ADVERTISEMENT
  About the SA Blog Network













Extinction Countdown

Extinction Countdown


News and research about endangered species from around the world
Extinction Countdown Home

How much is a wolf worth in Idaho? $11.75

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.


Email   PrintPrint



wolf howling at moonGray wolves have a price tag on their heads in Idaho, and it’s a bargain-basement price at that.

Starting Monday, Idaho residents can get wolf-hunting permits for just $11.75 (after purchasing a state hunting license for $12.75, of course). Nonresidents have to pay a bit more: $154.75 for a hunting license, plus $186 for a wolf tag.

The state has set a total quota of 220 wolves for all hunters this season, representing about 25 percent of Idaho’s wolf population. This also represents about 13 percent of the total wolf population in the northern Rockies (estimated at 1,645), which also includes Montana and Wyoming.

Hunts are also scheduled in Montana, with its own quota of 75 wolves, starting in October.

Gray wolves (Canis lupus) have gone on and off the U.S. endangered species list over the past two years. (Read our account of their ever-changing status here.) The populations in the Great Lakes region regained their protected status in June, but the population in the Rockies did not.

Of course, several lawsuits remain pending as environmental groups try to get the Rockies species listed again. Defenders of Wildlife has announced plans to request a temporary injunction to block Idaho’s hunt, but they don’t have much time—wolf season opens on September 1.


Image: Wolf howl by Michael Lorenzo, via Stock.xchng





Rights & Permissions

Comments 37 Comments

Add Comment
  1. 1. robert schmidt 6:37 pm 08/19/2009

    I’m all for allowing the wolf hunt. I just think we need to level the playing field. Hunters should have to go naked and hunt with their bare hands. If those were the terms I’d even recommend extending the hunt to include all major predators. And if turn-about is fair play, we should give out permits to bears and cougars allowing them to take down a person or two a year. You know, to help thin the herd, take out the old and the sick, and the ones with the biggest rack…

    Link to this
  2. 2. MikeA 7:29 pm 08/19/2009

    robert schmidt wrote I’m all for allowing the wolf hunt …

    There’s nothing like sarcasm to bring a point home. Well done!

    Link to this
  3. 3. Marc Trying to Understand 8:57 pm 08/19/2009

    Very well done. People think of nature as "them". Sadly people don’t realize it is "we"; and "we" are getting out of hand like our perspective relating to so many of "them".

    Link to this
  4. 4. robert schmidt 9:19 pm 08/19/2009

    @MikeA, who says I was being sarcastic?

    Link to this
  5. 5. hotblack 9:24 pm 08/19/2009

    Why not just get right down to it and sell human tags? Much more profitable. 850 wolves and 220 tags? With a human hunt, comparatively, we’d be looking at 380,000 tags in idaho alone! And with the damage the average human does to the nation vs a wolf, we’re just saving even more money down the road in ecological cleanup and repair costs.

    Human vermin. Shoot all ya want, you know we’ll breed more.

    Link to this
  6. 6. hotblack 9:26 pm 08/19/2009

    I see I’m late to the party. Robert, your post was better.

    Link to this
  7. 7. robert schmidt 9:40 pm 08/19/2009

    Now you’re talking crazy hotblack, I was only talking about giving a couple of tags a year to each bear. Humans have reduced their numbers to between 400 and 600 in idaho and surrounding states. In fact we eliminated them from 98% of their historic range within a 100-year period. So 1200 humans a year is totally sustainable. Probably more people killed by diseases related to smoking.

    Link to this
  8. 8. hotblack 10:03 pm 08/19/2009

    I wonder, will wolf hunters wear orange?
    It sure would make them easy targets out there… all alone… unsuspecting….

    Realistically, the argument that we know-it-all humans (with such a great track record in managing populations) need to control wolf populations by shooting any wolf we see for a few months …or else they’ll die… is incredibly shortsighted. Random, unnatural selection only causes further long lasting damage to the species. Slight overpopulation is supposed to result in the weaker, dumber, less resourceful individuals perishing. This is the real value of a natural population balance. Hunting the active wolves leaves only the timid, lazy, & inexperienced.

