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="Scot E" data-source="post: 588456" data-attributes="member: 10832"><p>The real problem is that State's have NO experience managing them because the feds won't give them the power. This is the REAL issue. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I think you will find far more guys just wanting to have them managed than wanting all wolves dead. I don't find that to be an accurate depiction at all. Yes, guys that live in the Rockies are hacked off that our big game numbers are being destroyed over politics and money and yes, most of us want to help reduce those numbers as much as we can to save our big game herds but I have talked to very few hunters that aren't equally impressed by them and really enjoy their vocalizations. Much of the frustration about wolves is an indirect response to the ineptness and corruption of the government officials doing little for real wildlife management. </p><p></p><p>Also, this falsehood regarding extinction needs to stop being bantered around as truth. Wolves are not endangered. They weren't before the introductions to the Rockies, they aren't now. And nobody wants them extinct. There were wolves in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming prior to 1994, there are over 10,000 wolves in Alaska and 5-7 times that amount in Canada (depending on which report you read). Minnesota has 3-5000 wolves. Then there is Russia and Europe and on and on. The entire argument which originally got the wolves on the ESA is a farce. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Without too much political influence? That hasn't gone so well for sportsman and big game herds in the Rockies. The originally agreed upon numbers were 15 packs and 150 wolves per State to be considered recovered. These numbers were offered as acceptable by State and federal scientists. We are past this number by 20-40 fold and still no resolution. </p><p></p><p>This is one of the most politicized topics in the nation right now and will continue to be in large part because there is only one side being told and much of that story is untrue. People are living in fantasy land if they think that this issue is just going to take care of itself. Real wildlife lovers, sportsman and hunters, etc. need to step up and get the truth out and donate some time and money to get this mess fixed or we will end up looking back at was used to be. </p><p></p><p>And to the OP, we are still a nation of laws and we should abide by them. If we disagree we are much better served to get involved in changing the laws than to give our opponents more power by being able to show how unlawful and heartless we are as a whole. And that is exactly how such actions are portrayed to the other side. </p><p></p><p>Scot E.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Scot E, post: 588456, member: 10832"] The real problem is that State's have NO experience managing them because the feds won't give them the power. This is the REAL issue. I think you will find far more guys just wanting to have them managed than wanting all wolves dead. I don't find that to be an accurate depiction at all. Yes, guys that live in the Rockies are hacked off that our big game numbers are being destroyed over politics and money and yes, most of us want to help reduce those numbers as much as we can to save our big game herds but I have talked to very few hunters that aren't equally impressed by them and really enjoy their vocalizations. Much of the frustration about wolves is an indirect response to the ineptness and corruption of the government officials doing little for real wildlife management. Also, this falsehood regarding extinction needs to stop being bantered around as truth. Wolves are not endangered. They weren't before the introductions to the Rockies, they aren't now. And nobody wants them extinct. There were wolves in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming prior to 1994, there are over 10,000 wolves in Alaska and 5-7 times that amount in Canada (depending on which report you read). Minnesota has 3-5000 wolves. Then there is Russia and Europe and on and on. The entire argument which originally got the wolves on the ESA is a farce. Without too much political influence? That hasn't gone so well for sportsman and big game herds in the Rockies. The originally agreed upon numbers were 15 packs and 150 wolves per State to be considered recovered. These numbers were offered as acceptable by State and federal scientists. We are past this number by 20-40 fold and still no resolution. This is one of the most politicized topics in the nation right now and will continue to be in large part because there is only one side being told and much of that story is untrue. People are living in fantasy land if they think that this issue is just going to take care of itself. Real wildlife lovers, sportsman and hunters, etc. need to step up and get the truth out and donate some time and money to get this mess fixed or we will end up looking back at was used to be. And to the OP, we are still a nation of laws and we should abide by them. If we disagree we are much better served to get involved in changing the laws than to give our opponents more power by being able to show how unlawful and heartless we are as a whole. And that is exactly how such actions are portrayed to the other side. Scot E. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Wolf Hunting
See a wolf... what would you do?
Top