Idaho elk gone......
04-24-2008, 11:47 AM
#21
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western Montana
Posts: 96
RE: Idaho elk gone......
I really think this board is great. I mean it, I appreciate that we can have an intelligent conversation about these issues. That is something that can't be had on many other boards. Thanks much to all of you!
The private land issue is complicated for sure. One thing that I thought was interesting was that in MT the animals are not considered owned by the landowner, but the people of the state.Predators have been controlled so effectively that the major tool used by the state to manageanimal populations is hunting. I think that many of us will agree that animal populations must be kept in check for their own good, as well as the good of humans. We do not have CWD in MT, a disease of having too many animalssmall areas. Nor do we have urban elk problems like they have in Jackson Hole (thank god!). We do have access problems and ranches with 1,000's of elk that don't migrate off of them anymore andonlyallow a few big bulls to be killed every year. These are problems for our animal populations and it seems like they are only getting worse every year. It seems the problem is only getting worse every year and there is no better time to try to address the issue than now. Read the MT Elk Management Plan on the FWP website for a good overview of thisissue and others we face as elk hunters. And keep up the good work everyone!
The private land issue is complicated for sure. One thing that I thought was interesting was that in MT the animals are not considered owned by the landowner, but the people of the state.Predators have been controlled so effectively that the major tool used by the state to manageanimal populations is hunting. I think that many of us will agree that animal populations must be kept in check for their own good, as well as the good of humans. We do not have CWD in MT, a disease of having too many animalssmall areas. Nor do we have urban elk problems like they have in Jackson Hole (thank god!). We do have access problems and ranches with 1,000's of elk that don't migrate off of them anymore andonlyallow a few big bulls to be killed every year. These are problems for our animal populations and it seems like they are only getting worse every year. It seems the problem is only getting worse every year and there is no better time to try to address the issue than now. Read the MT Elk Management Plan on the FWP website for a good overview of thisissue and others we face as elk hunters. And keep up the good work everyone!
04-25-2008, 09:21 PM
#23
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MN USA
Posts: 1,392
RE: Idaho elk gone......
I've found over the years when talking to poeple or reading articles about Timber (Gray) Wolves and how many there should be in this part of the country, those in favor of no reasonable controls on wolf population usually fall into3 categories or combination of:
[ul][*]Those those who think that because they are furry and nice to look at they shouldn't be touched.[*]Those who think a moderate population being good to cull some of the sick, young or old game means unlimited number of wolves means even more good.[*]Those who worship the wolves as part of "mother nature" and would sooner see their own biological mothers numbers reduced than the wolves numbers controlled.[/ul]
All of these misguided views and approaches to wolves are bad both for the herds of game animals (e.g. Elk, deer, etc.) and ultimately the wolf populations, because the overpopulation of large predators, including wolves can and will eventually have devastating effects on game results in wolf populations in those areas having to spread or starve. This brings them into more conflict with farmers / ranchers and hunters, who see the animals they hunt or own killed off in larger numbers every year.
Those opposed to putting any kind of reasonable limits on wolf numbers don't do so for rational reasons, as I've stated. So, don't think that just because you show them evidence of the damage too many cause, they'll suddenly change their minds and support your efforts. Just the opposite, they are more likely to join with the extreme "environmentalists" and anti hunting groups to oppose your efforts to bring sanity back and control of wolf population through Federal courts and the leftist in Congress. But you've got to fight the good fight, if you expect to have any game animals of numbers for your children or grand-children to enjoy and appreciate, along with a stable population of large predators like Gray Wolve, Grizzlies, etc.
[ul][*]Those those who think that because they are furry and nice to look at they shouldn't be touched.[*]Those who think a moderate population being good to cull some of the sick, young or old game means unlimited number of wolves means even more good.[*]Those who worship the wolves as part of "mother nature" and would sooner see their own biological mothers numbers reduced than the wolves numbers controlled.[/ul]
All of these misguided views and approaches to wolves are bad both for the herds of game animals (e.g. Elk, deer, etc.) and ultimately the wolf populations, because the overpopulation of large predators, including wolves can and will eventually have devastating effects on game results in wolf populations in those areas having to spread or starve. This brings them into more conflict with farmers / ranchers and hunters, who see the animals they hunt or own killed off in larger numbers every year.
Those opposed to putting any kind of reasonable limits on wolf numbers don't do so for rational reasons, as I've stated. So, don't think that just because you show them evidence of the damage too many cause, they'll suddenly change their minds and support your efforts. Just the opposite, they are more likely to join with the extreme "environmentalists" and anti hunting groups to oppose your efforts to bring sanity back and control of wolf population through Federal courts and the leftist in Congress. But you've got to fight the good fight, if you expect to have any game animals of numbers for your children or grand-children to enjoy and appreciate, along with a stable population of large predators like Gray Wolve, Grizzlies, etc.
05-10-2008, 08:54 PM
#24
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington Wa. USA
Posts: 1,386
RE: Idaho elk gone......
ORIGINAL: millagerobert
Your right, my bad. I should have said "since the politicians down around Boise see this herd they are told to think, by their environmental-special interest- campaign fundraising-wolf petting-save the squirrels-my mind was programmed by my college professor-the trees have feelings too-as long as our hearts are in the right place everything will be okay-koombaya-we stand for hope and change-groups, that everything is still ok up in North Central Idaho"
Anyone out there ever think of the possibility that it is all going to plan for these people who don't want the wolves to be controlled. I mean they would be anti hunting folk, and what better way to end elk hunting than to have the wolves bring down the population of elk,deer,and others to the point that THEY would qualify for protectionunder the endangerd species act. What happens to hunting then???????
Thanks
Your right, my bad. I should have said "since the politicians down around Boise see this herd they are told to think, by their environmental-special interest- campaign fundraising-wolf petting-save the squirrels-my mind was programmed by my college professor-the trees have feelings too-as long as our hearts are in the right place everything will be okay-koombaya-we stand for hope and change-groups, that everything is still ok up in North Central Idaho"
Anyone out there ever think of the possibility that it is all going to plan for these people who don't want the wolves to be controlled. I mean they would be anti hunting folk, and what better way to end elk hunting than to have the wolves bring down the population of elk,deer,and others to the point that THEY would qualify for protectionunder the endangerd species act. What happens to hunting then???????
Thanks
