No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6194887
03/21/18 03:23 PM
03/21/18 03:23 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,127
McGrath, AK
W
white17 Offline

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
white17  Offline

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
W

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,127
McGrath, AK
I am sure you are correct about the observations you mention. But that doesn't mean that your DNR is lying to you. It stands to reason that when more people are in the woods, more interactions will happen. The more livestock is available to the wolves, the more there will be.

Wolf numbers are directly related to available prey. The pack won't out grow it's food supply without wolves dispersing into new areas....which is certainly happening. Also, the less food there is per wolf, the greater the tensions between individuals in a pack and between packs at territory boundaries. The greatest source of wolf mortality, is other wolves. Also as available protein declines, litters or litter survival rates will decline.

The problem you guys have is that there are several different food sources available to them. And they are very adept at switching to targets of opportunity...dogs, cats, cattle, pigs, etc. Farmers that use dead pits for morts are just setting up feeding stations.

On the moose calf survival issue, I would question your bear population. They are a lot tougher on moose calves than wolves are.


A very good book on the whole subject is here:

https://www.amazon.com/Wolves-Behavior-Conservation-David-Mech/dp/0226516970

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech & Boitani


Mean As Nails
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6194979
03/21/18 05:17 PM
03/21/18 05:17 PM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,630
Virginia
5
52Carl Offline
trapper
52Carl  Offline
trapper
5

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,630
Virginia
In my opinion, the biggest problem with every topic one cares to discus, is that the State of Minnesota is full of Minnesotans.
They elected Jesse "the body" Venture for Governor, and Al "glad hands" Franken for US Senator.
The vast rural nature of the State makes wolf population estimation extremely difficult.
Without a trapping or hunting season, they lack harvest records.
While harvest records do not provide population estimates, they do provide year-to-year data which is valuable for measuring trends, and it is virtually free to conduct.
It will likely take some bad press from a dead child or a famous persons poodle to change the tide.

Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: 52Carl] #6195021
03/21/18 05:51 PM
03/21/18 05:51 PM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,152
Northern Minnesota
BernieB. Online content OP
trapper
BernieB.  Online Content OP
trapper

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,152
Northern Minnesota
Originally Posted By: 52Carl
In my opinion, the biggest problem with every topic one cares to discus, is that the State of Minnesota is full of Minnesotans.
They elected Jesse "the body" Venture for Governor, and Al "glad hands" Franken for US Senator.
The vast rural nature of the State makes wolf population estimation extremely difficult.
Without a trapping or hunting season, they lack harvest records.
While harvest records do not provide population estimates, they do provide year-to-year data which is valuable for measuring trends, and it is virtually free to conduct.
It will likely take some bad press from a dead child or a famous persons poodle to change the tide.


Well you are right on some points. The urban areas of Minnesota have a history of voting for idiots and there are now more people in the cities than there are in the country so brace yourself for more idiots.

No amount of bad press is going to change things. It's in the hands of the courts. As long as the antis can find a judge that will side with them, there will be no wolf hunting or trapping. And unless the DNR and the feds can prove that the wolves should be removed from the endangered species list, the things will stay the way they are right now. Unless of course we have a governor and legislature that is willing to take things out of the hands of the courts. If you are hoping for that to happen, go back to the earlier point about electing idiots.

Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: 52Carl] #6195036
03/21/18 06:02 PM
03/21/18 06:02 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
G
goldy Offline
trapper
goldy  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
Originally Posted By: 52Carl
In my opinion, the biggest problem with every topic one cares to discus, is that the State of Minnesota is full of Minnesotans.
They elected Jesse "the body" Venture for Governor, and Al "glad hands" Franken for US Senator.
Minnesota is basically made up of two very different entities. You have the metro area of Minneapolis/St Paul and the rest of the state. Unfortunately, the metro area has more people and are largely liberal so they control most of the state elections.


"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety" Ben Franklin talking about guns
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: white17] #6195052
03/21/18 06:15 PM
03/21/18 06:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
G
goldy Offline
trapper
goldy  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
Originally Posted By: white17
I am sure you are correct about the observations you mention. But that doesn't mean that your DNR is lying to you. It stands to reason that when more people are in the woods, more interactions will happen. The more livestock is available to the wolves, the more there will be.

Wolf numbers are directly related to available prey. The pack won't out grow it's food supply without wolves dispersing into new areas....which is certainly happening. Also, the less food there is per wolf, the greater the tensions between individuals in a pack and between packs at territory boundaries. The greatest source of wolf mortality, is other wolves. Also as available protein declines, litters or litter survival rates will decline.

The problem you guys have is that there are several different food sources available to them. And they are very adept at switching to targets of opportunity...dogs, cats, cattle, pigs, etc. Farmers that use dead pits for morts are just setting up feeding stations.

On the moose calf survival issue, I would question your bear population. They are a lot tougher on moose calves than wolves are.


A very good book on the whole subject is here:

https://www.amazon.com/Wolves-Behavior-Conservation-David-Mech/dp/0226516970

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech & Boitani
Two things. One, the DNR has come out and said their population estimates are on the conservative side. I think the evidence shows that might be a gross understatement. In one of my first posts I said either the DNR is lying or they just are doing a really bad job of getting a handle on the true count. It's probably a combination of being really conservative and having bad computer models. Like was said above, without a hunting/trapping season, they just don't have much to go on. I know they were surprised how quickly the harvest quota was met during the last allowable harvest season.
As far as moose calves, wolves were responsible for the deaths 67% of collared moose calves in a study done a couple years ago.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...b5m3aKXVtBWjyau


"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety" Ben Franklin talking about guns
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195084
03/21/18 06:52 PM
03/21/18 06:52 PM
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Eric B Offline
trapper
Eric B  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
I can personally attest to the wolf population spreading vastly south. I'm 45 minutes southwest of brainerd and I have seen wolves on our land, see tracks annually, and when I go 10 minutes north to trap bobcats, I see more wolf sign than bobcat sign. Unheard of 5 years ago.

Last edited by Eric B; 03/21/18 07:20 PM.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: goldy] #6195101
03/21/18 07:12 PM
03/21/18 07:12 PM
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 5,471
West Central MN
20scout Offline
trapper
20scout  Offline
trapper

Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 5,471
West Central MN
Originally Posted By: goldy
Originally Posted By: 52Carl
In my opinion, the biggest problem with every topic one cares to discus, is that the State of Minnesota is full of Minnesotans.
They elected Jesse "the body" Venture for Governor, and Al "glad hands" Franken for US Senator.
Minnesota is basically made up of two very different entities. You have the metro area of Minneapolis/St Paul and the rest of the state. Unfortunately, the metro area has more people and are largely liberal so they control most of the state elections.


X2


Common sense is a not a vegetable that does well in everyone's garden.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195110
03/21/18 07:26 PM
03/21/18 07:26 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
G
goldy Offline
trapper
goldy  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,302
minnesota
Look at this map and tell me the population is the same now as in years past like the DNR is telling us. Any fool can see how much the range has expanded southward, and they've expanded because the carrying capacity of the original wolf range is saturated with wolves. And we are to respect their population estimates? It's pretty obvious they aren't being totally truthful.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt...=mrc&uact=8

Last edited by goldy; 03/21/18 07:28 PM.

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety" Ben Franklin talking about guns
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195120
03/21/18 07:38 PM
03/21/18 07:38 PM
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,518
MB
J
Jurassic Park Offline
trapper
Jurassic Park  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,518
MB
Now take that map and spread 3000 wolves around where it shows they are, and you’ll see that’s a lot of wolves to disperse in that small area.
You guys sound like the guy that says the wolf he caught weighed over 200lbs.


Cold as ice!
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: Jurassic Park] #6195144
03/21/18 07:57 PM
03/21/18 07:57 PM
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Eric B Offline
trapper
Eric B  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Originally Posted By: Jurassic Park
Now take that map and spread 3000 wolves around where it shows they are, and you’ll see that’s a lot of wolves to disperse in that small area.
You guys sound like the guy that says the wolf he caught weighed over 200lbs.

What's your stake in this? You have the right to trap the wolves that inhabit your area, and aren't paying others to do it for you. I'm not necessarily trying to get rid of wolves. I don't mind having them around per se, but I would like the opportunity to harvest them. Particularly if I'm putting up with them traveling through my yard, killing the deer in my area, and causing a threat to my livestock. Wolves around here have no respect for humans, because we can't touch them. I just want them to have a healthy fear of people like they would in a place with regulated harvest. I don't think you realize just how many wolves we have. You can go drive on a snowy day and make a 50 mile loop on back roads north of my house and cut tracks from 3-4 different packs easily. It's far easier to cut wolf tracks than bobcat tracks around my area these days. I understand that you have wolves in your area and you know your wolves, but what do you know about our wolves? I've lived here all my life and seen things change. That would be like you taking your deer hunting abilities from the area you live, and trying to translate it to hunting deer in the appalachians. It's a whole different game animal, even though it's the same species.

Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195148
03/21/18 08:03 PM
03/21/18 08:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,518
MB
J
Jurassic Park Offline
trapper
Jurassic Park  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,518
MB
Eric, how many wolves do you have in Minnesota?


Cold as ice!
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195151
03/21/18 08:07 PM
03/21/18 08:07 PM
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Eric B Offline
trapper
Eric B  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
I don't know. Do you? I don't believe the DNR knows either, if they say that the numbers are stable and not increasing over the last 30 years. They've doubled their territory. I also don't claim to know anything about your wolves. Our wolves are becoming a huge problem, regardless of the total number, due to the fact that they have no fear nor respect for human establishment or humans in general.

Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195155
03/21/18 08:14 PM
03/21/18 08:14 PM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,264
james bay frontierOnt.
B
Boco Offline
trapper
Boco  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,264
james bay frontierOnt.
Once the wolf population gets high you'll see a drastic reduction in beaver overall.
You will also notice that the few beaver that are left will have changed their habits drastically,very noticeably in the fall when putting up feed.

Last edited by Boco; 03/21/18 08:15 PM.

Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195163
03/21/18 08:20 PM
03/21/18 08:20 PM
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Eric B Offline
trapper
Eric B  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
I have noticed that I'm finding a lot more dead lodges than I did when I started trapping. Do you think this may have something to do with this Boco?

Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195204
03/21/18 08:45 PM
03/21/18 08:45 PM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,264
james bay frontierOnt.
B
Boco Offline
trapper
Boco  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,264
james bay frontierOnt.
Some dead lodges and mudded lodges in the fall with little or no feed.
Also one or two large beaver in a big colony with no yoy,or year and a half beaver.
Look for beaver hair in the wolf scat,it is easy to identify.

Last edited by Boco; 03/21/18 08:46 PM.

Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195212
03/21/18 08:53 PM
03/21/18 08:53 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,536
Sandhills Nebraska
G
Gary Benson Offline
trapper
Gary Benson  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,536
Sandhills Nebraska
Last week I watched a FABULOUS program about the wonderful wolves of Jellystone. 13 packs in the park. They showed a neat map of what area each pack # controlled. Funny there were no wolves outside the park. They stop right at the boundary! SUCH smart wolves!!!


Life ain't supposed to be easy.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: white17] #6195273
03/21/18 09:41 PM
03/21/18 09:41 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 10,421
mn north of blakely
S
Steven 49er Offline
trapper
Steven 49er  Offline
trapper
S

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 10,421
mn north of blakely
Originally Posted By: white17
I am sure you are correct about the observations you mention. But that doesn't mean that your DNR is lying to you. It stands to reason that when more people are in the woods, more interactions will happen. The more livestock is available to the wolves, the more there will be.

Wolf numbers are directly related to available prey. The pack won't out grow it's food supply without wolves dispersing into new areas....which is certainly happening. Also, the less food there is per wolf, the greater the tensions between individuals in a pack and between packs at territory boundaries. The greatest source of wolf mortality, is other wolves. Also as available protein declines, litters or litter survival rates will decline.

The problem you guys have is that there are several different food sources available to them. And they are very adept at switching to targets of opportunity...dogs, cats, cattle, pigs, etc. Farmers that use dead pits for morts are just setting up feeding stations.

On the moose calf survival issue, I would question your bear population. They are a lot tougher on moose calves than wolves are.


A very good book on the whole subject is here:

https://www.amazon.com/Wolves-Behavior-Conservation-David-Mech/dp/0226516970

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech & Boitani


Ken, I didn't say the DNR is lying to us or even that they are wrong in their estimations.

You gave a viable reason why population levels may stay stagnant. I gave a good reason why they could be increasing.

Their over under on population estimations is +- 500. That is quite a variation on a 2500 estimation


"Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon". Milton Friedman.
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195344
03/21/18 10:40 PM
03/21/18 10:40 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,579
Duluth, MN
C
Clark Offline
trapper
Clark  Offline
trapper
C

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,579
Duluth, MN
Standard errors in estimating wildlife populations can be quite high as a percentage. It's very difficult to get it lower. Errors in estimating jobs to the economy are even higher, often 50%. Estimating large, mobile and changing populations is difficult and fraught with many known and unknown sources of error.

I don't disagree with the sentiment that wolf populations have risen significantly in the last 20 years. I have no way to prove that. We can say the DNR wildlife biologist, sitting behind his computer (while we type on a computer) doesn't know anything but you're certainly wrong about that. He has numbers that he can satisfy a court with. We have, at best, anecdotal data that gives us a hunch of what is going on.

330 - The best way to prove the DNR wrong would be to talk to them, get their raw data (it's public) and prove to the world they are wrong. Until you can do that any two-bit, law school drop-out would make mince meat out of you in a court room.

Clark


Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. -Albert Einstein
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: Steven 49er] #6195381
03/21/18 11:17 PM
03/21/18 11:17 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,127
McGrath, AK
W
white17 Offline

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
white17  Offline

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
W

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,127
McGrath, AK
Originally Posted By: Steven 49er
Originally Posted By: white17
I am sure you are correct about the observations you mention. But that doesn't mean that your DNR is lying to you. It stands to reason that when more people are in the woods, more interactions will happen. The more livestock is available to the wolves, the more there will be.

Wolf numbers are directly related to available prey. The pack won't out grow it's food supply without wolves dispersing into new areas....which is certainly happening. Also, the less food there is per wolf, the greater the tensions between individuals in a pack and between packs at territory boundaries. The greatest source of wolf mortality, is other wolves. Also as available protein declines, litters or litter survival rates will decline.

The problem you guys have is that there are several different food sources available to them. And they are very adept at switching to targets of opportunity...dogs, cats, cattle, pigs, etc. Farmers that use dead pits for morts are just setting up feeding stations.

On the moose calf survival issue, I would question your bear population. They are a lot tougher on moose calves than wolves are.


A very good book on the whole subject is here:

https://www.amazon.com/Wolves-Behavior-Conservation-David-Mech/dp/0226516970

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech & Boitani


Ken, I didn't say the DNR is lying to us or even that they are wrong in their estimations.

You gave a viable reason why population levels may stay stagnant. I gave a good reason why they could be increasing.

Their over under on population estimations is +- 500. That is quite a variation on a 2500 estimation




Steven: I was responding to Goldy there. Sorry for the mix up.


But I want to point out that I also stated that in my post above that wolves are certainly dispersing. I was trying to agree with you guys that they are most likely expanding their range. Again. It makes it tough when people can't see facial expression and hear a tone of voice.


As far as being -/+ 500 wolves in their census and being "conservative" in their estimates goes.........that may actually work in your favor. Many times on different species census issues, animal rights groups have sued to end harvest because the managing agency had no data, or inflated data. Your DNR may be trying to avoid another lawsuit based on population estimates.

You may actually be better off LEGALLY with a lower estimate.

I also want to make clear that I believe it when some of you report an apparent increase of wolves in your area. It may also be true that there is a decrease in other areas due to all the reasons listed previously.

That's why I think it makes complete sense to say that populations are more DENSE in certain areas but the wolf population statewide is fairly stable. As such, I don't think DNR is lying.....if that isthe case. We know one thing for certain. Wolf populations are not static.

If we could get Gulo to chime in on this we would all benefit from the experience of a professional in the wolf wars.


Mean As Nails
Re: This stupid wolf thing [Re: BernieB.] #6195503
03/22/18 05:53 AM
03/22/18 05:53 AM
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
Eric B Offline
trapper
Eric B  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 269
Central MN
White, you may be right that there could still be only 2500 wolves in the whole area, but even in their original range, people who live there talk about how much more abundant they've become. So if they've doubled their range, and seem plentiful in the entirety of it, it's only natural to believe their populations have grown significantly. And they only continue expanding, when their is abundant food in the places they're already living. This seems to me that they are only moving due to expansion of population.
Also, a couple of the many examples of my states mis management of our natural resources. Have you ever heard of mille lacs lake? Used to be one of the top walleye fisheries in the state. The dnr allowed the mille lacs band of ojibwe to net them during spawning. This would be fine if they were for personal consumption, but they were netting them for sale. While the rest of us were paying for stocking efforts through the dnr. Used to be able to go and catch your limit of walleyes there virtually any time you wanted to. They just reopened the season, I believe, so that you can keep one. Used to be 6. So we pay for them to be stocked, for the mille lacs band net them when we can't target them, to sell them to restaurants and fish markets.
Example 2, my area used to be abundant in deer. Over abundant, maybe, but made for very interesting hunting. The dnr made a 5 deer per person quota and people took advantage of it. And that includes tons of people from urban areas hunting small parcels. We have one neighbor who had 9 people hunting 160 acres. They killed 45 deer. And that's not a unique story. Lots of people taking every deer they could during that time. After a few years of that, our deer were all but gone. We used to see 20-30 deer per hunt. That started about 8 years ago. This year was the first year when we started to see deer again. There were seasons in between where we saw 1-5 deer in a 9 day season. We used to see that in the first 15 minutes of light on opening day of the season.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread