Will The MT FWP Nightmare Continue?

Montana's Epitaph...Unless Sportsmen Take Back MT Fish, Wildlife & Parks

___________________________________________________________________________________


This blog site is simply the old LOBO WATCH blog that was published under the name of "Wolf Hunt Update".  That blog served its purpose, helping to get the word out when it was time to organize protest rallies at federal court houses...to attend sportsmen rallies calling for far more stringent wolf and other predator control...to take over pro-wolf rallies...to announce important state wildlife commission meetings...and to bring together sportsmen any time there was a need to have our voices heard when it comes to how poorly wildlife is now being managed in the Northern Rockies.

Here in Montana, we had high hopes that a new Governor would appoint a new Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks director who would take charge, and turn the agency around.  What newly elected Governor Steve Bullock gave us is former FWP Director Jeff Hagener, who headed the agency from 2001 to 2008 - until Governor Brian Schweitzer replaced him with ol' school buddy Joe Maurier.  Hagener's appointment to head MT FWP is now being met with very mixed emotions.  Many sportsmen in the state still associate him with the far less than adequate stand against major predators during his previous stay in the Director's office.

Robert Fanning, of Pray, MT recently pointed out that Hagener presided over years and years of litigation abuse by animal rights and eco fascists, who whistled the tune to which Hagener danced.

He said that groups like Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council, EarthJustice, and others repeatedly stalled wolf delisting, and milked the legal system through the Equal Access to Justice Act (for millions of dollars).  Fanning acknowledges that, as FWP Director, Hagener's legal department enabled all of this, and did nothing to fight back.  During all of this political jockeying, wolf populations grew 30-percent per anum (compounded) - and Western Montana's big game herds went into a nose-dive spiral.

Fanning presented three Ph.D's in wildlife ecology to the Governor's office that warned how Montana's ungulate herds would be pushed into a "predator pit", and how a $237-million per anum hunting industry would be destroyed.  Today, the western one-third of Montana has become a big game wasteland, with barely 15- to 20-percent of the elk, moose and other big game found in this region before Jeff Hagener's first go around as Director of FWP.

Bob Fanning says, "Hagener ignored the warnings and licked the boots of his federal overseers.  Now, Bullock and his Agenda 21 keepers just served up another dish of hot steaming wolf scat to Montana sportsmen."

During Bullock's campaign for office, opponents repeatedly spotlighted his close ties with radical environmental groups, who do indeed push hard for the rewilding of the West...which means moving people off the land.  While Bullock regularly reverts back to the chorus line "openning up more public access for Montanan's", the fact remains that the agendas of those radical environmental friends he keeps is to revert much of this state back to wilderness areas, effectively shutting out most state residents.

Bullock's appointment of Jeff Hagener as the once again Director of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks likely comes out of pure convenience.  Hagener is already in step with what it takes to destroy huntable populations of big game, making Montana a less desireable place to live.  Fewer people, far fewer people, is indeed the goal of Agenda 21.  Now we have a governor who just may be positioning himself to be an even greater threat to Montana's outdoor lifestyle than the extremely lame governor he replaces.

Sportsmen of Montana, if there ever was a time when pulling together was needed...it's right now.  For the next four years, this state must be run through the legislature...not the Governor's office.  And that includes any and all legislation regarding Fish, Wildlife and Parks issues.  Now is the time for all hunters and anglers to become extremely politically active, and to dominate FWP Commission meetings.  Learn who's your State Representative and State Senator, get their e-mail address, and inundate them with your opinions when it comes to legislation that will make it easier for the likes of Steve Bullock and Jeff Hagener to further destroy the wildlife resources of this state.

The new direction of this blog will become the FWP Watch Dog.  Anytime that any one of you catch wind of anything related to FWP that's either unethical or illegal, drop me an e-mail at lobowatch2@gmail.com .

Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH
www.lobowatch.com

Wolf Management Should Be Year-Round

By Toby Bridges (www.lobowatch.com)

The sportsmen who spend a great deal of time in the outdoors, and who have witnessed the destruction of big-game herds, now openly challenge the effectiveness of controlling wolf numbers by treating these apex predators as a “big-game animal”, and hunting them only during a regulated season. Many now realize the intelligence of wolves, and their ability to remain hidden in the thick cover of the Northern Rockies—and to disappear in the blink of an eye.

Several-hundred thousand elk, deer and other big-game hunters participate during the big-game seasons held in each of the two states where wolf hunting is legal, but once those seasons come to an end, not many venture out to just hunt wolves. For example, in Montana the general firearms elk and deer seasons closed on November 27, 2011. At that time, 100 of the 220-wolf quota had been harvested. A few had been harvested earlier during archery hunts, but the vast majority of those wolves were shot by hunters looking to hang their tag on an elk or deer during the 5-week-long gun season. During the six weeks after the close of that season, just 25 additional wolves were culled. What are the chances of the 220 quota being filled, and if it is, just what real impact will it have on the wolf population and depredation of game and livestock?

Sportsmen are now calling for more sensible control of wolf numbers. They feel an established season and quotas will never gain any control of burgeoning wolf numbers. Many want wolves to have the same status as coyotes—shoot on sight year-round, no license or permit required! Only this approach has made any impact on wolf numbers in Canada, where wolves have always been a major problem.

During the 72nd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, held in Portland, OR in 2007, the University of Montana’s Mark Hebblewhite presented a study on “Predator-Prey Management in the National Park Context: Lessons from a Transboundary Wolf, Elk, Moose and Caribou System”, and stated "Based on experiences in BNP (Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada), I show that wildlife managers face tough choices ahead and must come to terms with the truth that maintaining pre-wolf ungulate harvest regimes may be a fantasy in post-wolf landscapes…”

He went on to state, “The typical conclusion of previous studies where wolves limited prey densities to low numbers was usually a recommendation to reduce predation via large-scale wolf control. While there is some controversy over the success of wolf controls, there is some experimental evidence that wolf control—when applied consistently to reduce wolf populations by greater than 80 percent over huge areas for long terms (5-years) at great financial costs can be partially successful at enhancing ungulate populations for short periods of time. I feel compelled to reiterate, however, that the main conclusions of the authors of perhaps, to date, the best executed wolf-control study in the Yukon pointed out the seeming futility of their wolf-control program as a long-term solution to ungulate population declines. Within 2 years of the end of wolf control, wolf densities and ungulate vital rates returned to pre-control levels. To be successful, wolf control needs to be conducted for long periods of time with greater than 70 percent of the wolf population removed from huge areas. While future harvest plans for wolves once delisting occurs will undoubtedly include some wolf harvest, it remains difficult to conceive of states being able to conduct wolf control at the spatial and temporal scales required to even obtain short-term increases in ungulate populations. Within national parks, where management objectives are often ecosystem based, low-density elk populations may be consistent with long-term management objectives. However, in the managed lands surrounding national parks, management objectives include both consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife use. In this context then, low-density populations of elk may not meet historical agency management objectives. This contradiction will become a common management problem in ecosystems with recovering wolf populations.”

Mark Hebblewhite is one of the professors now teaching future wildlife managers and biologists at the University of Montana, in Missoula. More and more, the sportsmen who have funded state wildlife agencies are seeing a change in management practices that they really don’t like, and that is a move to supporting the agendas of radical environmental groups rather than the sportsmen who have footed the bill for wildlife conservation. Hebblewhite’s study does a great job of exactly identifying what’s happening inside Canada’s Banff National Park, as well as in Yellowstone National Park—and that is a move to permit nature to balance itself—by allowing major predators to dramatically reduce big game populations. Only problem is, the practice has spilled outside of park boundaries, and those who have strongly supported the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation for the past 75 years are now witnessing state wildlife agencies literally robbing them of hunting opportunities.

The sad truth is, this is all by design. The University of Montana is one of more than a hundred collaborators of the “Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative” (Y2Y) along with anti-hunting organizations such as Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, and the Wildlands Network. It’s their goal to establish a near human free wild corridor nearly three times the size of California running from Yellowstone National Park all the way into the Yukon. This corridor would be returned, as much as possible, back to wilderness, where wildlife could move freely north and south for more than 2,000 miles — and where wolves, grizzlies and cougars would serve as the wildlife managers. The Y2Y, followers neither endorse nor condone the hunting of large carnivores. For many Northern Rockies hunters who have lost all trust in IDFG and MFWP, it does not come as any surprise to learn that those two state wildlife agencies are also listed as collaborators of this environmentalist dream world.

Last Minute Update - 2-16-12...

The above was written last month (January)...and sent out to several hundred members of the media and the shooting & hunting industry. Due to pressure from sportsmen and sportsmen groups, both IDFG and MT FWP have withdrawn their names from the list of Y2Y collaborators. But, a MT FWP Commission meeting on February 16 revealed that they are still reading from the script that was handed them by their radical anti-hunting environmentalist partners.

When the original closing date for the Montana 2011 wolf season rolled around on December 31, hunters had only filled about 50-percent of the 220 quota. The MT FWP Commission extended the season to February 15, 2012. When that date rolled around, the harvest was still more than 50 wolves shy of meeting the quota. A commission meeting on February 16 voted unanimously to NOT extend the season a second time. MT FWP cannot control the wolf population in this state...if we are to save the big game herds of the Northern Rockies, it's time for wolves to be shot-on-sight 365 days a year.

The above was sent out to the media a second time, plus also went to Montana's Governor Brian Schweitzer, the two Montana U.S. Senators, to the state's only U.S. Representative, and to more than 70 state senators and representatives. To read the accompanying e-mail, which further points the finger at MT FWP, go to the following link - www.lobowatch.com .

Spanish Hunting Magazines Look At Needed Wolf Control In The U.S.

This past September, I wrote and circualted a LOBO WATCH editorial/news release titled "Building A Dedicated Wolf Hunting Rifle". That story is published on the LOBO WATCH website at -

http://www.lobowatch.com/adminclient/WolfControl1/go

Somehow, a copy of that release, or a link to the published article, got to Peter Menzel - a shooting & hunting writer who lives in Spain. He contacted me about using the information in my release to spotlight the rifle and load I chose for hunting wolves, while at the same time covering the wolf problem here in the Northern Rockies.

Wolves...the destruction they are dealing other wildlife...and what it is going to take to control this predator are now gaining international attention.

Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH

Where In The Hell Is Wildlife Management Headed These Days???

Following is an e-mail that was sent today to Steven Williams, President of the Wildlife Management Institute...It also went to the heads and upper management of many sportsmen-based wildlife or conservation organizations.


Dear Steven;

I really need to ask...What in the hell are universities teaching those who are majoring in wildlife studies these days? One thing is for certain, it sure isn't the good ol' North American Model of Wildlife Conservation that has served us so well over the past 75 or 80 years. Is it?

Last week, I read the study presented by "Professor" Mark Hebblewhite, of the University of Montana, at the 72nd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference (2007). The title of that study was, Predator-Prey Management in the National Park Context: Lessons from a Transboundary Wolf, Elk, Moose and Caribou System. In that study, Hebblewhite referred to wolf recovery in the Lower 48 as "one of the great conservation successes of the 20th century". In reality, it has been the biggest wildlife disaster in our lifetimes.

But then, I guess that all depends on whatever one's real agenda happens to be. The University of Montana is a collaborator of the Yellowtone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, and for that matter so are MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. And I guess I don't have to tell you the "agenda" of that environmental pipedream. But for some of those in the "Cc:" field, I will anyway. The "agenda" is to pretty much remove the majority of human inhabitants from western Montana and Idaho, on through Canada, to establish a wild corridor three times the size of California - which would allow major predators to travel freely North-South for more than 2,000 miles. One of the Y2Y policies states that the effort neither "endorses" nor "condones" the hunting of wolves, grizzly bears and cougars...the very predators which are now destroying big game populations in MT, ID and WY.

Is this the new wave wildlife management that's now being taught? Is that why the mismanagement of predators and big game now leans so heavily in favor of our anti-hunting enemies with organizations like the Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, and the Humane Society of the United States?

If this is the direction that the Wildlife Management Institute has also chosen, forsaking all of the members of all the sportsmen based organizations and groups in the "Cc:" field - tighten your belt, the sportsmen of this country have had their fill of this idiocy.

The change just may begin here in Montana come November 2012 - when the voters purge our political ranks of those who have stood in the way of getting back to the business of managing wildlife the way the sportsmen who have footed the bill want wildlife managed. And when we get a like minded governor into office, rest assured that MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks will get one hell of an overhaul...and those who are not with the program today's sportsmen want will be the first to be shown the door.

