Wolves on the Westside?

Have you seen this or read this or heard this from some one reliable. I say this because the info I got from a friend who is a Wildlife Biologist the lives in the Methow says the two killed from this pack by a local idiot all but decimated the pack down to one adult and a couple of sub adults. Also, one of the females form this pack was reported now at the Teanaway.

Just trying to make some sense from conflicting testimonies.
WOW!! Seriously?!?
 

Salmo_g

Well-Known Member
I don't fret sleeping in my tent in wolf country, even around the Methow pack, cuz I sleep with the bears, who, believe it or not, don't snore as badly as most of my fishing partners.
 

dflett68

Active Member
this thread was already humming along nicely when i left for a long weekend in winthrop with the family on tuesday. not surprised to see it still at the top this afternoon. way more interesting than catching up on the impending nhl lockout. thanks everyone.
 
5shot,

You write as though wolves have been deliberately re-introduced in WA, ". . . on the Wolf re-introduction . . ." and ". . . people who are for the introduction. . .", but as far as I know, wolves have simply migrated naturally into WA from Idaho and BC. WDFW anticipated this happening, and for once proactively developed a wolf management plan in advance to deal with the issue.

If you can, would you please post the source for WDFW spending $2.4 MM on wolf studies over the next 6 years? Also, I'm doubtful about that money coming from license and access fees. The reason is because I've heard that the NON-GAME program at WDFW is the best and most reliablly funded at WDFW because the money comes from vehicle vanity license plates and is independent of hunting and fishing license fees. If that's changed I'd like to know the source of the information.

I do agree with you that where there are wolf and human conflicts, the wolves will lose. That's pretty much spelled out in the management plan.

Sg
Wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming have been reintroduced...so any wolf coming into WA from ID is reintroduced - doesn't matter if WDFW put them here or not.

As for the 2.4M (it is really 2.28M, but I rounded for convenience) - that figure is from WDFW - http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/faq.html#15

And if you think they won't pull funds from your licensing fees to fill holes in their budget for non-game species, I think you are wrong. Nothing is safe. The state pulled money out of accounts ear marked for schools...do you really think the WDFW won't shuffle money around?
 
And if you think they won't pull funds from your licensing fees to fill holes in their budget for non-game species, I think you are wrong. Nothing is safe. The state pulled money out of accounts ear marked for schools...do you really think the WDFW won't shuffle money around?
I personally have no problem with using license fees for management of non-game species. It's all one ecosystem out there and our favorite game species are just a part of it.

D
 

Freestone

Not to be confused with freestoneangler
I personally have no problem with using license fees for management of non-game species. It's all one ecosystem out there and our favorite game species are just a part of it. D
The name of the agency is the Department of Fish and Wildlife, not the Dept. of Fishing and Hunting. Only 28% of WDFW's budget comes from license sales (Wildlife Fund). WDFW is tasked with overseeing (almost) all creatures, not just the ones that we can eat/fish/hunt. Here is the WA State legal definition of "wildlife" that WDFW is obilgated to manage:

(75) "Wildlife" means all species of the animal kingdom whose members exist in Washington in a wild state. This includes but is not limited to mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrates. The term "wildlife" does not include feral domestic mammals, old world rats and mice of the family Muridae of the order Rodentia, or those fish, shellfish, and marine invertebrates classified as food fish or shellfish by the director. The term "wildlife" includes all stages of development and the bodily parts of wildlife members.

plus:

(19) "Fish" includes all species classified as game fish or food fish by statute or rule, as well as all fin fish not currently classified as food fish or game fish if such species exist in state waters. The term "fish" includes all stages of development and the bodily parts of fish species.

As we learned in school, all parts of the ecosystem are interdependent and none of us completely understands how it all works. I'd much rather see money channeled into ecosystem restoration than things like more 'put and take' hatcheries as in the long run, it should mean healthier ecosystems with more native fish and wildlife for all of us.
 

ribka

Active Member
Dear libtard idiot I never once suggested getting rid of wolves.Introducing an apex predator like the wolf into WA without a well thought out or in this case NO management plan is just stupid; Idaho and Montana discovered this years ago and the elk deer and moose populations are suffering the consequences of some D bag Fish and Wildlife Service bureaucrat urban dweller in DC master minding this plan. Of course living in an urban area you wouldn't know the first thing about over predation.

I used to work in DC and N VA in the 1990's in the F&W service building. I would overhear conversations of employees pontificating about making the entire western US like a giant national park and with the ultimate goal of ending all hunting on public lands.

Like any hunter conservationist on here I enjoy hearing wolves and hunting near mountain lions black and grizzly bears. The Us is not like it was was when Lewis and Clarke came through here almost 200 years ago.

So Ribka: What is your solution? You seem to have a lot to say, but aren't really contributing any ideas for what to do about it, other than this sarcastic rant. Are you saying we should get rid of wolves completely?

I totally understand that there is no way to "go back to nature." But I do believe that we can probably find some middle ground to lessen the impacts on everyone involved in this, while at the same time recognizing that there will be impacts and we have to do our best with them.

Making fun of others by calling yourself "Humen Vermin Pro Staff" doesn't seem to help.

Jason
 
I'm pretty sure you've just helped me make most of my points in this thread.

Yours in bleeding-heartedness,

Libtard.

Dear libtard idiot I never once suggested getting rid of wolves.Introducing an apex predator like the wolf into WA without a well thought out or in this case NO management plan is just stupid; Idaho and Montana discovered this years ago and the elk deer and moose populations are suffering the consequences of some D bag Fish and Wildlife Service bureaucrat urban dweller in DC master minding this plan. Of course living in an urban area you wouldn't know the first thing about over predation.

I used to work in DC and N VA in the 1990's in the F&W service building. I would overhear conversations of employees pontificating about making the entire western US like a giant national park and with the ultimate goal of ending all hunting on public lands.

Like any hunter conservationist on here I enjoy hearing wolves and hunting near mountain lions black and grizzly bears. The Us is not like it was was when Lewis and Clarke came through here almost 200 years ago.
 

Freestone

Not to be confused with freestoneangler
... or in this case NO management plan is just stupid.
No wolf management plan? I guess I am confused as to why everyone keeps saying this. I guess everyone missed the public announcement in 2007 looking for citizen volunteers to serve on the Wolf (Plan) Working Group or the ones inviting public comment on the plan and the one last January announcing that the plan was finished.

Here is the plan for those who missed it: http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00001/ Now, I have not read the plan so I can not comment on whether it is good or bad, but I know it does exist. This and lots more can be found on WDFW's site, and is available to anyone who wants to include some facts in their arguements - for or against.

For those who claim there was no input from ranchers, hunters, etc., please note that the Wolf Working Group included cattle and sheep ranchers, hunters in addition to 'environmentalists' so despite what many people want to believe, there was input from many of those who would be affected. Here is the list: (from WDFW's site)

Working Group Members

Daryl Asmussen
Cattle Rancher
PO Box 417
Tonasket, WA 98855

Ken Oliver
Former County Commissioner, Pend Oreille County
32371 Le Clerc Rd N
Ione, WA 99139

John Blankenship
(replaced by Linda Saunders at the June 2011 meeting) Executive Director
Wolf Haven International
3111 Offut Lake Rd
Tenino, WA 98589

Tommy Petrie, Jr.
President
Pend Oreille County Sportsmens Club
10152 LeClerc Rd
Newport, WA 99156

Duane Cocking
Board of Directors
Inland Empire Chapter
Safari Club International
8322 N Glenarvon Ln
Newman Lake, WA 99025

Gerry Ring Erickson
Consulting Scientist
PO Box 1896
Shelton, Wa 98584

Jeff Dawson
Director
Stevens County Cattleman
Cattle Producers of Washington
449 Douglas Falls Rd
Colville, WA 99114

John Stuhlmiller
Director of State Affairs
Washington Farm Bureau
PO Box 8690
Lacey, WA 98509

Jack Field
Executive Vice President
Washington Cattlemen’s Association
PO Box 96
Ellensburg, WA 98926

Arthur Swannack
President
Washington State Sheep Producers
1201 Cree Rd
Lamont, WA 99017

George Halekas
Wildlife Biologist
Raven Wildlife Services
24918 N Monroe Rd
Deer Park, WA 99006

Bob Tuck
Principal
Eco-Northwest
270 Westridge Rd
Selah, WA 98942

Kim Holt
Secretary/Treasurer
Wolf Recovery Foundation
18632 Broadway Ave
Snohomish, WA 98296

Greta M. Wiegand
Outdoor Recreationist
2142 N 192nd St
Shoreline, WA 98133

Derrick Knowles
Outreach Coordinator
Conservation Northwest
35 W Main, Suite 220
Spokane, WA 99201

Georg Ziegltrum
Supervisor
Washington Forest Protection Association
724 Columbia St NW, Suite 250
Olympia, WA 98501

Colleen McShane
Wildlife Ecologist
Seattle City Light
1132 North 76th St
Seattle, WA 98103

Here is a synopsis of the plan development process: (from WDFW's site)

Development of the plan began with the appointment of an advisory Wolf Working Group comprised of 17 citizens to give recommendations on the plan. WDFW conducted 7 public scoping meetings early in the process in 2007 to request comments from the public on the scope of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the plan.
The Wolf Working Group provided extensive input on early versions of chapters of the plan in 2007 and 2008. The first draft of the plan (August 2008) underwent scientific peer review by wolf experts, resource managers, wildlife biologists, and other specialists. This was followed by a second draft plan (August 2009) that received additional input from the Wolf Working Group in September 2009.
In October 2009, WDFW published a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) titled: Wolf Conservation and Management Plan for Washington. The DEIS contained 4 alternatives, including a “no action” alternative and a preferred alternative. These were based on recommendations from the Wolf Working Group, public scoping comments, peer review comments, and WDFW reviews. This document underwent a 3-month public review period from October 5, 2009 through January 8, 2010. Twelve public meetings were also held during the public comment period. In addition, WDFW contracted with the University of Washington to conduct a blind peer review of the draft plan from late 2009 through February 2010.
Comments from the public (nearly 65,000 respondents), blind peer review, and further WDFW review were analyzed and incorporated into a revision of the preferred alternative. These revisions were discussed with the Wolf Working Group in June 2011, which resulted in further edits to the plan. A final EIS and recommended plan was presented to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission on August 4, 2011, and was discussed at workshops on August 29, October 6, and November 3, 2011. The plan was adopted with some modifications at the Commission meeting on December 3, 2011.