There are two sides to every story. http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/how-wolves-change-rivers/
Sometimes chains of events get complicated.
I would dearly love to get the opportunity to peer-review those studies…
As agenda-driven as it is, right down to the Limey accent, I need to pass on further comments…
For goodness sake, hap, the guy has a British accent . Surely he’s smarter than us, especially about occurrences in the United States. How many people could reach such broad conclusions on a very limited data set?
The trophic cascades that are happening in Yellowstone are extremely obvious to those of us who live here. When I made my second fishing visit to Yellowstone in 1999, it was hard to find willows taller than your knees. Now they are routinely over your head and the beaver population is skyrocketing with the obvious effects on the fishing, especially on little mountain creeks that used to not have fish over 6 inches.
So in effect, did the wolves do anything that hunters wouldn’t have done? Couldn’t we have re-introduced hunters to the ecosystem and done all of that as well as improving the economy of the area? And is the increase in bears really a plus?
I am quite ready to be enlightened to the contrary, but I wonder if the problems Yellowstone had weren’t the result of a protectionist mindset in the first place.
Open to honest debate,
Ed
Careful now Ed, you’re treading on holy ground now. LOL Hunting in Yellowstone? Next you’ll be suggesting we kill and eat a trout! 
I’m conflicted on this wolf thing.
Heard a lady call into a radio talk show the other day …she is a bow hunter and said where she has been hunting deer and elk for years…since the wolves have moved in …no more deer and elk…That bothered me thinking the wolves had devoured them…but I do wonder maybe they[deer/elk] just moved out.
Ed, I suspect that mindset still exists.
Before I jump onto either side of this bandwagon, I need a few more actual FACTS.
I am no in any way smart enough to know whether the deer (and elk, since that’s what he showed in the video) simply moving from one spot to another spot is a good thing. Maybe deer (and elk) were better off being able to be in BOTH places.
Someone who is smarter than I needs to show me, for a fact, that there being more beavers is better, that an increase in the bear population is better. I get nervous when human intervention is automatically considered an improvement.
Not trying to start a fight here. I just know I’m not smart enough to understand all of the ramifications.
Royce
For the sake of argument. Hunters will seek out and kill the biggest and strongest. Wolves on the other hand need to be efficient and will take the slower, weak or sick animals. I would think the latter would be better for the herd overall.
Wolves also have no bag limits or seasons. And just like bears their predation on calving or fawns is immense.
I live in an area that has, and always has had, an extremely high wolf population. I won’t way in on good, bad or indifferent as far as wolves go, but I am surprised about a jump in beaver populations. I would say that the beaver population grew in spite of the wolves, not because of them. Around here, wolves are serious predators of beaver, as well as moose and deer. Bears, as well as wolves, account for a majority of our moose calf mortality.
Again for the sake of argument. Don’t kill wolves in Washington State. The $22,500.00 reward is enough money for some to turn their mother in.
OLYMPIA - The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WFDW) is seeking the public’s help to identify the person or persons responsible for shooting and killing a gray wolf last month in Stevens County.
A 2-year-old black female wolf from the Smackout Pack was found dead Feb. 9 near Cedar Lake in northeast Stevens County. The condition of the carcass indicated it had died between Feb. 5 and Feb. 7, and a veterinarian’s examination confirmed it had been shot.
Wildlife managers had captured the wolf about a year ago and fitted it with a radio collar so they could track its movements and those of her pack members.
WDFW, with the help of three non-profit organizations, is offering a reward of up to $22,500 for information leading to an arrest and conviction in the case. Conservation Northwest, the Center for Biological Diversity, and The Humane Society of the United States, have each pledged $7,500 to create the reward.
Gray wolves are protected throughout the state. WDFW is responsible for management of wolves and enforcement of laws to protect them. The illegal killing of a wolf or other endangered fish or wildlife species is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000.Sergeant Pam Taylor of the WDFW Northeast Washington Region is leading the investigation. She urged people with knowledge of the crime to report it confidentially by calling WDFW’s poaching hotline, 877-933-9847, or by texting a tip to 847411.
The beaver populations are rebounding because of the increase in willow growth along streams. The elk used to hang out in the wet valleys and browse the willows down to nothing. They are easier prey there than on the hillsides, so now they hang out on the hillsides and leave the riparian areas alone.
NJTroutbum:
Actually, wolves are far more likely to take old cows than calves. I briefly dated a girl who was involved with elk mortality studies and both bears (both species) and coyotes were bigger predators of calves.
In regards to the overall numbers of deer and elk, elk numbers have indeed plummeted. One thing that the RMEF never mentions is that the year the wolves were reintroduced was also the all-time high for elk in Yellowstone’s Northern Range. With the drop in elk populations, wolf populations even in packs not subject to being hunted (entirely inside the park) have also dropped. The peak year for wolves in YNP was roughly 2004. Deer numbers have little to nothing to do with wolves, because elk are a far more important prey species. Deer populations crashed last year due to hemorrhagic fever, but I still routinely see hundreds or more on a drive from Gardiner to Livingston at dusk. This is not an exaggeration. That’s an absolutely terrifying drive at dusk.
Hunters can be programmed to take what ever animals the managers decide to let them take… While many hunt for the biggest, most hunt for the first legal animal.
Wolves on the other hand kill as many as they can and size, age, and condition only modify the ease with which some of their prey are caught.
Now I know we are talking about an environment that has already been drastically altered by man but it would seem if we followed this logic there would be no wild herd animals left. The wolves would have modified them to the point that they would have already caught all of the prey prior to us even screwing it up.
While they may “prefer” elk. Wolves will take watever fawn/calf is available. The fact that the wolf population has dropped in the park along with the elk numbers could very well be a result of them leaving the park for other herds. Those park herds don’t all remain in the park year-round. And the wolves follow.
Now a wolf can decimate your livestock…but you can’t shoot it without getting fined 22K. Fabulous. So farmers will shoot them or poison them as before, and not brag about it.
Back in the day, when wolves, bear and coyotes controlled the herds, elk were plains animals roaming over most of the continent. The wolves could not impact the herds like they are able to now. The elk have been slowly pushed by human encroachment into literal pockets in comparison. A fact of life never to be removed. Now, only a few packs can place a HUGE burden on the herds. If you’re going to place predators back into a human created ecosystem, then you have to allow a season for them as well. Protectionism of only one artificially impacting species of predators does not work.
I will probably REALLY open up a can of worms, now, but: “Why protect any species at all?” And I am serious. People seem to think that the best and prettiest creatures exist today and we want to “preserve” them for “future generations”. BUT 'ol Darwin has already said that species evolve and, eventually, die off, it is a part of life and the history of life forms on this planet (99% of all species that have appeared on the planet have gone extinct). By us deciding what species are worthy of saving, we are also potentially keeping another species from evolving and filling in the “gap” (for lack of a better word) that would have appeared when the one species died off.
I also take issue with how many “environmentalists” tend to separate mankind from the “natural” (beyond the religious argument). They call everything mankind does “artificial”, yet nothing that mankind has done is “artificial”, although I will say that even though I believe all that we do is “natural” it does not mean that it is good for the environment, etc., I just mean that we cannot do or make something that is not “natural”. We burn oil that is supposed to be leftover from the earlier stages of life (i.e. fossil fuels), even make plastics from that oil. All materials we make are made from the raw materials found on this planet, which originated somewhere in this universe, if not on planet Earth. Yes, we may change the state of the raw materials to something not found already on the planet, like plastics I mentioned, stainless steel, vulcanized rubber, etc., but these are still made from raw materials found on this planet and there is no reason to believe that somewhere else in the universe stainless steel or the various plastics can not be found as a raw material. Now if you really want to get out there, you can claim that we can and have made new elements not found on Earth in the laboratory, absolutely true, most of which are unstable and only last nano-seconds, but some are stable and last longer, even if we were to find a niche that some of these “unnatural” elements can fill and we manufacture it/them on a large scale, there is still no reason to believe that they do not exist as a raw material somewhere in the universe under the right conditions.
Anyway, I’ll get off my soapbox. I am sure I have lit a fire, so I’ll put my natural asbestos fiber suit on.
Paul
I have no desire to carry on such a specious argument… The very basic history is that predator and prey never reach stasis but bounce back and forth radically as events drive the balance of power between them. Caribou herds remain the most drastic examples in wild ungulates and they are constant boom-bust cycles. I have significant training in wildlife management but the topic has become nothing but a political argument in most circles and I will back out for good now.
art