Sport Killing

shootbrownelk

Veteran member
Apr 11, 2011
1,535
196
Wyoming
That is why I quit hunting WY. No tags, no big game, nothing but bears and wolves!!!!
That outlook you have suggests you were unsuccessful in Wyoming...correct? It all depends on where you hunt here. No big game? There isn't a trophy behind every rock and tree, but they certainly do exist....and thanks!
 

lang

Member
Nov 11, 2013
141
30
Sorry, they have a facebook page that has all their info on it now. Forgot they haven't used the web sight for a while...OK a few years. Just search for Northwest wolf sighting from fb and you'll get there.
 

shootbrownelk

Veteran member
Apr 11, 2011
1,535
196
Wyoming
Its not recovery because Canadian wolves are not native. Wyoming got it right sticking to what they want and not settling for less. Its to bad Idaho and Montana didnt join them. I know it looks better for Id and Mt rightnow but eventually Wy will get what they want and they will be better off in the long run.
Wyoming Agriculture was behind that decision to make over 3/4 of the State a "Shoot on Sight" predator zone. It was stupid then and it's still stupid. Our legislators need to listen to the G&F and the hunters and outdoor recreationalists instead of all the ranchers in our "citizen" legislature. The fern fondlers will have Wyoming in the court system for years fighting this. Montana and Idaho can't be sued by them, it's a law.
 

mntnguide

Very Active Member
Wyoming Agriculture was behind that decision to make over 3/4 of the State a "Shoot on Sight" predator zone. It was stupid then and it's still stupid. Our legislators need to listen to the G&F and the hunters and outdoor recreationalists instead of all the ranchers in our "citizen" legislature. The fern fondlers will have Wyoming in the court system for years fighting this. Montana and Idaho can't be sued by them, it's a law.
I agree completely.. Wyoming screwed up big time with that decision. The state of WY has less wolves than either MT or ID by quite a bit. Wolves spread throughout ID from top to bottom, east to west. If they would have stayed with WY, there would be no elk left in some of the zones. Between trappers and hunters, ID is getting rid of 2-300 wolves a year at least, and that doesnt include the ones still shot by government trappers. The numbers of wolves has not even started to drop still! Just shows how little was truly known about the extent of the population 5 years ago. But back on track, WY screwed themselves and the extreme presence of anti-hunting nazis in this area will always keep this issue in court as long as they can, whereas ID and MT are free to hunt and manage like a state should. ID and MT got screwed out of a year of wolf hunting because of WY and there refusal to make zones like the other 2 states. Thats all they had to do, set quotas and zones and boom, we would be hunting them now in WY, but instead WY refused to cooperate and cost all 3 states a full year of hunting before ID and MT realized what they needed to do to make sure they could start managing the wolf population.
 

mallardsx2

Veteran member
Jul 8, 2015
3,921
3,241
Funny how Govt promotes the introduction of species like this back into the food chain...


Not to Hi-Jack this thread but a similar thing happened in Pennsylvania. The Game Commission re-introduced Fishers about 15 years ago. They have literally wiped the turkey population out in my area. Talk about an apex predator. They are the wolves of the east. I'm not joking either...they are bad and they have taken hold.

And the reason they introduced them was to control the porcupine population...

Years after their introduction porcupines went from the protected list to being able to shoot them...

PORCUPINES: Sept. 1-March 31, except during overlap with the regular firearms deer season. (3 daily, season limit of 10).

From protected to this...

Because those little overgrown weasels are'nt killing them and they are literally killing everything else they can get their teethe on...

I caught one in a trap that was 54" from the tip of its tail to the tip of its nose skinned out...

Several of my friends have trail camera pictures of them carrying fawns past their cameras. Game commission refused to believe that they can kill a deer... lmfao...

Its all Govt bureaucracy...
 

