Have you come across any interesting Wildlife News? February 14, 2011

Note that this replaces the 22nd edition. That edition will now move slowly into the depths of the blog.

Coyote in the snow.  © Timz

Coyote in the snow. © Timz

 

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.

223 Responses to “Have you come across any interesting Wildlife News? February 14, 2011”

  1. Daniel Berg Says:

    I was amazed when I looked at the GPS tracking for the female wolf that was poisoned by 1080 in Colorado.

    http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/gray-wolf011.html#cr

    From Montana into Wyoming, From Wyoming to Idaho, From Idaho into Utah, and from Utah into Colorado. Not only into Colorado, but almost to Denver. Then a line back into Wyoming that almost had her dipping her paws into Pathfinder!!

    I know wolves can range far and wide, but kowing that did not lessen the surprise of looking at this map.

    • Woody Says:

      Daniel Berg
      Thanks for the informative link. Satellite images and tracking information offer a lot.

      • Jon Way Says:

        Further evidence to dismiss the “Canadian” wolf claim. While this wolf, of course, wasn’t in Canada, the data clearly shows what wolves are capable of…

      • PointsWest Says:

        Just imagine what a map would look like if you could track wolves that traveled the plains 150 years ago. I don’t know how anyone could possible believe there were subspecie boundries on the plains or in the central and northern rockies.

    • Angela Says:

      Points West, subspecies can form where there are barriers–geological, vegetative, glacial, etc.–and the subpopulations may persist long after the barrier is no longer there because of geological or climatic changes. The subpopulations may, after time, develop their own dialects, behave differently, etc. There are many subspecies of birds, despite the fact that they can fly. There are also two species of killer whales in the Puget Sound that do not interbreed or commingle. In their case it seems it came about through diet specialization. In the wolf’s case, I’m guessing it was glacial and interglacial periods that changed habitat connectivity between populations.

      • Angela Says:

        But just to be clear, there is no doubt in my mind that wolves traveled long distances in the past. The Canadian wolf argument is absurd.

  2. Rita K.Sharpe Says:

    Nice photo of the coyote in the snow,Timz.

    • timz Says:

      Thanks, he’s been hanging around my place for a couple weeks with a smaller one (I think female mate), hunting mice in the meadow across from my house. Both are very healthy looking. We hear them yapping at night a lot.

  3. WM Says:

    SB,

    I have been waiting for a suitable topic and time to bring up a discussion item from late December. We haven’t had an opening, recently so I am going to raise it now. Recall we were speaking of the possibility of RM elk genes in the Olympic elk population. You indicated you had a photo (or more?) a Quinault elder had given you depicting some RM elk being offloaded from rail cars somewhere on the Olympic Peninsula in the 1930’s or so, and other data indicating so (DNA results ?).

    Anyway, I ran this by Bruce M, the former ONP elk biologist for some 30+ years, and he has been checking on it for me for the last six weeks or so, through all of his sources. To date he has been unable to confirm your assertion. Can you give me the name of the Quinault elder with whom you spoke or any other information that would help in the query? It has Bruce stumped.

    • Savebears Says:

      WM,

      Those records are at my Fathers in Washington, but I will be more than happy to dig them out when I am back there in June, I am sorry, I don’t have them here in Montana, I got that information when I was doing my studies in the quest for my degree and left them at Dad’s when I moved to Montana, but if you will remind me, I will get them out..perhaps it will help your friend out in helping to complete their records.

      • Savebears Says:

        By the way WM,

        I don’t know if Ralph provided my email address to you, if not contact him and let him know it is ok for him to do that..then we can correspond through email and not have to wait for an appropriate topic..

    • Angela Says:

      Many years back I was involved in meetings attended by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and one of their top wildlife biologists told us something about the introduction of Rocky Mountain elk into Washington. He was a big elk *enthusiast* (hunter). I asked him whether they were concerned about the subspecies interbreeding–nope, they weren’t. I can look in my notes and see if I took any notes.

    • Angela Says:

      on WDFW site:
      Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) occur primarily in the mountain ranges and shrublands east of the Cascades crest. Small herds have been established, or reestablished, throughout other parts of western Washington. Rocky Mountain elk populations currently in Washington stem from elk transplanted from Yellowstone National Park in the early 1900s.

      Hybrids, or genetically mixed populations of Roosevelt elk and Rocky Mountain elk, are common in the Cascade Range.

    • Woody Says:

      Lets see, $107,000,000 per 2 square miles, or 1280 acres, is $83,600 per acre. WOW! No wonder they think it is a good deal for the state school fund. It would take a long time to collect that in grazing fees.

      I hope that if there is a transfer in ownership that grazing is discontinued.

  4. wolf moderate Says:

    Page 6 (part 13.) of Ralph et al lawsuit against helicopter landings in wilderness areas really surprised me. I do not remember this being discussed on this blog. If it was could someone send me the link? I didn’t realize that you all were a part of that lawsuit last year. Anyways, this really fired me up, so if someone has a link to where you all spoke on this topic I’d appreciate it.

    I was researching educations of of wolf advocates and came across the lawsuit.

    Often, I do not think of things that you guys do (Just wired differently), so it’s possible that I’m in the wrong on the helicopter landings in wilderness areas… but I do not think so. Thanks.

    http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:NPUgj1BL4xEJ:www.westernwatersheds.org/legal/10/wilderness-wolf-watchers/Ralph-Maughan_Decl.pdf+ralph+maughan+education+idaho&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShG5paNpJvCaSGu1BNijHxEPIJTpipeSBqvZAlf3SnfpuXB1l102FEHdTK07mpaEWQvBfQhh4jVDv28wr4xbcngnqVo3YAEsVCpOeeHyA2R3OnjvQaYB_BI2f9C–oU3l3QwEAw&sig=AHIEtbR5p41izicB9QhGb2gojHc0d5i32w

    • Salle Says:

      Oops, meant to put that link here but it’s in the next slot below…

      As it turned out, the IF&G, unlike Otter claimed in that video ~ why I said he was lying, were allowed to land helicopters in the Frank Church Wilderness River of No Return that spring but the judge told them that was it and not to ask again. They did ask again this year, and they were denied. The link you posted is a compilation of depositions from plaintiffs since you found it on a search using Ralph’s name.

  5. Salle Says:

    Wilderness wolf lawsuit attracts wide environmental base
    February 9, 2010 — Ralph Maughan
    Rocky Barker’s update on the lawsuit filed by Wolf Recovery Foundation and WWP-

    https://wolves.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/wilderness-wolf-lawsuit-attracts-wide-environmental-base/

    • wolf moderate Says:

      I know it’s a bunch of groups, not just ralph.

      Thanks for the link so quickly!

    • wolf moderate Says:

      Rocky seems to be biased from what I’ve read over the years. My assumption was validated when he linked 2 websites pertaining to the article and they bother were wolf advocate sites. No sites from the opposing side. Look on the bottom of article and you will see.

      http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2010/02/09/rockybarker/wilderness_wolf_lawsuit_attracts_wide_environmental_base

      I think Mr. Creel summed it up nicely. It’s basically ridiculous that a chopper can’t land for a few minutes or even a few hours to collect scientific data. Here is a quote from a letter he wrote that I like.

      “While I personally think that the information to be gained from radiocollars can justify their use in wilderness areas, I certainly acknowledge the argument that research in wilderness areas might be expected to follow the same rules as other activities in wilderness areas.

      Best,
      Scott Creel”

      • Salle Says:

        So I suggest you have a look at chapter or section 4 of the Wilderness Act for reference on why it was an argument at all.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Then change the wilderness act to allow this to take place. I guess commonsense has left the building and everything has to be done through lawsuits and threats. What a sad state of affairs this country is in.

