Wolf pup trapped in lower

[swampbuck]

I would expect wolves to get the same treatment here as they got from the yoopers.........Except theres not as many remote areas to hide in. I dont think the population will grow much, if at all.

[WAUB-MUKWA]

Originally Posted by swampbuck

I would expect wolves to get the same treatment here as they got from the yoopers.........Except theres not as many remote areas to hide in. I dont think the population will grow much, if at all.

Wolves don't need a place to hide, they will populate just as the coyute did downtown in Detroit. There is plenty to eat in the NLP for them to flourish and grow quick, and deplete the elk herd fast too.

If anything the 3 S's will happen more if the "slums" near Harrison and Mio get the chance.

[TrekJeff]

Originally Posted by Shlwego

It's been a good discussion, Jeff. There are still a couple of questions you haven't answered, and I'd like to hear your "personal" take on them: Do you want wolves fully restored to Michigan, and if so, WHY? What benefit do you think they will bring us?

Shlwego, as far as "my" take on wolves, the restoration of any native species is attractive. Although the initial wolves that were re-introduced were not part of the existing eco system, the ones that have been born since are part of the eco system, the adjustment period has already passed.

To answer your question of why...I feel that over the course of time, man has taken its liberties with the Natural Resources regardless of the impact of the whole. We use excuses such as economical development and progress to do as we wish. Don't get me wrong, if the safety of my friends, family or even some less desirable human was at risk of an attack, I would dispatch a wolf in a heart beat, just as with any threat. But I don't support the needless killing of any native species. THIS link is an excellent essay that has a refreshing open minded view of the wolf/human interaction. It addresses both sides of the fence and pretty much expresses the views I have about wolves. Check it out.

[2PawsRiver]

It is of course all Tree Hugger lies and propaganda.....

Wolves have long been blamed for elk deaths in Idaho. But research is showing the predators have gotten a bum rap.

In its August newsletter, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game summarized recent elk studies and found only a minority of elk populations are declining and wolves are culprits in few.

A third of elk populations are increasing even though wolves have been in Idaho since 1995. Though statewide numbers have dropped some, claims that wolves are wholly responsible for declining elk populations aren’t holding up.

Craig White of Fish and Game said the agency’s wildlife division conducted elk studies in 11 of the 29 state elk management areas between 2005 and 2008. The sample included five of the six areas in the state with declining populations. White said biologists tried to collar approximately 30 female elk in each area, but didn’t provide exact numbers.

“We selected areas we thought would be representative for a snapshot of what was happening across the state,” White said.

Biologists found that wolves killed significant numbers of collared elk in only one area, the Lolo zone along U.S. Highway 12 in north Idaho. Over the three years, the report claims wolves killed 20 percent of the Lolo sample, or about six elk. Three-quarters of the collared elk survived, less than Fish and Game’s survival goal of 88 percent.

White said deteriorating habitat in the Lolo zone has contributed to declining elk numbers since at least 1988, before wolves entered the picture. The population dropped by 40 percent during the severe winter of 1996-97 alone. Bears and cougars also kill many elk. Just across the border, Montana biologists are starting a similar collaring study in Ravalli County, where one factor of elk decline may be high human population growth.

The report said wolves caused the highest number of deaths in two other areas with declining populations. But in the Smoky Mountain zone west of Ketchum, where wolves were said to have killed 5 percent of about 30 collared elk, other predators and hunters together killed 7 percent. The Sawtooth zone, west of Stanley, had similar results.

Conversely, the report showed that hunters were the biggest cause of elk kills in two other areas with declining populations: the Pioneer zone east of Ketchum, and Island Park near Rexburg. In the Island Park zone, hunters killed 17 percent of collared elk while wolves killed none.

White said Fish and Game ran a shorter study starting in 2008, collaring 6-month-old calves in just the Lolo and Sawtooth zones. In both areas, wolves killed around a third of the calves. But in the Sawtooth area, only one-third of calves survived, meaning other factors were also to blame.

The conclusion that wolves don’t have a greater effect on elk runs counter to the expectations of many. In July 2009, an informal Fish and Game survey of 2,500 out-of-state hunters found that three in 10 didn’t plan to visit Idaho because of the perceived effect of wolves on elk populations.

In the late ’90s, even ecologists like Scott Creel of Montana State University expected wolves to kill a lot of elk. But after eight years studying the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem where wolves are numerous, he’s learned that other factors are more likely to reduce elk populations.

Before wolves were reintroduced, elk populations were larger and elk stayed in the open, which is what hunters got used to, Creel said. Now, he said, elk may be acting like they did before wolves were eliminated.

Given time, Creel said, he thinks both populations would stabilize. He noted population sizes are only considered “good” or “bad” based upon arbitrary ideas of what the size should be.

“No predator has ever eliminated its food,” Creel said. “Change is always the most dramatic at the beginning, then population numbers settle.”

