E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
AP Photo/Yellowstone National Park
A gray wolf runs near Blacktail Pond in Yellowstone National Park. The gray wolf was taken off the endangered species list in Wyoming last week.
The gray wolf, soon to be off the endangered species list in Wyoming, will have a new official title in 86 percent of the state: predator. That means anyone may shoot a wolf on sight, no permit required.
Safe havens do remain in the northwestern corner of the state -- no hunting will be allowed in Yellowstone or Grand Teton national parks -- but now conservationists worry that sportsmen will be allowed to take aim at wolves traveling through the John D. Rockefeller Jr. Memorial Parkway, a 24,000-acre area that connects the two larger parks.
The state of Wyoming wants hunting; the National Park Service does not.
“We want to preserve wildlife for viewing and for conservation," said Bert Frost, associate director for Natural Resource Stewardship and Science for the National Park Service. "We would prefer not to have them shooting wolves on the parkway.”
But here's the catch: The parkway, managed by the National Park Service, has allowed elk hunts to reduce their population. Legislators in Wyoming say that means wolves are also fair game.
Most agree this is a somewhat symbolic argument, as only one or two wolf packs use the parkway. But for many, the gray wolf has come to embody the symbol of the federal government meddling in state affairs.
Poll: Should wolves be hunted on National Parks land in Wyoming?
Among the comments submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the Endangered Species Act, was one from Earl Crawford, a Cheyenne resident, who said, according to the Casper Star-Tribune, "wolves kill to just kill.”
Crawford continued: “Let the state game & fish control and manage the wolf population along with the other game animals of the state. Most bureaucrats back East haven’t the foggiest idea of how life is out west.”
1995: Wolves return to the Rockies
In the early 1900s, bounties were paid on more than 20,000 wolves, viewed then as killers of livestock. Twenty years later, the gray wolf became extinct in the Northern Rockies.
In 1995, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service arranged for 66 gray wolves from Canada to be released in Yellowstone and Idaho. The wolves, to the delight of conservationists, repopulated as quickly as they disappeared. Now about 1,650 roam the Rockies.
“The big picture of the whole thing is that the recovery of the gray wolf is one of the most amazing success stories of the Endangered Species Act,” said Derek Goldman of the Endangered Species Coalition.
The plan was so successful that in 2009 the gray wolf was removed from the endangered species list in Montana and Idaho. Wyoming, however, refused to produce a wolf-friendly plan.
“Basically, Wyoming flipped the middle finger to the federal government,” Goldman said.
Despite government promises to repay ranchers for livestock losses, pressure mounted.
Data show that domestic dogs kill more cattle than wolves; weather kills cattle at 25 times the rate of wolves. Mike Jimenez of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said that wolves were just one more variable eating at an already small profit margin.
“You have to understand that the ranchers are raising animals by the pound,” said Jimenez, the coordinator for wolf management for the Rocky Mountains. “If they run around, they abort, or they lose weight. The profit margin is not huge to begin with.”
Although wolves were delisted in Montana and Idaho without as much political wrangling, wolf hunting in those two states is as controversial.
In February, U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents killed 14 wolves from an aircraft in Idaho, heeding a request from that state, according to the Missoulian newspaper.
And the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, an organization founded by hunters to promote elk habitat to “be hunted or otherwise enjoyed,” announced it would give $50,000 to help government agencies afford killing wolves that chase after livestock, the Missoulian reported. David Allen, the president of the foundation, said he wants fewer black bears, mountain lions and wolves.
“We can’t have all these predators with little aggressive management and expect to have ample game herds,” Allen told the Missoulian.
Wolves delisted
Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead signed a new version of the wolf management plan into law last month. This one demands that Wyoming manage 10 breeding pairs outside of Yellowstone. An area in the northwestern part of the state would protect wolves from Oct. 15 to March 1, so they may breed with wolves from other states and avoid inbreeding.
Whether hunters will be able to take aim at wolves in the parkway is unclear. Hunting is allowed in Alaska national parks, and culling of elk has been allowed in the parkway and Theodore Roosevelt National Park in North Dakota.
Back in Washington, D.C., Bert Frost said the National Parks Service has plans to work with the state of Wyoming. He hopes those conversations won’t become politicized.
“I hope nothing gets resolved in Washington,” Frost said. “There are the biologists on the ground, and they know the situation better than anyone else.”
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Smoke a pack a day!
I would kill one if it showed up by me, but I would hunt them.
Wyoming----home of dick cheney. Nothing more needs saying about the mentality of the maority of those from Wyoming.
I meant to say wouldnt hunt them
Wyoming is a beautiful state filled with wonderful people. Your comment says far worse about you then the fact that an unpopular person happens to reside in their state says about the people of Wyoming.
Nuke Wyoming, and hope Darth Cheney is home at the time.
There are sonic fences used to keep dogs in their yard, since dogs are the descendants of wolves has any one tried the same technology to keep wolves out of the cattle fields. Just a thought, a little common sense instead of jumping to extremes to start.
Obviously, the folks in Wyoming do not understand, the wolf is a keystone specie, in the eco-nomy of keeping our Earth life giving and supporting. The wolf has two ecological jobs for Earth. First, their job is to trim the herd so the herd does not devour the living, life giving body and face of Earth. Second, they trim the populations of the every expanding mid-size or meso predators, like racoons, whose populations are pushing many species closer to extinct, like our native birds, small mammals, frogs and reptiles, all the bricks and mortar of man's only house, the Earth.
The wolf, our native birds, small mammals, amphibians and reptiles are biodiversity, the creators and life supporters of planet Earth, the eco-nomy of life itself. Man is not alive because of welfare ranchers; he exists only because of Earth's ecosystems, and ecosystems exist only because of their plant and animal biodiversity, the givers and saviors of life aboard planet Earth. And, the wolf is one of the most important and vital species to all the ecosystems within his range.
Wyoming ranchers are a bunch of lying welfare queens using public lands for PENNIES per acre to fatten up their cows, and they are COMPLETE and PROVEN liars when it comes to wolves. Virtually every single claim of a wolf "kill" has been in fact either scavanging of an ALREADY dead cow, or a kill by a bear.
If you want the REAL story of wolf/human interaction today in the lower 48, research Minnesota, where we have about 3000 wolves and no big problems.
Hey, environmentalists, hunters, ranchers and others interested ----- FORGET THE WOLVES ! They are a minor threat at worst. Let us go after the REAL PREDATORS in our country; the elected officials in Washington D.C. who are destroying our lives as we speak. Put a bounty out on them and watch the culling begin in earnest. Declare it to be "open season" and let us be rid of these parasitic opportunists.
Wolves should be predators; they are natures way of keeping other animal populations in check.
The ranchers need to get off public land and buy their own land.
Ry and Debi, I'm thinking Minnesota is a more intelligent and conscious state. Yes, wolves are not only a native, top predator, they are a keystone specie. In architecture, the keystone is the stone that supports and holds up the entire structure. In the architecture of our life giving Earth, the keystone specie is vital to the entirety of life supporting, ecosystem services and holds together, the entire ecosystem. Mankind is a alive and breathing because of ecosystems, and plant and animal biodiversity, just like the wolf, are the creators and saviors of Earth's ecosystems.
DingleB
Wyoming is a beautiful state filled with wonderful people.
Yo dingleballs,
Yes Wyoming is a beautiful state but no it is not filled with wonderful people. Like Idaho, where I reside, you have way too many ignorant people who believe they are the lord and master of the earth. They're not. We are part of our environment and to have people who would willing hunt an animal to extinction says much more about their stupidity than I could ever post.
As for dick cheney "residing" in Wyoming you fail to grasp the fact he was an elected, and relected, politican from that state. That also says quite a bit about the mentality of the "wonderful" folks from Wyoming.
ryoushi12 hits the nail on the head. The Wyoming cattle ranchers are classic welfare queens, and guess what. Some of them really do drive Cadillacs.
Money, it's always about money with these guys and there is no limit to what they will do to get it, including murder....not just wolves, but human beings. Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_County_War
While it is true that wolves rarely, if ever, attack livestock, think about this for a minute. The wolves, correctly identified as a keystone species, roamed the west freely not all that long ago. It was their home. They got along just fine with the Indians, but those white settlers, well that was a different story. The white settlers walked in and said, "Mine, mine, mine."
Maybe the wolves were fooled when the squatters put huge, tasty, and very stupid animals in their dining rooms.
So the wolves lose. Gotta love those he-man Republican, government is my enemy types.
I would gladly shoot the ignorant putz that would presume and distinguish a wolf from a bear..
David Walker you the man.
Lusitania..MN.
You are right David Walker.... those greedy ranchers are out there in the winter when its 30 below, feeding twice a day, chopping ice and watering, calving, doctoring - then surviving the summer and drought, using their livelihood to feed a "non-indigenous" wolf species (look it up).... Those ranchers EARN every penny of those cadillacs!
Wolves have decimated the Yellowstone elk herd in 6 short years - from 17,000+ elk to near 2,000. So now that the elk food source is gone (and the wolves were not held in check at 300) they are feeding on the bison, harrasing the grizzlies and leaving the park to regularly feast on livestock in a population explosion.
Man altered the west in the 1800's with cross country expansion to the extent that post #1 is spot on. Wolves are not recoverable in the 48 states, experiment failed!
Go back packing in the northern territories if you want wolf action. I'd advise taking a side arm in the event one gets growly and wants to bite when you try to pet him.
Well sdpaulson your comment is only partly true read below, after you read you will find that nature will take care of it self w/out greedy a!@ ranchers killing wolves. The elk pop is above 4,000 and actually Grizzlies are part of the elk pop problem also. You should really check facts before you come on a board and post BS of course I am sure your one of those ranchers that leases state land and feels he should be allowed to do whatever he wants.
LEAVE the Wolf ALONE!!!!!!!!!! Nature will take care of it self.
Drought conditions experienced during the early 2000s appear to have impacted the nutrition and abundance of forage, and may have lowered reproduction rates in some elk.
The number of permits issued for the antlerless Gardiner Late Elk Hunt declined from 1,102 in 2005 to just 100 permits during the 2006-2010 seasons. The late-season hunt was eliminated altogether for 2011.
The number of grizzly bears seen on the northern range during elk calving season has decreased slightly in recent years. Also, the wolf population on the northern range inside Yellowstone National Park has dropped from 94 wolves in 2007 to 37 wolves in 2010. Biologists suspect predator numbers may be responding somewhat to the decline in the elk population.
Biologists expect the reduction in the number of wolves and the elimination of the late season hunt will result in some increase in the elk population.
We should labeled the lawmaker in Wyoming as A$$HOLES.
Lets see... the Fundamentalist Church State of Wyoming has 414,000 people. Thats fewer than required to be a state. (I believe the number for a territory to be a state now is 425,000 to 440,000 Somewhere in that range)
Problem solved. Declare Wyoming a Federal Territory.
And thats my opinion.
One more backward state to be avoided. Pakistan with pine trees.
Just great. Why not put a bounty on them while they are at it? Every body knows that certain humans kill or destroy what they fear or don't understand. @imwhitewolf excellent post.
There is a difference between control and wholesale slaughter....it's just that "white-man" doesn't seem so clear on that sometimes.
Wolf numbers should be controlled but they have a place on this planet.....otherwise why would your God have put them here???????? Hey it's your fairy tale you explain it.
I have to agree with the welfare rancher bit, as I live in Ohio and know of farmers that are indeed paid not to grow crops or slaughter livestock... paid by the government, by us really... in order to control prices and quantities. So, we're paying in order to pay more ourselves, meat sold overseas as is oil and bought back thanks to our supposed representatives and lack of legislature legislating towards Americas best interests and instead to it's own corporate government interests.
As I've said before, more $$ comes from tourism and elk hunting and is why wolves are vilianized. Wolves as predators don't go after the healthy, the strong; they go after the old, the weak, and yes, the young but not the robust... it's too much of an energy expenditure. That's how all predators work. I completely disagree with those that would say wolves kill for funzies; that goes against nature and energy expenditure. I also see, readily, where electric fencing is a minimal expense and would do much towards insurance against any real losses, though I do believe livestock loss is exaggerated.
How nature managed Herself before us is beyond me; I mean come on.... predators vs. prey, bears, wolves, mountain lions, bison. I've no idea how the Indians managed before the Europeans got here, wolves killing just to kill didn't exterminate themselves. It's called an ecosystem, look it up... and yes, that means that if you live in an area where there's wolves, Fido does need fenced in; look up how many dogs and cats die because of stray dog attacks, car hits, poisoned by people, etc.. vs. wolf attacks.
Wolves will predate to eat as do others, but also realize there aren't any obese, over fed wolves lumbering about..... they eat what they need period. Now, some human animals......
@Antistupidity: How do you plan to get the wolves to wear the little battery-powered collars?
One mistake I keep reading in posts above is that the wolves only kill and eat what they need. This may have been true about wolves at one point, but the re-released wolves behave differently than those ideal wolves. In Montana the re-released wolves make elk kills, eat the gut, then leave the rest to rot. They are not balanced killers, they are not regulated by mans laws. Responsible game management is a must to keep the balance.
To all the non-hunters who think you are saving the world by preventing hunting, you are not. Most hunters are conservationalists these days interested in making sure the enviroment is healthy to support a balanced ecosystem. Nearly every product sold for hunting include fees for supporting environmental activities:
Wolves, just like all other animals, are a part of the ecosystem. If there are too many wolves, then we need to cut back on their numbers to protect wildlife. This should be a decision based on scientific facts instead of ranchers or preservationists. Regardless, we should be happy of the successful reintroductions of wolves. I love hearing them howl at night when I am out in the woods.
Here's an idea - lets butt out.
It's usually our interference in nature that has caused the problem in the first place.
We take away their natural habitat - and all those macho hunters out there are shooting the deer - so there's not much left for wolves to do but look to cattle and family pets for dinner.
We should spend a little time considering the booming number of humans we have on this planet (over 7n billion now) and "manage" those levels. That would be the best thing we could do for this planet...and ourselves.
Wolves belong there. Cattle do not.
@daryl-2183015
As they say, most reasonable people fall somewhere in the middle. Too many people on the fringes are trying to over simplify this and many other complex issues and turning them into right vs. wrong, all or nothing, black & white problems. There is a balance to be achieved. Personally, I think hunting of wolves is necessary, but Wyoming classifying them as a predator goes a too far.
The argument about there being too many wolves is being made by a hunting lobby, not by scientists. The scientists all agree that hunting wolves would be a bad idea. They did say there were too many elk, and they allowed hunts to cull the herd. Shooting wolves would further reduce elk predation, and increase their numbers to unsustainable levels, in parks that has witnessed these deer starving to death for that reason before---and is the very reason such strong efforts were made to bring wolves back and encourage more and larger packs. The hunters may want that, but it is definitely not based on science or good ecological principles. It is based on the redneck mentality, "lets go shoot things."
Funny how the State wants the Federal gov't to butt out of their affairs but the State won't butt out of nature's affairs. Either really arrogant or really dumb. Hey Earl Crawford, "self-described Wyoming native", why don't you ask the REAL Wyoming natives what they think about what your dumb redneck a$$ is promoting.
I put my faith in the hands of Idaho Fish and Game in this matter. They, and their scientists, do say that there are too many wolves; I will defer to them. When the wolf population is where it should be and no more hunting is allowed, I'll defer to them again.
Indigo Kid, not only is that an excellent idea, but it is EXACTLY what Minnesota did between 1970 and 1974 when the state wolf population stood at 700 or so (yes, wolves were NEVER hunted to extinction in Minnesota). The state DNR's estimates of the growth in population and range of the wolves was low by what actually happened (the wolf population DOUBLED in HALF the time the DNR thought it would), BUT, the fears of wolves running amuck NEVER happened. With 3000 wolves today in the state, the average number of ALL domesticated animals killed by wolves is about 100 per year (that is from dogs to cows and everything in between) and stock animals are compensated for. And, about 20-30 wolves a year are killed as problem animals with a track record of going after domestic animals regularly, or about 1% of th epopultio per year.
And, as for the REPUBLICAN run Fish and Game of wyoming, their ONLY mission in life is to make big game hunting rich bastards happy, by making sure they have lots of elk to shoot. YOu wnat a professional service, look at Minnesota's DNR reports on wolves, NOT a bunch of servants for hunters.
We do have democrats in the state legislature, the legislature doesn't hire F&G biologists, and this isn't a republican vs. democrat issue. I can assure you, there are plenty of democrats in Idaho that hunt, and many of them feel ID F&G is making sound decisions regarding wolf management.
Dingle, too many wolves? Before the white man showed up, wolves ranged all over the USA, even in San Diego, Los Angeles, the Pacific Northwest, the southwest, the east, the north, the south. It was Earth that selected wolves for this continent. The wolf was everywhere on this continent for multi-thousands of years! How did the Native Americans survive for multi-thousands of years with wolves?
Early man lived so closely with wolves, they tamed them, and they became pet dogs! Indeed, the Blackfeet witnessed the wolf extinction in this nation at the turn of the last century. They were horrified, even stating that God took the wolves to a mountain far removed from the white man, and that after the white man fell extinct, God would set them free again to roam the Earth.
We won't have too many wolves until they're returned to their historic ranges and to their ecosystems as a keystone specie. It's not vital, of man's opinion of the wolf; what is vital to man's continued existence on this planet, is Earth's opinion of her wolves. FYI, they are a keystone specie, vital to oxygen releasing, the integrity of the atmosphere, a moderated climate, the entirety of Earth's biogeochemistry, the sequestration of the heat trapping gases, the provisions of the nitrogen cycle and the hydrological storage and flux and all and every reason these rednecks breathe! And the creation of the very life zone of the Earth, Earth's biosphere/ecosphere.
Take a kindergarten class in the science of ecology. Man is light years from learning how to manage the Earth. What is Earth's opinion of her wolves is what counts, and didn't Earth decide wolves to be placed on this continent? Even the dumbest of birds is not so stupid as to kill his only nest, and that's exactly what the rednecks in Wyoming are doing.
What's Earth's opinion of her wolves?
Dingle, I doubt you fish and game "experts" can even TELL the difference between a wolf and a coyote.
Leave handling wolves to REAL experts, with DECADES of direct experience, and hire the Minnesota DNR to do the job for your game service.
skor154 - Excellent comment! I agree totally.
Wolves are a keystone species, but how many wolves are needed. That is the question. While some people want the wolves completely eliminated, an overwhelming majority do not. The problem is that wolves create a boom-bust cycle. Over time they destroy their food source and then starve to death, which allows the food source to come back.....most of the time. I believe some caribou herds in Alaska went extinct from wolves. If people really cared about the wolves, they would limit the population to levels that are supported by the surrounding habitat.
My point is that humans have inhabited all those areas you speak of and must be taken into account in the decision making process. You cannot seriously be advocating for the return of wolves to San Diego and Los Angeles, can you? Here in reality we have to accept and contend with the fact that the human species will remain on this planet for the foreseeable future. In order to get anything good accomplished, we have to take into account all human interests (yes, even the interests of us rednecks), we have to be reasonable in our approach, we must be balanced. You are out on the fringe; you are advocating for the impossible.
@PutAmericaFirst
I'm not sure why wolf advocates place a much higher value on the life of a wolf than they do the elk, caribou, or deer. It's pretty clear what's happening to the ungulate populations in the northwest, and if it were allowed to continue down the path advocated by some, the outcome would be exactly as you describe.
Dingle,
The boom-bust cycle you speak of is a temorary phenomenon from having only recently re-introduced the wolves. Given enough time, prey species bounce back, and then so do the predators to the point where they reach a general equalibrium eventually, until outside factors change the dynamic. Outside pressures like human habitation and wolf hunts. The dymanic between wolves and moose on Isle Royale has shown this to be the case. You and other reactionaries simply "cry wolf" when they see one piece of a recovery cycle that features a temporary dip in the elk and deer they want to hunt for themselves.
Sorry, that should have been directed at "Put 'merica First."
No, dingle, I am advocating for your very existence, the fate of mankind, and the fate of Earth. Man exists only because of the real, natural and wild Earth that seeded all life and maintains it right today or Earth's ecosystems, and ecosystems exist only because of their plant and animal biodiversity of which science deems the wolf as a keystone specie.
Scientists were stunned when they reintroduced the American wolf to the Yellowstone ecosystem. The elk herds' mushrooming populations were trampling and killing that ecosystem's riparian and riverine systems. Not long after this reintroduction, scientists witnessed trees and plants not seen in over a hundred years re-appear. As plants and trees are the habitats, homes, food, nurseries and shelter and cover for all the strands in the web of all life, more and more bird species re-appeared, more and more species of biodiversity, the bricks and mortar of man's house, Earth came home. Even beavers returned to Yellowstone.
Coyotes were reducing the populations of pronghorn antelopes at Yellowstone, taking babies as young as a few weeks. The wolves intimidated the coyotes, and the antelope populations did a turn-about. In other words, this ecosystem became more life giving and more stable, thus more life-giving and supporting for all of mankind and the Earth.
Los Angeles and San Diego are now about as life creating and sustaining as the surface of Mars. Therein is the problem. Homo Sapiens are clueless as to what constitutes a living Earth and what is as dead as Mars. L.A. supports one specie, artificially. L.A. would not support the existence of wolves, and if a community cannot support the existence of biodiversity, it cannot support man's existence in the big picture, precisely why we are facing Earth's sixth massive spasm of extinction, a hotter and drier climate and science screaming, "we have no analogues for all of the unnatural changes occurring globally."
They need to be put back into Central Park in New York!
Then we will see how important everyone really thinks they are.
It's all fine to complain about protecting predators in other peoples back yards, but as soon as they show up in their back yard it's get the guns.
I just want New York restored to it's natural state> wolf's and all.
daryl 2183015
Got to love statistics right I mean they are indisputable facts right??? It's easy to through out numbers that back a position but if anyone takes just a second to look at those numbers they can realize they are bogus, assuming they are the least bit honest.
If you look at the number of cattle deaths by both groups and then compare that to the number of both groups as a whole state wide and by geographic areas of location for both groups you will find out that numbers of cattle killed per wolf by location it astronomically higher than that of dogs.
not actual numbers but you should get the point
350 wolves kill 1200 head of cattle in a year
500,000 dogs kill 1500 head of cattle a year
so yes more cattle killed by dogs, but comparatively wolves are the bigger threat.
Survival, not genocide by, the fittest. If there's a wolf in your backyard, in the woods, in the middle of a field (wherever) threatening you, nature has given you the ability to defend yourself - you are not intended to be prey. The animals you think you should be protecting, they are the wolf's natural prey. You have no right to interfere, even if you think that's "your" livestock.
I, too, would like NY restored to a more natural state. Though there are still wolves and a lot of other predators around here. We're just a lot smarter dealing with them. Bald eagles lately, too - that's just cool. They've probably been snatching up cats and small dogs, if I find someone taking aim at one he's getting a stone upside the head.
Well AK, unlike you I DO live near wolves, my home town is at the southern end of the wolves range in eastern Minnesota, and frankly, most people here would LIKE some more wolves to move in and eat all the damn deer that are the REAL menace in these parts, as roving road blocks on the roads and vermin eating farmers' crops and backyard vegetation, along with spreading diease laden ticks everywhere, and dieases related to mad cow disease as well as hoof and mouth to cattle. Actually the same can be said for the elk ranchers are so worried about in wyoming too.
Wyoming, where men are men and sheep are scared.
What right wing punkass idiots.
My experience with cattlemen after 40 years in the beef business is they are the biggest collection of whiners in the nation. To hear them talk, none of the have ever made a penny in their lifetime but yet they keep purchasing more land and expanding their herds.
100% agreenment there, as well as welfare queens paying "rents" on federal lands at rates that were consider ridiculously cheap in the 1870's and then consistently OVER grazing that land while blaming the native species.
Actually, Charlie, the feds provide free land for the hooved locust lovers and welfare ranchers. They're permitted to graze their hooved locust on lands that, cough, cough, belong to the American people, including BLM lands. Free, welfare ranchers. Nice, huh?
skor154
In truth, ranchers must pay to graze on public lands.
The wolf population should be managed by the state wildlife departments, as those from Minnesota have astutely pointed out. When wolf populations expand too far in various wildlife management areas, hunting should be allowed with a determined quota to manage the population. Wildlife biologists are more qualified than cattle ranchers, anti-hunting activists, hunters, PETA and politicians in managing and balancing wildlife populations.
Here in Colorado, a very vocal group of animal lovers succeeded in baning the spring bear hunting season by referendum, against the strong protests of The Colorado Division of Wildlife.
The resulting population explosion has created multiple problems, urban bear encounters, bear scavenging and pet deaths in the mountain communities and a declining mule dear population. Sadly many adult bears and cubs have been killed because it does little to relocate bears that have become accustomed to human communities.
It was a real "feel good" movement to reintroduce the wolf to the Rockies, and a success, but nobody asked the wolves if they would have preferred living were they were, far from our unfettered human population.
Maybe Palin can loan them helicopters, you know for some real sport like they do in Alaska!
Pathetic losers!
There are only about 350 wolves in Wyoming.
This is crazy, and wrong.
Wyoming----home of dick cheney. Nothing more needs saying about the mentality of the maority of those from Wyoming.
Exactly mike, we in Minnesota have TEN TIMES as many wolves, living cheek to jowl with about ONE MILLION people in an area ONE THIRD the size of state of wyoming, which has about HALF that number of people living in the ENTIRE STATE as compared to the wolf range in Minnesota. I doubt if one in TEN THOUSAND people in wyoming has been within 200 MILES of a wolf, while about one in TEN Minesotans lives within a nice afternoon walk of a wolfden.
I live in Wyoming. And I think they should leave the wolves alone. When I was growing up we had a half wolf half husky and he was awesome. There is enough elk to keep the wolves fed. Just let them live in peace.
right Patty, and deer too . and those deers can be a pest on crops too. Oh I forgot Disney, Bambi etc...
Some people just aren't happy unless they can kill everything. These are the people that are causing global warming and destroying the world around us but as long as they get their way they're happy. Sad and pathetic. Most of these ranchers are government subsidized any way.
Well said , daryl!!! Sorry about your family's misfortune. The corporate and 1%ers takeover of the family ranches should be exposed as what it is, the real threat to America's wild places.
The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation works with family ranchers to preserve thousands of acres of private ranch land from development and protects against excessive taxes that force ranchers to sellout, through Conservation Easements.
As a life member, I'm dismayed at the somewhat derogatory light the RMEF was exposed to in this article, it is a premiere conservation organization that supports the wolf reintroduction and the management of wolf populations by state wildlife agencies which includes wolf hunting seasons when appropriate.
Wolves have always been preditors. however, mankind remains the most dangerous preditor & we make excuses for them, mental, proverty, abuse where as wolves kill to eat & survive & man kills for enjoyment and dominate.
Ahhh,so if a wolf kills a human and leaves the carcass to rot, it's "natural and ok".
But if WE kill a wolf for protection,or to cull their numbers it's "greed and murder".
This issue isn't as black and white as you think it is.
"Most bureaucrats back East haven’t the foggiest idea of how life is out west.” And that's why they let buffalo hunters slaughter 50 million to almost the point of extinction.
"This year they passed a bill to force the feds to hand over all federal land (including national forests) to the state so they can give it to developers, oil interests and (you guessed it) ranchers."
I'm sure that would be news to the federal government, who (last I checked) still operate National Parks, National Forests, National Wildlife Refuges, and National Monuments in the state of Utah.
Pretty sure there are more than a few laws which would prevent that from happening. Maybe the federal government would we willing to give them all the "unwanted" land administered by the Bureau of Land Management.
Thinking the headline a few years after that would be 'Utah begs Feds to take back lands to prevent state bankruptcy!'
I beg to differ. they knew exactly what they were doing by encouraging the slaughter of buffalos. their plan was to starve the Native Indians whose relation with the bison was well understood. What would modern day America do if there were no bovine left for meat? Imagine that for a second, even though we still would have pork and chicken. but no more burgers and t-bones..?
Save, you got it right as always. Prez Grant gave the order to starve out the Plains, Native Americans as they were the most resistant Native Americans. [Real, go-getters!] So, they pushed the bison to near extinction. At the end of this holocaust, only six baby bison were left on Earth. A Native American secured them, and several, free-thinking ranchers who understood what was happening, took them in.
These six blessed babies in the twenties, became the herd that would live in the Yellowstone ecosystem. The American bison were as American as hickory trees and bald eagles, and two sub-species fell extinct, including the wood bison, native to the eastern U.S.
Prez Grant butchered multi-thousands of these Native Americans, this nation's oldest mammal with the largest vocabulary of any native American heritage. They survived the Ice Age but couldn't survive One Nation Under God.
I would kill a wolf if it showed up near me, but I wouldnt Hunt it.
Looks like the sheep in Wyoming have another predator to be nervous about.
First they push for reintegration of the packs then they reproduce, DUH, and now they want to have open season on them. Typical state legislation at its finest.
exactly, exactly exactly. stupid stupid stupid
You're wrong Earl Crawford, wolves don't just "kill to kill." That's what the human animal does. A wolf is estimated to kill 20 deer a year. That's hardly random killing or killing for killing. This is the same mentality that brought the wolf to near extinction!
I cannot believe the federal government delisted the wolf. This is outrageous. Wolves are already killed illegally, now they are making it legal to do so.
And, how much taxpayer money has been spent already to reintroduce the wolf across this country? My state promotes giving to the endangered species fund on our state tax forms, plus you can purchase car vanity plates that also go to this fund. How much in federal and state funds have been spent to reintroduce the wolf? All this money down the toilet and the wolves suffer horrible deaths in traps and by gun shot.
It makes no sense and needs to stop!
They got away with it because of the MASSIVE success of the regeneration of the wolf population in Minnesota, which has nearly TWICE as many wolves as the rest of the lower 48 states COMBINED. They are using OUR numbers to make a bogus claim of wolf recovery.
Wow, JB, what a magnificent, beautiful summary of all the reasons mankind must save our wolves as they are a keystone specie, relevant to the security of all life on Earth. FYI, I believe you know, our president, Obama, sealed the deal to slaughter our wolves. Ironically, he has been a worst environmental prez than even ole Bush. Right today, he is working on gutting the vital Endangered Species Act that has existed in this nation since Nixon was prez. Sad, isn't it.
Obviously, Obama is clueless as to all the reasons Mother Earth creates and supports all life, including man's, and it has everything to do with wolves and all biodiversity, both plant and animal, that create and support and save all ecosystems, every reason mankind exists.
skor154,
Attacking Obama on the environment has been the domain of the far right and the gas and oil lobby, for trying to reinstate and improve EPA regs. Bush/Cheney among other deregulation, exempted gas drillers from the Clean Water Act and proposed selling huge tracts of public land in the West to the highest bidder.
The deregulation of offshore drilling was largely responsible for the BP disaster.........and who demanded that BP fund a $25B escrow account that paid for mitigation and financial losses, Obama. The Republican leadership apologized to the CEO of BP for the tactics of the President and called it "blackmail" The victims of the Exxon Valdez are still waiting for payment.
Gutting Endangered Species act? I don't buy it........now...... his opposition in Congress has has it on their wish-list as well as abolishing the EPA completely.
I've been an enviromentalist since the 1960's, back then we saw the real problem........uncontrolled human population growth. We accomplished many things, among them, Creation of the EPA, The Clean Waters Act which saved the Great lakes, Superfund cleanups, The Clean Air Act, and on and on etc........
We couldn't coax people into having only one or two or no children....!
