Author Topic: Wolves return to federal protection, again  (Read 2471 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Skunk

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3520
Wolves return to federal protection, again
« on: July 03, 2009, 02:12:04 PM »
The Humane Society of the U.S., the Center for Biological Diversity, Help Our Wolves Live, Friends of Animals and Their Environment and Born Free USA, applaud the Obama administration for restoring federal protections for wolves in the Great Lakes. ::)

Wolves return to federal protection, again
UPDATE: The change makes most wolf shooting or trapping illegal.

Published June 29 2009

By: John Myers, Duluth News Tribune

Wolves in the Great Lakes region are back under federal protection under a court-ordered settlement announced today between the federal government and wolf protection groups.

The change makes it illegal to kill wolves under most circumstances except when someone’s life is in danger. It supersedes state laws that had allowed shooting wolves under some circumstances.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Humane Society of the U.S. agreed to the settlement after the groups filed suit to stop the federal government from handing wolf protection back to individual states.

It’s the sixth time in the past several years that wolf management has changed hands.

The federal government moved in 2006 to remove wolves from the endangered species list and give control to state departments of natural resources in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan. The agency concluded that wolves had recovered from near-extinction in the 1960s and 1970s and had met the goals to restore their population in the region.

For two years wolves were under state management in the three states where, in addition to government trapping of problem wolves, all three states had allowed slightly more liberal wolf killing by livestock farmers, pet owners and landowners. Wisconsin officials also were mulling a wolf hunting season in the future, while Minnesota had put that issue off until at least 2011.

But a court order last year, pushed by wolf protection groups, gave wolf management back to the federal government. The government then resubmitted the plan and moved earlier this year to hand control back to the states. today’s agreement again puts the feds in control and renders all state wolf laws moot for now.

The agreement doesn’t stop the federal government from re-opening public comments and starting the process again to hand control back to the states. But it wasn’t clear today when or how the government will do that.

“The goal continues to be to de-list. We believe the states have been doing a good job in managing wolves,” said Georgia Parham spokeswoman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency. “This is kind of the latest bump along the way.”

There are about 3,000 wolves in Minnesota and more than 500 in each of Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. While indiscriminate wolf killing remained illegal under state wolf laws, all three states allowed for more liberal wolf killing by farmers and landowners.

The settlement comes in response to a federal court motion filed two weeks ago by The Humane Society of the U.S., the Center for Biological Diversity, Help Our Wolves Live, Friends of Animals and Their Environment and Born Free USA.

“We applaud the Obama administration for restoring federal protections for wolves in the Great Lakes,” Jonathan Lovvorn, vice president and chief counsel for animal protection litigation with the Humane Society of the U.S., said in a statement, adding that while wolf numbers are high in northern Minnesota, the animals still are present across only 5 percent of their original range.


http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/124066/
Mike

"Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition" - Frank Loesser

Offline mirage1988

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2009, 02:42:10 PM »
1) shoot

2) shovel

3) shut up ;)

Offline Skunk

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3520
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2009, 02:52:01 PM »
Agreed!
Mike

"Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition" - Frank Loesser

Offline ihookem

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 763
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2009, 01:33:02 PM »
This is a good thing cause it's going to kill more wolves than it will save. Hunters will start shooting wolves again and noone will ever know. A few years ago the Park Falls area found 9 shot wolves over the deer season. About a third have radio collars. This means it's safe to say 30 wolves were really shot. I think hunters would think twice about shooting one with a collar. They were delisted the next year and the shootings all but stopped. Plenty around Phillips and loaded with wolves around Springstead according to a few people I know. They might also get mange and wouldn't bother me any. The only ones caught are the ones turning themselves in accidentally shooting one. This will also stop.

Offline EsoxLucius

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 601
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2009, 05:31:29 AM »
Quote
...adding that while wolf numbers are high in northern Minnesota, the animals still are present across only 5 percent of their original range.
Yeah, and now humans and their domesticated animals occupy most of it.
We learn something new everyday whether we want to or not.

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2009, 06:40:57 AM »
big deal.  it still doesnt make them bulletproof.   

  a side note, last summer i started seeing mange on the wolves.  i am getting reports from the boys up north that they are seeing more fawns this year than they have in the last 5 years.     mother nature will handle this stuff her own way.    moron tree huggers will never understand that.

Offline borrowed time

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2009, 02:41:32 PM »
This wolf protectionism is getting old. Wait till someone (child, old, hurt, lost) is done in by wolves. It will happen,  as long as the wolves have no fear in them from hunting. There are over 80,000 wolves in North America, no way should they be on the endangered species list. And think about the money that pays for lost livestock, dogs, pets. I have seen numerous wolves, heard them howl. Nice. But I don't want them around every dam tree, either. Too many of any species is not good for the environment, including man. Ship the excess wolves to Madison, those that think we can support countless numbers of these creatures would save gas and time by not traveling north.

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #7 on: July 09, 2009, 02:50:15 PM »
1) shoot

2) shovel

3) shut up ;)

That's right mirage1988. If it's good enough for the neighbor's cats, and their free rangin dogs, it's good enough for the big bad wolf. Oh, and those collars? Can they be turned off with a hammer?
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline charles p

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2009, 03:00:20 PM »
Reading the Journals of Lewis & Clark for the umteenth time.  They are just getting to the Kansas River on their way up the Missouri, and they have already killed and eaten several wolves, bear, and elk, not to mention dozens of turkey, gooslings and deer.  The month of their journey so far is June and July.  Not uncommon to kill a half dozen deer and a couple of bears per day.  They jerk the meat they don't eat.

Offline Cheesehead

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3282
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2009, 05:04:21 PM »
big deal.  it still doesnt make them bulletproof.   

  a side note, last summer i started seeing mange on the wolves.  i am getting reports from the boys up north that they are seeing more fawns this year than they have in the last 5 years.     mother nature will handle this stuff her own way.    moron tree huggers will never understand that.

What he said.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance.

Offline skarke

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2009, 04:05:22 AM »
First, I have no experience with wolves, their effects on livestock, human habitation, etc.  I speak from a position of ignorance on the subject.  Basically, I'm looking for opinions and education as to why they need to be eradicated.

While I've read about certain problems, does anybody know personally of lost livestock or human life?  I mean, after all, we have gozillions of coyotes in Texas, my last deer lease was a goat/sheep farm (yes, I know, but it really was a nice place) and we lost about 5 lambs per year off of a 1500 head ranch.

Are wolves more efficient?

Believe me, I'm not a bleeding heart.  I have the "I love animals, especially with steak sauce" bumper sticker.  It just seems that there is an awful lot of hoopla about a minimally destructive animal.

Thoughts?
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children what it was once like in the United States when men were free.  Ronaldus Maximus

Offline borrowed time

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2009, 07:08:56 AM »
Heard a story about a logging operation in Wisconsin in the winter. This is second hand news, but reliable. A large pack got into a logging area in late winter, and were going through the deer that moved into the area like a knive through butter. Over 60 deer killed. It seems that when the killing starts, they kill more than they can eat at the time. This is something we have heard before, a kind of storage thing. Like I stated before, some are fine, but this situation is getting to be that none will ever be controlled, in some cases this will be necessary. What will happen someday when the wolves are so numerous that they need the deer to survive? There goes the deer season. And by the way, now that there is no season, you have no need of that bad old rifle in your closet.
  This is about controlling people also, not just the wolves.

Offline scootrd

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2745
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2009, 07:53:00 AM »
I just don't see this whole wolf debate as large an issue as others make it out to be. A healthy adult wolf will take about 10 -20 deer per year.  Wisconsin boasts one of the nation’s largest deer herds with a healthy population of approximately 1.5 to 1.7 million animals. Wisconsin's present wolf population is Approximately 564 wolves.

Wisconsin Estimated average deer killed by Bobcats 7,000
Wisconsin Estimated average deer killed by Wolfs 8,460
Wisconsin Estimated average deer killed by Bears 12,000
Wisconsin Estimated deer killed by Vehicle kills 12,600
Wisconsin Estimated average deer killed by coyote 16,000
Wisconsin Estimated average deer killed by over winter stress 35,000
Wisconsin Deer hunters registered deer harvested over 452,000 gun and Archery

Do wolves ever kill more than they can eat?
Occasionally snow or other conditions are so harmful to prey that wolves can kill more than they can eat at the time,
although they usually return later to these kills. Such conditions occur less than 5% of the time.

-Source: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources


Given the size of the deer poulation I just don't see the impact. What I do see in this yuppie era of political correctness is a
unhealthy decline of younger Deer hunters. My sisters kids are a great example. she  wont even let them handle a firearm.
I would think Wisconsin could use all the helpm they can get from the wolves to keep the  deer in check.
Wisconsin Yotes easily kill almost twice as many Deer as the wolves.
Just my 2 cents.
"if your old flathead doesn't leak you are out of oil"
"I have strong feelings about gun control. If there is a gun around I want to be controlling it." - Clint Eastwood
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjaman Franklin
"It's better to be hated for who you are , then loved for who your not." - Van Zant

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2009, 08:16:38 AM »
the problems is scoot, you are getting your numbers from the dnr, and their numbers are way off.   i am not guessing it, up until december i lived in these areas and spent everyday of my job out and about in the woods.   so go live up there, have your dogs and livestock eaten alive in front of you, and then come back here and talk about it.  until then, your just yapping about stuff you do not know about. 

  and skarke;  nobody is talking about eradicating the wolves.  keeping their numbers in check is all anyone wants.   reasonable management of the species by the state government is all anyone is asking.   and the great thing is, if they dont do it, the people up north can/will/are doing it.    antifreeze, treble hooks, and bullets are cheap. 

 and dee, if the hammer wont do it; the second shot usually will.  the collars are about as bulletproof as the wolves. 

Offline scootrd

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2745
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2009, 08:30:01 AM »
the problems is scoot, you are getting your numbers from the dnr, and their numbers are way off.   i am not guessing it, up until december i lived in these areas and spent everyday of my job out and about in the woods.   so go live up there, have your dogs and livestock eaten alive in front of you, and then come back here and talk about it.  until then, your just yapping about stuff you do not know about. 

  and skarke;  nobody is talking about eradicating the wolves.  keeping their numbers in check is all anyone wants.   reasonable management of the species by the state government is all anyone is asking.   and the great thing is, if they dont do it, the people up north can/will/are doing it.    antifreeze, treble hooks, and bullets are cheap. 

 and dee, if the hammer wont do it; the second shot usually will.  the collars are about as bulletproof as the wolves. 

Well where should I begin .. I could be offended by your comment but that would be a waste of time. Instead I will make the below comments:

1st,  I didn't realize you were all knowing on the subject and your opinions superceed Wisconsins reported data.  If you have better stats and feel the numbers are way off produce them. Otherwise these are the stats.
2nd, lets try respect for each others individual opinions. you don't have to agree , just respect. I would have expected better etiquette from a board moderator.
3rd, I don't have to physically live in Wisconsin to read, absorb, digest, educate myself,  and formulate my own opinion regarding subjects such as the reintroduction of wolves, polar bears or any other species regarding wildlife management, so  I can share my opinion rather than just "yap" about it as you so put it.. 

The controversy of reintroducing wolves is a NATIONAL one , and one that is also taking place here in the Northeast as well (my stomping grounds. ) .. and I certainly wouldn't try to chastise or berate you for giving your opinion on the NATIONAL subject just cause you don't live here in my back yard, and have to worry about my Goat herd being attacked, or my chicken coops being raided, or the loss of my pigs by wolves,  yotes,  foxes , coy dogs etc..

A strong well managed wolf population would help keep our Coyote population numbers down which in turn would actually lessen predation. So as a Livestock owner here in the Northeast I am far less concerned about wolves being reintroduced, as I am about the over abundance of Yotes and coy dogs. It is also believed Wolves in low densities breed with coyotes, which would also decrease their numbers.

Again I state what Wisconsin has is a very large healthy deer population and less younger people getting involved in hunting. This is also a national issue. so I think everything in perspective the wolves are on the lesser scale of the problem. But since you having lived there at one time in your life and determined the official data is so far off , Let me ask you ..How much further in check do you suggest Wisconsin should manage their approx 460 (or whatever number you have determined the official tally is)  wolves?. Please Educate us all. 

So hey ,
That's my 2 cents  -  you have a good day .
   

"if your old flathead doesn't leak you are out of oil"
"I have strong feelings about gun control. If there is a gun around I want to be controlling it." - Clint Eastwood
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjaman Franklin
"It's better to be hated for who you are , then loved for who your not." - Van Zant

Offline borrowed time

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2009, 09:42:47 AM »
Actually, the most deer in the state are in the southern two-thirds, where predation is not as big a factor, along with a lot tougher winter 9 times out of ten in the north. As far as DNR figures, when I wrote to the Outdoor News in Wi a couple years ago that the DNR was off in bear and deer numbers, I said that the boys counting deer should be counting bears, and vice-versa. Guess what, they later admitted twice as many bears, a lot less deer than previously thought.
  Before this is seen as a bashing of the dnr we can consider they are understaffed and you have a hard time doing field work from a desk. Gov Doyle does not instill  a lot of confidence in the dept in my opinion.
  One other item, the deer that wolves kill is nothing compared to what is stressed during the winter from being chased, or tested to see if they are available for the table. Our large bear population does not help the fawn survival rate much either. Want a bear, go to northern Wi. I saw 6 different bear last fall in seven days, I was not hunting either.

Offline ihookem

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 763
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2009, 05:21:39 PM »
There is no way there is only 564 wolves in Wisconsin. I see wolf tracks all over Price county. I don't live there but I see ten times more wolf tracks than bobcat tracks. I also see as many wolf tracks as bear tracks. At 26,000 bear in Wisconsin I don't understand how the 564 wolves make as many tracks as bear. It just doesn't add up. Does anyone else see the same thing?

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2009, 03:18:31 AM »
ihookum- around hayward, there are MORE WOLF TRACKS THAN DEER TRACKS.  go out in the first 24 hours after a fresh snow and see for yourself.  crazy. 

Quote
1st,  I didn't realize you were all knowing on the subject and your opinions superceed Wisconsins reported data.  If you have better stats and feel the numbers are way off produce them. Otherwise these are the stats.
baloney.  these are the bogus stats the dnr puts out there.  practically no one who lives in the area agrees with the findings. 
Quote
2nd, lets try respect for each others individual opinions. you don't have to agree , just respect. I would have expected better etiquette from a board moderator.
respect you advocating the continued destruction of the natural resources, ecological balance, and public safety?  highly unlikely.  get off your high horse with you 'board moderator' jab, i am entitled to my opinion and to voice it.
Quote
3rd, I don't have to physically live in Wisconsin to read, absorb, digest, educate myself,  and formulate my own opinion regarding subjects such as the reintroduction of wolves, polar bears or any other species regarding wildlife management, so  I can share my opinion rather than just "yap" about it as you so put it..
  the problem is, you are accepting bogus information as fact to formulate said opinion.  which, puts you dead center in lalaland.  which means, you are YAPPING about something without having the facts.   

 furthermore,  your theories are dead wrong.  no one in washington (national issue) has a clue as to what the real facts are nor do they care.  coyotes and wolves do not breed.  where you got that one i have no clue.  so put down your book, and take yourself into the areas affected by the federal government sticking their noses where they dont belong.  quit spewing theory and get the facts from people that live in affected areas.   moreover, if you think they are so great, put them in YOUR backyard and not mine.  people like you are short sighted and dont give a damn that other people have to deal with the results. 

Offline scootrd

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2745
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2009, 04:46:18 AM »
ihookum- around hayward, there are MORE WOLF TRACKS THAN DEER TRACKS.  go out in the first 24 hours after a fresh snow and see for yourself.  crazy. 

Quote
1st,  I didn't realize you were all knowing on the subject and your opinions superceed Wisconsins reported data.  If you have better stats and feel the numbers are way off produce them. Otherwise these are the stats.
baloney.  these are the bogus stats the dnr puts out there.  practically no one who lives in the area agrees with the findings. 
Quote
2nd, lets try respect for each others individual opinions. you don't have to agree , just respect. I would have expected better etiquette from a board moderator.
respect you advocating the continued destruction of the natural resources, ecological balance, and public safety?  highly unlikely.  get off your high horse with you 'board moderator' jab, i am entitled to my opinion and to voice it.
Quote
3rd, I don't have to physically live in Wisconsin to read, absorb, digest, educate myself,  and formulate my own opinion regarding subjects such as the reintroduction of wolves, polar bears or any other species regarding wildlife management, so  I can share my opinion rather than just "yap" about it as you so put it..
  the problem is, you are accepting bogus information as fact to formulate said opinion.  which, puts you dead center in lalaland.  which means, you are YAPPING about something without having the facts.   

 furthermore,  your theories are dead wrong.  no one in washington (national issue) has a clue as to what the real facts are nor do they care.  coyotes and wolves do not breed.  where you got that one i have no clue.  so put down your book, and take yourself into the areas affected by the federal government sticking their noses where they dont belong.  quit spewing theory and get the facts from people that live in affected areas.   moreover, if you think they are so great, put them in YOUR backyard and not mine.  people like you are short sighted and dont give a damn that other people have to deal with the results. 


Hmm where should I begin ///

1. Here's one source .. THERE ARE MANY MANY MORE.
2. Still waiting for you to direct us to more scientific population stats. ???
3. Wolves are an Apex hunter -  Reintroduction with controlled and moderated populations help strengthen and create
a more balanced wildlife ecology keeping lesser species prey numbers in check.  (not destruction)
4. I own a farm and live in an area with an over abundant population of coyotes and and coy dogs now. 
I consider them more trouble than any controlled population of wolves ever could be.
5. I have read numerous postings by you on many various subjects. For the most part are just rude.
you spout your opinions as True fact and belittle anyone who challenges your thoughts.
yet when solicited to produce substantive evidence to back up your opinionated claims you never do. 

6. So basically you are just white noise and the one yapping on subjects you don't have a clue about.
Overtime visiting this board I have managed to easily tune you out. 

Interspecific hybridization
A Coyote-German Shepherd hybrid

Coyotes will sometimes mate with domestic dogs, usually in areas like Texas and Oklahoma where the coyotes are plentiful and the breeding season is extended because of the warm weather. The resulting hybrids, called coydogs, maintain the coyote's predatory nature, along with the dog's lack of timidity toward humans, making them a more serious threat to livestock than pure-blooded animals. This cross-breeding has the added effect of confusing the breeding cycle. Coyotes usually breed only once a year, while coydogs will breed year-round, producing many more pups than a wild coyote. Differences in the ears and tail are generally what can be used to distinguish coydogs from domestic/feral dogs or pure coyotes. Breeding experiments in Germany with poodles, coyotes, and later on with the resulting dog-coyote hybrids showed that unlike wolfdogs, coydogs show a decrease in fertility, significant communication problems as well as an increase of genetic diseases after three generations of interbreeding.

Coyotes have also been known on occasion to mate with wolves, though this is less common than with dogs due to the wolf's hostility to the coyote. The offspring, known as a coywolf, is generally intermediate in size to both parents, being larger than a pure coyote, but smaller than a pure wolf. A study showed that of 100 coyotes collected in Maine, 22 had half or more wolf ancestry, and one was 89 percent wolf.

The large eastern coyotes in Canada are actually hybrids of the smaller western coyotes and wolves that met and mated decades ago as the coyotes moved toward New England from their earlier western ranges.

The Red Wolf is thought by certain scientists to be in fact a wolf/coyote hybrid rather than a unique species.

Strong evidence for hybridization was found through genetic testing, which showed that red wolves have only 5% of their alleles unique from either Gray Wolves or coyotes. Genetic distance calculations have indicated that red wolves are intermediate between coyotes and Gray Wolves, and that they bear great similarity to wolf/coyote hybrids in southern Quebec and Minnesota.
____________________________________

It is a fact that documented wolf populations exist in Quebec just sixty miles from New York and seventy five miles from Maine. 
It is a fact that a 67 pound, black female wolf was shot and killed in northern Maine in August 1993. 
It is a fact that an 81 pound male wolflike canid was trapped and killed in eastern Maine in November 1996.  This animal is undergoing more modern and sophisticated DNA analyses in an attempt to determine its identity and origin. 
It is a fact that an 85 pound male wolf was shot and killed in New York's Adirondack Mountains in December 2001.  DNA analysis of this animal showed that the animal likely originated from the Great Lakes region. 
It is a fact that an 85 pound wolf was killed by a trapper in Quebec's Eastern Townships some 20-30 miles from the U.S. border in January 2002.  Its DNA was analyzed and it was confirmed to be a wolf by Quebec wildlife authorities.
It is a fact In January 2005, trapper Yves Jette of La Patrie, Quebec caught and killed a seventy two pound canid north of Parmachenee Twp. some ten miles from the Maine/New Hampshire border.
It is a fact Viable wolf populations occur in southern Quebec’s Papineau Labelle Reserve just sixty miles north of Massena, New York. Several years ago an ear tagged wolf from Papineau Labelle was killed on Mount Sainte Anne, several hundred miles to the east. Recent measures by the Province of Ontario to protect wolves in and around Algonquin park may promote dispersal of wolves farther and farther from the park in search of unoccupied wolf territories and suitable habitat, both of which are in abundance in northern New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.
It is a fact The coyote population in Maine is an estimated 12-16,000 animals. Studies in Yellowstone have indicated that within two years, with the presence of wolves, coyote populations decreased by approximately 50% until a balance was reached.
Wolves strengthen the biodiversity of a region by bringing into balance species with large populations and bolstering species under stress. Wolf kills provide food for scavengers like bears, ravens, and eagles. Fewer coyotes means more rodents for smaller predators. Plant species flourish with fewer large ungulates overgrazing plants and small trees.
"if your old flathead doesn't leak you are out of oil"
"I have strong feelings about gun control. If there is a gun around I want to be controlling it." - Clint Eastwood
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjaman Franklin
"It's better to be hated for who you are , then loved for who your not." - Van Zant

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2009, 05:48:17 AM »
all i will say about it anymore, is my information comes from living in an area INFESTED with wolves; not out of a book read from afar.  my opinions are formed from first hand observations from the field.   you continue to cut and paste info from sources that people such as myself reject because it does not reflect first hand observations. 
   again, come back and talk to me once you have lived in an area infested with them.  until then, you are just blowing smoke.   
Quote
2. Still waiting for you to direct us to more scientific population stats.
i dont deal with baloney others are selling, i deal with what i see and experience firsthand. 
Quote
3. Wolves are an Apex hunters Reintroduction with controlled and moderated populations help strengthen and create
a more balanced wildlife ecology keeping lesser species prey numbers in check.  (not destruction)
bullspit.  talk to ANYONE living in an area with wolves.  they DESTROY game populations.  you showed your hand once again as a theory peddler. 
Quote
4. I own a farm and live in an area with an over abundant population of coyotes and and coy dogs now. 
I consider them more trouble than any controlled population of wolves ever could be.
guess again, homey.  at least you have the option of controling the coydogs and coyotes.  with wolves,you risk prison time if you control them.  you think they dont breed like rats?  get in the real world. 
Quote
5. I have read numerous postings by you on many various subjects. For the most part are just rude.
you dont last as long as i have around here without following the rules.  i have seen folks come and go, and in some cases, come back and go again.  and yet in some other cases, come and go, come and go, then come back yet again.  you with a whopping $1.50 in posts.   :D if you think you are going to get away with trying to peddle dribble as fact and not be challenged on it around here without someone with firsthand knowlege calling you on it, think again.
Quote
you spout your opinions as fact yet when challenged never produce any evidence to back up
your opinionated claims.
  again, i dont let others do the field work for me.  i am going off what i have seen firsthand; not what some idjiot printed, then i read; and then try to push off as fact.  pull your head out of the sand, go out and witness things for yourself and quit letting others brainwash you.

Offline scootrd

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2745
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #20 on: July 21, 2009, 06:02:53 AM »
I'm sorry , I forgot .. It's you who are all knowing and your opinions based on limited personal observations -  VS  - the scientific community. Even when presented with their years of research and supported documented facts. I should have expected no less a response. Thank god we have folks like you out there helping guide us to manage wildlife to create a sound ecology based on your formulated opinion through limited personal observation , and not sound scientific study and in depth analysis. You can lead a horse to water, But...

Since we are dealing with only personal opinions and throwing out all scientific data . Please share with me what I should do with the 3 Black bear I had along my pasture fence line this year .. We must have an over abundance for me to see 3 already. Should we reduce their numbers? What do you suggest should be a good population number for them? Personally I think I may be observing an infestation and we should eradicate them. Funny they must have had plenty natural food to eat, they didn't even bother my livestock. And I almost forgot to mention the 2 moose  I observed walking along my wood line ... Since I already seen 2 there must easily be 2 hundred hiding just out of sight. I suggest counting the two I saw that's probably 2 moose too many. God knows we can't go by any published stats or  scientific data. Sound ecology must only be based on a single persons observations.

We clearly don't see eye to eye on this subject and that would have been fine with me if you could have responded without being so rude. It's obvious you don't even know how to agree to disagree agreeably without trying to belittle others. A little tact goes a long way ... you should try it sometime.

 
This is also the last I will post on this subject.

"if your old flathead doesn't leak you are out of oil"
"I have strong feelings about gun control. If there is a gun around I want to be controlling it." - Clint Eastwood
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjaman Franklin
"It's better to be hated for who you are , then loved for who your not." - Van Zant

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #21 on: July 21, 2009, 06:20:32 AM »
I'm sorry , I forgot .. It's you who are all knowing and your opinions Vs the scientific community. Even when presented with their years of research and supported documented facts. I should have expected no less a response. You can lead a horse to water, But...  I'm not sure you even know how to agree to disagree agreeably without being rude.  This is also the last I will post on this subject.
it is NOT fact.  it is propaganda and nothing more.  if you saw firsthand the methods and formulas they use to calculate their numbers, you would puke.   and then compound that by people living in the areas contesting the results their numbers for years, then after the damage is done they come out and ADMIT their numbers are way off, time and again, and you learn to trust firsthand accounts versus some schlub that never steps out of an office and relies on information they get from people who are forced to use methods developed by the moron who never gets outside.
   the entire wolf "only killing what they need, the weak and the sick", the myth that they bring "balance" is a farce.  there was a reason they were reduced in the first place.  like i said,put them in your backyard and quit trying to tell me how great they are in mine.  and after they destroy any traces of wild game, and then decimate your bank account by eating your cattle right before your eyes, then come for your pets, come back and talk to me.  until then, your theories simply dont cut it where the rubber meets the road.
   your entire arguement is akin to a toxic waste dump.  it is fine if other people get screwed with it, but no one wants it in THEIR backyard.  and any fool who does agree to it,REALLY regrets it after they see what it does. 

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #22 on: July 21, 2009, 09:22:41 AM »
nice try!
 
Quote
This is also the last I will post on this subject.
and then you go back and edit it in order to try to get the last word; too bad threads and modifications are time and date stamped here at g.b.o.. 

   a single person's observations?  hardly.  talk to anyone up here that actually spends time in the woods; instead of swallowing the propaganda statistics that they try to push off as facts.   utility workers, loggers, farmers, landowners and sportsmen have a great idea what is going on out there, and if the dnr would use the system the way it is supposed to work they would be on the right track.   
   what is going on instead is political garbage instead of sound game management; which is why my feathers get so ruffled.  you are trying to push off politcal issues as scientific fact.   just like global warming.  scientists cant be wrong, can they?  you have been buffalo-ed, and have started to try to buffalo others.
   and please, if you are going to break your word, at least be up front about it and drop the backdoor approach.  we werent born yesterday. ::)

Offline scootrd

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2745
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #23 on: July 21, 2009, 10:03:57 AM »
wow I love the features on this board .. I just found this ignore feature ... now lets see .. how does this works ??
add name ... Hmmm...Myronman3.. click... Poof Gone ... wow that's great. Lookie ' thar no more white noise to contend with,
works like a champ.  I must remember to thank the programmers.
"if your old flathead doesn't leak you are out of oil"
"I have strong feelings about gun control. If there is a gun around I want to be controlling it." - Clint Eastwood
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjaman Franklin
"It's better to be hated for who you are , then loved for who your not." - Van Zant

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #24 on: July 21, 2009, 10:07:58 AM »
everyone loves a coward.  cant handle being challenged, so just stick your head in the sand and stay there. 

Offline borrowed time

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #25 on: July 21, 2009, 10:11:33 AM »
The problem with scientific reports and statistics is that the unreported data is sometimes relied on as factual: example; not one documented case of a wolf attack in modern North America. Sounds good, until upon chcking data, you must have the stomach contents of the suspicious wolf attack to verify, or this CANNOT BE VERIFIED AS A DOCUMENTED ATTACK. Good luck finding the guilty wolf, and I doubt that every wolf in an area would be shot to find the guilty party. I actually believe that there are certain people that would cry more over a dead wolf than a human attacked. That's my gut feeling, not a fact.

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #26 on: July 21, 2009, 11:14:32 AM »
unfortunately, it is more likely a fact.   :'(

Offline 379 Peterbilt

  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #27 on: July 21, 2009, 11:18:10 AM »
It's a fact that I like this picture. LMAO


Offline Cheesehead

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3282
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #28 on: July 21, 2009, 02:38:22 PM »
379,

And what rifle would you be using in that picture?

Cheese
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance.

Offline 379 Peterbilt

  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
Re: Wolves return to federal protection, again
« Reply #29 on: July 21, 2009, 03:05:07 PM »
12 gauge slug. I'd like for it to be a BIG hole.  :D