HomeNewsSportsMoreWeatherAnnouncementsClassifiedsMy Trib.ComMy CityJobsHomesCars
Advanced Search
 

'We're going to start conservatively'


Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:
del.icio.usdiggNewsVine




trib.popular


LANDER -- Many critics of Wyoming's wolf management plan have predicted the imminent slaughter of up to two-thirds of the state's gray wolf population after the animal loses protection under the federal Endangered Species Act next month.

But state action might turn out to be quite a bit more tempered than many have envisioned, one official with the Wyoming Game and Fish Department indicated last week.

The state of Wyoming, led by Gov. Dave Freudenthal, fought hard to have its post-delisting wolf management plan accepted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A core component of that plan -- which the federal government finally agreed to in December -- is a dual classification for wolves in Wyoming.

Wolves in the extreme northwest of the state, where most of the animals are, will be classified as trophy game animals -- making it illegal, in general, to kill them without a permit. The boundary of the trophy game area includes Cody, Meeteetse, Dubois, Pinedale and Jackson.

Outside of that zone, however -- and in the majority of the state -- wolves will be classified as predators, similar to coyotes, where they can be shot on sight, without limits, as long as the kills are reported within 10 days.

"There really aren't a lot of areas in Wyoming outside the trophy game area where it would be good for wolves to live," said Bill Rudd, the Cheyenne assistant division chief of the Game and Fish Department.

Game and Fish will approach the management of the trophy game population conservatively at first, Rudd said. The department will err on the side of caution with its initial hunting seasons, the first of which should begin in the fall.

"We're going to start conservatively to get a sense of how the take we allow affects the packs, and the number of breeding pairs there are," Rudd said. "We have to retain the numbers so they are not relisted. There'll be a learning curve as we go forward. Ideally, we'd like to be able to have hunters participate in the removal and take of excess wolves on an annual basis."

Those who are concerned about too many wolves being killed after the state takes control can examine the state's management history with other species such as bald eagles, grizzly bears and black-footed ferrets, which have also been removed from the endangered species list, Rudd said.

"We've got an excellent track record, and they're going to see the same thing with wolves," he said.

Is Wyoming ready?

The state still has a number of things to accomplish before it can actively manage wolves.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced Thursday it will remove wolves from federal protection at the end of this month, and following publication in the Federal Register there will be a 30-day waiting period before Wyoming, Idaho and Montana take over management of the wolf in the Northern Rockies.

Before the end of March, the Game and Fish Department intends to hire four new staff members to run the program, including wolf biologists and technicians, Rudd said. The department needs to put staff and procedures into place to allow it to respond to claims of livestock depredation by wolves within 48 hours of the reports.

Game and Fish also intends to complete a thorough review of all of the Fish and Wildlife Service research and management materials pertaining to wolves, and develop specific hunting and trapping regulations for the animals using that information.

And the department -- and by extension, taxpayers -- will have to pay for it all.

"We have a biennium budget request in the Legislature for $2.35 million to run that program," Rudd said. "That cost includes four permanent people, the purchase of radio collars, the cost of capturing wolves, the cost of monitoring wolves and dealing with depredation of livestock, and, of course, paying for the loss of livestock to wolves."

The budget request asks for more money for the first year than the second, to cover start-up costs. The request for year two is about $1 million.

When the department deems it necessary to destroy wolves, it will probably use "aerial removal" techniques, to shoot the wolves from helicopters, much the same way the Fish and Wildlife Service has done in recent years, Rudd said.

"I assume we would need to use the same technique, because that's been the experience so far. We may learn some different things, but that's been the technique the Fish and Wildlife Service has used successfully," Rudd said.

Environment reporter Chris Merrill can be reached at chris.merrill@trib.com or at (307) 267-6722.


Previous   Next
Forest officials: Get dogs under control   A botanical mystery

Article Rating

Current Rating: 0 of 0 votes!Rate File:

Reader Comments

There are 24 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

Marion wrote on Feb 24, 2008 6:00 AM:

" I believe the wolfer are saying we won't keep our word because they are judging us by themselves. they didn't and won't keep their owrd, so they think no one else does either.
It is going to be much harder to kill any of them than is acknowledged, look how hard it has been for ranchers to actually catch then in the act of killing so they could be removed. "

DewD wrote on Feb 24, 2008 8:13 AM:

" By using a "Connect the Dots" method of stitching anecdotal evidence. I'm confident that Wyoming with the full help of USF&WS and other local ,state, and federal agencies has quietly been going an attrition take-down of Wolf numbers in advance of the March 20 delisting handover for some months now. While they still have the federal gunships and federal managers and resources, the NW Wyoming landscape outside Yellowstone has been decimated of wild Wolves. It's already started, folks. And many if not most of these Wolves have done nothing wrong and encroached on no livestock or property. When the federal voersight and federal resources run dry in March and Wyoming assumes full management of Wolves, we willa ctually see the modest amount of " conservative control" of Wolves written about in this article. But that is just a function of Wyoming no longer having the manpower and money to do the search and destroy missions courtesy of the Department of the Interior. There is absolutely no doubt that Wyoming G & F will "manage down" to the absolute minimum number of Wolves needed to keep the feds and Relisting ( when has THAT ever been done ?!?) at bay, over time. But it will be a la carte from here on out, not a calculated campaign. Regardless,It's already started, with the relaxing of the 10-J Rule late last year. USF&WS wants out of the hotbed of Wolf Management in Wyoming by declaring victory and moving on. They have enabled Wyoming's accelerated killing of Wolves in the past few months. After all, the ONLY conservation tool Wyoming is willing to apply to Wolves is killing them. No relocation , no allowances for them to do what wolves do, which is to take wild game as prey. This is quite often a good thing, but Wolves have absolutely no positive value to Wyoming Game and Fish whatsoever, which totally destroys any notion that G&F is putting out that Wyoming's Wolf Plan assures wolf recovery for generations to come. It does not. It's all hype and special interest politics ( read: Ranchers and Trophy Hunters). They are presently killing wolves as fast as they can till D-Day, and to forestall a new breeding and denning cycle ( timing is everything ehre). There is not one defensible milligram of wildlife conservation or science in Wyoming's Wolf Management Plan, even though the Grey Wolf is the greatest big game conservator at work in the Wyoming wild today. Man and his rifles are a lousy game management tool...hunting does NOT achieve good big game management. This is the sportsman's dark shame...disguising themselves as conservationists. They are not. Ecology is woefully absent in Wyoming wildlife management; decades old hatreds and politics have taken its place ( they never left, actually). Game management is done for economic reasons, not ecologic, in Wyoming these days. And managing with money for money by money makes for near worthless wildlife mitigation. But that has become the status quo at Wyoming Game & Fish , sadly. Wolves are Wildlife, too, But where is the wisdom in allowing for that ? I see none. "

Ricardo wrote on Feb 24, 2008 12:36 PM:

" The base for maintaining wolves in Wyoming will be 120 animals? If this is correct, that leaves a couple of hundred wolves that can be killed as soon as Wyoming takes over the program. Game and Fish will likely go to issuing permits to hunt and kill wolves since they could easily charge $1000 per wolf; twice that for non-resident. This might me the way to go since hunting them and shooting them from a helicopter will be very, very expensive. There might be some new wild game recipes in Wednesday's CST cooking section! "

RLA wrote on Feb 24, 2008 1:14 PM:

" I guess it is a start! Management is needed. THere is no room for a single wolf outside of the recovery zone. And no use for them either. THis is 2008 not 1808. I hope the state can stave off the law suits, or just maybe ignore the ingnorance! "

RLA wrote on Feb 24, 2008 5:26 PM:

" DewD, you are correct on the killing down of wolf numbers. I have seen wolves and wolf tracks in the areas I elk hunt, which is in the recovery zone, not the shoot on sight zone. I have seen the tracks and small packs for several years, until this winter. Nothing, NADA, Zip, Gone! Which is also ok with me, becuase you are way wrong on wolves being "great conservators"! They are cold blooded killers, often kill with out even eating a scrap of meat. Wolves are killing, eating, machines, and oportunists. 120 wolves is about 100 to many. I feel, keep them in the park, if they come out they get shot! "

Shawn wrote on Feb 24, 2008 5:48 PM:

" I have to agree with DewD. I live in Texas, but have worked a ranch in Lander, as well as lived in Wyoming for awhile. I see the same thing now as I did then. Wyoming is as Texas used to be, full of wild Nature to take care of itself. Now all major predators are gone, thank you Texas ranchers, and we see the damage done by removal of the apex predators. If you allow ranchers to dictate predator-control policies, you will never get the whole truth, and Nature will always lose. "

Wyoelkhunter wrote on Feb 25, 2008 7:38 AM:

" It shows incredible arrogance to say that game management in this country is some kind of failure. It is still true as ever that legally hunted species in this country thrive without exception and that non hunted species also benefit from habitat management for hunted species. The hunting community has provided the vast majority of funding of wildlife conservation in this country since the turn of the century. This funding dwarfs that coming from non hunting or anti hunting groups. In fact anti hunting nuts probably are responsible for drawing money away from conservation as wildlife agencies have to defend frivolous lawsuits. You have no right to say that sportsmen have not traditionally been conservationists. They most certainly have.

I am a certified wildlife biologists with a masters degree in wildlife management. I retired recently after over 30 years in the wildlife field. Ecology forms the core of todays wildlife management programs and to say otherwise is misleading and irresponsible.

Yes politics is an issue in wildlife decision making in Wyoming and always has. This is a fact of life in resource management in this country. The game and fish department is under intense pressure from energy interests, cattlemen, outfitters, developers, and wolf advocates to name a few. Despite the increasing threats the size of the department has not significantly changed. The personnel are just being asked to do much much more. The department also is still being funded largely by hunting and fishing license fees. Sportsman money is now being spent for uses which do not directly benefit sportsmen. A dollar spent on lem wolves is one not spent on habitat improvement. Same is true for all the money spent on dealing with drilling on public lands. Do I think that the WGFD is taking the best approach in their proposed wolf management plan? No I don't. I also don't think that the US FWS did a good job of considering all user groups when they were doing groundwork for the wolf release. They minimized the concerns of legitimate stakeholders that had a long history in the region. Now they are reaping the rewards. i learned long ago that wildlife management is not about managing wildlife as much as it is about managing people. Your utopia in which predator and prey are the only players does not exist anymore, nor should it.

Sportsmen efforts are largely responsible for the prey base you now think ishould belong only to wolves. The people who released the wolves apparently expected hunters to meekly give up hunting opportunity and step aside. This was unreasonable and arrogant. Wolves can exist in the northern rockies but it has to be within the context of what is their today not what was there in 1800. "

Tguide wrote on Feb 25, 2008 8:35 AM:

" Thank you Wyoelkhunter! Your comments are right on! DewD you need to really understand just what WEH has just said! But, then you are the ex-hunting guide from mountain creek, who is anti-hunting. And I want to know where you are getting your information about the wolves being decimated outside the park "as we speak"! I say it is nothing but foolish talk and gossip or just dreamed up in your own mind to instill a fear in the minds of those who will listen! Don't worry... most of us don't and won't listen. "

crazy horse wrote on Feb 25, 2008 10:52 AM:

" To DewD - you, sir, are an idiot. RLA - if you are not seeing plenty of wolf tracks you are not looking in the right place. Try going up the Greybull. "

WYOMAN wrote on Feb 25, 2008 12:36 PM:

" What caliber rifle would you suggest would be the best for hunting wolves? Legally of course. "

Eaton wrote on Feb 25, 2008 2:05 PM:

" Wildlife management in America is by all measures a huge success story. To say other wise is a blatant lie. Wild animal numbers post 1900 have been on the rise across the nation. As man's encroachment into habitate continues, our hands will have to be much deeper into this business or wild life, game and non-game species alike, will have no chance for survival. The real enemy in all of this is development, not hunters, fishermen, trappers or ranchers. The preservationists need to learn that lesson and they'd have some real allies with real clout and first hand knowledge on their side. Instead thes city folks continue to attack the wrong groups wasting resources and all of our collective time to solve the actual problems we all face. "

crazy horse wrote on Feb 26, 2008 9:18 AM:

" To WYOMAN - I recommend a .270 with 130 gr bullet. That's what I'll be using. For those of you that wonder what in the h*** DewD is talking about, here is the link for Wyoming's management plan "http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/WolfFinal2007WyomingGrayWolfManagementPlan.pdf". While DewD has obviously not read the plan, I urge all who are interested in the facts to do so. It is actually a very comprehensive and detailed plan, with no provisions to kill wolves other than those attacking livestock, unduly impacting ungulate populations, or threatening people or pets. There is no accelerated killing of wolves whatsoever. Game & Fish personnel are some of the hardest working, most professional, dedicated individuals you'll ever meet. G&F did not ask for introduction, and they have a well thought out management plan in place (accepted and signed off on by FWS) heading into delisting. Problem wolves will still be shot by WS, as has been the case since wolves were introduced - nothing new there. On the bright side, now we won't have to go to Canada or AK to harvest a wolf. I know where a bunch are and I will be applying for a license. "

Sad wrote on Feb 26, 2008 10:43 AM:

" The problem is enviros are used to bullying to get their own way...good or bad. If they want it, it must be provided for them regardless of the consequences. They of course are not responsible for any problems, nor any cost, just demands.
They lied about wanting 100/300 wolves, they had no intention of ever delisting them.
The elk are nearly gone from Yellowstone, without elk, and decreased whitebark pines and cutthroats the grizzlies will go too. It will never be the fault of misguided designer wildlife, enviros do not take any responsibility. "

crazy horse wrote on Feb 26, 2008 4:33 PM:

" Shawn can you please elaborate on the "damage done by removal of the apex predators"? And feel free to be specific, if at all possible. Just curious. "

DewD wrote on Feb 27, 2008 8:40 AM:

" Sure glad I have E-mail to type and send this stuff with , because you guys have put so many many words in my mouth that I can't speak....woof! What part of "taking it ouf of context" do you not understand ? All of it ? Most of it ?? Could you please just read what I write and stay with it , instead of flying off the rim into the ditch ? If you really want to shoot yourselves in the foot , I recommend a sawed off 10 gauge Mossberg full of 7th grade biology. Use both barrels...that way we'll be sure some science gets into your system. I have to reiterate: allowing the ranching community and the commercial sport hunting community to call the tune and name the dance for Wyoming's wolf plan , all for money , is incredibly poor wildlife management policy. Wyoming Game & Fish has sold out. Wolves are wildlife, too. But who besides me has the balls to say publically that Wolves have positive value and more right to the range and ridges and resident ungulates than you or me. I'm not anti-hunting. Provided that hunter and his outfitter are people of integrity. Let me know if you spot any , because THERE is the real endangered specie: the Noble Sportsman who knows at all times he is just a guest in the wilderness, not its master, and his takingof wild game is a privilege not an absolute right. I do get rightfully angry at folks who are backcountry bucaneers , the greedy mountaint rash cowboy who takes, takes ,takes, from the mountains in every season as though it were their manifest destiny without remorse .( Today's Pirate of the Day : unscrupulous Horn hunters) Or just want to kill something. There is no place for them in the Absarokas or anywhere else. There is plenty of place for Wolves... "

crazy horse wrote on Feb 27, 2008 11:52 AM:

" Um - take 5 minutes and READ the plan sometime DewD, before you further embarass yourself here in this public forum with your continued effete gibberish. Oh, and woof woof back at ya lol. "

Tim Wolf wrote on Feb 27, 2008 7:15 PM:

" I say it DewD! I'll stand up with you any day and say WOLVES HAVE A HUGE POSITIVE VALUE TO THE WATERSHED, far more than the Mountain Trash Cowboys you so perfectly described. Keep up the great and well informed posts like you have been. Crazy Horse had better re-read the plan and find out what happens to the wolves classified as "predator" if he thinks the only wolves going to be shot are the ones (falsely) accused of livestock, wildlife, and pet depredations. Allowing you wolf hating morons with firearms the right to harvest wolves, and then having 10 days to report the kill is the biggest poach of all against Wyoming's wildlife. But that's cool, it will only get wolves relisted again. Right on. Saddle up and get out there and get you a wolf taco/hat! "

crazy horse wrote on Feb 28, 2008 11:15 AM:

" Yes wolves outside the trophy game area will be classified as predators and CAN be shot on sight. Of course, wolves(falsely - LOL omg) accused of livestock, wildlife, and pet depredations will continue to be aerial gunned by WS, after WS CONFIRMS that the depredation is from wolves. If you are not even aware of the depredation that is occurring, and how the process works, I'd say YOU are the moron timmy. Here are some choice tidbits excerpted from the FWS gray wolf web page weekly reports, under CONTROL ACTIONS: Blackfeet biologists and MT WS CONFIRMED wolf depredation on tribal lands on the 4th. On the 5th, WY WS CONFIRMED that a wolf killed a newborn calf and a 400 lb calf on private land near La Barge, WY. USFWS requested WS to remove the wolf or wolves present on the property. On the 7th, WY WS CONFIRMED a calf was killed by a lone wolf on private property west of Cody, WY. A single mangy black wolf was killed by WS at the depredation site. MT WS killed a wolf on private land on the 30th in Big Sheep Creek southwest of Dillon, MT. A calf was CONFIRMED killed by wolves in the area on Dec. 20th and WS was authorized to remove 1 wolf at that time. On the 21st, MT WS CONFIRMED that wolves had killed 2 sheep (1 bred ewe and 1 buck) and had injured a steer calf on private property near Hall, MT. On the 22nd, WS killed 2 wolves on private land near the ranch. On the 16th, a ID WS aircrew was able to shoot and kill a gray wolf from the Buffalo Ridge pack along the East Fork of the Salmon River near Clayton. A chocolate lab was attacked by a wolf in the Bitterroot Valley near Sula, MT the evening of January 9th. The dog was about 3/4 of a mile away from the house when it was attacked. Snow tracking indicated a lone wolf attacked it. It ran back toward the house and was attacked a second time and then made it under the porch. The owners took the dog to the vet in Missoula and while they had the dog under anesthesia and were doing surgery, it died. MFWP authorized the removal of 2 wolves from the Monitor Mountain pack west of Augusta, MT. This fall the pack moved back onto the East Front and were CONFIRMED to have killed 2 calves again on November 26 and December 7. As a part of an incremental response, one wolf was killed on December 8 and two wolves were killed on December 10. On Dec. 29th, MT WS CONFIRMED that 3 weaner calves were killed by wolves on private property in the Big Hole Valley northwest of Wisdom, MT. MFWP authorized MT WS to kill 3 wolves from this pack. On the morning the 31st, WS shot 3 wolves on private property near where the depredation occurred. Due to their past depredation history and potential for further problems, MFWP has authorized MT WS to remove the remaining 3 wolves from this pack. Please let us all know what part of the previous you fail to understand, grasp, or what is beyond your capacity mentally. You should probably bookmark that site. If you think a hunting season is EVEN going to have an impact, you are clued out timmy. Look for aerial gunning by WS to continue as the primary means of control. They are shooting wolves by the score, and it has had little, if any, impact on the population to date. PS - I have taken the liberty of capitalizing CONFIRMED, so it is easier for you to find. "

sf wrote on Feb 28, 2008 10:53 PM:

" i believe it is now time to introduce the wolf in the mountains of calafornia, oregon, washington, the east coast states and other areas. why just in this area as they were in these other areas also. how about colorado that would be a good area also. oh where are the envioros when you need them. "

DanaJill wrote on Feb 29, 2008 12:43 PM:

" I like how some people can post their own thoughts, and others have to cut and paste out of context snippets to try and prove their points. Wolf reintroduction was the smartest thing ever tried in Yellowstone. And I agree with some others on this issue when they say Wyoming's management plan is shortsighted and will only lead to the wolf being relisted. "

Cindi wrote on Feb 29, 2008 1:55 PM:

" Tyrannosaurus Rex was the apex predator at one time and his range was extensive. Using the logic that was employed with the wolf, should we be now seeking science to recover all lost species and return them, including old T Rex, to their historical ranges? Please let me know so I can bring the kids inside first and then order an elephant rifle from Cabela's. I have to wonder how mothers in Vermont or Louisiana would feel about this reintroduction in their back yard? "

Brenda wrote on Feb 29, 2008 1:59 PM:

" crazy horse, I have found the .243 with the 85 grain round to be very effective on the larger varmints including the wolf. Although I cannot wait to try the 6.5 X 284 out too. Daddy told me he's make me a wolf stole as soon as I can get one here locally. "

Tguide wrote on Mar 1, 2008 4:54 PM:

" Brenda, I think that if you're shooting that gun with that load you must be a BIG WOMAN, which is cool. Good sense isn't measure on a bathroom scale. You're my kind of woman. Where are going to hunt? "

crazy horse wrote on Mar 1, 2008 9:18 PM:

" Yes, that's also a good choice Brenda. A wolf quilt may also be a good choice. Out of context snippets might refer to FWS grey wolf web page. How out of context is that? Timmy has little to say I see. CONFIRMED. Get that Timmy? Who is shooting wolves? Not I. Talk with WS. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
(optional)
   
Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.