wolverine

[kellydockter]

#6917

want to go wolf hunting and i got to thinking – wolverines –

with my long bow? – or can it even be done.

[archer38]

#56243

I like to think that nothing is impossible….. but somethings are very difficult and I’d have to say this is one of those things

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#56619

They’re about to be federally listed as “threatened.”

[lyagooshka]

#56802

Like the polar bears, who’s numbers are steady-to-increasing? I sometimes wonder if it’s to save a specie or just to keep busy. Sorry, didn’t mean to add politics into a purely archery thread. But since I already did, does anyone know what happened in the Supreme Court case attempting to de-list the polar bears? Be well.

Alex

😕

[Don Thomas]

#57428

Wolverine populations in the lower-48 are minimal, and because of geographic isolation of the few remaining populations active management, including listing, is likely justified. They are still legal in MT, but the annual quota is two–total for the entire state. I have seen one wolverine track here in all my winters of looking at tracks in the snow. There are still plenty of them in Alaska, where they are still legal game. It’s a matter of opportunity. I have seen a grand total of one on the hoof there, and only know of one taken with traditional archery tackle. Don

[Michael Scott]

#59247

Let’s see if this works any better.

Montana Wolverine Closure

[Don Thomas]

#60775

Thanks for the update, Michael. Since I didn’t plan on killing one, I haven’t checked for a while. The two per year for the state regulation was in effect for some time. The Lower-48 wolverine population is all but certain to be listed as totally protected anyway. Too bad–shows how much wilderness we’ve lost. Don

[Etter1]

#60791

After speaking to a lot of people who, now once again live in wolf country, I hope you kill all of them.

Wolverines are another story. They have a really tough time. Our wolves that have been re-stocked are here to stay. They’re like coyotes in the southeast. No getting rid of them.

[James Harvey]

#60929

Etter1 wrote: After speaking to a lot of people who, now once again live in wolf country, I hope you kill all of them.

What have they been up to to get you thinking like that Etter?

[Etter1]

#61767

ausjim wrote: [quote=Etter1]After speaking to a lot of people who, now once again live in wolf country, I hope you kill all of them.

What have they been up to to get you thinking like that Etter?

I like the idea of having wolves around, in concept. In reality, I don’t think there’s much of a happy medium.

They tried to re-stock red wolves down here near me and it didn’t work out at all. Wolves do a lot of damage to an already frail agricultural community in the western us. They also reproduce at unbelievable rates and kill untold numbers of deer and elk. You can see that just from looking at Yellowstone today.

I just think we’re past the point of having wolves and making anybody happy about it. It’s the reason that Alaska still uses airplanes to limit their populations on top of all of the legal hunting and trapping.

I’ve talked to people from Idaho, to Michigan, to Tennessee and Canada. I’ve never heard a positive thing said about their reintroduction from anyone (including a lot of traditional bowhunters).

We are wildlife managers now and I just can’t see how they can fit in to this new world.

Just my opinion. They do make a beautiful pelt for anyone’s cabin.

[Ben M.]

#62134

Etter1 wrote: After speaking to a lot of people who, now once again live in wolf country, I hope you kill all of them.

Kill a species to the point of extirpation?! To the point of extinction?! Now, I’m not the argumentative type but what in the hind hair are you thinkin’, brother?!!

The community of life is a NET: untie one knot and the whole web weakens.

http://www.yellowstonepark.com/2011/06/yellowstone-national-park-wolf-reintroduction-is-changing-the-face-of-the-greater-yellowstone-ecosystem/

[Etter1]

#62371

Prairie Prowler wrote: [quote=Etter1]After speaking to a lot of people who, now once again live in wolf country, I hope you kill all of them.

Kill a species to the point of extirpation?! To the point of extinction?! Now, I’m not the argumentative type but what in the hind hair are you thinkin’, brother?!!

The community of life is a NET: untie one knot and the whole web weakens.

http://www.yellowstonepark.com/2011/06/yellowstone-national-park-wolf-reintroduction-is-changing-the-face-of-the-greater-yellowstone-ecosystem/

They had been gone for quite some time. We’ve lost quite a few species in the last few hundred years and I just don’t see this one fitting back in. Just my opinion. My degree is in wildlife biology so I promise I can see both sides of the coin.

Maybe some folks from wolf country can chime in.

[James Harvey]

#62386

I thought the elk had Yellowstone’s ecosystem on the ropes there for a while? I’m sure the wolves do cause ranchers problems. I remember reading an interesting discovery with the wolf reintroduction, that it only took one generation of exposure to wolf predation for domestic cattle to start exhibiting aggressive wild behaviour, even to the ranchers.

But surely a cornerstone to conservation is the voluntary limiting of your own behaviour/rights to allow the existence of another member of the community? I get that means only one small part of the human community gets penalised for that, but man, once they’re gone they’re gone.

I second that it would be good to hear from folks who live in wolf country.

[Etter1]

#62453

ausjim wrote: I thought the elk had Yellowstone’s ecosystem on the ropes there for a while? I’m sure the wolves do cause ranchers problems. I remember reading an interesting discovery with the wolf reintroduction, that it only took one generation of exposure to wolf predation for domestic cattle to start exhibiting aggressive wild behaviour, even to the ranchers.

But surely a cornerstone to conservation is the voluntary limiting of your own behaviour/rights to allow the existence of another member of the community? I get that means only one small part of the human community gets penalised for that, but man, once they’re gone they’re gone.

I second that it would be good to hear from folks who live in wolf country.

Yellowstone is a poor example, I think, because populations are not controlled by means of hunting.

In most parts of the western US, predation by man, lions, bears, and coyotes, along with winter kill keep deer and elk populations in check.

I’d love to have some wolves as much as the next guy, but I just don’t think it’s fair anymore.

[lyagooshka]

#62544

Etter,

I am not from wolf country, nor have I ever even seen a wolf in the wild. That being said, this is one where I have to humbly disagree. I don’t disagree with hunting being a form of wildlife management. That, I think, is spot on, but the “kill ‘em all” mentality (I understand where you are coming from and that it is just a phrase) to me is punishing an animal for, well, being an animal.

I understand the damage caused by animals like hogs (many times brought here by man, I know), but yet they are not evil, they just do what animals do, survive. It’s the same with wolves. Many times I see “hunters” PO’d about wolves, yelling about the damage to deer and elk. To me, it’s just another X-Bow mentality. It’s “I don’t want the competition”. Nature has a great way to regulate predators. Once the prey reaches a certain level, the predators start to have less offspring, and eventually the numbers stabilize. Nature’s been at it for billions of years. No amount of training or knowledge can prepare us for a 4.5 billion year head start.

I’d like to also point out 2 little factoids. 1) There are more deer in the woods (fields, farms, etc) today than there have ever been in recorded history. 2) Over 90% of every animal that has ever lived is now extinct. This doesn’t mean that I want any animal to disappear, but it leads me to wonder if there is not a greater plan, and that extinctions are simply part of it. If so, who am I to stand in the way? I don’t know, nor do I profess to even have a clue. I simply don’t have issue with the animals that are supposed to be in the woods being in the woods. I have no more problems putting back an animal that man has brought to near extinction than I do planting a tree from a seed taken from a tree I cut down.

I don’t think we will solve the world’s problems on this forum. It would be nice if we could as we are probably the best judges of what goes on out there. It’s certainly not the politicians, it’s not the huge corporations pushing the next flashy gadget, and it is most certainly NOT groups like PETA. Thing is though, if we OK the eradication of a certain animal (wolf, coyote, etc) because they HUNT, how long until that same argument is used against us?

Again, I have very limited experience, and I am sure if I saw AND LIVED both sides of the coin, my views might be a bit different. But in the end, I stand beside you as an ethical hunter. I may not hunt predators, and you may, but we are part of a group that needs to band together. We can settle our differences between ourselves. To the outside world, we are united. Be well.

Alex

❗

[Etter1]

#62667

I don’t think I’m getting my point across very well.