Laura Lundquist may be reached at llundquist@magicvalley.com or 735-3376

[earlybugle]

At the risk of getting flamed I'll offer the following observations and opinions for consideration;
- every organism in an ecosystem exploits other organisms. Humans are only different in that we take it upon ourselves to manage our impact (and that of other species).
- wolves are large animals, far far larger than most folks realize. An average adult male is larger than a average Mi. deer. They fear very little and eat amost anything they want or need including humans. 3 or 4 can pull down a bull moose. (after having taken a wolf in AK, I can say I'd rather face a cougar or bear than multiple wolves.)
- uncontrolled, wolves will expand to the carrying capacity of their habitat, consuming all prey animal (including healthy) and displacing coyotes, lions, AND bears!
- like coyotes, wolves WILL expand into areas with humans as has been proven in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana
- if we allow wolves to expand in Michigan I pray we find a way to quickly give the DNR the authority to manage them. The alternative (experiment) has already been run enough to know what will result.

EB

[Shlwego]

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

Shlwego, as far as "my" take on wolves, the restoration of any native species is attractive.

Provided that the environment is right and they don't do more harm than good, I agree. However just because something is "attractive" does not make it "right."

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

Although the initial wolves that were re-introduced were not part of the existing eco system, the ones that have been born since are part of the eco system, the adjustment period has already passed.

By that logic every invasive species is also part of the eco system and the adjustment period has also passed. I don't buy that logic. And it makes no difference that wolves WERE once native here, because they were re-introduced into a completely altered environment, as I've stated before.

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

To answer your question of why...I feel that over the course of time, man has taken its liberties with the Natural Resources regardless of the impact of the whole.

I agree, and I believe we are doing it AGAIN by bringing the wolf back. It seems we never learn.

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

We use excuses such as economical development and progress to do as we wish. Don't get me wrong, if the safety of my friends, family or even some less desirable human was at risk of an attack, I would dispatch a wolf in a heart beat, just as with any threat. But I don't support the needless killing of any native species.

In time I don't believe it will be needless, it will be necessary. The question is will those who allowed this re-intorduction ever be able to say "We were wrong. We should never have allowed this 'experiment,' it has gotten completely out of hand?"

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

THIS link is an excellent essay that has a refreshing open minded view of the wolf/human interaction. It addresses both sides of the fence and pretty much expresses the views I have about wolves. Check it out.

I read the entire page. I don't consider it open minded, unless what you mean by open minded is that "wolves should be re-introduced everywhere they once were native, and people will just have to deal with it." I hear what your saying, I just don't believe that it's going to play out the way you want it to. Again, that's my OPINION, and I respect the fact that you feel otherwise. Since the wolves are now here, it's all academic anyway, and we are both in a position to see if the "experiment" works. How long do you think it will be before we know?

[TrekJeff]

How long will it take..... once the numbers allow the State to take over management. It's all in the numbers, when they get to the point of State management, then treat them as any other resource utilizing the methods we do on any other animal. All the members of the SSS clan will then be able to apply for a wolf permit rather than an elk permit...after all, they'll all be eaten.

Have fun with this...I'm moving tomorrow, of all places North. I'll catch up with things in time.

[omega58]

I'll be in Cheboygan county next week in a remote area with the family on vacation. . .I'll keep you posted if we see one. I have known they were there for a long time, the neighbor has a video of one playing in a field.

With a 14 month old weimaraner and 2 young boys, I would prefer they were not there. I will definitely run a bell on my dog. . . maybe put a bell on the kids as well.

[tommy-n]

Wouldn't that be like ringing the dinner bell

[James Dymond]

Was the critter really weighed, this article says it was 23 pounds, in my Outdoor News it says Lonsway estimated it was about 12 weeks old and weighed 23 to 25 pounds. Was a blood sample taken? In the picture it looks like a coyote to me, but what do I know. Jim

[WAUB-MUKWA]

Blood, hair samples are sent to the lab in Rose Lake.

[James Dymond]

was it weighed or estimated? Jim

[UPHuntr]

Originally Posted by TrekJeff

How long will it take..... once the numbers allow the State to take over management. It's all in the numbers, when they get to the point of State management, then treat them as any other resource utilizing the methods we do on any other animal. All the members of the SSS clan will then be able to apply for a wolf permit rather than an elk permit...after all, they'll all be eaten.

Have fun with this...I'm moving tomorrow, of all places North. I'll catch up with things in time.

Jeff,
The numbers are above the states goals, that is why they were once taken off the endangered species list. it is the tree huggers and the liberal judges that put them back on. Now IMO the wolves are over carrying capacity and managment goals. If and god knows I pray when we can hunt them I hope the first couple of years the DNR keeps this in mind and issues higher numbers of tags then first thought.

[Nick Adams]

Originally Posted by UPHuntr

Jeff,
The numbers are above the states goals,

The numbers are above the minimum required by law (ESA) for delisting. That has little or nothing to do with "carry capacity" or "management population goals". I predict they won't manage anywhere near the minimum ESA number as a population goal and risk the wolf going back on the list and under federal control due to an unforseen weather or disease event.

I haven't seen the state advance any population goal numbers to date. If you have, I would be interested in seeing the document.

-na

[WAUB-MUKWA]

Originally Posted by James Dymond

was it weighed or estimated? Jim

Weighed.