Delisting wolves is Idaho Fish and Game Commission’s no. 1 priority

Residents voice concerns about the protection of steelhead and bighorn sheep, but Commission chair says reducing protection of wolves more important-

Fish and Game: delist wolves again. KLEW-TV. Lewiston, Idaho

18 Responses to “Delisting wolves is Idaho Fish and Game Commission’s no. 1 priority”

  1. vickif Says:

    I find it astonishing how these people are so idiotic. We manage bighorns, and steelheads, want to manage wolves….HELLLLOOOOOO!
    You are failing in management of salmon, bihorns, and failed at your previous attempt to manage wolves. Clue in, you cannot manage wolves by exterminating them. You caanot manage any endangered species while public land use that protects habitat is being raped by ranchers and mismanaged/abused by thier cronies in office.

  2. Ralph Maughan Says:


    This commission doesn’t like bighorn or steelhead very much either. They like them only inasmuch as they don’t offend their real constituency which is the livestock industry, the dam lobby, and a segment of the Republican Party. This election brought no state level change in Idaho. The mentality of George Bush and Dick Cheney still prevail at the state level.

  3. vickif Says:

    well, we will kick their ass at the federal level then.

    It is quite something, you’d think they’d want to increase revenue in other venues considering recent studies suggest that American’s are consuming less beef,…a new and groing trend. They are also consuming more vegatables-and organic everything.

    p.s. I mentioned your name in my “suggestions” to Obama’s new transitions sight.

  4. Anthony Says:

    I totally agree with Ralph, If they really cared about bighorns, steelhead, mule deer, etc. they would attempt to do something about livestock grazing on public lands. At the very least be vocal about the devasating effects of livestock grazing. I had to laugh at the Idaho fish and games mule deer initative to figure out why mule deer numbers are dropping. Could it be possible the reason is because their are thousands of competitors for grass in their winter habitat.

  5. vickif Says:

    ofcourse they don’t care about the salmon or bighorn, it’s just easier to kill wolves….less public sympathy. after all boghorn don’t have fangs, and they can’t claim a fish climbed out of the water, and walked (Too Darwinian for some Christians to swallow) and killed a cow. Wolves are easier targets. They are managing their way into control of public lands, one extinct species at a time.

  6. John d. Says:

    If proper science were to be the driving force behind man’s involvement in natural affairs, then not one species would need to be ‘managed’.
    I love the use of euphemisms these blokes use.

  7. Buffaloed Says:

    I would argue that the IDFG/livestock industry doesn’t give a crap about either steelhead or bighorn because they DO get in the way of their industry. Steelhead have caused the livestock industry all kinds of difficulty. Since they are listed as threatened there are all kinds of standards for streams and riparian areas (which are not being met in many places) and they don’t like that. Bighorns threaten the welfare sheep industry because there are starting to be places where they are being kicked off the Payette Forest because of disease issues.

    I threw some numbers together from the last wolf report and it is obvious to see that this year they are ramping up the killing of wolves not just the number that they kill but the number of wolves they kill for every domestic animal they kill. Of course they don’t want anyone to know any of the details anymore about when, where and why they kill so many wolves so they just give vague numbers and hope nobody notices. Of course we here have been lulled into inaction because we don’t hear about it anymore either and the media only reports details when wolves show up in new places too. Lack of detail means less criticism from us.

    Here are the numbers:

    Number of wolves per domestic animal (only WS and 10j)








  8. Buffaloed Says:

    That didn’t come out the way I wanted.

    let’s try it this way:

    Year Cattle Sheep Dogs Total WS 10j Other Total Number of wolves per domestic animal (only WS and 10j)
    2003 7 130 3 140 7 0 8 15 0.05
    2004 19 176 4 199 17 0 21 38 0.09
    2005 29 166 12 207 24 3 16 43 0.13
    2006 41 237 4 282 35 7 19 61 0.15
    2007 57 211 10 278 43 7 27 77 0.18
    2008 91 211 13 315 82 13 36 131 0.30
    244 1131 46 1421 208 30 127 365 0.17

  9. Buffaloed Says:

    The ratio has gone up from 0.05 wolves per “depredation” in 2003, up to 0.18 in 2007, and is now more than double what the average was when you use numbers from previous years from 0.12 to now 0.30.

    In other words, if you remove this year’s number from the stats the average number of wolves killed per “depredation” for all of the years from 2003-2007 is 0.12. Now it is 0.30, more than double.

    So I guess Nadeau has earned his doctorate. “take 3 and call me in the morning”.

    There are rumors of some nasty stuff going on in the wolf world out there, rumors of WS trapping and killing wolves near “culled” sheep among other things. Things that are probably illegal but we don’t hear about them anymore so we don’t scream and yell about them anymore.

    We’ve been lulled into a sense of complacency.

    I encourage someone to submit public information request to IDFG. I submitted one recently and was denied because I now work for WWP and we are fighting the 10j lawsuit.

    Anyone not associated with the lawsuit must be given this information if requested. I would encourage someone to ask for this info. It might be a little costly because it involves costs to the IDFG to round it up.

    You can even use the text of the letter I sent to them:

    Idaho Department of Fish and Game
    P.O. Box 25
    Boise, ID 83707
    Telephone: (208) 334-3700
    Fax: (208) 334-2148 / (208) 334-2114

    Attn: State Record Officers

    Dear Idaho Officials,

    I am requesting all information pertaining to wolf management in Idaho.

    Specifically, WWP would like the documentation about all depredations that occurred in Idaho from the reporting period of July 28, 2008 up to the present.

    Any documents which include:
    • The location of the depredation(s).
    • Whether the depredation occurred on public or private lands.
    • The name of the agent(s) who investigated the depredation(s).
    • The number and type of livestock killed.
    • The control actions recommended for such depredations.
    • The control actions which actually took place for said depredation(s).
    • The method of control (i.e. aerial control, shooting, trapping and killing etc.).
    • Resources and costs associated with control actions, the date(s) of control action(s).

    We are also requesting any communications (emails, letters, faxes) regarding the management of wolves in Idaho from individuals within the department including but not limited to Steve Nadeau, Jason Hussman, Michael Lucid, Carter Niemeyer, and any other IDFG employee involved in the management of wolves. We are also requesting emails regarding wolf management sent to the IDFG from individuals from Idaho Department of Agriculture, Idaho Office of Species Conservation, USDA Wildlife Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Nez Perce Tribe who are involved with management of wolves in Idaho.

    These documents are requested under the Idaho Open Records Law Idaho Code § 9-338 that provides public access to information.

    Please contact me if you have any questions about this request. We appreciate your prompt response.

    Thank You,

  10. jerry b Says:

    Buffaloed….I requested the same info from Montana FWP over a month ago. Just submitted my 3rd request and received a response….. “they’re busy, and will get to it in time”. Unfortunately, unlike a F.O.I. request to the feds, there’s no time limit in Montana pertaining to the public disclosure law and I can’t afford an attorney to go after them. Any suggestions??

  11. Ralph Maughan Says:

    I’d think Earth Justice would want to help because this information is critical.

    Perhaps they are already working on it.

  12. Brian Ertz Says:

    Earth Justice should have the info, at least – that’s the idea eluded to in the state’s response – but WWP and other plaintiff parties are being denied because the state claims that it can’t administer information requests that overlap/conflict with the litigation’s ‘discovery’ process.

  13. Rick Hammel Says:

    Hmmm. Looks like Judge Malloy needs to get into the act.. and soon, Denying plaintiffs in a case information pertentant to that case would seem to me a violation of federal procedures.


  14. Buffaloed Says:

    The reason they gave is legitimate when you look at the actual code. I still think someone needs to obtain the info and publicize it. I don’t care who.

    There is a time limit in Idaho with regard to a response to the request but that doesn’t mean that they have to provide the information requested to you in a prescribed period of time.

    Idaho Code § 9-338 to 9-343 are the most pertinent.

  15. IzabelaM Says:

    Do you have to be state resident to request the info from officials pertaining to wolf management in Idaho or Montana?

  16. Save bears Says:

    Not Ralph,

    But based on the information I have read and heard, anyone can put in a request for a release of public information IzabelaM, so you should be able to file your requests with the respective government agencies and they by law should provide the information. As you can see though, it may not be in a timely manner.

  17. John d. Says:

    ID F&G is already hard at work organising another wolf hunt come January 20 next year, they seem to ignore the fact that there has been a decline in wolf pups this year.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: