Note that this replaces the 21st edition. That edition will now move slowly into the depths of the blog.

White tail deer fawn © Ken Cole

White tail deer fawn © Ken Cole

Please don’t post entire articles here, just the link, title and your comments about the article. Most of these violate copyright law. They also take up too much space.

About The Author

Ken Cole

Ken Cole is a 5th generation Idahoan, an avid fly fisherman, wildlife enthusiast, and photographer. He is the interim Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. We do not accept unsolicited “guest” authors or advertising.

244 Responses to Have you come across any interesting Wildlife News? February 7, 2011

  1. Salle says:

    Grazing fees announced

    The federal grazing fee for 2011 will be $1.35 per animal unit month (AUM) for public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management and $1.35 per head month (HM) for lands managed by the Forest Service. The 2011 fee is the same as last year’s.

  2. Salle says:

    What’s Behind Judge Molloy’s Questioning of ‘Experimental’ Status for Wolves?

    • WM says:

      Curiously the article under the heading does not answer the question.

      • Salle says:

        I thought it seemed like someone read this blog and then wrote a story.

      • WM says:

        Me too.

        In fact, I have felt that way about other authored print pieces that actually require the writer to think about the topic a bit.

  3. Salle says:

    Corporate Control? Not in These Communities
    Can local laws have a real effect on the power of giant corporations?

    • wolf moderate says:

      Heh, Van jones.

      Interesting though. Don’t agree with much but I’ll be sure to read more from that site. Anything that says environmental justice I get visions of the idiot Timothy Treadwell, not sure why. I guess just the pie-in-the-sky kind of views. Good luck on the site! You’ve been pushing it quite a bit, possibly you are involved 😉

  4. wolfsong says:

    Bison Slaughter A Smoke Screen for Livestock Industry

    Read through the comments – someone posted this comment made by the livestock industry.

    “Bottom line, our ranchers don’t support bison relocation,” said Errol Rice, executive vice president of the Montana Stockgrowers’ Association. “Our ranchers are just very fearful that bison restoration will result in the elimination of cattle grazing.”

  5. wolf moderate says:

    It’s strange that all of these reality shows on discovery that deal with more “traditional” career paths are really gaining popularity. these industries are incredibly hard on the environments. It’s almost like 90% of the US doesn’t care too much about the environment. I guess that’s backed up by the large houses they buy and the SUV’s they drive, or that they do not “believe” in GW/climate change.
    ***Shows include: Gold Rush Alaska, Deadliest Catch, MMA fighting (doesn’t affect enviro) flying wild alaska, etc…***

    Slowly the mangina’s are givign way to manchildren. 🙂

    Maybe there is hope for us as a country after all. Time to cut back on mandarin lessons for now.

  6. jon says:

    Budget crunch for Wildlife Services could stall N.D. coyote control

    • wolfsong says:

      I would like to see their budget crunched, right down to ZERO.

      • jon says:

        I couldn’t agree more. I hope I’m here on this planet when wildlife services finally goes bye bye. The scum that they are.

  7. JimT says:

    Craven Lackey Salazar Bends Over for Grazing Industry; Bison Pay Price.

    I think the only reason he hasn’t quit is that there is no place in Colorado for him to go…Maybe he could move to Montana…

    • Save bears says:

      Who indicated that we wanted him?

      • JimT says:

        I just since he is so willing to give his fellow ranchers so many gifts up there, he should go, but I see your point…;*)

    • wolfsong says:

      Ken Salazar is an embarrassment to Colorado, I sure as heck don’t want him back here! Hmmm, maybe we could send him to Iraq?

    • Save bears says:

      I have been to Iraq, he would fit in to much there, and I have no desire to make his life easier!

      • jon says:

        sb, do you see Iraq getting any better? I see daily killings and bombings still going on. Were you for or against us invading Iraq?

      • wolfsong says:

        Somewhere there is a petition floating around on the Internet calling for his removal from office, will have to see if I can find it 😉 Honestly I cannot understand WHAT was going through Obama’s head when he appointed him, the man is an idiot.

  8. JimT says:

    This was the transition team choice…Hayes and Strickland, I believe. Safe model to follow for the West was the advice Obama got, and he could give a crap about Western issues…at least land and animal issues….that is plain now for all to see.

    There is no place for Ken to ‘save face’ in going to, no race he can say he is quitting to run. Unless Udall decides not to run in 2012..and I don’t see that happening though he is another Dem running to sit on the fence these days..don’t know where the hell Mark is on the ESA stuff; sure which he would surface. A LOT of Coloradans are wondering the same thing, especially the environmentalists who put him over the top last time around. He has some sort of EPA thing going on right now, but it is not a Western issue per se….Oh well. I hear Salt Spring Island off the coast of Vancouver is a nice place to retire…

    If you find the site, please post it…I will see it gets to Facebook…

    • wolfsong says:

      Jim – Found it! It’s wording does apply more to Salazar’s abuse of the wild horses, but take a look. It could be rewritten to expand on all of the issues.

      As far as Mark goes, all I know is what I have heard from him on petitions I have signed. Here is a quote from one of them:

      “Recovery programs vary based on geographic area, and it is critical that the USFWS continues to monitor wolf populations as hunting, human encroachment and other factors change. Additionally, I believe the USFWS should use the most humane methods possible if it must remove animals. I am encouraged by the success of some of the gray wolf recovery efforts, but I continue to have concerns about the wolves’ ability to maintain adequate population levels. I will continue to closely monitor this issue with your views in mind. As a native Westerner, I am passionate about preserving our natural environment and the wildlife that inhabits our wilderness areas.”

      Taking into consideration his and his cousin Tom’s support of the Mexican Wolf reintroduction and his comments I would assume that he supports the wolf, however you never know.

      I did send Mark a 12 page fax today so will let you know what kind of reply I get 😉

  9. Nathan Hobbs says:

    Bad News for the Wolverine.

    The Wolverine is likely unable to handle climate change in the 48 states.

  10. Salle says:

    This is an interesting turn around…

    Mark Rey spent his public career fighting for logging on national lands. Now he lobbies for conservation.

    Interview with Mark Rey

    Martin Nie talks with the former undersecretary of Agriculture
    about some of the hot-button issues during his tenure in office

    As an aside, I am reading a book by Martin Nie right now. It addresses all the value conflicts and analyzes the whole wolf re-introduction/policy/political/public attitude mess. It’s meant to be a polisci textbook-like thing but very informative and not hard for avaerage folks to read… not full of legalese.

    It is: Beyond wolves with a subtitle that I can’t recall at the moment but I would recommend it to anyone wanting to dig in to the socio-political aspects of this whole issue. A nice complement to Wolfer by Niemeyer.

  11. Salle says:

    ATV-riding Idaho hunters want backcountry trail access

  12. Salle says:

    This is cool…

    Dinosaur species named for Boise State postdoctoral student and her twin sister

  13. Salle says:

    Rehberg blasts Obama, wolf ruling

    U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg R-Mont., speaking to the Legislature Monday, attacked the policies of the Obama administration, defended states’ rights and said a federal judge in Montana belongs on the Endangered Species Act for his ruling on wolves.

    • jon says:

      Based on the comments in that article, they don’t seem to like Rehberg all that much. He’s probably not as hated as Tester, but he’s hated none the less. Rehberg will say and preach what the people want to hear. That is how he will continue to stay in power no matter what position he is in.

      • Elk275 says:


        Rehberg and Tester are Montana’s representatives not yours, liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat we will elect are own menbers of congress and you will elect your members of congress. Rehberg is liked by some and Tester is liked by some, who ever is liked by the most is going to win and we are all going to have to live with the winner.

      • WM says:


        I notice you use the base word “hate” alot in your posts. Ever consider expanding your vocabulary and you thought processes? It will make you a better commenter, to say nothing of possibly a more rounded person.

        It would seem you could use every avenue to enlightenment, since, as I understand it, you have never actually been out West, but nonetheless seem to endlessly pontificate about the deficiencies of those who regularly visit, live, work or play here.

      • jon says:

        What wm, do you prefer I use the word dislike? Yes, some Montanans dislike Rehberg. Denny is a nutcase just like Michelle Bachmann.

      • WM says:


        Just suggesting you might comment within your pay grade while employing creative writing skills with an expanded vocabulary, like you were a sort of intelligent person, trying to become better.

      • jon says:

        wm, this is a blog. That’s all it is. You should stop worrying about what I say on here. It has nothing to do with you.

      • jon says:

        And with that said, I’m sorry to hear about your dad.

      • WM says:


        Thank you for your condolences, our other differences aside. I learned three things these past few weeks. First I have greater empathy and understanding of the experiences people go through when a loved on is in hospice care.

        Second, life is short and as an existentialist author once said, “life can only be lived forward, but understood backwards.”

        Third, the importance of the circle of life cannot be overstated, as we discussed briefly on another thread here just a short time ago. I will carry my father’s cremated remains high in a watershed where we used to go, and scatter them on the nutrient deficient soil where they will become a part of other living things, and maybe the wildlife we see on the landscape. A fourth thing, I guess -Cemeteries and funeral homes suck the life out of pocketbook and soul. Cemeteries consume wildlife habitat. I have no use for either.

        I should also say I learned alot while at my father’s bedside in his final hours reading Mitch Albom’s, “Tuesdays with Morrie,” a book which I wish I would have found years ago. A PBS television interview of Albom by Kokie Roberts and Ted Koppel got me interested. I highly recommend it.

        Sorry for the diversion.

    • I see from Rehberg’s speech that reducing unemployment is just not on his agenda. It’s state’s rights, wolves, maybe killing an unnamed federal judge, and everyone knows who he is talking about.

      The Republicans are going to make an effort soon to try and delist the wolf legislatively, but I suspect many of them, e.g., Rehberg, hope their own efforts will fail because they would really like the issue around for election day. Meanwhile, the Democrats will probably delist the wolf themselves so to save Tester.

      Do any of them care about jobs other than their own?

      • Save bears says:

        Simple Answer Ralph…


      • jon says:

        Rehberg knows how to play the game. He knows wolves are an important issue to hunters and ranchers Ralph. He is telling these people what they wanna hear and that alone will probably keep him in power. Being a republican/conservative also helps because most ranchers and hunters are more likely to be conservative rather than democratic. I personally think Denny doesn’t really care about the wolf issue. He’s using it as a tool to keep himself in office and in power. All the guy cares about is having power. He’s rich. I doubt he cares about other people’s jobs. Rich people seem to be the most arrogant people around. They look down on the little guy struggling.

      • jon says:

        What did Denny say about Molloy, he should be put on the endangered species list. Some might see that as some sorta threat. Kinda reminds me of when Rex Rammell said he’ll buy some Obama tags.

      • jon,

        I’m not sure you understand. Rehberg is giving up his seat as Montana’s lone member of the U.S. House to run against Jon Tester, who is one of Montana’s two U.S. Senators.

      • Save bears says:

        If you only read comments from the Population centers of Missoula and Bozeman(College Towns) you could infer there is a strong dislike of Rehberg, but those towns don’t paint the whole picture. There is actually a pretty strong base of supporter’s for him in the State of Montana, you only need to look at this track record of elections for his current position.

        Tester is a first timer and the jury is still out on him, but at present he holds no lead, they both seem to poll pretty well. Time will tell, but I expect it to be a very close race between the two..

      • jon says:

        Ralph, Denny is using the wolf issue to get elected into the senate. That in itself and him being a republican/conservative almost guarantees him in my opinion that he will win against Tester. Dems are not well liked in Montana. I think most on here would agree that Montana is a republican/conservative state.

  14. wolf moderate says:

    Poor Idaho Fish & Game. Nobody likes them lol!

    “Idaho Fish and Game has a secret agenda,” said Danny Cone, a hunter from Fruitland in western Idaho. “They’re basically in a conspiracy with the U.S. Forest Service.”

    Read more:

  15. Wildlife Fan says:

    Sumatran Tiger population keeps declining

    This sub species of tiger need special attention

    • jon says:

      Actually, all subspecies of tigers are in trouble. They all deserve special attention. The siberian tigers, the bengal tigers of India, and the sumatran tigers are all in trouble of going extinct and it will be at the hands of us humans.

    • Elk275 says:

      I hope all of the readers of this forum understand where the money for this study came from:

      ++The collaring effort and subsequent tracking this year will cost somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000.

      Funding was provided by FWP, a U.S. Forest Service RAC grant, the University of Montana, Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, Montana chapter of Safari Club International, Hellgate Hunters and Anglers, Montana Bowhunters Association and a collection of other private donations.

      The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation provided $30,000 on Jan. 31 to help pay for the calf capture and radio-tagging operation set to begin in the spring.

      The total cost of the calf capture operation nears $50,000.++

      The wildlife watching crowd could never come up with this type of money. Maybe one moneyed individual could make a large contribution. There needs to be a North American Wolf Foundation and they could hold a convention and maybe raise and contribute there fair share.

      While those bitch about domestic sheep and mountain sheep on this forum, they do little. Today is the start of the Foundation of North American Wild Sheep convention in Reno. Millions of dollars will be raise for the North American Sheep. Where is the “wildlife watcher’s” convention and how many millions are they going to raise. The restoration of North American wildlife was accomplished by sportsman’s groups for the last 80 years.

      I am off to Paradise Valley now.

      • PointsWest says:

        The elk calf study in Island Park was funded by Rex Rammell’s fine.

      • Virginia says:

        Those millions of dollars raised for the North American Sheep are contributed by people who have an interest in hunting and killing the North American Sheep so I wouldn’t give them too much credit for saving mountain sheep!

      • wolf moderate says:

        They have a vested interest in seeing that there is ample sheep to hunt. Don’t think they want to hunt them all to extinction in one season, but you never know (rolls eyes)!

      • Virginia,

        I think Foundation for North American Wild Sheep (FNAWS) does some good, and the high value (for hunting of course) for a full curl ram is ten of thousands of dollars that can be used for other wildlife projects.

        The number of bighorn sheep in the United States is probably 5% of what it should be. There is evidence that many Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming Indian tribes lived off of bighorn sheep, not elk. This shows their one time abundance.

        On the other hand, the biggest threat to bighorn sheep is pneumonia passed from domestic sheep to bighorn. This has come out the last two years after the sheep industry suppressed the knowledge for many years. We have made post after post about bighorns dying from domestic sheep pneumonia.

        Because the Western Watersheds Project has taken action on many fronts specifically to protect bighorn from domestic sheep, including clearing out the domestic sheep in major parts of the Payette National Forest, one can argume that WWP is the biggest friend of bighorn.

        The winter of 2009-2010 saw over 10% of the U.S. bighorn population die of sheep and/or goat induced pneumonia.

      • JimT says:

        BS. How much money did Defenders come up with to pay off all these ranchers for all these years, ELK275? And money is still available to ranchers who want to craft co-existence solutions. Defenders could be correctly portrayed as the voice of the “wildlife watching” crowd you so frequently disparage here with that label, as if no one from the wolf advocate crowd goes hiking, walking,etc. But then, I am getting the drift from recent posts of yours that if one doesn’t go out with the purpose of hunting, you can’t appreciate or understand the dynamics of nature and its environs.

        We give plenty to fund studies etc; just not the studies the hunting and trophy groups want to see done. You point to your interest groups and the money raised. I point to the folks like Defenders, GYC, Western Watershed, various Sierra Club groups..and the work funded to protect the enviroment from abuse and overuse.

        As far the funding dynamic goes, we have debated that to death. We would be more willing to pay than the hunting and fishing crowd portrays, only we want the same kind of access and place at the table these groups get. So far, no indication that the fish and game folks wouldn’t take the money and just keep on doing what they are doing…

      • wolfsong says:

        I have to agree with Jim on this one. I for one am sick and tired of being told how wonderful the sportsman’s groups are and that the rest of us don’t contribute money for conservation.

        I’m a nature photographer, I PAY parks fees, ATV fees, trail fees, habitat fees, etc., not to mention the hefty sales taxes I pay on equipment purchases.

        I also bust my butt from spring through fall cleaning up after the idiots (general public and hunters) who leave piles of shotgun shells everywhere, trash, unattended campfires, you name it.

        I may not be contributing “millions” but I sure as heck am attempting to do my part.

      • JB says:


        You might be interested in Teaming with Wildlife — It is an example of what hunters and non-hunters can do TOGETHER to conserve wildlife. Making wildlife conservation a hunters vs. non-hunters issue will only ensure that wildlife loses.

      • jon says:

        Elk, non-hunting wildlife users do contribute to wildlife conservation, but have been given little opportunity to increase funding of non-game programs and have been essentially excluded from state wildlife management decision making.

      • Bob says:

        I have to say BS to your Defenders of wildlife claim. In 2010 our local water shed spent more money in one valley than defenders spent in the whole state of Montana. Defenders is quickly becoming a laughing stock in Montana. One they can’t keep their word and second they make claims that are pure BS. Just where have they started a carcass pick-up program anyway.

      • jon says:

        Bob, what are these claims that are pure BS? Please be specific.

      • Immer Treue says:


        “wildlife users do contribute to wildlife conservation, but have been given little opportunity to increase funding of non-game programs and have been essentially excluded from state wildlife management decision making.”

        I feel you have hit a home run with this statement. Other Than DoW and a few other organizations, there is no real forum for our voices to be heard.

        Therefore I will continue to contribute to DoW, even if I disagree with some of their antics. I will also continue to contribute to the International Wolf Center because it is an organization that is attempting to educate people about wolves.

      • JB says:

        More on State Wildlife Grants… (From Teaming with Wildlife–Link above)

        “What Are State Wildlife Grants?
        The State Wildlife Grants Program provides federal dollars to every state and territory to support cost-effective conservation aimed at preventing wildlife from becoming endangered. Congress created the program in 2000. Funds appropriated under the State Wildlife Grants Program are allocated to every state according to a formula based on each state’s size and population. America’s Wildlife at Stake United States laws and policies place the primary responsibility for wildlife management in the hands of the states. State fish and wildlife agencies have a long history of success in conserving game species, thanks to the support of hunter and angler license fees and federal excise taxes. But 90 percent of our nation’s wildlife is not hunted or fished. The result? There is a serious gap in wildlife conservation funding, and thousands of species are falling through the cracks.

        State Wildlife Grants fill that gap by supporting projects that prevent all wildlife from declining to the point of being endangered. Projects supported by this program protect and restore important lands and waters, collect information on what kinds of wildlife are in trouble, and develop partnerships with landowners to protect declining species and habitats on public and private lands. By emphasizing a proactive approach, the State Wildlife Grants Program helps us take action to protect wildlife and habitats before they become more rare and more costly to protect.”

      • Bob says:

        I can think of a couple 1) Defenders talks of all the money they spend on conflict reduction, yet we spend more money in one valley than they did in the whole state of Montana. We work with all agencies because we search for the middle ground which is why Defenders can’t sit at a table.
        2] The compensation plan they set up was so strict that a guy I work with video taped wolves chasing his calves across a field into the trees. They found a dead calf, WS opinion was a wolf kill yet, the qualifications did not allow for compensation. Here’s a line for defenders-All hat no cowboy.

      • jon says:

        Bob, you should be giving dow credit for compensating ranchers for livestock depredations by wolves. You may not like them simply because they are an environmental organization, but they still compensated ranchers. I don’t put much faith in ws. They will blame any cow’s death on wolves because it gives them the perfect excuse to go out there and kill wolves. The less wolves out there, the happier ranchera are. Livestock dying is just apart of being a rancher. The fact is livestock dies from a bunch of different reasons. Wolves are a very small % of those reasons.

  16. jon says:

    Reelsville man faces charges in bobcat trapping investigation

    • william huard says:

      They are just trappin fools in Indiana. The home of the National Trappers Assoc. This guy was caught, how many more go free?

  17. Wildlife Fan says: – Indian Big Cats’ “Well” Fiasco

    Within a span of 24 hours two big cats of India slipped into man made wells at different locations.

  18. Virginia says:

    Living in Northwest Wyoming and reading the Billings Gazette (which is published to provide news to non-college towns), I would say my conclusion about the popularity of Denny Rehberg is that he is a republican, not a Democrat and in that lies his sole reason for popularity, not that he and his policies (of which he has none) are so popular.

    • Save bears says:


      I would have to agree for the most part, that was the exact reason the Conrad Burns was elected so many times, he was a republican, not because of his policy positions which were very anti wildlife and anti environment. I worked on the Tester side to get rid of Burn’s. I can’t say I have been thrilled with Tester, but he is better than Burns was IMHO.

      I have heard many say Tester was just a step stone to get another republican in that office, because no one had been able to mount a strong run against Burns..

      But when it comes down to it, normally a republican will out poll a democrat every time in the state of Montana

      • Elk275 says:

        Since the direct election of US Senators, the State of Montana has only elected Republicans 4 times to the US Senate. Once in the mid 1940’s and 3 terms for Conrad Burns.

        There were and are a number of convative Republicans in Billings, Montana who never wanted anything to do with Conrad Burns for various reasons. His business dealings, well………………………? My father was one of them, I never knew him nor did I care to.

        Currently there are eight elected state wide offices in Montana: Governor, Sec of State, Auditor, Attorney General and Office of Public Instruction, 2 Senators and one congressman. Rehberg is the only Republican.

  19. PointsWest says:

    Why Yellowstone Grizzly Policy Undermines Obama’s Pledge for Scientific Integrity

    This guy speaks of “Scientific Integrity” but then writes, “The fact is that whitebark pine does matter because its absence prompts human-bear conflicts—which jumped to unprecedented levels this year. ” The gist of his article is that “science” supports this claim.

    While I think there is clear “science” that the decline of the whitebark pine impacts grizzly survival to some degree, there is no “science” to support the notion that it was the cause in the rise of human-bear conflicts last year, or any other year. It is clear to me that the bear problems last year were due to the early spring followed by heavy spring and early-summer snow storms. The bears came out of the den early only to find 6 more weeks of winter. I have not found “science” to support this claim other than the precipitation records. It is just a claim…so far.

    I think this issue of exactly what is “science” needs to come to the forefront. I posted an article last week about how the internet is damaging science and the credibility of science with the public and this is a prime example.

    Good “science” on the internet is that science which I might find with a Goggle search to support any claims I want to make.

    • Virginia says:

      I posted a link to this story on Counterpunch the other day and Louisa Wilcox is a female, not a guy. I disagree that there is no “science” to support the fact that the grizzly bear is impacted by the decline in white bark pine. I hope to refute your claim but do not have time right now to do the research and will not be using Google to do so.

      • PointsWest says:

        Virgina…please read what I said carefully. I said, “I think there is clear “science” that the decline of the whitebark pine impacts grizzly survival to some degree.” There is “science” for this and I accept it. I have no reason not to accept it.

        My point is that there is no “science” for the claim that it was the whitebark pine decline that caused the human-bear conflicts last summer or any other summer.

        Please articulate:

        1.) whitebark pine decline —> long term grizzly survival


        2.) whitebark pine decline —> sudden rise in human-grizzly conflict las summer.

        These are two very different concepts. For one thing, the whitebark pine decline is taking place over decades, not over the summer. There is no science supporting claim no. 2. Among other things, science does not work that fast.

        So if when you post your “science”, let it be for claim no. 2 and not for claim no. 1 for which I already know there is good science.

  20. PointsWest says:

    Right on! …sue the bastards!

    Climate Scientist Sues Skeptic for Libel
    New York Times article

    I hope there are similar cases in the USA and that true scientists assert their scientific authority and certain people think before spewing out the pie-hole. 🙂

  21. PointsWest says:

    Paul Nurse on science vs anti-science
    Posted on January 27, 2011

    It’s on YouTube

    Paul Nurse (nobel prize winner, and president of the Royal society) reports on the conflict between science and anti-science:

  22. jon says:

    No Oink About It, Feral Pig Problem Spreading

  23. wolfsong says:

    Washington man pleads guilty to poaching

    Appears to be yet another poaching ring.

  24. Virginia says:

    PW – I am wondering if you draw any of the “conclusions” that you share with all of us here, based on anything other than “science.”

    • PointsWest says:

      Yes…sometimes. But I when I do, I usually qualify my statements with expression like, “I think” or “it seems to me” or, “its my guess.”

      • Virginia says:


      • PointsWest says:

        I do! If I think science is behind me, I will write with conviction. If I know there is no science and it is my theory, I qualify my statements as being my ideas.

        I’m sure I don’t always…but I usually do.

  25. Kropotkin Man says:

    Another ocelot sighting in Arizona. Follow the chatter in the comment section for the public’s thoughts on AZGFD.

  26. wolf moderate says:

    “”Chairman Upton’s bill is part of an effort to delay, weaken or eliminate Clean Air Act protections of the American public,” Jackson said in her opening statement. “Chairman Upton’s bill would, in its own words, repeal the scientific finding regarding greenhouse gas emissions. Politicians overruling scientists on a scientific question – that would become part of this committee’s legacy.” ”

  27. REChizmar says:

    Albeit non-contributory in substance, it’s been a week or so I still cannot get that image of that pronghorn “drowning” in the Montana snow. Real bummer … and indeed it is part of the cycle of life and death in the wild but the image is … and this is not to discount the 200 or so killed by the train … brutal.

    • wolfsong says:

      I have to agree, it keeps popping up in my head also. I live at 8500 ft and spend a great deal of the summer at 10,000 feet and higher and it never ceases to amaze me how the wildlife survives the winters.

  28. Jerry Black says:

    Is Gardner, Montana, the Selma, Alabama of Wildlife Conservation?

  29. Wildlife Fan says: – In the memoery of a Tigress

  30. wolf moderate says:

    And you thought Idaho was full of “bible thumping” holy rollers. We got mobsters.

  31. wolfsong says:

    Be sure to read the last line.

    Grey wolf to be delisted within two years, biologist thinks.

    • timz says:

      “and we’ve seen big game hunting wiped-out in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana,” Potter said.”

      News to me and I suppose the thousands who got an elk or deer in those three states. It’s hard for me to fathom that someone could make such a stupid statement.

      • wolfsong says:

        Yep. And it is that stupid statement that is fuel for the fire in Congress right now. Along with the falsely inflated depredation statistics. It’s very sad that they refuse to look at all of the GOOD that wolf re-introduction has done and at all of the studies showing that predators are a essential part of the ecology.

      • jon says:

        The misinformation constantly posted by the anti-wolf folks is something that should be expected. These people would like nothing more than to convince the whole world that the wolf situation is much worse than what it really is.

      • jon says:

        wolfsong, in their mind the wolf is no good. They are viewed as vermin. They hate them because they eat elk and deer. How stupid of a reason is that? Ask these people what do they think wolves are supposed to eat? White human hunters want to be the only predator in the woods. They hate competition from other more efficient predators such as wolves, bears, cougars, etc.

      • timz says:

        I don’t believe it’s misinformation in most cases. These dolts actually believe the shit they spout to be true.

  32. WM says:

    Very interesting article by British wolf researcher Shaun Ellis on the developing situation with the Siberian wolves enduring a very cold and devastating winter affecting their food supply, supposedly congregating in a “pack” that could approach 400 wolves.

    It would be nice to see some different pictures from the apparent Siberian phenomenon along with more scientific folks commenting on it. However, it does not seem Ellis is far off from some of the theories postulated so far by Dr. Valarius Geist (who some here love to hate)–Have-ruthless-killers-lost-fear-humans.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

    Also, lest you think Ellis is some sort of fraud, check out this youtube video which includes comments from Yellowstone’s Doug Smith (on his approach). Ellis lived with wolves for a period of time.

    • WM says:

      Sorry. I intended the web link, not the actual video. Not sure what happened. Ralph, Please remove if you think it adds to the upload time problem as with the last “Have you…” thread.

    • jon says:

      Shaun Ellis said wolf attacks on humans are increasing. As far as I know, there have only been 2 recent wolf attacks on humans. kenneth Carnegie in 2005 I believe and Candace berner in Alaska in early of 2010. Is he talking about other attacks in other parts of the world? I would also like to see some scientific evidence that hunting wolves is going to automatically make them fear man.

      • jon says:

        And I’m a little skeptical that this pack is 400 strong. What they did do, count every single wolf in the pack? I highly doubt it.

      • WM says:


        An “attack” and a death of a human resulting from an attack are two VERY different statistics. Only a death is recorded typically. Doesn’t matter if it is a wolf, bear, cat, or otherwise.

        In the case of the Kenton Carnagie death, there was at least one encounter or “attack” of sorts on two other individuals at the air field the day before, allegedly by the same wolves. There is a published picture of one guy facing off with a wolf at close quarters, stick held out to defend himself. There may have been similar unreported encounters.

        The concept of “attack” is also subjective. When a predator “tests” its prey (Dr. Geist has talked about this and experienced it personally a number of times with wolves on Vancouver Island) are these attacks? If no blood is drawn is that an attack? If your dog is killed, injured, or even if it responds to wolf aggression by barking or growling, but is not injured while on your leash, does that count as an attack on a human?

        I will guess there are many, many such incidents – attacks on humans or however they may be classified- that are not reported around the world. Seems there a few of these coming out of Turkey, Afghanistan and Russia every year. They don’t show up on the stat charts, however. Heck I even saw on a Carhartt clothing commercial a few weeks back that didn’t draw blood (insert sarcasm and smiley face here).

      • Salle says:

        Just a note to clarify some things about the Carnegie case…

        I saw the photos of the alleged “attack” or “face-off” with a wolf that was used as evidence of aggressive wolves… it was analyzed by the investigators, (Giest apparently was the only investigator whom the RCMP were willing to listen to because he didn’t seem to think the evidence tampering was an issue). Another investigator concluded that there was some staging with the alleged attack photos, that being that the wolf’s body language showed that the wolf was being challenged/attacked by the person holding the stick in an aggressive manner. Photos can be misleading when the background evidence is obscured by story or omission. Those who are familiar with wolves were able to discern this immediately. The Carnegie death is still a questionable wolf death given the rest of the evidence, some of which was tampered with before the investigation took place. There was more evidence of a black bear having done the deed, if not his fellow humans… So why did the fellow humans find his body, go back and watch a hockey game before calling in to authorities? They never even checked to see if he was alive? Or were they waiting for a predator to come along and eat enough of the body for them to be absolved from perhaps killing him? The evidence I saw and heard, from another investigator in the case indicated that Carnegie could have been severely wounded by the other humans – who didn’t like him – and left for predators to finish him off and destroy any evidence that would have indicated them, thus the “wolf attack” photos for evidence, if they only knew anything about wolves they would know that a wolf expert would be able to tell the photos were probably staged..

        The bungling that I heard about with regard to this case was enough for me to lose all respect for Giest after hearing how he handled his part of the investigation and his automatic conclusion… must have been the boogeyman… I mean wolves.

        So I’m skeptical about that finding that the RCMP latched onto and bought into.

      • jon says:

        I believe Canada wolf expert Paul Paquet (spelling?) said it was a bear that killed Kenneth Carnegie. Mark Mcnay who is a retired highly respected wolf expert out of Alaska said it was wolves that killed Carnegie. I will agree with with Mcnay that wolves did it. Wolves imo can be dangerous, but aren’t something to really be worried about. There are by far greater threats out there to people. With the exploding human population and wolves habitat getting smaller and smaller and losing their prey because of humans and other things, you can expect these kinds of things to happen every now and then. It’s just a fact of life, but as I said, there are many other things out there that kill far many more people than wild animals like wolves.

