Outsider looking in

[Capt. D]

Being from South Texas and only visiting the western states to hunt, although I have not been able to for some time, I am not directly impacted by the wolf problems that face you. However I do support you and have signed several petitions though with no good explanation of how those petitions will be used.

After following this issue for a while a thought crossed my mind. Has anyone considered the Lacy Act as a possible avenue in getting the introduced Canadian wolf listed as an invasive specie under the injurious wildlife clause since the Canadian wolf is a much larger specie than the indigenous gray wolf and has decimated the gray wolf since its introduction.

Defined; Injurious Wildlife are mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and their offspring or gametes that are injurious to the interests of human beings, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, wildlife, or wildlife resources of the United States.

Provisions of the Lacy Act are to protect the health and welfare of humans, the interests of agriculture, horticulture or forestry, and the welfare and survival of wildlife resources from potential and actual negative impacts.

As far as a negative impact, the reduction of the Yellowstone Elk Herd by greater than two thirds gets my attention. I have read about predation pits, I have watched several videos, and have read several state wildlife reports that state and independent biologists have indicated that the decline in big game herds is mostly attributed to wolves.

Is all of this information being compiled somewhere or by an organization.

I have read some about Big Game Forever and have seen their video but have not seen their plans other than trying to make the public aware.

Are there any funds from a reputable organization accepting donations that are planning to present this information to a congressional panel. It seems that if a group of tree huggers can get in front of a panel that the other side should be able to as well.

Is there any organization out there or is all of the information being put out on the world wide web in hopes that someone will take the lead. The one thing that it will take is dollars, without a reputable organization and dollars your plight will be in vane. I would certainly buy some of the smoke a pack a day decals, bumper stickers, and shirts if I knew that the proceeds were going to the wolf management efforts and would certainly donate to a reputable organization for the management cause.

With all of the data out the it seems that something could be done instead of all of the preaching to the choir so to speak.

Just my thoughts, but please remember that there are a lot of us in the south that are behind you folks all the way.

Dallas

 

[threejones]

Being from South Texas and only visiting the western states to hunt, although I have not been able to for some time, I am not directly impacted by the wolf problems that face you. However I do support you and have signed several petitions though with no good explanation of how those petitions will be used.

After following this issue for a while a thought crossed my mind. Has anyone considered the Lacy Act as a possible avenue in getting the introduced Canadian wolf listed as an invasive specie under the injurious wildlife clause since the Canadian wolf is a much larger specie than the indigenous gray wolf and has decimated the gray wolf since its introduction.

Defined; Injurious Wildlife are mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and their offspring or gametes that are injurious to the interests of human beings, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, wildlife, or wildlife resources of the United States.

Provisions of the Lacy Act are to protect the health and welfare of humans, the interests of agriculture, horticulture or forestry, and the welfare and survival of wildlife resources from potential and actual negative impacts.

As far as a negative impact, the reduction of the Yellowstone Elk Herd by greater than two thirds gets my attention. I have read about predation pits, I have watched several videos, and have read several state wildlife reports that state and independent biologists have indicated that the decline in big game herds is mostly attributed to wolves.

Is all of this information being compiled somewhere or by an organization.

I have read some about Big Game Forever and have seen their video but have not seen their plans other than trying to make the public aware.

Are there any funds from a reputable organization accepting donations that are planning to present this information to a congressional panel. It seems that if a group of tree huggers can get in front of a panel that the other side should be able to as well.

Is there any organization out there or is all of the information being put out on the world wide web in hopes that someone will take the lead. The one thing that it will take is dollars, without a reputable organization and dollars your plight will be in vane. I would certainly buy some of the smoke a pack a day decals, bumper stickers, and shirts if I knew that the proceeds were going to the wolf management efforts and would certainly donate to a reputable organization for the management cause.

With all of the data out the it seems that something could be done instead of all of the preaching to the choir so to speak.

Just my thoughts, but please remember that there are a lot of us in the south that are behind you folks all the way.

Dallas

I love the idea of using the Lacy act to fight the infestation. The problem we face is that the wolf is a "species of interest." Which seems to mean, "species that we watch wipeout entire populations while wait for courts to decide who's study on wolf impacts we should listen to." There are several organizations that have started legislation, raised awareness, etc. But I think it's a matter of too many cheifs, not enough indians. If all these outfits would work with one another, instead of just localized efforts, we'd be alot more effective.

You've got it right. We just need a good preacher (with a loud voice and deep pockets) to bring us all together.

 

[BikerRN]

The wolf issue may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak, and pits western non-city dwellers against the feds for a second war of federal aggression against the citizens of this nation.

As far as I'm concerned the only good wolf is a dead wolf, legal or not.

Biker

 

[Gary Kaney]

Capt D

Are you aware "whether their are provisionsfor citizen suitsor state enforcement" re: the federal government?

 

[Swamphunter]

The wolf issue may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak, and pits western non-city dwellers against the feds for a second war of federal aggression against the citizens of this nation.

As far as I'm concerned the only good wolf is a dead wolf, legal or not.

Biker

As an ethical hunter that statement is really ignorant. That kind of thinking are why the anti hunters have made so many inroads against hunting. If the wolf numbers are controlled there can be game for everyone, wolves included. I figure that wolf has as much right to eat as do I. I have been hunting deer in Minnesota my whole life, competing with the wolf. I think me and my long range weapon match up just fine with the wolf.

 

[royinidaho]

As an ethical hunter that statement is really ignorant.

BWOW, Be cautious of using the "E" word.

 

[rooster740]

As an e$%#@&l hunter that statement is really ignorant. That kind of thinking are why the anti hunters have made so many inroads against hunting. If the wolf numbers are controlled there can be game for everyone, wolves included. I figure that wolf has as much right to eat as do I. I have been hunting deer in Minnesota my whole life, competing with the wolf. I think me and my long range weapon match up just fine with the wolf.

Why exactly are you here? Is it to convince us "dumb-uns" that wolves are our friend?

**** the wolves, they took my livelihood, and I hate them. Survival of the fittest, and they were the fittest untill now.

From the inside looking out, I say kill them all

 

[Loner]

As an ethical hunter that statement is really ignorant. That kind of thinking are why the anti hunters have made so many inroads against hunting. If the wolf numbers are controlled there can be game for everyone, wolves included. I figure that wolf has as much right to eat as do I. I have been hunting deer in Minnesota my whole life, competing with the wolf. I think me and my long range weapon match up just fine with the wolf.

I have not one intention of kissing up to any antis. They are our enemies period. Try
standing up to them instead of appeasing. And wolves have no rights, they are animals.
Try reading the bill of rights, they are God given to men, not animals.

 

[HARPERC]

As an ethical hunter that statement is really ignorant. That kind of thinking are why the anti hunters have made so many inroads against hunting.
I've heard appeasement preached in many situations-never seen it work yet. The inroads made by anti-hunters is strictly do to a lack of organized resistance willing to out the liars. I've heard the hunting groups preach appeasement for 30years, NRA and RMEF to name a couple could have altered this fight, but were to busy fund raising. To give credit most sportsmens groups were doing hands on-on the ground work that benefits wildlife. Of course anti groups don't spend their money on these projects. Fact is when it came to the wolf, money was stolen from Pittman-Robertson funds-HUnters-Sportsmen-Wildlife. Talk to me about the ethics, of lying, stealing, and violating the law that's occurred putting this non invasive species in our midst, and why you aren't angry about it?

 

[Swamphunter]

Yeah kill them all, seems to me that has been done before and now it is back for round 2, we also killed how many million bison, eliminated elk from how many states? so many that now we have only a hand ful left to hunt them, and lets not mention caribou from the northern states, and the Moose used to be more widely distributed. I ain't appeassing any anti hunters, I am just not willing to wipe out a whole population of animals. Not for you and not for anyone else. I have actively battled anti hunters. I have written to PETA and the humane society telling them that while they think the are helping the wolf they are in fact actually hurting them because when they keep filing lawsuits to keep the wolf on the endangered list people get ****ed and start taking matters into their own hands. So I don't need you to tell me about anti-hunters as I am well aware.

 

[jmden]

As an ethical hunter that statement is really ignorant. That kind of thinking are why the anti hunters have made so many inroads against hunting. If the wolf numbers are controlled there can be game for everyone, wolves included. I figure that wolf has as much right to eat as do I. I have been hunting deer in Minnesota my whole life, competing with the wolf. I think me and my long range weapon match up just fine with the wolf.

"12000 yards, 155mm howitzer took the heart right out of it, and the grove of trees it was standing in."

Your quote above from the poll here about your longest shot in the last year.

Is this the 'long range weapon' you mention above.

 

[jmden]

Yeah kill them all, seems to me that has been done before and now it is back for round 2, we also killed how many million bison, eliminated elk from how many states? so many that now we have only a hand ful left to hunt them, and lets not mention caribou from the northern states, and the Moose used to be more widely distributed. I ain't appeassing any anti hunters, I am just not willing to wipe out a whole population of animals. Not for you and not for anyone else. I have actively battled anti hunters. I have written to PETA and the humane society telling them that while they think the are helping the wolf they are in fact actually hurting them because when they keep filing lawsuits to keep the wolf on the endangered list people get ****ed and start taking matters into their own hands. So I don't need you to tell me about anti-hunters as I am well aware.

We? You and I killed them all? I don't think so. That is swiss-cheese thinking. Subsistence hunters, but mostly commercial hunters and wolves, yes wolves, killed them 'all', as you say. Not us. Because 'us' are regulated sportsmen that for generations are responsible for the vast majority of the support for wildlife in this country, bringing much of it back to the abundant wildlife we have had.

From Defenders of Wildlife's own website! :

http://www.defenders.org/programs_a...led_species/bison/background_and_recovery.php

"Habitat and Range

Bison once roamed across much of North America in great herds (see map). Historically, bison numbered an estimated 20-30 million. Their constant grazing helped shape the ecology of North America's Great Plains. Many species of plants and animals depended on them or benefited from them. Prairie dogs preferred the heavily-grazed areas they left, large wolf packs hunted them, and numerous scavengers feasted on bison carcasses."

Now, there aren't, in general, subsistence or commercial hunters, just sportsman hunters. So, of the three things mentioned above that killed 'all' the bison, etc. What is left? The wolf. Happily introduced by the Feds.

That is great that you are battling the anti hunters, etc., but do your research and get on board with the wolf issue or show us good evidence to the contrary.

 

[Swamphunter]

We? You and I killed them all? I don't think so. That is swiss-cheese thinking. Subsistence hunters, but mostly commercial hunters and wolves, yes wolves, killed them 'all', as you say. Not us. Because 'us' are regulated sportsmen that for generations are responsible for the vast majority of the support for wildlife in this country, bringing much of it back to the abundant wildlife we have had.

From Defenders of Wildlife's own website! :

Bison Background and Recovery - Defenders of Wildlife

"Habitat and Range

Bison once roamed across much of North America in great herds (see map). Historically, bison numbered an estimated 20-30 million. Their constant grazing helped shape the ecology of North America's Great Plains. Many species of plants and animals depended on them or benefited from them. Prairie dogs preferred the heavily-grazed areas they left, large wolf packs hunted them, and numerous scavengers feasted on bison carcasses."

Now, there aren't, in general, subsistence or commercial hunters, just sportsman hunters. So, of the three things mentioned above that killed 'all' the bison, etc. What is left? The wolf. Happily introduced by the Feds.

That is great that you are battling the anti hunters, etc., but do your research and get on board with the wolf issue or show us good evidence to the contrary.

The wolf didn't kill off the bison, a big part of the reason for killing off the bison was to take away the food from the Indians to force them to the reservations. Yes market hunters killed off alot of wildlife, most of it in fact.
The modern hunter has singlehandedly done more for wildlife than any other group or groups of people in the world.
And the modern hunter shouldn't now be in favor of wiping out any species of wildlife.

 

[jmden]

The wolf didn't kill off the bison, a big part of the reason for killing off the bison was to take away the food from the Indians to force them to the reservations. Yes market hunters killed off alot of wildlife, most of it in fact.
The modern hunter has singlehandedly done more for wildlife than any other group or groups of people in the world.
And the modern hunter shouldn't now be in favor of wiping out any species of wildlife.

No one said the wolf (single handedly) killed off the bison. Read my post again. But they certainly helped.

From p 65 of Jerry Keenan's book, 'The Life of Yellowstone Kelly':

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Kelly, however, came to believe that those who reduced the wolf packs by poisoning actually provided a useful service to large animal herd management. 'It was said,' wrote Kelly,

[quote from Kelly] that wolves killed more buffalo than Indians and whites combined. I am convinced that the men engaged in poisoning wolves for their pelts rendered a good service in protection of herds of wild game. I have seen in the North bands of wolves numbering fifty or more traveling with noses up on the scent of buffaloes borne by the wind. They killed the young calves and hamstrung the cows and bulls. [unquote from Kelly]

It is often pointed out how the buffalo was the mainstay of the Plains tribes; how virtually every part of the animal contributed to Indian society in some way. In contrast, white hunters slaughtered the herds, taking only the hide and delicacies of the animal. Kelly recalled, though, that the Indian could be as wasteful as the white man--for example, killing buffalo cows 'for the unborn calves for the purpose of feasting, the cows being at that time of year poor in flesh and the robes by no means prime.' "

-------------------------------------------------------------

Something to consider, at least.