Hey all you that want to hunt wolves hear me out (myself included). If we do not like something then lets change it. The only way to get something you want is to do something to get it. So lets all get the legislative ball rolling on allowing the states to manage wolves. I think with alittle publicly there would be enough support. I do not know where to begin to start the paper work. Maybe someone will know. If you have any real ideas post them here. I know I would want my tag, lots of wolves in minnesota and would not mind having one on my wall.
Wolves
- Thread starter AWS
- Start date
MichiganShooter
New member
WSD,
I certainly respect you for including the links to that other site. I find the person you quarrelled with pretty harsh when I go there looking for info.
Having said that, I ain't a joiner. You want to be an ambassador to the rest of the world, that's a good thing. But please do not advocate to the rest of us what our role should be. Frankly, stupid laws are going to be broken. I do not particularly care what the voters of my country's biggest cities think about guns or hunting. You seem deeply concerned by what they think. I think the majority can pass any law they want. Enforcing it is a different matter.
I didn't happen to catch any foxhunters in Britain hand in their spurs on Boxing Day. Instead, they went hunting. They and their government knew there weren't enough cops in the UK to enforce that ban. Here in Michigan, we don't even have enough cops to close down the 7,000 crack houses in Detroit. And we have something like as many deer hunters here as the US Army has troops in the Middle East.
A gun ban/hunting ban in the US is a non-starter. Since that is the case, I plan on calling a spade a shovel. I am interested in people's actual thoughts on how to solve ranchers' problems and how it fits with sport hunting. After all, we in Michigan will face the same thing eventually. Growing the wolf population so you can someday shoot part of it seems like a bad idea when it comes to keeping a ranching business profitable.
I certainly respect you for including the links to that other site. I find the person you quarrelled with pretty harsh when I go there looking for info.
Having said that, I ain't a joiner. You want to be an ambassador to the rest of the world, that's a good thing. But please do not advocate to the rest of us what our role should be. Frankly, stupid laws are going to be broken. I do not particularly care what the voters of my country's biggest cities think about guns or hunting. You seem deeply concerned by what they think. I think the majority can pass any law they want. Enforcing it is a different matter.
I didn't happen to catch any foxhunters in Britain hand in their spurs on Boxing Day. Instead, they went hunting. They and their government knew there weren't enough cops in the UK to enforce that ban. Here in Michigan, we don't even have enough cops to close down the 7,000 crack houses in Detroit. And we have something like as many deer hunters here as the US Army has troops in the Middle East.
A gun ban/hunting ban in the US is a non-starter. Since that is the case, I plan on calling a spade a shovel. I am interested in people's actual thoughts on how to solve ranchers' problems and how it fits with sport hunting. After all, we in Michigan will face the same thing eventually. Growing the wolf population so you can someday shoot part of it seems like a bad idea when it comes to keeping a ranching business profitable.
plottpower
New member
New to this site and coyote hunting both. Not trying to stir the pot just speaking my 2 cents. I live in North Idaho right on the B.C. border. I have hunted hounds for close to 20 years on bears and cats. I have watched what was once a small pack in this area 10 yrs ago boom in the last 5 yrs. There is now a minimum of 5 packs. Last summer IDFG finally admitted there were wolves in the area, a single pack they say. The hound hunters were sent a pamphlet from IDFG stating if you know there are wolves in an area you should not turn your dogs loose there. That pretty much covers the entire area that I cat hunt. If that is not trying to control hunters with wolves....There have been numerous hounds killed by wolves in this state and more to come. When a wolf attacks your hounds you have no rights, your loss. I guide hunts with my hounds, this is my livelyhood they will kill, same as cattle. It has not happened in this area yet, but it will. The wolves and the lions hunt the same areas, if you want to kill a lion you have to hunt with the wolves. My view is the wolf numbers are too high in this state. They can be lived with, but they have to be well controlled. They are out of control at this point. The hunters WILL take it into their own hands if they are not. Which will cause war within, which this topic on this site demonstrates, which may be the goal of wolf introduction. Last week there were two cows killed on a ranch in this area, the first, of many to come, domestic kills North of I-90 in the state that I am aware of. There has been no press on this instance.
The IDFG states there are 500 - 600 wolves in Idaho. Where do you draw the line. Read this article and you tell me.
