Wolves, do you want em?

[elkaholic]

Tomorrow night there is a meeting in Salem to find out whta we think of wolves and what future management or no management plan will look like. It is Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2002
Salem, Claggett Creek Middle School 1810 Alder St. N.E. 7 to 9 PM.

Based on the 135 people who showed up in Eugene last night, you will be sharing your deer and elk and pets with the wolf. If you think that would be good for Oregon, then stay home and let it happen. Otherwise, we better be heard or it will be like some pro-wolf people say now - everybody we heard from wants wolves. Do you??

Maybe you Idaho guys can tell us about wolves?

There is a meeting Portland on the 17th, same issue.

[willametteriveroutlaw]

I want one hanging on my wall..

[garyk]

I much prefer wolves over cows.

Wolves don't wreck the rivers, pollute the water, etc. etc.

If you're concerned about deer, just remember that typically 98% of the available forage on eastern lands is allocated to cattle grazing.

If you want more deer, don't sweat the wolves, round up the cows instead.

[WildHawg]

Gary,
You have some things to learn. When Peter Skene Ogden ventured through Eastern Oregon in, I believe the 1820's (not gonna look it up now), he commented on the lack of game, namely deer. He ventured all over in search of beaver for the HBC, kept excellent diaries, and can be counted on as a reliable source for the period.
There is a heck of an argument that cattle grazing actually favored the deer as they are browzers, not grazers like elk. By eating down the native grasses, they encouraged the growth of more bitterbrush, sagebrush etc. etc., which in turn, created more favorable conditions for deer. Numbers reached their historical peak AFTER a period of far more intensive grazing than we have today.
Your statement that " 98% of the available forage on eastern lands is allocated to cattle grazing" is patently false, and demonstrative of your lack of knowledge regarding ungulates.
Basing your argument in opinion and emotion does not further your cause either. Do wolves have a place in Oregon's ecosystem? Maybe--I am not knowledgable enough to give an educated opinion. I do however, think the arguments like "they'll eat all our deer and elk", and "our ancestors worked hard to exterminate them for a reason" also fall far short of the mark.
Wolves are indigenous to Oregon, and their removal has left a hole in our ecosystem--that much I know. I am not so selfish as to say they have no place here, nor am I so ignorant as to say that cattle are a bane to society. I don't like what they do to our stream banks, and I think they do impact elk, which, in case you didn't know, were originally a prairie, not a mountain animal. The grasses they rely on for winter range feed are certainly depleted by bovines. Still, their numbers are increasing almost every year, especially here in Western Oregon.
We, as humans, have had a tremendous impact on wildlife population--that is undeniable. We have taken it upon ourselves to regulate game animals in a very unnatural way. Is that ideal? Certainly not, but it wont change as long as we are around. I believe we could "manage" wolves much like we do cougars and other predators.
You seem to be some kind of radical environmentalist whose agenda includes returning everything to a "pristine" state. Sorry idealist--it aint gonna happen. North America has not existed in a "pristine" condition for over 10,000 years. Native Americans too "managed" game populations, and at times overharvested and had very negative impacts on wildlife. Wanna read about it? Let me know, and I'll provide you with source books so the next time you make "factual" statements you'll be able to back them up with more than just opinion
Did you possibly confuse Ifish with the PETA message board?
Read and learn, then come back and we'll have another chat, OK?

[GutshotApe]

Garyk - Yeah, your 98% figure is high . The last time I paid attention to it (about 8 yrs ago) the BLM's grazing plan for the Andrews district (southern Steens and Trout Cr Mtns) only 96% of the forage went to cows and a whopping 4% was left for everything else :grin: . I hope the ratio is different today but who knows. The problem with cattle over there is they like to hang out in the creek bottoms and eat the shade needed to keep the creeks cool. BLM has fenced some riparian areas to keep cows out but they can't keep them off the uplands. What the effect of cattle grazing on soil compaction and runoff characteristics is unknown to me - but could be significant.

As for wolves, it seems unlikely that enough wolves would ever get established in Oregon to be a major factor in predation. And if they did become established, would their predation be in addition to current cougar/bear/coyote predation or offsetting? :whazzup:

[skein]

From what I understand, wolves push out both coyotes and cougars, viewing them as competition. As for cattle, wasn't there a study done (oh boy, I'm about to get in trouble here) that indicated grazed land ended up with more diverse feed that was beneficial to deer and other species? I'm probably not saying that right, and who trusts those studies anyway, but while we're ragging on the ranchers, take a look at his hay and alfalfa fields and see the number of our game animals that survive because of that un-natural food source.

