me, I think this was in response to my avatar:
Quote from: me on September 05, 2009, 03:17:17 PM
Just noticed your avatar and was curious but that's for another thread.
If so, my avatar is in response to this:
KPLU (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kplu/news.newsmain/article/1/0/1548765/KPLU.Local.News/Advocates.Ask.Judge.to.Stop.Wolf.Hunt)
IMO this is hunting for the sake of being cruel and blood-thirsty. Of course they claim that it's population regulation, but there's other ways to manipulate the population without killing, especially considering that wolves just came off the endangered list earlier this year.
I am against it. It serves no purpose except to feed the egos of "sport hunters". If they wanna consider themselves sporting, they should show up to the hunt armed with only what they were given the day they were born, like the wolf, and let mother nature determine the outcome.
I have mixed emotions on that. Would you rather see the wolf population become large enough to be a threat to humans and livestock as well as pets? What other way would you see it done?
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 02:49:40 AM
I have mixed emotions on that. Would you rather see the wolf population become large enough to be a threat to humans and livestock as well as pets? What other way would you see it done?
How about relocation?
The wolves were just taken off the endangered list so I don't think that they're remotely in danger of becoming such a large population that they'd be a threat to people, etc. However, if the wolves are or ever were a threat then it's the developers who are to blame and not the wolves. Wolves are behaving on survival instinct. Developers are taking more and more of their habitat to build unnecessary housing developments, strip malls, whatever, so of course they have to look for food because their own habitat and food supply has become limited. Move the wolves to other locations where they'll have a better chance, national parks are a good option, rather legalize a wolf massacre and call it wolf management.
Somehow I don't think it's all that easy. I think a lot of these save the animal and wildlife groups put animals, rodents, and other wildlife above human life.
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 01:59:56 PM
Somehow I don't think it's all that easy. I think a lot of these save the animal and wildlife groups put animals, rodents, and other wildlife above human life.
The rodents that you so easily dismiss feed the wolves and other large animals which otherwise have to look for food elsewhere. So, the food source is diminished and people want to whine because the wolves do what's natural to them.
How exactly would relocating them rather than slaughtering them be putting them above human life?
How many more house developments do we need?
How many more 7-11's will it take to say that we have enough?
How would "human life" be negatively impacted by reusing the abandoned strip malls?
Why is important for mankind to inhabit every last corner of the earth?
Why do we get to say that not giving these animals a chance is okay?
Hum, what about the farmers who can't plant because of some rodent being endangered? A rodent endangered :confused: :rotfl: :rotfl: Wolves eat bigger prey than rodents. They eat cows, dogs, sheep, buffalo and larger things.
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 04:51:08 PM
Hum, what about the farmers who can't plant because of some rodent being endangered? A rodent endangered :confused: :rotfl: :rotfl:
O'rly? I'd be interested in reading the entire story. Source?
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 04:51:08 PM
Wolves eat bigger prey than rodents. They eat cows, dogs, sheep, buffalo and larger things.
Might wanna check your facts before you assume.
http://www.wolfweb.com/diet.html
They eat what is available and if they can't get rodents or even larger game because of encroachment,then they might make a snack outta your poodle. Whose fault is that? Not the Wolves. Talk to the poachers and developers.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 07, 2009, 06:25:47 PM
O'rly? I'd be interested in reading the entire story. Source?
Might wanna check your facts before you assume.
http://www.wolfweb.com/diet.html
They eat what is available and if they can't get rodents or even larger game because of encroachment,then they might make a snack outta your poodle. Whose fault is that? Not the Wolves. Talk to the poachers and developers.
I seen no where in that article where they ate a mouse by choice or what they prefer. I didn't say the didn't eat mice I was laughing at mice being endangered. Wolves are beautiful animals but they are also dangerous animals and a farmer or person who lives away from civilization should not be put in a position of having to wait until they are rounded up and taken elsewhere nor would it be safe for those in the populated areas if they are starting to venture into them. Yes, it is cruel but necessary. We had a wolf for about a year and he was a wonderful animal and very loving but he was a tame one and very well trained. Like I said I have mixed emotions about it. I hate that it has to be done that way but it is the fastest best solution. You and others seem to forget we, humans, need to live too and therefore need to develope land. We need food so we have to have farms to raise it on, and we need buildings to live in. As the population grows we need more and when there are too many of us Mother Nature shakes some of us off which is her way of controlling population. If a wild animal were to threaten you or your daughter can you honestly tell me you wouldn't shoot it?
I think the difference there is that it wouldn't be for sport, it would be immediate survival. Unlike what she is saying, which sounds like organized shooting.
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 04:51:08 PM
Hum, what about the farmers who can't plant because of some rodent being endangered?
Are we all going to let
me get by with this absurdity? I see Sandy asked for a source. Now I will. What farmer? Where? When? Stop making it up as you go along. And stop acting like you never said it when you get called on the fantasy.
Quote from: LOsborne on September 08, 2009, 07:54:10 AM
Are we all going to let me get by with this absurdity? I see Sandy asked for a source. Now I will. What farmer? Where? When? Stop making it up as you go along. And stop acting like you never said it when you get called on the fantasy.
Like "grapes can't grow in England"
How much more land needs to be developed for our survival? at what point does it end and what is the real cost?
The amount of time that it would take to tranquilize and relocate the wolves wouldn't be more than hunting them down to slaughter them. So, making it sound like the farmers would be unreasonably inconvenienced isn't acceptable because it doesn't even pass the common sense test.
Coming into open and populated lands to hunt is a last resort for wolves and according to statistics not as common as propogandists would lead you to believe.
www.//fwp.mt.gov/wildthings/wolf/human.html
www.defenders.org/programs_and_policy/wildlife_conservation/solutions/wolf_compensation_trust/wolf_predation_and_livestock_losses.php
Quote from: me on September 07, 2009, 02:49:40 AM
I have mixed emotions on that. Would you rather see the wolf population become large enough to be a threat to humans and livestock as well as pets? What other way would you see it done?
This raises an interesting question since your ilk seems to have absolutely no issue with the human population becoming so large that it poses a threat to virtually every other species on the planet. I say we have a human hunt...how freakin' fun would that be!
Quote from: LOsborne on September 08, 2009, 07:54:10 AM
Are we all going to let me get by with this absurdity? I see Sandy asked for a source. Now I will. What farmer? Where? When? Stop making it up as you go along. And stop acting like you never said it when you get called on the fantasy.
You're arguing with a moron who pulls "facts" out of her fat ass. Think about it. :rolleyes:
The northern tier of states in the midwest, need more wolves. I recall seeing one of the first wild packs relocated to the Oneida county area of Wisconsin 10-12 years ago. It was night and we were returning to the cabin after a rather successful evening of hunting walleye.
A storm had blown in and it was pitch black out. As we approached the shoreline I fired up the outboard lights to help visual navigation and there they were! Eyes glowing in the dark. They followed us along the shore line for a bit, then must have got a whiff of us and were off in a flash.
They've flourished there but are still unable to cull the deer populations at an acceptable rate from what I've been able to determine thus far.
They are beautiful creatures, and while I am a hunter I only kill what I am going to eat. I could never kill a wolf unless it threatened a human life.
Relocate them! :icon_evil:
Well said PH and the visual you painted was breathtalking. I hope that I get an opportunity to see them in the wild like that someday.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 08, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Well said PH and the visual you painted was breathtalking. I hope that I get an opportunity to see them in the wild like that someday.
THAT is what he does so well...he just needs to learn to get paid for doing it..... :yes:
IGNORANCE AND FANATICISM ARE RAVENOUS. THEY REQUIRE CONSTANT FEEDING!!!!!
My username should be an indicator of why I am shouting.
http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1084&page=NewsArticle&id=5302
Let's see.....
Farmers, ranchers, and miners out west have, for years, lived by the grace of governmental programs that have given huge tracts of land on which ranchers have been grazing cattle for years, miners have created "claims" on public land, and farmers have been the recipients of water resources created by dams and reservoirs built with tax monies.
These super-duper "I carved out a living with my own two hands" people really didn't do so all alone; they have had the benefit of all kinds of government help along the way, (and still do benefit from the residual effects of long-standing programs) only they don't care to admit it.
Now we are beginning to realize the folly of the "carving out of nature" and "conquering nature" philosophies when they are taken to the extremes and we cause some species to become extinct.
So the priorities change.
Those who have secretly suckled at the governmental breast (and then yapped about how all those good-for-nothings that live off the government dole are the downfall of the country) are now feeling the effects of really and truly having to do it all themselves, instead of just mouthing the words.
The winds of change blow in many different directions.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 08, 2009, 01:48:26 PM
Well said PH and the visual you painted was breathtalking. I hope that I get an opportunity to see them in the wild like that someday.
TYVM! I could have gone into further detail but needed to be brief due to an appointment. I swear it was one of the most breathtaking scenes I have personally witnessed in my life thus far, and the locals were quite jealous that my friends and I had actually seen them at the water's edge.
It is one of those Kodak moments that just hypnotize you. . . (To the point where you even forget you have cameras aboard! We had 3 and not one of us thought to snap a picture of it!) We saw them a time or two afterward, but never again as clearly and for as long as that initial time.
Quote from: followsthewolf on September 08, 2009, 02:22:02 PM
IGNORANCE AND FANATICISM ARE RAVENOUS. THEY REQUIRE CONSTANT FEEDING!!!!!
My username should be an indicator of why I am shouting.
Indeed. I felt that needed repeating! :yes: :yes: :yes:
Perhaps they should bring a few of these wolves to Indiana. Might help drive out some of the coyotes and do a better job of culling the festering ranks of the deer around here!
Quote from: me on September 08, 2009, 03:06:16 PM
http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1084&page=NewsArticle&id=5302
That's about fish from a government reservoir, not mousies on the farmer's privately held land. Not even close to a match. And if you want to talk about reservoirs, look at how farmer's on the Colorado pocketed a little extra jingle
selling water rights to California.
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_farmers30.3e5e77c.html
As with all "set-asides," sometimes ya make more
not planting.
Quote from: Palehorse on September 08, 2009, 04:32:43 PM
Perhaps they should bring a few of these wolves to Indiana. Might help drive out some of the coyotes and do a better job of culling the festering ranks of the deer around here!
Not to mention thinning out the chucacabras!
I have just as much of a problem with someone shooting a wolf as I have with letting a wolf rip a deer apart although I know they are doing it to survive and that it is a food source for the wolf. This may not be just a do gooder group who wants to see everyone on a vegetarian diet but so many of them are its ridiculous.
I stated I had mixed emotions about the subject and I don't like organized hunts but did want to know what else they might do to alleviate the problem. I guess I let something else, my dislike of groups like PITA, get the best of me and forgot this has nothing to do with the radical groups like that and they truly want to help.
Like I also stated we were privileged enough to own a wolf for a little over a year and they are wonderful animals if you happen to be in their pack and but they are dangerous if you aren't or threaten, or they think you are threatening, part of their pack. I won't go into details of why we had him or anything else but I feel privileged that he accepted us and allowed us to be a part of his life and felt welcomed into our pack and safe with us.
Heck it bothers me to watch the nature shows that show an animal attack another animal even though I know it's nature it still bothers me so why would I think an organized hunt is fine.
I realize what I was saying appeared that I approved of them but you were all forgetting I stated I had mixed emotions about it and then I got off on to something else, which I should not have done, and it snowballed from there. Hunting for survival is one thing but for sport is entirely another. In a sense that hunt which this article is speaking of can be construed as either depending on a persons point of view. If the hunters were to use the skins and the meat it would serve a purpose but if they are just going to pitch the carcass it is strictly for sport and should not be done. Possibly another solution would be to put conditions on the licenses which are issued.
I'm not good at putting my thoughts down like some here and there are times I see both sides of a topic but when the name calling and belittling starts it just totally closes my mind off to what you are saying because some can't do it in a civil manner. No, I'm not saying Sandy did that but it did snowball and get off track after I mixed up issues for which I apologize and will try to watch it in the future.
FTW, I understand more than you think I do but won't go into it on open forum.
PH has a real good solution. Put them where they are needed to balance things out not a National Forrest. That is, to me anyway, just a step up from captivity.
Really? What about a huge place like yellowstone?
Although, I think PH's idea is excellent, but also that they'd be further protected in a national park/forest.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 08, 2009, 09:23:26 PM
Really? What about a huge place like yellowstone?
I'm not sure about that one. I have been to Yellowstone and I'm not sure it would be a safe as far as tourists are concerned. I imagine there are wolves there just naturally but a lot of tourists are really stupid. There are signs all over the place and you still see them get out of their cars and approach the buffalo and get off of trails. Bears are a danger but I kind of think wolves might pose more of a danger if they seen it as their territory. FTW or PH might be more help on that one.
Quote from: LOsborne on September 08, 2009, 07:17:09 PM
Not to mention thinning out the chucacabras!
Chupacabras
(http://www.skepdic.com/graphics/chupacabra.jpg)
Quote from: me on September 08, 2009, 10:53:46 PM
Bears are a danger but I kind of think wolves might pose more of a danger if they seen it as their territory. FTW or PH might be more help on that one.
I can help; it's "saw". :razz:
Are you sure she hasn't seen them?
:rolleyes: