Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) and Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) have introduced federal legislation to line the pockets of Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana in their efforts at compensating livestock producers for animals probably maybe killed by wolves.
Senators seek to compensate owners for livestock killed by wolves
Two more take permits have been issued for probems near Dubois.
Here’s the other side of Wyoming’s new kill-a lot-of-wolves policy. Generous killing of wolves where they are supposed to be protected because of minor or vague wolf problems with livestock — kill permits in the wolves are “trophy game” zone.
Cody rancher receives first ‘kill’ permit. Cody Enterprise.
Given the relative numbers, killing 6 wolves in Wyoming (where there are 150 outside the national parks) is like killing about 26 wolves in Idaho.
The Great Falls Tribure explains how Montana is resting its hope for tolerance of wolves on its state compensation program following delisting. 100% compensation will be distributed for both confirmed and probable losses and the state hopes to expand the program to include compensation for “broken fences” attributed to wolves in the future.
Some people tend to forget that state management of wolves isn’t a responsibility exclusively reserved to the Idaho Department of Fish & Game, a department that’s allegedly insulated from politicization. I slip “allegedly” in there because anyone who’s been paying attention to wildlife issues in the state has a good idea that the Livestock lobby pretty much holds its will over the head of even our good ol’ boy governor “Butch” Otter, let alone the IDF&G (See: Idaho Interim Bighorn Management Plan). The lobby exercises its authority most prominently in the legislature, where last week House lawmakers passed SENATE BILL NO. 1374. The bill sets the bar for “disposal” of wolves, which we’ll see below the fold, but for this space we’ll set the mood with with a characteristic sampling of the mentality behind the governing body that will hold authority over “managing” wolves in the state of Idaho come Friday.
The bill starts :
10 [...]any person may control, trap, and/or remove any
11 wild animals or birds or may destroy the houses, dams, or other structures of
12 furbearing animals for the purpose of protecting property from the
13 depredations thereof as hereinafter provided.
The killing of the Buffalo Ridge Pack in Idaho prompted an inquiry bringing forth some interesting information about the cost of wolf control.
The information is in a letter by Gloria Carlton in the most recent Idaho Mountain Express.
I wonder what the dollar loss of livestock to the rancher (said to be Wayne Baker) was and the cost of measures that would have made the pasture less attractive to wolves?*
I imagine direct expenditures by conservation groups to keep this wolf pack out of trouble plus volunteer time was easily $50,000. The efforts were mostly in Squaw Creek where the pack denned each year and was quite easy to see in the winter until about the end of May.
- - - - -
* Note it was never proven the Buffalo Ridge pack killed the several small calves that were confirmed to be killed by wolf. The East Pass Creek pack is in the area and their are other scattered wolves.
State wildlife agencies wait to take over wolves. 2007 also saw record number of wolves killed in the region. By Mike Stark. Billings Gazette Staff.
The record number of wolves killed did seem to reduce reduce, or was at least associated, with fewer losses of livestock in Wyoming. Sheep are more likely to be killed than cattle. Of course they are smaller are worth less. Stories rarely mention that a high percentage of the dead cattle are calves, and usually late winter, spring and early summer calves — small or smallish.
I need to calculate the rates, but my perception is that in Idaho the livestock losses per wolf are consistently lower than in Wyoming and Montana, probably due to the larger cow-free backcountry.
Except for an occasional large sheep kill, I must admit my perception is that wolf losses are trivial and the perception of high losses is an opinion artifact created by the livestock industry and politicians. They can tell me 75 cows is a lot of cows, but then I know they were mostly calves and Western Montana is a huge place, but if you report each lost calf and a tearful livestock operator (at least while the video is recording) . . . “how I loved that little gal. Now she’s hamburger (Ooops, I mean she was viciously hamstrung),” it will have the desired effect.
It’s just amazing from a benefit/cost standpoint (assuming wolves have no benefits).
Wolves do maybe $200,000 damage and state appropriates more than ten times that to monitor them, collar them and kill them, and of course give oh so generous reimbursement (7x) to livestock operators who are lucky enough to have a wolf kill a lamb or a calf in the trophy game area in the NW corner of the state.
Story in the Jackson Hole News and Guide. By Cory Hatch.
This open letter to Cal Groen, director of Idaho Fish and Game, was published in the Challis Messenger today.
Cost of control. By Gloria Carlton
 | Layton on Rocky Barker: Judge appears to… |
 | Larry Thorngren on The “Y-pole” for h… |
 | Robert Hoskins on Do Elk Feedgrounds Violate Pub… |
 | Linda Hunter on Do Elk Feedgrounds Violate Pub… |
 | Catbestland on Do Elk Feedgrounds Violate Pub… |
Western Watersheds Project Blog Buffalo Field Campaign Blog Wild Again!! Demarcated Landscapes