      • jon says:

        I think Mcnay wanted to find out what really killed Carnegie and didn’t want to jump conclusions and Geist just blamed it on wolves. What I found interesting about Geist was that his grandfather died from e. granulosis, the “deadly” parasite carried by gray wolves that he believes is extremely dangerous to humans even though no one that we are aware of has been infected by it since wolves being reintroduced into the northern rockies 16 years ago.

    • Peter Kiermeir says:

      We should keep in mind that there is yet absolutely no proof of that “400 strong pack”. There are no fresh reports coming up, no new infos, no pictures, no video, nothing! Bit strange, isn´t it? Sibiria (or better Jakutia in this case) is remote but not that remote! All what we have is the same newspaper message repeated over and over again. Let´s wait and see…. I have a strong feeling, that just another vodka fuelled story will develop here.

      • WM says:

        I have been thinking that too. The curious part in the article is the government hiring hunters to seek out these numerous wolves killing horses. Independent confirmation would be helpful and easy. Maybe Putin could put in a guest appearance and solve the ……problem?

      • Salle says:

        Maybe Putin could put in a guest appearance and solve the ……problem?

        Ha! I can see it now, Putin striding up, shirtless, upon his steed to vanquish the wild vermin…

        Yikes. Seems like it’s come to “all politics all the time”.

      • jon says:

        I don’t believe this pack is 400 strong. They are exaggerating. I believe there was a wolf pack in WY 22 strong or something like that. This is why I don’t like stories like these. They say this pack is 400 strong and expect everyone to believe that without some kind of proof. They did follow this pack and count every single member in it? I somehow doubt that anyone just stood around this pack and counted every single member in it. WM, I should have been more specific. Attacks and deaths are still pretty low. He must be talking about in Russia. I’m not one of those people who think wolves are cuddly non threatening animals, but wolf attacks on people and wolf caused deaths are still pretty low even if they do happen from time to time.

      • jon says:

        Salle, does Putin dislike wolves? I believe he is helping in trying to save siberian tigers which are endangered in his country.

      • jon says:

        I believe it is extremely cold in Siberia right now. What I want to know is where did they get the 400 # from? Did they chase this large pack all over in the bitter cold and count every member in the pack? You gotta be skeptical when reading articles such as this one.

  33. wolfsong says:

    Feds drop legal effort to restore tribal management at National Bison Range

  34. mikepost says:

    A recent post by Colorado DOW re dogs harrassing wildlife related to the earlier post on this blog.

  35. jon says:

    Ferrioli to European wolf advocates: Go away, morons!

  36. Mtn Mama says:

    Forest Service Planning Rule Revealed Yesterday
    -Dont know if anyone else on here participated in the public comment round tables but this is not got for indicator species!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os_gAC9-wMJ8QY0MDpxBDA09nXw9DFxcXQ-cAA_1wkA5kFaGuQBXeASbmnu4uBgbe5hB5AxzA0UDfzyM_N1W_IDs7zdFRUREAZXAypA!!/dl3/d3/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnZ3LzZfUDhNVlZMVDMxMEJUMTBJQ01IMURERDFDUDA!/?contentidonly=true&contentid=2011%2f02%2f0061.xml

    • Mtn Mama says:

      sorry that the link thread is so long. I double checked it before I posted. Perhaps there is a more condensed link that I didnt find.

  37. Daniel Berg says:

    Kalispell Attorney Dana Christensen under consideration to replace Judge Molloy.

    • jon says:

      Does anyone know anything about this person Christensen who might replace Don Molloy?

      • WM says:

        Firm profile; senior partner and list of representative clients often is a clue to politics and specialties.

        For his personal profile click on Attorney link in upper left corner.

        He is AV rated as a lawyer by peers.

        Conclusion: He is smart, has good book of business, rain-maker, good lawyer, politically connected, and if he has already been vetted internally no obvious skeletons in the closet.

      • WM says:

        And, as one thinks of replacements for Judge Molloy, do recall he is not retiring completely, just going to senior judge status. He will still hear cases.

        Question: Will he keep the environmental ones this forum is interested in?

      • JB says:

        His profile lists the following:

        Insurance Defense(10%);
        Medical and Legal Malpractice Defense(70%);
        Class Action Defense(20%)

    • Save bears says:

      Dana is a very above board guy with an impressive list of adjudicated cases behind him. He is very fair and very knowledgeable about the law and procedures concerning the law.

      I believe he would be a good choice to replace Molloy.

      • jon says:

        Yeah, but I’m sure you are aware that since he is a democrat, some people out there might think he is just another “pro-wolf greenie” lawyer like Molloy.

      • jon says:

        May i ask your opinion of Molloy sb? Do you think Molloy is fair and knowledgable about the law and procedures concerning the law?

      • Save bears says:

        I am not a fan of Molloy, but it really has nothing to do with the wolf issue, it has more to do with some other issues he has ruled on. Molloy was a good attorney, I have been less than thrilled with him a Judge. At times I believe Molloy has had an agenda when it comes to certain issues that are not environmental in nature…

        When it comes to political affiliation, I could care less as long as they do their job..within the scope of existing law..

        You have to remember these Judges rule on other cases, but to look at what the media reports, often times some get the impression they are only environmental in nature. As a resident of the state of Montana, I look at the whole package because their rulings can and do affect me on many levels.

      • REChizmar says:

        Do not know Dana — but based on his profile his entire practice is insurance-defense based (accounting for every six minutes of his professional life) — the insurance company hires and pays him for Malpractice defense and Class Action Defense … many on that side of the fence claim all plaintiffs’ claims are either frivolous or exaggerated … and more juries agree! I did 7 yrs of insurance defense and now do Plainitiff’s work, and I now work harder and sleep better.

  38. Salle says:

    Montana Department of Transportation OKs megaloads bound for Canada

  39. Salle says:

    Utah’s land rebellion leaders could use a history lesson (and a few other nearby states…)

    • wolf moderate says:

      Impressive group Tester appointed.

      “Tester said he plans to lead the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus toward strengthening gun rights, removing wolves from the endangered species list, improving access to public land, and fighting for clean water and healthy wildlife.”

      • Salle says:


      • wolf moderate says:

        “In addition to the local representatives, the new panel members are Ryan Busse of Kalispell, an outdoor industry worker; Bruce Farling of Missoula, executive director of Montana Trout Unlimited; Bill Geer of Lolo, a special projects representative for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership; John Gibson of Billings, president of the Public Land and Water Access Association; Kathy Hadley, a lifelong hunter, angler and conservationist; Gayle Joslin of Helena, who retired after 30 years as a wildlife biologist for Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, is a founding board member of Orion — The Hunters Institute and is issues chair for the Helena Hunters and Anglers Association; Chris King, a rancher and Petroleum County commissioner; Ben Lamb of Helena, the Montana Wildlife Federation’s conservation director for state and national issues; Randy Newberg of Bozeman, host and producer of “On Your Own Adventures;” Joelle Selk of Helena, first vice president of the Montana Bowhunters Association and the chairman of the MBA’s Legislative Committee; Pat Smith, a partner in a Montana law firm that specializes in American Indian law; Land Tawney, a fifth-generation Montanan, former president of Hellgate Hunters and Anglers, senior manager of sportsmen’s leadership for the National Wildlife Federation, and chair of the Private Land/Public Wildlife Council; Brett Todd, president-elect of the Montana Outfitter and Guide Association and a member of the Private Land/Public Wildlife Council; Dan Vermillion, who owns Sweetwater Travel with his brothers in Livingston; and Irv Wilke, president of the Billings Rod and Gun Club and vice president for the Laurel Rod and Gun Club, as well as the Laurel Rifle Club.
        The Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus is a bipartisan caucus made up of members from the House and Senate.”

      • Salle says:

        Yeah, I’m so impressed that there’s a big dent in my head now.

      • william huard says:

        Such diversity! They are missing a couple of trappers though!

      • Salle says:

        I’m surprised that Farber and Fanning aren’t on the list. I sort of anticipated that they would exhibit a “slam dunk” aspect to the carcass… oops, I mean caucus.

      • WM says:


        Just playing devil’s advocate here. Given MT’s voting base, who should be on Tester’s Sportsman’s Caucus and what issues should they pursue (remembering that there are business people in the group as well as advocates for certain wildlife)?

    • I doubt he’s insane, but is he anything more than a grafter posing as a legislator?

      Phil Hart, the guy who introduced this legislation, has been a big embarrassment to the Republican caucus. He was convicted of timber trespass (stealing timber from the state school endowment lands) and he didn’t pay his state or federal taxes. He is far in debt ($500,000). He said he was protesting paying taxes, but was it that he decided taxes were unconstitutional after failing to pay them.

      He was removed by the caucus from the legislature’s tax writing committee.

      He got elected 75% to 25% against a write-in candidate. If he gets a real opponent from either party, he might be beaten.

  40. Salle says:

    Yeah, I think that a significant level of insanity is a prerequisite for holding office in Idaho.

    • william huard says:

      One of his testimonials says- “Phil is a thoughtful and thorough legislator.” These far right rejects are an embarrassment to their states. Just another example of limited government! How bout that defective gene pool!!! still producing some mighty fine specimens for display

      • Salle says:

        And the further over the cliff they are the more proud of themselves they are… serious genetic defect I’m guessing. there is no reasoning with them, they seem to be genetically predisposed to this sort of rationale.

        Is it any wonder – anymore – why they are devoutly against education?

      • william huard says:

        After doing a little research my only question is why this guy is not in jail? Next week maybe he will introduce legislation for immediate euthanasia for shelter animals. After all it’s their fault the position they are in.

      • jon says:

        one has to remember that it is the regular folk of those states who put these people in power. That shows you that a good amount of people in these states want people who are anti-wolf in power.

  41. PointsWest says:

    Eastern Idaho Moose Research Subject of NatGeo Documentary
    Rexburg Standard Journal 02/12/11

    ISLAND PARK — Ongoing wildlife research being conducted in the Island Park area will be part of a documentary being filmed by National Geographic Television. The film crew will be taking footage of research on moose migration routes that cross U.S. Highway 20.

    To better determine where animals cross the highway, creating a danger to motorists and themselves, the Idaho Fish and Game and Wildlife Conservation Society and volunteers have been keeping track of animal tracks and road kill and have begun a monitoring effort after trapping and installing radio-collars on moose and elk. It will be the moose trapping and collaring effort that the National Geographic crew will be trying to capture on video.

    [ … ]

    The project will be the only scientific capturing and collaring work on moose that National Geographic will film, according to Cramer.

    [ … ]

    The film will be broadcast on National Geographic

    There are a lot of roadkill moose in Island Park. It will be interesting to see how many and what, if anything, is ever done about it.

  42. Cody Coyote says:

    Some raw intel from the field on the topic of Brucellosis in northwest Wyoming, the next battleground :

    I attended a workshop on Brucellosis in Cody WY two nights ago ( February 10) . The state veterinarian and his sidekick, plus Game & Fish and state livestock board and the cattlemen’s association held this conference , and it was attended by local veterinarians and producers. This was being done because there have been no less than four confirmed cases of brucellosis in cattle in the Cody-Meeteetse area since last fall. More are most certainly coming. It is a new ” hot” zone. The local ranchers are getting worried. Preemptive measures are in order.

    What measures, you ask ? Only two. Be sure and vaccinate your calves and heifers twice ( the State will pay 100 percent of that cost …more welfare ranching) , and fergawdssakes keep your paperwork up to date. APHIS just changed the rules again . At the moment here in northwest Wyoming , the only solutions on the table are bureaucratic.

    The obvious unspoken solution is : Keep elk and cattle apart from one another. That has to originate on the cattle side of the equation , but ranchers are reluctant to cede the ground, even when they lease it and don’t own it. A true rancher believes in his 19th century Manifest Destiny heart of dark hearts he owns everything he can see… that is the source of the imbroglio just north of Yellowstone…old beliefs die hard. In Montana, anyway.

    It’s a different scenario altogether here in Park County Wyoming. Migratory elk are dong what they have done for thousands of years, leaving the deep snows and bitter cold of the Yellowstone plateau and wintering on the front range of the Absarokas. They are drawn to fenced ranchlands and riparian areas, and other ” wintergraze” shared by cattle. The elk and the cattle are in proximity for about five months, which happens to coincide with cattle calving season. Elk are rapidly becoming The Enemy. But the word” elk ” was hardly uttered the Cody meeting until the Game & Fish regional supervisor spoke, noting that almost 16 percent of the elk in northwest Wyoming are testing seropositive for brucella. That value has only increased by< 1 percent in recent years.

    That's it for the Wyoming Solution to a Wyoming problem. Use plenty of ineffective RB-51 vaccine, and do your paperwork. The paperwork seemed to be the most important tool. What to do about elk ks not yet on the screen , except we did have this emergency Cow Elk attrition hunt in January in the hot zone, hurriedly approved at a state Game & Fish Commission meeting in Thermopolis in December after the first three cases of brucellosis appeared late last autumn….

    Here's something the Assistant State Vet Bob Meyer stated that made my jaw drop:

    – the only approved vaccine , RB-51 , has been shown to CAUSE cows to abort their calves….

    Meyer said 1 to 5 percent of vaccinated pregnant heifers lost cows …and that is straight from field reports in Sublette County Wyoming where Wyoming Game & Fish runs a gob of elk feed grounds surrounded by cattle operations. Vaccination is at the very best under ideal circumstances only a partially successful remedy. Brucellosis will still occur regardless , coming in on the Elk vector, and vaccinated cattle will still get infected, and cattle will lose calves BECAUSE they were vaccinated, not becasue they were NOT vaccinated. Some days, you just can't win.

    None of this is the fault of the elk or bison. Every animal in the wild pretty much has its own strain of brucella.

    If Brucella abortus should ever become vectored by Mule Deer instead of just elk , we are in a world of hurt on northwest Wyomng, where mule deer are more common than cottontail rabbits in the ranching country . Who's ever heard of any cases of brucella in deer ? Elk and deer ain't that far apart genetically , yet the Brucella abortus has shown it can travel from Cervids ( elk) to bovines ( cattle and bison ) to hominids ( us humans). The bacteria is genetically malleable…it can and does alter its own genetics. There are 6 strains of brucella and man, many variations.

    At least the RB-51 vaccine doesn't pour out a raft of False Positives when cattle are tested down the road. The older R-19 did that , frequently . But having said that , RB-51 has caused somewhere from 1 percent to 5 percent of vaccinated heifers to abort their healthy calves anyway — it's a " live" vaccine and stays hot. Even if the cow was vaccinated before it got pregnant, the vaccine stays " hot" for months and can still cause the mother cow to lose its calf. If it ain't the disease proper, it's doing a darn good job of mimicking it. The result is the same. There's no money in dead calves

    So I have to ask…does RB-51 ever CAUSE brucellosis in succeptible cattle by the very act of vaccinating ? Like years ago when the Swine Flue vaccine killed a number of humans by giving, not preventing, the very disease it was supposed to stop ? Ditto the Salk polio vaccine course. A few cases of polio were sourced to the public vaccinations we queued for in the 50's.

    We certainly have monkeyed with cattle genetics and field treatments. I am not a veterinarian or epidemiologist , but I'm asking. Is the RB-51 " cure" as bad as the B. abortus disease here?

    RB-51 doesn't work all that well to start with . There s no vaccine being developed for Elk in the known universe. Probably next to impossible to do so, , regardless of a ways and means and the resources to administer it even if it did exist . There are 100,000 + wild elk in the Greater Yellowstone. We cannot even accurately count them , let alone inject them.

    But then again , this brouhaha over Brucellosis is NOT about the disease, cattle markets, public health or any of that . It is about the ranchers reacting to a perceived threat against their privileged public lands grazing.

    The Cattle Barons are going to do everything the can to take it out on the Elk and the Bison . The already are. Again , we just we had an emergency attrition Cow Elk Hunt during the month of January in the South Fork of the Shoshone and Greybull River drainages of the Park County " hot zone". Somehow I don't think there was any great public groundswell to go out in below zero weather to shoot a diseased pregnant winter elk for a little extra burger…..

    But I do suspect that elk will be in the crosshairs in the very near future. Literally as well as procedurally. here in my corner of Wyoming anyway.

    Park County Wyoming will be the next Brucellosis Battleground. Our circumstances raise the stakes, however. We have no elk feedgrounds , we have no migratory bison that come anywhere near cattle. What we do have is thousands of migratory Yellowstone elk that cross over the entirety of the Absaroka Range to winter on the Greybull and Shoshone Rivers.

    What the Rancher-Game & Fish-State Vet-APHIS Hegemony does in Park County Wyo in the months to come will tell all.

    The next aborted calf is coming, the next infected cow just a calendar flip away . The elk are out there, but have done nothing wrong…

    Recall that 75 percent of the millions of Native Americans died from Smallpox from exposure to sailors and settlers, or sleeping in infected blankets provided by European colonial conquerors on purpose. An Old World disease ravaging the New World, shamelessly . Brucella abortus was brought to North America with those mythical cattle drives and cowboy daze in the 1800's.

    We need to factor in some Cowboy history here. This problem did not happen overnight.

  43. jon says:

    “Rehberg spoke Monday before the state legislature. As the Helena Independent Record reports. “When I first heard his decision, like many of you I wanted to take action immediately,” Rehberg said. “I asked: How can we put some of these judicial activists on the Endangered Species list?”

    Rehberg was then quickly denounced by the executive director of the state Democratic Party, Ted Dick: “Congressman Rehberg’s veiled threat against federal judges he disagrees with is in light of the murder of a federal judge in Tucson less than a month ago.”

  44. Salle says:

    Legislating Species Exemptions from the Endangered Species Act: Undermining the Law and Ignoring Science

  45. Mtn Mama says:

    Bighorn Sheep in CO being relocated in hopes of improving surviability

  46. Jaynes was a panel member, chosen by a local outfitter, for a showing of Lords of Nature in Sandpoint, ID, put on by the Northern Idaho Wolves Alliance (NIWA) last September. During the discussion, he consistently challenged the statistics of state & federal wildlife agencies.

    Note the leniency with which he was treated, getting off with a mere $500 fine & loss of hunting privileges for 2 years. Even his record will then be wiped clean. To their credit, commenters on the article suggested that had they broken the law, the penalties would have been more severe.

    He now joins a growing list of anti-wolf people, who have been caught poaching other animals. Is there a correlation between law-breaking and hatred of wolves?


    Plea negotiated in trooper poaching case – Bonner County Daily Bee: Local News: idaho state police, poaching, jeff jayne, bonner county, sandpoint

    Posted: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 10:00 am | Updated: 8:45 pm, Sat Feb 12, 2011.
    By KEITH KINNAIRD News editor |
    SANDPOINT — A binding plea agreement is being proposed to resolve a misdemeanor criminal charge against an Idaho State Police trooper who shot a bull moose four days before the season opened.
    If a 2nd District judge signs on to the plea agreement, Cpl. Jeffrey Richard Jayne would be placed on unsupervised probation for six months and ordered to pay a $500 penalty, according to documents released by the Latah County Prosecutor’s Office.
    Jayne’s hunting privileges would also be revoked for two years. The conviction would be removed from his record upon completion of all the sentence’s terms.
    If the court declines to abide by the sentencing recommendations, Jayne would be free to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial.
    Jayne, 42, shot the bull in northern Bonner County last fall.
    The case is being prosecuted in 2nd District Court because Jayne’s patrol beat is encompasses the jurisdiction of 1st District Court. Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson was appointed to handle the matter to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. The venue was shifted from Bonner to Latah County for similar reasons.
    Thompson’s office released more than 20 pages of court documents on Tuesday, including investigative report and filings documenting administrative matters in the case.
    Below is a chronology of events compiled from the Idaho Department of Fish & Game investigation and court documents:
    May 28, 2010 — Jayne’s name is drawn for a controlled moose hunt tag for northeastern Bonner County and southeastern Boundary County.
    Sept. 11, 2010 — Jayne harvests a moose on a neighbor’s property after obtaining permission from the landowner to hunt there. The same day, Jayne advises a Fish & Game officer he shot the moose.
    Sept. 12, 2010 — Jayne makes follow-up call to the Fish & Game officer regarding the mandatory big game mortality report.
    Sept. 15, 2010 — An Idaho Fish & Game officer was directed to a Coeur d’Alene taxidermist by an anonymous tip that Jayne brought in antlers and the hide of a moose that was possibly taken out of season.
    Sept. 16, 2010 — Fish & Game investigates the anonymous report. Jayne is advised the same day by a Fish & Game officer that he shot the animal prior to the opening of the season.
    Sept. 18, 2010 — Fish & Game Senior Conservation Officer Matt Haag interviews Jayne, who said he would take responsibility for his error.
    Oct. 4, 2010 — As word of the Fish & Game investigation spreads, Jayne releases a statement admitting he made a mistake in recalling the hunting season dates.
    Feb. 2, 2011 — Jayne enters into plea agreement.
    Feb. 4, 2011 — State files charge against Jayne. The binding plea agreement is filed the same day.
    When asked what influenced a charging decision in the case, Thompson pointed to the probable cause affidavit, which notes that Jayne was cooperative and candid during the investigation.
    “As the affidavit indicates, there is no evidence that Mr. Jayne intentionally disregarded the season dates, and we are aware of nothing to suggest that he attempted to cover up or hide anything,” Thompson said in an e-mail to The Daily Bee.
    However, Thompson added that there was no question that Jayne unlawfully jumped the gun on the season, which necessitated a charge in the matter.
    Thompson anticipates a sentencing hearing will be held later this month, at which time a judge will decide whether to adopt the sentencing recommendations.

    • wolf moderate says:


      I’ve read a few of your pieces and enjoy them, but It’s interesting that when wolf advocates use numbers to reflect ungulate (elk mostly) numbers, yet use percentages when reflecting on depredation (sheep mostly). It’s a running theme it seems. Is it to minimize depradation or what? Just curious. Thanks.

      “The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, an organization dedicated to hunters, reported in 2009 that although Idaho’s elk population fluctuates, it has risen above 100,000 animals for several years.

      Many ranchers in Idaho believe that wolves are decimating livestock. But the Idaho Fish and Game Department found that wolves are responsible for only 1 to 2 percent of sheep depredation. In fact, feral dogs killed four times as many sheep in 2008 as did wolves.”

    • Salle says:

      I particularly like this article on the NIWA web site. We should have this as one of our story posts.

      NIWA and Wolf People acquire audience with the Governor…

      (scroll about halfway down the page.)

      • wolf moderate says:

        Yeah, saw that video a long time ago. I thought the governor represented the state quite well in this instance. “those” people were very rude IMO.

      • Salle says:

        What I saw in that video, just watched it right now, is that Butch got pretty testy when asked simple and civilly asked questions that he didn’t like. Butch is an A-hole of the first order and cannot argue his way out of a paper bag when pressed with facts or confronted with his own false claims. He can’t relate to anyone who has more intellect than he does or who actually knows more about an issue than he does or doesn’t buy his BS. He was terribly condescending to those asking him to clarify his lies and confronted him, with a simple question, that he didn’t like because the questioner politely called him out on his lies and fuzzy math.

        If I had been there I would have been more confrontational because he was lying so badly that he makes a mockery of his job ~ which is to represent the residents of the state. He only represents those who agree with him and pay his tabs for electioneering and whatever perks he gets without disclosure.

        Do you live in Idaho?

        Notice how one of his handlers quickly whisked him away when he got flustered?

      • wolf moderate says:

        I live in Idaho and voted for him, mostly due to lack of qualified candidates (sorry Ralph, I know you were for Allred). I happen to think he is OK. I love Idaho and how it’s run. It’s much better than Illinois, CA, NY etc *IMO*. Right to work state is great for businesses, not employees. Then again, businesses are there to make profit, not to ensure jobs.

        Governor Otter has spent 29 (I think) consecutive years in public office. Must be doing something right. He was re-elected by a wide margin. Voters in Idaho want small government I guess. Personally I’d like to fire Otter and elect Christie : )

        Yeah, yeah, you guys are brilliant and the Otters of the world are stupid…Yadayadayada.

      • jon says:

        I posted this video a while ago. Butch was the rude one. The wolf advocates were just asking him questions. Wolf moderate, not suprising that you defend Otter.

      • wolf moderate says:


        I watched the video again. Again I see nothing wrong with what he said or his tone. He was “surrounded” by a bunch of people that hate his guts and were constantly interupting him. If I were him I’d get tired of “these” people constantly misrepresenting facts also. I mean, trying to say that there were less than 850 wolves in Idaho? I’d bet there is well over 2k in the state. The guy was a bleeding heart that just can’t stand to see any wolf killed, which is fine, but it’s just not the way the world works. It’d be nice if it did I guess.

        It’s OK, we can agree to disagree. It was nice of Otter to approach a group of men that disagree with him deeply like he did in this case.

      • Immer Treue says:

        Otter walked into a meat grinder. I think he knew what he was getting into, let his antagonists say their peace, said his, and more or less said we aren’t going to agree on the subject, knew it wasn’t going to lead to anything positive, and got out before it turned into a shouting match. Not saying I like Otter, but I believe he handled the situation just fine. For what my opinion matters

      • jon says:

        I will have to agree with immer. Butch and people like him are not going to change their attitude on wolves just like people from the other side of the coin aren’t. I have a certain opinion about wolves that no one will ever change and I expect the anti-wolf people are the same exact way. This is why non-hunters and hunters will never agree on anything. They are fighting for 2 totally different things. You got those out there trying to protect wildlife and you have others who are trying to kill it. This wolf fight will be a very long and extremely tiring battle/fight if you will.

      • wolf moderate says:

        Ummm Jon,

        “They are fighting for 2 totally different things. You got those out there trying to protect wildlife and you have others who are trying to kill (MANAGE/HARVEST) it”

        Please refrain from using the word kill. Like global warming (changed to climate change by its handlers), we (sportsmen/women) decided that the word kill had the wrong connotation and now use “harvest” or “manage”. Thanks.

      • jon says:

        No, no matter how you spin it, it’s killing.

      • jon says:

        As far as killing elk or deer, I’m not really bothered if you wanna use the term harvesting, but for predators, it’s killing.

  47. Savebears says:

    This is not a wildlife story at its heart, but it could have big ramifications of what direction Montana is following concerning Federal law and how it applies to wildlife management..

  48. Salle says:

    Okay so… I guess that the “nullification” frenzy that is going on in the NRM states can cut both ways. I mean, if they think the fed is out of control and imposing too much for the states to deal with, then maybe those farm/ranch subsidies and grazing permits, funding for Interstate Highway repairs, PILT funds and a host of other subsidies that they get from the federal gov’t can be nullified right along with all the other stuff. Can’t pick and choose here, it’s either one or the other. If that comes to pass, the nullification bills and the gov’t rescinding all funds to those states, boy will there be some screeching then.

    • SAP says:

      You nailed it, Salle!

      Check this out:

      That’s just for fuel tax! Montana gets back something like $1.50 for every $1 it sends to the federal government.

      Consider also things like emergency services and firefighting — not just forest fires, either. Our volunteer Rural Fire Dept here (I am a volunteer) has a lot of equipment acquired through federal grants, federal surplus programs, and so on.

    • Savebears says:

      Actually Salle,

      There are many Montana legislators that are saying, they will pass laws to keep Montana Money in Montana, much of it will derived from mining and oil development, as far as PILT, that is a done deal, there is very little in the way of PILT any longer. What is scary, if they continue down the road they are on, then we are going to see some real raping of the environment..

      I am not taking a side on this one, I know that with the passage of the Medical Pot law in Montana, the nullification movement started many years ago.

      I know there are quite a few other states that in one way or another are doing the same thing, Texas, started down that path last year as well.

      Montana has a really interesting make up of law makers this time around..

      • mikarooni says:

        In your words, “if they continue down the road they are on, then we are going to see some real raping of the environment… I am not taking a side on this one…” Well, okay then, as long as you’re not taking a side.

      • Savebears says:

        Do yourself a favor Miki…

        Ignore me

      • mikarooni says:

        I’m sure you didn’t mean it the way it came out; but, it was too funny to pass up.

      • Savebears says:

        Fair enough, I am not happy what our legislature is doing this year. They are wasting to much time, money and not accomplishing anything..

      • jon says:

        sb, did you know Craig Jourdonnais when you worked Montana fish and wild parks? How do you think the elk are doing in the bitteroot and do you think the low elk #s are caused solely by wolves? I’m sure you are aware of the 3 year I believe it is study that is going on in the bitteroot on elk.

      • Savebears says:


        Not that I remember.

        I don’t believe wolves are the sole cause of anything, I do believe that they are additive causes, but I also believe there are some other problems going on in the Bitterroot.

        As a predator, wolves are always going to be a very visible additive cause..

      • jon says:

        sb, have they ever found out why there are only 114 moose in yellowstone? Has there been any studies done that you are aware of that explains why moose #s are pretty low in yellowstone? I would expect that moose are much harder to take down than elk for wolves correct since they are bigger? Reason I’m mentioning the 114 # is that is how many moose are left in ys according to some.

      • Savebears says:


        I really don’t pay attention to the Moose biology topics

  49. Immer Treue says:

    Fisherman fights off and outruns wolf pack

    • Before I even read the story I knew there would be dogs involved. Little doubt to me that the barking dogs attracted the wolves. Nine stories out of ten are like that.

      If the wolves wanted the poor scared follow, they would have easily taken him.

      • Salle says:

        These two quotes really got my attention and made me wonder just how credible this tale of woe really is:

        “The wolves ate the fishing rod and I never found my hat,”


        Passmore, who also fought off a black bear about 10 years ago, said he was surprised to see wolves at the Nawhitti.

        The good part is the advisory from the Conservation officer:
        “The Conservation Officer Service is advising the public of a recent wildlife conflict between dogs and wolves in the Nawhitti River area,” said CO Tim Schumacher. “People are advised to be safety conscious and aware of potential wildlife conflicts when out of doors.”

      • WM says:

        So, like does this count as an officially reported “attack on a human,” and will it show up in the statistics? I would say no to both. Nonetheless it did happen.

        Jon, you reading this?

        Editorial comments aside, this guy should have expected something like this.

      • JEFF E says:

        Reminds me of the fellow over in St.Anthony a year or so ago whose dog was attacked by a pack which he waded into, grabbed his dog and received not so much as a scratch.
        Point is I seriously doubt this guy came close to outrunning these wolves, they just could not figure out a way to get at the dogs with him there. Mating season is kicking into high gear. Bad time to take dogs into the hills.

  50. Immer Treue says:

    I hurried through the story, but two things :
    1. why on earth run?
    2. whenever in the back country, I have a lead for my dog if I need to put it on him.
    3. two young dogs, tough to handle one, let alone two
    4. yep, he knew he was going to be ambushed
    5. his dog was attacked by a ***150*** pound wolf

    The last two points are just poking fun, but the first three are just common sense. I’m sure he was scared, and this will be played up, if it hasn’t already been amplified. Then he had cougar dogs? I don’t want to jump to conclusions, but …

  51. Salle says:

    Yeah the cougar dogs… and he had no clue about dogs and wolves. They were beagles, looks like from the photo. I wonder why they didn’t use the cell phone pic he stopped to take of the wolf with the dog’s neck in it’s mouth.

    Reminds me of a comedian’s act, from long ago, comparing accident insurance claims in England and Australia. the Australian claims were the best…

    “After the wreck I thought I was fine but on removing my hat I found I had a fractured skull…”

    “…the bloke had no idea which way to run so I run over ‘im. I had to swerve several times before I hit ‘im…”


    • Nancy says:

      Think they were American foxhounds (bigger than a beagle) Don’t think they are bred to hunt cougars 🙂

      • Salle says:

        Hmmm, quite possible, don’t know that much about hunting dogs… Thanks for the additional info.

        I also noticed that the guy kept calling the wolves dogs. I have to wonder about the validity of the claims. This guy appears to have some pretty spectacular altercations with some pretty charismatic predators… see my post above.

      • Immer Treue says:

        Ok Ok I know I’m pro-wolf, but I also have another take on this. What animals initially showed the aggression, it was his dogs. Also, he “launched” himself onto the back of a wolf, then landed on his back as five more heads popped up in a milisecond. The wolves sure did not go after him.

        Then, this happened January 30 and did not make the news until February 10. Much unlike Karen C. whose encounter was on Black Bear Blog right away, and in the news the next day. Or the two hunters with horses who went in to get the elk, and were attacked by wolves, and shot one, which again was in the news right away. Whatever happened in that last example.

      • Tim says:

        They aren’t fox hounds. They are treeing walkers and they are bread for big game hunting (Bear, Cougar and Bobcat) and coon hunting. Fox hounds have no tree instinct which is why the are used for fox and coyote. The are also called running dogs.

  52. wolf moderate says:

    What happened? This is a little old but really good.

  53. Nancy says:

    Couldn’t read the entire article (saw the picture of the guy and his “cougar” dogs though) a warning box claiming Internet Explorer couldn’t open the site kept popping up. Tried to locate the article on another news link but they all relate back to that one site.

  54. jon says:

    Jim Beers will speak about wolves at BSU.

    “His main argument is the act is unconstitutional and reintroduction of wolves was done illegally.

    “The illegal introduction of Canadian wolves into Idaho in 1995 has set back a century of predator control, causing a catastrophic drop in big game herds and causing untold losses to ranchers,” Maurice Clements of Caldwell who was instrumental in bringing Beers to Idaho. “The outfitting business, once a mainstay to backcountry Idaho has nearly disappeared. The people responsible should be arrested for this crime.”

    I really wonder if we are ever going to see this proof that Beers has that proves that wolves were illegally introduced.

    • jon says:

      sb, I would like to get your take on this. Do you believe wolves were illegally introduced” if so, how does one go about proving they were illegally introduced? The way beers talks, it’s as if he has evidence/proof that proves that wolf reintroduction was illegal, but why has he not come out with it?

      • Savebears says:

        He is basing his argument on the non-native species argument, which really holds no water as the genetic difference has not been able to be shown..

        He is also basing his arguments on the misappropriations of funds for the program, if there were actually any illegal actions in the re-introduction, that would be where it would reside. The species argument holds no water, but I, after working with various agencies could buy that perhaps there could have been some misuse of funds..

        As far as why he has not disclosed after making the claims so many times, I don’t know, Knowing him, his mind works in a very odd way..

        Of course he may be negotiating with the Fed’s under the Federal Whistle Blower laws, hoping to get a big pay off..only he knows at this point in time.

      • jon says:

        I believe he is talking about the money that was supposedly stolen from the pittsman robertson fund. If the money was indeed stolen, how does someone prove it? And if someone does prove it, what happens to the people who stole the money? If Beers somehow does have proof, does that mean that Jaime Rappaport Clark does jail time? She is the one that supposedly stole the money according to Beers.

    • Jim Beers came out of nowhere to go on a speaking tour and about the same time the anti-wolf folks suddenly got a lot better organized. That wasn’t because he had an irresistible message.

      Likely they got an infusion of money from some big funding source. My opinion is that the “enterprise” is tied up in Tea Party-like political beliefs and movement. It is part of the general effort to bash teachers, poor people, sick people, disabled vets, funding for protecting the air and water, nullification. You get the picture!

      We know they are funded by the Koch Brothers and other rich right wingers who hate democracy, but specialize in wedge issues to prevent average folks from organizing to stick for their interests.

      • Savebears says:

        Ralph being honest with you, I would not be surprised if there was some improper steps taken in the re-introduction when it comes to the money factor, we all know the government, just can’t keep its hands off of large sums of money sitting in an account, just as with Social Security and the many other funds that get paid in so they can hold in “Trust” Look at how the BIA handled the Indian monies..just to much of a temptation for sticky fingers politicians and upper management employees..

      • jon says:

        SB, how is taking money to be used to wolf reintroduction if this is indeed true different than the feds taking taxpayer money to be used to bail out large banks? people’s money is used sometimes for the wrong things and we have little control over it.

      • Savebears says:


        I am not going to get into the bailouts, it has no productive conclusion as to this wildlife blog.

      • mikarooni says:

        This all points out one of my pet peeves with Beers. He struts around and claims to be a biologist; but, to “real” scientists, his science training was token at best, an undergrad degree from a school that was and still is notoriously skewed and mediocre at best where science is concerned, and he hasn’t used what little science he learned since he left the program. Sure, he rose up through the FWS, but only on the basis of his politics and his home state connections. The education that he really traded on was his MPA (master’s in public administration), which is just another MBA with the private sector finance classes replaced with classes in government bonds and budgeting. You can get that kind of training at night at a Webster franchise housed in a store front at a half-empty strip mall. Just look at his career. He got in through politics and worked his way toward refuges, where he endeared himself to his special interest friends by advocating agriculture and hunting/fishing in the refuges regardless of their impact on or fit with the conservation mission. Guess who supported him for doing that? When the politics shifted, they put him over as liaison with wildlife services. Duh! Does that sound like the profile for a dedicated, respected, valued scientist? His MPA training is all he really knows; he’s just a bean-counter; and he isn’t even really very good at that. But, he thinks he knows how to get some traction off these unsubstantiated accusations of financial impropriety. Well, he better make the most of the publicity coming off his accusations while they last and before even the rubes get tired of it being just talk because, frankly, I found him to be nothing more than a political shill, never found him to be any good even as a bean-counter and I can’t, even in my wildest imagination, see him being able to develop anything on his own, much less a court case on any topic whatsoever. To use the vernacular, he is a total loser.

      • jon says:

        I don’t know what Beers endgame is, but I can tell you that some are trying to put the people responsible for wolf reintroduction in jail for supposedly introducing wolves illegally. This is because as sb mentioned, they are non native wolves and because 70 million dollars was SUPPOSEDLY stolen from the pittman robertson fund to pay for bringing wolves over. One person over at the bbb blog even mentioned sb being part of the wolf reintroduction in ys. I would love to see the proof if they have any that proves without a doubt that money was indeed stolen to be used to reintroduce wolves, but I really don’t believe any of it. If I’m correct, Jim Beers was fired and I believe he’s just a disgruntled ex-federal employee pissed off that he got fired.

      • jon says:

        They call Jim Beers a wolf expert.

        He also has a documentary coming out called wolving in America.

        Ken Fischman who posts on here from time to time said this,

        “However, the Northern Idaho Wolf Alliance, a Sandpoint-based group of wolf advocates, believes wolves play an important role in a healthy ecosystem based on scientific studies. The NIWA, in a press release, called Beers’ talk of diseases “overblown hype directed at stirring up anti-wolf sentiment.”

        Ken Fischman, NIWA spokesman, said Beers has been speaking to draw anti-federal government support while portraying the gray wolf as the symbol of government intrusion on personal rights.

        “Wolves have become the scapegoats for almost every imaginable discontent some people have in this era of high unemployment and financial crisis,” he said. “Perhaps we should call them ‘scapewolves.'”

        He is really right on the money.

        • Beers seems to have some money behind him. To some degree in America today that’s all you need. Knowledge, evidence, that is so unnecessary. That’s what they would have you believe.

      • Savebears says:

        I was part of the wolf re-introduction? Nope I was not part of the program, I was there the day they were released, but I had nothing to do with either side of the re-introduction.

      • jon says:

        Oh, gotcha sb.

      • Salle says:

        “,em>MPA (master’s in public administration), which is just another MBA with the private sector finance classes replaced with classes in government bonds and budgeting. You can get that kind of training at night at a Webster franchise housed in a store front at a half-empty strip mall

        Really? I take issue with that comment as I find it insulting. (Grrrr!!)

        I hold an MPA degree and it took me a while to get through all the required study, which had nothing to do with “bean counting” as with an MBA. My degree program was focused on environmental policy and wildlife management along with policy analysis, administrative process, human resource management, agency management, and administrative ethics, to name a few major subjects in my program. Bean counting was in another department altogether.

        I am all for exposing this Beers guy for what he is but please don’t lump all of us who studied hard and gained much knowledge and developed skills from an honorable degree that hardly anyone understands… including whomever feels the way the above commenter does about it. Besides, I bet there weren’t half empty malls or Internet programs available when he got his degree. That being said, some folks don’t retain anything they might have gained form exposure to knowledge if they gained anything at all. Remember, “W” went to Yale and look how well that worked as far as him actually “knowing” anything.

        My favorite saying… You can lead ad mind to knowledge but you can’t make it think.

      • wolf moderate says:

        Geez. So Beers has a MPA and undergrad in biology. He is entitled to his opinion, this is absolutely ridiculous.
        President of DoW…
        What is his degree in MBA. How about undergrad.

        Rodger Schlickeisen holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Washington, an MBA from the Harvard Business School, and a doctorate in finance from George Washington University. He is the author of numerous published opinion pieces and articles, including an influential law review article on the need for a constitutional amendment to protect the natural environment for future generations.”

        People are free to express there feelings however they see fit. Of the President of DoW wants to spout the blank that he/they do, well good on him. You guys need to understand that just because you do not agree w/ someones views does not make them “less than”, stupid, or ignorant. In fact, I’d say it makes you look that way.

        I was going to post a list of wolf advocates that have much less of a background than Beers, but decided that it was pointless. The second person I researched was Ralph Maughn.

      • jon says:

        Are you defending Beers because he’s anti wolf? Even hunters on here like sb doesn’t think very highly of Beers. Savebears met Jim Beers a few times and I believe he doesn’t think very highly of Jim Beers.

      • jon says:

        I don’t know much about Rodger from dow, but I don’t believe he goes around acting like he’s a wolf expert unlike Beers. It’s funny because Beers used to work for the federal govt. until he got fired. One has to ask is what why he really hates the feds nowadays? because he got fired?

      • jon says:

        1. Supports dog fighting, cock fighting and horse slaughter “property rights.”
        2. States dog fighting and cock fighting should be regarded as sports; HE SAYS they are the same as hunting.
        3. Previously worked for Wildlife Services, an agency which kills literally hundreds of thousands of “nuisance animals” each year, including eagles, raccoons, bobcats, bears, cougars, coyotes and wolves, by way of shooting, poisoning, trapping, and snares. (see for yourself at )
        4. Supports trapping with leg-hold traps; a practice widely banned as cruel.
        5. Blames environmental and animal rights groups for the loss of his job.

      • wolf moderate says:


        It’s just absolutely ridiculous that you guys slam Beers for lack of education, when many of the people doing the slamming have less of a background! It makes zero sense. Salle says MPA’s are great, but not when Beers has one, only her. His biology degree is worthless etc…

        I could care less if he’s anti wolf or not. He should be able to express himself however he chooses. I’m pro wolf w/in reason.

        This thread reminds be of the whole “tea bagger” thing. People slam them as ignorant racist hillbillies basically on one hand, then on the other say most of them are white, wealthy, and well educated! What? Just do not understand the constant hate or disdain or whatever it is that some possess.

        I’d say Yale did Bush pretty well. He worked his way up all the way to President of the United States! LoL.

      • WM says:


        What credentials do you have that you can look down your nose at someone with a BS from Utah State, and an MPA from U of Northern CO (I always understood it to be a teacher’s college, but a decent school nonetheless, even thirty plus years ago)? I bet JB might even take exception to your backhand slap at Utah State.

      • jon says:

        wolf mod, I never said anything about this education. All I’m saying is that he calls himself a wolf expert when he’s not. People on here will slam Beers because some don’t like him.

      • Salle says:

        Salle says MPA’s are great, but not when Beers has one, only her.

        That’s not what I said at all. I was disputing the claim that an “MPA (master’s in public administration), which is just another MBA with the private sector finance classes replaced with classes in government bonds and budgeting.“. It is nothing of the sort and that is what I was defending. So Beers has one too, doesn’t mean he learned anything from it. Just like “W”, he didn’t learn anything beyond high stakes thievery and how to use daddy’s friends and money to “break the world” as SNL folks put it. Beers could be just playing on the state sanctioned ignorance of the emotionalists… who hate wolves.

      • wolf moderate says:

        Fair enough. I was paraphrasing, but not that well I guess.

        There sure are a lot of rich kids w/ powerful parents, but only one slot for president of the US. I think you guys underestimate him, but no need to chat about that. History will decide this.

  55. jon says:

    You should post this Ralph or Ken.

    Don’t Mess With Mama

    “If Canada has many more wolves than the United States, why aren’t Canadian ranchers losing more cattle to wolves than their U.S. counterparts?

    “We just couldn’t figure that out, so we’ve visited some cattle ranchers up in British Columbia,” said Suzanne Stone, lead author of Defenders’ recent publication “Livestock and Wolves: A Guide to Nonlethal Tools and Methods to Reduce Conflict.”

    “We learned that Canadian ranchers in wolf country hardly ever lose calves to wolves. They lose yearlings, but not calves,” said Stone. In the U.S., calves are targeted by wolves.

    It turns out that Canadian mama cows that have grown up in wolf country and survived earlier encounters are wolf saavy. “They know how to protect their calves and they do it pretty effectively,” said Stone.

    Canadian ranchers select for maternal protectiveness by culling out the failures and keeping the successes for breeding stock.

    Defenders of Wildlife is considering bringing down some wolf saavy cows from Canada to see whether that protectiveness can be passed on to U.S. cows. “

    • Bob says:

      Yes fladrey works for a short time, less than 60 days. Try rolling out 4 miles. Also cows do learn from each other could be why some ranches have more problems than others. Momma elk and bison also protect their young doesn’t stop a wolf from eating.

      • jon says:

        Bob, I know your first solution in dealing with wolves is probably kill, but there are people out there who are trying to help ranchers out with protecting their livestock from wolves and other predators by using non-lethal methods. We need to look at non-lethal methods as a long term solution, not killing.

      • WM says:


        Sometime ago I did a rather extensive critique of the Defenders publication which Susanna Stone authored on Non-lethal methods, on this forum. This Newwest article is pretty much along the same lines.

        I won’t go into the detail I did back then, but suffice it to say there is no discussion whatsoever of the capital costs, maintenance costs, labor costs or long term effectiveness of the non-lethal methods discussed. It is all fluff – great on general concepts and lots of nice pictures. But it is all fluff. To make this work for ranchers it has to be boiled down to dollars that cover costs of material and labor – period. This was not done. Here is the publication so anybody can see for themselves.

        If I recall correctly USDA did some studies (MN or WI maybe?) on fladry a few years back. They DO NOT conclude that fladry (even turbo) works over the long term, and it sure does not work on large scale -even Stone will admit that after doing a 9 mile turbo fladry fence line and walking it every day, noting it needs very regular inspectionm, and tha costs money.

        And as for the assertion of Canadian cows being effective protectors of their young, excuse the candor here, how can one cow fend off a half dozen quick moving wolves over a protracted period of time. If a bison can’t do it, a moose can’t do it, an elk can’t do it, how can a slow moving Canadian cow do it?

      • Bob says:

        I should just post my name and let you fill in the blank.
        My pack spent just about everyday this past summer in the same pasture as my cows never shot one of them. Like WM said most pro-wolf stuff is fluff. Best tool is a range rider but wolves in the summer do their best work a night. I personally can’t pay someone enough to watch cows in this country a night, it’s when all the predators come out to play. Yet even with a range rider collared wolves and seven day a week watching you can’t keep wolves from killing one calf. Also my none pregnant cow numbers doubled this year, just one of those cost ranchers don’t get paid for. As I said before I live north of the 10J line the only management tools I have are non-lethal.
        We have more grizzlies than people a good population of lions and yet wolves are easily the biggest livestock killer in this valley.

      • Daniel Berg says:

        What does a range riding job pay in your area?

      • jon says:

        Bob, i don’t believe that most pro wolf stuff if fluff. I believe that they are trying to find ways to stop wolves from preying on livestock by trying different and new things. Some of these non-lethal methods do infact work. Things like flagging I personally don’t think will have any effect on wolves, but there are other non-lethal methods that stop wolves from preying on livestock. The fact is you are never going to stop wolves or other animals from killing livestock. All we can do is try to limit these depredations.

      • Bob says:

        I am not sure what we pay the rider it’s a coop thing real cool job if you like being out doors 12 to 16 hours a day and access to places not many people go. Daniel if you truly need to know I could make a call. As for your post on the Colorado wolf I meet the lady who collared it she also had one go to Idaho from this area, she got a bad batch of collars and lost like 5 more.

        jon yes we have to learn to live with them cause their not going away. Even if the current bills pass I would guess that in 10 years we will have more wolves than we do now.

        Any way got to go check cows calving season, 24/7 abuse and neglect I believe is how its done some would say.

      • wolf moderate says:

        Bob, I’d be a range rider at night during the summer. That’d be sweet. I’d be the best worker you’ve ever seen…until a bleeding heart shows up telling me how to live my life or do my job lol.

      • jon says:

        Bob, you don’t seem to put much faith in non-lethal methods. yes. I understand you may be skepitcal of some of these methods and their effectiveness, but if we want to protect both wolves and livestock, we need to come up with ways that will stop wolves from killing livestock. Killing is a short term solution, but does not solve the problem. You kill wolves that kill livestock and it will only be a matter of time before you have more wolves there killing livestock. There are people on the ground such as dow that are working hard to find ways to keep wolves away from livestock.

    • Salle says:

      They should.

  56. Daniel Berg says:

    I was amazed when I looked at the GPS tracking for the female wolf that was poisoned by 1080 in Colorado.

    From Montana into Wyoming, From Wyoming to Idaho, From Idaho into Utah, and from Utah into Colorado. Not only into Colorado, but almost to Denver. Then a line back into Wyoming that almost had her dipping her paws into Pathfinder!!

    I know wolves can range far and wide, but kowing that did not lessen the surprise of looking at this map.

  57. Nancy says:

    WM – sure you saw this amazing video – Battle at Kruger:

    Don’t think its just one Canadian cow, but maybe a herd of Canadian cows with a herd mentality, keeping their babies safe?

    Bison have that ability and its probably why you don’t hear so much about their numbers shrinking (unless the DOL is involved) when it comes to wolf depredation.

    And I honestly believe as long as domestic cattle are taught from birth, to run from working dogs or else, they lack any ability to confront a predator.

    The bigger question seems to be should wildlife, in what’s left of wilderness areas, continue to pay the price (as in death) to prop up an industry that contributes somewhere in the neighborhood of just 3% in livestock totals, yet at the same time demands millions of acres in order to raise that 3%?

    • WM says:


      I have seen the video. Wild Cape buffalo are THE most aggressive and one of the largest bad attitude herd prey animal on the planet.

      As for our bison North American bison, I will rest on the observations of Dr. Dale Lott of UC Davis, a behavioral ecologist who specialized in bison (he grew up on the National Bison Range in western MT. He studied bison at Wood Bison Park in Canada for decades (author of book “American Bison,” 2002. His observations (contradicted by Bob Jackson who no longer posts here – I wish he still did), were that for the most part calves were just taken from the herds, with minor protestations of the mother cow and others, while the bulls mostly looked on and reserved their strength for breeding. Bob Jackson claimed the bulls would defend, and with his “family” theories.

      I don’t know who is right, or if there is other research supporting a claim that bison will put up a communal defense for the herd. I will submit most domesticated cows have a different temperment. Bulls don’t run with the cows mostly, unless the owners want them bred. If there is research that verifies S. Stone’s claims lets see it. And if the Canadians are on to something, and it works, great!

      Where’s the data, for those of us who are scientifically inclined.

      And, Nancy, you know you get no argument from me on the public grazing lands subsidy.

      • Nancy says:

        +Where’s the data, for those of us who are scientifically inclined+

        Good question WM…………

    • Izabela Hadd says:

      Another stupid thing happenning in the west. I really feel like the cows rule the country. What happened to science and logic?

  58. Salle says:

    Rocky Barker: Are wolves still ‘non-essential’ in the West?

  59. jon says:

    Judge Molloy’s children speak about the comment that Denny Rehberg made about their dad.

    • wolf moderate says:

      Very nice letter. They didn’t blow the comment out of proportion like many would have done. It was pretty tasteless to say he wished some activist judges were on the ESA (though kind of true, heh), in light of the Arizona “massacre”.

    • IDhiker says:

      Denny Rehberg is no friend of either wildlife, wildlands, or sportsman. He is just cynically using them to achieve his goals. In all his time in the House, Rehberg has never moved to protect any Montana wildlands or big game habitat. Hunters that vote for or support him are just allowing themselves to be used, to their own detriment.

  60. Salle says:

    Fish & Wildlife nominee could face tough questions over wolves, other species


February 2011


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

~ Edward Abbey