Yellowstone Is Dead

HunterHarry

Long Time Member
Messages
5,003
The video Yellowstone Is Dead was released today. This is a documentary of wolf introduction from the beginning to present day including the USFWS cover ups, the DOW' hand in introduction, the impact of wolves on our ecosystem and everything in between. DVDs are $16 plus $4 shipping and handling for a total of $20. This is a must see video for sportsmen and outdoor enthusiasts.
With the pro wolf organizations wanting to place wolves in all of the lower 48 states this will be coming to a forest near you very soon.

Previews of Yellowstone Is Dead can be found at

http://savewesternwildlife.org/

To order the video use this link

http://yellowstone-is-dead.myshopify.com/products/yellowstone-is-dead
 
Can somebody send me an illegal bootlegged copy?:D

I don't care if they're big or small!
If they throw lead I like em all!
 
I know I am going to take some heat for this...here goes nothing..

Something like this should be given away for free.. too as many people as possible.. they should try to get this aired on PBS stations... it should be on youtube the whole thing not just a preview..I know it cost money to film and produce.. however there will be a lot of people that will not pay for this...take donations and give the dvd away... it should be given away free at the big hunter expos......

just my opinion.
 
I will make it four in a row! They would be much better off getting the real message out to the masses doing exactly what was mentioned in the previous posts.
 
I will buy it and show atleast 100 people this video. Everyone of you guys need to do the samething. Let's get er done....
 
I visited Yellowstone for the first time last summer. We spent 3 days touring all areas of the park looking for wildlife and seeing the sights. I expected to see elk all over the place but only saw one group next a lodge on their grass.
I talked to a buddy that is on some Yellowstone committee and he told me that there used to be 50-75000 elk in the park. The numbers decreased after the wolves were introduced. I asked him why I didn't see any elk and he said lowwer numbers and they are hiding. I don't know what the numbers are now but if you want to see elk, don't go to Yellowstone.
 
Man made ecological disaster with the reintroduction of wolves into the Yellowstone ecosystem and incredibly there are calls for still more wolf reintroductions. Sportsmen must continue to make their voices heard to
stop this madness by putting pressure on government, business, and or-
ganizations to 1) delist, 2) stop all other reintroductions, and 3) establish hunting seasons. Only then will we avert the tragedy that has befallen the Yellowstone ecosystem.

Eldorado
 
I was out through the Park one time for 1 1/2 days in 98 and even that early in the introduction of the wolves we hardly saw anything but bison and busloads of Japanese running around with videocams around their necks and a camera in their hand!!! I actually felt more like I was visiting their country than them the US! If it was like that just a few years afetr the introduction started, it's hard to imagine what it must be like out there now. All I remember is how much forest was gone from the big fire a few years earlier, no animals, and lots of foreigners having a ball.
 
Honestly, they are only preaching to the choir. Most of the people that hunt those states(MT,ID,WY), and im sure the majority of the hunters that hunt the western U.S. know about this. Ill bet there is some information in there that we havent heard before, but we already know what side we are fighting for. I agree 100%, this should be shown on local television stations every so often. To get to the people that have NO CLUE this is going on. Not sell it to the people that already know about this. Why would people that dont hunt buy this? Heck even wildlife enthusiasts probably wouldnt buy it; but they would watch it on tv if they stumbled onto it flippin through the channels.
 
Yep, PBS channels would be the best place to get exposure to the throngs that really need to see it!
 
I was there mid October, Elk, Bison all over the place. Saw Grizzly too.

Obviously there aren't the numbers there once were but we saw enough to be going back as part of my WY Antelope hunt.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-16-11 AT 12:32PM (MST)[p]larrbo,

Better recheck your "facts" regarding 50-75,000 elk in Yellowstone.

Thats a lie...the GY herd topped out at about 20-21,000 and was way over-objective.

Yellowstone is dead...yet people flocked to the park to whack six points off the roads this year just outside the park boundary.

Strange............
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-16-11 AT 12:45PM (MST)[p]Hey BuzzH---I just got word from an Idaho resident on another website that the Feds have just dropped their wolf lawsuit against Wyoming and want to get together and get this ##### straightened out so Wyoming can do their own management thing!!! That's all I know so far, but I'm going to start looking to see what goes, but thought I'd get this out on this thread as I just got the email!


Just Found This Posted On The Net:

Wolf bargain in the works
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service drops a court appeal and will look again at Wyoming?s lobo plan.

print page | email editor

By Cory Hatch, Jackson Hole, Wyo.
March 16, 2011


Wyoming and the federal government will head back to the negotiating table after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed with a court decision to reconsider Wyoming?s wolf plan.