        Ok, that’s all. I just meant to get a bit of input on why they sued. I got it now and that’s good enough. Thanks for the info, no need to beat a dead horse😉

      • Salle Says:

        Indeed. However, I don’t see where it is warranted to just change a law because a gang of zealots find it inconvenient because it prevents them from doing something that the law prohibits and is absolutely unnecessary. Frivolity is no reason to change an important law that protects the environment, or a small portion of it from reckless instant-gratification-mongers who would destroy anything if it doesn’t meet with their ideological agenda.

      • WM Says:

        Salle, I think you also need to look at:

        Section (7) State jurisdiction of wildlife and fish in national forests. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the several States with respect to wildlife and fish in the national forests.

        There is legislative guidance for this provision, and this is the basis for the Forest Service FC Wilderness memo allowing ID to use helicopters, See House Report 101-405, dated February 21, 1990, (from the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs), which accompanied the passage of the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1990.

        Appendix B of this report says:

        “2. Fish and wildlife research and management surveys

        Research on fish and wildlife, their habitats and the recreational users of these resources is a legitimate activity in wilderness when conducted “in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment” (Sec. 4(d)(1) of the Wilderness Act). Methods that temporarily infringe on the wilderness environment may be approved if alternative methods or other locations are not available. Research or management surveys must be approved in writing, on a case by case basis, by the administering agency.
        Helicopters and fixed wing aircraft overflights may be used to conduct approved fish and wildlife research activities. Aircraft must be used in a manner that minimizes disturbance of other users, including humans and wildlife.
        All fish and wildlife studies within and over wilderness must be conducted so as to preserve the natural character of the wilderness. Aerial counts and observations of wildlife may be permissible for management of wilderness wildlife resources. Capturing and marking of animals, radio telemetry, and occasional temporary installations (such as shelters for cameras and scientific apparatus and enclosures and exclosures essential for wildlife research or management surveys) may be permitted, if they are essential to studies that cannot be accomplished elsewhere.”
        ——–
        So, the issue in the litigation seems to be whether the FS complied with this Congressional guidance under the Wilderness Act as it exists today.

        A point that sticks in my craw is that on the one hand some of these wolf advocacy plaintiffs say in one law suit “no genetic connectivity” and “no proof of numbers,” then attempt to thwart efforts to get the data, with yet another law suit to prevent gathering it. Wolf moderate is right common sense has left the building.

        Personally, I don’t think helicopters need to be in Wilderness, but my prediction is the judge will allow it in this instance.

        Here is another very current resource that specifically identifies what Congress has determined to be within the permitted and prohibited activities in Wilderness (as interpreted by a Congressional Research Service specialist citing specific statutes) :

        http://polis.house.gov/UploadedFiles/WildernessUsesCRS.pdf

      • Ralph Maughan Says:

        WM,

        You made a prediction, but this article is from 2010.

      • WM Says:

        Ralph,

        Is there different more applicable Congressional guidance that supercedes the 2010 material, and if so what?

  6. timz Says:

    Normally this would be good news but his replacement is likely to be the same or worse.
    http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/02/15/1528617/idaho-fish-and-game-director-to.html

  7. Christopher Harbin Says:

    I ran across a very thorough though somewhat dated wolf bibliography if any one is looking for info:
    http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/18AD27DD-15BE-42FF-9860-B6B808B73144/0/wolfbib.pdf

  8. Moose Says:

    WI wolf attacks on dogs and livestock rise in 2010

    http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/191384/

    • Moose Says:

      From WI DNR website:

      Four hundred fifteen wildlife damage claims were submitted in 2009, with appraised losses totaling $1,958,449.23…… deer damage represented 76.33% of appraised losses statewide

      • Immer Treue Says:

        Interesting. I’ve been sparring with someone periodically on other sites and get the usual wolves are killing the deer, wolves are killing the dogs, wolves cost too much…. I’ve been on some of the Wisconsin DNR sites, in particular the deer salvage from auto collisions. They are down statewide, not just in the more dense population centers where “swat” team go in and remove deer. The trend has picked up over the years that wolves have repopulated the state. I would think that is a positive in terms of wolves.

        One can also look at the rise of Lyme’s disease throughout the state, where deer are part of the tick cycle that causes Lymes. I believe there have been studies on the east coast, where deer had become a real problem, and the incidence of Lyme’s disease increased and decreased with the rise and fall of the deer population. A natural source to keep deer down is a good thing, yes?

      • Moose Says:

        Several of the damage estimates from whitetails for individual farms exceeded $100,000.00…..I guess that doesn’t warrant the media coverage given to dead dogs and livestock.

        Another note: wolf depredations reported for 48 farms in 2009..up from 32 in 2008…there are over 1200 livestock operations in wolf country in WI…don’t want to minimize what the losses entail for individual operators, but there does need to be some perspective here.

        My broken record speech – just giving operators the right to lethally defend their livestock would go a long way with MOST people in the affected areas. Delist GL wolves.

  9. JB Says:

    Extremely Important

    Currently, the primary means of federal funding for non-game animals–the State Wildlife Grants Program–is under attack in the House of Representatives, which has zeroed out its budget in a continuing resolution on spending that will be voted on Friday.

    Since 2000, the State Wildlife Grants Program has provided federal funding to state agencies to help prevent species from becoming threatened and endangered . To tap these monies, states must write “State Wildlife Action Plans” that prioritize research and conservation efforts and must show a non-federal match (usually $0.5 – $1 for every dollar requested). Learn more here: http://www.teaming.com/funding/state_wildlife_grants.html

    Note: A coalition of more than 3,000 interest groups supports this program; everyone from wildlife advocates such as Defenders of Wildlife and the Nature Conservancy, to sportsmen’s groups such as the National Wildlife Turkey Federation and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, to scientific societies such as the Wildlife Society and American Fisheries Society are on board.

    – – – –

    What you can do: ACT NOW on behalf of our nation’s fish & wildlife by calling your member of the US House of Representatives to ask them to OPPOSE the Continuing Resolution. Calls can be made up through Thursday, Feb. 17.

    • JB Says:

      More information on the State Wildlife Grants Program

       In FY10, the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program was funded at $90M of which $72M was apportioned(~$1.2M per state/territory)
       The program is the nation’s core program for preventing future endangered species listings and is used to implement voluntary conservation actions to stabilize declining fish & wildlife populations. More than 12,000 species are considered to be at-risk of becoming endangered in the US.
       There is wide agreement amongst stakeholders (conservation groups, business owners, farmers, ranchers, etc.) that proactive action is preferred over more endangered species listings
       The program leverages tens of millions of dollars from state and private sources each year
       The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program is the principal source of funding for implementation of State Wildlife Action Plans.
      o Development of State Wildlife Action Plans was mandated by Congress in 2000 and are in place in every state and territory. In a nationwide poll, nearly 80% of voters favored creation of the plans and 84% support directing federal resources to the plans.
      o State Wildlife Action Plans are non-regulatory, incentive-based and developed in collaboration with state and federal agencies, conservation groups and private citizens to ensure that actions taken on the ground are acceptable, practical and benefit working landscapes.
      o Loss of the program would significantly curtail or end implementation of Wildlife Action Plans

       The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program directly supports jobs in every state and territory. The program employs professional biologists who use the best available science to lessen the impacts of development and other threats on fish and wildlife and use technical assistance to help private landowners and land management agencies implement voluntary conservation measures.
       The program directly benefits the economy allowing states to hire local labor (i.e. heavy equipment operators, contractors, universities, etc.) to restore habitat that leads to improved fish and wildlife populations and environmental conditions. Conservation jobs typically have a higher ratio of jobs created per dollars spent than infrastructure-related jobs such as road construction .
       The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program is supported by over 6,300 organizations and businesses that make up the national Teaming with Wildlife coalition. This coalition is considered one of the largest and most diverse conservation coalitions ever assembled. A complete list of the coalition’s members is available at http://www.teaming.com.
       The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program has greatly improved states capacity to conserve the full array of species that are held in public trust by state and federal agencies consistent with the North American Model of Conservation. The program has restored some balance to fish and wildlife conservation funding which has been disproportionately carried by fee-paying hunters and anglers.
       The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program will save taxpayer dollars by conserving fish and wildlife before they become more costly (and controversial) to conserve as endangered species.
       Examples of how the State Wildlife Grants Program is addressing priority conservation needs in every state and territory can be found athttp://www.wildlifeactionplans.org/

      • Bob Says:

        Thanks for the info JB, our valley uses this money a lot.

      • JB Says:

        You’re welcome, Bob. I know Congress “floats” a lot of ideas this time of year–but this idea is bad for everyone that enjoys wildlife and we need to tell them so.

  10. Mooseboy Says:

    The State of Utah’s perception of wolves “killing machines” granted this was said by Chris Buttars who also happens to be the most racist polariazing Senate member in Utah history. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14401110

  11. Nancy Says:

    +The proliferation of wolves the past few years threatens the Utah economy, particularly in agricultural areas, said Sen. Allen Christensen, R-North Ogden. Not only are wolves hurting rural jobs, they are taking a toll on wildlife and livestock, killing pets and threatening people+

    What?????????

    • Nancy Says:

      Ment to say “What the hell is he talking about?” Wolves have yet to make any kind of appearence in Utah and already they are blaming them for loss of jobs and taking a toll on wildlife, livestock and pets………….

      • jon Says:

        From what I understand, there is no wolf population in Utah unless you count a FEW wolves showing up there every now and then. Allen Christensen is a liar plain and simple.

    • Mooseboy Says:

      (Sarcasm) Yes, already this year hundreds of Utahans have fallen victim to wolf attacks.

      • Nancy Says:

        We have replaced ourselves at the top of the food chain with the wolf,” said Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City.

        I guess that explains it in a nutshell Mooseboy.

  12. Larry Zuckerman Says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/opinion/16wed2.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

    NY Times editorial on escalating rhetoric and threats against Judge Malloy, this time by a US Congressman and the written response in the Helena paper is from Malloy’s children.

    I guess they have not seen the inflamatory tshirts, hats, and bumper stickers promoted by Josephine’s Pizza and RV near North Fork, Idaho — http://www.josephinesidahorvpark.com/index.html

    • IDhiker Says:

      I drive by Josephine’s Pizza every spring, summer, and fall to get to the Salmon River to hike and boat. Actually, I have never stopped there, and I definitely never will in the future – after their “free pizza” for “tagging a wolf” sign was displayed before hunting was legal.

      I do stop at the North Fork Store all the time, but, if I ever see such BS posted there, I’ll tell them why I won’t be patronizing their business anymore.

  13. WM Says:

    Not sure what this MT Governor’s letter really does to the wolf issue, other than restate the obvious and the practical, but it was released today nonetheless.

    Text of letter by Gov. Schweitzer to Secy. Salazar:

    http://governor.mt.gov/news/pr.asp?ID=880

    • IDhiker Says:

      I emailed the good governor and told him I thought I’d follow his example. That, from now on, I wouldn’t follow or obey any Montana statutes I didn’t approve of.

      Really, though, I doubt FWP has put any real effort into investigating illegal wolf killings, and his comment about wiping out the Bitterroot wolves says they will follow the ESA. So…I’m not sure what his point was to even write the piece.

    • Immer Treue Says:

      Montana, whether practical or not, takes a step toward the feed lot state.

  14. Larry Zuckerman Says:

    perhaps town dogcatcher, or more likely, he would love to break into the national scene, perhaps as a V-P candidate with Western voters support

  15. PointsWest Says:

    After global warming denialist claimed recent winter storms were “proof” that global warming is a hoax, the nation, particulary the east, is now setting record high temperaturs late this week.

    http://www.nj.com/gloucester-county/index.ssf/2011/02/we_may_see_a_record_high_tempe.html

  16. timz Says:

    “But wolves are worse. In many cases, they will kill just for the enjoyment.
    One solution is the three S’s: Shoot, shovel and shut up.”

    Like the comic Ron White says, “you can’t fix stupid”

    • jon Says:

      And you wonder why they are federally protected. When you have people saying they want to poison wolves and shoot them illegally and whatever else, it’s no surprise that a lot of people want them protected. I mean some are saying they want to kill every single wolf. this is how extreme some people are getting. All wolves are doing is eating other animals and that is what they are supposed to do.

  17. jon Says:

    http://www.standard.net/topics/utah/2011/02/16/senator-remove-wolves-act

    “Christensen said if he believed all the reports that he has received about wolves, “we have hundreds here.”

    Christensen said wolves can weigh as much as 125 pounds and have been known to kill for sport.

    “These are not little animals,” he said.

    Mark Hadley, spokesman with the Division of Wildlife Resources, said as far as the division is aware there are no wolves in Utah.”

    This guy Christensen is a nut! he believes there are hundreds of wolves in Utah. lol

    • Immer Treue Says:

      jon,

      This is true! Wolves are sport hunters! You can go into any wolf den and see any number of head mounts on the den walls.

      • jon Says:

        IT, have you ever talked to Dave Mech? I wonder what his opinion is on wolves and sport hunting. One thing is for sure, human hunters are responsible for far more sport hunting than wolves.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        I have spoken with Mech, but the subject of “sport hunting” never came up. Sport hunting is an abstract term that exists in the realm of humans.

        Speaking with some folks a couple years ago, I was utterly amazed at the excitement expressed by a couple of guys camping out near prairie dog colonies, and blasting away all day.

      • timz Says:

        Jon, Mech addresses the sport hunting issue in some of his books.

      • jon Says:

        Immer, I would like to ask Mech questions if I got the chance. With all of the misinformation being spread around on wolves, an expert like him can put some if not all of this inaccurate information about wolves to rest. Did you ever hear him speak on the claim by some MN hunters that wolves are killing off all of the elk in MN? He must have mentioned this or touched on this. I’m sure he is aware of the myths and anti-wolf propaganda that is out there.

      • jon Says:

        Immer, sport hunting is when an animal supposedly kills another animal and just leaves it there. I’m not aware of any science that says wolves kill for sport. As you said, sport killing is a term invented by humans. I’m not aware of any rule book out there for wildlife that says when a predator kills an elk or deer, he has to eat it immediately. There are plenty of reasons to explain why “sport” hunting happens from time to time. Sometimes a wolf kills an animal and is disturbed by humans and runs away and humans think that the wolf didn’t eat that animal and just killed it for “sport” or for fun. Other times an animal may be exhausted because of running after and taking down an animal and just decides to go away from the kill and rest for whatever reason and return later. By then, humans will come across the uneaten animal and just assume that it was killed for sport by wolves. There are logical reasons out there to dismiss sport hunting as nothing more than a myth made up by wolf haters. That’s how I see it. One thing that irks me quite a bit is that hunters who accuse wolves of killing for sport do the same exact thing and they do it much more than wolves.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        jon,

        MN is not much of an elk state, but there are still plenty of moose. From the little I know about it, moose have more to rear from picking u brain worm from deer, than wolf predation.

        That being said, and I can’t speak for Mech, but I believe from some of his past comments that the time is here for delisting and hunting of wolves. A couple of these have been posted in the past on the forum. He believes limited hunting will have little to no impact on overall wolf populations, and may go a long way to defusing some of the controversy.

        He is well versed to all the propaganda and wolf mythology.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        more to fear

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Personally I think that when sheep kill lots of sheep (more than they could eat), it’s because they are teaching the pups how to hunt. This is pure speculation obviously.

        Also, I’m not a wolf, so wouldn’t know if they “sport hunt”. I’d rather use wasteful hunter. Why wouldn’t a wolf just eat the high caloric parts of its prey and move on, at least from time to time. It makes sense to me atleast. Brown bears do the same thing. They only eat a few parts of the salmon they catch and “waste” the rest. Is it waste? I don’t think so, because other animals are eating the discarded carcass. Some might argue that they are wasteful.

