How many elk do wolves eat in Yellowstone

[BuzzH]

Personally, I look at all these issues subjectively, and at the facts. Many don't, you aren't alone in that and that's fine too.


You say that I am looking at this subjectively without facts, yet I have posted several articles that have shown the FACTS that the elk declined in Yellowstone upon reintroduction.

You are literally a im right you're wrong regardless type of person. Your beliefs are the way it is and everyone else is wrong in their opinion even with facts hat show otherwise.

I am still trying to figure out how you figure an elk provides 175lbs of meat roughly. Yes maybe for a humans consumption that's an average, but wolves and lions both eat internal organs what's a gut pile weigh? As well as slicking a carcass as you have said, puts all kinds of face meat, neck meat, rib meat, that isn't always harvested by all hunters. You have also left out the fact that many lions will go 7-9 days on average after a harvest before their next harvest.

The other fact is wolves killing for sport that is never once been brought up, how about the 19 elk killed in Idaho overnight and not a single one was eaten on by the wolves? Sure that doesn't go towards your wolf yearly harvest fact, but has been proven wolves kill for sport, this is a fact that most wolf lovers leave out of the equation. I have never seen a fact of lions killing for sport.

I'm not denying any of the actual facts you provided...just don't buy the conjecture.

Science is like that.

I'm not putting my beliefs into my position on wolves, only providing the facts, sorry the facts offend you.

Since you seem to imply that I have, perhaps enlighten me then, on what my position on wolves is.

 

[gypsumreaper]

I thought we were basing this on wild ungulates? So based on your new facts the lions kill more domestic animals than they do wild animals. So their 9000 lbs of meat per year is actually a lot more of domestic animals which cuts their harvest on wild game even less. This makes our wild ungulates safer from lions and more likely to be harvested by wolves. Since the wolves obviously prey more on wild game than they do domestic game.

 

[BuzzH]

Where did I say lions kill more domestic animals than wild animals?

The APHIS data is specific to what kills livestock, and how much by each type of predator.

Slow down there partner...you're getting confused.

 

[gypsumreaper]

I'm just using your facts that you provided to understand your entire argument.

I don't see where the domestic harvest facts come into the conversation of wolves diminishing elk herds and how many elk wolves kill a year.

Someone asked for your facts and you throw out random articles of domestic harvest by predators.

I believe you are getting confused with all the "facts" you have used over this entire conversation. You read a different article every time and use those facts although the facts aren't always coming together in your favor. Which is why they are becoming fuzzy facts in your argument.

 

[ivorytip]

The domestic thing came up from me posting article about the sheep.

 

[Prerylyon]

Complex issues, competing interests. Regardless of how one feels about them, I believe these predators will spread on their own. It's just a matter of time. I've posted before about wolves being confirmed here in Iowa. Iowa is a far cry from the wilderness areas of the west, but one thing our industrial agriculture state does share with the western regions, albeit on a much smaller scale, are expansive, desolate areas. Less people farm, farms keep getting bigger every year with increased automation. The wolves, lions just roam on in. There is nothing to stop them and there is plenty of deer for them to eat; right now here in Iowa, anyway. As they expand their populations, my hope is that they are managed-along with the deer, elk, everything-and that hunting is allowed as a means of conservation.

Regards,

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337Z using Tapatalk

 

[Hilltop]

Another good read...

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwio8OT374DTAhUo6oMKHTvtB0MQFggvMAM&url=http://tomremington.com/2012/07/20/dna-studies-smaller-native-wolves-existed-in-northern-rockies-before-canadian-wolf-transplant/&usg=AFQjCNEh-7uZ-l-ipv0N4GKZpXwMVUye6Q

Pretty hard to argue with DNA but I'm sure I'll get another national enquirer comment. I'm not interested in picking a fight but rather want intelligent dialogue. Is this a topic the pro-wolf crowd can prove false or is it just swept under the rug?

 

[Againstthewind]

Another good read...

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwio8OT374DTAhUo6oMKHTvtB0MQFggvMAM&url=http://tomremington.com/2012/07/20/dna-studies-smaller-native-wolves-existed-in-northern-rockies-before-canadian-wolf-transplant/&usg=AFQjCNEh-7uZ-l-ipv0N4GKZpXwMVUye6Q

Pretty hard to argue with DNA but I'm sure I'll get another national enquirer comment. I'm not interested in picking a fight but rather want intelligent dialogue. Is this a topic the pro-wolf crowd can prove false or is it just swept under the rug?

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/photosmultimedia/qa-wolves.htm. I thought this was pertinent. I also thought the article about the sheep was pertinenet because it goes to killing styles like was already talked about. Wolves run animals to find the weak ones, it just so happens with a pretty homogeneous sheep herd they are all the weak ones so it can become a slaughter house. Cats seem more solitary and one kill at a time type. As far as numbers, from the Yellowstone web-site - wolves at the high end if you go with the wolves and elk just in Yellowstone where they are probably the most studied in the world - 84-104 wolves, 18-22 elk a year =1512-2288 elk a year out of a herd of 10000 to 20000 in the summer, less than 5000 in the winter. Pretty close to the original article. Cats estimate if you go with the 1/week which was on the high end of the Yellowstone estimate, but pretty close because they said they were hard to study and they said 26-42 Cats in Yellowstone = 1352-2184 undulates a year (I think the 1/week number was undulates in general not just elk). Those numbers are too close to call which one takes the top predator I would say. Weather beats them both. A lot of pro ranching bias on my end, so I had better stay out of that one, lol.

 

[BuzzH]

Another good read...

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwio8OT374DTAhUo6oMKHTvtB0MQFggvMAM&url=http://tomremington.com/2012/07/20/dna-studies-smaller-native-wolves-existed-in-northern-rockies-before-canadian-wolf-transplant/&usg=AFQjCNEh-7uZ-l-ipv0N4GKZpXwMVUye6Q

Pretty hard to argue with DNA but I'm sure I'll get another national enquirer comment. I'm not interested in picking a fight but rather want intelligent dialogue. Is this a topic the pro-wolf crowd can prove false or is it just swept under the rug?

Its been proven false.

Its proven false within Tom Remington's own article.

What "sub-species" are the wolves that migrated into NW Montana from Canada? What "DNA" do the wolves that migrated on their own into NW Montana have?

What was the barrier that kept genetic exchange from happening between the Yukon through the lower-48 northern Rockies?

There wasn't one...and never has been.

 

[Hilltop]

Its been proven false.

Its proven false within Tom Remington's own article.

What "sub-species" are the wolves that migrated into NW Montana from Canada? What "DNA" do the wolves that migrated on their own into NW Montana have?

What was the barrier that kept genetic exchange from happening between the Yukon through the lower-48 northern Rockies?

There wasn't one...and never has been.

I understand and have read those arguments but haven't seen a logical dismissal of the differences. While very similar genetically there are behavioral and physical differences. Many animals have similar genetic makeups but aren't the same animal. For instance look at the behavioral and physical differences between the keys deer and whitetails, coues deer and whitetails, or black tail and mule deer. Very stark differences are there as well in wolves.

I'll admit that I haven't studied this subject anywhere near to the degree that you have. I am finding that the more I look into this the more it stinks with corruption and bad decisions but I am obviously biased. Existing wolf populations, while small, were proven to be in the areas before the stocking took place. It is my understanding that this made the stocking illegal but was proven too late to "take it back". Since they couldn't take it back, they have done their best to color it in a good light.

 

[BuzzH]

I understand and have read those arguments but haven't seen a logical dismissal of the differences. While very similar genetically there are behavioral and physical differences. Many animals have similar genetic makeups but aren't the same animal. For instance look at the behavioral and physical differences between the keys deer and whitetails, coues deer and whitetails, or black tail and mule deer. Very stark differences are there as well in wolves.

I'll admit that I haven't studied this subject anywhere near to the degree that you have. I am finding that the more I look into this the more it stinks with corruption and bad decisions but I am obviously biased. Existing wolf populations, while small, were proven to be in the areas before the stocking took place. It is my understanding that this made the stocking illegal but was proven too late to "take it back". Since they couldn't take it back, they have done their best to color it in a good light.

I agree with you that there are physical differences, size, coloration, that exist within the range of a species. Trouble is, size and physical appearance do not mean genetic difference.

Further, the argument that you're presenting here, with the wolf sub-species, would never hold an ounce of water legally. There is NO biologist on planet earth that could have differentiated by simply looking at the wolves that migrated to NW Montana, the remnant populations that continued to exist in MT/ID, and claim they are any different genetically than those captured in Canada and reintroduced. The smaller size sub-species theory was false, mainly because there was never a barrier to isolate lower 48 populations with Canada. Impossible to differentiate by genetics, and also by appearance.

Without a way to differentiate, no proof exists that we introduced a "non-native" bigger, badder, super-wolf species back into the lower 48. It just isn't there, no matter how much Toby Bridges, the Wyoming Farm Bureau, and Tom Remington want it to be true.

I'll also not provide any denial that the whole process was an absolute chit-show...it was. But, there was/is enough blame to go around when it comes to why it turned into a chit-show. Plenty of people were responsible and nobody is blameless. I'm not forced to guess, since I lived it in the epicenter of the whole process.

But, the world didn't come to an end post reintroduction, and wolves are not going to ever be responsible for "wiping out all the elk" and they aren't going to end hunting either.

The hysteria is just ridiculous...and we aren't going back, so may as well move forward.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

What I am afraid of is "going forward" will mean the pressure to introduce wolves to "balance" the ecosystem will focus on another National park...namely Rocky Mt NP. There is no argument that elk overpopulate the park and there has been lots of discussion about relocating wolves there. How to resolve the problem is where I part ways. I believe that a limited amount of sportsman hunting should be allowed to remove elk from the park. It's a win/win , elk get removed and the NP Service could make quite a bit of money. We already allow hunting on wildlife refuges, so it wouldn't be a big stretch to allow some hunting in a National Park. RMNP is hiring commercial hunters to do some hunting now (and paying THEM TO DO IT), let the sports hu8nter do it and pay for doing it.

 

[fackelberry]

I am enjoying reading this dispute. I didnt want to get involved or take sides on this issue. But i have a few questions for someone who would know more about elk harvest figures in Wyoming. I know they put them out every year, just havnt looked at them for these particular areas. I know Wyoming has had a few record breaking elk harvest years lately. Would i be wrong in saying that the extra numbers of elk we are getting arent coming from the areas directly bordering Yellowstone where the wolves were introduced and migrated out of? I would say, ( and please correct me if im wrong) that the extra elk are coming from areas in Southern, Central, South Central, and North Eastern and South Eastern part of the state. Like i said, if im wrong and they are showing record numbers of elk killed next to Yellowstone, My "theory" is all wrong. Im partly saying this is because when i was in High School in the early 90's here. { Damnit people know how old or young i am now} haha! area 7 which is to the south of me used to only put out 800 type 1 tags and about that many type 4 cow tags. They are now putting out 1500 bull tags, and i think damn near 3,000 cow tags! The G&F biologist said they only want 4,-5,000 elk TOTAL in area 7. He told me they have over 7,500 elk in the area. So they are almost 2x over herd objective here. Im seeing alot of that same scenario in other areas not directly affected by wolves. In that same breath, back in the high school days i used to see LOTS of lion hunters in the area and could count on seeing half a dozen dead lions in trucks around town. Lots of lion hunters then. Now about 6-7 years ago or more i talked to local game warden and he said that the lions caught distemper like house cats and killed a bunch of them off. In that same time til now i dont see the numbers of lion hunters in the area and dont hear alot about harvests, but i know they still kill some. Is that why the elk population has exploded in area 7 partly because less lions? I have no idea. Like i said, im not taking sides here because i would shoot either one given the chance! Ok BUZZ, GypsumReaper carry-on!

 

[tim]

Dam you little red riding hood.

One of the things that is not brought up, is that the nez pierce tribe was an intergral part of the wolf reintroduction. They wanted the wolf back. A few years after the wolf was released, recreational sport hunters started voicing there concerns over the diminishing oppurtunities on elk. I remember the tribes comments was basically, become better hunters.

Now competition can be viewed in different ways. competition will either make you better or you get your ass kicked. A lot of the recreational sport hunters where not able to get better at killing elk, wether it was not enough oppurtunties to kill elk, or they did not have the desire to become better hunters and change the hunting styles\ways to fit into the new way of elk hunting. I believe a combo of both happened. Now there are hunters that can still kill elk on a regular basis, in wolf country. Those guys either have it, in them, or learned the game of hunting in wolf country. So some of the hunters got better, some got there ass kicked. It is completely up to you on which one you want to become.

Personally I have not understood the argument against wolves: that they kill for sport. Umm so do humans, so to me. the wolf issue can be simplified down to a competition issue. I am strickly talking about hunting on this one. yes , there are states rights, business ownership rights, protecting you property and livestock, that stuff is a whole nother issue, but still part of the bigger wolf issue.
I am very neutral with the wolf, I bought tags the very first day you could in Idaho in 2009, but I regulary harvest elk where there is a pack of wolves. I have coyotes, wolfs, bears, lions, deer and elk all on the same game cam. The animals do not vacate the place, but they do use it different. The wolf has changed the game, have you changed your game to the new game, or are you just bitching about it?

We all have our own opinions, hopefully we can keep the conversation civil and some folks, will just have to agree to disagree. Anyway I love hearing the wolfs, howl, I also love eating elk. And after 20 years of the wolf in north Idaho. I would say things have come to a balance. The elk hunting is not as good as it was, but it is not as bad as it was. Now I do need to stay, I have bumped into a pack before, my neighbor has had there dog killed by a wolf, and I have howled back and forth with them(really cool) but I do also have tags. The wife wants a full size mount in the house. but they are tough to hunt.

 

[tim]

cc
in 20 years rmnp will have wolves, the wolves have expanded that much in the last 20 years.

 

[AKaviator]

I really don't want to jump into the fray here either, but, I agree with Buzz;"we aren't going back, so may as well move forward" and with Tim also, that WE need to adapt.

Wolves are part of the landscape and eco-systems now. There will be no real need for the government to reintroduce them to Colorado or anywhere else in the lower 48 that is suitable habitat. The wolves will reintroduce themselves.

I believe strongly in science based "active management" of wolves. Alaska is very good at it. We "manage" (kill) plenty of them. Even with that, the wolf population is very strong. You'll never completely eradicate them again, so my advice would be to study them, enjoy seeing them and manage them as best as possible. There is nothing spiritual about wolves but they are fascinating and beautiful and here to stay.

 

[Tim McCoy]

Simply Google OR-7. A wolf from far NE OR, went to SW OR and was in N Cal for a bit. Believe his journey was 1,200 miles or so. They naturally disperse at least as well as dandelion seeds in a stiff breeze.

 

[kidoggy]

I love the wolves. in fact I hope they expand to every major city in the nation.

 

[Prerylyon]

Dam you little red riding hood.

One of the things that is not brought up, is that the nez pierce tribe was an intergral part of the wolf reintroduction. They wanted the wolf back. A few years after the wolf was released, recreational sport hunters started voicing there concerns over the diminishing oppurtunities on elk. I remember the tribes comments was basically, become better hunters.

Now competition can be viewed in different ways. competition will either make you better or you get your ass kicked. A lot of the recreational sport hunters where not able to get better at killing elk, wether it was not enough oppurtunties to kill elk, or they did not have the desire to become better hunters and change the hunting styles\ways to fit into the new way of elk hunting. I believe a combo of both happened. Now there are hunters that can still kill elk on a regular basis, in wolf country. Those guys either have it, in them, or learned the game of hunting in wolf country. So some of the hunters got better, some got there ass kicked. It is completely up to you on which one you want to become.

Personally I have not understood the argument against wolves: that they kill for sport. Umm so do humans, so to me. the wolf issue can be simplified down to a competition issue. I am strickly talking about hunting on this one. yes , there are states rights, business ownership rights, protecting you property and livestock, that stuff is a whole nother issue, but still part of the bigger wolf issue.
I am very neutral with the wolf, I bought tags the very first day you could in Idaho in 2009, but I regulary harvest elk where there is a pack of wolves. I have coyotes, wolfs, bears, lions, deer and elk all on the same game cam. The animals do not vacate the place, but they do use it different. The wolf has changed the game, have you changed your game to the new game, or are you just bitching about it?

We all have our own opinions, hopefully we can keep the conversation civil and some folks, will just have to agree to disagree. Anyway I love hearing the wolfs, howl, I also love eating elk. And after 20 years of the wolf in north Idaho. I would say things have come to a balance. The elk hunting is not as good as it was, but it is not as bad as it was. Now I do need to stay, I have bumped into a pack before, my neighbor has had there dog killed by a wolf, and I have howled back and forth with them(really cool) but I do also have tags. The wife wants a full size mount in the house. but they are tough to hunt.

Those cam pics are damn kewl!...just sayin!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337Z using Tapatalk

 

[Prerylyon]

Simply Google OR-7. A wolf from far NE OR, went to SW OR and was in N Cal for a bit. Believe his journey was 1,200 miles or so. They naturally disperse at least as well as dandelion seeds in a stiff breeze.

A radio collared wolf from northern Michigan was killed near Kirksville, MO some years back (2000). There is no stopping them.

http://www.iowadnr.gov/Portals/idnr/uploads/education/visitors/gray_wolf_status.pdf

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337Z using Tapatalk