I agree, though, that there is not likely to ever be enough wolves to seriously impact game animals. If only we could train them to eat sea lions....

Skein - who has his fire-proof flak jacket on.

[Norm]

The biggest loser will be the coyotes based on the study numbers from the yellowstone packs, there has not been a huge impact on deer and elk numbers. I personaly don't have a problem with it, they were part of the echo-system long before we messed with it. I'm not sure the ranchers will see it the same way I do. I think establishing packs in wilderness areas like eaglecap would be a good thing.

[birdhunter]

I'll be at the meeting tonight and probably the one in Portland as well. Before I check mapquest, anyone know the directions to Claggett Creek Middle School from I-5? You gonna be there Rogue?

[Big Willie]

I just don't think Oregon has the wilderness to sustain wolves. Eagle Cap is large at approx. 400,000 acres, and is the largest in the state. Is that enough? We already have a large cougar population thanks to the anti-hunters, what impact would wolves have on them? As a hunter, I'm always looking over my shoulder for large kitties, do I need to worry about a wolf ripping my a** apart? We don't have room...besides, the ranchers would shoot them all anyways. I'm very curious though!
Gary

[TheRogue]

BH....I'm gonna try, although not sure if the wife will let me out. I'll know by noon or so!!

TR

[Bait O' Eggs]

I have been anti wolf by nature, but after talking to an outfitter on my Idaho hunt that I crossed paths with one day, I think the wolf may be the solution to the cougar problem we already have and that is growing with the voters regulating the hunters and their methods. This outfitter was telling me the wolves do very little damage to the deer (sounded like birdhunter ) but are doing a lot of damage to his guided cougar hunts. The cougars are kept pushed back from where the 2 wolf dens are in the area he hunts. The cougars he kills now are very skinny and under fed for the most part. The outfitter finds his cougars in the upper less productive hunting ground for the cougar because the wolves have taken over where he use to find the cougars.

I can listen and believe an outfitter who spends all his days observing animals. To often those that are book smart think they know more because they have been thru some formal degree on a particular topic. Not to say Biologist arent plenty smart but this outfitter I ran into knew plenty about the "reality" of the topic from first hand experience, not some study that was influenced by politics.

I think the wolf will never have a huge presence in Oregon, to many people will shoot them on site. Maybe in the Eagle Cap a few packs could survive fine, but not in most of the state.

Wildhawg - you sound like an educated redneck

When will the meeting be in Portland??

[pdxkevin]

What do they taste like?

[Sea Nymph]

I prefer cows over wolves. I haven't seen evidence other than from bias organizations that prove cows destroy our rivers. Anyway they can't be as bad as us building cities on rivers....

The Klamath has cows on it and it has more steelhead than ever before.

Cows provide jobs and groceries.

SN

[roadsend]

SSS.

[Sea Nymph]

SSS ???

[Bounty Hunter]

Why does this have to be wolves against cows? Ranchers don't want anything bothering their introduced cattle. Coyotes, prairie dogs, deer, elk, bears...kill them all. I have a feeling wolves wouldn't be taking that many cattle. (sorry I don't have any documented studies for you Wildhawg, go easy on gary and I, OK big guy? [img]graemlins/hearton.gif[/img] )
And yes, cattle do harm the watersheds.

The only problem they had when they reintroduced the Mexican Gray Wolf in AZ and NM was that the coyote hunters were shooting them all. Of the 1st three released 2 were shot and the last one seemed happy to be recaptured. One of those 2 was shot during elk season and the feds (illegally) aquired information on all hunters that drew for that unit. I don't know if they ever found the shooter. On the next round they gave the wolves a nice flourescent yellow spray-painted collar so people wouldn't mistake them as coyotes. I could just imagine what they must have looked like in the wild.

[Norm]

Here is some interesting numbers to look at.

http://www.wolf.org/wolf/news/news7_...i_cry_wolf.asp

[roadsend]

Norm
As a start the above article says that 12 wolves account for about 10% of the harvest on the affected herd. Which 10% of us are willing to give up our elk tags to feed the wolves? Not me.

[Sea Nymph]

Bounty Hunter, ok so cattle do harm the waterways. What doesn't? Even water can harm waterways. Do cattle pollute the water? Some. Is it enough pollution to affect anything? Depends on who you ask. Dead fish can cause problems for other species... Dead decaying deer and elk can too and I also understand those are things that can't be helped. Unless you do what the Clinton Admin. wanted to do to the Klamath, which is put up a fence with a 300' buffer zone on each side which would be off limits to everything.

http://www.nativefish.org/Articles/grazing.htm
http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.URLR...udge_send.html

So you see, usually the results of any (politically influenced) study will have accoding results. In portland/salem Seattle and anywhere in the southerh 1/2 of Cal, you will most assuredly get results that favor the liberal agenda. Montana and the Midwest you will get mostly the opposite.

SN

[ 12-11-2002, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: Sea Nymph ]

[TheRogue]

I think it's been pretty well established that the elk herds in Yellowstone have been very over-stocked in the last 10+ years. Feeding and lack of hunting has contributed to what is often described as an "unhealthy" population. Wolves interacting in that population would have nothing but the right, NATURAL, affect. I don't think that most any study that comes from Yellowstone is completely pertinent to looking at different areas.

While we still do have some feeding, and we do have the herds which always winter in agricultural fields, we don't have the concentrated daily subsistence feeding that Yellowstone has. We also do not have huge no-hunting tracts which coincide with feeding areas.

Question, if it's being found that cougars are being pushed out of their current ranges because of wolf packs, where do you suppose they end up, considering we don't have huge wilderness tracts?? Do you suppose the big cats might end up relocating to easier country and prey, such as rural town outskirts we have scattered around the wilderness areas, such as the Eagle Caps (Enterprise, Union, Joseph) or the Strawberries(John Day, Prairie City, Seneca)??

Just wondering..... I hate to have rules and regulations shoved down the rural people's throats, without them being able to do anything about it. It would, however, be easier to regulate a cougar population that was a problem, rather than a wolf one, as you can bet the wolves will be illegal to dispose of for years.

TR

[GutshotApe]

Rogue - Many or most of the displaced cougars would die, probably. Especially young males. There are already lots of cougars in the urban fringe areas. A female cougar apparently raised kittens recently inside the fence at the Eugene Airport. A cougar was recently seen at the Eugene-CG Trap club sitting on the adjacent brush-covered hillside calmly watching the trapshooting events. Anyplace there are deer, there are cougars and probably not a lot of unoccupied room for a lot of new ones - unless they're bigger and tougher than any resident. Several female cougars may have overlapping smaller home ranges within a larger home range area occupied by a single dominant male who will do all the breeding in that area.

[elkaholic]

I am glad all this information is getting discussed. Go to one of the meetings or send ODFW an e-mail with your perspectives and concerns, if you have any concerns.

There does not have to be one single wolf in Oregon to delist them from the Federal list. They will be considered delistable in January this year for Oregon federally and what are we going to do with the ones that come between now and the delisting?(after years of litigation by greens to keep them on the list)

Thanks, some great thoughts and thinkers here.

[riverrat]

the visions of wolf packs roaming oregon will never happen due to the lack of wolf habitat....you may have a few packs (6-8) animals in a pack in only a few remote areas...they will not be roaming the high desert eating rabbits.....they might move through and get a few coyotes...also due to logging in some of the remote areas the wolves will not hang around humans or equipment, so their habitat is severly limited oregon....there might be a few head of cattle lost to wolves each year but it will be minimal....the feds have a fund that they pay ranchers who lose animals to wolves....last the grey wolves that were introduced to yellowstone in 95' has had no great effect on any undgulates......

[skein]

Wow, Riverrat, I'd be interested in where you get your figures and information. The wolves I ran across in Canada were all over the logging areas, not while the logging was going on, but they followed the moose and grouse into the area as those species came in for the new browse. We had three separate packs come in to the guide's cow (moose) call. One of the hunters had a tag and shot one of them. That was the last good moose hunting in that area too, with the success ratio falling from near 85% to 14% the next year.

Now I agree that Oregon doesn't have the extensive habitat that Canada does, and probably won't see that kind of wolf population, but I've certainly been hearing different stories about Yellowstone. But then again, I don't have studies, statistics, or time in the field to back up what I've heard bantered back and forth. Do you?

Skein

[Norm]

Originally posted by roadsend:
Norm
As a start the above article says that 12 wolves account for about 10% of the harvest on the affected herd. Which 10% of us are willing to give up our elk tags to feed the wolves? Not me.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Good point roadsend, There will be an impact to the deer and elk herds in areas habitated by wolves. This will directly compete with all of us hunters. I would be willing to give up 10% of my hunting days, but not my tag. I don't want to sound like a greenie, but I think allowing natural re-introduction is the right thing to do. Very little of this great state has been protected as natural area's such as wilderness and parks. I would like to see more land dedicated to these type's of causes. I would like my great grand children to have the same experences I have had. We all have a vested interest in public lands and resources and how they are used. I wouldn't mind the wolves living on 10% of it. They were here long before humans. This is an interesting topic and some great replies. I'd like to read more bioligist reports from areas in Canada That have Deer, elk and wolves to better understand the impact on big game.

[GutshotApe]

Norm - Oregon actually has quite a bit of land set aside in parks and other protected areas. The Atlas of Oregon 2nd Edition classifies 15.18% of the state (almost 10 million acres) as "protected lands". Late Successional Reserves (old growth timber) and wilderness areas account for about 7.8 million acres, or about 1/4 of all forested areas in the state. There are another 1.25 million acres in national parks, monuments, wildlife refuges, research natural areas, etc. And, there are several million acres of BLM wilderness study areas in the high desert areas.

However, none of Oregon's wild areas seem big enough to contain wolves for long and without rancher/farmer conflicts. Oregon ain't Alaska, or even Montana/Idaho. Its too developed for wolves, IMHO.

How many here have ever lived where there were wolves? I have. Wolves will take down anything. I have a video that a friend of mine that works for the ADF&G took of three wolves killing and eating a brown bear.
If wolves are allowed to populate Oregon with out controls on their numbers, say goodbye to deer, elk, cows and sheep.

Let wolves repopulate the state naturaly and have a season on them.

[Chum King]

I believe the beneficial aspects of cattle grazing that you are referring to may be the activities on some Nature Conservancy property in Central Oregon. I believe it was Big Marsh, and it was shown as a segment on Oregon Field Guide some time back. As I recall, they were finding that limited cattle grazing was essentially mimicking the natural activities of wildlife foraging on the marsh. They saw an increase in plant diversity and better overall health of the area for the wildlife.

On the other hand, I have hunted in a number of areas in the eastern Oregon desert, and have seen wetland areas that have been overgrazed. Where an area was fenced off to limit cattle access, the plant growth was often astounding, and the wildlife followed. The key is not trying to get more cattle usage out of the land, than the land can support.

Oh, this was supposed to be about wolves. I guess I am selfish, and don't want to share any more of my hunting opportunities with any other higher order predators... not that I have been doing much damage to the elk herds in my hunting career, but maybe someday. :grin:

[elkaholic]

Here's the biggest issue for Oregon in my perspective. We do not have enough elk and deer winter range on public lands to keep the wolves out of where the elk, deer and livestock are in the winter in Eastern Oregon, on private lands. This will put them in constant conflict and yes, they like the cougars, will come to town to get the deer that come to town.

We cannot think that if you put/allow them one place to live that they will stay only there. How the heck are we getting wolves now, they disperse and make for wolves in more places. I didn't really care if they introduced them in other states, but if they had said honestly that that meant they would be in my back yard in a few years, I would have cared. We can't be decoyed into buying that again, I won't anyway.

It is no true that USFWS in compensating anybody for losses due to wolves. Defenders of Wildlife is doing this on confirmed and probable kills, and only has plans do continue this until delisting occurs and then it ends.

elk,
In 15 years we only had wolves come into the populated areas of the island 4 or 5 times. The will come into towns when hungry. One was shot off the back porch of a houst 100 yards from the edge of town (in town) and I shot one about 150 yards behind my house (we lived 7 miles out of town). My brother shot two in a creek eating salmon.

[GutshotApe]

I read something not too long ago about the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone NP. Seems like the wolves have really had a big impact on elk & moose populations there.

Some say its for the good because the large ungulates were overpopulated in the park .

Others say the wolves are killing off any huntable surplus and hunting around the park perimeter ain't what it used to be. :depressed:

[roadsend]

SSS - Shoot, shovel and shut-up. An old rancher saying.