Wolves had free roam of this country when we had far far fewer people. We have millions of people now making a living off of industries that wolves will have a large effect on (namely ranching, and outfitting).

We didn’t need them to control herd populations anywhere (except for some parks).

When people living in these areas were polled whether or not they wanted wolves reintroduced, the numbers were overwhelmingly on the side of “no”.

Yes, you’re correct that once prey species decline to a certain level, but I doubt there’s a hunter out there that wants to see how low that level really is.

The state government in Idaho is now paying professional trappers to remove wolves because even with incredibly liberal hunting seasons, their numbers are still too high.

Would I love to see wolves live in harmony with a burgeoning human population? You better believe it!

I just don’t think it’s realistic. All for the same reasons that Alaska still has to aerial wolf hunt and that red wolves couldn’t be released again here in the southeast.

And as for predators, I am not the least into predator control. I don’t kill raccoons because they eat “my” turkey eggs and I don’t shoot coyotes on sight because they may occasionally kill a fawn or two.

Somebody on here may change my mind and I welcome everyone’s opinions.

[lyagooshka]

#62682

Etter,

I don’t think it’s about “changing minds”. I do not see your view as evil or even wrong for that matter since I have never been in your shoes. My big thing is the “wiping out the competition” mentality that is sometimes seen in these types of discussions. Both from hunters and ranchers/farmers.

True, no one wants to see game at low levels, but if they have been artificially inflated, what then? And besides, what gives us the right to choose what animals we save and don’t save? Is it fair to eradicate a specie because we “want to expand and that particular specie can’t play nice with us”? Every time I hear about human expansion, really bad thoughts come to mind. Thoughts of mini-malls and townhomes where pristine woodlands once stood. Habitat destruction is the number one reason for declines in animal population. So we are pushing the animals into tighter quarters, forcing them to survive by any means possible, and then blaming them for doing what we forced them to do.

Again, I don’t have a solution, nor have I walked in your shoes at all. The real point I am trying to make is let’s not do as is happening today in politics. Let’s not put a great divide between us. Let’s work together to find a solution that will benefit all involved. United we stand, divided PETA takes over. Be well.

Alex

😕

[Michael Scott]

#62713

Being from Northwest Montana, I’ve seen the impact of the wolf reintroduction. The wolves have done more than make a come-back. They are now encroaching into civilized human domain. About a year ago, one was sighted, reported to and followed by law enforcement, and Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks confirmed that it was a wolf from the police cruiser’s dash cam. Here is an article about that single incident:

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/news/local_montana/article_19ac79dc-6037-11e1-a61b-0019bb2963f4.html

Also, the wolves that were brought in for reintroduction were not the original subspecies of wolf that existed and was virtually eliminated from the West when settlers moved in. They are a larger, more aggressive subspecies from Northern Alberta and BC, and as such, have a larger impact on ungulate species. Here is another site for those interested in the damage wolves are capable of producing:

http://www.saveelk.com/

There are some graphic pictures, but a lot of information on the consequences of a severe mistake made by U.S. Fish and Wildlife.

The wolves are now under state management and are delisted, as they are a fully and overly recovered species in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, and are moving into Utah, Oregon and Washington as well. Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota have them, too. Just as there are more coyotes now than there were in the days of Lewis and Clark, wolf populations are on a fast rise across the Northern Rockies of the U.S. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should have turned management of these prime predators over to the states long before they did.

Truthfully, I don’t have a problem sharing the deer and elk woods with wolves. But they must be managed and their numbers controlled through hunting and trapping. They have had their time to flourish, and now that they have, sound, scientific management practices are necessary to keep a balance.

[Etter1]

#62742

lyagooshka wrote: Etter,

I don’t think it’s about “changing minds”. I do not see your view as evil or even wrong for that matter since I have never been in your shoes. My big thing is the “wiping out the competition” mentality that is sometimes seen in these types of discussions. Both from hunters and ranchers/farmers.

True, no one wants to see game at low levels, but if they have been artificially inflated, what then? And besides, what gives us the right to choose what animals we save and don’t save? Is it fair to eradicate a specie because we “want to expand and that particular specie can’t play nice with us”? Every time I hear about human expansion, really bad thoughts come to mind. Thoughts of mini-malls and townhomes where pristine woodlands once stood. Habitat destruction is the number one reason for declines in animal population. So we are pushing the animals into tighter quarters, forcing them to survive by any means possible, and then blaming them for doing what we forced them to do.

Again, I don’t have a solution, nor have I walked in your shoes at all. The real point I am trying to make is let’s not do as is happening today in politics. Let’s not put a great divide between us. Let’s work together to find a solution that will benefit all involved. United we stand, divided PETA takes over. Be well.

Alex

😕

If you look into some of the special interest groups involved in the reintroductions, you will see names like PETA and others.

I think a lot of the push has to do with providing a predator other than man to control game populations so that we can be moved aside.

The amount of money spent in lawsuits alone on these canines would blow your mind, and it’s you and I paying that bill.

[lyagooshka]

#62763

Etter1 wrote: If you look into some of the special interest groups involved in the reintroductions, you will see names like PETA and others.

I think a lot of the push has to do with providing a predator other than man to control game populations so that we can be moved aside.

The amount of money spent in lawsuits alone on these canines would blow your mind, and it’s you and I paying that bill.

This is an excellent point as well. Again, I am playing devil’s advocate here in my sheltered (wolfless) part of the US. I do agree with what you are saying. I just hope we can come to some intelligent solution. Be well.

Alex

😕

[Michael Scott]

#62789

Just to throw this out there, as I heard it from a couple people that some may consider to be “conspiracy theorists”. What if the government allowed/pushed for the reintroduction of a larger, more aggressive wolf to eliminate such food sources as wild game for people that would rather be self sufficient, with the objective being to push as many people as possible closer to the big cities of the country where they could be managed (controlled), as part of a New World Order, where the government controls everything from food to gasoline to whatever they deem is their “responsibility” to control?

Now, before you hang me out with all the other CT’s, I’m not…LOL!! But, what if the wolves are all part of “The Plan”?? 😀 Food for thought…YUMMY!

[Brennan Herr]

#62818

Well if that is the case it is time to start posting wolf recipes!!!

[Etter1]

#62821

BTW- I thought about this when I was at the gym and I realize that I misspoke in my original post.

I do not in any way want to exterminate wolves. I think there are places in north america where they do just fine under the right controls. I absolutely loved hearing them in Canada and finding their tracks is a real treat.

I just disagree with the reintroduction of wolves that has gone on here in the last fifteen or so years. Sorry if that didn’t come across.

[Etter1]

#62822

Also, I have to apologize to the original poster for totally hijacking your thread.

[Ben M.]

#63110

Etter1 wrote: Somebody on here may change my mind…

I can say the same. That’s a true and honorable measure of a man’s integrity: that he would evaluate his own experience, opinions, the available evidence, and allow himself to change. I’m proud to be associated with such folk.

The future is fragile and we all want the best for our descendants. Open-minded discussion is surely the only way to achieve our common goal.

[James Harvey]

#63204

Etter1 wrote: I just disagree with the reintroduction of wolves that has gone on here in the last fifteen or so years. Sorry if that didn’t come across.

I get you now mate 🙂

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#9414

Had a dream last night that I fell through a hole in the snow into a wolverine den. Freaked me out so much I woke up. No kidding.

Friend of mine saw one the other day in a canyon on the outskirts of town. Males have an average territory of 200 sq. miles. Based on that, they figure there are only about 4 adults occupying the entire Teton range. That’s some pretty low population density.

[Etter1]

#9436

Smithhammer wrote: Had a dream last night that I fell through a hole in the snow into a wolverine den. Freaked me out so much I woke up. No kidding.

Friend of mine saw one the other day in a canyon on the outskirts of town. Males have an average territory of 200 sq. miles. Based on that, they figure there are only about 4 adults occupying the entire Teton range. That’s some pretty low population density.

I’ve watched a few documentaries on em. Amazing creatures. There is still so much about them we do not know.

[Author]

Posts