Deseret News | Reader comments: Wolf issues not so simple in Utah

Reader comments
Ray Grass: Wolf issues not so simple in Utah

joe | 6:25 a.m. April 3, 2008

leave all of these animals on the list /IF a n animal really kills a ranchers cow or etc let the state pay for it / these animals were here 1st/ some think we are god but we are not/ we ruined the balance of nature not them /no one needs a head hanging on there wall so do not allow hunting/ yes I understand the rancher side of the story/ my family had a 135 section ranch / they would have killed the wolf because it was there not because it had done harm/ times have changed/ if you just need to kill something signup for Iqua /you do not prove how brave you are by killing a wolf from 400 yards with a 30/o6 rifle/ yes I can do that also but I will not please think about why you really want/need to kill anything / after nam I will not shoot if they did not or can not shoot 1st

So... | 7:29 a.m. April 3, 2008

The wolf loses again. They've already been killed nearly causing extinction of the animal. In nature, every species depends on another. Well..except humans that is. Humans are the only species that kill themselves. Animals are so much smarter than people are.

An unfair burden | 7:37 a.m. April 3, 2008

One of the key problems with wolves in the ranching community is that 90%+ of the time when wolves kill livestock it is not within sight of anyone. I can bring cattle out of the mountains and know that 5% of my calves are not there, but I have no way of knowing what killed them. Wolves are cold-blooded killers and have no natural predators. It would be the equivalent of the government introducing bands of car theives into the city. It isn't a matter of rancher compensation as very few cases can be documented. I think its interesting that TV programs are so willing to show wolves howling and wolf pups playing but seem to neglect the footage of a pack of wolves eating a cow while she is still alive. Someone has to feed the wolves and unfortunately it is cattle and sheep producers who pay the price. I love nature and the outdoors, but its a very naive to ignore the enormous burden placed on livestock producers by introducing these predators.

Comments continue below

Enormous burden? | 8:27 a.m. April 3, 2008

I think you're exaggerating a bit. If there's one straggler wolf from Yellowstone that makes it to Utah, how many cows is it going to kill to feed itself?

There are things out there that threaten all our livelihoods. Maybe not wolves, but something. And what do we do? We protect ourselves against those things. I'd suggest ranchers do a better job of fencing off their livestock. This isn't a problem without a solution, it's just that some ranchers don't want to spend the money or take the time to implement the solution.

You chose to raise livestock in wolf territory - I'm having a hard time seeing how this is wolves' fault.

enjoy wildlife | 8:43 a.m. April 3, 2008

It's a shame that most environmental groups don't understand the meaning of "wild life management". For example, they want the gray wolf back in yellowstone unmanaged at the expense of Say Moose which now are being taken out by the wolf at such a rate that within a few years there won't be any moose left in Yellowstone. Not to worry however, by then sportsman will pony up the money to reintroduce them back into yellowstone where environmentalist will have figured out how to teach the wolf not to like moose meat. I have hiked in areas where I used to see lots of deer and other wildlife. Now that mountain lion hunting in that area has been banned I see little of what I once enjoyed. I don't even see the mountain lions. I know their out there but I really don't get to enjoy them. Mind you, I'm not against the Gray wolf but please lets think Management. And for information only, the worst preditor on young grizzly bears isn't human. It's adult male grizzly bears. The same can be said of other animal species.

Frank | 8:38 a.m. April 3, 2008

One of the key problems with the enviroemnt is ranching on public land. Overgrazing is a huge issue in our state. We need more wolves to eat the cows that are destroying the public's land. I love nature and the outdoors, and I don't believe that livestock producers in Utah who leech off of the public should be supported.

Matt | 8:51 a.m. April 3, 2008

They're not exagerating at all. If people actually knew what goes into ranching, they would be more qualified to comment about it. Isn't the whole point of the Endangered Species Act to get animals off it? The point is to help them rebound to healthy levels, and then take them off. With so few ever getting off, it shows how the program is not effective.

I see what people are saying, how dare we ever establish a community anywhere. Wolves were here first and rule. We shouldn't even be on this planet..right?

Your Crazy | 9:00 a.m. April 3, 2008

To Enormous burden? The last time I checked a fence would not stop a wolf from going where it wants. For those of you who have never witnessed either live or on video a pack of wolves attacking a cow, sheep or elk it is the most gruesome sites I have ever seen. How would you like to be pounced on by 6 or seven 150 lb wolves and have them start eating your guts while you are still alive. We got rid of wolves once for a good reason let them stay in Yellowstone!

Ernest T. Bass | 9:03 a.m. April 3, 2008

It's time to stop welfare ranching on public lands! Losing livestock to predation on public land is the cost of doing business.

killing for fun | 9:22 a.m. April 3, 2008

You cant manage wildlife,humans have tried and have failed.The elk heard in Yellowstone was overgrazing the Lamar valley destroying the ecosystem.Once the wolves were introduced,it made the elk heard stronger and revived the ecosystem.Ranchers care about one thing MONEY!If we allow the wolves to roam our great state the mountain lion population will decrease because of compitition, the deer will not starve in the winter and the elk will also flourish.The ranchers give money to the legislatures in the west and get what they want.The people who shot the three wolves in Wyoming enjoyed killing them,thatis the nature of these backwords people.

Frank? | 9:52 a.m. April 3, 2008

You obviously don't have a clue how grazing on public lands works. The ranchers pay the government a lot of money for the right to graze on the land and are only allowed on that land during certain and specified seasons; not all year. Ranchers are not leeches.

Catherine | 9:52 a.m. April 3, 2008

There should be another listing. Once an animal is off the Endangered Species List, it should be on another transitional list to protect it from idiot humans who think they now have free range to shoot or trap an animal just because it isn't "protected" any more. And believe me, there ARE people who will shoot or trap an animal just because it is there, walking along minding its own business doing no harm to anyone.

The ranchers should not have gotten into the ranching business if they could not come to terms with risks to their product. All business has some element of risk. Product loss/waste is a very real issue and every business has this problem. In a rancher's case, the risk they are taking is product loss via wolves or illness to the herd. In Walmart's case, the risk of loss of product is theft/shoplifting. Are there steps each can take to protect loss of their product? Yes. But the bottom line is, there will always be shoplifters and there will always be wolves or illness. It is part of doing business and any smart business owner knows this going in. It's not a big surprise.

Sportsman | 9:50 a.m. April 3, 2008

To "Enormous burden": Anyone who thinks a fence will
keep a wolf out doesn't know much about wolves. Why do you think that a wolf who rips its prey to shreds has more of a right to live than the deer, elk, moose and other animals it kills. Many people use wild game for food."Are wolves more important than people". Wolves are decimating the elk, deer, and moose herds and hurting hunting. To Frank: Studies have show that the ranges in Utah are in the best condition they have been in 100 years.Well managed grazing is good for ranges. You need to take a course in range management. I believe if you can't even spell environment you don't know much about it. I suppose you don't know that a big reason for the severity of the terrible fires in California is lack of grazing and the banning of the removal of dead timber etc. If we follow your plan fires in Utah will be terrible too. Birds, mammals and other wildlife are killed by the millions in massive fires.Please get educated.

t

snowman | 10:02 a.m. April 3, 2008

This really is a non issue! I think all sportsman know what to do. We have been hunting coyotes forever and they are still in very healthy numbers. Most of the time when a coyote is killed it goes unnoticed and unanounced. End of story!

400ex | 10:38 a.m. April 3, 2008

Does everyone commenting so far think that there is only one side to this issue. Wolvers are a natural part of nature. Ranchers are trying to support their families just like I do everyday. Hunters really are not part of this as just because something is not on the endangered species list does not make it legal to hunt them. I love everything outdoor. To solve this we need to understand the other points of view so we can come up with an answer both sides can accept. Neither side will get their way completely but neither side should be completely ignored either.

Don't be democrates against repulicans, listen and compromise and you will find the answer in the middle.

Anonymous | 12:14 p.m. April 3, 2008

Wolves were and are an integral part of the wildlife food chain. Humans though with their ubiquitous introduction of livestock and sheep to mountain zones created dysfunctional human conflicts with both wolves and grizzly. Yellowstone in part works, for both the grizzly and wolf. But what other habitat corridors in the West viably exist that these critters can semi peacefully live in? Ranchers are one band; reckless hunters with a rifle will shoot any coyote, fox, badger and now wolf, because it's simply a "varmit" and has no value other than bullet bait to a wily human. Varied human interests exist no doubt. These critters though should be allowed to live and roam without interuption by common citizens. If circumstance arrives where they need to removed (killed) or humanely trapped and trasported elsewhere, it should be done by Federal Wildlife officials and NOT by the public citizenry. Ranchers can economically be reimbursed if documented grizzly or wolf kills exist; And the hunting crowd (Ray Grass included) can chase after "bunnies" in the West desert, whoop it up, salute their brews to the high moon - and otherwise leave the grizzly and wolf alone.

Rancher | 1:13 p.m. April 3, 2008

Frank, you're an idiot.

Peter Wolf | 1:19 p.m. April 3, 2008

Kill 'em all.. Stuff 'em and let lberals and environuts buy them for their living rooms.

wolves are dangerous and to simply reintroduce them so human beings can feel good about some balance of nature is bunk!

Wolves kill amnything they can. The myth is they only kill weak animals, they will take down a healthy animal or anything else they can corner.

Bill | 1:41 p.m. April 3, 2008

Pretty disheartening to see the lack of common sense here. Probably the biggest challenge for ranchers today is the fact that fewer and fewer people have any clue about where their food comes from. That isn't a problem in itself, but when the majority vote establishes policy, it becomes a huge problem.
I'm a 4th generation cattle rancher and use public lands. My forefathers paid for grazing rights and we pay every year to continue to use them. Our stocking rates are less than half of what was originally grazed and we spend a lot of money to improve public land that we don't own. The additional regulations (fencing, pumping water, etc) have raised my cost to $22 per AUM (animal unit month) which is above market prices for private grazing which is not available due to the limited private land. My margins this year will provide a minimal income (I hope) and I seriously question the future viability of this industry.

Timj | 2:23 p.m. April 3, 2008

Wow. Where to start.
Actually, I'll start by saying this:
Go take some classes (BYU, U of U, Utah State, etc.) on wildlife management, ecology, etc. It's obvious that most of the posters really have no clue what they're talking about.
As far as Peter Wolf goes, wolves tend to be afraid of humans (so generally when humans are around they'll stay away) and they kill what they can catch, which usually ends up being the old and the sick, but can also include mice, rabbits, etc. that are perfectly healthy.
If you ranchers out there are worried about losing cattle to wolves, do what ranchers and shepherds did years ago. Guard your flock.

Rich | 3:08 p.m. April 3, 2008

I don't think we need wolves in Utah. We have plenty of predators in the form of coyotes, mountain lions and bobcats and humans. I would rather see humans than wolves eat the surplus elk and deer that our state produces each year. Not only does hunting bring in a lot of dollars, but in-state hunting also contributes a great deal to the local economy. And the value of the recreation provided by deer and elk hunting is hard to measure. Plus we have extensive cattle grazing in Utah, and that industry provides a lot of food and brings in millions of dollars. As is typical of government, they wait until there's a problem before they try to solve it. I wish they would announce now that they will allow, say, 20 wolves in the Uintas, and any other wolves anyplace else in the state may be shot on sight. If you want to see a wolf, go to Yellowstone, Alaska or Canada.

Timj | 3:08 p.m. April 3, 2008

It costs $1.35 for one cow and one calf to use federal land for grazing each month.
Now that's a serious bargain.
If you want to see the difference between land with cows and land without, go down to the BYU nature preserve near St. George. A fence separates a beautiful, diverse landscape filled with multitudes of flowers from a bleak, boring flower-less landscape.
If you're Christian, you believe that God created wolves like he created every other creature. If you know anything about science, you know that there's a balance in nature. If you destroy all the predators, deer and other herbivores will multiply and multiply until a harsh winter comes...and then masses of them will starve to death.
I realize that ranchers are trying to make a living. But they can't go blaming every lost cow on wolves. If I were criminal, I'd make money by stealing cows...the ranchers obviously don't guard them too closely (which is why some disappear), and they'd blame wolves for my crimes.
Just sayin'...

re timj | 3:14 p.m. April 3, 2008

or a five hundred dollar calf. Don't sugar coat it to much.

Wow.... | 4:13 p.m. April 3, 2008

Apparently most here including Timj have no concept of ranching. The $1.35 per month is the gov't AUM fee. The additional $20 / month that Bill refers to per month is the cost of diesel, labor, fencing, pumps, based on gov't regulations. These cattle range at the rate of 60+ acres per cow for the summer season. I run 70 cows in common with a large group of ranchers. The total permit encompasses 480,000 acres. My cows are mixed in with 8,000 cows over that area all summer. I think it's pretty funny how the naive city folk say that we should just take better care of our cows, fence out the wolves (???), or guard them more closely. Completely ridiculous. Anyone that thinks gov't grazing rates are subsidy: there are a lot of permits for sale. Go buy one and get rich....

Michelle | 5:09 p.m. April 3, 2008

After reading thru the comments on this page there are only a couple that seem to grasp the idea that comprimise is the only solution and that does mean including hte welfare of the wolf. Long before ranchers decided this was Their land the wolves lived here.If we keep wiping out all chains of life except humans we also will no longer exist,so there will be no need to worry about live stock. Just think about it. We need each other .

Flango | 5:15 p.m. April 3, 2008

First of all there has been more than one confirmed sighting of Wolves in Utah; The wolf caught in a trap near Morgan and returned to YNP, A wolf was caught in a trap near Tremonten and died in the trap. Defenders of Wildlife paid damages to a rancher near Tremonten who had multiple sheep (around 20) confirmed killed by Wolves and most recently the sighting of 5 Wolves near Flaming Gorge.

Second the comment about Wolves making the Yellowstone Elk herd stronger is not well founded. The herd has declined by over 50% since wolf reintroduction and currently does not have a calf recruitment rate adequate to even maintane that number. There is no scientific evidence that the Elk are stronger now than before but there sure are a lot less of them now.

Utah does not have game herds that have the numbers to support a strong wolf presence. People loose the emotion and get real, Wolves will have to be managed and that's a fact, failure to do so will have drastic effects on our wildlife populations and cost honest hard working ranchers income.

clark | 5:45 p.m. April 3, 2008

And why shouldn't ranchers and farmers be able to worry about "one thing" money!
Why just because my father is a rancher and farmer does he not have the right to make "money" just like every one else in the world? And don't give me that junk about ranchers and farmers being subsidized by government, ultimately every business out there gets some sort of incentive or subsidization.
I've been in Cook City and gone out and watched the wolves with the researchers in the morning. And it was an amazing thing to see an alpha female teaching give youngsters to hunt the morning we were there in Yellowstone. But I tell you what, they weren't hunting any old or lame elk. The cows they were chasing down were yearlings and healthy as could be. And yes, it's pretty gruesome watching them eat the animal alive.
Plus, the woman who owned the motel in Cook City where we stayed, had one week previous run her car into a snowbank on the way home. She was one mile from Cook, and did she get out and walk. Nope, waited til morning, cause she said these wolves are not normal cause packs big.

Kirk | 12:00 a.m. April 4, 2008

Ray Grass takes the easy position of simply endorsing the propaganda and decisions of the Fish and Wildlife Service. He doesn't know much about wildlife ecology or conservation biology - or much about the Endangered Species Act.

Grizzlies and wolves now exist in greater numbers in the northern American Rockies than they did 20 years ago, but it hardly follows that they have recovered to sustainable levels or that they have recovered to a "significant portion of their historic range" as required by the ESA.

These animals can't live everywhere they once did, no doubt, but why must we be so stingy? The range of both is still less than 10% of what it was before our ancestors waged war on them. Management efforts now will have to constantly work to keep their populations just barely this side of extinction, which will be difficult given their low population numbers and genetic isolation, which will lead to extensive inbreeding. Furthermore, both of these species play important roles in keeping ecosystems healthy. It is simply wrong to compare them to thieves that take and give nothing in return.

We can learn to live with wolves and bears and cougars, and should.

Willow | 9:05 a.m. April 4, 2008

Every person who thinks wolves are "evil" need to get over themselves. Wolves are absolutely no different than any other animal in the wild. They hunt to survive. If cows are the target, it's only because humans have basically handed them an easy target. If you were a starving wolf trying to feed your young and you happened upon a herd of cows, would YOU pass them by? Easy meal. This doesn't make wolves "evil." And it certainly doesn't give us any right to shoot them out of fear or panic. Don't be a rancher if you aren't aware that you WILL lose some of your herd to predators.

For those who say watching wolves kill a cow is "gruesome", are you all 2nd graders? Apparently you've never seen footage of killer whales flipping around a baby seal, or a snake swallowing its prey whole AND alive. Grow up, folks. That's how things work in the wild.

Wolves are incredibly fascinating creatures and are extremely misunderstood.

Stan omlstead | 12:39 p.m. April 4, 2008

How about this. I don't want any cattle or especially sheep on my public lands. I am a tax payer and that is what I want. Ranchers can cry all they want to, here is a tissue. I dont now how many times I have been up hiking around and step in a cow pie or run accross the smell of cattle. They are a sorry excuse for and animal and have no place in nature. So keep them off my land.

Mountain Man | 4:23 p.m. April 5, 2008

Some Compromise might work here. I am an avid big game hunter, zoologist and former cattle and sheep farmer. I can see the isssue from both sides. If the environmentalists would allow the ranchers and hunters to have local control and hunt the animlas, the ranchers and hunters might be more willing to tolerate and even promote such critters. It could work! Just look at what hunters and ranchers have done for turkeys and whitetail deer. But if the environmentalists continue to try and ram these big predators down the rancher's throats, the ranchers will continue to fight it tooth and nail. So to make this work, let the environemntalists have the big predators but let the ranchers and hunters have control. Think about it! It could work.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.