Fish and Wildlife Wolf Cull within RFMA

[F Mandolin]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

Both. In areas where there are RFMA I'm certain the trappers could do it. Depending on how many lines are actually in the cull area that is.
Trapping a few wolves here and there is pretty easy and not overly expensive, but a mass cull of big numbers is pricey. Not worth it for just the pelts alone.

You would be totally rewriting science if trappers could remove the 600 wolves. I've trapped and snared them and think it would be impossible to clean them out. Science says a maximum of 15% of the total population can be taken by trappers and I think thats high. I mentioned earlier snares are much less selective than the proper toxicant and chopper shooting.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by F Mandolin

You would be totally rewriting science if trappers could remove the 600 wolves. I've trapped and snared them and think it would be impossible to clean them out. Science says a maximum of 15% of the total population can be taken by trappers and I think thats high. I mentioned earlier snares are much less selective than the proper toxicant and chopper shooting.

Oh poisoning them is effective, no doubt about that.

But if one tried to wipe them out by snaring I think big numbers could be taken. Far more then 15% if one applied himself.

I'm about to start a similar project myself in a couple days, time will tell just how many can be eliminated!!!

[F Mandolin]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

Oh poisoning them is effective, no doubt about that.

But if one tried to wipe them out by snaring I think big numbers could be taken. Far more then 15% if one applied himself.

I'm about to start a similar project myself in a couple days, time will tell just how many can be eliminated!!!

That sounds very interesting, I would like know how you do. Try and estimate how many you have to start with.

[jawa]

Originally Posted by F Mandolin

When a cull is implemented it's for a confined area and attempts to remove all wolves. According to scientists trappers and hunters combined cannot take more than 10-15% of a wolf population so a bounty would be cheaper but accomplish nothing. When the proper poison is used by professionals it is selective towards wolves, coyotes, and foxes only and much more selective than snaring. There is no comparison for effectiveness. This is not being done now by fish and wildlife in the Smoky and i doubt they will change in this new cull. They know everything. Merry Xmas

What your saying is they will use a poison that is specifically made to kill dogs only it wont hurt birds cats or members of the weasel family.
what a waste coyotes and foxes left to rot i would be charged for allowing the fur to go to waste not to mention even dark bush dogs were worth good money last year
i dont understand what you mean by snares being less selective if fish and wildlife have killed one deer or one moose to use for bait they are ahead of me in incidental kills.
i took twelve out of a pack of sixteen last winter they are back up to eight will see what happens this winter will see what happens also any coyotes and foxes i caught i set for
happy new year dwight

[nube]

Well I know an area that has been trapped the last 2 years and basically has broken up or killed the most part of 3 packs...... It doesn't take much. You don't need to take out 3/4 of a pack to save the ungulates in an area. Seen it first hand.
Also I am wondering what size of an area they are hitting if they want to take out 600 wolves. I would say the number of wolves they think are in there is hugely inflated especially when it's a no fly area except military personel. And if I am wrong on that then I still want to know how they did a count when the place is solid bush.
I highly doubt they really did do their homework because to do the count justice would cost a huge amount of money and heck they can't even get the Grizz count right for goodness sake

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by nube

Well I know an area that has been trapped the last 2 years and basically has broken up or killed the most part of 3 packs...... It doesn't take much. You don't need to take out 3/4 of a pack to save the ungulates in an area. Seen it first hand.
Also I am wondering what size of an area they are hitting if they want to take out 600 wolves. I would say the number of wolves they think are in there is hugely inflated especially when it's a no fly area except military personel. And if I am wrong on that then I still want to know how they did a count when the place is solid bush.
I highly doubt they really did do their homework because to do the count justice would cost a huge amount of money and heck they can't even get the Grizz count right for goodness sake

My friend's line is quite a bit north of the base Nube,and he was told they will be culling that area.
Cat

[F Mandolin]

I have no idea what kind of cull f&w are going to do and have heard nothing about it other than what i read on this thread. The reason i registered was because i disagreed with many of the things trappers were saying.

I've snared wolves and don't believe trappers can come close to the numbers choppers and poison can take. If they shoot a moose for bait that's not a non target and jusst by setting baits on a lake or large opening they eliminate non targets, especially if 1080 is used. You can't do this with snares. How many snares would need to be set over how big this area is to kill 600 wolves or 90% of them?

If you kill 8 out of 12 wolves one winter you do nothing because they will be filled in within one breeding season unless there was something wrong with the population before you snared them. Could be decease or shortage of prey so they have poor pup survival. Mange often kills all the pups in the den. If game is being reduced by wolves at least 60% - 80% have to be killed every year for them to recover and thats if wolves are the only problem which i would bet they are not. Thats one reason the Smoky cull has been a flop.

If f&w use strychnine and have some people use snares on ther people's traplines as i hear they did at Smoky then they should raise holy hell because there will be terrible damage. If it's 1080 and choppers then wolf, coyote, and fox could be virtually wiped out as long as they continue the program. I agree the fur from these animals will be wasted.

Thats my take on it anyway but having read the replies on Smokey cull and the clamoring for bounties i don't suspect anything will change. Its interesting reading all the opinions and I'll stick to my original one. Who wants to skin a mangy, rubbed stinking wolf for next to nothing.

[nube]

Dwight please go away......

[jawa]

x2

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by hunterdan44

The poison bait sites are the worst thing. Just boggles the mind , let the trappers have the pelts and utilize the resources.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I understand it, the hair will slip badly after a animal has ingested a poison like 1080, so the pelt has no value.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

Oh poisoning them is effective, no doubt about that.

But if one tried to wipe them out by snaring I think big numbers could be taken. Far more then 15% if one applied himself.

I'm about to start a similar project myself in a couple days, time will tell just how many can be eliminated!!!

I think Trappers could get much bigger numbers - if they applied the effort.
Problem is, how do you mandate that a trapper MUST apply the required effort? Sure some would, but that wouldn't be enough to get this necessary job done expediently. It requires immediate attention because the problem is more or less out of control at this point in many areas. Viable alternatives to a poison program don't seem to be there ,as much as I don't like to see it happen.

[Big Grey Wolf]

In the past trappers cleaned out wolves in Alberta. In 1907 Western Stock Growers paid bounty and 2849 wolves delivered in 1907. In 1948 1143 wolves were harvested by trappers and that's when bounty was increased to $15.
Just give Alberta trappers a $500-$1000 bounty and you will see how many wolves will be harvested. "Money talks BS walks" Cheaper than paying $2000 for "Air Wolf" out of Grand Cache. No wolf no pay.

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

Oh poisoning them is effective, no doubt about that.

But if one tried to wipe them out by snaring I think big numbers could be taken. Far more then 15% if one applied himself.

I'm about to start a similar project myself in a couple days, time will tell just how many can be eliminated!!!

I agree. I know it can be done on a local scale.
Not wiped out but reduced to a fraction of what they were.

I was county Beaver tapper for a number of years. Even with the limitations of the Beavers normal movements, it is nearly impossible to wipe out such a population.

You can wipe out some colonies, you could wipe out some packs. But there will always be one pair, one colony, one pack you don't find, or that move in from somewhere else.

I've seen two packs wiped out in recent years. Not 100 percent killed but reduced to where they were no longer a viable pack so the survivors moved away, looking for mate I suppose.

[trouty]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

In the past trappers cleaned out wolves in Alberta. In 1907 Western Stock Growers paid bounty and 2849 wolves delivered in 1907. In 1948 1143 wolves were harvested by trappers and that's when bounty was increased to $15.
Just give Alberta trappers a $500-$1000 bounty and you will see how many wolves will be harvested. "Money talks BS walks" Cheaper than paying $2000 for "Air Wolf" out of Grand Cache. No wolf no pay.

They're in an air weapons base, let the forces do some target practice.