18 replies [Last post]
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2009
Posts: 1
This is bad... Really really really bad..

From the Idahostatesman...

An Eagle man was cited Tuesday by Idaho Fish and Game wardens for shooting a wolf outside of an open hunting zone.

The hunter, who was not immediately identified, was issued citations for shooting a wolf in a closed season and shooting from a public road. Witnesses told officers he shot the wolf while standing in the road at the back of his pickup truck.

The wolf was shot about 6 p.m. Sunday in the McCall-Weiser wolf zone, which is closed to wolf hunting.

He called the 24-hour wolf harvest reporting line Tuesday morning and reported that the wolf had been killed in the Sawtooth wolf zone. Later that day he checked in the wolf at the Fish and Game office in the Nampa. He later told officers he thought he was in the Sawtooth wolf zone until he looked at a map back in camp Sunday evening.

An illegal take would be charged to the harvest limit of the zone in which it occurred. In this case, the wolf will be taken out of the McCall-Weiser wolf zone harvest limit.

The wolf is a small female, still a pup. Officers seized the wolf hide and skull, a rifle, camera and tag.

The investigation is ongoing and charges have not been filed with the court.

I'm ashamed to be a hunter today.. What was this guy thinking? While I think a controlled hunt is a good thing for all, this is bad for all.

Offline
Location: Idaho
Joined: 06/01/2004
Posts: 1068
This is bad... Really really really bad..

... let's see how it all plays out. On the other hand, it sends a message that the IFG isn't allowing a free-for-all. I'm a bit curious how the guy got cited for shooting from a road if the gamy wasn't there ... but I guess the rules are different for game laws. In other words, I don't think a policeman would ticket me for j-walking based on a report from my neighbor.

Offline
Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 132
This is bad... Really really really bad..

I SAY KILL THEM ALL THEY ARE KILLING YOUR ELK HERDS LAST I HEARD Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil! Evil!

Offline
Location: Southeast Colorado
Joined: 01/07/2007
Posts: 94
This is bad... Really really really bad..

I'm catching the scent of a troll. No limits on them.

Elkkrazed65's picture
Offline
Location: Moscow, ID
Joined: 09/08/2009
Posts: 7
Wolf Kill

I say that a wolf needs to be killed by the laws that are made to keep asswipes like the new Czar having additional fuel to take away our priveledges to hunt period. It is a shame the guy didn't know where the heck he was at. Also think the wolf tags should not be permitted to nonresidents. Just a thought.

Bull Buster's picture
Offline
Location: Nebraska
Joined: 10/12/2007
Posts: 167
This is bad... Really really really bad..

Elkkrazed65, look at the reveune your state generates from selling nonresident tags. Hunting as a nonresident myself in several states take it as an insult with statements like that.

Tell me why I need to by a nonresident tag to hunt Federal ground. My taxes pay for it just as yours do.

Elkkrazed65's picture
Offline
Location: Moscow, ID
Joined: 09/08/2009
Posts: 7
Wolf hunting

Bull Buster it was not my intent to offend you.  I just think that there are too many people that buy non resident tags and come in to our state and do what they please.  I am not speaking about yourself because you are probably a law abiding hunter and sportsman.  I have just ran into a lot of unscrupulous nonresident hunters who have given hunters a bad name....  If you want to spend the extra dough to come to Idaho to shoot a wolf then by all means do so!

Location: Utah
Joined: 02/24/2003
Posts: 596
This is bad... Really really really bad..
Bull Buster wrote:
Elkkrazed65, look at the reveune your state generates from selling nonresident tags. Hunting as a nonresident myself in several states take it as an insult with statements like that.

Tell me why I need to by a nonresident tag to hunt Federal ground. My taxes pay for it just as yours do.

Now Bull Master I am on your side on this issue but let me say one thing.....the land these animals are on has nothing to do with it. The animals by law are "owned" by the state. The management responsiblity belongs to the state in other words. You can load up in your car right now and walk all over that Federal land today if you like. If you want to hunt a wolf or any other big game species you need a tag from the state that owns the responsiblity of managing that particular species. As a non-res your tax dollars actually do not go towards wildlife management. They go towards land managment which may have an indirect impact on wildlife but it's not a direct connection.

I agree with you though on the non-res tag issue....why would you want to keep those tags out of non-res's hands? You guys need all the help you can get taking out a few of those wolves.

hawkeye270's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Joined: 06/15/2008
Posts: 1862
This is bad... Really really really bad..

As a wildlife management major at Colorado State University I have to say that Rather be Huntin is right on par. And as he points out, this is no reason to ban non-residents from attaining tags. Especially with agencies that generate so much of their budgets from the sale of hunting/fishing licenses.

Now I could see a point about non-residents not being as familiar with zone boundaries and the such. I'm curious, do you have any special course/class/test that you must go through for the wolf hunt. I haven't heard of one but here in Colorado you take an informal sexing course online before hunting mtn lions.

Bull Buster's picture
Offline
Location: Nebraska
Joined: 10/12/2007
Posts: 167
This is bad... Really really really bad..

Rather be Hunting and Hawkeye 270, I can see where you are coming from as the state manages the wildlife in that state but, why not have a permit for U.S. national forest and BLM ground. I'm not saying that the permits should be 25 bucks for everyone but, maybe something like 375 vs 550. After all the animals the state are claiming as their own are being fed by grasses grown on the land the U.S. citizens own. Last I knew ranchers are charged to graze their cattle on forst and blm land why don't the fed's send the states a bill for feeding their animals? just a thought from another perspective.

hawkeye270's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Joined: 06/15/2008
Posts: 1862
This is bad... Really really really bad..

It is just a little more complicated than that. States are not "claiming" wildlife as their own. States own the wildlife within their borders to be held “in trust” for their citizens. That is the way this country has structured wildlife management at the most basic level. And it is very AMERICAN and beautiful. It was structured this way in order to make it difficult for the federal government to veer in the dangerous direction of concentrating access to wildlife resources at the highest level of say... feudal systems like that of Britain inwhich we departed. Thankfully. Your seggestion sounds like the first baby steps towards a modern day "Royal Forest" approach to wildlife management where hunting opportunities were safeguarded for the royalty. On a side note, I already see parellelism between this English system and the modern day movement towards private-land-tens-of-thousands-of-dollars hunts.

When you say, "why not have a permit for U.S. national forest and BLM ground", are you seggesting an additional permit should be paid to the federal government? Or instead of a permit bought through the state?

States are far better suited to manage wildlife within their borders than the lumbering and detached federal bureaucracy because the states are better able to monitor and respond to wildlife needs and threats, and to establish cooperation with landowners and other agencies while recognizing the social values of the residents that regularly (not just during hunting season) interact with wildlife. Keep in mind that it is the Federal government, through uses by various entities of it's federal environmental laws, that has prevented the state of Idaho from managing wolves successfully, like it has with ten big game species including bears and mountain lions for decades.

Ranchers are private entities that can use public (federal/state) land by leasing grazing rights to it. They are a business using public ground to produce it's products so yes... they pay for it. It is the Federal Governement's laws that grant ownership of wildlife to states and entrust them with the responsibility of managing the wildlife "in trust" for their citizens. This is why they don't "send them a bill". As well you are insinuating that every wild animal within a state feeds solely on public ground. Go ask farmers and ranchers around CO if this is true. Go visit the San Luis Valley first.

Once again... We should all be happy as clams that the wastefull, inefficient federal bureaucracy isn't responsible for the management of the majority of the wildlife in this country.

On a lighter note... good luck hunting this fall and I completely understand non-residents frustration with certain comments and perspectives reguarding them. And I also understand the frustration with the price of tags for non-residents as I too, hunt out of state. But it is these high tag fees that allow states to manage the animals.