# Montana sets wolf harvest objective



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/articl ... |Frontpage

Montana has set their harvest objective at 220 wolves this year. That is triple what the objective was in 2009. Unlike Idaho, Montana was pretty conservative in '09, and fulfilled their harvest objective with hunters. Another 120 wolves were culled by wildlife officials. So added up, they took just under 200 wolves that that year. It will be interesting to see if they meet objective this year. The wolf hunt will go from August through December, or whenever the quota is reached. As in 2009, it will be interesting to watch how things go down.


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

I believe that The State of Montana has failed miserably by setting the number of tags way to low. The established number should at the very least be doubled. Furthermore, I don't see anything objective about managing a sustainable population of wolves in The Westeren States period! In fact, I support the eradication of any wolf spotted wandering in Utah. How's that for being opinionated? If you disagree with me no big deal. Just pray that your pet wolf isn't ever spotted out by a hillbilly extermination team, because these individuals are highly skilled in the art of concealing evidence. Anyway, that's what they tell me at the Hillbilly Wildlife Board (HBWB) Meetings, and isn't it nice to know that their board members are not appointed by the governor but rather duly voted in by their peers? In fact, last time I heard, at least 3 of the hillbilly board members are wildlife biologists with PHdeity degrees, and none of them have ever been an auctioneer.
GOSH, them hillbillys' sure is smart.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

That's a tough one there Berg. All the hillbillies in Idaho, including them that cun reed, right, und cypher weren't able to kill 200 wolves in '09, even though the objective was 225. I certainly don't disagree with you on the extermination of wolves. But it is easier said than done. Kind of like the guys talking tough in the high school locker room, about how many chicks they'd bagged over the weekend when truth was, they sat at home sipping cheap beer and scratching themselves.


----------



## JHas (Nov 21, 2007)

I thought we were going to get along today...


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

BERG's a long story. This _is_ getting along.................

You best feed him a corn dog and dijon mustard before he gets ornery. :mrgreen:


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

Thanks for speaking the truth Tree.  

JHas.............................. *(u)* 

And thank you Gary for the excellent follow-up post.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Did someone mention a corn dog?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

hmmmmmmm. Corn dogs. Now I know what we'll be having for dinner! Dang it all. That means we'll need some bbq chips and mountain dew to go with it - you know, a well balanced meal! 

On a more serious note, the wolf thing is very interesting to me. I grew up in Challis, Idaho, in the center of the wolf world, though I left before the populations were supplemented with the Canadian transplants. (Yes, I said supplemented). Anyway, before the wolf population exploded and got all the attention, the native population was nearly never seen, and when it was, it was "taken care of" by the locals. But wolves or not, there was always something with the lands that seemed to mess things up. Fires. Snow in July. Tough winter kill. Its a tough place to make it in ranching, and in the guiding business. Folks got along, but just barely. So I guess its like anywhere.

Anyway, since the wolves were supplemented in '95, and a microscope was placed on them, the locals weren't able to "take care of things" any more. So the wolf populations expanded and at the same time, game populations dropped. Never mind the vast expanses of marginal land that got overgrazed for generations prior. Never mind that the marginal range left, had climaxed into a state of monoculture. Never mind that on some key elk units in that area (27, 29, 37A to name a few), IDFG increased cow tags for three years by 10X - crashing the elk herds. But it was all the fault of the wolf. 

I certainly think the wolves had a serious impact to the hunting in central Idaho. Absolutely they did. But no more so than the decades of range abuse and overly aggressive elk harvest on lands that were suspect to begin with. But for a decade and a half, the locals talked tough. They talked that they couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a wolf. They walked the mountains with fear. Livestock loss was pervasive. And yet, when they got the chance to finally shoot them legally in '09, central units in the core of wolf country were left not meeting harvest objective. And not for lack of trying. 20,000 wolf tags sold, to guys that spend 100+ days afield on wheelers, horseback, in trucks, and on foot. And yet, they fell short. That to me is the absolutely fascinating part about it all. I will be watching Idaho and Montana again with keen interest in the entire deal. Again.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

As a side note, as I re-read what I wrote, it got me thinking about some of the locals that complained most about the wolves wiping out the herds. One was a guy that volunteered as football coach at the high school. He complained all the time about how hard the predators were on the game populations. Then a couple years later, he was convicted through a sting operation, "guiding" undercover wardens on hunts for bighorn, goat, elk and deer. And pushing them to kill additional rams when the ram they'd just shot didn't quite make full curl. His "guiding" operation alone was taking out dozens of bighorn and other game every year - and leaving behind many that were "almost big enough" trophies. Anyway, the irony of it was not to be understated.


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

Thanks for sharing those thoughts Gary. Are any of the units you mentioned near Arco? I have some friends there who told me the wolves have destroyed elk herds in their area.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

It is certainly going to be interesting to see how things go down in both Idaho and Montana. Even though it's only been a couple of years since last hunted, I would bet those smart buggers have retained a trick or two to outfox the hunter. I am hoping to be able to get a tag in one of the states, but cash is hard to come by these days! Perhaps if I develop some psychological issues or even some interesting "brain patterns" in an MRI, BERG could see through donating a bit of cash to the Stillhunterman Wolf Hunt! ;-) I hear he is magnanimous in his effort to improve brain function!


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

I'm here for you bro. Send me a pm with your name and address. Your wolf fund donation is a done deal. A man with desires in his heart to smack down the vermin wolf is called to the work! Without question, you have the Mega-Lumens working in your brain causing great beams of concentrated light too shoot out of your eyes; as a result, you are thereby enriching the masses with knowledge and great pearls of wisdom.


----------



## ktowncamo (Aug 27, 2008)

I like your style BERG. I would gladly sponsor a motivated hunter that has the desire, time and skill. Wish I knew the territory up north and had the time to personally deliver the smack down on a wolf. Stillhunterman - if you've got friends that meet my requirements, I'm willing to hunt vicariously through someone else.


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

BERG and ktowncamo, you are both Gentlemen and Scholars! Although I do have "something" working in my brain, I am not sure it is the Mega-Lumens of which you speak BERG, but I will take you at your word! ;-) Thank you! and PM's sent...


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Berg - those units I'm most familiar with are about 40 miles north of Arco, but in the Lost River Range. No offense to your friends, but the areas right around Arco never had good elk herds. There have been elk there, but never in decent numbers, and that is reaching back into the 80s when I hunted central Idaho extensively. From Arco though, it isn't a far drive to some great elk country in Copper Basin, the White Clouds, and areas around Mount Borah, and over the mountain into the Pashimori Valley. 

I guess in the area right around Arco, it wouldn't take much to wipe out the herds, as they were scarce at best anyway. The further north into the Lost River range though, the numbers pick up. From Mount Borah north - there were really significant numbers. This is area 37. This is also the area where in either the '01- '02 - '03 seasons (+- a year or two - I can't remember without looking it up) the IDFG jumped the elk tags to 400 - 600, on a herd that had only supported 100 tags in previous years (25 bull, 75 cow). Then they dropped the herd objectives from around 2,000 elk on that unit, to 100. They went from a total, sustainable harvest of 100 elk, to a total population objective of 100 elk. Last time I checked, they issued 5-10 total tags for the unit. The herd was devastated certainly. But the way that tag numbers were increased (with 80-90% success rate) for three consecutive years, it wasn't the wolves that decimated the herds. It was IDFG and the hunters. 

The other herd they did this to was the East Fork of the Salmon River herd. This was one of the most prolific herds in the region in the 80s. It was several thousand strong. A good portion would winter on Willow Creek Summit - the pass between Challis and Mackay. Any given winter day, hundreds of elk were visible from the road. And if you'd hike to the top of the summit - on the east side of highway 93 near the radio/microwave repeaters on the top of the ridge), it was a regular elk feed lot. Again - IDFG multiplied the tags for the East Fork herd by 6-10 times, what they had historically given. And then when the herds were wiped to a 10th of what they'd been, everyone blamed the wolves. 

I don't know the reasoning for things. My best guess is it was preemptive. In that they figured the wolves were going to get them all so might as well let the hunters over-hunt them. I really don't know why they did what they did. But the decimated herds were not wiped out solely by the wolves. There were several moving parts of the puzzle from '95 (wolf supplements) to about '04, when the herds had been wiped out.


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

Now that is some interesting information Gary! Thank you for the detail. If what you say is true, then me thinks that them pseudo-friends from Arco, and their crazy sister what wanted to marry me at shotgun point by her brother, must have been feeding this alien outta stater some bogus information. Notwithstanding, I must stand by my decree that the vermin wolf should be shot on site without the need for a tag purchased from those conspiring men, at The IDFG, here in The Last Days. That's what the boys recently told me at the last HBWB board meeting in Howell. 

Gary, are there any hard stats. (or other report) too back up your theory? I'm not saying that I don't believe you, because I know that you are a straight shooter. If the IDFG really did what you suggested, then why isn't there more public outcry? I would think that this would be big news.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

There are Berg. I'll see if I can find the link. It was all in the elk management plan, and it highlighted herd numbers, tag numbers, hunter success, and all that. I've not lived in that area for a couple of decades, but I've followed the hunting/game management in the area as it is very near and dear to my heart- its where I grew up and learned many of life's lessons. A few years ago, I was researching some stuff to put together a hunt in the places where I shot my first elk, deer and pronghorn. That is where I found the changes in tag numbers and hunter management - the spike in tags jumped out at me in a big way. Then when I saw in the elk management plan what happened to the herd numbers after that, I was pretty shocked. I'll look for the link and post it up here.


----------

