# wolf problem out west



## bowhunter3 (Oct 18, 2007)

Fellow Sportsmen,

If the Anti-hunting groups get their way, and keep wolf delisting from occurring by tying up the issue in court for years, If A Federal Judge Over Rules the Twice Elected Bush Administration and every western states Governor and Legislature, then according to several PHDs - within 15 years, there will be very little if anything for Sportsmen in the Western States to hunt. First the elk and moose will go, then mule deer then bighorn sheep. Hunting could be reduced as much as 90% from what it was just a few years ago.

SFW has a well oiled machine and millions of dollars will continue to pour into habitat conservation, making sure wildlife gets its fair share of the public lands forage, funding transplants and other conservation activities.

In addition, we are forming a sophisticated and comprehensive strategy to win the wolf war. It is a multiple pronged approach, and it will require the intensity and resources that our Proposition 5 effort required - and More. We will find as many partners as we can. We will share our strategy with members and concerned folks in the appropriate places, but that will NOT be on internet sites or with emails. There will be Legal, political, grass roots, A List celebrities, PR campaigns, and other efforts.

We have proven time and time again, when we focus our energies, sportsmen can win, Including the reversal of the first rejection of the Wyoming plan - which is Now approved and wolves can be managed as predators in ¾ of the state, Prop. 5, the Major West wide habitat restoration efforts.

We will also bring in other interested parties who are negatively affected by unmanaged wolf populations.

Wolves are costing millions of dollars in lost economic activity and red meat production for people. The impacts will continue to grow in an exponential fashion.

Game and fish agencies are all too eager to simply pass on higher license costs and fees to cover for the declining tag sales due to wolf and bear predation. Some are now beginning to sound the alarms as they see what is really going on.

The original agreement was 30 packs 300 wolves. There are now Over 100 packs and 1500 wolves. And if the anti-hunters win and get their stated goals of 5,000 to 8,000 wolves in the west, Hunting is done as we know it within a generation.

And As Dr. Valarius Geist who has written about the dramatic reversal in the decline of wildlife populations over the last 80 years, and the current model of sportsmen funded land and habitat conservation, said, it will be sad to let one animal destroy all the rest and the system with the only economic hope of keeping populations healthy and abundant for generations. Forgive me for the paraphrase, but there are many in the PHD world ready to come and out blast the wolf advocates for the failed and flawed fairy tales that have been propagated upon the American public.

Just like Prop. 5, the media will be opposed to us, we will have to buy our own press.

This is an issue that every one of the millions of American Sportsmen who hunt in the west, or who dream of hunting in the west one day needs to get behind, financially, grass roots wise and every other way we will ask in the future.

For those who have bought into the natural ecosystem arguments, who think that this issue is going to be solved without a Herculean effort from sportsmen, they simply do NOT understand the agenda and strategy of the folks whose end game is to end hunting, and the wolf is there best weapon in the last 50 years to do that.

I have talked with many sportsmen around the west and the country, and there is NO clear plan for victory in the courts, in public opinion, or in the halls of congress.

We will begin developing that plan and find all the partners who want to engage in this most important issue facing western states big game hunters in our lifetimes.

If you feel otherwise, please let us know, but the counter offensive to the war on western states big game and the destruction of big game hunting is about to begin.

Below are some comments and photos of what are becoming daily occurrences around the west.


































































This 6x8 bull was killed a week ago up wolf creek which is 30 miles out of Libby , MT. 
Two wolves killed it, ate a bite or two of meat and left, never did come back. 
Pic # 032 shows where the bull had "hooked" a wolf with his antlers and had thrown him out into the snow. 
A local logger seen blood and tracks on the road going to their job and followed the blood to the dead bull. 
He fought hard but only two wolves can kill a bull that's in his prime. 
Goes to show you how bad ass wolves really are. More proof that wolves do in fact kill for fun!


