Idaho Wolf Lawsuit

TheTone

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
836
You seem butt hurt because your guys didn't get elected. Most heads of game agencies are politicians (appointed) so your argument that wildlife regs should not be influenced by politics doesn't hold a lot of water.
Idahos directors are not politicians and the current one is a 30+ year employee.
 

Still Hunter

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2016
Messages
374
Location
Texas
You'd prob never see a wolf so it wouldn't matter.
You are absolutely correct, and I only bowhunt so the wolves are pretty safe from me. I also will probably never get the chance to even see one. So no worries, no gut shot wolves from me, LMAO! Never seen a more toxic topic all together than wolves.
 

S.Clancy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Messages
1,016
Location
Montana
You are absolutely correct, and I only bowhunt so the wolves are pretty safe from me. I also will probably never get the chance to even see one. So no worries, no gut shot wolves from me, LMAO! Never seen a more toxic topic all together than wolves.
Have you heard of COVID-19....
 

dirtytough

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
1,359
elected idiots
You have multiple posts in this thread calling the politicians idiots. If they are so bad why don’t you run for office? I would think it would be a non issue for someone like you to win the seat an “idiot” is occupying.
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,977
politians
Idahos directors are not politicians and the current one is a 30+ year employee.
I call directors"politicians", because their job is mostly political, however he was not elected, so he is actually a burocrat, spelling lol, appointed by politicians. I would imagine he's not a classified employee anymore. Cheers
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,977
You have multiple posts in this thread calling the politicians idiots. If they are so bad why don’t you run for office? I would think it would be a non issue for someone like you to win the seat an “idiot” is occupying.
Part of my definition of politians is idiot. The Republicans are generally idiots, but Democrats are generally dangerous. I'm in California and most politicians here are dangerous, but I'm not going to run for office.
 

Billinsd

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1,977
What are folks thoughts on hunting wolves when they are denning with pups? Fair game if you find the den and it's legal to kill them all? I heard this argument about hunting coyotes and some will not hunt them when they are denning. Personally, I don't believe trapping and hunting them will do much good. Poison was used on the coyotes I'd bet it was used on wolves too, but I'm guessing. I'd imagine trapping reduced the Grizzlies, is that what eliminated wolves? Poison was fantastic, but my hometown President Nixon nixed that and it ain't never coming back.
 

wapitibob

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
3,907
Location
Bend Oregon
It could be argued the regs may/may not have instigated this lawsuit, but the regs darn sure instigated the review of the ID and MT wolf plans by the USFWS. Showing everybody you're the tough guy can backfire.

'U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Initiate Status Review of Gray Wolf in the Western U.S.

The Service has completed the initial review of two petitions filed to list gray wolves in the western U.S. as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service finds that the petitions present substantial, credible information indicating that a listing action may be warranted and will initiate a comprehensive status review of the gray wolf in the western United States."
 

bowieknife50

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
390
Location
Northern Michigan
No, I cannot.

If you aren’t able to figure that out on your own then I can’t help you at all.
Being dismissive is always a great way to win an online argument. It just really seems that if you have a commission made up of people appointed by a governor and confirmed by the senate, that's a part of the government.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
 
OP
Mtnboy

Mtnboy

1
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
1,240
Location
ID
Being dismissive is always a great way to win an online argument. It just really seems that if you have a commission made up of people appointed by a governor and confirmed by the senate, that's a part of the government.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
I suppose you're right. Except they are chosen for their knowledge of wildlife, game laws, hunting, fishing etc. Translation....they are there for a reason.....they aren't just some random elected official who may know nothing about hunting and is more concerned about serving their rancher buddies and getting elected again for another term so they can have a tax payer funded vacation in Boise.

The commission has been in place and working just fine since 1938....evidenced by the fact that out of staters like you are clamoring at every opportunity possible to come hunt here.....we didn't need the elected officials who mostly don't know shit about hunting or wildlife to step in.

Some of ya'll are so blinded by your hatred for wolves that you make decisions based on emotions just like the Wolf lovers do.

It is PLAIN AS DAY that these new laws were a bad choice but some of ya'll are too damn emotional to see it. Like I said before, maybe some of ya'll will come back to reality when they start making decisions to kill off a bunch of Elk to serve the ranchers.....
 

bsnedeker

Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
2,084
Location
MT
I suppose you're right. Except they are chosen for their knowledge of wildlife, game laws, hunting, fishing etc. Translation....they are there for a reason.....they aren't just some random elected official

....evidenced by the fact that out of staters like you are clamoring at every opportunity possible to come hunt here.....
Wow man, you give the government a LOT of credit in this post.
 
OP
Mtnboy

Mtnboy

1
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
1,240
Location
ID
Wow man, you give the government a LOT of credit in this post.
Isn't that exactly what everyone who is claiming this is new law is great is doing? They are applauding elected officials for making a decision on something that the majority of them have no clue about and shouldn't be meddling in to begin with.

Honestly, are people really naive enough to think that they won't make more laws now that they got away with it once?

Are people really naive enough to think they make these decisions to help sportsman?

News flash.... they answer to the Ranchers, period. Mark my words, they will come after Elk next, can't wait to see how that works out.....
 

idelkslayer

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
303
Location
Idaho
IDFG has increased the wolf season lengths, tag numbers, and methods of take in each and every regulation cycle. It was done incrementally to ensure that Idaho would maintain control of wolf hunting. Given a few more regulation cycles, I'm pretty sure that many of these legislative actions would have worked their way in to the wolf seasons. And that would have been the right way to do it.

The legislators who proposed and passed the new law don't care about elk or hunting in Idaho. They are politicians and they care about re-election and power. They knew that they could use the wolf issue and appear sympathetic to ranchers and get influence for their next campaign.

Realistically, the new methods of take allowed in the law will do very little to increase wolf harvest. Allowing hunters to purchase an unlimited number of tags will do nothing when the vast majority can't even fill one tag. There are a handful of guys out there that are filling multiple wolf tags and trapping their limit, most others never see or hear a wolf.

The first problem is that the legislators will now feel emboldened to pursue other pet projects that they have been pushing for years. Increased numbers of Landowner tags, selling/auction Landowner tags, point systems, additional auction tags for Bighorns, Moose, Mtn Goats, Elk, Deer, Antelope. They have gotten a taste for wildlife management that benefits themselves and their big rancher and farmer friends. The principle and purpose for the creation of the IDFG Commision was subverted. When a principle is compromised it is not cause for celebration, regardless of whether or not we like the outcome.

The second problem and the topic of this thread is the lawsuit. Politicians don't do anything quietly. They have to grandstand and make bold often half true statements to get attention. They did this with the wolf legislation. They bragged about how they would reduce the wolf population by 90%, (even though the legislation had no language to support their claims). They did it to draw attention to themselves and create power and influence for their re-election campaigns. They made this a newsworthy topic and drew attention to it. They might as well have filed the lawsuits themselves.
 

Customweld

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
686
Location
Idaho
IDFG has increased the wolf season lengths, tag numbers, and methods of take in each and every regulation cycle. It was done incrementally to ensure that Idaho would maintain control of wolf hunting. Given a few more regulation cycles, I'm pretty sure that many of these legislative actions would have worked their way in to the wolf seasons. And that would have been the right way to do it.

The legislators who proposed and passed the new law don't care about elk or hunting in Idaho. They are politicians and they care about re-election and power. They knew that they could use the wolf issue and appear sympathetic to ranchers and get influence for their next campaign.

Realistically, the new methods of take allowed in the law will do very little to increase wolf harvest. Allowing hunters to purchase an unlimited number of tags will do nothing when the vast majority can't even fill one tag. There are a handful of guys out there that are filling multiple wolf tags and trapping their limit, most others never see or hear a wolf.

The first problem is that the legislators will now feel emboldened to pursue other pet projects that they have been pushing for years. Increased numbers of Landowner tags, selling/auction Landowner tags, point systems, additional auction tags for Bighorns, Moose, Mtn Goats, Elk, Deer, Antelope. They have gotten a taste for wildlife management that benefits themselves and their big rancher and farmer friends. The principle and purpose for the creation of the IDFG Commision was subverted. When a principle is compromised it is not cause for celebration, regardless of whether or not we like the outcome.

The second problem and the topic of this thread is the lawsuit. Politicians don't do anything quietly. They have to grandstand and make bold often half true statements to get attention. They did this with the wolf legislation. They bragged about how they would reduce the wolf population by 90%, (even though the legislation had no language to support their claims). They did it to draw attention to themselves and create power and influence for their re-election campaigns. They made this a newsworthy topic and drew attention to it. They might as well have filed the lawsuits themselves.
Brought to you by the same IFB lackeys that gave us the new trespass law. They most definitely have sportsmen's best interest in mind.:rolleyes:
 

bsnedeker

Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
2,084
Location
MT
News flash.... they answer to the Ranchers, period. Mark my words, they will come after Elk next, can't wait to see how that works out.....
Lol...I live in Montana my man....I'm very familiar with govt. going after elk hunting! I just kind of find the idea funny that you are giving F&G the credit for the explosion in elk hunting in Idaho. I'd probably blame Corey Jacobsen for that one but that's just me.
 
OP
Mtnboy

Mtnboy

1
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
1,240
Location
ID
Lol...I live in Montana my man....I'm very familiar with govt. going after elk hunting! I just kind of find the idea funny that you are giving F&G the credit for the explosion in elk hunting in Idaho. I'd probably blame Corey Jacobsen for that one but that's just me.
It's actually ironic you say that because for a few years Jacobsen gave up hunting in Idaho, blamed the shitty hunting on the wolves, I believe he talked about this on an early Gritty podcast.

Then he started hunting here again and having great success right around the time the Wilks Bros started buying up a lot of land around where he lives.... hmmmmm.......
 

TheTone

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
836
Oh like this? These poor outfitters can’t get enough clients, especially the unlicensed private land ones. The very outfitters the legislature created by making those operating on private land not need to be licensed.

This is why you don’t want politics involved

Glad these are important issues. In a state with climbing property tax killing the working class, terrible education funding, rampant population growth; but helping outfitters that’s what’s important
 

Attachments

  • 6228E33D-73F1-443F-B83D-C042A6DC345C.jpeg
    6228E33D-73F1-443F-B83D-C042A6DC345C.jpeg
    170.3 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:

Ross

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
4,091
Location
Liberty Lake, WA
What are folks thoughts on hunting wolves when they are denning with pups? Fair game if you find the den and it's legal to kill them all? I heard this argument about hunting coyotes and some will not hunt them when they are denning. Personally, I don't believe trapping and hunting them will do much good. Poison was used on the coyotes I'd bet it was used on wolves too, but I'm guessing. I'd imagine trapping reduced the Grizzlies, is that what eliminated wolves? Poison was fantastic, but my hometown President Nixon nixed that and it ain't never coming back.
any season is a good season…fair game if legal take them all out
 
Top