Subscribe to Outdoor Life
Get 1 Year for Only $10
Hunting Recent Posts
Categories
Recent Comments
Archives
Hunting |
February 18, 2010
Shoot-on-Sight Wolves? - 24
 Do bourgeoning wolf populations in the Rockies constitute an emergency that would justify the sort of response states typically reserve for floods, wildfires and other natural disasters? Or, put another way, might the Idaho National Guard be called out to kill wolves? That’s one way to read a joint resolution that has been drafted by the Idaho Legislature and could be introduced in the state’s House any day. The legislation, HCR043, calls for the governor “to declare that a state of emergency exists in Idaho” due to the “unnecessarily large number of wolves” in the state. Further, the law would require the state’s Fish and Game Department to “use any means” to reduce Idaho’s wolf population to the numbers adequate for recovery of the previously endangered species. It’s a high-profile call to action by a growing number of anti-wolf activists in the state. This loose coalition of hunters, outfitters, landowners and wildlife advocates has become so frustrated with the growing number of reintroduced wolves, and what they claim are rules that hamstring effective management of the predators, that the legislative big stick is one of the few tools left to them. The resolution, which had its first reading yesterday, makes a number of claims, including:
The resolution uses as its state-of-emergency model the executive order issued in 1996 by Gov. Jim Risch after the escape of captive elk just outside Yellowstone National Park. Because of fear the escaped elk might spread disease to wild elk, the governor issued a shoot-on-sight order, and most of the pen-raised elk were killed by hunters and wildlife agents. Wolves, the resolution claims, constitute a “far greater threat” to wildlife populations, and “hereby encourages the Governor of the State of Idaho to declare that a state of emergency exists in Idaho and to authorize and require the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to use any legal means to reduce wolf numbers to those designated for recovery of the species.” Click here to read the resolution yourself, then let us know what you think. |
Outdoorlife.com is part of the Field & Stream Network, a division of Bonnier Corporation.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Comments (24)
They spend all this money trying to bring back wolves and now they are going to spend money to get rid of them.
There can sure be problems re-introduceing a species. I live in an oldgrowth forest(Aaska Panhandle) that is loaded with wolves. In 32 years I've seen their numbers rise after good winters and go down after heavy weather deer kill. I've spent many days observeing them. Ofcource I'm talking about an undisturbed wilderness. That is totaly different than the lower 48 situation.
Now back to re-introduceing a species. Less than 40 yrs ago the fish and game planted 18 sea otters in an outer bay on the coast. Since then the 18 have turned into 18,000 and have wiped out the abalone(a lucritive dive fishery) and have just about wiped out the crabs. There is no way to control their population and it will take decades for nature to came back to any sort of balance.
you have a great family kody you should be proud.
Kody, sharing is caring & we are thankful for them both. It makes a man feel good when he learns there are many others that can relate to his passion for the outdoors & its a extra bonus that we have a place to gather to learn from one another but its hard to learn if you dont share are if you dont speak up. We may not know eachother physically but we know eachothers hearts! p.s. still waiting for steaming gut pile :-)
thanks Dropjhook I just noticed your comment by a photo. Charlie Elk has been looking in as well. I must tell you guys that i don't know you beyond this forum but I find it most heart warming to share parts of my life with you. I has been said. "Speak, so that I might know you." I believe I am coming to know you. Thank You
Patrick and Dropjhook, I will be offended if you don't check out the pictures I posted on my profile. You will see the whole family. Wow! How did a kid with those big ears ever land a beautiful wife and those kids? Just lucky I guess!
I saw alot of wolf dropings shed hunting today. Why would they call in military personal for a wild life issue? The past shows the cheapest & fastest way to handle it is a bounty.
your right bo they scream endangered then they scream over populated its one extreme to another. where did the people go with the common sense.
Patrick, if it is like most government agencies, they have to worry about red tape, not making the anti's mad, keeping the green heads, happy... It's a wonder they can even figure out they have a problem before the whole thing has blown up beyond repair.
Make them reimburse the ranchers for lost stock ,there is nothing like getting of that hip pocket that will bring action.I don't have a dog in this fight but would be willing to come take a few of the stock killers out of the gene pool.
hey bo and kody why wouldnt the dnr take care of this problem before they declared a state of emergency.
Thanks, guys.
Bo, feel free to take me to task on any of my future mishaps.
Yours truly,
Kody
its ok bo we all have bad days young man.
Sorry about that, I had some other issues that caused me to flare. I apologize. You are right this is not the forum for that.
BO usually makes good sense but like the rest of us .a little slip up is only human.
