It is time for a new “wildlife news” thread.  Please put  your news, links and comments below in comments (“Leave a reply”)  

Here is the link to the thread being retired (June 5, 2013).

The most abundant large animal on the planet. Here they are just turned out (June 16) onto the Targhee National Forest.  Can our political system make room for some wildlife too -- real wildlife -- not elk treated as though they were livestock. Copyright Ralph Maughan

The most abundant large animal on the planet. Here they are just turned out (June 16) onto the Targhee National Forest. Can our political system make room for some wildlife too — real wildlife — not elk treated as though they were livestock. Copyright Ralph Maughan

About The Author

Ralph Maughan

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

457 Responses to Do you have some interesting wildlife news? June 24, 2013 edition

  1. Ralph Maughan says:

    I reposted this for Louise Kane. She posted it to the old “Interesting Wildlife News” just before we were about to create this new thread. Ralph Maughan

    A reminder to send comments to Montana by Wednesday at 5 PM. See below for info: send to

    Comments can be emailed directly to the Commission via this email address (above) also provided in our alert –

    Talking points provided

    Subject: Re: [WCCL] FW: URGENT!!! Wolf Hunt Comments Due on 26th

    We all know that it doesn’t seem to make a difference when it comes to our public comments making a difference when it comes to MFWP idiotic and reprehensible
    wolf management, but it will be on public record, and will show support for seeing wolves alive rather than dead and, it will show the rest of the world that more people value wolves and but a few want to eliminate them. These new regulations are being supported by the livestock industry, Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation, and other hunting groups and have nothing to do with science.

    PLEASE comment and here’s some talking points from WOTR and Kim Bean
    Wolves that are coexisting with humans and livestock will be killed for no other reason than bigotry and extreme mismanagement. Critical habitat for wolves near Yellowstone (Gardiner Basin) has been excluded from the quota areas. This is a deliberate attempt to kill as many YNP wolves as possible. With less than 25 wolves in the entire northern range of YNP, this will certainly prove an end to wolf packs of Yellowstone.

    Some of our concerns are as follows: Hunters & trappers will be able to hunt over baited traps, as well as use electronic calls to pull wolves from safety into their line of fire. Because of the extended season September 15, 2013 – March 31, 2014 hunters will be able to hunt wolves in the advanced stages of pregnancy. If a hunter kills an alpha female he/she has killed the future survival of the pack. Disruption of the pack structure will lead to increased depredation and smaller pack sizes, yet more packs on the land. A Visions of Walt Disney’s Fantasia “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” comes to mind. A Wolf’s fur does not become full until late November; wolves killed prior to this are killed simply for the sake of killing.

    Issues of Concern or Talking Points

    1. Extended Season (15 Sept 2013 – 31 March 2014)

    • Hunting Pregnant Wolves

    • Pelt is Substandard

    • Unethical & Immoral

    • Disruption of the Pack Structure

    • Killing to Hunt or Hunting to Kill

    • Bitterroot Elk Study Research states Very Low Wolf Predation

    2. Bag Limit of 5

    • Annihilate Entire Pack

    • Disrupt Pack Social Structure

    • Increased Depredation

    • Leads to Smaller Packs = Increase in Packs on the landscape

    • Decrease in Recruitment

    • Killing Pregnant Wolves 1Ž2 way through gestation

    • Black Science

    • In Contrast with North American Wildlife Conservation Model

    3. Baiting Traps

    • Not Fair Chase & Unethical

    • Unenforceable

    • Drastic Departure from Montana Wolf Management Plan

    Yellowstone Wolves

    Gardiner Basin MUST be included in the quota unit of 313

    Revenue producing value of 35.5 + million sustainable dollars to the communities surrounding YNP

    Research value utilized world-wide

    Number 1 tourist attraction in YNP

    These are not just Montana’s wolves, but the Nations wolves

    Miscellaneous Talking Points

    Could help slow or contain CWD Chronic Wasting Disease

    Livestock Depredation continue to decline – In 2012 2.6 million cattle in MT, depredation by wolves 67

    Huge deviation from the Montana Gray Wolf Management Plan

    Under Public Trust Doctrine Wildlife belong to all Montanans

    Elk Populations are virtually at or above objectives in Montana 55% above objective

    More elk now in Montana then when wolves were reintroduced

    Approximately 73 wolves in Yellowstone

    Less than 25 in the Northern Range of YNP – only 18 in Lamar Valley”

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Critical habitat for wolves near Yellowstone (Gardiner Basin) has been excluded from the quota areas.

      So messed up. You know, we keep talking about can a compromise be made, but every time someone comes up with a suggestion other than killing to manage wolves, it gets blown out of the water. A huge swath of protected, unbroken habitat like Y2Y would keep livestock/wolf conflicts to a minimum, not this primitive killing system. Tourist habituation is also not good for them. Otherwise, we might as well just be honest and say we’d like a zoo/canned hunting range for our wild lands so that human selfish needs will always be satisfied.

      • alf says:

        “we might as well just be honest and say we’d like a zoo/canned hunting range for our wild lands so that human selfish needs will always be satisfied.”

        From what I gather, that seems to be exactly the way state fish and wildlife departments seem to be moving — not a great deal of difference from put-and-take trout fishing, or the old days of state run pheasant farms.

        • Elk275 says:

          Alf have you ever hunted elk? I have hunted elk before and after wolves. After the first few days of the season elk head to the dark timber and if pressured enough will become nocturnal. This is a bunch of BS that without wolves we have a large game farm. There hunters that get lucky and kill and easy elk. It takes on the average of 10 days to kill any bull in Montana.

          • alf says:

            I was an avid hunter for years, but about 20 years ago I realized that I enjoyed seeing wildlife on the hoof (or wing or fin) more than on my plate, and certainly more than hanging on a wall or as a rug in front of a fireplace.

            Also, the experience of the hunt was so badly degraded by the explosion of ORVs running rampant everywhere that that played into my decision, too.

            I didn’t say or imply anything about wolves or how they may or may not have changed the habits of elk.

            My point was that in recent years groups like RMEF and SF&W and their supporters and like-minded “sportsmen” seem to be of the opinion that if one buys a license and tag, rather than that being the purchase of the privilege of TRYING to kill an elk (or whatever),the state has to GUARANTEE you a successful “hunt”; and those groups have acquired, for some reason that I don’t understand, such political influence that state F&W commissions and departments have been completely coopted and influenced by that mindset.

            So the philosophy seems to be to maximize “game” animals, at the expense of just about every thing else, good science be damned.

    • mikepost says:

      Unfortunately many of these “talking points” are as goofy and unscientific as the anti-wolf tirades. I love it when the NACM is shot down when it suits someone and then touted when it does. Wolves are not well served by this communication and I would urge careful consideration and insightful evaluation of which of these talking points you use as the list as a whole can be used to discredit the sender and and the cause.

  2. alf says:

    Salmon-Challis National Forest and University of Idaho Partner to better understand Pygmy Rabbit Habitat

    Release Date: Jun 25, 2013

    Contact(s): Amy Baumer 208-756-5145

    Leadore, Idaho: The Salmon-Challis National Forest and the University of Idaho have been working under a cooperative agreement to conduct research and better understand Pygmy Rabbit Habitat since 2003. The pygmy rabbit’s historical range includes portions of Idaho. Pygmy rabbits are typically found in areas of tall, dense sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) cover, and are highly dependent on sagebrush to provide both food and shelter throughout the year. Their diet in the winter consists of up to 99 percent sagebrush.

    June 27-29, scientists will be conducting fly-overs of sagebrush cover by small unmanned aerial vehicles in hopes of enhancing the survival of pygmy rabbits by better understanding their habitat needs. The robotic aircraft are hand launched, weigh approximately 14 pounds, and have a seven to nine (7-9) foot wingspan. They will be guided over Bureau of Land Management property in Lemhi County, in east central Idaho. The goal is to help determine whether the aircraft’s camera is able to capture high-resolution digital images that measure concealment of rabbits from predators and quality of food provided by the sagebrush. Each flight will return high-resolution digital imagery, in both the visible color and infrared ranges, to assist scientists in determining the viability of this data-collection method. The small unmanned aerial vehicles fly parallel transects for 20-30 minutes at a time.

    As part of the effort to understand the animal’s habitat needs, the work aims to create maps of habitat quality that will be matched with patterns of habitat use by the animals.

    Members from four universities, including the University of Idaho, are participating in the work being conducted this week. The University of Florida Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research Program – or UFUASRP – has received a Certificate of Authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration permitting low-altitude small Unmanned Aircraft System – or sUAS – flights over unpopulated areas, within one nautical mile radius of the ground control station.

    University of Idaho and Boise State University experts are available to speak to the media about the assessment of the pygmy rabbits. Experts are also welcoming the public to observe the flights, please contact Janet Rachlow at the number below, as there is limited parking available and there is a need to minimize interference of people and vehicles during the flights. Experts are also are happy to give presentations on the research, upon request. They include:

    Janet Rachlow, associate professor in the University of Idaho Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences, jrachlow@uidaho.eduor (208) 885-9328 or (208) 310-0460.

    Jennifer S. Forbey, assistant professor in the Boise State University Department of Biological Sciences, jenniferforbey@boisestate.eduor (208) 426

    • ZeeWolf says:

      Interesting use of drones for biological research. The civil libertarian in me is extremelly suspicious of aerial reconnaisance, whether unmanned or not. Yet the pragmatic side of me understands the benefit to be gained by the use of drones. Is this the first use of drones for research in the U.S.A.?

      • WM says:


        You do realize for a few hundred bucks you can get your own drone, with a camera, yes? Some have gyros on the cameras and hover quite nicely.

        HSUS and some others have been using them for covert, privacy invading activities for a couple years now. State legislatures and the FAA are posed to regulate them, and I think some states already have (realtors have been using tiny camera fitted drone helos to showcase high end properties with a video of the grounds). Cheap technology has opened a Pandora’s box with this, and we are at the front end of the tensions of civil liberties and privacy. Unfortunately, there is also potentially the problem of hunters using this technology illegally to locate animals.

        • ZeeWolf says:


          I did not realize that (and thanks for the heads up) however I can’t say I am surprised. There are so many ethical questions raised by these devices that I don’t even really know where to begin. The only problem with George Orwell’s book 1984 is that he was off by three decades, IMO. Technology has made cameras, regardless of drones, an ominpresence.

          Also, I see that the orignal article relating to pygmy rabbits referred to these things as “robotic aircraft” and I just assumed it was an euphinism for “drone”, which is the word I used in my criticism. Is there a differenc that I am missing?

          • Mark L says:

            “And on Sundays I elude the Eyes
            And hop the Turbine Freight
            To far outside the Wire
            Where my white-haired uncle waits”
            Red Barchetta, Rush

            Thought you might appreciate the lyrics…prophetic.

            • ZeeWolf says:

              Mark L – a great example of science fiction in music. One of my favorite Rush songs, the tune I like to play as I’m putting the ’91 Loyale (aka – Roo Dog Millionaire) through the paces. However, I’ll opine that the song wasn’t inspired as much by Orwellian dread, but rather as a reaction against safety and emmission standards then being set for newer vehicles. The liner notes to the song as included on the album Moving Pictures say that the song was ispired by ‘A Nice Morning Drive’ by Richard S. Foster.


              I love to drive, and from the same song…

              “Wind in my hair-
              Shifting and Drifting-
              Mechanical Music-
              Adrenalin surge-”

              but all that is temepered by the realization that my activities cause great harm to that which I love, namely the wild life and places that are dear to my heart.

              The dichotomty that exists in my soul generally centers around my libertarian urges versus my environmentalist leanings.

        • Jerry Black says:

          WM….will you please provide proof
          “HSUS and some others have been using them for covert, privacy invading activities for a couple years now”

          • WM says:

            Jerry, Zee,

            Here are a couple stories from a quick Google search (terms: HSUS + drones):





            A more thorough search would reveal more stories.

            We even talked about drones (fixed wing, and the more versatile and cheaper rotor type which is available to the public) on a thread here some months back, as well. I can’t find the link for our topic, but there was an animal rights group monitoring a hunting club bird shoot on private land somewhere on the east coast, if I remember correctly. There was an included link to some video. Generally, the scenario was deployment of a remote control multi-rotor hovering drone with camera over private property at low altitude. The operator of the drone was on a public road. Some hunter/participant took a shot at the hovering camera (invasion of their privacy even if they were doing a legal activity), but it limped back to where the drone owners could retrieve it. There was an exchange between the two parties, at a fence line. I seem to remember the audio of that part was caught on tape.

            Running parallel to this, states are looking at legislation to regulate this stuff, as is the FAA. HSUS/PETA seem inclined to use the technology.

            Also, the Seattle Police Department has at least one, maybe two, of these with high end capability for crime-fighting and for eye in the sky riot control application. They were grounded for some reason, a few months back. Don’t know what has happened since.

            Here are some images of the type of unit that might be involved for private purchase:


            • Jerry Black says:

              WM…As I recall, there was an uproar against the Seattle drone program and it was scrapped.
              Will check later for the HSUS list.
              Heading out to the Table Mountain area, which I’m sure you’re familiar with, to gather some more morels

              • WM says:


                Lucky you. Maybe a bbq’ed silver (kokanee) to go with them, a raspberry vinegarette on some fresh locally grown lettuce and herbs?

            • ZeeWolf says:

              WM – Thanks for the links, definately gives me some food for thought. Brave New World, indeed.

          • WM says:


            I put together a short list of links showing HSUS was using drone technology, but for some reason after posting, it shows “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” What?

            • ZeeWolf says:

              WM, This has happened to me also when I made a post that had four links. One or two seem to get by without issues, so I am guessing that any post with multiple links is auto-tagged for moderation.

  3. WM says:

    What the? Two grizzlies chased to death by Hutterites?–Hutterites-Grizzly-Bears/

    Companion question – what moron trying to pass him/herself off as a journalist wrote this confusing short piece?

    • JB says:

      Thanks, that was a good read.

    • ZeeWolf says:

      Does anyone else feel like they are fighting a continual “rear guard action” when it comes to protecting wildlife and wild places?

      I have come to the (depressing) conclusion that regardless of what we do, numerous species will go extinct in the next century or so. At this point, I will be happy if the human race somehow manages to not kill off all forms of life on earth.

  4. Mareks Vilkins says:

    “Status, management and distribution of large carnivores – bear, lynx, wolf & wolverine – in Europe”

    MARCH 2013

    ~ 200 pages long survey and every European state is covered

  5. Elk275 says:

    This happen North of Red Lodge which is all private property. I wonder exactly where, no one in Red Lodge knew.

    • CodyCoyote says:

      It would be interesting to see a map of where this bear roamed in his short life on Earth . He was with his brother and mother on the South Fork of the Shoshone , about 125 miles SSW of where he was euthanized, when they trapped them and relocated them last year.

      As a case in point for the discussion now turning to Grizzly delisting. The plan is for only bears in the Primary Conservation Zone surrounding Yellowstone to count towards anything. That P{CS almost exactly mirrors the Trophy Zone for wolves.

      Connecting the dots here, it appears that both the USFWS and Wyoming want to only manage bears inside that zone for a set number, and any bear outside that zone can just plain be shot on sight , just like Wyoming’s Predator classification for wolves. Create a Zoo Zone and cap the population.

      So…. ?

  6. Louise Kane says:

    Ed Markey wins in MA special election

  7. CodyCoyote says:

    Astronaut photos of the wildfires in southern Colorado.
    Not even July yet…

    • ZeeWolf says:

      I can see some plumes from my house, although they are far away. I could see the plume from the South Fork fire even though it was 65-70 miles to the south. If the “monsoons”, or summer rains, fail to materialize then I would imagine it will only get worse. If there is any good news it is that the snow is lingering in high country much longer than I would have anticipated based on snow-pack percentages. We, that is the county, now have stage I fire restrictions in place, and yesterday there was a smaller fire between Gunnison and Montrose that (I’m guessing since that plume is no longer visable on the horizon) was extinguished quickly.

      • cobackcountry says:


        I have had four sets of friends evacuated in less than a year, and another set trapped during floods.

        Dire times in Colorado’s forests. Had there been a larger logging industry here, we might have a variety of generation of trees. We are all old growth. That, drought, and beetles benefiting form it all…yes, I can agree-no end in sight.

        I have been planning fishing trips around smoke plumes and fire risk/escape routes.

        • ZeeWolf says:


          I hope that all your friends survived and that thier lives weren’t too disrupted. We now have fire evacuees from around the state here in Gunnison.

          The City of Gunnison isn’t likely to be evacuated due to a fire itself, but perhaps we would be evacuated to move the citizenry out of the way of firefighters. I don’t think that is likely, buy have been making contingency plans, regardless. The big worry for me is “where would I go”? It seems like “out of the frying pan, into the fire” – meaning, I feel as if I could get myself into more a much worse situation if I were to leave here.

          I do have to disagree with you regarding the logging industry in Colorado. We did have a logging industry here. Certainly, not as robust (from the industry’s perspective) as in places like the Great North Woods, or Oregon, California, Washington, et al.

          The problem as I see it is that Colorado’s logging industry mostly occured during the last part of the 19th and early part of the 20th century and was completely unregulated. That this industry existed isn’t well known is probably because they drove themselves out of business after cutting down all the marketable trees. There are numerous old logging roads and the stumps and slash to prove it throughout Gunnison county. Also, check out this book:

          Tracking Ghost Railroads in Colorado by Robert Ormes

          This is a hard to find book, but is in the stacks at Western State Colorado University. Mr. Ormes describes numerous railroads that were set up specifically for logging. Especially, two different railroads between Pagosa Springs and the old D & RGW mainline near Juanita Junction and another northeast of Cortez. (And,yes, I am one of those oddballs that just loves to hike for miles on end on old, abondoned railroad grades and obsolete highway alignments – just to see where they go and what remains)

          I’m also under the impression that much of Colorado’s logging occured on private land. As an example, the west side of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains (some might call this the Culebra Range)south of U.S. 160 down to the town of San Luis have been heavily logged throughout the years (personal observations).

          Something else to consider regarding Colorado’s forests is that much of it may have been burned off by the early prospectors so that they could more easily discern potential lode-bearing rock. In concert with that, much of the forest was heavily logged and utilized to provide railroad ties, mine timbers and fuel for boilers, stamp-mills and such.

          I see much of the problem lying with our society’s view of fire as being “bad” and having to control every last fire outbreak over the last many decades. This has left fire, an ecological agent over the last millions of years, as unable to do its job. All the beetle kill in lodgepole forests over the last few years…. many see this as related to global warming (and it may be) but, just speculating, perhaps because these lodgepoles were prevented from burning (which I understand they need to regenerate) they instead just grew old and weak and were in the early stages of dying anyhow when the beetles got them.

          I apologize, if you have read this far (LOL), for the long-winded “diatribe” but I am very suspicious of industry solving problems that I see they themselves created. I think mother nature has the tools she needs to solve many of these problems herself and us humans need to learn to stand back, have some patience and let her tend to her own wounds and apply her own balms and salves.

          Coback, I generally like your views and opinions and hope you take the above rant as an honest critique and not as “I’m right, you’re wrong”. I’m just trying to give another angle at this problem and like to think of myself as being open minded enough to listne to any reasonable criticism of my thoughts.

  8. ZeeWolf says:

    Are you a Calvin and Hobbes fan? I am, and while randomly browsing one of my old C&H books I found this one particular strip that I thought described the current situation between “anti” and “pro” wolf factions. I was able to look it up online and found it dated from January 18, 1987. Little did Bill Watterson know he was astutely predicting the future of wolf managment in the 21st century.

    I hope folks see the humor in the situation.

  9. Elk275 says:

    This also from today’s Billings Gazette. An excellent article about grizzlies on the Beartooth front. There are getting to be more and more grizzlies and they are moving in to non traditional habitat.

    • cobackcountry says:

      They were plains dwellers before being down sized. They have to go some where. Thanks for the post.

      • cobackcountry says:


        There seems to be an expectation of grizzly offenders. “Every major drainage”, that’s a big deal.

        I am glad there are enough bears to keep the genetics growing. It is notable that the male recently killed may have learned his vices from his mom.

        • CodyCoyote says:

          On occasion, grizzlies have been sighted way east of Red Lodge in the Pryor Mountains and the northern spur of the Big Horns even . How they got across the Big Horn River is a mystery to me…must’ve gone around through Fort Smith or st. Xavier. I can’t imagine they’d swim Yellowtail Reservoir or traipse across the top of the dam…)

          G. bears in northern Montana are now regularly seen 40-50 miles east of the mountains out in the sandstone and cedar breaks , heading for the Missouri Breaks.

          Grizzlies used to roam from Hudson Bay to Guadalajara Mexico all the way to the Pacific Coast where the last sonoran Grizzly ended up on the California state flag . A little bear shuffling out of the Yellowstone core population is nothing…

          • Elk275 says:


            One of the most interesting tib bits about grizzlies is that there was a radio collar grizzly bear who swam across Flathead Lake spending the night on one of the islands. The bear travel west to east and went into the Mission mountains after his swim across the lake. No one saw him swimming.

            • cobackcountry says:

              I have heard tales that they swim across the sound from B.C. mainland to Vancouver Island. The locals them periodically there.

              • CodyCoyote says:

                I spend a little time boat camping on Yellowstone Lake. There’s a picnic dock on Frank Island, which is 2-1/2 miles out into the deep cold lake from the ” mainland “. We’ve seen fairly fresh grizzly tracks and not-that-old scat out there. Unless they like ducks and geese, there is nothing meaty for them to eat, although the island does have a generous raspberry crop and salad bar.

                I also have photos of a grizzly swimming in the lake near Steamboat Point. It did every stroke in the book, even diving beneath the waterline. And it would just sit and float , mostly submerged with only its head visible like a submarine conning tower. All that fat in late summer must double as a personal flotation device. The bear really seemed to enjoy doing this.

          • CodyCoyote says:

            I meant to type Sierra Grizzly , not Sonoran , for the icon on the California flag. The Sonoran , or ” Desert ” Grizzly roamed all the way south to Hidalgo state in Mexico. California had its own bear in the high Sierras, and there was a coastal grizzly in the Pacific Northwest and BC. In the Plains States of the US was found the Plains Grizzly , or ” White” bear…predominantly a lighter fur , faster, meaner , and with longer claws than its Rocky Mountain cousin , today’s remnant Yellowstone grizzly. The Plains grizzly gave most of the other variants a bad name…a truely vicious animal if confronted, and would stalk humans. I consider the bears of the far northern Rockies and Canadian Rockies to be a separate variant from the Yellowstone island bears. For one thing they reproduce much slower. The bear that was in the southern Rockies of Colorado and northwest New Mexico was not all that different from the Yellowstone bear, but I’m not the taxonomist. I’ve heard it called the San Juan grizzly. The bears of Ontario, Manitoba, Sakatchewan and eastern Alberta need a classification.

            The point of all this folderol is the Grizzly Bear roamed and resided in a wide variety of habitats in Pre-Columbian North America , but today depending on how you do the stats we have less than 2 percent of bears on less than 3 percent compared to known former population and range.

            • SEAK Mossback says:

              I’m not sure the “white” bear of the Great Plains is really extinct. I’ve noticed animals that generally fit the description on the North Slope just west of the Yukon Territory. Many have gorgeous long, light blond pelage and are heavily predatory on ungulates, muskoxen, etc. — although they also spend a lot of time foraging on vegetation. Much of the area near the base of the mountains and from the larger valleys out onto the coastal plain has a plains-like feel to it, and they are very tuned in and interested in things walking about the landscape even at considerable distance –will sometimes run toward you to check you out. I tried photographing a beautiful blond bear as we were drifting by at a good clip in our raft in strong current, and the next moment my son and I were struggling over the rifle as the bear dashed at us — finally pausing like a big dog at the river’s edge to watch us drift out of range. Another time, a young friend and I climbed at dusk over a knife edge ridge and dropped down a treacherous frosty, bouldery slope into a very out-of-the-way valley. In the morning, we encountered a blond grizzly with long fur not far below our camp and got some decent photos of it running toward us and then crouching low on its belly, watching us very intently for several minutes. One noticeable physical feature in the photos is indeed very long claws. When we turned to depart, it launched again toward us but stopped when we turned back, yelling and waving. It did not seem to be defensive but rather curious and trying to evaluate us as prospective prey. However, it’s certainly not universal behavior, as numerous other bears, including another adult we encountered in the same valley minutes earlier, departed with haste.

              After a herd of caribou has passed through, you can sometimes spot with binoculars different bears feeding on them up and down a major valley. It’s feast or famine with the protein portion of their diet. Caribou are here today, gone tomorrow, so the bears have substantial incentive check things out and act quickly. Conditions may have been similar on the Great Plains. North Slope bears seem actually to be thriving in recent years — for reasons I suspect may be related to increasing lushness of vegetation that has been documented from satellite photos. They are considered a prime suspect in the steep decline of muskoxen in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge since the late-1990s (with individual bears observed killing multiple muskoxen in a single encounter), and those that have begun swimming out to the whale carcasses on Barter Island in recent years have generally proven more aggressive and dominant over substantially larger polar bears. Anyway, I would not consider them an animal prone to persevering in predation on humans, but certainly believe some “would stalk humans”. It’s simply not prudent to let a potential meal trot off without quickly verifying and testing — and that generally requires shortening distance, whether by speed or stealth.

              • CodyCoyote says:

                Carter Mountain dominates the far southwest skyline seen from Cody Wyoming, a fifty mile long west-east spur jutting out of the Absarokas separating the Shoshone River from the Greybull River. It was named for a corrupt Judge who populated northwest Wyoming from his base along the UP Railroad in southwest Wyoming , sending roughneck cowboys and hooligans to stake homesteading claims and claim the territory before anyone else did. He even had the mountain renamed for himself ,and a major creek, and a ranch yada yada.

                The Indian name from antiquity for that magnificent mountain was White Bear Mountain. The resident Crow tribe of Chief Blackfoot and then Plenty Coups and Shoshone tribes of Chief Washakie had many stories about the pale bears that had no fear of man or beast. The exceptionally long claws were prized by the warrior-hunters for their necklaces, especially since the Plains Griz was so very much harder to kill before guns became relatively common in the mid-1800’s thereabouts. Historian-archaeologist Bob Edgar thought the White Bear variant of grizzly was actually larger than the Mountain, or ” Yellowstone” bear , but its fearlessness eventually accelerated its demise as Mr. Henry’s . 45 cal repeater and Mr. Sharp’s .50 cal rifles came on the scene. The Big Horn Basin country was the last region settled in the interior West by us white folk, of those places worth settling anyway. The Crow tribe kept their hunting and summer camp rights all the way into the early 20th century in exchange for being the only Plains tribe to settle with the US government and US Army in 1868 and thus avoided the Indian Wars for the most part. It’s a large part of the reason why the Big Horn Basin and Absarokas retained so much wildlife and native culture. The White Hominids were slowed in getting here. Being backstopped by Yellowstone didn’t hurt. The Griz have always had a bit of a semi-sanctuary in the Absarokas.

                Then again, you have guys like Colonel William D. Pickett who established a small ranch on the Greybull River in 1883. It is claimed he killed over 300 bears. One day , he killed four grizzlies with a single shot Sharps 50 in one stand , reloading as he went, but the last bear still had enough life in him to charge and fall on him , breaking one of Pickett’s legs. That’s why they named it Four Bear Creek, which empties into the Greybull above Pickett Creek

                I came across all this while producing a history book on the area in 1978 for Edgar who had gathered the tales.

                I sincerely hope the Plains Grizzly migrated north and still exists to this day, as you say Seak.

              • ZeeWolf says:

                CC and SEAK, thank you for the posts. The grizzly stories and observations are enjoyable and informative. I miss living in Grizzly country. Some claim they are present here in Colorado but I doubt it. On the east side of the Sawatch Range, the (then)Colorado Division of Wildlife posted Grizzly warnings at trailheads based on supposed observations but I don’t believe anything came of it.

                CC – The Gazette article was interesting. Based on what I understand of former Grizzly range, I would say that “non-traditional” lands would be somewhere east of the 100th meridian.

  10. Louise Kane says:

    its hard to believe this – yet this document explains much of what we have been seeing in the wolf slaughter.
    I’m trying to wrap my head around the fact that this policy was actually implemented in concert with the states, in such gross disregard of the ESA and the public, not to mention the wolves. How dare they…..

    “Washington, DC —The federal government’s plan to remove the gray wolf from the protections of the Endangered Species Act was hammered out through political bargaining with affected states, according to documents obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Contrary to requirements of the Endangered Species Act that listing decisions must be governed by the best available science, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service presided over a process in which political and economic considerations were at the forefront.

    The 52 documents produced by Fish & Wildlife Service detail how the “National Wolf Strategy” was developed in a series of closed-door federal-state meetings called “Structured Decision Making” or SDM beginning in August 2010. The meetings involved officials from every region of the Service and representatives from the game and fish agencies of 13 states. The SDM process featured –

    A “Focus on Values. Determine objectives (values) first, and let them drive the analysis.” An SDM flow-chart starts with Problem and goes to Objectives, to Alternatives and then to Consequences at which stage a small box labeled “Data” finally comes into play;
    An explicit political test “Where should wolves exist? (emphasis in original) What does the public want? What can the public tolerate?”; and
    A matrix to weigh alternatives on a scale of “legal defensibility” then “public acceptance” followed by “wolf conservation” and finally “efficiency.”
    “These documents confirm our worst suspicions that the fate of the wolf was decided at a political bazaar. The meeting notes certainly explain why no outside scientists were welcome,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch who had been seeking the records since April 2012. “From what we can see, Structured Decision Making was structured primarily to deal out the lower-48 population of gray wolves.”

    Under a federal proposal currently out for public comment the gray wolf would be stricken from the federal list of threatened or endangered species. The Mexican wolf, with only a handful remaining in the wild, would keep its endangered status but no protected habitat would be delineated for it.

    Much of the meetings were devoted to assuaging state threats to sue to halt wolf reintroductions. The tenor of these discussions was captured by a map titled “New Fantastic Alternative” which allowed unlimited hunting of gray wolves in Colorado and Utah. It also confined Mexican wolves to portions of Arizona and New Mexico.

    “The Obama administration keeps preaching integrity of science and transparency but seems to practice neither on any matter of consequence,” Ruch added, pointing to PEER’s detailed complaint on how politics smothered the recovery plan developed for Mexican wolves by a team of scientific experts. “In simplest terms, these documents detail how the gray wolf lost a popularity contest among wildlife managers.”

    These foundational SDM documents obtained by PEER will likely provide fodder for the lawsuits that will almost certainly follow the expected final federal decision to de-list the gray wolf.


    View the SDM overview and flowchart

    Look at the political matrix for assessing alternatives

    See the “New Fantastic Alternative”

    Read scientists’ critique of de-listing plan

    Examine state litigation threats

    Scan background on Structured Decision Making for the gray wolf

    Revisit politics pervading Mexican wolf decisions”

  11. Louise Kane says:

    An explicit political test “Where should wolves exist? (emphasis in original) What does the public want? What can the public tolerate?”;

    these bastards they ask these questions and then ignore the information, polls and comments that clearly illustrated the general public’s desire to see wolves protected and recovered – not recovered to be annihilated.

    • Jeff N. says:

      Does anyone with a background in law want to comment on Louise’s post regarding proposed wolf delisting and whether or not the conditions that wolves will be delisted under may not hold up when lawsuits are inevitably filed.

      • JB says:

        Jeff, Louise:

        There are a variety of problems with the FWS’s review of science, as well as their interpretation of their obligation under the ESA. I can’t go into these now, but I will later. One comment I would make regarding PEER and the SDM process that FWS used: There is nothing inherently wrong about SDM. It’s simply a decision support tool, meant to help decision-makers walk through very complex problems. What was disconcerting about this, however, is that the ESA says listing status determinations are to be based ONLY on the best scientific and commercially available data, NOT the desires of the representatives of the 13 invited states. The ESA’s mandate is to promote recovery by mitigating threats to species. Simply stated, it does not appear that is happening. Rather, it seems they’re using every tool at their disposal to get out of the wolf conservation business.

        • Jeff N. says:

          Thank you JB. I look forward to your more detailed post.

        • Robert R says:

          And they should get out of the conservation business.
          It should be a state by state issue and a case by case issue weather some like it or not.
          I made a comment a while back about a vast peice of land scape being void of the usual animals summering there. This last Monday we finally seen and elk and guess what, it was being run down by wolves. I’m not against the wolves but I said there was a reason why the landscape was void of ungulates.
          Like it or not the best science is not always right.
          I’m not defending the elk I’m just making a statement. After all what’s the difference of defending any animal.

          • ZeeWolf says:

            Robert R – It seems to me that the USFWS’s job is conservation, whether its managment of National Wildlife Refuges, protecting birds under various treaties or encouraging species recovery under the ESA.

    • ZeeWolf says:

      Robert R – Thank you for the link. It is nice to see some positive news about people caring for the environment.

      To answer your question: John Boehner is to blame. He is also to blame for herpes, volcanos, earthquakes and bad breath (satire intended).

      • Kathleen says:

        Ha ha, I think G.W. Bush is also to blame, and maybe the Rainbow Family. And wolves. Seriously, it’s past time for this. We almost always go to YNP in shoulder seasons, before invasive people (aka tourists) arrive and before invasive plants are up or after they’ve died. The first time we went during their growing season I was depressed for days. Even stopped at Albright and asked the rangers what was being done (nothing at that time)–gave them the litany of all the horrors I’d seen. We had taken off from Mammoth to hike to the beaver ponds and there along the trail were a few Dalmation toadflax plants (one mature plant can produce half a million seeds). I was like, OMG, we have to pull these!!! I start pulling like a thing possessed and my husband says, “uh, I think you can stop now” because just ahead was more than we could pull in a week. *sigh* I wish people got as fired up about this issue as they do other issues. Invasive exotics can have such an immense negative effect on native plant/animal/bird/pollinator communities… negative as in, wiping them out.

        • ZeeWolf says:

          Kathleen – When I was living at Mammoth, I would take time off occaisionally and go pull out all the hound’s tongue I could find. Sadly, I wasn’t able to single-handedly solve the problem.

          Currently, my front lawn is inudnated with dandelions. To 2,4-D or not to 2,4-D – that is the question.

          My sarcastic response to Robert R is based on an old “Bloom County” comic strip by Berekely Breathed that I recollected from my youth. Sometimes its too easy to play the (mostly useless) blame game and not actually deal with the real issue at hand. Ahhh… here is the link. My comment originated with the second panel.

          And yes, I devoured Mad Magazine when I was in my tweens and beyond.

          P.S. – I looked at your website and found it useful and interesting although I don’t agree with all of it. Good food for thought, though.

          • Kathleen says:

            Houndstongue is another one, ugh. But I’ll trade you my leafy spurge and cheatgrass problem for your dandelions any day! We eradicated houndstongue on our land by hand-pulling. Had to spray for knapweed and spurge (had a near-monoculture of spurge in places) and now control by hand-pulling, but spurge is slowly gaining ground on us again (of course, since you never actually get rid of it). Sadly–catastrophically–cheatgrass has moved into all disturbed and entirely undisturbed areas to threaten our entire native restoration. After 10 years of nonstop labor, I’m about ready to give up my Weed Avenger title.

            Opus, Bill the Cat, I loved Bloom County…but didn’t recognize your quote. Thank you for visiting Other Nations. Given the diversity of opinions and beliefs just within the animal rights community, I doubt that even all AR people agree with all of it.

  12. john says:

    Rare bird last seen in Britain 22 years ago reappears – only to be killed by wind turbine in front of a horrified crowd of birdwatchers

    More + pics here-

  13. Ralph Maughan says:

    I just got back from 4 days on the central Idaho backroads and backcountry.

    It is still very green, but it has suddenly turned very hot. There have been no major wildfires yet. This is one reason I went at this time. The time between the onset of summer heat and what is often a long smoky summer is often short. It could be only a matter of days.

    Yesterday morning I woke up in the frost in Big Meadow at the head of Bear Valley Creek. I drove back to Pocatello where the temperature had hit a summer high of 98 degress.

    I am aware that there are many places much hotter than Pocatello.

    • SAP says:

      Same story here in southwest MT, Ralph. Grass grew up nice and tall, and now heat & wind are turning it into upright hay. Am anticipating some fireworks-started fires here in the next week. Above 7,500′, there’s a little more soil moisture thanks to some late snows up there.

      • Nancy says:

        Mother Nature said “enough of this heat!” and sent a nice thunderstorm rumbling thru last night, complete with rain & hail. 53 degrees this morning. Still lush and green here 🙂

  14. Immer Treue says:

    Saw a presentation last night by an interesting older gentleman, Charlie Russell.  As with Lynn Rogers who works with black bears, Charlie has made a life of working with grizzlies.

  15. Ida Lupine says:

    I had to post something uplifting, especially the little guy on the left:

    Howling Lessons

  16. CodyCoyote says:

    And now for our Wildlife news ” Change of Pace ” act… Pavel and his incredibly talented 350 lb. brown bear Tima.

    Tima can dance, play a trumpet, do the hula hoop, and sit in a plastic patio chair good and proper. And apparently 180 other things not in this short YouTube video.

    ( Bart the Bear is s-o-o-o-o-o-o jealous )

    • Immer Treue says:

      Amazing! And after what I saw last night, I am in awe of both the intelligence and ability to learn, even human things. Remarkable animals.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      While I don’t like to see animals used in entertainment, I am in awe of how smart this bear is.

  17. Immer Treue says:

    White wolf swimming across a lake in Northern Saskatchewan.

  18. Ida Lupine says:

    I love it, gives me hope. Maybe they can swim across the St. Lawrence. I love the comments: “go North, young wolf, go North!” 🙂

  19. ZeeWolf says:

    I just recently saw a video entitled “A Season of Predators” produced by Alpenglow Press Productions. IMO, well done and even handed. I am encouraged by the collaboration demonstrated by all parties involved. I tried to find out more about some of the backstory, but kept running into dead ends. The link to is broken and I couldn’t find any information on the website maintained by Alpenglow Press. The credits made it seem that there was no or very limited outside funding. Does anyone have any information about this video or opinions on it?

  20. Ida Lupine says:

    Saw this in my Sunday paper today:

    Free roaming bison provide habitat for grassland birds and other animals by grazing intermittently, leaving the grass at different heights.


  21. Mike says:

    Idaho hunters to match livestock industry “dollar for dollar” in wolf killing funds.

    Like I’ve said many, many times before…..

    • Rancher Bob says:

      So what’s your problem with hunters and ranchers funding Wildlife Services? How many times have I read someone here bitch about the general public funding WS?
      Let me also point out the reason states don’t listen to pro wolf management ideas. It’s the holes in your management plans call them lies if you will. We continue to hear the call for the end of WS. WS are the people who kill, call them problem wolves if you will. Pro-wolfers find WS killing wolves unacceptable. The first leg of the lie.

      The second leg of the lie is revealed when public hunting and trapping is the issue. How many times have we heard random killing of wolves is unacceptable, yet killing problem wolves would be acceptable. Who is in charge of killing problem wolves?

  22. Louise Kane says:

    Comments due on MI wolf plan and hearing July 11th. Remember this is the state where the tribes and the citizens demonstrated they did not want a hunt through a legal process that was usurped by a special interest driven legislative process. The antithesis of how a democratic process should work. The hunting rules are the least onerous of the states, but I believe this reflects a cautiousness on the part of the DNR and legislators to move too aggressively because they pulled a sleazy move that they know will be recalled. I don’t trust this to last. I hold out hope that the tribes and people of MI will renew their efforts to stop this unneccessary hunt

    Fro Nancy Warren
    The Michigan Natural Resources Commission will meet July 11, 2013 in Lansing. The agenda posted at the link below. Once you open the document, you click on the agenda item F Wolf Regulations as Game Species to open that document.

    If you’re unable to attend the meeting but wish to submit written comments on Agenda items, please write to: Natural Resources Commission, P.O. Box 30028, Lansing, MI 48909 or e-mail: . If you would like further
    information or would like to address the Commission, please contact Debbie Whipple at 517-373-2352 or e-mail: . Persons registering on or before the Friday preceding the meeting will be allowed up to five (5)
    minutes for their presentation. Persons registering after the Friday preceding the meeting or at the meeting will be allowed up to three (3) minutes. Persons with disabilities needing accommodations should contact Debbie Whipple.

    There is one substantial change in Wildlife Order 14 from what was presented in May.

    The May 13,1013 version of Wildlife Conservation Order Amendment 14 contained Section 9.1 (9) which stated, “Wolves may be taken by department personnel, and persons authorized in writing by the department to manage wolves for one or more of the following purposes: a) To protect public health, safety or welfare b) To control damage or nuisance caused by wolves on privately-owned property c) For purposes of scientific research d) To address disease concerns e) To stabilize or reduce wolf population levels.

    We know that many people wrote about the vague language contained in Section 9.1(9), further this was a new section that wasn’t even discussed with the Wolf Management Advisory Committee.



    While the NRC has the authority to modify the rules/regulations as proposed by DNR, we do not expect they will.

    To summarize, the Michigan DNR is proposing:
    WMU A – Far Western U.P – Quota 16 wolves
    WMU B – Portions of Baraga, Houghton, Ontonagon, Gogebic Counties – Quota 19 wolves
    WMU C – Luce and Mackinac Counties – Quota 8

    Total Quota = 43

    Season would be 11/15 (opening day deer firearm season) – 12/31, unless quota filled
    No night hunting
    No dogs allowed in the hunting of wolves
    No trapping allowed
    Mandatory reporting

    Baiting will be allowed


    • rork says:

      It would seem as if something like 9.1(9) is useful, unless we’re gonna let federal wildlife services do all the targeted killing. I admit “To stabilize or reduce wolf population levels” is more than I’d allow.
      Anyone know what official reasons are for no trapping?

    • rork says:

      I have written them, arguing mostly that having no sports hunt would do wonders for the reputation of our state, and it’s hunters and game managers, in the eyes of average people. I want us to be famous. Let pros kill (or educate) problem wolves immediately, rather than maybe-killing maybe-problem wolves months from now.
      Pure Michigan: where wildlife managers respect wildlife.
      I haven’t been smoking red osier, so I realize this is not going to happen.

      PS: hit a damn doe driving home from fishing. She tore the roof rack and canoe completely from the car after bouncing off the front. In other personal news, I killed my first animal with a bullet ever. A hard-to-trap super-chuck (Marmota sapiens) who has reduced me to tears a few times – I have huge gardens.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Oh boy. I swerved out of the way to avoid a migrating frog the other night! 🙂

        You’re right tho, let the pros do the handling (I can’t even say killing) of problem wildlife, instead of using it as justification for hunting and trapping.

  23. Mark L says:

    I would be curious what MIDNR would think of moving the wolf hunting from 12/15 to say 1/29 so it doesn’t overlap with deer season much (and before pregnancies). Might be interesting to see the results.

  24. aves says:

    The impact on wildlife isn’t the only thing we should be considering in the face of the Obama administration’s push for green energy. New research shows the climate benefits of wind power differ by region.

    “Wind in California has few benefits”:

    The full report “Regional variations in the health, environmental, and climate benefits of wind and solar generation”:

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thank you, Aves. More disappointing news about green energy. If there’s anything worse than killing birds for green energy, it’s killing them for nothing.

  25. Immer Treue says:

    Wisconsin DNR unanimously votes to increase wolf quota.

    And of course the bear hounding lobby has a comment.

    But Al Lobner of the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association says the increase is warranted because of the conflicts between wolves and people.

    Lobner: “Get that wolf population down to a more acceptable number, then we feel the depredation will stop, and the dislike that some people have for wolves will diminish.”

    The depredations will not stop with hunting random wolves. I’m still waiting any data from Vicksconsin or MN on any correlation between hunting seasons and a decrease in livestock depredations.  ma???

  26. Immer Treue says:

    Conflicts Rise Between Idaho Ranchers and Gray Wolves

    Two hunting seasons and depredations increase? I thought hunting and trapping was supposed to decrease depredations.

    Catch Faulkner’s quote on numbers in a wild pack.

    • JB says:


      In all fairness, there’s a ton a variability in depredation numbers. I really don’t think it’s possible—nor is it likely to be possible in the near term–to separate the signal from the noise. IDF&G reps were claiming success when after the first hunt depredation numbers fell. Trouble was, the fell by greater percentages in Wyoming, where there was no hunt at all. Seems other factors were likely at play.

      • Immer Treue says:


        I agree. Two days does not a week make. Yet we continue to hear all this noise that hunting will reduce depredations. Threats the catch. Science says wait and see because of all the variables at play, such as Winter Severity Indexes, rainfall… We need to quit hearing that the random hunting and trapping of wolves will reduce depredations until
        All the variables are calculated into the equation. That is unless The wolf Numbers are reduced to insignificance.

        • Mark L says:

          Also, curious if anyone changed the definition of a ‘depredation’ in the last few years, or has the minimum damage to an animal changed in any states? There seems to be a lot left to interpretation (yep, on both sides), like judging a winter’s severity based on the previous one.

        • Immer Treue says:

          Should read That’s the catch

  27. Ida Lupine says:

    How much more of this do they think people are going to tolerate. First they say the management is working, then they say it isn’t. What a mistake to delist. It’s going to be this way until the last wolf is gone, just like in the 1800s. The media stories are sensational and unfair also, at least the local stories.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Every year, the quotas increased, ignoring science, ignoring facts. What a freaking big mistake to delist.

    • SaveBears says:

      No we are not at his beck and call.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Sorry again. 🙂

        • SaveBears says:


          You do have to realize, there are really some very strong moderates in this area. Wolves will not go extinct, that is a physical imnpossibility.

  28. SaveBears says:

    Not wildlife related at all, but it is wild lands related, please take a moment and give a thought to those 19 families that have lost such brave men in Arizona, my nephew spent many years as a Prineville Hotshot and went through loosing many he worked with and this has hit him pretty hard.

    Prayers are with those families and friends that lost loved ones in this wildfire.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Yes, it’s a terrible shock. They are in my thoughts and prayers.

    • Ralph Maughan says:


      This is the worst wildfire death toll in 19 years. Wasn’t that one the Prineville Hotshots?

      My spouse was a Forest Service Fire Lookout for six summers and lived through two major tragedies. She is following this one closely.

      These things are taken personally by all those who work the wildfires.

      • SaveBears says:


        Yes, my nephew worked with the group that was killed in that wildfire. Hew was out with an injury sustained during a training jump, so did not respond to the Storm King Fire.

      • WM says:

        Not to lessen the loss of these firefighters, but fighting wildland fires is dangerous work.

        Many years ago my first project wild fire (age 19 at the time and a USFS summer employee), was on the Willamette NF in Western OR. I had only rudimentary USFS training, and because I worked for the Asst. Fire boss (whose full time regular job was a silvicultural forester, but they get special training for fire management), I got called up on a fast-moving project fire, because they were short resources. Fires were burning elsewhere in the West during that very hot, dry summer. My job, with two other guys, was taking meals and drinking water to a hotshot crew, building fireline in the bottom of a deep hole, on some very steep slopes of red slash in a clear cut unit. This was at night. They were working in close proximity with a D-9 cat. The fallers would drop trees, and the cat would doze line, mostly proceeding down hill, perpendicular to the steep slope. One of the fallers was in the wrong place when the cat backed up. The track pinched him against a log and took his foot off at the ankle. I carried what remained of his boot with foot still inside, up the hill in my backpack, on a return trip from dropping off C-rations (before what we now call MRE’s), and helping with the ground evacuation of the guy. Another guy got knocked in the back of the head by a powered down chopper rotor blade, when he didn’t duck (very specific training on this by the way) when in the danger zone. Again, this was at night. Fortunately, his hard hat helped lessen the blow, but he still had serious injuries.

        Most folks don’t know, these big fires (the ones over a couple hundred acres) are run like a military battle, with crews doing 12 hour shifts or longer, 24-7 until the fire is under control. Fire camps have lighted areas, with motorpools/equipment repair, heli-ports, kitchens, sleeping areas, and loudspeakers for announcements, going all the time (you sort of block out the noise and you are so tired, you really don’t notice). Things happen quickly, as winds change, or air temperature/fuel moisture changes.

        Safety is always at the forefront, but some conditions cannot always be anticipated. And, more people working, means more risk and more injuries/deaths. The tough part is that when something horrible and drastic happens, there is the investigation to learn what happened, to prevent it from happening again, and sometimes to assign blame with 20-20 hindsight.

        • Jerry Black says:

          My questions would involve weather and if there were buildups in the vicinity. Anytime you have thunderstorms, you’ll have erratic winds and even “microbursts” which have brought down enough airliners that pilots have learned to avoid takeoffs and landings in these situations.
          IMO, if these conditions are forecast, fire fighters should not be sent into these areas….What was the forecast? What were the conditions at the time of the “blowup”? Was there adequate, up to the minute communication to the fire fighters as to any changing weather conditions? These weather events can be forecast.

          • SAP says:

            Some reports indicating the wind changed 180 degrees and was erratic in the face of the thunderstorm. Bad bad combo of weather, high heat/low humidity, and, best I can tell, a very flashy fuel type — maybe a mesquite chaparral type? Very dense layer of fine fuels. Throw in a few burning houses to raise the ambient temperature even more and it’s gonna get scary.

            RIP, Granite Mountain Hotshots.

        • Louise Kane says:

          My son’s best college friend was an Arrowhead hot shot, Dan Holmes. Dan died in 2004 when an approximately 6 foot long snag fell on him from a height of 100 feet in King’s Canyon. Dan was an amazing young man. He and my son Brock shared a love of extreme snowboarding, wilderness hiking, and outdoors. They took their first cross country trip to Arcata to attend a semester at the U of California Arcata, leaving our home in DC so excited to start a new journey. I have the photos chronicling the backcountry snowboarding and camping trips, two really happy young men smiling and loving life. I later came to learn how difficult it was to be selected as a hot shot and how suited Dan was for the job. Dan’s favorite saying was peace, love and mountains. He would take on any adventure, any challenge. Dan had an infectious laugh a real love of life, and a huge heart. Dan always left everyone he came in contact with in a better place. I was very very sorry to hear of the loss of these hotshots. It brought back some painful memories of losing Dan but also some wonderful memories of his adventures with my son and my good fortune in knowing and loving him as a special special person. RIP Danny and RIP hotshots. WM your description of the work is in line with my memories of letters Dan sent describing his job, tough work under grueling conditions.

  29. Ida Lupine says:

    Terribly tragic. The sheer number, nineteen people, is a lot. A father lost his only son.

    We’re putting too much emphasis on protecting property and not enough on protecting life. The population keeps growing, and we are expanding out into areas where there is drought and fire danger. Property can be replaced, people cannot.

    • SaveBears says:


      I disagree, these guys are the best of their breed, and with fires things get very unpredictable at times, those of us that live in fire country understand the risk as do those that fight those fires.

      As far as protecting property, I would suspect you have never really faced a situation like we have in the west at times. Things just simply turn wrong very quick in this fire as it did at Storm King and Mann Gulch so many years ago.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        I have no doubt that they are the best of their breed. With fire, I’m sure things can turn wrong very quickly. I have not experienced anything like it.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Concerning that they don’t want to give up on the Mexican wolf either.

  30. Ida Lupine says:

    Wildlife report:

    Saw a beautiful coyote while driving home tonight. Thought it was a fox at first because of the bushy tail, but realized it was a coyote after he crossed the road and disappeared, because he was more brown than red, and much larger.

  31. WM says:

    Looks like the report on how the UT Legislature spent its money with contractor “Big Game Forever” is being dissected, including how they spent their $300K. Nobody should be the least bit impressed, and if I were a UT voter I’d be asking for a refund.

    Here is a link to the SL Tribune article that lays it out:

    Here’s the report:

    What a snow job! Most of the 102 pages is articles or letters others have written – not even their work. Somebody needs to hold the UT Natural Resources contracting officer and their contractor’s feet to the fire.

    • timz says:

      Reminds me going back when the anti-wolf group in Idaho held a big fundraiser to hire attorneys and file a lawsuit to have wolves removed. They claimed to have raised thousands of $$$ yet nothing was ever heard about a lawsuit or lawyers.

    • JEFF E says:

      I havequite a bit of family in Utah. I am going to make sure tis is disseminated.


      • CodyCoyote says:

        I saw this yesterday and let out a Whoop! I hope Ralph and Ken give this story a top-tier heading of its own.

        The Utah legislature gives the snark Ryan Benson $ 300,000 to do his anti-wolf schpiel, and he really cannot account for where the money went.

        His ” Big Game Forever” might be a nonprofit, or might be something else. How would we know ? Their 120-page report is a pinnacle of vagueness shrouded in smoke , seen only in mirrors.

        Utah, Utah , you four letter word. No other state in the Union can touch it for deeply rooted public-private corruption , IMO.

        • Immer Treue says:

          I second the movement. This requires maximum exposure!

          • Louise Kane says:

            I posted that story on the Big Game Forever facebook any of my comments were immediately blocked and removed, including the story

            • jon says:

              You shocked? LOL I think something fishy is going on here. Why hasn’t big game forever come out and told people what they used the money for? Big game forever is an anti-predator organization.

        • timz says:

          Were I looking for this money I would start
          with the bank accounts of some of these good ole boys.

  32. rork says:

    Announcement that a petition is starting to try to repeal the second Michigan law that let the NRC declare any species a game animal and set the regs for it (now called public act 21).
    would be a pro-hunt side version, from a self-styled conservation organization I used to like allot better in days past (and they still do some very good work). They have been practicing their rhetoric for months, so their spiel is pretty polished. Accurate or to the point, not so much.
    The story is in many other places too.

    • jon says:

      Good for Michigan.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Yes. This group is complaining about out-of-staters – I’m sure Safari Club International et al is lurking somewhere for them too.

        • jon says:

          MUCC seem like a radical organization. As I understand it, all of the people that signed the petition live in Michigan.

  33. jon says:

    Will any of you guys vote for him if he runs for president in 2016? LMFAO

    • Immer Treue says:

      You mean he’s still alive or not in jail? Someone brought up some inuendo about him on the past about underage women. I’m sure that there exists enough crap on him where this talk would amount to little more than a joke.

    • Louise Kane says:

      I would not imagine anyone here would vote for him, but I bet other people see him as a hero and not the ultimate creep/loser that he is.

      • CodyCoyote says:

        One version of this story I read quoted Nugent saying he was ” entertaining thoughts ” of running for the highest office in the land.

        I took that to mean he was hearing voices in his head…

  34. Louise Kane says:

    This from Jim Robertson
    Not being a big fan of fireworks, gunfire or patriotic pandering…this struck a chord with me.

    I know how much my own dog hates the loud fireworks I have often wondered what it might be like for wildlife. I can take a night of fireworks but it goes on seemingly the entire summer. Its disruptive, loud and intrusive. I’ll trade a peaceful sunset anytime

    “On the way home from the ocean, just before sundown yesterday evening, I passed a field where a local elk herd can often be seen peacefully grazing or lounging at the edge of the forest. This time the elk were running away from some unseen threat. Being as it was July 3rd and considering the number of fireworks stands around, there was no sense second-guessing what was frightening them—fireworks!

    Despite the increasing fire danger this time of year and regardless of who or what they might annoy, celebratory Americans can’t seem to resist launching their little rockets and lighting off their pocket-sized explosives. Those without their own box of bombs compensate by shooting their semi-automatics ‘till the cows flee home.

    What a thrill—but not for everyone. While people play their war games, the wildlife head for the hills. To them, the sound of fireworks and gunfire are synonymous: they both spell human-up-to-no-good. As the raucous revelers express their right to be obnoxious assholes, the non-human animals—much more in tune with the senses—have to live in terror. Don’t believe it? Just look at your family pet.

    And all so we can relive a war over and over. But the one good thing about war: while humans are busy fighting with each other each other, they don’t have as much time to torment the wildlife. Also, from the scavengers’ perspective, there’s sometimes a lot of fresh carrion left on the battlefield.”

    • Louise Kane says:

      My GSD/Akita baby turns into a crazed wild eyed monster when he hears fireworks. Instead of being afraid he seems to think of the noise as a direct threat to us and to him. He rears up barking, racing from one corner of the house to another, charging around. We have tried everything thunder shirts, conditioning with video and tapes, taking him to events, soothing music. If we happen to be outside, he rears up snarling at the sky like some cujo like apparition. This from my normally perfectly well behaved and calm buddy. The only think that remotely works is treats. Even then he gobbles the treats in between hysterial barking. Perhaps I should leave a smorgasbord on the table and see if that works!

      • Immer Treue says:


        Appears my lead in post was moderated and deleted. My GSD ended up doing quite well, didnt care for the aerial bombs going off, but survived. On the other hand, my brothers black lab spent a good part of the evening cowering under my nephew’s bed.

        • bret says:

          An interesting read.

          In some cases, the collars revealed some remarkable and weird stories. In the fall of 2006, White and his colleagues equipped a mountain goat with a GPS collar. The goat died during the winter and deep snow prevented biologists from retrieving the collar. The following summer, a black bear scavenged the goat and managed to “put on” the dead goat’s collar. Researchers then tracked the bear for more than a year as he crossed glaciers and ice fields, climbed ridges and descended into remote valleys.

          • SEAK Mossback says:

            It’s been fascinating watching the wildlife studies on different species in these drainages (where I’ve spent cumulatively close to a year and a half of my life over the past 32 years, but on salmon). Last October, Kevin White found another of his collared goats expired on a ridge top well north of the bay, and when he went in by helicopter to retrieve the collar, got some great footage of a wolverine desperately trying to tear and make off with a big chunk of goat, obviously concerned foremost that this was going to be the very last chance before the screaming gassin’ machine hovering just overhead took final possession. Hopefully, he’ll post it on the virtual viewing website that has other trailcam photos and video, much of it from the same drainage, including for example these shots of one large, obviously contented, recently-emerged (and still pretty fat!) brown bear with a moose carcass.


    • JEFF E says:

      ” But the one good thing about war: while humans are busy fighting with each other each other, they don’t have as much time to torment the wildlife”

      you have to be the all time most ignorant individual I have ever seen after sunnyJon and $3.
      As just a start research the on going nightmare in the Congo an mountain gorilla populations, not to mention human populations. Good-god do not ever let me engage you as a representative in anything that actually matters.

  35. Ida Lupine says:

    I think about this too – how our relentless activities, including the seemingly benign ones, appear to other life, especially birds (oh no, now what are they up to?). I think animals associate fireworks with hunting possibly?

    My cat who I’ve had for sixteen years seems to take her cue from us – loud noises such as thunderstorms and fireworks frightened her a little when she was a kitten and we’d reassure her, but since it doesn’t bother us, she doesn’t seem to mind anymore either.

    I hate the noise of the artificial modern world – motorcycles, lawnmowers, leaf blowers, endless road noise, the ‘home-improvement’ TV show mentality where bigger and louder is better, and it is increasing the more people there are. But, I adore fireworks and loud music, and I want to choose the noise I am exposed to.

    Fireworks are good fun. Hope everybody had a happy 4th!

  36. WM says:

    Wild pigs a national crisis!

    Finally this topic, which we have discussed under Ralph’s perceptive vigil, is getting some national attention. Even a little talk on the economics of this invasive species and unfortunately who caused it.

    Today Show:

    • cobackcountry says:


      The “pigs gone wild” issue is being studied and proposals abound. It would seem, to myself anyways, that it is a matter of economics. It hasn’t cost the right people enough money yet.

      We have seen that we can place a small bounty on an animal, and they are quickly diminished. Yet, we are not seeing much progress with feral pigs. They are not as sympathetic as horses, and are far more threatening to human welfare. Still, not many waves are being made.

      I would question if there is resistance to having snipers on private land? I have heard so many people saying they’d hunt them, no bounty required.

      However, we are now managing the efforts in a way that tries to ‘create jobs’. That is when management goes to shitaki mushrooms, or at least is a contributing factor. We sacrifice expedience for the sake of short term jobs. Or do we? Hmmm…I’d say that managing feral hogs for a job market would lead to dragging out the invasion for the sake of a handful of jobs.

      The hogs are a cancer on the habitat, they are darn mean and dangerous, and spread HMF (Cocksacki-virus) to livestock. Yet, we seem to seriously lack the vigor with which bison are pursued from the ag sector? Could it be that reality shows about hunting hogs have given them clout that bison lack? I don’t know. I just see a very slanted playing field.

      I did some research on feral swine for some public awareness pieces. The USDA via APHIS and the NWRC is working toward solutions.

      Ultimately, the swine issue will be up to southern people to get fed up with. It will take taxation and diligence….. one to provoke behavior, the other to stick to it.

      It is just a reminder of how hypocritical our system can be.

      Feral swine, feral horses, pythons, nutria….we have our hands full.

    • Ralph Maughan says:


      Thank you. This is fascinating stuff about Mr. Rockholm.

      • jon says:

        Your welcome Ralph.

      • WM says:

        Ralph, anyone?

        Interesting link. Forgive my ignorance, but who exactly is Steve Adler?

        Hopefully his statements and reproductions of correspondence/emails/conversations are true, accurate and may be verified, as he suggests.

        Wouldn’t it be interesting if the IRS were to look into Rockhead’s non-profit operation for a little audit. And, wouldn’t it be interesting if some who donated to Rockhead, based on certain (mis?)representations he made, asked for their money back, maybe even in a legal complaint?

        As previously noted, I don’t know who Steve Adler is, but there certainly is some history between Adler and Rockhead – see this link for some discussion by Rockhead about “death threats” allegedly attributed to a third party.

        You can’t make this stuff up, or can you? Geez.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I love the opening paragraph:

          If there was ever a doubt in citizens’ minds that laws are for the lowly subjects and the ruling elite get to exist above such laws, then perhaps what is going on in Idaho will shake you out of your lethargic trance and incite you to ask what in the world is going on.

          • Immer Treue says:

            That site is loaded with such pap! Once upon a time TR had a hunting/outdoors site. It has “evolved” into a closet racist, radical right wing, anti-wolf, anti-predator, holier than thou, propaganda rat nest of conspiracy theories supported by lint of biblical proportions.

            If one decides to visit, don’t stay long, wipe your feet, and wash your hands when leaving, and dwell not upon a return.

            • WM says:


              I guess this is the replacement for the bad bear blog (also a Remington creation, which it appears he has abandoned due to inappropriate conduct requiring blocking some comments). I only found the current site by doing a quick Google search using “Rockholm + Adler” and a couple other modifiers. After finding the article, I didn’t drill further into the site. I went back after your comment.

              It would appear your advices to steer clear of anything with the name Tom Remington are well justified. All these guys are nuts!

              • Immer Treue says:


                On those two sites, the only one with an original thought was TR. He’s articulate, well read, and appears to be a genuine craftsman and outdoorsman. But both sites turned into, “did you hear what was said on TWN”. Everyone over here, including you, have been lambasted. Then TM panders to the three or four that have hijacked his blogs. I use to go there and attempt to post, but even when dialogue was established, someone came in and turnedit into a bitch match. I’ve erased it from my book Marks and no longer peruse the site(s). There exists better things to do with one’s time. I have no more to say on that issue.

                That’s why when TWN turns onto the anti-hunting ramp, I get vertigo. There are some here who pine for the old posters, yet the discussion is at times informative, and intelligent. Much positive “stuff” goes on here, and important issues are usually well documented and certain posters and exchanges are must reads. Despite what is said at times, I doubt there is a better wildlife blog out there than TWN.

            • JEFF E says:

              I remember too when that was a true hunting/wildlife blog of better quality than most. That was a number of years ago and has since degenerated into little more than a platform for world conspiracy central. The absolute dumbass thing about it all is that that site has been totally supplanted by one individual, who a few years ago publicly accused a cop in his own hometown of being someone else, after publicly admitting to stalking him and his family, talking pictures, which then, to my understanding, went right up to the state government. When it was proven to be an absolute case of slander, this individual was not even man enough to stand up and apologize, as I understand it. This is the same individual that claims worldwide centuries old knowledge of all things, that could not find his ass with both hands if he had his lips planted on it.

              So all things considered, Rockholm is probably one of the smartest of the bunch.

              • Immer Treue says:

                All things considered perhaps, yet listening to jon’s post, the drama queen goes on about the “docile native wolf”, and the giant aggressive “Yukon wolf”…it’s mind addling how childish he sounds. Remember, Yellowstone is dead.

              • JEFF E says:

                and this from someone that has been “transplanted” into Idaho.

                “By gum and by golly I knows everthing and if youse and all yer concernd frnds will jus contribet a measealy Grant ever couple weeks, why I”ll fight the good fight. I’ll even take extended euoropean vacations so’s I can see the root o the problem.”

              • jon says:

                People on here right now are being slandered by someone on the tom remington blog.

              • jon says:

                Most of the people who post on the BBB blog are radical extremists. Rockholm from what I was told is originally from Washington State or California and transplanted himself to Idaho. Rockholm says he was almost killed by a pack of wolves in Montana. He also claims that 90% of the elk in Idaho are gone.

              • Immer Treue says:

                ” Rockholm says he was almost killed by a pack of wolves in Montana. He also claims that 90% of the elk in Idaho are gone.”


              • Immer Treue says:

                One more thing to say on this topic, and I am done.

                ” Rockholm says he was almost killed by a pack of wolves in Montana.”

                We have talked about this before.
                Why is it these armed to the teeth pansy asses and their associates are the only ones having these near death experiences with wolves? And NO,they are NOT the only ones going off into the woods.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Good digging! Exposing the drama queen and some of his cohorts for the frauds and windbags they are is important.

      • JEFF E says:

        turns out to be what I thought it would be; an attempt to get rich by getting donations from the rubes. Probably tried the playbook of Ron G. and “Chicken little” Fanning.Did not work so well for them either.
        As for “little” Barry Coe; a more productive conversation could be had with a tree stump.

        • CodyCoyote says:

          What an incredible takedown.

          When the other Idaho sportsmen turn their guns on you point blank , surrender and capitulation might be wise. Of course Rockholm will go on being Rockholm…

          … if he dare show his face , pollute his own website , and run his mouth in public ever again.

          I have no idea who Steve Alder is, but he deserves a collective thank you for shining the bright white light into such a dark place for us , regardless of your wolf persuasion.

          Coming on the revelations of Ryan Benson’s skullduggery in Utah over his ” misapplication” of state money that was misappropriated from the get-go , this has been a very sunny week for wildlife advocacy.

          • jon says:


            Rockholm talking about the native wolves.

            • SEAK Mossback says:

              Wow, that’s quite a dissertation. The original Idaho wolf was a very “coyote-like” “docile” animal that did not “thrill kill”. The nearly 100 native wolves in Idaho before the “Yukon wolves” were so incredibly docile that hardly anyone knew they were there. They ate mostly dead things but might have a chance at a deer or young cow elk (compared with the super-lethal Yukon killers that eat adult grizzly bears).

              What do you think motivated these Yukon killers to migrate at least 600 miles from the SE Yukon to central Alberta (where a handful were captured for transplant to the US NRM region) but to venture no further southward for millennia, not even another 300 miles to northern Idaho and Montana? Why on earth would they let those dainty, docile native wolves have all that vulnerable game to themselves for all that time (when individual young Alaska/Yukon wolves today commonly disperse hundreds of miles looking for just such opportunity)?

              How do true believers work all this out in their brains? Or do they?

              Unfortunately, BS repeatedly repeated in an inflating echo chamber creeps inevitably into the mainstream, including the reading rack in a local dentists office where the current issue of Fur-Fish-Game parrots dual-lethality yet again in an article on wolf hunting by a long-time, well-traveled outdoor writer (Judd Cooney) who should (maybe does?) know better. But by now, the narrative has likely already been heard or read by nearly all readers, leaving little risk of being called to question while giving the article a sense of mission, i.e. an appeal to public service in helping control a destructive exotic.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Unfortunately Little Red Riding Hood continues to evolve and in her present form is alive, ridiculous, and well.

  37. Ida Lupine says:

    Yes. I don’t know about those other blogs, and would have no reason to check them out. I’m on this one enough as it is, I don’t have time for anything else.

    I found this one through searching for wolf delisting info and my love for the West, and I’m so happy I did. I agree with Immer that there is nothing better out there for wildlife information. There are like-minded people here, and those who have taught me a thing or to about what I didn’t know.

    Have a good night everyone,

    • Immer Treue says:

      ” We don’t know the ages of the wolves killed or how the hunting/trapping season affected pack dynamics. Did depredations increase because of pack disruption? ”

      I continue to await this information in MN.

      Plus with an estimate of 100 SSS in Vicksconsin and up to 400 in MN, that’s pushing 500 illegally killed wolves or a possible 13% illegal take in the two states. So much for “valued” wildlife.

  38. Immer Treue says:

    Though a bit old, interesting editorials from Minnesota on its wolf hunting/trapping seasons. Their are a number of sub stories and some well written comments. If you have time.

  39. JEFF E says:

    this is way past due. Maybe Utah will develop the courage to take this as a stepping stone and start looking at Don “the pissant” Peavey

    • JEFF E says:


    • Immer Treue says:

      Jeff E

      But wouldn’t that be another government intrusion into a “conservative” organization? Sarcasm intended.

      • JEFF E says:

        more likly the legislature is giving peay a subtle hint that it is time to start spreading some campaign donations around.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Wolves were exterminated from Utah by 1930, but they are expected to return should the populations in the Northern Rockies continue to expand into their historic range to the south.

      I see they conveniently left out what would happen to any wolf after it arrives in Utah.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Wow! Really?

      • Ida Lupine says:

        The changes include a bag limit of just one wolf per person in areas adjacent to the park and an increase in the area where quotas will apply.

        Sigh. I shouldn’t have gotten my hopes up before reading. I also don’t understand what is wrong with treating Yellowstone wolves differently than other animals. They are different because they are part of studies, and protected by the park.

    • Immer Treue says:

      This quote says it all.

      “Once those wolves come into Montana, they become Montana wildlife and we need to manage them,” Vermillion said.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Immer they also said they received 25,000 comments and that they can’t please everybody. What a ridiculous statement. I’m betting from what I have read in the past a good many are very against the increased hunting. If anyone has a file of the comments and has read them I’d be interested in a summary. Montana’s idea of a summary, in the past has been to categorize the types of comments they received no details and no statistical info.

        • jon says:

          What is the point in having a comment period if you are going to ignore the majority? The majority of people who commented on the upcoming Montana wolf hunting season were against it, yet FWP listens to the minority. The majority of people who sent in comments regarding federal wolf delisting were against it as well overwhelmingly. FWP should just do away with the comment periods since they have shown numerous times they only care what the anti-wolf minority want and think and they have already made their minds up before the comment period even starts.

      • Louise Kane says:

        substitute kill for manage in your quote and there is a great deal more truth in that statement.

        • SaveBears says:

          When the new governor was elected, I knew that major changes were ahead for FWP, FWP could really care less what the park service has to say when it comes to wildlife management in the state of Montana.

          Ida, as far as research animal, there are thousands of those roaming the hills in Montana, it seems that I am seeing collared animals all the time here in Montana and I am sure it is the same in Wyoming and Idaho.

          This is a perfect example of the saying “We are studying them to DEATH”

        • Immer Treue says:

          Manage/kill was the Cognitive connection.

          • jon says:

            Doesn’t matter if you call it harvesting or managing, in the end, it’s still killing.

        • jon says:

          makes you sick to your stomach seeing the FWP say them wolves need to be killed. FWP is a wildlife killing agency that only cares about making money off of people who want to kill wildlife. Nothing more and nothing less.

          • SaveBears says:

            You are exactly right jon, the main focus of FWP is hunters and fisher persons. This is the way the agency was set up and that is why it is funded by hunters and fishermen.

            • jon says:

              That focus is wrong. It will come back to bite them in the you know what eventually. To cater to a minority and ignore the rest of the people is wrong.

              • SaveBears says:


                That has been the American Way of life since day one, and I don’t see it changing anytime soon. Montana has told everybody, they are going to manage what is in Montana, no matter what anyone outside the state says.

                It won’t change during your or my lifetime.

              • Rancher Bob says:

                There you go again claiming to be part of some majority, that is until I call you on the fact. Your Yellowstone wolf watchers can’t even contribute 1% to Montana’s tourism economy. Seems you got your facts wrong, seems your the minority.

  40. cobackcountry says:

    We require pet owners all over the country to micro-chip their dogs. license them, and clean up their poo from public places or face fines.

    I propose we do the same with public land grazed animals…chip, track, and monitor. If their owners don’t clean up their crap, fine them.

    Sorry, I am dreaming. But hey, we could collar the cows and study how their presence is effecting native species? Turn-about is fair play, no?

  41. Leslie says:

    Grizzly bear counts may be flawed and bears are actually in decline study shows.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Interesting deduction. In fairness, it was not huntersthat knocked bear population into the 200’s but park rangers after dumps were closed down, despite Craidshead brother’s warnings.

      And,I really do wish folks would stop using the word decimate.

      • SAP says:

        Because deci mate means “kill every tenth one,” literally?

        • Immer Treue says:

          Yep. It is an over and misplaced use of the word. Drives me nuts, just like the use of the word anyways. Anyway will suffice.

  42. Eric T. says:

    pretty intense read re: wolf encounter by bicyclist on ALCAN highway:

    • timz says:

      Dear Penthouse Forum,
      I was walking….

    • Elk275 says:

      My question is why this can not happen. Most of the wolves that I have seen in my life were in the same general vicinity either west or east of Watson Lake by 100 miles (I have driven the highway 17 times). I believe this is true incident. People who love wolves think that they can do no wrong. Sad

      • Immer Treue says:


        I’m sure it can happen. I’ve had dogs come after me when I have been running and cycling. Not a good feeling, in particular on a bike. Wolfs just a big dog. If story is true, what’s the big deal? Was the wolf looking for a meal, was it upset, was it playing?