RICMIC

Veteran member
Feb 21, 2012
2,016
1,796
Two Harbors, Minnesota
WY didn't want the wolf introduction in the state at all, and their "compromise" that they couldn't stop anyway was to "allow" the wolves in Yellowstone Park, and then have management authority on any wolves leaving the part. The lawsuits using the ESA (Endangered Species Act), and the ability to shop for sympathetic federal judges anywhere in the country will tie this up until a bill correcting the situation passes congress. I read that such a bill has passed the house, and if it can get to the senate I would think it has enough support to pass. MNs two Dem senators, WIs Dem & Rep senators, WY two rep senators, & MI senators all support returning management back to the states. Even when WY was managing the wolves for a couple years, I believe that the Bonderant feed-ground was still in the limited area and only one hunting tag was allowed. However, I suspect that the state would still have had the ability to cull problem packs where necessary. The Humane Society and PETA get millions in donations from primarily the urban area, and those groups not only don't support hunting, but they don't support the use of any meat as food. As such, ranchers are on their list too.
 

tim

Veteran member
Jun 4, 2011
2,423
1,072
north idaho
it is funny how humans can kill for sport but not other animals. just something to think about.
politically speaking I am neautrul with the wolf. I don't believe in kill on sight, but I don't believe we should not be hunting and trapping them.

And I have a documented pack not far from the house.
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
909
952
These wolf threads are so full of emotion, and so short on facts.

During the EA and EIS process, there was over-whelming support of wolf reintroduction in all 3 states. In fairness to Wyoming, there was less support than either MT or ID. In the comments received during the EA/EIS process a vast majority of local, as well as out of state comments, favored wolf reintroduction.

So, to say that Wyoming didn't want them is just not correct when the comments submitted didn't reflect that. If those that are whining about wolves now, didn't comment then...well, I don't feel sorry for them. There were more comments received during the open comment period on wolves than any other EA process ever.

Also, its not accurate to blame the USFWS for any of this. Early on in the process, the USFWS actually lowered the number of required breeding pairs, to a total population number. This was done because the average pack size was much larger earlier in the recovery, and they knew that the total population would be wayyy past required numbers if breeding pair status was met.

From the get-go, Wyoming and their plan have been the problem. The EIS is crystal clear, and all three states agreed to the provisions found in same. One of the requirements to delist was for ALL three states to have approved plans. If one state plan was not acceptable, then delisting couldn't move forward. That is the reason that delisting was delayed in MT and ID. Wyoming would not change their plan, even at the request of MT and ID, so it was delayed. Finally, MT and ID had enough of Wyoming playing Marlboro man. They successfully passed the Simpson/Tester rider and gained management control without being bound by Wyoming's lack of an approved plan.

It is ridiculous that Wyoming just didn't designate wolves as a big-game animal statewide. The dual classification was the problem, and by simply making them a big-game animal statewide, dropping the dual classification, we would have been hunting wolves for the last several years here. But, politics being what they are, and an unwillingness to compromise within the system, Wyoming wolves are still not being managed by the State.

What should have happened is drop the dual classification. Classify as trophy/big-game statewide. In the recovery areas set a quota and a season to ensure long-term sustainability to keep them off the list. Outside the recovery area, still require a permit, still classify as a trophy animal, just have a 365 day season and no quota.

As to this particular issue, its a non-starter. Wolves kill big-game. So do lions, bears, and people. How is this any different than a mature tom mountain lion killing a deer and only eating the nose, and other choice pieces and leaving the rest? It happens all the time, and in some cases, lions will kill another deer before they feed on a cold carcass.

Saying that we should wipe out wolves, lions, or bears because they kill some big-game is akin to saying humans should stop hunting because a few guys get into a herd of elk and kill a gob of them. Or stop hunting because big-game is shot every year and lost by both archery and rifle hunters. I can assure you, there are 19 elk a day, shot and lost in Wyoming every day of archery and/or rifle seasons. How many deer, elk, and antelope are poached every day? How many are hit by vehicles? How many does a bad winter kill?

No question that wolves, bears, lion, coyotes, etc. all need to be properly managed, but its ridiculous to think that wolves are going to "wipe out" big-game in Wyoming or anywhere else their found.

If that were true, I seriously doubt each hunter in Wyoming could kill 3 elk a season, 2 buck deer, 2 buck pronghorn, at least 4 each of antlerless deer and pronghorn.

I say manage all the wildlife in a responsible manner...based on science, carrying capacity, etc.

Do that, and predators killing some big-game is no big deal.
 

RICMIC

Veteran member
Feb 21, 2012
2,016
1,796
Two Harbors, Minnesota
BuzzH: I don't believe that anyone here has advocated wiping out the wolf, just managed like any other game animal. They are part of the ecosystem, but man's impact has changed the natural system so much that it will never be like it was 200 years ago. I para-phrased much of what has occurred in WY, but my main point was that the original agreement was completely bypassed because of the ESA lawsuits. The North American wolf was never endangered. True it is not in all of it's former range, but what animal is. I live deep in the woods, 22 miles from the nearest small town in NW Minnesota. We always had some wolves, and they were protected to the goal of 1,200 wolves. The federal protection was removed, but after the lawsuits, they are back on the protected list. We did have a couple tough winters, which is always the biggest factor, but I have not seen a deer near my home since last June. The official number in MN is 2,400 wolves, but last fall I spoke to one of the federal wolf researchers (we met in the woods), and he stated that the true number is likely between 4,000 to 5,000. Hunters can be managed, laws made and adjusted to the game population. Females are only allowed to be taken when the surplus allows it. In natural conditions, elk herds would be disbursed in their winter range, and I doubt that the "sport" killing by predators would occur. However, as I have previously stated, the winter range has been taken over by people, and that isn't going to change.
 

brdhuntr

Member
Feb 17, 2016
64
0
Eagle Idaho
Buzz,i agree with a lot of what you said,except the part of being over whelming support for wolves from the public. We need to look at that statement,while it is correct that the so-called public was in favor,MOST HUNTERS were not in favor. I remember it was presented here in Idaho as these cute cuddly creatures frolicking in the forest,and all the non-hunting public jumped on that message all the way to the east coast,and the politicians ran it down our throats!! It has cost our state millions of dollars in lost domestic animals,and money diverted from F&G coffers for wolf control. The wolf is here to stay,and i feel for the hunters in Wyoming,but like you stated t he Marlboro Man mentality of your'e politicians are to blame!
 

mnhoundman

Veteran member
Oct 25, 2012
1,291
111
Minnesota
No pc here, the wolves can go the way of the carrier pigeon, I hate them.
Agreed!! I have no time for them and never will, my father in law had hounds killed by them chasing cats. Surrounded them at the tree and tore em up. So yeah they can disappear again, there is a reason they did it once! I can't imagine how many moose and elk they kill that we don't know about!!
 

Tim McCoy

Veteran member
Dec 15, 2014
1,855
4
Oregon
I'm just fine wiping them out outside of a very few areas. A few poking around a onemor two large Nat Parks and large wilderness area or two is OK by me. The species is not endangered at all. The ESA has been turned into a weapon, not a tool solely used to protect endangered species. We have a terrible problem with sea lions here and even fewer control options due to the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
 

480/277

Very Active Member
Feb 23, 2013
629
1
it is funny how humans can kill for sport but not other animals. just something to think about.
politically speaking I am neautrul with the wolf. I don't believe in kill on sight, but I don't believe we should not be hunting and trapping them.

And I have a documented pack not far from the house.
I am sorry can you explain this like I am 4 years old. Are you saying the licensed guy that kills an elk during season is the same as wolves killing elk and leaving them to waste. Or are you comparing poachers who act in a like manner.
 

crzy_cntryby

Active Member
Dec 9, 2014
269
0
Those same homesteaders also damn near eliminated all the buffalo, grizzlies, elk, deer and antelope. There was a lot of wrong done in those days that we've been trying to fix for decades. Everything has its place and it's OUR responsibility to make sure we manage the resource not only for our interests but future generations as well; with an emphasis on the future.
Those were meat hunters not homesteaders.
 

tim

Veteran member
Jun 4, 2011
2,423
1,072
north idaho
480

All I am saying is that there are humans who like to kill. that is it. nothing more. Animals like to kill and have for eons. You can go with the poacher who just drops animals and leaves them, I found 2 dead moose feet apart a couple of years ago. just dropped and left. or you can go with the extremes of Charles manson. All I am saying is it is ironic, that one species that kills a lot(humans) is upset because another animal is killing also.

Now for fun, I am a small business owner who is used to competition. In the business world, competition makes you a better player in the game. Now are hunters upset because we have competition(predators). Albeit not a level playing field, but competition non the less.