Have you seen any interesting wildife news? May 11

Note that this replaces the 8th edition. That edition can be found slowly moving down into the depths of the blog.

Burrowing Owls © Ken Cole

Burrowing Owls © Ken Cole

Please don’t post entire articles here, just the link, title and your comments about the article. Most of these violate copyright law. They also take up too much space.

476 Responses to “Have you seen any interesting wildife news? May 11”

  1. Chris Harbin Says:

    I’d like to pass along a couple of book recommendations if anyone is interested. “Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the U.S.”, is an edited collection of papers by those who have worked on wolf recovery in that area for years. The Great Lakes story is great if only because it has been successful but not highly conflicted.
    Another is “Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals” by Marc Beckoff and Jessica Pierce. This book lays down the premise that many wild animals, particularly primates and social mammals have a certain moral code that they abide by most of the time and that like humans there are those that do not live by certain morality. This morality is not necessarily ours but in many aspects it is similar. Peaceful reading folks!

  2. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    You are indeed a confusing person,I have read all the books you mention,and these are the basis for your understanding of native Americans?Well see, we are talking about different firearms, which is the major problem, people see these videos and they don’t know what they are talking about..and those viewing really don’t know what they are talking about..

    But is still gets the shit going, unfortunately..

    I did say stick to Jon’s opinion ,she said the firearms did not matter, it was the intent that matters! Now that you put it this way, I really don’t give a shit what you think! I do not care about your expertise in firearms, this is about intent. I really don’t give a shit about your judgement of me, and about the Native Americans. In my opinion, the people of this country, did many injustices to many indian tribes. Crazy Horse,was one of many who got a SCREW by our government,Crazy Horse was a great warrior. The builder of his stature, will not take any money from our government,for fear they will try to control his operation. The way I write is none of your bussiness, and you are a know it all! I liked you once,but not now.

    • Save bears Says:

      Richie,

      First of all, whether you like me or not, has no bearing on the issues..Second, I agree 100% on the issues of what our government did to the native Americans.

      As far as the way you write, guess what it is anyone’s business that reads it and has difficulty in understanding what your trying to say! You have to remember, your only as effective if people can actually understand you..

      You have an absolute dislike of anyone or anything that disagrees with your view of how things should be, you lash out at hunters, gun owners, land owners, ranchers, etc. You try to post in a manner suggesting that you are right and everyone else is wrong..

      As far as liking you, I don’t either like or dislike you, as I have never met you..I disagree with your position on many subjects, but that is not like or dislike…

  3. matt bullard Says:

    An interesting article in the New York Times about establishing protected corridors for jaguars in Costa Rica. It is significant that these are NOT wildlife sanctuaries where development is prohibited but areas where development is limited or its scope adjusted. Central to the success is education of the public.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/12/science/earth/12jaguar.html

    “The idea is not to stop building entirely, but to adjust development so that animals can move through landscapes that humans also occupy. A tall fence surrounding a shopping mall may be forbidden, for example, or a two-lane road may have to be substituted for a proposed four-lane highway.”

    • Angela Says:

      I just watched the accompanying video and it’s worth watching just for the words of the dairy farmer at the end who has had cows killed by jaguars.

  4. Cody Coyote Says:

    There is also a long article entitled” Crying Wolf” by Jake Nichols in this week’s edition of Planet Jackson Hole, or the Jackson Hole weekly , whichever you prefer. May 12 edition , lead story.

    http://www.planetjh.com/news/A_106138.aspx

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Not a bad story. The outfitters come across as, well, as they always come across. Interesting though that the reporter only talked to Franz on the pro-wolf side. Franz knows his stuff but he’s not a hunter. There are a few hunters in western Wyoming who support wolves and know BJ Hill, Lynn Madsen, and Brian Taylor are talking crap. Moose living on pine needles? Give me a break.

      RH

  5. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Sb;
    I promised I would not do this but here it goes, I promise I will not call you general, if you promise not to talk down to me,that might be hard for you to do. I will understand if this is an impossibility for you to do.

    • Save bears Says:

      Richie,

      I guess we have a completely different view of what is going on, I do not intend to talk down to anyone, and I am sorry, if that is the way you feel, but I will continue to post on subjects I disagree with..

      But I will add, making comments of this nature: “That might be hard for you to do” and “I will understand if this is an impossibility for you to do” is in fact talking down to me and being sarcastic..

  6. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Why does this hazing have to occur, Ken Salzar should be taken out of office. Salazar was supposed to clean up the energy commission,did he accomplished anything? I don’t think so ! Let’s get him out, Obama is more of a central figue,than I thought he would be. He is a real disappointment, Thank God for Bernie Sanders he is the one bright light in congress.

  7. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    Most of the time I add “in my opinion”,if you do not see this,I really do not know what to do, but in any case I am sorry if I offended you in any way.

  8. Save bears Says:

    Richie,

    I always see you post, in your opinion…and I am not offended, but when you do the exact same thing that you request others not do, then what are people suppose to think?

    • WM Says:

      SB,

      I am still hearing the musical theme to the Odd Couple in the background. LOL

      Richie,

      May I suggest when you type, you reread it before you hit Enter. I have been confused by your comments, as well, especially when you get on a roll. Recall our dialog about the Nez Perce and the Lolo a few days back.

  9. Robert Hoskins Says:

    This comment by a fellow named Barry just appeared on NewWest, and I thought people would like to see it. (Barry is one of the five or six occupants of the Bad Bear Blog that has declared war on Ralph and some of the rest of us):

    http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/elk_foundation_pro_wolf_groups_need_to_walk_the_talk/C41/L41/#comments

    “Well, well, well, look here…Ralphs minions have wander out of their
    romper room to spew more of their one sided pro wolf disinformation.

    Fact, the pro wolf side has no intention of being reasonable or settling
    for any compromise.
    Fact, laws were violated in this right from the beginning, both state and
    federal.
    Fact, Ed Bangs was informed about the tapeworm BEFORE introduction, he just
    chose to ignore it.
    Fact, the original number was only intended to “get their foot in the
    door”
    Fact, Idaho is experiencing sever decline in EVERY elk herd in the state,
    with one now being identified as unsustainable. And puleeeeez….don’t even
    try to claim any other cause other than the wolf and intentional
    mismanagement from the agenda driven ID F&G;department.
    Fact, ID F&G;intentionally inflated ungulate numbers before the
    introduction to fulfill their pro wolf agenda
    Fact, the pro wolfer has no issue with dismissing ANY science that doesn’t
    fit into their agenda.
    Fact, the ‘wolf experts’ that are so heavily relied upon by the wolfies
    were WRONG on EVERY estimate they made. At what point to you lose your
    position as ‘expert’ with that kind of track record?
    Fact, DoW was allowed to be put in charge of state programs concerning the
    wolves. That is essentially the same as letting a congressman oversee his
    own ethics hearings! And we wonder why we see skewed numbers….
    Fact, state laws were broken when Conley signed an agreement to allow
    wolves to be brought to Idaho. He had no authority to agree to any such
    thing.
    Fact, Robertson/Pittman monies were stolen and illegally funneled to the
    wolf program.
    Fact, ID F&G;has hired a multitude of people directly tied to DoW.
    Fact, ID F&G;is in violation of state laws from neglect in the management
    of Idaho’s wildlife.

    And this is a short list……the lies are going to be exposed. This isn’t
    about wildlife, this is an extension of the progressive movement inside this
    country that is agenda driven to control the people to fit the progressive
    mind set. The time is upon us to dismantle this sham of an environmental
    scam and to dismantle the ID F&G;and bring back REAL wildlife management to
    this state.

    The beginning is in Bozeman, Montana this coming Sunday. But, it is far
    from the end. We have gather a long list of whistle blowers that are finally
    willing to shed light on and provide evidence to the lies and deceit that
    have plagued this program from the beginning. The time to bring those
    responsible to justice is nearly at hand. It is far past time to fight fire,
    with fire. Anyone truly interested in the truth behind this issue is invited
    to Bozeman, you are going to be sick to your stomach when you realize whats
    been pulled off right under our noses.”

    Some comments.

    First, the anti-wolf folks have been propagandizing this “conference” in Bozeman for some time as an unparalleled, or perhaps unprecedented, exposure of why wolf reintroduction to Yellowstone and central Idaho was illegal, or criminal. However, they haven’t really been clear til now as to the content of their claims. Well, here they are.

    Second, all of these claims are subject to proof/disproof (generally disproof); indeed, some of them are justiciable. Presumably, this conference is a prelude to a lawsuit asserting the illegality/criminality of wolf reintroduction, in the sense that these guys are looking for money to pursue a lawsuit. The thing about lawsuits is that once they’re filed, they have to be defended against. Forewarned is forearmed.

    Third, this meeting isn’t a danger to wildlife conservation because of any truths that will be uttered (there are no truths here), but because of the political power that is being generated by wolf opposition. Dewey just sent me a list of speakers for the outfitter anti-wolf rally in Cody this coming Saturday. Three of the four Republican candidates for Governor of Wyoming will appear; others appearing include David Allen of the Rockey Mountain Elk Foundation, Don Peay, founder of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, Jim Magagna, ED of the Wyoming Stockgrowers (the most powerful group in Wyoming aside from the minerals industry), and Pat Childers, Chairman of the Wyoming House Committee on Travel, Recreation, and Wildlife. All of these people have a lot of influence over wildlife and land use decisions.

    Here’s the full list

    “SPEAKERS: Wolf Impact Rally 5/11/2010
    Colin Simpson ….. WY Gubernatorial Candidate
    Ron Micheli………WY Gubernatorial Candidate
    Matt Mead………..WY Gubernatorial Candidate
    Pat Childers……….WY State Representative, TRW Chair
    David Allen……….CEO, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
    Neil Thagard………Wild Sheep Foundation
    Jim Davis………….Deputy Park County Attorney
    Lynn Madson………President, Jackson Hole Outfitters
    Bob Wharff………..Executive Director, WY SFW
    Toby Bridges………Lobo Watch
    BJ Hill……………..WYOGA
    Tim Hockhalter……CCOGA
    Todd Stevie………..President, WYOGA
    Joe Tilden………….Chairman, WY SFW
    Jake Clark………….CCOGA
    Randy Blackburn…WY Trappers Assn
    Clay Dethlefsen…..Western Predator Control Board
    Arlene Hanson…… Sportswomen
    Steve Simonton…..Candidate for WY District 24
    Jim Magagna……..WY Stock Growers Assn
    Rita Meyer (Republican Gubernatorial candidate) will have a Rep. from her Campaign speaking.”

    Since it is highly likely we will end up with a Republican governor in Wyoming this coming election (as yet we have no legitimate Democratic candidate, and the filing deadline is coming up), this list of gubernatorial candidates–all of whom have adopted the radical anti-wolf position–foretells really bad times for all wildlife in Wyoming, not just for wolves. These are all nasty people in the Dick Cheney vein. Among other problems, the Wyoming G&F Department will get hammered with even more bile and ignorance. I know a lot of people who post here don’t care for wildlife agencies, and I myself have strongly criticized the Department, but still, it doesn’t help to have it even more politicized than it is now. The agencies are all we have until something better comes along. And nothing’s coming any time soon that I can see.

    I don’t see much different in Idaho or Montana coming up.

    What does this mean? Bad times ahead for wildlife, at least in Wyoming. So, how many of you are still determined to “compromise” on wolves and wildlife? Time to stand up and be counted.

    RH

    • JB Says:

      In addition to fear-mongering, we can expect more attempts to associate wolves with the “big government” forces that westerners love to hate. This whole political game has become extremely transparent…almost formulaic.

      Recipe for wolf-hatred:

      (a) Assert that wolves were put here by the federal government.
      (b) Remind people how much they hate the federal government.
      (c) Throw in some quotes from hunters who have seen “proof” that wolves are decimating elk herds.
      (d) Round things off with a few ranching families who don’t know if they can make it much longer.
      (e) Top it all off with some innuendo about risks to human health (e.g. attacks, tapeworms, maybe even brucellocis).

      It is too bad that these people can’t see they are being used (or worse, they are all too happy to be used). I used to think westerners were tough, but apparently 320 dogs are too much for a state full of Marlboro men.

    • WM Says:

      JB,

      The recipe wouldn’t be complete without:

      (f) liberal garnish of “enviro fairy dust” claiming fewer elk is better for everyone, or anything with the inflammatory terms “environment” or “ecosystem” in it.

    • Layton Says:

      Then of course there’s the “greenie” sauce.

      Find out just one place that the elk counts came up by even a small number — use it as an example for everywhere.

      Throw in a few references to “bubba” and “cabela’s queens”

      Even tho’ this should accomplish most of the stirring required, add a bit of agitation by referencing public land grazing and welfare ranching, then of course throw in the bit about the one “for the wolves” guy that claims he gets his elk every year and doesn’t understand the problem.

      Let it simmer.

  10. timz Says:

    “Fact, ID F&G;intentionally inflated ungulate numbers before the introduction to fulfill their pro wolf agenda”

    Only a complete loony would think IDF&G has a pro wolf agenda. They already are waging their own little war on the wolf.

  11. Ralph Maughan Says:

    These folks on the Black Bear Blog seem to have some probblem about this web site.

    I don’t want to have anything to do with them — not to argue or trade insults. It would be nasty, pointless, and only egg them on.

    Their single-minded concern over one issue is hard to understand. Some people are just monomaniacs. They won’t like to hear that because it is one of those Ph. D-kind-of-words. They seem to have it out for those who got an education.

    It is possible they operate out of some grudge from their past life. Please ignore them here.

    • Save bears Says:

      Ralph Said:

      “Some people are just monomaniacs. They won’t like to hear that because it is one of those Ph. D-kind-of-words.”

      LMFAO, give me a second Ralph, I need to pick my ass up off the floor and wipe the tears from my eyes, NOW that was great slap…

      I am a loving it!

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Ralph

      While I appreciate and share your extreme distaste for these folks, let’s not forget that they’re the equivalent of stormtroopers or blackshirts. All their hate and bile need is competent leadership, and if that happens, things immediately get out of hand, or worse. We’re already seeing the degree to which Republican politicians are harnessing the wingnuts of all stripes to pursue policies that are at best civic crimes and at worst constitutional horrors. Have we already forgotten Republican congressmen legitimizing the guy who flew a plane into an IRS building as a form of anti-government protest? This is serious stuff.

      Speaking as a soldier, and I’d hope that SB and others with a military background would agree with me, I think it’s imperative to know our enemies and be prepared to deal with them.

      I’ve long believed that conservation is the moral equivalent of civil rights. I think we’re approaching a time when that’s not just a metaphor, but a reality.

      RH

    • Jon Says:

      RH, check out this guy. He thinks he is going to send guys like Bangs and Doug Smith to jail over this as he calls it an illegal introduction of wolves into his state. lol

      These people provide others with a good laugh I must tell you.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Jon

      This is a self-interview, if you want to call it an interview. Ralph used the word monomania above–I’d expand the term to meglomania. One doesn’t need a PhD to understand that.

      However, I wouldn’t laugh about this; I take these guys seriously. Look at their language and demeanor–they’re tied in with the worst of the far right: the racist militias and hate groups. (For example, spend some time looking through the Southern Poverty Law Center or Montana Human Rights Network websites). The sagebrush rebellion, or whatever it’s called these days, is deeply rooted in the larger right wing ideology. Perhaps it’s easier for me to recognize since I grew up with the KKK in the South during the civil rights era. These guys were my neighbors.

      During my military career, especially at Fort Bragg, “home of the Airborne and Special Forces,” right wing infiltration of the military was a serious problem. The White Patriot Party and the Christian Militia were active around Fort Bragg and Camp Mackall, the site of SF field training, and were actively recruiting. I myself kicked two neo-Nazis out of SF.

      I have long since realized that the real threat to what’s good about America comes from the far right, not the far left. The left is foreign to American values; the right is homegrown and perverts American values to the worst of what humans are and can be.

      Did anyone see Rachel Maddow’s documentary on Timothy McVeigh three weeks ago? If not, do so: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/37120529#36650309. It’s based on four hours of taped interviews done with McVeigh in prison before his execution.

      I make a point of this because conservation isn’t just about land and wildlife. The land community is inseparable from the survival of civil society; Aldo Leopold argued this when he presented the land ethic for our consideration.

      The right despises civil society, community, and the rule of law. The right despises anything that is public space. The right despises anything that is “ours.” The right seeks to break down society into its individual parts, which are then easier to control. The right worships not democracy or even representative republican government, but totalitarianism.

      I’m not making this up.

      RH

  12. Save bears Says:

    Robert, the only way to win a battle and a war is know your enemy and know them well, you need to know them as well as you do your wife, you kids and your family, or you are destine to fail…you can’t win a war, if you don’t acknowledge and know who your fighting…to sluff them off and say they are not important is the biggest mistake you can make, all to often, you will win a battle and loose a war…which unfortunately, I see each side, wining battles, but I have not seen anyone win the war as of yet…and until such time as both sides, understand, this is not a battle, it is a war, it will continue along this path, give and take, take and give, which is what has happened for many years now..

  13. Si'vet Says:

    Oh Jon. after reading your post “again” hunters are in competition with predators. “Again” I will you offer you a hunters perspective.
    Wolves are not seen as competition, they are a “threat”. I posted months ago, the deer and elk numbers don’t have to be at zero for my opportunity to share the privilege of hunting with my sons and grandsons at zero.
    Jon, the history channel buys many of it’s programs from independent production company’s, maybe all of them. I know the executive producer of one of those company’s. Since on many, many occasions you continually talk about hunters lacking the ability and expertise to be successful, you could shoot a program a “hunting show” and share your infinite wisdom and knowledge on what it takes to be a successful hunter today. For a half hour program you will need 22 1/2 minutes of edited footage, to allow for commercials, just double that for an hour program. I have an idea for sequel. Let me know, I’ll give Randal a call.

    • jon Says:

      No, wolves are seen as competition for hunters. Don’t deny it either. I did not make those comments, George Wuerthner did, but I agree with what he says 100%. He speaks the truth.

  14. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, competition, (compete) how does a hunter compete with something that can kill deer and elk, young or old, year round with no boundry’s, borders, or limits. “Threat”. You support and expounded on Wuethners comments. Right. don’t deny it. As far as your concerned he speaks the truth… Are we on for the hunting show. If we can line up sponsors in advance it makes the program an easier sell. I know it sounds to good to be true, but I also have a connection with one of the largest firearm manufactures in the U.S. Let’s make some $$$ on your hunting expertise.

  15. Elk275 Says:

    Jon

    I read George Wuerthner article and it is very well writen. George says that wolves will reduce elk in some situations and these elk will eventually rebound. The problem with reduced elk numbers from wolf kills is that it is and can reduce hunter opportunity.

    Anti proaching ads claim that proaching is stealing from the people, well wolves are stealing hunting opportunites, each elk killed by wolves is one less elk available for a hunter. I do not want wolves elimitated but I sure do not want seasons shorted, or a limited drawing for elk tags where they were once over the counter.

    • jon Says:

      I believe you said you are friends with George and said you have known him for years. Elk275, do you believe that wild predators are competition for hunters? Both want the same prey animals, so it is understandable that some hunters hate wolves simply because they are taking elk hunting opportunities away from them.

  16. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, if your not willing to share your wealth of hunting knowledge and outdoor skills with other hunters, then you shouldn’t continue to complain about listening to hunters and outfitters whine. So maybe we can move on.

  17. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, he probably does, you got me. He also probably makes a lot more $$$ selling books to people who don’t hunt than those who do. So what side of the issue do you suppose is in his best interest to support?

    • jon Says:

      He can support whatever side he decides, but it looks like he supports both sides.

  18. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, come on, I’m reading the link you posted. He’s selling, and throwing in a little vanilla favoring. He talks about a few isolated incidences and reduced elk herds, then swings into the benefits of reduced coyotes and improved antelope herds, that’s vanilla flavoring, to try and appease hunters. Coyotes do have an affect on antelope if there affect is to great, they are managed. George has seem to have forgotten there are 270,000,000 other inhabitants.

  19. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, one last question. You say your not a hunter, and I am guessing you never have, how can you hang your hat on something other people say with regards to hunting, especially given the scope and complexity of it?

    • Jon Says:

      Common sense. Just because someone has never hunted before does not mean they have no idea what hunting is all about. Whether you like what George has to say or not, he speaks the truth. That is my opinion. Your opinion is most likely going to be different since George is saying not so nice things about hunters even though he is a hunter himself. You are going to disagree with George simply because you may not like what he has to say. This is how things work.

  20. cobra Says:

    This may not be interesting to some but I found it interesting.
    A friend of mine who spends all his time in the woods year round saw the elk this winter reacting differently to wolves than in the past. More than once he saw wolves bedded down not more than a 100 yards from these two herds of elk, each time he saw them the wolves would get up and the elk formed a circle butt to butt sort of like the musk ox will do when threatened, the wolves would circle the elk until one broke out of the circle and then the chase was on for the one that broke loose from the herd. In the past the elk would all just scatter, sounds like their learning some tricks.
    He also said more times than not the elk that broke and ran were the yearlings. To bad he can’t get it on film. Anyone else seen this happen?

  21. Si'vet Says:

    Jon, I think I have made a good living using common sense, certainly wasn’t looks and brains. I do have to disagree with you on your hunting comment, unless you’ve really hunted, you don’t know what hunting is all about. And because you’ve never hunted you don’t know if George is speaking the truth or not. I take issue with what George says because I hunt and I hunt a lot, I also spend a lot of time in the very areas that are in the fore front of this whole issue. I disagree with George because I have nothing to gain financially or socially, and what I see with my own eyes doesn’t match up with what he’s saying. And my eyes have served me well for a long time. Jon if there wasn’t a problem, I would be focusing my efforts somewhere else. That’s how I work.

    • Jon Says:

      What he says makes perfect sense to me and you don’t have to hunt to know that or understand that. It is common sense that some hunters view wolves and other predators as competition for prey animals and that is why they want them hunted down and killed. Do not try to deny that some hunters don’t think like this .

  22. Si'vet Says:

    Cobra, 2 weeks ago my hunting partner called, he was watching a bedded herd of elk, above them about 300 yds up wind 3 bedded wolves, our take they had no where left to run safely and they needed to bed down, rest and digest. He watched for about an hour the wolves got up worked their way down to elk and they scattered, around the hill out of site.

  23. firebug1 Says:

    The photo of the burrowing owls is just great. How did you get it? Amazing. However, I could not tell that the photo was related to the story until someone pointed it out to me.

  24. cobra Says:

    Si’vet,
    Maybe you should send a few elk over here to learn how to circle the wagons. Hopefully in time the young ones will learn to stay put in the circle, but then again wolves are smart and eventually the circle has to break. I sure would like to see it though. The circle anyway.

  25. Si'vet Says:

    Cobra, with the size of the packs I’m seeing sign of, an elk is going to be killed circled or not. There’s a pack above the Salmon river I cut the tracks on in mid Dec. even with the amount of lined out tracks in the snow, I couldn’t decipher how many there actually were. On a a snow covered sand beach in the Frank Church this spring, I counted at least 14 sets of lined out tracks, in one pack. I don’t think circling is going to reduce the number of elk killed, it would make for an interesting video, to see if there was some advantage to it.

    • Save bears Says:

      There was some reports of elk circling when I would doing my field work in WA state a few years ago, it seems to be as I remember, in response to Mt. Lions, I never did witness it, but it was up around the Mount Adams area, just north of the Indian Heaven Wilderness area..

    • WM Says:

      I hope a behavioral ecologist weighs in on this observed behavior Cobra describes.

      My take on the circle the wagons, butts to the center of the circle, with the yearlings being the first to “blink,” suggests a couple of things. First, this behavior conserves energy. No sense for everybody to try to outrun the wolves. It won’t work in the end, and the whole group depletes energy reserves. Second, the sick and the injured would be protected, since the whole herd is standing its ground, and not on the move, so it would appear the slow would not be culled in this scenario. Third, the young, as a marker for inexperience, are the ones to break, so there goes the herd structure – young and inexperienced are first to die in this scenario. Is there genetic selection to retain youngsters who remain calm and conform to herd group tactics? Maybe.

      Mark Hebblewhite, a U of Montana scientist, has looked at wolf depredation on various sizes of elk herds. One study was done in Banff NP. His conclusion: Elk appeared to adopt two different strategies to minimize predation risk: living in small herds that were rarely encountered by wolves
      or living in large herds that reduced their predation risk through dilution (Hebblewhite, M., & Pletscher, D.H. 2002. Effects of elk herding on predation by wolves: linking anti-predator behavior to population dynamics. Canadian Journal of Zoology 80: 800-809.)

      His study did not address the “circle the wagons” tactic. Maybe there other studies out there that address this. He has some other papers in press, which address the apparently different predation risks of resident and migrant elk herds.

      The point, however, is that each wolf is still going to get its 8-23/elk per year, regardless of which ones are taken and where.

    • bob jackson Says:

      WM

      I doubt M.Hebbijebba of University “validation” understands the “why”. Observation of herd size at that time, yes, cause and effect (such as supposed protection by dilution) I seriously doubt.

      Without functional herds, groupings are better left for assessment by abnormal behavior psychologists ….than a biologist who doesn’t have a clue of what makes up evolutions extended family herds. One can have a grouping of very functional 300 elk herd during certain times of the year (numbers noted by documenters on the frontier) or one can have the refuge camps of 300 or more very dysfunctional elk “herds” ( observation of bunching by our very wise Jackson hole outfitters who then can’t rlate this refuge situation is why their guides and clients were able to locate and then kill off so many elk).

      My assessment is the small grouping, noted by Hebbie, can be a smaller satellite functional family but more likely a family trying to form its own identity. The larger grouping I’d say (where hunting management means destroyed families) was a refuge camp situation. Why?…because modern hunting doesn’t allow for that amount of herd infrastructure to develop.

  26. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    I am sorry for what I have said to you,but in that note,you do have a tendency of talking down to people. Maybe it is a military thing, but in any case, most of the time I do start out with, in my opinion. I do come on strong, but it is for a love of animals and wildlife.I have learned a great deal from Ralph and guys,on this site. I am not analytical when it comes to wildlife and animals. So on that not I hope we can go on with our opinions,remember I am for the underdog, always will be.

  27. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Wm;
    A little late but thanks,you thing on the Nez Perce was great,I mean that. I was reading it over and over, it was a great blog,wonderful,I did not really think of how much thought you put into these people. Again thank you for telling me how I write, yes, when I get on a role.

  28. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thanks Jon great article by George Wuerthner, at least he points to the positive impacts that wolves had on this eco system.P.S. Like a breath of fresh air!

  29. Jim Macdonald Says:

    I just wrote this account of the bison haze on Monday, which I was witness to:

    http://www.eclecticworld.org/2010/05/buffalo-torture-2010-firsthand-witness.html

  30. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Could the wolf behavior be due to the landscape they were in,maybe it is not open plains ,where it is easier to run down an animal. Wildlife must adapt, humans adapt to different circumstances, people envolve in different ways, maybe the elk are trying to due the same. Remember wolves were just introduced in the past decade, situations will not remain constant,certain things will change with tme. To circle wagons is a human trait,but elephants due circle, to protect their young from lions,and other predators. Research in animal behavior would be welcomed at this point in time.

  31. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    Doesn’t the musk ox move into a circle in order to protect their young or try to?

  32. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Come to think of it, herd animals circle to protect, just another tactic being used, the must try to adapt. A mother bear will circle against multiple predators to protect her young, makes sense to circle.

  33. WM Says:

    Looks like things are not all peaches and cream in WI. Whispers of allegations of wolves being poisened by a large potato farmer, and with search warrants and investigation underway.

    http://newsofthenorth.net/article/Top_Stories/Northwoods_Top_Stories/Northwoods_potato_farm_target_of_US_probe/42035

    • WM Says:

      And I should have mentioned, wolves are still listed in WI (they petitioned FWS just two weeks ago to begin a new delisting determination), which means the investigation is done by the US Attorney, and whatever federal law enforcement supports them. I will bet this investigation alone runs $10,000 -20,000, just to the point of whether there is enough evidence to prosecute. Your federal tax dollars at work.

    • JB Says:

      Wisconsin’s wolf problem is largely of their own making. WDNR allows bear hunters to run bears with dogs during the time of year when wolves are using rendezvous sites. Dogs run headlong into packs that treat them as invading wolves. Of course Wisconsin is also trying to reduce its deer population via management mechanisms such as “earn a buck” (requiring hunters to first shoot a doe). Hunters who don’t find deer where they are used to them, of course, blame wolves.

      FYI: Wisconsin has more than 40,000 verified DVCs per year (many more go unreported). Wisconsin hunters harvest roughly 470,000 deer per year (1996-2007 average). Wisconsin’s roughly 650 wolves consume an estimated 15 to 19 deer per wolf, per year for a total (17*650) of 11,050 deer.

      Even if you just look at northern areas where wolves and deer co-occur, the WI DNR estimates 13,000 deer were killed in these areas by DVCs, and 122,000 by gun and archery hunters.

      For more info: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/harvest/reports/predators.pdf

  34. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Good if the alleded farmer is guility prosecute !!! civil unrest against the wolf again !!!!

  35. WM Says:

    Richie,

    The point I was trying to make in a backhanded way was that WI wolves should be delisted, as WI wants them to be. And, they should be spending their own money on investigating and prosecuting this case, most likely at significantly lower cost.

    JB,

    Are you saying there should be no bear hunting with dogs at all, or seasonal adjustments?

    • JB Says:

      A seasonal adjustment would prevent some conflicts, banning hunting bears with dogs (as MN does), would pretty much solve the problem.

  36. Si'vet Says:

    Jon,JB,Richie G & JimT
    I have been contemplating this idea all day. We (mostly Jon and I lately) have gone round and round over what biologists, see verses what I and other hunters are seeing. And I usually throw out a challenge in those regards. What’s real, what’s not.
    My thought; this fall, Sept.ish, I take you 4 on a archery hunt in the LoLo area, only instead of bows, you bring camera’s. I will take you to where I’ve hunted elk for years (no tell ’em ridge) we spend about a week, you will hunt elk with camera’s, we will set up, glass, call etc. just as if we’re going to harvest and elk. I will try to bring bulls in for each of you to photograph at close (archery range) 30 yds or less. We will also look at the habitat, an discuss where and what I used to see. I will provide, 2 wall tents, stoves, cooking equipment etc. You bring personal gear, bed roll, food and drink and sturdy back pack. We will return each night, to the main camp, I don’t own a 4 wheeler. rally point is Missoula Mt. and then a 5 hr. drive. If everyone is fly in, we can work that out, I have a club cab duramax, and a toyota 4 runner for transportation, a little help with gas would be appreciated, but not mandatory. I am dead serious on this offer. The LoLo is a beautiful area, experience it as a hunter would. All I ask is that you are honest in your assesment, and you don’t share my hunting spot with others, there hard to come by. Unless they’ve moved we will be in wolves, if we are, we will set up and I should be able to call one or more of them in. Again
    this is a no BS offer. Again all I ask is an honest assesment.

    • Save bears Says:

      Si’vet,

      boy or boy, I wish I was included in that offer!!!

      ):

    • JB Says:

      Si’vet:

      That is a VERY gracious offer that I, for one, would love to take you up on!

    • WM Says:

      Si’vet,

      You will probably want to have at least two in that group sign a “Run Bambi run!” waiver, under penalty of being left behind with no food or protection from the things that can get you in the woods.

      This could be as good as John McPhee’s “Encounters with the Arch Druid,” sort of.

      By the way, need a camp cook?

    • WM Says:

      Archdruid.

    • JB Says:

      I used to spend a lot of time behind a lens, but I don’t get many chances anymore.

      Coyote Pups, Yellowstone National Park
    • Elk275 Says:

      I just picked this up on a hunting forum. I do not know if comments are copywrited on a forum. So if they are copywrited maybe Ralph would not want them posted. These are very good comments from a man with 25 years experience in the Clearwater country.

      I hope everyone takes Si’vet up on his offer. There is 2 sides to every story, there are other people out there that have affective by wolves.

      +++I just wanted to tell you about my Idaho Bear hunt that we just got back from. I’ve been going up to Idaho’s Clearwater area for 25yrs now. About 10 or 15 yrs ago, I loved going up there, even if we didn’t see many bears, because there was so much game. It was not uncommon to see 3 to 5 thousand elk in a week. When you see that many elk, it’s amazing at the music the cows and calfs make. It was awesome. We would see 20 + Moose, and many whitetail deer. Well that’s all gone. In a week hunt I seen maybe 15-20 elk, no Moose. And I never even cut a deer track. The elk never made a sound for it would alert the wolves. But for all those people that wanted to see and hear wolves, we got to see one, (which I would have put a bullet in it’s belly if I could have got off a shot),and hear them howl everyday. I’m just sick, I was so looking forward to taking my kids and grandkids up there someday. I’ve told my sons so much about the place over the years they couldn’t what to get there, and it was like a ghost town up there. I know the wolves didn’t completely do this, but as low as the numbers are, the wolves will see that it will never be the same as it was. After talking to the F&G officer, I couldn’t believe the amount of money and resourses it takes to have monitor the wolves. We as a country have to take it back, we need to form groups that are as strong as the groups that are trying to change our way of life. Right from Obama to these anti hunting groups and the tree huggers, we need to stop them. The wolf problems, we can’t wait for laws to change to help us. We need to do it ourselves. The officer up there said he’s afraid they’ll stop the wolf hunting in Idaho soon. He said they were upset over the 160 wolves that where legally killed this year, but there’s probably 250 to 400 pups on the ground already to replace those that where shot. Sorry to ramble on, It’s just a said day we’ve let such a few people, in America change it for the rest of us. +++

    • jon Says:

      Elk, that guy is your typical ignorant hunter referring to wolf lovers as tree huggers. Us wolf lovers are not all anti-hunting. Hunting for food is the only acceptable form of hunting to me. Hunters only care about getting their elk. Wolf lovers are trying to stop the senseless killing of wolves. All that hunter clearly cares about his getting his elk and has a complete disregard for all of the wolves that lost their lives just because people are whining and complaining there is no more elk because of the wolves which is a flat out lie. He is blaming wolves for killing elk when he does the same exact thing. Very hypocritical of that hunter.

  37. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To WM;
    If you let the locals investigate, nothing will come of it, you know that.The local police are on the side of the ranchers, I think this must be federal.

    • WM Says:

      I think WI DNR, and maybe the local sheriff would investigate the use of poisons. Nothing good can come from that, especially if the neighbors’ dogs get into it. You are probably right that a one-off wolf poaching might get less attention.

      Based on what JB said, sounds like deer poaching should be encouraged in WI. And if they use clean up crews for fresh DVC deer kills the prisons should be well supplied with wild protein for their residents. AK does that for moose I think, and other states do as well.

    • JB Says:

      Richie:

      Not a lot of “ranching” (in the Western sense of the word) going on in WI. Cows (mostly milk cows) are on private lands where their diet consists of a lot of feed. Cows kept close to home are much less vulnerable. This is one of the reasons conflict is much less intense in the Midwest. Additionally, the livestock industry does not have the political sway that it has in Western states, and deer are extremely abundant.

  38. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Si’vet;
    I would love to, as I said I am in the process in selling a house in Brooklyn,if the dael goes through, I will be able to buy something out wEst. I just do not like the killing,but I will have to close my eyes to that. I do not mean hunting for food, but the control hunts,that bothers me,really. I have four sets of eyes on me everyday, I love animals. But this sounds great, I might be able to get out their in june,again thanks again.

  39. Si'vet Says:

    SB,WM, nice try. Show my no tell em ridge to a couple of hunters. I was born at night but not last night. lol
    Richie, it’s not about killing, it’s about opportunity, my reason for the offer to you, you say you root for the underdog, right now I feel elk,deer, moose are the underdog, let me show you why I feel that way. Let me show you a little slice of what a hunter get’s to experience. The advance notice is so you can make arrangements.
    JB, I will know how I fared on draw permits by late June, usually zipo. Then dates could start to firm up.
    JimT,Jon, have you had a chance to consider..

  40. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To JB;
    Yes JERRY I agess about the cows and the milk and all that,and proximity of the cow to home base. But out west you guys have “excuse the expression” gun happy cowboys,that’s a little different. The cowboys have a strong personality,to say the least,they did not call it the “wild west” for nothing. Again excuse my dialog!

  41. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Si’vet;
    Yes I am for the underdog, but I love wolves,even when they kill a coyote,it bothers me,but I love the wolf, can’t tell you exactly why, but I do. Maybe they are so much like a dog, I prefer big dogs,than small ones. A wolf is so beautiful,and so proud looking. Look I have had many dogs throughout my life, a majority of my life , three or four at a time. It’s hard to say,wolves are just majestic to me. Again thanks for the offer,would be nice to meet all you guys and lady or ladies!

  42. WM Says:

    The Columbia River is subject to fishing treaty rights of 4 tribes, the Nez Perce, Warm Springs, Umatilla and the Yakamas. A WA Court of Appeals decision referenced below makes it more difficult for the state of WA Division of Wildlife to write up Yakama tribal members violating the agreed rules of the river. Enforcement, particularly with respect to the Yakamas, has always been a challenge. They even get a little testy with their own 4-tribe Columbia River Inter – Tribal Fish Commission CRITFC (but that is yet another very complicated story).

    The story below sadly reports a Washington appellate court decision which leaves enforcement to the Yakama Police on certain treaty access points on the river. The problem is the Yakama police headquarters is about a 60 mile drive just to get to the river. Then there is another 90 miles of river to patrol, either from the road (for some shore violations like netting) or from the water. The tribe does not have the resources to do an adequate job with their other responsiblities, let alone patrol the river effectively. Even if a tribal member gets written up, the violation goes to Yakama tribal court. The tribal court was about a year or so ago determined by independent Indian audit to be one of the worst in the entire country (poorly kept records of decisions, unqualified tribal judges, lack of consistency of decisions, etc.). The upshot of this is there is no deterrent for violators and tribal members know this.

    In the past, even the other tribes are a little pissed at the much larger Yakama tribe and the way they do things. One year recently they even withheld enforcment authority from CRITFC so that the CRITFC officers who patrol the river on behalf of all the tribes did not have authority to arrest Yakama members, but did the members of the other three tribes, as well as authority to arrest non-Indians with special authority of the Oregon State Patrol (which gives authority to cite any non-indian on the water, but just not on land in WA). Ain’t tribal sovereignty a great thing?

    http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2010/05/11/ruling-limits-wildlife-officers-authority-over-tribal-fishing

    I can’t wait until they get their own wolves, to see how that plays out.

