Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cycle is not complete until we,humans, who are part of the cycle participate. We, humans, were smart enough to correct things by reintroducing animals, in this case wolves. It is our job now to control the balance for them. It is seen all over history, that humans are part of the cycle. It is not a terrible thing to hunt and kill wolves, deer, elk, bears, fish, and corn. It is a natural part of the cycle of life. Like all things in life, moderation is key, as we have learned from the past with Buffalo. Same with chocolate...to much can be bad right? Makes you sick.
Corn? Yes you read correctly. If we can humanize animals, then we can plants. And if you think about it, try and steal corn off the farm...better run faster than a buck shot.
Last edited by gfunkerror; 03-06-2012 at 10:51 PM..
Reason: added more humbled opinion.
Location: Approximately 50 miles from Missoula MT/38 yrs full time after 4 yrs part time
2,308 posts, read 4,122,972 times
Reputation: 5025
Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoEagle
It's all about compromise and responsible management. It is possible to coexist with wolves. Although it is not perfect, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho should look at how some countries have coexisted with wolves. Romania for example, has at least 2,000 wolves and is smaller than the state of Oregon. Although they have problems (since no place is going to have none), they have managed to coexist. Minnesota is also home to many more wolves than the Northern Rockies and yet there still are plenty of deer in that state. I know these places are not the same, but it is still worth a look.
Just a few documented facts and points of information that are relevant to the above quoted post:............................................. ..............
The wolves that were INTRODUCED (NOT RE_INTRODUCED) into MT several years ago were NOT the same specie of wolf that existed here 100 years ago. The wolves that are now devestating our elk herds are 160 pound Canadian Grey Wolves......not 80 pound Prairie Wolves.
To compare our situation to that of european countries such as Romania is not valid at all..........the type and number of differences in these two areas is obvious to the informed.
Minnesota: I have personal and documented data that the Moose herds in northern Minnesota (particularly in the "Boundary Waters area") have been reduced by 75% over the last 5 years. Elk are not a factor in MN., and the deer populations in the northern half of the state HAVE been adversly effected by the growing wolf population.......Some internet research will confirm the situation in MN.
We (Montana) were "coexisting" quite well with the number of wolves that were living in Montana back in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, & 80s. The problems became appearent shortly after the release of the "Imported Canadian Grey Wolves" in the 1990s.....
The "real facts" that relate to our present situation are readily available to those who "do the proper research"........and not spread "subjective opinions" that are not backed up by documented data.
I'd like to observe a meeting between "wolf advocates" and:
1/ ....the Dillon area rancher that lost over 200 "imported sheep from Spain" in one night.. They were in a corral and were slaughtered "just for the sake of killing>
2/...or the rancher down near Darby who had a $10,000. quarter horse slaughtered in a corral up by his house.
3/....or the Darby area Lion Hunter who lost two of his highly rated and expensive Lion Dogs to wolves within 50 yards of his place.
4/..... and the numerous dog owners in the Bear Creek Canyon area that have lost several domestic family dogs (confined within the property fencing) to wolves.
5/....and the Hamilton resident (inside the city limits) who had their family dog slaughtered, at 10 am, just 50 feet from their front door. (Thank God that wolf was shot by the dog owner).
All of the above situations are documented (by F&G) and have been written about in Montana Newspapers....(and these are just A FEW of many more instances of similiar wolf attacks just here in Ravalli and Beaverhead County).
I don't think it would be wise to bring up "compromise & responsible management" to any of the above Montana residents who have "first-hand" been victims of the so-called Wolf "re-troduction" program in Montana.
Location: Approximately 50 miles from Missoula MT/38 yrs full time after 4 yrs part time
2,308 posts, read 4,122,972 times
Reputation: 5025
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfunkerror
IMHO
The cycle is not complete until we,humans, who are part of the cycle participate. We, humans, were smart enough to correct things by reintroducing animals, in this case wolves. It is our job now to control the balance for them. It is seen all over history, that humans are part of the cycle. It is not a terrible thing to hunt and kill wolves, deer, elk, bears, fish, and corn. It is a natural part of the cycle of life. Like all things in life, moderation is key, as we have learned from the past with Buffalo. Same with chocolate...to much can be bad right? Makes you sick.
Corn? Yes you read correctly. If we can humanize animals, then we can plants. And if you think about it, try and steal corn off the farm...better run faster than a buck shot.
There are so many statements in your post that I take issue with, that my only comment is: "Read my post".
And I might suggest: IF you do in fact move to Montana..........it is my humble opinion that you would be well advised to "keep your subjective opinions" (such as those stated in your post)...to your self..... Otherwise I think you will find living in Montana to "be quite lonely" and devoid of human inter-action with those that "know what's going on"................Just my Humble Opinions
There are so many statements in your post that I take issue with, that my only comment is: "Read my post".
And I might suggest: IF you do in fact move to Montana..........it is my humble opinion that you would be well advised to "keep your subjective opinions" (such as those stated in your post)...to your self..... Otherwise I think you will find living in Montana to "be quite lonely" and devoid of human inter-action with those that "know what's going on"................Just my Humble Opinions
I'm confused by your reply. Other than your point about the difference of wolves, that were or were not "re"introduced. I do not see much of a difference of opinion. I am aware the wolves that are there are not the same as the ones eradicated.
I feel the wolves should be able to be hunted for the same reasons you posted. It's the human participation, meaning, hunting, that is important. The "balance of the cycle" statement. That is where I feel we are smart enough to come up with a solution.
My opinion is what it is because the wolf issue is a well known one across the Nation. We locally here by Valley Forge go through this deal about deer in the park. We have these people who feel the deer should populate so much that "they",(Animal Activist), can sleep at night. But as my current job has shown, there is a danger in "just let them be." I drive a public transit bus through the park, at night, in all 4 seasons.
I have lost thousands of dollars, people have been killed by deer crossing roads and not to mention damage to property and so on.
Wolves however are another thing. Since they were brought to NATIONAL lands, it became quite a discussion among people in the Nation. The attacks on livestock and people are well known. This is something many people are watching because the success of it will show who is right in the debate. I feel the danger of the predator supersedes the safety of the people,and animals such as live stock.
I am wondering if this is such a hot issue for you that threatening me with isolation in Montana, "when," I move there, has misled you away from my point. They are there, they should be on the list to be hunted. To control population, and to also remove them from human populated areas.
Hunters are the greatest conservatives of the environment. Regardless of what a hippie has to say about it. Hunters see things with a better perspective and less emotion regarding the issues of nature. The idea to place them was a good one in theory and I supported the idea because a predator was needed that would then keep populations down for the wild land is limited. The idea was to create a balance. But now what? The wolves are to much, and they should then be cut back to maintain a balance.
I hope I communicated better this time around. In my humble, and may, or will be lonely opinion. I offer it online to be part of the discussion. In person, I have no interest in sharing what I think unless pressed to speak up. Give me some credit please. I am not unintelligent, I may be uninformed at times, but from what I understand...that is why this site is up. To help people become informed. I don't think insulting someone attempting to learn more is a right thing to do. It is easy to share your opinion and
Sorry you felt insulted. Sorry if I misjudged your reply. I am not sure ether way. And the humanization comment was a bit of a slam on the ecopeople. Sorry.
Last edited by gfunkerror; 03-07-2012 at 01:13 AM..
Location: Approximately 50 miles from Missoula MT/38 yrs full time after 4 yrs part time
2,308 posts, read 4,122,972 times
Reputation: 5025
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfunkerror
..
......................................I am wondering if this is such a hot issue for you that threatening me with isolation in Montana, "when," I move there, has misled you away from my point.........................................
.........in no way did I "threaten" with the last paragraph in my post #43. ... I referenced "A fact of life" that I have observed countless times after living here 33 years. ... and attending (countless)..various gatherings (morning coffee groups, poker clubs, etc, etc, ) where 6 or 8 local, long time residents are joined by a "new resident to the state" who immediately "adds his {2} cents" to the discussion of some local issue.........
If you took (post #43) as a threat.......you are mistaken..........................
To be candid with you,.....I took your usage of the word "threatening" to be totally inappropriate and accusatory!......IMHO, my phrasing in post #43 was intended to be factual and helpful..................In this community,...."Silence is Golden" ; "Patience is Silver" and "knowledge acquired through years of involvement" is :Priceless!
.......Admittedly, I take great pride in what I have learned, experienced and adsorbed in my 80 years of "boots on the ground".
I wish you luck.............
I hope I communicated better this time around. .........Yes, you have
P.S..............and as an after thought that won't gain me any additional friends on this Forum (particularly those that are prone to "hug a bunnie or two",...I offer you an invitation:......
It is known to some here that I have been a hunter for 70 of my 80 years.............in that context, you are welcome to contact me to view a Canadian Grey Timber Wolf (7'3" long/163 pounds) that proudly graces my Living Room Wall........and no, I did not harvest it in Montana....(Canada several years ago).....and yes,....I wish I had taken it in Montana.
P.S..............and as an after thought that won't gain me any additional friends on this Forum (particularly those that are prone to "hug a bunnie or two",...I offer you an invitation:......
It is known to some here that I have been a hunter for 70 of my 80 years.............in that context, you are welcome to contact me to view a Canadian Grey Timber Wolf (7'3" long/163 pounds) that proudly graces my Living Room Wall........and no, I did not harvest it in Montana....(Canada several years ago).....and yes,....I wish I had taken it in Montana.
Then please except my apology.
I will accept your invitation. I personally would love to see it.
Like I said, I am on here to learn about the people, place, and little thing such as this issue to understand where, and how I need to be. I really do not just speak my 2 cents openly in public. Something I learned from growing up in Philly is there is no need to add 2 cents to a jar already filled. They will fill it no more than it already is.
Again I thought here, in this forum, it is OK to share these things to gain better knowledge that you would not get from a book, or leaflet. People like yourself share a great deal that could not be found in any other format.
I hope you have more than that to see by the way. Have a good day.
Just a few documented facts and points of information that are relevant to the above quoted post:............................................. ..............
The wolves that were INTRODUCED (NOT RE_INTRODUCED) into MT several years ago were NOT the same specie of wolf that existed here 100 years ago. The wolves that are now devestating our elk herds are 160 pound Canadian Grey Wolves......not 80 pound Prairie Wolves.
To compare our situation to that of european countries such as Romania is not valid at all..........the type and number of differences in these two areas is obvious to the informed.
Minnesota: I have personal and documented data that the Moose herds in northern Minnesota (particularly in the "Boundary Waters area") have been reduced by 75% over the last 5 years. Elk are not a factor in MN., and the deer populations in the northern half of the state HAVE been adversly effected by the growing wolf population.......Some internet research will confirm the situation in MN.
We (Montana) were "coexisting" quite well with the number of wolves that were living in Montana back in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, & 80s. The problems became appearent shortly after the release of the "Imported Canadian Grey Wolves" in the 1990s.....
The "real facts" that relate to our present situation are readily available to those who "do the proper research"........and not spread "subjective opinions" that are not backed up by documented data.
I'd like to observe a meeting between "wolf advocates" and:
1/ ....the Dillon area rancher that lost over 200 "imported sheep from Spain" in one night.. They were in a corral and were slaughtered "just for the sake of killing>
2/...or the rancher down near Darby who had a $10,000. quarter horse slaughtered in a corral up by his house.
3/....or the Darby area Lion Hunter who lost two of his highly rated and expensive Lion Dogs to wolves within 50 yards of his place.
4/..... and the numerous dog owners in the Bear Creek Canyon area that have lost several domestic family dogs (confined within the property fencing) to wolves.
5/....and the Hamilton resident (inside the city limits) who had their family dog slaughtered, at 10 am, just 50 feet from their front door. (Thank God that wolf was shot by the dog owner).
All of the above situations are documented (by F&G) and have been written about in Montana Newspapers....(and these are just A FEW of many more instances of similiar wolf attacks just here in Ravalli and Beaverhead County).
I don't think it would be wise to bring up "compromise & responsible management" to any of the above Montana residents who have "first-hand" been victims of the so-called Wolf "re-troduction" program in Montana.
Can we please stop with this Canadian gray wolf argument? Calling a wolf a Canadian gray wolf is like calling an elk in Montana a Montana elk. While the number of wolf subspecies is debatable, the fact remains that the wolves that were reintroduced are not some alien species (as there is only one gray wolf species to begin with). This is not like introducing Indian wolves that are not adapted to the cold weather or hunting the same prey. These wolves were not that far north of the Canadian border and so could have easily wandered into these states. Also, I do not doubt that there were a few wolves here and there in this part of the country before they were reintroduced. However, a few wolves here and there are not a viable population.
I never once stated that there were not conflicts with wolves. I have read the news reports and I understand there have been and will be. I am not against having problem wolves being removed. I am not against a responsible hunting season for wolves.
As far as the Romania argument, I don't see why nobody can look at what other countries are doing. I'll check into the Minnesota argument.
Can we please stop with this Canadian gray wolf argument? Calling a wolf a Canadian gray wolf is like calling an elk in Montana a Montana elk. While the number of wolf subspecies is debatable, the fact remains that the wolves that were reintroduced are not some alien species (as there is only one gray wolf species to begin with). This is not like introducing Indian wolves that are not adapted to the cold weather or hunting the same prey. These wolves were not that far north of the Canadian border and so could have easily wandered into these states. Also, I do not doubt that there were a few wolves here and there in this part of the country before they were reintroduced. However, a few wolves here and there are not a viable population.
I never once stated that there were not conflicts with wolves. I have read the news reports and I understand there have been and will be. I am not against having problem wolves being removed. I am not against a responsible hunting season for wolves.
As far as the Romania argument, I don't see why nobody can look at what other countries are doing. I'll check into the Minnesota argument.
Just wondering here...if you were not born in Montana, but you lived there almost your whole life, are you a Montanian? If you have children who were born in Montana, are they not Montanian?
There is a valid point when talking about the difference between the different types of wolves. The natural food source for the smaller native wolves that used to inhabit parts of Montana was smaller mammals (rabbits, field mice, etc...). The larger wolves that were transplanted to parts of Montana prey on the larger herd mammals (which can include livestock).
Might just be me, but I see a very valid difference there...
There is a valid point when talking about the difference between the different types of wolves. The natural food source for the smaller native wolves that used to inhabit parts of Montana was smaller mammals (rabbits, field mice, etc...). The larger wolves that were transplanted to parts of Montana prey on the larger herd mammals (which can include livestock).
Might just be me, but I see a very valid difference there...
No, you are correct. There is a complete difference. Some people want to paint with a wide brush so that their arguement has merit, but there is a difference and to say that they have some of the same DNA doesn't mean they have the same appetite.
Yes, they might have migrated South, but I doubt it. They prey on meals that they are familiar with, so when you bring a 160 lb species down into country that used to have 60 lb species, there is a big difference.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are there, they should be on the list to be hunted. To control population, and to also remove them from human populated areas.
I offer it online to be part of the discussion. In person, I have no interest in sharing what I think unless pressed to speak up. Give me some credit please. I am not unintelligent, I may be uninformed at times, but from what I understand...that is why this site is up. To help people become informed. I don't think insulting someone attempting to learn more is a right thing to do. It is easy to share your opinion and 
