Quote:
Originally posted by fabsroman
DaMadman,
I agree that wolves should stay, but I also agree somewhat with the other side in that their numbers should be limited through hunting. I know foxes and coyotes can have an impact on waterfowl birth rates, and I am willing to bet the same goes with the wolf and big game animals. Difference is that we can shoot and trap the coyote and fox to keep their numbers down, but these guys out west cannot do anything to keep the numbers of the wolf at bay. I sure wouldn't want to end up as wolf scat.
The fact that the wolves were willing to attack a pack of dogs because they were hungry means that there is not enough game out there for them to eat. Most predators will look for the easiest prey possible because there is no veterinarian in the wild.
So, if the wolves are attacking dogs and they aren't frightened by humans, I think they need to learn to be frightened.
We now have coyotes in Rock Creek Park here in Maryland/DC. Never thought I would see that, but I am willing to bet that their resurgence is directly linked to the amount of whitetails road kill, just as I bet the black bears resurgence is linked the same way. They reopened the black bear season a couple of years ago, and the tree huggers were so against it that they took it to Court. Lucky for us, the Judge decided in favor of the hunt. I think the same thing needs to be done in the west. If the people out there are complaining about wolves, there is usually a reason for the complaints. We waited too long with deer and geese here, and now they are a nuisance in some places. Might have the same problem with coyotes too, but you can bet I will kill every one I see, along with every fox I see, unless it would interfere with my actual hunt.
|
I totally agreed that the wolves should be managed with a hunting season. I just don't see that this guys story is some great tragedy.
He was out in the woods hunting (training dogs to hunt) a predator much larger than a Wolf. He said in the story that the dogs treed a Bear and he approached and retrieved the dogs with the bear in the tree above his head. With this in mind I am going to assume he was pretty much out in the middle of the woods somewhere which is exactly where the wolves SHOULD be. He invaded the Packs teritory with a pack of dogs, which to the wolves I am sure that is the same as another pack of wolves or group of coytes coming into their territory. The wolves were doing what they do naturally in defending thier territory.
As I said above I agree agressive wolves anywhere near a populated area should be shot on site. That is a definite menace and should be handle appropriately.
However as I also said this guy was out in the woods in the Wolves Territory with a pack of dogs which to a wolf is no more than a natural enemy.
Knowing what I know about wolf behavior I would venture to say that if the same guy had been in the same area without the dogs he would probably never have seen a wolf or if he had come across them without the dogs in the picture I would bet the wolf would have went the other way. I would also venture to say that the wolf lunged at the man because he got in the middle of a fight between a wolf and another animal that the wolf sees as an enemy.
Bottom line these wolves were not in the wrong, they were out in the middle of the woods and this guy introduced a threat to the pack and they acted as any predator in that situation should, they defended thier territory against the Dog Pack. If this had happened in a populated area or on someone's ranch near where people live I would have to agree that it was a big problem and the pack of wolves should be eliminated by any means possiblt.
I just can't go along with people going into the wolves territory running dogs then getting upset that the wolves did what comes natural to them.