Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Washington we have a problem ( wolf attack )

35K views 297 replies 94 participants last post by  Brennen Busse 
#1 ·
This just in from a very reliable source, and considering the new pack that has taken up to living in the Blueit pass area maybe should all be packing our 44 mag while river side. P.S the Blueitt pack has already attacked a herders dogs this summer.

It happened Monday, Sept 26. Headquarters is a town 18 miles from my house (as the crow flies) on Idaho State Highway 11. I've done some hunting in the area, in the past. The North Idaho Correctional Institution is in Orofino. Her son works there.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

People we have been preaching for years now that wolves will start attacking people when their prey base runs out. Read this and tell me if it isn't a sign that things are under way

"William Anderson 9/27/2011 9:25 AM
This email should be read by anyone who hunts, camps, or spends any amount of time in the woods in northern Idaho . Last night I received a phone call from my mother who lives in Headquarters. She informed me that on Sunday while bow hunting she was attacked by a wolf. A few of you know that she is not your typical mother or grandmother. She has worked as a professional hunting guide for many years, so she has spent many hours in the woods. She has seen wolfs on many occasions and this is the first time one came at her.
She said as soon as the wolf saw her it charged. She was able to drop her bow, draw her 44 mag. out of its holster, and put 1 round in the wolfs head at a range of a few feet. Please let any of your family and friends know of this so they can take whatever precautions needed while out in the woods. If any of you have any questions please feel free to call me. Thanks
William "Jeff" Anderson
View attachment 44712
 
See less See more
#267 ·
Ribka,

Thanks. At least the reduced revenue is verifiable. Do you also know that IDFG employees were laid off, or is that an inference you're drawing? I'm not doubting that some were, but this thread is a classic example of opinions and inferences being represented as facts. Consequently I've become interested mainly in separating the BS from the truth.

Since wolves eat ungulates, I don't doubt for a minute that deer and elk herds are reduced. I'm just fascinated that people are willing to post so much BS that they cannot back up. Then I realize this is a fishing forum, so now it's all beginning to fall into place (jk).

Sg
 
#268 ·
I heard a news report(actually a couple) that mentioned several western states had declines in hunting licenses(and other tourist visits). The main factor was the economy.

"States without introduction of wolves ( Colorado, NV, AZ, NM) increased license sales this year."
That could be hunters staying closer to home to save money.... that in turn increases license sales locally.
 
#269 ·
#270 ·
"The increase (up $43.25 to $300 for deer, up $44.25 to $415 for elk)."

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, with some certainty, that this has a lot more to do with Idaho's lost revenue than wolves. I don't really have an opinion on wolf reintroduction -yet- but at those prices the wolves can have it.
 
#271 ·
So in summary before we hit page 20, just to make sure I've read things right:

Bunch of anti-wolf propaganda and rhetoric gets posted.
Level headed individuals point out that while they don't disagree with wolf hunting or management, the obvious rhetoric is getting in the way of real action.
Anti-wolf fundamentalists come out of the woodwork and insist that we're disagreeing with the conclusion as opposed to the knee-jerk bullshitting.
Level headed individuals again try to point out that they're not arguing the conclusion, just the large amount of bullshit involved.
Several people continue to argue against the boards non-existent pro-wolf supporters.

Not a single person in this thread is on team Jacob.

We're all here because we're interested in angling. Hunting follows the exact same vein. As anglers, we understand that fucking around with mother nature can have major repercussions. This is true whether you're removing a species, changing habitat, or even re-introducing species. But the means we choose to interact with nature gives us a unique perspective on harvesting animals. It's why hunters and anglers drive environmental conservation. Not the PETA-tards.

Sadly, the anti-wolf fundamentalists have lost sight of reality and tried to remove the ESA in it's entirety this year--despite countless hunting and conservation groups pointing out how stupid that is. Even the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation--one of the main groups being politically and judicially active to limit wolf predation on elk, considers the fundies to be complete tards.

So just to re-route this to more relevant discussions, what are people's opinions on the chances for wild steelhead should the ESA go away due to the rabid anti-wolf lobby?
 
#277 ·
Where is it said that anti wolf fundamentalists want to get rid of the ESA in it's entirety? I read they wanted to remove the wolves from the ESA (which they have) but not the entire ESA and every species on it?
 
#272 ·
I returned from a hunt in MT last week, and while there was surprised to hear that despite the large number of wolves in the area, and the number of licenses sold, that few hunters there could manage to "fill" their tags.

As with anything, proper management will rely on good data coming in, to make effective decisions in the field - "Shoot, shovel, shut-up."
 
#273 ·
#275 ·
44 wolf tags filled in Montana and 100 filled in Idaho. Hopefully they will fill 500+ tags for each state this season. ONly costs $31, thats right only $31, for an out of state wolf tag in IDaho, and $350 for an out state wolf tag in Montana. I think the best way preserve the larger non indiginous canadian wolves here in the lower 48 is to take one to a taxidermist.

