Wolf Poisoning

[creeky]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

I went for a walk this morning. 10km in 406. Saw 4 deer, 7 wolves. One moose track. And a couple of cougar tracks. Devastated country.

Yeah, how many wolves did you get-share your pics?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[sevenmil]

Originally Posted by creeky

Yeah, how many wolves did you get-share your pics?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He said he saw some wolves. He never said he killed any for crying out loud. He doesn’t have to prove it to you. Maybe you should prove that he is wrong if it is that big of a deal that he says he saw some wolves.

[bitterrootfly]

Originally Posted by creeky

Yeah, how many wolves did you get-share your pics?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still see plenty of game in 406 just way more wolves, way too many.

[mckenzieclan]

I’m for keeping predator numbers under control by any responsible means possible, (all predators, by all means), in fact the same goes for all game & habitat.
I’m also a firm believer in thinking outside of the box,...
I pose that whilst big game hunters are prepared to brave -30 inclement weather in pursuit of their favourite big game animal, most are not prepared to do the same in pursuit of predators, (or at the very least aren’t as enthusiastic to do so - Yes, I’m generalizing, and No I don’t have any facts to back it up, just my own observation).
Since we, the hunting community do our part in conservation efforts with respect to big game population control, why should we not be accountable to do the same for predators.
What if a Tag exchange programme was introduced whereby you exchanged predator hide/fur for big game Tags,...
Each winter preceding the big game season, you had to do your part in controlling the predator population in order to secure the right to do the same for big game in the following big game season,... or maybe you get special/additional big game opportunities due to your overall conservation
commitment.
5 Coyote hides/furs get you your usual general deer tags, (No furs, No deer tags).
1 Wolf hide/fur gives you the eligibility to apply in the usual special draws, (No fur, No eligibility to enter draws).
Any number of hides/furs in excess, gives you access to additional opportunities.

What you think about that fellas, (as bad as you think it seems, it can always get worse).

Cheers,...

[creeky]

Originally Posted by sevenmil

He said he saw some wolves. He never said he killed any for crying out loud. He doesn’t have to prove it to you. Maybe you should prove that he is wrong if it is that big of a deal that he says he saw some wolves.

He initially said "406 was a nice place to hunt. Now all that's left is piles of bones and hair." which is utterly and completely fake news.

I honestly don't care one way or the other whether he shot/photographed/or observed 7 wolves when he posts on here that that there's no game left in the whole of 406-because that's irresponsible (fake) news.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[creeky]

Originally Posted by bitterrootfly

I still see plenty of game in 406 just way more wolves, way too many.

Agreed.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Deer Hunter]

Wolves move. And reproduce easier than anything. If you are seeing good game populations your 400s honeyhole, give it a year or two. The wolves will find it.
I don't need to post pics to have an educated opinion of what's going on here.
I'm more interested in hunting then arguing.

Maybe I'll go for a walk and see how many wild horses I see. Or Subaru's parked on trailheads... who cares? Just me!

[bitterrootfly]

Originally Posted by mckenzieclan

I’m for keeping predator numbers under control by any responsible means possible, (all predators, by all means), in fact the same goes for all game & habitat.
I’m also a firm believer in thinking outside of the box,...
I pose that whilst big game hunters are prepared to brave -30 inclement weather in pursuit of their favourite big game animal, most are not prepared to do the same in pursuit of predators, (or at the very least aren’t as enthusiastic to do so - Yes, I’m generalizing, and No I don’t have any facts to back it up, just my own observation).
Since we, the hunting community do our part in conservation efforts with respect to big game population control, why should we not be accountable to do the same for predators.
What if a Tag exchange programme was introduced whereby you exchanged predator hide/fur for big game Tags,...
Each winter preceding the big game season, you had to do your part in controlling the predator population in order to secure the right to do the same for big game in the following big game season,... or maybe you get special/additional big game opportunities due to your overall conservation
commitment.
5 Coyote hides/furs get you your usual general deer tags, (No furs, No deer tags).
1 Wolf hide/fur gives you the eligibility to apply in the usual special draws, (No fur, No eligibility to enter draws).
Any number of hides/furs in excess, gives you access to additional opportunities.

What you think about that fellas, (as bad as you think it seems, it can always get worse).

Cheers,...

While I think it’s awesome that you are thinking outside the box, I say this and I mean no offence but I don’t think it’s a good idea to go through with something like this plan. Some people hunt solely for food and have no interest in predator management and that’s ok, some people hunt in areas with no coyotes, some in areas with no wolves, now your idea did get me thinking... what if we reduced tag costs based off a similar idea to yours, certain number of carcasses results in some licensing cost reductions. Just a thought.

[roper1]

Originally Posted by bitterrootfly

certain number of carcasses results in some licensing cost reductions. Just a thought.

Reasonable idea, maybe just a more palatable bounty ?

[NCC]

Originally Posted by mckenzieclan

I’m for keeping predator numbers under control by any responsible means possible, (all predators, by all means), in fact the same goes for all game & habitat.
I’m also a firm believer in thinking outside of the box,...
I pose that whilst big game hunters are prepared to brave -30 inclement weather in pursuit of their favourite big game animal, most are not prepared to do the same in pursuit of predators, (or at the very least aren’t as enthusiastic to do so - Yes, I’m generalizing, and No I don’t have any facts to back it up, just my own observation).
Since we, the hunting community do our part in conservation efforts with respect to big game population control, why should we not be accountable to do the same for predators.
What if a Tag exchange programme was introduced whereby you exchanged predator hide/fur for big game Tags,...
Each winter preceding the big game season, you had to do your part in controlling the predator population in order to secure the right to do the same for big game in the following big game season,... or maybe you get special/additional big game opportunities due to your overall conservation
commitment.
5 Coyote hides/furs get you your usual general deer tags, (No furs, No deer tags).
1 Wolf hide/fur gives you the eligibility to apply in the usual special draws, (No fur, No eligibility to enter draws).
Any number of hides/furs in excess, gives you access to additional opportunities.

What you think about that fellas, (as bad as you think it seems, it can always get worse).

Cheers,...

I think that you have some commendable ideas, but they won't work. I lived, ranched, and hunted in an area that was covered up with wolves and averaged about one per year. My friend managed a grazing association where they had several wolf kills every year. Riders were out there all day every day and saw very few wolves. Footholds, snares, and strychnine work at night when the wolves are active. Unless we are allowed to hunt with helicopters, hunters will never shoot enough wolves to make a difference.

[mk63]

Originally Posted by NCC

I think that you have some commendable ideas, but they won't work. I lived, ranched, and hunted in an area that was covered up with wolves and averaged about one per year. My friend managed a grazing association where they had several wolf kills every year. Riders were out there all day every day and saw very few wolves. Footholds, snares, and strychnine work at night when the wolves are active. Unless we are allowed to hunt with helicopters, hunters will never shoot enough wolves to make a difference.

Completely Agree with this

[mckenzieclan]

Originally Posted by NCC

I think that you have some commendable ideas, but they won't work. I lived, ranched, and hunted in an area that was covered up with wolves and averaged about one per year. My friend managed a grazing association where they had several wolf kills every year. Riders were out there all day every day and saw very few wolves. Footholds, snares, and strychnine work at night when the wolves are active. Unless we are allowed to hunt with helicopters, hunters will never shoot enough wolves to make a difference.

I like where you are going with this,... in some parts of the world you are allowed to hunt predators at night, with a flashlight & silencer mounted on an AR15, and on top of that, get paid a bounty for your trouble!

I don’t know what the all round best solution is, just like to provoke thought,...
But until a solution is found, I’ll continue trying to do my part, (just wish I had someone up North to teach me the ropes when it comes to wolves, haven’t found that easy going for sure).

Cheers J

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by NCC

I think that you have some commendable ideas, but they won't work. I lived, ranched, and hunted in an area that was covered up with wolves and averaged about one per year. My friend managed a grazing association where they had several wolf kills every year. Riders were out there all day every day and saw very few wolves. Footholds, snares, and strychnine work at night when the wolves are active. Unless we are allowed to hunt with helicopters, hunters will never shoot enough wolves to make a difference.

Bcfw was flying around last week south west of me. They were out a year or two ago and I can't remember how many wolves were shot. This year with only flying 2 days they come across 3 wolf tracks. They seem to be doing the job. It might be a little early in the season to be shooting wolves because they might not be as mobile until we get a couple melts and refreezing. The helicopter was gonna check out my area but I don't know if he did or not.

Helicopters aren't cheap but I have heard of using planes and catching the wolves out on the ice.

[NCC]

If it were legal, I’m sure there are people who would pay to shoot wolves from an airplane or chopper. It wouldn’t cost the government a dime.

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by NCC

If it were legal, I’m sure there are people who would pay to shoot wolves from an airplane or chopper. It wouldn’t cost the government a dime.

No but it would cost me a few bucks!!

[walking buffalo]

Lol....

Just picturing a hundred thousands hunters out trying to shoot a wolf in order to qualify for the draw.

[Chuck_Wagon]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Lol....
Just picturing a hundred thousands hunters out trying to shoot a wolf in order to qualify for the draw.

LOL, all screeching on Sceery snowshoe rabbit calls and howlers.

[NCC]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Lol....

Just picturing a hundred thousands hunters out trying to shoot a wolf in order to qualify for the draw.

I’m picturing a trapper in a dark alley selling wolves out of the trunk of his car to unsuccessful hunters.

[Deer Hunter]

[Gboe8]

What if when you bought your hunting license it cost 20$ more and that money went in to a wolf cull fund for trappers and people that kill wolves. Then there could be a bounty like Idaho. I hunted Idaho in the fall this past season and those guys are serious about getting the wolf problem under control, from what I got talking to a few locals.

[NCC]

Looks like Idaho has it figured out.

I would pay $150 for a wildlife certificate if $120 of that total was going towards productive wolf reduction strategies.

[Big Grey Wolf]

Most successful non poison wolf control was in North west BC. The guides would use their own airplanes to spot and direct helicopter shooter. It worked real well to keep wolf numbers down to manageable levels.
However a $1000/wolf bounty for Alberta trappers much like the Idaho program would also do wonders to bring wolf numbers down to Alberta's management plan target of 4000 wolves.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Most successful non poison wolf control was in North west BC. The guides would use their own airplanes to spot and direct helicopter shooter. It worked real well to keep wolf numbers down to manageable levels.
However a $1000/wolf bounty for Alberta trappers much like the Idaho program would also do wonders to bring wolf numbers down to Alberta's management plan target of 4000 wolves.

I thought Alberta goal was always 3500? Also anyone have current estimated numbers? I know about 10 yrs ago the wolf lovers at the world wolf congress held here admitted to over 5000 in ab and we could kill 1200 right away. We thought more likely 7000 at the time. Would love to hear current estimates...things have only been going up since...for all preds...because we love them so much more than the other animals.🤔

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Chuck_Wagon

In an emailed statement, the province suggested that poison is only used to cull wolves in rare circumstances, and that use is strictly regulated.

"Annual wolf population reductions to avoid the loss of caribou populations are primarily conducted through aerial tracking and shooting of wolves, but also through the use of chemical toxicants," a government spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

"Chemical toxicants are only used in extreme situations, after other methods have been demonstrated to require this additional management action.

"The use of toxicants allows the removal of animals that filter into the target areas while aircraft are not operating, and allows removal of wolves that are impossible to target from the air: transient wolves and small packs that move a lot.

The only toxicant used by the Government of Alberta is strychnine, the province said in a statement to CBC News.

"The use of this substance is regulated by the Government of Canada, which requires strict reporting and safety protocols," the government statement said.

"Alberta is licensed to use this substance and rigorously follows all such protocols."

This has been known for several years now. I'm not sure why so many outdoors men seem to be so uninformed. It's been discussed several times on this forum, and others.

I agree with controlling wolf populations but NOT by any means.
I won't repeat my objections too strychnine. I've said it enough times to realize that the younger generation has no idea how nasty strychnine really is, and does not care.

I have little faith in this generation of outdoors men. most seem to be woefully uninformed and only interested in management that enhances their immediate hunting opportunities. It's a road to ruin if yo ask me. But no one is asking are they. That's the scary part. No one cares anymore.
Except us old has farts.

[RockyMountainMusic]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

This has been known for several years now. I'm not sure why so many outdoors men seem to be so uninformed. It's been discussed several times on this forum, and others.

I agree with controlling wolf populations but NOT by any means.
I won't repeat my objections too strychnine. I've said it enough times to realize that the younger generation has no idea how nasty strychnine really is, and does not care.

I have little faith in this generation of outdoors men. most seem to be woefully uninformed and only interested in management that enhances their immediate hunting opportunities. It's a road to ruin if yo ask me. But no one is asking are they. That's the scary part. No one cares anymore.
Except us old has farts.

Couldn't agree more with you keg, what an uphill battle its been and a sad thing to witness out in bush. The wolf has been a perfect scapegoat while making people happy thinking that they are doing "predator control" lmfao... the absolute worst part is how careless they are with it.

[NCC]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

This has been known for several years now. I'm not sure why so many outdoors men seem to be so uninformed. It's been discussed several times on this forum, and others.

I agree with controlling wolf populations but NOT by any means.
I won't repeat my objections too strychnine. I've said it enough times to realize that the younger generation has no idea how nasty strychnine really is, and does not care.

I have little faith in this generation of outdoors men. most seem to be woefully uninformed and only interested in management that enhances their immediate hunting opportunities. It's a road to ruin if yo ask me. But no one is asking are they. That's the scary part. No one cares anymore.
Except us old has farts.

Your generation poisoned the **** out of the wolves, shot grizzly bears, and enjoyed 40 years of great hunting because of that. The current generation is way more sympathetic towards predators than previous ones.

[Big Grey Wolf]

Kegs and my generation knocked the wolf population back in the 50's to control the spread of rabbies, not for game management. However it did have a very positive effect on ungulate game. We needed to bring Americans unguided with a $20 license just to help trim back the moose numbers.

[Spruster]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

This has been known for several years now. I'm not sure why so many outdoors men seem to be so uninformed. It's been discussed several times on this forum, and others.

I agree with controlling wolf populations but NOT by any means.
I won't repeat my objections too strychnine. I've said it enough times to realize that the younger generation has no idea how nasty strychnine really is, and does not care.

I have little faith in this generation of outdoors men. most seem to be woefully uninformed and only interested in management that enhances their immediate hunting opportunities. It's a road to ruin if yo ask me. But no one is asking are they. That's the scary part. No one cares anymore.
Except us old has farts.

You agree there's a wolf problem and it needs controlling but all you can say is what "not to do" . How about a solution to the wolf problem ?

The high number of wolves and the devastation they are causing is a PRIORITY to act now .
I support the poisoning of wolves in certain areas ! It's too late for anything else

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Kegs and my generation knocked the wolf population back in the 50's to control the spread of rabbies, not for game management. However it did have a very positive effect on ungulate game. We needed to bring Americans unguided with a $20 license just to help trim back the moose numbers.

As a whole, that's just not true.

Since the formation of Alberta, wolf control has always included great consideration for the effect of protecting and increasing game populations. The rabies epidemic simply effected a short term increase in the effort to control wolves.

While written with a certain flavour, there is plenty of interesting Alberta wolf cull history available at this page.

http://www.wolfmatters.org/history.html

[walking buffalo]

This is paper is well worth the time for hunters to read for a better understanding of wolves and wolf management in Alberta over the last 100+ years.


Review of Management and Research of Wolf-Big Game Predation in Alberta 1984
https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/2d4c...-inalberta.pdf