Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Hunting Forum > Re-introducing wolves

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-05-2011, 10:38 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 55
Liked 2 Times on 1 Posts

Default

The three S rule is used up there. You talk to anyone up there and that is exactly what they say. The problem is that it is winter, so the ground is frozen. There is a ton of snow up there right now so the blood shows like an eye sore. The DNR fly around up there looking for suspicious activity and that will stick out like crazy. People usually won't shoot them unless if it is summer or if its not on their land. A lot are waiting for Wolf hunting season to open up.

__________________
hawkman1 is offline  
 
Old 05-04-2011, 10:29 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ploofy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,205
Liked 57 Times on 42 Posts
Likes Given: 22

Default

...This is absurd. They obviously weren't going for the cop. They ran right past him. Have you ever seen any type of canine tree a coon? Or eye a table scrap? They don't keep running past. They wait. Want to know what are responsible for more human deaths per year than wolves? Moose. Raccoons. Flu shots. Accidental firearm discharge. And no kidding the guy keeping the wolves got bit. Would have happened if it had been a big dog in heat. People don't keep mountain lions as pets too often either.

__________________

Animo non Astutia

Vae Victis

Ploofy is offline  
 
Old 05-11-2011, 11:27 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Idaho --,Happy
Posts: 1,905
Liked 341 Times on 237 Posts
Likes Given: 38

Default

Idaho update;

Idaho Mountain Express: Wolf tag sales off to slow start - May 11, 2011

__________________
Flat Tire is offline  
 
Old 05-12-2011, 12:27 AM   #14
Supporting Member
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sniper03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,015
Liked 2241 Times on 1122 Posts
Likes Given: 1150

Default

I agree! It is very obvious that the wolves had not intent on attacking the officer. I notice he had what seemed to be a heavy coat on. Which could have put it in the time frame of the possibility of a female in the pack or two being heat. But I also realize some of the problems the reintroduction to areas has caused. Bottom line it never fails! When man interferes with nature he always Fs things up. I believe they are a game as well as an intelligent animals. And hunting like other animals should have been permitted all along with normal game laws but not completely stopped. As they have done on the reintroduction situation. And ranchers and farmers should always have the right to kill them if they are a nuisance or killing livestock. They have been doing a good job or cleaning our deer herds, elk and other animals in the areas of introduction. Only my two cents!

03

__________________
Sniper03 is offline  
 
Old 05-12-2011, 01:46 AM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
500mag_guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 180
Default

they did it here in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho and it was the STUPIDEST thing they could have ever done hands down!!! they are everywhere here and they have been tossed back and forth from being protected do to a cock sucker judge named Donald Molloy in Missoula, Montana that i personally would knock on his ass if i ever seen him in person. He is responsible for our elk, deer, moose, JUST EVERYTHING population dropping over 1/2. They have it set up for this year where there will be a season but ol Molloy will get it shut down agian. But personally i dont care id shoot every one of those phuckers i see!

smoke-pack-day.jpg

__________________

My dear boy if 5 miles away they don't sit up in their beds and go what the HELL was that, the gun is not big enough!


Last edited by 500mag_guy; 05-14-2011 at 12:39 AM.
500mag_guy is offline  
 
Old 05-13-2011, 01:02 AM   #16
Supporting Member
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sniper03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,015
Liked 2241 Times on 1122 Posts
Likes Given: 1150

Default

500,

I do not blame you! As the one member said shoot and bury!
Some judges are known for being total idiots! Happy shooting!
03

__________________
Sniper03 is offline  
 
Old 05-13-2011, 02:40 AM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SW OK
Posts: 4,211
Liked 1999 Times on 1075 Posts
Likes Given: 2974

Default

We don't have grey wolves in OK. But we do have cougars. Some of us believe that the OWDC brought cougars into the state. OWDC denied that but they were very protective of cougars. A friends stud house was torn up by a cougar and had to be put down. The man called OWDC and told them that he was going to kill that cougar. He was told: "Those cougars have tracking chips and we will arrest you if you kill one".

Finally the OK legislature over-ruled the OWDC. Cougars can be killed if they are a threat to livestock or humans. You're supposed to call a game warden if you kill one but most don't bother.

__________________
alsaqr is offline  
 
Old 05-13-2011, 03:54 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ViNoM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma,USA
Posts: 322
Default

Pardon me while I jump up on my soap box...and I apologize for the lengthy post. This will be the only thing I will post to this subject.

While wolves have gotten a lot of press, it offers a chance to bring to light some other facts that should be illuminated as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Tire View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjd3282 View Post
Did you see the numbers and how it was reported? 1.7 millon dollars spent for wolves. The reporter said the state paid some and the federal government paid some. Really? The government didn't pay jack for them we the tax payers did. I wish every time someone says the "government" paid they would use the words "tax payers". The government doesn't generate it's own income they steal it from us. 1.7 millon for wild dogs. Wonder why we are broke?

Now instead of the State paying and funding sport hunts, the full responsibility of regulating and controlling the animals falls back to the federal government. Money that could be better spent on other animals more deserving of the FWS strained funds for conservation. More dollars are spent on legal defenses than on actual biology within the FWS.

Endangered Species Act Candidates Getting Prioritized | Miller-McCune
Since 2007, WildEarth Guardians has petitioned more than 700 species for listing and filed more than 30 related lawsuits to nudge the Fish and Wildlife Service through the process’ many bottlenecks. The Endangered Species Act requires that wildlife petitioned by the public receive an initial finding within 90 days, and then another at 12 months. The government then ultimately places species in one of three categories: they either warrant or don’t warrant protection, or warrant it but are “precluded by higher priorities.”

Fish and Wildlife officials said this week that the sheer volume of court orders has threatened to consume most of the service’s funding and staff. The service has received more than 1,230 petitions for new species to be considered in the last four years, nearly eclipsing the total from the previous three decades. The government sought to consolidate the many related lawsuits in district court in Washington, D.C., leading to the settlement reached this week.

From outside Washington, it’s hard to grasp exactly what it is that takes so long in making these decisions. “The principal question is actually a very simple one,” said Nicole Rosmarino, the wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians. “Is the species threatened or endangered, or not?” And that question is supposed to be a purely biological one, without regard for political or economic considerations, without concern for even how an endangered species would logistically be saved once it’s listed.

So IMHO, it looks to me like tax payer dollars were used to battle petitions by tax-exempt companies. Not squandered by your federal government. Here is a little info on this "Charity" working to "steal" your tax-payer dollars url=http://www.wildearthguardians.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_history]WildEarth Guardians: History

So you see, there are other aspects to funds spent by the federal government on "wolves" than what meets the eye (or the ear) of the public. Statute requirements dictate that moneys be spent on these animals. The federal government, i.e. FWS, is FORCED by these groups to expend YOUR tax dollars on things that they would normally spend elsewhere for greater benefits to everybody.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WANTS to delist the wolves, but a congressional rider is not the way to do it, in this I agree.
On MAY 5, 2011
The wolf activists continue their selfish challenges to wolves being delisted under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a challenge in federal district court in Missoula, Montana, arguing that a congressional rider requiring removal of ESA protections for wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains is unlawful because it violated the separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution.

The wolf rider (to the budget) is a clear example of overreaching by Congress. The rider is a disaster for any endangered species that a politician doesn’t like. Congress has set a terrible precedent that I hope will be overturned; not because of the wolves, but because of the precedent.

Delist Wolves Defenders of Wildlife agreed to not litigate delisting of wolves once certain population numbers were reached. Defenders of Wildlife along with other wolf activist groups have not honored the agreement they made challenging every effort to delist wolves from the Endangered Species List. Wildlife agencies now estimate wolf numbers to be at least 5 times the objective population agreed to prior to reintroduction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spittinfire View Post
I am not a fan of reintroducing them. They are hunters and don't care what they hunt. They will kill deer, livestock, pets, and I believe humans just like they did in the past. A wolf has a place and it is no where near me.
Wolves were once a vital part of the landscape of North America, and evidently they were also an integral contributor to ecosystems before bounty hunters decimated their numbers. But with the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone, researchers have discovered that wolves may literally be reshaping the landscape. By keeping elk on the run, the aspens and willows are allowed to grow unchecked (contrasting the denuding of the vegetation seen in Yellowstone after the wolves were extirpated from the park). Trees and shrubs are starting to grow back along the streams and rivers, and beavers and songbirds once again have new homes and habitats in which to flourish. The reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone may have been controversial, but the long-term effects have paid off through the manifestation of biodiversity within the park. The majestic wilderness and vitality of Yellowstone National Park is making a comeback of its own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking View Post
Around here we use the three s rule " SHOOT, SHOVEL, AND SHUTUP.
Wolves and cyotes are reaking havok on our deer populations.
F.K.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 500mag_guy View Post
Donald Molloy is responsible for our elk, deer, moose, JUST EVERYTHING population dropping over 1/2. They have it set up for this year where there will be a season but ol Molloy will get it shut down agian. But personally i dont care i shoot every one of those phuckers i see!

Attachment 28473
A word of caution to the wise: posting of illegal activity on a public forum is never a good idea...The federal penalty for killing an animal protected under the Endangered Species Act is a maximum $100,000 fine and a year in prison.

Food for thought.
__________________
ViNoM



Prescribed Fire is Mother Nature's plastic surgeon.
ViNoM is offline  
 
Old 05-13-2011, 11:32 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ploofy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,205
Liked 57 Times on 42 Posts
Likes Given: 22

Default

Even the bounty hunters who took wolves knew that they were vital to the ecosystems. When the game levels up north decreased, the government sent researchers up to investigate, and they proved conclusively that it was due to over hunting by humans, not wolves. In fact an apex predator, like the wolf, is more likely to keep game at better levels. I'm sure you've all taken part in hunts with higher than normal bag limits because the deer are all starving and dying because of lack of food, where people can just hold out some hay and kill the deer with a ball peen hammer. Wolves and animals like that keep it from happening and keep the animals moving to areas with more food. Frank Glaser, one of the more accomplished wolf hunters, said himself that wolves were vital, and could not imagine this country without them.

__________________

Animo non Astutia

Vae Victis

Ploofy is offline  
 
Old 05-13-2011, 12:52 PM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,722
Liked 2233 Times on 1006 Posts
Likes Given: 2169

Default

I'm confused ploofy: if they are being over hunted then there would be fewer an hence more food for the rest. They only go hungry when there are to many of them.

It's interesting to note all the animals that went extinct before humans or wolves and the eco system didn't seem to mind at all.

__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs Gatekeeper Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 15 12-02-2011 03:15 AM
Wolves Impact markerdown Hunting Forum 38 03-06-2010 03:39 PM
Off endangered list, wolves face new pressure from hunters sculker The Club House 0 04-27-2008 09:40 PM