        Basically, who cares if they sport hunt? If they do they do. What are we going to do, put them throught a hunters etiquette course or something?

      • jon Says:

        I believe he is for wolf hunts because he thinks it might increase tolerance by those who hate wolves or don’t want wolves in their state eating deer and elk.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Should be “Personally I think that when WOLVES kill lots of sheep”.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        jon,
        here is the link with Mech’s take on wolf hunting.

        http://www.wolf.org/wolves/news/live_news_detail.asp?id=5894

      • jon Says:

        wolf mod, I don’t know. We are not wolves so we have no idea why wolves do the things they do. I don’t consider them a wasteful killer. Besides, there are no rule book that says wolves have to eat the entire animal that they kill. They are going to do what they want. They don’t live by what we humans think.

      • jon Says:

        immer, my opinion all along has been that wolf hunting will be ineffective just like Mech believes. I believe he is for wolf hunts to increase intolerance by those that dislike wolves. Correct me if I’m wrong on this. I don’t believe that even with wolf hunting, it will increase intolerance because wolves will still continue to eat deer and elk. Wolves are and will always be a hated animal. Some people just hate them with a passion.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        That’s my point Jon. Who cares if wolves “sport kill” from time to time to train pups or for whatever reason they do it for (if indeed they DO). Also, these supposed sport kills will be eaten by other predators and scavengers. It’s not like it doesn’t get eaten by something. Never really followed the anti wolfers arguement on this. Showing the elk partially eaten by wolves etc…is silly to me. Whatever brings the money in. Shock n’ awe is a contribution tactic they picked up from DoW.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        wolf mod,

        Of all the wolf killed deer and moose I’ve seen, there is very little left after a day or two other than the stomach, the hide and a few bones.

        With something like sheep, I would think the wolves take what they can get. They don’t know the sheep can’t or won’t really run away, so they take advantage of the situation. It might be some time between meals, then people show up, and the wolves skedaddle.

      • jon Says:

        wolf mod, you make a good point, who cares? but the fact is that many sportsmen care that wolves supposedly kill for sport as they bring it up all the time along with the wolves being an invasive subspecies. these are 2 constant things you constantly see being brought up. I’m sure immer has seen both of these claims being brought up time and time again on his internet forum travels.

      • jon Says:

        And I will agree with you that kills don’t go to waste. I’m sure there are plenty of other animals willing to take a bite or two out of a elk or deer killed by wolves

      • jon Says:

        immer, you make a fabulous point. Even if the wolves don’t eat their kill right away and run off for whatever reason, they will eventually come back if their kill isn’t disturbed by humans that is. If the wolves don’t eat it, the scavengers most certainly will and most like coyotes too if they are in the area. it’s common sense really.

      • WM Says:

        jon,

        You have been on this forum for quite awhile. Not that I have ever offered you advice before, but you should have enough knowledge from your web cruising and constant presence and chatter here to retain a bit of knowledge.

        You accuse others of offering bad information and spin, and yet you do it all the time. In this string alone, lets just talk about a couple of the most recent. Wolves do not “sport hunt.” A few wolves sometimes, though rarely, engage in behavior called “surplus killing” in which they kill, almost in frenzy mode, a significantly larger number than their immediate needs. For example, a very few wolves (like 2 or 3) have killed from a dozen to something like 63 sheep in one night. According to researchers, it is not known exactly why some wolves engage in “surplus killing.”

        Yours is the first assertion I have heard of wolves killing elk in MN. From what I know, and maybe other commentors can confirm, the Great Lakes wolves have pretty much left what few elk there are in MN alone. They are not widely distributed, and I believe there are only two small herd areas in northern MN. Of course, we know the GL wolves are smaller and feed mostly on deer, which generally pose less risk for them to kill. Of course they get a few moose, but they have learned which ones they can get while minimizing injury and expending few calories (typically the old, sick, etc.) Will they develop a taste for elk in MN over time? Maybe.

        In the 1990’s MN wolves were responsible for killing something like up to 1,200 free roaming turkeys on farms a year, and some of this was reportedly surplus killing [APHIS/WS records, which were at one time accessible on the IWC website]. With changed turkey farming practices they get less than a quarter that number these days, if I recall correctly.

    • jon Says:

      “Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, called wolves killing machines. “That’s all it does. We’ve let this thing get totally out of control.”

      The stupidity of some people. Let’s just add coyotes, cougars, lions, tigers, crocodiles, etc on that list as well. Don’t these right wing nuts get that predators need to kill and eat other animals to survive? These people look at it as a bad thing rather than a natural thing. It’s absurd the attitudes some have against wild animals that need to kill other animals in order to survive.

      • Ralph Maughan Says:

        jon,

        Chris Buttars is best known as an enemy of students. He proposed eliminating the 12th grade (senior in HS). He proposed eliminating school buses to high school because the students all have their own automobiles (telling us the kind of people he associates with).

      • skyrim Says:

        The only bigger idiots than Buttars are those in his district that voted him back in. He also doesn’t think that traffic violations in other states should go against your “utah” driving record. You instantly become a better driver in your home state. Damn fool! I wonder if the Insurance industry will buy into that when setting rates………………

  18. Mtn Mama Says:

    The Great Outdoors Colorado land preservation program is announced today.
    “We’re intending to pay for it with existing oil and gas revenues,” Obama said. “Our attitude is, if you take something out of the earth, you have a responsibility to give something back to the earth.”
    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17404919

    *I participated in one of the Colorado roundtables on this last summer.

  19. Salle Says:

    Lawmaker seeks state control of federal land

    http://helenair.com/news/article_eb62224c-3996-11e0-83cf-001cc4c03286.html

    You know, it’s come to pass that Montana is now just like Idaho.

    • Savebears Says:

      With everything going on right now, I think us in Montana, might have to get used to those bad roads for a while!

      LOL

      • jon Says:

        You better get out of MT while you still can sb!

      • Salle Says:

        Yeah, especially after those megaloads tear them up even more! The roadbeds will sag and then the whole corridor(s) will need to be replaced. Then again, who’s going to be able to drive given the price of gas? No jobs, no money for rent or food, who needs gas or roads? Then again, if we can’t afford gas, who needs megaloads?

    • william huard Says:

      Peter-
      I am afraid this situation will not improve until someone forces China to enforce a ban on tiger farming. Without the ban there will still be demand for tiger parts. What should we expect from a culture that could care less if sharks go extinct so people can have a bowl of freaking soup at a wedding, or ingest a spoonful of putrid infected bear bile from a cancerous organ- but hey- it will wake you up and cure what ailes ya

  20. jon Says:

    This story should get your blood boiling. Some asshole in NH shoots a dog while chained out in its doghouse. Dozer the siberian husky had to get one of his legs amputated.

    http://www.wmur.com/news/26887096/detail.html

    • jon Says:

      This scumbag should face the same thing he did to this poor dog who was minding is his business while in his doghouse. Chain him up and shoot his legs off!

  21. Wildlife Fan Says:

    http://relivearth.com/blog/archives/778 – 10 New Species Discovered in Thailand by Nature Explorer

    • jon Says:

      “There are just more than a thousand tigers, few thousand leopards, just more than a thousand Rhinos left in India against approximately 1.2 billion people. So do you think these wild animals are over-crowding in India? ”

      And no one says a peep about the 1.2 billion people in India. Absolutely disgusting!

      • Savebears Says:

        Yup,

        Hang them high in the town square every morning!!

        Jon, what do you propose they do with the people?

      • jon Says:

        Look at those #s compared to the 1.2 billion people. What is really in excess here? A population of 1000 ENDANGERED TIGERS or a population of 1.2 billion people? It’s a no brainer.

      • jon Says:

        sb, there is nothing you can do to the control India’s human population.

      • jon Says:

        Wildlife is without a doubt going to suffer because of human overpopulation and nothing will change that. Wildlife species will be extinct because we humans all we do is breed and breed and there is nothing that stops us.

  22. Elk275 Says:

    Jon

    There are some things that you can do something about and other things there is nothing you can anything about. The population of India is something none of us can do anything about. Yes, the wildlife population is going to suffer.

    One fine November morning, I left Katmandu, Nepal flying to Bangkok, I had a window seat. We flew south almost to Calcutta then turned west across the Bay of Bengal. I was looking forward to seeing the jungles of India below. As soon as we entered India the entire landscape had been deforested all the way to the ocean. It was sad, no tigers, little wildlife habitat and excessive human population. With the exception of genocide there is nothing that can be done.

  23. Daniel Berg Says:

    Biologists looking for signs of mating from Lookout Wolves:

    http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2011/feb/11/biologists-focus-fate-methow-wolf-pack/

    http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=5190

    I’ve talked to a couple of people who claimed that the alpha female was most likely killed and the collar destroyed given the circumstances, but this is the first time I’ve seen it mentioned in print. An unfortunate setback to wolf recovery in Washington State and specifically the Northern Cascades.

    • william huard Says:

      Remember- BC is home to the fair chase- just not cougars, coyotes, wolves. grizzlies………

  24. WM Says:

    ABC Nightline/nat geo special segment on Coyotes (including coywolves) that aired two nights ago. Specific details on the killing of the young Canadian female singer. My apologies if this has previously been posted.

    watch the video:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/nat-geo-coyote-man-12927767

    • Angela Says:

      Sounds like pretty aberrant behavior to me. I would have liked to have been a fly on the tree to see what happened before the attack. Coyotes do a great service in and around human habitation–they kill the rats that human garbage attracts. (Don’t get me wrong, I have pet rats and love them, but still.) And feral cats. Can they actually thin out urban deer? But the one whose territory I live in is very interested in my two sheep. It’s only when I leave the gate open to the back pasture that she comes in and I have chased her off three times now in the middle of the night after she has driven the sheep up into the paddock. The first time, the coyote ran like hell right when I came out the back door and yelled at it. The second time, it took a little more clapping. But the last time, I actually had to go into the paddock to chase it off and it waited until I got pretty darn close before it trotted off. Maybe I’ll take some pepper spray next time. Beautiful animals. I love them.

    • JB Says:

      I encourage folks to watch the National Geographic special about this tragic incident that airs tonight at 10PM. National Geographic worked with Dr. Stan Gehrt, a colleague who I greatly respect, on the special.

      More information can be found here: http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/killed-by-coyotes-5169/Overview

  25. jon Says:

    You should really post this article Ralph. It’s amazing how attitudes towards some animals change very quickly.

    http://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/briefs/x1546677930/Revived-then-reviled-Ky-community-allows-hunting-elk

    “STONEY FORK, Ky. (AP) — Bringing the majestic elk back to the Appalachian hills and hollows where they once roamed has become a nightmare.

    Rogues from a herd that numbers in the thousands are trampling gardens, flattening fences and marring yards with manure in the southeastern Kentucky town of Stoney Fork. They have made the roads dangerous, causing dozens of car crashes.

    Some residents have had enough. With the state’s OK, they headed out into the woods to kill elk. They killed 13 of them.

    “They’re dangerous. Somebody’s going to get killed if they don’t do something,” said Stoney Fork resident Nelson Short, a 73-year-old resident with a flowing white beard that gleams like Santa’s.”

    • Savebears Says:

      Not saying I agree with them, but once again, you are talking about many generations of people who have never lived with elk and there has been very little control..

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Jon,

        We talked about this a couple of days ago. The elk went from a few to 10,000. This is where “management” comes into play. There is nothing wrong w/ depradation hunts. They aren’t going to kill off all the elk!

  26. Salle Says:

    Obama details conservation action plan

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/02/16/obama.conservation/index.html?hpt=Sbin

    A little too little and a little too late…

  27. Mtn Mama Says:

    Global Warming Chamging the Anatomy of Forests

    http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17428133?source=rss

    • Cody Coyote Says:

      Saw this. According to the Anchorage Daily News the State of Alaska is chastising this TV production crew . Since the events depicted happened months ago, the trail has gone cold, so there is not prosecution ( yet) unless somebody squeals. The state noted the bear that was shot and killed did not appear to be the same bear that had been coming into their camp/video staging set. It was, as you say , killed as an opportunistic prop piece for the ‘ drama’.

      And they say wolves are such ruthless sport killers….

      http://www.adn.com/2011/02/18/1710284/alaska-says-tv-miners-shouldnt.html

  28. WM Says:

    The spin doctors are at work interpreting the newly released WI wolf depredation statistics.

    http://www.rhinelanderdailynews.com/articles/2011/02/19/outdoors/doc4d5f05d6f17ba410389857.txt

  29. Savebears Says:

    Montana House votes to Nullify the Endangered Species Act:

    http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_56b0a050-3c4e-11e0-8b75-001cc4c03286.html

    • Salle Says:

      F^&!*ng idiots. Collaborating with the t*&&*&ists.

      • Salle Says:

        You can’t appease these people unless you give them everything on earth, and even then that wouldn’t be enough for them. Unless they have total control over everyone and everything they think, do, say, and believe, the bully faction will not be appeased. It’s about not having anyone tell them anything and them having the power to force everyone else in the world to live they way these folks insist they should. And I really mean that, unless these folks are the arbitors of everyone’s fate there is nothing that they will accept. Just look at the assault on women of late, for an example… Enforcement of self-fulfilling prophecies.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      In the long run, it might prove best that these contemptible, vicious people were elected.

      Now we can see their agenda for the rest of us and for the outdoors everyone on this blog cares about. Hopefully, folks will organize to take them down for good.

  30. Rita K.Sharpe Says:

    The Governor is now facing the results of letting the genie out of the bottle. It is rather hard to put the genie back into the bottle.

  31. Ron Kearns Says:

    This is Arizona Daily Star reporter Tony Davis’ latest blog post from last evening, Saturday, February 19.

    ‘Macho B capture: How Game and Fishers remember it’

    {Quote:

    “This week marks the second anniversary of an event that was at first a cause for celebration but then became a tragedy. Macho B, this country’s last known wild jaguar, was discovered in a snare trap in the Atascosa Mountains near the Mexican border two years ago yesterday. To mark that anniversary, Blogging the Desert presents quotes from the Arizona Game and Fish Department officials on their reactions to learning of the capture. The quotes come from transcripts from 2009 of the department’s continuing internal investigation of the incident, one of two such investigations. The other is being conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Law Enforcement.”

    End Quote}

    http://azstarnet.com/news/blogs/desertblog/article_0234d738-3c87-11e0-98c2-001cc4c03286.html?mode=story
    ____________

    I have commented on most of the other Macho B-related Davis’ blog posts, although I have not yet done so for this article.

  32. Ron Kearns Says:

    ‘The Macho B Saga’…

    Arizona Daily Star (ADS) reporter Tony Davis has posted 5 topics within the last 3 weeks regarding jaguar Macho B. The impetus for his recent articles is the upcoming April 2011 trial of whistleblower Janay Brun, which has renewed interest in Macho B’s death. I consider Ms. Brun’s prosecution by the federal government a travesty of justice; however, the trial might expose additional facts and implicate persons who are genuinely culpable, which could and should lead to further job dismissals and/or legitimate prosecutions of any Arizona State and/or USFWS federal employees found guilty.

    I commend the newspaper and Mr. Davis for continuing to cover this topic and informing the public about the internal Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) transcripts that only became public because of the ADS’ Arizona Public Records Act request. These documents—comprising over 1900 pages—have shone sunlight on what occurred within the Department.

    The AGFD conducted their employees’ interviews under the Garrity Law/Rule/Rights, which absolves—from subsequent criminal prosecution—any of those employees who were questioned about their involvement with Macho B’s capture and eventual death. The Garrity Rights are governmental employees’ 5th Amendment rights against forced self-incrimination regarding their actions occurring within the scope and conduct of their official duties.

    While I unquestionably champion the necessity for 5th Amendment rights, I consider the transcripts’ leading questionings and the cordial, unprofessional manner in which the interview process was conducted as an underhanded means of unethically shielding AGFD employees from possible criminal prosecution. This unsurprising course of action by the AGFD further illustrates why internal governmental investigations—state or federal—are invariably fraught with improprieties and appearances of cover-ups.

    The following link lists all of the Macho B topics within Davis’ ‘Blogging the Desert’ section of the Star.

    http://azstarnet.com/news/blogs/desertblog/

  33. Jerry Black Says:

    BELIEVE IT OR NOT!!! These Bills Are in the Montana Legislature

    1. Legalize hunting with hand-thrown spear (Senate Bill 112)

    2. Create fully-armed militia in every town (House Bill 278)

    3. Allow legislators to carry weapons in the Capitol (Senate Bill 279)

    4. Create an 11 person panel with authority to nullify all federal laws (House Bill 382)

    5 Allow guns in schools (House Bill 558)

    6. Eliminate educational requirements for persons seeking job of State Superintendent of Schools (HB 154)

    7. Lift nuclear ban for purpose of building a nuclear reactor in the Flathead Valley (House Bill 326)

    8. Withdraw the United States of America from the United Nations (Senate Joint Resolution 2)

    9. Eliminate all state incentives for developing wind power (House Bill 244)

    10. Omit Barak Obama’s name from the 2012, ballot because his father was born outside of America (House Bill 205)(this guy was on CNN this week)

    11. Compulsory marriage counseling for people seeking a divorce (House Bill 438)

    12. Give sheriffs authority over the federal government in terror investigations (Senate Bill 114)

    13. Legalize hunting with silencers (House Bill 174)

    14. Lift the prohibition on carrying concealed weapons in bars, churches and banks (House Bill 384)

    15. Eliminate law that requires landlords to install carbon monoxide detectors (House Bill 354)

    16. Require the federal government to prove in court that the National Parks were lawfully aquired. (House Bill 506)

    17. Officially designate the “Code of the West” as the “Code of Montana” (Senate Bill 216)

    UPDATE: 18. Declare that global warming is good. (House Bill 549)

    • Savebears Says:

      Jerry,

      There are just as many nutcase bills in other legislatures around the country as we have, many of these you have listed have already been tabled..

      I do agree, this is year a really weird year..and they still have not introduced a jobs bill as they promised when they were running…I just hope they get all of the Bullshit out of the way, so they can really get down to work, so we don’t have to spend 30K a day for a special session!

      • Jerry Black Says:

        SB…….many are still alive. I agree …what a waste of our $$ to even introduce such idiotic bills. But then jobs, education, healthcare etc. isn’t a priority.

    • JB Says:

      Wow. How’s that one party system working for y’all?

      • Jerry Black Says:

        That’s the problem….with very few exceptions, there’s no difference between them.
        Helena will never be a “Madison”!

    • Phil Says:

      Jerry: I hope you are kidding and that you pulled all these out of a “101 Jokes” book.

      • Jerry Black Says:

        No joke, Phil. But we constantly hear the governor and our mayor advocating for bringing businesses into this state..After taking a look at this legislature, would you move here?

      • Elk275 Says:

        It is sad but true.

        One of my Jr high and High School friends is the senate majority leader. I have had thoughts of diving to Helena and having a talk.

      • rtobasco Says:

        Way back when Tom Judge was governor and I was tsil in high school I can recall him pledging to bring more business to Montana. I had a sick feeling then, suspecting that more business would mean more development and more pressure on the resources that mean so much to me. 40 years down the road I understand now better than ever that sick feeling in the pit of my gut. More business and more people certainly haven’t enhanced the quality of life in Montana nor the resources. My hat’s off to the loonies in Helena if they accomplish nothing more than keeping more suits and business out.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Tobasco,

        “I had a sick feeling then, suspecting that more business would mean more development and more pressure on the resources that mean so much to me.”

        I felt the same way. I remember growing up in Oregon an hearing my dad whining all the time about “damn Californians” moving up here (Oregon) and building mansions in the mountains, driving up the housing market, bad driving etc…Then he’ complain when construction would be down and thus work would be slow. Well, w/o “damn Californians” moving to Oregon the economy would be much worse.

        It’s one of those damned if ya do damned if ya don’t kind of things when it comes to bringing in business to the state.

        I had a sick feeling then, suspecting that more business would mean more development and more pressure on the resources that mean so much to me. 40 years down the road I understand now better than ever that sick feeling in the pit of my gut. More business and more people certainly haven’t enhanced the quality of life in Montana nor the resources. My hat’s off to the loonies in Helena if they accomplish nothing more than keeping more suits and business out.

    • Salle Says:

      Jerry,

      Thanks for posting all of those BS Bills… watchdog that you are, I missed a number of them. This is a ruse, the legislators are putting up this crap partly because they actually believe they should have the power to secede from the nation if they see fit, and partly because they feel the need to rein in the people who aren’t in lockstep with their agenda. That agenda would be to see that only the “chosen few” have power, it’s another move toward feudalism ~ which tends to give power to the landed/wealthy and everyone else can just go someplace else. For them a landscape totally owned by them is the only acceptable use of land, this public lands thing is just too much for them. Since they have been losing out to “others” they are, in a sense, declaring war on the public. Seems to be a sign of the times, funded by the wealthy zealots of the world.

      As mentioned above, there’s something much uglier coming down the pike if this sort of stuff is just the daily grind. It’s the only story in the country right now, and it seems, for some time to come.

      • Larry Zuckerman Says:

        I had a pretty wise political science prof that taught me that a true sign of the decline of a civilization and its conversion toward Third World Status or as a colony is when it shifts from exporting manufactured goods, highly educated people (PhDs), and innovations and instead switches to exporting natural resources like minerals, timber, fossil fuel energy, and other things that really are not sustainable at high levels of exploitation. Look forward to the sign when I leave Idaho and enter Montana, “Welcome to Montana, We’re a Colony of China”.

        Legislatures should be focused on producing more highly educated and skilled workforce that create advancements, and promoting sustainable uses of invaluable public natural resources; not joining the “Flat Earthers”.

        Larry Z in Salmon, Idaho

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Great point. Unfortunately w/ the decline of the American family, there are a lack of kids that are able to compete w/ kids from other countries. I guess that’s why we are having people from India come here in droves.

        I think your political science professor is correct, as we become less competitive on a global scale, we will be forced to exploit our natural resources. Then once those are depleted, we’ll become like Somalia🙂 Unfortunately, we are spending money on wars and healthcare instead of giving our children an education that is worth a damn. I place most of the blame on parents. Gotta get the parents involved in there chilrens lives/education…Then again that would take putting down the cell phone, putting the zanax away, and turning off desperate house wives….We’re screwed! They can’t do that much for there kids…

    • Savebears Says:

      Just to add, I really am thrilled at the idea of being out there facing down a 600 lb grizzly bear with an attitude, with a squirt gun! Yup, Just gets my knickers bunched up a bit!

      His recipe says you need 20 peppers, well around my area, peppers are selling for 1.99 each, so 20 equal almost $40 and I can buy a can of real spray for less than that!

      Where do these people come from!

      • WM Says:

        SB,

        No risk in cutting or crushing this stuff and cooking it down. The fumes are enough to do you in before you ever see the bear.

        Or you could just buy a bottle of Dave’s Insanity Sauce for about 10 bucks and run it through a old dirty sock. By, the way, I have never had a squirt gun or spray bottle that didn’t leak.

        A few drops of that stuff leaking in you backpack on to your spare undies would make for an interesting experience. Geez, where to do these idiots some from?

      • Savebears Says:

        I can just see it now, we are going to have hikers running all over the place with super soaker bazooka squirt guns!

      • Daniel Berg Says:

        “Transfer the pepper solution into a spray bottle with a jet setting or a water gun. These types of spray containers will shoot out the solution several feet or more, keeping you a safe distance from the bear.”

        haha…..I had a few squirt guns as a kid. There’s no way in hell there’s a squirt bottle that would have the combination of volume and distance to be effective. I’ve never seen a squirt gun that can mimick the trajectory and volume of store-bought bear mace, not even close. Well, maybe one of those hand-held water cannons, but it would take up more room than a fly rod in a hard cylinder case and most definitely leak everywhere.

      • Savebears Says:

        Whats so bad, is this guy is putting people in danger, it is virtually impossible to get the concentration of active material by doing this, the peppers used for this application are not just the run of the mill pepper, they have been genetically modified and grown for this particular use…

        Also, though it varies by manufacture, there are other ingredients added the punch up the pungent nature of the spray. That is why it is not recommended to use personal defense spray on bears, it is just not the same stuff, basically what this guy is doing is making a normal pepper oil like is used in low quality personal defense sprays and the way he is doing it, is not concentrating the active ingredient to a very effective level..

        Putting it in a spray bottle or squirt gun, would be like trying to put out a forest fire with a hand held water pistol…

      • Cody Coyote Says:

        A pack of Burpee cayenne pepper seeds is $ 3.00. Grow ’em your self.

        I spent some time in hunting camp with an inventor who holds 400 patents. Back in the mid-1980’s he invented pepper spray all on his own. We tested it in camp. The first cowboy to “try it ” was in a tent and got caught by his own cloud of pepper . He was mostly blinded and roared out of the tent in a rage, heading for the creek to wash it off. Didn’t help much.

        It was hilarious, actually ( you had to know this guy to appreciate that ). We determined the stuff worked as intended. If it was that strong on mere humans, think of the effect on a bear’s membranes which are much more sensitive.

        I’ve always wanted to invent a pepper-powered Hand Grenade. Would extend the defense perimeter out to 50 feet or more. The problem with pepper spray is the collateral damage of using the stuff…the sprayer also becomes the sprayee , too often. ( See above)

        Or perhaps a special paintball capsule load. These backcountry yahoos always want to shoot a bear with a gun, so I say let them . A .50 cal paintball pepper gun.

      • Savebears Says:

        Cody,

        There are already manufactures making pepper grenades as well as pepper ball guns, but the formulation is for humans, and the bear spray is formulated completely different..

        If you can think of a delivery system, some company somewhere has already done it, but pepper ball guns are actually quite prevalent, they use the same size ball that the regular paint ball gun does, but they don’t atomize the pepper in the nature that needs to be used on bears..

        There was a story here in the Montana news a year or two ago, that a paint ball company was getting over run by bears that were eating the paint balls, it is a food grade product made with tints and vegetable oils. They found out that the bears would do the same thing with pepper balls as it is a food product as well.

      • Savebears Says:

        Besides the whole point to bear spray is to have compact carry system to it does not add to much weight or bulk when you hiking and camping.

        I don’t think it would be to conducive to a great backpacking experience to have to carry around a paint ball gun or laden my web belt with grenades!

  34. wolf moderate Says:

    lol. Funny stuff.

    • Peter Kiermeir Says:

      Sorry, I did not notice the whole thread dated 18th, slipped through somehow. Can you delete the post?

    • Nancy Says:

      “Fish and Wildlife doesn’t want to manage the land or the wildlife,” said Beers. “Once they started hiring women and minorities, the service went from managing the land and wildlife to saving all the animals and habitats.”

      Peter – I’m sure that kind of statement still goes over well in some parts of the west.

  35. JEFF E Says:

    seein as how we’er all makin money hand over fist we should each one buy one of these for a vaction retreat
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/expatproperty/8328824/Perfect-homes-for-wildlife-lovers.html

    • WM Says:

      The article doesn’t really say whether the land is in federal ownership already. If so, less of a big deal than objectors claim to covert to a NW Refuge. Objectors also forget you can only cut the trees off once and can’t do it for another 80 years, so that argument doesn’t make much sense, since it appears to be federal land anyway. The explantion is this is Aberdeen …..and, is that dueling banjos I hear in the background?

      • Daniel Berg Says:

        According to this page, 62% of the Willapa Watershed consists of “corporate timber” I’m not sure whether that includes both federally owned and corporate owned? 10% is State Timber lands. The article also states that, “Nowhere in the Northwest do conifers grow faster”.

        http://willapaharbor.org/natural_resources.php

        It would have been amazing to see those stands of old-growth before they were harvested.

      • WM Says:

        Daniel,

        Good find on the Willapa watershed and bay. This expansion of federal wildlife refuge strikes me as a very good candidate for a NEPA or SEPA EIS. This estuary, tidal lands, and bay with its production history of oysters (used to get them there when I was a kid and our family was on the way to the beaches to the north). I wonder if Washington’s new State Lands Commissioner would be willing to let go of state timber lands, and whether some of these corporate timberland holders (many of whom have converted their corporate structures to real estate income trusts or REIT’s for better tax treatment and to maximize profits) wouldn’t sell for the quick bucks, instead of waiting another forty years for the second growth timber to become merchantable. I don’t think Aberdeen and Pacific County has much of an economic future under any scenario. Timber won’t pay off again, I am thinking, for at least another generation or two, and then it will be back to near nothing just as it is now – that is the problem with resource extraction of even a renewable resource.

      • WM Says:

        Oops. REIT = real estate INVESTMENT trust

  36. Peter Kiermeir Says:

    Chinese bear-bile firm flotation plans provokes online outrage http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/16/chinese-bear-bile-firm-flotation-outrage

  37. JEFF E Says:

    http://www.newser.com/story/112610/libya-unrest-could-push-gas-to-5.html
    Of course. this is exactly what BP and Exxon wants(planned)

  38. Mooseboy Says:

    The troubling decline of the Minnesota Moose. http://bit.ly/hE66bv. Wolves (sorry Utah Senate) don’t look to be the main reason.

    • Phil Says:

      I believe the show “According to Jim” replayed a similar segment to Mr. Craig’s bathroom romance with a man.

  39. Daniel Berg Says:

    Another move by Koch’s…….It makes me wonder how involved they are in Western States politically?

    http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_7e8aa25a-3ec0-11e0-9923-001cc4c03286.html

    • Immer Treue Says:

      Interesting analogy, and if I attempt to debate Honer, well…. But T. Rex was the biggest guy on the block, and if it didn’t kill something, well what was going to stand up to it? I’ve read quite a bit abut the horned dinosaurs and the supposed purposes of the horns and frills, but jeezo peezo, the frill covers the back of the neck, and the horns face forward… why?

      Also, if more T. Rex’s are being found, how many of them are younger/juvenile. and perhaps hunted in packs, like hyenas.

      Then again, we know that the T. Rex has remanifested itself as the wolf in Utah.

    • Phil Says:

      Is he really a leading wolf expert? It sure does not seem like it.

      • jon Says:

        No, I don’t believe he is. From what I researched on him, he is not a wolf expert and those who are anti-wolf usually claim he’s an expert on wolves. Maybe immer can chime in on here. Immer, do know if Val Geist is a wolf expert? Some also say Jim Beers is a wolf expert. The 3
        wolf experts
        you see mention anti-wolf folks mention is Beers, Geist, and Will Graves. As far as I can tell, not one of these guys are real wolf experts.

        “Using this example he did dispel the notion hunters and myself have had that the wrong wolf was used for introduction. Dr. Geist said we could have used a smaller wolf but with the enormous food supply available any wolf put into this environment would grow quite large and have a similar impact on our elk and moose.”

        I guess that kills the non native wolf argument. As I thought all along, diet is what determines how big a wolf gets.

      • wolf moderate Says:

        Diet is one reason, but from what I understand geographic location is another. The further north you get the larger the wolf or whitetail deer for that matter.

      • jon Says:

        Diet is the main reason. The more food you eat, the bigger you are going to be. It’s the same thing for people.

      • Immer Treue Says:

        jon,
        I believe Geist’s expertise is not with wolves but with ungulates in the Pacific NW and the Rocky Mts.

        Will Graves is absolutely not a wolf expert. He wrote a horrible book that is a collection of **possible*** facts and a whole lot of anecdotes.

        Beers to the best of my knowledge was not a wolf “expert”. At the 2000 Wolf Symposia in Duluth, MN., Beers was not a presenter, but Carter Niemeyer was.

      • jon Says:

        so the main question is why are people trying to push forward these 3 particular gentlemen as “wolf experts”????

      • Immer Treue Says:

        Because all three of them have some sort of professional education and credential, and tell um what they want to hear.

    • Phil Says:

      He said “Wolves historically begin sizing up humans…”. What? He is signifying wolves attacking humans because of what happened one year in France? Hippos kill more humans then wolves do, but why is he not complaining about them? I have always believed this moron has a self agenda against wolves.

  40. Phil Says:

    jon: Not to start an arguement, but the proper and correct wolf was (re)introduced. At least in my opinion.

    • jon Says:

      I agree with you, but time and time again, you hear some hunters saying the wrong wolf was reintroduced. From the link,

      ““Using this example he did dispel the notion hunters and myself have had that the wrong wolf was used for introduction. Dr. Geist said we could have used a smaller wolf but with the enormous food supply available any wolf put into this environment would grow quite large and have a similar impact on our elk and moose.”

      • Phil Says:

        My mistake. But, I do not agree with the comment that it depends on what the diet is that determines the size. It does when it comes to weight, but many hunters have also stated that the wolf reintroduced is longer in length which gives off the weight as being larger then the former native wolves. Just like humans, if an animal eats to much, or in this situation has diets consisting of large amounts, they will not grow in length if they are already fully grown adults. They will get heavier and be larger then an average sized (weight) wolf. In my opinion, I believe animals such as wolves know how to regulate their weight. Almost any predator understands that eating to much may alter their way of life. For example; eating to much will alter their hunting ability. If a wolf is much larger then a normal sized one, will they be more successful in hunts? Most likely not.

  41. Phil Says:

    jon: I see a lot of truth in that article. I have not researched wolves for 3 or 4 decades, but just like all living creatures on this planet, weight increases immediately after eating, and I do not see it as being different with wolves. With saying that, I don’t believe that a Northern Rocky Mountain wolf that averages 120 lbs or so can survive being 220. Hunting would be extremely difficult for, if it is a solitaire wolf. I don’t see a cougar weighing 100 or so lbs above the average being able to survive through the form of hunting and protecting territory from other conspecifics.

    So, Dr. Geist is more of a hunter then an expert on what he criticizes? Thanks jon.

    • wolf moderate Says:

      Hmmmm. That does make sense. Maybe the growth is over time however, Not just in one generation. Not sure though, you make an excellent point. Thanks.

      • Phil Says:

        wolf moderate: You mean overtime within a few or so generations? Could be. As I have been taught, Giraffes have not always had the large necks as they currently do. Throughout generations of offspring baring their necks grew in adaption to the vegetation that was higher in elevation. This similar situation (without the neck example) could occur with wolves.

      • WM Says:

        You arm chair biologists are aware of Bergmann’s rule, yes?

  42. Phil Says:

    Immer: What about Dr. Kay from Utah? He is as harsh on wolves as is Dr. Geist. Would you know about him?

      • Phil Says:

        Now: Did he get the information on wolves from actual studies, or from another party?

      • Immer Treue Says:

        I will not pretend to be an expert on Geist or Kay, however, I would be willing to wager that neither have conducted many peer reviewed studies on wolves. The anti-wolf people will bring up Mech to defend their points as often as these guys.

        Mech is a wolf expert, and a damn good scientist who panders to no one. Mech even disagreed with many of the main points on Scott Creel’s latest paper on wolves, and hunting impact of wolf populations. Geist, and Kay are not wolf biologists, and certainly not wolf experts. Geist is the supposed editor of Will Grave’s Wolves in Russia. Phaw, but you read the book, and other than in the appendix, please show me any evidence of editing.

  43. Phil Says:

    Immer: Thanks!

  44. Salle Says:

    Spike Reported in Number of Stillborn Dolphins on Coast

    http://www.sunherald.com/2011/02/21/2881674/spike-reported-in-number-of-stillborn.html

    Can anyone say “oil spill”?

  45. PointsWest Says:

    ‘Epigenetics’ Means What We Eat, How We Live And Love, Alters How Our Genes Behave [including weight and size]

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051026090636.htm

    I believe that the reason for larger animals in northern climates has to do with how cold it is. I’ve also heard that size is something a species readily can change. The last mammoths in North American were on the California offshore islands…but they were pigmy mammoths, only a fraction of the size of typical mammoths. The species on the offshore islands had quickly changed their size to survive.

    Wolves have such a wide range…I cannot believe their genes would be different between Canada and the USA. Wolves may be larger in some locations but my guess is that, if they are, it is epigenetics rather than genetics.

  46. Mtn Mama Says:

    Survey finds Western voters favor the environment

    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17462707?source=rss

  47. Kropotkin Man Says:

    Montana isn’t alone when it comes to crazy politics.

    “Ariz. Senate to consider takeover of federal land”

    http://azstarnet.com/article_c5fcf7b4-3f5b-11e0-a8d4-001cc4c002e0.html

    Don’t forget to read the comments.

    • PointsWest Says:

      I don’t know how much federal land this could affect. All of Arizona was federal land at one time…before statehood. The main reason states allowed the federal goverment to administer federal lands, BLM and Forest Service, is because the states did not want the financial burden of doing so.

      I personally wouldn’t mind Airzona taking a lot of the BLM land, it might lessen my federal income tax some.

    • jon Says:

      “What we have is headed your direction,” Rex Rammell, an activist and former gubernatorial candidate, told the group at the Veterans of Foreign Wars building in Enterprise. “Our elk herds are gone.”

      “They have devastated our county,” Carole Galloway, a Clearwater County, Idaho, commissioner said before the meeting. “I would much rather have elk, deer and cattle back.”

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I wonder who is paying angry nutcase Rex Rammell’s way to go speak?

  48. PointsWest Says:

    Koch Industries has quite a PR problem on thier hands now…

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110223/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions

    This story was all over the TV news tonight. It was on NBC news. It may be the undoing of both Gov. Walker and the Koch heads.

    • Salle Says:

      It’s the buzz all over right now. I hope he gets skewered along with the rest of those zealots.

    • jon Says:

      ” He writes: “I didn’t consider myself a crime scene investigator until I learned that everyone else did. In their minds, a crime had been committed against livestock by wild animals needed to be answered—preferably with a gunshot. It turns out not to be such a simple job… Without cutting off its hide, I couldn’t tell what killed a torn up sheep or a steer sprawled in the mud. My knife—and my diaries—became my closest allies. I wanted to be thorough, and moreover, I wanted to be honest. I cared what the answer was, even when others in my agency didn’t. I did a lot of skinning while the rancher standing over me talked trash about wolves. When I reported right there that disease or weather or something besides a predator was responsible, most of them were not happy about it.”

  49. Daniel Berg Says:

    “Rep. Hastings blocks breaching Snake River dams”

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014318961_apwasnakeriverdams.html

  50. Daniel Berg Says:

    “Oregon tribes pursue first bison hunt in century”

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014319061_apusbacktobison.html

    I wonder if the participants in the hunt would feel so good about it if they realized how imperiled the Yellowstone Bison could be genetically?


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: