Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Washington's reasonable wolf policy.

NFR 
8K views 134 replies 38 participants last post by  generic 
#1 ·
I'm glad I live in a State where killing is the last - not the first - approach to predator control:

"In July 2015, some U.S. Air Force personnel were hiking about eight miles up North Fork Chewelah Creek, in northeastern Washington, when they found the chewed-up remains of a cow. They notified the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, which sent out investigators the next day. The investigators found a second carcass nearby and three days later, discovered two more — a cow and a calf. Wolves, they determined, had killed all four animals.

The dead cattle were squarely in the territory of a wolf pack called Dirty Shirt, and local ranchers’ reactions were predictably fierce. “The time for the removal of the Dirty Shirt pack is now,” Justin Hedrick, the president of the Stevens County Cattlemen’s Association, said in a statement. But instead of mustering sharpshooters, wildlife officials sent riders on horseback to keep the wolves away. They used generators to shine bright lights around the rest of the herd, while other employees patrolled the area. They shared data on the pack’s location — three wolves are radio-collared — with area livestock producers, so other cattle could be shifted out of harm’s way. But they also said that if the wolves killed more cows, they would consider shooting them.

Within a few days, the pack moved to a different part of its territory, and fears died down."
 
See less See more
#3 ·
We the general public paid (with our taxes) for wolves to be introduced into WA. A bad idea I might mention. Now we are paying (with additional tax monies) to "manage" wolves. Another bad idea.

Why don't the wolf lovers step up with funding wolf management?

I would have preferred to be consulted with what my tax money was being spent on.
 
#4 ·
We the general public paid (with our taxes) for wolves to be introduced into WA. A bad idea I might mention. Now we are paying (with additional tax monies) to "manage" wolves. Another bad idea.

Why don't the wolf lovers step up with funding wolf management?

I would have preferred to be consulted with what my tax money was being spent on.
You were consulted, and then voted (collectively), and are now reaping the benefit.
 
#8 ·
All warm and fuzzy unless you're the rancher and those wolves live-gut your prize horse or bull or cow. My cousin in Montana had a policy that anyone hunting their property had to have a shovel close at hand...

The next round of "warm fuzzy" will happen after grizzly bears are established and an elk or deer hunter returning to his kill will get killed. Just wait, it's coming.
 
#9 ·
By the way, I was a professional biologist for the federal government in a former portion of my life. Now the biologist jobs are occupied by "warm fuzzy" folks who don't live in the areas they're managing and typically give a rat's ass about human animals in their areas. That process was starting when I left the fed.
 
#22 · (Edited)
There are quite a few LGDs that will take on wolves: Great Pyrenees, Kuvasz, Akbash dogs, Ochvarkas etc. My male Great Pyr killed a coyote just by grabbing it by the neck and shaking it; also faced down a cougar. But LGDs want to chase predators away from their flocks - they don't kill unless they are defending their flocks - or themselves.
 
#58 · (Edited)
we live in a society in which we hire people who represent us and make decisions for us.. What this means is that not everyone likes every decision made. Everyone who does not like that decision has no choice but to suck it up and deal with it.. Yes that decision got rammed down their throat and they have no resource against it.. That is how America works... Decades , in some cases a century ago our society decided that it didn't need real rivers but it did need electricity and lumber and vacation homes those decisions lead to the demise of our salmon and steelhead runs.... that totally sucks for me as do many other decisions society has made I think those decisions were wrong and they impact me personally.. To the ranchers I say this society has chosen to have wolves.. get over it!!!!! The safety of livestock is 100% the responsibility of the rancher. NO government agency should spend any money to protect cattle or any other private live stock.. if a rancher doesn't want some cows eaten by the wolves society has chosen to have he can keep his own animals safe..

farm and ranch subsidies for the state of Washington were just a tad over 4.5 billion from 1995-2012 keep in mind that only 10% of Washington farmers got subsidies.
 
#59 ·
Decades , in some cases a century ago our society decided that it didn't need real rivers but it did need electricity and lumber and vacation homes those decisions lead to the demise of our salmon and steelhead runs.... that totally sucks for me as do many other decisions society has made I think those decisions were wrong and they impact me personally..
I'm curious Rob, do you live in a tent without running water, a place for your waste, and electricity? Oh wait, scratch the last item. your post here answers that one. The wolf re-introductions are just another example of folks playing house with nature - one well intended decision resulting in yet another unintended consequence. Our society has also decided that Safeway's and packaged food is preferred... which means livestock ranchers... get over it.

BTW, China has just decided to increase global population -- better hope they don't all watch The River Runs Through It or April Vokey videos.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top