WDFW LogoWashington Department of Fish & Wildlife
  HELP | EMPLOYMENT | NEWS | CONTACT  
WDFW LogoConservation

Washington Department of
Fish & Wildlife

Main Office
Natural Resources Building
1111 Washington St. SE
Olympia, WA 98501
360-902-2200
Get Directions

Mailing Address
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98501-1091

Phil Anderson
Director

 

 

<< Back to all DEIS Comments


Public Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
Online Comments on DEIS: Wolf Conservation and Management Plan for Washington

<< Back to DEIS Online Comments list

Comments on Wolves (Section 4.1.1):

NO WOLFS

Jim Steveson,  Vader WA

Introducing wolves in this state is a huge mistake and mismanagement of funds, with the state deficet we have it is a shame we are concidering such a program. Talk to Idaho and see how the wolf program there turned out!!

Rick ,  Centralia WA

wolves deplete the big game herds and they are already having a difficult time because of loss of habitat-also wolves will attack domestic animals-wolves kill just to kill not just for food-keep wolves out of washington

eldon riggle,  clarkston WA

Very important to the state and to the ecosystem in WA. Important culturally.

Lisa Dabek,  Seattle WA

Wolves were once part of the ecosystems in Washington State and their return will help to bring a balance back to the system. There is value in wolves existing for the sake of existing and then their contribution to the environment plays a critical role in ecosystems.

Kristin Mitchell,  Seattle WA

Please restrict the population of wolves. We need to protect the wildlife of Washington. Sport kill by wolves is unacceptable.

Kirk Alexander,  Seattle WA

Wolves are native to the Olympic Peninsula. Olympic National Park was established to preserve the natural ecosystems within its boundaries. Wolves are a keystone species in those natural ecosystems.

Patricia Willits,  Port Angeles WA

No comment

Sean V Owen,  Seattle WA

Wolves have shown themselves to be very adaptable, and without illegal persecution, will be able to re-establish in Washington very easily. The question will be whether one area of the state will suffer more problems than another before delisting occurs. Look at Alt. 1A, the responsible approach to wolf management.

Anonymous

We are the thirteenth most populas state we do not have the room other states have had.

AL SHERMAN,  WENATCHEE WA

I strongly oppose any plans to introduce wolves anywhere in Washington. Yes, I know they are already here. They will spread on on their own and will do great damage to wildlife eventually, and this should not be aided by the department.

Gregory R Field,  Seattle WA

They are a natural part of a healthy ecosystem and should be returned throughout the state.

Anonymous

Reintroduction of gray wolves back to WA is needed and overdue. They will provide for healthier herds of elk and deer.

Joe Sheeran,  Ellensburg WA

wolves kill a lot,our big game herds can not sustain more wolves than what exist now

Ross MacArthur,  Cusick WA

By far the most effiecient predator on the planet, left to their own devices they will decimate the large ungulate populations of this state like they have done over and over in other areas. (U.P., Wisconsin, Isyle Royale etc.) Try listening to the real experts, who have studied wolves for many years, like Mech an Geist.

Ty Brown,  Naches WA

Manipulated information that is misleading, a sales pitch for wolves.

dale denney,  colville WA

Maybe you should speak with Idaho & Montana to see what it has done to the sales of big game. Yes they did sell tags for the wolves, but still hasn't replaced the big game.

Gerald W Guhlke,  Reardan WA

Too Many!

AnonymousClarkston WA

The wolf is on a very short list of animals that are keystone preditors. The presence of such an animal in the ecosystem is the sign of a healthy ecosystem that requires no intervention by humans to maintain. Left to themselves they pose little to no threat to livestock or humans.

Anonymous

The wolf does well in Wi but cattlemen here are used to turning cattle loose to fend for themselves.

James Maves,  Pomeroy WA

The number of wolf pairs set for delisting are too low. the numbers need to be higher for the wolf population to establish itself.

Jocelyn Eke,  Los Angeles CA

These animals are needed in Wa. state

Diane Sonntag,  Tenino WA

I think that the true potential number of wolves was cleverly disquised. Only by close reading is the number 150 -500 deduced. Not the simple sounding 15 breeding pairs, which is actually 30 wolves. Any attempt to lie about total numbers???

Kenneth G Matney,  Ellensburg WA

For personal, aesthetic, and ecological reasons, I support the presence of wolves.

Matt Dahlgreen,  Wenatchee WA

One wolf is to many. I understand the wolf is here, but it doesn't have to be a protected preditor in this state. To see what has happened in Oregon and Idaho, and to still protect and increase the number of wolves, without delisting, seems very stupid.

Jess Kayser,  Centerville WA

I appreciate wolves and understand thier role in the system. I support recovery, but enjoy elk and deer as well. I prefer to maintain high numbers of prey animals.

Stephanie George,  Newport WA

I have already made my comments on wolves. Thanks!

Jane Hoffman,  Rye NH

Our state has been devoid of a indigenous wolf population for decades!! To have them make their way back on their own, is awe inspiring!! Lets make sure we do all we can to keep a healthy & growing population in our mountains!!!

Frances Gloor,  Enumclaw WA

The recovery objective numbers of breeding pairs needed for down-listing and eventual delisting of wolves is too low to ensure a viable wolf population in WA. The lethal kill provisions for livestock owners and private citizens whose livestock or domestic dogs are attacked by wolves while wolves are in threatened or sensitive status are too liberal during the critical early phases of wolf recovery and could slow recovery. Translocation of wolves from areas within WA with healthy wolf populations to other areas to establish new populations is an important tool and will speed up the recovery and delisting process.

Wendy Young,  Bellevue WA

Keep them out if at all possible, open season would be nice.

Duane Bernard,  Rainier OR

Alaska and Canada have millions of acres of wolf habitat with healthy populations of wolves. Human interaction(problems) are minimal because of population density of humans in low. This is not the case in washington state.

Gary Nielsen,  Colville WA

we dont need them in the olympics or any other place why do you thnik canada is so willing to et rid of theirs

gary Ryan,  sekiu WA

The pacific Northwest states have expressed their concernes about wolves with no clear strategies on how to manage them. Washington state has failed on every management tactic that concerns other predators, and I don't forsee any difference in the management of wolves. The studies are always inconconclusive, but the state still pays the same biologists to search for answers. How is Washington going to manage their biologists? If you keep giving them money, then their results will always be inconclusive. Washington State should be ashamed on their track record in managing the elk herds in Eastern Washington, and I want to know what they plan to change with the managing of wolves? With the wolves coming, I hold my head in sadness on the fact that I will probably not be able to take my son hunting when he gets older, nor do I feel safe with him in the mountains with all these predators. As stated above, I really only have one question: What different managment tools do you plan to use with the wolves, because you guys have failed on every other management task?

Aaron Neer,  Kennewick WA

Leave them in other states and Canada

Darrell Quimby,  Elma Wa WA

Please choose Alternative 3 for the final plan. It is highly important that a long-term viable wolf population be established in Olympic N.P. in order to restore the ecoystem to it original and proper functioning and will help to ensure that the wolf population can be delisted. I support wolf translocation to the Olympic Peninsula as crucial to the delisting effort. The goal of 15 breeding pairs needed to delist the wolf from federal and state protections is too low. Scientists suggest 30 to 60 breeding pairs would a more realistic minimum number. By taking reintroduction (from out-of-state wolf populations) off the table, the draft plan severely limits the chances for recovering wolves on the Olympic Peninsula and in Olympic National Park. Naturally dispersing wolves from the Cascades will not survive crossing the I-5 population corridor. Only non-lethal methods, including translocation, should be used in dealing with "problem wolves" that interfere with livestock operations. Olympic National Park offers the best habitat, the largest unmanaged elk population, and the least chances for wolf-human conflicts in the state. Returning the park's keystone predator -- the only species missing from Olympic -- would benefit the entire ecosystem, from endemic Olympic marmots to streamside forests. And the presence of wolves would bring lasting economic benefits to surrounding Olympic Peninsula communities.

Will Roush,  Medina WA

I would be comfortable with wolves being on the Olympic Peninsula. I believe the Park and local ecosysyem requires wolves in order to be healthy.

Charles LeBer,  Port Angeles WA

Wolves have a savage history and that is why they were hunted so hard at a time when doing so was very difficult.

Wayne Vinyard,  Glenwood WA

This year during general season for deer in eastern wa. (chicamun canyon) I was terribly disapointed at the LACK of deer that i saw. In three days of hard hunting we saw 6 deer. A far cry from last year when i was seeing at least twenty per day. I however saw 7 wolves, I've never seen wolves here before.Everyone talked to had never seen such a poor deer population in this area. And many others saw wolves as well.Seems to me that if this nonsense continues , In a few years there will be no mule deer whatsoever.And that means no license sales as well. Are'nt mule deer populations in peril as well? I heard many hunters saying shoot, shovel, shut up. Are there any rock solid studies being done on deer populations and mule deer survival? I doubt it. In my opinon green agendas are going to ruin hunting for us and many generations to come.

Daniel Gitchell,  Mc Cleary WA

Wolves should not be allowed in the State of Washington

James Schleusner,  Glenwood WA

We DON'T need wolves in Washington.

Anonymous

Reintroducing into this State is not a good idea. allowing them to be introduced into areas are already causing conflicts beyond the scope of existing studies and science.

FRED S Chapman, Jr,  RAYMOND WA

I feel that every Licence buying person in the State should be notified by mail and a vote should determine if Wolves should be allowed to be reintroduced. I personaly feel that the Wolves that are trying to reistablish are an invasive species (not the original native wolf) and should be treated as an invasive species and they should be eliminated before they get established.

John Evans,  Longview WA

Dangerous to introduce into a state with heavily populated areas.

Robert E Daharsh,  Woodinville WA

I've strived all my life to promote the re-introduction of wolves into national parks and other public lands. Living in the Midwest where wolves are quite common, I am surprised at the opposition posed by many Western residents (ranchers and hunters, in particular). We have done very little "management" of wolves int the Midwest, and we've gotten along just fine.

James R Salkas,  Oak Lawn IL

Wolves, as has been seen by the hunters of Idaho, will grow extremely fast once the move into an area that has been highly populated by ungulates over the last 100 years. They will kill at any oppurtunity, and the WDFW will never be able to move rapidly enough to control the explosion. If this were truly an EIS for the betterment of the states wildlife, there would be plans to use hunting as a control mechanism from the outset.

Charles Olney,  Yakima WA

Wolves are a key driver in ecosystem health and function and deserve the most respect and protection possible.

David Moen,  Oregon City OR

Based on the human population is there enough room for wolves in this state?

dylan peterson,  federal way WA

As a hunter I would rather not see wolves in Washington

Scott ,  enumclaw WA

NO WOLVES

Anonymous

IF ALLOWED TO POPULATE WASHINGTON IT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST MISTAKE THE GAME DEPARTMENT HAS EVER DONE. THE GAME DEPT. HES WORKED HARD TO MANAGE WILDLIFE IN WASHINGTON IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO GO BACKWARDS

RYAN JERLES,  RAYMOND WA

Need to kept to a minimum.

Anonymous

I feel that unlike Idaho or Montana, Washington has much less wilderness area that could sustain large populations of wolves. In the NE where I live, national forest and state land is broken up by a series of valleys that hold populations of private ground, ranches, farms and people. This will ultimately result in greater conflicts with humans than say the boundaries of the Frank Church wilderness, Selway Bitterroot wilderness or Bob Marshall wilderness areas. As well as Washington having a much greater population of people than Idaho or Montana, even in the east. I'am not of a old timer "kill em all" mindset. But government on all levels must be ready to pay the consequences of the reintroduction of wolves. Rural people are very much hurting economically speaking, and are not going to take kindly to sharing what bounty they have left with wolves. With that said wolves have a place in our nation's wilderness, but with the understanding that wilderness doesn't extend to our back yards.

Wade Moss,  Rice WA

Wolves are integral to healthy ecosystems, including healthy populations of ungulates. The team has done a good job of trying to balance human interest/needs with that of managing wolves in Washington State.

Karen Goodrowe Beck,  Gig Harbor WA

I feel wolves should be managed like all big-game species. Their is a balance between wolves and ungulates, that hunters can help maintain.

Mark Olis,  

PREDITORS OF GAME AND LIVESTOCK DEMESTIC PETS

Tom Freeman,  Tonasket WA

I am not against the wolf. I am against protecting myself, my family and my property with the fear of persecution (yes, persecution).

Anonymous

Wolves (canis lupus) are a natural part of the North Cascade ecosystem that has been absent from the State of Washington for far too long. As a citizen and a voter in the state concerned I am 100 percent in favor of their reestablishment in the greater Washington ecosystem. I believe that the interests of private entities in particular those involved in the ranching and other livestock industries already hold too much sway in land use decisions in this state and throughout the country. That being said I also believe that wolf depredation can occur and as long as management and response to such depredation is responsible and based on sound proof via scientific evidence than I would support either removal from the area, recompensation from the general fund, or as a last resort lethal force for the animal(s) involved so long as all other options had been exhausted.

Ryan Alexander Sparks,  Pullman WA

Top predator so intertwined with their enviroment that over time their presence alters it. The old and weak are removed from our game populations. The herds become healthier overall.

Bill Liggett,  Eatonville WA

kill every damn wolf in washington idaho and montana. its devastating the elk and deer populations already in tremendous amounts. hunters keep the populations of elk and deer at a good rate anyhow theres no need in destroy all of the deer and elk. soon there wont be any. i hate this state and its government. i hate washington state

Anonymous

Do not release any more wolves into this state.

Kevin Wolf,  Lacey WA

See comments

Chase,  maple Valley WA

When the wolves were reduced the big game species increased to a balance between food, shelter and water availabiltiy.

Jim Rubert,  Puyallup WA

I would like to see no wolves in Washington, but if they are to be here I would like to see no more than eight breeding pairs at any one time. The wilderness areas make Washington a small state (vs. the populated areas) and the impact that wolves would have on our wild game could be devastating especially animals with small populations such as moose and woodland caribou. Wolves should not be used as a game management or conservation tool, but they themselves need to be thoroughly managed by the sportsmen and women of Washington state. Wolves should only be allowed in areas where they will not have any effect on the general population; i.e. interactions with peoples pets, livestock, or livlihoods. Again NO wolves would be the best option, but at most only eight breeding pairs who are thoroughly managed at all times.

Christopher M Williams,  Graham WA

We don't WANT any more more wolves.

Jay Arment,  Spokane WA

I think wolves will help balance the states current wildlife populations, without too much of an impact.

Steve Solberg,  Spokane Valley WA

Nice job

Marcia avajas,  Bainbridge Island WA

We had messed with the ecosystem enough, let the wolves come back into play and balance back out the ecosystem. Sure ranchers will be mad, but they need to realize that in this day and the future, environmental issues are going to be powerful then simple economic issues.

Karl Schulke,  Republic WA

Wolves are here already. Allow them to populate and migrate without translocation. Delisting number should be at 9 pairs.

Lee Davis,  Ellensburg WA

I have not heard a good or just reason to have a wolf in the State of Washington.

Jim Lamb,  Spokane WA

We are here now, we are natural, we should not assist this wasteful Carnivore by increasing it's numbers. They are dangerous, aggressive and unpredictable.

Kenneth Nilson,  Silverdale WA

Important to keep ungulate populations healthy and under control. Beautiful animals

Jack Hirsch,  bellevue WA

They were here at one time and should be again

Roger Wallace,  Leavenworth WA

Studies in Yellowstone National Park since the reintroduction of wolves in 1995 show an increase in many plant and animal population that are directly tracable to the Park's wolf population. Much of this increase health biodiversity was an unplanned but pleasant surprise to the National Park Service. The States own comments in this section states, "Alternative 3 is predicted to have the most beneficial impact for wolves and the highest probability of achieving and maintaining a long-term viable wolf population in Washington." Is this not the state primary goal of the plan. This section also seem to imply the problem would be Alternative 3 "would likely take longer to achieve recovery, unless translocation were used in recovering regions where wolves have not established breeding pairs on their own." I believe the State has unstated political (financial) concerns. The length of time should not be a State problem. As for funding to translocate or even relocation from distant areas, I am sure there are groups that could come up with the money to move a number of breeding pairs or whole packs if it ment health self-sustaining wolf populations.

Ed Wilson,  Enumclaw WA

I CANNOT BELEIVE THAT WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE HAS NOT LEARNED A THING ABOUT WOLVES AND THE PROBLEMS, TIME, MONEY,LOSS OF GAME OPPERTUNITIES AND ALL OF THE POLITICAL HARASSMENT PRO AND CON FROM IDAHO MONTANA AND WYOMING . WHAT IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT IN WASHINGTON ?

Anonymous

I believe wolves play a critical role in keeping browsing mammal populations in check, so that they do not over-browse and cause erosion

Andrew Reding,  Port Townsend WA

I stand with organization such as Defenders of Wildlife that continues to advocate for strong, sustainable wolf populations throughout the northern Rockies and beyond. Defender of Wildllife team of scientists, wildlife conservationists and economists study and report and understand wolves and their behavior. Wolves are the "keystone" to effective and balanced management of our remaining "wild" lands.

elizabeth archambault,  Seattle WA

I need to get more educated on many of the numbered sections - Plese advise. Thank you

Melquiades Velez,  chicago IL

Wolves are highly intelligent and emotionally complex creatures whose presence improves any ecological system

jeanne barrett,  Seattle WA

Keep wolves out of Washington!

Florence Wheeler,  Vancouver WA

Good Summary, you stuck to Science.

Lois Neuman,  Vancouver WA

As a member online of the League of Women Voters and also having a sister who is a chairperson of the League of Women Voters in Virginia who works parttime for a Senator who support the conservation of God's breathing creations, not for man's purpose, but for His.

MB ,   FL

I support a wolf management plan that is strong enough to ensure wolves fully recover—to a population healthy enough to effectively resume their role as top predators in our state's ecosystems.

Pamela King,  Shoreline WA

If wolves are brought back, there may be some long term consequences. The wolves will reproduce ( possibly more rapidly due to the large populations of ungulates that came up after the wolves left ) and spread. Then we may face wolves coming onto our properties or eating livestock ( again ) , and things may get violent.

Ka'imiloa ,  Battle Ground WA

Please do not use a "one size fits all approach" when drafting decisions about wolves.

Mark Timmerman,  Tonasket WA

I have had dealings with the Wolves in Alaska and they were great but look what happened to them

Gary Hemenway,  Hoquiam WA

THe elk have a hard enough life with out wolves When I started hunting the elk was twice the size it is now wolves will just make it smaller Iv only killed one elk and fife deer me and all my frends will all kill on site eny wolf. Iv had lots of close encouters once with a grizz on stamped pass,countles black bears, cats,and corned by a pac of coyots once speeking from experinc I dont want cross a pack of wolves I will kill eny wolvs that cross paths with me.

doug carney,  ellensburg WA

The key is education. Educate others on misconceptions about wolves. Decisions should not be political. Wolves can live with people but it's the people that can't always live with wolves due to fear and misconceptions.

Michael Heath,  Whitestown IN

These wolves were not natives species to the lower 48. The wolf species that has been reintroduced into Montana in 1995 was original found in Canada, thus the original name the "Canadian Gray Wolf". These animals are the most extreme or any known predator. The kill just to kill, and not just for food. These wolves have been portrayed as a cute, cuddly creator and that is not only far from the truth, its the wrong message to give to some little kids that might just encounter a wolf someday.

Teresa Selby,  Bonney Lake WA

I am very excited that the Gray Wolf is returning naturally to Washington state! I will support any plan that will help the long term recovery of wolves in their native habitat. The best way to insure their protection is to educate WA citizens about wolf ecology and their beneficial role in the ecosystem.

Anonymous

Personally, I'm glad to hear they are back!

Anonymous

No wolves! If they do get started, please allow hunters to take them.

Mark D Smith,  Battle Ground WA

Don't let the wolvs be protected

john casebeer,  mount vernon WA

It will bring back a natural Predator

Micheal Pacholski,  Toledo OH

From an economic standpoint, wolves will gut the economy of the hunter/fisher. See what happened to Pierce, ID.

Larry Zalaznik,  Walla Walla WA

Fine

Thomas F McLaughlin,  Spokane WA

If wolves are going to be a part of Washington's wildlife, a season and bag limit will need to be established. If hunting is not allowed for these wolves, they will surely and drastically effect the deer and elk herds. The current cougar population is proof of this. Not enough harvest of these predators will result in very limited deer/elk and consequently reduced hunting over time leading to greatly reduced license sales and a bankrupt game dept. Please remember who supports your paycheck!!! Hunters and Fishermen. Mark Wells President/Tournament Director Cascade Musky Association

Mark Wells,  Puyallup WA