WDFW enforcement Officer Pam Taylor steadies a male gray wolf in
Pend Oreille County that has been temporarily sedated so it can
be equipped with a satellite radio tracking collar.
After being fitted with a satellite radio collar, this male
wolf will return to his pack.
Wolves of
the "Diamond Pack" in Pend Oreille County.
Lack Of Fear
Skinner was
correct. The areas of Asia where wolf attacks occur on
humans are the same areas where people have no firearms or
other effective means of predator control: See
One of four photographs taken by Chris van
Gelder of Todd Svarchopf fending off an
aggressive wolf on November 4th 2005. This was
only four days
before the
Carnegie Wolf Attack.
Kenton Joel Carnegie
Unarmed engineering student killed by wolves a few days later in the same area
of Saskatchewan where the aggressive wolf had confronted
Todd Svarchopf.
Why
Hunt
Wolves?
Analyzing the history of
wolf-human and wolf-livestock conflicts in areas where
wolves are hunted as compared to areas where wolves are not
hunted, it is easy to conclude that wolves need to be hunted
to reinforce their fear of ranching operations and humans so
wolves and humans can co-exist in today's world.
Wolf Management
Wolf
Attacks Dog In Back Yard In Town
Dog killed by a wolf.
Note: The dog is still on its chain.
Northern Minnesota has documented wolves coming into
towns to kill dogs.
.
This is the plan by which wolves will be managed as they
reproduce and repopulate Washington.
Very few people realize the future of wolf management is
being decided right now and that the Wolf Plan is scheduled to be adopted
by the Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Commission
sometime in early 2010. People (especially rural
communities that wolves will impact) need to know all the facts about wolves and given a chance to voice their opinion
regarding the future of wolf management in Washington.
Many people have accepted the
fact that they are going to have to live with wolves.
Most people just want to see a responsible management plan
developed.
Why Is Management Needed
Washington is a smaller state and has a much higher human density than the Rocky
Mountain States. Washington does not have the
large elk and deer herds like Idaho, Montana, or Wyoming, thus fewer
wolves can be supported in Washington. A lack of
responsible management could easily allow wolves to over
populate and destroy game herds even faster than in other states.
As a result of diminished big game herds, there could be many conflicts as
hungry wolves invade ranches
and towns to prey on domestic animals and pets for food. These conflicts
could cause wolves to become
very unpopular with local residents. For obvious reasons wolves
should be encouraged to stay in wild remote areas and should
be discouraged from frequenting farming, ranching, and rural neighborhoods.
Why Is Your Help Needed
Rural
residents, ranchers, and hunters may not be represented well
on the “Wolf Plan Issue”. Citizens need to make sure that
the wolf plan is being developed fairly and that it takes
into consideration the livelihood of ranchers and local
communities, and the interests of hunters as well as nature
lovers in Washington.
Rural Lifestyle And Economies
Wolves need managed in a responsible manner so there is minimal effect
on human lifestyles or safety, and to a rancher's ability to earn a
living. Wolves should not be allowed to destroy game herds that
people like to watch, and that hunters depend on for hunting.
Ranching and Hunting are very important activities for rural economies.
If wolves are managed in a responsible manner they may fit into Washington's modern environment
without destroying rural economies as they have done in many
small towns in Idaho. Washington's rural families and small
towns cannot afford for wolves to reduce big game herds or
for wolves to attack livestock. Many rural economies depend on
ranching income and on the annual
influx of dollars from visiting hunters
Are Wolves Dangerous
Most pro-wolf organizations (including Defenders of Wildlife)
and many pro-wolf biologists maintain that wolves pose little or
no threat to the public safety, livestock, or pets. In most
cases network news fails to report many local wolf incidents. As
you can see by the collection of wolf reports and studies on
this website, there are a multitude of attacks and problems
occurring with the increasing wolf populations. After reading
many of the news stories and data it becomes quite obvious that
wolf numbers must be carefully managed.
What About Hunting
Currently the
Washington Draft Wolf Plan
does not include language
specifying "Hunting" as an eventual management tool
for wolves in Washington.
Within a few short years wolves will multiply and
problems associated with wolves will increase as they have
in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and elsewhere. If
"Hunting" is not included in the wolf plan
language as an eventual wolf management tool
it will be unlikely that "Hunting" could be used
as a management tool without many court
challenges from anti-hunting groups like "Defenders of
Wildlife".
The Cost of Management
Do
Washington taxpayers want to pay the cost of removing depredating wolves and controlling the wolf
numbers once wolf population objectives are reached?
Expensive predator removal programs have had to be implemented
to remove problem wolves in many states. Professional wolf
hunters in Idaho reportedly have been paid $1500.00 plus
helicopter flight time for each wolf removal. Why not let
hunters pay the cost of wolf management with license sales.
Wildlife Departments can then afford to carefully monitor
wolf populations appropriately for the available habitat and
it doesn't burden the state's taxpayers any more than
necessary.
Hunting And
Wildlife Management
Management
strategies involving "Hunting" as the
management tool have worked well for many species of
game and predators in North America. America's hunted species are
actually America's most abundant wildlife species, in fact, it's the species of
animals that hunters are not allowed to hunt, who's
existence is
the most threatened. History has proven that hunters are the
best wildlife stewards, they have a sincere interest in
maintaining healthy wildlife populations and they actually
provide the funding to accomplish that goal.
How Many Wolves In Washington
The
Washington Draft Wolf Plan
is recommending a minimum of 15 breeding pairs but not limited to that number of breeding
pairs, for 3 consecutive years (in appropriate
distribution, see page 50) before delisting. Data from
Idaho and Montana indicates that 15 breeding pairs
translates into as many as 361 actual wolves. A problem with
this requirement is that until there are the (appropriate
quantity of breeding pairs in 3 or 4 of Washington's Wolf
Areas), it doesn't matter how many wolves are living in the
other areas, wolves will not be delisted. Another problem,
these breeding pairs must exist for three years, in 3 or 4
areas. Data from Idaho indicates a wolf population increases
20% to 24% each year. Perhaps there will be 30 or 40
breeding pairs in central and eastern Washington before
there are any breeding pairs in the Olympic Peninsula. Under
this plan 40 or more breeding pairs (as many as 1000 or more
actual wolves) could live in eastern Washington before the
Olympics have any breeding pairs. Even if translocation
occurs which is also mentioned in the plan in the event
livestock killing wolves need moved to colonize a new area,
yes you read correctly, they do not want to kill wolves that
kill livestock, they want to move them (see page 52).
Map Showing Estimated Wolf habitat In Washington
Wolves Eat Elk
And Deer, or Livestock
Studies have indicated
that 1 wolf eats 17 elk or 44 deer per year (page 73). At
that rate the target population of 361 wolves in Washington could eat as
many as 6137 elk or 15,884 deer. If wolves do not populate
all wolf zones at the same time, wolves will likely
overpopulate in some areas of Washington first (which is
possible under this plan). Eastern Washington could end up with 1000+ wolves just like Idaho
has now. That many
wolves could eat as many as 17,000 elk or 44,000 deer per
year in Washington before any breeding pairs are established
in the Olympic Peninsula so that delisting can occur.
Hunters only harvest
an average of 8,000 elk and 38,000 deer in all areas of
Washington (page 78, page 83). If wolves overpopulate, it is
very possible that there would not be enough elk and deer to
allow any hunting seasons. This would dramatically effect
local economies and lifestyles.
Wolves also eat
livestock (see page 63) and even though there are reimbursement
programs, a big problem is that many wolf predations on livestock
are currently being classified as "non-conclusive",
which results in ranchers not being able to get reimbursed
for their loss, see the photos in the right column. This
effects ranch incomes and local economies.
A big
problem with the Washington Draft Wolf Plan is that it calls
for too
many wolves to inhabit Washington for the available big game
herds in the state. When game herds are
reduced, most likely predation on livestock, pets, and
possibly human encounters with
wolves will increase.
Wolf Plan -
Minority Position
This statement is from Rural Resident, Hunting, and Ranching
members of the
Wolf Working Group,
a group of stakeholders who helped draft the
Washington Draft Wolf Plan.
The "Minority Position" is included on pages 246 to 247 and states
the following:
We are "unable to live with" the proposed numbers in the WWG
Draft Plan. We believe the numbers are too high and will
result in direct conflict with the Livestock and Sportsman
Communities.
Therefore we feel that the WWG’s desired number of BP’s is
unrealistic given the lack of suitable habitat and the much
higher human population density of this state and that the
requirement of 15 BP’s for 3 years (50% Higher that the USFW
criteria for recovery in WY, MT, and ID,) defies common sense.
We therefore propose the following numbers of BP’s statewide:
3 BP’s to down list to Threatened, 6 BP’s to down list to State
Sensitive, and 8 BP’s to change to a Big Game Animal. And we
would eliminate the 3 year period since the state was not
considered essential for recovery of wolves in the NRM (p.6119
Federal Register). This total number of 8 BP’s or approximately
80 wolves would fit in the states economic analysis as outlined
in Chapter 14, "Economics" which states "Wolf numbers between 50
and 100 animals should pose little detriment to the states
livestock industry as a whole…As wolf populations become larger
and more widely distributed, financial impacts are likely to
accrue to more producers" (p.126). "Populations of 50 to 100
wolves should not have negative effects on big game hunting in
Washington" (p.139).
The "Draft Wolf Plan" may have resembled
the "Minority Position" if the Working Group had not been stacked
so heavily with pro-wolf
members.
Methow Valley Predation, First
Agents On the scene said it was wolf kill, but the Regional
Biologist would not confirm it to be a wolf kill. Thus a total
loss for the rancher.
Live cow had to be killed after being eaten on by wolves, this
confirmed wolf attack occurred in another state.
