Wolves coming to new States!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Scot E, Dec 7, 2011.

  1. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    This disaster is now coming to everyone's backyard. Please read and get involved.




    [FONT=&quot]Southern Rockies Wolf Plans Dangerous? Read for yourself[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]Folks,[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The official S. Rockies wolf documents have now been released to the public.[FONT=&quot] CLICK HERE[/FONT] to visit [FONT=&quot]biggameforever.org/blog[/FONT] where you can download and read the proposal. Here's how these documents were released to the public.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]On December 2, 2011 Arizona Fish and Game commission released official documents, which would mandate wolf proliferation across the Southern Rockies and into Texas. The documents have been confirmed by several sources, including a regional director for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service testifying at Friday's Arizona Fish and Game Commission hearing.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Despite denials by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding these plans, it has become clear that these plans are moving forward. This official "draft" was released for official comment by members of the wolf recovery team in the last couple of weeks. In the wake of criticism by western states, USFWS' national director accused states of "mischaracterizing" the Southern Rockies wolf plans. These leaked documents confirm that the criticism of these plans by western states were well founded.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Here are several quotes from the document that illustrate the dangerous nature of these plans:[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot](1)[FONT=&quot]An acknowledgment of the intent to force wolves into Texas[/FONT]
    "Several questions at the August recovery team meeting focused on...availability of suitable habitat in Mexico and the United States, especially Texas." "Approximately 24,000 square kilometers of potentially suitable [wolf] habitat...occurs in western Texas."[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot](2)[FONT=&quot]Mandated wolf proliferation across the entire southern Rockies[/FONT]
    "Based on the material below we recommend that the Mexican wolf recovery area include "Mexico...western Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and the southern portions of Utah and Colorado."[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot](3)[FONT=&quot]Dramatic increases in forced wolf populations minimum numbers[/FONT]
    "Three major zones of suitable wolf habitat exist in the area encompassing Arizona, New Mexico, southern Colorado and southern Utah. Under current habitat conditions, it is estimated that over 1,000 wolves could inhabit this large area." This is more than triple the number of wolves that were required in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot](4)[FONT=&quot] Mandating Mexican wolves OUTSIDE their historic range using the Endangered Species Act[/FONT]
    The report spends several pages trying to justify mandated Mexican wolf populations outside their historic range. The report concludes "recovering [Mexican Wolves] outside purported historical ranges...may establish a useful and critically important precedent." Given demonstrable damage from invasive species, most biologists we have spoken with feel this is a slippery slope and a dangerous precedent. The areas outside of historic range includes Utah and Colorado.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot](5) [FONT=&quot]Plans designed to prevent S. Rockies wolves from ever being managed by Western states[/FONT]
    The devil is in the details. Legally, no delisting can occur until Mexican wolves are recovered across a "substantial portion of the range." 90% of Mexican wolf range is in Mexico. With no plans to recover wolves in Mexico, there is little hope that wolves in the Southern Rockies would ever be delisted. The legal mechanism of preventing wolf management in the future is by eliminating the safe-guards provided by "non-essential experimental" status and instead create a "subspecies" listing. A "subspecies" listing would prevent delisting even if populations objectives are reached in the Southern Rockies. As a result, these plans provide little in the way of safeguards for livestock and wildlife.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot](6) [FONT=&quot]The plans would result in "swamping" of Mexican Wolf Genetics[/FONT]
    Despite claims these plans are about recovering Mexican wolves, Wolf specialists have confirmed that interbreeding with Northern Gray wolves could overwhelm Mexican wolf genetics in as short as 20 years.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]Folks these plans are dangerous. These plans do not protect wildlife. These plans do not protect livestock. These plans would violate well-established limitations on federal authority. These plans are based on a dramatic overreaching.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Please help us stop these plans from being forced on the good people of the Western United States.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Ryan Benson
    [FONT=&quot]http://biggameforever.org/[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]ryandbenson@msn.com[/FONT][/FONT]
     
  2. sp6x6

    sp6x6 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,043
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    It is already too late in Montana. Worst season ever for me, and I hunt the tough stuff. Never thought I would see hunting this bad in my lifetime, I am wolf hunt full time right now, get em in your cross hairs
     

  3. bassin93

    bassin93 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    237
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    I didn't buy a wolf tag, I refuse to pay for something that was shoved down our throats. When asked if I have a wolf tag I respond "as many as I have shells in my ammo box. I Shoot on sight.
     
  4. gunpower

    gunpower Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    111
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    WOLVES were PART OF THE STATES many years ago!

    But somebody decided that wolves would attack humans- Bull !
    They are part of the natural order of wild life, they keep the herds of wild life under control, by taking the sick and weak animals.
    Nature was balanced until white man came to the country.
    Nature takes care of it's own!!
    The indians , before white man arrived, survived just fine on the
    natural order of nature.lightbulb
     
  5. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said. The issue comes when the feds refuse to allow the States to manage an extremely efficient predator in an UNNATURAL setting where food population numbers are intentionally bolstered compared to what they would be in a true non-human interventionist world. States chose to artificially prop up big game numbers so it citizenry could enjoy the wildlife in the form of hunting, viewing, food, etc. It is a large segment of many Western State's GDP. Now an unmanaged predator is growing at an astronomical rate and is taking a major toll on the big game herds. If the States don't get control soon this not only ends badly for hunters, wildlife lovers, and the big game animals but also for the wolf. What is going to happen when they run out of food? They will eat anything they can which will bring more conflict and eventually their numbers will have to fall way off to balance things out. A real mess all the way around simply because States are not being allowed to manage them. It took Idaho almost 40 years to get elk numbers where they were in 1990. I really don't want to start that process over just because of government politics and bureaucracy. States currently manage bears and cats. Why is it exactly that they can't manage wolves?

    Now for some minor disagreements. :) The primary reasons wolf numbers were driven down wasn't because of the fear of human attacks. It was in large part due to the attempt to lower predator numbers so big game populations could grow and so ranching operations could be more successful. I personally don't have an issue with this line of thinking. And in general the State wildlife agencies have done a very good job of managing wildlife.

    Also, this whole notion of endangered is bunkus. We had wolves in Idaho prior to the reintroduction, even though they sure weren't the size of the wolves we have now. I saw them a few times in the Sawtooths. Alaska has them. Minnesota has them. Canada has them by the thousands. So the question comes as to why the big push? Americans don't like having this kind of thing shoved down our throats, especially when the real reasons behind it are being hidden and we are sold the "endangered" BS. There is a lot more behind this push than it seems on the surface. And the almighty dollar is at the very top. When you see the statistics on these wolf advocate groups it is simply staggering how much money they bring in and how little of it actually gets used to help the wolf!

    Also, they do a lot more than just kill the sick. I have seen first hand multiple kills where less than 10% of the animals was eaten. There is a lot of joy killing going on unfortunately.

    Scot E.
     
  6. bassin93

    bassin93 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    237
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    gunpowder, apparently you don't have a clue as to the devastation the wolves are doing to our game herds here in MT. and ID. sure they take care of the weak and sick, but also everything else. I found a cow and small bull moose that they had killed within 30 yards of each other and a cow elk they killed, took a bite out of the head and ass then left the rest.

    down near yellowstone park they used to give out hundreds of late season elk tags, now, nothing, not one. the wolves have killed most of the elk that were there.

    worse thing the USFW has done to sportsman
     
  7. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Agreed. One of my favorite units used to have over 3-400 cow tags each year for the late season rifle season and over 200 bull tags. Since the introduction of the wolves I have watched the bull numbers be cut in half and the cow tags are completely gone. They haven't offered cow tags for 3 years.

    I am sure it is habitat. Just so strange about the timing though! :)

    I am a passionate elk hunter but what really is sad is the moose numbers. I used to be able to see moose all the time driving from Idaho to Yellowstone but no any more. The F&G numbers are ridiculously low in some areas.

    Scot E.
     
  8. bassin93

    bassin93 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    237
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Scot E,

    then what really frost my ass about this are the people that don't live in our areas making out of their hindend statements such as gunpowder. too many of these long distance biologist making decisions that don't affect them but horrendously devastate our herds and way of life.
     
  9. Scot E

    Scot E Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,312
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008

    hehe, Yup, you are exactly right!

    Kinda along the same lines as some city dwelling soccer mom who hasn't stepped a foot out of the city her whole life who is mad as hell about how hunters are so mean to wolves. Makes me want to introduce a wolf pack in her local park and see how she likes it!
     
  10. HARPERC

    HARPERC Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,037
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Just the other day I followed a link to comment on the wolf plan in the USA, the interesting thing was they asked where you were from, and any country from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe was free to comment. As there was a link to comment on Alberta's plan to "kill thousands of wolves" I followed it and discovered comments from Non-Canadians was not allowed.
    I'm thinking gunpower should use his expertise to help Alberta realize the folly of their ways, and then come preach at us.
    I hear the definition of an expert is somebody with a big mouth, over 50 miles from home. Well with the Internet it's easy to cover 50 miles in a hurry, but I'm betting nobody at home is buying gunpowers message so he's taking it on the road.