----------



## soules2007 (Oct 29, 2007)

good post. I always try to follow the law, but when hunting this season if a wolf presents itself. My law abbiding ways will be sorley tested.


----------



## bigbr (Oct 24, 2007)

Bowhunter3,

I do not beleive that Don intended to have this posted over the internet. I for one think that somethings are better left to reason and not speculation and by posting it here you bring undue speculation to the spirt in which it has been released to your trust.

Bigbr


----------



## bowhunter3 (Oct 18, 2007)

bigbr said:


> Bowhunter3,
> 
> I do not beleive that Don intended to have this posted over the internet. I for one think that somethings are better left to reason and not speculation and by posting it here you bring undue speculation to the spirt in which it has been released to your trust.
> 
> Bigbr


I don't agree. Why wouldnt he want a group of hunters to see this. Why would he email it if he didn't want people to see.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

bowhunter3 said:


> bigbr said:
> 
> 
> > Bowhunter3,
> ...


The number one rule of warfare is never let the opposing side see you coming.

I do think hunters, and other interested parties (i.e. Ranchers, non wolf supporters) need to informed of this impending campaign.

As for the following qoute


> Soules 2007 said My law abiding ways will be sorely tested.


 My law abiding ways don't come into play when I see wolves. :shock:


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

bigbr said:


> Bowhunter3,
> 
> I do not beleive that Don intended to have this posted over the internet. I for one think that somethings are better left to reason and not speculation and by posting it here you bring undue speculation to the spirt in which it has been released to your trust.
> 
> Bigbr


Anytime Don has emailed me something I wanted to post, I have asked his permission. He has never said no. I don't know if it was obtained here, but it is a good idea to ask in the future.


----------



## bowhunter3 (Oct 18, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> bigbr said:
> 
> 
> > Bowhunter3,
> ...


I don't know how he got my email address. I recieved this email directly so I figured it was something that he wanted every hunter to see. There is no need to put me in my place for doing so.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

I am not "putting you in your place" as I don't even know you. I was just pointing out a friendly recommendation. I am sure he wouldn't have put it out there if he didn't intend for it to get out to the public. Don doesn't seem to be one to worry about what people think about him, what you see is what you get.


----------



## bowhunter3 (Oct 18, 2007)

ok, just figured others might be interested in it. Anyways its cool, us bowhunters got to stick together :lol:


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

I've always said that I'll kill the first wolf I see while I'm hunting....actually I'll kill the first wolf I see anytime. They never should have re-introduced the plague in the first place. I can always say that I thought it was a big coyote......right? :lol:


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

I figure just about every poacher rationalizes what he does to put himself above the law. Still, it's interesting that the original post is a call to legal action and yet the responses are anything but.

The proposal sounds a whole lot smarter than poaching. Of course, it won't be much fun and I won't get to kill anything in the process. Might even miss some hunting time. But I haven't seen any evidence at all that poaching has ever helped anything. In fact, when it comes to wolves, it's had just the opposite effect.

Hmmmm...new poacher rationale? "Wolves are going to kill all the big game anyway - might as well get some while I can. Dang wolves!"


----------



## girlsfishtoo (Feb 5, 2008)

I don't think poaching would be the first thing to pop into any bodys minds. But when your out hunting and run across one what would you do? I have heard stories of people out hunting birds with their dogs and run into a wolf. Believe me I am totaly against poaching, but if I had an encounter where I was in fear of safety, weather it be myself, family, friends, and expecially my dog, you bet I wouldnt think twice about shooting to kill. Im sorry my family, friends and expecially my dog are worth a whole lot more than a wolf. Like I said I wouldnt set out for the main purpose to poach a wolf or any animal for that manner.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

I have heard that the wolves they set free in Yellowstone and Idaho are not even the native wolves of that area, is this for sure true? 

If so, I cannot agree with them being there unless the native wolves are totally extinct and then it would have to be monitered and controlled and kept in check.

I was a supporter of wolves (within a controlled situation) until I found out they are not putting the native wolf back, but a larger wolf out of Canada. Can anyone verify this?


----------



## The Naturalist (Oct 13, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> bigbr said:
> 
> 
> > Bowhunter3,
> ...


Sorry to be uninformed, but who is Don? In his email he mentioned that wolves cannot be managed, which is simply not true. They are easier to manage than coyotes! Once they are established in an area they can and should be delisted and regulated. Only a few uniformed would suggest that there be no controls placed on them.



HighNDry said:


> I have heard that the wolves they set free in Yellowstone and Idaho are not even the native wolves of that area, is this for sure true?
> 
> If so, I cannot agree with them being there unless the native wolves are totally extinct and then it would have to be monitered and controlled and kept in check.
> 
> I was a supporter of wolves (within a controlled situation) until I found out they are not putting the native wolf back, but a larger wolf out of Canada. Can anyone verify this?


It is true that the wolves introduced into Yellowstone are out of Canada. They are the same species, Gray Wolves. There are several sub-species such as the Arctic (which is the largest), Timber, and Plains wolves. It was decided that the Timber wolves in Canada were the closest genetic match to those that were exterminated in the northern mountains of the west.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

A change in federal law that took effect February 27, allows pet owners to kill a wolf attacking their dogs, goats, llamas, mules or horses on private or public land, except land north of Interstate 90 in Idaho, or land administered by the National Park Service, and provided there is no evidence of intentional baiting, feeding or deliberate attractants of wolves. 

Dog owners should report any dog injured or killed by wolves as soon as possible to local Fish and Game officer, to the regional Fish and Game office, or to USDA Wildlife Services. Anyone who kills a wolf attacking their dog must mark the location, protect the evidence of the attack, and report it within 24 hours.

If they come after my packgoats no matter where I am at I will deal with it. I will do everything to prevent it but if it happens then I really don't have a choice in my mind.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

That's what Claude Dallas said. You get pushed to a point and it's kill or be killed. Same with dogs and goats.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Finnegan said:


> I figure just about every poacher rationalizes what he does to put himself above the law. Still, it's interesting that the original post is a call to legal action and yet the responses are anything but.


Claude Dallas rationalized what he did and put himself above the law...now people are dead.



HighNDry said:


> That's what Claude Dallas said. You get pushed to a point and it's kill or be killed. Same with dogs and goats.


Sadly, Claude Dallas isn't the one who was killed.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Finnegan said:


> I figure just about every poacher rationalizes what he does to put himself above the law. Still, it's interesting that the original post is a call to legal action and yet the responses are anything but.


Claude Dallas rationalized what he did and put himself above the law...now people are dead.



HighNDry said:


> That's what Claude Dallas said. You get pushed to a point and it's kill or be killed. Same with dogs and goats.


Sadly, Claude Dallas isn't the one who was killed.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

I was not talking about Claude's poaching. He admitted to the F&G that he had poached a deer for food, caught some cats out of season and baited his traps. He asked them to cite him. They wanted to push the issue by claiming they had to take him in. Earlier in the day, they cited another poacher without taking him in so I don't know why they were pushing Dallas so hard. In fact, they told Dallas he could go easy or go hard. Hard to Dallas meant stiff and dead. I don't know why the F&G were making threats like that, other than the fact some claim the warden carried a little too much badge. Neither one was willing to back down. You can't justify murder but I wonder if you can be forced into it. Just like these guys on this site that calim if they run into a wolf, they will kill, bury and keep quiet. That mentality is alive and well when it comes to the macho men hunters, trappers and fishermen out there. Scary as heck if you ask me.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

There's no claiming to it- it doesn't matter what it is- if it's screwing with my live stock I'm going to adjust it's attitude about that thought wave. I won't kill something just to kill it- 
There are areas I probably will keep my animals out of because the percentage of chance of having to deal with a predator there is higher than other areas. I understand that pack goats look like a MC Cougar burger but how I will deal with any type of predator has been pretty well thought out and planned for. My reaction will not come in a spur of the moment ordeal.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

What would you do if a man with a gun attacks your livestock? Have you thought that out too?


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Why of course I have - I have discussed that question many times and the legalities of my answer. I worry more about the guy in hip boots at night though---------- goats are not sex toys------- you don't own hip boots do you ? :lol:


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Defense is one thing; poaching is another. If a defensive wolf kill was necessary, I wouldn't hesitate, (and I'm always packing). No reasonable person would. But that isn't poaching. The biggest difference is that the poacher will S.S.S. while the lawful citizen will likely report the incident, same as if you had to shoot a human being.

What would I do if I saw a wolf? Simple...get an exact fix on the location and report it to the DWR as quickly as possible. The DWR is the intermediary in this issue and if they're going to be successful, they need our support. Poaching a wolf in some misguided belief that it will make things better only empowers the wolf protectionists and makes the DWR's job more difficult. I'd even argue that promoting the poaching of wolves online has a similar effect, although to a lesser degree.

If there's a lesson to be learned from Idaho (and I think there is) then the lesson is that fighting is counterproductive. Hunters have much more in common with the wolf protectionists than disagreement. While Idaho had fist fights in the streets and daily exchanges of threatening rhetoric, nothing was being done to manage the wolves. So here we sit in Utah blaming the damage that resulted on wolves when in fact, it was the direct result of mismanagement, (or to be precise, no management).

I applaud Don's (if it's Don's) call to action, with one important caveat. Call the wolf protectionists to the table, too. Let's get the negotiation done now, outside of court and come to a workable agreement so that the day after wolves in Utah hit that magic number, we can delist and enable the DWR to do their job as wildlife managers.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

UZ-A-BOW said:


> I've always said that I'll kill the first wolf I see while I'm hunting....actually I'll kill the first wolf I see anytime. They never should have re-introduced the plague in the first place. I can always say that I thought it was a big coyote......right? :lol:


 I've always said that I'll kill the first elk I see while I'm hunting....actually I'll kill the first elk I see anytime. They should have never increased the herds above their historic levels (which was really low in Utah). I can always say, it was coming in my fields and eating my alfalfa.....right?


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

You know it- then you can drive your truck right up to it and load it up- maybe even run over a few wolves on the drive to it. Nothing like bonus points.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Just saw a picture story of a wolf elk kill this last weekend outside of Jackson. Pretty amazing pictures of a 6 pt and how and where the battle took place. Where the wolves layed around following the sun up the mountain. Pictures of the wolves for about 20 minutes before the realized they wrere being watched and then trotted off up the mountain single file. 
The wolves did eat a lot of the elk. I work with the guy who took the pictures, looked like an intense cross country ski trip.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8703365?source=rss

Anyone up for some wolf calling?

Can't wait!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Don't get that call out yet, this is what I mean by the greens trying to stop 'managing' wolves:


> "Every state that's done a wolf management plan has included that concept," he said. "There are some places where wolves can live and other places where wolves can't be allowed to live because of conflict."
> That's little consolation to *Earthjustice, which has given notice of its plan to sue the Fish and Wildlife Service next month on behalf of several environmental organizations*. Federal law required the group to give 60 days notice of its lawsuit plans.
> "In the meantime we'll be monitoring what's happening to wolves on the ground," Harbine said. "*We hope that public pressure to do the right thing will be enough to keep these wolves alive until we can obtain a court order reinstating endangered species protections*. The world will be watching how Idaho, Wyoming and Montana chooses how to manage their wolves."


 Exactly the prediction that wyo2ut has dismissed. :roll:


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Like I said only if they mess with my live stock. I might have the opportunity though because I spend 1/2 my summer in SW Wyoming.


----------

