Wolf quota to at least double.

[mustang58]

Hopefully some common sense will float to the top before our big game hunting is gone. There are alot more wolves in the 3 states then they know. There are many packs that don't have a collared member and are thus not counted. I have lived in Idaho since 1948 and it is sickening to see the elk herds in the shape they are in now. Wolves need to be put on the predator list. It is impossible to control them now with rifles.

 

[Dr. Vette]

It's nothing but a big lie ... Montana do not have any elk.

Fixed it for ya.

 

[Chas1]

Terrylamb's point on $186.00 for non-residents. To add to it if it was less expensive more non-residents might come and spend their $'s which would benefit the local economy and tax revenues in Idaho.

 

[mustang58]

I understand the feeling about the cost. It is too bad that that two forces controlling this, politics and money, are preventing common sense game management. I have questions just not many answers. It is costing the state alot to control the predation on domestic liverstock. They aren't really controling it but rather reacting after the fact. It seems if Govt. is involved efficiency isn't.

Mustang58

 

[ATH]

Regarding the NR tags, if they corrected their math I bet they would make MORE money by lowering the price. If they charged us Resident rates for the wolf tags, I'm sure virtually everyone would want one in their pocket. Right now, no NR I know going out there would even consider a wolf tag.

I'd really love to put one down, and I know my local resident friends would appreciate it too. But I'm not going to pay that much for a lottery ticket nor am I going to risk my broader hunting privileges by poaching one (even if I didn't already have moral issues with doing that).

 

[bigngreen]

The reason, I think, that the wolf tag is so much more for a non resident is the fact that the wolf is classified as a big game animal thus more value is placed on the tag.
If they were able to classify it as a predator you would see a different pricing for sure. Mt lion tags are way more expensive than wolf tags and they seem to be running the wolf harvest like the Mt lion so the tag isn't really that bad when considered in relationship to other big game predators.
Remember Idaho and MT are trying to stay as conservative as they can so as to not loose the wolf hunt in the courts, Wy has the best plan on the ground but it looks to aggressive in court.

 

[Troutslayer2]

The reason, I think, that the wolf tag is so much more for a non resident is the fact that the wolf is classified as a big game animal thus more value is placed on the tag.
If they were able to classify it as a predator you would see a different pricing for sure. Mt lion tags are way more expensive than wolf tags and they seem to be running the wolf harvest like the Mt lion so the tag isn't really that bad when considered in relationship to other big game predators.
Remember Idaho and MT are trying to stay as conservative as they can so as to not loose the wolf hunt in the courts, Wy has the best plan on the ground but it looks to aggressive in court.

The idea is that we hunters will start looking at the wolf as another sporting opportunity some day. I don't think that we will, but that's what they think. Non-residents on wilderness hunts should have to pony up the coin if they want a wolf tag. I bet their guide will have one in his pocket and even though it's a grey area, I bet the guide will fill his tag if wolves are spotted. As far as non-resident backcountry hunters getting a better deal? That's total bs. We live out here, pay taxes here and generally make huge sacrifices in pay by living here. We deserve first crack at hunting opportunities and we deserve it for cheap.

They were getting pretty worried last season when the high numbers of wolves were getting killed on early season backcountry hunts. They had to shut the wolf season down in those areas because originally they wanted the front-country wolves to get knocked down.

I see more and more every year, and if you remember, last season I wounded one and another guy with me wounded another. Never could find them. I saw at least 20 wolves last year, more than I'd seen in all my years combined. Just some food for thought. Go get em! I never thought in a million years that I would see wolves while able to kill them but I was into them more than once, it is unreal. What's really unreal is the numbers of them that have been shot from planes and helis by FWP, in the Dillon area alone. There are tons of them out there and it's nice to have the right to shoot them.

 

[bigngreen]

Ya, the Dillon area is crawling with them. I know the guy who does all the shooting and he said that there is a couple packs he's been after and he can't get them with the airplane so he went in with the helo and now he can't get them to brake cover even with it. They are not going to be controlled by one method or another it will take all methods being deployed.
Whining about the tag price is a little over the top, at the rate wolves are destroying our elk herds elk tags will be a special lottery that costs a fortune.
At this point the tag is a license to be in the field hunting wolves without getting harassed while trying to line up on a pack!
If anyone lines up on a pack, please for the love of all that is right don't shoot a pup, take out an adult preferably the lead female and male, think before you shoot and make it count!!!

 

[ATH]

Non-residents on wilderness hunts should have to pony up the coin if they want a wolf tag. I bet their guide will have one in his pocket and even though it's a grey area, I bet the guide will fill his tag if wolves are spotted. As far as non-resident backcountry hunters getting a better deal? That's total bs. We live out here, pay taxes here and generally make huge sacrifices in pay by living here. We deserve first crack at hunting opportunities and we deserve it for cheap.

You complain about people that don't live there creating the wolf problem to begin with, but you don't want those of us willing to help by shooting some while we're out there help you for a reasonable price. So unless you are capping out every quota, I don't want to hear any more whining about the wolf problem. I'm not going to risk my hunting privileges by poaching a wolf nor am I going to buy a $300 lottery ticket. High-priced tickets and limited NR quotas are appropriate for things like elk where it preserves opportunities for residents, but if you're trying to bring down a population it's silly to thumb your nose at the assistance.

The area I was hunting, and seeing lots of wolf tracks, was not wilderness BTW. It was front-country where I'm sure they were taking down ranchers' cattle.

 

[mustang58]

In the long run the wolves will cost the state due to lost hunting opportunity for other big game. The partial solution to this is for every hunter afield to have a wolf tag. If that means reducing the price, do it. Wolves are hard to find and most are killed by chance not plan. We are learning but so are the wolves. If the wolf numbers aren't reduced other hunting opportunity will be. Watch Idaho elk tag sales for the next few years if you don't believe me. I'm for reducing price.

Mustang58

 

[Troutslayer2]

You complain about people that don't live there creating the wolf problem to begin with, but you don't want those of us willing to help by shooting some while we're out there help you for a reasonable price.

If you can afford a trip out here, an elk tag, and all of the other expenses of a Montana hunt then don't tell me that you just can't afford the $150 non-resident wolf tag. Oh, and I do not consider you coming to our state as "help". If you really want to help, stay at home. MT is full, we have enough resident hunters to take care of our game animals and predators.

 

[Dr. Vette]

In the long run the wolves will cost the state due to lost hunting opportunity for other big game.
Mustang58

It already is.

We were there in 2007 and 2009 hunting elk, and the herd north of Yellowstone is so decimated that we're picking a different state for 2011.

 

[Chas1]

If Montana is full, and has enough resident hunters to take care of their game animals and predators. Then what's the problem?

 

[bigngreen]

If Montana is full, and has enough resident hunters to take care of their game animals and predators. Then what's the problem?

Legal problems.