Grizzly mauls sheepherder; kills dogs, sheep

Dandy example Art, the reintroduction of the Canadian wolf is just another example of a means to run the ranchers out of business, stop hunting and a whole slew of land grabbng all in the name of a wolf that was brought down to the lower 48 illegally. The USFWS and their partners, the Defenders of Wildlife have been running the show from the start and they still are. How can it be that everytime the USFWS goes to delist there is always some loophole which allows the Defenders of Wildlife to sue and have the wolves relisted. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out, after the third or fourth delist/relist. Check out this info on "What they didn't tell you about wolf Recovery."

http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Web...e_Outdoorsman 26 January 2008 full report.pdf

http://washingtonwolf.info/

wolfbait
 
The absence of guns with the sheepherders has to to do with the trouble from the federal government if they kill a wolf or grizzly to protect the flock.
Click to expand...

The trouble is if ranchers start to pre-emptively kill predator animals. This situation was very different. There was an attack. If a wild animal is actually attacking the flock, less alone a human, you shoot it.
 
It will come down to SSS, if it hasn't already. One thing they're also scaling back on is F&G officers.
And for the record, I've known many sheepherders that carried guns.
 
You know, I wrote a whole page on this before I pulled my head out and realized it had become a political post rather than anything to do w/ hunting. I think it is unfortunate that this happened but do not believe that many here have a real grasp on the issues at stake. Perhaps it should be moved to another venue so that wemight talk to the issues w/o getting slapped.
elkman06
 
What is more important- Federal Wildlife laws or human occupational health and safety?

I agree, sending shepherds out without at least a rifle for personal safety is crazy.

If she is worried about shepherds shooting Bear at long range why not provide them with a shotgun with rifled slugs?
 
Seems to me that while we've spoken more to ranching than hunting, this issue of ESA protection affects hunters and/or hunting guides as well. Yes, it's political, but it does directly affect us as hunters.

As long as folks stay courteous and polite and focussed, omitting a bunch of anecdotal vignettes and "merely noise" harumphing, I don't see why we can't let it run for a while.
 
Okayyyy,

First, Most of the shepherds in this state are aliens. Basque more accurately. Legal or not?? Legal to posess fireams??? Not much chance of them sueing Ms. Thoman. They work for about $6-800 clams per month plus food. These workers would normally have a hard time even expressing themselves to the authorities as most don't even speak english. How in the world could they maintain their composure in the world of lawyers?

Secondly, I am no fan of ranching per se..but, they should not have to protect their livestock w/ weapons. We taxpayers will ultimately foot the bill over this. More subsidies,,welfare if you ask me. We allready pay for govt trappers to do this. They have been actively killing wolves in the aforementioned areas for about 5 years now. We also have been being taxed in record setting totals($) to protect livestock the last few years.

Thirdly, the bears were here first. Yep, true, the rest of us immigrants need to clear out. I'll follow you.

Fourth, The Feds have mandated we have the critters, they have imposed a back east and west mentality on the cute and fuzzy little guys and yet reject any management plan that the State of Wyoming has put forth while mandating we take them over. I personally want to see beavers resettled back into the Potomac river, and see their slides and cut down trees there,,it's only natural, right? I don't care if it looks like crap.

Fifth, the State G&F has little input in this,,see number four. Also, Wyomings' G&F is controlled by the top, most powerful ranchers in the state. If they could, we would wipe them out again(wolves). Meanwhile, they look at us hunters as pondscum because we wanted a right to carry a sidearm while bow hunting. They would change that rule back if they could. Our local division is growing in personnell by 2-3 officers and biologists each year.

Lastly, I think it is a crying shame that we hunters have to fear,,yes fear for our safety, (personal or financial) based off of the fact that we choose to recreate somewhere other than the local tavern. I have friends who have their camps raided by bears, regularly. Take all of the necessary precautions people.

The reality of the situation is this: We hunters will continue to be pawns in a much larger game while all of the players take our money in the form of taxes, licenses, etc. I believe it will take real activism on our part to maintain our way of life and liberty. This crosses political boundaries folks. It really is important to you as a hunter to follow what changes take place in this nation.

elkman06
 
Do we know if Mesa and Tejeda are legal citizens?

This sounds to me like it could be a case of an employer taking advantage of illegal aliens. How many folks would accept working such a job unarmed??

Fortunately, reports say that Tejeda is expected to recover. According to reports, it was 2 am in the morning, and Tejeda approaching the mother grizzly and her cubs as they were busily feeding on a carcass.

He really is very lucky to be alive, in my opinion. You get between a mother Grizzly and her feeding her cubs, and you are asking to be removed from the gene pool.

See this updated report:

http://www.jhnewsandguide.com/article.php?art_id=5073

What should the Game and Fish Department do about this mother grizzly?

--
 
I've never understood the "bears were here first" basis for controlling humans. We should quit growing wheat and corn and give all that land back to the bison?

Strong homo sap groups run off weak homo sap groups. Been going on since Noah's Ark ran aground. But strong or weak, homo sap's gotta make a living, and critters gotta give way. That's called "reality" as well as "history".

Only an uber-rich society where luxurious living is the norm--and that's for sure the U.S. of A.--can try to mess around and shun reality via laws and regulations.

So a generation moved in and created an eco-system suitable for raising beef and mutton to feed people. And wool for clothing. Now, for the third or fourth generation of those providers, our own government is instituting a reversion of a healthy eco-system into an unhealthy eco-system.

Over time, then, as the little towns dry up and as farmers and ranchers are forced out by economic hard times, how do we as hunters have access to local knowledge and local infrastructure support when on our hunting trips?
 
Maybe this was a wake-up call on priorities. I would bet she didn't want to deal with the feds over shooting wolves or bears while protecting her livestock that are protected under the endangered joke list. Why has the ESA become a joke? Because of the abuses of this law and its intentions. Through the ESA the Canadian Gray wolf was introduced. The Canadian Gray wolf was not even close to extinction in the USA. Most states had a spattering of their native wolves, which if left alone would have repopulated into a viable native wolf population. Instead, the Canadian Gray was introduced. A wolf that has killed the native wolves, decimated the big game herds, killed livestock whether on public or private land, and in many cases no action has been taken to correct the problem wolves. No management of wolves period. The feds and the Defenders of Wildlife brought these wolves into the lower 48 illegally, they have lied and cheated from the very start and still are. Why are they above the law???:mad::mad: Because no one is holding them accountable.
 
Last edited:
There are a couple million people living throughout the whole wolf recovery area, it doesn't make much sense to me to talk about giving it back the predators.

In my opinion the predators should be managed to fit into the modern world in a manner that's compatable with the last 70 years of history in the west.
 
“We have had a nightmare,” she said of the W&M Thoman Ranches’ forest allotments on the Upper Green. “Nothing but grizzlies and wolves all summer long.”

So why would you continue to place your sheep and cattle in a area that you know contains wolves and grizzlies? It's a wilderness area, where else should the large carnivores be? It's not like the bear left the wilderness area and went down to the ranch house and did this.
On the other hand, just kill all of the predators,cougars,bears,wolves and wolverines.Then you can start on the bocats,coyotoe' fox',pine martins.Then it will be safe for the Sierra Club members.
 
So why would you continue to place your sheep and cattle in a area that you know contains wolves and grizzlies?
Click to expand...

You have to realize that these ranchers have been leasing the allotments for many years. Change to their business doesn't just happen. They will go until it becomes economically unfeasible. That means that the government either, quits paying them for their losses or ceases to lease that piece of ground. Other allotments don't just spring up.You can't just up and move 1000 sheep somewhere easily. There has to be somewhere for them to go.
You also have to understand ranching here. Few ranchers have enough deeded ground to justify the size of herds they maintain.. By leasing government land they are able to feed their cattle/sheep very cheaply on you and my public land grasses. They pay a pittance for this as compared to what it would actually feed the animals or to purchase deeded acreage to do the same. Then with the government paying depredation payments to them, they do well.

It would be like the government paying you an extra $10.00 per hour on top of what your employer pays you. You would be hesitant to make any changes also.

It is a shame that these men got caught up in this. I also don't blame them on the dog part. I had a guy give me a bunch of crap about my Labrador being in my bow hunting camp as he thought it inhumane for me to tie him up during the day while I hunted. He was sure a bear or cat would come into my camp an eat him. Also he commented that if a bear or cat approached at night, that my dog would take the brunt of the attack. I calmly agreed, and then reminded him that while I love my dog, at the end of the day,,better him than me.
elkman06
 
The government set up the whole leasing system for BLM and Forest Service lands in the 1800s. People thus developed lifestyles and occupations in accordance with government policy.

"Multiple Use" has since become a mantra in recent decades, adding recreation and wildlife preservation, after over a century of mostly just mining, logging and ranching--and, of course, hunting.

Now there has been change in the policy, but the consequences to the people of the area have not been honestly addressed. People who have acted in good faith are bearing the brunt of the changes, with no recompense for the negative impacts on their lives.

A rancher may have what's believed to be a low-cost per-acre lease, but he has to invest in any pens, water wells and troughs, and fencing. Private-land leases have all those items included. And, in general, public lands don't have the carrying capacity as the private lands of the more eastern and southern states. East of I-35 and south of I-30, it doesn't take but a few acres per cow/calf (animal unit) whereas in much of the federal areas it's 20 to 40 or more acres per animal unit. Some public lands (and private lands in western Texas) can run as many animal units per section as there are inches of annual rainfall--and a section is 640 acres.

Generally, ranching is one of the lowest rates of return on the investment value for any occupation there is. Well, this side of picking up aluminum cans along a highway. Bottomline net/net on a feeder calf is not much over $100, time you amortize the mama cow and figure all the expenses. In modern America, $100K is just a "decent" income, not wealth. So if you're in 30-acre country and wanna make $100K, you're needing how many acres? 30,000? Sounds big, doesn't it?

Which, Dearly Beloved, is why those ranchers who can do so will shift some focus onto high-dollar deer hunts. Much better cash flow for not near as much work.
 
Wolfbait:

I have been trying to stay out of the back and forth of this thread but your post urges me to jump in.

You make some wild assertions that don't pass the smell test.

Do you have any facts or sources to back up your statements about remnant populations, the introduction of the Canadian wolf or the purported illegality?

I didn't think so.

However, if you do, I'd appreciate you coughing them up. I'm not sayin' your wrong, I'm just tryin' to keep it real...........
 
Last edited:
Most states had a spattering of their native wolves
Click to expand...

It's long been a contention at least in our State,,via the ranching industry that wolves allready existed in our ecosystem. Proof, pretty hard to come by unfortunately.

I would bet she didn't want to deal with the feds over shooting wolves or bears while protecting her livestock that are protected under the endangered joke list.
Click to expand...
I would agree w/ this whole heartedly. I would venture a guess that these type of events are investigated w/ all the interest of many murder scenes. The difference being that the accused had better have a pile of physical evidence on his behalf.

why those ranchers who can do so will shift some focus onto high-dollar deer hunts. Much better cash flow for not near as much work.
Click to expand...

Which definitely points to maintaining a viable relationship w/ the locals as opposed to corporate ranching. Even though I've said some strong things about them here, I realize they aren't necessarily wealthy. I once gained access to a ranch for a moose hunt by supplying the rancer a method to purchase a part for his swather at a very discounted price due to my connections in the hydraulic supply industry. I also fixed his hired hands' transmission. Amazing how well a turbo 400 shifts once you put vacuum to it.

Again, we as hunters owe it to ourselves to get involved whenever you see notice for a public meeting, get a public comment card in the mail and also challenge the State and Feds in a decent manner.
I once got a inpromptu meeting w/ 7 officials from the local Forest Service office over a road closure program. I did this by walking in the front door on a Tuesday morning. Of course I prefaced it w/ a letter to the editor of the Saratoga Sun, two weeks before.
elkman06
 
It's long been a contention at least in our State,,via the ranching industry that wolves allready existed in our ecosystem. Proof, pretty hard to come by unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I am looking at the 1959 edition of "Mammals of North America" by Hall and Kelson. It is a two volume set that is pretty much nothing but geographic distributions and records with some brief taxonomic descriptions. H&K show records of 3 subspecies of wolves in Wyoming that have been documented historically.
 
Agree with the wolf in Wyo population.

Did water resources research work in the back country from Meeteetse to Dubois to Pinedale for about 6 years in the eighties.

Never actually saw a wolf in that time but saw lots of sign and heard lots of lore from the ranchers. Particularly at the top of the Greybull River drainage and the headwaters of the Wind River north and east of Dubois.

I don't understand why Wyo cannot work out their deal with the FED to put in a season the way Montana and Idaho have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top