March 28, 2023

Another Half-Million Dollar Wolf Scam

A few years ago I pulled the plug on wasting my time trying to fight a rigged corrupt government system that grows and perpetuates wolves across the landscape of America – a practice that runs contrary to anything that once resembled normalcy and sanity.

At the time I made my announcement, I did hint that I might, from time to time, shine the light on the continued fleecing of hunters and trappers, and tax payers in general, when it comes to gray, red, Mexican, and any other mixed breeds of hybrid, wild canine designed and released into the backyards of Americans in the Northern Rockies, the Southwest, Southeast, and Western Great Lakes regions to perpetuate scarcity.

I more or less keep up with what’s going on. I swallow back my regurgitation when I hear the word wolf, shake my head and head in the other direction. However, I’ll be the first to admit it when I can boldly and proudly write: I told you so.

The other day I was alerted that the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) was asking taxpayers to fork over more than $400,000 a year to count wolves in their state. Please go back a read that again.

You see it wasn’t enough that the state of Idaho, in gutless, silent acquiescence, allowed activists, mostly rogue quasi members of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), to spread wolves throughout their state, they went so far as to arrange things so that the wolves would continue to proliferate only instead of the Federal Government criminals footing the bill, the state of Idaho had to cough up the money to perpetuate wolves and destroy their prized game herds, i.e. elk, deer, and moose. These sportsmen claimed a victory. How so? How are those elk tags going for you? When’s the last time anyone hunted moose?

I’ll get to the “I told you so.” During the process of watching the wolves grow to numbers ginormously exceeding the target number of “recovered” wolves (10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves), the state, with the help of a handful of criminal politicians (aren’t they all?) got the Feds to turn management of wolves over to the state. This, of course, came when wolves in Idaho numbered probably somewhere around 1,000 – who knows for sure? Management involved finding ways to bilk the sportsmen of dollars to fund management, while at the same time their game herds began to nose dive due to wolves slaughtering the choicest of the elk, deer, and moose.

Never fear, the state offered a solution – a “trophy” wolf hunt.

About this time, I railed on the IDFG, laughing in their face at their ignorance that a “trophy” wolf hunt was going to have any effect whatsoever on controlling wolf numbers. I said back then it wouldn’t have any effect and that in about 5-8 years the state would be trying to figure out how they were going to control wolves. They still haven’t figured it out and never will, I’m afraid.

I began writing a multi-part series on the historic challenges that faced countries, cultures, and tribes across the world in their attempts to rid their landscapes of undesired wolves. I later took the time and pieced the multi-part writings into one piece. I called it, “To Catch a Wolf.”

In October of 2014, and again in February of 2017, I published an article about trophy wolf hunts, addressing specifically the claim by ignorant wildlife managers and activists, that offering trophy wolf hunts was somehow going to cause elk, deer, and moose populations to plummet. No, you can’t make this stuff up.

If you are interested in facts about wolves and some of what has transpired that has gotten Idaho to the point they are at now – dwindling game herds and anywhere from 1,000 to 1,500 wolves and god knows how many breeding pairs – please take the time to read the links I’ve provided above.

In the meantime, it appears that citizens of Idaho are about to get shafted once again. They are being asked to supply the inept fish and game department $408,000 a year so they can count wolves. What for?

Mind you, we just learned that the same IDFG used $120,000 to kill elk that the department say are destroying ranchers’ crops. Not only is this fascist regime not giving hunters an opportunity to reduce elk populations in regions the state claims need it, but they are charging the sportsmen so the department can do it themselves or pay others to do it, while donating the meat to food banks. How big of them!

There’s a couple of sayings that come to mind here. One of them goes something like “Burn me once, shame on you. Burn my twice, shame on me.” But then again, perhaps we are well beyond burning twice. I think we’ve reached the point where insanity has crept in and taken over.

I was livid when sportsmen, wolf control activists, IDFG, and politicians agreed to take over management and charge the taxpayers and sportsmen for that privilege. Thanks a lot! More money and more wolves. That worked out real well.

If I was an Idaho citizen, I would place a big fat demand on any notion of providing nearly a half-million dollars to IDFG to count wolves. Here’s the demand.

Presently, depending on which lie you want to believe, there are from 1,000 to 1,500 wolves in Idaho. I don’t know how many breeding pairs. I don’t care how many breeding pairs. There are plain and simple too damned many wolves….period!

When the criminals illegally dumped the wolves on Idaho, they were promised that when there were 10 breeding pairs or 100 wolves, the species would be considered recovered and the state could take over managing wolves so long as they met that requirement. How did that work out for the victims? I thought so.

If the IDFG wants $408,000 to count wolves, give them the money with the understanding that by counting them and knowing where all the wolves are, they can then systematically kill enough wolves, geographically laid out to maintain a certain density and lower the total wolf population back down to 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves. Anything short of that, IDFG can go pound sand.


Montana Receives RMEF Grant to Bolster Wolf Management

*Editor’s Note* – Wolves should not be “managed.” They need to be controlled. On the one hand, we must commend the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation for caring enough to be willing to give money for wolf management. Yet, on the other hand, the money is being given for a useless purpose that will NEVER, EVER, attain control over wolves in order to protect the rights of humans and the existence of other wildlife species. Further studies and spending money to obtain “more accurate information,” is playing into the hands of environmentalists who want wolves in everyone’s back yard while destroying all hunting and trapping opportunities.

It is complete dishonesty for any fish and game management entity to corruptly and deliberately UNDERESTIMATE the population of any species, because doing so placates the will of the wolf perverts. To offer an “official” population estimate of wolves out of the corner of their mouths, while stating real populations are “27 to 37 percent higher” is dishonest and should not be tolerated by anyone. If nothing more, it simply makes no sense.

It is my opinion, that while RMEF’s intent might be good, their $50,000 is going to enhance a ridiculous wolf “management” program. It is a bad choice of what to do with $50,000.

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation awarded $50,000 in grant funding to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) and Wildlife Services to assist Montana with its wolf management plan implementation.

“RMEF stands behind the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation which calls for the management of all species so their populations will be sustained forever,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “Predator management is a key principle in the model. And in Montana, we have a wolf population that far exceeds minimum objectives so we need to obtain more data to enhance the science of estimating wolf numbers so we can have more accurate information to assist in overall effective management.”

The funding goes toward additional collaring for wolves in order to expand the science related to wolf pack locations, size and home ranges. More specifically, GPS collars will be deployed to help refine the Patch Occupancy Model for estimating wolf numbers and number of packs. The expectation is to use the modeling in conjunction with harvest surveys to have a less labor-intensive method of estimating wolf populations.

With the onset of hunting seasons, wolf packs seem to be smaller in size yet the number of breeding pairs reportedly increased from a year ago. The goal of this research utilizing collars is to gain a better understanding of the new population dynamics of wolves in a hunted population.

Montana reported a 2014 minimum wolf population of 554 animals but biologists maintain the actual on-the-ground count is 27 to 37 percent higher. If you do the math, that places Montana’s wolf population somewhere between 705 to 760 which is still more than 400 percent above minimum objectives.

“The bottom line is it’s extremely difficult to manage wolves toward a given objective unless managers know how many wolves there are on the landscape. This grant funding will help FWP determine just that,” added Allen.

RMEF supports state-regulated hunting and trapping as preferred tools of wolf management. RMEF also remains committed to learning more about wolves and their effect on elk and other prey through research efforts. In the last three-plus years, RMEF awarded approximately $300,000 in grants specifically for wolf management.


Wolves, Sheep, Cows

“About three days before the wolf attack on my cow, I believe there were seven sheep that were killed within 2 miles of where the cow was attacked. They are getting to be a pretty big problem in that area. It is the Umatilla pack.” You just heard from Oregon rancher Mark Lane after his cowherd was attacked by two collared wolves in his pasture. Moving to the subject of the sheep that were attacked, I wanted an opinion on the subject so I called Stan Boyd, Executive Director of the Idaho Wool Growers Association: “As a guy who sits on the sidelines and talks to damaged sheep ranchers, and with no disrespect to environmental movements but how do these folks justify not wanting to manage, and I use that in a nice way, a population of animals that devastate livestock, devastate ungulate populations and, left unchecked, simply will multiply beyond our capability to contain them? I have never been able to understand their thought process so I figure you just have to ask those folks that question. I agree. It is beyond comprehension that we were going to reintroduce wolf populations in Idaho and not have to manage them. By manage them I mean kill them. You are going to have to use lethal measures to keep that population within a manageable group. If you don’t, their populations become so large and they lack the prey base and that’s when they come down and foray into agricultural areas and that’s where they really start to cause damage.” <<<Read More>>>


Once Again, Proposal In Idaho Charging Hunters/Ranchers to Control Wolves

Scam*Editor’s Note* – First let me say that I am about to make a lot of enemies (nothing new). I would also like to say that it is easy for me to offer commentary and opinion on this wolf issue when I don’t live in Idaho, nor do I have anything at stake (other than friends) with or without the presence of wolves. However, I do have the right to voice my opinion.

Nearly one year ago, I published an article in disagreement with a bill in Idaho, proposed by Rep. Judy Boyle, whom I would like to consider a friend. Her bill would have added $4.00 to the cost of a wolf hunting permit and take $8.00 from each wolf hunting tag sold to pay for livestock losses to ranchers.

And now I am reading that Idaho’s Governor “Butch” Otter is proposing to allot $2 million in start-up fees to create an entity for the purpose of funding wolf population control. After the one-time $2 million, then the funding will come from, “annual contributions of $110,000 from members of the livestock industry and a match from Idaho sportsmen thereafter. Some of that funding will come from hunting licensing in the state, Siddoway said.”

Senator Jeff Siddoway, is a sheep rancher in Idaho and over the past year had a mass killing of his sheep by wolves. He states:

“Anything that reduces the wolf population is a good thing,” Siddoway said. “I don’t think there’s a person in the state that could give you an accurate estimate about how many wolves we have. All we’re hoping is that if we get a reduction in numbers, that our losses are ultimately going to be less.”

I can’t say that I feel his pain because I’ve never had to endure such losses with anything, and those losses are due to not only people protecting a nasty wild dog but introducing it into a landscape that had been vacant of wolves for many decades. This action could have and should have been prevented from the beginning.

Also as a result of introduced, Government wolves, the hunting industry in Idaho, has for the most part, gone to hell in a hand basket.

While some are expressing joy and a victory that a funded program said to be focused on “wolf control,” I wonder how many people have any idea just what the Gov’s ideas or definition of wolf control are?

And consider this statement by Mr. Siddoway:

“It’ll allow more people to go out and actually do the hunting and trapping,” he said. “It’ll finance that. Some of the work may be done aerially either by fixed-wing (aircraft) or helicopter, depending on the terrain.”

Can you imagine what will happen the first time the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, or some other Idaho government agency, attempts to fly aircraft for the purpose of killing wolves? This will be tied up in the courts for years, leaving only the, “allow more people to go out and actually do the hunting and trapping.” See, “To Catch a Wolf.”

So far, all efforts put forth with wolf hunting and trapping has done little to “control” wolf populations. Even a recent, purpose-driven wolf and coyote killing derby resulted in no wolves killed. If Idaho can find enough money to pay enough hunters and trappers of wolves, for a long enough period of time, to make it worth their while, then it may prove helpful.

But this isn’t really my gripe. My gripe is that this is no victory. This is akin to ask a feller to braid his own rope for his own hanging. Wolves were dumped in Idaho and just who was it that made that decision? Did the hunters and the livestock industry, along with all the citizens of Idaho, get to vote on this? From information I have found over the years, it was the fish and game department who illegally authorized the Federal Government to dump the wolves and litter the landscape with disease. What was done about that?

Professionals in the field of wolves, were asked what would happen if wolves were introduced. Any scientific notions that opposed introduction of wolves, were ignored. What was done about that?

To date, the Federal Government, in cahoots with the Idaho Government, have made all the decisions, mostly all on their own, to infest the forests of Idaho with killing machines that have endangered the lives of people, destroyed ranching, put many outfitters out of business, spread human killing diseases across the plain, seriously destroyed the elk herd, raised hell with deer and moose, etc.

In addition to all of this, Idaho had the audacity to then turn around and charge hunters for a permit and tag to kill these vermin when populations got to be at least 10 times what government officials once declared as a “recovered” population. How much hatred can exist toward the outdoor sportsman?

And now that the hunters and trappers are helping to pay those who destroyed their passions and livelihoods, who continue to protect these nasty animals, the Governor of the Gem State wants the victims of their crooked and failed wolf worshiping introduction program, to pay to “control” wolves. If that ain’t fascist and dictatorial government at its best I don’t know what is. I wonder. Are rape victims require to pay an additional tax in order to “control” rapists? How about murder victims?

I wise man once told me that the epitome of ignorance was when a person meets with somebody that wants to take advantage of them, they get screwed over and yet walk away with a smile thinking they had achieved a great victory.

While I agree that killing wolves is a good thing, it is a damned shame that the victims are being asked to pay for it. What kind of justice is this?

In addition, the article states the make-up of a board of directors who will oversee this communistic plan:

…the board will be co-chaired by Fish and Game’s director and the director of the Idaho Department of Agriculture. The remaining membership will be appointed by Otter and will include a representative of Idaho sportsmen, a representative of livestock owners and a member at-large. That at-large member will likely represent the interests of wolf advocates.

If the member at large will actually be a representative of the “wolf advocates”, then how much in higher taxes are “wolf advocates” going to pay in order to have a voice on this board? Isn’t it one of President Obama’s demands for “an even playing field” to require the same from everyone, or does this work only in the direction that fits an agenda? If so, then there needs to be compensation paid by “wolf advocates” so they can have a voice. Excuse the punny story but isn’t this just a bit akin to Ben Franklin’s analogy of two wolves and a sheep sitting down to discuss what’s for dinner?

Killing wolves is a good thing; the more the better, from my perspective. But to kick the livestock owners and hunters and trappers in the groin, over something they didn’t want in the first place is wrong on every level. Isn’t this corruption at its ultimate? The rotten bastards who were responsible for bringing imported wolves back to Idaho should all be jailed.

Why not levy a tax on government employees salaries and make them pay for their damned mess they created?

As I first pointed out, I don’t live in Idaho and I don’t have a dog in this fight, except for the fact that these kind of fascist and dictatorial toned down pogroms tend to filter over into other states. I see no victory here in agreeing with Gov. Otter’s proposal; one that was buried in some other bills I am being told.

If the program passes, it will likely be because ranchers like Mr. Siddoway, along with sportsmen, (and can we really blame them?) will follow the premise that killing any amount of wolves is a good thing. And, only time will tell if such a program will accomplish what Siddoway and others believe it will.

History should be convincing enough that this program will fail and/or the money will be used for something else – probably another program geared against the efforts of the Livestock Industry and sportsmen.


Wolves: An Emergency Situation

By Will Graves, author of Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages and a soon to be new release about wolves in the United States.

sakha republic

Early this January an emergency situation has been declared in the republic by the Sakha leader Yegor Borisov due to an overpopulation of wolves. He has had his fill of wolves. The wolves are prowling at the edge of villages frightening the people. There are an estimated 3,500 wolves in the republic, and Mr. Borisov said the ideal number of wolves should be 500. In 2012 the wolves killed 16,111 reindeer and 313 horses. The estimated value of one reindeer is about $328.00, which adds up to an approximate loss of $5,000,000 dollars to reindeer herders. Although 750 wolves had been recently culled, the damage done in 2012 compared to damage in 2011 went up by a 4.3 %. To reduce the predation by wolves in any given area, it usually takes a culling of from 80 to 90% of the wolves for about 8 to 10 years. Reducing the population by 10 to 50% one year will have negligible effect. (Observations by Will Graves, author of “Wolves in Russia.”)

Mr. Borisov will initiate a culling program on the 15th of January 2013, the goal of which is to reduce the wolf population from 3,500 to 500. As an incentive for hunters and herders to cull wolves, he has placed a bounty of $629 or $680 per each wolf pelt. The difference in the amount of the bounty is because of fluctuations in the currency exchange rates. Additionally, the first three hunters who cull the most wolves will receive awards mounting to more than $3000 each. (Source. “Russian Region Declares State of Emergency Due to Wolf Attacks,” Internet Radio Free Europe, January 11, 2013.

“Wolves at the Door in Siberia,”, Internet article by Andrew Kramer, January 10, 2013.)

Vladimir Krever, the Russian World Wildlife Federation’s Head of the State Committee Biodiversity Program, said, “When wolves start attacking deer and livestock they have to be killed and the population controlled. This is the right policy.” He made this statement when talking about Khakassia, a republic located about 1,000 miles southwest of Sakha (Yakutiya). He added, “Even if they were able to kill 3,000 wolves the population would recover quickly…”
(Source. “Second Russian Republic Declares Open Season on Wolves,” Internet Outdoor Hub Reporters, January 11, 2013.)

In addition to heavy predation on reindeer, the wolves carry and spread around parasites and diseases. The parasite Echinococcus granulosus is particularly damaging and threatening, including being a threat to humans. A resident of the city of Yakutsk send me a notice that the Yakutian (Sakha) Scientific Research Institute of Agricultural Science sent out to residents of Yakutiya in 2010. The notice warned people about the threat of Echinococcus granulosus and Echinococcus multilocularis. On 3 March 2010 I sent a cover letter and a translation of that report to the Montana Environmental Quality Control Committee.

In 1962 it was reported that E. g. occurred widely in wolves in the Soviet Union. (Source.“Cystic Echinococcosis in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic, Robert L. Rausch, 2003, page 877, by Petrov and Delianova 1962.)
Three of four wolves examined in the Novosibusk Oblast were found by Lukashenko in 1975 to be infected with E. multilocularis, and the fourth with E. g. (Ibed, page 876.).

In my opinion, the bottom line is that wolf numbers need to be controlled.