Big Game Hunting Moose, elk, mulies, caribou, bear, goats, and sheep are all covered here.
 Nosler

Yellowstone is Dead

Old 01-20-2011, 10:06 PM
  #51  
Spike
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 59
Default

DIET
The size of Mackenzie Valley wolves is partially due to their large abundance of food. They will prey on wood bison, elk, caribou, musk ox, moose, Dall sheep, Sitka black-tailed deer, mountain goat, beaver, ground squirrel, vole, snowshoe hare, lemmings, and salmon.)

I have seen some huge Canadian wolves were I live in North Central Washington> We have fairly big Coyotes and these coyotes look like they are standing along side of a Shetland pony. One morning I watched two of these wolves eating on a deer they had killed in the wee hours of the morning, there was 9 coyotes harassing these two wolves trying to get a bite, one wolf would take after the bunch and drive them off and then go back to eating, we watched this for about an hour. Till finally both wolves ran them coyotes into the timber, about a half hour later 6 of the coyotes showed back up to eat on the deer.

I think it depends a lot on how much game there is as to how big these wolves will get, and they are the largest wolf there is to start with. When Ed Bangs introduced these wolves he stated that he was looking for a wolf that could kill the hell out of elk, and he said he found just what he was looking for up in Alberta.

Canada and Alaska is a spread out sort of a country, dumping the C.wolves in states that have far less open country and abundant wildlife and soon you have wolves multiplying faster than you can count, and of course the wolf count has been and still is being underestimated. But then how do you actually get an accurate count when you have know idea where all of your wolves went. The release and then discover has been going on in several states, and in some cases the released wolves end up getting shot before the great discovery. In my opinion seeing as how the wolves were brought in illegally and then allowed to expand beyond control, they are open season--SS-Shoot and shut up. Some would argue that that is poaching, I would say to them, the Canadian wolves and the drug cartels along the Mexican border have a lot in common. If you don't take care of them it will only get worse.

Not only are these wolves killing off our hunting but they carry many diseases that are very dangerous to humans, it isn't going to be to cool when folks start having to have cyst remove from their organs, actually it has already start happening. It take 10-15 years before you even realize you have been infected, and the operation is a very tricky one.

The wolf introduction wasn't about recovering wolves it is and has always been about land control.

I honestly believe we are going to turn this around and get back to managing our game herds. More people are getting educated about what has happened and the lies of the wolf introduction are being exposed. You never see the real truth about what these wolves have done to the lower 48 on TV, but that is just about to get changed. MM

http://www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html

http://www.y2y.net/
moremules is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 01:55 AM
  #52  
Spike
 
Bruinsden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South of the Mason Dixon Line.
Posts: 40
Default

Originally Posted by brianspetcare
I am a biologist and in my ecology class in college they discussed what happens when things are signficantly changed. When you add or remove a species it has drastic changes to the whole ecosystem.

In this case when you introduce a predatory species that has been gone for decades, which allowed its prey to increase in numbers, you will get a HUGE increase in the population of the predator. It will be so big that it will drive its prey almost to extinction. The long term effect of the drop in prey is a big drop in the predator. Then the prey comes back, then the predator, etc. Eventually you will hit a more natural balance (which still usually goes through cycles). The problem is that this is on a very long term scale (many decades to centuries).
Sounds to me like you Yankee's need to start killing some Wolves! SSS and solve the problem.
Bruinsden is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 07:01 AM
  #53  
Typical Buck
 
justhuntitall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: west central IL
Posts: 674
Default

moremules

Thank you for your time and response . You have answered many questions and gave us a wealth of information . Again thank you for your response!

Shane
justhuntitall is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 08:10 AM
  #54  
Typical Buck
 
tangozulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 694
Default

So if you saw wolves in North Central Washington they probably walked accross the border from Canada and we're not intriduce. This would make them local wolves.
tangozulu is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 08:56 AM
  #55  
Spike
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 59
Default

Originally Posted by brianspetcare
I am a biologist and in my ecology class in college they discussed what happens when things are signficantly changed. When you add or remove a species it has drastic changes to the whole ecosystem. When I went to Yellowstone years ago (as a driving through the park visitor) I learned that because of the wolves the herbivores stopped eating the plants by the streams because they were too out in the open (easy prey for the wolves). This let the plants grow more, which shaded the streams, which cooled them, which allowed the trout to return. This sounded good to me and really demonstrated the far reaching effects of a top predator. I even had a question on a college exam about this exact situation.

In this case when you introduce a predatory species that has been gone for decades, which allowed its prey to increase in numbers, you will get a HUGE increase in the population of the predator. It will be so big that it will drive its prey almost to extinction. The long term effect of the drop in prey is a big drop in the predator. Then the prey comes back, then the predator, etc. Eventually you will hit a more natural balance (which still usually goes through cycles). The problem is that this is on a very long term scale (many decades to centuries).

To me it seems like hunting the wolf is an absolutely perfect way to keep their population from rising so sharply that they bring their prey within sight of extinction. They were there before, in balance, but it would be a LONG time for it to ever reach that naturally, if it did.

In my opinion someone should have the right to keep animals on their own property under control. I know when the squirrels get out of control here (literally chewing on the deck and house) the problem doesn't last long...
Brianspetcare- You are thinking of the study done on the wolves and moose on Isle Royale, for many years biologist used this study as a balance ecosystem, it wasn't until a few years ago that it came out as bunk. Those wolves were lock on an island and the cycle that you described above did happen. On the other hand with unmanaged wolves on the main land there is No such cycling of the up and down as wolves have an unlimited supply of prey, meaning in cattle country they can hit livestock while they continue to hit the game herds. the end result is the wolves will put the game herds in a predation pit. Predation pit is where elk, deer etc. sink so low there is no way for them to recover. The wolves will not die down from starvation as on an island. When the wolves wipe an area clean they will move on, this has happened in parts of the Yellowstone, the wolves left a barren landscape with not even the chirp of birds.

As far as hunting to control wolves in the lower 48 it cannot be done, 70% of the wolf population needs to be killed each year to keep the wolves from expanding. Alaska is a good example where wolves are hunted and trapped and still yet they have to have special hunts to keep the wolves from killing whole caribou herds off. They found out with the wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana just how hard it was to hunt and kill wolves. Like IDFG said a while back without the use of airplanes and helicopters it would be impossible to do control efforts on wolves killing livestock, even with radio collars on some of the wolves it is very difficult, and there are hundreds of wolf packs that are undocumented, which means of course no collars. If the USFWS and IDFG would have been honest from the beginning these wolves would never have been introduced and even after the introduction if the wolves would have been managed at the levels that were "promised" then perhaps we would have a managed population. But instead they lied, and now the American people will be stuck cleaning up the mess.
moremules is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 09:04 AM
  #56  
Spike
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 59
Default

Originally Posted by tangozulu
So if you saw wolves in North Central Washington they probably walked accross the border from Canada and we're not intriduce. This would make them local wolves.
, yeah sure they did. I have ocean front property in Montana also.

Washington is a "release and then discover" state.
moremules is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 09:29 AM
  #57  
Spike
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 59
Default

The Lacey Act
At the turn of the century Yellowstone was wide open, it was being hunted by contract Hunters for the wealthy of the day, much the way the wealthy of today are using it to feed their Wolf. If left unchecked there would have been no Wildlife in Yellowstone, the same situation that we have today.
The Lacey Act was used to stop contract hunting and thus began the long road of recovery and the resurrection of the Elk herds thru out the Western States.
The wolf was hunted to extinction, only thirty Wolves were taken during the purge of Yellowstone, last wolf killed in the United States was in the Dakotas in 1930’s.
First licensed Elk hunt in Idaho was in 1948, today the Elk are disappearing faster than Democrats in Louisiana, Moose are harder to find than a Democrat in Florida. What went wrong?
The first violation of the Lacey Act – Wolves were imported illegally into the United States and they were purchased with stolen money.
Second violation of the Lacey Act- EIS were ignored and to date most all the EIS that were done on the Wolf were wrong….kinda’ funny ??
Third violation of the Lacey Act- Provided in the Lacey Act is the States right to regulate any and all species and nothing supersedes the authority of the State.
Silver lining- Included in Lacey Act is the provision for restitution for Storage, Damages and rewards and fines and jail time for those found guilty of knowingly violating the Lacey Act……Ed Bang !



The Lacey Act provides that it is unlawful for any person to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any Indian tribal law whether in interstate or foreign commerce. Violation of this federal act can result in civil penalties up to $10,000 per each violation or maximum criminal sanctions of $20,000 in fines and/or up to five years imprisonment. All plants or animals taken in violation of
other the Act are subject to forfeiture as well as all vessels, vehicles, aircraft, and equipment used to aid in the importing, exporting, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing of fish or wildlife or plants in a criminal violation of this chapter for which a felony conviction is Obtained where the owner should have known of the illegal transgression.


The Lacey Act
4) State authority
Nothing in this subsection preempts or supersedes the authority of a State to regulate wildlife species within that State.
The above regulation is evidence of the U.S. Govt. over stepping its authority and trampling States Rights. States have authority over the Wolf and its regulation based on our needs and wants and concerns.

§ 3374. Forfeiture
(a) In general

(1) All fish or wildlife or plants imported, exported, transported, sold, received, acquired, or purchased contrary to the provisions of section 3372 of this title (other than section 3372(b) of this title), or any regulation issued pursuant thereto, shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States notwithstanding any culpability requirements for civil penalty assessment or criminal prosecution included in section 3373 of this title.

(2) All vessels, vehicles, aircraft, and other equipment used to aid in the importing, exporting, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing of fish or wildlife or plants in a criminal violation of this chapter for which a felony conviction is obtained shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States if (A) the owner of such vessel, vehicle, aircraft, or equipment was at the time of the alleged illegal act a consenting party or privy thereto or in the exercise of due care should have known that such vessel, vehicle, aircraft, or equipment would be used in a criminal violation of this chapter, and (B) the violation involved the sale or purchase of, the offer of sale or purchase of, or the intent to sell or purchase, fish or wildlife or plants.

(b) Application of customs laws

All provisions of law relating to the seizure, forfeiture, and condemnation of property for violation of the customs laws, the disposition of such property or the proceeds from the sale thereof, and the remission or mitigation of such forfeiture, shall apply to the seizures and forfeitures incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, under the provisions of this chapter, insofar as such provisions of law are applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, except that all powers, rights, and duties conferred or imposed by the customs laws upon any officer or employee of the Treasury Department may, for the purposes of this chapter, also be exercised or performed by the Secretary or by such persons as he may designate: Provided, That any warrant for search or seizure shall be issued in accordance with rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

(c) Storage cost

Any person convicted of an offense, or assessed a civil penalty, under section 3373 of this title shall be liable for the costs incurred in the storage, care, and maintenance of any fish or wildlife or plant seized in connection with the violation concerned.

The above Regulation leaves the USFWS liable for damage caused by the Wolf.
Part c) Storage Cost – Leaves the door open for compensation to the States for cost of caring for the Wolf while he was in our States.
The following regulation also opens the door for compensation for exposing the criminal activities of the USFWS !


(d) Rewards and incidental expenses

Beginning in fiscal year 1983, the Secretary or the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, from sums received as penalties, fines, or forfeitures of property for any violation of this chapter or any regulation issued hereunder (1) a reward to any person who furnishes information which leads to an arrest, a criminal conviction, civil penalty assessment, or forfeiture of property for any violation of this chapter or any regulation issued hereunder, and (2) the reasonable and necessary costs incurred by any person in providing temporary care for any fish, wildlife, or plant pending the disposition of any civil or criminal proceeding alleging a violation of this chapter with respect to that fish, wildlife, or plant. The amount of the reward, if any, is to be designated by the Secretary or the Secretary of the Treasury, as appropriate. Any officer or employee of the United States or any State or local government who furnishes information or renders service in the performance of his official duties is ineligible for payment under this subsection.





The Endangered Species Act – U.S. Govt. has used the Endangered Species Act to bludgeon the Western States for years. The Lacey Act was and is a powerful tool created to protect Wildlife but it was not powerful enough. Endangered Species Act was invented to side step States Rights,which the Lacey Act protected.

The necessity to destroy the Constitutional Rights of any State or Person is an indictment against the Law that does so and is grounds for the prosecution of those who would find it expedient to pass such heinous legislation. At this point in time we can see the damage that has been done by just such a Law – The Endangered Species Act!.... and there is a list of names of those who voted for it !
Nothing Good has come as a result of The Endangered Species Act! Like a cancer the U.S. Govt. has used it to destroy not preserve. Name one thing that is better because of the Endangered Species Act and I will Kiss your Ass.