  43. Si'vet Says:

    Richie, I have owned big dogs all my life. Spent 30 yrs. training retrievers for hunting and field trials, I understand the bond. That’s what we have in common, there are just some good topics of discussion, on which we don’t agree, when better to discuss, than over a plate of burnt on the outside raw in the middle gourmet hunting camp food, and a beer/coke.
    Rethinking the logistics, it maybe easier to travel if, all each of you had to bring would be clothing and personal items.
    I can provide transportation, tents, 3 if one of us is of the other gender. All sleeping bags, cots and pads, coolers, table, cook stove and camoe gilly suits for the person set up to take the picture. I have a portable zook shower so you can stand out in all of mother natures glory and take a nice hot 5 qt. shower. We can provision up in Missoula as a group if needed. All you need to bring is clothing (camo not neccessary) boots, etc. and personal items, I have at least 3 good back packs. Again we won’t spike camp, we will return to base each day. All I ask that you don’t mention to my wife that I have enough camping equipment on hand to outfit 5 people, or my allowance will get cut.
    Jon, JimT I hope your delayed response is due to looking at rearranging your Sept. calendar. I would appreciate knowing if your in or not. thanks

  44. Nancy Says:

    Nice collection of shots JB. Had a Western Tanager come thru last year. He spend a couple of days hanging around. Managed to get some decent shots of him. Beautiful bird!

  45. Si'vet Says:

    Jon , JimT THANKS, Jon each time I gave you a sincere invite to exeperience the north west, on a different perspective, you showed me, an let eveyone know you could ignore it. And quickley make a lame post about in the other direction, Jon you must be about 13 yrs old, nice try but adults see through you like flint. When you get in the 8th grade hopefully you’ll study the propeties of obsidian.
    JimT my daughter and son in-law are both working there way towards law degrees thanks for being a a a a a lawyer. Hopefully they wiil take the high road POS.

  46. Si'vet Says:

    Harley, on the BBB blog I am T-Bone, and you know more than most the roads traveled. I have offered Jon & JimT the opportunity of a life time, and to teach me a hunter a lesson they took the low road. As a mideastern who was on the fence, I would like to make you and a partner,husband, child, friend the same offer. Because you are a teacher and my folks we’re teachers, I will make you a better offer, if you and whomever can make it to Salt Lake city, from there we can make it happen. All you need to bring is boots that fit and a can do attitude. We can make everything else work out. I will post on the BBB as well.

  47. WM Says:

    Si’vet,

    Not my issue, but did I miss a response from JimT on this thread? Jon, apparently, is not responsive while posting other stuff. Maybe that is, indeed, your answer. Doesn’t seem like either would just ignore you. Sorry for butting in on your conversation, but just wondering what is going on.

  48. Si'vet Says:

    WM it is the issue, You and a few others understand what my offer truley was and is, Richie G whom at times we westerners struggle to understand, was stand up and honest. If JimT was stand up and honest and I missed it, I apologize. I’m pretty sure Jon was playing his usually smoke and mirrors and wanted to ” show me”. Jon as a hunter, thanks, without you, the last few weeks wouldn’t have had the near the success. Good luck in the 8th grade,they stress history there.

  49. cobra Says:

    Nice roll Si’vet. Sounds like a good time and I already know I won’t be invited. I like to hunt closer to home anyway. Harley seems like a good person and would probably cherish an outing like you suggested. I really hope Harley can make it. I wonder how Jon feels about fishing?

  50. Si'vet Says:

    Cobra, I’ve always enjoyed your input. Like most hunters I hold those spots close to the vest. I have no hidden agenda. In my perfect world, you, myself, Save bears, WM, JB, Layton, Elk275, Ralph, jeff E, Ryan, PW and Ralph and many others could spend time in the hills around the campfire and discuss the issue. I honestly believe we could move forward, my glass is half full. If the invitation falls flat, I would be honored to spend time in the mountains with SB, WM, you, layton, Elk 275 and many others, time in the moutains is time well spent. thanks

    • JEFF E Says:

      sure si’vet but Lolo is too far away for me at this time. i do go to your part of the state from time to time….

    • Layton Says:

      Si’vet,

      Congrats to you on having the perseverance to stay in the Lolo area for elk hunting. I used to hunt there (for 10 or 15 years) but moved on after the wolves were introduced. We’ve probably hunted some of the same spots. Now the wolves are tearing the hell out of my current area and there doesn’t look like there IS a place to move to.

      Jon and JimT obviously either don’t recognize what an opportunity they are being offered, or really don’t want to REALLY see what’s going on. Oh well, what’s new??

      I agree that the people that you mentioned (‘cept maybe Jeff.E 8) ) could have a DISCUSSION and maybe even agree on a thing or two — not so with the other two. I for one would hesitate to even be in the mix. I don’t have the patience required to put up with the BS they hand out.

      Plus that, I think maybe you’re right — jon’s problem is that he can’t get his parent’s permission to join a party like that 8) .

      Is it really true that God doesn’t subtract the time you spend hunting and fishing from your time to be spent here on earth?

    • JEFF E Says:

      my arn’t we frisky this moning

    • JEFF E Says:

      morning,
      there I go again

    • Layton Says:

      Hi Jeffy,

      I could come up with time for a cuppa this AM if you’re interested. Email??

    • JEFF E Says:

      okay

  51. Si'vet Says:

    Layton, I am done in the LoLo for now, any success I have there is only going continue to reduce numbers. So I am out hunting for a new hunting spot. My offer to the folks was for photo ops only. I hear ya about that onery old Jeff, bet he’s handy with a dutch oven though.

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Si’vet
      Thanks for the beautiful picture of the cedar waxwing. Even in spite of your wife’s terrorist terriers being on her stomach she did a good job. Perhaps the waxwing will have a successfull nesting and you won’t have to fix a nest this year. I have four barn swallows that are not nesting on the porch this summer but until they have their own clutches they seem to be using the old nest for a bedroom.

  52. WM Says:

    jon & JimT,

    Will you give Si’vet the courtesy of a reply, even if it is a “no thanks?” As I understand his offer, it was basically a gratuitous -near no cost to you- Lolo, ID wildlife camping tour, with an opportunity to get up close and personal with wolves and elk during a time when elk should be bugling (great experience in itself), and to take photographs of what you see (even better), while learning a little bit more about what is involved in setting up a camp, and going out each day, attempting to call in game, as one would do as if hunting, or a nature safari. Isn’t this kind of what the eco-tourism concept is all about? Wow, what a great opportunity for an early fall camping trip!

    I was a little confused on this point, but I do not think Si’vet actually intended to bow hunt with the purpose of actually harvesting an elk.

    Si’vet. Did I get all this right?

  53. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To all you guys anyway you wantm to do this is fine with me !

  54. ProWolf in WY Says:

    They are advertising the Cody wolf rally on the radio. Apparently some gubernatorial candidates will be there. I will try to make it but Cody is a bit of a drive for me. I hope some of my other fellow Wyomingites might be able to.

  55. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    great article Jon on trapping.

  56. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    How many related incident’s are reported by trapping, I mean,pets, kids, etc,?

  57. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Elk;
    I will take Si’vet up on his offer, butit was it o.k. when the white man killed all the buffalo,to starve off the indian? Let nature take it ‘s course, as for the elk, I have a vet who comes from your part of the woods. He told me a story of how elk were so abundant in Yellowstone,that they plugged up a river,like a dam, being their were so many of them.

    • Save bears Says:

      Not quite that many in Yellowstone now a days Richie, it is quite a bit more balanced now…

  58. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To SB;
    I agree sb you are probably correct, I do agree it is balanced now.

  59. WM Says:

    Michigan and Minnesota weigh in again on their delisting frustrations.

    “Michigan, others at odds with U.S. over gray wolves”

    http://toledoblade.com/article/20100516/COLUMNIST22/5160365/-1/SPORTS17

    • Carl Says:

      I guess the Humane Society is expecting the wolf to thrive in Minnesota corn fields, soybean country and the Twin Cities all suitable woodland habitat and aspen parklands are occupied. They claim the population is still not viable.

  60. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To J-bird;
    Anything that helps,hey it would not hurt to try it,would it?

  61. Virginia Says:

    counterpunch.org/halle05172010.html

    “Salazar Unleashed” by John Halle in which Halle blames NRDC, NWF, Sierra Club and LCV for praising the appointment of Salazar to Interior. Good article!

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Fortunately, Carl Pope of the Sierra Club, is no longer of the Sierra Club. I think he went off to promote big wind and big solar or something similar.

  62. Barb Rupers Says:

    Perhaps a bit old but wilderness in SD National Grasslands? I like the idea.
    http://www.argusleader.com/article/20100506/NEWS/5060313/1001/news

    • Save bears Says:

      Whats amazing is Idaho F&G didn’t even reintroduce the wolves, that was done by USFWS…

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Save Bears,

      I have said many times that Idaho Fish and Game was very foolish to take over wolf management. It’s an old Idaho tradition to damn the federal government for everything (your hand is always out, of course). For their own sake, Idaho Fish and Game should have let the feds continue to take the heat.

      As soon as I got interested in wildlife politics (1970s), I noticed a strong tendency by certain individuals to blame the department when their hunt or fishing trip failed. This was often connected to some silly conspiracy theory or insistence that regional managers, the director, or a host of others were men (not women in those days) of bad character.

    • Save bears Says:

      Ralph,

      I don’t disagree, let the feds take the heat and pay the bills..

  63. Robert Hoskins Says:

    Has it struck anyone that this “press release” is first and foremost an example of delusion?

    RH

  64. Ralph Maughan Says:

    The effect of Val Gueist and others is clearly to create a delusion rather than provide clear information about the dangers of wildlife’s parasites.

    These people who listen uncritically and are suddenly very worried about “worms from wolves” remind me of little boys and girls who have just learned they can get bad things if they don’t wash their hands.

    It’s very good to wash your hands, but don’t be obsessive.

    All animals have parasites. Coyotes and fox have always had plenty, and this particular worm, or one closely related is not new to the lower 48. How could it be? There were wolves here when the lower 48 was taken from Native Americans.

    The wolves from Canada were given repeated courses of anti-worm drugs, tests, vaccines, etc. One person involved wrote the other day, that these introduced wolves were probably the “cleanest wolves that ever lived.”

    No wolf biologist has been known to catch this infestation from wolves. Very few people have, almost all are First Nations people or sheepherders (their’s from a closely related tapeworm).

    • jon Says:

      Ralph, Dave Mech said the only people at risk at catching the tapeworm are wolf biologists who actually handle wolves. He said this tapeworm argument is just to make the wolf look like the bad guy. All animals have parasites as you said, but they are clearly singling out the wolf. It is just another way to say we don’t want wolves here. Mostly for selfish and ignorant reasons.

  65. Robert Hoskins Says:

    This tapeworm stuff is simply amazing. I managed to spend virtually my entire youth in the rural South barefoot without picking up a single tapeworm.

    • Save bears Says:

      RH,

      I agree, I have been running around in the woods and such all my life, I have never caught anything…

    • jon Says:

      Very good article with Dave Mech about the parasites. Have a look at it RH and Ralph if you haven’t before. The only people I see claiming this is a big danger to humans are Will Graves who is a linguist or should I say was and Valerius Geist.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I was never infected with worms over the years either, but I did get giardia from drinking water polluted by cattle. It was a chronic case, not easily diagnosed. The tipoff to the doctor was my infection with another parasite (relatively harmless) indicative of cattle polluted water.

    • Save bears Says:

      And when you assume you can decide the intent of another human being that you have never met, don’t know and will never know, you are showing your arrogance plain and simple..as classified by the game dept, all hunting is sport hunting, that is what the hunting licenses are for…sport hunting, they don’t issue sustenance hunting licenses..whether you like it or not, hunting is considered a sport…my intent is getting meat, but I enjoy the sport of the hunt and will take any legal animal I can, if it happens to be a big horned deer, than it is a big horned deer..

  66. Ralph Maughan Says:

    It should be noted that essentially all human infectious diseases originated from animals, and we pass many of them back too.

    These worm worriers would do well to learn some basic background material about zoonosis (animal disease passed to humans).

  67. howlcolorado Says:

    More interestingly…

    http://howlcolorado.org/2010/05/10/wildlife-vet-says-dont-blame-wolves-for-tapeworm/

    The wolves didn’t bring the parasites with them.

    The other fascinating argument being made is that surrounding the subspecies of wolves. I could go into all of it here, but here’s something I wrote previously regarding this issue.

    http://howlcolorado.org/2010/04/22/detangling-the-subspecies-controversy/

    • Kristin, Northern CA Says:

      Are the wolves in the Midwest the same gray wolf subspecies as the Greater Yellowstone Area Wolves? Are they the eastern wolves?

    • howlcolorado Says:

      Midwest? As in Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin?
      If that’s what you are referring to, those are the subspecies canis lupus nubilus. They are a different subspecies from those used for the reintroduction in to yellowstone.

      Nubilus was thought to be extinct until it was rediscovered in the upper midwest. To use that population for reintroduction would have been using an endangered population to create an experimental population in Yellowstone. The courts at the time believed that would have been contrary to the intent of the ESA and allowed the USFWS some room to interpret the law to protect all the various known populations while still creating the experimental population in Yellowstone.

      Since then recognized subspecies irremotus was thought to be extinct, or at the most, single animals, the infamous section of the ESA 10(j) was never, in the eyes of the court, broken by the reintroduction either.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Kristen,

      They are slightly different and always have been. I think the Idaho-Wyoming area was always a mixing ground between the sub-species more common in Canada and that in the Great Lakes.

      Today the Great Lakes wolves have a small percentage of coyote genes too.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      howlcolorado,

      My conclusion was that canis lupus irremotus never existed. It was a misclassification, now fortunately abolished by greater knowledge of wolf taxonomy.

      I know that wolves were brought from Canada in part because they ate the same prey there (deer, elk, moose, and in the 1996 group, bison) as was present in Idaho, MT and WY

    • howlcolorado Says:

      I don’t think irremotus existed either. Nor, likely, did youngi (the Colorado “native” subspecies).

      Nowak presented evidence that irremotus and youngi were both part of the subspecies nubilus back in 1992.

      The thing that’s interesting about irremotus however, is that it was the subspecies which played the biggest part in the legal proceedings in the early 90s. It was also, I believe, the first wolf put on the Endangered Species List. Infact, it may even have been a charter member. So whether it existed or not, it now has a place in wolf history.

      Occidentalis was selected for more reasons than my non-wolf biologist mind can recall. But reasons I can recall are:

      1) Drawing from that population risked no damage to the survival of the Canadian-based populations (nubilus was not in that position at all).

      2) It was also a population of healthy wolves which as you say hunted the same prey which existed in Yellowstone.

      3) There was also evidence to show that those same wolves were thought to be the most likely to arrive in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming by themselves without human interference.

      There are literally books written on the process which I have probably horribly degraded with this three point recollection, but as you know there were years of thought put in to the decision and the current evidence of smaller wolf sizes and a relatively successful reintroduction project imply they were right.

    • Jon Says:

      Some claim that the “native” wolves were solitary animals or ran in pairs of 2, not packs like the wolves you see today do.

    • Robert HOskins Says:

      Must have been militia wolves …

      RH

    • howlcolorado Says:

      That’s a funny justification. Lone wolves are not uncommon, or even unexpected, but solitary wolves are travelers with places to go and things to do – like find other wolves. They don’t do to well by themselves.

      Large prey (which those three states most certainly have) requires pack hunting. The courts ruled of course that a single animal does not constitute a population. As others have said, solo animals were likely not even “native” (a term which entertains me to use – wolves are very good at observing human-defined borders… oh, wait…) and were likely wolves dispersing from a core population somewhere else.

      We know through geotracking and collaring that Yellowstone wolves made it down to Colorado before being killed. They were however alone and quite likely expecting to find wolves here to join with and obey their biological imperitive of interbreeding.

      It almost brings tears to the eyes to think that these wolves traveled hundreds of miles in search of a population which no longer exists only to die alone on the side of a highway because we eradicated wolves so deliberately and with such blood-chilling effectiveness.

      The inexcusable lack of foresight shown in the case of wolf and bison eradication is the reason people are fighting so hard. It is hard to overlook the foreshadowing of a path which would lead to a repeat of the past. I trust that there are enough hunters, ranchers and common citizens who recognize the value of predators that it will never happen, but that will be a challenge if we continue to allow the rhetoric to continue unabated and without answer in the national media.

      They may have been just numbers in the minds of many, but 9 and 10 made the horrible error of stepping out of the protective and invisible borders of Yellowstone. And the death of 10 waved a red flag so big and so disturbing. The underlying contempt for wildlife is pervasive and dangerous and the biggest battle ahead for wildlife advocates is generating enough interest to make people care about something other than “Dancing with the Stars” for more than a couple of minutes. There are plenty of Americans who love the thought of wildlife, but I fear they will also be the same people that think back and say “I remember when we used to have wolves.” after the anti-wolf lobby wins.

  68. Virginia Says:

    Some of the Cody May 22 anti-wolf rally speakers: four gubernatorial candidates, RMEF, Sheep Foundation, Jackson Hole Outfitters, Lobo Watch, BJ Hill (the real authority), Cody Country Outfitters, WY Outfitters, Sportsmen for F&W, WY Trappers (great), West. Predator Control Board, Arlene Hanson – “sportswoman”, Jim Magagna WSA. Should be a fun time! This rally should be proof that Wyoming cannot be allowed to manage wolves.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      All this tells me is that these people are well organized and have a cohesive strategy.

      Wolf advocates are often caught up in their own personal missions and are unresponsive to, or disinterested in any collaboration.

      It isn’t always the people who are right who win in political conflicts, it’s often the people who can shout the loudest, and these anti-wolf activists are shouting very loudly with the responses coming in very fragmented, quiet fashion.

      Where are the pro-wolf rallies? Just wondering. We are planning for pro-wolf rallies in Colorado when we get proof-positive that there are packs settled here.

    • JEFF E Says:

      I am starting to wonder if Don Peay is not the driving fource here

  69. Jon Says:

    Lobo watch is the website of Toby Bridges. That guy is a dangerous nutbag.

  70. Jon Says:

    Wolves travel great distances, so it’s not impossible at all for wolves to come down from canada into places like Idaho which we know they have done so on their own, so my conclusion is the wolves you see today are the wolves you would have most likely seen in idaho in the 1930s and before. Those that claim they saw “native” wolves before the reintroduction most likely saw grey wolves that came down from canada on their own.

  71. Jon Says:

    Wolves kill Idaho hunter’s hunting dog.

    http://www.kxly.com/news/23588359/detail.html

    • Jon Says:

      What amazes me is they want compensation for the loss of their hunting dog. How ridiculous is this? They should know the risks. You should know very well that there is a good possibility that wolves will attack and kill your dog if you let it run loose in wolf country while trying to hunt other predators.

    • Jon Says:

      Can you make a new post with this article Ralph?

    • Ryan Says:

      “What amazes me is they want compensation for the loss of their hunting dog.”

