelhead fishing in three weeks can’t wait.

            • rork says:

              Elk “no radical environmentalist is going to have a damn thing to say whether I can or can not fly fish”.

              Go ahead and fish the Elwah illegally to test the truth of this statement. Or maybe you’ll conclude those are not radical environmentalists stopping you (and never have been), but just biologists.

              • WM says:


                ++…those are not radical environmentalists stopping you (and never have been), but just biologists.++

                I have to say this carefully and with reservations, but in some instances it is hard to tell the difference between radical environmentalists and a subset consisting of biologists. One of my favorite love to hate groups is the Center for Biological Diversity, whose membership and staff consists of quite a few radical environmentalist biologists on a mission (some of us might call it a fool’s errand the way they approach some of it).

            • rork says:

              Maybe there’s been a context problem.

              When I wrote “We are privileged” I mean people like me, who oppose stocking based on a long term view of genetics, and are free to feel strongly about that because we are not financially dependent on the fish either directly or indirectly.
              If I had a tackle store by a river that would have a crash in angler numbers if fish weren’t stocked, I might not be so strongly anti-stocking.
              I offer to quit fishing certain places when biologists request that, as a means of proving my devotion to my ideas that fish population genetics are important – it’s not just my mouth working.

              • Elk275 says:


                I have problem not fishing areas where a biologist would request no fishing. There is getting to be a number of people who oppose fishing the same as they approach hunting.

                I like catching native fish not rainbows, brookies or brown where they should not have been stocked in the first place.

  6. SAP says:

    Idaho legislature has double standards about national sovereignty: pitching a fit because a Turkish company wants to call products “Idaho”:

    What would the Idaho legislature say if the Turkish National Assembly demanded royalties for this?

    The good news is, this is another illustration that dim-wits eventually burn themselves out chasing after every perceived provocation. Too bad they can’t find something productive to do.

    • Peter Kiermeir says:

      Relax Idahoans. The Turks wanted to “idaho” only some melons and beans. Something you could be proud of. Could be worse: Just imagine Idaho brand toilet paper…

      • JEFF E says:

        but then it would be named “Berlin”

        • Peter Kiermeir says:

          probably not, cause we have so many turkish people in Berlin nowadays, even second/third generation, that they already start to complain in a broad berlinish slang that there are so many foreigners in Berlin nowadays……

    • WM says:


      Is Idaho’s quest to protect copyright of the name of the state any more foolish than the US Olypmic Committee’s effort to protect the use of the word “Olympic” or “Olympics” by anyone? I would say it is more like hi-jacking the term. Guess who was at the helm on that one to pass federal legislation – AK Governor Ted Stevens (R, deceased). It has widespread application – not the least of which is limiting the use of those words.

      There have been legal fights going on for several years now, prohibiting or putting restrictions on honest small businesses from using the words or the “Olympic ring symbols” (think everything from labeling food products to photographs to manufactured items like T shirts). Actually it wasn’t such a big deal before the internet and internet sales became more dominant.

      Here is the result of one IOC copyright prosecution. There are many others, as the legal issue continues on:

      Query whether Idaho is right in protecting its rights to identity as against a business operating unregulated on foreign soil and possibly committing fraud, if the intent is to lure purchasers of products to indeed believe the origin is within the state of ID.

      As for your use of the word “turkey” that is more of a world wide accepted generic word recognized in several languages, and refers to an avian genus/species (as well as its slang application – I am thinking Chicago Mike is a turkey – a. One who speaks as though they know what they’re talking about…though they do not. b. a bullshitter.

      • JB says:

        “Is Idaho’s quest to protect copyright of the name of the state any more foolish than the US Olypmic Committee’s effort to protect the use of the word “Olympic” or “Olympics” by anyone?”

        No, it isn’t any less foolish. (And by that I mean that both efforts are foolish).

        Just as the term “turkey” has multiple recognized meanings, so does the term “olympic” or “olympian”, which can refer to something that originates from the Greek city (Olympia) or the occupants of the mythical city (Olympus) as well as a well known US national park.

        Q: What is the difference between a shame and a pity?

        A: If a busload of lawyers goes over a cliff, and there are no survivors, that’s a pity. If there were empty seats, that’s a shame.

        • WM says:

          And now we are coming closer to knowing the true nature of the IOC, and its ego and for profit motive for some. To think that some of us were so naive as to believe it was a noble gathering of athletes of the world in the spirit of true and pure competition.

          • CodyCoyote says:

            The State of Wyoming copyrighted and trademarked that ubiquitous cowboy and bucking horse logo about 10 years ago. The one on the license plate ***. That move immediately had some repercussions and negative feedback,e specially considering that nothing was grandfathered. if you had been using that bucking horse logo prior to the new law regulating it, you either paid the license fee or ceased and desisted. My local tourist souvenir wholesaler got slammed big time and now pays Wyoming a lot of money to use that bucking horse on coffee mugs, key chains, etc. The State won;t allow even a facsimile or somewhat dissimilar representation …if it looks like a bucking cowboy with one arm up, horsehead down , then Wyoming owns you.

            Or as I describe this chicanery, it’s a One Trick Pony.

            – *** and that is your only choice for a vanity license plate in Wyoming…standard blue and white faded mountain scene, or the deluxe brown and gold University of Wyoming version . No artful renderings of wildlife or other icons to be had , like every other state in the union , for any amount of money. And you still get only 4 alphanumeric characters for your choice of personal wordage on your vanity plate. How dumb of us.

            I showed outgoing Governor Mike Sullivan a photo I took in West Yellowstone one year of a nice Montana vanity plate, the one with the nice state border on the edging. The plate read ” WYOMING” . Seven letters’ worth of vanity. i told Mike that Montana was rubbing our nose in it. Sign an executive order to give Wyoming residents more choices on license plate art and something more than creative four letter words. Although to be fair , if there was an All-American contest for best use of 4-letter words, some salty swearer from Wyoming would likely win it .

            • savebears says:

              Wyoming is simply being closed minded, Montana as well as the groups, make really good money off the vanity plate program we have. I can’t remember the last count, but it is over 50 vanity plate designs that you can choose from, which incur extra revenue. Any state that does not take advantage of a program like this, is simply leaving money on the table.

      • SAP says:

        Ah, but the etymology of the large birds of genus Meleagris tells us that early Euro-American settlers named them for their resemblance to birds imported to Europe via . .. Turkey! 😉

        The august body in Boise can stomp their feet all they want, but there ain’t a whole lot they can do about a business in Turkey decides to name itself. Take it up with GATT? Invade? Declare that county sheriffs can arrest and extradite foreign nationals? Apply “enhanced persuasive techniques” at an undisclosed location in the Arco Desert?

        They’ll probably get about as far with this as Montana will with declaring that state gun laws supersede federal laws.

        • Ida Lupine says:


        • WM says:

          Indeed, a foreign purveyor of goods using an illegal US trademark can be enjoined by the owner of the trademark from selling such goods in the United States (and perhaps elsewhere in the world if there is the political will to stop it).

          So the work of ID may not be in vain, especially with the intervention of our trademark/copyright laws, or the often persuasive arm of the State Department. One should not be so dismissive of these avenues, I should think.

          As for the turkeys of Europe being resemblent of those in the middle east, and then subsequently the common name applied in America, could not the same be said for any common name derived in one location (or name from one language carried forward in that language in another culture) and applied to the next observed population even though several thousand miles apart? Hardly a commercial application, as in appropriating the name “Idaho” for the purpose of manufacturing and marketing one’s goods.

          We do, of course, see such protections in parallels in France’s wine industry. Champagne, for example, an elixir originally created by monks, has been relatively successful in protecting and maintaining its brand. Imitations are of course, everywhere, though their labeling must contain the words “champagne process” sparking wine, unless, of course from the Champagne region of France and fermented with the historical process defining its unique fine bubbly character.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      What a wonderful story. Some of these folks work so hard and are so dedicated. 🙂

  7. Ida Lupine says:

    They [wolves] are the poster child for canine ADHD.

    Is this really fair to say? Here we go, attributing (questionable) human qualities to wild animals again.

    A dog’s ability to be ‘attuned’ to humans is a process that has evolved over thousands of years. Wolves as wild animals do not come in contact with people, and so do not have this ‘trait’. Perhaps they can learn to recognize the ‘angry killer’ and ‘laughing sociopath’ look as time goes on and learn to avoid even further.

    • Immer Treue says:


      Watch the bleeping video sequence in “Dogs Decoded”. The statement about ADHD is metaphorical in context to a domestic dog at that age. Don’t read too much into it as it was meant in fun. Wild is wild.

  8. Salle says:

    Guess you just can’t fix “stupid”…

    Committee advances endangered species bill


    • Ida Lupine says:

      But Ketchum Democrat Sen. Michelle Stennett questioned whether the bill would have any teeth when matched against federal authority.

      It won’t.

      • Salle says:

        Indeed. Idaho legislature can usually be rightfully accused of playing “trickle-down” politics and take their cues from the big boys in DC and do whatever they can to obstruct reasonable policy whenever given the opportunity. It helps to make sure that there’s no $$ left for the general fund so that actual social needs are met. They’d rather be sure that they get to use that money as they see fit… by wasting it on stupid crap like this. “Oh yeah, and to hell with those guys in DC unless they are giving us subsidies and grants… we’ll show them.”

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      It says the cattle would remove the “residual” vegetation,thus benefiting elk and deer. Since elk and cattle eat about 90% the same thing, they are competitors for food. There is no residual vegetation. This is just a lie to hide that cattle are being allowed to eat the elk food.

      • Rancher Bob says:

        If your ideals weren’t so fogged you would have read rest rotation grazing meaning some part is always rested while another part is in regrowth. Then your preaching to the choir, your right it’s a evil lie, being as the elk population in that area is over management objections, caused by the drought and the lack of a large numbers of wolves.

  9. alf says:

    I saw on the local news on a Missoula TV station this AM that so far this year hunters and trappers have admitted to, or claimed to, have killed over 200 wolves in Montana since the hunting and trapping seasons began.

    • Rancher Bob says:

      Today’s count stands at 209 as of noon, with 9 1/2 days left in the season. Even at that Montana’s wolf population is still growing around 10-15% a year, we’ll have a better idea on numbers by the end of March.

      • Immer Treue says:

        Rancher Bob,

        What has your Winter been like this year in regard to cold and snow?

        • Salle says:

          ALong the SW end of the divide, it’s been pretty mild, not much snow at all. Whenever we get some wet snow, it gets really cold for a few nights and draws all the moisture out so it’s like dust and concrete. Right now there’s only a few feet at best with some thinner spots out in the sagebrush. There might be more snow north of here but I haven’t been out of the area to see anything more than this…

        • Rancher Bob says:

          I would call this winter mild so far about half normal snow here with it being colder than normal without the a long really cold spell. Calving is coming on so I figure we’re due for couple really nice storms.

          • Immer Treue says:

            RB and Salle,

            Thanks. I’m trying to coordinate a bit of information linking increased wolf livestock depredation with milder winters as per Fritts/Mech paper from the 80’s.

            Though other variables are certainly in play, there did seem to be a correlation between severity of winter and increase/decrease of livestock depredation.

      • Robert R says:

        This is what is being said in the northwest.

        The 2012 report is expected to add five to seven packs to that map in Northwest Montana, said Kent Laudon, FWP wolf biologist, bringing the number in the area near 60. With an average number of seven wolves per pack, the estimated number of wolves in Northwest Montana hovers near 420. Statewide that number is near 650.

        • WM says:


          Is this an unofficial preliminary “official” number of what is MTFWP is expecting to publish as of 12/31/12 or another date?

          Looks to be, by anyone’s count, well above 150, and then there is the spring crop of pups in a few months.

          • JB says:

            “Looks to be, by anyone’s count, well above 150, and then there is the spring crop of pups in a few months.”

            Bad choice of words…unless you’re just trying to provoke a response?

            • Salle says:

              Aside from the questionable wording, there seems to be the lack of recognition that packs that have been broken up by hunting may not be breeding this year as re-establishment takes place and other factors that would indicate disruption of normal activities among most of the packs in the hunting zones.

          • Rancher Bob says:

            Was just talking with a couple state biologist who are looking at numbers before the hunting season and the take during the season. Locally we’ve put off the winter count until March, it sounds like in the future counts will look at a March population instead of end of year.
            One other point that came out is the number of cattle killed by wolves dropped again seems George Wuenthers comparison of lions and wolves fails.

            • WM says:


              You lost me with the last sentence. Please clarify.



              In retrospect, “crop” was probably a poor choice of words, yet not inconsistent with the management term “harvest” or “optimum sustained yield” bothof which are wildlife management terms that, of course, make some folks blood pressure rise uncontrollablly.

              I have heard the word “crop” of calves, sheep, elk calves, bear cubs. I have heard in the sports world, “crop of new ball players,” “crop of students,” and a host of other applications. Why should wolves be accorded any different designation?

              • JB says:


                I suspect that you understand very well the role context plays in interpreting such terms. I too have used the word “crop” to refer to incoming students. Of course, we don’t shoot a percentage of those students at the end of the year…

              • savebears says:

                “Of course, we don’t shoot a percentage of those students at the end of the year…”


                Might be something you want to consider JB….


            • Rancher Bob says:

              George likes to tell us that wolves MAY be like lions in that killing mature lions leads to increased cattle depredation. There are other factors at play here but the bottom line is that hunting of wolves is not leading to increased cattle depredation.

              • JB says:

                Rancher Bob:

                With all the factors that potentially impact cattle depredations, one (or two) seasons don’t provide adequate data for evaluating that hypothesis. More importantly, one should also account for cattle availablility relative to wolves location, as well as the total number of cattle and wolves. If you’ve completed that prelinary analysis on the few hunting seasons of data, I’d love to see it!

              • Rancher Bob says:

                As I said there are other factors at work here like more aggressive control action now that wolves are delisted.
                Does comparing canine to feline behavior make any sense to you?

              • Louise Kane says:

                perhaps the fact that there is not increased depredation is directly linked to the scant number of wolves left. I don’t think most believe the BS about wolves increasing every year despite the carte blanche to kill them now.

              • WM says:


                ++More importantly, one should also account for cattle availablility relative to wolves location,

                Good point. Could pass that very tip on to George W., Norm Bishop, and especially Wendy Keefover-Ring for their writings.

              • Rancher Bob says:

                You can find some of those answers in Montana’s annual wolf report. Here’s a few numbers, we’ve hunted wolves 2009,2011 and 2012.
                2010 31% of wolf packs killed cattle
                128 wolves removed
                2011 17% of wolf packs killed cattle
                57 wolves removed
                2010 72% of confirmed cattle depredations occurred on private land
                2011 89% of confirmed depredations occurred on private land
                With Montana cattle numbers steady and wolf numbers increasing I think the available question is answered.

          • Louise Kane says:

            talk about setting the bar absurdly low. Jeez for god’s sake what a statement

        • Louise Kane says:

          new pups to kill as they reach 6 months old, keep that crop coming in. SOBs

      • Louise Kane says:

        how do they arrive at this number, not by head counts. provide proof please of increasing numbers of wolves

        • Rancher Bob says:

          Counting heads or bodies is exactly how we count wolves in Montana no formula’s. Find a pack, find their home range and count how many live there. Simple stuff, hard to prove wrong.
          As far as being a SOB well your mother must be real proud of you.

          • Louise Kane says:

            No Rancher Bob the wolf counts are done using modeling and some partial counts.
            This quote below from a story in the Missoulan. The state has been accused of fuzzy math for a long time. Rancher Bob your state looks shoddy, unprofessional and irresponsible for the treatment of its wildlife.

            “Approximately 30 percent of the known NRM (Northern Rocky Mountain) wolf packs were monitored annually, and observations from monitoring these wolves were supplemented by agency track surveys and public observations of wolf pack size for the remaining packs,” they wrote.

            • Rancher Bob says:

              Do you know the difference between Montana and the northern rocky mountain area. Any time you want to come out to Montana and count wolves let me know, winter is best, I’ll show you who’s math is shoddy. As for our treatment of wildlife what’s the wildlife population trends for Montana compared to the population trends for Yellowstone.

            • WM says:


              ++No Rancher Bob the wolf counts are done using modeling and some partial counts.++

              Yours is an incorrect statement; Rancher Bob is correct. MT minimum wolf count is actual “observed” packs and individuals = Nmin

              While you are trying to pump sunshine up the backsides of the gullible, you might take a look at this paper that responds to the Creel and Rotella modeling paper in the news article you cite. Please note. There are two phenomena discussed. Actual count (Nmin) and modeling projected future wolf population from the minimum (several model approaches which yield different results, hence their disagreement). Dr. Mech is a co-author, as is Carolyn Sime, long time MT and well respected wolf coordinator who has since left her position.

              Sorry for the length of this link address to the paper:

              Wolf Population Dynamics in the U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains Are Affected by Recruitment and Human-Caused Mortality

            • Nancy says:

              Louise, least we forget when looking at RB’s figures above (from Bishop’s article)

              “About 2.6 million cattle, including calves, live in Montana. Seventy-four killed by wolves in 2011 out of 2.6 million is less than 0.003 percent. Western Montana, where most wolves live, has fewer cattle than the east side of the state. As of 2009, there were 494,100 cattle there. Seventy-four of these animals were killed by wolves, or less than 0.015 percent of the western Montana cattle population”

              • Rancher Bob says:

                Sounds like a small number right, least we forget those 74 were the animals paid for and does not count the 5 to 10 times the animals that were killed by wolves and not confirmed. So let’s use five percent or 0.075 percent. How much did you give of your gross income to Montana wolf management cost, for collars, wages,livestock compensation or research. Don’t tell me you are one of those lazy welfare receivers who has been told your entitled to wolves on the landscape at no cost to your life style. Entitled to seeing wolves as easily as a visit to the zoo.
                As I see the issue until there is a tax on everyone who loves wolves we will not really know how many wolf lovers exist. Question do you want wolves on the landscape? Answer YES you pay .075 tax on your gross income. Answer NO you pay your normal taxes.
                So how much do you pay over your normal taxes for wolves, Nancy?

  10. Ralph Maughan says:

    The author of the bill is rancher Bert Brackett who is the county squire in the area. Thankfully we do have the U.S. Constitution to prevent this and similar exercises in feudal power, though how much longer before this country collapses is an open question … scary!

  11. rork says:

    Michigan “2012 Crossbow Deer Hunter Survey Report” is about the third report down the page on

    Might be of interest if your state is considering liberalizing crossbow use. Some highlights for me:
    – about 88,000 crossbows.
    – We are getting new people out in the bow season, particularly older folks. I hoped for that. Works for the youngest people too.
    – Their success rate is better than other bow hunters. That surprised me. (Crossbows aren’t really that much better – I hate using them, feels like a gun – and we might expect folks using them to have less of the other skills that help on average.)
    – Bow hunters in general now have the same or better success rate than people in the firearm season. (Bow season comes first, and is about 3 times longer, and is better timed to the rut except for far north where rut is later.)

    If I picked just one take-home, it’s that some gunners have been complaining that the archers are too advantaged, shooting lots of deer and particularly large males, before the gun season. And they are educating/scaring deer. My response is that this holds some truth – so please come join us in the bow season. Being a good archery hunter is hard though. This crossbow thing does rather dumb-down the archery, but it removes a bit of the impediment.
    I and my buddies have had no bad experiences so far, but we met a few new old-timers, often with delight.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Doing their best to leave no stone unturned.

    • JB says:

      A: Probably not.

      • Salle says:

        But they can’t stand the fact that all that land is protected for the public and managed by the ultimate of evils (as per the Reaganites) the fedrul guvvamint.

        It’s almost as if they can’t help themselves, like heroine addicts.

  12. Salle says:

    Wolf sortie
    National Elk Refuge managers get a lesson on capturing and collaring the resident pack.

    The GPS collars — which cost $3,000 to $5,000 and record a location every 30 minutes — would be too heavy for the smaller females.

    The leather collars, lined with metal wiring to prevent chewing, are timed to pop off Feb. 15, 2015 — two years from Friday.


    • Ida Lupine says:

      What about hearing protection? A wolf’s survival depends on it. Accidentally darted twice? How traumatic.

    • Robert R says:

      Maybe they should incorporate shock collars and put a wireless pet fence around the YNP boundary to keep the park wolves from being shot..

      • Salle says:

        And then YNP will be little more than a zoo. What a ****** idea.

      • jon says:

        Robert, you hunters are giving yourselves a very bad image when you are shooting collared yellowstone wolves. There needs to be a law that says you cannot shoot collared wolves. What is the point in even putting a collar on the wolves if you are just going to allow hunters and trappers to kill them? It makes no sense.

        • Robert R says:

          Jon YNP wolves were not the only collared wolves killed.
          It’s seems you are the one who wants to make hunters have a bad image.
          Until regulations are made for collared wolves they will be killed in a legal seasons.

          • jon says:

            Hunters killing wolves for sport and for a trophy and because they hate them already gives them a very bad image in the eyes of the the non-hunting conservationists Robert. Don’t think otherwise.

  13. CodyCoyote says:

    ” A Murder of Crows”. The ubiquitous intelligent black bird is getting its 52 minutes of fame. Tonight’s episode of ” Nature” on PBS ( February 20 plus replays later this week ) is all about the craftiness of the Crow.

    Like the twenty or so I wake up to every morning…

  14. Salle says:

    Debate emerges on grizzly bear hunt

    Numbers show population improving in southwestern Alberta


  15. Salle says:

    Group wants Idaho’s Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness Area declared a disaster

    A House resolution represents a dig at the U.S. Forest Service, which manages the huge Central Idaho area.


    • rork says:

      Ah, yes, it’s a bit too wild for some people there. Something must be done. We wouldn’t want actual wilderness to inconvenience the poor horse riders.

      • Salle says:

        And they want a pretty hefty chunk of taxpayers’ cash to get ‘er done too.

        Maybe they could volunteer to do it themselves…

  16. Salle says:

    This is different…

    Small shark falls from the sky onto 12th tee at California golf course


  17. Kathleen says:

    We all know how dysfunctional the Montana legislature can be–no buffer zone for wolves around national parks, ludicrous, extremist wild bison bills, etc., but this really takes the whole cake and shows the depth of moral depravity: Montana continues to be the only state in the union where it’s legal to spectate at criminal dogfights because Republican legislators refused to close a loophole in state statute. Why? It will create a “slippery slope” that might impede other cruelties like…rodeo. This hasn’t gotten much coverage, just sharing the outrage.

    Montanans who want to speak up on puppy mill regulation (fat chance) have about 24 hours to do so. It takes only a minute or two. http://www.othernationsjustice.org/

    • Ida Lupine says:

      We’re on a slippery slope all right…

    • Nancy says:

      Kathleen – re: puppy mills? The only way to stop them ( and FYI – the battle to stop this abuse has been on going for over 30 years) is to investigate pet shops who sell puppies (and kittens) from these mills and SHUT THEM DOWN.

      But sadly, its all about supply and demand.

      As long as these “breeders” can get approval from the USDA… or NOT, with their “here today, gone tomorrow auctions of puppies” (and keep in mind, the USDA, as long as I’ve been concerned about puppy mills, never seems to have the manpower to check on conditions in these “kennels”) and as you said “fat chance” so, nothing is going to happen, regardless of how many regulations are put forth, as long as a “blind eye” is in place.

      Oprah Winfrey (with her huge following at the time) did a show on puppy mills a few years ago and still these mills seem to sprout up, prevail and profit.

      Its all about greed Kathleen and what too many think are healthy, happy, well adjusted puppies “in the window” puppies who actually spend their short lives, crawling around on 1 inch chicken wire (so the poop doesn’t build up in the cage) before they were wisked off to some nationally known pet shop, for sale.

      Only have to look at how many “purebreds” are ending up in animal shelters, everywhere in this country… everyday, to see the sad “legacy” of puppy mills.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Nancy to add to that, there are thousands of full bred dogs on petfinder and in shelters abandoned for any number of reasons, usualy trivial and selfish. get a shelter dog – purebred or not.

  18. Salle says:

    Holy guacamole!!

    I know this isn’t exactly wildlife news but I am moved by this as I used to travel this road regularly…

    US HWY89 south of Page, AZ collapsed! On the 7 mile “HILL” after the pink wall… it terminates at US HWY89A that goes to the north rim (I think) of the Grand Canyon.


  19. Guepardo Lento says:

    Not only Yellowstone, but ALL parks across the nation are facing a 5% cut this year. While all the parks will suffer, the lesser known parks that are always struggling will feel the sting. For example, North Cascades NP in WA is facing a $365K cut. See spreadsheet chart below…


    and sequester chart:

  20. CodyCoyote says:

    I awoke this AM to soundbites on local radio news of all three of my Wyoming Congressional represenatatives extolling the virtues of the Sequestration and what a good thing these mandatory forced spending cuts will be. Our lone Representative, and former Miss Cheyenne Frontier Days queen Cynthia Lummis even said unequivocally that we should all EMBRACE the sequester and get behind the cuts.

    Here’s what I don;t get about the Three Stooges who represent Wyoming in Washington ( or represent Washington in Wyoming ). They seem to forget that the Federal Government they sod espise is actually integral to the Wyoming way of life and the single largest sector contributing to payroll, ( when you factor in school funding). The US Government contributes about 30 percent of the payroll directly or indirectly across Wyoming, and they are the better paying stable jobs. Further, Uncle Sam is the foundation and economic support structure for so very much of Wyoming from curbside to mountain top. Uncle Sam built Wyoming , not the ranchers and sodbusters and carpetbaggers. Wyoming also gets back more than $ 2.00 in federal service or subsidy for every dollar its citizens pay into the Treasury. Wyoming is as much defined by its Forest Service, BLM , and National Park lands as anything.

    Focusing on the theme of this Wildlife News blog, we who appreciate and advocate for wildlife and wild lands and all that goes with that probably have more appreciation for the value of the federal government than folks in inner cities or the Bicoastals. We know that humans and wildlife have an almost symbiotic relationship with federal mechanisms and land use.

    So why is my Congressional delegation so hellbent on deconstructing and downsizing the Feds , with such draconian dogma ?

    We need a Wildlife news topic bloc on this subject: Sequester and the American West.

    • Leslie says:

      Cody, I contacted Barrasso (I irregularly harass him) about the sequester and the Park. You’d think given how dependent western WY is on the Park that our congresspeople would be gung ho about protecting monies for it. His response was obtuse. Below:

      “The President’s Budget for FY2013 included a request for $2.6 billion in funding for the National Park Service (NPS). This represents a $13.5 million increase from the amount the NPS received in FY2012 appropriations. If the NPS is subject to a budgetary sequester, their budget could be cut by 9%. I appreciate hearing of your support for our national parks.

      On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed H.R. 8, the “fiscal cliff bill”, into law averting the scheduled income tax rate increases. The bill also postponed until March 1, 2013, the scheduled sequestration reductions to the budget, such as the cuts to the NPS. It isn’t clear whether or not Congress will consider additional legislation to make changes to the statute requiring these cuts.”

      So, what the heck is his opinion?

      • Salle says:

        Sounds to me that the last two rounds of draconian funding reductions for the parks just wasn’t enough… they want to privatize them too doncha know… so as long as he hates Obama so much he’s willing to be complicit in bringing down the entire country to satisfy this racial hatred among his disintegrating party. It’s a “feel good” thing for these individuals who have no real clue as to how “we the little people” live since he and all his cohort are making more than $172K a year of our hard earned tax $$. %^&*&*#ers!!!

  21. Salle says:

    Land protection still a priority
    in the Rocky Mountain West
    Colorado College’s 2013 Conservation in the West poll finds that
    91 percent of Westerners say public lands essential to states’ economies


  22. Salle says:

    More signs of a morally depraved society..

    Pregnant cow moose poached near Avon

    “When we did a necropsy, we found she was bred and was carrying another baby that would have been born this year,” Kambic said. “She was a big, healthy cow … and they shot one moose but took two out of the population. The moose suffered; she was shot Monday and still alive about 3:30 or so on Tuesday.

    “This was obviously a thrill kill, and then they left it there to suffer.”

    He’s hoping that someone will call him at 490-1227 or TIP-MONT at 1-800-847-6668 to help track down the poacher. Callers can remain anonymous and may be eligible for a reward up to $1,000 for providing information that leads to a conviction.

    “They shot the moose while the calf was just standing there,” Kambic said. “Hopefully, that little guy makes it.”


    • Louise Kane says:

      wow – I hope they get the bast*&%$#
      The whole idea of kids with guns, teens with guns,…. guns, guns, guns, guns, guns,everybody carrying guns, as a god given, constitutional right needs to be rethought, in light of a couple hundred plus years passing since we needed to protect ourselves individually from the threat of a well armed militia at the door.

  23. Salle says:


    Lake Louise lynx refuse to be fenced in;
    Pair provides rare glimpse into behaviour


  24. Louise Kane says:

    This from Exposing the Big Game …..

    DNT possibly giving GPS coordinates to wolf hunters, hounders etc…if true I hope this is the straw that breaks the camels back. Wolves need federal protections, there are too many crazy people with a single minded determination to kill these animals. Its too sick to believe.

    **UPDATE** Remember these are only allegations at this time, but they are backed up by some very serious statements from people with impeccable integrity. We will keep digging for more information, and update as more information becomes available. All of us are still trying to wrap our minds around this.

    Yesterday we were made aware of some very disturbing information. According to multiple reliable sources, with direct links to the the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, a DNR employee or employees have given confidential research data regarding the precise GPS coordinates of wolf dens to wolf hunters/hounders/trappers. The sources are reluctant to go on the record with this information, but if true it would answer many questions about this past falls wolf killing season.

    One of the most common questions asked during the wolf killing season last fall was, “how are they killing them so quickly?” I think that we may have found our answer. This revelation has led two two highly respected and well known wolf trackers to resign because much of the data allegedly given to wolf hunters/trappers/hounders, they gathered. If these allegations are indeed true, and I have no reason to doubt otherwise, the DNR has much to answer for. The unholy alliance between the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association and the DNR is disturbing enough but the possibility that confidential research data compiled from dedicated volunteer winter trackers is being fed to these people is borderline criminal if true.

    As expected the talking heads at the DNR are saying that these are just “rumors” and they have no knowledge that the data was given to wolf hunters/trappers/hounders. This is what one had to say today:

    Thank you for writing. I have checked with my coworkers. We are aware that there is a rumor going around that DNR has provided someone with locations of all known wolf den sites. However, we have not heard of such a request and are not aware of sharing of any such data.

    Scott Loomans
    Wildlife Regulations Policy Specialist
    Bureau of Wildlife Management
    Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
    (*) phone: (608) 267-2452
    (*) fax: (608) 267-7857
    (*) e-mail: scott.loomans@wisconsin.gov

    While the DNR may hope this “rumor” goes away we will keep digging up facts to confirm what we have been told. I must reiterate that this comes from MULTIPLE sources with direct ties to the DNR who are truly fearful of retaliation if it is known that they have spoken about this. If these allegations prove to be true they are likely criminal violations at both the state and federal level, according to several wildlife experts. Several wildlife advocates have also made the Humane Society of the United States aware of these allegations and they will be investigating as they prepare to move forward with their lawsuit.

    These disturbing allegations, if verified, are just another example of how the current DNR administration, Governor, and Legislature have no intention of ethically “managing” wolves. Each day there are more and more examples of how extreme the DNR has become and how a select few in the killing cartels control not only the DNR, but the Legislature as well. Wisconsin has become a massive killing ground for a select few with no consideration given to the rest of us.

    More to come……

    Share this:

    • jon says:

      I just posted this because I didn’t see your post. Thanks for posting. I hope these lawsuits put wolves back on the endangered species list. These fish and game agencies seem to think wolves are doing fine and that hunting and trapping seasons pose no risk to them, but they don’t seem to take into account all of the wolves that are being poached by hunters and the wolves being killed by ranchers and the wolves dying from natural causes.

  25. jon says:

    Multiple Sources: Wisconsin DNR Employee(s) Giving Wolf Hunters GPS Coordinates of Wolf Dens


  26. Louise Kane says:

    Wolf and wildlife advocates take a look at this. Maureen Hackett and Howling for Wolves.

    Howling for Wolves and their relentless pursuit to help wolves in Minnesota…they got their senators to introduce a common sense bill that represents the people. an amazing organization

    Immer – you are lucky to have this woman in your state. Maybe your state will be the first to stop this crazy BS and the wolves you enjoy and hear near your home may be there next year and the year after.

    This is how its done! Kudos Howling for Wolves


  27. Peter Kiermeir says:

    Bill to outlaw coyote killing contests scheduled for Friday vote
    Seems tis an initiative by hunters that want ethical hunting in earnest!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thank goodness.

    • jon says:

      “Opponents of his bill testified for 20 minutes Wednesday night. They included the New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides, wool growers, cattle growers and Jim Lane, director of the New Mexico Game and Fish Department.”

      You shocked? I’m not. Jim Lane should be fired. He should be supporting the ban on these disgusting contests, but what do you expect from someone who is anti-coyote himself. Jim Lane has probably killed hundreds of coyotes. There is absolutely no justification to having these contests at all. When you have the head of a fish and game agency supporting a contest where you kill the most animals for prizes and money, you know there is something utterly wrong.

  28. CodyCoyote says:

    Yellowstone Winter Use final plan released today.

    The park would allow up to 110 “transportation events” a day, initially defined as either one snowcoach or on average a group of seven snowmobiles. No more than 50 transportation events a day would be allocated for groups of snowmobiles.

    The preferred alternative would provide for one entry a day per entrance for a non-commercially guided group of up to five snowmobiles and would continue to allow for motorized oversnow travel on the East Entrance road over Sylvan Pass.

    The current winter season and 2013-2014 will be a transition to the new regulations. There’s a news conference about all this later today in Mammoth at Park HQ.

    Here’s a summary article: http://www.yellowstonegate.com/2013/02/yellowstone-final-winteruse-plan-follows-earlier-draft-version/

  29. Salle says:

    The awful truth… and some perspective on what we don’t see but is affecting us anyway…

    Choked To Death On Waste


    • Ida Lupine says:

      This is one of my pet peeves. Again, why can’t we clean up after ouselves? With upwards of 7 billion of us – you can see where it would be a huge problem. All of that petroleum-based plastic can be used for energy, and probably an endless supply of it at the rate we use plastic.

  30. Salle says:

    [Idaho] House committee OKs wilderness trail resolution

    “The Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness has some of the best wildlife habitat, water quality and fish habitat in the Lower 48 states,” said Craig Gehrke, Boise director of the Wilderness Society. “Spreading wild misinformation about wilderness and designating one of Idaho’s icons a ‘disaster area’ is not the right way to fix the trails.”


  31. Salle says:

    [Public] Comment sought on additional thinning at Lake Como


  32. Salle says:

    BLM dam in need of repair but lacks public access

    The Lewistown Field Office is seeking public comments until March 1 on what to do. The environmental assessment can be viewed online at http://blm.gov/6zkd. Additional copies are available at the Lewistown Field Office at 920 NE Main.

    To comment, include your name, address, phone number, email address or other personal identifying information and submit it along with your comments to: Steve Smith, Rangeland Management Specialist, Lewistown Field Office, 920 Northeast Main, Lewistown, MT 59457, by email at s1smith@blm.gov, or call him at 406-538-1974.


  33. Salle says:

    Grizzlies are ‘not Alberta’s to destroy’ say opponents of restoring hunt


  34. Louise Kane says:

    This is what these creeps are up to now.
    From Big Game Forever

    using a killing contest to engage people. These people are the worst.


    Three very important updates. Big Game Forever remains very active when it comes to facilitating responsible wolf management. Here is what is happening.

    (1) Yesterday Big Game Forever filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit challenging Wyoming’s right to manage and protect its wolf populations. We are filing on the side of the state of Wyoming and US Fish and Wildlife Service in support of Wyoming’s right to manage its wolves. Judge Johnson, who ruled in favor of the dual status of Wyoming’s Wolf plan in 2010, is the Judge in this case as well. A huge thank you to our co-plaintiffs in this motion to intervene.

    Board of County Commissioners of the County of Weston, State of Wyoming;
    Board of County Commissioners of the County of Washakie, State of Wyoming;
    Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation;
    Converse County Farm Bureau;
    Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife Wyoming;
    Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife-Big Horn Basin Chapter;
    Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife- Teton County;
    Cody Country Outfitters & Guides Association;
    Predator Management District of Niobrara County;
    Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts;
    Meetetse Conservation District;
    Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife Idaho;
    Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife Montana;
    Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife Utah;
    Wild Sheep Foundation;
    Montana Outfitters and Guides Association.

    2) Attend today’s seminar on “how to Successfully Hunt Wolves” today at 10 am today and tomorrow at 10 am. Legendary wolf hunting expert Rick Kinmon will share tips and techniques that work. We regularly hear how difficult it is to hunt wolves. With a less than 1% harvest rate, wolves may be one of the most difficult to hunt wild game species on the planet. Come learn from Rick who boasts 100% shot opportunity on wolves. Rick’s methods include calling in multiple sets in some of the most wild wolf habitat in North America.

    3) Bid today on an epic wolf/lynx/wolverine/arctic fox predator hunt in Alaska. Rick Kinmon has graciously donated a 7 day Alaska to Big Game Forever. Hunters can expect to harvest multiple species of predators and 50 shots per hunt are typical. 100% of the proceeds of this hunt will go to our efforts to restore state’s rights to manage wolves in America. Please email me if you are interested in bidding on this hunt. You can either set a maximum bid or we can call you for a live phone bid. We expect that this item will be auctioned between 1:15pm and 3pm MST today. A great hunt and all in support of a worthy cause.

    Rick boasts 100% shot opportunity on wolves, 100% harvest of lynx, 90% on Wolverine, 100% on arctic fox and red fox.

    Look at Alaska Trophy Hunters gallery: http://www.alaskatrophyhunters.com/

    Here are the details on Rick’s hunt.

    Alaska Trophy Hunters
    Rick Kinmon
    Wasilla, Alaska
    If breathtaking scenery and hunting for spectacular wolf (gray, black and white color phases), lynx, wolverine, pure white arctic fox, northern coyotes and red fox color (red, cross and silver color phases) are on your list, this is the hunt for you. This trip will be unlike any trip you’ve been on before. Fifty shots taken per person is common. To date the outfitter boasts100% shot opportunities on wolf, lynx and fox and 90% on wolverine. Additionally, up close photo opportunities could include moose, caribou, Dall’s sheep, arctic grizzly, polar bear, musk ox, hawks, eagles, owls and a variety of small game.

    The winner of this auction is guaranteed a spot during the one-week in November 2014 which is the very best week all year for hunting these predators and photography as well. This expedition will normally begin in Fairbanks, Alaska. You will travel into some of the most remote country in Alaska. We will hunt from a vehicle on the road system and make numerous calling sets, as well as spot-and-stalk. Shot opportunities abound, including long-range and moving targets. During this time of the year, photo opportunities are endless. The scenery is breathtaking.

    Permits: Only one $250 non-resident trapping license is required.
    Accommodations: We will stay in a hotel room periodically during this expedition and have 1 hot meal in a restaurant daily.
    This hunt is for a single hunter and is valued at $9,000. The hunt will be guided with 2 hunters per guide.

    Physical Requirements: The expedition is geared to be less physically demanding than most, very enjoyable to elderly, physically challenged or both.
    Expenses: All expenses are covered except travel to Fairbanks, Alaska, skinning, taxidermy and trophy shipping and handling expenses.

    Ryan Benson

    • Leslie says:

      “The expedition is geared to be less physically demanding than most”

      These guys just shoot and probably never even walk anywhere. Lots of outfitters have guys with walkie talkies who go to peaks, look for game, then push them in for a shot for their customers. No one should be saying 100%. That is not hunting. That is simply killing/murder

      • Louise Kane says:

        The Big Game Forever organization spreads its lies, hate and ignorance to a willing cadre of eager beavers chomping at the bit to hate and kill wolves. They are really creepy and promoting predator killing contests – disgusting

  35. Greetings all:

    Wanting to finish up (finally!)a massive writing project concerning how a forty-three-million dollar-plus, so-called wolf “recovery” program became so marginalized that per IFG regulation, wolves can be used as trapping- bait to kill yet more wolves (some “regulatory mechanism there”!), I had a polite, free-ranging, thoughtful, informative (on both ends I might add) one hour-and-one-half telephone discussion this morning with Deputy Chief of IFG, Dave Compton. (Carnivore Manager, Jon Rachael, has yet to return my call).

    I wanted to share these questions and answers from my notes:

    In response to my question: “Did IFG sanction the baiting of wolves with the body parts of other intentionally killed wolves (see IDAPA 13.01.17 Use of Baiting and Trapping for Taking Big Game Animals” — which is unlike any other animal classified as “big game” in Idaho — is there an equal protection argument to be had herein??) to FURTHER HARVEST THE POPULATION AS FAST AS POSSIBLE?”
    (emphasis added).

    Answer: “Yes.”

    In response to my follow-up question “What was the impetus for your agency’s promulgation of the regulation?”

    Answer: “Hunter request — because they can’t use the wolves for anything else.”

    In response to my question “In terms of ‘ecological effectiveness’, how do you value the wolf as a species?”
    Answer: “Same as earth worms.”

    In response to my question “What is your current management standard for wolves (given that the 2002 version of the Idaho wolf mint. plan governs)?”

    Answer: “not grounded per se on a base recovery target of 15 Breeding pairs/15) wolves (except to avoid an extinction level event) but rather ‘adaptive management’; “IFG will manage population in the ways “which reduce conflict.”

    In response to my follow-up question: “Do you mean conflict from elk-hunting and livestock interests?”

    Answer: “Yes.”

    In response to my follow-up question: “Which interest group (e.g., hunters or ranchers) takes priority as far as IFG is concerned?”

    Answer: “They’re equal.”

    In response to my question: What are my chances of getting a FOIA response were I ask for all the e-mails between the Regional Supervisors regarding their leaked 2010 memo about decentralized control actions?”

    Response: “Not good.”

    Question: “Why did IFG Commissioners recently turn over $50, 000 of coyote control funds, despite vociferous protest from wolf advocates, to Wildlife Services for wolf control?”

    Answer: “Wildlife Services asked for the funds because they had a budget short-fall”.

    Is IFG planning to completely relinquish wolf management to Wildlife Services (as has happened in Montana)?”

    Answer: “Not yet.”

    I, loyal to accuracy, look forward to any and all of your responses. Thanks!

    • Ida Lupine says:

      “Answer: “Hunter request — because they can’t use the wolves for anything else.””

      Says it all I think. Disgusting.

      Thank you, Valerie for providing this snapshot of the IFG and their bosses.

      • jon says:

        They is quite disgusting. Idaho fish and game only seem to care about killing as many wolves as possible, just so there can be more elk and deer out there for hunters to kill. This is game manipulation management. Why should wolves die? Just so there is more elk and deer out there for hunters to kill?

      • Ida Lupine says:

        In response to my question “What is your current management standard for wolves (given that the 2002 version of the Idaho wolf mint. plan governs)?”

        Answer: “not grounded per se on a base recovery target of 15 Breeding pairs/15) wolves (except to avoid an extinction level event) but rather ‘adaptive management’; “IFG will manage population in the ways “which reduce conflict.”

        In response to my follow-up question: “Do you mean conflict from elk-hunting and livestock interests?”

        Answer: “Yes.”

        This is rather worrisome also. Not part of the original ‘bargain’, as has been complained about by some.

    • jon says:

      Valerie, do you have Jon Rachael’s email address? I emailed Idaho fish and game a few days ago and I have not gotten a response back from them. I asked them why are they allowing wolves to be hunted in the lolo and selway zones while they are giving birth to wolf pups? Wolf hunters can kill 5 wolves in the lolo and selway zones during the months of April, May, and June. I asked the IDFG aren’t they concerned with the image of hunters killing wolves giving birth and raising wolf pups. A wolf hunter in the lolo or selway can find a den and kill 5 newborn pups if he wants to. I have no doubt this would happen as a lot of hunters are anti-wolf extremists and hold very dangerous and extremist views towards wolves simply because wolves eat elk and deer. That’s it. This hatred that you see from hunters against wolves is just because wolves eat elk and deer.

    • Leslie says:

      Fact: earthworms aren’t native to North america. Wolves are.

      IDG&F seems to be the absolute worst in terms of wolf management of the three states. Even though WY has a predator zone, the G&F are not hell bent on eradication. I met two of the WY G&F wolf biologists last month. They are good guys.

  36. Compton interview addendum:

    In response to the my question: “Are you and
    IDF concerned about the significant loss of tourist dollars from wolf-watching outings (e.g. Stanley Basin, Sawtooth recreation area)?

    Answer: “No. Because IFG serves its hunting, fishing and trapping constituents as described in our missions statement.” He then read me the mission statement:

    “All wildlife, including all wild animals, wild birds, and fish, within the state of Idaho, is hereby declared to be the property of the state of Idaho. It shall be preserved, protected, perpetuated, and managed. It shall be only captured or taken at such times or places, under such conditions, or by such means, or in such manner, as will preserve, protect, and perpetuate such wildlife, and provide for the citizens of this state and, as by law permitted to others, continued supplies of such wildlife for hunting, fishing and trapping.”

    • jon says:

      Idaho fish and game are having problems with funding and they admitted this. They are trying to reach out to non-hunting conservationists. Out of state hunters are not coming to Idaho like they used to. Most likely because hunters in Idaho have been spreading lies and telling out of state hunters that the wolves in Idaho are eating all the deer and elk. If Idaho fish and game wants help from non-hunting conservationists, they gotta stop this what it seems like an all out war on wolves. Killing as many wolves as possible, just to manipulate game populations in the hunter’s favor.

    • jon says:

      Idaho fish and game are catering to a very loud minority. Last numbers I checked, only a minority of those that live in Idaho hunt and trap and Idaho is supposed to be a state known for its hunting. Idaho fish and game will be digging their own grave by ignoring those that specifically want to view wildlife, not kill or trap it. I believe Virgil Moore said that the IDFG has enough funding for a few more years. This is why the wildlife summit was held. It was to reach out to those that don’t necessarily hunt, but are conservationists. They need to change with the times and should recognize that a lot of money can be made specifically from wildlife viewing.

  37. Jon,

    Yes indeed. It was quite interesting to me that Deputy Chief of IFG Compton, upon reading me the mission statement over the phone, left out “… will preserve, protect, and perpetuate such wildlife, and PROVIDE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS STATE (e.g. non-exploiters/ tourist venues) and, as by law permitted to OTHERS, CONTINUED SUPPLIES of such wildlife …

    In sum, IFG is abrogating its very own mission statement by not EQUALLY considering the need of THE CITIZENS OF THIS STATE.

    Nor the citizens of the nation as I repeatedly pointed out who value the priceless wolves of the NATION’S ‘GEOGRAPHY OF HOPE’ either on a psychological basis or by spending thousands to be wolf-watching tourists.

    • jon says:

      They keep saying that Idaho’s wildlife belongs to all of the citizens, but it’s easy to see that they are trying to manage the wildlife that benefits the elk/deer hunter. One fish and game commissioner said in the past that the fish and game commission only listens to what hunters have to say. Idaho fish and game say that they want to manage wildlife for hunting, trapping, etc. What about wildlife viewing? Everything is about killing wildlife. Why doesn’t Idaho fish and game focus on wildlife viewing opportunities?

      • Elk275 says:


        If there is wildlife for hunters then there is enough wildlife for wildlife watchers. If hunters can find wildlife then why can’t wildlife watchers find the same wildlife. Year after year hunters find wildlife why can not wildlife watchers find wildlife. Why do they bitch.

        One of the reasons is that non resident wildlife watchers do not have the needed equipment or resources to access wildlife areas. No 4×4 truck with four tire chains (the typical wildlife watcher that I see in the Lamar Valley would not be able to chain all four wheels or want to) , no snowmobile (which I do not have) or horses/mules or know how to pack them into the mountains. How many wildlife watchers know how to winch a truck out.

        Then most of them would not know where to find a wolf outside of Yellowstone Park. If wolf hunters can find wolves why can not a wildlife watchers find wolves. The wolf watchers that I see in the Lamar Valley most have very limited ability and outdoor skills.

        If I had the time,I think that I could find wolves in Southwest Montana this weekend. Now, I have to go feed the mules.

        • JEFF E says:

          that is the perfect doppelganger argument.
          sunny jon (an admittedly poor example) wants a zoo like experience for wildlife watchers, while decrying the same dynamic for hunters.

        • JB says:

          “Then most of them would not know where to find a wolf outside of Yellowstone Park. If wolf hunters can find wolves why can not a wildlife watchers find wolves. The wolf watchers that I see in the Lamar Valley most have very limited ability and outdoor skills.”

          It seems you’ve answered your own question, Elk. Your assertion seems to be that the “bar” to find wildlife should be the same whether one is hunting, trapping or simply watching wildlife? That’s fine if the goal is for wildlife-based recreation to be confined to a few; however, I spend a lot of time talking with agencies about how they can get MORE people involved in wildlife recreation (hunting, fishing and otherwise). You yourself have bitched about how too few people care about wildlife. Not everyone has the access, resources and know-how to find wildlife–especially on unfamiliar ground, and getting people to wildlife only becomes harder as a greater percentage of the population spends the vast majority of time in the city.

          Bottom line: People need a reason to care about wildlife conservation, and having the opportunity to watch wildlife interact in a natural setting can be the trigger. Limit those interactions to a few, skilled people and you its a safe bet that support for wildlife will erode.

      • Robert R says:

        Jon you will never understand why hunting and yes trapping is needed to manage wildlife in today’s over crowded United States.

        Elk you said it. Why do they bitch!

        • Zach says:

          I think that if WY, ID, and MT didn’t launch so hardcore into trimming wolf numbers in one fell swoop like they’re trying to do, then I don’t think you’d have so many people freaking out about it.

          I’m all for hunting and trapping, as long as it’s moderated and fair. To slaughter half a populations species in what seems to be 3-4 years, seems excessive to me.

          I think that’s what the biggest concern is. You can’t have X number of wolves running around and not have a hunting season. But, to have X number of wolves and then you do everything you can to decimate them in a small amount of time, well, like I said, it seems kind of excessive.

        • Louise Kane says:

          hunting and trapping are not needed as management tools especially if predator/prey relationships are intact, that is BS.

          • Elk275 says:


            People like to go hunting end of conversation.

            • Louise Kane says:

              Elk not all people believe wildlife only exists to be killed by hunters especially those animals that are not eaten after being killed. what a presumption it is to believe so strongly that other beings do not have the right to live their lives as something more then a target for a trophy or sport hunter.

          • Zach says:

            I am OK with a moderate amount of both because you need to extend some sort of balance to the hunting/trapping crowd.

            I have accepted the fact that we live in a time when no one can have everything 100% their way. I get farther in conversation and idealism by being rational and fair.

            I am OK with a moderate amount of hunting/trapping if I can get a hunter/trapper to be OK with a reasonable amount of wolves/wildlife and be OK with not totally destroying all of their habitat.

            If we don’t want the extermination of wolves to happen again, we have to be rational about our ideals.

          • Zach says:

            I am OK with a moderate amount of both because you need to extend some sort of balance to the hunting/trapping crowd.

            I have accepted the fact that we live in a time when no one can have everything 100% their way. I get farther in conversation and idealism by being rational and fair.

            I am OK with a moderate amount of hunting/trapping if I can get a hunter/trapper to be OK with a reasonable amount of wolves/wildlife and be OK with not totally destroying all of their habitat.

            If we don’t want the extermination of wolves to happen again, we have to be rational about our ideals.

            • Louise Kane says:

              don’t you think maybe its time to acknowledge that there really is no good reason to kill predators? how about making some advancements, it is after all 2013.jeez

    • jon says:

      “Today, 57 percent of the $92 million budget for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game comes from resident and nonresident tag sales and taxes on sporting goods. But out-of-state hunter numbers have dropped, and fewer young people are choosing to hunt as the nation becomes more urban.”

      Faced with those financial realities, the Fish and Game Commission has a choice: Does it become a leaner agency devoted to hunters and anglers – and the 17 percent of Idahoans who want the agency to manage only the species that hunters and anglers kill?

      Or, does the agency appeal to the more than 90 percent of Idahoans who stated in an F&G poll that they support Idaho wildlife beyond just hunting and fishing opportunities.”

      Some in Idaho have accepted that the times are changing. Just like the republican party has to reach out to minorities if they want to win a presidential election, Idaho fish and game are going to have to reach out to non-hunting conservationists.

  38. Jon,

    What you report is consistent with the gist of Compton’s comments because when he read the mission statement to me, he skipped over to the last part concerning the PROVISION OF SUPPLIES OF WILDLIFE FOR HUNTING, FISHING, AND TRAPPING.

    As a corollary, I asked him whether he was concerned about the growing intensity of the nation’s spotlight (e.g. New York Times coverage, L.A. Times coverage, Sacramento Bee, Huffington Post) on the relentless slaughter throughout the northern Rockies?

    He said that he wasn’t aware of the coverage and opined that because of the 2010 wolf hunts “conflict had died down.”

    Plus, he added incongruously, “do you know what’s it like in New York?”

    I responded, “I do. I was born on the East Coast I know that and those who are enlightened and who suffer in dirty crowded cities depend all the more on the transformative experience of being able to hear a wolf howl (outside Yellowstone) as in the Wood River Valley.

    No response to that other than saying that people back East aren’t stuck there — they could move if they wanted like he did from Montana — and dismissively acknowledging that he knows about Lynn Stone’s reports about not being able to hear wolves howl much anymore.

  39. JEFF E says:

    whether or not the content was lefty out of the phone conversation with you is irrelevant as it is clearly stated here:

    If you want to argue about an Idaho politician or appointee
    /state employee not giving a rats ass about anything but the status qua or CYA, then welcome to Idaho.

    Unfortunately the employees, the ones that actually do the work, are forced /intimidated into that position…..in my considered opinion.

  40. jon says:


    Idaho wolf poacher charged with threatening wildlife officer.

  41. Nancy says:

    “Question do you want wolves on the landscape? Answer YES you pay .075 tax on your gross income. Answer NO you pay your normal taxes”

    Long as you’ve got the calculator out RB, how much do I pay in taxes, WAY and above ag land, for my little piece of property that looks no different then the ranch land next to me? How much do I pay, in taxes, to subsidize the use of public land by ranchers? How much of my taxes go to the wear and tear on roads by cattle trucks and trailers (in ranchland)

    And would the county be paying (part of my taxes too) to have all those gravel roads graded so often if there were not a half dozen ranches on a lot of those roads?

    It would appear, lots of taxes, from many areas, go to proping up what amounts to a fraction of the cattle industy.

    • Robert R says:

      Nancy you should ask FS,BLM or DNRC what there road maintenance plan is. County roads are the only ones that get graded more than once a year.
      BLM does not do a lot with there roads and the FS usually only blades onces a year.
      With Obama back in office the FS had a budget cut, I know because we have not got the jobs as usual.
      Far as the county putting gravel on roads, its only roads with priority and most only get a $50,000 budget for gravel witch is not much.
      If these are public roads I would voice your concerns to the county commissioners and stop blaming others. Maybe there needs to be a speed limit of 30 mph if there isn’t.

      • Nancy says:

        Who’s blaming others? Just stating the facts. See you avoided the subsidizing of public lands grazing and why my property taxes are triple compared to the ranches around me – more subsidization?

        • Elk275 says:

          If you had 160 acres of land your home would be on taxed on a one acre tract with the said improvements and the other 159 acres would be taxed as agricultural lands the same as a rancher even if you never raised one beef cow. You have said that your home is on 5 acres which would not benefit from an agricultural exemption, I believe that it takes a minimum of 20 acres.

          • Nancy says:

            Thanks Elk but why the minimum?

            • Elk275 says:

              A site or parcel under 20 acres would have no or very little agricultural value in Montana. Until a few years ago 20 acres was the minimum for a subdivision without county review, it is 160 acre now.

          • WM says:


            Aren’t living structures for humans in MT taxed at the same basis, regardless of how much land upon which they sit? The basis for the structure would be square foot size and condition, yes?

  42. Jon,

    I don’t have Rachael’s e-mail but his department’s general number is 208-334-2920. The reception staff is very helpful as was Deputy Director Dave Compton. He’s very approachable and gave me a great deal of his time, though not the answers that I wanted to hear. I thanked him politely for his time several times. He seemed to know a lot though nothing about and e-mail communications between regional supervisors. Re: wolf pups being left to starve when mom is taken out — he evidenced no problem with that when I brought it up. Re: the marginalization of a 43 mil wolf “recovery” program to wolves being reduced to bait chunks, he did agree that that was a compelling way to view the program.

  43. Elk 275 says”

    “One of the reasons is that non resident wildlife watchers do not have the needed equipment or resources to access wildlife areas. No 4×4 truck with four tire chains (the typical wildlife watcher that I see in the Lamar Valley would not be able to chain all four wheels or want to) , no snowmobile (which I do not have) or horses/mules or know how to pack them into the mountains. How many wildlife watchers know how to winch a truck out.”

    I beg to differ. I live a little north Seattle with all of the necessary equipment, including a winch (like many Washingtonians). You see, while I am a Washington-based attorney (with an Idaho license as well), I worked for the U.S Forest Service between ’78 and ’84 (before going to law school to become an environmental/endangered species attorney) because I was sick of cruising old-growth timber for destruction.

    An avid Yellowstone wolf watcher, I would love nothing more to return to the Lowman/ Salmon areas and be surrounded by wolves howling. But I fear seeing not only wolves slaughtered in front of me (and the rage that would generate in me) but myself shot as well in the gun/trapping craze that rages throughout the state most of the year.

    • Robert R says:

      Valerie eigther you have had a bad experience with wannabe hunters or you just have a general hate.
      The majority are not crazed. That is your perception because you don’t agree with lethal means of managing wolves.

    • Elk275 says:

      My real comment is are you and others like you capable of finding wolves outside of Yellowstone Park this weekend or the next weekend. Do you know where to look? How to look? There are wolves in the Salmon area and Southwest Montana do you know where to go and find them tomorrow. I think that I could find them in 2 days in Southwest Montana.

  44. Robert, et al.,

    Perhaps you are right. Perhaps it’s a minority. But it only take one bullet to kill.

    Secondly, I “don’t generally hate.” Far from it, I try to follow Bhuddist principles — which fundamentally proscribes the causation of intentional suffering to any sentient being — as much as this flawed human being is currently capable of.

    The truest measure of a man is someone who has the authority and power to kill but instead demonstrates MERCY.

    Having spent many years in Idaho going to school at UI and working for the USFS, I have experience first-hand “chomping-at-the-bit hunters” and wannabe hunters, who couldn’t wait to male-bond come Fall. They’d become primed watching the Sportsman Channel together (where you can still see grotesque footage of animals about to be killed or being killed). I remember the escalation of chatter in the bars with walls covered with big game trophy heads and “catch-pics”. I know for a fact many of these pumped-up guys were having domestic problems (e.g. with wives, etc.) and my personal theory is that their excitement about killing derived from a sublimated desire to inflict violence. Of course, one cannot kill one’s wife and generally get away with it.

    If only these stunted men would use their extra energy and adrenaline/testosterone to CREATE beauty (e.g. wood-working, photography, writing, painting, music, teaching, etc.) INSTEAD of DESTROYING it.

    In closing, OF COURSE, an intelligent, compassionate, aware person (like myself) does not agree with killing such expressive, sentient, curious, supremely intelligent beings such as wolves. How could I?? How could ANY intelligent, compassion, aware person??

    • Louise Kane says:

      In closing, OF COURSE, an intelligent, compassionate, aware person (like myself) does not agree with killing such expressive, sentient, curious, supremely intelligent beings such as wolves. How could I?? How could ANY intelligent, compassion, aware person??
      Thanks Valerie for speaking for many of us

    • rork says:

      The shrieking discredits you.
      Got trouble with men generally I figure.
      (See how that’s done?)
      I’m against wolf hunting, but you don’t sound like the kind of ally I want. Cause it’s too easily dismissed. Wanna stop bear hunting in Michigan UP by the same logic? Are trout just broccoli with eyeballs? How do you feel about habitat destruction associated with car use?

    • topher says:

      Did the almighty Buddah enlighten you as how to be so critical of others?

  45. Louise Kane says:

    by Exposing the Big Game
    Unless a severe blow to the head or some congenital brain disorder has rendered them incapable of feeling empathy, anyone who has witnessed the harrowing ordeal suffered by an animal caught in a leg-hold trap should be appalled and outraged that trapping is legal in a society that considers itself civilized.

    The continuation of this hellish violation in a country governed by the people suggests that either most folks have brain damage, or the majority of the voting populace is blissfully unaware of the terrible anguish someone caught in a trap goes through.

    They must never have heard the cries of shock and agony when a dog first feels the steel jaws of a trap lock onto his leg. They must never have looked into the weary eyes of a helpless captive who has been stuck for days and nights on end…

    Sidestepping the indisputable cruelty issue, pro-trapping factions try to perpetuate the myth that this demonic practice is “sustainable,” but time and again entire populations are completely trapped out of an area, often within a single season. The winter after I found wolf tracks in Alaska’s Katmai National Park, all seven members of a pack who had filled a niche in and around that preserve were killed by trappers. Though wolves are extinct or endangered in most of the US, but 1500 are permissibly “harvested” in Alaska each year.

    Leg-hold traps are now banned in 88 countries and a few enlightened US states. Yet in most states, as in Canada, this twisted tradition is not only legal, it’s practically enshrined as a sacred human right. Compassionate people everywhere must add their voice to the rising call to end this gratuitous torture for good.


    Text excerpted from the chapter “Time to End a Twisted Tradition” in the book, Exposing the Big Game: Living Targets of a Dying Sport.

  46. Mark L says:

    Along the same thinking/questioning, are wolf hunters allowed any equipment that wolf watchers may not use? I.e. electronic calling in some areas.

    • WM says:

      Mark L.,

      A concern raised some time back was that “wolf tourism” would create its own bag attraction mechanisms. Baiting repeatedly in certain locations, or use of calls – electronic or otherwise- were discussed here awhile back. One would presume some “guides” with profit motive and a desire to satsify client viewing opportunities would use the same attractants, whether legal or not. An enthusiastic individual watcher might employ some of the same tactics, but not all may have the time or patience to see if they are very effective.

  47. CodyCoyote says:

    Wolf poached last week west of Cody WY in Shoshone NF being investigated.


    I’m sure Wyoming Game and Fish will bring all its investigative power to bear on this heinous case, he says satirically…

  48. Greetings Wolf advocates and those on the fence,

    I highly encourage you to read Carter Niemeyer’s memoir “Wolfer.” I’ve now read it five times and have marked more than a hundred passages for research on the backstory as to how a 43 million so-called wolf “recovery” program degenerated into wolves being sanctioned last July as bait chances to kill yet more wolves.

    As much as I personally hate reading about the number of kills at the hand of Niemeyer (e.g., 6000 coyotes alone), the book is a public service of the highest order in that it reveals an unblinking portrait of Wildlife Services’ parasitic relationship with both IFG and USFWS.

    For example, on page 355, Niemeyer writes: “As an IFG manager once said, “Wolves are like grass. You have to keep mowing them down.” Niemeyer then opines: “But do we really?”

    On page 317, Niemeyer writes: “It only took two more drafts before Ed Bangs RUBBER-STAMPED it (the legislatively enacted 2002 Idaho Wolf Conservation and Mgnt. Plan).” (emphasis added).

    QUESTION: Can anyone in the know give me their opinion as WHY Bangs — a man who told NOVA in 1997 that “wolves are the parents, the mothers, the fathers, the brothers and sisters that we always hoped we could be,” RUBBER-STAMPED the disastrous plan that sanctions the current epidemic of slaughter????

    In closing, as I alluded several times on this site, I am in the process of completing a five-year writing project re: the players and events that have gotten us to the point where the sanctioned killing of wolves is going nine months a year (in varying regions of Idaho) and Wildlife Services has taken over wolf mint. in Montana (confirmed by Deputy Director of IFG yesterday) and again, wolves are being used as bait to entice more wolves to their deaths.

  49. Addendum/typos:

    bait “chances” should read wolf “chunks”/

    wolf “mint” should read “mint.”


  50. CodyCoyote says:

    The Montana conclave of cottonwood Cardinals and the bovinous Bishops meeting in Helena have declared a Holy War on free roaming/transplanted Bison . Rather, any Bison at all in Montana outside Yellowstone is being branded a nuisance animal and would be dealt with accordingly if the bloc of Bison-hating legislators have their way.

    The Lee Newspapers guild has a long article today about this Bison bashing, written by Mike Dennison . Here’s the link to the Missoulian article. ( Can also be found at the Billings Gazette et al.)


    Bad times for Bison under the Big Sky.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I’m very worried about this for our birds – and all under the guise of ‘green is good’.

    • Immer Treue says:

      “I was sure I was shooting at a bear.”

      Gosh, but this does not instill a great amount of confidence in me.

      • topher says:

        I only posted this because I remember some of the comments on this site when it first happened.

        • Leslie says:

          “I froze,” he recalled. “I thought the only person up there was my grandson. Then I realized he wasn’t dressed like that.”

          Bears don’t wear clothes, at least last I checked.

          • topher says:

            To me the most disturbing part of this story is the pain pill. I have a prescription for pain pills and wouldn’t ever consider using them while hunting. The deal is tough it out or don’t hunt, I restrict myself to short bird hunts lately and it’s sure nice to be out and about.

      • jon says:

        He should have been found guilty. There is no way someone can’t tell the difference between a bear and a person. If he was sure he was shooting at a bear, this just shows you that people in the woods are not safe from some hunters. This is not the only case either where a hunter has mistaken a human for a wild animal and shot at that person thinking it was an animal. It’s a shame this hunter was let off.

        • savebears says:

          Well Jon,

          Apparently those that sat on the Jury and actually reviewed all of the evidence, disagrees with your position.

          • Immer Treue says:


            Perhaps so, however, in my opinion, there is absolutely no, none, not a reason in the world that one who hunts with an unaddled mind, could possibly mistake a human being for a bear, unless said victim was wearing a bear suit.

            In this case, I am solidly behind jon’s statement. The man violated the cardinal rule of hunting, he did not positively identify his target.

            As an aside, I remember this case as first posted, and I wondered aloud if the grandfather did not fall on the sword for the grandson.

            • savebears says:


              I don’t think there is any reason a human should mistake another human for an animal, but none of us were in that court to actually review all of the information and the jury rendered the verdict it felt was correct, whether anyone of us like it.

              • jon says:

                “Perhaps so, however, in my opinion, there is absolutely no, none, not a reason in the world that one who hunts with an unaddled mind, could possibly mistake a human being for a bear, unless said victim was wearing a bear suit.”

                I agree 100% immer and the scary thing is this hunter has apparently been hunting for 60 years. The jury probably asked themselves quite a few times how on earth does a hunter who claims he’s been hunting for 60 years kill a person thinking he was a black bear?

              • Immer Treue says:


                I can’t disagree with your assessment, yet, there is no excuse. Either he may have been addled with Vicodin, or the shooter was actually the grandson, and grandfather was willing to take the fall.

                Regardless, and not meant as anti-hunting, this man should never be In the field again.

            • jon says:

              You would think a hunter who has been hunting for 60 years would be an expert on properly identifying targets. There is just no excuse as you have already said for someone to confuse a man with a black bear.

              • topher says:

                I’ve seen a coyote coming over the hill and seconds later realized it was slung over a man’s shoulder, even though I don’t hunt coyotes it was still a case of somewhat mistaken identity. Circumstances such as this serve as a constant reminder to me to carefully identify my target and not take snap shots at game. More than once I have put the sneak on other peoples turkey or goose decoys.
                The eye and brain make assumptions about the things we see without taking in every detail and as hunters we should be aware of this and always cautious. It’s easy to think “this could never happen to me”, but if your in the woods with a weapon it can.

              • JEFF E says:

                once again sunny jon displays a total lack of knowledge

        • Elk275 says:


          About 1980 a hunter mistaken a fluorescent orange tent for a black bear and killed a woman inside outside of Gardiner, Montana. How can a hunter or anyone mistaken a fluorescent orange tent for a black bear. This incident was on the news, and commentary was written about it all over the nation. How can one? The trial was held in Livingston, Montana and the evidence present to the court. There was a reason why the hunter had mistaken the tent for a black bear. The jury found him guilty, the judge was surprised with verdict and do to his work record sentence him to probation. A year later he drowned in North Dakota.

          How does one mistaken a fluorescent orange tent for a black bear. The hunters had seen 5 grizzlies that day and were on the edge, they were scare of grizzlies. It was near dark and the orange tent had turned black, the couple was having sex and she was on top, animal like noises coming from the tent.

          The next night the sheriff department set the tent up and at the exact same time, tent was jet black. I would be careful and learn all the facts before making a judgement and learn what they were seeing.

          • Immer Treue says:


            Your comment has merit, but the fact is a positive ID was not made. Also, I don’t know what Montana restrictions are on when hunting stops, but in MN it is sundown/when that day glow orange looses it’s affect.

            Ironic that a couple going through the throws of procreation, one ends up dying because of it.

          • Mark L says:

            True Elk, he went out there to kill, just didn’t kill what he expected. Happens.

            • CodyCoyote says:

              I managed the public hunting access for a 110,000 acre Wyoming cattle ranch for 13 years. I lived in a trailer at the front gate and wrote hunting access permits and checked game, and generally gave advice to the many hunters who came there to hunt, about 450 deer and antelope hunters. Many came from the upper Midwest.

              I recall the Michigan autoworker hunter who brought out a mule deer with its ass mostly blown off. Poor deer probably bled to death. I noted that ” well, they can’t all be clean shots thru the heart…”

              He said the big Doe ducked into the thick brush before he could get a good shot off, so ” just took a Sound Shot ” . I had not heard that one before…point your gun towards a noise and lay out a flak pattern. He added that is not unusual when hunting Whitetail with shotguns in the Midwest .

              Mistakenly shooting a fluorescent orange tent in the pitch dark is not that much of a stretch to me. We do not test and certify hunters for competency around here…

          • SEAK Mossback says:

            I seem to recall an incident probably in the 1970s in the Selway-Bitteroot out of Hamilton (unsure if it was Idaho or Montana) where some guys were packed in bow hunting. On a dreary, rainy day one of them made a quiet stalk on a black bear and fatally arrowed his hunting partner who was sitting under a tree eating lunch while wearing a black saddle slicker.

            I often help with hunter education instruction around here — every year, the entire 6th grade class at a middle school (about 220 students, minus a couple whose parents withhold permission) take hunter ed and get certified. I always set up something similar, that I call carhartt man on the shoot-don’t shoot course — sitting in the forest gloom with in a dark brown suite with just his shoulder sticking out from a tree shaped like a deer’s head with buck antlers on it as if he was resting while packing a deer with his lunch spread out next to him and his hunter orange pack on the ground, none of it visible from the initial perspective of the students who are evaluating criteria for the shot (safe? legal? ethical?). Then after walking up, I relate a tragic story or two, reminding them that all is not always what it seems based on our expectations, and hoping to leave an impression . . . . always looking to add a new story, but I think Elk’s might go just a bit too far for 6th graders.

  51. Immer Treue says:

    Perhaps the billboards and protests have some merit as MN lawmakers introduce bill to end wolf hunt.


    • Ida Lupine says:

      Fantastic. *huge sigh of relief!*

    • Immer Treue says:

      To add just a bit more. Certainly not a done deal, but a foot in the door for hopefully meaningful wolf management in the future in MN.

      Wolf bill introduced to make good on broken public promise


      • Ida Lupine says:

        Glad to hear it.

      • jon says:

        I am glad they are trying. Don’t know if it will go anywhere since the governor is a republican.

        • Immer Treue says:


          This is an oops moment for you as Mark Dayton is not a Republican, but a member of the DFL. Democratic-Farmerand-Labor.


          • jon says:

            Thanks for correcting me. For some reason, I assumed he was a republican.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            He sounds wonderful. 🙂

          • Louise Kane says:

            also interesting in this proposed legislation its bipartisan….

          • WM says:

            I have never really understood what the Democratic Farm Labor party stood for. Must just be generic D’s who probably really like farm subsidies in whatever form they take, with wheat, corn, soybeans, (maybe even grazing allotments on federal land, if there are in any in what little federal forests there are in MN). LOL.

            I guess we will have to watch what the farm lobby of whatever party does to weigh in in favor or against wolves. My recollection is MN has been trying to delist for 10 years, which means the promise was held up by HSUS and the others that filed suit to keep wolves on the list. So, somebody will make the argument that they have already waited their five (or more) years. So there really is no broken promise.

            Strikes me that Maureen Hackett is a well organized advocate with actually a little pull in MN political circles.

            • Immer Treue says:


              “Strikes me that Maureen Hackett is a well organized advocate with actually a little pull in MN political circles.”

              It sure looks like she is organized, and that helps.

              I think the volume of wolves taken in MN: 413 legally during the two seasons, approximately 270 due to depredation, who knows how many poached (estimates as high as 400 in the past, which I have mentioned before) and add to that auto collisions, and it is not inconceivable that nearly 1,000 wolves in MN were killed this year.

              No matter how one looks at it, that’s a lot. For an animal that has just lost protection, 30% loss is big. This after the very unscientific survey displayed an overwhelming slant against wolf hunting.

              Not saying MN should not control its wolf population, but this amounted, in my opinion, overreaction. I really think a couple years, at least, should be skipped, and monitor depredations (will they increase or decrease due to the seasons). Will wolf pack numbers increase due to fracturing of pack stru tires. Will wolf numbers increase, surveys now being made, or has the MN wolf population taken a devestating hit.

              Time will tell.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Yes Immer I saw that a couple of days ago, perhaps your state will be the first to stop the runaway train wreck, knee-jerk barbaric wolf-killing state management plans. Sure be nice to hear some good news for wolves. That Maureen Hackett is great!

        on a more somber note the New Mexico proposed ban on coyote killing contests failed 38-30. A very sad day. One senator said isn’t it time to be civilized. The livestock industry still does not think so, they were big players here along with some whiny losers arguing that banning killing contests was an infringement of the 2nd amendment rights, sos
        what a shame. Even hunters were standing up for this bill arguing that killing contests are not hunting. The same shrill, ugly vocal minority winning with the same deep pocket corrupt special interests behind them. A disgrace, to allow killing contests of animals.

        • jon says:

          Those 38 who voted against coyote killing contests are a disgrace to the human race. Coyote killing contests for prizes and money are not justifiable in any way, shape, or form. As one would expect, most of the republicans voted against banning coyote hunting contests for prizes and most democrats voted for banning these despicable and disgusting contests.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Wow. It isn’t time to be civilized? When is it time?

  52. Leslie says:

    Wolf poaching on the North Fork outside Cody


    Why these officials say they’ve factored poaching into their quotas is beyond me. Doesn’t that give people free license to poach as long as they make sure they are not caught?

  53. jon says:


    “But several speakers Tuesday afternoon spoke vehemently against the practice of using dogs, regardless of rules.

    “This isn’t Rome,” said Ron Fitzpatrick, a lawyer and dog owner from La Crosse. “This is barbaric.”

    Fitzpatrick said it is unlikely hunters will be able to stop fights between dogs and wolves, resulting in the deaths of animals. While the law setting up the wolf hunt makes legal the use of dogs to track and trail wolves, it does not permit hunters to allow the dogs to kill wolves.

    Fitzpatrick said it makes little difference what the law says.

    “The wolves can’t climb trees,” Fitzpatrick said. “They are going to turn and fight for their lives. And it’s going to be ugly.”

    Wisconsin DNR is playing with fire. Only bad things can happen when you mix wolves with hunting dogs.

  54. Nancy says:

    The industrialization of agriculture:



    • Salle says:

      Okay… I made it through about the first 8 seconds of that. (Made me think of “Soylent Green”) I’ve seen a lot about what goes on in the industrial food manufacturing world, still have nightmares about stuff I saw two years ago. Another reason I don’t like to eat meat.

  55. WM says:

    Looks like the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (the most liberal court in the federal appellate system, sitting in San Francisco), doesn’t like the activities and attitude of the Sea Shepard group and its captain Paul Watson. But it looks like the legal appeal is not over as Sea Sheperd seeks to have the 3 judge panel ruling looked over by an 11-judge full panel. The 3 judge panel decision was unanamous, so the motion for reconsideration will likely not be successful.


    Personally, I think authorities ought to throw Captain Paul Watson’s sorry ass in jail, and fine their group substantially, before somebody gets killed on either side.

    • WM says:

      Here is a link to the court decision, and it looks like the appeal court spanked the trial court judge pretty good for his misinterpretation of the law. It is not good for an upward mobile judicial career when a judge gets taken to the woodshed like this. Even worse, and very rare, when a court of appeals actually takes a case away from a judge.

    • Rancher Bob says:

      Maybe the gene pool would be better off if some did get killed, I watch the show from time to time for a laugh, devoted idiots comes to mind.

      • jon says:

        What a disgusting thing to say.

        • savebears says:


          If the shoe fits, wear it!

          • jon says:

            You’re defending his comment Dave? No surprise there.

            • jon says:

              Oh, I’m sorry, I meant “Donald”.

            • savebears says:

              You are a real prick, that has no knowledge other that what you read on the internet. Jon, you live a very sad life.

              • savebears says:

                By the way, you used to corespon with me through email, I have sent you a few note lately and I have not received any answers, care to let me know why?

              • jon says:

                Dave, Donald, Jackson, or whatever your real first name is, I blocked you a while ago. Don’t waste your time sending me anymore emails.

              • savebears says:

                Okay Jon, I won’t, don’t waste our time when we are discussing important issues, you have never even experienced any of the stuff you talk about, you cruise the net, gathering new paper articles, and actually think you are posting information, you are pathetic Jon Wilson.

              • jon says:

                It’s extremely hilarious how you say I live a sad life. In an email you sent me a while ago, you said your name is Jackson and now you are telling people your name is Donald. One person said your first name is David. How many first names do you have sb? Dave Smith was right, you are Dave Parker on the yellowstone forums.

              • jon says:

                Says the guy who has numerous first names. Don’t bother me anymore Dave.

              • savebears says:

                My Name is Donald J. Jackson, you live a very sad life Jon Wilson

              • Harley says:

                Hello Donald J. Jackson! I’m…. Harley! LOL!

                Whew, things got a bit heated around here didn’t they.

              • savebears says:

                Harley, Hi, If you want to check out things, just run my IP address, you will find that “Dave Parker” has a completely different IP, Jon is pathetic and grasping at straws to bolster his very small position on this blog.

              • Harley says:

                Pfft, I don’t need to run an IP address!I was just trying to break a little tension. I guess I should have said my name was Harley Davidson lol! But maybe that could get me into some kind of copyright infringement… hmm….

              • savebears says:

                No worries Harley, you and I have always got along, unlike Jon, who changes position as the wind blows, he is a uniformed jerk, who have never even visited the areas that he professes to know so much about.

              • Harley says:

                How’s the weather been your way? We’ve finally gotten snow, it’s been so long since we’ve gotten this amount that we almost don’t know what to do with it! It’s that icky heavy wet stuff though but I’m not going to complain too much, we need the moisture badly.

              • savebears says:


                We have been picking up an inch or two the last couple of days, pretty dry snow with little moisture content, still only have about a foot to eighteen inches on the ground. Does not bode well for this upcoming summer, could be dray and dangerous.

              • Harley says:


                We got dumped on. around 7 inches. More than the city. The way the wind was whipping around yesterday, I had a few white knuckle moments on the way home from work. We’ve been totally spoiled. It’s rather ironic because I just got finished reading a book titled The Children’s Blizzard. I really can’t complain considering what they went through in 1888. Wow…Very glad I have my car!

                I hear you on that dry and dangerous. I’ll be keeping a close watch on it. The relatives in Iowa have been very concerned too. Not sure what kind of crop they’ll get this year. Scary stuff.

  56. Ida Lupine says:

    I wonder how the problem of Japan’s illegal poaching of whales in a whale sanctuary and ignoring the IWC should be handled:


    • Ida Lupine says:

      What’s our stake in this race – I don’t believe we even have jurisdiction here, do we? Is it the Antarctic treaty, or we don’t recognize Australia’s claims?

  57. timz says:

    these people belong in a looney bin rather than a statehouse.

  58. Louise Kane says:


    bizarre comment at the end by farmer calling elk eating potatoes, welfare elk.

    a friend sent me a silly joke about dogs, but it made me think about ranching and agricultural businesses, at least big ones and their land grabs and destruction of wildlife.

    Dog Property Laws

    -If I like it, it’s mine.

    -If it’s in my mouth, it’s mine.

    -If I can take it from you, it’s mine.

    -If I had it a little while ago, it’s mine.

    -If it’s mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way.

    -If I’m chewing something up, all the pieces are mine.

    -If it just looks like mine, it’s mine.

    -If I saw it first, it’s mine.

    -If you are playing with something and you put it down, it automatically becomes mine.

    -If it’s broken, it’s yours.

    rules for puppies kind of cute, when its groups of people acting that way with public lands and wildlife, not so cute.

    • WM says:


      ++bizarre comment at the end by farmer calling elk eating potatoes, welfare elk. ++

      Actually not bizarre at all. These elk are a small but growing herd on the Skagit River (known by the way for its very high seasonal population of bald eagles in winter). The area is way north of Seattle, near the Canadian border. There isn’t much winter range, so more elk are “sharing” with the private landowners that farm the fertile valley bottom. Lots of milk cows here (no federal land in the valley and no grazing allotments, by the way). The “welfare elk” comment refers to the private landowners having to put up with the elk that trash their fences and eat their grass, with no reimbursement for either at present.

      The Nooksack Indian tribe wants to grow the herd for subsistence use, as does WA Fish and Wildlife. The problem is there is greater demand on the resource than there is land available. And, this area is to the west of the North Cascades NP/wilderness, where eventually some folks want, and there will likely be, wolves. Wonder what will happen then?

      The tribe and WA elk hunters want their elk. Ranchers on private land already feel they are “sharing” more than they want. Lots of small ranchettes here with horses, few cows/sheep, and the occasional llama. Urban dwellers want their wolves. Stay tuned. I give it about four years before conflicts begin in this locale, when the wolf feces hits the fan. WDFW hasn’t figured that part out yet. Sure hope Commissioner Brad Smith wakes up when it does. He just retired (I think) as Dean of the Huxley School of Environment at nearby WWSU in Bellingham. I expect if he hasn’t already, he will be getting an earful soon (treaty obligations to tribes, hunters, too many or too few elk and soon wolves making it even more competitive).

    • Immer Treue says:


      So true about dogs. I posted this before,
      ” The Wolf Credo”.


      Wolf Credo

      Respect the elders
      Teach the young
      Cooperate with the pack
      Play when you can
      Hunt when you must
      Rest in between
      Share you affections
      Voice your feelings
      Leave your mark.





    • jon says:

      What are “welfare” elk?

      • WM says:


        I have come to believe you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even you can figure out what a “welfare elk” is in the context of the article on the Nooksack elk, and my comment. Think hard, eventually it will come to you.

        • savebears says:

          Sharpest knife in the drawer, that is funny, Jon rubs the edge of his knife on concrete WM. No Jon cannot figure out what Welfare Elk are, he has not ever experienced anything we talk about on this blog.

      • Robert R says:

        They are on Obama’s welfare nanny state program.

        • CodyCoyote says:

          Robert , I think you missed your bus . Welfare elk are the critters used by welfare ranchers and welfare farmers to get their welfare payments ( subsidies ). Some of these elk only exist on paper. Some are totally imaginary. Yours, I think…

  59. jon says:


    “The bill is in response to critics who say the wildlife board is dominated by sportsmen interested in promoting hunting opportunities. Critics argue wildlife is a state resource and more consideration should be given to protecting animals.”

    This is good news.

  60. Leslie says:

    Nice article but a bit long on cougar science in the West.


  61. Robert R says:

    This should make some of the anti hound hunters happy.
    I hope it’s not any of your favorites pets when your cross country sking ect. !!
    There has been seven hounds killed by wolves in Montana alone this year.


    • jon says:

      Happy? why on earth would you think anyone would be happy because someone’s hound is killed by wolves? Hound hunters know the risks involved with hound hunting.

    • Leslie says:

      Robert R.

      Having dogs killed doesn’t make me happy, but the entire ‘sport’ of mountain lion hunting, with dogs with GPS collars, is like killing fish in a barrel. Cats have been diminishing due to hunting. See the article I posted link to above. What’s great about wolves is that they are keeping mountain lion hunters out of those areas. I really object to mountain lion hunting. Using dogs to do all your tracking while you watch your GPS unit, then go shoot the lion who is treed is not hunting, it’s murder.

      So, yes, although I don’t like to hear about a dead dog, I think that dog was sacrificed for a good cause.

      • Robert R says:

        The GPS collars are used for location the dogs. Houndsman listen for the sound of the dogs to know weather the dogs are on a track or have a cat in a tree.
        Mountain Lions have not been declining due to hunting.
        As much as most dislike hound hunting you can be selective if you choose to kill a cat. Most lion hunters do not kill females or young cats.
        These guys could have easily killed some of the wolves but didn’t.

        • Leslie says:

          Yes I know the collars are for the dogs and the dogs do all the work. I suppose there is a little walking for the ‘hunter’ and a bit of aiming up a tree once the dogs tree the cat. Or he can just check his GPS dog locater and see where they are congregating before he gets out of his truck. Oh, and then the hunter can ‘decide’ if he wants to kill the cat once treed. Shooting furry fish in an arboreal barrel. Not exactly much skill, except, I will admit, in the training of the dogs.

          There are many issues with these cats and I urge you to read the article I posted, such as random killing by hunters poses greater risks from cats to livestock and people when ‘teenage’ cats are left without the territorial big Toms around.

          As far as decline, WY just made a ‘no limit’ year round special zone for cats, and the South Dakota side of the Black Hills is on the rampage to eliminate cats.

          I just made a count and with one more month left in the cougar season, WY hunters have killed more than 200 cats. That’s a lot of indiscriminate killing.

          • Robert R says:

            Leslie Montana must have a larger population of lions than Wyoming because the harvest numbers are well above 200.

            • savebears says:

              The lion population in the west is quite large, FWP has documented over 50 cats from Columbia falls to the area I live north of C Falls, which is only about 20 miles.

              • savebears says:

                Speaking of Cats, here is a very unusual picture that was taken this week here in the Flathead. I know exactly where this is, we almost bought a house in this area!


              • Harley says:


                Awesome pic! 3 together like that, is that rare? I’ve read that mountain lions are rather solitary?

              • savebears says:


                It is extremely rare, I suspect these are three juvenile cats, by the looks of them and they might be litter mates, rare to have three kittens, let alone all of them surviving to full grown.

              • Louise Kane says:

                great image of those three lions
                the comments seem to express a good amount of anger about Montana’s treatment of predators, looks like they are Montanans commenting

              • Leslie says:

                SB, this interesting cougar show today on the Teton study noted only 9 cats in a 150 mile radius around the jackson/teton area. Their study is on why only 20% of the kittens are surviving; probably due to increased competition with limited prey and more people.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I’m sure noone is happy about it. The responsibility lies squarely with the dog’s owner. Hunting wild animals who will fight to the death to save themselves is always a risky undertaking.

      Is there any proof of this? I find it strange that a hunter wasn’t able to shoot a wolf if an entire pack was close enough.

      • Elk275 says:

        The wolves were 100 yards away and the houndsmen only had pistols. A 100 yard shot with a pistol – not likely.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          Who goes hunting with a pistol?

          • savebears says:


            I know a lot of people that hunt with pistols, The Thompson Center Arms is a very popular hunting pistol, you can change the barrels depending on what caliber you want to hunt with.

            • Ida Lupine says:

              I didn’t know that. 🙂

              Love the pics of the mountain lions you posted. So beautiful!

        • Robert R says:

          Elk I have to agree and disagree with you.
          Depending on the caliber of the pistol and how good of a shot anyone of these guy are no one knows. One problem is being able to get a clear shot in the timber weather open or dense.
          A 100 yard shot with a pistol is very doable with the larger calibers.

      • Leslie says:

        One thing I find interesting and I don’t think biologists know yet is the relationship of these two predators in the same space.

        I personally have been tracking a cat and each tracking session ends with the cats tracks obscured by the resident wolf packs’ tracks, both same freshness. The other day there was a deer kill with cat tracks nearby but the wolves had clearly been the ones to finish it off. Who knows if the cat killed it and the wolves ran the cat off. So it does seem that wolves are taking real advantage of cougars.

        Dogs hunting cats may be more often running up against wolves who keep a close proximity, or a close tab on these cats. We’ve had random dogs lost in Sunlight and after a week they turn up. One fellow this winter lost his dog on the mountain, the dog got caught in a hunters trap, the trapper released the dog, the dog ran the several miles to the fellow’s cabin which was empty. The dog sat on the porch while a pack of wolves killed a deer that night in the front yard. The owner showed up the next day and found the dog with only a wounded foot from the trap.

        So there may be more to cats, dogs, and wolves than meets the eye.

    • JB says:

      I don’t really feel strongly about hounding one way or another, but I do think it’s hypocritical for hound hunters to complain when their dogs are killed by predators; after all, the houndsman has made a conscious decision to subject his dogs to this very hazard. It’s sort of like walking up to a bison with a point-and-shoot and then complaining when the flash goes off and you get gored. As a general principle, I don’t think wildlife agencies should be responsible for mitigating the risks associated with doing inherently risky things around wildlife.

  62. Peter Kiermeir says:

    bear-poaching probe continues after massive bust nets 80 (!) arrests

  63. Snaildarter says:

    In the south legitimate Fox hunting is done two ways. The English style with horses and country style where several fox hunters will bring their dogs build a big fire, turn the dogs out, and just listen. Usually a bottle of whiskey is past among the participants. Each owner will take turns explaining what is happening as the dogs run a fox. As a boy I remember being fascinated by the stories “Big blue is in the lead and the male just passed the dogs off to his vixen and she’s leading them over the ridge while he rest. Blue is tiring now and baby has taken over as lead. Go baby go!!” This would go on most of the night. The fox would get away and the dogs would return to camp. In fact I remember just one time when the dogs caught a fox and “fox hunters” really got upset. This is as close as hunting can come to fishing with a barbless hook.

  64. Leslie says:

    NGChannel has an excellent 1 hour documentary called American Cougar Revealed. Try to catch it if you can as it comes up periodically. The schedule would say online for the next showing. It just showed again today so it might be on again soon in your time zone.

    The show was filmed in Jackson through Panthera and Beringer South. Howard Quigley of Panthera (http://www.panthera.org/people/howard-quigley-phd)is doing an ongoing study in the Tetons to understand why cougar kittens are declining, and also to understand bear/wolf/cougar interactions. This is some of the best footage of cougars I’ve ever seen and the study is fascinating.

  65. Louise Kane says:

    wyoming more killing ….anyone else find this kind of state management reprehensible and the wink and nod with Salazar at the helm slightly criminal

    From Exposing the Big Game

    Wolves Are Getting it From the Left and the Right
    Posted on March 1, 2013
    Since 2011, when Congress stripped wolves of their Endangered Species status, an estimated 1,084 wolves have been killed in the Northern Rockies. Again, that’s ONE THOUSAND AND EIGHTY-FOUR living, breathing, social, intelligent wolves killed by scornful, fearful, vengeful and boastful humans, often in the most hideous ways imaginable.

    Of course, that number might not seem so shocking if you consider that 5,450 wolves were killed in the Montana Territory in 1884, after a bounty on wolves was first instated there. Clearly, there were a lot more wolves in the country then as compared to now, but that didn’t stop the Obama Administration from declaring the species “recovered” in 2011 and handing them over to eagerly awaiting hostile, hateful anti-wolf states to “manage” as they see fit.

    Now, under a plan supported by the federal government, the state of Wyoming is opening even more wolf habitat to unlimited killing. As of today, March 1st, until at least October, wolves can be slain there at will. How many will survive such an onslaught is anyone’s guess, but I can guarantee the number of “recovered” Wyoming wolves will be in the dozens or very low hundreds, not the thousands.

    (Doubtless, a few will survive…for a while. The famed “Custer wolf” eluded hunters and trappers for over ten years and over 2600 square miles along the Wyoming-South Dakota border, even though he had a $500.00 bounty on his head. The crafty fugitive was aided in out-witting the best hunters in the country by a pair of coyotes who flanked him on both sides, serving as sentinels. Finally a government hunter was assigned to track down the Custer wolf. He first shot the two coyotes, and six months later, in October 1920, he caught up with and killed the wolf, making him one of the last of his kind to live and die in the region for nearly a century.)

    Anyone (well, anyone with a conscience) would be ashamed to read about the gruesome war on wolves carried out in this country during the 1800s which resulted in the extinction of the species over most of the Lower 48. Common “extermination” practices used by “wolfers” included killing pups in their dens.

    But where is the national outrage today as hunters and trappers in bloody red states like Wyoming, Idaho and Montana wipe out entire packs, including fathers, mothers and their pups? Wyoming’s expanded wolf-killing season is all the more tragic given that spring is the time of year that wolves are denning.

    From the group, Defenders of Wildlife: “This expanded hunt puts the most vulnerable population of wolves – pups and pregnant or nursing mothers – in greater danger of being shot on sight. This kill-at-will approach is exactly the kind of flawed policy we knew would happen if wolves prematurely lost their Endangered Species Act protection – this is why Defenders is suing the U.S. Department of Interior to restore Endangered Species Act (ESA) protection for wolves in Wyoming.”

    It’s not like the administration didn’t know what might happen when the fate of the wolves was turned over to states with extreme anti-wolf plans already in place. In just two years over 1,000 wolves have been ruthlessly murdered by hunters and trappers eager to relive the gory glory days of the 1800s.

    Obviously some people have a different reaction when they read their history books than those of us with a conscience.

  66. Ida Lupine says:

    It’s not like the administration didn’t know what might happen when the fate of the wolves was turned over to states with extreme anti-wolf plans already in place.

    This is what truly galls me. And 1084 wolves killed for absolutely nothing but securing a Democratic senate seat.

    • Leslie says:

      Louise, they are talking about the notorious ‘flex zone’, a strange idea that makes south of jackson trophy, then predator, in order to allow wolves to breed and have genetic diversity, as well as pass through. I just don’t see how that is going to work.

  67. Robert R says:

    Don’t get me wrong because I want to see the sage grouse thrive.
    Ego environmentalism at its best without any common sence.
    Worried about dead or dying trees and burning sage brush. The burning of sage only makes it come back stronger and thicker.
    Unless you spray sage it is hard to kill. However if you can apply water at the right time of the moon phase it kills it for good and you know it because it turns a pinkish color.


    • Leslie says:

      Robert, I understand from a friend who was with the Forest Service for 30 years that a sagebrush burn area takes about 10 years to recover. He was involved in a lot of control burns in forest and open areas. I’d probably trust his opinion.

      • Robert R says:

        Leslie it all depends on the time of year the burn is done and weather it has been a drought year or semi normal year for precipitation.
        It also make a huge difference how many fuels are there for a good burn.

    • JB says:


      In your rush to condemn environmentalists, you’re oversimplifying the issue. Burning can reduce cover and increase invasive species. Also, increased frequency of fires can change soil characteristics, making them less favorable for sagebrush.

      • Robert R says:

        JB I’m not going to argue with you over apples and oranges but I know what I’ve witnessed from several burns.

        • JB says:

          Robert: The problem is, single observations amount to anecdotes. Don’t get me wrong, anecdotal evidence can be useful, but it doesn’t tell the whole story. When you make bold proclamations, like: “The burning of sage only makes it come back stronger and thicker,” you should expect someone to come along and say, “yeah, but…”

          In any case, try reading…

          Sankey et al. 2012. Fire effects on the spatial patterning of soil properties
          in sagebrush steppe, USA: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Wildland Fire

          Rhodes et al. 2010. Fire Effects on Cover and Dietary Resources of Sage-Grouse Habitat, Journal of Wildlife Management DOI: 10.2193/2009-143

          • Robert R says:

            I know what I have seen is not the norm.

            I think this says a little more than the info you gave me.


            • JB says:

              Indeed it does. The authors do not mince words:

              “Prescribed burns and wildfires typically result in the complete mortality of Wyoming big sagebrush. We found that Wyoming big sagebrush recovers very slowly from both types of burns at all sites, even those with relatively moist conditions. Full recovery to pre-burn sagebrush canopy cover conditions will take well over 100 years. “

              • rork says:

                Anecdote: That’s exactly what I’ve observed from wildfire near tri-cities, WA. And big sagebrush isn’t so common there, so it’s sad.

  68. Nancy says:

    OMG – Pre-empted almost the entire hour of the Ellen Show this afternoon on the local NBC Montana news station when they got the news of the verdict.


    Too bad wildlife doesn’t get the same kind of coverage when they get sh*t on……

    • WM says:

      In addition to that (it won’t set well with some here), RMEF just added another 12,000 members in 2012, according to their last magazine.

  69. WM says:

    Seattle Times front page print edition March 2. Could be Eastern WA is not so far off from the NRM states.

    Interesting comment from the responsible WDFW official, “Ware also said he’s expecting the federal government to include the rest of Washington in the area where wolves are no longer {federally} protected.”

    So on the one end of the spectrum WA will include aggressive lethal management of problem wolves, while on the other it wants an incredibly dense 15 breeding pairs in discontinuous habitat, with the most human populated of the Western states that has wolves, and nearly the smallest of elk herds. Schizophrenic wildlife management or overly optimistic and possibly conflicting goals, in a state with a growing human population, not all of which has the same perspective on the desire to recover wolves? So, what will WDFW tell wolf advocates on the West side of the state? Exactly what they want to hear, too.


    • bret says:


      I think the wolf issue will be even more contentious in Wa than the NRM states, the political divisions and expectations of all sides of the issue are so far apart.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Incredibly dense all right.

  70. Salle says:

    Some Saturday mental floss…

    • Immer Treue says:

      “Some Saturday mental floss…”

      I’ll say. Some many comedy routines rapped up into six minutes plus. To anthropomorphize in cat, “I met a cat who wasn’t there, he wasn’t there again today, I wish to god he’d go away.”

      • Ida Lupine says:


        So cute. I loved where he just seemed to wear himself out and flopped on the grass.

        • Salle says:

          It reminded me of so many cats I have had in my life. When they discover themselves in a mirror it can turn into hours of the funniest things you’ve ever seen a cat do. In some ways cats are all the same no matter how big they may be, this would be one of those cases.

          What I found interesting was that the one who found the mirror irresistible was the one who came pouncing out of the bush after the first one, on the road, had a look and wasn’t all that interested. But the first one did stick around for a while to see what was going to happen, or so it seemed.

          Immer, I like that poem!

          If you go to YouTube you will see a couple other animals who encountered the mirror, the young male elephant was interesting, he didn’t really know what to think of it and was pretty wary after looking for the other elephant for a moment and backed away for several feet before going on down the road. And interesting project. This was done in Ghana.

          • Louise Kane says:

            I loved that Salle thanks for posting! It reminds me of my kooky dog, Rue, who saw a snowman in the woods the other day. As we got closer his hackles went up, then he stood his ground while growling softly. His buddy a white lab and his other buddy a pomeranian stayed in the back while Rue was stalking the snowman. All of a sudden he charged and jumped while the snowman partially crumbled to his astonishment. He looked back at me, like, hey I knew it was a snowman. Goofy like these cats!

            • Salle says:

              I think observing animal behavior should have been my specialty… it fascinates me and I could spends the whole day just watching what animals do both when they know I’m there and not. And it goes way beyond watching cats… I love to watch birds, just about anything nonhuman, there’s so much to learn from them.

              The dog v snowman story is interesting and comical!

            • Immer Treue says:

              Yeah,but think of the poor snowmen out there with the yellow bottoms.