Wolves are rad.

[Powder Ho]

An interesting book on wolves is Of Wolves and Men by Lopez.
I volunteered at a wolf refuge years ago and we adopted a wolf dog puppy that came in. Awesome animal. Definitely not just a big dog and I wouldn't recommend them.

[The Reverend Floater]

An interesting book on wolves is Of Wolves and Men by Lopez.
I volunteered at a wolf refuge years ago and we adopted a wolf dog puppy that came in. Awesome animal. Definitely not just a big dog and I wouldn't recommend them.

There's an article in a recent National Geo about how differently domestic dogs and wolves have become. Since dogs have been domesticated for over 10k years, they have evolved to serve, understand and even mimic us. Wolves have simply evolved to survive.

[neufox47]

You're in CA , right? How is your ban on Lion hunting going? How many lions are killed by state paid "hunters" to even attempt at keeping numbers in check? CA (i grew up there) is the perfect example of how feelings can interfere with sound wildlife management and cause even more issues.

CA is bad from a hunting standpoint. I couldn’t believe it when I found out there were only doe permits for a small class of hunters here. It’s been known for decades that it is far better to have bucks and does hunted to control the herd health and population, but CA counties mostly don’t allow it. Instead we have herds of does and seldom see bucks.

[Pow4Brains]

gray wolves

I’ve been in the heart of cattle country for the last few years and even discussing the topic of wolves with a rancher ends up something like, “a seen wolf is a dead wolf”.

One of the better arguments I’ve heard is the genetics from the reintroduced wolves came from arctic gray wolves and not the native timber wolves. The claim is they are much larger and more efficient hunters that target cows more frequently than the smaller timber wolf.

Googlz didn’t turn up anything from a lazy search, does anyone here have any info on this?




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Conundrum]

If you want to dive deep on the reintroduction, I recommend reading Wolfer by Carter Niemeyer. Interesting perspective as he’s the guy in charge of the reintroduction. Pretty dry read for the first third or so of the book but worth it to get into the history.

The original and reintroduced wolves are slightly different sub-species so the ranchers are telling some truth. Where I’ve found a lot of exaggeration is both have the same diet and characteristics but the reintroduced version average 5-10 lbs bigger. Ranchers will say they are much larger and more aggressive. Really, they eat the same stuff, hunt the same ways, but the Canadian Mackenzie Valley wolves average 3-8% more body mass. Not sure 3-8% larger really jives from with what I’ve heard from ranchers but they are technically a different sub-species.

The funny part is I’ve heard the Arctic gray wolf argument too but Arctic gray wolves are not even what was reintroduced. So the ranchers are sort of correct that what we have now are slightly bigger but not because they actually know the facts. I’ve also found it’s not worth trying to correct them.

[Bunion 2020]

I’ve also found it’s not worth trying to correct them.

Yep.

[BmillsSkier]

Anyone ever seen the documentary Wolves at our Door? It’s about the introduction of the Sawtooth Pack and was very interesting - gave a lot of background on what it took to get to that point in the mid 90s.

Think it’s on Discovery’s streaming service now.

[Powder Ho]

Anyone ever seen the documentary Wolves at our Door? It’s about the introduction of the Sawtooth Pack and was very interesting - gave a lot of background on what it took to get to that point in the mid 90s.

Think it’s on Discovery’s streaming service now.

We watched that. I think it was a science assignment for our son. We signed up for the wolf sponsorship program. We sponsored Kamoots, one of the black wolves.

[Pow4Brains]

I’ve also found it’s not worth trying to correct them.

Thanks for the info. Yup, politics, religion and wolves are off the table round these parts.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[splat]

Big news in Southern Idaho a year or two ago that a wolf had killed a Great Pyrenees herd dog, which is almost unheard of, as the Pyrenees were bred to kill wolves and bear. Discussion of bigger, more badass wolves.

[simple]

Big news in Southern Idaho a year or two ago that a wolf had killed a Great Pyrenees herd dog, which is almost unheard of, as the Pyrenees were bred to kill wolves and bear. Discussion of bigger, more badass wolves.

I've heard similar tales from fisherman. Back to emotional responses to biological questions.

What does Idaho give per cow killed by a predator?

[highangle]

"GMO murder hornets killed my cow and turned me into a newt while we was grazing on public land."

Then again...wolves will come through a valley and hock every moose in it...A cow-hocked moose can't move, and so she and her fetus die of starvation...
Nothing can stop a pack of wolves in winter. Big cats fleeing packs on their trail will kill deer and leave them for the wolves.
Wolves [and people] are the only thing that can kill mountain sheep and mountain goats on anything like a regular basis.

As apex predators with special group skills, it seems wolves need to be managed if they're competing with people. Too many is too many, esp if human recreation is a priority.
Moreover, managed populations [like economies] can experience less boom/bust [aka "suffering"]. In the same way that wolves benefit ungulate herds, humans can benefit wolf populations.

"4-way split!!" -- Chronicles of Riddick




.

[Conundrum]

What does Idaho give per cow killed by a predator?

Defenders of Wildlife paid 100% of value for a confirmed kill and 50% of value for probable kills. That fund stopped a few years ago. Now it's a convoluted process that is paid by a fed fund and matching private funding. If there isn't enough cash in the fed fund, it can be prorated across all kills. There's more to it and I don't totally understand the process. But, in a good year, 100% of value if it is a verified wolf kill.

[simple]

Thanks! How is value calculated? I'm not a livestock farmer so I'm genuinely curious.

[Conundrum]

Rancher, not farmer ; )

Usually value will be calculated off recent auction prices. There's sales yards all over that have auctions frequently. It's a commodities based market driven by beef price, feed cost, breed, purpose (feeder, milk, breeder, etc). Pretty tough to fake value.

Edit-some are being raised under contract too so the value is predetermined. And I was just flipping a little shit. There are dairy farmers-but the product is milk. Typically, if you are raising cattle, you're a rancher. It all still confuses me too but I'm not involved daily. Mostly just talk to my grandpa anymore who is still very active in the business.

[simple]

Cool I figured something like that. It is a grip of paperwork and we know certain types abhor government paperwork.

When I see feed lots, dairy farms, etc I don't think "ranch". We do have much more ranches than that around here but cattle are in many different types of situations.

[lifelinksplit]

I (kinda) remember going and sitting in on a few meetings with MT FWP for some community outreach on wolves around 99-00 when at MSU. Heard a lot of what's been said above i.e. different breed etc. Honestly it was mostly uninformed ranchers yelling at FWP and being very pissed off(cant blame them dealing with loss of income) esp the one near Dillion. I dont know about how compensation works in MT but last I heard you had to prove the kill was directly by wolf. A sheep rancher told me it's not unusual for say 5-10 out of 50 kills to be considered actual wolf kills since the sheep trample each other during the mayhem. There was a pretty honest look from the ranchers perspective on MT PBS quite some time ago. Had Sun Ranch in Madison valley and another large ranch in Paradise valley discussing issues.

I have no dog in the fight and think wolves are pretty cool. I also believe wildlife populations need to be managed despite the many variables and difficult task.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using TGR Forums mobile app

[Conundrum]

Carter Niemeyer from that book I referenced was the FWP guy doing kill forensics in MT during that time frame and talks a lot about it in depth. Pretty interesting. He said it was a lot of tough situations because for every actual kill, there was a rancher trying to pass off animals for reimbursement that may have been a neighbors dog or some type of illness that scavengers came in to eat after death.

I can see both sides and don't have a good answer. I do think that ranchers get highly subsidized federal ground to run livestock on and can buy insurance but often don't. How many businesses does the government highly subsidize raw materials and then if the business owner doesn't buy insurance against a known risk, gives them money for losses too? Seems like if you're using public ground at a very below market cost, there might be some risks to go with that. If you're grazing on private ground, might want to build better fences.

Sticking with the wolves are rad theme, which I think they are, here's one I saw sunning himself a couple years ago out on a bow hunt.



I saw a pup playing in a field up the drainage the year prior. I blew a stalk on a nice bull about an hour before seeing this guy. I was pretty down in the dumps and seeing him really brought my spirits up. Plenty of elk and plenty of wolves in this area. Also some open range grazing going on near here too.

[grskier]

Carter Niemeyer from that book I referenced was the FWP guy doing kill forensics in MT during that time frame and talks a lot about it in depth. Pretty interesting. He said it was a lot of tough situations because for every actual kill, there was a rancher trying to pass off animals for reimbursement that may have been a neighbors dog or some type of illness that scavengers came in to eat after death.

I can see both sides and don't have a good answer. I do think that ranchers get highly subsidized federal ground to run livestock on and can buy insurance but often don't. How many businesses does the government highly subsidize raw materials and then if the business owner doesn't buy insurance against a known risk, gives them money for losses too? Seems like if you're using public ground at a very below market cost, there might be some risks to go with that. If you're grazing on private ground, might want to build better fences.

Sticking with the wolves are rad theme, which I think they are, here's one I saw sunning himself a couple years ago out on a bow hunt.


I.

Wait until you read about the oil industry....



Point taken. In Colorado, it'll be interesting, I think about here in the Elk Mountains, where we have a giant swath of Wilderness that is HEAVILY recreated in. Up north of here in the flat tops there may be some viable range, I'm not sure how the big game is doing up that way though.

[BmillsSkier]

Ok, educate me about this Idaho bill that was fast tracked to the Governor that would permit up to a 90% reduction in population- 1,500 to 150 per the article.

Tell me about the poor cattle. (Sorry, couldn’t help myself with that one). Seriously, some mag in ID tell me how this is a good approach. Believe it or not I’m open to being shown viewpoints that may not be presented in the article.

https://apnews.com/article/bills-ida...282e2b097040a9

Can’t recall if you’re in ID, Highangle, but I assume your explanation above is a partial reason?

[Conundrum]

It’s a bullshit law that rules science out of a process that is supposed to be ran by biologists from the Idaho State Fish and Game. I respect the job IDFG does. Our legislature has been taking small jabs at them for a number of years.

[BmillsSkier]

Thanks mang. Appreciate the local context.

Believe it or not, this is one area I’d appreciate hearing from one James Piotrowski.

[Conundrum]

Thanks mang. Appreciate the local context.

Believe it or not, this is one area I’d appreciate hearing from one James Piotrowski.

Believe it or not I truly know Pio would have voted the high road on this one.

[The Reverend Floater]

It’s a bullshit law that rules science out of a process that is supposed to be ran by biologists from the Idaho State Fish and Game. I respect the job IDFG does. Our legislature has been taking small jabs at them for a number of years.

This. And the worst part is it would set precedent in Idaho for legislative game management. Idaho is one of only a few states left that is entirely managed by F&G. Those fuckers used wolves as a patsy to get this thing going, knowing people are too dumb to recognize the precedent it sets when there are wolves involved. I have nothing against wolf hunting when done legally and within management boundaries, but this is ridiculous.

Best part is it's basically shitty hunters asking the government to help them hunt elk by reducing wolves. I'm a shitty archery hunter but I don't blame wolves for my struggles. And the few ranchers I know don't give a shit about wolves.

[yeahman]

Like I said earlier, worst-case scenario for wolves is too many wolves. The article stated there are 1,500 wolves in Idaho, and the state's management plan (created in 2002) calls for 150. Obviously if the population had been effectively managed prior to now, such a drastic 90% reduction would not be on the table. But by not keeping numbers in check, it has resulted in significant public backlash among hunters and ranchers and others directly affected by wolves.

Kind of doubt the extreme reduction will ever come to pass though. We'll see.