Idaho’s wolf hunt is on

BOISE - Idaho will start selling tags next Monday for its first-ever public wolf hunt, to give hunters from both inside and outside the state a shot at up to 220 of Idaho’s wolves - a quarter of the wolf population.

Idaho’s Fish and Game Commission voted 4-3 for the wolf-hunt plan, with the three dissenters holding out for an even more aggressive hunt to target 49 percent, or up to 430, of Idaho’s wolves. Chairman Wayne Wright, one of the dissenters, declared, “Now’s the time to do the right thing. … Neither our state’s economy, our ranchers, our sportsmen or our elk herds can wait any longer.”

The decision was closely watched both by hunters who’ve been deluging Fish and Game with inquiries about the hunt, and by wolf advocates who maintain the state’s going too far to target a species that until May was considered endangered..












http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/aug/17/idahos-wolf-hunt/

assholes.

hunters are on the side of maintaining wild areas.

But a quarter of the wolf population is way too much.

The consensus is that the wolf numbers are too high. There is no predator pressure on wolves except man. To reduce wolf numbers, some culling needs to be done. The disagreement was not if it was needed but how much. By having hunters do it and pay for the privilege, the state makes some money on the deal.

I don't necessarily agree with the above, but that is the explanation.

...I mean, we're acting like it's an endangered species or something. Oh wait...

However, at some point without some form of of culling there will be the same problem in Idaho we had with cougars here in California. Also a lot higher percentage of the population in Idaho hunts for food than in California. An Elk can really make the difference in terms of feeding the family.

divided by how much.

I don't know about Idaho, but wolves have been carefully reintroduced to areas in the west in spite of angry protests from residents.

Ranchers have already been shooting wolves if they have depredation problems. Presumptively some of those kills were preemptive, its hard to know for sure.

...Right? Just like there was no clear cutting in Tongass National Forest, right?

If Interior tried to rush a new study through it would still take at least a year. Any attempt to relist the wolves without one would be stopped in the court. Presumably the Dept of the Interior was also consulted along the way.