In the first couple of decades of the 20th Century in Idaho, ranchers were in an all out battle with wolves, much more so than they are today. The concern of today's ranchers in Idaho over wolves is not based upon some shallow "Little Red Riding Hood" syndrome, as the environmentalists have coined it. No, their concern is based on experience. Their grandfathers fought that war, won it, and lived to tell the story. But their efforts to undo the wily and rapidly growing wolf population was undone when the federal government had other bright ideas in the last couple of decades of the 20th Century.
How bad were things early on? Consider this news report from the L’abeille de la Nouvelle-Orleans newspaper on January 17, 1911:
Wolves are destroying scores of sheep and cattle in the southern part of the state, according to James J. Gordon, an Orryhee county rancher, who is in Boise for a few days. The animals are said to be particularly ferocious this year, for the early season, and many of the ranchers are taking special precaution in the hiring of extra ranch hands to ward off the attacks of the ravenous animals.
“It is the most remarkable early winter I have ever seen,” said Mr. Gordon, “in the number of wolves which are infesting the country. Not only sheep, but many cattle are being destroyed by the animals, which are traveling in packs over the country. Even the coyotes are doing more damage than usual this year, but the greatest danger to the stockman is the number of wolves.
“The animals are apparently ravenous, which is an unusual condition at this season of the year, and much trouble is anticipated when the winter really sets in severely. Many ranchers have had trouble with them, running in the very barnyards.
“Wolves are decidedly on the increase in the southern part of the state, and more have been killed there in the past month than in former years.
“In the event that the trouble is not abated, it is extremely probable that united efforts will be made by the stockman, and hunting parties will be organized as part of a systematic crusade against them.
“Another means, which has been suggested as an aid in their extermination, is an added reward to the bounty given by the state, which would be offered by the stockmen.
“Large bands of sheep have been removed from northern Utah and it is generally believed that this has been responsible for a large number of wolves which have come into the southern part of this state, for they have been forced out of Utah, because of lack of food.
A couple of points to take away. First, I find it interesting that they saw a connection between the removal of sheep from N. Utah and the migration of the wolves to find a new food source. Sounds pretty common sensical to me. But I think that bears some pondering, and what it might mean for the current wolf situation.
The second point is that ranchers had enough with it, and set up a bounty system. Did it work? Consider the answer that is found in the August 18, 1930 edition of the Lewiston Morning Tribune:
Boise, Aug 17, 1930 (UP)- Although for many years a bounty on wolves has been awaiting the successful wolf hunter in Idaho, only one wolf has been killed in the last three years’ records of the predatory animal funds of the state disclose. This does not include coyotes.
Three years ago the biological survey reported there were only two wolves in Idaho. Within a month one of these was killed, a female, leaving the lonely male wandering around in the timber by himself. What became of him or exactly how accurate the count was could not be known.
But the last report stated there were 17 wolves. Of course they had drifted in from British Columbia or Montana – or even possibly escaped the earlier enumeration. Yet in the several months since this report was out, no claims have come in for wolf bounties. July claims called for bounties on 198 coyotes, nine wild cats and 12 cougars.
Incidentally, this will be about the last of the cougar claims paid by the state predatory animal board as the bounty was discontinued due to the disagreement with trappers over surrender of the pelts.
In about 20 years time, the bounties had worked well enough to reduce Idaho's wolf population from infestation status to virtually zero.
How many sportsman would bicker with a proposed bounty on wolves?
If the Montana and Idaho game commissions are displeased with the lack of harvested wolves this past season, perhaps they should offer some additional incentive to hunters and trappers. Non-residents would jump more readily at the idea of a bounty hunt, helping IF&G coffers, and really - who wouldn't be spending more time afield?
But let me add one caveat. Perhaps the ranchers of today would do well to remember something else their grandfathers did - help pay for the bounties. Rather than putting this on the shoulder of the general tax payers, ranching organizations and individual ranchers were opening their pocketbooks first.
Would bounties really be that much more politically incorrect than gunning wolves down from helicopters?
Would bounties really be that much more politically incorrect than gunning wolves down from helicopters?
~ J. Bunch
