Can We Conclude There Are More Wolves?

What a confusing mess! I guess this is another classic example of government making shambles out of anything they touch. Idaho Department of Fish and Game in their most recent wolf report shows they have confirmed wolf kills on livestock outnumbering last year. The same report shows more wolves have been killed than last year but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in September that wolf populations were on the decline in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. So what gives?

According to IDFG, since January 1, 2008 until November 24, 2008, they have 325 confirmed kills by wolves – 100 cattle, 212 sheep and 13 dogs. For all of last year, there were 278 confirmed kills – 57 cattle, 211 sheep and 10 dogs. Can we conclude that there are more wolves?

Perhaps but we could also say certain conditions made the wolves more hungry or as some would probably like to say, the ranchers aren’t taking care of their livestock.

The same report says that again from January 1, 2008 until November 21, 2008, 136 wolves have been killed – 86 authorized through Wildlife Services for various reasons, 13 taken under the ESA 10j rule and 37 other, including illegal kills.

During the whole of 2007, 77 wolves were killed – 43 by Wildlife Services, 7 by 10j, and 27 other. Can we conclude there are more wolves?

OregonLive.com has a short article today that says that Steve Nadeau, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game large carnivore coordinator, reports that wolves are “moving onto private land”. He also was quoted as saying:

“You can’t just keep stuffing wolves on top of each other,” he said.

This doesn’t make sense according to other talking points we hear about how wolves are loner animals who love the wilderness and are fearful of humans and just want to be left alone. We have to ask why the wolves are moving onto private land? Maybe because the wolves have no fear of man and they see man and his activities as a food source, much the same way as bears do.

But if Nadeau is saying that “You can’t just keep stuffing wolves on top of each other”, isn’t that also an admission on his part that wolves are on the increase? Can we conclude there are more wolves?

Just last week, Jim Unsworth, Idaho Fish and Game Deputy Director, said wolves were the biggest cause of elk herd reduction in the Lolo Hunting Zone.

The agency estimates cow elk in a remote area designated as the Lolo Hunting Zone have dwindled by as much as 13 percent each year. A recent study of radio-collared cow elk indicates that for the most part, wolves are to blame, Fish and Game says.

Not only is he blaming the wolves for taking its toll on the elk herd in this region, the IDFG says that they fear a continued reduction at the current rate will drop the level of herd sustainability below recovery rates. This could devastate the elk herd.

Can we conclude there are more wolves?

If this is “on the ground” evidence of what’s going on with wolf depredations, why is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reporting that wolf populations are on the decline? The Service provided no real proof of their claim other than to say that’s what they have concluded. They even said they didn’t understand why their conclusions would show that.

Steve Nadeau claims the wolves are on the move. Well, maybe they moved and Ed Bangs and his entourage at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have slept through the move.

It has taken a long time for the IDFG to begin to acknowledge that wolves are affecting at least the elk herds in Idaho. Some indications show that deer numbers are down as well. Could it also be the wolves are having a field day with them as well? It’s time to get the wolf off the ESA list and get them managed before we are forced into spending millions more dollars trying to recover elk and deer herds.

Can we conclude there are more wolves?

Tom Remington