Rally At Yellowstone National Park Aims To Boost Public Support For Wolves In The Wild

Alternate Text

Editor's note: A rally to raise public awareness about wolves in and around Yellowstone National Park is scheduled for late June near the north entrance to the park at Gardiner, Montana. The following release came from the program's organizers.

The establishment of Yellowstone National Park in 1872 represents one of the greatest achievements in American history, affording protection to one of our country’s true wild places. Appreciation for this action, and the land it preserved, is increasing with each passing generation. And Yellowstone is much more than an American treasure; it is an international jewel, attracting millions of people from all over the world every year.

Fast-forward 123 years to 1995 and 1996, when the federal government, at the behest of the American people, released 66 gray wolves into Yellowstone. After one of America’s most iconic species was brought to near extinction through hunting, trapping, poisoning, and other government-funded methods in the 19th and 20th centuries, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service finally began to recover this internationally beloved species. And, because of its wildness and large size, as well as its complement of abundant prey species, Yellowstone was one of two places chosen to welcome the wolves home. Idaho was the second place.

On June 28-29, 2014, people of all walks of life are invited to attend Speak for Wolves: Yellowstone 2014, a 2-day family-friendly celebration of wolves, predators and other native species that contribute to our rich national heritage. The event will be held at Arch Park in Gardiner, MT, just north of the Roosevelt Arch, near the north entrance to Yellowstone National Park. Speak for Wolves: Yellowstone 2014 will feature prominent speakers and authors from the conservation community, and will include live music, education booths, children’s activities and food vendors. The event is free and open to the public.

In addition to daytime activities at Arch Park, the screening of two wildlife documentaries will occur on Saturday evening, June 28, at 7 pm. The films will be shown at the Gardiner Community Center, which is located at 210 W. Main Street in downtown Gardiner. Organizers will be showing Predator Defense’s film, Exposed: USDA’s Secret War on Wildlife and Project Coyote’s film, Coexisting with Wildlife: The Marin Livestock and Wildlife Protection Program. The films will be followed by a panel discussion composed of conservationists and scientists. The films are free.

Speak for Wolves: Yellowstone 2014 is an opportunity for the American people to unite and demand wildlife management reform, and to take an important step toward restoring our national heritage. Unbeknownst to many Americans, over 3,000 gray wolves have been slaughtered across America, including around Yellowstone National Park, since certain segments of the wolf population were prematurely stripped of federal protection under the Endangered Species Act just a few years ago. The controversial delisting of the northern Rockies gray wolf was the first time Congress intervened and delisted a species in the 40-year history of the Endangered Species Act.

Alternate Text
A public rally is scheduled for late June to raise awareness about wolves/Monty Sloan

Lengthy hunting seasons now occur in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Hunters are permitted to hunt wolves with dogs in Wisconsin. Barbaric trapping/snaring seasons exist in Idaho. The USDA Wildlife Services just gunned-down 23 wolves from a helicopter in a rugged national forest in Idaho. In just 20 years, the federal government has completely reversed its course on the biological recovery of the gray wolf, and is now in the business of wiping them out again.

While many people are calling for relisting of gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act, others are saying that it is time to completely reform wildlife management in the United States.

Event organizers for Speak for Wolves: Yellowstone 2014 have developed the following five keys to reforming wildlife management in America:

* Ban trapping/snaring on all federal public lands.

* End grazing on all federal public lands.

* Abolish the predator-control department of the USDA Wildlife Services.

* Reform how state fish and game agencies operate.

* Introduce legislation to protect all predators, including wolves, from sport hunting, trapping, and snaring.

Please consider attending Speak for Wolves: Yellowstone 2014. The only thing that can save the gray wolf from a second extermination is a strong grassroots movement consisting of every-day people. Let’s come together and embark on this journey together. Let’s make the world a better place, for not only current generations, but also for those generations still to come. Your support is greatly appreciated! Learn more at www.speakforwolves.org or follow the event for updates at www.facebook.com/speakforwolvesyellowstone2014.


Why are you allowing the wolf pimps to pollute this page? This is for the public not the tiny lunatic fringe that only love wolves. Let do a fact check on the destruction wolves have caused.1. Before wolves Yellowstone had around 1200 moose today less than 10 moose survived the slaughter. So the National park is supporting driving animal to extinction?2. The Northern Yellowstone elk herd was over 19,000 before the wolves today 2083 survived the slaughter from wolves. That is disgusting you are allowing wolves and bears to destroy all wildlife in the park.3. The number 1 killer of Yellowstone wolves is what? Not hunting, not trapping, not vehicles. The number 1 killer of Yellowstone wolves is other wolves. That is straight from the NPS report.4, Who is the tiny lunatic fringe group to say what happens on Federal land. Ban trapping and hunting of predators so the wolves can destroy and drive to extinction more of our wildlife. How about ban wolf pimps from all Federal land.5. How dare you use my Federal money to allow these wolf pimps to be on this page. This is all about deadbeats collecting money so they don't have to work for a living. Don't believe me look at the donate now button, look at buy the T shirts all they care about is the money not the destruction of Yellowstone wildlife to the point it is ridiculous the wolves are starving to death and seeing elk in the park is becoming rare. The public last year were complaining where is all the wildlife. Did you tell them the truth the wolves kill most of the wildlife.

For the record, Freedom, your tax dollars don't support this site. We're an independent business, not part of the National Park Service.

The back story behind someone with that much venom and anger boiling over is occasionally at least forensically interesting, but I'm not asking for it.

How dare I tell the truth about wolves destroying wildlife. I mean really let's allow the wolves to destroy all the wildlife and starve to death. Who goes to a national Park and wants to see wildlife trees and grass are so cool to look at. Anger and Venom is telling the truth? You are little strange Rick.

That's good to know my tax dollars are not being wasted. So you people just hate wildlife and support allowing the wolves to destroy the ecosystem?

Shameful. Where is the opposing view from people that actually LIVE with wolves?It is unfortunate that you are clearly siding with uninformed, out-of-state wolf lovers who do not have a clue about living with wolves. They have a ridiculous agenda of hateful bigotry and predjudice against ranchers who have been here for generations and FEED them and hunting/trapping, also a tradtion steeped in history and a necessary management tool for reducing predator numbers. These are the full-time residents that live around Yellowstone.Ranching and Hunting/Trapping are our national heritage. Two of the passions of one of the founders of Yellowstone: Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was an avid wolf hunter and rancher.All this wolf lover propaganda is under the guise of "raising awareness about wolves".We are "aware" of wolves and the devastation they cause because we WITNESS it. They need to be "aware" the wolves are overpopulated, delisted, and there is a legal hunting/trapping season on them. Reality. Yet they see fit to come into our states: Wyoming, Idaho and Montana to stage a rally to arrogantly attempt to outline how they think we should live our lives. They are preaching to the choir. We do not care about their demands and they need to worry about issues in their own backyards.

I agree. Donate. Donate. Donate. Someone will get a new car out of it and no wolves will be saved. Guaranteed.The full-time residents that actually live near the park do not need to be lectured about wolves by ill-informed tourists that visit wolfdog parks back East. We see what wolves do. They are delisted and it is legal to hunt and trap them. Period.

Its people like freedom1080 and livingwithwolves above that wolf advocates strive to show another way to coexist with wolves. Its people like this spreading their pure uneducated wolf hate everywhere they go that has to change. They stubornly cling to bad husbantry practices, refuse to listen to the other causes that effect undulate population, besides wolves. I can only think that their world is a tiny place. They refuse to learn nonlethal methods that work and would increase their bottom dollar raising livestock in wolf country. They continue to insist the wolf is the root to all evil. So that they can continue on their mission to hate. They refuse to accknowledge the good things wolves do for their ecosystem and for all of us.

Dispite what they say most wolf conservation groups are not in it for a new car. Most are non-profit and my own group is totally run by volunteers which receive no money for anything they do to run the group. Not one cent goes to any purpose other than to run the organazation. Not one member gets a dime. It all goes to support other wolf conservation missions and programs by wolf groups and educate the public about wolves, advocate for wolves and show people how to live with them so that wolves, livestock and people can tuely coexist where all will survive better. Yes they sell shirts but again, not one dime goes to any member of the organazation. It all goes to combat the hate like I read above every day that I advocate for the wolves.

Learning better ways seem to not be in these peoples worlds. And so my mission continues. Educate, advocate and participate for wolves.

Wow. So much false and misleading and hateful "information" in one place!

If all this is true, why are many ranchers in the area immediately around Yellowstone now changing their minds about wolves? Could it be that they've discovered the lies being fostered by folks like these two commentors?

Then there are the statements published by wildlife experts employed by the various states where wolves have been "destroying" elk and other "nice" animals. Statements that completely debunk the idea that wolves are the cause of elk population declines. Remember, these guys are working for the states in which a few propagandists post billboard messages full of the same kind of outlandish claims made by our friends above.

Making claims like those above is simply a sign of laziness. Too lazy to do even a minimal amount of research to learn the truth. Too lazy to avoid allowing themselves to be duped.

Freedom1080--Why are we allowing anti-wolf pimps to pollute this page? Your analysis of wildlife in the park is ludicrous.

Freedom 1080, I am fairly certain that all of the wildlife in Yellowstone has been coexisting in a perfect balance of predator and prey for the last several million years, up unitl the early 1800's when Europeans arrived. It sounds like you have lost livestock or know people who have lost livestock to wolves, and your feelings represent a hatred and fear of them. You have a very 19th century mentality.

Fortunatley, most land managers are now recognizing the value of top predators to the health of ecosystems.

Uneducated? How so? I stated that I live with wolves & witness what they do. I don't see that anyone can BE more educated about wolves than being in the real world."Researching" them on the internet and watching PBS's "Nature" will not educate you on wolves.What do you know about "clinging to bad husbandry"? How bigoted and predjudiced you are about a group of hard working Americans that feed you. How dare you assume you can dictate and demand how we live. Reminds me of me exactly of the persecution of Jews by the Nazis. How many ranchers have you personally spoken to that have suffered wolf predations? How many have you spoken to that have grazing leases? Have you discussed the details of how much they pay, for how long and all the work and additional costs involved?Wolves are overpopulated, delisted and legal to hunt. No, we absolutely will NOT use any any ineffective, expensive, time-consuming "non-lethal" methods. Those days are long gone. They do nothing to control/manage the wolf numbers and only delay inevitable wolf attacks. We have a right to protect our animals.

No, having livestock killed by these wolves represents a huge financial loss. No "fear". Wolves are delisted. Legal to hunt. Nothing scary about them.How much money/income have you personally lost to wolves? Judging by your ignorant and bigoted comments about ranchers, seems you are the one afraid. How many ranchers that have lost have you personally spoken to, or know?You contradict yourself by stating the wolfies were thriving "until Europeans arrived" then whine about us having "19th century mentality". lol.Yeah, I live in the here and now; it's 2014, lots more people here now, NOT the "19th century" you live in. Free-roaming wolves are a thing of the past...ummm, "19th century".

Hmmmm, and who ARE those ranchers tolerating wolves killing their livestock, especially when the prices are at an all time high? That is a complete lie. I personally know many ranchers around Yellowstone and NONE willingly allow wolves to kill their animals. How ignorant, that's like saying a store owner willingly allows thugs to rob him and steal his inventory.The only "laziness" is from clueless wolflovers that are too lazy and bigoted to get out and speak to people living with wolves and ask them what wolves have done to their animals.

I am so sorry. I hate to see someone with such a festering bile inside. If you kill every possible wolf you will still have this dark hate you have built up. I wish you every possible bit of healing.

I am glad there are people on here to support the wolves. The vile hatred of some commenters is irrational. You have no right to eradicate any species just because it is inconvenient and annoying to you. We need to respect all living things. Other people live in this country, not just ranchers. We are entitled to OUR opinion. The wolves were there first. Yes, I'm a tree hugging, wildlife loving conservationist so you don't need to make your nasty comments!

I HAVE gotten out and talked with ranchers from the Gardiner area. Five of them at the Town Cafe one morning last February. They were unanimous in their feeling that bringing wolves back to Yellowstone has been a good thing. They all said they had been opposed to the idea at first, but have changed their minds after seeing the benefits wolf watchers were bringing to the local economy. Only one of them has lost any cattle to a possible wolf kill. He acknowledged that the two calves he lost may have been killed by a pack of dogs allowed by their owner to run loose in the area. But even though there was doubt as to the killers of the calves, he was reimbursed for his loss by the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Instead of hiding behind anonymity, how about disclosing your reasons and interests in this debate. Are you ranchers? What are you? Where are you from?

We await your answers.

I dont have a particular dog in this fight but am amazed at the personal attacks vs reasoned argument. Perhaps Freedom was a little agressive with his "pimps" comment but the total disrespect for his arguments and interests is ironic coming from what is normally the "tolerance" crowd. If his stats in the opening post are accurate, then he makes quite a compelling case. If they aren't then demonstrate such rather then claiming "festering hate", "vile hatred" and questioning motives.

This has been an issue that's generated plenty of debate - and even more emotion - for years. Doesn't look like things have changed much. When topics such as this are involved, it can be difficult to find solid, and impartial, information from someone who, as ec says, doesn't have a dog in this fight.

Without citations, it's difficult to accept Freedom 1080s statistics. For instance:

* According to the National Park Service, Yellowstone is home to fewer than 200 moose. One of the reasons, though, is lack of suitable habitat.

Although some Rocky Mountain moose populations have continued to grow and spread into new habitat, those in Yellowstone have declined since the 1980s. Estimated at roughly 1,000 in the 1970s, the current Yellowstone moose population is believed to be less than 200, with the northern range population down by at least 75 percent since the 1980s. Predation of moose calves by bear and wolf populations may be continuing to limit population growth, but the low pregnancy rates of Greater Yellowstone moose suggest limits set by food availability. Longterm studies suggest that North American moose populations tend to erupt, crash, and then stabilize for awhile at a density that depends on current ecological conditions and hunting pressure.


* As for elk populations, Dr. Ralph Maughan, a professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, notes that Wyoming's Game and Fish Department reported a near-record elk harvest last fall.

They estimate that 25,968 were taken, a near record. However the number one year was 2012 when the hunt saw 26,365 elk reported killed. In a news release, the department compares today to 1995. . .”in 1995, elk harvest was 17,695 elk, more than 8,000 fewer than the Wyoming harvest of the past few years.”

The department choose an odd year for comparison, 1995. That was the year wolves were reintroduced. Within a few years after Wyoming politicians and others were arguing that wolves were gravely harming the elk population. Eighteen and Nineteen years later, elk are at a record. So did wolves cause the elk increase?


At the same time, it's been well-noted that the park's Northern elk herd has declined quite a bit in recent years. But is it due to hunting, to wolves, to grizzlies, to brucellosis, to drought?

After decades of debate over whether this range was overgrazed by too many elk, public concern has shifted to the herd's small size. The winter count, which was approximately 17,000 when wolf reintroduction began in 1995, fell below 10,000 in 2003. It fluctuated between 6,000 and 7,000 as the wolf population on the park's northern range declined from 94 in 2007 to 38 in 2010. The elk count dropped to 3,915 in early 2013, the lowest since culling ended in the park in the 1960s. The decrease has been attributed to predation by reintroduced wolves and a large bear population, hunter harvest, and drought-related effects on pregnancy and survival. The State of Montana has reduced the permits issued for this herd so that hunting of females now has little impact on population size.--NPS

That said, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks officials went into last fall's elk hunt saying populations across the state were in good shape, with many areas (including southwestern Montana) reporting increased numbers.


Not to be overlooked is the debate over whether Yellowstone's wildlife is to be managed for hunter success or an ecologically balanced ecosystem.

Thank you, Kurt.

livingwithwolves- your posts were so incohearant and rambling I dont know how to really respond...As a historian, I tend to tune out the very second people start comparing the Third Reich and other issues. As for calling me 'bigoted' towards ranchers, I am not sure how you came up wit that conclusion. Perhaps you could explain more...

My 19th century mentality statement clearly went right over your head so I wont bother to respond to that...

I never said wolves were 'thriving' in the 19th century. I said that the wildlife in Yellowstone was living in a perfect balance of predator and prey prior to Europeans arriving. Clearly that one went over your head too...

When communicating in a written format, it might benefit you to work on your decoding and writing skills if you want your points to be understood by the otherside

And perhaps if you ranchers and farmers were not the most heavily subsidized groups in this country, people might be more receptive to your concerns.

For those who wonder why such strong reactions have come from some of the pro wolf killing folks just read the goals of the Speak for Wolves rally. This discussion is not about science or Yellowstone. It is about changing the culture of many of the rural areas of the country. It would be nice to think a reasonable balance could be reached on predator control and wildlife management in the US, but I can't think of single location where that has happened. Certainly not here in West Texas where I live.

I agree with Lee Dalton's plea for people to identify themselves. It is hard to argue with ghosts.

Wolves have a polarizing effect as people tend to be either for or against. I have read enough information that consistently states that when the top predators are on the landscape, the ecosystem is more resilient and healthy.

Accrording to MFWP, 80% of hunting units where wolves are present, elk populations are either exceeding or meeting goals. The majority of the units below goals are very close to meeting them. Wolves cannot afford to waste energy or become injured so they tend (not always) to prey on the old, lame, sick or very young elk. This results in a gene pool where the most healthy elk breed, reduces potential starvation and maintains healthy forage. They also keep elk moving thereby allowing aspen, willows and other vegetation to be restored.

Wolves account for less than 1% of livestock predation in the western US and actually help lower predation as they kill coyotes (main source of predation). Yes, wolves are no longer listed and can be hunted and trapped. Bald eagles and gray whales are no longer listed so should we start killing them. We know that predators keep nature in balance and its time to use this information instead of villifying them.

Here is a link to a good summary of the effects of wolf predation compared with other causes of loss of cattle, sheep, and game animals.


In all three categories, wolf predation falls far below other causes of deaths of animals. In fact, in the case of beef cattle, wolves account for less loss than theft -- plain old fashioned cattle rustling.

What is shameful is someone using the name of an organization that is based in Idaho that has and does live with wolves. Are you someone who got banned from their page or something? Ranchers feed only 3%-%5 of Americans, contribute very little to the work force of this country as compared to other businesses, suck up over $200 million in subisides furnished by the American tax payers yet pay in around only 10% of that. There are many, many people in ID, MT, WY, and other wolf states that DO want wolves on the landscape. You don't speak for those people. A national heritage whose time has come and gone, especially trapping. Some people evolve past the 1800's or even 1996 when the wolves were reintroduced into ID but living in the past makes it hard to live in the now. You "witness" only what you want to see, period. And I'm sure half of that is made up anyway.

Very well said!

There is not one shred of truth in his statement. But it is true that the Yellowstone elk herd is lower since the wolves returned. Prior to the reintroduction, excess elk were shot by the park service, like they are in the Rocky Mt. Nat'l Park in CO. However, WY just had one of its top two very successful elk hunting seasons and MT wants to kill more elk because they are overpopulated in some areas of the state. Ranchers in ID want elk killed because they are eating food for their cows. What Freedom 1080 says has been circulated for years, one of the more popular sayings he left out is that wolves stalk kids at bus stops...which is not true either. By the way, 1080 is a poison that used to be used to poison wolves and other predators. It has since been discontinued.

Thank you for doing research on this and posting the data.

Oh, please. You only speak for a very tiny fringe element whose "time has come and gone". The majority of America wants safe regulated food, and a good job. Yeah, I'm speaking for us. Overpopulated wolves will not last in the modern progressive society of 2014, any longer than they did in the 100 years when there were a lot less people.Get used to it. You will not save any wolves.You REALLY need to educate yourself on where your food comes from. Do you think it drops out of the sky or comes from China?Ranchers who are also farmers, feed 100% of Americans, moron. Besides all the dairy and meat products, we grow wheat, barley, oats, corn, soybeans, canola, sugar, potatoes, etc. to name a few, out here in the West. We have (organic) honey beehives that pollinate in our alfalfa fields. All, or a portion of all the food you eat each day, as a consumer, was produced by an American rancher/farmer. All the pet food you feed your animals is produced by ranchers/farmers. What are wolves doing to feed you? The Farm Bill has eliminated most CROP subsidies which were for conservation, storm damages, fire, etc. Those subsidies helped to keep the cost of food prices down. I guess when you are paying $20 for your granola bar, it might hit you.Quit being an ungrateful bigot. I "witness" only what I want to see"? Haha, good grief you are naive. No, dear, I DO NOT want to see what wolves do to animals,it's disgusting, horrific and makes me angry. I guess I could close my eyes but that doesn't change the reality that it happened

Oh, please. You only speak for a very tiny fringe element whose "time has come and gone". The majority of America wants safe regulated food, and a good job. Yeah, I'm speaking for us. Overpopulated wolves will not last in the modern progressive society of 2014, any longer than they did in the 100 years when there were a lot less people.Get used to it. You will not save any wolves.You REALLY need to educate yourself on where your food comes from. Do you think it drops out of the sky or comes from China?Ranchers who are also farmers, feed 100% of Americans, moron. Besides all the dairy and meat products, we grow wheat, barley, oats, corn, soybeans, canola, sugar, potatoes, etc. to name a few, out here in the West. We have (organic) honey beehives that pollinate in our alfalfa fields. All, or a portion of all the food you eat each day, as a consumer, was produced by an American rancher/farmer. All the pet food you feed your animals is produced by ranchers/farmers. What are wolves doing to feed you? The Farm Bill has eliminated most CROP subsidies which were for conservation, storm damages, fire, etc. Those subsidies helped to keep the cost of food prices down. I guess when you are paying $20 for your granola bar, it might hit you.Quit being an ungrateful bigot. I "witness" only what you want to see"? Haha, good grief you are naive. No, dear, I DO NOT want to see what wolves do to animals,it's disgusting, horrific and makes me angry. I guess I could close my eyes but that doesn't change the reality that it happened

lol. Ahhh, there it is: the same predjudiced propaganda "statistic" constantly posted by your ilk, somehow assuming is is a valid argument. I knew you wouldn't disappoint.Why, no. It is not. It is actually laughable; a cow that dies of old age in a state like Alabama(no wolves) has nothing to do with a young healthy cow that is killed by wolves, in a state like Wyoming, with wolves. NO comparison or relevancy at all. Wolves that kill livestock in states infested with wolves, are the top cause of deaths by predators. Can you please post the link for your USDA stat of the wolf-killed livestock, in states with wolves only? Then post one of the cows that die of alligator attacks in states with alligators. lol. I'll be awaiting your reply.90% of the livestock kills are unreported anyway. No one I know has any need to report them now that wolves are delisted, and NO one reports any of their cattle dying of old age or illness, either. How stupid.

why no, Gary, wolves are responsible for 100% of livestock predation by wolves in Western states infested with wolves. I believe you are erroneously citing the bogus stat that refers to ALL deaths of cattle in ALL states, nothing at all to do with wolves killing livestock here. A cow that dies of old age in a state like Alabama(no wolves) has nothing to do with a young healthy cow that is killed by wolves, in a state like Wyoming, with wolves. NO comparison or relevancy at all. Wolves that kill livestock in states infested with wolves, are the top cause of deaths by predators. Can you please post the link for your USDA stat of the wolf-killed livestock, in states with wolves only? 90% of the livestock kills are unreported anyway. No one I know has any need to report them now that wolves are delisted, and NO one reports any of their cattle dying of old age or illness, either. Try agian.

Oh, for pete's sake. All of y'all on the polar extremes of the wolf question, trying to piddle on the other guy's Post Toasties. With the "you and your ilk always do blahblah" and "you and the other liars do such'n'such" back and forths I've lost the ability to tell who is on what side. And both sides of you are quickly numbing me on my give-a-damn scale.

If "Lee Dalton" and you choose to identify yourselves, your choice. I would question your motives. I do not wish to "argue" with you anyway. I do not for my own personal safety after being repeatedly threatened with death and injury by so-called wolflovers. I have never theatened anyone over a disagreement about wolves & never will, be the same cannot be said for your side. Several years ago, I was having a (civil)discussion with a wolflover on a PBS thread about wolves, using my real name. He posted that he wanted to see me "running through the woods, for my life, being shot at". Sorry, but I found that disturbing and soon realized such behavior is typical from wolf lovers. Maybe out of frustration of not saving any wolves, maybe mental illness?

Try brushing up on your reading comprehension, then, "rambler"(btw: "Lee Dalton" wants you to use your REAL name) seems you are having difficulty. I provided you very clear, concise, educated, factual information from someone who lives with wolves: me.Judging by your naivete and spelling errors, I would doubt your credentials as a "historian".This is a link on WIKIPEDIA: the "fact" source for all the "wolf links" that people who do not live with wolves are always citing. Tune out if you wish. You cannot deny the similairities. I say if the shoe fits, wear it:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_GermanyWho ARE these "heavily subsidized" ranchers/farmers? BIGOTED.Ranchers/farmers not only FEED you but are one of the largest taxpaying bases and provide 17% of this nation's jobs. Do you even know WHAT the subsidies are for? They are for CROPS and help keep the food prices down. They have been slashed by the new Farm Bill, so expect to pay a lot more for your food. Educate yourself.Again, what are wolves doing to feed the world, pay taxes and provide jobs?

lol, "We"? Who is "We"? Your contingent of wolf warriors that think by harassing and threatening people that live with wolves, like me, you will somehow save wolves? You will not. I choose anonymity #1: to protect my personal safety from threats and harassment from wolf lovers(yes, I have had many threats) and #2: my name isn't important on a discussion forum such as this. Focus on the discussion and not trying to stalk me. I HAVE disclosed my reasons for commenting on this forum; please review my previous posts. I hate reposting because people are too lazy to read. I would question your motives for wanting my personal information, what I "do" where I live, my real name, etc. I DO live with here wolves and see what they do in Montana and Idaho. Odd that I do not see you asking anyone else commenting here for their identities or what they "do". I personally don't care.Funny, the fact that you choose to use your "real" name does not lend you any more credibilty or believability: are you sure it wasn't 10 or 20 "ranchers"? FYI: just because you see men in a cafe wearing cowboy hats and boots, they aren't always "ranchers". So since you had an indepth discussion with these "ranchers" about wolves, curious as to how many head of livestock did they each have and how many animals have they lost to depredation? How large are their ranches? What are their names? I would know them; at least one or two of them for sure.I will "await your answers".NO ranchers, NONE approve of overpopulated predators and are ok with them killing their expensive animals. What hogwash. How ridiculous for you to even insinuate that. Not even Ted Turner is happy with wolves killing his buffalo, and they are killing a lot ( I know two of his ranch managers, on two of his ranches).Fish & Game has NOT compensated any ranchers for livestock kills recently that I know of, if at all, especially since wolves were delisted. Our neighbors lost 20 cows to wolves several years ago & only recieved a minimal amount that wasn't equal to market value. At least the state trappers killed all the wolves responsible.Where & when was this and how much was he compensated?Compensation doesn't cover the full cost of the care, feed, time, vet bills, etc. of any animal killed by wolves. Did your "rancher" friends tell you that, too?I think you are full of baloney and are making up stories as you go.

"Bear Hunter", is that you? Safe, regulated food, huh? Growth hormone injected, anti-biotic-filled, scrub-fed cattle on public lands that costs US taxpayers over $200 million? And a few hundred million $$ for Wildlife Services? Cattle that roam into national forests, national parks (Bundy, McIrvine...those fine upstanding PUBLIC lands ranchers you mean)? Nope, those ranchers provide only a very small per centage of beef, which is at or near record-high prices right now and most of the workers on those ranches are family members. Oh and Peruvian sheepherders in Idaho. Much of the agricultural work is done by migrant workers. I favor crop farmer moreso than PUBLIC lands ranchers whose cows foul water sources, encroach on habitat for native wildlife, that infect wildlife with diseases (pneumonia spread by domestic sheep to big horn sheep).

And now you have to resort to name-calling? I wasn't referring to crop subsidies but to the ranching subsidies. Oh you only like the nice animals that YOU and your buddies can hunt, right? What some hunters, and especially trappers do to animals is not so pretty and done by choice. Wolves eat to survive. Well those "nice" animals are there, thriving and healthy because of wolves and not overpopulated due to the lack of predators. The Yellowstone elk herd was artificially inflated due to the lack of predators. Are you going to take a sickly elk or a big, healthy one (that is most likely still of breeding age)? Wolves are happy to take the vulnerable ones due to ill health. Over 2 million cows in MT and wolves took 68 in 2011, 2012 (one or the other), and the ranchers compensated market value for confirmed kills, and yet do nothing to protect their livestock. Must be nice to sit back and collect checks. Is it? These reports are out every 5 years and based on ranchers' information. If you disagree with it (oh eeegads, the info is compiled by the dag nab f'dral gubmint, it can't be right!!) then blame the ranchers who provided the info....http://www.wildearthguardians.org/site/PageServer?pagename=priorities_wildlife_war_wildlife_livestock_losses

You gave no facts, nothing educated, nothing verified. You gave an opinion, period. Wolf/wildlife viewing brings money into MT, WY, ID and other wolf states---hotels, motels, campgrounds, gas stations, stores, markets, restaurants, gift shops, cameras-equipment, scopes/binoculars, trail guides, wildlife guides...wolf-wildlife viewing contributes $35 million to the Yellowstone areas, gateway towns. That's what wolves provide financially.

I'd also like to thank National Parks Traveler for using photos for cover shots from two of my friends. Thank you!

living, when you try to discredit part of the information I posted by claiming it compares national and not local numbers, you're wrong.

Try actually getting into the report and reading something besides the title page.

Check out page 8 for example, where you will learn that in Montana, only a tiny percentage of cattle deaths were from predators of all kinds. However, on page 9, we do learn that of predator deaths, wolves did account for more than coyotes or cats. What is not told in these numbers, however, is the fact that when a wolf kill is confirmed, the rancher is reimbursed for the loss.

Here is a link to the Montana state website that records payments for livestock losses:


Instead of emotional rantings, how about posting some facts to support your side?

And if you really have legitimate reasons for remaining anonymous, you can at least tell us where you are from, what your occupation is, why you have the opinions you espouse. What are your qualifications for posting your information? Are you posting facts or merely opinions? Are those opinions based on personal experience, or are you regurgitating someone else's opinions?

lol. What are YOUR qualifications? How arrogant of you. It is obvious you do not know anything about wolves except for the stereotypes and mistruths you read on the internet.

Whether you consider my reasons for remaining anonymous "legitimate" or not, I don't care. Are you the moderator of this forum? Please quit harassing me. Please inform all of the other commenters on here that you want their names and personal info, too.

Since I live with wolves and see what they do, REAL LIFE, I don't need to look at any bigoted propaganda from a wolflover website. Besides, that might be a tiny bit biased, don't ya think? Thanks, but no thanks. Absolutely no relevance to wolf predations in states with wolves. Why can't you comprehend that? Too bad you are so steeped in your predjudices and stereotypes of what you think ranchers are and what they do, that you are afflicted with terminal tunnel-vision. Get out and speak to ranchers that have suffered wolf depradations. Looks like the only "emotional" one here is you and you cannot accept facts I repeatedly put before you.

Once again,it is NOT a fact that ranchers are reimbursed. Please back that up by posting the names and amount of "compensation". Prove it. I will be awaiting your "facts".

Too bad you live in a fantasy world on the internet. Laziness.

I'm awaiting your link for the statistics of cattle killed by wolves only and only in states with wolves. Again, citing a stat about all of the general causes of deaths in livestock in all 50 states has nothing to do with wolves. Please post the most recent numbers, too. Not 4-5 year old figures. Good luck with that. Those stats are only accurate if all ranchers report their losses and none that I know, report anything anymore, since delisting. I'm sure you can make something up though.

I know of a local grazing association that had 30 wolf depredations, confirmed, that were not reported. The wolves were killed. Another ranching friend, had over 20 cows killed by wolves, in 3 months, last year, confirmed, not reported. All the wolves responsible were killed.

What is your real name, "kal007'? Who is Bear hunter?

What are the "rancher" subsidies? I have never heard of those, or know anyone that has recieved those. Please list.Ranchers are NOT reimbursed for any wolf kills. Prove it.

Please 'volunteer' to work on a ranch where there are wolves...for one year. I could provide you with connections to get you started. You would definitely "eat crow", and see how foolish your bigoted stereotypes are concerning ranchers. lol. The farming is mostly done by the ranchers. Educate yourself.

Yes, thanks to wolf-loving, anti-rancher/farmer enviros, like you "trying to "bite the hand that feeds them"; your children and grandchildren will curse nuts like you for trying to destroy the sources of the food they won't be able to afford. All because of wolves and ignorant bigotry. What you are doing is trying to destroy family farms/ranches that produce wholesome, safe food and promoting the large industrialized commercial Ag. operations and skyrocketing food prices.

As far as your false bigoted allegations about grazing, take it up with the BLM who is in charge of overseeing the condition of "public lands". Please tell them you don't want ANY animals defecating in the streams and rivers. Maybe you can put up fladry and warning signs.

Most state leases are surrounded by private property, so you aren't allowed to step foot on them anyway, unless you fly in.Please post a recent unbiased (non-wolflover)"livestock loss report". I personally know of 60 head of cattle lost within a 3 month period, in ONE state with wolves.

As I have stated repeatedly, wolves are delisted, legally hunted and no compensation is paid for livestock, so no wolf kills are reported.

There are hundreds of expensive head of cattle and sheep killed by wolves, every year, not counting the horses and family dogs they also kill. Wolves are opportunistic and kill what is nearby, usually young healthy animals. We see it. Don't need a internet stat to tell us anything else. They do not look at an animal and think about how "happy" they are to kill an old or sick animal. How stupid.

No rancher reports losses anymore so your "statistic" from a predjudiced radical, AR source such as "Wildlife Guardians" means nothing & has zero legitimacy.

Please list the unbiased government link where you got the info about the"$200 million cost" that the hardworking taxpaying Americans grazing cattle on THEIR grazing shares that they pay for, are "costing" America? Since ranchers and farmers are one of the largest tax bases and provide 17% of this country's jobs, and again, feed you and your cat, please explain?

Did you just make that up?

Ranchers also pay taxes on that expensive livestock. Most never have the luxury of retiring & work well into their 80's or while their health permits, continuing to pay taxes into the goverment system and feeding ingrates (like you and your cat), until they die. Quit being such an uninformed bigot.

An emotional subject on which it's hard to find a lot of middle ground, with plenty of hard questions.

Wolves can't be expected to remain within artificially drawn boundaries separating places like Yellowstone from adjacent land, so we find ourselves with difficult questions, such as: Should ranchers, especially those who run cattle on leased public land outside the park, be expected to accept some loses to predation as part of the cost of doing business on public land?

If so, what constitutes an "acceptable" level of loss will be defined a lot differently by a rancher than wildlife supporters. Should expectations of "freedom from wolves" be different on private land vs. public land used for grazing?

Should ranchers be compensated for confirmed predation losses as part of the overall cost of maintaining self-sustaining wolf and bear populations on public lands, including USFS and NPS areas? Should those losses be viewed differently from those due to blizzards, drought, disease or other causes? Tough public policy questions.

Part of the difficulty in answering these questions is the lack of good data. Livingwithwolves criticizes comments based on the lack of current and accurate data...but then describes a number of wolf depredations that were not reported by ranchers to any authorities. They'll have their reasons for failing to report, but right or wrong, that reduces the credibility of complaints by ranchers.

One of many issues – and likely a subject of frustration by both sides in the issue - is the question of "confirmed" wolf depredations. While there's no question about a wolf observed in the act of bringing down a healthy calf, wolves seen feeding on a carcass where the cause of death is unknown is a gray area which will be vigorously debated by both sides.

We shouldn't be surprised there's lot of emotion on both sides of this issue, but it would be helpful if everyone keeps in mind the debate taking place on this site won't change policy one way or the other on this specific issue– it's simply a place to voice opinions—so let's try to do so in a respectful manner.

Thanks, Jim, for a good post.

And, again, here is a link to a MONTANA STATE GOVERNMENT website regarding reimbursement for ranchers. Note that the latest data is year to date 2014. So this is about as up to date as you can get. It's also not information from a wolf lover website.


It's very difficult to try to cite facts in the face of emotional diatribes.

As I see it, the wolves deserve some protection. Certainly within the park boundaries and perhaps into some federal lands. Compensating ranchers for confirmed losses whether on private or public land also seems reasonable.

What I find unreasonable is Speak for Wolves' call to ban grazing on all federal lands and for a ban on all predator hunting. Kal's claim that ranchers feed only 3-5% of Americans is laughable. As to "subsidies" who is actually getting subsidized? The 300 Million amercians that eat beef and lamb, that is who. Claiming the ranchers are subsidized is the equivalent to claiming that construction companies are "subsidized" by the money we spend on roads.

Living--You need to calm down a bit. It is possible to disagree about issues without insulting the person with whom you disagree. One of the reasons I like this site is that we can discuss controversial issues without getting into each other's faces.. Your use of phrases like "wolf-loving anti-rancher/farmer enviros" violates that code


I have to agree with both Rick Smith and ecbuck. Nice to see some sanity in the discussion.

Incidentally some grocery store chains promote the value of grass fed beef. It doesn't come from a feed lot.

In the PC world Rick, "wolf-loving anti-rancher/farmerenviros" is a very accurate description. Bambi is there somewhere. That's the world that all the major issues are discussed. The real is at odds with the distant and virtual. More than just a few range techs having worked with real living ranchers relate and in a few cases become extremely sympathetic to their concerns.

It seems there are 1.3 million cows in Wyoming and around 350,000 sheep. In 2012, there were 157 confirmed livestock kills by wolves (of which 44 were cattle, 112 were sheep, and 1 horse). Ranchers were paid an average of $1243 per head for their loss and Wyoming Fish and Game removed the livestock predating wolves (43 to be exact). (These stats were posted by WFWS. USDA has different stats based on surveys).

In Wyoming, coyotes and grizzly bears kill more livestock than wolves. 7 times as many are killed by weather, At least 2 times as many are killed by poisoning. More cows are stolen in Wyoming than are killed by wolves. 20 times more livestock are killed by disease than by wolves.

It seems to me that some people want to find a convenient enemy to use as a scapegoat. Wolves are an easy target.