Heres some wolf facts from Idaho
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/wolf_removal_nr.cfm
The IDFG states there are 500 - 600 wolves in Idaho. Where do you draw the line. Read this article and you tell me.
Heres some wolf facts from Idaho
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/wolf_removal_nr.cfm
Michiganshooter,
I feel you are wrong on this. I do not know the exact stats but something like 10% are hunters 5% of people are actively antihunters and the rest are in the middle. If you do not think hunting bans, anti hunters have power to do things then you are wrong. Look at California and all the hunting privledges they have lost. Cougars, dogs etc. Colorado in the last 15 years has lost Baiting for bear, Spring Bear hunts, Trapping, seen stricter regs on hunting with dogs, lost night hunting access etc. You should care what voters think period. They decide. If you tell them to shove it, your going to loose. Why not take a proactive approach and work in positive light for the rest. We are in a war with the anti's. At stake is the hunting and right to bear arms as we know it. Yes guns are getting banned all the time, heck in NY there is a huge anti-gun bill. If we do not advocate for ourselves no one will. If you can't put aside personal bias (even I hate anti's and those who push that agenda) then we can not win this battle. Sorry but we are a minority and the only way we win is by getting the support of the majority. Right now that is in the cities. If you are not part of the solution by putting a good face on then you are as harmful to the rest of the hunting world as an anti hunter. We need all the help and positive image we can get. The people WyoSongdog are talking about, the poachers who believe in SSS is ok are going to be our down fall.
Also even if a law is stupid we still have to follow it and when we break it gives us and our sport a black eye. plase reconsider you position, if not for yourself and my self, but for the future and our grand childern
I feel you are wrong on this. I do not know the exact stats but something like 10% are hunters 5% of people are actively antihunters and the rest are in the middle. If you do not think hunting bans, anti hunters have power to do things then you are wrong. Look at California and all the hunting privledges they have lost. Cougars, dogs etc. Colorado in the last 15 years has lost Baiting for bear, Spring Bear hunts, Trapping, seen stricter regs on hunting with dogs, lost night hunting access etc. You should care what voters think period. They decide. If you tell them to shove it, your going to loose. Why not take a proactive approach and work in positive light for the rest. We are in a war with the anti's. At stake is the hunting and right to bear arms as we know it. Yes guns are getting banned all the time, heck in NY there is a huge anti-gun bill. If we do not advocate for ourselves no one will. If you can't put aside personal bias (even I hate anti's and those who push that agenda) then we can not win this battle. Sorry but we are a minority and the only way we win is by getting the support of the majority. Right now that is in the cities. If you are not part of the solution by putting a good face on then you are as harmful to the rest of the hunting world as an anti hunter. We need all the help and positive image we can get. The people WyoSongdog are talking about, the poachers who believe in SSS is ok are going to be our down fall.
Also even if a law is stupid we still have to follow it and when we break it gives us and our sport a black eye. plase reconsider you position, if not for yourself and my self, but for the future and our grand childern
Remember the Boston Tea Party???
When government thinks it's more important to grow wolves than lock up sexual predators or drug dealers or buglars, it's time for a change.
When running hunters and other recreationists out of the resource is the goal, it's time for a change.
It's time for a wolf party, Boston Tea Party style!
Three 44s
When government thinks it's more important to grow wolves than lock up sexual predators or drug dealers or buglars, it's time for a change.
When running hunters and other recreationists out of the resource is the goal, it's time for a change.
It's time for a wolf party, Boston Tea Party style!
Three 44s
Last edited:
Thanx for sharing your situation Plot,people with first hand knowledge of thier effects seem to have a fairly similar opinion on the subject.A friend of ours has lost three of his cow dogs right off his porch near Augusta MT,the F&G told him it was probably coyotes......they dicovered 2 "NEW" packs this year near here after hunters took so amny pics of them this hunting season that they couldnt deny it,residents of the area have been reporting them for decades but the Feds refused to aknowledge them because it would have been detrimental to thier reintroduction agenda.There were plenty of resident ranchers and hunters that attended thier "public comment" meetings before they okd the program and nobody at ours was in favor of the plan,didnt make a damn bit of difference.The wolf reintroduction is the biggest battle the antis have won,you dont think they know how much effect they will have on hunting rights?
MichiganShooter
New member
Elks,
For what it is worth, regulations on guns are declining. CCW laws have loosened up nationwide and the assault rifle ban ended. Ask the anti-gun people why. They'll never credit their defeat to that darned pro-active approach of gun owners. Nope. They can't spew enough about the NRA, Chuck Heston, and the fact that people get voted out of office because of NRA rhetoric and money. Anti-gun people are endlessly puzzled by this. The NRA drew a line in the sand and refused to back down. I've never seen Wayne LaPierre accomodate anybody other than gun owners. Frankly, it has persuaded the voters and the legislators. Has the NRA accommodated people who want to ban 50 cal weapons? How about those who want airline pilots unarmed?
Fact is, the system is working (mostly). People want more liberty, not less. And nobody ever got more liberty because they compromised with their aspiring oppressors. It appears that the party of liberty (if you leave out sex--which is a big thing to leave out) is now in control of all three branches of the federal government. Jean Kerry has all the time in the world to don his rubber suit and windsurf his heart out. And that is because the citizens prefer power over paternalism, and because gun owners dealt with gun grabbers from a position of strength.
I am unfamiliar with California issues. What strategy did hunters use to lose all those rights?
For what it is worth, regulations on guns are declining. CCW laws have loosened up nationwide and the assault rifle ban ended. Ask the anti-gun people why. They'll never credit their defeat to that darned pro-active approach of gun owners. Nope. They can't spew enough about the NRA, Chuck Heston, and the fact that people get voted out of office because of NRA rhetoric and money. Anti-gun people are endlessly puzzled by this. The NRA drew a line in the sand and refused to back down. I've never seen Wayne LaPierre accomodate anybody other than gun owners. Frankly, it has persuaded the voters and the legislators. Has the NRA accommodated people who want to ban 50 cal weapons? How about those who want airline pilots unarmed?
Fact is, the system is working (mostly). People want more liberty, not less. And nobody ever got more liberty because they compromised with their aspiring oppressors. It appears that the party of liberty (if you leave out sex--which is a big thing to leave out) is now in control of all three branches of the federal government. Jean Kerry has all the time in the world to don his rubber suit and windsurf his heart out. And that is because the citizens prefer power over paternalism, and because gun owners dealt with gun grabbers from a position of strength.
I am unfamiliar with California issues. What strategy did hunters use to lose all those rights?
Well said Mich.I dont think poachers are going to give the antis any more fuel than they have,the comercialization of hunting and the popularity of canned "hunts" will do more to harm the sport than poachers.Organizations like the NRA and SCI donate huge sums of money to canidates who support gun and hunting rights and I believe without them things would be way different for us right now.Support these two organizations and every canidate who endorses our rights and hunting heritage,thats how you can fight the antis.In my state ranchers now have the right to kill wolves and other guy who gets caught doing it is harming himself,not endagering our hunting rights.What about the poor bastards who mistake a wolf for a coyote?i have heard of two cases of this so far where the people admitted it,a man in Idaho and a woman here in MT,I wonder how many there are that didnt get reported?Would you turn yourself in?If it was an honest mistake would you risk your vehicle,gun,$100,000 and ten years of your life to be an ethical hunter?
HighPlainsDrifter
New member
I would Nonya, if I made an honest mistake. But that is the path I have chosen in life and I would be powerless to do anything different. I would be a hypocrite as an enforcer of the law to try and hide the fact that I made an honest mistake and violated one. Honestly, I have seen it happen first hand and although charges are usually filed, people who make honest mistakes are rarely ever indicted and those that are, rarely are convicted by a jury of their peers. Tell me how the Federal Govt could effectively prosecute someone for killing a wolf in an area that they deny their very existance. Sounds like a pretty weak case. Hell guys, I am not saying wolves havent complicated our lives and changed the face of the lands we hunt. I know they have. I just believe its very important for us to set the example for the world. Especially for the general public out there that do not understand what we do. I dont want to be viewed as a mindless barbarian who goes out and kills things for the sake of killing. I want people to understand that the success of a species and the preservation of habitat and the funding of programs and projects all comes from hunters and sportsman. That we do what we do because we love the land and the animals that live there. We dont hunt Elk or deer to erradicate them from existance. I know that, you know that, but there are people out there who dont understand that. In that sense, if we dont educate them and lead by example and if we are not ambassadors for our sport, then who will be? I really cant understand how you could not recognize the importance of that MichiganShooter. I am a little concerned that some also dont recognize the true threat that the anti hunting and anti gun groups pose to our rights. I guess all I can do is follow my own heart. Also, thanks for the kind words about the other situation MichiganShooter. I thought I was in a place of like minded people over there but quickly discovered I was wrong. Even though we dont always agree here, this place is a night and day difference from there. PM is an outstanding site.
I dont recall anyone saying they wanted to totally eraicate the wolf species,once again you make us sound like we want to eradicate these animals from the face of the earth,not true.Every animal has its place,all those dollars that we sportsmen have contributed over the years to keep the heards we hunt strong are now going to make sure the wolves have somthing to eat.As I said before they will eliminate the need for human hunting,its already happening in 3 states that I know of,here in Montana people who used to apply for cow permits for the migratory heards out of the park now have to find a new area to hunt,there arnt enough elk left to support the hunt that has taken place there for decades,they were killed by wolves,not only does this do damage that would take many years to fix it applys more pressure on other hunting areas around the state,several hundred people now have to give up hunting or find a new place to hunt.Many outfitters in the north west corner of your state are going out of buisness because they cant find game for thier clients,do you give a damn about them?Do you think they would consider ethics when this subject came up?If the tree huggers knew how many animals would be saved by the death of one wolf they may just endorse thier killing,the only reason the antihunters embrace the wolf project is because they know what it does to hunters,If you are concerned about the game we hunt you should be more concerned about thier current plight,anywhere the wolves inhabit the game numbers are dropping rapidly and then they will move in to a new area,maybe the one you hunt in.
The legislators will make the chances if there is going to be any. As for the anti hunters they will still be here Guns laws have lessed,the radical harsh judgement,and the stiring the pot amoung hunters and ranchers by the the so called hunter sportsman will cause more of a problem than the anti's. anytime a landowner and stock prodcer which most of these people are hunters and do carry guns lose their property and the other part of the hunting and sportsman community say well Iam sorry, you will just have to get over it you are a minority jusr pay for it Then its time to put up the no hunting signs let the ethical sportsman who thinks you should provide him with a place to hunt hnut the blm lands and know private lands In my opinion WySongDog and his harsh loudmouth comments and unfounded judgements is much worse than the ainti's he got everyones< attention but for the wrong reasons I hope he doesn't ask permisson to hunt on our 2 places in Wy
Mauser
Mauser
Quote:
In my opinion WySongDog and his harsh loudmouth comments and unfounded judgements is much worse than the ainti's he got everyones< attention
As a moderator, I have not seen Wysongdog' comments harsh or loudmouthed. I do, however, find your calling him a loudmouth as being dangerously close to a TOS violation. If this topic continues to follow this line of talk, I will request that it be locked, and for TOS violation enforcement.
In my opinion WySongDog and his harsh loudmouth comments and unfounded judgements is much worse than the ainti's he got everyones< attention
As a moderator, I have not seen Wysongdog' comments harsh or loudmouthed. I do, however, find your calling him a loudmouth as being dangerously close to a TOS violation. If this topic continues to follow this line of talk, I will request that it be locked, and for TOS violation enforcement.
Michiganshooter, if the anti's really pose no threat then why do we need the NRA or SCI etc. They are a very real threat. As hunters/sportsman we need to present our sport in the best light possible. Our rights are always under attack. No one poacher probable will not get the anti's over whelming support, but if a non hunter who is not an anti yet sees it you can bet that person will never fully support our sport. We are not talking about changing the anti's opinons jsut talking about have a positive public image. Yes I support the NRA, RMEF, CBA, DU, [beeep], and BMA. All good groups, but that is not enough. It is not enough to just to send money, we ahve to live our lives sch that the image of hunting is a pleasant one.
Here is what I saw as a hunter/sportsman when the banned trapping, spring bear hunts, hunting with dogs and baiting bears in CO. Please note that all this happened when I was 14-15 years old.
The anti hunting groups came well organized and very to the point. They presented facts on huting in CO. Most were fairly percise. I remember the hunters/trapper coming only with emotion. They fought the legislation in dirty manner by calling names etc. Public meetings I went to found all the sportsmen up in arms and not willing to take anything for consideration. The result was huters got a bad image, in part because the anti's were ushing that image, mostly cause of hard headness and a refusal to act in civil intellignet manner. I saw this and was able to see he difference as a young kid. What do you think the voting public saw? The same thing. Sportsmen blamed all the stats on a few hunters, saying that most of us are not like that etc. In one meeting representatives from anti hunting groups presented a video of a pair of bear cub twins whose mother was shot during spring bear hunt. It was a sad video and a bad situation. At that meeting there were probable 10 anti hunters in a group. about 25 hard core huntersand trappers and maybe another 15-20 people on the fence. After the video showed the hunters as a group verbally attacked the anti's stating things ou bunch of treehugging...... They then argued that those types were not real hunters etc. The truth of the matter, it did not matter who did it, just that it was done. This one instance probable turned 15 people on the fence to against against hunting and in favor of the anti's. i remeber a lion hunt in CA that was filmed and got into the hands of the anti's. this hunt showed a lion that had been ran by dogs, it was then treed for a lengthy period of time. When the lion was shot the bullet did not kill the lion it brokes its back leaving it paralyzed in the hind end. The lion fell from the tree tried to run. The dogs attacked the lion fought for a while before the second shot finished it off. Yes this does happen, it is part of hunting, however I do not know why anyone would circulate a video of it. Again that piece of video led to baunch of fence sitters suddenly becoming antihunters. We should atleast be very consience that this goes on and at anytime it could be you in the video, or the one caught doing something illegal. Please reconsider your opinion about acting in an ethical law abidding manner, again not for me, but for all of hunting and its future.
Here is what I saw as a hunter/sportsman when the banned trapping, spring bear hunts, hunting with dogs and baiting bears in CO. Please note that all this happened when I was 14-15 years old.
The anti hunting groups came well organized and very to the point. They presented facts on huting in CO. Most were fairly percise. I remember the hunters/trapper coming only with emotion. They fought the legislation in dirty manner by calling names etc. Public meetings I went to found all the sportsmen up in arms and not willing to take anything for consideration. The result was huters got a bad image, in part because the anti's were ushing that image, mostly cause of hard headness and a refusal to act in civil intellignet manner. I saw this and was able to see he difference as a young kid. What do you think the voting public saw? The same thing. Sportsmen blamed all the stats on a few hunters, saying that most of us are not like that etc. In one meeting representatives from anti hunting groups presented a video of a pair of bear cub twins whose mother was shot during spring bear hunt. It was a sad video and a bad situation. At that meeting there were probable 10 anti hunters in a group. about 25 hard core huntersand trappers and maybe another 15-20 people on the fence. After the video showed the hunters as a group verbally attacked the anti's stating things ou bunch of treehugging...... They then argued that those types were not real hunters etc. The truth of the matter, it did not matter who did it, just that it was done. This one instance probable turned 15 people on the fence to against against hunting and in favor of the anti's. i remeber a lion hunt in CA that was filmed and got into the hands of the anti's. this hunt showed a lion that had been ran by dogs, it was then treed for a lengthy period of time. When the lion was shot the bullet did not kill the lion it brokes its back leaving it paralyzed in the hind end. The lion fell from the tree tried to run. The dogs attacked the lion fought for a while before the second shot finished it off. Yes this does happen, it is part of hunting, however I do not know why anyone would circulate a video of it. Again that piece of video led to baunch of fence sitters suddenly becoming antihunters. We should atleast be very consience that this goes on and at anytime it could be you in the video, or the one caught doing something illegal. Please reconsider your opinion about acting in an ethical law abidding manner, again not for me, but for all of hunting and its future.
Mauser and Nonya,
I am really not sure why you are so up in arms about WyoSongdog. He has not really attacked either one of you, just stating his stance on an issue. I find it offensive that you attack him as being a wolf lover, tree hugger, loudmouth etc. In all of this he has been civil and honest. His whole point is what we do reflects on us to the general public as positive or negative. He never reall called either of you out, however he did call out those who followed the SSS mentality. He never once said that anyone doesn't have right to protect his or her property. I do feel that all of us need to do all we can to protray our lives, hobbies and activities in a positive manner. This does not mean we bow down to the antis, however it does mean we shouldn't fuel the fire with our actions.
The question came up somewhere of what to do with and accidental kill of a wolf, turn yourself in period. Why? cause first of all honesty and integrity are extremely important. Secondly cause if you get caught the penalties will be much more sevre than if you do not. Third, with out stepping forward you paint the picture that each and everyone of us will kill and leave it. right now in CO hunters are getting a bad image again. The Wildlife department has been reintroducing LYNX(antoher protected animal) back into the CO forest. This last big game season 2 were killed. They never did find the cats just the collars cut off. No one has came forward so as a group we hunters are being blamed. There are even talks right now in the state to limit all predator hunting in these reintroduction areas. Now I am positive it was not a predator hunter who did this, but with out someone stepping forward we will never know. Like it or not gun owners and hunters are becoming a minority with diminishing power. We must do what we can to support our sport.
WyoSongdog... I am sorry about what happened on the other cheap rip off site called Coyotegods. I hope you find that all moderators here are more than fair and do an excellent job for the good of the board. Yes there are times, especially on hot topics where members act like buttholes (even I have done it). I hope you find this site as fun and helpful as I have. Welcome aboard.
YH thanks for stepping in always good to know you watching.... Hymmm ok maybe not always!
I am really not sure why you are so up in arms about WyoSongdog. He has not really attacked either one of you, just stating his stance on an issue. I find it offensive that you attack him as being a wolf lover, tree hugger, loudmouth etc. In all of this he has been civil and honest. His whole point is what we do reflects on us to the general public as positive or negative. He never reall called either of you out, however he did call out those who followed the SSS mentality. He never once said that anyone doesn't have right to protect his or her property. I do feel that all of us need to do all we can to protray our lives, hobbies and activities in a positive manner. This does not mean we bow down to the antis, however it does mean we shouldn't fuel the fire with our actions.
The question came up somewhere of what to do with and accidental kill of a wolf, turn yourself in period. Why? cause first of all honesty and integrity are extremely important. Secondly cause if you get caught the penalties will be much more sevre than if you do not. Third, with out stepping forward you paint the picture that each and everyone of us will kill and leave it. right now in CO hunters are getting a bad image again. The Wildlife department has been reintroducing LYNX(antoher protected animal) back into the CO forest. This last big game season 2 were killed. They never did find the cats just the collars cut off. No one has came forward so as a group we hunters are being blamed. There are even talks right now in the state to limit all predator hunting in these reintroduction areas. Now I am positive it was not a predator hunter who did this, but with out someone stepping forward we will never know. Like it or not gun owners and hunters are becoming a minority with diminishing power. We must do what we can to support our sport.
WyoSongdog... I am sorry about what happened on the other cheap rip off site called Coyotegods. I hope you find that all moderators here are more than fair and do an excellent job for the good of the board. Yes there are times, especially on hot topics where members act like buttholes (even I have done it). I hope you find this site as fun and helpful as I have. Welcome aboard.
YH thanks for stepping in always good to know you watching.... Hymmm ok maybe not always!
Last edited:
HighPlainsDrifter
New member
I give up. My last two posts I have done nothing but try to make peace and in the eyes of Nonya and Mauser I am evil personified. Mauser offers to sit down with me and drink a beer in one post and then bans me from hunting two of his Wyoming ranches in the next one. Go figure. Its okay Mauser. I have plenty of places to hunt and I guess I dont need anything you might have. Your personal attack on me was unwarranted simply because we have a different opinion. And Nonya, I do come up to the breaks country every February to ice fish Peck and I do have friends in Jordan and Miles City so let me know if your anywhere in Eastern Montana so I can steer clear. I wouldnt want to spoil your day with a difference of opinion. Dont worry, when I visit I wont bring any wolves with me.
Redfrog
Moderator
WSD, I think he was talking about beer with Mike Granger.
Be that as it may. I've been watching this thread and while it is a hot topic, and invites heated exchanges, I think it's a good thing to swap ideas and views. I am not for or against the reintroduction of any animal, there are those that know a heck of a lot more about it than I do.
I love hunting wolves, or coyotes or 20 other species and I wouldn't like to see any of them hunted to extinction.
I've followed this thread and read all the posts and surprise!!! surprise!!! When the emotion is taken out and the content looked at, you guys are very close to saying the same thing. The points you disagree on are a very small part of the whole concept.
So take a breath, relax and express your opinion without making it personal. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
Be that as it may. I've been watching this thread and while it is a hot topic, and invites heated exchanges, I think it's a good thing to swap ideas and views. I am not for or against the reintroduction of any animal, there are those that know a heck of a lot more about it than I do.
I love hunting wolves, or coyotes or 20 other species and I wouldn't like to see any of them hunted to extinction.
I've followed this thread and read all the posts and surprise!!! surprise!!! When the emotion is taken out and the content looked at, you guys are very close to saying the same thing. The points you disagree on are a very small part of the whole concept.
So take a breath, relax and express your opinion without making it personal. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
I just happened to get my copy of the MDF magazine (MuleDeer foundation) and they had an article in it that had some interesting facts from a study on predator prey relationships and the reintroduction of the wolfs in the western states. Also it referenced a study on predator vs. Prey vs. Habitat loss. They found overwhelming evidence that Predators are the major factor in reduction of ungulate sized game. In Alaska and Canada where higher predadation occurs only 5% of animals can be taken by hunters vs. Scandinavia, where large predators are absent hunters enjoy a 55% harvest objective, therefore predators can reduce hunters opportunities by 90%. Also take a look at what's really happening in the Rockies near Yellowstone. The Rocky mountain elk foundation has spent millions on habitat restoration for Elk and other native species in the Gallatin and Yellowstone River Valley north of the park for wintering wild game. In the mid 90's there were 4000 late season elk tags for the area. They fell to a low of 400 tags and now Montana says no more tags for the area, all because Wolfs were reintroduced. So now the prey has to deal with the Grizzly, lions, coyotes, black bears, and wolfs. Out of all species the wolf is the most effective predator out of the bunch by far.
This is a problem that has so far taken 4000 hunters out of the field along with the revenue. It has also put many business's on the endangered and extinct list.
As far as the Wyoming problem, I have yet to see any real information on what is actually happening, so here goes. They are requesting that the wolf be de-listed and that is where the problem is. Want to talk about breaking the laws, laws that are supposed to protect both parties. The wolf plan set in place is before they could be de-listed that the numbers had to meet the feds set objectives. Once met de-listing would happen. The numbers were 30 breeding pairs and 300+ individuals. They are currently at 835 individuals and some 66 breeding pairs.
It is not because Wyoming want's to kill them all, they are the only state that has stepped up to have the courts de-list the animal which in turn provides states the right to manage to the original objectives set forth in the first place. The other states are just doing what the feds asked them to do so they can take whatever time they see fit to make a judgment call on each states plan, Wyoming's not following suite and is suing because the feds are in the wrong. There is overwhelming evidence that the wolf has reached the goals of the feds, yet they will not de-list them as they should have in the year 2000. If you do not think that the opposition on hunting is not aware that they have taken away hunting in the area, from 4000 hunters, you better rethink your position. There is more than one way to skin a cat and they will keep fighting for there rights as well we should.
The wolf surpassed the objectives yet we still can not manage them, who is breaking the law now? Who has gone back on their word? Hunters or anti-hunters? Why is it fair for them to step around the rules and commitments. I DO NOT advocate poaching of any kind and hope you read this with the understanding that at this point it should no longer be illegal to control the wolf population through controlled hunting, yet this does not give us the right to poach, it does give us the right to de-list and manage them by state. I hope Wyoming keeps up the fight and organized groups get behind them. At this point all of your opinions matter, but the truth is we could be in a heck of a battle and it will take a while. And while Wyoming has stepped up and Idaho and Montana has taken a less active approach, nothing has yet to result in the de-listing of the wolf in any state. I am behind it because the original objectives have been met.
Just a bit of food for thought.
This is a problem that has so far taken 4000 hunters out of the field along with the revenue. It has also put many business's on the endangered and extinct list.
As far as the Wyoming problem, I have yet to see any real information on what is actually happening, so here goes. They are requesting that the wolf be de-listed and that is where the problem is. Want to talk about breaking the laws, laws that are supposed to protect both parties. The wolf plan set in place is before they could be de-listed that the numbers had to meet the feds set objectives. Once met de-listing would happen. The numbers were 30 breeding pairs and 300+ individuals. They are currently at 835 individuals and some 66 breeding pairs.
It is not because Wyoming want's to kill them all, they are the only state that has stepped up to have the courts de-list the animal which in turn provides states the right to manage to the original objectives set forth in the first place. The other states are just doing what the feds asked them to do so they can take whatever time they see fit to make a judgment call on each states plan, Wyoming's not following suite and is suing because the feds are in the wrong. There is overwhelming evidence that the wolf has reached the goals of the feds, yet they will not de-list them as they should have in the year 2000. If you do not think that the opposition on hunting is not aware that they have taken away hunting in the area, from 4000 hunters, you better rethink your position. There is more than one way to skin a cat and they will keep fighting for there rights as well we should.
The wolf surpassed the objectives yet we still can not manage them, who is breaking the law now? Who has gone back on their word? Hunters or anti-hunters? Why is it fair for them to step around the rules and commitments. I DO NOT advocate poaching of any kind and hope you read this with the understanding that at this point it should no longer be illegal to control the wolf population through controlled hunting, yet this does not give us the right to poach, it does give us the right to de-list and manage them by state. I hope Wyoming keeps up the fight and organized groups get behind them. At this point all of your opinions matter, but the truth is we could be in a heck of a battle and it will take a while. And while Wyoming has stepped up and Idaho and Montana has taken a less active approach, nothing has yet to result in the de-listing of the wolf in any state. I am behind it because the original objectives have been met.
Just a bit of food for thought.
most all of us agree that poaching is not the answer, but when you are put in that catagory of poacher,sss,and ect. because you speak out about your losses, from someone in the hunting community thinks their opinion is completely right and you should just take the loses as ever biness has it's problems, is hard to stay on the side of the sportman even if you have hunted all your life. These wolves are costing ranchers a lot of money but all buiness that have connection to the hunting industy. I have tryed to ask A Federal employee some quetions on the facts and the figures of how much wolf damage there really if but I don't think the Feds know or realy care. I have set in serval stock growers meeting about the wolf all you will get from one of the Feds is comments like cars kill more wildlife than wolves bu no stats as to how many were killed by car or by wolf. I don't poach,I don't beieve in sss,I dont want the complete eradication of the wolf and there never has been, Every one blames the anti's and the so called tree hugger, the fact is the woloves where truned lose by the Feds with know way of handling them. Education is the key along with a few truths by the feds, let the anti's, the petas"s think what they want to you can't talk to them anyway. We have some so called sportsman a lot worse than they are. Mauser Mauser
Elkeholic,I was upset with his ethical stand when talking about a landowner protectring his propert BEFORE it was legalized here in MT,thatwas the days when they had to SSS or loose thier livleyhood.Montana isnt aking a less active stand they are taking a stand where they can begin to act imediatly,now our ranchers can shoot wolves,it may be several years in Wy before they get anything due to thier lawsuits.SO there are 4000 peole who no longer get a chance to fill thier freezer with a cow elk because the wolves are #1,as I said before this also puts more pressure on the game in other areas because of all the displaced hunters.I personally know poeple here in my hometown who had several generations of family who used to go down for the late elk hunts in this area,now they either dont hunt elk or have started hunting near here in public areas already overpressured.Even if the wolves were removed today it would take decades to get them back where they were,I justead a report on the MT f&g site about a "Disturbing Trend" http://fwp.mt.gov/news/article_4065.aspx
HighPlainsDrifter
New member
No Redfrog he was talking to me about the beer. He said he was going to be in Casper and I am from Casper not Mike. It really doesnt matter at this point because 99% of what I said was not even directed at Mauser or Nonya in the first place. I also agree that when all the smoke clears, we are all saying similiar things. I think I tried to make that point as well to no avail. Nonya, look back over the posts and you can read for yourself that I have said over and over and over that I agree with landowners rights to protect their livestock. You just cant seem to get your brain around that fact because something in this whole thing is blocking that fact out. Go back and read Nonya, please. Elkeholic, excellant post and I agree 100% with what you had to say. I truly wish, as much as any of you, that we could all go out tomorrow on a wolf hunt and begin to take back control in this situation. As we all well know, that isnt gonna happen. We are all on the same side here. For the last time Nonya and Mauser. I was not referring to either one of you when I was talking about ethics. I was referring to several people who made reference to POACHING and SSS. I acknowledge the fact it was neither one of you. What does that mean? I NEVER QUESTIONED EITHER OF YOUR ETHICS.