    Link to this
  9. 9. jabwocky 10:21 pm 08/19/2009

    Interesting response, but some what ignorant isn’t it? Wolf as well as all hunting tags given out by the jurisdictions each year, are meant to thin the herds and keep them healthy, the Fish & Wildlife depts keep count on all the species that are out there and try to keep them on a somewhat level playing field. Too many wolves, and not enough to feed off, they could wipeout an entire species, and still die off at huge rates due to lack of food, or turn to attacking cattle/sheep/domestic animals (when this happens, ranchers shoot and bury, and this is how you end up with them on the endangered species act). It is much better to control them, than to wipe them out.

    Link to this
  10. 10. MikeA 12:35 am 08/20/2009

    jabwocky wrote … hunting tags given out by the jurisdictions each year, are meant to thin the herds and keep them healthy …

    And the hunters only shoot the weak and the sick wolves right? ‘Cause that’s how nature thins herds.

    Link to this
  11. 11. shawmutt 6:36 am 08/20/2009

    Good on the F&G commission of Idaho for ignoring the animal rights movement and appeal to emotion. Go science!

    Link to this
  12. 12. SciamReader 9:12 am 08/20/2009

    Wolves were driven out of the lower 48 by policies designed to exterminate them via unlimited trapping, bounty hunting, and poisoning programs put in place by state and federal wildlife agencies. Putting a mini artlcle about a managed quota hunt for wolves under a, 60 seconds to extinction byline is rather ingenuous. Wolves are a fast reproducing species and taking 25% of the adults out of an expanding population will barely keep them in check which is why that number of tags are planned to be issued. It is easy for anti hunters areas to come up with all kinds of arguments as to why hunting should be allowed, but the fact is that managed hunts are very effective in maintaining healthy populations of animals. Look at deer for example. Hunters take 10 Million deer each year, which barely keeps them in check and the deer are doing just fine most everywhere. And one can’t really compare managed hunting to natural selection unless the population of wolves were to expand to where they outgrew the food supply, which isn’t going to happen. Not when the food supply includes calves and sheep. The ranchers won’t stand for that to happen.

    Link to this
  13. 13. SciamReader 9:19 am 08/20/2009

    I meant to use the word disingenuous as to posting this article under a 60 seconds to extinction byline..

    Link to this
  14. 14. blahblahblah1234 1:09 pm 08/20/2009

    Hey the wolf’s ancestors have had just as long as our ancestors to develop gun powder, metallurgy, language, mass production, etc… We did it and they didn’t. Survival of the fittest. Or don’t you believe in evolution?

    Link to this
  15. 15. Ken Fischman, Ph.D. 1:22 pm 08/20/2009

    Thank you John Platt & Scientific American for getting your numbers right. Idaho Fish & Game(IDF&G) has been exaggerating when speaking with media people. Their representatives claim that there is an Idaho wolf population of 1,020, & an overall Northern Rockies population of over 2,000. You recognized that the US Fish & Wildlife Service estimate of 1,645 is more reliable by noting that killing 220 wolves would result in a 25% reduction. That showed me that you did not fall for IDF&G’s verbal misrepresentations, but stuck with the official statistics posted on their web sites. Getting the numbers right is important because they show that the wolves have not yet fully recovered, either biologically or genetically. Commencing hunting seasons at this time is premature & irresponsible.

    Link to this
  16. 16. robert schmidt 8:15 pm 08/20/2009

    I have no problem with predator-prey relationships and I understand that we are omnivores. I do eat meat. There are three issues I have with hunting; the first is the mentality. When I am in the wilderness I am awe-struck by the beauty and complexity around me. I don’t want to make even the slightest sound for fear of disturbing it. So, what kind of mentality does it take to witness such a scene and then terminate it with such extreme violence? Is that what it is to be a "moral and intelligent" species? The other issue relates to the naturalist fallacy so often quoted by hunters and already mentioned on this post; despite the claim that hunting is part of the natural order, hunters do not take out the sick and old. They take out the best. This harms the species. It doesn’t strengthen it. This takes me back to my earlier comments, if the hunters hunted naked and with their bare hands you could be sure that only the old and weak would be taken and with any luck, same for the hunters. A win/win situation. The third issue is the continuing illusion that the best way for humanity to manage nature is to kill bits of it. Nature has done well without us for hundreds of millions of years, and not so well with us for the last few millennia. Maybe it’s time to learn the lesson we should have learned long ago. If we leave intact ecosystems, they will manage themselves, no need to employ sadists to do it in nature’s place. To quote Jurassic Park II, nature doesn’t require our help, it requires our absence.

    @bla… you are clueless. I highly suggest reading at least one book about evolution before lecturing anyone else about it. Also look up, "naturalist fallacy," as I mentioned in my comment. While you’re at it, read up on the other fallacies too. Those are things you aren’t supposed to say in an argument. Who knows, you might even end up knowing something for a change…

    Link to this
  17. 17. wildcat310 10:08 am 08/21/2009

    I will be getting my permit on monday. I have already picked the beautiful big black wolf out that I am going to put a hole it’s gut so it can suffer. I won’t be wearing orange at all. I probably will shoot him from 700 yards away and will get plenty of pictures that I will be happy to post. He will then be mounted and displayed so that everybody can know what happened. If you think wolves are so great then you take them to your state and let them chew on your pets. How about your children? You retards have no idea what it is like living in wolf territory. They only kill the sick, what planet do you live on. You really need to come out here to idaho and see a pack take down a bull moose that is as big as the crappy prius that you drive. Wait don’t do that, then we would have to save you from those precious animals that you think you can just go out there and pet. Get real retards.

    Link to this
  18. 18. wildcat310 10:40 am 08/21/2009

    By the way, this hunt is only going to last for about a week. That’s how long it is going to take for the quota to be met. We are going to have to be quick if we want to get out wolf. There are a lot of people out here what are really exicted to get a shot at these wonderful creatures. By the way, all we have to do is save the skull and hide. F&G does not even care what we do with the carcass. Im sure that the smell will draw other wolves in so they can get shot in the gut as well. If I shoot it anywhere else it will ruin the pelt. If you would like the carcass, I would be happy to drag it out and mail it to you so that you can have a piece of history as well. Otherwise it’s staying there. Maybe wolves should have invented gun powder, and thumbs.

    Link to this
  19. 19. Ken Fischman, Ph.D. 12:17 pm 08/21/2009

    To wildcat310: Thank you for informing us about the developmental age of wolf haters. I know that most hunters are not like you because i have talked with them & they seem quite rational. You clearly need help.

    Link to this
  20. 20. Morning Walk 12:46 pm 08/21/2009

    Has anyone every heard of peaceful coexsistance. THe dignity of other species.

    It amazes me that for millenia the wolves lived here before we did and no one needed to THIN THE HERD. And this continent wasn’t over run with wolves.

    Link to this
  21. 21. wildcat310 12:57 pm 08/21/2009

    Ken I would like to thank you for your comment. I also have my doctorate and the appropriate letters behind my name. I actually worked on the reintroduction program in Yellowstone in the winter of 1999. As you can see, that doesn’t mean that I am an educated individual. You obviously do not live in wolf country and you obviously have never seen the carnage that a pack of wolves can place on a population of elk, deer or any other animal for that matter. I have seen cattle ranchers livelihoods and families destroyed because of work that I have done. I have written grants and know how politically biased the entire process is. Yes, there was a lot of sarcasm in my last two posts, but they were fun. You have to admit that. They are meant to hit a nerve with people who do not live in idaho. I would be willing to pay to have a pack of wolves shipped to your city and released in your neighborhood so that people on the other side of the country can begin to see what "wonderful" creatures they are. Last weekend a good friend of mine who runs cattle in howe idaho was surrounded by 6 wolves who were after his dogs, not his cattle. He was moving his cattle to winter feeding areas. He shot them all from his horse. The furthest wolf was 12 feet from where he fired his pistol. The "government" hunter came out and shot at one wolf that was in his cattle on monday, and could not hit the animal from 120 yards. It is easy to support these animals from the other side of the country. I agree they are beautiful creatures that have a place in nature. But, they need to be controlled just as bears and mountain lions. You want to have a good time, just get hunted by one of those animals. It’s a real good time. So how about I send you some.

    Link to this
  22. 22. robert schmidt 6:40 pm 08/21/2009

    @wildcat310, "I am going to put a hole it’s gut so it can suffer". You are a psychopath. Everything you have attributed to the wolf can be said about you and those like you but to a much greater extent. The wolf kills because it needs to; you kill for the joy of it. What does that say about you? You’ve moved into their territory with some slow, dimwitted food for them to eat and you blame them for showing up for dinner. What would you do if you were hungry and someone came into your home and put some food in front of you? Are you incapable of thinking about anything else but yourself?

    Link to this
  23. 23. wildcat310 7:32 pm 08/21/2009

    May I call you Robert, you can call me mike if you would like. I feel we should be on a first name basis. So, just let me know where you live and I will be happy to mail you a pack, or just two. It will be like Noah’s ark. You really know nothing about wolves. They don’t just kill because they need to. They do kill for sport just like you and me. I will gladly send you a video of a pack taking down a cow elk and eating her calf before she even dies and then leaving her. I have videos of wolves taking down healthy elk for sport and then just leaving the poor animal to die in the snow. Are you kidding me, you cannot be that ignorant. By the way, if they show up for dinner they get shot anyway, I would at least shoot back. I’m game for letting them shoot back. The bears have learned that one the hard way (Probably because they can’t shoot, it’s a thumb issue) and so should the wolves. It’s about animal behavior on both sides, us (you included) and the wolves. You obviously live in a city and only watch discovery channel, I am truly sorry for you. You really need to spend some time in wolf country. Just send me your address and I will gladly send a breeding pair your way. It’s the whole not in my backyard principle. It’s fine if it’s not your backyard. I agree with another poster that it is a shame that the wolf has not "evolved" to the extent that they could hunt humans. (they really can) Easy dinner can always be found in the big cities where people believe they can go out and watch these animals in peace, maybe even pet them. I’ll be glad to ship a breeding pair your way. What color would you like? Oh wait, your state probably would not accept them. Maybe you could protest that with a sign. Missouri was thinking about it last year. In all seriousness, I was kidding about the gut thing. Please laugh, this is fun. I will only shoot an animal if it drops immediately. It isn’t right to gut shoot an animal, any animal. I was saying that to get a rise out of people like you. All hunters should be able to shoot or they shouldn’t be allowed to hunt. All that I am saying is leave our state alone. People like ken (and I actually know him) just send money to our state from the other side of the country and try to influence what we do here with their dollars. Step up to the plate and accept wolves in your state. If you really want them protected, then do something in your state to get them. I don’t try to influence the garbage that happens in the state of New York. So how about it, can I send a breeding pair to your local park or school?

    Link to this
  24. 24. wildcat310 8:59 am 08/24/2009

    Well, I am shocked by the silence. So let me give you guys an update. I did my pre-hunt scouting trip over the weekend. I saw 13 different wolves of which 4 had radio collars. We have to turn those in. Tags go on sale in less that 3 hours. Wow, it feels like christmas all over again. So lets get to the core issue. Is the life of an animal, any animal worth more than a human life? Robert called me a psychopath and yet in an earlier post he stated that it would be fine for people to die, especially those here in idaho. Kind of an interesting statement. This gets to the whole point of this issue. It is my opinion that people are worth more than a wolf. That is where we differ. It’s interesting that Hitler thought that a certain group of people were worth less. Hmmm, Robert stated the same thing. So, who is the psychopath? Is any human life worth more than the life of an animal?

    Link to this
  25. 25. blahblahblah1234 10:00 am 08/24/2009

    robert schmidt, doesn’t have much of a sense of humor does he…. I guess it is a dog eat dog world out there, errr wait scratch that.

    Link to this
  26. 26. robert schmidt 8:10 pm 08/24/2009

    @Wildcat310, I’m just bringing the naturalist fallacy to its natural conclusion. If it is ok to kill wolves because their population is too large and they kill other animals it would seem that the same would apply to us. If killing animals is good for them because it weeds out the sick and old, then, by extension, it should also apply to us. Of course a gun is not ‘natural’ so, in order to preserve the naturalist argument it has to go. I’m not saying we should kill anyone, or that anyone should be gut shot, I’m saying that if these are your arguments then look out because they can be applied to us even more so.

    It’s interesting, Hitler was a man, and so are you. Wow, you must also be Hitler. Have you ever heard of an Ad hominem attack, how about an association fallacy? Well that’s a classic one there. Sounds like you understand logic just as much as you understand ecology.

    ‘Is any human life worth more than the life of an animal?’ If you tried to hurt my, or anyone else’s, horse, dog, cat, etc. I’m sure you’d find out. A while ago, people thought of African Americans as nothing more than animals. People stood aside and said, why should we do anything for these animals when we need to protect our own kind? That’s the point. People like you are always glad to draw the boundary of what deserves respect and protection close around yourselves. You therefore feel justified committing any atrocity as long as you do it to those outside your invisible line. When "they" kill something it blood thirsty and evil but when you do it, it is noble. What a sad joke. It truly ceases to amaze me that you people think you are somehow superior while exhibiting worse behaviour than your adversary.

    To quote another movie, ‘If the earth dies, you die, if you die, the earth survives.’ I personally don’t believe it has to come to that. I think we can live in harmony with nature. I hope we can, because if we can’t we’re kidding ourselves if we think we are going to come out on top. Now, if you are saying you can’t co-exist with nature perhaps its just part of the natural order of things that people with your mindset go extinct, one way or the other.

    By the way, I’m from Western Ontario and our wolves are doing fine.

    Link to this
  27. 27. wildcat310 11:24 pm 08/24/2009

    Robert, Im going to be serious here. First I really would like to thank you for discussing this with me. I don’t often get the opportunity to test my personal opinions and theories. I live in idaho. You have made me think, and question some fundamental beliefs and for that I would like to thank you. I have baited and joked, and I really do not intend to hurt you personally. I will offend you because we believe differently, that’s just going to happen. Please don’t take it personally. But, really thanks. Second, I do envy you for living in Canada. I can’t think of a more beautiful country. Obviously you don’t need any wolves, I won’t send any.
    So, back to the wolf thing. I need to clear the air that this is about thinning the herd to get rid of the sick and old. Wolves do not just "thin the herd" by eliminating the sick and old. That is just not accurate. And that is not my argument.
    I actually agree with a lot of what you said in your last post. The difference is that I tend to take a more humanistic approach to the world. The problem that I have with naturalism is that man tends to screw everything up. Pure marxist communism was a great idea until the greed of man was allowed to take hold. Lets take canada for example. Wolves are hunted where you live. Their population is controlled. I believe that the population here needs to be controlled. I think that canada has a great management plan and I wish that Idaho would follow it’s lead.
    Also, the behavior of wolves and people needs to be changed. Tactics such as flagging have shown to be effective in decreasing the number of cattle/wolf incidents. I have worked with behavior modification of wolves. They are extremely intelligent. People here need to be taught how to live among wolves. Hunting wolves is definitely going to change the behavior of the wolf. Your country is a perfect example of that. I am not for the extinction of wolves, they are a necessary and vital part of our ecosystem here in idaho. The problem is that we (american) humans have not figured out how to deal with two super predators in the same area. But if humans and wolves can’t get along then there won’t be ANY wolves in idaho. Also, nothing about killing is noble. It gets to the very soul of a person and lets them know how fragile life is.
    I have heard of an Ad Hominem attack. We can be hitlers together. That’s the last thing this world needs. And about the coming out on top when all is said and done. I am in total agreement with you on that point. Either way, we are not going to come out on top.

    Link to this
  28. 28. wildcat310 9:29 am 08/25/2009

    I did see that movie with Keanu Reeves, by the way he is from your neck of the woods. It had some really bad acting and I almost didn’t make it through alive, but I managed. (I know that’s unfortunate.) Did you see the end? In the movie, what actually saved the planet and the human race?

    So, lets imagine a quick little scenario. I believe you have a horse, because you said I would find out what would happen if I tried to hurt your horse. Lets pretend that I am a wolf, and haven’t had any decent meat in a while. Your horse is minding it’s own business in it’s fenced in playground, and I come along. You happen to be watching this from your porch and notice me sneeking through the weeds towards your horse, with 5 of my buddies, and I am licking my chops. What do you do? Do you let nature take its course and come to it’s natural conclusion? Or do you try to change the natural conclusion to fit what you think would be the best outcome? You obviously don’t own any firearms, so what would you do? Next question, would your reaction be any different if it was a small child and it’s mother, who happened to be from Idaho?

    Link to this
  29. 29. robert schmidt 9:12 pm 08/27/2009

    I appreciate the need to protect ones self, family and property. As much as it would bother me, I would agree to have nuisance bears, wolves, etc put down. At the same time, if someone plants themself in wolf country and does nothing to dissuade the wolves from dining on their livestock then I have just as much compassion for them as I do for the idiot photographer who gets himself between mama bear and her cub. If the bear ends up needing to be put down for that, it is just senseless. After all, she did us a favour by weeding out our week (minded). I realize it’s not cheap to put up fences but it’s not cheap to rebuild ecosystems either. At some point the farmers, and all of us for that matter, have to stop pushing the costs for our irresponsible, short sighted behavior onto the next generations. If it is not cost effect to operate farms in Idaho, without the need to devastate the environment, then there shouldn’t be farms in Idaho. With a reduction in farms, prices will go up and then maybe someday it will be cost effective. Also, keep in mind; we are not talking about giving out hunting licenses so people can protect their families. Just how many people are eaten by wolves in Idaho anyhow? These licenses are for yahoos looking for a trophy. If the farmers want the wolves thinned then they can pay ecologists to go out and remove problem animals, excess males, and the old and sickly. On the other hand Billy Bob is going to be aiming for the best.

    P.S. I didn’t agree with the ending of the movie. We were spared because of the biological imperative. The same wiring that causes a parent to sacrifice their life for the life of their child also makes us willing to sacrifice our neighbor in order to ensure an advantage for our offspring. Ultimately, this is what has put the earth in the situation it is in now.

    Link to this
  30. 30. oneelk 5:52 pm 09/8/2009

    Tell me, and I dont mean this sarcastically& is the restoration of the wolf in Idaho worth the losses that we have incurred because of it? Not only do I ask, is it worth the revenue? Is it worth the closing of several Outfitters Lodges and the jobs and revenue they used to create? Is it worth the loss of clients to Outfitters across the state? Is it worth the deaths of thousand upon thousands of Elk and deer most of which are killed for sport by wolves and not for food? (At least cougars eat almost everything they kill) Is it worth the loss of a heritage for hunters of many generations and a way of life for many who have treasured safety in the back country but who now cannot take a dog or a horse into the back country without the fear of being attacked by a wolf?

    I understand the desire to have wolves in the woods again& but is it worth it? And if it is, can we manage them better than we have? Can we allow the IDFW to do their job? They are the experts, not the Federal Government or Activists. I have hiked in the Sawtooths for years in areas that used to be teeming with deer and elk. For the past three years I have watched a rapid decline in the elk numbers there. Last week I hiked 12 miles on foot, alone, off trails where I used to see dozens of elk and deer. Trails that used to be beaten down with tracks from herds of elk did not have a single track on them. Trails that used to be highways are now growing over with vegetation. Most of the plants that have been prime elk food were not even touched and are growing out of control. I followed rub lines where bull elk for years have darkened and sharpened their antlers, but the only rubs present are from years passed. I have been in the woods long enough to know that youre not always going to see game, but when there are no tracks and no sign of game& there is a problem. I saw one fresh elk track in 12 miles of prime habitat, and no fresh droppings at all. Daylight hours in the canyon where I hiked used to be filled with the echoes of bugling elk, but now it is silent. You no longer hear the bugle of elk in that area, but the wolves howl every night. We may have introduced the wolves successfully in Idaho, but we have successfully mismanaged our game animals against the will of the majority of the people in a democratic state (doesnt make much sense to me) and the entire state is paying a huge price with the closing of many sporting goods stores and the loss of hundreds of jobs, loss of income for IDFG, and so much more.

    I dont understand people who love the wolf so much that they are willing to cause so much harm to their own kind.

    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Link to this
  31. 31. oneelk 5:53 pm 09/8/2009

    Tell me, and I don’t mean this sarcastically… is the restoration of the wolf in Idaho worth the losses that we have incurred because of it? Not only do I ask, is it worth the revenue? Is it worth the closing of several Outfitter’s Lodges and the jobs and revenue they used to create? Is it worth the loss of clients to Outfitters across the state? Is it worth the deaths of thousand upon thousands of Elk and deer most of which are killed for sport by wolves and not for food? (At least cougars eat almost everything they kill) Is it worth the loss of a heritage for hunters of many generations and a way of life for many who have treasured safety in the back country but who now cannot take a dog or a horse into the back country without the fear of being attacked by a wolf?

    I understand the desire to have wolves in the woods again… but is it worth it? And if it is, can we manage them better than we have? Can we allow the IDFW to do their job? They are the experts, not the Federal Government or Activists. I have hiked in the Sawtooth’s for years in areas that used to be teeming with deer and elk. For the past three years I have watched a rapid decline in the elk numbers there. Last week I hiked 12 miles on foot, alone, off trails where I used to see dozens of elk and deer. Trails that used to be beaten down with tracks from herds of elk did not have a single track on them. Trails that used to be “highways” are now growing over with vegetation. Most of the plants that have been prime elk food were not even touched and are growing out of control. I followed rub lines where bull elk for years have darkened and sharpened their antlers, but the only rubs present are from years passed. I have been in the woods long enough to know that you’re not always going to see game, but when there are no tracks and no sign of game… there is a problem. I saw one fresh elk track in 12 miles of prime habitat, and no fresh droppings at all. Daylight hours in the canyon where I hiked used to be filled with the echoes of bugling elk, but now it is silent. You no longer hear the bugle of elk in that area, but the wolves howl every night. We may have introduced the wolves successfully in Idaho, but we have successfully mismanaged our game animals against the will of the majority of the people in a democratic state (doesn’t make much sense to me) and the entire state is paying a huge price with the closing of many sporting goods stores and the loss of hundreds of jobs, loss of income for IDFG, and so much more.

    I don’t understand people who love the wolf so much that they are willing to cause so much harm to their own kind.

    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Link to this
  32. 32. wildcat310 2:15 pm 09/9/2009

    Mike, I have been busy hunting elk and haven’t gotten back to this forum in a few weeks. Our wolf area opens up on the 1st of October. Get yourself a tag. It’s an awesome opportunity to hunt such an intelligent animal.
    By the way, these people don’t care about the harm to their own kind. They don’t see us (you and I) as their kind. In their wacked out world, a non-human (animal) has the same rights as a human. Maybe we should offer wolves healthcare, how about abortions? They think that the economic, social, agricultural and ecological problems are all caused by us infringing on what should be the wolves territory. They don’t value HUMAN life. See, you are the problem. Just your existence is the problem.

    Link to this
  33. 33. gediyi 1:20 am 09/11/2009

    First of all Wildcat, we live in Mt. Home, second of all, Wolves don’t live in herds, they live in packs, 3rd, when you go hunting wolves there is a real possibility of killing an alpha male or female.( the only breeders within the pack) When you do this, you end up with wolves that cannot hunt effectively, thus rogues. The rogues that attack cattle, horse and what have you. When you break down the complex family system which is the wolf pack, that is where your trouble comes in.

    Link to this
  34. 34. wildcat310 10:22 am 09/15/2009

    gediyi, You are brilliant!!! If I kill the alpha male or female then the rogue wolves end up in cattle where they can then be hunted any time during the year, even at night. That’s a huge advantage to a cattle farmer. And you don’t even need a license. Hey, your catching on here. Way to go idaho!

    Link to this
  35. 35. agapetied 6:06 am 11/3/2009

    Actuakky We DO ALREADY THIN >OUR OWN< OUT ~ BUT "OURS" NEVER HAVE THE ADVANTAGES OF EVEN A SICK/INFIRMEED OR HEALTHY WOLF DOES… "ours" are yet in their mothers’ womb. "Our" smartest, most well-trained SPECIALISTS do "our" focussed-kills for "us." No arising at dawn and stealthily persuing a live prey in its own environment ~ nope. Our high-paig PROfessionals have a >TEAM< of well oiled assistants – and hese sophistacates work with the same type of tools mentioned by advocates of "fairness" – to even the field by wolf-advocates; you know: "bare-hands and/or knives. Though the hunts are reasoned to make the total herd healthy and robust; our specialist wang-away with forceps and specialty instruments to do "our" corporate slaughter for convenience-sake. AND the amazing consistent cry from the "warm & fuzzy" crowd is for their emotional reaction in love for what? – for which??? Let’s see: an animal VS.> a human in their own mother’s womb? Yeah "I get it." Sardonicism-wrapped logic supporting nothing more than a ‘worship of the created instead of a worship for the Creator… warm & fuzzies bathed in self-appointed righteousness which is the best camoflage ever… kinda’ curious how true to fom that is: the first reaction was to cover-up with grape leaves and hide in bushes.

    Link to this
  36. 36. Alex Th 4:44 pm 03/19/2010

    Am not one of those environmental people but i think that wolf shouldn’t be hunted like deer and so on.Because its like we have a connection with them like a connection between a man and his dog.

    Link to this
  37. 37. Nate 2012 7:35 am 08/8/2010

    Many of the comments above are insightful!

    With less than half a day’s investigation into this, I find it tediously inevitable that there is virtually a 100% affiliation, in these opposing states, to the NRA (National Rifle Association) and each state head of Idaho and Montana are also fully signed up members. Also no fluke then that Lynn Scarlett (who reversed the Endangered Species decision in 2009) has made her way to the top by lecturing, writing about, and actively promoting incentive-based environmental policies. The proposed cull number of the Wolf would inevitably involve a huge government backed program running into many millions of dollars. The NRA would be at the heart of any such funding, for
    obvious reasons. The real ‘incentive’ would appear to be clear then? The whole cull argument is about MONEY, nothing more, and nothing less. Again the poor Wolf is made scape-goat for a money spinner, as it was turn of the last century. However, it is the so-called ‘Sportsman’ who’s voices worry me more than the ranchers!

    I admire the skills of a true ‘tracker’, yet even the Native Americans respected the Wolf. Most Wolf head-dresses were only taken from those Lupus found dead, or were obtained by a one-off ‘right of passage’. In this age where our every conceivable need is catered for, the average person has
    nether the NECESSITY nor REQUIREMENT to kill any animal indiscriminately. It is repulsive! If we are to hunt, then let’s remove the trappings of our currently spoilt human existence, with our supermarkets, monetary system,
    safe homes, and other materialistic creature comforts, and return to a true ‘Hunters’ life; Killing for survival only with due respect given to the wild and mother nature as they deserve and require. ‘Hunting’ these days is a mere rush of adrenaline, the ‘high’ felt from committing murder in a predominantly one-sided affair. If you can track a Wolf until you find one, I respect your acumen, but any moron and coward can fire a trigger on something defenseless. Especially something that would rather have nothing
    to do with you in the first place. It is a tragedy of the human condition that we cannot help but continually attempt genocide on our own and other species. It MUST stop! But then I am reminded of the ancient Cree text that
    says,

    "Only when the last tree has died and
    The last river has been poisoned and
    The last fish has been caught,
    Will they realize that
    We cannot eat money"

    Link to this

Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.

More from Scientific American

Scientific American Back To School

Back to School Sale!

12 Digital Issues + 4 Years of Archive Access just $19.99

Order Now >

X

Email this Article



This function is currently unavailable

X