Wolf kill pics.... Trophy Bull Elk.....

[jmden]

I respect your comment and I feel the same way as you
Maybe I came off different I dont know. Its real irritating being called a peta or wolf hugger because I feel natural balance is proper rather than pure eradication.
If the wolves have been transplanted then to where they arent native then I do see the issue, but still I wouldnt think eradication (kill the whole population) is the answer

Very few here or anywhere are calling for full eradicaton. This an opinion you have formed about 'us' that is not valid. The wolf does need to be agressively managed to protect prey populations.

'Natural balance' must take into account the role and needs of man as well. I'm just as natural as the wolf is, but as humans we have the responsibility to manage all wildlife.

Sure wish you guys would go back and carefully read the threads I left links to on page 8 of this thread. There is much good stuff there.

 

[elkaholic]

I respect your comment and I feel the same way as you
Maybe I came off different I dont know. Its real irritating being called a peta or wolf hugger because I feel natural balance is proper rather than pure eradication.
If the wolves have been transplanted then to where they arent native then I do see the issue, but still I wouldnt think eradication (kill the whole population) is the answer

This is why I respectfully request that you research before you speak! These wolves are three times the size of native wolves and everyone having to live with them knows it....Rich

 

[jmden]

If it IS all erroneous propaganda as you put it...where does one "learn it"..? You need to chat; petition...etc...ABC abd CBS ..etc..etc..to publish the TRUTH instead of diseminating lies. Hit the people in congress a few smacks also ( that totally useless pack of bast**** ) Name calling, etc. on a open BB doesnt accomplish jack squat. And if you have linked FACTS...then send them up the stack also to see who salutes...but NOT...publish links to story's about some nit wit woman out jogging in the dammed wilderness area...totally unprotected... and getting attacked by wolves; bears or even skunks.

Believe me Sully2, all of those news agencies have been contacted by many people and organizations over the years. They often have a philosophical bent towards one side of a story. It's very easy and much more palatable to the unknowing masses to talk about wolves and how wild places are so much more wild with wolves there, etc. The nitty gritty showing the wolves killing and the damage they are doing is not seen because of a nationally marketed mindset about the wolf it doesn't fit with. So, the reality is not dealt with and the masses never know.

The folks that do know and care fervently are the folks that are being directly affected (hunters, ranchers, ect.) or somehow otherwise understand what is going on. Folks out west that live with the wolves and see day to day and year to year what is happening. But yet, we have folks such as yourselves that are not directly affected that call themselves hunters and are seemingly unwilling to even listen to the folks that live here and are directly affected.

 

[bigngreen]

I really wish some of you guys could know what it is like to grow up in the mountains and be in them every day, seeing animals you know and have seen for years and interacting with the land every day, those of us who have get passionate when things are going wrong on the land, we are tied to it very closely, making our living with and on the land and raise our families on it.

I have an uncle that is a card carrying member of PITA, raging liberal and donated hard cash to their cause. He came and visited Yellowstone and the area where he grew up and after that he agreed with me that there was a fundamental mistake made by releasing that wolf into this ecosystem but it took him seeing it with his own eyes.

 

[elkaholic]

I really wish some of you guys could know what it is like to grow up in the mountains and be in them every day, seeing animals you know and have seen for years and interacting with the land every day, those of us who have get passionate when things are going wrong on the land, we are tied to it very closely, making our living with and on the land and raise our families on it.

I have an uncle that is a card carrying member of PITA, raging liberal and donated hard cash to their cause. He came and visited Yellowstone and the area where he grew up and after that he agreed with me that there was a fundamental mistake made by releasing that wolf into this ecosystem but it took him seeing it with his own eyes.

Well put Rhian! We would all do well to pay attention to the old Indian saying about "walking a mile in someone elses shoes" before we form an opinion.......Rich

 

[jmden]

The reason I want all the current wolves dead is because they ARE NOT NATIVE to my area, it's well documented that the wolf that was introduced into this area is not the same sub species as was living here and doing well prior to the introduction. I don't want to kill the wolf of where it has a place, I've had ample opportunities to kill native wolves but I have not because they belonged and were in balance in our ecosystem.
I worked for a wildlife biologist in Salmon Id when they started talking about this wolf and he was full on against it because we already had a population of native wolf and this wolf was not it, his recommendations were round filed the same as many biologist who were on the ground in these areas.
I harbor no animosity toward the wolf in general, if the current wolf was a native animal I would be all for managing it just like any other animal. I've hunted Mt Lion all my life, never have I wanted to damage the population and I take animals that need to be taken, same with killing coyotes, I won't trap an area till they are gone I pull out once they are at a level that is right. The last thing I would want to do is permanently hurt the population of a native animal!!!!

This is a big part of the equation that Sully2 and timmay don't seem to know. The wolf that was helicopter netted in Canada and then brought down across the 49th parallel and suddenly called 'endangered' is NOT the wolf that was already here. the USFWS at the time stole 60-70 million dollars from the Pittman-Robertson Act, money that is supposed to be distributed to the state wildlife agencies, to fund this introduction of an invasive sub-species of wolf, the Canadian Gray Wolf. The Rocky Mountain Wolf, of which there was an established population, why was it not agressively managed to bring it back? Why not bring back what was already here?

There an many posts that talk about the above, again, in the two links I left for you guys on page 8 of this thread. Please read those and gain a fuller understanding of this issue.

If you are just now learning this stuff, like many here have said, you need to do a bunch of research before coming back to this argument. You are arguing based only on common politically correct easily understood but incorrect, politically correct reasoning.

You've been given plenty of opportunity to learn what is really going on here.

 

[Coyboy]

Rich, Jon, and others bring up great points, but don't expect Timmay and Sully to debate
based on reason, fact and first hand knowledge.

They are here to be devicive, rude and menacing. They lack an argument so they put words in others mouths, so they can debate the fiction they created.

one of them has stated only Rabid wolves attack humans. untrue.
they have both made the false statment that we want all wolves dead. untrue.
one has stated that woilves don't pleasure kill, untrue.

All these statments are used by the wolf introduction people. Who are the same people who want absolutly no population controls on the wolves.

If it looks like a duck, talks like a duck, and walks like a duck. then so it is.

 

[ss7mm]

Guys, I just went through and deleted some Childish and Immature posts. You may think that yours shouldn't have been deleted but anything with mindless crap in it got deleted. It may have been your comment or maybe your post contain a quote that was junk but it's gone.

I left a lot that probably should have been deleted but you all have a right to express your opinions. What you don't have the right to do is trash this site. I can think of a handful of sites where you can go and play kids games and call each other childish names and demonstrate your immaturity.

I can't believe some of what I'm reading. Go back, read the original post and rethink things. This is a touchy subject and I understand that but don't turn it into some name calling, finger pointing school yard trash.

Try to stick with known facts and keep it clean. Personal attack on anybody by anybody will not be tolerated.

The next time this thread goes sour it gets locked and there is no reason that should ever happen when adults reasonably debate a subject, no matter how touchy it or or how close to home it may hit someone.

 

[elkaholic]

There is a Proverb that says "answer a fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own eyes"! For a person to really know what the truth about something is, they have to WANT to know what it is. Several truths have been stated concerning the current wolf population in the west based both on undeniable evidence of others and personal experiences of people who live here. Even the Idaho Fish and Game realizes what a problem we now have, but liberal judges from the 5th circuit court, and even in Missoula, make decisions for all of us based on what THEY want. I suspect Cowboy may have it right when he states what their motives are .......Rich

 

[Topgun 30-06]

I'm not going to say anything more for fear of being banned from the site and I'm sure not going to let these two cause that to happen. I'm glad that others seem to be able to have some patience after all that has gone on the last half of this thread! Mine is worn out!

 

[sp6x6]

For a 4 yr.old post this sure lit up. I was hunting this general are at the same time period. I was also hunting a 8 pt. bull that Inever got. This area is a lot of large clear cuts and some timber, not my typical hunting. I like wilderness type areas, no roads etc. This area has alot of gated roads and some pretty large areas behind gates.When I first hunted this area I could find as many as 6 bulls in a day out bugling, and many times 3. I hunted w/ friend, who drove my rig back and I hiked a main ridge, 3 times, about 8 miles. Had fresh snow and cut 1 elk track. This is just one of many examples of what is happening. Few yrs. back I was in a nasty hole in ID, MY buddy had called and seen 8 bulls, he had his recurve. I showed up a day later. We thought we had found elk heaven. Next season,dropped in to same spott, let out a bugle and a wolf howled. The elk where clear around in the next basin, and it was so thick we had to crawl, it was not bow huntable. I was starting my son hunting, and game has been so slim he is loosing interest, there is no good reason for this, this is out West.Friend of mine saw wolfs today out cross country skiing. That area closed and only had a wolf quota of 3 because it borders GNP. A biologist use to stay in our cabin on the border of Canada, 30 yrs. ago,all winter no electricity, studying the NATIVE wolf. She was a pioneer in here field. In the early 90's this area had 50 wolfs in 4 packs, the quota dosnt fit?

 

[elkaholic]

One last comment and I'm done with this thread. I want to thank everyone of you guys who aren't afraid to call foolishness for exactly what it is! Political correctness is going to destroy us if we don't!....cheers/Rich

 

[drahthaar]

sp, are you saying that the wolves we have here in NW MT are not native? Please. They are as native as the dirt. They have all been pretty much spawned from the packs in the north fork of the flathead, and the others that have been roaming around Eureka, back and forth across the border since I was a little kid. I have seen wolf tracks since I started hunting in the late 80s. None of this is new to me. Nor should it be new to anyone that has hunted around here at all. They have got more plentiful for sure, no argueing that, but they aren't special in any way.

They are 80-120 pounds with a few outliers that get maybe 15 pounds heavier. I have grown tired of this idea that those McKenzie River Valley wolves they brought from Alberta have eaten all the little dinky native wolves. Where did this 3x bigger than native wolves come from? 3x? Holy buckets!! Just isn't true, no matter how many times someone writes it on the internet. The sizes and weights of the wolves released in Yellowstone was documented, go look it up.

Think about it. How in the past 3 or 4 or 5 thousand years did not one or a group of these super huge, ultra bad wolves not wander out of the MRV and go and kill off all the other wolves on the north american continent? I mean really, if they are so prone to killing other wolves, why would they have only started doing this after being drop shipped into yellowstone and central ID? I mean, since they are so big and bad ***, shouldn't they have at some point eaten themselves out of house and home enough to go have to wander out of the MRV? Doesn't make much sense does it. Or is there an impenetrable fence around the MRV?

And not all the wolves they did transplant came from there. Some came from BC as well. What are those? Some other form of super wolf?

The bottom line is, we should have been shooting and trapping these things about 8 years ago, that is the problem, not that they are some superwolf.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Drahthaar---You need to read this, but it shows you are incorrect and that sp and I are on the button with what we have stated in this thread:
All American Patriot (AAP): Drs. Geist and Kritsky, Messrs. Fanning, Hoppe, Graves, and Beers, welcome to the AAP roundtable. Gentlemen, we've assembled to talk about the re-introduction of the wolf into Yellowstone, but first, there are many who take issue with the term "re-introduction" [Editors note: see the thorough treatment of this issue in the accompanying articles authored by Lynn Sutte .] Why is that?
DR.FANNING: It's simple. There is no "re-introduction" because the wolf introduced into Yellowstone Park is not native to this geography and had never naturally been here to begin with. The Gray wolf is ironically enough, a human introduced invasive species. You see, the original wolf inhabiting the geography of the Park was a much smaller animal, the Rocky Mountain wolf or Canis lupus irremotus. The Canadian Gray Timber wolf, Canis lupus occidentalis, is also known as the Alaskan Tundra Wolf. It was introduced at significant cost to the U.S. taxpayer and is a super size predator with a rapacious appetite and lust for wanton killing – killing far in excess the number of ungulates (hoofed animals: deer, antelope, elk) claimed by authorities. There are hundreds of cases of man monkeying around with the balance of nature and screwing things up. One of the best examples is the introduction of the Mongoose into the Hawaiian Islands as a means for dealing with a huge and troublesome rat population. Those conscientious biologists however neglected to realize that the rat is a nocturnal animal while the Mongoose preys during the day. Their paths simply never cross, so today Hawaii not only still has its rats, but it has 100s of thousands of Mongooses creating mayhem with rare ground nesting birds and other native species. This is just one example of the law of unintended consequences in dealing with wildlife. The unintended consequence to the Rocky Mountain States of the non native Gray wolf is much, much more serious and not simply the consequence of a couple thousand extra wolves roving the countryside, but rather a much greater problem caused by the level of depredation of native species – Elk and deer, than originally claimed. It's all about wolf "densities" and who gets to control those densities. Federal and state biologists have failed colossally in their claims every step of the way and the impact is economically huge