Wolf hunt suspended in southern Montana

Wolf hunting in southern Montana is closing just after sunset today, only a day after the general season opened Sunday, after the 12-wolf quota for the region was quickly exceeded by one.

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks had suspended an early back-county hunt in a small, remote part of the region north of Yellowstone National Park after nine wolves were shot -- before  the general wolf hunting season, Montana's first in modern times, even opened on Sunday. That hunt raised controversy because four wolves from Yellowstone's Cottonwood pack who had ventured outside the park, including the pack's alpha male and female, were killed.

The brief opening saw an additional four wolves in the southern Montana region quickly shot, prompting Montana officials to close down all of Wolf Management Unit 3. Hunting remains open through Nov. 29 in northern and western Montana, where an additional 10 wolves out of the state's overall quota of 75 have been shot so far. Wildlife officials have held out the option of extending the hunt through Dec. 31 if the quota isn't met in November.

State officials said two of the four wolves shot in WMU-3 on Sunday were in Gallatin County, again not far from the border of Yellowstone National Park. The other two were shot in Sweetgrass County.

Conservationists have sued to stop the removal of Northern Rockies wolves from the Endangered Species list, arguing that wolf numbers could drop precipitously, especially since there are no assurances that wolves in discrete regions of Yellowstone, northwestern Montana and Idaho will be able to connect and share genes.

But Montana wildlife management officials have calculated that wolf numbers are likely to increase, despite the hunt. While there are about 500 wolves in Montana now, even if 75 are hunted this year, there are expected to be 590 wolves in established packs across the state, and 655 wolves overall (counting wolves that go out on their own) next year.

-- Kim Murphy

Map: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks

Comments

[Whatever in LA]

There are less than 600 wolves and they allow hunting... Montana definitely knows how to assign and protect its endangered species!

[Manofsteel]

Why would you kill a wolf? We should conserve our wildlife.

[Ronin]

So these big brave hunters set out bait for a month or so and then shoot the wolves from a blind. How Brave!! I hunt, but not like these worthless individuals. Anyone needing a trophy is obviously lacking elsewhere.

[Ray Roker]

serious... Wolf hunting.. dont they have DJ Hero on PS3 or Cable TV? .. Get herr done!!!

[raised in Montana, going to college in southern california.]

Yes, Whatever in LA, they do. Montana also is trying to protect its ranchers from the predatory wolves. The wolves have been known to kill for fun. This past year, a pack killed 200 sheep just for fun. Also, since the wolves were reintroduced, deer and elk populations have been in steady decline. Please, do not assume that the state of Montana is filled with ignorant people. Actually, life is much more peaceful and enlightening when you live in a place like Montana. You learn to appreciate nature, not from inside a car in a National Park with paved roads. You can really get out there. Maybe you should try it sometime, its rather enlightening. Hunting is a much more natural thing than shopping at Whole Foods everyday and trying to protect an environment that you know nothing about.

[D]

Anyone that kills an animal for fun is disgusting. How this even allowed.

[Eric of Reseda]

There simply MUST be some way to allow these magnificent animals to thrive, while protecting the interests of ranchers and citizens. And in fact, ultimately, helping these creatures to survive is indeed in everyone's interests.

[Raised in Oregon Living in Alaska]

Raised in Montana - thank you. The first intelligent comment yet on this article. Humans hunting is as natural as wolves hunting. The level of ignorance displayed by these comments would be funny if it wasn't such a serious matter . These are knee jerk comments that reflect a comprehensive misunderstanding of hunting and the natural world in general. Let's hope they stay in California - the fewer of these folks in Alaska and Montana the better.

[Judie Stein]

Why is killing a sentient being that shares this planet in its own way - otherwise known as hunting - a natural thing? Is it not in the 10 Commandments thou shall not kill? Or is that only for two legged beings? Or maybe those of certain color - and it can go on.

Why should it be a right to kill species who walk on four rather than two legs? Do wolves satisfy a human's nutritional needs? Or are those who kill those innocents so insecure they need to kill the parents of little cubs to feel better about themself? Does that not smack of the Third Reich ?

Get it together you folks with your itchy fingers on triggers as you spread out bait then cowardly hide in blinds or cars to murder your fellow inhabitants of Planet Earth. Some day they might do the same to you.

[D]

Hunting for food is natural, yes, but hunting for sport is stupid and sad. Dont act like you know better because you are from Oregon or Montana.

[aw]

Re: raised in Montana, going to college in southern California

You are an amazing specimen able to read a wolf's mind.
Tell us more about what a wolf thinks and what he does for fun.

How do you know what a wolf thinks? Enlighten us, please.

The wolf is a predator? Really?! I didn't know that.

Please inform us about the science of wildlife management. Please tell us how 500 wolves in Montana of 150,000 square miles represents a threat to anyone.

Please explain why the mentally castrated are allowed to take position outside of Yellowstone and fire upon the alpha male and female of that pack carefully nurtured at great expense.

Just because you have a reading list from your English composition professor's assistant doesn't mean that you are not a slack-jawed yokel.

Your ignorance is painfully apparent.

[Terri Cheng-Nodelman]

For those of you saying hunting is natural for humans as it is for wolves: fine, but leave your cowardly guns at home and hunt with your senses and kill only with your jaw. If you can't do that, then go home, shut up, and leave the wolves alone.

[peter hagelis]

Hunting for sport is stupid. There is such hatred for Wolves it blows my mind.
Yes wolves can kill fior "fun"... humans do it as well. Sport hunting is that, take the head, skin and leave the rest to rot. Wolves are doing what is natural. Why do humans hunt for fun? Bragging rights?
Hunters who killed the cottonwood pack knew what they were doing, hateful behavior.

[gino]

with limited space (land) and no predators, how will the wolf population be controlled? when these beautiful creatures become too many for a certain area and begin venturing into neighborhoods (close to your children playing in the backyard), what will you say then about controlling the wolf population?

[Cynthia Minde]

The wolves that were in the back country like the Cottonwood Wolf pack haven't killed anyone's livestock, These were behaved wolves. They should have never opened season hunting to all hunters only to the ranchers who are having problems. I am against any sort of hunting but if there was the need it should have been limited to those who have the right to defend their livelyhood. This hunt brough in hundreds of Sport hunters who just kill for the thrill. Is this how we treat our wildlife. Humans are more predator than wolves. We kill for the fun of it and they kill to survive. Montana messed up and they know it. But it is to late now. The one pack that has been on TV and photographed by hundreds is now gone. That isn't anything to be smiling about. Shame on Montana for allowing the wolf hunt in Yellowstone.

[Toby]

When in L.A. - do as Californians do...When in Montana, leave it to the residents to do what's best for their state.

Wolves have no place in this settled community...and like it or not, the Northern Rockies are a settled community...and those not-so-beloved wolves are destroying elk, deer and other wildlife populations. In much of western Montana last spring, wolves nearly killed the entire elk calf crop...and next door in Idaho, elk herds are now down 30-percent or more due to wolf predation. Likewise, with dwindling wild prey, wolves are now turning to domestic livestock. And all of this fiasco has already cost American taxpayers several hundred million dollars...and it will cost hundreds of millions more to manage wolf numbers.

For those of you who feel there are too few wolves to allow hunting...do some math. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service admits that there are about 1,700 wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. The wildlife biologists with the game departments in each of these states accept that the average wolf kills approximately 30 elk each and every year. That adds up to 51,000 elk killed annually by wolves. Big game populations cannot withstand that kind of depredation - and neither can cattle ranching.

I wonder how long it will be before a pack of hungry wolves take down a few rural school children as they wait for the school bus at the end of a long lane.

All wildlife has to be managed, especially apex predators like the wolf - they are not the cute and cuddly creatures that Walt Disney brainwashed so many into believing.

Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH

[RC]

When in Montana, leave it to the residents to do what's best for their state...

"Big game populations cannot stand that kind of depredation." When European man arrived on this continent, the land was teaming with wild game. Wolves were here, along with grizzlies, mountain lions, coyotes, foxes, wolverines, and other predators in number we can only imagine now.

And by the way. There has never been a documented case of a wolf attacking and killing a human being on this continent. Ever.

[anonymous]

It is interesting to me that the people who are posting from Montana seem to think that they "own" that part of the United States...this is a country that is shared by ALL citizens. My federal taxes are put into a large pot from which funds are drawn to provide services for the people of Montana. California's economy is consistently in the top ten in the world, let alone within the states of our country. Montana residents benefit from the funds that California residents and businesses contribute via taxation. The environment (which includes wildlife, ecosystems, etc) is something that is shared by all American citizens and if Californians choose to protest anything that is happening in Montana - it is our right as tax-paying citizens of the United States of America to do so. To think that citizens beyond the borders of Montana should stand by while the citizens within the borders plunder wildlife for fees or bragging rights it ridiculous. To discount what hunting will do to the sustainability and stability of the wolf population is ignorant and short-sighted. I am not someone who thinks that wolves are cuddly sweet animals - I cannot bear to watch the documentaries in which predators kill the weak, young and infirm - but if the wolf population must be "managed" then why leave something to hunters (who often do not know what they are doing), instead task the Department of Fish and Wildlife with reducing the numbers to a level that does not destabalize established packs. As for wolves killing 200 sheep - that pack was killed by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. I have to question why that person who had a flock of 200 sheep - why were they left unprotected, it is ridiculous. I live in Pasadena, California - home of the Rose Bowl, a highly urban area of Los Angeles county and I do not leave my CAT outside because I know that coyotes come down into my area and eat them. On walks in my community (which happens to be near the Huntington Library) I can't list how many cat paws and tails I have seen on lawns and parkways. Now - if I live in an urban area and have the sense that God gave me to protect my animal...how is it that this rancher thinks that he can put a flock of sheep out in the wilderness and think that nothing may happen to them? It is ridiculous. Perhaps that pack practiced on easy prey to prepare for more difficult prey - perhaps is was adult wolves teaching younger wolves how to hunt...this is behavior documented in many animals...bottomline - if you are in the wilderness then animals are going to do what they do and ranchers should understand that part of being in that business means that there is going to be a certain amount of losses that occur from predators. I would recommend that people (1) write President Obama and protest the removal of the wolf from the endangered species list and his choice for Secretary of Interior, Robert Salazar (2) write Secretary Salazar to protest (3) ask neighbors and friends to do the same. If it was possible to put the wolf on the endangered species list under President Bush - how is it not possible to put it back on under President Obama?

[Natalie]

WOW! It takes BIG man to kill a helpless wolf with a high powered rifle from 200 yards away. What a sport, huh? If these cowards had any courage they would chase the wolf and kill it by hand, but they'd probably urinate in their pants if they came within a few feet of it. Just once, in a moment of poetic irony, I'd like to see a wolf tear one of these cowards to shreds. To use a common descriptive, I guess a high-powered rifle is a macho substitute for small guys, they can't even get a grip with the tips of their own fingers. bang.

[J Trosper]

Here is an informative article about the effect on wolf research:

http://www.minnpost.com/stories/2009/10/27/12851/death_of_a_wolf_raises_questions_about_research

It might clear up a few "myths"...

[Rubi]

It is deeply saddening to me the little regard that we have for animal life and how animal killing is regarded as a "sport". Even more sad is the fact that the gray wolves after being in the endangered species list and then making a comeback then we allow hunting again to reduce the over-population. I always wonder when will humans realize that maybe animal life is just as precious as human life. We're just the ones with the big brain...This beautiful beast's journey was pretty admirable ( Wolf 527) what a shameful way to end it.By the way we also have over-population in Los Angeles just look at the 405 freeway. If the now over-population of the gray wolf or any species for that matter is a problem, shouldn't we use our big brain to solve the problem? By looking at the 405 I guess I'm expecting too much.

[ssi]

I thought egocentrism was the primary ill here in California...but anthropomorhism is pretty rampant too...hey anonymous...I wouldn't brag too much about our economy to others less it remind them that we are painfully too enept to manage our financial resources...this in spite of (or because?) we are so much more intelligent than the rest of the country???

[anonymous]

in response to ssi:

"I wouldn't brag too much about our economy to others less it remind them that we are painfully too enept to manage our financial resources...this in spite of (or because?) we are so much more intelligent than the rest of the country???"

My point in bring up the contribution of the state California economy to our country - The United States of America - was in response to previous posts:

"Let's hope they stay in California - the fewer of these folks in Alaska and Montana the better."

"When in L.A. - do as Californians do...When in Montana, leave it to the residents to do what's best for their state."

It was not bragging it was a comment directed at shared resources. I do not have a choice on where my Federal tax contributions go, it is used to fund our entire government (and the last time I checked - most of the tax that I pay via payroll tax is federal tax). Given that the contribution of California tax payers to the federal tax base is one of the largest - and states like Montana and Idaho which have smaller populations contribute less...well, it stands to reason that the citizens of those states enjoy the contributions of Californians and have a RIGHT to. One of the contributions that Montana and Idaho offer our country are beautiful land, wildlife and ecosystems that can be preserved for the enjoyment of ALL Americans. If they are not treating those natural resources in a manner that preserves them for the enjoyment and appreciation of ALL Americans than it is our RIGHT to protest until our governement responds to the interests of ALL AAMERICANS - not just ranchers, residents of Montana and Idaho - but every single tax-paying citizen who calls this country thier own.

As for Californians being more intelligent than other places - I didn't infer that, obviously we have our own issues to iron out. In fact, I applaud WYOMING for having the foresight to not include the wolf in thier hunting season - instead they have tasked the Department of Fish and Wildlife with the management of the wolf. I APPLAUD Wyoming for thier ability to recognize the possibility of a debacle happening within the border of thier state and acting proactively. If there is an "intelligent" state in this discussion the blue ribbon would have to be handed to Wyoming.

Here are some facts -

Idaho and Montana together are 363,770 SQ MILES
Current wolf population in Idaho and Montana: 1,343
Projected post-hunting season wolf population: 1,123

That is one wolf per 3,262 square miles - to put that into perspective Los Angeles County is 4,061 square miles - based on these numbers we would have one wolf in our ENTIRE county.

Attempts at minimizing the destabalization of a pack due to the loss of the Alpha Female and Male by calling it anthropomorphism displays an ignorance to what that term means. The social complexity of wolf packs are something that scientists do not completely understand but they do know that the Alpha Female and Male are key to the survival of a pack.

Oh - and with regard to California being inept at handling our finances...we are not alone in the country on that one. what does that have to do with this issue? I dunno

[L.B.]

Wolves are native to Montna, cows and sheep are not....wolves have a right to be there...and they have given a boost to the economy by being there...fact-Yellowstone was started to PROTECT animals..Ranchers should have to buy insurance, so they can be re-embursed if predators kill their livestock...if someone breaks into my home and steals my t.v., etc...no one re-imburses me if I don't have insurance...I can almost understand hunting to eat what you kill, but I would assume most of the hunter do not eat wolves...AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE "CIVILIZED" COUNTRY???

[A Wolf]

There are too many humans and they are eating all the rancher's cattle - maybe we should have a quota for them. Too bad their pelts really aren't worth much. Ugly little pests...