Controversy over wolves and elk was predicted before wolves entered the Lolo area

Idaho Fish and Game uses Chopper to kill 23 wolves in The Lolo

Controversy over wolves and elk was predicted before wolves entered the area-

Idaho Fish and Game reports it has used a helicopter to kill 23 wolves in the north central Idaho area commonly called the Lolo.  This is the latest in a continuing effort (6 forays in 4 years) to reduce the number of wolves there by 70%. In recent years IDF&G has also had very generous hunting rules to kill cougar and bear. Here is the story from the media — Associated Press in the Missoulian. “Idaho Fish and Game kills 23 wolves in Lolo Pass area.

The point of these efforts is to try to bring back the once mighty elk herd that roamed the area. The Lolo became famous for elk in the 1940s through the 80s. The size of the herd stemmed from the regeneration of the great forest fire of 1910 and later fires. Regeneration provided perfect conditions to result in a large number of elk. Elk numbers were legendary and became part of hunting lore. Unfortunately for the elk herd, the burned forest did not only regenerate. It advanced to maturity resembling the conditions when Lewis and Clark traversed the area and almost starved due to lack of game. Predictions were this maturity would cause elk numbers to crash and remain low indefinitely (until the habitat was “reborn”). As predicted, the crash happened. The elk population peaked last in 1989 at an estimated 16,054. Then came a sharp drop, almost a cliff, but by then politics dictated a new and logically impossible explanation for the crash — wolves.

We first drove down the Lochsa River in the spring of 1976. It was new country for me — beautiful, primitive or Wilderness country just beyond Highway 12. There was, however, the interesting distraction of numerous fires burning on the slopes just north of the highway. We learned these fires were set in an effort to forestall the coming decline in elk habitat. We almost hit an elk on the highway and saw quite a few more.

In those days there were plenty of bear and cougar were increasing. Cougar had recently become a protected game animal in Idaho. No one spoke of predation as a factor. That would come later in the mid-1990s. After the first drop in the early 90s, the elk herd took another hit in 1995-6 with a big die-off in a severe winter.  Afterwards the low population recovered but little, and drifted slowly downward. Today (2014) there are only about 2200 elk.

Wolves were reintroduced to Idaho in 1995 and 1996, but none to the Lolo. Wolves eventually made their way north to the Lolo, but their numbers were not significant until at least 5 years later — about the year 2000.copyrighted Hayden wolf walking

We see that the huge drop in elk populations came before the wolves. Therefore, wolves could not have been responsible for the elk herd’s drop off the cliff. They could not have been, at least in this universe where a cause has to come before the effect.

At the time of the big crash, I predicted wolves would, nevertheless, be blamed. Anti-wolf groups were gearing up. They likely figured that many hunters did not have the time sequence of events clearly in mind. Politicians soon joined in and the future path for Idaho Fish and Game was set in political concrete.

From the Lolo, anti-wolf forces then took the misinterpreted data and added to it the big drop in Yellowstone Park’s northern range elk herd. This became standard fare to show how wolves hammered elk. Agencies did not highlight data on the where elk numbers were stable, or even growing inspite of an increasing wolf population, such as the Hells Canyon Elk Zone, the Brownlee Zone, the Weiser River Zone, or finally the Snake River and Pioneer Zones where there are wolves, but “too many elk,” where elk will be reduced to please agricultural interests.  Are these elk somehow less important than deep backcountry elk?

At any rate, the conventional wisdom became elk were almost extinct in Idaho, disinformation that IDF&G did not actively dispute even though it brought great harm to the department’s revenue when hunters shunned the state.

On the contrary, Idaho Fish and Game launched their campaign to nearly rid the Lolo of wolves and other large predators at a high monetary cost. Meanwhile in reality, in their new Idaho Elk Management Plan, Fish and Game reports a statewide elk population of 107,000 animals.

Now Idaho Fish and Game plans to go after wolves even in (especially in) Idaho’s famed Wilderness areas where natural processes are legally supposed to be paramount.

What will happen in the Lolo? After 4 years of a war on native Idaho carnivores, we should expect to be seeing an increase in elk if predators are the reason elk numbers have remained low. This is a logically possible explanation. However, the habitat for elk has not clearly improved. There have been some new forest fires and these burned areas should eventually lead to new habitat. The fires have not yet been extensive, and it isn’t clear that the fire-opened areas are growing elk food instead of the invasive spotted knapweed. This noxious invader was not present back in 1940. In the new elk management plan, weeds are blamed for lower elk numbers in a number of hunting zones in Idaho. Why not the Lolo? It might be politically appropriate to speak only of other zones.

If You Love Wolves, Love Elk and Hate Hunting

Wolf advocates have known for a long time now that ranching is the nemesis of all things natural and wild, and that if you want to help the wolves, boycott beef, leather, wool, lamb and mutton. But lately hunters like those in the Idaho trophy elk hunting industry have been out to prove that they are a wolf’s gravest threat.

Not only do certain Idahoans want to run wolves out of lands cleared for ranching, they want to eliminate them from the wilderness as well.

They see public lands, such as the Lolo National Forest and the Frank Church wilderness area, as private breeding grounds for elk specimens they love to kill, and they’re not willing to share those specimens with the likes of wolves.

Some wolf lovers respond with hatred for the cows and sheep themselves, and disregard for deer and elk. But wolves need elk and deer to survive, therefore wolf lovers should also be elk and deer lovers and wilderness advocates. Ultimately, a true wolf lover is not only anti-cattle and sheep ranching, but also anti-deer, moose, caribou and elk hunting.

Wolf advocates who are indifferent to ungulates and accepting of hunting and ranching will never see an end to wolf hunting or “control.”

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

Idaho kills 23 wolves from helicopter this month in Lolo Zone

copyrighted Hayden wolf in lodgepoles

This article was sent to me with the comment:

“Bastards aerial gunned down 23 wolves those fuckers 
How is this going to end Jim
I feel so sad
And hateful.”
…To which I answered: It will end when the human race or finally grows a conscience or goes extinct , whichever comes first.

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2014/feb/28/idaho-kills-23-wolves-month-lolo-zone/

by Rich

Feb. 28, 2014 3:36 p.m.                             •  12 comments

PREDATORS — Idaho Fish and Game, in cooperation with the USDA Wildlife Services, killed 23 gray wolves from a helicopter near the Idaho-Montana border during February in an effort to relieve predation on the struggling elk herds in the remote Lolo Zone.

The agency said in a just-issued media release that the wolf-control effort has been completed.

“The action is consistent with Idaho’s predation management plan for the Lolo elk zone, where predation is the major reason elk population numbers are considerably below management objectives,” the agency said in the release.

In addition to the animals killed in this control action, 17 wolves have been taken by hunters and trappers in the Lolo zone during the 2013-14 season – 7 by hunting and 10 by trapping, officials said.

The trapping season ends March 31, the hunting season ends June 30.

Fish and Game estimates there were 75 -100 wolves in the Lolo zone at the start of the 2013 hunting season with additional animals crossing back and forth between Idaho and Montana and from other Idaho elk zones.  Officials said their goal is to reduce that Lolo zone wolf population by 70 percent.

The Lolo elk population has declined from 16,000 elk in 1989 to roughly 2,100 elk in 2010, when Fish and Game last surveyed the zone.

The Lolo predation management plan is posted on the Fish and Game website.

This is the sixth agency control action taken in Lolo zone during the last four years.  A total of 25 wolves were taken in the previous five actions.

Fish and Game officials say they authorize control actions where wolves are causing conflicts with people or domestic animals, or are a significant factor in prey population declines.  Such control actions are consistent with Idaho’s 2002 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Idaho Legislature, they say.

More from IFG:

Fish and Game prefers to manage wolf populations using hunters and trappers and only authorizes control actions where harvest has been insufficient to meet management goals.  The Lolo zone is steep, rugged country that is difficult to access, especially in winter.

Restoring the Lolo elk population will require liberal bear, mountain lion, and wolf harvest through hunting and trapping (in the case of wolves), and control actions in addition to improving elk habitat.  The short-term goals in Fish and Game’s 2014 Elk Plan are to stabilize the elk population and begin to help it grow.

Helicopter crews are now capturing and placing radio collars on elk, moose, and wolves in the Lolo zone in order to continue monitoring to see whether prey populations increase in response to regulated wolf hunting, trapping and control actions.

Idaho game management killing elk after killing wolves

by Justin King

 Wildlife Photography © Jim Robertson

Wildlife Photography © Jim Robertson

Boise – Ranchers in Idaho are asking the state government to help eliminate some of the state’s elk population. The state is halfway through the wolf season, which was said to have been introduced to stop the wolves from attacking elk.

A group from Mayfield claims that Idaho’s Department of Fish and Game has been unable to protect their livelihoods from elk herds which they say are trampling their fences, crops, and causing other problems. The department currently allows a small group of hunters to participate in “depredation hunts,” in which the hunters are allowed to kill animals while hoping to drive the herds away.
Elk hunters have actively encouraged thinning the wolf population. Some have established co-ops to shoulder the cost of trapping wolves that are eating the prized trophy animals. Wolf trappers are paid up to $500 per kill.

Conservationists unsuccessfully attempted to stop the wolf hunts and predicted an explosion in the elk population if the wolf, an apex predator, was hunted. Tim Preso, an attorney representing the conservationists said of the wolf hunting efforts last week:

There is every reason to believe that this is not going to be a one-off, they have set a goal of inflating the elk population by removing wolves. According to their own plan that’s a multi-year undertaking. So I see every reason to believe that this is going to be a recurring activity.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, almost 900 wolves have been killed since they lost federal protection.
One of the proposed solutions to Mayfield’s problem is to move the herds closer to the areas where wolves roam.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/idaho-game-management-killing-elk-after-killing-wolves/article/367461#ixzz2uSvsIeLq

The Animals Support Gun Control

On the way up to the mountains to ski some of the seven plus feet of snow which fell during the past week, I passed a car with a bumper sticker that read: “The Animals Support Gun Control.” That brings up an issue you almost never hear about, ironically enough, after someone brings a hunting rifle to school and tries to peck off every kid or teacher they can get a bead on.elk-000-home17300

Oh, you hear about gun control, that’s a given, but almost never in the context of how they’re used against non-human animals—for sport or savagery—in contest kills, often geared especially for young people, as if to tempt the next mass-murderer out of hiding and onto the playground for some real fun and games.

You can’t expect grade-schoolers to understand the subtle difference between a sacred human life and those of other animals they’ve been trained to kill—before they could even develop a conscience—by their proud parents, who use their kids’ eagerness to please and to play follow the leader against them, in hopes of recruiting a life-time hunting partner.

The disturbing trend among states to lower the legal hunting age, practically to infancy, suggests the word “Columbine” evokes only the image of a pretty flower to them. Meanwhile, hunters in states like Idaho are actively luring young children to try their luck in coyote or wolf killing derbies to further degrade the value of life that movies and video games have already taught them to disregard a thousand times over. The town of Holley, New York, just held another appalling example of state-sanctioned sadism in the form of an animal-kill contest they dubbed the “squirrel slam.” “Sporting” events like the so-called “squirrel slam” are an embarrassment that only adds to the global perception that this is an inherently violent country.

Not to be outdone, the Oklahoma “game” department just announced that the senior class of Sasakwa High is sponsoring a crow-killing contest, set for the end of this month—complete with prize money for whoever murders the most crows. It’s a spectacle sure to inspire the next killer-in-waiting to turn their semi-automatic on their fellow classmates.

These kinds of hunting events beg the obvious question: how can kids be expected to know the difference between officially sanctioned animal cruelty and acts of cruelty they come up with on their own?