The agency Monday withdrew its appeal of the court decision. U.S. District Court Judge Alan Johnson in Cheyenne last year said the Fish and Wildlife Service ignored science when it rejected Wyoming?s plan.

?We will continue ongoing negotiations with Wyoming to reach agreement on a wolf management plan that satisfies the Endangered Species Act,? acting Fish and Wildlife Director Rowan Gould said in a statement Tuesday. ?Rather than lose more time in court with an appeal that won't help resolve the problem, the Service looks forward to working on a plan that can meet the state?s needs while ensuring maintenance of a viable and sustainable recovered wolf population that is connected to other populations in Montana and Idaho.?

At issue is Wyoming?s law and plan that would allow wolves to be killed by any means at any time in roughly 88 percent of the state.

Only in northwestern Wyoming would wolves be managed as trophy game, where they could be hunted according to regulation and season.

Today, wolves, remain protected by the federal Endangered Species Act. They were restored to Idaho and the Yellowstone area starting in 1995 with the goal of turning over management to states once established in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho.

Gould said state rule is still the goal. ?We strongly believe that the recovered Northern Rocky Mountain distinct population segment of gray wolves is most appropriately managed by states and tribes under approved state management plans,? Gould said.

Wyoming politicians, including Gov. Matt Mead, applauded the decision.

?I thought the judge?s ruling was a strong one, and I think this action by the agency may be a sign that the service is willing to look at Wyoming?s plan in a real way and accept what Wyoming people want,? Mead said.

?We are trying to work in a spirit of cooperation and we are cautiously optimistic that we may get somewhere,? Mead said. ?But, as I always say, this is a process and we've had our hopes dashed before. So we are moving cautiously, but in an optimistic fashion, to see whether we can get something done.?

Dropping the lawsuit will help solve the wolf issue. U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi said. ?I was encouraged by acting Director Gould?s comments on the appropriateness of state and tribal management of wolves,? Enzi said in a statement. ?That's a good place for the negotiations to start back up again. It's also a good place for the negotiations to end. I hope both sides can swiftly reach agreement.?

The nationwide delisting of wolves should be an Obama administration priority, U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis said. ?Today?s decision by the USFWS is a positive step,? she said. ?Governor Mead?s negotiations provide the most promising way forward in finding an agreement that will bring relief to Wyoming?s big game herds, ranchers and farmers.?

U.S. Sen. John Barrasso said the science is on Wyoming?s side.

?Today?s decision by the USFWS is a step in the right direction,? he said in a statement. ?The administration is right to finally recognize Judge Johnson?s ruling that there is ?no meaningful scientific explanation? why Wyoming?s plan will not protect the state?s wolf population.?

?Wyoming?s plan honors its commitment to successfully manage the wolf,? Barrasso said. ?There is no reason for the USFWS not to immediately accept it.?

The Greater Yellowstone Coalition reserved judgement on the federal decision.

?We don't know what this means yet for Wyoming?s wolf management plan, or for wolves, but clearly the current plan is flawed,? GYC wildlife advocate Chris Colligan said.

The Greater Yellowstone Coalition objects to the plan?s predator classification and stated minimum number of wolves ? 150 wolves and 15 breeding pairs for the state. ?GYC has been working to improve that plan,? Colligan said.

The news from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service comes after federal wolf managers released a report showing that wolf numbers in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming appear to be stabilizing, with researchers reporting a slight decline in the population for 2010.

The minimum estimated wolf population is 1,651 animals, compared with 1,733 animals last year, according to the Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery 2010 Interagency Annual Report. The decrease in wolf numbers reflects a 19 percent decline in Idaho, from 870 wolves in 2009 to 705 wolves last year, according to the report.

Wyoming increased from 320 wolves in 2009 to 343 last year and Montana increased from 524 to 556.

?The Associated Press contributed to this story.

ShareThis
 
WY and the USFWS have been talking for 8 years...doesnt solve anything.

Also still doesnt address the Molloy ruling.
 
Yellowstone is much more than elk. It's the geological activity and the whole ecosystem...lakes, plants, and animals that makes it special. Believe it or not, wolves and the reduced elk populations have had positive influences on other species. So to me calling it "dead" doesn't make sense. The record number of visitors the last few years supports that people go to see more than elk.

The way I see it, elk look the way they do because of predators like wolves that helped evolve the physical charactoristic that us hunters like so much.

The Feds vs States managing the populations as big game animals, now thats a diffent story.
 
So muley man what are these species that you say are thriving? Cause last i checked wolves will KILL anything they get their paws on.
 
>Yellowstone is much more than elk.
>It's the geological activity and
>the whole ecosystem...lakes, plants, and
>animals that makes it special.
>Believe it or not, wolves
>and the reduced elk populations
>have had positive influences on
>other species. So to me
>calling it "dead" doesn't make
>sense. The record number of
>visitors the last few years
>supports that people go to
>see more than elk.
>
>The way I see it, elk
>look the way they do
>because of predators like wolves
>that helped evolve the physical
>charactoristic that us hunters like
>so much.
>
>The Feds vs States managing the
>populations as big game animals,
>now thats a diffent story.
>


Again here we have shortsighted evolution theory. True, elk evolved defense mechanisms because of predators like the wolf. HOWEVER, man has run the planet about as long as wolves and have been either killing them or domesticating them for that time period as well. Why is it biologically advantageous for the elk, deer, and buffalo to have a predator to keep them in check, but its not for the bears and wolves to have the same? If you support the wolve reintroduction and its massive slaughter of game, then your a hypocrite if you don't support mans controlling the wolf numbers. If predators are good for prey, then man(the ulitimate predator) is good for the wolf.
 
Don't jump to conclusions hossblur...I do support state control of wolves, hunting wolves, and managing their populations as a big game animal. Also, wolves have been around for thousands of years, long before the early settlers expanded into the west just a few hundred years ago. They were just eliminated for about 70 yrs.

CamoMan- Now that huge herds of elk aren't fully living in meadows and along streams there are more new aspen shoots and cottonwoods. I've also read where this is having a positive impact on small animals, birds, eagles and cutthroat populations.

If I wanted to see a bunch of elk layin around chewin' their cud I'd drive to an elk farm...but thats my opinion.
 
Call the movie "This isn't Your Grandpas Strychnine Yellowstone." Kill the wolves but don't be an idiot about it and tell people the end is near for Yellowstone and that wolves are coming to a neighborhood near you to kill our children. "Yellowstone is Dead" is going to do nothing but come across as lame propaganda before the guy even puts the dvd in the player. Just like Wyoming....trying to kick in the damn door and it's not going to work that way.
 
muleys,

please provide how wolves have had a positive impact on cutthroat and small animals or from what unbiased publication you read that from. TU maybe????
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-16-11 AT 05:49PM (MST)[p]Mulyes24Seven. I'm sure Montana, Idaho and Wyoming would be more then happy to send Eugen Oregon all the Wolfs you want. Then you could conduct your own personal study on how the ecosystem is changing thanks to the Wolf.
Don't take what I said personal Just my opinion!

Justin Richins
R&K Hunting Company Inc.
www.thehuntingcompany.com
 
Whats TU?

huntinco, i live in Idaho and would gladly ship some wolves

The National Geographic along with some other articles I've read. The NG represented all sides from ranchers, hunters and environmentalists.

Impact on cutthroat...the elk in Yellowstone were gathering in large herds and spending most of their time in one spot. This was usually along streams and meadows. As a result there was over grazing and damage along stream banks. Willows and other trees were either being eaten or trampled. Since the wolves, the elk have grouped in smaller herds and have been forced to move around allowing the vegitation to re-grow. As a result beaver populations have rebounded creating dams giving cutthroats deeper water to survive in.

Wolves are definitely a polarizing issue, but I think we can all agree more beav's is a good thing.
 
Thanks for the reply, I found the cutthroat impact laughable since yellowstone cutts are a shadow of what they were since just like elk a predator (ie lake trout) was introduced to their ecosystem and they have been decimated... Just goes to show you not everything you read is neccessary factual. I can look up exact numbers for you but cutthroat population in the yellowstone has dramaticly decreased in the last 15 years. In fact there has been a few attempts to have them put on the endagered species list the last 4-5 years. Something that the GYE elk might need to be on in the future.
 
Your profile was disabled so I goggle your IP, Thats where I came up with Oregon. I like you am a mule deer guy with elk taking a 3 seat behind moose. However, I stongly believe the locals who are directly affected should be the ones with the final say about wolf management. No way in hell should the Feds, Aspen trees or cutthroats be making the calls.

Justin Richins
R&K Hunting Company Inc.
www.thehuntingcompany.com
 
I read the National Geographic article written by Doug Chadwick. It kind of told both sides of the story, but was definitely slanted pro-wolf.

I don't think there are many sportsmen (even the anti-wolf ones) that would argue that Yellowstone didn't have too many elk in some areas. However, there are much better solutions for that situation. Ever notice how elk in the park behaved differently than outside the park? It was because there weren't really any predators in the park. Outside the park WE WERE THE PREDATORS that kept elk moving and from do damage to riparian areas. In the park where elk weren't hunted and weren't afraid of people they spent too much time along the rivers and streams and probably did have some negative impacts on those areas. Instead of using a common sense approach and using hunters to remove some elk and change the behavior of remaining elk, they decided to do things the "natural" way. Now they have no control of the situation, and are sitting back watching the worst disaster in wildlife management in decades unfold before their eyes.

Human hunters are the ultimate wildlife management tool. Unlike wolves, most hunters can understand and follow bag limits, unit boundaries, and season dates. Hunters will do everything a wolf will do, do it better, quicker, more humanely, more precisely, and at a much lower cost. In fact, hunters will actually pay wildlife management agencies to manage wildlife. Think about the massive financial costs related to wolves; the actual transplants, research and monitoring, never ending lawsuits, and the damages to livestock and other wildlife species. On the other hand human hunters pay their own way and then some.

Personally I don't think we need wolves in the lower 48. However, if we are going to be stuck with them they need to be managed just like mountain lions and bears. State wildlife agencies have a proven track record of being able to manage sustainable populations of other large predator species and can do it for wolves too. Wolves can be managed in a way that doesn't have massive negative impacts on other wildlife species and still ensures survival of the species.

It boggles my mind that this debacle has gone on as long as it has. There is no clearer illustration as to how broken the ESA and our legal system are.

Dax

There is no such thing as a sure thing in trophy mule deer hunting.
 
Support the title or not. Every sportsmen in the country should buy a copy or two. If the current trends hold steady there will be no moose in two yrs in the Jackson herd, if Yellowstone isn't dying I don't know what you call it. I just bought a copy
 
Won't dispute anything about the need to cull a bunch of wolves. However when we were in Yellowstone last summer, we saw a lot of elk in various locations. So more elk and buffalo in the Hayden Valley area than I recall ever seeing. Hunted the Thorofare last fall and saw elk everywhere. My outfitter said it was the best year they'd had in a long time for elk. Interestingly, we saw more bears than you could count. The outfitter said it was the first year he hadn't seen or heard wolves in his hunt drainages. His theory was the bears had pushed them out. As soon as an elk hit the ground, bears were on the way. He said they lost several elk. I'd imagine wolves would give up on an area if they couldn't get a meal out of the deal...
 
In this months issue of Men's Journal they had a full blown article about the death of Yellowstone. The author spent the entire article talking about global warming and the loss of the white pine as the doom of the Yellowstone grizzly. He essentially blamed the death of those campers on global warming while never once even mentioning the effect the lack of moose and elk calves as a possiblity for that hungry female and her cubs attacking a hiker.
I acknowledge we need to look at all aspects of Yellowstone but to deliberately turn a blind eye to the introduciton of the gray wolf is, to me, amazing.
It's no wonder we can't get anything done with wolf legislation when major majazines peddle this kind of garbage. Do your homework, tell the whole truth and offer up some kind of responsable journalism. Please
 
huntinco...I like your list but I'd have mtn goats and sheep above elk.

Lake trout have definitely been hammering the cutt populations in the big waters like Yellowstone and Shoshone Lake but I doubt rivers and streams.

The one thing I think we can all agree with is the 1st step should be granting state control and begin managing wolf populations like any other big game animal. I'll be right behind Gov Butch Otter in the line for a tag.
 
Not on is there magazines and other outlets that peddle this cr@p but we have dumb a$$es everywhere including here that believe it. I smell a troll. Ron
 
There are no Cutthroat in Shoshone Lake, the majority of yellowstone cutts is in the yellowstone drainage, including the yellowstone, lamar, slough creek, and soda butte all have taken a severe hit in numbers of cutthrouat trout per mile with non harder hit than the meadow section of the yellowstone itself.
 
It sure doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that the herd is significantly reduced from years past. For the first time in decades, MT had no late season hunt in the Yellowstone area. They used to give out a couple thousand cow permits and a couple hundred bull permits. This year, NONE.
 
"The one thing I think we can all agree with is the 1st step should be granting state control and begin managing wolf populations like any other big game animal."

24Seven, that's the second time you've mentioned treating wolves lika a big game animal. BuzzH says that all the time also. Do you know what that is going to end up meaning? I believe it will mean that hunters may be allowed to take elk and deer so long as it doesn't have an impact on wolves. In other words if elk numbers are too low to support the wolves, there will be no elk season.

So, if you think that's something we can all agree on you better think again.

Eel
 
So eel, what are our options...Fed control or State control? There's going to be control, so my point was I think we'd all agree that having wolves under state control which could allow hunting would be better than Feb control and probably no hunting.

Wolves are here to stay, and yes we are competing with wolves over elk. Man wants to hunt elk and so do wolves. The reality is we are going to have to compromise and hopefully the wolves will too.
 
Yes we will have to compromise by many different ways. The only way the wolf will compromise is from bullets.
 
I agree with AaronJHanson's post above.

I'm on the same side of this wolf fight the group from SWW is, but unless you like to fight this battle by "stretching" the truth (putting it mildly) this group will make you roll your eyes.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom