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

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-14-2011, 03:42 PM   #41
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ploofy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,205
Liked 57 Times on 42 Posts
Likes Given: 22

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Tire View Post
Interesting ! It is always tough on people not in Montana, Wyoming or Idaho to understand what has happened in these states. In this first article Rex Rammel is telling people to shoot a Federal Endangered Animal and you won't be prosecuted by the local authorities. Why is he saying that ? Because he has seen the damage to Deer and Elk herds, lets do the math. Each wolf kills four times a month. 800 wolves in the state kill 3200 each month. 3200 x 12 months =38,400 dead Deer and Elk each year. 5 years =192,000 or no more Deer and Elk. The pro life group never does the math.

Former gov candidate urges residents to kill wolves | KTVB.COM Boise

VICTOMNOMORE - comes on here and tells me I am wrong and all gray wolves are the same. Thats like saying all dogs are the same. So I called her a fool. Sorry- But wolves are different and the wolves they brought here are big. And the Timber wolf on the east of the US is as big as our coyotes here. And I just have to include this, you are the moderator and your avatar is very offensive, you disgraced the president of the US. You'll say that's my freedom of speech, and so is it my freedom to correct someone that doesn't know there is a difference between wolves. Come to Idaho, Montana or Wyoming and see the animal in action.

Here is what is going on- it just doesn't make your local paper. And your tax dollar is paying for it.
Wolves kill 120 sheep at ranch near Dillon


...Yes, because wolves only eat elk and deer, and elk and deer never escape or reproduce. And insulting the president isn't offensive, also it is well within the law unlike what you're saying, and he isn't insulting the president. He's making a visible connection between real life and pop culture for comedic relief with political intones. And maybe each Pack kills 4 deer a month, but certainly not each wolf.

And the article sounds highly unlikely. That sounds more like a pack of stray dogs. The article itself said that that has never even come close to happening before. You also just posted an article that said hunting wolves would be bad. Did you even read it?
__________________

Animo non Astutia

Vae Victis


Last edited by Ploofy; 05-14-2011 at 03:59 PM.
Ploofy is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 04:08 PM   #42
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Idaho --,Happy
Posts: 1,905
Liked 341 Times on 237 Posts
Likes Given: 38

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ploofy View Post
...Yes, because wolves only eat elk and deer, and elk and deer never escape or reproduce. And insulting the president isn't offensive, also it is well within the law unlike what you're saying, and he isn't insulting the president. He's making a visible connection between real life and pop culture for comedic relief with political intones. And maybe each Pack kills 4 deer a month, but certainly not each wolf.

And the article sounds highly unlikely. That sounds more like a pack of stray dogs. The article itself said that that has never even come close to happening before. You also just posted an article that said hunting wolves would be bad. Did you even read it?
You must have read something different, didn't the article say they got in a plane and shot the uncollared wolf ? And my german shepherds eat twice a day. A pack of 4 wolves will dismantle a deer in one day.
__________________

Last edited by Flat Tire; 05-14-2011 at 04:12 PM.
Flat Tire is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 04:13 PM   #43
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ploofy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,205
Liked 57 Times on 42 Posts
Likes Given: 22

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Tire View Post
You must have read something different, didn't the article say they got in a plane and shot a collared wolf ? And my german shepherds eat twice a day. A pack of 4 wolves will dismantle a deer in one day.
No, it said that it shot an UNcollared wolf, and then stated that actively hunting wolves would likely cause more domestic animals to become food. And do your german shepards eat something that weighs much more than them twice a day? I'd hope not.
__________________

Animo non Astutia

Vae Victis

Ploofy is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 04:33 PM   #44
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ViNoM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma,USA
Posts: 322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Tire View Post
Interesting ! It is always tough on people not in Montana, Wyoming or Idaho to understand what has happened in these states. In this first article Rex Rammel is telling people to shoot a Federal Endangered Animal and you won't be prosecuted by the local authorities. Why is he saying that ? Because he has seen the damage to Deer and Elk herds, lets do the math. Each wolf kills four times a month. 800 wolves in the state kill 3200 each month. 3200 x 12 months =38,400 dead Deer and Elk each year. 5 years =192,000 or no more Deer and Elk. The pro life group never does the math.

Former gov candidate urges residents to kill wolves | KTVB.COM Boise

VICTOMNOMORE - comes on here and tells me I am wrong and all gray wolves are the same. Thats like saying all dogs are the same. So I called her a fool. Sorry- But wolves are different and the wolves they brought here are big. And the Timber wolf on the east of the US is as big as our coyotes here. ... Come to Idaho, Montana or Wyoming and see the animal in action.

Here is what is going on- it just doesn't make your local paper. And your tax dollar is paying for it.
Wolves kill 120 sheep at ranch near Dillon
From the first above article: Rammell says county commissioners should declare an emergency that allows citizens to kill wolves on sight. But, he adds, residents should organize a hunt and start killing wolves anyway even if no such order comes. He says he does not believe the sheriff, the state or federal authorities would interfere. Wolves lost their endangered status in Montana and Idaho in 2009, but were returned to the endangered list this year following a lawsuit from environmentalists.

First of all, I never said ALL Wolves are the same...I said they were all the same species. They are just now looking at the taxonomy for separating them into different species. But from a legal standpoint, they are the same species, until the time they are reclassified. As such, the same laws apply to them. It also says he does not believe the authorities would interfere. But what do you think those enviro-nuts would do if that happened? Force the hand of the government through a...wait for it...lawsuit! The article makes the point I was trying to make in my first post on this subject...lawsuits from environmentalists are the problem, not the government.

The 2nd article is scare tactics and hype (that most people will fall for.) It says explicitly: In a highly unusual move for wolves, they killed about 120 adult male sheep in one incident on the Rebish/Konen Livestock Ranch south of Dillon last week. That compares with a total of 111 sheep killed by wolves in Montana in 2008, according to Carolyn Sime, the statewide wolf coordinator for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

Highly unusual, meaning they don't usually take that many at a time. Personally, I think there should be a mechanism in place for compensating farmers for lost livestock from federally-protected predators. That would solve that problem. The ecosystem needs predators to stay in balance and be healthy. What is good for the land/beast is also good for the man; all things are connected!
__________________
ViNoM



Prescribed Fire is Mother Nature's plastic surgeon.
ViNoM is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 05:01 PM   #45
Deader Bears=Better Bears
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: BFE,Mississippi
Posts: 19,150
Liked 5692 Times on 3341 Posts
Likes Given: 4847

Default

Personally, i think this is yet another area in which Big Government has overgrown its "usefulness". The government is supposed to be "by" and "for" the people, not just "of the people". If a person has bought and paid for land, particularly rural land, that person should be the one to determine what wild animals are allowed to roam on that land (as long as they can be reasonably expected to remain on THAT land and not bother other property owners).

It would be hard to deny the overpopulation of some species (white tail deer in some areas), but hunters would be much easier to "manage" than wolves. Rather than bringing back (to privately-owned property in some cases) potentially-dangerous wild animals to control the population of other dangerous/troublesome wild animals, why not encourage more people to hunt the actually dangerous/troublesome wild animals while leaving the potentially-dangerous wild predators in the limited ranges they have sought out (and in zoos).

I can think of better uses for my tax dollars than federal & state mismanagement of what the government has so obviously mismanged in the past. As for the management of government-held property, that would probably be more fairly handled by the neighbors of that government-held property, as they are the citizens with the most at risk or to gain.

LESS GOVERNMENT = BETTER GOVERNMENT & a closed/disolved government agency is a good start.

__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.
GANDER MOUNTAIN OF HATTIESBURG, MS IS OVERPRICED, HAS LOUSY CUSTOMER SERVICE, & SELLS BEAT UP PISTOLS TO LITTLE OLD LADIES AS "NEW". :p


Last edited by orangello; 05-14-2011 at 05:09 PM.
orangello is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 05:06 PM   #46
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ViNoM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma,USA
Posts: 322
Default

I will agree with certain aspects of that but, the Country has hardly any areas where there are no people. How would you manage for that?

__________________
ViNoM



Prescribed Fire is Mother Nature's plastic surgeon.
ViNoM is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 05:25 PM   #47
Deader Bears=Better Bears
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: BFE,Mississippi
Posts: 19,150
Liked 5692 Times on 3341 Posts
Likes Given: 4847

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VICTIMNOMORE View Post
I will agree with certain aspects of that but, the Country has hardly any areas where there are no people. How would you manage for that?
I'm not sure i understand your question. In unpopulated areas, it would seem that the current residents (animals) would have little impact on citizens and could be left to "manage" themselves unless/until those animals presented a problem for their neighbors. In populated & semi-populated areas, there are property owners to manage the animals on their property.

If you are asking where the government should set aside land for game preserves, i would say anywhere that no people want to own the land (not where people are prohibited from owning land by an over-reaching government) or nowhere at all. If an individual or group of individuals wish to use their rural land to house a population of elk or wolves or even bears, more power to them, as they will be responsible for any damages done to the property of others by their pets/livestock.

National parks would present a bit of an issue, but the income from park visitors should be enough to support the level of management desired by the public on a park-by-park basis. IE, if Yellowstone spends millions on bear care, yellowstone should be certain of an income stream from park visitors to cover that expenditure.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.
GANDER MOUNTAIN OF HATTIESBURG, MS IS OVERPRICED, HAS LOUSY CUSTOMER SERVICE, & SELLS BEAT UP PISTOLS TO LITTLE OLD LADIES AS "NEW". :p


Last edited by orangello; 05-14-2011 at 05:28 PM.
orangello is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 05:34 PM   #48
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ViNoM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma,USA
Posts: 322
Default

take a look at google and zoom in to just about anywhere and you will find people there

You ideal is a good one, but not everyone would be as responsible with the animals that have every right to be there as much as we do. That's all I'm sayin'

To many unscrupulous people that do not understand or appreciate the size of the home range of a bear, or cougar. These can be 100's of miles

__________________
ViNoM



Prescribed Fire is Mother Nature's plastic surgeon.
ViNoM is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 05:45 PM   #49
Deader Bears=Better Bears
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: BFE,Mississippi
Posts: 19,150
Liked 5692 Times on 3341 Posts
Likes Given: 4847

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VICTIMNOMORE View Post
take a look at google and zoom in to just about anywhere and you will find people there

You ideal is a good one, but not everyone would be as responsible with the animals that have every right to be there as much as we do. That's all I'm sayin'

To many unscrupulous people that do not understand or appreciate the size of the home range of a bear, or cougar. These can be 100's of miles
Yes, and the people and their livelihoods and freedoms/property rights are far more important to me than the animals they have replaced in given ranges. If a landowner is being irresponsible by eliminating unwanted animals from his property, then we define "irresponsible" differently.

As for the range of such historic predatory animals, the ones in zoos seem to be an adequate legacy to the history of these now superfluous animals, much like the statues & fossils of the dinosaurs we have available for view and study in various museums. Museums are the proper places for such historical examples of the former landholders of this landmass, though small groups on larger parcels of privately-owned and well-enclosed property shouldn't be much of a problem for anyone.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.
GANDER MOUNTAIN OF HATTIESBURG, MS IS OVERPRICED, HAS LOUSY CUSTOMER SERVICE, & SELLS BEAT UP PISTOLS TO LITTLE OLD LADIES AS "NEW". :p

orangello is offline  
 
Old 05-14-2011, 06:01 PM   #50
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ViNoM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma,USA
Posts: 322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
Yes, and the people and their livelihoods and freedoms/property rights are far more important to me than the animals they have replaced in given ranges. If a landowner is being irresponsible by eliminating unwanted animals from his property, then we define "irresponsible" differently.

As for the range of such historic predatory animals, the ones in zoos seem to be an adequate legacy to the history of these now superfluous animals, much like the statues & fossils of the dinosaurs we have available for view and study in various museums. Museums are the proper places for such historical examples of the former landholders of this landmass, though small groups on larger parcels of privately-owned and well-enclosed property shouldn't be much of a problem for anyone.
Not saying that we should take any freedoms away from anyone. Just would like to see more people respect the planet and ALL of its inhabitants. Learn to live within our means, and only take from the land what it can ecologically support. It is my world view that we do not live ON this planet but WITHIN it. If we destroy the animal's habitat, we destroy ourselves in the process. All things are connected.

All peoples need to learn this lesson, but alas, I fear that many do not hold the same world view as I do.
__________________
ViNoM



Prescribed Fire is Mother Nature's plastic surgeon.
ViNoM 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