Bo, what the are you doing introducing abortion into this discussion? This forum will be torn apart at the seams with talk of 'baby killer', it is inappropriate in the context of this topic. The main thrust of this forum has focused upon hunters united in their desire to preserve and further this great sport. If you wish to polarize this group and damage this cause, you would be hard pressed to choose a more volatile subject.
We have had occasions in Alberta where bears and wolves were taking moose and elk calves at an alarming rate. Fish and Wildlife studies show that the wolves in our Rockies are the bad boys of the wolf clan. Why, because they have enormous jaw stretch and are able to actually pull chunks of flesh not just hide from their prey. Controlling these populations is difficult as their pelts are usually of too poor a quality for trappers and most hunters fortunate enough to spot a wolf hesitate to shoot for fear of scaring away their intended game. When hunters are encouraged to take that shot, you mobilize a tremendous wildlife control force. Few outside the hunting community acknowledge that hunters are the key to safeguarding our wildlife populations. Controlling populations means blood on the ground which can be a tough sell to many of the softies out there. Consider that this small army not only works for nothing, they pay license fees to get the job done. Cities are proud of their volunteers who help to stage festivals and such. Just like hunters these volunteers work for nothing but the similarities stop there. What other volunteers are made to pay for their giving their time and energy? To add insult to injury hunters are frequently subjected to harsh criticism for their efforts. While government claim the revenue from those licenses to support wildlife departments. they don't wish to send out any bouquets to those hunters as it does not serve their political ambitions. Call out the Army! When I hear these kind of rhetoric I quickly conclude that a powerful lobby group has the reins. Staging a panic, jerk knee response usually gets the public's attention. The mob that follows such leadership should be subjected to the criticism normally reserved for those terrible hunters. Which bring us back to the very people who could solve this problem for nothing, pay to do so and and a good time performing the task. Life just keeps getting stranger!
Colorado Samurai makes a good point. Landowner preference for wolf tags??
Is this going to negatively affect wildlife populations? Yes. Is this going to negatively affect the livestock industry? Yes. Should the wolf population be better controlled? Yes. Should a state of emergency be declared? NO. Should the number of hunting tags go up a little next year? I would recommend giving such thoughts consideration. P.S. Does anybody think that farmer's tags for wolves should be made? (you know, like for deer and elk?)
why did they wait till the wolf population got out of hand sounds like the dnr is not doing its job.bo its womens right to abortion which is a whole nother issue.
To what change? Uh, lemme think on this, maybe reduce the wolf population? just a thought there. And this is not nearly as scary as the stuff coming out of Congress and the White House. They want to make all of us pay so they can kill babies, all in the name of human rights. Aren't babies human? Why don't they have any rights?
If this wasn't so frightening it would be hysterical! It appears to be an hysterical response - but to what change? Where is the data to support the number of livestock proven killed by wolf predation and not reimbursed? pets? people attacked? Just appears they wrote a resolution and put whatever they wanted into it and expect that to be enough!!?? SCARY!! And VERY WRONG!!
If this wasn't so frighteneing it would be hysterical! It appears to be an hysterical response - but to what change? Where is the data to support the number of livestock proven killed by wolf predation and not reimbursed? pets? people attacked? Just appears they wrote a resolution and put whatever they wanted into it and expect that to be enough!!?? SCARY!! And VERY WRONG!!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)
Sorry about that, I had some other issues that caused me to flare. I apologize. You are right this is not the forum for that.
We have had occasions in Alberta where bears and wolves were taking moose and elk calves at an alarming rate. Fish and Wildlife studies show that the wolves in our Rockies are the bad boys of the wolf clan. Why, because they have enormous jaw stretch and are able to actually pull chunks of flesh not just hide from their prey. Controlling these populations is difficult as their pelts are usually of too poor a quality for trappers and most hunters fortunate enough to spot a wolf hesitate to shoot for fear of scaring away their intended game. When hunters are encouraged to take that shot, you mobilize a tremendous wildlife control force. Few outside the hunting community acknowledge that hunters are the key to safeguarding our wildlife populations. Controlling populations means blood on the ground which can be a tough sell to many of the softies out there. Consider that this small army not only works for nothing, they pay license fees to get the job done. Cities are proud of their volunteers who help to stage festivals and such. Just like hunters these volunteers work for nothing but the similarities stop there. What other volunteers are made to pay for their giving their time and energy? To add insult to injury hunters are frequently subjected to harsh criticism for their efforts. While government claim the revenue from those licenses to support wildlife departments. they don't wish to send out any bouquets to those hunters as it does not serve their political ambitions. Call out the Army! When I hear these kind of rhetoric I quickly conclude that a powerful lobby group has the reins. Staging a panic, jerk knee response usually gets the public's attention. The mob that follows such leadership should be subjected to the criticism normally reserved for those terrible hunters. Which bring us back to the very people who could solve this problem for nothing, pay to do so and and a good time performing the task. Life just keeps getting stranger!
Bo, what the are you doing introducing abortion into this discussion? This forum will be torn apart at the seams with talk of 'baby killer', it is inappropriate in the context of this topic. The main thrust of this forum has focused upon hunters united in their desire to preserve and further this great sport. If you wish to polarize this group and damage this cause, you would be hard pressed to choose a more volatile subject.
Kody, sharing is caring & we are thankful for them both. It makes a man feel good when he learns there are many others that can relate to his passion for the outdoors & its a extra bonus that we have a place to gather to learn from one another but its hard to learn if you dont share are if you dont speak up. We may not know eachother physically but we know eachothers hearts! p.s. still waiting for steaming gut pile :-)
Patrick and Dropjhook, I will be offended if you don't check out the pictures I posted on my profile. You will see the whole family. Wow! How did a kid with those big ears ever land a beautiful wife and those kids? Just lucky I guess!
thanks Dropjhook I just noticed your comment by a photo. Charlie Elk has been looking in as well. I must tell you guys that i don't know you beyond this forum but I find it most heart warming to share parts of my life with you. I has been said. "Speak, so that I might know you." I believe I am coming to know you. Thank You
BO usually makes good sense but like the rest of us .a little slip up is only human.
Make them reimburse the ranchers for lost stock ,there is nothing like getting of that hip pocket that will bring action.I don't have a dog in this fight but would be willing to come take a few of the stock killers out of the gene pool.
Is this going to negatively affect wildlife populations? Yes. Is this going to negatively affect the livestock industry? Yes. Should the wolf population be better controlled? Yes. Should a state of emergency be declared? NO. Should the number of hunting tags go up a little next year? I would recommend giving such thoughts consideration. P.S. Does anybody think that farmer's tags for wolves should be made? (you know, like for deer and elk?)
I saw alot of wolf dropings shed hunting today. Why would they call in military personal for a wild life issue? The past shows the cheapest & fastest way to handle it is a bounty.
you have a great family kody you should be proud.
There can sure be problems re-introduceing a species. I live in an oldgrowth forest(Aaska Panhandle) that is loaded with wolves. In 32 years I've seen their numbers rise after good winters and go down after heavy weather deer kill. I've spent many days observeing them. Ofcource I'm talking about an undisturbed wilderness. That is totaly different than the lower 48 situation.
Now back to re-introduceing a species. Less than 40 yrs ago the fish and game planted 18 sea otters in an outer bay on the coast. Since then the 18 have turned into 18,000 and have wiped out the abalone(a lucritive dive fishery) and have just about wiped out the crabs. There is no way to control their population and it will take decades for nature to came back to any sort of balance.
They spend all this money trying to bring back wolves and now they are going to spend money to get rid of them.
To what change? Uh, lemme think on this, maybe reduce the wolf population? just a thought there. And this is not nearly as scary as the stuff coming out of Congress and the White House. They want to make all of us pay so they can kill babies, all in the name of human rights. Aren't babies human? Why don't they have any rights?
Thanks, guys.
Patrick, if it is like most government agencies, they have to worry about red tape, not making the anti's mad, keeping the green heads, happy... It's a wonder they can even figure out they have a problem before the whole thing has blown up beyond repair.
Colorado Samurai makes a good point. Landowner preference for wolf tags??
Bo, feel free to take me to task on any of my future mishaps.
Yours truly,
Kody
why did they wait till the wolf population got out of hand sounds like the dnr is not doing its job.bo its womens right to abortion which is a whole nother issue.
its ok bo we all have bad days young man.
hey bo and kody why wouldnt the dnr take care of this problem before they declared a state of emergency.
your right bo they scream endangered then they scream over populated its one extreme to another. where did the people go with the common sense.
If this wasn't so frighteneing it would be hysterical! It appears to be an hysterical response - but to what change? Where is the data to support the number of livestock proven killed by wolf predation and not reimbursed? pets? people attacked? Just appears they wrote a resolution and put whatever they wanted into it and expect that to be enough!!?? SCARY!! And VERY WRONG!!
If this wasn't so frightening it would be hysterical! It appears to be an hysterical response - but to what change? Where is the data to support the number of livestock proven killed by wolf predation and not reimbursed? pets? people attacked? Just appears they wrote a resolution and put whatever they wanted into it and expect that to be enough!!?? SCARY!! And VERY WRONG!!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)