Todd Fross
Save Western Wildlife

http://savewesternwildlife.org/lacey-act.html
moremules is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 12:33 PM
  #58  
Typical Buck
 
tangozulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 694
Default

I truely understand the need for the wolf to be managed by hunting. It seems to me that Wyoming is the reason this is not happeneing. All that said, the wolf belongs in all national parks and I enjoy sharing my hunting areas with them. There is NO doubt the wolves were migrating up and down the Flathead River for decades.........."Canadian Greys" or whatever.........big uns. No conspiracey.
tangozulu is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 02:45 PM
  #59  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 334
Default

That is all fine and dandy there Todd. But tell me something. If these wolves are the only reason for the elk and moose and deer disappearing in ID and MT, then how is it that British Columbia was able to DOUBLE its elk population in the same 10 years that our elk population tanked? How did they take their East Kootenai elk herd from 15000 to 30000 in the midst of FAR MORE WOLVES, FAR MORE BEARS, AND FAR MORE LIONS. How are they able to kill more 6 point bulls in the East Kootenai than we kill bulls in all of Region 1 in MT? Is the 49th parallel a magic line or something? What, the super-wolves can't come crawling back over I90, MT 200? Or do they just stop at the border. Oh, I know, wolves aren't as hungry in BC. Can't run as fast? Blind in one eye? Wooden noses? Arthritis? Must be some reason they have never come over the hill from Alberta into that trench north of Eureka MT, Cause I have stood a hill above the border there, and glassed to the north. It looks like the flipping serengeti up there. Or can you actually have both wolves and elk, with proper mgt of habitat and game? They have something figured out up there. Sorry to be a sarcastic jerk again, but this whole argument of subspecies is irrefutably stupid.

I am so sick of everyone with a website making these things into so much more than what they are. They are big dogs, they eat, they run, they breed(once a year people) and they sleep. All these different species of wolves were all named back in the late 1800s and early 1900s when every scientist and self-proclaimed ecologist were all racing to name everything, just to get their name in the books, all it took was a different color variation, and tada!! A new subspecies. There was a wolf researcher from U of Montana, that just gave a talk about all those "Canadian" wolves intermingling over time, cripes, they walked hundreds and thousands of miles into other "subspecies" territories since the beginning of time. Are we to think none of them bred with each other?

Ever heard of Bergmann's Rule? If some of you scholars want to do something, go to a few of your profs at whatever college you attend, and ask them how many generations of wolves it would take to turn these "Achillian" Mackenzie Valley wolves into a wittle, tiny, plain old Columbian wolf, once they are drop-shipped into Yellowstone.
Given the stats from our first hunt, and all those "giants" that were killed, must be something less than 20 years. Where were these 140 lb beasts?

And you want to talk diseases? Scare all the soccer moms out there? Push the same type of rhetoric as the PETA folks? Nice. But I would suggest doing a little research on it first. You want to talk Echinoccus granulosus or multilocularis? Occurance of E. granulosus(the one wolves tend to carry) is 1 in a million. Even where its considered endemic(northern AK), its 1 per 100,000. And funny where it has been seen in the lower 48, its most common(if you want to call it common) in California, Arizona, NM. You think they were drop shipping MV wolves there too? Or is it possible there are greater risk factors than wolves. See, rhetoric. ANY place anyone ever had sheep, you could have this. Blaming wolves and the gubmint is a waste of time.
Coyotes carry multilocularis, which causes alveolar(lung) cysts. I don't hear anyone calling for extermination there.
And since its such a huge scary issue, why do I see all these successful hunters and trappers in BC and AB giving great big hugs to their wolves for their hero shots. No gloves, no masks, no protection from this horrific affliction. Don't spew that garbage. You had people scared to go pick huckleberries last summer, afraid they are going to pick up Echinococcus.

All the crap about the Lacey Act is going to go nowhere, as is crying over MacKenzie Valley super-wolf subspecies, as is worrying about Hydatid disease. Stick to delisting, stick to getting a hunt.
MTdrahthaar is offline  
Old 01-21-2011, 04:00 PM
  #60  
Fork Horn
 
finnbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kittitas, Wa.
Posts: 462
Default

Well all this uproar over importin animals and all...I'm a wonderin if they're just against the wolf or against all game/animal importation???
finnbear is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.