Wolves are a potential threat to livestock, wildgame populations, and people, especially children. Like grizzly bears they are historically incompatable with human populations. They should only be established in uninhabited areas, where their contact with humans is zilch.
Like the cougar issue, I resent urban folks ramming this stuff down the throats of us farmers and ranchers and other rural folks.
If they want wolves and cougars, let them put them in Portland's green areas (city limits only).

[skein]

Roadsend,

Cougars have been beating up on people for years, and coyotes are hauling off children in Vancouver, BC, but I don't know of a documented case of wolves attacking humans.

The real problem with having them back is if it doesn't work and they become a real detriment to livestock and wildlife, we won't ever get to do anything about it. Look at sea lions and cormorants, and you'll see what I mean.

Skein

[roadsend]

Skein
There aren't enough wolves in inhabited areas now to have statistics on wolf predation.
Like you say, once they are back there will be no getting rid of them.
There should be a bounty on seals and sea lions, but you can't even shoot the b******* if they are taking fish off of your line or destroying your boat dock.
Put the wolves in Portland first and we will see about predation statistics.

[TheRogue]

Did anyone make it last night??? BH??? I am stuck at home with a sick kid (gotta love the public school virus factories )

TR

[birdhunter]

Yeah I made it. Little late (thank you mapquest) but I got there. Mark Henjum and Craig Ely had a short presentation and a question and answer session. Then it broke up into smaller groups where people could voice their opinions. All opinions were written down and will be compiled and presented to the Commission. Lots of the big whigs there. Saw a few legislators, most of the ODFW Commissioners and Director Ball. This issue is getting their attention and the genuinely want to know how Oregonians feel.

[TheRogue]

Lots of the big whigs there. Saw a few legislators, most of the ODFW Commissioners and Director Ball. This issue is getting their attention and the genuinely want to know how Oregonians feel.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Now that is good news, regardless how it turns out.

[elkaholic]

I went too. Wasn't as many people there as Eugene, maybe 100? 135 at Eugene. I thought there were many more in Salem that didn't want wolves than in Eugene. Overall a good way to get input.

I heard the one of the best reasons from a pro wolfer to establish a population. The reason was the wolf would eat elk and deer, hunters would not have anything to hunt, therefore there would be no hunter shootings! This was a positive because no hunter deaths in the woods. And the guy made them write it down!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want to know who the pro wolf people expect to pay for the management once delisting occurs?? I think I know. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[Bait O' Eggs]

elkaholic - I love it when those from the far extreme perspective show up and think they have logical reasoning.

I think the newspaper said the PDX meeting was next tuesday. Can you confirm that Birdhunter, and are you going to be at that one also?

very informative thread. :smile:

[eightball]

I just have to get in on this discussion. I have hunted the same area in Idaho for thirteen years. I saw my first wolf tracks there in 95. The first year we had a pack of wolves in our hunting area was 2000. We saw very few elk and not many deer. We did fill our tags on elk though. The next year the wolves had moved on to another area and we saw more elk than ever. I think they moved out of the area when the wolves were there. We are seeing as many deer as ever. The coyotes seemed to have dissapeared. We used to see lots of coyote tracks on the trails. Not anymore. The only cat I ever saw there tried claim a bull I had just shot. His claim wasn't stong enough. I don't like the wolves. The winters there havn't been bad in the last few years. I think if there is a bad winter where the snow is deep the wolves will decimate the elk and the deer. I don't have studies or facts, just the observations of a hunter in the same area year after year. We have had wolf tracks within a hundred yards of our camp. And the ranchers there do have wolves kill their cattle. They say it's very hard to get money out of the government to pay for wolf predation. You just about have to have it on film to prove the calf or cow didn't die of some other cause. If wolves are introduced, there will be Feds running all over the place trying to keep track of them. Harassing hunters who are hunting in the same area, airplanes flying around trying to track the ones with collars or chips. P***es you off when you are hunting and an airplane keeps circling right above where you are hunting. NO WOLVES-- unless they are nuetered . Dan

[roadsend]

Does anyone have an e-mail address where those of us who cannot attend the meetings can comment?

[birdhunter]

Send e-mail comments to: ODFW.Comments@state.or.us

Meeting on Tuesday up in Portland, World Forestry Center Miller Hall 4033 S.W. Canyon Road. Starts at 7 pm. Should be up there for this one as well.

[roadsend]

Thanks Birdhunter.