Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Wolf Hunting
See a wolf... what would you do?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 588524" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>We're probably drifting off-topic. Nature's ebb & flow of predator-prey populations is indeed naturally balancing, but the natural swings can be awfully extreme. Those predator-prey animals aren't thinking about maintaining maximum sustained yield. Only about survival. Humans can, given the proper tools, resources and authority, manage wildlife populations to greatly reduce the extreme swings of wildlife populations that most typically occur if solely left to mother nature and the natural predator-prey relationship. Much of Alaska is so wild that the natural ebb & flow is still in effect. And we do observe some pretty wild swings in caribou and moose populations. Minimizing the extreme natural swings of the pendulum in predator-prey populations is one of the goals of wildlife management. So my point with reference to American native's survival in competition with the wolves was: that if under the extreme predator-prep population swings that existed without professional wildlife management, the native Indians (which were heavily dependent on wildlife) were able to survive, that with modern wildlife management today we should be even better able to achieve less extreme predator-prey population swings, and sustainable yield of the game resource.</p><p></p><p>I agree absolutely that there's more wrapped up in this than pure wildlife management for maximum sustained yield of the big game population. Wildlife management is attempting to include non-human predator's into the mix. AKA wolves. Because to the disappointment of many, the wildlife in this country doesn't exist for the exclusive use of, and harvest by, hunters... except from the perspective of some hunters... That's the clear unadulterated truth. Those other user groups create the source of the competition, conflicting priorities, and politics which prevents wildlife management for the sole use of big game hunters. Conflicting preferences from the other user groups IS the '<em>more that's wrapped up in this</em>'. I like to see wildlife management biased towards hunting and hunters, and it very much is in Alaska. Especially on State-owned lands. Jump onto Federal Lands, even in the wilds of Alaska, and the influence of the other user groups from all over the country gets equal consideration. And then the fight begins.</p><p></p><p>And there-from the fight continues.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 588524, member: 4191"] We're probably drifting off-topic. Nature's ebb & flow of predator-prey populations is indeed naturally balancing, but the natural swings can be awfully extreme. Those predator-prey animals aren't thinking about maintaining maximum sustained yield. Only about survival. Humans can, given the proper tools, resources and authority, manage wildlife populations to greatly reduce the extreme swings of wildlife populations that most typically occur if solely left to mother nature and the natural predator-prey relationship. Much of Alaska is so wild that the natural ebb & flow is still in effect. And we do observe some pretty wild swings in caribou and moose populations. Minimizing the extreme natural swings of the pendulum in predator-prey populations is one of the goals of wildlife management. So my point with reference to American native's survival in competition with the wolves was: that if under the extreme predator-prep population swings that existed without professional wildlife management, the native Indians (which were heavily dependent on wildlife) were able to survive, that with modern wildlife management today we should be even better able to achieve less extreme predator-prey population swings, and sustainable yield of the game resource. I agree absolutely that there's more wrapped up in this than pure wildlife management for maximum sustained yield of the big game population. Wildlife management is attempting to include non-human predator's into the mix. AKA wolves. Because to the disappointment of many, the wildlife in this country doesn't exist for the exclusive use of, and harvest by, hunters... except from the perspective of some hunters... That's the clear unadulterated truth. Those other user groups create the source of the competition, conflicting priorities, and politics which prevents wildlife management for the sole use of big game hunters. Conflicting preferences from the other user groups IS the '[I]more that's wrapped up in this[/I]'. I like to see wildlife management biased towards hunting and hunters, and it very much is in Alaska. Especially on State-owned lands. Jump onto Federal Lands, even in the wilds of Alaska, and the influence of the other user groups from all over the country gets equal consideration. And then the fight begins. And there-from the fight continues. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Wolf Hunting
See a wolf... what would you do?
Top