If wolves are SO vicious and deadly...

[Kodiak Hunter]

...explain Isle Royale to me???

Obviously the moose can't just leave. Neither can the wolves.

Yet there are about 300 moose and 19-21 wolves there. Has been that way for some time now.

Thoughts?

[wyle_e_coyote]

Right off I want to say I am not a Wolf hater! I just want to make sure they are kept in check.

Now, as for Isle Royle.. The Moose herd at 1 time was 2,400. I don't know where you got the 300 from, I think it is around 1000. It has been a struggle for both on the island.
http://www.admin.mtu.edu/urel/PressReleases/feature/wolves/wolf.html

[Linda G.]

I visited the island with a number of other Michigan outdoor writers in 1995. The park service gave us a number of tours around the island and other islands.

That year, the moose population was incredible, something like 2500, the park service said, a result of very mild winters. They were everywhere, all over the island, and all of them very small and stunted, about 1/3 smaller than an adult of that subspecies should be. The browse lines on all the trees, which isn't saying much anyway, was incredible, and the moose were cleaning the various lakes of any and all available vegetation.

That winter, Mother Nature brought winter back, and something like half of those moose starved to death. The wolves, which had been suffering from parvo virus introduced to the island a few years before, did well for several years after that, but now I think the numbers are once again leveling off. Something like 100 wolves is right, I think, right now...

They won't do anything on Isle Royale about either the moose or the wolves because of the studies in natural selection going on there for the past thirty years or so.

I've always thought that a trophy moose hunt was most definitely in order on that island, both to control the moose, help the destruction to the environment there, and contribute money to a park service that is always claiming poverty. I don't believe it's right that the public should have to pay to visit our national parks, they belong to us, and trophy hunts of some of the animals in the various parks could very helpful to park budgets.

But apparently the Park Service doesn't see it that way... :rolleyes:

If the winters were cold enough in the last thirty years or so for an ice bridge to form to the Canadian shoreline, which is only 18 miles away, the wolves and the moose COULD leave, that's how both got there back in the 40's. But they'd have to walk through Thunder Bay, which has grown into a major metropolis since the 40's.

[wyle_e_coyote]

I have always wondered how we can have a moose population that is 1000 -2000 strong on a small island and not hunt them. Yet we are allowed to hunt Elk to keep them from go over the 800-1000 mark? The moose population, at times, doubles our elk herd for an area that is what..1/8 the size.

[plugger]

The key here is no hunting, are we willing to allow the wolves to balance the deer population vs hunting in michigan?

[Adam Waszak]

I say trophy moose hunts along with trophy wolf hunts as well. If you do not hunt the wolf he will not fear us in the years to come if he is hunted he will avoid human beings all togather. If it is done in a sound manner and managed properly (not like our deer herd) I think we can do this and benefit hunters, the park service, and most importantly the environment and the animals in it.

AW

[Skibum]

The key here is no hunting, are we willing to allow the wolves to balance the deer population vs hunting in michigan?

BINGO!!!! Exactly why the anti's support the re-establishment of large predators such as wolves. One of the arguments we as hunters have always used to support or pastime is population management. The effects are already being seen in some of the areas surrounding Yellowstone. As wolf populations have increased there has been a decline in the number of elk and in calf production. Rather than proposals to manage wolves there has been a call for reducing elk tag numbers.

Jeff

[WILDCATWICK]

I say trophy moose hunts along with trophy wolf hunts as well. If you do not hunt the wolf he will not fear us in the years to come if he is hunted he will avoid human beings all togather. If it is done in a sound manner and managed properly (not like our deer herd) I think we can do this and benefit hunters, the park service, and most importantly the environment and the animals in it.

AW


Your suggesting this for Isle Royal or just the U.P.?

[Skibum]

I'd love to see moose and wolf hunts for both Isle Royal and the UP but can you imagine the uproar politically trying to push a wolf hunt through? Heck, look at the outcry over a dove season.

Jeff

[WILDCATWICK]

I'd love to see moose and wolf hunts for both Isle Royal and the UP but can you imagine the uproar politically trying to push a wolf hunt through? Heck, look at the outcry over a dove season.

Jeff


Well I think Isle Royal needs to be left alone and as a biosphere I beleive it has to be. It is, I beleive the only place in the world that they can study populations with almost no human interference. The information that is obtained is too valuable to allow hunting just so we can get a "trophy". The rest of the U.P. I'm all game for if the research from the DNR shows that the population deems a hunt. Otherwise I think we just need to sit back and enjoy the sheer beauty of nature. :)

[Masterblaster1]

The way i see it wolves were taken out of the up for a reason, whether it be the farmers losing livestock, or because of them killing off way too many deer, both are valid reasons in my opinion. If any of you guys know people who live up there they will tell you that many local farmers are taking it upon themselves to shoot wolves and then bury them so to avoid more livestock losses like in years past. At least in the the part the of the up i hunt deer, the Coyote population has boomed bigtime and the wolves are on the rise also. This year i saw more coyotes than deer and i hunted every day of the firearms season. I saw 5 total deer and 10 total coyotes, 8 of which were hot on a does trail, but because our dnr says we can't shoot coyotes in zone 1 during the firearms deer season i could do nothing but watch, i could have easily shot 3 or 4 of them, let me tell you i was tempted. The dnr needs to do something to curb the boom in large predators otherwise our deer herd will suffer alot. The dnr's prediction for deer hunting this year was a load of crap as far as i am concerned.

[Buddy Lee]

Facts: http://www.mucc.org/documents/WolvesandDeerinMichiganlowresolution.pdf

[GVDocHoliday]

Actually the DNR shouldn't do anything. Predator prey relationships are dynamic and follow similar curves. If the deer population is as bas as they say it is then the wolves and coyotes are soon to drop off as well. During which the deer population will rise. Followed by a rise in predators, then the cycle starts all over again. It's quite simple actually. Wolves and coyotes do nothing but better a heard. Natural predators usually target the sick and weak animals of a species. Allowing the stronger and more healthier animals to breed. I'm also all for leaving Isle Royale alone. It is a great study area and should be designated as such.

[Ferg]

I'm also all for leaving Isle Royale alone. It is a great study area and should be designated as such.

to happen @ Isle Royale - The feds have it registered as a United States Biosphere Reserve.

So it will be hands off for sure.

ferg....
:)

[Skibum]

Be careful what you wish for. No question nature will manage wildlife populations without human intervention. Problem is the results may be far different than you want to see. I have no wish to see all predators wiped from the face of the earth but I'm a deer hunter. I want to see strong, healthy, consistant populations of deer that maximize the opportunities for myself and other hunters. I don't want to see boom and bust cycles. I don't want to see habitat maturing to the point it can't support good deer populations. It's fine to romanticize the wilderness of Michigan before settlement. You also have to face the reality that there were far fewer deer than we have today. The fact that man manages wildlife for his own needs is not necessarily some sort of evil concept.

Jeff

[Ebowhunter]

I was on Isle Royale in September 2000. What a fabulous place!

Less people on Isle Royale in a season than Yellowstone sees in a day.

I thought we were very lucky to be woken up by wolves howling in the distance on our sixth morning. Both populations were in the bottom of the cylcle that year - we saw 12 moose and heard a couple of the 30ish wolves.

Now, the UP. What has kept that moose population in check? Are deer the only thing feeding the wolves and coyotes. Why haven't the elk moved north?

There are rumors that the wolve is being downgraded from endangered to threatened. This would allow the marauders to be legally killed and would allow me to sell a non-native wolf mount inside of Michigan to someone other than the hunter.

[Dawg]

Isle Royal is a perfect example of how wolves live in and maintain a natural balance - and how that natural balance favors more prey than predators.

The best way to keep CWD (etc) out of Michigan is a naturally balanced ecosystem that includes predators. Hunting season is 90 days long and during the other 9 months wolves predate the weak and the infirm. Thus, they also prevent the overpopulation that contributes to the spread of infectuous disease.

Coyotes and wolves don't live in harmony. If you're seeing a high number of coyotes you probably don't have wolves contributing to local predation.

[Linda G.]

Yes, Isle Royale is a very special place, and a great place for researchers to study dynamic relationships and all that, and as someone else said, there's no plans to do anything all there in the way of human interference because it is listed as a world biosphere reserve.

But don't think that's the historic nature of the island. Neither the wolves nor the moose on that island were there prior to something like 1948, although they both may have inhabited the island, along with the woodland caribou and other now-extinct species, prior to the tribal and white settlement of the island before the 1700's.

What that island has, and is rapidly losing, is natural flora that is rapidly being chowed into extinction by the moose as they look for food. All kinds of rare orchids and other really, really rare plant life. And no one knows how many species of flora the moose have already wiped out of existence on the island. A lot of scientists have said that the island hasn't looked as God intended it since the 1600's, and probably won't ever look like that again, thanks to the settlements by both people and wildlife.

So, just like on the mainland, there's no natural balance, and a natural balance is the basis for research of the type supposedly going on on Isle Royale...it's a really interesting contradiction.

I don't believe there's anywhere on earth that you can study life as it was before humans began to irrevocably change it... :eek:

[Dawg]

I really can't argue who/what came first to Isle Royal. It's even theorized that some copper from there ended up in early Egypt.

I do know that humans didn't place either moose or wolves on the island. I also know that deer, bear and several other species are known to have inhabited the island at different times. Why they aren't anymore varies but probably has little to do with human intervention. For example, it is speculated that overbrowse was likely the demise of the deer who couldn't browse as high as the moose. Somehow some ground flora survived this overbrowse, that is natural selection.

As God intended it? Only God knows.

[Bwana]

-The wolves are not going to kill out the deer population; nor will the Coyotes.
-A limited hunt in isle Royal would be nice but is not feasible at this point due to UN influence. Isle Royal is indeed in the Biosphere program and under the control of the United Nations so we need to start by taking it back and getting the US out of the UN :)
-The Wolf was originally eradicated because humans were short sighted.
-The anti's will use anything they can to end hunting. But to give them credit for reintroducing the Predators just to screw deer hunters may be giving them too much credit...unless they are evil geniuses:)

[Crosman]

Actually the DNR shouldn't do anything. Predator prey relationships are dynamic and follow similar curves. If the deer population is as bas as they say it is then the wolves and coyotes are soon to drop off as well. During which the deer population will rise. Followed by a rise in predators, then the cycle starts all over again. It's quite simple actually. Wolves and coyotes do nothing but better a heard. Natural predators usually target the sick and weak animals of a species. Allowing the stronger and more healthier animals to breed. I'm also all for leaving Isle Royale alone. It is a great study area and should be designated as such.
I totaly agree with you, wolves and yotes are going to go for the young and the sick, its not 100% that the predator will get its kill ethier. Killing yotes in firearm season would be fine if we didnt hunt yotes, but some people may see that offensive, if everyone shot a yote everytime they seen one, then something may change in there population, I dont know much about the seasons and such, but alot of people already hunt the yotes. Maybe a "one yote per person during firearm season''

by the way, is there a bag limit on yotes?

[Bwana]

I totaly agree with you, wolves and yotes are going to go for the young and the sick, its not 100% that the predator will get its kill ethier. Killing yotes in firearm season would be fine if we didnt hunt yotes, but some people may see that offensive, if everyone shot a yote everytime they seen one, then something may change in there population, I dont know much about the seasons and such, but alot of people already hunt the yotes. Maybe a "one yote per person during firearm season''

by the way, is there a bag limit on yotes?
I hunt yotes and I think it would be hard to hunt them out. They are prolific breeders and are not as easy to hunt as many think; whitetails are easier.

[Bwana]

Found this today. Interesting.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1894&e=5&u=/ap/20041209/ap_on_sc/wolf_study

[AKBuckbuster]

I hate wolves. Every hunter except wolf hunters should hate wolves. Wolves kill 26-40 deer per year per wolf. Add it up. Do you want wolves or deer in our woods. I like deer in the woods.

Don't beleive me...Just look at your whitetail hunting numbers over the past few years since wolf introduction.

And yes the population will balance, but after 20 or 30 years will the deer population come back and no where near what we had.

[Bow Hunter Brandon]

I hate wolves. Every hunter except wolf hunters should hate wolves. Wolves kill 26-40 deer per year per wolf. Add it up. Do you want wolves or deer in our woods. I like deer in the woods.

Don't beleive me...Just look at your whitetail hunting numbers over the past few years since wolf introduction. .

I hunt in Gogibic County they have the highest wolf population in the up. I see more deer every year that goes by. That because I continue to learn I dont sit in the same shack year after year as the forest around me changes and the deer habits change. I cant say the wolves have had any impact on the deer numbers that I can see.

[GVDocHoliday]

And yes the population will balance, but after 20 or 30 years will the deer population come back and no where near what we had

Where is your evidence to show this? What studies were performed to show this lag in population dynamics. I'm interested.

I highly suggest you do a search on the kaibab deer heard. As well as studies performed on the George Reserve. Primarily the Kaibab deer herd. 4,000 animals in 1905 to 65,000 in 1920 because all the predators were killed. You know what happened? Over three quarters of the deer population died of starvation and desimated the lanscape because of overbrowsing. Hunting was implemented to kill over half of the herd remaining and that didn't help it either. The population skyrocketed in the next 15 years and the same kill off happened. Natural predators are keystone species. They are detrimental to the health of an ecoystem. I'm a hunter. A conservationist. My goal as hunter is to be a natural predator. Being a natural predator is knowingly managing deer numbers the way a natural predator such as a wolf did unknowingly. This created a stable ecosystem of vegetation, predator, prey, floura, insecta, and other terrestrial interactions. I'm not hunting to increase deer numbers so I can go in the woods and see a lot of deer each sitting. This is just asanine. There are very few areas north of Muskegun that can handle 15 or more deer per square mile. We are seeing lower deer numbers simply because of starvation. Deer are eating themselves out of their habitat. They kill off all new growth seedlings, so mature stands are able to continue to grow with now regeneration. As the stands grow higher and thicker less sunlight makes it to the forest floor. Again no regeneration. Ecologically speaking that forest is now unhealthy. We need to harvest about 75% of those mature stands. Actually 85% would be preferred. Leaving 15% for seed dispersal. Harvest in the summer, and by the fall of the next year there will be a bunch of 2-3foot high seedling/saplings that deer will just love. A single deer require near 2,000lbs of forage a year just to survive...not grow, just survive. That's the bare minimum. The way I look at it, 40 deer a year taken by wolves does wonders for the understory to develop into prime deer habitat.

But hey what do I know, I've only been studying ecosystem dynamics for the last 4 years. I don't pull any weight around here.

[AKBuckbuster]

Hey I too am born to hunt like a predator. I do not have a shack or believe anyone should sit in one. When was the last time you picked up a "Petersons Hunting" or "Outdoor Life" and read an article on shack hunting.

I just have seen the places in Alaska where I live become waste lands with no deer, bever, or birds because of wolf impact. Yes hard winters do kill many of the deer and over harvesting of forage by deer, but the hard winters make deer easier prey for wolves. Wouldn't you like to go into a deer yard and take your pick in February?

I'm just saying that the wolf has no seasons or bag limits. In some areas there can be too many deer. Given a hunter who does not care if what he kills is a doe, spike or big buck and with disreguard for numbers killed, well my friend this is a wolf. Too many were all going to have problems for many years to come.

[AKBuckbuster]

I've seen the deer herd drop to be very tough hunting. I don't prefer it.

I don't want to see nothing but spikes and an occasional 8. Michigan has great genetics and the bucks are so young, like you. When you shoot about 20 bucks your mind will change about spikes and small 8 pointers. Give me a 10 or 12 anyday over an 8 pointer.

The bucks need to grow. With road kill, wolves, and hunters like you monsters are just 3 years too young.

[AceMcbanon]

Oh well i enjoy the meat, and wether it has 10 points or is a doe it taste the same to me, if i get a trophy along the way then great, but if not i savor it just as much. To blame wolves on deer decline when we kill a much larger percentage, as well as road kill then we are looking for nothing but a scapegoat. Try to blame habitat, since our forests are growing every year

[EYESON]

Ace,
Watch what you say about Wisconsin. The wolf debate there is much more heated then it is here. The biggest problem there is the DNR says that the wolfs are only in certen areas of the North but they are finding dead wolves in the highly populated south central part of the state. This is leaving people very angree at the DNR for not being straight with the people of Wisconsin.
I think wolves are great and love to see them in the woods to me they are as majestic as a deer or an elk. I how ever have to say that with the increase in human population and wolf/human incidents on the rise the federal government has to put something in place to control the population. I think the populations are higher then they project in both Michigan and Wisconsin so something needs to be implimented to control the population. The wolves need to be looked at as being managed just like our deer herd. The DNR and the feds need to decide just like deer what is the caring capacity of the land verse the wolf population so it is not "over browsed". They also need to rember when deciding this that the hunter is also a predator of the deer, so maybe it would be equal to one wolf per five square miles, as an example.

[boehr]

Do some of you read or really believe what you post. I'd advise that you go back and read this and evaluate your position. To me, some of the positions are "what I want", you know selfishness! After you read what you have posted sit back and think for a minute of other things that provide the same result. Then make sure you at least have some of your facts straight like introduction of the wolf, impact of the deer herd etc. Sometimes I think I'd rather live with nothing than wolves than some of the selfishness and ignorance out and around. That's not to say I want thousands of wolves and there shouldn't be a management plan but much of this shooting from the hip is ridiculous.

[wyle_e_coyote]

I would hope that wildlife biologist are at least starting to think about what a healthy wolf population for MI will be, before they get past that point!

Hey Linda, if you see this (or anyone that knows). Has any of our biologist ever given a reason why Isle Royal can grow over 2000 Moose, but we could not meet the 1000 moose objective in the UP by the year 2000? The wolves on the island can not kill off all the moose, so it stands to reason wolves are not to blame in hte UP.

[GVDocHoliday]

Bwana, that was a great article. So great in fact that I thought I'd post it here. This is the type of hard scientific evidence that I will reference and use as basis for a majority of my posts regarding wolves and deer populations in response of forest ecology. The journal Forest Ecology and Management is a wonderful publication with lots of great information. The Wildlife Society Bulletin is also great. Respected scientists showing years and years of HARD FACT in respectable published science journals. Not just some over the shoulder opinion slinging that has no backing.


By JEFF BARNARD, Associated Press Writer

GRANTS PASS, Ore. - Scientists studying the broader effects of wolf reintroduction said a growing body of evidence suggests that killing off predators such as wolves and grizzly bears in the last century started a cascade of effects that threw ecosystems out of balance.


AP Photo



Researchers from Oregon State University found that a thriving wolf population not only changes where and how elk browse — it even reverberates down to the number of willows that grow next to streams.


"We are just at the very infancy of understanding the importance of these apex predators sitting at the top of the food chain affecting entire ecosystems," said forest resources professor William J. Ripple, co-author of a new study.


The research, published in the Oct. 25 issue of the journal Forest Ecology and Management, comes as states begin to wrestle with a problem they haven't faced in nearly a century: how to deal with wolves.


After wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park in 1995 and 1996, researchers noticed they were most successful bringing down elk where the prey had to deal with a change in terrain, such as crossing a stream. Elk soon learned to avoid those areas.


"When you remove the wolves, the elk are able to browse unimpeded wherever they want, as long as they want," said co-author Robert L. Beschta. "Now that the wolves are back, the ecology of fear comes into play."


Comparing old photographs and other descriptions of the area with present conditions, Ripple and Beschta found streamside vegetation sharply declined in the mid-1920s, about the time the last wolves were killed.


Vegetation along streams prevents erosion, cools the water for fish, cycles nutrients through the food web, and provides habitat for birds and amphibians.


Ripple and Beschta established a study area in 2003 in the Gallatin National Forest where Tepee Creek runs into the upper Gallatin River. Elk use the area for winter range. No livestock graze there. Three wolves from Yellowstone arrived in 1996, and the pack grew to as many as 13.


The scientists charted the growth of willows along 1.8 miles of the Gallatin and 1.8 miles of Tepee Creek, and compared growth inside and outside two fenced-off areas.


Outside the fenced-off area near the river, considered a high-risk area for wolf attack, the amount of willows eaten dropped from 92 percent in 1998 to zero percent in 2002. There was little change around the fenced-off area in an open area away from the river identified as low-risk for wolf attacks.


Jim Peek, professor emeritus of wildlife biology at the University of Idaho, said it was too early to know whether the study's findings would hold up over time, but the observations were valid.


"It's important work, because it directs our attention toward things other than the fact that predators eat prey," Peek said. He said he doubted wolves would have as much impact on elk browsing in more open country, such as central Wyoming.


Duncan T. Patten, with Montana State University, agreed that wolves have changed elk behavior, but felt reduced elk numbers, mild winters that allowed elk to eat grass instead of willows, and changes in the river from beaver dams were more likely explanations.

[Linda G.]

I bet a lot of deer hunters won't like this one.

According to what I've read and been told, the deer in the UP are what's keeping moose populations low, (or almost non-existent, from what I'm being told these days).

Deer carry a parasite known as brainworm, it's apparently non-lethal to deer, but is toxic to moose.

There's no deer on Isle Royale, nor in most of the moose range of Canada or Alaska, hence, lots of moose...

:)

[wyle_e_coyote]

I bet a lot of deer hunters won't like this one.

According to what I've read and been told, the deer in the UP are what's keeping moose populations low, (or almost non-existent, from what I'm being told these days).

Deer carry a parasite known as brainworm, it's apparently non-lethal to deer, but is toxic to moose.

There's no deer on Isle Royale, nor in most of the moose range of Canada or Alaska, hence, lots of moose...

:)

OH..Sorry I asked..LOL your gonna hear it now ;) Thanks

[Adam Waszak]

Ya learn someethin new everyday :) Ihave heard of the brainworm but was not aware it affected moose in that way. Guess we nee to eliminate the deer in the UP :yikes: :lol: :lol:

[WILDCATWICK]

Brainworm had a major effect on the moose at Algonquin. The same place the U.P. moose came from. It did put a dent in the moose poplulation within Algonquin Provincial Park even though they have a very limited deer population.

[Skibum]

It affects elk in the Pigeon River area as well.

Jeff

[boehr]

That is why the moose introduction was in the counties that it took place to begin with. Brainworm being deadly to moose was commonly known when the moose introduction was happening. I'm a little surprised that some would be shocked by that fact, being hunters and all (another part of the "I want" syndrome though). Kind of one of those things, along with many other reasons, that biologist takes into consideration attempting to keep the deer population in check especially in those areas of moose (and elk) concentrations.

Here is some info for those really interested.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10370_12143_12185-30966--,00.html

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10370_12143_12185-30970--,00.html

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10370_12150_12220-26502--,00.html

[Bwana]

I bet a lot of deer hunters won't like this one.

According to what I've read and been told, the deer in the UP are what's keeping moose populations low, (or almost non-existent, from what I'm being told these days).

Deer carry a parasite known as brainworm, it's apparently non-lethal to deer, but is toxic to moose.

There's no deer on Isle Royale, nor in most of the moose range of Canada or Alaska, hence, lots of moose...

:)
Linda, I have read that irrespective of disease Moose and Deer just do not mix well. For some reason when one enters the area the other species moves as well. I don't know why.

I personally, would like to see additional types of hunting in the U.P. includeing Wolf and Moose hunts but...........I know we can't do that with a large deer population:hide: .

[wyle_e_coyote]

That is why the moose introduction was in the counties that it took place to begin with. Brainworm being deadly to moose was commonly known when the moose introduction was happening. I'm a little surprised that some would be shocked by that fact, being hunters and all (another part of the "I want" syndrome though). Kind of one of those things, along with many other reasons, that biologist takes into consideration attempting to keep the deer population in check especially in those areas of moose (and elk) concentrations.

Uhhh..well I don't expect anyone to be shocked by my ignorance...after all, I am just a redneck with a gun and a huntin' dog. That is why I ask questions.

Now, to futher show my ignorance. Why, if it was so "commonly known" did biologist even think that a moose population of 1000 by the year 2000 was possible? 1000 moose would surley reach into highly populated whitetail areas in the UP.

[Linda G.]

that message boards are places for people to learn from one another, communicate with one another, and express their opinions to one another... ;)

I firmly believe that it is a direct result of these boards that our sportsmen and women are as informed as they are today...and fervently try to promote them to every person I know who has access to the web.

Perhaps it's been a bad day in the office...? Wrong side of the bed...?? Bad hair day...??

:)

[boehr]

Yes Linda you are right about giving opinions, I just provided links that will enable people to express informed opinions. Of course you do enjoy attempting to light fires or you wouldn't have stated "I bet a lot of deer hunters won't like this one.":) By the way, I'm at home on vacation today! Would have been muzzleloading if it wasn't pouring rain outside.

wyle e coyote...I provided links to learn the information, there are many other places right on the internet to learn more too, if you want to, that is up to you.;)

[Skibum]

Boehr,
Thanks for the links. Is brain worm the consenus limiting factor for moose in the UP?

Nice bike. Is that a Shadow Sabre?

Jeff

[wyle_e_coyote]

wyle e coyote...I provided links to learn the information, there are many other places right on the internet to learn more too, if you want to, that is up to you.;)
I could probably read it all at the liberary also, but that would not be nearly as fun as discussing it amongst my peers.
I went to all your links and read them all. The links were appreciated.

[Linda G.]

"Of course you do enjoy attempting to light fires or you wouldn't have stated "I bet a lot of deer hunters won't like this one."

No, Ray, only, on occasions, trying to light your fire, because you are the only CO I've ever known who so readily takes the bait...but, in this case, I was only making a personal opinion...note the "I bet"...

we are allowed to do that without a degree in law enforcement, aren't we?

Perhaps you should work more often, if this is you on a vacation day... :rolleyes:

Skibum-you might want to contact Tom Cooley, Steve S., or Jean at the DNR's new research lab for an answer to your question about brainworm, unless Boehr has a biological degree, too... :rolleyes:

[boehr]

Boehr,
Thanks for the links. Is brain worm the consenus limiting factor for moose in the UP?

Nice bike. Is that a Shadow Sabre?

JeffI wouldn't say brainworm is a limiting factor, just one of many factors. Sometimes the best laid plans are effected by things that were not even considered regardless how hard groups attempt to consider everything.

Yes, that is a 2004 Shadow Sabre. That bike and I plan on seeing a lot next year. Winter doesn't even start till the 21st and I can't wait till spring. :lol: At this particular time in my life, I rather be riding that than hunting or fishing! Bet that will light some fire eh Linda? :)

[wyle_e_coyote]

I wouldn't say brainworm is a limiting factor, just one of many factors. Sometimes the best laid plans are effected by things that were not even considered regardless how hard groups attempt to consider everything.

Yes, that is a 2004 Shadow Sabre. That bike and I plan on seeing a lot next year. Winter doesn't even start till the 21st and I can't wait till spring. :lol: At this particular time in my life, I rather be riding that than hunting or fishing! Bet that will light some fire eh Linda? :)

I think you lite the fire with how surprised you were that hunters did not know all that info.
I did not realize that we would have to compliment you on you Bike before we could get a answer without ridicule. Were you just hoping someone would jump in with a "how would I know that , becasue I am just a hunter" so you could let us all know that we ARE just hunters and NOT biologist. Nope NO FIRE STARTING THERE. Maybe I took it the wrong way. If I did sorry!

[Skibum]

Yes, that is a 2004 Shadow Sabre. That bike and I plan on seeing a lot next year. Winter doesn't even start till the 21st and I can't wait till spring. :lol: At this particular time in my life, I rather be riding that than hunting or fishing! Bet that will light some fire eh Linda? :)

Sweet. I ride a 2000 Shadow Spirit 1100. Love it. Don't know if it's better than hunting or fishing but it is right up there. Keep the shiny side up.

Jeff

[Kodiak Hunter]

Ummm...wow this topic sure took a turn for the worse.

I got those original numbers from an article I found online - of course now I can't find it. Also, to the 2nd poster, the article you quoted your numbers from is dated 1997. Not exactly current!

Back to the topic at hand???

[boehr]

Gee guess I'm not entitle to an opinion. I think your the one with a bad hair day Linda.

[Ferg]

Kids play nice or the big bad moderator will shut this thread down ;)


Ok Group hug :grouphug:

Everyone have nice weekend -

Time for me to take my marbles and go home -

Be safe everyone - see you on monday !

ferg....
We, after all, are ultimately on the same team.... :)

[wyle_e_coyote]

Right off I want to say I am not a Wolf hater! I just want to make sure they are kept in check.

Now, as for Isle Royle.. The Moose herd at 1 time was 2,400. I don't know where you got the 300 from, I think it is around 1000. It has been a struggle for both on the island.
http://www.admin.mtu.edu/urel/PressReleases/feature/wolves/wolf.html

Peterson, a professor of wildlife ecology at Michigan Tech, said the 2002 survey counted 17 wolves on the island, as opposed to 19 last year. The island's moose population increased from about 900 last year to 1,100 in 2002. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/03/020313075141.htm

2002, That is the most current I have found. My point was that the moose population was 2400 at one time (1997), Now it is (as I posted) around 1000.
Your wolf population is correct, just not the moose.
Agian, both species struggle on the island. When the wolf are up the moose are down, then the wolf population drops the moose come backup. That only make sense though.

[Bow Hunter Brandon]

I just have seen the places in Alaska where I live become waste lands with no deer, bever, or birds because of wolf impact. Yes hard winters do kill many of the deer and over harvesting of forage by deer, but the hard winters make deer easier prey for wolves. Wouldn't you like to go into a deer yard and take your pick in February?



This sounds like a self solving problem. if the area is now a waist land the wolves will be dead in no time of starvation. almost like.... Nature. :lol:

[multibeard]

Brandon,

Maybe you do not under stand the life style of of a lot of the residents of Alaska. The deer carribou and moose are the sustinace to get thru the winter. If we do not have deer to shoot down here it is not big deal we can go to the store and get what we want.

In a lot of Alaska going to the store is not a real option. That moose deer or caribou you shoot in the fall may mean the difference between living or not.

When the wolves take the populations of the moose etc to low levels it can mean whether some one lives or dies. They have tried to have aerial hunts in Ak to controll the wolf populaton over the years but the do gooders that have no clue to life in the real world of Alaska put a stop to it.

It is no joke to those people it is their LIFE!

[Kodiak Hunter]

Brandon,

Maybe you do not under stand the life style of of a lot of the residents of Alaska. The deer carribou and moose are the sustinace to get thru the winter. If we do not have deer to shoot down here it is not big deal we can go to the store and get what we want.

In a lot of Alaska going to the store is not a real option. That moose deer or caribou you shoot in the fall may mean the difference between living or not.

When the wolves take the populations of the moose etc to low levels it can mean whether some one lives or dies. They have tried to have aerial hunts in Ak to controll the wolf populaton over the years but the do gooders that have no clue to life in the real world of Alaska put a stop to it.

It is no joke to those people it is their LIFE!


Multibeard, you hit the nail on the head.

The moose (or caribou) populations CAN be a life or death thing here in Alaska - not for the wolves, or for the moose/'bou, but for the people that live in the bush/remote villages.

Good point.

[Bow Hunter Brandon]

Brandon,

Maybe you do not under stand the life style of of a lot of the residents of Alaska. The deer carribou and moose are the sustinace to get thru the winter. If we do not have deer to shoot down here it is not big deal we can go to the store and get what we want.

In a lot of Alaska going to the store is not a real option. That moose deer or caribou you shoot in the fall may mean the difference between living or not.

When the wolves take the populations of the moose etc to low levels it can mean whether some one lives or dies. They have tried to have aerial hunts in Ak to controll the wolf populaton over the years but the do gooders that have no clue to life in the real world of Alaska put a stop to it.

It is no joke to those people it is their LIFE!

Actually I was aware of the subsistence hunting in Alaska. I was trying to point out the gross exaggeration of the wolves turning an area into a wasteland void of all life. It makes no sense that a predator can eliminate all life in an area. Nature just doesn’t work that way. Well unless you count humans we are really good a screwing up the natural order of things.

[Tecumseh]

I hunt in Gogibic County they have the highest wolf population in the up. I see more deer every year that goes by. That because I continue to learn I dont sit in the same shack year after year as the forest around me changes and the deer habits change. I cant say the wolves have had any impact on the deer numbers that I can see.
Thank you for mentioning the changing habitat throughout the U.P. I have spent a lot of time in the western U.P over the past 12 or so years and that area has changed considerably over that period. Much more of the forests have grown older [and wilder]. A lot of the fields, edge and young growth are no longer there so these newer areas just can't support the deer numbers of years past. I am not saying that wolves are not impacting deer numbers but I am saying that wolves are not the main culprits. I agree with Bow Hunter Brandon that as the habitat changes, hunters need to change and adapt to changing conditions.

[FieldWalker]

Not sitting down looking at a book of statistics and not being exceptionally knowledgeable on the subject- I'm glad someone posted about the cycles... as there are cycles for all of nature, not just the deer herd. ae: bobcat, human, yote - deer, hare, grouse - obviously habitat plays a key role as well... but why, because habitat is how these animals avoid the preditors- once avoided these preditors numbers lower because of lack of food etc. Then deer, rabbit, etc increase, thus preditors eat better etc. I'm sure everyone knows how a line graph works.

Not being a "big" deer hunter and a recent relocation to the U.P. where the deer population has been in the paper lately. The debate was this- issue out more doe tags as to bring down the herd, thus less general buck firearm tags, allowing more bucks to mature (seeing spikes, 4's and 6's versus 8's, 10's etc). But to do this people must break the stereotype of shooting a buck versus a doe. Then they go on to compare the buck/doe ratio to that of deer farms.... Yada yada yada.

So are you guys concerned about the wolves or your personal deer harvest? Your personal deer herd on your private land? The fact that you dont see as many deer compared to that of prior years? How serious are you about hunting deer? Are you going out in a full carbon suit and carbon popup blind as to not "stink" the deer out of the woods. Are you baiting months in advance? Has this years "doe in heat" not brought that buck in? Its amazing the revenue whitetail deer hunting brings this state. I think the general population of hunters simply don't have the time to invest in scouting etc. Now on that note, the general deer hunter probably isn't as serious as our M-S community, thats why we're here. But to hear the worries of the wolf population on your deer herd is sad.

Things I like to consider- is the wolf population increasing as fast as the increase in the number of hunters? Are the wolves taking out the mature deer in the winter or the straglers that wont make it in these harsh winters?

I'd consider myself a pretty die-hard grouse hunter. So my stance on preditors is simple, the less the merrier. Not to mention the fact that wolves have been known to snag hunting dog... but wolves have been here before I was and these same wolves take down yotes and coons.

Feel free to bash me on this topic... as I'm too tired to go through and edit it :bash:

By the way, I'll invest my time before I buy into that scentlock.

-Scott

[Northern_Lights]

The way i see it wolves were taken out of the up for a reason, whether it be the farmers losing livestock, or because of them killing off way too many deer, both are valid reasons in my opinion. If any of you guys know people who live up there they will tell you that many local farmers are taking it upon themselves to shoot wolves and then bury them so to avoid more livestock losses like in years past. At least in the the part the of the up i hunt deer, the Coyote population has boomed bigtime and the wolves are on the rise also. This year i saw more coyotes than deer and i hunted every day of the firearms season. I saw 5 total deer and 10 total coyotes, 8 of which were hot on a does trail, but because our dnr says we can't shoot coyotes in zone 1 during the firearms deer season i could do nothing but watch, i could have easily shot 3 or 4 of them, let me tell you i was tempted. The dnr needs to do something to curb the boom in large predators otherwise our deer herd will suffer alot. The dnr's prediction for deer hunting this year was a load of crap as far as i am concerned.


I've never seen a coyote during deer season.....I've seen several very large grey squirrels..... some of which were chasing deer. But I've never seen a coyote. (Do they look like very large grey squirrels by the way......? :sad: ) Anyway, I do know some farmers in the U.P. Some hate the wolf, some don't care. It's like the general population....some hate it, some don't care. One thing I can tell you, is that nobody is shooting them and burying them. That would be stupid as some have collars, but most now have implants and you'll never know which ones are being monitored. Leave them alone for now, and let the politics play out. The deer herd has been so badly mis-managed, it's been destroyed in the U.P. anyway. I don't think the DNR has a remote idea how many deer there are up here. And they sure don't have any idea of how many have been tagged. (And it's so simple to do....) Anyway, I know it's not a popular idea, but I'm not buying a license next year. Maybe if a bunch of us decided to save our money so we can go somewhere where they do actually manage the deer herd, the state might change their practices and actually mangage the herd. (Isn't that what our license fees are supposed to pay for?) :help:

[Northern_Lights]

I hate wolves. Every hunter except wolf hunters should hate wolves. Wolves kill 26-40 deer per year per wolf. Add it up. Do you want wolves or deer in our woods. I like deer in the woods.

Don't beleive me...Just look at your whitetail hunting numbers over the past few years since wolf introduction.

And yes the population will balance, but after 20 or 30 years will the deer population come back and no where near what we had.

I'm certainly no wolf lover, I've had two run ins with them, had one at 6 feet from me and she certainly wasn't bothered by me.....scared me half to death! Anyway, lets do the math.... Let's say there are 300 wolves, and they each eat 50 deer a year. (We know it's not that much, but it makes for easy math....) That's only 15,000 deer a year. Give me a break, that shouldn't make a dent in the population at all. Now, in some locations, I feel they make a significant impact. But look at Canada. Northern Ontario, Saskatiwan (sp?), Manatoba, and other places all have always had wolfs. And they have some huge deer. I thinking that it's might nice to go into the woods and see lots of deer. But maybe we got a bit spoiled. Maybe we shouldn't have as many deer. Maybe less deer makes them healthier and bigger. Less wolfs would be nice, but let's not blame them for the debacle the DNR has created in the mis-management of our deer herd.

[pacer88220]

Here's my question on how weel we manage things.
If we are so damn good at it why are we discussing the wolf problem like its the plague? Also why do we consistently bring in the fact clear cuts are great for our forests? If we allowed the forest's to burn they grow back alot better then they were before because of the ash fertilizing the ground.
But wait old forests dont hold deer populations as that of young budding forest's (b.s) walk through the areas I hunt I would like to see that proven to me since snow is on the ground.
So how does any of this relate you may be wondering about now:
Show me where we have effectively managed anything other then getting p.o-ed nothing is going our way as we want it to.
Last thing and I am done. The research in wyoming is biased against the wolf. Thats right before he was introduced to the yellowstone the hunting was a vague image due to lobyist's ( I said it b-4 check on it it's true) not wanting the park destroyed or the elk dessimated. When the effects of over grazing started appearing they opened the season. LOL and behold wolves appear in the same park and the numbers drop not to extinction but they lower and hunting pressure increase. Figure where I am heading now.
Magazines told millions of great elk hunting avail in wyoming people flood to kill one and guess what? If you cant never mind.
Funny thing is the upper is crying over the wolf being there they been in graylord grayling alot longer and the deer have started declining but then again look at the numbers killed by hunters on doe permits.
Though was glad to see one hunter saw 10 coyotes and one trailing a doe. Kinda says alot right there.

[WAUB-MUKWA]

Not sitting down looking at a book of statistics and not being exceptionally knowledgeable on the subject- I'm glad someone posted about the cycles... as there are cycles for all of nature, not just the deer herd. ae: bobcat, human, yote - deer, hare, grouse - obviously habitat plays a key role as well... but why, because habitat is how these animals avoid the preditors- once avoided these preditors numbers lower because of lack of food etc. Then deer, rabbit, etc increase, thus preditors eat better etc. I'm sure everyone knows how a line graph works.

Not being a "big" deer hunter and a recent relocation to the U.P. where the deer population has been in the paper lately. The debate was this- issue out more doe tags as to bring down the herd, thus less general buck firearm tags, allowing more bucks to mature (seeing spikes, 4's and 6's versus 8's, 10's etc). But to do this people must break the stereotype of shooting a buck versus a doe. Then they go on to compare the buck/doe ratio to that of deer farms.... Yada yada yada.

So are you guys concerned about the wolves or your personal deer harvest? Your personal deer herd on your private land? The fact that you dont see as many deer compared to that of prior years? How serious are you about hunting deer? Are you going out in a full carbon suit and carbon popup blind as to not "stink" the deer out of the woods. Are you baiting months in advance? Has this years "doe in heat" not brought that buck in? Its amazing the revenue whitetail deer hunting brings this state. I think the general population of hunters simply don't have the time to invest in scouting etc. Now on that note, the general deer hunter probably isn't as serious as our M-S community, thats why we're here. But to hear the worries of the wolf population on your deer herd is sad.

Things I like to consider- is the wolf population increasing as fast as the increase in the number of hunters? Are the wolves taking out the mature deer in the winter or the straglers that wont make it in these harsh winters?

I'd consider myself a pretty die-hard grouse hunter. So my stance on preditors is simple, the less the merrier. Not to mention the fact that wolves have been known to snag hunting dog... but wolves have been here before I was and these same wolves take down yotes and coons.

Feel free to bash me on this topic... as I'm too tired to go through and edit it :bash:

By the way, I'll invest my time before I buy into that scentlock.

-Scott


Brother, I'd like to buy you a yooper pop one of these days because you just described 90% of the people down there in one post. Thank you! ;)

[Huntsman27]

the 90% your talking about. Too much junk on the market. Rich PS what about the free beer?