So if you feel your Second Amendment rights are withering away at the mere mention of gun control, relax that death-grip on your rifle for a moment and consider what the animals would have to say about the issue, if only we allowed them a voice.

1609691_10151912687967297_548770786_n

Idaho House panel backs $2 million plan to kill wolves that prey on elk, livestock

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/b0d0c545a3e9408e8e7b7352300d4e08/ID-XGR–Wolf-Panel

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
February 17, 2014 – 6:08 pm EST

BOISE, Idaho — Idaho’s House will get to consider a measure seeking to shift $2 million in taxpayer money toward a panel that will oversee the killing of wolves that prey on livestock and elk herds. [Wolves eat elk, get over it.]

Republicans on the House Resources Committee voted Monday 14-4 for the disputed bill.

It’s being pushed by Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter [the man is an insult to the entire weasel family], over objections labeling this a “funding mechanism for a war on wolves.”

With this cash infusion, Otter wants to target wolf packs blamed for killing too many cattle, sheep and elk. [When did elk become a domesticated species?]

Backers including the cattle and sheep industry pledged not to reduce Idaho’s wolf population, now roughly 680 animals, to levels triggering a renewed federal Endangered Species Act listing.

But foes branded it a “thinly veiled proposal aimed at the second extirpation of wolves in Idaho.”

copyrighted Hayden wolf walking

Why Wolves Need ESA Protection

1509686_1453770291507881_1955386015_n

The sad story of OR9 is a prime example of why wolves need to remain on the federal Endangered Species list…

Sibling of famous OR-7 wolf killed by hunter in Idaho

Published: Friday, February 10, 2012

JOSEPH — A sibling of Oregon’s world-famous wolf OR-7 has been shot and killed in Idaho by a hunter whose wolf tag was no longer valid.

“What an amazing difference between how this wolf’s story evolved compared to his brother, OR-7, who is now in California and is an international celebrity,” said Suzanne Stone of Boise, spokeswoman for the 530,000-member Defenders of Wildlife environmental group.

The radio-collared male wolf identified as OR-9 was killed Feb. 2 near a cattle feedlot and winter calving area north of Emmett, between Boise and the Snake River, said Mike Keckler, spokesman for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

Like his famous brother, OR-9 was born into the Imnaha pack near the northeastern Oregon town of Joseph. He was collared Feb. 26, 2011, in the Grouse Creek area east of Joseph when he was about 1 1/2 years old and weighed 90 pounds then.

OR-9 departed Oregon in July two months before OR-7 began his epic 730-mile trek to Crater Lake and south into California earlier this winter. OR-9 headed east, swam the Snake River into Idaho at Brownlee Reservoir and traveled south toward Emmett.

His travel destination turned out to be dangerous. Unlike the Joseph area, where gray wolves are protected under Oregon’s Endangered Species Act, Idaho’s wolves are classified as big game animals and subject to regulated hunting rules.
More…http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/02/sibling_of_famous_or-7_wolf_ki.html

From Defenders of Wildlife:
You didn’t support it. We didn’t support it. Now it’s been shown that the best available science doesn’t support the plan to delist nearly all gray wolves in the Lower 48 either.

ACT NOW: Demand that Secretary Jewell abandon this reckless delisting proposal and allow for the full recovery of gray wolves!

An independent peer review board, commissioned to assess the quality and adequacy of the science underlying the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s (FWS) delisting plan for gray wolves, just released their unanimous decision: that the proposal to strip gray wolves of Endangered Species Act Protection is not based on the best available science and contains numerous omissions and errors.

This is a major development in our efforts to stop this irresponsible proposal from going through.

Please speak out! Urge Secretary Jewell to direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to withdraw this proposal immediately!

Now that it’s been confirmed that this proposed delisting is clearly not based on the best available science, we are left wondering why FWS wants to turn its back on wolves.

In states like Idaho, we continue to see what happens when wolves are prematurely stripped of federal protection and left to be managed by states with deadly anti-wolf agenda’s – just recently they announced a proposal to kill off as many as 450 wolves statewide!

Wolves now serve as a scapegoat for anti-government extremists with a political agenda – and these groups will spare no expense to try and derail wolf conservation in America. We simply can’t allow politics and private interests to trump science – it’s irresponsible and unacceptable.

Idaho Lowering Big Game Hunting Age to 10?

[Next they’ll be wanting to kill more wolves so 10 year olds will have a better chance of “getting their elk.”

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/idaho-lowering-big-game-hunting-age-to-10/

by Heather Pilkinton on February 4, 2014.
This is neither the website of, nor affiliated in any way with, Guardian News and Media.

Hunting is a way of life for many in Idaho, but a new proposal has some questioning how young is too young to huntsafe_image big game. Idaho lawmakers are considering a proposal which would lower the current age to hunt big game, such as elk, from 12 to 10.

Right now in the state, children as young as 10 are able to hunt small game like duck and rabbit, as long as they have completed a hunter’s education program and are accompanied by a licensed adult. However, the type of gun needed to hunt big game is different than small game, which leads to the question as to whether a 10-year-old is capable of handling that level of firearm.

Currently those 12 and over are able to hunt without an accompanying adult as long as they have completed a hunter’s education program. As per Idaho law, anyone born after January 1, 1975, must complete a hunter’s education program, or show proof of a valid license from another state in order to purchase a license.

Part of the reason for the idea of lowering the hunting age is to boost stagnant hunting and fishing license sales in the state, which have hovered around the 330,000. Wildlife regulators hope that by lowering the age, hunting can be promoted as a family activity, especially in this age of electronic entertainment. They are hoping that lowering the hunting age will bring families with kids back to Mother Nature.

Sharon Kiefer, the Idaho Fish and Game Deputy Director, has stated that more women are getting into hunting, but admits that not all parents are keen on the idea of younger children being out in the field with a high powered firearm. One former conservation officer and hunter education instructor, Tony Latham, worries about a 10-year-old handling a rifle, even a scaled down model, that can shoot a bullet for miles when hunting big game.

This is not the first time that Idaho’s hunting practices have come into question in the past year. In December, 2013, the Wolf and Coyote Derby held in Salmon brought a lot of unwanted attention to the state from animal rights activists, from both inside and out of the state, who sought to stop the derby. This derby is one of a few derbies in Idaho; the annual Hannah Bates Memorial Rock Chuck Derby in Bliss serves as a fundraiser for cancer research and other charity programs.

Idaho is also under scrutiny for another piece of legislation not related to hunting. Republican lawmaker Lynn Luker recently introduced two bills that would make it legal for professionals to refuse service to individuals based on characteristics such as sexual orientation, if that individual was “contrary” to the professional’s sincerely held religious belief. This would mean that a teacher could refuse to teach a child who is gay, or a medical professional could refuse to accept a single mother as a patient if items such as birth control violates that medical professional’s religious teaching.

The idea to lower the big game hunting age from 12 to 10 also comes at a time when gun violence as a whole is a pressing issue throughout the United States. The number of school shootings has raised the question as to how young is too young to handle a gun? This is brought to the forefront even more as gun manufacturers are making “youth” firearms, which are scaled down models of those used by adults.

However, many will say that education plays a big part in firearm safety and that younger hunters will benefit not just by Hunter’s Education, but by being mentored by experienced, adult hunters. Kiefer believes this and this sentiment is echoed by Jim Toynbee, who has taught hunter’s education for nearly 40 years, though Toynbee admits a lower hunter age would not be possible without the smaller sized rifles. He said his main concern is that a young hunter might get too excited and not make a clean shot. This means an animal might be unnecessarily wounded, where an experienced hunter would harvest the animal with a clean kill.

If the hunting age is lowered in Idaho from 12 to 10 for big game, it will not be the only state with a minimum age of 10; Maine and Nebraska both have that same minimum age with adult accompaniment. Those states who do have minimum ages often require adults to be with minor hunters. However, considering the type of firearms used and the controversy around children and firearms in general, the question is how young is too young to hunt big game in Idaho?

By Heather Pilkinton

Idaho Elk Hunters Want More Wolf Trapping

http://m.cdapress.com/news/outdoors/article_59dcd3c3-b13b-52dd-8ca8-cabf53002b54.html?mode=jqm

F4WM seeks new members

COEUR d’ALENE – A group of North Idaho elk hunters formed a foundation in 2011 that is designed to incentivize more winter trapping of gray wolves in528624c939a88_preview-620 the Idaho panhandle – and now they want to take it statewide

The Foundation for Wildlife Management, or F4WM, has created a website and Facebook page to generate interest in starting new chapters and recruiting new members.

“We are in a hardball fight for our hunting heritage in Idaho,” said former Idaho Department of Fish and Game Commissioner Anthony McDermott, who now sits on the board of the foundation.

According to McDermott, the mission of the foundation is to encourage the trapping of gray wolves in areas where the wolf predation is excessive.

“The foundation is totally focused on restoring the elk in our backcountry areas,” he said.

The board of the foundation has found that trapping the wolves is the best way to manage the predator. McDermott said wolves are smart animals that learn very quickly how to evade traditional hunters.

“This organization has figured out that trapping is the answer,” he said. “But trapping is also very expensive.”

So, the foundation offers up to a $500 reimbursement to a successful gray wolf trapper who can provide receipts for their expenses.

F4WM has 278 members in the Idaho panhandle area, and they just started another chapter in Lewiston last week. The organization has also attracted interest from people in Salmon, Challis, Riggins and the Bitterroot Valley.

Cost of membership is $35 annually and most of that money is used to reimburse wolf trappers.

In 2011 and 2012, the F4WM was able to reimburse 22 trappers, and paid 14 trappers so far this season.

For more information on how to join the organization go online to http://www.foundationforwildlifemanagement.org

Nuking Idaho is as Sick as What Hunters and Trappers Do

Occasionally I get comments that I don’t completely disagree with, but are clearly from troll hunters and therefore by their very nature not allowable here, as per the commenting policy and scope of this blog, spelled out in the “About” section: https://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/about/

Today I received just such a comment, which starts out, “I think the comment about the whole state being nuked is seriously sick and just equally sociopathic as the actions of the ‘idiot’ dominators who care more about the money the state will gain from big game hunting tags…” Ok, I can see where you’re coming from there–the act of nuking Idaho would be about as bad as what hunters and trappers there do.  Don’t worry, I don’t think that particular commenter was even remotely serious about actually nuking Idaho. But, to be fair to others whose comments have been removed, and to avoid anyone comparing her comment to something a hunter might say, I’ll remove it.

I’ve removed or disallowed plenty of comments from hunters. The difference being, they aren’t just blowing off steam. When they talk about killing animals, it’s for real. So hunters, please don’t waste time writing a comment that doesn’t get posted. As a rule, I remove any comments that talk about so-called “ethical” hunters killing animals “respectfully.” That said, because it includes a few kernels of truth, here’s the full text of a comment I received today:

 

“I think the comment about the whole state being nuked is seriously sick and just equally sociopathic as the actions of the “idiot” dominators who care more about the money the state will gain from big game hunting tags and the big game small penis hunters that need to show their bravado (which means lack of courage) by placing any animal on their wall in their home. Ethical hunters don’t need to do this, they hunt/kill to eat and they do it respectfully. But, in our sick greedy culture of monster trucks and steroidal men who learn at an early age (through abusive words and actions) to stuff their emotions for fear of becoming too much like a woman or even worse a gay man and likely go home from drinking with the good ole boys who have experienced the same young lives, to beat their wives…we are creating more to come in the future of our country and yes, particularly in Idaho.”

 

Of course, since human beings don’t have to kill and eat animals in order to survive, there is no such thing as an “ethical hunter,” and taking the life of a healthy animal can never really be considered “respectful.”

1469842_668794219837443_817014975_n