We're going to take wildlife management back, and make it harder than ever for radical environmental NGO's to do business in this state. America is as mad as hell right now, and the stupidity of allowing wolves and other major predators to destroy the wildlife resources that have taken nearly a century to rebuild is a powder keg that will explode right in the faces of those who continue to practice such idiocy.

Where does the Wildlife Management Institute get its funding?

You can't play both sides of the fence. The Wildlife Management Intitute is either part of the problem or part of the solution. There is no middle ground.

Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH


www.lobowatch.com

"Wolf Lies" Presentation In Kalispell on August 25th

How Many Lies Can The Wolf Recovery Project Support And Continue To Have Any Validity Whatsoever?

Everyone who is now affected by an out of control wolf problem in the Northern Rockies needs to revisit the Northern Rockies Wolf Recovery Plan and the 1994 Environmental Impact Statement issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service before wolves were "reintroduced" into this region of the country. If you do, and fully realize the negative impact wolves are now having on our wildlife populations, the increased rate of livestock depredation, the threats to human health and safety, the loss of hunting opportunities, the destruction of the rural economy, and the overall not-so-good psychological impact wolves are now having on human residents, it's easy to realize just how gullible most of us were to believe that anything good would come of this government orchestrated disaster.

It also becomes even easier to realize that those who were "in charge" of the "plan"...those who assessed the impact wolves would have...those who promised that the wolf population would be "managed"...were either too stupid to get the job done - or outright lied from the very start, and have had an entirely different agenda since well before the first wolves were released into Yellowstone National Park in 1995.

When one takes the time to compare what has really happened since those wolves were released into America's wildlife wonderland to what was stated as fact, as known, as real, anyone capable of rational thinking knows that "wolf recovery" in the Northern Rockies has been little more than one great big lie. And that lie began well before USFWS released those first wolves 16 years ago.

Likewise, the agency knew fully what the outcome would be, before the door of the first wolf cargo box was opened. And USFWS has lived the wolf lie ever since.

The need for wolves in this ecosystem was likely the first big lie. For that matter, so has been the need for greater grizzly bear densities. The wolf that USFWS released as a "replacement" for the native wolf was not the same, or in other words was also a lie. How the funding for the project was stolen from Pitman-Robertson funds, under the "assumption" it was okay - is just another lie. How wolves have "spread on their own" is a lie. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks became a willing partner in this wildlife disaster, and has repeatedly lied about the true number of wolves in this state...and has lied to cover up the loss of big game to wolves. The states of Idaho and Montana have lied to residents about the health threats and physical danger that wolves pose humans. State and federal agencies who have vowed to cover livestock losses to wolves repeatedly refuse to pay that reimbursement due to lack of "evidence" that wolves were involved - even though sheep and cattle carcasses had been ripped apart by wolves, and the ground has been covered with wolf tracks. In other words, those sent to assess whether wolves caused the death or not are also living the wolf lie.

These and other wolf lies will be the topic at a presentation given by LOBO WATCH founder Toby Bridges in Kalispell, MT on Thursday, August 25. His "Wolf Lies" presentation will be at the Outlaw Inn, on Highway 93 South, and begins at 6:30 p.m.

LOBO WATCH
www.lobowatch.com

Will Judge Molloy Challenge Congress When It Comes To How Wolves Were Delisted For A 2011 Management Hunt?

Above, Scott Rockholm, of Save Western Wildlife, is being interviewed during a protest rally at the U.S. Dsitrict Court - Missoula courthouse back in March. JOIN US ON JULY 26TH...WE NEED SOME NUMBERS!



Back in April, President Barrack Obama signed H.R. 1473 into law. This legislation, known as the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriation Act of 2011, also contained a briefly worded rider which removes wolves in several states from the protection of the Endangered Species Act. And that has not set well with several pro-wolf environmental organizations, who are challenging the constitutionality of the manner in which Congress slipped this issue in among the 459 pages of the continuing resolution to keep the federal government funded, and working.

The wolf rider reads: "Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule published on April 2, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 15213 et seq.) without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule. Such reissuance (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review and shall not abrogate or otherwise have any effect on the order and judgment issued by the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming in Case Numbers 09-CV-118J and 09-CV-138J on November 18, 2010."

Judge Donald Molloy, of the U.S. District Court in Missoula, MT, has accepted a lawsuit filed by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and the Center for Biological Diversity, and despite the wording "shall not be subject to judicial review" found in the wolf rider, it is now very apparent that this federal judge has decided to do just that. Many residents of the Northern Rockies now feel that this issue no longer has anything to do with establishing and maintaining a recovered wolf population, but rather it has become all about a federal judge making law instead of enforcing the law.

The lawsuit filed by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and the Center for Biological Diversity seeks to determine the legality of adding the wolf rider to a budget continuing resolution. Their goal is to stop the wolf management (i.e. control) hunts in Montana and Idaho this year. Despite the fact that the number of wolves in these two states are now upwards of 10 to 12 times the recovered population goals established in the early 1990s Northern Rockies Wolf Recovery Plan and the 1994 Environmental Impact Statement filed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, such environmental groups keep moving the goal post - and the over population of wolves is now making a severe negative impact on elk, moose, deer and other big game herds, with escalated depredation of livestock as well.

A large segment of those sportsmen and ranchers who have been fighting to gain control of wolf numbers now see Judge Molloy as the real threat. His decisions have stalled wolf control hunts, resulting in a tremendous loss of wildlife and making it more difficult for ranchers to raise livestock profitably. One such decision cancelled a much needed 2010 wolf hunt. Molloy found that Montana and Idaho could not conduct such a hunt, even though both states had approved wolf management plans, because Wyoming's plan had not been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Actually, the Wyoming plan had been approved by USFWS. However, Molloy did not agree with the manner in which the state intended to manage wolves in only the northwest corner, to insure the 100 wolves and 10 breeding pairs mandatory under the Northern Rockies Wolf Recovery Plan and the 1994 EIS. In the rest of Wyoming, wolves would be considered a predator, and could be shot on sight. Donald Molloy so harshly criticized the plan that USFWS turned around and disapproved how the state intended to manage wolf numbers. A couple of months after Molloy's decision, a federal court in Cheyenne, WY stated that USFWS had been wrong to reject the Wyoming Wolf Management Plan. Still, the 2010 wolf hunts did not take place in Montana and Idaho, and tens of thousands of big game animals were lost to a burgeoning wolf population.

Last month (June), Molloy received the briefs for the wolf rider lawsuit, and on Tuesday, July 26th, he will hear oral arguments by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and the Center for Biological Diversity, and by the U.S. Department of the Interior. In June, a dozen or so sportsman, conservation and ranching organizations filed to become interveners in this case, which Molloy denied. The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m., at the Russell Smith Federal Courthouse, 201 E. Broadway, Missoula, MT.

This could prove to be a "no win" case for this judge. Should he side with the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and the Center for Biological Diversity, and rule that Congress did not have the constitutional right to add a wolf delisting rider to the budget continuing resolution, that could be the catalyst to push Congress to amend the ESA, returning wolf management to every state. Should Molloy decide in favor of the rider being added, Montana and Idaho will conduct wolf control hunts this fall and winter - on top of which Congress could very likely still act to amend the ESA.

That same day, sportsmen groups from the Northern Rockies are organizing a wolf protest on the sidewalks around the courthouse, to show support for wolf control, and calling for an end to wildlife management being decided by an extremely biased federal judge. The rally will begin at 9 a.m. and run until the hearing has ended. There's sure to be some extremely colorful protest signs being carried that day. - Toby Bridges, LOBO WATCH

At The Heart Of The Northern Rockies Wolf Problem Is USFWS & State Wildlife Agencies

Following is some correspondence I received from one of our state senators here in Montana. That senator had requested some info on how neighboring Idaho would attempt to get a handle on an out of control wolf population, and this is what was sent.


"I was finally able to speak with Idaho Fish and Game today about their current wolf management efforts. Here's what they've been doing under the most recent delisting:

1) Ungulate protection: use of control activities in the Lolo game management unit. This includes:

a) aerial control -- which was used for less than a month after delisting in the Lolo unit due to the weather and a change in wolf movement. The wolves moved into the timber, making aerial control unfeasible. 5 or 6 wolves were killed in the effort, but that's far less than the goal, which sounds like it was 20-30 wolves.

b) authorization for licensed outfitters to shoot wolves on site in the Lolo game unit during the spring black bear season which runs through June 30. None is believed to have been taken this way yet.

2) Hunting: the Idaho Commission is expected to adopt its hunting proposal in July. The details of the proposal are expected to be released in the next week or so for review. The commission is expected to be more agressive than the 2009 hunt, authorizing trapping as well as rifle and perhaps use of more liberal quotas and issuance of multiple tags to individual hunters.

3) Designation of sheriff's officers as special agents in Idaho County, specifically in the Elk City area. Elk City apparently has traditionally had elk within its boundaries and the wolves have followed the elk in. The agreement between the county and Idaho Fish and Game delineates the circumstances under which sheriff's officers may shoot wolves. Apparently, the first wolf was just taken in the city limits.

The person I spoke with promised to send me some written materials related to Idaho's efforts via email next week. I'll be happy to forward them to you if you like.

Please let me know if I can be of further assistance."



One concern this elected official has centers on the liklihood that Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks will, once again, adopt a quota that will accomplish nothing in the way of controlling wolf numbers...or the damage wolves deal the state's wildlife resources and the ranching community. Following is some of what I sent back...


"The biggest obstacle we face here in Montana is the false image of just 566 wolves in this state.

I have personally now seen 16 wolves in the state over the course of the past 12 months. If one person can physically see that many wolves while travelling a state the size of Montana...there are a heck of a lot more wolves here than the "at least" number that Fish, Wildlife and Parks is now touting.

If we use the math that wolf biologist Dr. L. David Mech used in his 2008 delisting declaration, Montana now surely has "at least" 1,500 to 1,600 wolves (possibly as many as 2,000). If FWP sticks with their 566 population count, and fills a quota of 220...that means there will still be 1,280 to 1,380 wolves in this state.

And with the birthing of pups next spring, at a 25% reproduction increase, the number of wolves will jump right back to anywhere from 1,536 to 1,656 wolves - more than the number we truly have now.

The wolves we already have here are already decimating game populations, and putting an ever bigger dent into livestock production. Still, FWP is hell bent to insure that with each new year, we will have more wolves than the year before. And that will mean still greater depredation losses."


This morning, the senator sent a link to an article in today's Idaho Statesman newspaper, headlined "Idaho To Offer Looser Wolf Hunt Rules As Tag Sales Lag". The only comment made was... "The gap between Idaho and Montana management just grows and grows!"



To which LOBO WATCH responded...


"Here is how the majority of sportsmen now see this issue. USFWS and state wildlife agencies (MT FWP and IDFG) have created the problem, this bona fide wildlife disaster, by "managing" wolves to insure that their numbers rapidly increases year after year. And now that this not-so-grand experiment has gone terribly wrong, with excessive wildlife resources lost and growing livestock depredation, these agencies now expect the sportsmen to step up to the plate and save wildlife in this country once again. The real fallacy of all this, at this point, has been any talks of quotas...and selling "wolf hunting permits".

Those agencies created the problem, now they want sportsmen to pay to fix the problem they created. And that is pure hogwash.

MT FWP's extremely low "at least" wolf number is part of the junk science that plagues this failed project. What FWP needs to do this year, is to allow any hunter with any valid hunting license/permit to shoot a wolf (or wolves)...and to keep a count of the number killed...those wolves need to be checked in. No "wolf" permit...no "wolf" quota...no "wolf" season. When, say 400 wolves are killed, then close down the hunt, and then make an all out honest effort (through the winter) to get a feel for how many wolves are still here. Rest assured, there will still be far more wolves than what was culled.

Over the weekend, I will be putting together a July LOBO WATCH news/editorial release that looks at the junk science behind the Northern Rockies Wolf Recovery Plan, and in the crosshairs will be state wildlife biologists and wildlife managers, the greenie academic type professors now teaching wildlife ecology (and their new agenda), the lack of technology and manpower to adequately research and account for wolf numbers and the damages caused by wolves, and how the radical environmental groups are now buying off "scientists" (and probably a few politicians, wildlife department heads, educators, etc.) for them to support their environment/wildlife cause or agenda.

Hope you don't mind, but I want to share this with a few others...some of which I do believe have been enticed (or ordered) to outright lie to or misslead the public when it comes to wolf numbers, wolf impact, what it will take to get a handle on this problem, and other threats and dangers of allowing wolves to spread basically unchecked across a settled land (i.e. - physical harm and the more than 30 infectious diseases wolves carry and spread)."


What are your thoughts?

Toby Bridges
LOBO WATCH