Carter Niemeyer is never one to mince words, and it was all straight talk at a recent discussion about wolves at Wild Idaho: “If you really want to get misinformed, go on the blogs… It’s bullisome, it’s hostile, it’s intimidating. There’s a real attempt to misinform, and so people are totally confused about wolves.” (read more at the Idaho Mountain Express)
Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife recollared the alpha male of the Imnaha pack last week.
This blogger happens to agree, so no offense taken. For example, despite tall tales about 250-pound wolves that bounce around the blogosphere, Niemeyer says the biggest one he’s ever seen weighed 141 pounds. And most wolves are between 70 and 120 pounds.
Even the mainstream news outlets fall into the trap of perpetuating wolf mythology, sometimes unwittingly. This week the Billings Gazette reported that, according to a survey of ranchers conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 4,437 head of cattle were lost across the Northern Rockies. That’s more than 23 times the number of losses confirmed by state and federal wildlife agencies in the 2010 annual wolf report put out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service! The story made no mention of the fact that USDA’s numbers are based on speculative reports from the rancher, while the USFWS numbers are verified by experts in the field. In most cases, it’s extremely difficult to identify the cause of death for livestock. Simply blaming wolves for dead cows doesn’t make it so.
The Missoulian did a much more thorough job of tackling the sticky issue of how many wolves are enough to maintain a viable population. The current minimum of 150 wolves per state is clearly too low and was admittedly picked more or less at random to get the ball rolling on reintroduction. Other projections of 2,000 to 5,000 wolves across the entire region sound more reasonable and are supported by the latest science.
But ultimately, the exact number may be less important than getting the states to manage wolves responsibly as a vital part of the landscape rather than as an unwanted varmint. And on that score, Idaho and Montana have taken a very aggressive stance so far. Montana is planning to target 220 wolves for removal, and Idaho has already been gunning down wolves from aircraft and letting outfitters kill wolves during the spring bear hunt. Thankfully, Idaho’s wolf supporters aren’t keeping quiet. Read the letters to the editor printed in the Idaho Statesman last weekend:
“Wolves belong in Idaho, and we want them in great numbers. Pearce’s ideals for Idaho’s wolf population are idiotic at best and a slap in the faces for all us taxpayers and the years we’ve spent paying to recover this majestic animal. Idaho Fish and Game should be ashamed for aligning themselves with Idaho’s elite wolf haters: Republican politicians.
Let science play its part, like you promised. There should be a statewide count of all wolves before any plan to hunt them. Simply going on an inflated estimate is foolish and potentially dangerous to their recovery and continued establishment.” — ZACHARY JONES, Boise
“The Idaho Department of Fish and Game has teams of shooters killing wolves from planes. This action cannot even be called a hunt … it is a kill.” — GERALDINE HALL, Boise
“We brought them here. The wolves did not invade on their own. What did we think they were going to do when they got here? Of course they are going to populate and hunt for food. We need to be more responsible.” — PATTY CAPENER, Boise
“I’m horrified, furious that Idaho plans on carrying out killings now of 50 wolves in Lolo. Aerial hunts during denning season, leaving babies and their parents to die.
No other wildlife has this unjustice happening. Policies are in place to protect most animals from hunting during denning season. What the heck is going on with your wolves?” — TRACY SWENSON, Logan, Utah
Author
comments
