Wolves in the NW. Thoughts?

[joken]

Friend jumped the cat off the kill when hunting

 

[Howard1955]

 

[Jamie6.5]

Exactly, it makes no sense to alter the balance of nature and expect good results. Wolves existed just fine ( in Oregon) for thousads of years and there was no shortage of prey.

In fact id say hunting has become worse since the last wolf was shot in Oregon....

But that's not entirely true and we have plenty of anecdotal evidence as well as forensic archaeology to prove it.
Predators create boom/bust cycles in prey populations, and their own numbers follow suit.
We know there were centuries with few wolves and little game in many places in the PNW.

But take for instance the Lewis and Clark expedition and the fact that they almost starved a few times, and probably would have if a couple of indian tribes in the PNW hadn't taught them which indigenous plants they could eat. They went days at a time and sometimes a week or two without seeing any significant game.

The fairy tale story of healthy ungulate herds coexisting with large numbers of wolf packs is just that. A fictional fairy tale.
Predator loving biologists love to blame humans for the extirpation of wolves in the PNW. But the truth is, we don't really know what caused them to leave. We know some were killed off, but it's far more likely some just up and left, as they're wont to do when their feed sources get scarce, and competition for what's left is fierce.
We know they can travel hundreds of miles in a matter of a month or little more. What happens if/when they decide to head back north, and end up back in B.C. Canada?
Re-import them and start over on this B.S. program?

Oregon's game management policies, if they continue in the current direction are far more likely to result in this state becoming a predator pit that few get a chance to hunt.
And as pressure on budgets mount, hunting is just as likely to become a rich man's sport.

And I'm sure nothing would please the elite leftist classes in Lane and Multnomah Counties more.

 

[Koda]

But that's not entirely true and we have plenty of anecdotal evidence as well as forensic archaeology to prove it.
Predators create boom/bust cycles in prey populations, and their own numbers follow suit.
We know there were centuries with few wolves and little game in many places in the PNW.

But take for instance the Lewis and Clark expedition and the fact that they almost starved a few times, and probably would have if a couple of indian tribes in the PNW hadn't taught them which indigenous plants they could eat. They went days at a time and sometimes a week or two without seeing any significant game.

The fairy tale story of healthy ungulate herds coexisting with large numbers of wolf packs is just that. A fictional fairy tale.
Predator loving biologists love to blame humans for the extirpation of wolves in the PNW. But the truth is, we don't really know what caused them to leave. We know some were killed off, but it's far more likely some just up and left, as they're wont to do when their feed sources get scarce, and competition for what's left is fierce.
We know they can travel hundreds of miles in a matter of a month or little more. What happens if/when they decide to head back north, and end up back in B.C. Canada?
Re-import them and start over on this B.S. program?

Oregon's game management policies, if they continue in the current direction are far more likely to result in this state becoming a predator pit that few get a chance to hunt.
And as pressure on budgets mount, hunting is just as likely to become a rich man's sport.

And I'm sure nothing would please the elite leftist classes in Lane and Multnomah Counties more.

predator "boom bust cycles" are much different than they were 100+ years ago. Wolves naturally balanced their food sources out with their pack size and expanded accordingly, they didn't eat their food source clean and move on to the next area to devour. The difference is back then, the wolves range to move around was unrestricted. Today, wolf habitat is highly fragmented... confining them to tracts of land that goes against their instinct to disperse accordingly to food availability.

To clarify my position because of that, I'm not advocating unrestrained wolf reintroduction. The environmentals are living a pipe dream if they think they can let wolf populations run unrestricted "like it was". My position is I don't think we should exterminate a species from existing just because their natural lifecycle has conflicts with humans (livestock predation etc.) but nowadays managing their population is just going to be overwhelming and expensive burden. We currently have about 120 (?) in Oregon, and my unscientific guess is thats probably enough. But the enviros cant handle that truth and are livid at the idea of letting legal hunting cull the numbers.

 

[Jamie6.5]

predator "boom bust cycles" are much different than they were 100+ years ago. Wolves naturally balanced their food sources out with their pack size and expanded accordingly, they didn't eat their food source clean and move on to the next area to devour. The difference is back then, the wolves range to move around was unrestricted. Today, wolf habitat is highly fragmented... confining them to tracts of land that goes against their instinct to disperse accordingly to food availability.

Then why do we have so many anecdotal reports of extremely scarce game numbers in the century before Oregon and Washington were settled?
Accounts from trappers of that era often recount having to eat the carcasses of the fur bearers they trapped because there was no more suitable meat to be had.
Predator/prey boom and bust cycles are real, yet denied by modern day biologists.
And we're hearing reports of them recurring in some sections of Idaho currently. Places that once held great deer and elk numbers are near barren of ungulate herds, and the last reported wildlife sightings were of wolves.
And now even they're leaving/left.

To clarify my position because of that, I'm not advocating unrestrained wolf reintroduction. The environmentals are living a pipe dream if they think they can let wolf populations run unrestricted "like it was". My position is I don't think we should exterminate a species from existing just because their natural lifecycle has conflicts with humans (livestock predation etc.) but nowadays managing their population is just going to be overwhelming and expensive burden. We currently have about 120 (?) in Oregon, and my unscientific guess is thats probably enough. But the enviros cant handle that truth and are livid at the idea of letting legal hunting cull the numbers.

The enviros also have lots of money for lots of lawyers too.
And if we don't get a handle on game management policies, and let the experts and experienced have a greater voice, we'll be managing for the wildlife watchers instead of tag holders.
Which will be non-existent at that point.

 

[Flymph]

I'm still of the position that actual wolf packs roaming the streets of Gresham in search of food is a good idea...

 

[Koda]

Then why do we have so many anecdotal reports of extremely scarce game numbers in the century before Oregon and Washington were settled?
Accounts from trappers of that era often recount having to eat the carcasses of the fur bearers they trapped because there was no more suitable meat to be had.

Id like to learn more about this if you have any sources to share.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Id like to learn more about this if you have any sources to share.

You can start here:
Fur Trappers, Wagon Trains and Military Expeditions - Malheur - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The Hudson Bay trappers even note the native Indians were complaining of sparse provisions.
But trappers, indians, settlers all experienced periods of very little or non-existent game.

Then there's "Starvation Camp" on the Oregon trail.

The notion that Oregon was always teeming with game is pretty much a myth. Yes there were plenty of beaver and muskrat at one time, but elk were confined to coastal areas, and deer were, and some herds still are, heavily migratory.
The reality is, big game numbers exploded with logging, as more south facing hillsides were exposed to sun and precipitation, and the browsing grasses flourished.
And probably just as important, even earlier, were farming and ranching settlements that provided herds with more regular food sources.

But both of those elements also had one other factor. They took place during and after the extirpation of the native wolf.

But Lewis and Clark reported near starvation, many travelers on the Oregon trail starved in the mountains of Idaho and Oregon, and in Oregon's high desert, and fur trappers all reported eras of little or no big game prior to the wolf being killed off or driven out of Oregon.
Prior to that the #1 game animal for the natives was most likely bison. They're known for co-existing better with wolves than just about any other non-predator critter.

 

[bbbass]

I'm still of the position that actual wolf packs roaming the streets of Gresham in search of food is a good idea...

Lake Oswego.

 

[Flymph]

Lake Oswego.

Doped up meth wolves running through downtown Portland... seems like a good idea from some perspectives.
I should make a movie about it!

 

[Argonaut]

You can start here:
Fur Trappers, Wagon Trains and Military Expeditions - Malheur - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The Hudson Bay trappers even note the native Indians were complaining of sparse provisions.
But trappers, indians, settlers all experienced periods of very little or non-existent game.

Then there's "Starvation Camp" on the Oregon trail.

The notion that Oregon was always teeming with game is pretty much a myth. Yes there were plenty of beaver and muskrat at one time, but elk were confined to coastal areas, and deer were, and some herds still are, heavily migratory.
The reality is, big game numbers exploded with logging, as more south facing hillsides were exposed to sun and precipitation, and the browsing grasses flourished.
And probably just as important, even earlier, were farming and ranching settlements that provided herds with more regular food sources.

But both of those elements also had one other factor. They took place during and after the extirpation of the native wolf.

But Lewis and Clark reported near starvation, many travelers on the Oregon trail starved in the mountains of Idaho and Oregon, and in Oregon's high desert, and fur trappers all reported eras of little or no big game prior to the wolf being killed off or driven out of Oregon.
Prior to that the #1 game animal for the natives was most likely bison. They're known for co-existing better with wolves than just about any other non-predator critter.

Lewis and Clark never really learned to eat indigenous animals they encountered on there journeys including Salmon.....they preferred white flesh fish more like the Cod they were more accustomed to. They did learn some from the Indians but still resisted unfamiliar foods. I totally agree that logging and agriculture brought a great boom in big (and small) game populations and populations are not static however reintroduction of an apex predator is not good or nessisary. When I was studying Biology at the University of Idaho, it was taken as common knowledge there were 2 to 3 times the deer now on the continent than pre Columbian times. We have replaced Buffalo with there very close cousin (so close there interbreed without issue) the common cow for convince (I had a pet buffalo but they can be difficult to handle). We humans adapt our enviorment in ways that benefit us.......always have......as it is explained in the Bible. Even the much lauded indigenous people here were very hard on existing ecosystems, if a plains tribe wanted to eat a buffalo, they would drive an entire herd over a cliff.......the enviorment needs to be managed with care but the hypocritical manner we are engaged in doing it now is ridiculous only benefiting a group of otherwise useless collage graduates by giving them a paycheck. I left my collage zoology course study after the head of the department (a good friend and mentor of mine) said unless I wanted to teach (I did not) there were few job options available to a graduate. That was just before the huge expanse of the enviormental insanity we have lived with the last 45 years. The most significant advancement it has made is employing people many of which have few marketable skills.

 

[Koda]

You can start here:
Fur Trappers, Wagon Trains and Military Expeditions - Malheur - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The Hudson Bay trappers even note the native Indians were complaining of sparse provisions.
But trappers, indians, settlers all experienced periods of very little or non-existent game.

not certain if that story proves game was scarce in Oregon when we had wolves here, but it was a fun read. Drought periods of game in Oregon are influenced by many things not just predation. Winters in the Harney basin are really hard and even when I remember Eastern Oregon hunting akin to "grocery shopping" there were a few severe winters back in the 80s that devastated deer and elk herds. In fact... Seneca Oregon (near that area, kinda) holds one of the coldest recorded temps in the states at -54deg (F) in 1933. Also worth noting that nature doesn't discriminate certain species when nature culls wildlife populations.

Anyways, my point above was that nowadays wolves are confined to smaller fragments of land with natural and unatural barriers (major cities, hwy systems, massive agricultural lands like central Oregon) that inhibit their ability to move and roam freely. Thats why in some places like Idaho they have devastated game populations. Typically wolves would disperse to other areas and not eat everything in sight in one location . The enviros need to allow folks to hunt them to cull the numbers to fit these new confined areas... the wolves are not free to roam and follow the migration herds anymore... if those even exist.

At least thats how I understand it.

 

[Tony617]

Lewis and Clark never really learned to eat indigenous animals they encountered on there journeys including Salmon.....they preferred white flesh fish more like the Cod they were more accustomed to. They did learn some from the Indians but still resisted unfamiliar foods. I totally agree that logging and agriculture brought a great boom in big (and small) game populations and populations are not static however reintroduction of an apex predator is not good or nessisary. When I was studying Biology at the University of Idaho, it was taken as common knowledge there were 2 to 3 times the deer now on the continent than pre Columbian times. We have replaced Buffalo with there very close cousin (so close there interbreed without issue) the common cow for convince (I had a pet buffalo but they can be difficult to handle). We humans adapt our enviorment in ways that benefit us.......always have......as it is explained in the Bible. Even the much lauded indigenous people here were very hard on existing ecosystems, if a plains tribe wanted to eat a buffalo, they would drive an entire herd over a cliff.......the enviorment needs to be managed with care but the hypocritical manner we are engaged in doing it now is ridiculous only benefiting a group of otherwise useless collage graduates by giving them a paycheck. I left my collage zoology course study after the head of the department (a good friend and mentor of mine) said unless I wanted to teach (I did not) there were few job options available to a graduate. That was just before the huge expanse of the enviormental insanity we have lived with the last 45 years. The most significant advancement it has made is employing people many of which have few marketable skills.

Speaking of buffalo, they reintroduced the Wood Bison into Alaska near Fairbanks. They were almost but discovered a herd in Alberta, Canada back in 1957. Wood bison are somewhat larger that the smaller plains bison.

Wood bison - Wikipedia

Plains bison - Wikipedia

We took the last south bound cruise on NCL Seward, AK to Vancouver BC back in September 2015 and stopped at the wild life conservatory outside of Anchorage, AK. But the wood bison were released already.

 

[Herb g]

The last one was shot in the 70s (iirc), Oregon has always been wolf country.

Mammoths and tigers went extinct from natural causes millions of years ago....nature at work uninfluenced artificially by man.

Isn't man a part of nature albeit a "natural cause"? We have a good reason to restrict our competitors because they don't pay the bills. We do after they eat the last one, and move on to the next prey species...and yes they do kill for sport.

 

[Jamie6.5]

not certain if that story proves game was scarce in Oregon when we had wolves here, but it was a fun read. Drought periods of game in Oregon are influenced by many things not just predation. Winters in the Harney basin are really hard and even when I remember Eastern Oregon hunting akin to "grocery shopping" there were a few severe winters back in the 80s that devastated deer and elk herds. In fact... Seneca Oregon (near that area, kinda) holds one of the coldest recorded temps in the states at -54deg (F) in 1933. Also worth noting that nature doesn't discriminate certain species when nature culls wildlife populations.

Anyways, my point above was that nowadays wolves are confined to smaller fragments of land with natural and unatural barriers (major cities, hwy systems, massive agricultural lands like central Oregon) that inhibit their ability to move and roam freely. Thats why in some places like Idaho they have devastated game populations. Typically wolves would disperse to other areas and not eat everything in sight in one location . The enviros need to allow folks to hunt them to cull the numbers to fit these new confined areas... the wolves are not free to roam and follow the migration herds anymore... if those even exist.

At least thats how I understand it.

If you don't think there's migratory deer herds any longer, you need to head down to just S.E. of K-Falls in the fall and check out the interstate herd.
There have been evenings when I stopped counting deer at @4-500 head. It's crazy how many deer are moving south in mid-late fall on the south end of Stukel Mtn, on both the the east and west sides.
And the earlier/faster they move, the harsher the winter is gonna be. I don't know how they know, but in 30 years of watching them, I never knew them to miss.
Or, you can get ahead of them by heading down to the Lava Beds Nat'l Monument, where they layover and feed up.
I've seen herds that easily approached a thousand animals grazing in the flats.

My point was whether assisted by harsh winters or not, wolves had huge impacts on ungulate herds all over the PNW. And while we didn't/don't have biologist-level documentation, we have plenty of anecdotal evidence of boom & bust cycles for predators and prey. It was that way since forever. Breeding pairs of wolves have 2-8 pups. Does have 1-2 fawns. It doesn't take too many years before wolves eat their way through the available feed.
Then they move on to the next source. This is true of all canines.

A good year for jackrabbits makes for a great 2-3 year cycle for yotes.
It's not a mystery, but it does get covered up by pro-wolf biologists as a matter of course.

Currently the cougar population is out of control and the ODFW knows it. How long before the wolf population is in the same condition?
My guess is less than 10 years. Wolf packs are easily capable of doubling their numbers every year. And currently there is no mechanism in nature or management to provide a check on that growth.
And knowing the ODFW, there won't be until catastrophe is imminent.

 

[BroncoFan]

I grew up in Idaho...Lemhi county to be exact, right in the middle of ground zero of the wolf invasionin the late 80's. It was not a reintroduction but rather a govt sponsored invasion of an invasive species. It is the very epitome of Federal Govt. overreach and arrogance and basically the equivalent of "reintroducing" bull sharks into a trout stream. Was never there and doesn't belong there. I've been face to face. I have a 100lb German Shepard and he would look like a toy poodle compared to the old boy I saw. It's an invasion and should be treated as such.

 

[Tony617]

The last one was shot in the 70s (iirc), Oregon has always been wolf country.

Mammoths and tigers went extinct from natural causes millions of years ago....nature at work uninfluenced artificially by man.

That last saber tooth tigers went extent about 11,000 years ago and the American Mastodon went extent 10,000 to 11,000 years ago as well. The Woolly Mammoths went started after the last ice age finally became extinct about 4000 years ago.

I did visit the La Brea Tar pits in Los Angeles back in the mid 1980s and they had saber tooth tigers and mammoths that fell in to the tar pits.

 

[Argonaut]

The Germans concentrated DNA for an extinct ancient European cow during the war. They bred a small group of them that were captured after the war. They wound up with a Scottish rancher that in the end was glad to see them die off. They were so vicious and difficult to handle that they were a huge problem.

 

[Herb g]

Doped up meth wolves running through downtown Portland... seems like a good idea from some perspectives.
I should make a movie about it!

In Koda's neighborhood would also be good.

 

[SIG34]

They aren't dogs... literally just a killing machine that is very smart! I'm fine with them being in Yellow stone or Zoo but I don't want to be surrounded by a pack of them while I'm hiking !

Okay let's compromise ! Just send them all to California , then you'll see a turn around in need of guns!