      Jon,

      Where did they mention that they wanted money, what if it was some hikers dog instead of a hunting hound, would you still be as indignant over it? If I lost my bird dog out there, I wouldn’t show the restraint the hound hunters did. There would be no warning shots and no quarter given.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      There was not mention of requesting compensation for his hound.

    • jon Says:

      sb, Idaho Fish and Game released this statement about the incident with Jake:
      “Understandably, the loss of a hunting hound or any other animal companion is very, very upsetting. We recognize that our sympathy does not offer much condolence. Other than for some livestock, the state does not have a program to compensate the public for animals killed or injured by wildlife.”

      I am assuming that the hunters contacted Idaho fish and game to see if they could be compensated for the loss of their hunting dog to wolves. I could be wrong about these particular hunters wanting compensation, but cases like this have happened before where hunters lost their dogs to wolves and wanted compensation.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      That is your biggest problem with you, you are always assuming things without having hard information..

    • Save bears Says:

      I don’t know the law in Idaho, but in Montana, WA and OR, it is the law, that you contact the Fish and Game Dept if your animals are killed by wildlife..

    • Jon Says:

      sb, is it not out of this world to think that hunters who lose their hunting dogs to wolves would ask Idaho fish and game for compensation since hunters have before. They take their hunting dog into the wild, they should know the risk and take responsibility for their actions, not blame wolves for doing what they naturally do.

    • Save bears Says:

      Man, it is amazing, how much of an anti hunting stance that this blog is taking..

      I can tell you, I no longer have dogs, but I can guarantee you what would happen if I did, and there would be no warning shots..

      Ralph, if you want to maintain a balanced blog that allows all sides within reason to comment, it seems to be failing…and it is getting disgusting..IMHO I am starting to feel like I should just hang out at the PETA blog…

    • Save bears Says:

      And Jon,

      It is not out of this world, that you assume and claim things that you can’t back up, you post from a position of emotion and scan the net all day long looking for fluff in the news that supports your position or puts the opposite side in a bad light!

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      There was no indication or even mention of anyone asking for compensation in this incident, you have read between the lines, to throw the hunters into a bad light position, as you always do…you are becoming a real piece of work, a couple of months ago you portrayed yourself as if you didn’t know a damn thing, and now you come across as a self righteous savior of all the innocent and persecuted…

    • Jon Says:

      sb, there are infact instances where hunters have lost hunting dogs and wanted to be compensated by the Idaho fish and game, this is a fact. This is not something I made up, it happened. I assumed those particular hunters did the same thing, but if I am wrong, I am wrong, but that doesn’t change the fact that it has happened a few times before. I also said quite a few times before I have nothing against hunting if it’s done for food purposes. This is a blog for both hunters and non hunters to speak whats on their mind as long as it doesn’t get too out of control which I don’t think it has. Idaho fish and game brought up the compensation thing in that link I posted.

    • Save bears Says:

      And IDFG also stated, there is no compensation program, as they have many times in the past.

      You have taken every single opportunity to smash hunters you can over the last couple of weeks…you like to talk your mind, but you get down right crappy when someone who has a differing opinion than you speaks their mind…you are decidedly anti hunting, and only tolerate those of us that hunt for the meat, when in fact, even those that “Trophy or Sport” hunt use the meat as well, you forget, it is against the law to waste game animals! You seem to infer, that trophy or sport hunters are wasting the meat, which is not true…

    • Jon Says:

      Sport hunting is not the same as hunting for food. It has to do with the intent of the hunt. They are not the same. I think it would be appropriate savebears if we don’t respond to each other’s comments anymore. Some of my comments clearly annoy you for whatever reasons.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      I will continue to respond to you as I see fit, you annoy me because all of a sudden you have become an expert on every single wildlife issue, you rant on about hunters, and claim you knowledge comes from Videos, but when someone offers you a real chance to get out and go hunting even with a camera, you completely ignore the offer, not even responding, you infer that people are trying to claim compensation when it was not even mentioned that they did..your an armchair expert who shows that you have never spent anytime in the wild…

      You continue to put down and condemn those who are actually educated in the wildlife field and work in the wildlife management field, even those who feel similar on many of the issues discussed on this blog, I do hope Ralph sees through some of your Bullshit and acts accordingly…

      But again, I will continue to respond to your BS as I see fit, and I will do it until such time as one of the Moderation team asks me not to..

    • cobra Says:

      I hunt the area where this dog was killed. Used to be really good elk hunting but has gone down hill the last 3 or 4 years. That pack screwed my hunting up more than once the last couple years. Wish they made a bigger meaner bear dog. I wonder what would happen if you were out hiking with your dog and the dog killed the wolf. Anyone know?

    • Elk275 Says:

      There are very few people who hunt only for food, as there are only a very few only trophy hunters. Some animals such as bears, mountain goats and sheep are trophy animals but the meat must salvaged. Time one purchases the needed licenses, equipment, processes the animal I do not think that the economics pencil out for very many who are only hunting for food. Everyone is different and has different circumstances, myself I do not have the time to butcher an elk and processing costs approximately $150 per elk. Save Bears butchers his own game and his economics are different. Each hunter has different economics.

      I hunt for the enjoyment and I enjoy elk meat but it is far cheaper to go the grocery store and purchase meat at the reduce price bin because the dating is running out. I was there today. I hunt because I like to hunt and the meat is an added bonus. Most of the elk that I have shot in the last 10 years I have given away the majority of the meat and it was well received and eaten and then was ask if they was some more available. In 2000, I was able to hunt moose with my cousin in Alaska and I killed a 53 inch bull. All of the meat was packed back to the trail head and processed in Anchorage. I took the horns home and the back straps. My cousin told me the following spring that the moose meat had made 3 families very happy that winter.

      By law all meat must be salvaged from the field fit for human consumption in all western states and providences. The penalty varies from state to state, in Alaska it is a $5,000 fine if one does not salvage all meat or if the meat is spoiled. If hunting is not rocket science then try keeping meat form spoiling on a 65 degree September fall for 10 days; it is a trick and it could be rocket science; I know how to do it.

      I hunt for the enjoyment, if it is a sport well I was always the last chosen in PE class, so I not much a sportsman. You need to change your attitude. Hunting and guns are not going to be outlawed, hunting is going to continue in the foreseeable future. This country is turning to the far right and it is more important to help preserve our wild places than your anti hunting ranting’s.

    • jon Says:

      Elk, that is good. If you want to save money and want healthier meat, than hunt on. I have no problem with that. If hunting your own meat is easier for you money wise and if it saves you a trip down the grocery store, by all means, keep on doing it.

    • Tim Says:

      Cobra,
      I have also hunted in this area and with my hounds. I heard that the dog was actually killed in Butler creek just over the hill from Canary. From what I have been told that pack likes to hang out near Rochat Divide. I also like to go north of I-90 and I was wondering if you knew which drainage’s the Bumblebee pack likes so I don’t run my dogs on top of them? If anyone knows do they stay on one side of the Little North Fork mostly?

    • cobra Says:

      Tim,
      From what I hear the bumble pack runs a lot on the west side of the river. You’ve got to be careful no matter which side of the river you hunt because there is a pack on the east side also. They seem to run the bear creek drainage and up on Graham. They’ve also seen wolves on Wall ridge and sign just about everywhere north of I-90 at different times.
      I gues from what I hear from friends and see myself it’s probably going to be a crap shoot to as where the wolves will be at any certain time.
      I spend a bit of time in the Rochet area as it’s only about a ten minute ride from the house. I’m thinking there may be a couple different small packs in that area as we’ve had them behind the house at the same time as they were in the evans creek and canary creek area. I would suggest you not run hounds anywhere in the pine creek drainage or anywhere behind Pinehurst or Kingston as the wolves have been locked in these areas quite sometime. Good Luck and be careful. If you would like my e-mail Ralph can give it too you.

  72. Jeremy B. Says:

    “The dead calf was discovered yesterday afternoon (Wednesday, May 5) by an ODFW employee who had been involved in efforts to haze elk away from the area, where there are cattle grazing.”

    Hmm…what’s wrong with this picture?

  73. jon Says:

    savebears, it is clear I hit a nerve with you. If you don’t like my opinions, don’t respond to them. That way, we can keep the bs off of this blog. I am not one to brag, but I have more knowledge than you think. This will be my last comment to you in this post because I don’t want to say something that might upset you when I am not trying to in the first place.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      I am not upset at all, and I will continue to respond to you BS as I see fit, not you.I know you said you won’t respond to me, but I am sure you will read my response, a few months ago, you hit this blog and spent all of your time asking questions, then all of a sudden, you became and expert, and again, you still have not addressed the offer of one who actually wanted to show you what hunting is..why is that?

    • Save bears Says:

      Simple questions Jon:

      Do you work in the wildlife management field?
      Have you been trained in wildlife management?
      Do you live in any of the areas affected?
      Have you ever been in the wild or even gone camping?

      What is your qualifications to spend so much time putting those who work in this field down?

  74. howlcolorado Says:

    I think it’s time for people to move on from personal jabs and attempting to call each other out. This does nothing for discussion and merely serves to create animosity where none need necessarily exist.

    I will not go in to my personal viewpoint of hunting here. If you are interested in knowing HOWLColorado’s viewpoint of hunting, you can read it at the following link. And if you wish to discuss it, you may do so there.

    http://howlcolorado.org/2010/05/13/editorial-co-existing-with-hunters/

    This thread last I knew was to bring to the forefront interesting wildlife news. The story in question which started this latest firestorm was that of a hunting dog dying to a wolf attack.

    This (http://howlcolorado.org/2010/05/17/wolves-and-dogs-like-oil-and-water/) does a great job of explaining what is going on and how owners can avoid the problems.

    The hunter in question clearly will not be reimbursed for the loss of his dog. John Travolta’s dogs were killed by an airport service vehicle in the last 48 hours, and we aren’t discussing that here. I would hazard a guess that about 200 dogs died of various causes in the last day from traffic to abuse to dog attacks. All loss of loved pets is horrible and sympathies must be extended. For a hunter to lose a companion, while perhaps a sign of inexperience and not fully understanding the full risks to his dog in wolf territory, is just as painful an experience and it is the job of the informed to try very hard to educate as to avoid similar incidents in the future, and also try and deflect unwarranted anger from the wolves. Mountain lions and coyotes kill dogs. Other dogs kill dogs. And wolves kill dogs. It is a factor which any pet owner in wilderness areas or even more urban areas must be aware of.

    Do I wish this hunter had been more cautious and forewarned against the dangers he was taking his dog in to? Yes. He must assume some of the blame. Nature must shoulder the rest of the blame and hopefully his unpleasant experience will lead to more people questioning why it happened and making sure they take better precautions when they and their pet walk into similar situations.

    I don’t want this to seem as if I am coldly spinning this in to a learning moment, but only he and his family can mourn the loss of a companion. We can only offer sympathies and do something in our own lives to help reduce the chances of a similar story being told from our neighborhoods.

    • jon Says:

      Howl, there is no doubt that it’s tragic when you lose your 4 legged friend, but they must have known there were risks of their dogs being attacked or killed by other predators. When situations like this happen, more times than not, the predators are blamed. They are basically going into the wolf’s backyard and they blame the wolves for doing what they naturally do and that is to kill other animals. Wolves are territorial and I’m sure they knew that. Wolves are not to blame in situations like these. Sometimes, people need to accept the consequences and responsibility of their own actions.

  75. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    Jon just does not hunters with dogs chasing bears or lions or anything else that’s all chill sb, your opinion is valid !

  76. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To JB;
    So you thing they are blaming this on wolves and not their own doing, interesting!

    • Ryan Says:

      You should seriously consider proof reading what you write. You may be a genious in real life, but you type like a stoned 12 year old on the internet.

  77. vickif Says:

    Not that this is specifically about wildlife, but Boulder, CO is now requiring medical marijuana dispensaries to use wind and solar energy to support their energy use!
    Maybe we should do this to more businesses? It is obviously going to be small grid and very local. Roof tops and parking lots, wahoo!!!

  78. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    I think that there are other people that should watch what they say and others need to proof read.It’s time to move on from the personal jabs.

  79. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    o.k,o.k. guys calm down now ! we can’t all be perfeeect ! o.k. Ryan do you get that !

  80. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    JB I would like to add, those pictures are really thoughtful and beautiful. As for the wind and solar Rita ,anyway of getting this into our culture as quick as possible is a very good thing. Look at the gulf, that is a big reason for this to happen as soon as possible.

    • vickif Says:

      I agree. If we raised oil prices to pay for that clean up, people would be more conscious of their use of resources!

  81. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    oh I’s sorry I mean Vickif

  82. howlcolorado Says:

    It is stuff like this which should continue to worry people who are TRULY interested in saving wildlife. This group is incorporated??? Anyway… Press Release from yesterday.

    ————————————————————–

    The President of Save Western Wildlife inc., Scott Rockholm, Is demanding The Idaho Fish and Game take responsibility, and accountability for the environmental hazards directly resulting from the illegally introduced Canadian Grey Wolf.

    SWW demands the Department to initiate an emergency hotline to address the ecological disaster, and highly contagious diseases from the spread by the Canadian Grey Wolf.

    SWW, on behalf of the citizens of Idaho, demand the F&G form a Echinococcus granulosus emergency response team, to remove any hazardous matter.

    We demand, that if any Idaho resident protecting their families from this highly dangerous tape worm, immediately be given relief, and the Department dispatch specialized teams to remove the fecal matter of Canadian Grey Wolves from their property. We also demand the Department to test on a regular basis, areas with high densities of Canadian Grey Wolves.

    This is a highly contagious disease, and can not only affect residents who have resident wolves living in their neighborhood, it is also a very serious health hazard to citizens enjoying the outdoors.

    This is a public health hazard, and SWW demands The IDF&G be held accountable for irresponsible, and negligible actions. We are sounding the alarm, and we demand the IDF&G notify the public of the very dangerous conflicts of the unseen hazards of living with the Canadian Grey Wolf.

    ——————————————————-

    Can’t tell you how many things are wrong with this press release. The “Canadian” wolves were completely clean of parasites when they arrived, so it is the evil deer, elk and other ungulates to blame.

    We must destroy all animals which are infected with something which could infect humans!!!! Like… dogs, cats, rabbits, ferrets, mice, rats, birds (of pretty much any kind), prairie dogs, deer, racoons, chipmunks, the public school system…

    It is only by stating things in such ridiculous exaggeration that it becomes clear just how contrived and disingenuous these types of “press releases” are. All this group is actually suggesting is that we send out federal or state poop scoopers – which actually sounds even more ridiculous. All future wolves sedated for tracking and study must also be fitted with a wolf daiper.

    Courts disagreed with the whole “illegal” thing about 20 years ago. The only reason they don’t like Canadian wolves is because those wolves aren’t patriotic enough. The wolves probably questioned recent US military decisions. Good thing those upper midwest nubilus wolves are home-grown all-american wolves who wear flag label pins… while they range up through the entire central part of Canada all the way to Alaska.

    Hmmmmmmmmm

  83. Virginia Says:

    I must disagree with the statement the country is turning far right. That may be true in a few places, but the statistics do not support that statement.

  84. jon Says:

    http://allamericanpatriot.com/content/wolf-introduction-0

    The author of this article has no idea what she is talking about.

    She says, Males, on average, weigh 130 lbs, the females somewhat smaller.

    Not according to Idaho fish and game.

    • jon Says:

      Thanks Jeff, I found it, but I see that you have posted and howlcolorado has recently as well and I can’t see your comments. Would you be so kind to just put the link up for me? Thanks

    • JEFF E Says:

      Jon,
      after you click the older comments you must scroll down, at least I do. that is all i knowq as I am not sure what you mean by not being able to see the comments

  85. jon Says:

    Jeff E, if you can read this, do you ever have any problems reading other comments made in this have you seen any interesting wildlife news post?

  86. Cody Coyote Says:

    I’d like to take a moment to recall an unresolved Wolf issue…the fate of the wandering female wolf known as 341-F, who left Montana’s Paradise Valley south of Livingston in September 2008 in search of a mate, and wandered through parts of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado . In late March 2009 her carcass was found in northwest Colorado. US Fish and Wildlife immediately began a law enforcement investigation. That was 13-1/2 months ago…over a year. The 5-month 1500 mile odyssey of 341-F was remarkable for many reasons , but the circumstances of her death remain in jurisdictional darkness.

    I wrote Ed Bangs an e-mail today asking if he was ready to release any info about 341F’s demise yet. In a word, he said No. It’s still considered an ” active law enforcement investigation”.

    (Bangs’ reply – quote) “At this time no information can be released about the death of a radio-collared Montana wolf #341F. She left the Mill Creek pack near Gardiner, Montana and during 2009 traveled through western Wyoming, southeastern Idaho, across northern Utah, into northern Colorado, up to southern Wyoming, then back south to Colorado. This case is still an active law enforcement investigation and no information can be released until USFWS law enforcement agents complete their work. Once law enforcement agents determine that release of further information will not compromise their ongoing investigation we will post information about wolf #341 on our Wyoming Wolf Weekly report at http://westerngraywolf.fws.gov . Thank you for your interest in wolves and wolf management. ”

    Fine, Ed, but 13 months is plenty of time to release some basic casework info , regardless. IMHO. The autopsy would’ve taken 6 weeks at most. There is currently a huge convergence of Wolf issues and court hearings , especially in mid-June when Wyoming’s failure to meet FWS / ESA delisting criteria will be argued in court , yet again. We have competing lawsuits in competing courtrooms.

    Genetic diversity is a primary concern , and geographic dispersion of wolves across the Northern Rockies will be evidentiary.

    Honestly , I expected more and better from Bangs et al by now , on the fate of 341F. I fail to understand the blackout of information, which raises more questions and does not serve anyone’s interests ( again my opinion).

    Just a reminder of the ebb and flow of the Grey Wolf recovery process…

    • JEFF E Says:

      look up the site name reddog

    • Cody Coyote Says:

      Huh?
      reddog ??

      All my google search returned was a beer, a KuKlux Klan invasion of Dominican Republic, and some vague allusion to the Asiatic Wolf that went nowhere

      please clarify , Jeff E.

    • jon Says:

      Jeff E, are you talking about a person? There is a wolf hater who goes by the name red dog and he posts on the anti-wolf website huntwolves.com

  87. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To jeff who mention taking his dogs out,at least I think it was Jeff. I would suggest keeping the dogs in eyesight,and go on line and buy a boat horn. These horns can be heard for miles in the ocean. I brought one with me the last time I visited Yellowstone. Bear spray in hand and a fog horn, I was pretty secure. The horns are very loud I mean,could pop your ear drum. So this is just a suggestion, hounds,wolves or bears, do not like a very very loud noise.

    • JEFF E Says:

      I have got to say Rich that is funny.
      Next time you you are out this way get in touch. Ralph will give you my e-mail

    • Peter Kiermeir Says:

      Richard,
      Several times while out in YNP I heard that story of a crazy guy (politely said, the original was a little bit more explicit) blowing a fog horn all the way through the valleys. Was that you?

  88. jon Says:

    Fellows like rockholm and Jim Beers and others like them really believe in their minds that people like Ed Bangs, Jaime Kennedy (dow), Doug Smith, etc are going to jail. This is how delusional these nuts are. I myself would like to see this supposed evidence that Jim Beers has that proved it was an illegal introduction.

    • Save bears Says:

      You have to remember Jon,

      Many people thought George W. was going to be prosecuted as well…

      Delusional Nuts are actually something to fear…they seem to be able to organize much better than those in the middle..

    • howlcolorado Says:

      Jon, you asked a question. Here’s the answer…
      http://howlcolorado.org/2010/04/05/howlcolorado-response-to-mark-french-press-release/

      I don’t mean to keep linking to my own site, but I have done a lot of research on this and to re-write it would be both unnecessary and space consuming.

      Beers isn’t doing anything new. He may have a slightly different angle for his strategy, but the underlying criticisms are the same. Either you challenge the right of the federal government to mandate management of wildlife under the commerce clause of the constitution or you challenge the decisions made by the USFWS. You can introduce revisionist history and attempt to trip up precendent but there isn’t much new here.

      It boils down to what appears to me to be more conspiracy theory than actual facts. And the underlying reason for most everything of this fashion is fear and as, I believe I am right in attributing this quote to FDR, was once said “there is nothing to fear, but fear itself.”

      Amazing how insightful a statement that really was.

    • jon Says:

      I have read that article before. Thanks for putting it up again. Your site is very informative howlcolorado. is this Mark btw?

    • howlcolorado Says:

      Yes, it is Mark… right now anyway🙂

  89. jon Says:

    During his Bozeman presentation, Jim Beers did not mesh words when he stated that those responsible for the wolf disaster must be held accountable. And a large number of those in attendance voiced that former USFWS Director Jamie Rappaport Clark (now Executive Vice President of Defenders of Wildlife) and Wolf Recovery Project coordinator Ed Bangs both need to do time behind bars.
    Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd sponsored Beers’ presentation, which was videoed and will be offered for sale in the near future. More on Jim Beers’ talk will be published on the LOBO WATCH website, at http://www.lobowatch.com, before the end of May, along with details on how to order a copy of the presentation. All money from the sale of this DVD will go into a legal fund. It is the goal of Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd to take USFWS, and others, to court to insure they stand accountable for the theft of $60- to $70-million from Pittman-Robertson funds, the manner in which the money was used, and failure to adhere to many other laws – and USFWS regulations.-Bob Fanning

    There are going to be many battles down the road.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      http://wildlifelaw.unm.edu/fedbook/pract.html

      supposed to be used for wildlife restoration. I guess they have to prove the wolf reintroduction was in some way illegal to make this stick huh?

      I am interested to know if there is liable, slander and deformation of character charges which could result from this.

    • jon Says:

      Yeah, should be very interesting to see what unfolds. I am scratching my head trying to figure it myself how in the hell are they going to prove the wolf reintro was in some way illegal. You are right about one of the other comments you made about how wolf supporters need to start having pro wolf rallies just like how the anti wolf people are doing.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      I am researching this issue right now. During the 90s, under Jamie Rappaport Clark’s tenure as Director of the USFWS, PR funds were improperly diverted to a variety of projects unfunded by Congress and/or otherwise unaccounted for, as pointed out in two GAO reports, one in 1993, the other in 1999. Congress got involved in 1999 and held hearings and raked the USFWS over the coals for gross mismanagement of the PR program. (There are House and Senate Reports on this issue, both available on the internet). A law was passed in 2000 that considerably tightened up the management of the PR program.

      Beers is claiming that some of these funds–millions–were illegally diverted into the wolf program, which he claims is also illegal on other grounds (i.e., the ESA is an unpermissable application of the commerce clause of the US Constitution and also violates the 10th Amendment).

      Technically, federal use of PR funds for the wolf program would have been illegal, although state use of PR funds to support wolf recovery, had a state so desired to use PR funds that way, would not have been illegal.

      However, I can find no evidence for or even discussion of alleged federal diversion of PR funds into the wolf program in either the GAO or Congressional reports. As a matter of fact, Beers himself did not make this claim when he testified before the House Natural Resources Committee in 1999. (I have a copy of his testimony if anyone is interested). His main complaint in 1999 was that he was allegedly ordered to approve an illegal grant of PR funds to the Fund for Animals.

      Once I get this straightened out I’ll do a report.

      RH

    • jon Says:

      Thanks RH.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      I will publish what you find out. The federal use part I knew about, but it seemed that the states made the requests and the feds provided management. The more details we can find about that the better.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Howl

      Can you explain in more detail? I’ve found no reference at all to alleged federal use of PR funds for the wolf program, and certainly not state use, since the states largely opposed the program in the first place. It’s my understanding that the wolf program was fully funded through normal appropriations.

      RH

    • mikarooni Says:

      It would be a pleasure to have Beers and/or Fanning try their luck at the table anytime they so desire. They can bring Toto, er, Toby, too.

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Presentation by Jim Beers, given at Bozeman, MT May 16, 2010 for Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd
      http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2010/05/20/criminal-activities-by-federal-bureaucrats-pertaining-to-wolf-introductionprotection/

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      A related earlier article in which Mr. Beers says that the wolves for the reintroduction were captured in Northwest Territories.
      http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2010/05/19/wolf-introduction-and-fraudulent-science/

  90. Virginia Says:

    http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/article_13a91588-62fd-11df-9d84-001cc4c03286.html

    “Animal habitat purchase in forest budget for 118 acres of private land near Dead Indian Pass above Sunlight Basin – crucial winter range for elk mule deer and bighorn sheep.” This land is near Russell Creek.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      The land in question is on Russell Creek above the gravel pit on the highway.

      RH

  91. Taz Alago Says:

    Keeping peace in the mountains

    Proactive efforts to keep sheep and wolves apart are working in the Sawtooth NF. http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005131395

    • howlcolorado Says:

      This is the sort of story that needs exposure. Positive reinforcement and recognition of the efforts these ranchers have gone through.

      The line “quietly redefining what it means to live and work in wolf-occupied western lands” says it all.

      Let’s not let them keep it quiet. This is how to fix the problem and find compromise.

    • jon Says:

      Good article. I hope one day Idaho, MT, and Wy can be like that, but I doubt it.

  92. Taz Alago Says:

    By the way, Jim Beers is giving a presentation at Eastern Oregon U in La Grande, OR this Saturday, sponsored by the Oregon Cattlemen’s Assoc.

    • Taz Alago Says:

      This ties in with the ongoing ever-mounting ant-wolf hysteria in Wallowa County where so far ONE calf has been confirmed killed. Considering the proximity of the Imnaha pack to the calving grounds, this pack is being pretty well-behaved.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I had heard that the dead calf was not being taken all that seriously despite the efforts of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association to stir up anger as well as the usual suspects as mentioned above — outside agitators😉

    • Taz Alago Says:

      I’m glad to hear that! When you’re close to ground zero it’s hard to see around the clouds of smoke and ash.

      This just in –

      Jim Beers will be testifying before the Oregon House Natural Resources Committee next Tuesday at 1p, room HR E. His subject: History of Wolf Reintroduction and Diseases, which is pretty alarming given that it is abundantly clear he knows nothing about either. His invitation came from Rep. Wayne Krieger, R- Gold Beach.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      In my opinion because the Oregon Cattle Association has always been the main negative force, one of incredible hostility toward Oregon wolf recovery, and the same true of other cattle associations, your support for the Western Watersheds Project is something I’d recommend.

      While other organizations work directly on behalf of the wolf, the Western Watersheds Project goes to the source of problem — the livestock associations.

      People like Jim Beers have no clout except as it is enabled by those who have long held a grip on the rural west.

      WWP doesn’t go around saying, “oh please.” They take the overgrazing bastards to court.

    • WM Says:

      Taz,

      Could it be that the sheep killed outside Baker City, about a year ago, are also a catalyst for the anti-wolf hysteria. I cant’ remember the details, but there were multiple sheep (20 -25) involved in a surplus killing incident by 2 wolves, I think. Then there were emergency hearings held by the state legislature within weeks of the incident, on what to do about the wolves coming in.

      Another thing to keep in mind about Beers – I expect the guy is making a pretty good living on the speaking tour, regardless of the forum. The more interesting the story, the higher the fee. Truth, to some extent, may be compromised in the effort to tell the good story.

  93. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thank you Cody Coyote;
    You thought is very very touching,I mean that with all my heart. After reading your blog, it tells me their are people who love the wild wolf, for they could take a lonely life’s path,or a life full with family members.Are they not like us in many ways?Then their are people who see them only as an obstacle, or a predator who gets in their way. A cunning foe who darts and weaves hits, then out of sight,like a boxer would due to their opponent ,like a true foe. The wolf takes on many roles, many, this is why so many people love them or hate them, but few are indifferent. They bring out the best in people or the worst in people.That is a lot to take on for one animal. They really are god’s creature,at least in my opinion.

  94. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thank you 341-f,you sure are the lone star.

  95. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Jeff e;
    Let Ralph give you my e-mail, if you want one I live by the shore,only the cost I will pass on to you.

  96. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey Jeff E.
    One moe thing, I went into slueth creek,I thing that is how it is spelled. Well I had a dead battery on me with one good one in the car, for my camera. I seen a wolf not more than thirty yards in front of me. Comming out I told a ranger the story,he said rookie mistake, then I showed him my fog horn, he repllied, your not going to use that, no I said only if I get into trouble.

  97. Nancy Says:

    The Peace of Wild Things

    When despair for the world grows in me
    and I wake in the night at the least sound
    in fear of what my life and my children’s lives may be,
    I go and lie down where the wood drake
    rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds.
    I come into the peace of wild things
    who do not tax their lives with forethought
    of grief. I come into the presence of still water.
    And I feel above me the day-blind stars
    waiting with their light. For a time
    I rest in the grace of the world, and am free.

    — Wendell Berry

    Just wanted to throw those thoughts in.

  98. Jon Says:

    Ralph, I hope you don’t mind if I post this year old interview of you because it is a great interview.

    http://idahoptv.org/outdoors/shows/wolvesinidaho/maughan.cfm

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      jon,

      That’s fine. I think it shows me to be moderate and not opposed to the right kind of wolf hunt.

      This idea of baiting wolves for a hunt is intolerable. It is not ethical hunting. It will turn wild wolves into possible threats to humans and livestock.

      It makes me think that some Commissioners might even welcome a nasty incident with a wolf and a person. Either that, or they just can’t put cause and effect together.

    • Save bears Says:

      Based on what I am hearing,

      I am 100% sure you are right Ralph, and IF it happens, watch out, cause shit is going to hit the fan, if those who are in favor of balanced environments, don’t get their stuff together, you will loose, even if you win in court, you will loose the war..

      The only reason I say this is based on my conversations and communications with fellow biologists…behind the scenes it is not looking good..

    • bob jackson Says:

      Save bears,

      When supervisors and other back country rangers told me it wasn’t worth it to go after poachers because all the time going into it could be put into other things that helped the resource more…and not only that, but they would continue on to say the amount of animals killed in yellowstone represented only a fraction of the animals there….do you think I just laid down and accepted this bunch of crap from the majority?

      Same for those “biologists” who huddles around in the closets and lament “it’s not looking good”. Its all Gary Larson Wimpodite conversation. Why don’t they be proud and stand up for what they believe in. Ask reporters to interview them, write papers, go into the dens of iniquity, the houses of the pharisees and smash their tables. But no, they stay in the darkened hallways huddled around just like I saw the deacons of my Baptist church doing because the pastors wife took us teen agers to the drive in theater to see Easy rider.

      Save bears, I suggest when you see these folks gathering, you walk the other way and then do some things to counter the embarassment they have become.

    • Save bears Says:

      Thanks for your input Bob!

    • Save bears Says:

      By the way Bob?

      How do you know I am not doing something to counter the bullshit that is going on?

  99. Taz Alago Says:

    “It makes me think that some Commissioners might even welcome a nasty incident with a wolf and a person.”

    Ditto with some ranchers and stock.

    • Salle Says:

      “It makes me think that some Commissioners might even welcome a nasty incident with a wolf and a person.”

      Ditto with some ranchers and stock.

      Actually, from what I have witnessed of these folks is that they are damned near PRAYING for a negative human/wolf interaction since the day the lost the argument to have them reintroduced. Larry Craig was reassuring constituents, for years, about such an event as have all the other gang of anti-wolf enthusiasts. It’s all they need, they feel, to get rid of wolves once and for all. I just hope that modern day humans who recognize that you can’t be protected from nature itself ~ and actually celebrate the natural world ~ will prevail over these eighteenth century geniuses.

  100. Salle Says:

    2 Utah mineral projects OK’d in roadless areas

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UT_FOREST_PROJECTS_UTAH_UTOL-?SITE=CODEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

    That ancient mining act has got to go.

  101. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    Jon,The face doesn’t look like a pure wolf. The face reminds me of a domestic dog. Could it be a hybrid? I don’t know. I ‘m not to sure they know,either.

  102. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thanks elk 275

  103. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Peter!
    I never hit the horn once, I would only do it in a time of danger,I HAVE TO MUCH RESPECT form the wildlife and the environment really!

    • Fastlane Says:

      Jon,

      Bob Fanning and the author of your link, Gary Marbut, cannot be taken seriously when they talk about wolves because they have a different agenda. They cry “wolf” because they are trying to get recruits for scary ideas on other things.

      Bob Fanning talks like a 5 th generation Montanan, but he moved in from Chicago.

      Gary Marbut has been promoting dangerous, what I think are unpatriotic ideas like Montana secession and the Christian Identity Movement, which is the idea that the only people who should have rights are certain kinds of Christians. Non-Christians and the “wrong” kind of Christians wouldn’t have rights if a “Christian Republic” was created.

      Bob Fanning has continually associated himself with Marbut and others in Montana who promote these causes.

      Marbut has a long history flirting with the militias that caused so much trouble in Montana in the 1990s.

      I did a quick search on Google, and came about with all kinds of things about Marbut. Here is one, http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/beck-cavuto-promote-militia-movement

      Don’t take my word, do your own search. It’s easy to find out what he’s really about.

  104. Cindy Says:

    http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=6001
    I was called in for this Jury but didn’t get seated. I’m interested to hear what other folks think, but my first reaction is the fine seems like a slap on the wrist?

  105. Bob Of Wyoming Says:

    Griz killer found guilty! But, a $500 fine? If this guy had killed the Griz two days later he would have faced charges of killing an endangered animal. As it was he committed the dastardly act during that brief window when the Griz was “off the list”! Lucky him…..
    http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=6001

    • pointswest Says:

      I think people need to realize how completely wacked out the law enforcement system has become in regards to grizzlies and need to learn to lie.

      1) He did not need to report the shooting.
      2) He could have lied and said the grizzly had charged.
      3) He could have lied and said he was closer than 40 yards.

      It is a mistake to be honest and expect people who were in their warm comfortable homes at the time to be reasonable. Everyone is a brave and calm grizzly expert when they are at the bar, at the coffee shop, or at their computers imagining how they would have handled the situation had they been there.

    • Mike Says:

      Lots of controversy brewing in Great Smoky Mountain NP. Last week an idiot hiker on the trail let a young black bear approach to within inches so the hiker could take a photo. The young bear instead bit into the tip of his shoe, causing no damage.

      The bear was tracked down and killed, weighing in at about 60 pounds. The Park was swarmed with calls asking for the hiker to be fined and the bear to be relocated, but they did not listen. Instead, the tiny bear was killed, and (if these photos are correct), the “dangerous” bear was allowed to be handled by tourists on the trail either after death or while tranqued:

      http://www.backpacker.com/cgi-bin/forums/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=692107219;t=9991137070;st=0;&#entry9991882772

      If those photos pertain to this incident, then a real shit storm is brewing.

    • Save bears Says:

      This is totally unacceptable if true, I would urge everybody to write the park as well as the Dept of the Interior to request information about the incident that occurred in Great Smoky Mountains National Park..

    • Jon Says:

      This is what happens when an idiot has no common sense, animals pay with their lives. The hiker should have been fined and the bear’s life saved. This bear was killed for being a bear.

    • Bob Of Wyoming Says:

      Pointswest – They reported it, hours afterwards! Hikers, who know a Griz from a black, ran across the dead bear not long afterwards, and nearby hunters and woodcutters heard the shots – close. This area is compact and well visited during a sunny Saturday in the fall so there were lots of folks around. Other than carrying off the dead bear I don’t think they could have hidden it from the ravens for very long.

      The bear didn’t charge. It was killed five feet on the off side of the gut pile. It simply dropped to the ground and was hit b4 moving! Not hard for the investigastors to see.

      Warden Bill Long and the Bear Mgt people of Wyo G&F are experienced, highly professional investigators. They know how to survey a scene. I sure wouldn’t want them investigating my lie!

      Your points are well taken in general, but I don’t think apply to this case.

    • pointswest Says:

      If this hunter did not shoot the grizzly out of fear for his life, what was his motive then? …that he glories in killing endangered animals? He wanted a trophy? I don’t understand the motive of killing the bear and then reporting it with a very believable story.

      Bears sometimes pay with their lives because they are animals and are ruthless killers. Some people seem to gloss over this fact. There is an episode on Grizzly Man Diaries about triplet cub grizzlies in Alaska. One of the triplets injures her paw and limps around for a few days and has trouble keeping up with her mother and two siblings. A few days later, the Grizzly Man finds the cub in a creek dead with most of her body eaten. She had been killed and cannibalized by her siblings because she had gone lame and could not defend herself.

      A few weeks later, the mother abandons the two cubs, probably because she was not finding enough food. The Grizzly Man tries to help the two orphaned cubs but you can see in the video that they are becoming more and more interested in and more aggressive towards the Grizzly Man. It is believed that it was these two cubs that ended the Grizzly Man’s life and ate most of his body.

      Grizzlies are not like humans. The have no morals nor ethics nor religion of any kind. They are ruthless killers and are unpredictable and can be very, very dangerous and interested only in survival. Gizzlies are known to be especially dangerous around a dead carcass since they get may get the idea that anyone coming upon it may want to eat it. They are known for furious charges in defending carcasses. I believe this hunter could have had a stair down with the bear and instantly realized that the bear was about to charge. Even if it was his imagination, he felt his life was in danger. He was justified in shooting. A charging animal is very hard to hit with a rifle especially if it has telescopic sights and, being a hunter, I understand his shooting before the bear had the chance to charge. The whole point of a grizzlies charge is to terrorize its victim, drive its victim with fear, and make its victim very predictable.

      I doubt bear spray would help with the type of furious charge you get from grizzlies over a carcass.

      I am all for personal bravery and preserving grizzlies and all that. But it seems to me that prosecuting some guy coming upon a grizzly standing over a carcass only 40 yards away and second guessing him for shooting is absolute madness. Like all laws that are born out of madness, people are going to stop obeying them as they should.

    • Save bears Says:

      PointsWest,

      Bear spray has already been proven effective in the type of situation you are describing on several occasions…

      Are you talking about the Grizzly Man Diaries which was the show about Tim Treadwell? If so, Treadwell and his girl friend were killed by a old adult bear that had been previously tattooed for Identification…but that bear was over 20 years old…

    • pointswest Says:

      That could be about Treadwell…I thought the episode I watched implied it was the cubs that killed him. Maybe I need to watch it again.

      How has bear spray been proven effective against an furious grizzly charge?

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Somewhat related; I mentioned it above and thought perhaps it got burried. I also posted Jon’s reference earlier. Note where Mr. Beers suggests that the wolves came from the NWT
      http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2010/05/19/wolf-introduction-and-fraudulent-science/

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      All of the 1995 wolves were captured near Hinton, Alberta on the Rocky Mountain front ranges near Jasper National Park (not in the Park, of course).

      I’ve seen video of the captures many times and heard Carter Niemeyer talk in detail about capturing the wolves (assisting were local commercial wolf trappers).

      The data about the 1995 wolves, which I have long has posted on my old web site, (weight, name of original wolf pack, etc.) I copied from the actual forms used for processing each wolf.

      Of course, Jim Beers is now talking in front of people 15 years after the event. Of course, they don’t know any of this. He knows it too. He could say absolutely anything (they came from Russia, for example). Some would believe it.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      My research into Beers’ claims so far indicates that he’s not in the least worried about evidence but very concerned with propagandizing.

      RH

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I have a local wildlife expert’s notes on the meeting now (looking for permission to post).

      These folks’ political views are as bizarre, actually more, than their views about wolves.

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Ralph

      Hope you can post the notes. They’ll be of benefit as I work through this.

      The political views are right out of the rightwing libertarian sagebrush rebel multiple use dark constellation that anything smacking of the common good, community, and individual responsibility is the mark of the devil.

      RH

      They are now up. Ralph Maughan

  106. Si'vet Says:

    Have you seen anything interesting.
    For me that question is a literal one. Unlike some I rely on what I’ve “seen” with my own eye’s, not someone else’s. I drove 250 mile to Bozeman MT. to listen to Bob, and Jim. This is what I “saw”. From W.yellowstone to Bozeman at 7 am in the morning not one, elk, deer, moose. starting in 1988 until 1997 I’ve driven that route at least 40 times, first time I’ve not seen a single animal, it was eerily sterile. The department of highways can eliminate the “watch for animals on the road signs”. 2nd thing I witnessed is Bob Fanning and Jim Beers didn’t have goats horns or a devils pitchfork. Also saw almost as many women at the forum as men.
    Also JimT, Jon, in 2008 in the part of the LoLo I hunt, we never had a better year, in fact we had to come home 5 days early to make sure our meat was taken care of, 1 pile of wolf scat. That same year Ralph was in another part of the LoLo and didn’t see, elk or wolves. The LoLo is big country. In 2009 we saw or heard very few elk and wolf sign was everywhere. We listened to wolves howl every single day. Habitat in drier climates doesn’t change in one year, unless something catastrophic happens, it didn’t. What Changed???
    Jon as an FYI the Sawtooth range and Wood River are in, IDAHO.
    Barb how about that CWW picture?

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Si’vet/TBone

      I’d suggest you look at Jim Beers’ sworn testimony before Congress (House Committee on Resources) in 1999 about problems with the management of the Pittman Robertson program and compare it to his unsworn presentation this past Saturday in Bozeman, as posted on the Black Bear Blog. Do you notice any differences? Is something missing from the sworn testimony that he asserted on the 16th?

      http://republicans.resourcescommittee.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=160951.

      RH

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Si’vet
      I did reply regarding the CWW picture a while back, you must have missed it. The barn and tree swallows here are up against a cold May.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I have posted Norm Bishop’s notes on Jim Beers talk.

      There are at the top of the blog (for now anyway)

    • Robert Hoskins Says:

      Aside from the ethics of “denning,” I question the claim that Alaskan natives traditionally carried out “predator control.” This issue came up quite often when I was doing research in the Yukon; the claim was being used to legitimize wolf control since allegedly it was traditional Native practice to control wolves to benefit caribou, so that made it OK.

      Problem is, when you dig into the ethnography of northern Natives, it seems clear that Natives didn’t begin “controlling wolves” until after contact with Europeans and the institution of wolf bounties. This doesn’t mean that Natives weren’t trapping wolves for their fur; it means that they didn’t control wolves to boost caribou populations.

      RH

  107. Jon Says:

    Alaskan fish and game shoot 14 infant wolves in the head.

    http://www.akwildlife.org/content/view/123/67/

    truly disgusting we have people like this in charge of wildlife.

  108. Si'vet Says:

    RH, you can count on it. I sat through the meeting took notes. since this was the first time I’ve had the opportunity to listen to both him and Bob speak in person, I focused on what they presented and how it was presented. Going to the meeting is the first half of the education process, follwing up the questions I have is the second half of the learnig process. Just happen to have an ex G12 in the family, and my bro is a fact finder.

  109. Robert Hoskins Says:

    Si’vet

    Since Tom Remington has posted Beers’ presentation in full, you don’t even have to rely on your notes.

    You’ll find quite a bit of documentation about this issue on the internet. Good luck.

    I look forward to your conclusions.

    RH

  110. Ron Kearns Says:

    Quote:

    Unethical feds want more lions killed for bighorn

    YUMA AZ — The US Fish & Wildlife Service, an agency in embattled Sec. Ken Salazar’s Interior Dept., has issued a very bad decision today to continue kill more rare desert lions so the State of Arizona can manage the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge as a bighorn sheep game farm.

    http://dpatterson.blogspot.com/

    • jon Says:

      Williams refutes that, saying that Canadian wolves migrated on their own into the North Fork Flathead drainage in the mid-1980s and have naturally proliferated since then under the protection of the Endangered Species Act.
      Thousands of people have ventured into the North Fork since then, he said, but there have been no known incidents of human tapeworm infections.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I have a comment — Teabaggers favorite foreign oil company!?

    • william huard Says:

      I hope Mr Paul keeps talking- this will help the democrats in the Nov elections as they expose the tea bag extreme views. I have to shake my head and wonder how these libertarians think that business interests should supercede even basic human rights! How dare we criticise BP for destoying our wetlands! I guess we know how they feel about the environment

    • Save bears Says:

      William,

      At this point in time and after the last 18 months, I can say , the Democrats have done any better than the Republicans have on the environment…I think come November, its going to be a free for all!

    • Save bears Says:

      That was “I can’t say”

    • william huard Says:

      savebears-Obama will be criticised for his Salazar pick- Salazar should have cleaned house in the MMS and USFWS to clean out the politically influenced depts who had a no reg agenda for 8 years- the old industry knows best model. Obama has had such a mess to contend with- one major issue after another that was conveniently shelved by the Bush Admin- Exactly what did Bush accomplish in 8 years other than 2 wars, a deficit, and damaged international relations with everyone? Not to mention allowing other countries to initiative green technologies as we kept the status quo!

    • Save bears Says:

      William,

      You did notice I was criticizing BOTH parties didn’t you? neither party is worth a shit, and the problems go a long ways back before Bush, unfortunately, many people like to gloss over this…

    • jon Says:

      I will agree with savebears on this. Republicans and democrats are the same, they both equally suck.

  111. jon Says:

    Social Security numbers required for Wyoming hunting, fishing licenses?

    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_e30a6c73-1442-5d40-823c-8b75f0129255.html

    • Save bears Says:

      Montana has required a SSN for years now to get your hunting and fishing licenses…had something to do with tracking down deadbeat parents…

  112. Mike Says:

    It looks like the GSMNP bear photos are legit.

    http://www.knoxnews.com/photos/galleries/2010/may/20/laurel-falls-trail-black-bear-sedated/21919/#section_header

    This little 60 pound bear nipped the shoe of a tourist who let the bear get within inches. They tranqued the bear, and while it was tranqued they let kids handle the bear on a trail. Then they killed this “dangerous” 60 pound bear.

  113. Jeremy B. Says:

    Many people here regularly bemoan the lack of funding for wildlife restoration efforts. Recently, the Wildlife Society put out the following message:

    Dear TWS members,

    Earlier last month, in The Wildlifer, we asked you to take action to help secure permanent funding for wildlife. If you have not done so, we’d like to remind you about it again:

    The Teaming with Wildlife Act of 2009 (S.655) would amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to ensure adequate funding for conservation and restoration of wildlife by providing permanent appropriations to the, currently unfunded, Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Account. Funding for the program would come from revenues from mining practices and drilling along the outer continental shelf and would be used by states for implementation of Wildlife Action Plans. Such permanent funds are desperately needed in order for the states to
    support wildlife and their habitats.

    Please contact your Senators and encourage them to co-sponsor the bill!
    Find your Senators here
    .
    Click on their name to enter their website where you will find their fax
    number, or send your Senator
    an
    email. Mailed letters are the best way to get your message across, but
    faxes, emails, and calls are all great ways too. Learn more about
    contacting decision makers with the Government Affairs Toolkit
    . If you do contact your Senator, please let us know
    and pass on
    any response you get. Thanks!

  114. Kristin, Northern CA Says:

    BP told to use safer chemicals to disperse oil- http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/21/MNAV1DI5I1.DTL

  115. jon Says:

    http://www.adn.com/2010/05/21/1288936/child-killed-after-wandering-into.html?pageNum=3&&mi_pluck_action=page_nav#Comments_Container

    This is what happens when parents don’t watch over their kids especially a child 3 years old. It’s not the dogs fault, it’s the parents and they are the reason why their 3 year old child was killed. This could have been preventable if the parents of this child were doing their job and watching over their child carefully.

    • jon Says:

      I believe in situations like this, the parents should face criminal charges for not watching their children.

    • Mike Says:

      Man what is wrong with people? Some folks just shouldn’t breed or own pets.

  116. Robert Hoskins Says:

    New York Times editorial on Rand Paul:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/opinion/22sat4.html?th&emc=th.

    RH

  117. jon Says:

    Wolf survival analysis shows successes, but struggles in Glacier, Bob Marshall

    http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_5b79e490-60a1-11df-b4ff-001cc4c03286.html

  118. jon Says:

    2 year old article about 3 cougar kittens killed by Idaho fish and game.

    http://utahhuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2008/02/05/death-of-three-cougar-kittens-irresponsibly-represented/

    A year old article, trophy hunting hurts big cat populations.

    http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/06/17/lionstudy/

    • jon Says:

      With regards to the first article I posted about the 3 cougar kittens killed by Idaho fish and game, here is what Mark Gamblin said that baffles me. Many hound hunters prefer not to shoot their quarry,” Mark Gamblin, supervisor for Fish and Game’s southeast region, told The Associated Press on Wednesday. “Their objective is to enjoy the chase and take photographs of the cats when they’ve been treed, then let them go.”

  119. william huard Says:

    Jon-
    In Tanzania 240 lions are killed by wealthy trophy hunters, many of them killed over bait. I think there should be a trophy hunters 12 step program because the desire for that trophy can become a sickness. There is help for them however, and who knows, trophies could be purchased on ebay to avoid being outdoors at all!

    • jon Says:

      Yeah, I know all about the lions, leopards, crocodiles, elephants, cheetahs, rhinos, etc that trophy hunters kill. They are scum.

  120. william huard Says:

    If you listen to Steve Scott from Safari hunters journal, you would think that trophy hunters came with a halo and wings for all that they do for conservation

    • jon Says:

      lion bowhunting

      this video will get your blood boiling William as should the other ones. All in the name of conservation I guess, yeah right. We are supposed to believe these people actually care about wildlife?

  121. ProWolf in WY Says:

    William, Jon, a lot of those trophy hunters that come into Africa use some wasteful practices. I read an article about one who shot a hippo and all he took was the ivories. Of course the article started out with a story about how the hippo had killed a mom and her baby so the Great White Hunter was the savior. I have also heard of people who shoot multiple species they don’t plan on eating and others where people are told to shoot baboons because they warn animals. Then you always read about how the hunters are good because they donate the food to the natives. That sounds like they are creating a cycle of dependence on the native people.

    • Save bears Says:

      Pro,

      I am not a SCI member and I don’t agree with their organization on most points, but one thing I will bring up here, there is not African country that allows foreign hunters to bring the meat home, when it is an American Hunter, USFWS does not allow you to import the meat, if you hunt in Africa, you are a trophy hunter because you can’t bring the meat home…there is no donation, it is a given, if you kill an animal in Africa, the meat goes to the natives…this is not a hunters choice, it is part of the requirements to get a licenses to hunt in Africa…as for baboons, they are hated by the natives as well because they compete for food resources with the natives..many native hunters will kill them and then string them up in trees to warn other baboons not to enter the area…

    • Save bears Says:

      Another point to bring up, many of the countries in Africa will not allow their own people to hunt for many of the animals that foreign hunters can hunt for, so the natives getting the meat is not a bad thing, it supplements their food stores. Another thing to point baboons will and often kill human babies and eat only the brain of the human child…there are a lot of things that these many articles don’t point out when they are published…it pays to research the subject more than the articles we read here in the US…

    • jon Says:

      savebears, this is only an assumption on my part, but I doubt that hunters who go to Africa to kill animals like lions and leopards are going for their meat even if they were allowed to bring the meat back. They are going for the trophy and for the sport. This is different than the typical hunter who hunts deer or elk for food. The reason for the trophy hunter who goes to africa is to kill animals for sport and to take the body of the dead animal home as a trophy. I know you may not see a difference between the two, but I do. The intent of the trophy hunter that goes to africa is not food, it is killing the animal for sport and for a trophy. These hunters are not the same as the ones who hunt for food.

    • ProWolf in WY Says:

      Save bears, I guess I can blame the governments of those countries then, good to know. Do you have any sources on baboons killing babies? I have heard of chimps doing it but not baboons.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      There has never been an option for non-African hunters to export the meat, since Before SCI was formed…

      I have said my piece…

      If you guys want to have an anti-hunting blog, why don’t you start one, because this is really getting out of hand, nobody can come here and have a conversation about wolves and other species and work on solutions without the anti-hunter rhetoric..

    • Save bears Says:

      Pro,

      Yes, it is the governments, I have known many who have gone to Africa to hunt and were mad because they couldn’t bring the whole animal home including the meat!!!

      Here is one article about baboons:

      http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/monkeywire/2003-June/000395.html

      Here is another:

      http://deadlykingdom.blogspot.com/2010/05/what-eats-people-part-13-baboons.html

    • jon Says:

      sb, I cannot speak for others, but I am not anti-hunting. I am pro hunting if it’s done for food. I have no problem at all with a hunter killing a deer or elk for food. The problem I have is with sport hunting and there is a difference between that and regular hunting (food).

    • Save bears Says:

      So Jon,

      In Africa, where the natives can’t hunt for many species, your against, the white man hunting and then the natives getting the meat? Its not a donation, it is a staple industry that supports the natives of the countries, if the white hunters were not hunting, then they starve? That is your acceptable solution? Again, many countries do not allow the natives to hunt many species, so no options for the them, they can’t kill the elephants when they destroy their crops and they can’t hunt the animals they can eat…sounds like a way I would want to live!

      If you want to blame someone, then blame the countries of Africa for the way it is..

    • jon Says:

      To all, check out this amazing video. A leopard kills a baboon and cuddles a baby baboon.

    • jon Says:

      Yes, I am against hunters going to Africa to blast animals away for sport savebears. I do blame the countries. Their amazing wildlife like lions, leopards, and cheetahs should be protected from the gun.

  122. ProWolf in WY Says:

    The Cody anti-wolf rally is today!

  123. william huard Says:

    If you’ve ever seen Safari Hunters journal Steve Scott is a former Board of Director of my favorite group to despise, SCI. I want to puke when he goes off on one of his trophy hunter’s good for conservation rants, where he pits the anti against the freedom of hunters to kill animals behind fences, for the animals benefit of course!

  124. ProWolf in WY Says:

    SCI is one organization I will never trust. I’m nervous about a lot of hunting groups and that one probably takes the cake.

    • jon Says:

      I agree with the both of you about sci.

      Safari Club International offers dozens of awards for killing an assortment of its more than 500 different “record book” animals, ranking the biggest tusks, horns, antlers, skulls and bodies of hunted animals.

      Hunters receive “Grand Slam” and “Inner Circle” award trophies, among others, for shooting a prescribed list of animals. For example, the “Trophy Animals of Africa” award requires the hunter to kill 79 different African species to win the highest honor.

      SCI has an award for “Introduced Trophy Animals of North America,” glorifying hunters who frequent captive hunting ranches.

      To earn every SCI award at the minimum level, a hunter must kill at least 171 different animals. Many members go well beyond that number. One has more than 600 different animals listed in SCI’s record books.

  125. jon Says:

    http://www.newsminer.com/view/full_story/7066416/article-Parks-service-closes-sport-hunting-and-trapping-of-wolves-in-Yukon-Charley-Rivers-National-Preserve?instance=home_news_window_left_top_3

    sb, many people see a difference between sport hunting and regular hunting (hunting for food). Many environmental organizations are actually pro hunting, but are against sport hunting. There is a difference between the two.

    • Save bears Says:

      I know they are Jon, I have spoke at many of their various functions, and it is amazing how many really don’t take the time to research the whole subject, both positives and negatives, then they get their friends and supporters to donate millions of dollars and go on this world wide campaign to actually ban something that the natives of the countries depend on for survival..

      I just wish people would do in-depth research before they start with this bullshit of how wrong something is.

      I spent a lot of time in many African countries, when I was in the service, and you do realize that tens of thousands are starving there and would not survive without the support of foreign trophy hunters..or is the cause worth the loss of humans…

    • jon Says:

      Savebears, SA is corrupt. Do not be surprised if that money made from trophy hunting does not to go to the locals. In 2004, Sir Edward Dashwood, director of the E J Churchill Sporting Agency, admitted to investigators that “90% of the trophy fee
      goes straight into some Nigerian’s pocket or African politician or whatever it is.”

      As an animal lover savebears, sport killing is wrong to me. You cannot expect an animal lover to be ok with the killing of animals for sport.

  126. Save bears Says:

    Ralph you have a mail when you get a chance to check, I am sure you are out in the field this weekend, but please let me know if you get it..

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Hi Save Bears,

      I’m following the blog very lightly today, but I’m not in the field because spring seems not to have come to Pocatello. The leaves are on the trees, but every day the high temperature is about 50 degrees or less and with precipitation.

      Right now there is a heavy snow flurry at my place. Anything you do is going to be in the mud. No mosquitoes though.😉

      I’m just plain bored.

      I got your email and will respond, but your comment is a chance for me to publicly complain.😦

    • Save bears Says:

      Ralph,

      I fully understand 1000% this last couple of weeks has been something…and I don’t blame you one bit..

  127. william huard Says:

    Savebears- With all due respect, your last statement is a stretch to say the least- that people in Africa would starve without the help of foreign trophy hunters. I have spent years researching SCi’s history, and I doubt there is anything that I have stated about them in the past that is inaccurate or misleading. That group is a bunch of wealthy above the law hypocrites- and i’ll back it up with as many facts as you have time for…..

    • jon Says:

      The Safari Club has filed two lawsuits to strip federal protection from the polar bear:

      The first seeks to allow importation of polar bear heads and hides into the United States even though the species was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2008.
      The second seeks to remove the polar bear from the threatened list altogether.
      Why? Because at $40,000 a kill, polar bear hunting is big business — and heavily promoted. Every year the Safari Club gives out a “Grand Slam” award to anyone who kills at least five great-bear species, including the polar bear. It is even accepting “Record Book” entries to encourage its members to kill the largest bears possible.

  128. mikarooni Says:

    SCI once joined me in an effort to tighten black bear hunting regulations and tag numbers in a situation where bear sizes were dropping precipitously and it was clear evidence that they were primarily down to killing cubs and other immature specimens. I thought that I had misjudged them; then it turned out that they had only joined the effort to infiltrate the group, get inside information, and make sure that it had only limited success. I found their motivations, actions, and methods to be well within the range of disgusting in that episode and haven’t seen any reason to change my opinion since.

  129. william huard Says:

    mikarooni
    Here’s a good one. endangeredspecieshandbook.org/persecution_illegalities.php

    For starters anyone can go to wilkepedia and put in Ken Behring for some truly facinating animal exploitation stories. I’ve got plenty more.

    • jon Says:

      William, have you ever heard of a guy named C.J. McElroy? He founded sci.

      McElroy hunted in nearly fifty countries on six continents, more than 70 times in Africa alone, and killed nearly 400 record-class animals, including:

      elephant
      walrus (since protected)
      scimitar-horned oryx (endangered)
      addax (endangered)
      southern white rhinoceros
      black rhinoceros (endangered)
      hippopotamus
      dama gazelle (endangered)
      polar bear
      Bengal tiger
      leopard
      wolf
      jaguar
      lion
      Bill Quimby, a past President of SCI, writes in his book “Safari Club International” that there were rumors among hunters that McElroy “ignored hunting laws,” that McElroy was even accused of killing a Rocky Mountain bighorn ram in a national park, and that his “ideas of sportsmanship and ethics simply were different from those of hunters who came along later.”

      Shooting Animals from Aircraft

      Quimby also says that when it was still legal, McElroy enjoyed spotting Alaska’s Dall sheep, grizzly bear, moose and caribou from single-engine aircraft, then landing and shooting them the same day.

      “[McElroy] could not understand why anyone would willingly backpack or spend weeks in a saddle to hunt one of these animals when there were pilots who could put a hunter on a record book trophy hunt in a day or two of flying,” Quimby writes. “Everyone was doing it, he told one hunter, and there were no laws against it (yet), so why wouldn’t it be ethical?”

      Many hunters, and even SCI members, disliked McElroy and he was eventually forced out. Norden Van Horne, founder of SCI Denver, said that, “as a hunter, I was embarrassed to be part of an organization represented by C.J. McElroy.”

    • jon Says:

      Pains me to see animals killed like this just so someone like Dan Duncan can put in his trophy room of animals.

    • WM Says:

      I had a business meeting a few years back in the top of the Columbia Tower (Private club in Seattle). I was introduced to Ken Behring and then had to sit across from him at a large round table and watch him eat. Most disgusting and longest hour of my life. Reminded me of Jaba the Hut from the Star Wars movie. The guy must have been nearly four hundred pounds at the time.

      Seems like all these rich folks in SCI (I think Behring was its president for awhile), have plenty of time and enough pull to do even borderline legal activities. I guess they pull this shi_ for the stories they can tell each other, but certainly not the ethics of a hunt. Most of these guys got where they are by not playing by the rules. Why should this activity be any different.

    • WM Says:

      Just to be clear, so I am not falsely accused, I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of SCI or any other formal hunting group of this type.

      My one and only hunting affiliation has been as a member of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation since about 1988. My renewal notice sits beside my computer and I am deciding whether to renew, because I really don’t care for its new CEO, David Allen, or the direction the organization is taking. My wife did renew our membership to DOW and Sierra Club, so how is that for balance?

  130. william huard Says:

    Jon-
    That is their legacy. I have been trying for years to get Sci to ban their canned hunt kills from their award competition pages. As you may know, many Sci members are also owners of hunting preserves, like the late Dan Duncan, who was found guilty of shooting animals from helicopters in Russia. He claimed he didn’t know it was illegal! Unfortunately the fair chase ethic falls on deaf ears or is conveniently ignored. The endangered species post earlier goes into detail about the Tara Gau Argali sheep that behring killed in 1997. We are talking real sleazeball stuff here, and you couldn’t make this stuff up. I recommend the Scully book Dominion where his chapter “the Shooting Field” describes ScI as follows “Respect” at Safari Club always means the courtesy of leaving enough behind for the next hunter, just as compassion always means helping the less fortunate who cannot hunt, and generosity always means sharing the fruits of the hunt (Hunters against Hunger). They practice a socially conscious sadism here. Ethics at Safari Club is ordered libertinism, like teaching cannibals to use a table napkin and not take the last portion.”

    • Elk275 Says:

      William Huard

      ++like the late Dan Duncan, who was found guilty of shooting animals from helicopters in Russia. He claimed he didn’t know it was illegal! ++

      Willy Boy, you could really P me off. You do not know what you are talking about. Dan Duncan was not found guilty of shooting animals from a helicopter in Russia, the grand jury did not indict him. It is not illegal to shoot animals from a helicopter in Russia if the local officials say you can. If you are going to discuss this please get your facts right and get them RIGHT now. The moose that was shoot was shot under orders from a local game warden so that a village could have moose meat for a feast, apparently Dan imported the horns home. Please, please get it right, I have followed this story since the beginning.

      It was the booking agent who was indicted under the Lacey Act, Bob Kerns of the Hunting Consortium of Virginia. Apparently anyone who has anything to do with a hunting trip can be subject to the Lacey Act. It took the jury less than one hour to find him innocent of all charges, this is a case of the federal judiciary running amuck. Even before the trial started, the prosecutor wanted to cut a very favorite deal which rwas ejected. Dan Duncan passed away several ago and was the 85 th richest man in the world with 8.5 billion in net worth. Dan financed the trial at a cost of $750,000 and they bought witness, lawyers, and game wardens from Russia to testify. It was very clear from the beginning that the local authorities legally could overrule any laws made in Moscow. No law was broken and the animal was shot for a village. If anyone without unlimited resources then that person would have been found guilty. As far as a hunter not knowing what is or is not legal they don’t print hunting regulations in Russia and distribute them at the local sporting goods store. The same law that indicted Bob could be use to indict an individual who returns home with shell found on the beach of an endangered animal.

      There is a number of people on this board who are totally anti hunting, but hunting is legal and as long as one follows the laws, it is no one’s business. I do not want to toot my horn, I have been to Africa hunting and yes, I have shot a baboon. Until you have been there please do not write falsehoods. Most of the meat in Africa is dried into biltong (jerky) and sold. I follow African hunting very closely and I hope to return in several years, but first an ibex.

    • jon Says:

      Elk, I am not so sure about that. Read this link.

      http://presszoom.com/story_137579.html

    • jon Says:

      The only reason why they declined to bring charges against Dan Duncan is because he had a lot of power and he was the richest man in Houston. His hunting guide was indicted. Dan Duncan’s hunting guide was indicted on one act of violating the lacey act. Duncan and four others hunted and killed moose and sheep while flying in an helicopter which is illegal in Russia and the united states.

    • Elk275 Says:

      Jon

      It is not illegal if the local authorities allow it. Whether it is ethical or not is another question.

  131. william huard Says:

    The issue here Jon is that the SCI’s of the world will try to label us “anti’s” and position us as the threat to preserving the heritage of hunting. I am not against hunting, but i will never condone unethical treatment of animals, especially when certain people consider themselves to be “superior beings” and above scrutiny.

    • william huard Says:

      Elk 275-
      Maybe you need to read Jon’s documented post. Shooting animals from helicopters was illegal in Russia at the time, and Duncan paid off local people and did not anticipate being caught. Like many wealthy people that think they can do whatever they want and pay whatever it takes to get out of it. If you want to defend a canned hunter that’s your choice! He went to his grave knowing the truth!

    • Elk275 Says:

      Here is the defence attorneys comments

      I have read other things in different publications.

      http://www.huntingreport.com/conservation_force.cfm?id=141

    • jon Says:

      Rich people do get away with a lot of things. I do not know much about this Duncan guy except that he was a trophy hunter and a billionaire. He could have very well known it was illegal and just paid people off to keep their mouths shut and play dumb and claim he didn’t know it was illegal.

    • Elk275 Says:

      William

      Please read the conservation force letter. The local authorities allowed it and there was no way anyone would have known different. I do not support any canned hunting or high fence hunting.

      Four years ago, I was in New Zealand and used a helicopter for transport only to a mountain top that is inaccessible for a tahr and chamois hunt. I spent the night out in 10 inches of rain and about perished but that is another story. I did not get anything. The following morning the pilot picked me up for the return trip to Fraz Joseph. We lifted off the ground and he founded the tahr way above where I was camped. He said ” do you want to shoot a couple from the copter” I said “no, I do not do that”. Fifteen minutes later we landed the helicopter and I paid my bill. He said ” well in several months I will fly the New Zealand Department of Conservation over the same mountains and they will cull every tahr seen’. I was not my idea of shooting an animal from a helicopter.

    • william huard Says:

      Elk275-
      I am not questioning your integrity as a hunter from reading your posts over the last year. What frustrates me the most is what happened during the bush admin in the DOI. “In June 2006, David Smith, a senior official@ DOI resigned after he violated the appearance standard and killed a buffalo@ Duncan’s ranch. A month before, Smith’s office designated Houston as the entry port for imports of exotic wildlife, a move that benefited Duncan.” I remember the article because the buffalo was an aging nearly blind male that Smith shot in the eye. Everyone is quick to say that they don’t support canned hunting but no one wants to do anything about it. After these stories come to light do you really feel it helps the hunter with all these ethical nightmare stories?

    • Elk275 Says:

      William

      ++In June 2006, David Smith, a senior official@ DOI resigned after he violated the appearance standard and killed a buffalo@ Duncan’s ranch. A month before, Smith’s office designated Houston as the entry port for imports of exotic wildlife, a move that benefited Duncan.” I remember the article because the buffalo was an aging nearly blind male that Smith shot in the eye. Everyone is quick to say that they don’t support canned hunting but no one wants to do anything about it. After these stories come to light do you really feel it helps the hunter with all these ethical nightmare stories?

      The way that I read this is that you do not like the fact that David Smith shot a buffalo on Dan Duncan ranch: the buffalo hunt was unethical because it was a canned hunted and we as hunters condemn can hunting but will not do anything about it. So the essence is that a hunter regardless of who he/she is shoots a buffalo on a high fenced ranch.

      Ok, between Gallatin Gateway and the mouth of the Gallatin Canyon are hay bale signs on both sides of the US 191; one sign says buffalo meat hunts available and the other sign says grass fed buffalo meat for sale. These signs are on Ted Turners property. In December and January the Flying D ranch has buffalo hunts available, trophy buffalo hunts, management bull hunts and yearling buffalo hunts. Most people go for the $875 yearling buffalo meat hunt, they take you out in their truck find a buffalo to your and there liking, bang, the ranch hands guts it out and loads it up in the truck then transfers the carcass to your truck. If you do not want to shoot the buffalo the ranch hands will do it for you. Off to the butcher shop you go.

      There are a limited number of animals for sale and when all have been shot there is no more hunting that year. I have never heard anyone decry ethics of morals of the act of shooting those buffalo; they are shot for meat period. Then there are the trophy bull hunts which last I knew cost $4000, if a hunter shoots a big enough buffalo then they can enter it into the SCI record books — big deal.

      So lets get back to the ethics of that buffalo shot in Texas vs the ones shot on the Flying D. A buffalo is shot behind a high wire fence in either place and there is no difference, period. Would I want to partake, No. But, the other day I was in the bank and one of the ladies wanted me to buy a $5 raffle ticket to support the Belgrade baseball team. I bought a ticket and the winner will get to shot a meat buffalo — I never win. The bank lady says every time she sees me that this buffalo is already in my freezer. If I win, I will be shooting a meat buffalo behind a high wire fence.

      There may have been other back room deals which are unethical and wrong in the David Smith case but the shooting of the buffalo is the way modern day buffalo hunting occurs, unfortunately.

  132. Save bears Says:

    Somehow, Ralph got the impression I am a member of SCI, I don’t have the time to go back through this whole rant, but to say again, I AM NOT a member of SCI and I disagree with many of their positions…!!!

  133. Ralph Maughan Says:

    Save Bears,

    Excuse me, not really.

    It’s just that I have been following this thread very lightly. Clarification is always good of course, but I did see where you wrote that you were not a member of SCI.

  134. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    I have always enjoyed reading the wildlife news that Ralph and the others have put on here.I,also,love the photos.It’s is part of the country that I do not get too see very often.Lately,from people’s responses to each other,the commentary part will be taken off.I might not agree with everyone one this board but I try to get facts,as much I can,than form an opinion.However,I like to be informed what is going on with the bison,wolves,fish,and,the wilderness.I did enjoy the little tid-bits of peoples lives that they disclosed here.Thank you.

  135. jon Says:

    DESPITE STRONG OPINIONS FROM BOTH SIDES, THE PREDATOR’S IMPACT ON WYOMING’S ELK POPULATION REMAINS UNCLEAR
    Are wolves to blame?

    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_a2a2bf6e-1458-533f-9570-cf6b1dd82602.html

    For those that may not have seen this article yet.

  136. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    Thanks,Jon,the link.

  137. jon Says:

    Forgive me if this article has been posted before.

    Mark Hebblewhite, wolves are here to stay and elk are on the menu.

    http://www.ravallirepublic.com/news/local/article_8b95b06a-36e3-11df-bfba-001cc4c03286.html

  138. Virginia Says:

    We drove by the anti-wolf rally, but I admit to not having the courage to stop and tell them that they have nothing to say about the decision for or against wolves – only the judge can do that. There were quite a few vehicles parked in the area of the public park where the rally was held, some from out of town and out of state, but mostly what I saw were lots of political signs for candidates running for different offices. The only thing I heard from a loud speaker was “we need to save our $500,000,000 wildlife resources and we need to get rid of wolves to do that.” It has been rather windy and chilly here today, so that might have contributed to the early end of the rally.

  139. jon Says:

    Virginia, how many people would you say did you see there? Hundreds? They talk about extirpation, but I wonder if they really believe they are going to get rid of all of the wolves in WY.

    • ProWolf in WY Says:

      Don’t all the states talk about extirpation? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if people in this state spent half as much time thinking about important issues like education, as they did pissing and moaning about wolves, they would be the envy of the nation.

    • Virginia Says:

      I am not too good at estimating crowds, but I would guess there were probably around 150-200 people in the park. It looked about like the crowd when the tea party gathered in the same Public park, so I would say it was probably the same people, with a few imported speakers from Idaho, Montana, etc. It also included backers of Colin Simpson, Steve Simonton and others who needed to get some attention for their campaigns. Maybe Dewey was there and could add more to the conversation.

    • Dewey Says:

      I did attend the Cody (anti) wolf rally. I counted the heads at one point and came up with 185. I figure maybe 225 “unique visitors” attended this Tea Party for the modern day mountain men. Of that 225, I would say 220 were strident anti-Wolfers. The crowd was thinning pretty dramatically before they got to the end of the list of 23 speakers…even though it was sunny a somewhat bitter cold wind was blowing straight out of the west. The anti-wolf, anti-Fed rhetoric was mostly the same from speaker to speaker and got rather tiresome.

      This rally accomplished nothing. Just made a lot of noise. There was a tanned wolf pelt sprawled across the signup table, and the customary photos of disemboweled elk.

      I could post some photos if Ralph allows, but they wouldn’t be too informative or enlightening. But they would be accurate depictions of the mood of the day.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Thanks for the information on the anti-wolf event.

      I was shocked to read that the head of the Federation of North American Wild Sheep (FNAWS) was there sharing the stage with the biggest killer of wild sheep, the lobbyist for the Wyoming woolgrowers.

      Last winter about a thousand bighorn sheep died from diseases transmitted by domestic sheep. Wolves killed few to no bighorn. Wolves flat out don’t prey on bighorn sheep because they live in terrain that is not compatible with the way wolves hunt. Bighorn’s predator is cougar.

      This tells me that if folks want to save and expand bighorn populations they need to support the Western Watersheds Project which has gotten closed a number domestic sheep operations in the middle of bighorn range on public lands.

      I had heard that during the meetings over bighorn versus domestic sheep in Idaho, FNAWS had been uselessly cautious.

    • jon Says:

      Ralph and others, the website huntwolves.com has some pictures of the event. Check out this one picture, you will see someone holding a sign that reads kill wolves.

  140. Save bears Says:

    We have many topics we discuss on this website, but I feel this is one of the most important ones, this concerns fellow humans, who put their trust in a Government long ago, that let them down…..

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_INDIAN_MONEY_COBELL_MTOL-?SITE=MTKAL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=ap_template.html&CTIME=2010-05-22-17-37-26

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Hopefully, the case will be resolved in favor of the native Americans. Perhaps they did not put their trust in the Government years ago, but were forced by circumstances to accept what was offered.

  141. ProWolf in WY Says:

    Virginia, I wish I could have been there. Cody is just a bit of a drive for me though. Did you happen to hear what the gubernatorial candidates were saying?

    • Virginia Says:

      ProWolf in WY – sorry, I did not hang around. All of the candidates are republicans and I have already read enough of what they are advocating. Evidently, the Billings Gazette has an article about the rally.

    • WM Says:

      Would it be too sensitive on my part to say:
      !Ole por el torro! What a stupid sport, made even dumber by those who watch it.

  142. jon Says:

    http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/53132,-1.php

    Old article, but still a good one. Cop shoots 15 pound mountain lion cub. Is it me or are police officers sissies nowadays? There was another article I posted few weeks back about how a cop shot a 12 pound daschund and said he shot it because he felt it was a threat to him. They have to deal with murderers and they are scared of a 12 pound little weiner dog. I mean come on here.

    • Save bears Says:

      But yet, when someone goes off handle about the threat of a wolf killing a child, we always remind them of how many dogs attack each and every year…

    • Save bears Says:

      And Jon,

      The cops are sissies, but you won’t even answer Si’vet on his offer, simply amazing..

    • Jon Says:

      Savebears, why do you keep going on about this si’vet offer? I think by not responding to him, he would have known the answer was NO to his offer. He could ask me a million times an the answer is still no, so move on and stop thinking about things in the past. A 12 pound weiner dog and a 15 pound mountain lion cub is no threat to a police officer. Some cops are just trigger happy fools that like to think they are above the law. There have been many cases where cops have shot dogs unnecessarily. To think that a cop has to deal with drug dealers and murderers from time to time and be scared of a little 12 pound daschund and think it’s a threat is quite laughable to me.

    • Jon Says:

      Savebears, there was a link to a story I posted a day ago about how sled dogs killed a 3 year old. One of the family members of that 3 year old decided to kill all of the 7 sled dogs that were chained up in a yard. I hold the parents responsible for that child being killed and they should face criminal charges for having their child killed. The relative of the 3 year old should face animal cruelty charges for killing all of the 7 dogs and be given jail time.

    • Save bears Says:

      Jon,

      You finally said no, so I won’t say another thing about it.

    • WM Says:

      Rude jon,

      One would have thought would at least have the courtesy to decline a very generous offer, regardless of whether you agree with his point of view. You certainly could have learned something. And, based on the number of comments and arcane (often disgusting) video and print offerings from your endless searches of the net, it appears you have the time for such an outing.

    • jon Says:

      WM, now, that is not very nice of you to say. Why don’t you take a hunting trip with si’vet? I am sure he will enjoy your company. Finding links only takes a couple of minutes out of the day if that. Even if I did have the time, I would still say no to his offer. He could as me a million times and the answer would still be no.

  143. Jon Says:

    cody hosts rally for Wyoming wolf management

    http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/article_cc772778-65f3-11df-a633-001cc4c002e0.html

    state, federal experts debate wolf kill evidence

    http://www.capitalpress.com/oregon/wolfwar052110 (scroll way down)

    • Jon Says:

      Do some of these idiots in Wyoming who want to hunt wolves realize that if they don’t change their wolf management plan, wolves won’t be coming off of the endangered species list? Shooting wolves on sight in 80% of the state is not a management plan based on science. That is basically an eradication plan to me. These people who want this shoot on sight plan do not care about those who live in WY that actually like wolves and want to have a chance to see them in the wild. They might not ever get that chance if this shoot on sight plan ever sees the day.

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      The Capitol Press article has a picture of the May 13 dead calf. It appears to me that it has not been eaten except for contents of the body cavity. A “textbook” wolf kill is bitten on the head, back, and rear. None of these were visible in the photograph. ODFG has not decided on the cause of the calf’s death although the examiner for Wildlife Services cried wolf. The remains have been sent to Washington SU for further examination.

    • jon Says:

      Barb, it is a common practice among ranchers to cry wolf whenever their livestock is killed. The possibility that it could have been another animal besides the wolf never crosses these people’s minds.

    • ProWolf in WY Says:

      Funny how everyone is only looking at wolf predation. Nobody is taking anything else into consideration. Typical. Even if Wyoming would look to their neighbors north and east of them they could figure out that they might get wolves delisted.

  144. vickif Says:

    For those of you who are aware that there is a ranch in Colorado that is said to have a pack of wolves on it…tonight there will be a CBS channel 4 special on the subject. Should be interesting to see how they play the wolf card in Colorado’s media.

  145. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    to sb;
    one of these attacks was at a research center, what experiments are on these baboons, maybe they were getting back,for what humans ae doing to them. You know they are not stupid animals. See this experiments with animals,leaves a bad taste in my mouth sb. Not that I do not see the harm in the attack on the baby. But their was an explanation for this. In fact their is a baboon sanctuary,to save these animals,and people handle them all the time.

  146. jon Says:

    Using dogs to help protect livestock from predators

    http://www.pinedaleonline.com/news/2010/05/Usingdogstohelpprote.htm

  147. ProWolf in WY Says:

    Surprise, surprise someone is holding a kill wolves sign. That hunt wolves site is about as credible as saveelk and lobo watch.

  148. Jon Says:

    The Buzz: Wolf protest may spark more

    http://www.planetjh.com/news/A_105994.aspx

    But the demonstrators who participated in Saturday’s anti-wolf rally weren’t your typical Townies or West Bankers, either.

    They were professional outfitters, ranch workers and sport hunters who came from the valley and afar to demand that wolf management be handed back to Wyoming.

    Not surprising in the least.

  149. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    All I am
    saying is their is a reason for the incident, and all baboons are not as you paint them. Am I reading you wrong, if so sorry, but they are not all blood thirsty creatures.

    • Save bears Says:

      Richie,

      I don’t have all day to go back and forth with you, but will say, baboons are one of the most feared and hated animals in Africa, you might want to do some peeking around on the net and do some reading up on the species. I am not saying blood thirsty, but they are very aggressive and very violent..they are very intelligent and will actually plan their wars and raids on competing groups, they are well known for killing babies in their own groups so the females will come back into heat..

    • Elk275 Says:

      Richard, there is a very interesting article on Accurate Reloading about a white baboon in Zimbabwe. One of my best friends in Bozeman is an old Rhodesian/Zimbabwe game ranger and he told me that the villages would be absolutely frighten of anything out of the normal; that white baboon is being blame for every ill in the local villages. It is a informative article about local villager and wildlife. I would suggest that you only read, that article as the rest of the contents of that website would not bode you well.

    • Barb Rupers Says:

      Interesting that there are more bears than wolves killing young moose and yet the wild life officials relocated 100 bears but killed wolves.
      Is it because wolves reproduce faster than bears?

  150. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    Don’t get so much in an uproar sb, o.k. You make a valid point, but the internet is not an absolute. As for them huntig and being intelligent yes they are. But their territory or habitat has been disminished by guess who? Mankind! So please, their is a refuge where they take in babies etc. So some people take care of these animals. Why are all these animals,monsters to you, and if I am wrong so be it ,it sure sounds that way. Lets end this now,go watch your bears from your house,that sounds more peaceful.

    • Save bears Says:

      Richie,

      Animals are not monsters or saints to me, they are simply animals, and hence all have their own behaviors…I am very neutral when it comes to all species, I don’t demonize them and I don’t relish them, but I do understand them, why they are here and what they do, that is what a biologist does.

      I have no romantic illusions and I have no condemnation, because I know animals are animals..

      Richie, I simply posted information about baboons, you are the one that, by choice decided to jump my ass again, and I posted what I know.

      I agree, the internet is not absolute, but a few here on this blog, think if they read it on the net or in a news article it is gospel, there is a heck of a lot more science involved, than what is written in the news..and again, you were the one telling me you don’t like being talked down to, but yet, you do it to me with your smart assed statement “go watch your bears from your house,that sounds more peaceful.”

      Must have been a bad weekend for you Richie..

  151. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thanks Jeff I see the wolves are the cause of everything !

  152. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thanks elk,I will read it, but I still think that they are being pushed from their territory,just as many wild creatures are today.

  153. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    Don’t be so sensative,I am not being a smart ass, and I do love animals. Again I will take the side of the animal,because they are the underdog. They do not have a nice life like you or I do,their’s is a hard fought one. What MAKES IT so SAD THEY DO HAVE FEELINGS,many times you do not see that,or you do not what to adhere to it. So if I sound like a smart ass,what I mean is watch your bears and maybe you will see the softer side of animals. Take it easy sb,their goes your military thing again. I can’t see you as a true natue lover,maybe my fault,but the picture does not fit.

  154. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    P.s. Sb not a bad weekend, but like all of us I do have something I must attend to, all I can say, New York is a very liberal state,especially if you are a landlord. At least writing you takes me away from other things.

  155. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Thanks elk, I was going to try and look for it under accurate reloading, do you mind if I do not add the 275 more things to write. Hey I like your thing on hunting in the mountains,you are a very idealist and a tough guy.

  156. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey elk sorry I like to see the guy in front and the animal holding the gun, really.

  157. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey elk that web site is not for me

    • Elk275 Says:

      Richie

      I told you only to look at the article on a white baboon. It is an extremely interesting article about Africa, wildlife and the African people.

  158. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey guys who is this senator from Alaska who wants BP to only pay for the first days of the cleanup in the gulf. Do you know that BP is doing a risk analysis of the spill in the gulf, whether it is worth to clean it up now, or wait till the price of oil goes higher.

  159. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Elk I did read the article,and it was informative, the people are superstitious, I guess superstition is still big with all kinds aaof culture’s.Their was a picture calle albino alligator,very good picture.

  160. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey JB,thanks for putting some perspective on this monster!

  161. howlcolorado Says:

    I have to ask this question. I have my opinions on the answer, and I have asked many hunters the same question in the past.

    What is the ethical justification (in terms of hunting ethics) for sport trophy hunting specifically of predators?

    Yes, it’s a loaded question. The addition of the qualifier of predator is the hook. It’s designed to make both “sides” consider ethics in hunting. It’s not a black and white discussion of “subsistance” hunting vs. “trophy” hunting. There are degrees of grey. I have found that predator trophy hunting garners the most revealing responses.

  162. Save bears Says:

    howl,

    Ethics are a personal judgment..and will continue to be for a long time, your ethics and my ethics are completely different, justification of ethics is not easy to define.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      There are a lot of books written by hunters about the ethics of hunting. There are hunters who have spoken to me at length about what should and should not be acceptable hunting practices. The offering of money or prizes for trophies is, for example, an area where hunters are generally quite opinionated.

      Was fox hunting an ethical sport? I worked in Animal Rights in England for many, many years. This particular sport was always the most contentious with hare coursing.

  163. Si'vet Says:

    Howl. what’s your definition of:
    1. trophy hunter
    2. predator

    • howlcolorado Says:

      1) A trophy hunter seeks out a specific species or specimen of a species satisfying certain personal defined requirements.

      2) An organism that lives by preying on other organisms.

      The scientist in me made that second answer somewhat facetious, so to be more specific, let’s select a food-chain definition and pick it to be any animal which satisfies the definition which also does not have a non-human natural predator of it’s own. The apex predators if you will.

  164. Si'vet Says:

    Howl, serious. I thought, you would come out of left field, with some bizzare caranage definition and I could just say we’re to far a part to ever get to where your headed. We are on the same page with the def “trophy hunter”.
    Predators: are lions,bears, coyotes,wolves, and bobcats, the predators your interested in.
    Though I call in lions and bobcats I don’t harvest them, just photo’s (not sure why), just not my deal. Is there something specific you are interested in.

  165. SEAK Mossback Says:

    Is there something particular about a top of the line predator? Bowhead whales may live as much as 200 years – probably the oldest mammals on the planet. A fair amount of very old hardware has been pulled out of recently harvested whales – the oldest confirmed commercial harpoon head dates to the 1880s but there are plenty of stone and ivory harpoons of presumed very old but indefinite origin. That’s after going through major population bottlenecks during commercial whaling eras that must have removed most of the potentially oldest animals.

  166. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey sb;
    It really does not matter what you go by, that is not my concern, I just like the big picture,and we as humans,destroy,which shows me the wrong people are in charge. Ralph even said,leave the wolves be alone with the other wildlife,and their will be an equilibrium. The wolves will die off when their food dies off, we humans introduce control, so the hunters could be happy,that’s all. I say,and only my opinion,this problem will go away when Salazar goes away, bring Bruce Babbit back,ex president of the wilderness society.

    • Save bears Says:

      I agree with Ralph 100%, always have for over a decade now, what I don’t agree with, is those who have no idea of what they are talking about..Salazar is a joke, appointed by the great savior…and so far has not don’t anything good..

      As far as what I go by, if it does not matter to you, then why continue mentioning it?

  167. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    Hey man I have proof of what I said before, from engineers on the projects I spoke before, experts general.

    • Save bears Says:

      Okay, if you have proof, then post it? If you have the proof, then post the links so it can be verified!

  168. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    very simple you attack me ,I attack any body who does not show respect,others have told my misgivings,but “you my friend’,and I mean that losely,attack. For the most part things I say, I have found by a book or something on ch.13,animal planet,etc.

  169. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    O.k. I will look over the ethics class I am refering to ! Must find it,then I will scarn and attached it. Or if it has a website I will give it, does this make you happy, sb!

  170. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb;
    Do you really think I care, if you were ziggy stardust or a general or what, just learn not to attack, like the others. But I guess this is too hard for you to do. You know I had a thing with Ryan,Layton, but these guys are smart and a level of,oh I do not know, respect or something. I do not agree with them but it stops at some point. You act like you lost the war or something,hey just let’s say we disagree, ok, sb.

  171. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    hey look I was reading this again I know you are very proud of the army and such,so just do not attack and I will stop the ziggy stuff and the general stuff o.k. , look in past post I was trying to be real and down to earth,but you can’t pick that up, so let’s just stop.

  172. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    hey to all I would say go to earthjustice and read about the permits given to these oil companies !

  173. Save bears Says:

    Richie,

    I really don’t care if you attack the military, and I don’t care if you attack me, it simply shows, who you are and how you act, you being Down to Earth has nothing to do with this, as to “can’t we just stop?” your more than welcome to proceed as you feel is correct and so am I and I will….

  174. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    This was about BaBoons that is all it was man, I do not think theyb are any different than any other animal,if you remember.

  175. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To sb; don’t you ever let up, I will post what I said before, and you did you the war,didn’t you

    • Save bears Says:

      Richie,

      Who doesn’t let up? You keep posting just as much as I do, so I would say it is pretty even, and which war did I loose? By the way, you should care about the military, it is one of the only reasons ignorant people like you have a place to talk like this, and before you go there, I didn’t say stupid, stupid cannot be fixed, ignorance can be…

      As I said, if you don’t like what I have to say, then show some smarts and stop reading it..you have the choice, don’t read it, ignore me, ignore what you don’t like…

      Simply stated, you butted in where you didn’t belong and now your fighting like a caged animal Richie, go back and take some more classes and this time pay attention a little more..

  176. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    lose the war, meant to say

  177. pointswest Says:

    You can make suggestions for stopping the oil spill at…

    http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/546759/

    My suggestion is to use an inverted parachute. Since the oil (and frozen methane) are buoyant, they could be captured with a large inverted parachute. Once captured in a large parachute, the oil and methane could be suctioned from beneath and up into oil tankers at the surface with one or several suction lines.

    A simple parachute could be quickly fabricated from a net fabricated with heavy steel cable that would contain a heavy woven textile such as heavy nylon. The parachute might be square or hexagonal and be one or two hundred yards across.

    It could be lowered over the spill site by four or six boats each with hoisting equipment and each lowering a single weight. The buoyant oil would fill the parachute as it neared the well but the weights would have to be sized to overcome the buoyancy of the oil.

    The parachute might be lowered to be a hundred or so feet above the well site. Suction pipes could then reach up from the sea floor up into pool of oil under the parachute before they rise to the oil tankers at the surface.

    This seems to be a fast and easy method with readily available materials. It would need to be engineered based on the buoyancy of the oil (and methane), the size of the steel cable, size of the mesh of the net, and the strength of the fabric, and the number and size of the weights.

  178. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To points west;
    Could they impload it like a building,the government should step in by now,all the birds,fish, wetlands,damaged because of big corps makes me sick, and will go to web site !!!Thanks for posting

  179. Si'vet Says:

    SB,Richie sorry for interupting, as I’ve stated before I interpret what I’ve seen as what I’ve seen. As I stated earlier from W.Yellowstone to Bozeman it was eerily sterile. After leaving Bozeman I spent the next 3 days in the Jackson Hole/Gros Ventre / Idaho side of the Tetons. I spent the time with some very good optics, even though the weather was lousy, the glassing was even worse. Never in 40+ years have I seen less game (deer,elk,moose). Just as an FYI, in SE Idaho, where with the good rainfall last spring and good winter fawn weight, and easy winter, fawn survival over the recent winter was 85%. Also as and FYI, mule deer are for lack of a better term the least likely to survive the winter. I’m willing to to stand on my head and bet my a–, the elk,moose survival rate in those other areas won’t be 15%. Why?

    • Save bears Says:

      No Problem Si’vet, in all honesty, I am observing pretty much the same as you are…

  180. Si'vet Says:

    elk, & moose “calf” survival rate

  181. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Si’vert;
    Could you blame this all on wolves alone, should you not explore the area further. LIke hike deep into bitteroot and other wilderness areas.Look I DO NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE YOU GUYS HAVE, but their has to be a better reason than blame the wolves. Or maybe it is an evolution problem, like the elk amd moose and others have to learn how to fight the wolves better. I heard before wolf introduction, coyotes were becoming supercoyotes, I think left alone in one hundred years,they would have evolved into wolves. My vet from out west agrees with this !

  182. Elk275 Says:

    ++LIke hike deep into bitteroot and other wilderness areas.++

    Richie

    One is not going to find any game deep in a wilderness area this time of year with the exception of Mountain Goats and in certain places (the Beartooths) Mountain Sheep. The bears are starting to emerge from hibernation and can be found eating various greens in avalanche chutes. It has been snowing at elevations in excess of 6000 feet for the most of May. There is no grass or vegetation for ungulates to eat until early June in the mountains and then it will be a slow migration into the wilderness areas.

    Most of your Big Game animals will be found in the valley floor on private land or state wildlife winter range. What Siv’et is talking about is the lack of game from Grayling Creek to Big Sky Montana. There has been a noticeable lack of animals from early years. Yesterday, I was trying to find a place to pop some poor helpless gopher, god forbid. I did see a number of antelope, deer and 12 elk in the Tobacco Root Mountains.

    The most wilderness areas are sterile until spring migration.

  183. Si'vet Says:

    Richie, I could if the downward trend would not have been so drastic. Richie, it usd to be that winters and spring rains dictated the the numbers, we’ve definately been in a drought for many years, drought is very serious with regards to mule deer, if they don’t weigh 72 lbs. at xmas, usually no matter how mild the winter, they are coyote food, mule deer metabolism slows during the winter. Elk on the other hand are aggressive and robust in the winter, and it takes some pretty severe changes to have a huge impact, in many of the places I have scouted, habitat hasn’t made a severe overnight shift. Richie, that’s why I invited you out, I would like to show you some of the most pristine wildlife habitat, in the west, and discuss why it’s so void of elk. Richie, rethink my offer, and if you accept, please read every drop of info you can with regards to elk habitat, and we will hike through country that is far and away better than experts say is needed. Come see for yourself.
    Jon, I think I’ve figured out, why you have every link, and have watched hundreds of hunting shows. If in fact you are disabled, the offer still stands. 14 yrs. ago my second oldest son had a diving accident and is a c-5 quad, (no feeling below the shoulders except for biceps) in my world there is no disability, just have to think outside the box a little. I have been his sole caregiver now for 14 yrs. along with his Masters degree, he has, fought MEAN king salmon in Alaska, after a 3/4 mile ride on my back in a make shift back from the fly in lake. ( he’s 6′ 4″). He joined us hunting deer, elk, antelope, coyotes, quail, and waterfowl. Helped train and run a dandy little lab in field trials and hunting situations, all good. If Jon is short for Jonee, we have some very good options there as well. So I take it if you ignore me that me no, right. Took me awhile to figure that out, wasn’t raised that way and neither were my children.

    • jon Says:

      It’s called research si’vet and I post the links for others to see. Afterall, this is have you seen any interesting wildlife news. I am not disabled, on the contrary, I am very active. Please don’t be mad because I declined your offer for that hunting trip.

  184. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To elk 275;
    I remember in early spring their was still snow and many dead animals that did not make it to the hot springs for warmth. So could you explain what is the problem?

  185. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Si’vert;
    You are are rea gentleman,I was thinking the same about Jon, but one more thing could he be Norwegian ? But let me say I will try and make it their,it all depends,to be honest if I can sell this property in Brooklyn? I am close,with a few problems. I am a very open and honest person, as you will see if we meet Si’vert,thanks again for the invitation,and you are a genuine person,nice story about your son.

  186. Richard Giallanzo,nj Says:

    To Si’vert and ELK 275;
    Thank you for letting me share your wildlife experience, many years ago,after living in the city limits, I wanted to see something else. So I remembered an uncle taking us to bear mountain, N.Y., so I took a ride their. It was over for me I loved the mountains and the lakes, WITH ALL IT’S BEAUTY, so I was hooked to the woods. I had taken my dogs their many times and others have gone with me since then. I try to visit different woodlands, I been to all of New England, every mountain top , but the best place I love is the west, you guys are very lucky.

  187. jon Says:

    http://www.allamericanpatriot.com/content/how-legal-was-introduction-canadian-wolves-northern-rockies

    An article by that nut Toby Bridges. Robert Fanning and Jim Beers are mentioned in this article.

  188. jon Says:

    Ralph, I sent you an email with a link to this article. Hope you read it.

    http://www.planetjh.com/news/A_105994.aspx

  189. Ken Cole Says:

    Seems to me we should close comments on this thread


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: