Albertal Wolf Management

[kcountry]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Shooting from airplanes and helicopters is very effective but SRD frowns on it unless they are doing it themselves. Poisoning is very effective too but not without risks.

Sadly, I don't think hunters will ever make a dent in the wolf population. We basically have unregulated hunting for them now. Trappers can be effective but again that comes with a whole list of challenges. I can't see any meaningful reduction coming without SRD involvement.....or private contractors

I agree 100%, A very good friend of mine Owned a Guiding operation in Northern Alberta for 20years. The only thing they guided for was Moose....In 20 years they only shot 6 Wolves......Very difficult to Hunt.....Just curious to see if any one has tryied hunting them this year by Electronic Calls?

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by kcountry

I agree 100%, A very good friend of mine Owned a Guiding operation in Northern Alberta for 20years. The only thing they guided for was Moose....In 20 years they only shot 6 Wolves......Very difficult to Hunt.....Just curious to see if any one has tryied hunting them this year by Electronic Calls?

This is a true statment but most outfitters dont target wolves they are only hunted by chance!!
We need people out there targeting them not just shooting them if they happen to see them.

[Hagar]

I agree that aerial wolf hunting (cull) would be very difficult and expensive in Alberta.The thick forest and the mountains make this so,unlike areas of the Yukon and Alaska.Not to mention the political side of it.

I have also heard about the shooting of the alfa pair is not a good thing for the same reasons as stated by Sheepguide.

I have hunted wolf for many years when I lived in the Yukon with a small amount of success but not enough to be any better then any other hunter.I got lucky a few times,but the are very smart or wary or both!I have used baits and kill sites but seemed to have more luck at plan old spot and stalk.

It has been said how much difference can a few make.To the big picture,not much.It is a start though.I don't know how much taking a couple wolves can improve game populations but if it is even 1/4 of taking one cougar then it would make a difference.

For example a few years ago I shot a cougar in the area I hunt whitetail.This area is about 50 sq. miles.The deer population was much better for a few years.This was also an area that no one hunts for cougars and it was estimated that there were 5 cats in the area.How does this apply to wolves?It shows how much of a difference the removal of one apex predator can make.Although I haven't had any luck getting another cat in that area I keep looking as I do with wolves.Like any thing else though you have to keep at it.

Can hunters make a difference?In some areas ,yes if enough get out there.

Can it make a difference through out the province?I don't know,there is a lot of area that hunters can't get in to during the winter.

Would more incentives for hunting wolves help?I would think so and it would cost the government less then doing a cull on there own.

[wwbirds]

I agree with much of what has been posted above for from all reports the wolves are on the increase and ungulates are down in many areas the wolf population is up. I can't remember the stats on how many ungulates a single wolf takes in a year but the number is staggering.
Having participated in a M.N.R. wolf cull in northern Ontario many years ago I can also offer a few facts. We were flown into the French River area where wolves were running the frozen river in an otherwise deep snow situation which had deer and moose trapped (essentially) in the yard area. We shot every wolf we saw for 3 days from 4-5 vantage points in the area and as many shooters. Immediate effect was good but as has been pointed out above breeding and litter sizes are somewhat dependant on available food sources and prime habitat. The few remaining wolves reproduced to probably 85% of the orignial population in the first year and probably exceeded the original population density the second year when a shortage of food probably caused them to slow reproduction.
Strychnine has been used very carefully and successfully for years but also kills non target species. 1080 a much more canine specific poison has wider success but is seldom used in Canada (check Africa and Australia for dingo success rates with aerial bait drops in problem areas). One 1080 bait can take out a whole pack of wolves for they convulse vomit and often spit up the bait and it kills the next animal in the pack that picks it up. There is no cure or treatment for 1080 and the animal is dead when they ingest it even if they live for another day or two. 1080 is canine specific in that it takes 8 times the amount of 1080 to kill a feline than a canine and probably 40 times more to kill a human and for some reason birds (raptors feeding on carcasses) can tolerate up to 80 times the amount it takes to kill a member of the dog family. Downside is in a bait drop area the potential for wiping out every wolf, coyote and fox is probable.

[sourdough doug]

I run a trapline in 350 and in the past 4 years have seen a very large increase in the number of wolves there. Initially , there was a large number of deer in the area. This is what I attribute the wolf number increase to. Since that time we have had several harsh winters for the deer and moose, making easy pickings for the wolf, which in turn led to healthy litters. From the trappers view, taking wolves is quite an undertaking for most, although there are those who profess to be exspurts to the nth degree. Then there is the compensation aspect from the presently depressed fur market via the auction house. As much as they would like to thin the wolves as the hunters, there is just not the incentive to do so. Anytime I see one and want to take a poke at him, he's on his way out of Dodge big time. What I am saying is that present hunting practices will not affect their numbers.
Gulo covered most of the bases real well. Out in the Grande Cache area, where they were doing/did the aerial cull, well there was as much sh*t raised by some of the trappers as by anyone else. Them, thinking they were capable of doing the cull and save the cariboo numbers. Yeah right !
I cannot say, presently, what kind of incentive could be proposed that would make me target them more exclusively. My trapline , like many makes no money, so to spend more for not, is not where I am likely to go. There are no solutions to what I've said , just some insite from this trapper.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by sourdough doug

I run a trapline in 350 and in the past 4 years have seen a very large increase in the number of wolves there. Initially , there was a large number of deer in the area. This is what I attribute the wolf number increase to. Since that time we have had several harsh winters for the deer and moose, making easy pickings for the wolf, which in turn led to healthy litters. From the trappers view, taking wolves is quite an undertaking for most, although there are those who profess to be exspurts to the nth degree. Then there is the compensation aspect from the presently depressed fur market via the auction house. As much as they would like to thin the wolves as the hunters, there is just not the incentive to do so. Anytime I see one and want to take a poke at him, he's on his way out of Dodge big time. What I am saying is that present hunting practices will not affect their numbers.
Gulo covered most of the bases real well. Out in the Grande Cache area, where they were doing/did the aerial cull, well there was as much sh*t raised by some of the trappers as by anyone else. Them, thinking they were capable of doing the cull and save the cariboo numbers. Yeah right !
I cannot say, presently, what kind of incentive could be proposed that would make me target them more exclusively. My trapline , like many makes no money, so to spend more for not, is not where I am likely to go. There are no solutions to what I've said , just some insite from this trapper.

Sourdough Doug,

Thanks for you input.

Redarding the economics of trapping wolves, would a guaranteed price (bounty) for the skull increase the trappers ability to put more time into wolves. What would that price be? I'm thinking along the lines outfitters are using in B.C.

[Vindalbakken]

That is the catch. A targeted program at problem packs could get the desired effect, but at what cost? How much do you need to pay a trapper to get him to dedicate his effort to the success of the cause? Does APOS and AFGA together have the will and the money? As near as I know it is legal to buy a wolf pelt from a trapper is it not? No bounty required, just a price per pelt for the right wolves.

[walking buffalo]

Working with trappers is one direction that the gov. can watch from the sideline (and provide location, pop. info), while private groups do the work.

AFGA, ABA, OPOS, municipalities, corporations, individual outfitters, and individuals could direct bounty resources to the trappers to purchase wolf parts. All legal.

B.C. has the same wolf issue we are having in AB, and bounties are being paid privately to help support their efforts.

Trapping won't solve the problem, but it can help.

[Knotter]

I'm late to this party. I missed lotsa fun. I see there are lots of stong feelings about who should foot the bill for wolf study/control. That's a good thing for sure - provided it's moving toward a solution. As I see it, (never a good start) Tthe greatest benficiaries of wolf control are hunters and this is going to be a tough sell in the political arena for even the most ardent pro hunting politician. It's especially difficult in those in ridings where the wildest places are mac's stores and money mart's. I like what some states have done with their "earn your buck" programs aimed at managing populations of deer that have exploded over recent years. The gist of these are - having to shoot a doe or two before you can shoot a buck That said - deer are nothing like wolves but perhaps hunters ARE the solution (at least in part) in key areas where ungulate populations are crashing. Perhaps we may see some "earn your bull/ram" incentives out there or by way of a bounty on wolves. A bounty certainly engages the trapper's economic motives. I know it's simplistic but if the problem is economic - no policy can really fix it. If anything, the policy is usually misguided.

WE just can't call it a bounty. Perhaps Game Management Equalization Payment would work.

I just thought I'd throw a big heavy boomerang into the fray. I will now return to my foxhole for the shelling.

[sourdough doug]

WB, Any incentive would be more than what there is. However, as already mentioned, the pack has to be substantially reduced and then maintained otherwise we're just blowing smoke.
Vindal, Only a processed fur could be purchased from a trapper, not a raw one. There one runs into the situation of having to pay for the tanning of it and then try to find a buyer for the fur, in whatever configuration. It's pretty hard to presell something like this on a regular basis. Sometimes, outfitters have a client who might be interested and then they want to dicker or will pay you or will send you a cheque when they get home.. I'm sure you see where this is leading..
I'm not sure what BC trappers are doing in this regard, but I do know that they did work much closer with their outfitters than here in AB.. I should give some trapper friends in BC a call and get more info..

[ganderblaster]

You have a point Knotter I believe thier is a shoot a predator before an ungalate program in some Scandinavian jurisdictions as well not saying I support this but it is definitely something to think on

[Vindalbakken]

Yes, bounty is a red flag catchword, which is why I suggested that no bounty is required, simply offer to buy the pelts for X dollars. This would be a financial aid program for an industry in difficult times. The AFGA could set up a chairman and committee for the Wolf Pelt Acquisition Program to determine the value of pelts from various geographic areas of the province. The trappers would sell direct to AFGA instead of through auction. AFGA could sell tanned wolf pelts through the online store. Pelts would be identified with the WMU of origin and hunters could assist the program by buying a wolf pelt from their favorite area. Of course any interested parties who wanted to donate funds to the acquisition program would be welcomed along with their input in determining where pelts of the most value could be found.

[Vindalbakken]

Originally Posted by ganderblaster

You have a point Knotter I believe thier is a shoot a predator before an ungalate program in some Scandinavian jurisdictions as well not saying I support this but it is definitely something to think on

Anything in place in a Scandinavian country would be at the sole discretion of the farmer who owns the land/animals or the hunt club to which he sold them.

[JustinC]

As far as I read this is they are paying pretty good money for wolfs. why wouldnt you trap them?


http://www.furharvesters.com/saleresults.htm

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sourdough doug

WB, Any incentive would be more than what there is. However, as already mentioned, the pack has to be substantially reduced and then maintained otherwise we're just blowing smoke.
Vindal, Only a processed fur could be purchased from a trapper, not a raw one. There one runs into the situation of having to pay for the tanning of it and then try to find a buyer for the fur, in whatever configuration. It's pretty hard to presell something like this on a regular basis. Sometimes, outfitters have a client who might be interested and then they want to dicker or will pay you or will send you a cheque when they get home.. I'm sure you see where this is leading..
I'm not sure what BC trappers are doing in this regard, but I do know that they did work much closer with their outfitters than here in AB.. I should give some trapper friends in BC a call and get more info..

The outfitter I worked for the last few years has a trap line in the Toad River, Tetsa River B.C area and he does just what you say. Any wolves he gets he tans then sells to hunters. The tanning is done cheap as he sends alot of buisness to the taxidermist that does his tanning. It would be tough for the average trapper to do this on there own as you say there isnt a large income off a trapp line.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Vindalbakken

Yes, bounty is a red flag catchword, which is why I suggested that no bounty is required, simply offer to buy the pelts for X dollars. This would be a financial aid program for an industry in difficult times. The AFGA could set up a chairman and committee for the Wolf Pelt Acquisition Program to determine the value of pelts from various geographic areas of the province. The trappers would sell direct to AFGA instead of through auction. AFGA could sell tanned wolf pelts through the online store. Pelts would be identified with the WMU of origin and hunters could assist the program by buying a wolf pelt from their favorite area. Of course any interested parties who wanted to donate funds to the acquisition program would be welcomed along with their input in determining where pelts of the most value could be found.

Nice. And well worded.

Worded? Is that a word?

[sourdough doug]

[QUOTE=JustinC;513136]As far as I read this is they are paying pretty good money for wolfs. why wouldnt you trap them?

The way I read the sales figures, for an eastern wolf the AVERAGE price was $75. The western wolves are not any more. When was the last time you did a stinking wolf, to taxidermy spec for that kind of money and time involved ? Based on the time factor alone there would be more money in doing squirrels.

[JustinC]

[QUOTE=sourdough doug;513145]

Originally Posted by JustinC

As far as I read this is they are paying pretty good money for wolfs. why wouldnt you trap them?

The way I read the sales figures, for an eastern wolf the AVERAGE price was $75. The western wolves are not any more. When was the last time you did a stinking wolf, to taxidermy spec for that kind of money and time involved ? Based on the time factor alone there would be more money in doing squirrels.

I need to go to bed I miss read that I thought it was $230 for a wolf. not $73. Sorry for the incorrect post

[Vindalbakken]

Name a price doug. Ballpark it. $400 was coming to my head.

[sourdough doug]

Sorry V, but it's getting late for me t and I don't quite understand what you are saying .
No problem Justin , done the same thing myself

[Vindalbakken]

That's OK, catch it tommorow. What price would it take to get trappers to actively target wolf populations on their line.

[sourdough doug]

Hey V, if you were serious about $4, I'm wide awake now.
I was about 1/2 that serious for starters. Some wolves as with all critters are worth more than others, that's why they give the average price on auction sale sheets. At the same time, prices vary from sale to sale, just like in the real world. A realistic base price would make things feasible.... have a good nite, that's where I'm headed

[209x50]

Originally Posted by wwbirds

I agree with much of what has been posted above for from all reports the wolves are on the increase and ungulates are down in many areas the wolf population is up. I can't remember the stats on how many ungulates a single wolf takes in a year but the number is staggering.
Having participated in a M.N.R. wolf cull in northern Ontario many years ago I can also offer a few facts. We were flown into the French River area where wolves were running the frozen river in an otherwise deep snow situation which had deer and moose trapped (essentially) in the yard area. We shot every wolf we saw for 3 days from 4-5 vantage points in the area and as many shooters. Immediate effect was good but as has been pointed out above breeding and litter sizes are somewhat dependant on available food sources and prime habitat. The few remaining wolves reproduced to probably 85% of the orignial population in the first year and probably exceeded the original population density the second year when a shortage of food probably caused them to slow reproduction.
Strychnine has been used very carefully and successfully for years but also kills non target species. 1080 a much more canine specific poison has wider success but is seldom used in Canada (check Africa and Australia for dingo success rates with aerial bait drops in problem areas). One 1080 bait can take out a whole pack of wolves for they convulse vomit and often spit up the bait and it kills the next animal in the pack that picks it up. There is no cure or treatment for 1080 and the animal is dead when they ingest it even if they live for another day or two. 1080 is canine specific in that it takes 8 times the amount of 1080 to kill a feline than a canine and probably 40 times more to kill a human and for some reason birds (raptors feeding on carcasses) can tolerate up to 80 times the amount it takes to kill a member of the dog family. Downside is in a bait drop area the potential for wiping out every wolf, coyote and fox is probable.

New Zealand seeds a version of 1080 from the air to control Australian possums. It works well for them.

[Young Eldon]

Many potential mangement ideas expressed in this and past threads. Here's my summary of what could possibly be done this year:

Our potential to reduce wolf densities in the wooded portions of Alberta for the purpose of increasing ungulate densities pretty much depends on our ability to increase hunter and trapper success rates. ASRD budgets and the lack of political will for wolf management will not get this job done. In fact, the latest Cabinet shuffle and budget likely made this job tougher for ASRD (budget cut, removal of strychnine for cattle/wolf problem resolution).
The options seem to be these:
1) Have an interested non government organization (NGO) establish a hot line where wolf sighting information (tracks, howling, kill sites, den sites, rendezvous sites, loafing areas, travel routes, ungulate concentrations) can be recorded and provided to the public. This could improve the chances of finding wolves on any given day.
2) Expand the area and fees where incentives for taking wolves are applicable. Paying hunters and trappers incentives is maintaining higher success rates but they likely need to be higher in order to reduce wolf densities enough to allow ungulate recoveries. The current incentives likely need to be increased to above $500. This requires that more people get behind the program by providing more cash. This is quite feasible if more clubs and associations would kick in funds.
3) NGOs provide wolf hunting/trapping information to the public by web sites, seminars, presentations at monthly meetings, etc.
4) ASRD to ensure that wolf hunting/trapping regulations are kept liberal in areas where wolf management requires lowering of wolf densities. Baiting of wolves requires a lot of bait to be successful. The allowing of electronic calls was a good example of how ASRD could increase hunter success at minimal cost to the Department. However, it is not going to increase hunter success rates enough to lower wolf densities by itself! Introducing telemetry assisted wolf hunting could effectively manage wolves but it would require a large budget and public acceptance that this government and most NGOs lack the will to generate.

[walking buffalo]

Welcome, and looking forward to your input, B.C.Outdoors.

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showth...t=46020&page=4
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showth...d=1#post627608

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Young Eldon

Many potential mangement ideas expressed in this and past threads. Here's my summary of what could possibly be done this year:

Our potential to reduce wolf densities in the wooded portions of Alberta for the purpose of increasing ungulate densities pretty much depends on our ability to increase hunter and trapper success rates. ASRD budgets and the lack of political will for wolf management will not get this job done. In fact, the latest Cabinet shuffle and budget likely made this job tougher for ASRD (budget cut, removal of strychnine for cattle/wolf problem resolution).
The options seem to be these:
1) Have an interested non government organization (NGO) establish a hot line where wolf sighting information (tracks, howling, kill sites, den sites, rendezvous sites, loafing areas, travel routes, ungulate concentrations) can be recorded and provided to the public. This could improve the chances of finding wolves on any given day.
2) Expand the area and fees where incentives for taking wolves are applicable. Paying hunters and trappers incentives is maintaining higher success rates but they likely need to be higher in order to reduce wolf densities enough to allow ungulate recoveries. The current incentives likely need to be increased to above $500. This requires that more people get behind the program by providing more cash. This is quite feasible if more clubs and associations would kick in funds.
3) NGOs provide wolf hunting/trapping information to the public by web sites, seminars, presentations at monthly meetings, etc.
4) ASRD to ensure that wolf hunting/trapping regulations are kept liberal in areas where wolf management requires lowering of wolf densities. Baiting of wolves requires a lot of bait to be successful. The allowing of electronic calls was a good example of how ASRD could increase hunter success at minimal cost to the Department. However, it is not going to increase hunter success rates enough to lower wolf densities by itself! Introducing telemetry assisted wolf hunting could effectively manage wolves but it would require a large budget and public acceptance that this government and most NGOs lack the will to generate.

Thanks Eldon,

Glad you took the time to write this out.

Introducing telemetry assisted wolf hunting could effectively manage wolves but it would require a large budget and public acceptance that this government and most NGOs lack the will to generate.

SRD already has spent the money on GPS collaring wolves. They would just have to share the info. IMO the resistance to releasing this data would be from individual w/i the dept., especially those who have a vested interest regarding their pet studies.

[Rantastic]

this may seem stupid but I personally dont hunt for wolves cuz I have no idea how to go about doing it... what if a very experienced wolf hunter toured alberta or had just a couple big seminars on wolf hunting and locating. I would gladly go out after hunting season when no one has anything better to do and hunt for wolves... a bounty would certaintly help cover costs and entice more hunters but I for one would prefer an afternoon with a pro before I felt confident gettin out there...

And as for the lots of bait required comment... What does The province do with Road kill? is that a feasable option to use roadkill form hunting season as bait in target areas ?

[wolfkiller]

Originally Posted by sheepguide

This is a true statment but most outfitters dont target wolves they are only hunted by chance!!
We need people out there targeting them not just shooting them if they happen to see them.

More people like me,my dad and my uncle. I cant believe some people are just realizing the wolf problem.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by crazy_fool1

this may seem stupid but I personally dont hunt for wolves cuz I have no idea how to go about doing it... what if a very experienced wolf hunter toured alberta or had just a couple big seminars on wolf hunting and locating. I would gladly go out after hunting season when no one has anything better to do and hunt for wolves... a bounty would certaintly help cover costs and entice more hunters but I for one would prefer an afternoon with a pro before I felt confident gettin out there...

And as for the lots of bait required comment... What does The province do with Road kill? is that a feasable option to use roadkill form hunting season as bait in target areas ?

Road kill is a hot commodity up here and now with the ungulate population down there certainly isn't the road kill around like winters past.

[Robmcleod82]

I hate to be this guy but..... I am an avid predator hunter, and try as I might I have not managed to kill a wolf but I will keep trying. Now that said as far as I am aware the predator/prey ratios are cyclic so as much as it sucks that the wolves are doing a number on the elk and deer and all the other 4 legged big game critters once the wolves deplete there food source there numbers will drop dramatically and the prey species will rebound will they not? I think it is a little bit naieve to think that we can kill off a majority of the wolf population. Maybe I just do something wrong but I have worked in the patch for over a decade and I do a ton of traveling around the province and I have only ever seen 5 wolves in my life. Most people will have a similer story. I just dont think killing them all will solve anything mother nature will sort it out before we will. just my two cents now I am sure the abuse will begin