Obama's opposition wants to @!$%# can all of it for greed and or religious revelations!!!!
Want to just roll over and give up.........your accusations of Mr Obama are, at worst lies and at best exaggerations...........but could be destructive for us all..
This is not about the Federal government bureaucrats dictating rules for the ranchers to live by. Conservation groups have highly qualified and scientifically educated boots on the ground in those states where wolves have been reintroduced. Scientific data is collected on pack movement and numbers. Any genuine attacks on livestock are recorded and reported as well and, in those cases where the attacks can be verified, the rancher is compensated for their loss. Data collected is provided to the approriate government agencies so that intelligent and scientific decisions can be made. Wolves are an important part of the ecosystem and as such should be allowed to attain sufficient numbers in order to maintain the population at an acceptable level. Keeping the population under control is one thing but inhumane killing by aerial hunting and trapping, which allows the animal to suffer horribly before death, is simply despicable and only serves to glorify the ignorant morons that find those methods humorous, label it a sport and post the results of their ignorance on the internet. They are a disgrace to all legitimate hunters. The environment would be better served without some of those humans that perpetuate their vile and inhumane slaughter than we will be with a few less wolves.
"This is not about the Federal government bureaucrats dictating rules for the ranchers to live by"
But those ranchers sure love that federal government land to graze their cattle. Cattleman -- the biggest collection of whiners in the nation.
I live in MT and can tell you that in a livestock based state they have killed many many domestic animals and all but wiped out the coyotes in Yellowstone. If you want a natural system remove everyone out of the west. The population of wolves is over 1200 and the government said it only wanted a small amount. Why are we spending millions and millions on wolves while people worry about the next pay check? This year MT had a hunting season-after which a population count was made and the wolves increased by 15% in spite of hunting. They do kill for fun, ask the sheep producer-they will rip the belly out of the lambs and have done so in a corral close to where people live. They may eat part of one but rip the belly's out of 20 babies.
As for the previous persons response, we would love to send a bunch to where you live. Also, the comments about humane treatment is laughable-man is the biggest killer of other humans-until we learn to treat each other better don't expect me to respect your views.
Let's look at some actual data, instead of heresay and "stories.". This is from the Wisconsin DNR website:
"Wolves are controversial because they are large predators. Farmers are concerned about wolves preying on their livestock. In northern Wisconsin, about 50-60 cases of wolf depredation occur per year, about half are on livestock and half on dogs. As the population continues to increase, slight increases in depredation are likely to occur. In Minnesota, with about 3000 wolves, there are usually 60 to 100 cases per year.
A few hunters continue to kill wolves, believing that such actions will help the deer herd. It is important to place in perspective the impact of wolves preying on deer. Each wolf kills about 20 deer per year. Multiply this by the number of wolves found in Wisconsin in recent years (630), and approximately 13,000 deer may be consumed by wolves annually. This compares to over 40,000 deer hit by cars each year, and about 450,000 deer shot annually by hunters statewide. Within the northern and central forests where most wolves live, wolves kill similar numbers of deer as are killed by vehicles (about 13,000), and about 1/10 of those killed by hunters (127,000 in 2008)."
Exactly what I've been posting here.
If you want FACTS, and not a bunch of BS, research MINNESOTA for REAL statistics on wolf/human interaction and wolf predation on domestic animals.
In Minnesota, the general consensus is that it would be nice if the wolves ate MORE deer, as they have reached population levels that just about make them vermin in many areas, both for destroying yard plants, AND foor eating crops.
Governor Mead is from a ranching family; truth be told, he would rather eliminate wolves again. Wyoming is run by those who raise sheep and cattle. If you want cattle to stay off of your property, there are places where YOU have to fence them out. And that really is a law.
Statistics show that feral dogs kill more livestock than wolves do. I can't believe there can be so much difference in paw prints (my husky has really big front paws) and bite wounds inflicted by wolves and dogs. So it would be easy to blame wolves.
This will be the third time i have posted a comment here and because i mention that the liberal MSNBC prints only half truths i believe that they remove the post. So, therefore, i will try again. THe statement that domestic dogs kill more cattle than wolves is just NOT TRUE!!. Follow the link in the article above to the USDA website and it will state that COYOTES AND DOMESTIC DOGS KILL MORE CATTLE THAN WOLVES.That is likely true. The reason being that coyotes live in every state where you will find cattle. On the other hand, the majority of wolves are mainly confined to Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, and now scattering into surrounding states. Make no mistake about it, where wolves are prevelent, they are the #1 preditor to livestock. Refer to article on the massive sheep kill from wolve attacks that recently occured in Montana. Over 120 specialty bred rams were killed in one attack. I have lived in cattle country all of my life. Domestic dogs do not kill a lot of livestock, and if they are caught even harrassing livestock they will be immediately disposed of. On the other hand, wolves will quickly dispose of every dog in their territory if they have the opportunity.
It should be required that all of the facts be stated rather than half truths that really are lies. As i read many of the comments in this post most are not looking to tell the truth, they only want to bitch. If telling the truth were a requirement to be a politician, we would soon lose all of the carreer politicians--on both sides of the isle.
"It's about "F -ing" time. The wolf population is out of control. They have already decimated the pronghorn antelope population in The Yellowstone as well as the park's elk population (the survivable elk birthing rate is below 25 %).
This is a natural predator that likes to kill just for sport except they don't neatly stay in the Park's boundaries anymore. They are making it tough on the ranchers in both Montana and Wyoming
(and they have it tough enough). " I hope this is the end of an error. " There is a reason our forefathers shot the bastards. No matter how cute National Georgraphic tries to make them, they need to be hunted and kept in control.
Maybe when we need to reintroduce them to Central Park and when someone's little " lap wetter" is killed and eaten by a wolf then they will get it.
T. Suitt
Atlanta, Ga.
Hogwash. Of course, they are natural 'predators' and admirable ones too. That's they way Nature evolved them. And predators kill for food - not 'for sport' as you stupidly claim.
And, their population has been carefully controlled and monitored over the years. They are hardly reproducing 'out of control' - where do you get this nonsense????
You sir, sound like one of those idiotic, cowardly 'hunters' who claim to hunt because those animals out there 'need to be controlled'. What baloney, you coward. If you want to hunt, then leave your artificial advantage - e.g. your gun - behind and then go confront nature. Now that's HUNTING dude, but I'm sure you won't do it. You only run your mouth because you have access to high powered rifles. Without them, you are useless. I only wish I could join the wolves and shoot back at you so-called 'hunters' and laugh my a&$ off as you go run like cowards. As an Army vet, I can tell you that my marksmanship is excellent too - the wolves would love my help.
If the thrill of shooting something is so damn precious to you, then go join the Army or Marines. They can arrange some genuine thrills for you. Of course, someone will be shooting back. You probably woin't like that part, will ya'?
You are hardly worth responding to except to say that almost every single thing you said was wrong. Try reading before you post such inaccurate drivel.
I don't live there, but I'd have 2 say that people should at least try 2 coexist with the wolf. I'd hate 2 C the demise of a species due 2 their remarkable comeback. Stupid is as stupid does as far as hunting and trapping them goes. Humans can B incredibly cruel.
I live here. Stanley, Idaho. Unfortunately the "new" wolves that are here are very much not co-existing with the rest of nature.
BS, you are just clueless as to what the ecology SHOULD look like after decades of human interference for fun and profit.
Wolves are predators? Wow!! I never knew. I thought they all ate Purina dog chow.
Need to manage the predators to manage the herd for hunts? WTF is that?!? Everything is royally screwed because we got involved in the first place.
Want to defend your livestock? Fine, I get it...completely. Have at it. But going out and hunting predators to get rocks off is borderline retarded. They're the most important members of the ecosystem.
Want to hunt something dangerous? Go to Iraq or Afghanistan and hunt terrorists. They shoot back. Not very accurately, but at least they try!
Looks like Cheney and his despots win again and the wolves loose!
Typical Red Neck politics!! As bad as Texas!
I see there's a problem in Atlanta GA with out of control wolves!! <GIGGLE>
In Wyoming, we arent talking about a lot of wolves. Wyoming needs to be told that they MUST follow federal law regarding wolf hunting. The experts on the ground know the situation better than anyone. Their opinion need to be given great weight. If not, we could easilygo back to the days when the wolves were hunted to near extinction. Federal land and federal laws are there to protect natural resources, not for ranchers and profit. Wolves arent even the biggest cause of death of livestock!!! It isnt even close!
Exactly right. The bulk of CLAIMED wolf kills were in fact scavanging, followed by coyote and bear attacks and dog attacks.
yes, I'd hope they weren't reintroduced to be re-exterminated. how bout we re-exterminate the few remaining Native Indians? would that be OK? Or have they been controlled and f'ed enough with?
Cheney has nothing to do with this. And yes the wolves are LOOSE!
I am hoping Wyoming will classify Dick Cheney as a predator and declare open season on him. He should never have been allowed a new heart, now we won't be rid of him for another decade, or two. I guess his war profiteering through his Halliburton holdings bought him a first in line position for the heart transplant.
Ranching is the most destructive human activity on the planet. It not only destroys the forests, grasslands, air and pollutes the waterways but they also want to wipe out any and all species that they can't make a profit on. They wipe out the "predators" and then when other animals like rats, squirrels and rabbits multiply they then expect taxpayer money to be spent on poisoning those animals as well and on and on it goes. They refuse to coexist with anything that competes with their special interests even though they are heavily subsidized by the government which means us taxpayers. They not only want plenty of meat readily available in the supermarket but also easy and readily available elk for easy taking....pathetic and disgusting.
Ranchers want to make a living. That's it. I suppose you and Jon Marvel hang out. You sure as hell better be a vegetarian. You are a hypocrite. You do realize that anything that grows is a living creature. I see no difference between eating meat from an animal or eating a tomato.
You can't be serious. You see no difference between a sentient being (who mates for life and has a complex social life) and the fruit of a plant that has no self-awareness or central nervous system? Then perhaps you see no difference between yourself, your child, your parent or your best friend and a clove of garlic or a broccoli floret.
And I agree with ABSDesigner wholeheartedly, and if s/he is not putting their insights and values of compassion into practice by being vegan yet, I'm sure that day is coming soon and I applaud it.
I sure as hell am a vegetarian and have been for decades. Everyone thinks I'm at least 10 - 15 years younger than I am and I highly recommend it. If someone truly wants to help the environment, try at least cutting down on meat if not eliminate it completely.
"Ranchers want to make a living."
To hear most ranchers talk -- they never made a penny in their entire life.
Yeah, and sex traffickers and drug dealers want to make a living too. The hell with every other living thing as long as a few are able to make their living.