Wolf hunting in the US.

[cobb]

Sounds like there are going to be a couple states with a wolf season this year. At least until some yoyo's get it stopped with some legal ******** and a liberal judge.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/eyepiece/ ... 68395.html

[LarryFlew]

I would kind of question the reasoning of allowing a 25% Kill. One year of diseases or other problems after that and they would again be endangered.

[cobb]

I would kind of question the reasoning of allowing a 25% Kill. One year of diseases or other problems after that and they would again be endangered.

They do a quota system in several states for Mountain Lions and it seems to work. Tags or licenses are issued, but once a set number are registered, the season is closed.

So yes, a disease or other problems could again put the wolf on the endangered list in those states, I could see that. But then they can just close the wolf season until the population comes back, just like states have done with managing the bear or deer population when there was a problem.

You have to look at the 25% harvest, or even a total wipe out of the wolf population in that state would not wipe out the specie. If all of the wolf population in Idaho would be wiped out, other wolves would migrate in from surrounding states, Canada and the problem area for some, Yellowstone. If you think that one year of disease or problems through the whole wolf population in Northern America is a possible reality, then the few harvested by hunters would have also died from the disease or other problems, so a moot point.

[justaguy]

I have heard on a lot of hunting forums that the wolfs are having an impact on elk and deer populations. They say wolfs are getting out of hand.

[ttousi]

I have heard on a lot of hunting forums that the wolfs are having an impact on elk and deer populations. They say wolfs are getting out of hand.

so are the wolves............

[LarryFlew]

They do a quota system in several states for Mountain Lions and it seems to work. Tags or licenses are issued, but once a set number are registered, the season is closed.

Several states do that sort of thing for wolves, coyote, fox, mountain lion etc but have never seen them an 25% so it just seemed to be a little out of wack.

25% may or may not be a lot of wolves to begin with. IE Yellowstone had appox 124 wolves as of last year and that is probably a pretty concentrated area compared to other areas if for no other reason than a LOT of habitat. This represents a 27% decline compared to the 2007 population and was similar to the 30% decline in 2005. There where 30 breeding pairs in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. High mortality of both pups and adults caused the low breeding pair count. So, taking into account that in any given area we kill off 25%, the next year they die off at the 27% they did in 07 and the 30% they did in 05 leaves a pretty small amount of wolves. If we happen to accidentally kill off too many of the breeding pairs it would be even more devastating. Soooo, 25% still seems high to me.

BTW we are not talking areas where they are over populated and causing problems which is another story altogether.

[cobb]

25% may or may not be a lot of wolves to begin with.

And the 25% reduction is the management plan for the next several years? I don't think so, with the percentage given or hopeful number of wolves harvested sounds like a management plan that will change from year to year.

BTW we are not talking areas where they are over populated and causing problems which is another story altogether.

And you know this and how? The link I posted was from a friend that has lived in Idaho for years and is more involved in that area than most can claim here.

In Mankato Minnesota we have Rasmussen park, mostly a wet valley area, but inside the Mankato city limits and surround by several miles of development. Years ago it was opened to archery hunting by special permit because of the concentrated deer population. The deer population was way over max, and if I remember right, the DNR report said that over 60% of this city park deer population had to be removed to meet the max carrying capacity for that area and a 75% reduction would be most beneficial. Basically the deer population got out of hand because of the bleeding hearts. In Mankato they even made a law against feeding the deer to try and curb the problem, but most know how that panned out with the Bambi huggers, they are too cute to not feed.

[Joecool]

I seriously doubt that wolf population is getting out of hand. Wolves do so much good. Unfortunately movies, press, etc... have really not done this creature justice.

They are probably the most enjoyable animal for me out there although I have never seen one in the wild and am not likely to as they are so skittish around humans.

[DeanC]

Come hunt deer with me sometime. There are wolves everywhere and few deer. (Area 107) We've had wolves run right through camp in the middle of the day. This year we have a very limited lottery for antlerless deer tags.

Ask a CO from Northern MN if there are too many wolves. The ones I talk with say there are.

The way to ensure a stable wolf population is to allow limited hunting, charging large fees for the permits and dedicate those revenues to wolf management.

[LarryFlew]

BTW we are not talking areas where they are over populated and causing problems which is another story altogether.

And you know this and how?


I mean as far as a hunting percentage and this thread we are not talking about wolf management but rather wolf hunting.

[LarryFlew]

Minnesota wolf population is 2nd only to Alaska. With an estimate near 3000 our population is large. Estimate is nearly double the goal to get them off of the list.

Yet we also have more deer than most other states or areas. Wolves typically cull the weak etc which strengthens our deer herds genetics.

I'm not against the hunting just really wondering about the 25%.

[macphisto]

The way to ensure a stable wolf population is to allow limited hunting, charging large fees for the permits and dedicate those revenues to wolf management.

...and free kickass wolf shirts for everyone!

[DeanC]

I can't comment on the 25%. I have no idea if that is too low or too high.

But you know, in my experience, the game biologists are usually reachable and glad to talk about what they know. Maybe you should look him up and give him a call.

Or, here is the 2008-12 Idaho Wolf Management Plan. It's only 90 pages. If you don't want to read it maybe you can get some politician to pay someone else to summarize it and coin a term like "WOLF DEATH PANELS".

[DeanC]

...and free kickass wolf shirts for everyone!

LMFAO - forgot about the wolf shirt.

[plblark]

I mean as far as a hunting percentage and this thread we are not talking about wolf management but rather wolf hunting.

Hunting is one of the most effective tools of population and game conservation there is. Hunting fees support conservation and habitat efforts and the culling of the population is very carefully controlled.