Wolves Eating us out of Elk...

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:20 pm

The Wyoming Dept of Game & Fish (or Fishy Games...) has requested reducing elk licenses in the Sunlight/Crandall area from 800 to 300, ostensibly to allow the herd to increase...

Most of us see it as a tacit admission by the G&F that the wolves have been eating thru our elk herd at a prodigeous rate. Several of the outfitters in the area will be severely impacted by the decision. Although the State does not owe the outfitters a means to make a living, neither should it direct nor participate in processes/procedures which would limit or eliminate their opportunity/ability to do so...

And so it goes, men...

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:33 pm

NoNONO that cannot be, Why Bruthy Babbit hizzself said the wolves would not leave the Park and would only eat the sick and weak buffalo.ssswss

Sides all that there's folks that think the wolve to be important just incase they ever venture far enough away from town that they and their children might be able to hear the howl of the wolf.......

stew71 · Post by **stew71** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:51 pm

Yeah I guess it makes to much sense to.....oh I don't know...harvest some wolves, perhaps? Is your DF&G getting advice from our DF&G out here in Kalifornia? Sounds like it.

On another note, when I picked up my non-resident caribou tag in Alaska a couple of years ago, the nice lady behind the counter in the F&G office asked us to shoot any wolves or grizzlies that we came across in the area. They were killing off the moose and caribou calves in alarming numbers and wanted help from the local hunters.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:50 pm

Yeah, "They" lied through their false teeth when they proposed the wolf plan -- from the beginning, 'til NOW... And we knew it, and we fought it, and we couldn't outspend the b*st*rds, and they dumped the ALIEN government DOGS down our throats, knowing we wouldn't put up with either the wolves OR the government.

According to Wyoming law, any domestic dog found harrasing wildlife may be SHOT ON SIGHT. Funny that we can't apply the same rule to USDA/USDI predators. The Inferior Department controls the wolves, through the FFWS, and WE, THE PEOPLE are supposed to keep our mouths shut, and our fingers off the trigger, while wolves & grizzly bears literally destroy our big game herds -- which belong, by statute, to the PEOPLE OF WYOMING.

I'm not even going to touch on the damage the wolves & bears do to livestock producers, which may be an even more serious problem.

Go figger...

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:07 pm

Well I never could follow their rational, that those CANADIAN grey wolves they flew in at a cost of 1 million us dollars per each, could qualify as an endangered species.

But they did, they wiped out the few true Rocky Mtn Grey wolves that were getting along just fine without anybodies help, but they weren't doing enough to wreck and ruin Wyomings economy, so ............

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:13 pm

I'd say there were enough of them in Canada, and close enough to the US, that FFWS felt no qualms about transplanting them. Hardly qualifies as "endangered" in MOST books...

I have it on good authority that the number of wolves actually "imported" exceeds 1,000 -- not the 300 they told us about.

Which rifle/caliber would you recommend using to help the State of Wyoming rid itself of this imported nuisance..???

BigSky56 · Post by **BigSky56** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:35 pm

Buck, your right F&G doesnt owe anyone a living but they are responsible for managing the game because of license fees and taxpayer money, had a warden tell me he preferred wolves to people cause people leave trash, shooting signs, poach I asked him who payed his salary people or wolves he didnt like that typical bureaucrat that forgets who he works for. The elk herd around my place has been cut in half in 2 years by the wolves and the calf survival rate is down 75% when there's no game to shoot and lic fees start dropping F&G will make excuses raise fees ask for public money to cover the shortfalls anything but address the problem, wolves. danny

I wish that MT & ID had stood with WYO about wolves it might of hurt some more but the fix would be better in the long run.

Post by **Old Savage** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:57 pm

I believe the wolves were brought in to destroy the elk and the deer.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:44 pm

I'm glad OS said that first because I was afraid to. Back in the 1800s the US Govt decided the best way to destroy the American Indians independence was to destroy their food source - the buffalo. No food to hunt, the Indians had to depend on the govt.

That is what I think the govt is working on here. No game to hunt, no need for guns. Easier to split the casual hunters apart from the true second amendment supporters. Divide and conquer. Turn in all your hunting guns, you don't need 'em. We'll take care of you.

I personally think this wolf and grizzly situation is just a tiny fragment of the bigger political picture.

JMHO

Joe

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:47 pm

Old Savage wrote:I believe the wolves were brought in to destroy the elk and the deer.

ARFS would rather see all Food/Domestic animals destroyed than to have them continue to be "enslaved" or used for "blood sports".

It's an Orwellian mindset...

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:14 pm

Buck 243 ought to be about right.

I think the elk and deer were the unintended consequence. The original plan was to wipe out the ag community in Wyo, then there wouldn't be much standing in the way of expanding the "Greater Yellowstone" area, and including the rest of the state into the "great buffalo" commons.
Our beloved Sect of state Ms. Kathy Carpin(d sweetwater co) is on record stating how nice the total inclusion of the state would be to Yellowstone and the buffalo commons. Mike Sullivan is still trying to figure out why he suddenly lost popularity. Between his wife Jane and love the wildflower push , Kathy Carpins turn the state clear over to the feds, and his steadfast refusal to stand up to the Clintonistas......

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:20 pm

I think Don is right on the unintended consequences part.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:17 pm

The Clintons and Babbit made no bones about "cattle free in 93".

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:37 pm

Did they really?
I did not know that.
What would be the purpose of such a policy?

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:10 pm

There was a big push to remove all the livestock from public lands. Remove the public land grazing, and you eliminate the ability of those folks to hang on to their private lands, adjoining the public lands. Remove the private property owner, eminanent domain the private land, presto chango, you gottum bigger national parks, monuments etc. Remove the production capabilities of the private sector the sooner you control the private sector.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:15 pm

Remember the push for the "buffalo commons" back in the hippy days. Well those nitwits went to work for the federal govt and now they have risen to the higher ranks and are in power. Give them credit for knowing how to execute their agenda.

Won't be long Don, they already shot two of the buggers up deer creek right behind me. We may have to learn how to make our own "getters"

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:38 pm

Mike there was a pair came thru here years ago. Not sure what happened evidently they didn't like it to good. Heard one of them was seen down along hiway 26 on the west edge of Torrington, and that's the last anybody has seen of em here.

BigSky56 · Post by **BigSky56** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:14 pm

Don, the cattle free by 93 crowd has hurt ranchers I also remember babbit say if you control the water you control the west. The feds have been buying up easements from yellowstone to the border they call them wildlife corridors so the game can get to other areas and not be landlocked. The feds have funded the building of 10' high fences along the major hwys hwy 200 & hwy 2 is on the list and hwy 93 already has been built on the flathead res they put in underpasses for the wildlife these fences are on private & public land with lockable gates the Canadians already have 93 fenced its a matter of time till its all fenced. Our county commissioners are fighting it as 2 transverses the whole county I dont think it wildlife control its people control. danny

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:23 pm

You're probably right on the fences Danny.
Yes Babbit and his entrenched beaurocrats stold just as many water rights as they could. Nebraska and Kansas have been playing the same game. I miss Gov Ed Herschler, and politicians with enough hair of the bear to tell things like it was. He told Nebraska once they could stand down stream with their piece of paper all they wanted, he'ld just stay upstream with his shovel.

Told the peanut Farmer to do what he wanted but if he kept it up the interstate wouldn't have any exits, and the gas and coal would stay home.

That raised a ruckus.

bigbore442001 · Post by **bigbore442001** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:51 pm

I'll concur that it is part of a plan to break the back of rural Wyoming. Not only will it drive out game and ranching but think of all the people connected with it. Guides and outfitters will no longer be in business so they will have to move and get employment elsewhere. Same with ranchers.

I know it has been said and been done but people need to do more than shoot, shovel and shut up. They need to start setting cable snares and finding dens. I don't think I have to explain what you do. This could mean the survival of the people in such areas.

Summit 512 · Post by **Summit 512** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:17 pm

Hi will see if this works ,pardon my ...this is my first post

kaschi · Post by **kaschi** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:34 pm

Here in PA it's the same thing with coyotes. 20 yrs ago you never saw one, now they are everywhere eating deer. A(denied) Game Commission plot to reduce the herd but they will never admit it. If I lived where some of you live with wolves around, I'd be shooting every one I saw.

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:12 pm

Summit 512,
It worked, sit down, welcome.

Summit 512 · Post by **Summit 512** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:03 pm

Why wont you allow my posts

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:33 pm

We got this one?

Post by **Hobie** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 6:49 am

J Miller wrote:I'm glad OS said that first because I was afraid to. Back in the 1800s the US Govt decided the best way to destroy the American Indians independence was to destroy their food source - the buffalo. No food to hunt, the Indians had to depend on the govt.

That is what I think the govt is working on here. No game to hunt, no need for guns. Easier to split the casual hunters apart from the true second amendment supporters. Divide and conquer. Turn in all your hunting guns, you don't need 'em. We'll take care of you.

I personally think this wolf and grizzly situation is just a tiny fragment of the bigger political picture.

JMHO

Joe

There is a faction that believes that and has it as an agenda. They started long before the Heller ruling (as good as that's done for us

).

GoatGuy · Post by **GoatGuy** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:40 am

Just e-mailed the link to this topic to a close friend/Wy property owner for his perusal. Expect he'll be p*****, to say the least. He recently got a contract to do some work up there and plans to become a permanent resident sometime in the near future. Yep, you guessed it; he's a hunter/shooter and wants the opportunity to live in what most of us have been led to believe is the finest big game state in the country. Hate to see this happening to ya'll. It's a crying shame!!

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:11 pm

Article in the CODY ENTERPRISE blames low calf numbers primarily on bears in the Lamar Valley and other parts of the park, but admits that the calves which escape the bear predation are then left to run the wolf gauntlet... Whatever the real cause, the result is the same.

Game & Fish rejected a proposed 6-pt. or better option for managing the herd -- likely because it was proposed & supported by outfitters...

I'm one of those who definitely believe there is a very sinister back story behind the shenanigans being pulled by various state & federal agencies in our area. Too much 'coincidence' and empirical evidence to believe the contrary. Too many bold, threatening statements by bear-huggers & officials alike. Most of these do not make the news, but are certainly heard by anyone in attendance at various meetings on the subject.

moosemike · Post by **moosemike** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 9:33 pm

What do they (bureaucrats,politicians) stand to gain from running the good residents of Wyoming out and creating a "Buffalo Commons"? I've heard the proposal for an "American Serengeti" used by liberals and I can't see the reason behind this madness. I've been to Wyoming probably six times and I love it and hate what these wolves are doing to the elk and moose. What's the sense behind this?

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:15 am

moosemike wrote:What do they (bureaucrats,politicians) stand to gain from running the good residents of Wyoming out and creating a "Buffalo Commons"? I've heard the proposal for an "American Serengeti" used by liberals and I can't see the reason behind this madness...

By in large, Urban Politicians (i.e. most of 'em) have no love at all for rural America. They know they can't control it like the can the Cities, so they are doing their worst to try to depopulate it further, drive small farms/ranches out of business, and generally turn food production (and control) over to Government Sponsored/Controlled Big Agribusiness.

5-year-plans and all that.

Then there is UN Agenda 21, for "Sustainable Development" which essentially mandates the forced movement of ALL people into "habitation zones" of mega cities/arcologies along transportation corridors leaving the rest of the country involuntairly "uninhabitated" for the birdies & bunnies so the land can "heal itself"... http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

Again, densly packed people can be more easily controled...

Ain't Centralized Gooberment Grand? We've got every everything Hamilton dreamed of, and everything Jefferson Feared...

PaulB · Post by **PaulB** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:32 am

Even if you do manage to shoot an elk, the bears come and take it away from you.

The real solution: see my signature line.

BTW, I have heard many a good old conservative Wyomingite say they are glad there are "public lands" (a euphemism for federal government preserves). They thought there was more hunting that way. Well, until the feds decide to stop it!

There was a big to-do in Cody when the feds decided to close the east gate of Yellowstone in the winter, further depressing the economy here. I couldn't believe how many people (figuratively) got down on their knees and begged the fed bureaucrats to leave it "somewhat" open. It was disgusting. They should have got out the tar and feathers instead.

If there are going to be "public lands", they should be controlled by Wyoming government, not the feds.

The feds are not even supposed to hold this land at all (44% of all land in Wyoming). It is unconstitutional.

Until people start making these points and threatening secession if things aren't set right, this problem is guaranteed to get worse and Wyoming WILL turn into a buffalo commons.

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:25 am

The collection of the populace into urban areas, and the turning of certain rural places into an American Serenghetti, it just does not pass the litmus test for me.
Such a thing could not possibly be " policy " the concept is implausible to me.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:30 am

mescalero1 wrote:The collection of the populace into urban areas, and the turning of certain rural places into an American Serenghetti, it just does not pass the litmus test for me.
Such a thing could not possibly be " policy " the concept is implausible to me.

I think the issue is less the plausability, but that it is an actual idea being bandied about by people in power and not just loons in their momma's basements.

Remember, one of BoBo's intellectual/weatherman cronies worked up a plan for "eliminating" the US "surplus" population...

Feasable or not, they are considering this stuff - if only as a Leftist Wet Dream...

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:38 am

Leftist wet dream, ok I'll go for that,
implemented policy? that one has a ways to go.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 11:00 am

mescalero1 wrote:The collection of the populace into urban areas, and the turning of certain rural places into an American Serenghetti, it just does not pass the litmus test for me.
Such a thing could not possibly be " policy " the concept is implausible to me.

The fact that such an idea seems "implausible" to so many people is just what makes it so dangerous. While too many 'citizens' sit on their hands in bewildered disbelief, the oligarchs put the plan into action -- one little piece at a time...

The concept of concentrating habitation into magalopolises is an old one, and it has worked wherever it has been implemented. Lots easier to control the population if it is gathered into centralized hubs. The Socialists' greatest fears and hatred are directed against 'independent' free-living people.

BTW, the people of Cody did not get on their (our) knees and 'beg' the Feds to keep the East Gate open in the Winter season. It was a hard-fought battle, with threats & concessions on both sides. One of the good things to come of it was the abolition of the notion that Yellowstone is Supt. Suzanne Lewis's private Park -- a notion that originated with her predecessor, Mike Finley.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:08 pm

Well said Buck

moosemike · Post by **moosemike** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:45 pm

We all have to be prepared to get lost in the wilds someday and live off the land. It will be the only way to live free at some point.

PaulB · Post by **PaulB** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 6:17 pm

It was a hard-fought battle, with threats & concessions on both sides.

Don't forget our most important concession: that the park is legitimately the fed's to administrate. I wonder if anyone even bothered to question it at all.

The fed administrator answers to the whole United States. That includes bunny huggers in New York City, who certainly outnumber the residents of Wyoming, never mind Cody. Any "victory" we had about the park entrance is very temporary.

Bogie35 · Post by **Bogie35** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:14 am

When does the season for socialistic politicians open?

bogie

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:22 pm

Bogie35 wrote:When does the season for socialistic politicians open?

bogie

No "season;" no license; no bag limit...

And yes, the fact remains that the Feds do administer the Parks, and always have. Back in my salad days, "administer" had a much different definition.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:57 pm

Buck Elliott wrote:
Bogie35 wrote:When does the season for socialistic politicians open?

bogie
No "season;" no license; no bag limit...

And yes, the fact remains that the Feds do administer the Parks, and always have. Back in my salad days, "administer" had a much different definition.

Any more, "administer" means about the same as "service"... and boy howdy do we get "serviced" by those "administrators"...

Wrangler John · Post by **Wrangler John** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:35 pm

The new "environmentalists" are quite mad. before I retired I managed a large west coast redwood park. There is a steelhead stream running through the park, the powers that be passed a regulation that steelhead were a protected species. It was completely ridiculous. The law considered an unlawful taking the act of "scaring" a steelhead off a redd. If a child wadded into the stream and scared a fish - they could be arrested for taking a steelhead! Needless to say the law was never enforced. They just want to make everything the way it was before man came along - man bad, animals good.

California's nut cases passed a ballot measure to outlaw mountain lion hunting, and we were soon knee deep in cougars. Fortunately, they developed a taste for wild piglets, and less fortunately, for humans. Seeing the trend, I came up with a plan to reintroduce the grizzly bear to California. I figured they would soon be eating Sierra Club members, who tend to be old women in tweed jackets wearing men's wrist watches, and can not escape. I pointed out that our trail maintenance budget could be reduced with the reduction in traffic. They didn't think I was especially funny.

I had a state biologist mention that our environmental problems are due to the white male Judeo-Christian ethics! Total brain washed insanity. It has been said that the old Communists went out the back door red and came back in the front door green. The hunting season for commies and socialists opens on the second Tuesday of November, 2010. Good hunting.

BigSky56 · Post by **BigSky56** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:52 pm

John, beat them at their own game

, the mentality of biologists that come up with this stuff makes you want to open a can of whipass and its happening all over the west. danny

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:21 am

Just heard on the radio that Idaho is planning on allowing 200-some wolves to be killed in hunts this fall, (about 1/4 of the population) and Montana is planning on 75 to be killed in hunts, starting in September of this year. Wolves are still on the protected list in Wyoming. Wyoming couldn't come to an agreement with the feds regarding how they would manage them, wanting to make them predators like coyotes. So, because of the wrangling about the terminology, Idaho and Montana will have wolf hunts, and Wyoming will not.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:22 am

Funny, it ain't...

There isn't a State border in the country recognized by the wolves, OR the grizzly bears...
What will happen if some hapless Idaho hunter bags a "Wyoming" wolf --- by 'mistake' of course...?

...

The beaurocracy has become bereft of all reason, and the greenies are lovin' it. Can't wait until the greens are officially classified as 'humans' and become subject to the same rules and rstrictions as the rest of us...