Idaho F&G Announces Wolves Major Cause Of Elk Kills
November 28, 2008
*Scroll Down For Updates!*
Reports coming out of Northern Idaho say that Fish and Game Deputy Director Jim Unsworth is blaming the gray wolf as the main reason for a 13% per year reduction in cow elk in the Lolo Hunting Zone. Another F&G biologist, George Pauley, states that at least 87% of the elk in this region needs to survive each year in order to sustain an elk herd. At present that survival rate is estimated at 75%.
And with this information, I have some questions. The first one and most obvious is what took IDFG so long to make an official announcement, assuming Unsworth’s announcement is official and not some rogue event?
One report from The Olympian said:
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.
My second question now becomes, for how many years have they determined, or better yet, known, that the cow elk have been dwindling at such a rate? Which leads me to my final question.
Why hasn’t IDFG done something about this problem and here’s the reason I ask? Back last January 25, 2008, I reported that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, while waiting for the formal delisting of the gray wolf, announced that it was easing some of the wolf management restrictions. Among those easements was one that allowed F&G to protect herds of elk.
While much of the west in and around the Rocky Mountains and Yellowstone Park wait impatiently for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to formally announce the removal of the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act, the USFWS announced that until that event takes place, they are easing some of the restrictions on the wolf in order to give flexibility to states to implement actions to protect wild herds of elk, deer and moose, protect livestock, private property and for public safety. The states involved are Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.
At the time of this report, Ed Bangs, USFWS wolf recovery leader, said there were no areas in the West where wolves where destroying elk herds but wanted to be prepared.
Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, says he knows of no areas where wolves are destroying elk herds in the west. That is probably debatable by some, especially concerning the elk herd in Yellowstone Park.
The point to all this is that USFWS and the three states, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, appear to be approaching this entire wolf delisting event with an attitude of being prepared and creating tools to be able to use in order to stave off any problems that may arise that would put elk, deer or moose herds in jeopardy from wolves. Reasonable people shouldn’t find a problem with that. Unreasonable people, which is what we are dealing with constantly with wolf recovery efforts, can only embellish facts and blow things completely out of proportion.
Well, it appears that we have our first official announcement of wolves destroying an elk herd in the Lolo region and the question I have is what is being done about it?
To the best of my recollections in researching through past articles, it is my understanding that even when Judge Donald Molloy ruled to issue the temporary injunction that placed the wolf back on the Endangered Species Act list, this ruling did not eliminate the eased restrictions USFWS had announce that gave F&G more flexibility to handle issues like this.
Finally an announcement from Idaho Fish and Game that wolves are destroying one elk herd. How long they have known this remains to be seen. IDFG has the flexibility granted them by the USFWS to protect that elk herd. Now they need to do something about it.
*Update – 11/28/2008 12:15 p.m.*
Doing some further research into the question of why the Idaho Department of Fish and Game hasn’t done anything to stop the decimation of the Lolo Hunting Zone elk herd, I probably have found my answer on the IDFG website concerning the easing of restrictions in wolf management. As I said before, the USFWS amended the 10j rule of the Endangered Species Act to allow for the protection of wild elk, deer and moose herds (see link above). The full text of that amended rule can be found here (pdf).
A brief explanation is also available on the IDFG website. Here’s what it says:
Options for ungulate management in amended 10j rule
(v) Take in response to wild ungulate impacts. If wolf predation is having an unacceptable impact on wild ungulate populations (deer, elk, moose, bighorn sheep, mountain goats, antelope, or bison) as determined by the respective State or Tribe, a State or Tribe may lethally remove the wolves in question.
(A) In order for this provision to apply, the State or Tribes must prepare a science-based document that:
(1) Describes the basis of ungulate population or herd management objectives, what data indicate that the ungulate population or herd is below management objectives, what data indicate that wolves are a major cause of the unacceptable impact to the ungulate population or herd, why wolf removal is a warranted solution to help restore the ungulate population or herd to State or Tribal management objectives, the level and duration of wolf removal being proposed, and how ungulate population or herd response to wolf removal will be measured and control actions adjusted for effectiveness;
(2) Demonstrates that attempts were and are being made to address other identified major causes of ungulate herd or population declines or the State or Tribe commits to implement possible remedies or conservation measures in addition to wolf removal; and
(3) Provides an opportunity for peer review and public comment on their proposal prior to submitting it to the Service for written concurrence. The State or Tribe must:
(i) Conduct the peer review process in conformance with the Office of Management and Budget’s Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (70 FR 2664, January 14, 2005) and include in their proposal an explanation of how the bulletin’s standards were considered and satisfied; and
(ii) Obtain at least five independent peer reviews from individuals with relevant expertise other than staff employed by a State, Tribal, or Federal agency directly or indirectly involved with predator control or ungulate management in Idaho, Montana, or Wyoming.
(B) Before we authorize lethal removal, we must determine that an unacceptable impact to wild ungulate populations or herds has occurred. We also must determine that the proposed lethal removal is science-based, will not contribute to reducing the wolf population in the State below 20 breeding pairs and 200 wolves, and will not impede wolf recovery.
It would appear with this amended ruling that once enough information is gathered, as it appears so in this case, to make a determination that the elk herd is being wiped out by wolves, it is then up to the IDFG to initiate the process as described in the Amended 10j rule, to stop the killing. Even if we were to assume that all the necessary parties were convinced the wolves were the problem, by the time any effort to stop the killing was approved, including the unending onslaught of lawsuits, it may be too late to save the herd.
This is just another example of poor management along with the creation of ridiculous rules by USFWS and the idiocy of the courts, that would allow such stringent rules with inadequate means of monitoring elk, deer and moose herds and wolf populations statewide. As I have said repeatedly, what good is the creation of game management plans, if the means aren’t also made available to carry out the plan properly. We are kidding ourselves to think that USFWS has any idea at all the condition of the wolf packs and ungulate herds anywhere within the Wolf Recovery Area.
For me this falls back onto the federal government for sticking their nose into wildlife issues they have no business being in in the first place. If the USFWS is going to introduce wolves and declared them protected, how on earth can they have a clue about the conditions of the wolves, the elk, the deer and moose, without built-in means of proper management? It has taken years for an agency to finally admit there may be a problem with elk herds being cleaned out by wolves because of inadequate management?
While it appears that the Zolo Hunting Zone is in imminent danger of losing its elk herd, about the only good thing that has come from this announcement is that IDFG has admitted there is a problem with wolves killing elk. Will any of this come soon enough to safe the elk herds in any other parts of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana?
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.
We’ve known for quite some time that this was happening but no one would listen. The wolf huggers are already calling bs. on IF&G saying their cooking the books. The wolves could probably wipe out all the elk and deer and even then theadvocates of the wolves would still fight management.
Hey, Mike! I was reading yesterday in several places where the wolf lovers were crying foul as you say, demanding to see the scientific studies to prove such. That’s funny isn’t it. When things don’t go their way they demand science. When it doesn’t science gets ignored.
I guess that’s having you cake and eating too.
You’re also right in that those in the field have known this for some time. What we want to know is why it has taken so long and more importantly, what are they going to do about it?
I’m afraid it will get worse before it gets better.
Nothing will get done about it, these people have known since day one what this would do, just as many other people predicted this outcome and said this was a mistake. Suddenly the answer next will be to stop human hunting, might not go off, but thats the theory or plan behind this nonsense. Research of the career of the head honcho of FWS, warrants the suspicions, Clintons Lady, anti gunner, anti hunter, in another position during that administration. It’s no mistake what we see, it is a strategy. They knew it all along. Everyone knows you can’t put 6 piranha in fish tank with 2000 fish in it….and expect balance to come forth on its own…you either gotta keep adding more elk, or reduce wolves…they know it. I bet they laugh at us for calling THEM stupid.
In ten years or less at this rate there will be no Elk season in Idaho and maybe none for Deer as well.
I agree Jim…their mission accomplished.
Well guys other than shoot and shut up, I’m not sure anything will get done about the problem. I’m afraid there are too many bed wetting lib’s in Idaho gov’t now. Being from N.Y., I have hunted Idaho for years, However, within the last two years, I have begun to see major evidence of wolves gaining ground. I know one thing, Idaho gov’t had better get off their buts and do something about it because the state can’t afford to loose the revinue when hunters end up going to other states. Its too bad because Idaho is such a beautiful stae.
Add a wolf tag to every elk tag and don’t use the elk tag for a couple years and I bet we would start to see a balance.
My only question is: if it’s a hunting zone, what percentage of the decline is due to successful human hunters, who because of the flight from Mexifornia may result in an increase in the kill rate by humans that far exceeds wolf kill if left without humans in the equation… Scientifically, there is little to “no significance” in the difference (short term, long term) between survival of 75% and 87%. In the spirit of “open-ness” , human hunters’ impacts in recent years should be considered to determine whether or not it is THEIR kill rates that have caused this difference. Just a thought, since, as I said, the science does not appear, at this point in time, to support the panic. And, before anyone gets abusive, I support hunting both species, but question, again, the validity of panic, given that the short term impact of a wolf may well be swamped in the long term by that of NEW humans in the hunting zone. Once elk learn to avoid wolves AND humans in that “hunting unit” perhaps we will see an increase in “survival of the fittest”.
When the snow piles up and winter ranges are the only option for elk…then we see the “panic” of the advocates attempting to cover up the truth with bunk for another winter yet to dump white onto the subject, or would that be light.
Tom, Idaho Department of Fish and Game Proposal to Reduce Wolf Numbers In the Lolo Elk Management Zone; Analysis of Public Comments; February 2006
http://www.forwolves.org/ralph/Final-Public-Clearwater-Analysis.pdf
A different perspective, good critique:
http://www.wolfhaven.org/PDF/conservation/PDF%20Comments/Idaho%20Lolo%20Control%20Proposal%20Comment.pdf
This IS the IDFG report on the study in the Lolo area. It was not considered a valid study by USFW because of the very small sample size. In short it didn’t meet the requirements you list in this article:
http://fwcb.cfans.umn.edu/courses/FW5603/Idaho_wolf_plan.pdf
Notice the impact of black bears and cougar on calves – only one was taken by a wolf.
A brief summary of the Idaho Lolo wolf removal proposal survey: 15 groups responded, 4 for removal (3 of them local); 2 neutral; and 9 opposed that included 5 local groups.
Of the 682 individual responses, NOT including the 41,738 from Defenders of Wildlife, 264 favored and 558 opposed reducing the wolf population.
The herd in question was declining prior to the reintroduction of wolves. The forests removed by fires of the early 1900s that created such great habitat have regrown.
Lee,
Are saying wolves killed only one calf in the Lolo ? Have you ever traveled in there ? Could we get some perspective other than FWS and IFG bullshit reports ? I am sick of hearing about this BULLSHIT HABITAT LIE LEE…Ive packed that country and failed to see the barren waste lands you and your government goons keep pointing to…Thats some of the thickest trash Ive ever been in. I hope others been on the ground in the Lolo will chime in and give us the FACTS their eyeballs showed them, instead of your damn paper trails you continually point to.
I find it irritating when FWS and IFG biologist estimations rule the day, No outfitter on the ground and that has lost his clientel is credible, hundreds of hunters on the ground are not credible either..travelers to winter ranges surrounded in deep snows watching ranges that once held 18,000++++Elk and now hold from four elk to four hundred elk, mostly cow elk with no calves and report what they see, including myself, having spent my funds on fuel and wear and tear on my vehicles to go see the facts in wide open living color get no credibility either…Other sportsmens and outfitters associations use their planes to fly Idaho while snow covered looking for Idaho’s elk, and upon not finding those normally easy to locate large herds asked IFG WHERE are all the ELK !!! IFG, said well we got this paper work here of biological etimations for ya boys and you can trust us to tell you the truth because we got no reason to LIE to ya…..OK, then why are they lying to me ?????????????
Estimated reports from FWS-IFG controlled biologists who either support the wolf re-introduction or fear jobloss are not credible either. When field agents of IFG are under gag rules and fear to express their honest opinions IFG becomes NON CREDIBLE. Now pressure is gonna get them coming out like the Deputy Director Jim Unsworth, and putting blame where blame needs put, ON WOLVES. I’m looking forwards to a winter of traveling hunt units once again to seek out what my eyes tell me, not some BULLSHIT PAPER ESTIMATIONS WHICH ARE NEVER CREDIBLE. 33/34/35/36/43/44/48/49/50/51/52/ via Truck/Snowmoblie/horse/foot here I come again. My eyes are credible, and my logical use of my own intellect to see the lack of elk in normal winter ranges which are not there needs no further explanation to myself. Who knows, perhaps the 150 bulls that used to winter here behind the house which have been gone now for five years, and dwindled down over the last 12, will be back, with yearling bulls like used to be the case every year before those KNASHING OF THEIR TEETH USELESS VARMINT WOLVES appeared back on the scene.
“THEY” can keep on using their double standards all “THEY” want. I will stock up on more CROW, double cellofane wrapped so its not freezer burnt, so when “THEIR” mountain of lies falls down from the weight of truth crushing it finally I WILL START UP THE CROW CHILI FEED for fools.
I agree with Greg until you have been out there and done the foot work to see up close and personal for yourself you can’t set in a goverment office and estimate the destruction the wolves are doing to the elk herd and be anywhere close to what is really happening to the elk.
The elk herds are and will remain in trouble until we take control of these predators.
Greg, there was a study done to determine mortality of elk calves. If you want the numbers read the report. Some of the calves in the study survivied, some were killed by black bear, some by cougar, one by a wolf. I did not say only one calf has ever been killed by a wolf.
Lee
I don’t know if you are a Idaho gov’t official or not, if you are then get out and see for your self, whether you are in Lolo, Dworshak, or the sawtooth range! They are all the same. There is a large increase of wolf crap, tracks in the mud/snow, sightings, wolves baying up in the middle of the morning. That along with the decrease of Elk and lets not forget the deer, tells one thing. There are too many wolves. I’m not saying kill all the wolves, but conservation is a hell of a lot better than presevation. To say that wolves only killed one Elk calf in the Lolo’s is just plain stupid. Tell me one thing, is it true that Feds only count breading couples and not the entire pack? If thats the case, then you numbers are way way off.
Phil, For the 2nd time I DID NOT SAY only one calf elk was killed in the Lolo by wolves. Please, read my last post carefully (#16).
I live in western Oregon but was raised and vacation in Idaho. I have lots of relates there. Some hunt in the Clearwater area.
This will get you started on how many and where; in the left column select “population fact sheet”.
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/
In 2006 they listed 713 wolves and 46 breeding pairs in Idaho. So now you can answer your own question!
“If thats the case, then you numbers are way way off.” I didn’t give any numbers!
[...] 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. [...]
[...] 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. [...]
[...] 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. [...]
I think this is a great article. I was hunting with my dad in zone 3 in Montana this year. Every hunter that we talked to along with ourselves, realized that the herds were down and the wolves were everywhere. We saw 3 wolves in one day!! One running across the highway and 2 up in the mountains. The herds of elk that used to be 200 are now down to groups (not herds) of ten. No calfs in these groups! The bulls are high and by themselves, there is something that has changed in that pasted 8 years that I have hunted. The elk are running at the faint sound of anything, and the fact that I saw maybe 10 calfs out of 500 elk in a week. I think that there is something very wrong! Management needs to change fast.
We have too many wolf lovers, anti-hunters within the ranks of our own Idaho Dept. of FIsh and Game. They do not listen to the sportsmen or the outfitters, the people out in the woods day in and day out. Ask any hunter where he hunted in Idaho and if he saw any sign of wolves. Every drainage and every unit, the report is always the same. I have been hunting elk during the archery rut season for the last 30 years. I have also guided for an outfitter friend of mine for 10 of those years. My only point here is, that I have been around elk in this state for a very long time. This is the first year in 30 of those years…..that I did not see and elk, did not hear a bugle, a cow mew and very little sign. For years you could at least count on the bulls to bugle in the night to let you know they are around. Now at night all you hear is the howl of the wolf. Any time I did find an elk track, there was a wolf track there as well. I hunt the Sawtooth zone. Each year for the last ten has gotten progressively worse, until this last year when it hit the all time bottom. I am so discouraged and heartbroken over the status of the elk herds in the state and it appears it will only get worse before it gets better. I doubt I will even buy a license or tag next year. Elk hunting used the be the 5th largest econonmy in the state and now non-residents will not come here and soon IF&G will see a larger decrease in resident licenses and tags. They are already wanting to increase fees, but yet they continue not to do anything more to help the sportsmen or to even listen to them. We have wolves being seen on the edge of town here in Boise and the IDF&G wolf expertt says there is at least 3 packs within a 20 mile radius of Boise. THREE packs in a 20 mile radius of the largest city in the state….!!! If there are that many this close to a large metropolis, how many do you possibly think there might be in the over 83,000 square miles of Idaho. The outfitters know, the hunters know and no one is listening. The overall plan of the wolf program is to put an end to all hunting and it is beginning to happen at an alarming rate. No matter how many wolves the packs grow to be, the wolf people will NEVER give into compromise or any sort of management program. They will ALWAYS make it a lawsuit, it has nothing to do with biology or science to them, it is totally political. I hope the IDF&G sees a real bright future for themselves in the sale of wolf viewing tags…..because hunting licenses and tags will continue to decline along with the decline of animal herds.
Ken – Not that I think it would make you feel any better but your expression of what’s taking place is not the only one. Many,many other feel much the same as you do. Hang in there. We can only hope that through all of our hard work and becoming a unified and loud voice, we can accomplish changes.
[...] exists two blatantly false statements. In some areas, as we have seen this past winter, wolves have destroyed far too many elk. Game management is done by management zones or regions, [...]
[...] exists two blatantly false statements. In some areas, as we have seen this past winter, wolves have destroyed far too many elk. Game management is done by management zones or regions, [...]