<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
So the problem is that the wolves are killing the elk before we are
able to get to them, thus fewer hunters wish to buy permits to go
hunting because there is less game available. Is that basically it?<br>
<br>
I had assumed it had to do with the wolves posing a danger to hunters
or something. I understand the money involved in our hunting industry,
but is it reasonable to reduce a species to so few numbers in this area
just to sell a few more permits and day-glo orange hats? <br>
<br>
Hunters that I talk to routinely realize the beauty of a pre-dawn
morning just before the sun comes up, with the serene calm and the cold
and the feeling of expectancy. Surely they can also realize the beauty
of a lithe, powerful animal like the gray wolf.<br>
<br>
I'm not a hunter myself, but I understand the draw of it. If the
wolves are severely decimating the elk population, then I could see the
need for some kind of controls to be put in place. That seems like
it's practical. However, this seems like we are using sledgehammer
when a screwdriver might do.<br>
<br>
Couldn't a compromise be reached that is far above the 100 wolf
number? Instead of dropping directly from 1200 to 100, why not sell
three or four hundred wolf tags and see if the problem improves? Done
correctly, money lost to elk hunting could be made up by wolf hunting
(at higher prices), with the number of tags printed each year dependent
upon population counts of both species - thus achieving a sustainable
balance. <br>
<br>
I would like to keep the population above the number 100 not because
dropping to 99 puts them on the endangered species list, but because an
epidemic, a fire, or some other catastrophe could wipe them out
entirely if the population is too small.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
Tom Hansen wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid00e701c73766$83e4a4a0$631aa8c0@D5L3R191"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">>From the January 12, 2007 edition of the Sioux City Journal (Sioux City,
Iowa) at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2007/01/12/news/latest_news/b1139d550ae">http://siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2007/01/12/news/latest_news/b1139d550ae</a>
6766e86257261001b7fb1.txt
(Subscription required)
It is pretty bad when you have to go out of state to learn the truth about
your own governor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governor wants to kill all but 100 gray wolves
1:15 AM
BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- Idaho's governor said Thursday he will support public
hunts to kill all but 100 of the state's gray wolves after the federal
government strips them of protection under the Endangered Species Act.
Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter told The Associated Press that he wants hunters to
kill about 550 gray wolves. That would leave about 100 wolves, or 10 packs,
according to a population estimate by state wildlife officials.
The 100 surviving wolves would be the minimum before the animals could again
be considered endangered.
"I'm prepared to bid for that first ticket to shoot a wolf myself," Otter
said earlier Thursday during a rally of about 300 hunters.
Otter complained that wolves are rapidly killing elk and other animals
essential to Idaho's multimillion-dollar hunting industry. The hunters, many
wearing camouflage clothing and blaze-orange caps, applauded wildly during
his comments.
Suzanne Stone, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group Defenders of Wildlife in
Boise, said Otter's proposal would return wolves to the verge of
eradication.
"Essentially he has confirmed our worst fears for the state of Idaho: That
this would be a political rather than a biological management of the wolf
population," Stone said. "There's no economic or ecological reason for
maintaining such low numbers. It's simple persecution."
Wolves were reintroduced to the northern Rocky Mountains a decade ago after
being hunted to near-extinction. More than 1,200 now live in the region.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to start removing federal
protections from gray wolves in Montana and Idaho in the next few weeks.
A plan drafted by Idaho's wildlife agency calls for maintaining a minimum of
15 wolf packs -- higher than Otter's proposal of 10 packs.
Jeff Allen, a policy adviser for the state Office of Species Conservation,
said 15 wolf packs would allow "a cushion" between the surviving wolf
population and the minimum number that federal biologists would allow before
the animals are again considered endangered.
Allen said Otter and state wildlife officials agree on wolf strategy and
will be able to reach a consensus on specific numbers.
"You don't want to be too close to 10 because all of a sudden when one
(wolf) is hit by a car or taken in defense of property, you're back on the
list," Allen said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeya round town, Moscow.
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
"If not us, who?
If not now, when?"
- Unknown
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</a>]
On Behalf Of Paul Rumelhart
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 2:48 PM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a>
Subject: [Vision2020] Wolves (was Re: Legislative Update II from Rep. Trail)
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ttrail@moscow.com">ttrail@moscow.com</a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">...
Sportsmen gathered on the step of the Capitol and applauded the Governor
for signing a resolution to endorse the delisting of wolves and putting
them under state control. ...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Could someone present the arguments behind this? I assume it's more
than just some sportsmen wanting a wolf's skin cloak or to feed on wolf
meat. Is the current population of wolves causing problems of some
kind? What would be the result if that population was reduced
significantly?
Paul
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>