Wolf supporters howling (Sane article re wolf reintroduction)

The Topeka Capital-Journal ^ | March 6, 2010 | Marc Murrell

[jazusamo]

The reintroduction of wolves to western habitats has met with plenty of controversy. Landowners, sportsmen and conservation groups have been on one side or the other since the project began. And now the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) is calling the bluff of pro-wolf groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Western Wildlife Conservancy and others for their manipulative use of data concerning the relationships between elk and wolves.

The rub lies in these groups' use of RMEF statistics that supposedly show an increase in elk populations in the northern Rockies as a result of the wolf reintroduction program. Letters to the editor in western newspapers by these groups, coupled with Western Wildlife Conservancy Executive Director Kirk Robinson's testimony before Utah lawmakers prompted the RMEF to take action and set the record straight.

"The theory that wolves haven't had a significant adverse impact on some elk populations is not accurate. We've become all too familiar with these groups' tactics of cherry-picking select pieces of information to support their own agenda, even when it is misleading," said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. "We will not allow that claim to go unchallenged."

The RMEF gets its data from state wildlife agencies. Information shows that elk populations are expanding in the northern Rockies, but only in areas where wolves aren't present.

And quite the opposite is true where elk share habitat with wolves such as the greater Yellowstone area. Since the reintroduction of gray wolves to the area in the mid-1990s, the northern Yellowstone elk herd has plummeted from 17,000 animals to just over 7,000 animals. Other localities in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are also documenting downward trends.

Additionally, some research shows that high wolf numbers in areas can cause elk to experience nutritional problems, lower body weights and declining birth rates.

"Every wildlife conservation agency, both state and federal, working at ground zero of wolf restoration —Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming — has abundant data to demonstrate how under-managed wolf populations can compromise local elk herds and local livestock production," Allen said. "There's just no dispute, and emotion-over-science is not the way to professionally manage wildlife."

The RMEF continues to support state-regulated wolf management to include hunting and other viable methods. When populations of furbearers like wolves get too high without any control, disease becomes a problem as seen in packs of Yellowstone wolves.

"When wolves are too abundant, they're more susceptible to diseases, just like all wildlife. The viruses and mange now spreading through wolf packs is another sign of way too many wolves," said Allen. "Defenders of Wildlife would like to spin sick wolves as a reason to end hunting. But real conservationists know that diseased wildlife populations need better management. Hunting as a management tool delivers that, period."

"Remember, pro-wolf groups make their living by prolonging this conflict," he added. "There is no real incentive for them to admit that wolves are overly recovered. Fundraising is their major motive and they've built a goldmine by filing lawsuits and preaching that nature will find its own equilibrium between predators and prey if man would just leave it alone.

"That's a myth. The truth is that people are the most important part of the equation. This isn't the Wild West anymore. People live here — actually, quite a lot of us. So our land and resources must be managed. Wildlife must be managed. Radical spikes and dips in populations show that we should be doing it better. It's not profitable for plaintiffs, but the rest of us would be better served if the conflict ended and conservation professionals were allowed to get on with their business of managing wildlife, including a well regulated hunting strategy."

The RMEF first got involved in wolf litigation in 2009 and supported defendant agencies by filing legal briefs in federal court to help delist wolves and proceed with hunting — "facts conveniently ignored by groups who misuse our name, data and credibility to prolong the conflict," Allen said.

"We stand for elk and other wildlife and what is happening right now is simply not good wildlife management," he concluded.

[jazusamo]

click pics

MARC MURRELL/SPECIAL TO THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is calling out the Defenders of Wildlife, Western Wildlife Conservancy and others for using their data to erroneously state that elk populations have actually flourished since wolf reintroductions began in the mid-1990s. That statement is true, but only in areas of the Rocky Mountains where wolves aren't present, the RMEF contends.

MARC MURRELL/SPECIAL TO THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The elk population in the northern Yellowstone area has declined from more than 17,000 animals to just over 7,000 animals since the wolf restoration project began in the mid-1990s.

[equalitybeforethelaw]

Just shoot em or poison them.

[jazusamo]

Ping!

[Pavegunner72]

Shot them in self defense- if questioned.

[utherdoul]

I’d love to have wolves introduced here (Cape Cod and MA) they could take care of the deer, coyote, squirrel, and overabundance of retirees around here. Besides wolves are friendlier than your average democrat around here.

[jazusamo]

LOL! There’s something to be said for that.

[Ditto]

Just shoot em or poison them.

Who, the wolves or the tree huggers?

[mbynack]

I went to the Seacrest Wolf Sanctuary for a tour last Saturday. I learned a lot. For example, when wolves kill bison and elk, it’s part of the “great circle of life”. When hunters kill bison or elk, it’s “the wanton distruction of our natural resources.”

[jazusamo]

Yep, the nuts at these type attractions would be correct if it was about a million years ago. They want all the wildlife protected and advocate there be fewer humans (all but themselves and those who believe like they do) to interfere with nature. :)

[dirtboy]

In the long run, nature appears balanced. In the short run, it seldom is. Grazing populations spike, followed by a spike in predators. Nature has cycled that way for eternity if man is not present. So the core question is, do we manage nature for the maximum benefit of man? Or for some bong-induced concept like Gaia? Wolves in small, managed numbers do help the strength of herds, but when they get too numerous herds decline and the wolves turn to domesticated animals - and hunting suffers as well.

[dirtboy]

Hunting dollars have preserved far more habitat than the kumbaya granola types ever have.

[george76]

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation

http://www.rmef.org/

[jazusamo]

Hunting dollars have preserved far more habitat than the kumbaya granola types ever have.

Absolutely!

And the RMEF and many other organizations with hunters and fishermen and women as members have raised big money that actually benefit wildlife. They also have provided many members for boots on the ground improvement of wildlife habitat.

[jazusamo]

Thanks for providing the link, George. The RMEF is a great organization.

[BooBoo1000]

S.S.S.

[mbynack]

In the long run, nature appears balanced. In the short run, it seldom is.

We use to notice this when we farmed. We would see rabbit populations grow substantially over two or three years and then they would decline as the fox population increased. Soon the foxes ran out of rabbits and they died or moved out and the rabbit population took off again. On one end of the cycle we were loosing crops to rabbits, on the other end we were loosing chickens to the foxes. No matter what, there never seemed to be a part of the cycle where the farmer won.

[mbynack]

About ten years ago I read that the largest contributor to US conservation was “Ducks Unlimited”.

[dirtboy]

And professional wildlife management, with managed hunting seasons, can hunt more rabbits in one year and more foxes in another to balance out the cycles. If you ever want to see what happens when there are no predators and no hunting, go to Valley Forge National Park - it is infested with small deer that leave a browse line on trees like a weed eater has gone around at five feet off the ground and that eat just about everything in the understory of the forest - leaving a forest that will die off eventuall because no young trees can grow to replace those that die.

[dirtboy]

Yep, the prey/predator populations run in similar cycles but the predator cycle is a year or two out of phase with the prey cycle.

[mo]

“It really comes down to this: My conservative political philosophy does not threaten or affect the freedom of liberals. I don’t ask them to sacrifice anything for me, but they DEMAND I sacrifice for them”

where do we send the bill for what it costs to make the librul do-gooders feel good....