"One hundred wolves were harvested by hunters through the end of October. Hunters killed three wolves
in August during the first two days of the season, 30 wolves during September, and 68 wolves in
October. In comparison, hunters had killed 84 wolves by October 31 during our first season in 2009,
including 67 during October. Just under 30,000 wolf hunting tags for 2011 had been sold as of close of
business on November 7. Additionally, 71 wolf trapping tags have been purchased for the season that
opens November 15. Hunters purchased 26,428 wolf tags in 2009."

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/wolves/reportMonthlyOct11.pdf

Here is an up to date link to show you how many wolves have been harvested. Looks like they are up to 142 wolves so far.

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/hunt/?getpage=121
 
#284 ·
I'm concerned that these wolves are a hatchery product and could impact the native strain, maybe they should be removed, i'm game for swinging a 55gr vmax their way. :)

on another note....spoke with a guy related to sheep capture with a helo at heller bar, this week, and i guess there are atleast two packs in the Anatone area. i saw wolves off of rattle snake grade maybe four or five years ago, nobody believed me, even my friends, but the guys skirtin the ridges lookin for sheep i guess have seen them.
 
#288 ·
WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/

December 3, 2011

Contacts: Commission Office, (360) 902-2267
WDFW Public Affairs, (360) 902-2259

Fish and Wildlife Commission adopts plan
to conserve and manage gray wolves

OLYMPIA - After four years of development and extensive public review, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission today unanimously adopted a plan that will guide state conservation and management of gray wolves in Washington state.

The citizen commission, which sets policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), approved the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan at a public meeting in Olympia.

Key provisions of the plan establish recovery objectives for gray wolves in three regions in Washington, along with procedures for addressing predation on livestock and impacts on ungulates such as deer, elk and caribou.

Prior to the final vote, the commission approved several changes to the draft plan, including one that modified the distribution of breeding wolf pairs needed to remove wolves from the state's endangered species list.

Once abundant in the Pacific Northwest, gray wolves are currently classified by the state as endangered throughout Washington. They are also listed under federal law as endangered in the western two-thirds of the state.

WDFW began developing the wolf-management plan in 2007, anticipating that gray wolves would naturally migrate into the state from Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and British Columbia. Since then, five wolf packs have been documented in the state - three in northeastern Washington and two in the Cascade Mountains.

During the past four years, the plan developed by WDFW in conjunction with a 17-member citizen Wolf Working Group has been the focus of 23 public meetings, 65,000 written comments and a blind scientific peer review.

"This plan establishes recovery goals for wolves, while also giving wildlife managers and individuals the tools they need to protect livestock and wildlife populations," said Miranda Wecker, commission chair. "The goal is that wolves will no longer need special status in our state and can be managed as part of the overall ecosystem."

Key elements of the plan approved by the commission include:

•Recovery goals: The plan establishes a recovery objective of 15 breeding pairs of wolves that are present in the state for at least three years. Before gray wolves can be removed from the state's endangered species list, at least four of those breeding pairs must be verified in Eastern Washington, four in the northern Cascades, four in the southern Cascades/Northwest coastal area and three others anywhere in the state. The commission also allows WDFW to initiate action to delist gray wolves if 18 breeding pairs are documented during a single year.
•Livestock protection: The plan provides a variety of management measures - from technical assistance for landowners to lethal removal - to control wolves that prey on livestock. The plan also establishes conditions for compensating ranchers who lose livestock to wolf predation.
•Wildlife protection: The plan allows WDFW to use lethal and non-lethal measures to manage wolf predation on at-risk deer, elk and caribou populations if wolf numbers reach or exceed the recovery objective within a region where predation occurs. The commission modified the definition of "at-risk" populations to give WDFW more flexibility in responding to the effect of wolf predation on those animals.
WDFW is not allowed to import wolves from other states or seek to increase the wolf population to historic levels under the parameters set for the new wolf management plan by an associated environmental impact statement.

All aspects of the state's plan will take immediate effect east of state highways 97, 17 and 395, where gray wolves were removed from federal protection last May. In the rest of the state, federal law will take precedence over the state plan until wolves are delisted under the federal Endangered Species Act in that area.

The draft Wolf Conservation and Management Plan is posted on WDFW's website at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/ . The final plan, incorporating amendments adopted by the commission, will be posted on the site by mid-January.
 
#289 ·
WDFW began developing the wolf-management plan in 2007, anticipating that gray wolves would naturally migrate into the state from Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and British Columbia. Since then, five wolf packs have been documented in the state - three in northeastern Washington and two in the Cascade Mountains.
This has changed already....or is about to. I've seen them at work, and on my way to work near hwy 58 and 95 junction. Recently one (out of several) was shot in St Maries Id. Maybe the crowds on the St Joe will thin out this year. :clown:
 
#291 ·
Don't know what you all think, but the populations still look a little puny to me :rolleyes:

Just another example of man (and woman) trying to manipulate nature and fouling the prop! I've spoken with some MT sheep and cattle ranch owners this past summer and they are not amused.

http://www.skinnymoose.com/bbb/files/2010/11/NRMWolfpacks.jpg

One more Ruger 44 Redhawk wandering the hills and valleys :thumb:
 
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