        That said, only encounter I’ve had with a wolf while cycling, the wolf ran into the woods when it realized I was close.

      • timz says:

        This story gets me humming the old George Strait tune, “I got some ocean front property in Arizona..”

      • timz says:

        “I believe this is true incident. People who love wolves think that they can do no wrong. Sad”
        What’s sad is people like you buying into this bullshit. Same as every other “aggreesive wolf attack” we read about. No witnesses, no pics, etc. A a wolf can take down a 700 bull elk running at full speed but not a 180 man on a bike. Still humming that George Strait song.

        • Elk275 says:

          “What’s sad is people like you buying into this bullshit”

          It is people like you by into this bullshit too. I have no reason not to believe the this person. There were pictures from the incident in Banff. There are to any people who think a wolf can do no harm to a human. Attacks are very rare but they have happens and will happen again.

          I have been on that highway many times. We all love the stories of animals getting caught on remote cameras doing things that we never thought possible or an animal being where it shouldn’t be. Who would have ever thought that a black bear eating on a collared goat could get that collar caught on his neck and wear it for over one year.

          Strange things happen in the land of the Midnight Sun.

          • timz says:

            In the accounts I read and from the pictures that wolf chasing the motorcyle never showed any real aggression. So let’s change the motorcycle to a bike and the wolf to one attacking, now we got a story.

        • WM says:

          timz says: ++A a wolf can take down a 700 bull elk running at full speed ++

          Now that could be the real bullshit statement. A (as in one) wolf. Uh, well …OK. I buy part of the story if it is a rutted out bull, running on empty and near starving, but even then one wolf would likely need a couple helpers.

          I am guessing nipping on the biker’s tent bag or panniers, or trying to grab a spoke might not be quite like a hamstring?

          AND, it appears the story will be verified as there is an update to the original article:
          ++ UPDATE, July 10, 2:10 p.m. — I’ve interviewed one of of the motorist heroes who drove the wolf away from Hollan’s bike and will be posting her account tonight. — RL ++

          On the other hand, since the rider is from Sandpoint, ID (clearly the land of exaggeration) I am surprised nobody discounted the story from that angle, yet.

          • timz says:

            Again WM, “aka the know it all” proves he’s just another closet wolf-hatin ignoramous. I just watched a video of a lone wolf taking down what looked like a perfectly healthy elk, well beyond the size of a man on a bike.

            • WM says:

              I just want to know if the video you watched was only one wolfr and a jhealthy “700 pound bull running at full speed.” You are so full of horse pucky (or whatever it is that gets you constipated), you need another trip to Jellystone so you can chill out (or remove the obstruction -perhaps your head- that gets you wound up and cranky).

              • timz says:

                Even a pseudo-intellectual such as yourself should be able to manage google to search for a video.

    • Immer Treue says:


      Been checking MN DNR site for this daily. You beat me to it. I beg to differ with rationale of fewer deer for wolves to eat.

      The MN wolf season was poorly Planned. Wolf hunting occurred in areas where wolves were not causing problems (NE zone). Poaching really not transparently addressed. I had wolves around all Fall and Winter, then none. Deer starving and weak. My old dog could find them, how come the wolves couldn’t.

      Again, I’ve got no problems with wolf management. But if deer are starving, there too many deer, and not enough wolves. Same thing with moose, as one of my friends (who is an avid hunter) has said, “if there are so many GD wolves, how come that can’t find all the moose stumbling around with brain worm?”

      Apparently the MN wolf population WAS very stable. Not any more.

    • SAP says:

      From the editorial: “Why not apply, say, a nominal lodging tax toward Game and Fish so wildlife watchers, not just sportsmen, help foot the bill?”

      • Immer Treue says:

        Many of us have suggested this in the past, only to have been laughed at and told, just because your contributing, doesn’t give you the leverage to weigh in on the decision making process. Oh, but $$$ does talk.

        • SaveBears says:

          As I have said many times in the past, it is going to take direct purchase, like hunters do with hunting license and tags. See hunters buy tags and licenses in addition to the other taxes.

        • jon says:

          Money does not talk. Do you think if non-hunters started contributing that FWP would listen to them? Non-hunters will continue to be ignored by FWP no matter how much money they may contribute. I heard the FWP commissioner say that non-hunters should buy wolf tags to contribute. The thing is non-hunters who are supportive of wolves are not going to pay to support wildlife killing and rightfully so. I think as the years go in Montana, there will be less and less hunters and FWP will have no choice, but to listen to non-hunting conservationists. You got people like sb saying that the wildlife in Montana belongs to all Montanans, but you have the FWP only listening to hunters and ignoring anyone else who isn’t a hunter or rancher. Something is very wrong with this picture.

          • Immer Treue says:


            “Money does not talk. Do you think if non-hunters started contributing that FWP would listen to them?”

            Something upon which I will be working in MN. A united coalition must be formed, with a continuing $ base, completely unlike outfits like DOW. The onus of the government paying for depredations and trapping of problem wolves, as well as adding to the DNR coffers must be put on the backs of those who advocate for wolves. In exchange, we get a say in wolf conservation.

          • rork says:

            In my state I want taxpayer money (the “general fund” here) to fund our Department of Natural Resources more. Lots more. Perhaps even better: an extra $5/year for vehicle registration for every vehicle, and have state lands be free for everyone (never check for a permit again, ever, and tell surprised tourists “you’re welcome”). Extra money could be used to make it more attractive too (to tourists), which is not a crazy subsidy in pure Michigan. In such situations, all voters have skin in the game and can speak a bit louder.

    • Nancy says:

      Hey Salle! Glad you’re back 🙂 🙂

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Thank God for him.

      Hi Salle! Good to see you.

      • Harley says:

        Salle! Wondered where you’d gotten to! I don’t hang around too often, just too darn busy but I’m glad to see you back!

    • Louise Kane says:

      yes its good to hear your voice out there Salle

    • Salle says:

      Hi everybody! I needed a break from it all and then I got really busy. I spend a lot of time looking at a computer screen at work s I don’t look at mine much when I get home.

      I got that story from an email from Carter so I thought I would post it.

      Guess I’ll have to make an appearance once in a while.

      My awful news of the day, today, is that a young lady – daughter of a business owner in West – was mauled by otters while tubing near the US191/ Madison River bridge yesterday. Sounds like it was pretty bad. Those otters have attacked others in the past…

  43. jon says:

    The DNR estimates that 2600 wolf pups were born this spring? That’s BS. It’s a guessing game and nothing more.

    • Immer Treue says:


      I also believe this number is on the high side. I don’ believe there are many wolves having more than six pups per litter, and there are probably many with fewer than six. Early pup mortality is also not figured in. Putting a number like 2600 pups is disengenuous. Anti wolf folks just say, “see, they breed like rats and this is why we need to hunt them, and it placates prowolf folks who take it as wolves will easily be able to make up their losses.

      Oh, did you catch the word “robust” in description of the wolf population? Where have we heard that before?

  44. Immer Treue says:

    Complete breakdown of 2012 Minnesota wolf hunting/trapping seasons. Includes how take was made, genders, and age distribution. Over 50% of take was in age groups 0-1 year old.

    • Rancher Bob says:

      Looks a lot like Montana’s results, was interesting to see how many were taken on private land.

      • Immer Treue says:


        Those pie charts are a bit misleading. In the East Central zone, almost all private only 18 wolves were taken. The West Central almost 50% private, with farms and ranches the largest take occurred. The North East, where I reside is almost all public lands, no livestock or farms to speak of, Superior National Forest and the BWCA. I do not understand the rational for hunting and trapping in this zone.

        • Louise Kane says:

          what rationale is there for hunting or trapping wolves in any zone, Immer? A prescribed legal method to klll “problem” wolves was always available. Public hunting of wolves destabilizes the packs and as you suggested this wolf season created a wolf population that is no longer stable.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            So adult men are running around in the woods killing juvenile wolves? And now have destabilized the wolf population? Did we need a rocket scientist to establish that fact? What a freaking mess. 🙁

            • Immer Treue says:

              Louise and Ida,

              Don’t mean to split hairs or recant. The MN wolf population was fairly stable in regard to total numbers over the years. Instability? Will bE interesting to see what happens. This is not to be confused with pack stability, as was predicted, the majority of wolves taken were young wolves. But, with average pack size down over wide areas, another question enters picture, will this possibly be a variable that will increase pup mortality rates? Dispersing wolves starting their own “pack” might negate this question. Time will tell. One reason I support a moratorium on a general wolf season. Wait, see what happens, collect data and adjust accordingly.

              • jon says:

                I’m listening to the Montana fish and wild parks commission right now. The majority of people who have spoke are against the wolf hunt. About the Minnesota wolf hunt, the DNR hinted that the quota of wolves being killed would be lower this upcoming season. We’ll see what happens. There is going to be a lot of people pissed off if more yellowstone wolves are killed. The people who kill yellowstone wolves should be exposed.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                Yes, obviously I have no background in wolf biology, but it does make me wonder too about pack stability and pup mortality. Thanks!

                It sounds like the Yellowstone population is having difficulties too. All in the name of fun, fun, fun and recreation for the sportsmen. I still think targeting park wolves, a high quota at the Gardiner boundary are terribly unethical, although legal, which doesn’t always have anything to do with ethics.

              • save bears says:

                A hi quota?

            • Rancher Bob says:

              “adult men” doing a little stereotyping are we.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                I don’t think so. I think for the most part it is the domain of adult men. I don’t have the statistics.

          • Immer Treue says:


            The ranching lobby lead by a fellow named Dale Lueck was very demonstrative. We heard all the same BS.
            1) The wolves are killing all the deer. No, this false, winter is the big killer of deer, and the wolves can’t find them prior to the deer starving, in particular if the wolves are dead.
            2) ranchers wanted opportunity to protect livestock. Couldn’t do it when wolves were listed. Then it morphed into do you expect us to stay up all night…
            3) believe it or not, we had the kids at bus stop argument.
            4) actuall had politician, don’t recall his name at this moment, other than I believe he is legally blind, suggested aerial hunting
            5) many folks just wanted ability to protect pets, but we’re then abhorred at breadth and depth of the season.
            6) political pressure applied by Franken, and Klobuchar.

            There are more. Thing is, most stakeholders had no disagreement with way things were handled in past in regard to trapping wolves guilty of depredations. Number has been over 200 annually for a while. Add the up to 400 estimated anually poached, perhaps as many as 20% of MN wolves were killed prior to the hunting seasons. Add in another 400…

        • Rancher Bob says:

          Question what other animals in your area do you not understand the rational for hunting and trapping? Seems to be a bit of pick and choose management.
          Second item lets state for the record that the result of your late winter storm would have had the same result, no matter what deer or wolf populations would have been before the storm. Even if you had half the deer population and twice the wolf population the storm covered the deer’s food supply for a long period, the result was deer starved. That starving had little to do with population numbers. As for the moose well you’ll have to answer that question.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Rancher Bob,

            No pick and choose at all. I’m dead set against trapping, period. So other than “problem” wildlife, there is no inconsistency.

            Next, if you don’t eat it, don’t kill it, applies to all mammals. I am opposed to killing something just to stuff it or hang it on the wall. Plus there are enough quality wool and synthetic cold weather gear out there that supplants any need for fur clothing.

            No reason to kill pine martin, fishers, otter, beaver, muskrat, etc. So no, I’m not picking and choosing at all.

            Back to my original point, with no real danger to livestock, or people (ok, the occasional dog) I do not understand the rationale for hunting and trapping wolves in MN’s northeast zone.

            Point two. Winter is the big killer of deer, not wolves. The wolves that habituated my small piece of land and abutting county land made it through the hunting seasons. I have them on a trail camera. I have seen no sign of them since February, and I have had deer too weak to run away from an old dog. If I find out someone’s poaching, I will turn their ass in, no matter how difficult that is bound to make my life. That’s what that comment was about.

            Moose. Speaking with DNR agents, they are finding otherwise healthy looking adult moose dead. Clear cutting. Fought deer up here in prolific numbers. The wolves aren’t giving the moose brainworm.

            All meant in a friendly tone. No, I’m not picking and choosing, but in my minds eye, rather consistent.

            • Rancher Bob says:

              I agree very consistent, so maybe you can help me with a question from your point at least.
              Pro-wolfers revel in the fact that wolves provide carrion for scavengers, even list dead animals increasing soil nutrients as a benefit wolves provide. I’ve watched eagles and a host of other scavengers enjoying a dead wolf even dead coyotes.
              At what point does carrion provided by wolves differ from carrion provided by man?

              • Louise Kane says:


                lazy ass wolf hating flat top ranchers having more wolves killed, including a pup for supposed depredations

              • Immer Treue says:


                “At what point does carrion provided by wolves differ from carrion provided by man?”

                I dunno, but man sure supplies a whole lot of it with: road kill; gut piles; wounded animals that wander off to die; abandoned pets; carnage of war; terrorism; SSS; vaporizing prairie dog colonies; not checking traps and snares… I’m sure others can add ample more examples of man providing carrion, yet all this does is show how barbaric man can be compared to the wolf. Sure you want to make that comparison?

              • Rancher Bob says:

                I’m well aware that man is the most evil animal.
                Thought was that bodies of animals trapped and not eaten by man make it back into nature as carrion. Scavengers make use of that carrion, nature doesn’t waste much, so whats the difference between wolf made carrion and man made carrion? At least as far as nature is concerned.

              • Immer Treue says:


                Nature doesn’t care at all, but still, is that a comparison you really want to make?

              • JBurnham says:

                Rancher Bob asks: “At what point does carrion provided by wolves differ from carrion provided by man?”

                One study finds differences in where and when the carcasses are deposited.

                Abstract. Mechanistic links between top terrestrial predators and biogeochemical
                processes remain poorly understood. Here we demonstrate that large carnivores configure
                landscape heterogeneity through prey carcass distribution. A 50-year record composed of
                .3600 moose carcasses from Isle Royale National Park, Michigan, USA, showed that wolves
                modulate heterogeneity in soil nutrients, soil microbes, and plant quality by clustering prey
                carcasses over space. Despite being well utilized by predators, moose carcasses resulted in
                elevated soil macronutrients and microbial biomass, shifts in soil microbial composition, and
                elevated leaf nitrogen for at least 2–3 years at kill sites. Wolf-killed moose were deposited in
                some regions of the study landscape at up to 123 the rate of deposition in other regions.
                Carcass density also varied temporally, changing as much as 19-fold in some locations during
                the 50-year study period. This variation arises, in part, directly from variation in wolf hunting
                behavior. This study identifies a top terrestrial predator as a mechanism generating landscape
                heterogeneity, demonstrating reciprocal links between large carnivore behavior and ecosystem


              • Rancher Bob says:

                I wouldn’t have asked the question if I didn’t want to make that comparison. I’m responsible for my share of death both man and beast caused by all different forms. Death has negative and positive effects.
                I understand many of the reasons you dislike killing of wolves in your area. Yet like a wolf killed animal benefits scavengers so does the body of a dead wolf benefit scavengers. Man doesn’t have to eat what he kills in order for nature to benefit from that death or suffer from that death. Granted there are way too damn many humans on this rock but either we are part of nature or nature is doomed. Maybe the comparison would be better if made in my part of the world, as long as the carrion is part of a healthy population, how does it differ?

              • JB says:

                “… but either we are part of nature or nature is doomed.”

                I disagree. Nature won’t even bat an eyelash when we ruin the world for ourselves. She’ll go right on like nothing happened. Witness what’s happened in the region around Chernobyl.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Rancher Bob,

                “. Yet like a wolf killed animal benefits scavengers so does the body of a dead wolf benefit scavengers.”

                Thing is, a wolf is always
                (sooner or later), going to die, and scavengers from bears, ravens, magpies, gray jays, chickadees on down to bacteria will benefit. We don’t “have” to kill it.

                We, on the other hand are put in metal boxes set inside concrete vaults. No dirt and worms for us. We have taken ourselves out of nature. Even cremation, we escape the scavenger pathway.

                So if we don’t play game, why kill any predator that doesn’t cause trouble, and is just getting on with it’s own life, until it is scavenger salad?

      • Louise Kane says:

        Outrageous to see how many were “taken” on public land

        • SaveBears says:

          Louise, does that mean all of them can be taken on private land? You need to realize, wolves are going to be taken, where would be the right place to take them?

    • Louise Kane says:

      This report makes my blood boil
      snares 58% of late harvest
      0-1 year olds making up the majority of the kill
      killing in areas where there are no depredations

      snaring and trapping wolves is unconscionable
      Most of these are pups just starting their lives, most not even capable of hunting or killing cattle or anything else for that matter

      a sick and twisted “sport”
      this is tragic and to see that absurd inhumane term harvest used to describe killing animals with such developed social structures…makes me very angry

      • Ida Lupine says:

        The worst thing is the myth of hunter’s ethics.

        • topher says:

          It’s easy to call ethical hunters mythical when you don’t know anything about hunting or hunters. Every person I hunt with has a strong hunting ethic. We go beyond what the law requires to ensure we are acting ethically when we hunt any species. Every year I see hunters acting unethically and it’s unfortunate that the slobs tend to be the most visible and the most vocal,but just because you don’t see ethical hunters doesn’t mean they aren’t there. We are often far from the road and far from other hunters where we can have a more enjoyable hunt without being interrupted by the masses. No-one I know wants to shoot an animal that has been run ragged through the hills with its tongue hanging out. I assure you it’s easy to find ethical sportsman, but first you have to look

          • Ida Lupine says:

            It isn’t an indictment of all hunters to call out the slobs. Hunting baby wolves, snaring, hounding. They need to be called out, and for some reason the government thinks all of it is acceptable, and trashes petitions.

    • ma'iingan says:

      Wisconsin’s age-at-harvest data was significantly different, but it’s not an apples to apples comparison. Yearlings and pups made up 75% of the total, and two-year-olds accounted for another 17% – animals in their prime years of 3-6 accounted for less than 5%. Surprisingly, almost 2% of the total consisted of nine-year-old animals.

      This distribution follows mortality from other causes very closely, so it tells us that a significant portion of the harvest mortality was compensatory, and that the percentage of breeding females in the harvest was quite low.

      I haven’t seen placental scar data yet.

  45. Mark L says:

    I think that was a theoretical max, not a mean (or average).

  46. jon says:

    “Joan Hurlock was raked over the coals when Idaho Gov. Butch Otter nominated her for a position on the Idaho Fish and Game Commission earlier this year. She did not get that appointment, supposedly because she wasn’t enough of a hunter and didn’t have the right credentials.

    What exactly are the credentials of the lumber company owner and the Magic Valley aviation company executive who were just appointed to the commission? It seems to successfully become a member of the Idaho Fish and Game Commission, you just need to have an irrational fear and hatred of wolves and advocate to see them eliminated in any indiscriminate and inhumane way possible.”

  47. SaveBears says:

    Well, Just heard on the news, FWP did not give at all on the proposed seasons and they have passed as is, despite testimony, now the news stated, that there were the same % of people testifying for as there were against and in absence of a strong majority against, they felt no reason to change anything. So the quota’s will stand as proposed.

  48. Rancher Bob says:

    As stated by Saves bears Montana approves new wolf hunting rules.

  49. Ida Lupine says:

    “I want to specifically put people on notice that at that meeting we may decide to summarily close some areas under Montana’s wildlife management plan if there are concerns for the wolf population in a district,” Vermillion said.

  50. rork says:

    A wolf scientist talks about supplementing Isle Royale’s wolves. Sadly 30 minutes long and no transcript I think. Perhaps the best summary I’ve heard, though I have several complaints.
    At least 3 times his main point is “health” of the ecosystem, but I don’t know what units that is measured in, except perhaps energy flux. He sure never said how to measure health. He fails to point out his conflict of interest – no wolves, no wolf work for him there, only boring moose/plant interactions. The suggestion that wolf experts should decide is a bit horrifying to someone of my background: they should all be recused. He didn’t give the most powerful arguments for just letting it ride rather than manipulating it to be an (uncontrolled) experiment, and it’s not like he doesn’t know them. It would be pretty cool to see what happens if the wolves are gone too: how fast do we get midget moose or divergence of plant genes from those of the mainland? Anyway, he was clearly being an advocate.
    However, I do think manipulating it to be something of a zoo, in contradiction to the prime directive, is acceptable, and he said that fairly well, though I think I and other could have said it even better – it’s a unique laboratory. Some of the people I admire here eloquently point out that pure ideology is often suboptimal, and compromise is often better. The island is not as good a lab as bigger places would be (eg. spots in Canada or Alaska), and I always hate it when people overgeneralize findings made there. Makes me wish we could buy out the hunting (and grazing) rights for millions of acres of ID, MO, WY, and maybe north east WA, from the states. Let some people live there still, but with some restrictions.

    I am drooling thinking that one of the experts, who think of these things far more than I ever will, might give their thoughts at some length.

  51. WM says:

    Update to the wolf chasing the bicyclist on the AL-CAN highway:

    {I can’t wait for timz’s smartass retort]

    • Rancher Bob says:

      I also can’t wait for the “wolves would never” comments.
      The next article we get to read will be Carter N telling us how bikers should be using fladry and flashing lights to protect them self from wolves.
      He has never felt threatened by wolves, after all he’s Carter Neimeyer.

      • Immer Treue says:


        Have you ever felt threatened by wolves?

        • Rancher Bob says:

          No, I have never felt threatened by wolves, and I will never say that it won’t happen.
          Then how often am I out and about that the odds are not in my favor.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Rancher Bob,

            “Then how often am I out and about that the odds are not in my favor.”

            A point I have often made in regard to wolves, and situations I have experienced. Not impossible, but so unlikely.

    • Elk275 says:

      Until yesterday,I never thought that otters were man eaters but there are several otters in the Madison River that like to chew on humans.

      • Nancy says:

        🙂 Defending young or territory maybe Elk? Or maybe the river’s getting to crowded?

        After reading the second account I think we possibly could all agree that this recent wolf incident was one of those “rare exceptions to the rule” when it comes to how wildlife acts or reacts.

        How many hundreds of thousands of bicyclists (had close to 500 bicyclists, in one day, pass by my cabin, a couple of weeks ago – Ratpod) and motorcyclists, not to mention hitchhikers (the Rainbow crowd had a few 🙂 are on the roads and highways, every year (since wolves were re-introduced over 15 years ago in this part of the country) and all seemed to have made it thru wilderness areas, without being attacked.

        Rabies comes to mind…or habituated? (wow, really enjoyed those weinies you tossed to me at the campground) Or even a hybrid wolf dumped (a dated article)

        Honestly? Living in “wolf country” I’d be a hell of a lot more worried about this kind of situation, than I would be about a wolf attack:

        • Elk275 says:

          Sixty miles west of Watson Lake, YK. A wolf hybrid, I doubt it, as wolves would have killed it immediately. It was a wolf. I know wolves do not killed humans and wolves do not attack humans. Remember two things: all horses/mules buck, bite and kick there are animals. All wolves have the capacity to bite, eat you and kill you. In really it is very rare but I would never let my guard completely.

          When a horseman let his guard down accidents happen, it is the same with any animal.

          • Nancy says:

            Seriously Elk?

            Ohhhhhhhhh, say can you see………. one of a few “kennels” in Washington state, popping out wolf hybrids puppies to ignorant consumers who have no idea what they’re in for when that cute little hybrid grows up:


            • Nancy says:

              Interesting to note though this “kennel” is in North Carolina but caters to:

              “We are Everywhere
              Whether you live near the cities of Seattle, Spokane, Tacoma, Vancouver or any rural area in Washington, chances are you will find a Wolf Hybrid that came from us”

              • Nancy says:

                AND if you dig alittle deeper into the site like under the sideline of “why choose us?” You are given information about their passion for raising Tamaskans – a nordic sledding dog (hmm) Which has what to do with wolf hybrids? Or is it just a way around peddling wolf hybrids 🙂

            • Immer Treue says:


              I’m pretty sure North Carolina State (The Wolfpack)uses a Tamaskan(s) as their mascot. Learned this a few years back when it was posted somewhere that someone had poisoned the dog.

              • Nancy says:

                Thnaks Immer. I’d never heard of this breed of dog and according to some of the comments on this facebook site:


                There seems to be some controversy surrounding the breed and the “some” (kennels in for the quick buck) who are attempting to pass them off as wolf hybirds.

                Its kind of confusing to say the least. Couple of posts on this Facebook page that mention the poisoning of the Wolfpack’s mascot.

    • timz says:

      All those cellphones and not a single pic of the whole incident. This might be the funniest thing I’ve ever heard.

      “I thought it was odd until I saw the panicked look on the biker’s face – as though he was about to be eaten,” she said in a telephone interview”

      Is she sure it wasn’t Little Red Riding Hood?
      There is my smartass commment WM, although with your seemingly pea sized brain you probably won’t get it. Fuuny you buy into this hook line and sinker without a shred of real evidence but you call bullshit on my comment about a single wolf taking down an elk when there are mulitple videos out there showing such an event. Maybe I exaggerated the elk only weighed 500 lbs not 700, I didn’t see it on a scale. So for a half wit like you I’ll explain, if that did happen and that wolf really wanted that guy it would have taken him out easily. So get out your crayolas and write down these insructions — open your browser, and google lone wolf taking down elk, and then click on the links.

      • WM says:


        The story has to stand on its own. Hunger can be an incredible motivator for a wild animal. Cell phone photos or not, it seems like a plausible incident in my opinion, and it seems several people would have to conspire to tell it (including the rider’s companions and the part about the tent stakes). Possible, but improbable, I would suggest. Guess the article writer would have to judge the truth and veracity of sources.

        asn’t it just a couple years ago the Park Service had to kill a wolf that was chasing bikers/motorcyclists not far from Mammoth Hot Springs. We even talked about the incident here. There have been cougars that have attacked and even dislodged mountain bikers. Why not a wolf?

        As for your healthy 700 lb. bull elk at a full run being taken down by a lone wolf – glad you admitted the exaggeration on the size (and maybe condition). That’s about a 40 percent weight difference.

        And, for future consideration, you know, by suggesting a single wolf could, and apparently in your world regularly does, take down healthy large antlered elk, you discredit the wolf advocate myth that wolves only take the weak, injured, old (and, of cours the healthy young). So, be careful what you advocate. It might just come back to bite you in the backside. And, apparently you can direct us to videos to prove it! 😉 Do recall the simple math, that more wolves mean more dead elk, and they won’t all be the easy prey.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          The wolf’s tail posture and facial expression would suggest he or she isn’t in an attacking mode. I wonder if he has become habituated to humans. Again I say that encounters with wildlife in remote areas are to be expected.

          • Ida Lupine says:

            Here’s a bit from one of the comments, ironically posted by someone named ‘Reality22’.

            God clearly made this animal to keep game in check in the ABSENCE of man. If GOD wanted wolves around people he would have made them capable of living in harmony around people. Minnesota NOW kills almost 300 of the VERMIN every year for getting into trouble (depredation and habituation) . Certainly not an animal that lives in harmony with people.

            I guess he or she was told this by God personally? Wolves do live in harmony with nature and people generally, just not ranchers, hunting outfitters and energy companies. It is only our warped, one-way perceptions that see them as a threat because in the real world outside of our own perceptions and selfish desires, they are not. And why single out the wolf as the only predator who gets in our way? Totally irrational.

            Seeing wolves as a threat has no place in a modern world. The world has changed completely. These animals were put here long before we were, and it is arrogant to want to remove them simply because they are in the way of our activities. It is up to us to find a way to get along, as the so-called most intelligent life on earth, without using lethal methods.

            • Louise Kane says:

              The usual creepy comments. I wonder if the wolf was attracted to the bike like some dogs get annoyed by vacuum cleaners such as when they growl and snap at the vacuum. Its a weird thing but my dog was starting to develop a big hate for the vacuum until we put a stop to it with some firm corrections. It became obsessive as the wolf is behaving with the bike tire. and I have seen many dogs chase bikes.

              • Harley says:

                No matter what the reason that the wolf did what it did, it’s still a scary encounter.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                This account is quite a bit more toned down than the first account of the encounter. The photos don’t show an aggressive looking animal. Sure it’s scary, but no more scary than encountering a mountain lion, a grizzly, or a human killer. Because there is so much irrational hatred and exaggerated and made up stories and outright lies surrounding this animal, you can’t blame anyone for skepticism. The photos are not guaranteed to be legitimate.

              • Immer Treue says:


                “Sure it’s scary, but no more scary than encountering a mountain lion, a grizzly, or a human killer”

                Human killer?

                Huh? The only one that might do it irrationally.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                I should have said mugger, thief or killer of the human variety. Actually I’d be more afraid of them. I hate to say it, but this wolf doesn’t look that threatening at all. Are there pics of him tearing away at the bike? I didn’t see them.

              • WM says:


                Rationality or not on the part of the aggressor, from the “victim” or “almost victim” perspective there is need for protection or control to ensure an attack does not occur. This guy, IMHO, was lucky. Not sure why the bear spray did not deter.

                Hunger, which seems a likely from looking at the photo of what appears to be an older and underweight wolf, is probably the motivator. Mistaken prey, or harassment by a food conditioning and habituation are good alternative explanations, perhaps. I don’t think this guy would have become a statistic, but it seems likely he could have been injured had help not arrived. As it was, seems he had a bit of a bad day, but a great story to tell. Could have been worse for the wolf too. Everybody walked away alive.

                Lest we forget, wasn’t there some woman who allegedly got bit in the throat by a wolf in Manitoba a couple months back? Or are the perpetual nay sayers gonna call bullshit on that one too? Oh, I guess they did – witnesses and all to that one, too.

                Well, here is another motorist and a not too concerned wolf outside Calgary:


                Wonder how this encounter might have gone for a rider on a bicycle?

              • Ida Lupine says:

                WM, her ‘wolf’ she said was 6’3″ – so I had to wonder. There were other things she described that were questionable, and I think she wasn’t very credible for some other reason in her background?

              • Ida Lupine says:

                The highway wolf, said McDadi, could also simply be curious and drawn to moving vehicles.

                That’s what it looks like to me, from the pictures. He’s behaving like a dog. In reading this article, I was wondering if fencing could be put up for those who do not feel safe and are shocked to find wildlife in wild areas, and the article does mention it. It also does mention that people are feeding them. So this poor animal probably was expecting food.

              • Harley says:

                “Sure it’s scary, but no more scary than encountering a mountain lion, a grizzly, or a human killer.”

                I don’t remember saying it was more scary than any of these. Fear is fear in my book. I did not qualify it just because it was a wolf vs. something else. I have a problem when it seems as though excuses are being made for the behavior. Explaining it, sure, but excusing it? This was the sticking point for me when that woman was killed up in Alaska. I don’t understand why people can’t just agree that this particular animal is a problem and something needs to be done. If it’s such a rare thing, than taking care of that one animal that did such a rare thing should be the right thing to do. While people argue over why it happened, it runs the risk of something else happening. Take care of the problem and then find a way to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Defending only inflames those who aren’t so found of wolves to begin with.

                Man I hope that wasn’t long winded and made sense.

              • Immer Treue says:


                “Rationality or not on the part of the aggressor, from the “victim” or “almost victim” perspective there is need for protection or control to ensure an attack does not occur. This guy, IMHO, was lucky. Not sure why the bear spray did not deter.”

                Perhaps I should have put a smiley face or something in there because it was an attempt at (dark) humor with man’s propensity for mindless killing, and had NOTHING to do with the wolf bike incident.

                Manitoba. Not making life of this either, but wasn’t this the case of the woman leaving her car, walking toward the wolf, and attempting to feed it something? It’s a wild animal and carnivore to boot. The wolf grabbed her alright, but nothing would have happened if she had just stayed in her vehicle and left it alone, just like Zimmerman. Sorry, but I had to get that in there.

              • Immer Treue says:


                Most of the time I perceive you as a very open minded person, who is genuine, and not afraid to play devils advocate with almost any issue. This gives wolf advocates a sober alternative. But unless I am reading too much into this:
                “Well, here is another motorist and a not too concerned wolf outside Calgary:


                Wonder how this encounter might have gone for a rider on a bicycle?”

                Up here, most wolf observations by “common people” (nothing to do with the band Pulp) are from the road. From personal experience on a bicycle with a wolf on the road, and a large number of cyclist up here, after logging and gravel trucks, deer are the animal most feared while cycling.

              • Immer Treue says:


                “Take care of the problem and then find a way to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Defending only inflames those who aren’t so found of (fill in the blank)

                Oh if it were so easy, but there is always someone who will defend the problem, and there exist so many problems other than wolves. It’s just “easy” to kill “them”.

              • Jake says:

                I’d be interested in the sounds the movement of the bike and rider creates that only the wolf can hear.

              • WM says:


                Don’t read too much into the statement about the wolf outside Calgary. I was earlier posing a question, that could produce an interesting result, however (I also asked that question when the guy on the motorcycle was chased). And as to the video of the wolf taken by the trucker, it seems to beg the question again. At what point does a wolf decide a motorcycle/bicycle is prey or a curiosity to pursue. And, I think as Louise pointed out, there are those instances where a canid decides a bicycle, horse or car along the roadside, or even the occasional vacuum cleaner deserves chase or harassment, for reasons maybe only known to the individual canid itself (guess we better get Marc Bekoff in for consultation).

    • Mike says:

      You’re still trolling?

  52. Ida Lupine says:

    Nancy Campbell, Environment Yukon spokeswoman in Whitehorse, called the incident “a new one for us.”

    It does read like adventure fiction. Very vivid!

  53. WM says:

    Squaxin Island (WA) tribal elders and others concerned about young men harassing and killing swimming buck deer from canoe (outside tribal hunting season and unsanctioned method) all recorded on a video:

    [Disturbing video even as reported by Komo4 TV, though in a different time, maybe 75 years ago, probably an accepted practice as long as the meat is used. Maybe not even all that different from harvesting a whale.]

    • Nancy says:

      Agree WM. Disturbing and nothing “fair chase” about this incident given the boats filled with young men bent on an illegal harvest, although I’d have to say, one of the videos that popped up at the end of this one (cops kill Rottweiler coming to the aid of its owner) was even more disturbing.

  54. Ida Lupine says:

    I don’t think we do leave much carrion to nature. Laws have been passed recently that people can take roadkill, and it is also used for the highway depts. and dumped at landfills, almost as if we’d rather use it for anything other than returning it to nature. Maybe a trophy hunter would leave the remains after taking a trophy head, but a healthy ecosystem wasn’t the motivation.

    We poison predators knowing that it will affect the entire food chain, and do so with indifference. The ground stays poisoned for years, so that even a pet dog could be killed.

  55. Louise Kane says:

    Save Americas Wolves 2:37pm Jul 11
    Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
    600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091

    July 11, 2013

    Contact: Wildlife Program, 360-902-2515

    Experts from three western states to discuss
    effects of wolves on hunting opportunities

    OLYMPIA – Big game managers from Washington, Idaho and Montana will discuss their experiences managing game animals in areas populated by wolves during a live webcast July 18.

    The event will take place from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. via the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) website ( ). Viewers will have an opportunity to provide questions via email at .

    Montana and Idaho have been managing wolves longer than Washington and their experience can provide context to inform the department and citizens on how to confront the challenges that lie ahead, said Phil Anderson, WDFW director.

    “We’ve been consulting with a number of experts, including our counterparts from other states, since wolves began to reappear in Washington to better prepare us for meeting the many challenges that come with having wolves back in the state,” said Anderson, who will participate in the discussion. “This will give the public an opportunity to hear directly from those who have been involved in wolf management in other areas of the west.”

    Jon Rachel, Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s state wildlife manager and Jim Williams, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks’ northwest wildlife program manager will discuss the impacts wolves have had on deer, elk and other big game animals in their states. They will also discuss strategies that successful big game hunters have adopted while hunting in their states.

    Dave Ware, WDFW statewide game program manager, will describe the status of wolves and big game hunting in Washington.

    For those unable to view the live webcast on July 18, it will remain available from the department’s webpage after the event.
    Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife
    The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Providing information resources to protect, restore,…

    • WM says:

      This is probably the conversation WDFW staff and Commissioners should have had before Gary Wiles and Harriet Allen (Olympia staffers) wrote the WA wolf plan and EIS, with some of its rather naïve statements and assessments.

      Recent Commission appointments by new Governor Enslee included reappointment of Chairperson Miranda Weicker (a scientist) and newbe Bob Kehoe, an attorney and commercial saltwater fishing trade organization executive.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Perhaps WM but which portion of the plan is naive? I think that plan reflected the input of its citizens. In the preamble, if I recall correctly, the plans states that a survey was conducted and the provisions of the plan were crafted partially in response to citizen’s input. This input reflected great support for wolf recovery and the use of non lethal alternatives. I saw that as a great and welcome departure from the usual killing first line of defense.

    • rork says:

      First cringe-inducing sentence started “Mammals appear to have the ability to select the gender of their offspring for the benefit of their species” and good of the species was mentioned again later. In medicine we are constantly served up mangled restatements of a paper’s findings by scientifically illiterate reporters too. This author deserves a prize.

  56. rork says:

    Michigan NRC approved the proposed wolf hunt yesterday about as expected. There is no permission to trap. Chairman of NRC, using about the same language as some politicians, claims that voters approval of proposal G in 1996 means they must like public act 21 which allows NRC to declare species game animals at will, without voters being able to petition to stop it. I get emailed press releases but they (DNR or NRC) don’t stick them on the web. This is the closest I found so far:

    Anyway, please ignore the sections on democratic principals in the North American Model or other statements of ethics when considering my state. Unless we can overturn act 21 itself, which needs doing I think.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Rork please see my post below if you’d like to help I am working to help Keep Michigan Wolves Protected campaign by cataloging the comments so that there is evidence that this hunt is not supported. Its also helpful information to bolster support to overturn sb 288/ public act 21. I need volunteers as the comment sorting is time consuming and there are 7000 of them.

  57. Ida Lupine says:

    With the climate of wolf hatred and the eye on the final prize of delisting in the lower 48 lately, I’m sure there would be plenty of co-conspirators for a story such as this.

    When you are in a wild area, you take precautions. An encounter with wildlife is something to be expected. Once you wade through the hyperbole of this story, you see that the man wasn’t hurt.

    With very little wolves except in remote areas, and very few remote areas left, it is much more difficult to find real wolf attack stories than in the 1800s, so a little creativity is required to keep they myth alive.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I’m not saying it didn’t happen, but that I’m a little skeptical.

  58. Ida Lupine says:

    Notice the description of the wolf in this article from the Standard Examiner:

    Davis thinks the money may be going to lobbying efforts out of state to keep wolf populations in check. He is not sure any of it is being spent locally.

    Legislature Howls About Utah Spending 600K To Keep Out Wolves in the Northwest

  59. Elk275 says:

    The French are incapable wolf hunters so now they are appealing to North Americans.

    France Calls for North American Wolf Hunters:

    July 11, 2013

    French authorities might soon be looking to hire experienced wolf hunters from North America to help cull the country’s troublesome native wolf population.

    As in the United States, wolves are a protected species in France. According to RFI, experts believe 250 wolves exist in the European nation’s forests, but the animals are causing serious problems for farmers. In 2012 alone, rural residents recorded 6,000 attacks on cattle and other domestic animals. To combat this, French wildlife authorities have authorized a small hunt with a quota of 22 animals.

    So far, French hunters have had no luck against the cunning canines.

    “In Canjuers, we organized a hunt with 150 hunters in February, and we didn’t find a single wolf,” said government official Laurent Cayrel. “…in France, nobody knows how to hunt wolves.”

    The current situation is a far cry from the wolf hunters of France’s past. Wolf hunting has a prestigious history in France and wolf hunters, or louvetiers, once served in an administrative position known as the Wolfcatcher Royal. The position still exists today, but now focuses mainly on wildlife population control. Cayrel tells RFI that France’s lack of experienced hunters could be helped by bringing in specialists from America and Canada.

    American hunters and conservationists are hopeful that wolf hunting will expand beyond the few states that currently hold seasons. Many state wildlife agencies are also in support of establishing management hunts, which could be possible if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delists the gray wolf from the federal endangered species list. However, the proposal is receiving strong opposition from animal rights organizations. Read more about the issue here.

    France’s wolves live mostly in the French Alps or along Pyrenees on the Spanish border.

    • Nancy says:

      “It’s now up to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the livestock industry, and the conservation community to honor the agreements that we have made,” he said. “If we do so, I am optimistic we will continue to see conflicts between wolves and livestock continue to be rare, and the need to kill wolves even rarer still.”

      Jeez, could it be that simple a thing to address – an arrangement like this, in other areas like Idaho, Montana and Wyoming? Leaving predators the “F” alone, to do what they naturally do, unless they become too attracted to livestock?

      For a lot of reasons…….

      Passed by a ranching neighbor’s calving area yesterday and noticed there were still some hides and bones left over from calving season, (4 months ago) and they were quite obvious from the highway, if you happen to glance in that direction.


      A case of “feeling the love” from WS when predators suddenly show up and start taking advantage of that kind of banquet? 🙂

    • Ida Lupine says:

      That’s a little bit of good news. Maybe one or two states out of 50 will have a rational, ‘civilized’ plan worthy of the term ‘management’.

  60. JEFF E says:

    next time u feel like trusting anything the news media says.

  61. Mike says:

    There have been incidents on Facebook of hunter scumbags using Yellowstone wolf-watchers reports as a way to help target wolves when they leave the park.

    Those who love Yellowstone wolves may need to stop reporting their activity and posting images.

    Wolves are being targeted by color, size and likely movement.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I think people should start misleading them. 🙂

    • Rancher Bob says:

      Prove it. Should be easy enough, unless…

      • Immer Treue says:

        Rancher Bob,

        Mike’s comment is not that far fetched. The International Wolf Center took down their entire telemetry data base once a hunting/ trapping season was established. Showed about every wolf pack in BWCA and surrounding areas. Put up so school kids could plot wolves on a day by day basis. One way hunting did interfere with academics, and if the data had not been taken down, you could bet your boots hunters and especially trappers would have used that information.

        • Rancher Bob says:

          Most state due stop posting where wolves are for the hunting season. As you know if I told you I saw a wolf 1 minute ago and where I saw that wolf what are the odds you would see any wolves in that area. How many people that hunt in the RMA are on facebook while hunting. I can tell you the home range and movement patterns of every pack in my area doesn’t mean I can kill a wolf every time I go out. The range rider has a receiver and they don’t even see wolves but by chance.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Rancher Bob,

            All I’m saying is that if you know areas wolves habituate, that’s where you go. That why IWC took down their extensive telemetry data base that had been made available to the public for twenty years.

            Pack territories are large, yet there are certain areas in which wolves spend considerably more time. That data would have made trapping a brainless activity.

            • Rancher Bob says:

              Yes the more information one has the easier it is to locate your prey, I agree.
              I have a challenge for you take a 50 cent piece and hide it any way you want, then try and get a wolf to place a foot on where you hide that 50 cents. Sounds so easy until you’ve done it. Just like hunting wolves point your finger aim and fire, don’t forget the safety. Around say thanksgiving let me know your harvest. The challenge should be for everyone not just Immer, I just figure Immer would have some luck.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Rancher Bob,

                I’d have better luck using snares as 73% of MN wolves taken were taken by either wolf or standard snares. Very inexpensive and one can saturate an area with them.

                That’s the whole thing about trapping, A veritable minefield of traps are out there. That’s a lot of fifty cent pieces.

                Thanks for your confidence in me, but I’ll not be setting traps.

              • Immer Treue says:

                Rancher Bob,

                One more thing. A little bit of old dog food attracted a number of wolves and coyotes, and a boatload of foxes, to my game camera. As baiting is legal, that ups the odds quite a bit for stepping onto the trap, or into the snare.

                Happy Trails for tonight! 🙂

      • Mike says:

        Search Facebook for “Kill the wolves in Idaho”.
        A few comments from that page (which has 3,800 likes):

        “hopefully this wolf has a growth spurt and the tight collar just keeps getting tighter!!!

        “With wolf season starting up in about 6 weeks maybe the pups won’t be big enough to make rugs out of, might have to go with slippers. You guys keep trying to get close and take your pics, keep pushing em towards the borders we will be waiting”

        • jon says:

          That is exactly why people hate hunters and rightfully so. They are extremists who love killing wildlife.

    • Robert R says:

      Mike I can understand you dislike for hunting and hunters and that’s your choice. I may disagree with some pro wolf ideals but I will not resort to name calling or labeling as you do.
      If Yellowstone was a zoo then they would own the animals within its boarders but they don’t.

      • Mark L says:

        Mike, I’m curious where you stand on this; do you object to all hunting or just predator hunting (or what)? Fishing? Or are some on here casting you in a different light?

        • Mike says:

          I dislike all hunting in the modern era, but I truly hate predator hunting, trapping, and the use of lead bullets.

          It’s lazy and outdated. I have much, much different thoughts on the guy in the Alaskan outback taking down a moose so he can get through the winter, and a bunch of hillbillies shooting penned birds on some farm.

  62. jon says:

    Educating ignorance like this doesn’t seem to be possible. The same old false talking points from these people.

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I truly cannot believe that these folks think people are stupid enough to believe this stuff. Scott Rockholm was complaining in the audio clip you posted how he doesn’t like the way wolves eat! He’ll have to take that up with a higher power than him, I guess.

      As far as the Facebook page with threats to Yellowstone wildlife, this is what our leadership in Washington has decided the people have a right to do. I cannot wait until 2016.

    • Nancy says:

      First off its good to note where Oregon stands when it comes to predators:

      Been a state, for years, who could care less (shoot em) when it comes to predators like coyotes.

      Then one only has to visit Connie Dunham’s site (Connie’s got that petition going, Jon’s referring to) to realize the dead calf pic, at the top of the site, I’m thinking most likely was the result of a coyote, Oregon’s most prevalent predator (would a pack, let alone a lone wolf, leave that much in leftovers?)

      And then you’ve got this little ditty:

      Oh and this is the funny one. ODFW went out and cleaned up THEIR OWN bone pile, not any rancher’s bone pile. They used to dump dead critters from road kill in a pile until ranchers were told to haul THEIR dead carcasses out of canyons and off hillsides to keep from attracting wolves. Guess they had to follow suit!

      Its gotten so fricken messy when it comes to anything other than our own species, taking FULL advantage of the “landscape” and what we deem permissive…. on that landscape

  63. Louise Kane says:

    Louise Kane
    July 15, 2013

    Hello everyone,

    I am posting this or contacting you because you have the ability or have expressed an interest in advocating on behalf of wolves, or wildlife. I have been asked by Keep Michigan Wolves Protected to work on their second referendum process and I am asking for your help. The work that is being asked of us will provide valuable data to help the campaign.

    A bit of background. In 2013 was launched in response to a proposed hunt by Michigan legislators, Keep Michigan Wolves Protected followed a citizen’s referendum process that would have stopped the hunt until the people of Michigan had a chance to vote on the issue. This same process was used to overturn the hunting of mourning doves. Keep Michigan Wolves Protected collected 257,000 signatures in less than 6 weeks and successfully followed the state’s proscribed legal process. The votes were turned in on April 1. By April 9 Senator Tom Casperson from the Upper Peninsula had submitted a bill (SB 288) specifically designed to overturn the referendum. The bill passed the republican dominated legislature and granted the DNR, (a politically appointed body) the sole authority to designate game species and to authorize a hunt. It was devastating news. In one sleazy move, hundreds of thousands of voices were silenced and the only population of wolves protected from public trophy hunting was doomed to a hunt.

    Instead of backing down Keep Michigan Wolves Protected organized another citizen’s referendum to repeal SB 288, or the new law granting the DNR the power to authorize a public wolf hunt. This new referendum is a vitally important move for two reasons, 1) to keep wolves protected from an unnecessary and unpopular hunt and 2) the Michigan legislature used its power to circumvent a traditional and sacred democratic process, its important that the law is challenged. Allowing laws to stand that bypass democratic process sets dangerous precedents.

    During the first referendum, I spent time calling and writing to each and every member of the Michigan legislature. I was then provided lists of constituents to call as part of the Keep Michigan Wolves Protected campaign. Upon hearing about the new campaign designed to overturn SB288, I quickly asked if there was something I could do. This is the e-mail I received from Keep Michigan Wolves Protected,

    “I found a job for you!
    Just today, we received a response from our FOIA request for the number of comments submitted to the Michigan NRC – there are 6959 comments & DNR put them on a flash drive. They were not sorted by DNR (and strongly suspect they were not given to NRC). Jill did a random sampling and the messages seem to be overwhelmingly in opposition to wolf hunting; The few that are in favor are tragically misinformed, or are clearly a result of a trapping organization’s plea to its members to ask the DNR to include trapping in the plan, and on public and private lands. One example: “I am for the change in snaring and the snare law should be changed…I also think that we should be able to snare on public land, as long as we were a mile from the nearest residence…I live in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and we are being over run by Wolfs and Coyotes…That brings me to bring up a response to wolf hunting… I think we should also be able to trap wolfs and not just hunt them if the Law is passed…Being able to hunt a wolf would be great to manage them but us trappers should be able to trap ours instead of the hunt…Thanks for your time…name omitted…”

    If we mail you a flash drive, can you sort them first from Michigan / outside of Michigan, then sort in favor or in opposition to wolf hunting (within Michigan / outside Michigan) I think it’s important to get a better handle on how many Michiganders wrote to the NRC vs. those from outside Michigan, or even outside the U.S., who wrote in as a result of an organization’s mass email.
    With nearly 7000 comments, it will be a huge task. Is this something you can do over the next few weeks? If so, Jill will mail you a flash drive.”

    Sorting 7000 comments in less than 3 weeks is too much for me to do alone. But the job is one that I am also familiar with.
    When I first heard that Tester’s rider would delist the Rocky Mountain wolves, I read all of the comments that were sent to Idaho in response to their solicitation to receive input on the hunt. I wanted to determine if the public was behind trapping and killing wolves as proposed. I was also appalled at the terrible and obviously biased survey. I worked with some talented and dedicated people to develop a sorting document to catalogue the comments that were given to Idaho. That experience and the sorting document will be very helpful in cataloging the comments for Protect America’s Wolves. This job may not be very glamorous and in fact can be tedious but once the comments are sorted, the information may be instrumental in obtaining evidence that a public trophy hunt is not supported.

    I wish there had been some immediate application for the sorted Idaho comments. But here we have an opportunity to provide meaningful information to a campaign that has been immensely successful in their attempts to protect wolves. I need volunteers to read the comments, and to sort and catalogue. I can send them in blocks of 350 along with the sorting document containing instructions. If 20 people volunteer to read and sort 350 each than the job is done!

    Please consider helping, I cannot do this task by myself at this time. I know many of you spend a great deal of time conversing or commenting on blogs, or otherwise expressing your disdain for the current state of “wolf management”. This is your chance to do something, to make a difference to work on a discrete task directed toward a measurable outcome. Please volunteer your time; I believe it will take 3-4 hours of dedicated time to sort your 350 comments properly.

    Two of us who worked on the Idaho comment sorting are in the process of organizing volunteers, converting the comments into a manageable format, and adapting the sorting document to use for the Michigan campaign. We should be able to send you a block of comments in the next week and then there will be approximately 10 days to sort the comments. The comments will most likely be provided in a word type format and need to be cut and copied into an excel spreadsheet that will be provided. It’s really very simple. If you contact me I will send you the comments with instructions. I hope you’ll consider putting your money where your mouth is, as they say. Thank you

    You can contact me through Ralph or if this site permits I’ll post my e mail.
    Please include:
    Your name
    Your title if applicable
    Your address
    Contact e-mail
    Contact telephone

    • Ida Lupine says:

      I’ll help, Louise.

      • Louise Kane says:

        I was hoping you would! Ralph would you please send me Ida’s e mail so i can contact her. and thanks so much Ida! I’ve got 6 volunteers so far I need 24 more…please help

    • rork says:

      “I think it’s important” wasn’t enough to convince me it’s important. You know, there is a bias of who got mobilized and wrote or spoke.

      “the information may be instrumental in obtaining evidence that a public trophy hunt is not supported.” That’d be crappy evidence compared to this: “Keep Michigan Wolves Protected collected 257,000 signatures in less than 6 weeks”. If you think that doesn’t suffice have a poll taken.
      Maybe you think an analysis of 7000 non-random opinions will sway the minds of some (ignorant) people if it is very anti-hunt, but that’ll be a crappy argument. I suggest we not use crappy arguments.

  64. jon says:

    July 15, 2013

    Many More Wolves Need Eliminated To Save Elk Herds

    In early June, the owners of a Bitterroot Valley hay farm, near Stevensville, MT, were shocked to find the tracks of four wolves crossing a freshly plowed and worked field. It was the first such wolf sign found in their relatively densely populated rural neighborhood, and what bothered the small acreage farmers most was that the tracks were headed directly toward several other small farms with livestock. From just about anywhere the tracks could be seen in the fine dirt, at least four or five nearby homes or barns could also be seen across open fields or through open stands of timber.

    The terrain and habitat of the area is far from being what is considered typical wolf country. Or, at least, what was once considered wolf country. The wolves are no longer keeping to the mountain ridges that border both sides of the Bitterroot Valley. They’re now down in the valley, and it has been hunger that’s driven them to hunt among the valley dwelling human inhabitants of Western Montana.

    There’s not much left to be hunted in the mountainous country up and down most all of the western one-third of the state – either for wolves or for human big game hunters. Once bountiful elk herds are now barely 20-percent of what they were 15 years ago. Back then, most local residents would catch sight of moose several times a year. Now, moose are merely a memory. Outside of the human inhabited valleys, deer populations have plummeted sharply as well, and there is growing evidence that wolves and other apex predators are now making a serious negative impact on bighorn sheep and mountain goat numbers as well – especially during winter when these high alpine dwellers move to lower elevations to escape deep snows.

    What big game there is left in Western Montana is now mostly found in the valleys, close to human inhabitants – where the remaining elk and deer seem to sense some safety and protection from aggressive wolf packs. Elk which once came down out of the high country when late fall snows began to blanket the ground, then returned the following spring, are now staying year-round in the valleys- and they’re staying out of the mountains. Following them are now the wolves.

    Healthy adult whitetails are simply too fast and too agile for wolves to depend on for a constant food source. Elk on the other hand are slower, and less likely to dart through thick timber at full speed. Three or four wolves can more quickly wear down a lone elk, especially a pregnant cow in the dead of winter – and that’s why they have so negatively impacted elk populations. However, without elk, the wild carnivores will turn to whatever else is available – wild or domestic. The four wolves hunting the tilled hay field near Stevensville were most likely hunting for newborn whitetail fawns or calf elk. The predators are particularly hard on the newborn of the year, in many areas leaving a less than adequate 6- to 8-percent calf elk recruitment. Just for an elk herd to exist, it takes close to a 20-percent calf recruitment – and around a 30-percent calf recruitment to justify even limited elk hunting opportunities for human hunters.

