More wolves??

#3
#3
I think the petitioners should be made to sign an agreement to accept all liability for loss of life or private property. That would put an end to their silly petition.
 
#4
#4
my co worker was just talking about how she could hear Wolves howling last night in ALPHARETTA. She said even her dog was scared
 
#5
#5
IPorange said:
My father shot a wolf last spring, and I thought of you gs.
Click to expand...

He must be a specieist, that's worse than being racist according to the humane society.

How are we ever going to create the world socialist order that is more humane if we don't reeducate specieists???

BTW, have you heard any more about the supposedly endangered snail that was sufficient cause for the banning of fishing and watering of livestock in Idaho??

I talked with an 82 years old farmer last week that is still farming and has gotten 1,000 bales of hay this year not counting rolled bales and he quit trying to raise calves a long time ago because coyote packs took about half his newborn calves.

I have a hispanic friend whose family still owns a ranch in new Mexico that is part of a 1600s Spanish land grant and they quit having livestock about 20 years ago because of coyotes and he told me it was supposedly illegal to hunt and shoot them.

Washington DC and a lot of activist judges evidently don't have the brains of that Idaho snail imo.

When will America ever abandon such insanities and get real?? I doubt the water has yet been turned back on for irrigation in California's central valley but who cares?? As long as some minnow is happy then the big fish in Washington are happy.
 
#6
#6
He's a pretty big outdoorsman up in Alaska, so...


Yes, I have heard of that snail in Idaho. I've told you, I grew up right there near that snail in Mountain Home, Idaho.
 
#7
#7
J-P said:
I think the petitioners should be made to sign an agreement to accept all liability for loss of life or private property. That would put an end to their silly petition.
Click to expand...

By loss of life what do you mean? Cattle or humans?
 
#8
#8
They'll insinuate humans, although wolves attack less people than bears, moose, or deer.
 
#9
#9
IPorange said:
They'll insinuate humans, although wolves attack less people than bears, moose, or deer.
Click to expand...

WILD wolves are less of a threat to humans than domesticated/stray dogs. I don't see a problem with re-introducing a species that was here before us (in appropriate numbers).
 
#10
#10
I agree. Many of the things blamed on wolves and coyotes are actually feral dogs, especially east of the Mississippi. I remember a few years ago when a neighbor of my parents was saying he had finally shot that coyote that had been bothering his animals: it was definitely just a scrappy german shepard mix stray.
 
#11
#11
I agree and the portrayal of wolves in movies make them seem like bold killers when in all actuality they are afraid of humans. Even the Red Wolves at the Chattanooga Nature Center, who are used to humans, shy away from visitors.
 
#13
#13
Are you saying that a large, hungry pack of wolves will shy away from attacking a lone hiker, simply because they recognize the prey is human?
 
#14
#14
J-P said:
Are you saying that a large, hungry pack of wolves will shy away from attacking a lone hiker, simply because they recognize the prey is human?
Click to expand...

Show me some stats on wolf attacks.

Also, explain to me how a species loses it's "natural" status. What, because some people said so?
 
#15
#15
You ignored my question, but you want me to search the internet to answer yours?
 
#16
#16
Gray Wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We can't properly manage our relationship with bears, and we want to further complicate things for wolves and citizens by re-introducing them into various areas of the country? And when a child or a hiker is attacked, we should just look the other way? Nostalgia for the way things were in the wild is not worth a single human life.
 
#17
#17
J-P said:
Are you saying that a large, hungry pack of wolves will shy away from attacking a lone hiker, simply because they recognize the prey is human?
Click to expand...

No but neither would a pack of stray dogs (it's happened here in Chattanooga). Anyone out in the wilderness takes the risk of being attacked by wild animals (deer, moose, bears, wolves etc etc). That's the risk you take when hiking or camping.

My point is that wolves were here before us. Therefore I believe that re-introducing them ( a species that were here before us and were brought to near extinction at human hands) is a good idea. Wolves are native to the United States and do not lose their "native" status just because they've been gone a while. If you leave the US and live in a different country for 25 years that doesn't mean you're no longer a US citizen.
 
#19
#19
J-P said:
Gray Wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We can't properly manage our relationship with bears, and we want to further complicate things for wolves and citizens by re-introducing them into various areas of the country? And when a child or a hiker is attacked, we should just look the other way? Nostalgia for the way things were in the wild is not worth a single human life.
Click to expand...

Please do not quote Wikipedia when trying to prove your point in an discussion. It is very unreliable.

Here is a good article:

Wolf Attacks on People | wolves | issues
 
#20
#20
VolGal423 said:
No but neither would a pack of stray dogs (it's happened here in Chattanooga). Anyone out in the wilderness takes the risk of being attacked by wild animals (deer, moose, bears, wolves etc etc). That's the risk you take when hiking or camping.

My point is that wolves were here before us. Therefore I believe that re-introducing them ( a species that were here before us and were brought to near extinction at human hands) is a good idea. Wolves are native to the United States and do not lose their "native" status just because they've been gone a while. If you leave the US and live in a different country for 25 years that doesn't mean you're no longer a US citizen.
Click to expand...

the problem is that 100 years ago the ecosystem was completely different. they are likely to dominate the current ecosystem far more than they did 100 years ago. reintroducing them could create a cane toad problem./
 
#21
#21
I don't see why they should be reintroduced to areas where the programs haven't already been started, as in many areas they would be an apex predator, and are pretty creative when food is scarce.

That said, I don't believe that they are having an appreciable effect on numbers of livestock and game mammals in areas where they currently live.
 
#22
#22
veggie-nazi
pam-anderson-500x384.jpg
 
#23
#23
But if by re-introducing wolves, you make both their lives and the lives of the citizens more difficult and/or dangerous, then how is the move a good one?

Look, if the environment were friendly to them, then I'd be fine with it, but the fact is, not even stray dogs are okay in the natural environment we have in the US, and much of the wildlife that is already in forest areas has difficulty finding food. Unless the plan to reintroduce them includes a method for insuring that they don't stray into populated and farmed areas when the competition for food increases, then they are just setting the wolves and the citizenry up for failure. It's no different than when city folks abandon their unwanted dogs out in the country so they can live happily ever after. They wind up at my door starving and covered in ticks and mange. Wolves will be run over, they will be shot, and so forth. Meanwhile, you have a federal government that does not allow the carrying of weapons on most federal parks, so the fact is that hikers and campers will be killed. They are killed by cougars and bears now, this would just add another predator to the list.

Personally, I think it is a terrible idea that reeks of sentimentalism over substance.
 
#24
#24
J-P said:
But if by re-introducing wolves, you make both their lives and the lives of the citizens more difficult and/or dangerous, then how is the move a good one?

Look, if the environment were friendly to them, then I'd be fine with it, but the fact is, not even stray dogs are okay in the natural environment we have in the US, and much of the wildlife that is already in forest areas has difficulty finding food. Unless the plan to reintroduce them includes a method for insuring that they don't stray into populated and farmed areas when the competition for food increases, then they are just setting the wolves and the citizenry up for failure. It's no different than when city folks abandon their unwanted dogs out in the country so they can live happily ever after. They wind up at my door starving and covered in ticks and mange. Wolves will be run over, they will be shot, and so forth. Meanwhile, you have a federal government that does not allow the carrying of weapons on most federal parks, so the fact is that hikers and campers will be killed. They are killed by cougars and bears now, this would just add another predator to the list.

Personally, I think it is a terrible idea that reeks of sentimentalism over substance.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing totally, but lack of predation is a major cause of this.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top