Wolves
I'm new here but wanted to post some pics I took this saturday Jan.6 2010 behind Pinehurst Idaho. I cannot begin to explain all the tracks seen and how outraged I am about their re-introduction to Idaho. Unfortunately I dont know how to add them to my post.
0
-
Just went to a meeting on wolf management, following their delisting in a few months. State Game & Fish is developing regulations for hunting season, livestock depravation, and predator control. This has been going on for years and years, and some of the landowners in the room have been going to various meetings on this topic since the early 1990s.
I am curious what some folks on this site think of our wolf problem. We folk in the intermountain west often wonder what the outside world thinks of this. Myself, when they were introduced to the Rockies in the mid-90s I made a decision to be open-minded. Now, over 12 years later, I just want to see every one of the bloodthirsty SOBs blasted to Kingdom Come. On sight. Now.0 -
I'd like to see wolves reintroduced wherever they existed before we exterminated them. I'd like to see them reintroduced to areas where there is enough protected land for them to make a go of it (i.e. maintain a self-sustaining population). Once you achieve that, then wolves that learn to take domestic stock can be shot on sight.
So: no way I'd like to see a reintroduction program in Iowa....there just isn't enough protected land. On the other hand, Minnesota now issues some (few....about 30, last I heard) tags for wolf hunts each year in the NW corner of the state, because the reintroduction program there has been successful.0 -
A couple years ago i went bear hunting up in manitoba, This was my guide's thoughts on the matter.
Americans are STUPID!
We have spent years upon years trying to get rid of wolves because they have been destroying everything and here the americans are trying to reintroduce them into the wild.... ITS STUPID!!!... Those wolves will do nothing but destroy the livestock and the wildlife.... I realy don't know whats gotten into the americans.
Again, This was his thoughts on the matter... Not mine.... But he does have a point.0 -
quote:Originally posted by stevenrayspeck
A couple years ago i went bear hunting up in manitoba, This was my guide's thoughts on the matter.
Americans are STUPID!
We have spent years upon years trying to get rid of wolves because they have been destroying everything and here the americans are trying to reintroduce them into the wild.... ITS STUPID!!!... Those wolves will do nothing but destroy the livestock and the wildlife.... I realy don't know whats gotten into the americans.
Again, This was his thoughts on the matter... Not mine.... But he does have a point.
Whatever his point may be, I have to ask: how is it that the wolves didn't destroy the wildlife in the several thousand years between the last ice age and the arrival on the continent of humans?0 -
Isn't it a bit ironic that we attack wolves for killing game animals....
God forbid Elmer Fudd not get his bag limit of deer every fall.....0 -
quote:Originally posted by spurgemastur
quote:Originally posted by stevenrayspeck
A couple years ago i went bear hunting up in manitoba, This was my guide's thoughts on the matter.
Americans are STUPID!
We have spent years upon years trying to get rid of wolves because they have been destroying everything and here the americans are trying to reintroduce them into the wild.... ITS STUPID!!!... Those wolves will do nothing but destroy the livestock and the wildlife.... I realy don't know whats gotten into the americans.
Again, This was his thoughts on the matter... Not mine.... But he does have a point.
Whatever his point may be, I have to ask: how is it that the wolves didn't destroy the wildlife in the several thousand years between the last ice age and the arrival on the continent of humans?
Thats a good question, To which i have no answer.... Like i said, Its his thoughts on the matter, Not mine.0 -
to spurgemaster the wolves didn't have man to contend with.
once man was introduced we not only ate the game the wolves would have eaten, but we cleared the rest of the land to plant food on that the wolf wouldn't eat. the wolves are only one rung down on the food chain.0 -
When it's gone it should be left gone. Are you aware that 90% of all species that ever lived on Earth are extinct? When it is time to be gone it should happen. Who cares why or when. If man caused it so be it. This is part of dominating our environment. This will happen to us some day also. Genesis: 1:28
and man--shall have dominion over--the earth--fish----fowl---and all the creatures that dwell upon it. Trying to put back what is gone is playing God. Man is not God.0 -
quote:Originally posted by fideau
Trying to put back what is gone is playing God. Man is not God.
Preserving a species = "Playing God"
Obliterating a species = "Not Playing God"
Got it.....0 -
As a fourth generation Montanan, I screamed bloody murder when the wolves were a comin in the early nineties, that our hunting would be destroyed and that the wolves would turn to livestock and become a huge mess. I was right. Where I live the wolves has a chance to follow the migrating elk from the Big Hole Valley into the East Fork of the Bitterroot valley, and they chose to remain in the Big Hole and eat cattle. My grandparents got rid of them once for a good reason. Thank god for delisting and the potential of 130 tags a year(which was the original reintroduction panels reccomendation). Those tag numbers represent only mamngement figures. But obviously wolves are part of the landscape now and managing them must become an immediate priority. 0 -
I lost one dog to the miserable reintroduced non-native specie and I'll not lose another if I can help it.
They can either give us a oppourtunity to leaglly hunt them as trophy game or predator
or it will continue to be
SHOOT, SHOVEL, AND SHUT-UP
If that offends you, there is a good chance that you don't live in Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho and have no connection with agriculture or spend much time pursuing or viewing various elk herds in the region0 -
If man is meant to dominate the Earth and is given dominion over all creatures then it could be his choice to preserve or not I suppose. When a wolf kills a human some people may say it is God's will. If you don't believe in God I guess you would say some stupid azz humans should leave nature alone. I don't care either way myself. I don't eat wolf. If I lived where wolves are now becoming a problem due to man's interference I would be a little pizzed. But hey, it's almost NASCAR season so WGAF? 0 -
I never intended to say that I thought the reintroduction of wolves was a good thing, or a bad thing. First I have no stake in the outcome of that war, I would think that if I were there, it would be as dpmule said shoot, shovel, and shut-up.
My point was that both the wolf and man are carnavors and as such we are opponents. they seem to do fine in Zoos and such and if people want to keep them, that seem as good a place as any.
It's obvious that man and wolf cannot live in harmony, if your down on the ground hurt, that wolf will have zero thought about your life except can he eat you.0 -
quote:Originally posted by daveald
to spurgemaster the wolves didn't have man to contend with.
once man was introduced we not only ate the game the wolves would have eaten, but we cleared the rest of the land to plant food on that the wolf wouldn't eat. the wolves are only one rung down on the food chain.+1 can't blame them, that's what they do to survive. eat other animals. they aren't ungulates.
take away your clothes and your hands, put on some fur and paws, what would you do? head straight for the cows.0 -
I think any reasonable person would comprehend that encouraging something to prosper that will be hostile and dangerous to people and their livlihood is not a smart thing. Or some good project is halted because of a snail. When snails dominated the earth they didn't give a slimy damn if a human was in their way. It always amazes me that so much of this drivel comes out of California, where the pioneers there dug up, cut down and generally trashed everything in sight for their own benefit, even to killing every Native American they could, virtually wiping out the population. Now they want to "preserve, protect, re-introduce, etc.,etc., etc. Every now and then a re-introduced protected Cougar kills some tree hugging nature loving jogging bottled water sucker out there. Dinosaurs once lived everywhere we do, and I am sure there are some mental midgets that would say we should bring them back if that were possible. So is the stupidity of man infinite. "Elementary, my dear Watson." 0 -
quote:Originally posted by flyfisher363
As a fourth generation Montanan, I screamed bloody murder when the wolves were a comin in the early nineties, that our hunting would be destroyed and that the wolves would turn to livestock and become a huge mess. I was right. Where I live the wolves has a chance to follow the migrating elk from the Big Hole Valley into the East Fork of the Bitterroot valley, and they chose to remain in the Big Hole and eat cattle. My grandparents got rid of them once for a good reason. Thank god for delisting and the potential of 130 tags a year(which was the original reintroduction panels reccomendation). Those tag numbers represent only mamngement figures. But obviously wolves are part of the landscape now and managing them must become an immediate priority.
We won't be able to use the tags once the FS shuts down all the public roads in the national forests here, the roads that we pay taxes on. There's been deer, elk, and household pets killed by wolves not a mile from where I live. I think that's getting a little close. Call me crazy (as I know some of you will, but you more than likely don't know the story anyway), but I say the 130 tags are good for management. It's a rather unnerving feeling looking across the river while fishing and seeing a full grown wolf staring at you licking it chops. It's just like transplanting Grizzlies, they didn't have to, they were always here. Just my $.02. Also a 5th generation Montanan.0 -
the wolf has his place here and was here long before the livestock they take which is there nature. in alaska they shoot them from the air which in my book only a wuzzy could do. my take anyway (member winchester arms collector's , remington society, M1 garand association and defenders of wildlife) 0 -
I like wolves. Cared for one, from 3 weeks until he died. Bets darn dog I have ever had bar none. More personality than 99% of the people I know. He was simply the greatest. Now, I kill coyotes because they compete with me for deer and pheasants. Being a dog lover, I just have to remind myself of that fact. So, if you guys have too many,(it pains me to say it) you have to kill them. But please don't wipe them out again. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by daveald
to spurgemaster the wolves didn't have man to contend with.
once man was introduced we not only ate the game the wolves would have eaten, but we cleared the rest of the land to plant food on that the wolf wouldn't eat. the wolves are only one rung down on the food chain.
I think you're absolutely correct.
So it comes down to a question of: are we here to dominate the earth, or to manage the earth, or to live on the earth? I prefer that last option, and the earth that I prefer to live on is populated by a bunch of pretty cool species. To keep them around will require some management because we are SO populous.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
quote:Originally posted by fideau
Trying to put back what is gone is playing God. Man is not God.
Preserving a species = "Playing God"
Obliterating a species = "Not Playing God"
Got it.....
That's a joke, right?0 -
quote:Originally posted by fideau
I think any reasonable person would comprehend that encouraging something to prosper that will be hostile and dangerous to people and their livlihood is not a smart thing. Or some good project is halted because of a snail. When snails dominated the earth they didn't give a slimy damn if a human was in their way. It always amazes me that so much of this drivel comes out of California, where the pioneers there dug up, cut down and generally trashed everything in sight for their own benefit, even to killing every Native American they could, virtually wiping out the population. Now they want to "preserve, protect, re-introduce, etc.,etc., etc. Every now and then a re-introduced protected Cougar kills some tree hugging nature loving jogging bottled water sucker out there. Dinosaurs once lived everywhere we do, and I am sure there are some mental midgets that would say we should bring them back if that were possible. So is the stupidity of man infinite. "Elementary, my dear Watson."
And let that re-introduced coug eat a water-bottle-hugging-hippie! I, for one, appreciate the opportunity to see that cougar even if it might eat me. I hope my kids have the opportunity to see it, too, even if it might eat them. The alternative really sucks.0 -
My neighbor has some property in WVA his son lives there with 5 full grown wolves. I figure he will get drunk go in to feed them and end up as feed but as (35WHELLANCLASSIC) says "thats just my $.02 worth." 0 -
we are the only ones that put animals needs over humans.
the river in ga proves that, we have people in ga, getting low on water, but we have to keep water running because of some shellfish?
how smart is that?0 -
quote:Originally posted by 46270
we are the only ones that put animals needs over humans.
the river in ga proves that, we have people in ga, getting low on water, but we have to keep water running because of some shellfish?
how smart is that?
I think we're no different from the wildlife on the planet. I think we attend to our needs in the same way that a fox or a coyote or a snail attends to its needs. I also think we're the most successful species on the planet. No other species (at least no other multicellular species) has managed to colonize all 7 continents.
So we're like all other wildlife EXCEPT that we have a much greater ability to modify the landscape than any other creature (beavers do pretty well, but they don't hold a candle to us) and we also have the power of rational thought. That allows us to ask: is this really a good thing, overall?
Now, the GA water situation is pretty dire and I wouldn't blame anybody who suggested that GA's water supply might be more important than the continued existence of a certain shellfish. That's the nature of self-preservation, the basis of natural selection, and the way that all creatures are. Still, if it were me, I'd be looking at EVERY alternative before I pulled the switch on that shellfish because I know that there's nothing I can do to bring it back once it's gone.
And I like the fact that it's there now, so I assume my children also will like the fact that it's there when they are grown.
To take my point to the extreme: do you want to live on a planet that is all asphalt and cement drainage ditches? I'm sure we'd figure out how to survive on that planet, but would you WANT to?0 -
quote:Originally posted by buschmaster
quote:Originally posted by daveald
to spurgemaster the wolves didn't have man to contend with.
once man was introduced we not only ate the game the wolves would have eaten, but we cleared the rest of the land to plant food on that the wolf wouldn't eat. the wolves are only one rung down on the food chain.+1 can't blame them, that's what they do to survive. eat other animals. they aren't ungulates.
take away your clothes and your hands, put on some fur and paws, what would you do? head straight for the cows.
I've seen a 90 pound calf that was completely gutted. Nothing but a little pool of blood in the rib cage. I don't think a coyote or satanic cult members did that.0 -
I hunt northern MN, the wolf population is growing bigger every year. It doesn't take much to figure that out, just go out to the road and look at the fresh wolf tracks that cover it from side to side. I like them as much as they probably like me. I do believe they do need to be MANAGED in some way.
Just my 2 Paso's0 -
quote:Originally posted by youngsparkey
I hunt northern MN, the wolf population is growing bigger every year. It doesn't take much to figure that out, just go out to the road and look at the fresh wolf tracks that cover it from side to side. I like them as much as they probably like me. I do believe they do need to be MANAGED in some way.
Just my 2 Paso's
And in MN, you're lucky to be in one of the areas where the wolf is really making a come-back! They will need to be managed, probably through hunts.
You know how MN manages its deer population, right? It is that number of deer that are just enough for the hunters, but just few enough that they don't eat too much of the corn crop. It'll take a while to get there, but eventually, wolves will be managed under the same paradigm.0 -
Before I say my piece, I'll admit to not having read the entire thread. Sorry if I'm repeating someone else.
Re-introduction of a species for cause may be a reasonable move under the right circumstances. From what I can gather there have been beneficial effects of apex predator releases within our national parks. I also understand that predators can't be made to respect park borders and that wolves are by nature an apex predator. This can be a problem for "neighbors".
Here in the east we're now regaining expatriated species fairly rapidly. The stray moose, turkey vultures, turkeys, coyotes, bears, and the occasional bald eagle are no longer considered rare.
There is some argument as to whether our coyote population was reintroduced by design, or merely the result of favorable circumstances. In the end it's likely counterproductive to argue the point. They're here. They, too, are apex predators, and they're smart.
I believe it fair to say that our grouse and rabbit populations have declined due to coyote predation. Turkeys and deer have continued to do well, though deer are somewhat less numerous than in past years. And maybe this isn't a bad thing.
Small domestic animals, it seems, have been put at some risk. This may be possibly balanced out by the reduction of feral cats. Coyotes seem to have a taste for them.
In any case, we deal with our "pests" as we think best. Coyotes not causing problems are left pretty much alone. Those casing our property in hopes of snagging a pet or farm animal often develop large fatal holes in their bodies. All in all a fair system.
Now for wolves... I believe I can say that we have them. Not a large population by any means, but they're here. They're much more secretive than coyotes so sightings have been only scattered, but I'm beginning to see the impact. Strangely, it's not exactly what I'd have expected.
More than anything else it's a reduction in the coyote population. Deer seem to still be doing well, though those injured during deer season have disappeared. Several years ago injured deer would winter over. No more it seems. Wolves? I don't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet on it.
Grouse are making a comeback, though our rabbit populations remain low. This may be due more to raptors and have little to do with coyotes or wolves. Many more hawks than in the past here.
Since we no longer have the numerous farms of the past, nor do we have open range here in the east, predation of livestock hasn't really been an issue. Perhaps a calf here and there. A cat or small dog disappearing on occasion, but that's about it. So far anyway.
When it comes to the point where our farmers begin to find their heifers pulled down, then it'll be another matter. Should the culprit be a wolf, then I suspect the problem will be dealt with in the same general way we've dealt with coyotes. I sincerely doubt that anyone will consult the local game warden first.
As to any predator intentionally introduced into an area, I believe it fair to hold those who made the introduction responsible for financial losses caused by their actions. This isn't to say that I'm against a population of native animals. All I'm saying is that there are consequences for every action we humans take.
We eradicated wolves and coyotes over much of their native habitat. This allowed us to raise domestic animals without much fear of predation. It also disrupted a natural balance both by removing a predator and by allowing human activities. I make no argument as to whether we humans had a right to do this or not. We did it, and it's a fact.
My position is that we humans probably overstepped our rights when we totally eradicated species such as the wolf. It temporarily made us richer, but in the long term poorer. Since the wolf has now returned, perhaps we can deal with him on a slightly more enlightened basis.
I wonder if it might not be best to eliminate the outright miscreants and tolerate those who cause minimal impact? Perhaps we both have rights. Maybe a little give and take on both sides would be of benefit to all concerned.
Wolves are not evil creatures, nor are coyotes. They have a place in nature. but their place sometimes overlaps ours. I suggest a bit of tolerance and respect for them. Control is one thing. Eradication is quite another.0 -
quote:Originally posted by spurgemastur
quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
quote:Originally posted by fideau
Trying to put back what is gone is playing God. Man is not God.
Preserving a species = "Playing God"
Obliterating a species = "Not Playing God"
Got it.....
That's a joke, right?
Yes, it's called sarcasm.....[:)]0 -
quote:When it's gone it should be left gone. Are you aware that 90% of all species that ever lived on Earth are extinct?
Where would we as american hunters be if that was the predominant thought about 75 years ago? Rabbits would likely be the biggest game we would have to hunt because a large percentage of our large game was nearly wiped out in the early 1900's. Had comservationists not stepped in we likey would have lost or at the least reduced to non huntable levels all deer, elk, moose, bear, bison, mountain lions, mountain goats, pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep and a few I have probably forgotten. Even if we were unable to hunt them the abundance of wildlife makes for a more interesting world.
Seems we humans are OK with things till it makes for an inconvenience in our personal lives. Such is the case for wolves, coyotes, mountain lions and bears. They are in many cases troublesome having less value to us than other wildlife/game. Keep in mind that they are only trying to adapt to human encroachment the best and only way they can. I see a big difference in the loss of animals that have the ability to adapt but are not afforded the opportunity as opposed to wildlife that exists in a small niche and is unable to adapt to outside of that niche. In spite of the the trouble they can cause there is a place for wolves in this world. They existed in natural harmony before man came to this country and they can still exist with REASONABLE accomodation and population control. It seems us humans have the desire to have 100% control over our environment
As a side note: I lived in north centeral Minnesota during the 70's. We heard wolves often and saw them rarely but I don't recall hearing of any serious human/wolf problems at that time.
I have also been a fan of sci-fi space movies. Every time I see a "space station" I think about how lonely and empty a world that must be without wildlife.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
66 comments