    The manner in which the State of Montana continues to *censored*foot around with an ever worsening major predator problem baffles the sportsmen and rural residents of the state. One thing that’s now clearly evident is that wolves cannot be controlled through sport hunting – requiring hunters to purchase a wolf hunting license and restricting those hunters to “sporting” methods of take. The transplanted Canadian wolves now roaming the Northern U.S. Rockies are not native to the region, they are not “big game” the same as elk or deer, and anyone in pursuit of wolves with the intent of controlling their numbers cannot be subjected to “fair chase” restrictions. Wolves are destructive predators, and must be controlled as such. Montana hunters impacted by the devastating loss of wildlife to wolves feel that the state’s wildlife agency needs to abandon all efforts to manage wolves as another big game animal, and allow hunters to take wolves whenever the opportunity presents itself – no license, no season, no limit, no “sporting” methods of take restrictions – until the wolf population has been adequately reduced.

    Currently, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has proposed some changes for the 2013 Wolf Season that will make it the most liberal season to date. This year, wolf hunters/trappers would be allowed to buy up to five licenses, the firearm wolf season would begin statewide on September 15, and the season would run until the end of March. Just days before the end of the 2012 wolf season, legislation was enacted to legalize electronic game callers for hunting wolves, but the 2013 season will be the first to determine just how effective such callers are for taking such an intelligent and secretive predator. Unfortunately, the writing is already on the wall, and concerned Montana residents are openly speaking out, condemning even these changes as not going far enough.

    During the wolf delisting hearings of 2008, Dr. L. David Mech, considered by many as the leading wolf scientist in the world, was deposed as an expert witness in support of halting the growth of the wolf population in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. In his declaration, he pointed out that wolves could not be managed the same as game like elk, moose and deer. He also outlined the degree that wolf populations had to be culled. Just to stop the rate of wolf population growth, and to stop the growing depredation caused by the wolves, required eliminating basically half of the existing number of wolves. However, even that degree of harvest would not allow big game numbers to rebound. A 50-percent elimination of the existing wolf population would only stop the growth rate of game and livestock depredation. According to Mech, it would take the elimination of 70-percent, or more, of existing wolf numbers, with the wolf population held at that level for at least five years, before wildlife populations would begin to rebound.

    At present, that cannot be accomplished, mainly because MT FWP has absolutely no idea how many wolves are in the state. They continue to throw out artificially low wolf population estimates, with the real number of wolves in Montana likely two or three times greater.

    The state’s 2012 wolf season saw hunters and trappers purchase 18,642 licenses for harvesting “a wolf”. The season opened with the start of the archery big game season on September 1, but for rifle hunters the only early season wolf hunting allowed was in several backcountry hunting units, which opened September 15. For all other rifle hunters, the season opened with the start of the general big game season on October 20. The first ever wolf trapping season opened December 15 – and that season, along with the firearm hunting season, closed on February 28. During the 181 days of the season, just 225 wolves were taken by hunters and trappers for a not so whopping success rate of only about 1.2 percent.

    Still, MT FWP Director Jeff Hagener commented, “We’re generally pleased with these results. The overall harvest of 225 wolves this season is higher than last year and reflects the more liberal harvest opportunities that were added for 2012. The effectiveness of hunters and now trappers together continues to grow.”

    Although the agency has done its best to make the season sound like a tremendous success, in reality when just 1.2 hunters or trappers per 100 fill a wolf tag, FWP’s so-called wolf management through sport hunting has been a miserable failure. As you read this, there are now more wolves in the state than before the start of the 2012 season – and MT FWP is further in the dark when it comes to truly knowing how many wolves are in Montana.

    At one 2012 MT FWP meeting in Missoula to discuss overall predator impact, and to allow sportsmen, ranchers and rural residents to comment on what’s being done or not done to control major predator numbers, one of those commenting pointed out that the problem is how few hunters are actually buying a wolf tag. One suggestion from the 300 or so who attended the meeting was that any big game hunter with a valid Montana big game tag in his or her pocket should be allowed to use that tag to take a wolf. Instead of fewer than 20,000 “wolf hunters” out there during the five-week general big game season, there could potentially be two…three…or four times as many hunters who would take a wolf if there was suddenly the opportunity to take a shot.

    With each season that Montana Governor Steve Bullock allows FWP to drag its feet on taking actions that would bring down the wolf population in the state, the greater the loss of big game resources. The herds continue to get smaller – and older. Many who have cherished the bounty and variety of big game in Western Montana their entire lives now fear that unless drastic measures are taken to bring wolf populations down as dramatically as outlined by Dr. L. David Mech back in 2008, many once great herds could be lost forever. More than ever, the talk among sportsmen is that FWP cannot be trusted to come up with a viable solution, and that it’s now time to take the matter into their own hands and begin killing every wolf they see. Some have already started their own kind of vigilante wolf control. Likewise, as grizzly numbers continue to increase, also taking more of a bite out of big game populations, more and more of the big bears are also ending up in the crosshairs – and left to rot.

    Does that sound like poor ethics to you?

    Welcome to the new normal. When a sportsman funded wildlife agency like MT FWP begins to favor growing numbers of predators and shows a complete disregard for properly managing the elk, moose, deer, pronghorn, and other edible big game that Montana sportsmen have counted on to help feed their families for decades, it is then the agency that has stepped across the ethics line. Dark storm clouds are brewing on the horizon and that rumble in the distance may not be thunder. More than likely, it’s some extremely disgruntled residents of Big Sky Country gearing up for war. – Toby Bridges, LOBO WATCH

    I feel for wolves and grizzlies.

    • Louise Kane says:

      Jon where did this come from?

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Most liberal season to date? The take is increased every year, as well as the length of the hunting season and anything goes methods. Anything more and they will be flirting with relisting.

    • topher says:

      If I wanted to read that crap I’d go to their website, but I won’t because I don’t. Next time post a link and try not to waste other peoples time.

  65. Louise Kane says:

    By Cach
    some very strong similarities in the arguments made to hunt wolves equally disturbing and enraging

  66. Louise Kane says:

    also for those of you interested in helping Montana’s wolves, Anjia Heister formerly of Footloose Montana recently posted this

    “I have a CD with 25,000 comments sent to Montana’s FWP in response to their proposed changes to the 2013-14 wolf killing season.
    The agency has claimed that Montanans support the increased number of five (5) wolves to be killed by any hunter or trapper or both.
    Let’s find out if that is true… please contact me if you can help tally up comments!


    if you don’t know how to reach her and want to help you can contact me.

    Thus far one person on this blog has offered to help with sorting the Michigan comments! This is a chance to do something positive to help wolves all the blogging in the world does not.

  67. Ida Lupine says:

    This is with protection. What will happen without it? These people are lowlifes who can’t be trusted to manage anything. If anyone had balls in Washington they would put a stop to this and keep wolves listed. There is so much irrationality associated with this poor unfortunate target animal and little has changed in centuries, that IMO they will always need to be protected. We need to go back to listing all wolves as endangered – there will always be the poachers and illegal killers, but adding legal hunting just puts more pressure on them. I wonder what’s going to happen around Yellowstone this year. It doesn’t look good.

    • Immer Treue says:

      The “seed” behavior of all the stereotyping heaped upon folks in rural areas.

    • Louise Kane says:

      The Go Michigan comment I love democracy quote prompts me to reflect, Democracy is partially about participating. I posted a call to ask for volunteers to help catalogue the comments Michigan received about the wolf hunt foisted on them and 1, exactly 1 person, offered to help despite the many that express frustration and anger about wolf policy. Go democracy needs to have some heft behind the sentiment. Who has a few hours to donate?

  68. Mike says:

    Interesting that a hunter killed the last Colorado grizzly in 1979.

    Man, they have a knack for being stupid, don’t they?

    • WM says:

      Gee, I don’t know Mike. It seems this guy was not looking for or planning to shoot a grizzly with a bow in the first place. So, what do ya do when a bear attacks, with the knowledge available in 1979… and of course no bear spray to address which was mostly a non-existent risk?

      Seems to me just one of those unfortunate things that happen when grizzly and a human occupy the same piece of ground at the same time. This guy was attacked by the bear…and then he killed it with an arrow, not shot from a bow, but in his hand.

      This sort of thing, as we know, happens fairly often now – at least a couple incidents a year-as grizzly numbers are increasing.

      • JEFF E says:

        pretty sure that $3 last conscious thought in the same situation would be; oh, I just shit myself.

      • Mike says:

        Stalking around the woods trying to kill things is not a benign activity.

      • Mike says:

        You make it out like granny was going to get groceries, and the last grizzly went after her.

        It just seems hunters are to blame for so much loss of rare species. Poking around in woods, quietly, deadly weapons in hand, without a thought for other living things.

        It really is a shame.

    • SaveBears says:

      Let see, no such thing as bear spray, nothing more than an arrow in your hands, what would you do Mike? Let the bear kill you?

    • topher says:

      Grizzlys? Absolutely.

    • topher says:

      Now he’s digging up crap from over 30 years ago, complete with the standard name calling. Pathetic and desperate.

      • SaveBears says:


        As with this hunter, I don’t hunt with guns, remember he was bowhunting, the person that wrote the story for bowhunting magazine and is friends with the hunter is also a friend of mine, there was no intent to go after a grizzly bear, in fact even at that time, there was no indication there were any grizzlies in Colorado. Much like California, it was thought, they were long gone.

        No, hunting is not a middle of the road activity, it is an activity, with the ultimate goal of taking the animal you are licensed for, but as with anything else, unknown things can and do happen, you could find yourself in the exact same situation even not hunting.

        • JEFF E says:

          …and then $3 would say: oh, I just shit myself..and expire…

          • Mike says:

            Still haven’t figured out that caps lock mystery, eh Jeff?

            • JEFF E says:

              no mystery at all $3. that is how I want my online name to appear, you are just too stupid to understand…no surprise there.

              • Mike says:

                The shouting suits you.

                • JEFF E says:

                  no Mike…you’re just stupid

                • Mike says:

                  Easy there, Caps Lock Jeff.

                • JEFF E says:

                  HOLY SHIT.
                  the world has never seen such ripostes.
                  I am in absolute awe at the herculean intellect before me; nearly blinded by the brilliance…..

                  What a total waste of someone else’s oxygen.


                • Immer Treue says:

                  JEFF E,

                  Ignore, don’t take the bait. You’ll be better for it. On of the reasons I’ll not even read a couple sites anymore. It’s just not worth it. Mike has about worn out his welcome as few even reply. Sad because there is good behind that passion.

          • Mike says:

            I encounter numerous grizzlies every year. The difference is I’m not trying to be quiet on purpose. I want them to know I’m there, unlike idiot hunters.

      • topher says:

        I cant understand why the moderators allow you to keep commenting when it’s always insults and name calling. Your a real piece of work.

      • topher says:

        Mike, maybe you should be a little less interested in what I jerk off to . Creep.

  69. Ida Lupine says:

    In this case, the man was trying to keep from getting killed himself, but it’s sad that it had to get to that point, where the numbers were so low that the last remaining bear was killed.

    I’m actually more frightened of encountering a grizzly bear than a wolf. But I would never want an animal to be killed because of something careless that I did. I’ll always try to do the best I can to anticipate an encounter with wildlife.

  70. Ida Lupine says:

    Wildlife report:

    If Aves is out there, I saw the most interesting little bird today:

    The Lone Ranger

  71. Nancy says:

    A nice, feel good story about wildlife and their struggles against odds 🙂

    • Louise Kane says:

      Leslie thanks for posting this it was an interesting and informative read. The cumulative impacts issue is going to be very hard to address and to understand

    • Ida Lupine says:

      Now we can see where all the hysteria originated. Also, when a scapegoat is needed for crappy economies (nevermind the fact that these countries ruined their economies themselves).

      The picture is a little sensationalistic also, nothing like that poor little coyote who terrorized the bicyclist.

      • Ida Lupine says:

        Or inadvertently terrorized the bicyclist.

        • Ida Lupine says:

          I love some of the comments :):

          Wolfs can arrive in Britain by hovercraft, jet ski, lilo or Flyboard jetpack – the latter being their favourite mode of transport. I don’t think they can get through the tunnel yet.

          Yes, they’re called bankers.

          I must put my Mother In Law on full guard duty alert “no contest”

          Oh dear… will they get a ferry?

    • WM says:


      I wonder how many wolves will be in parts of Europe in 10 years; what will be the tolerance level and the management plans, whether they are driven by livestock interests, hunters, those who want more wolves on the landscape, and ultimately the cost of managing them to the chosen objectives – costs to government and to the private sector.

      • Immer Treue says:


        Me thinks the more educated the country/area the more tolerance. Once the tolerance is tested, a small, but well managed wolf population will exist, safe from the like of the anti-wolf blowhards here, and equally safe from the extreme pro-wolf folks here.

        A certain serendipity will hopefully emerge, that looks not at Little Red Riding Hood as a documentary.

  72. Immer Treue says:

    Peter K,

    If you’re still reading, c’mon back. Your insight on issues was both refreshing and welcome. Unfortunately, (analogy follows) you got caught in an argument that your mother is fatter than my mother… No winners there.

    • Peter Kiermeir says:

      Good Morning Immer and WM, I´m still around, thus heavily involved in a project recently in a region with a weak internet and e-mail coverage. And, we are preparing for a few weeks of vacation. This year it will be bear and wolf watching in the mountains of northern Spain. And, yes, I admit, I needed some rest from this blog. Now, about the wolves in Europe (Central / Western Europe, cause in the eastern Countries living with carnivores is quite normal) :
      With so many independent and totally different States in Europe it is no surprise that the situation of large carnivores differs from Country to Country and even from region to region. It´s not so easily explained in a few words here. Take Germany alone, where everything is (relatively) quiet nowadays in the core wolf region in the eastern parts of the country, whereas Bavaria is a hostile region for wolves, bears and even considered as a “BermudaTriangle” for the lynx. Generally speaking, wolf populations are thriving everywhere in Europe (so does the lynx with the bear at least being stable). There is also considerable movement from the established wolf populations in eastern Germany westbound and northwestbound from the Italian population mostly into Switzerland and France. With the fall of the Iron Curtain (not so much the “Berlin Wall” as of the article) wolves came back to Germany from Poland and there is still some “exchange”. Overall in Europe, there is heavy opposition from sheep owners and hunters. Less nowadays in eastern Germany, where sheep owners are now well accustomed to deploy fences and/or dogs and losses are very low today. Management Plans are in force already over Europe or at least in preparation and sheep losses are covered albeit only after considerable paperwork. In every country NGO´s caring for carnivore protection are very well established (thus nor really working together – the language barrier making things even more difficult) and, in general, public opinion about carnivores is favourable. We do not have much “wildlife watching” tourism over here, this branch is in it´s infancy and needs development – despite the troubles involved (heavy hiking) til you finally see a wolf or bear – or not. Heaviest opposition is in the alpine regions of Germany, Switzerland and France and even more so in Scandinavia. And yes, we also have our fair share of extremists, on both sides, the “pro” and the “anti”. I really don´t know what will be in 10 years! Currently the future looks quite bright for large carnivores in almost all regions where they occur – save the few trouble spots (e.g. Pyrenaean alps for bears, Sweden/Norway for wolves, etc.) – but this could change in a moment. I pray that we will not see an incident where a bear or a wolf is involved! And, no, I do not see wolves roaming free in Britain (or better Scotland)!

  73. Mike says:

    New wolf poll knocks it out of the park:

    70% in favor of wolves. Only 31% support hunting and trapping wolves (but obvious this is a majority of the hunting community).

  74. Louise Kane says:

    A link to a documentary about a woman who is devoting her life to conservation of wolves. A beautiful story along the lines of the Dutcher’s but set in BC. Its lovely. These are the kinds of materials that need to be introduced into educational curriculum, not hunting and trapping classes.

    An amazing woman doing valuable and necessary work.

  75. JEFF E says:

    the world has never seen such ripostes.
    I am in absolute awe at the herculean intellect before me; nearly blinded by the brilliance…..

    What a total waste of someone else’s oxygen.


  76. JEFF E says:

    and once again the software screws up

    • Mike says:

      Yeah, I don’t think it’s the software. It’s more technical than that. See O.H.I., short for “Operator Headspace Issue”.

  77. Rita k Sharpe says:

    Welcome to the Mike and Jeff E show, stay tuned for further comments that just deal with each other’s name calling.

  78. Louise Kane says:

    this is a must see, its a segment from the Smithsonian channel showing a human and wild wolf encounter in a field in BC. Its astounding…..

    hope you enjoy

    • Ida Lupine says:

      A wolf’s body language and way of communicating is fascinating. Like the family dog. Of course I’d be cautious around any wild animal, but it is fascinating. Thanks Louise!

    • Elk275 says:

      Those that play with snakes eventually get bit.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Though I am somewhat in accord with Elk, most of us who have enjoyed wolf encounters would identify our experiences as benign as Gudrun’s. Yet, this woman demonstrates more fortitude than the barrel chested queen Rockholm who’s “tale” of a wolf encounter ends with all but loaded panties.

    • Immer Treue says:


      ” The agency’s real mission? To make life safer for livestock and game species.”

      I don’t think anyone begrudges WS when it comes to human safety. Think airports and birds, urban areas and deer, and yes, the predator that gets into serious mischief. There is a legitimate place for WS’s. Game species? The United States is not a game farm. Diseases such as CWD should herald that warning. The entire North American Wildlife Conservation Plan needs be rethought.

      There is room for hunting, plenty of it, as there are plenty of niches for predators. Coexistance.

      That said, there is probably more spent on predator removal (helicopters and planes), than actual predator damage to livestock.

    • WM says:

      NY Times Editorial Board does not have anyone with a biology, natural resource, aviation or public health background. Out to tell you something about the thought put into this short and rather shallow piece.

      So, OK some junior staffer reads the Sacramento Bee series on coyotes, don’t question the content or the motivation for doing the story, then have a short board meeting which probably covers two dozen topics, then somebody (probably a junior editor/reporter) write sthe piece and then published. There you have it, an opinion from the largest urbanite newspaper in the country – doesn’t mean it is a well researched or even a good opinion.

      • WM says:

        Sorry, first paragraph: “OUGHT to tell you something….”

        • Kathleen says:

          I see absolutely nothing wrong with this NYT editorial and its conclusion–that “resolving wildlife conflicts need not involve indiscriminate killing.” The vast majority of people don’t know that WS even exists, and for them, a “shallow” introduction is not inappropriate. Let’s not fail to point out that the junior staffer who read the Sac Bee piece (amazing how you *know* this stuff!) also searched out the recent study by scientists in Conservation Letters (a journal of the Soc. for Conservation Biology)

  79. jon says:

    Ignorant ranchers. Lacing dead animals with poison will kill more than just wolves. What is it with some of these ranchers and hunters advocating and supporting illegal activity?

  80. cobackcountry says:

    A great song, and some great accompaniment.

  81. jon says:,129918.0.html

    These people for real? Sounds like another crazy conspiracy theory from the anti-wolf wackjobs. 🙂


June 2013


‎"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