Finally!!!

[Tater]

Well, it looks like Idaho is finally adopting a season for wolves pending removal from the endangered species list. Unfortunately, they're also cutting other big game seasons and limits in order to give other species a chance to bring their numbers back up. At least they didn't wait until it was too late. Hopefully, deer and elk numbers come back up in the next few years cuz I know many people who usually harvest haven't had good luck the last couple years. We'll see how things work out.

[Wolfwoman]

When it works right and everyone obeys the management rules, it really can work! Best of luck!

[Adam Helmer]

Tater,

Bag one for the deer, one for the elk and one for me!

I am tired of the Tree Huggers, et al., pretending the wolves are a benign neighbor for deer and elk. I have seen some very graphic videos of wolf packs bring down a full grown animal and feasting before the host died. Go balance the playing field!

Adam

[Wolfwoman]

Mother nature sure isn't pretty, but if we'd left her alone years ago, she would still BE in balance. Man is the one who makes the playing field skewed.

[skeet]

If the wolves hadn't been introduced the numbers on deer and elk would still be higher than they are now. Elk in Wyoming are hurting wherever the wolves are located. The elk in the areas i hunt are also hurting from grizzly predation. Looked at a lot of elk herds last summer after the young'uns were born. In one day I saw 6 herds of 91 animals and in all that number there were 2 calves. Not good for certain. Of course the area I hunt is prime wolf country...and it is also the areas where the problem bears from Yellowstone are taken. Neither of these prime predators are scared of people. I have had wolves in my yard...as many as 6 at one time. The fools that perpetrated this ridiculous deed in the name of reintroduction don't have to LIVE with the wolves. Luckily they haven't killed any of the cows on the place. But we try to keep a pretty close check on them...between my neighbor and myself. I do know of one rancher that knows he has lost over 65 cows in the last 2 yrs. That isn't just the number of cows..that includes the calves they would have had..at an average of a 1000 bucks each..plus 500 for the calves..we're talking about a fair amount of money. And Adam..I've seen the wolves bring down and eat prey in person..and it ain't pretty. That stupid ploy that the tree huggers keep telling us just ain't true..they do not take just the sick and ithe infirm. Because there are too many wolves in one area the elk moose and deer really suffer the consequences of a bunch of fools actions. Yeah...I'm glad there are wolves in the area..but sorry the people and critters of the area are MADE to live with the problem by a bunch of do gooders that don't have a clue. We ought to turn a few loose in Central Park.

[Wolfwoman]

You are talking about recently, I am talking about when there already were wolves and deer and elk and bison and everything else living quite comfortably before we came along and wiped out the bison and the wolves. As I said, mother nature isn't always pretty, but she WORKS correctly without our interference. Now, however, it's too late and we try to fix it and NO ONE is happy about that on either side. Like I said, if we hadn't messed it up in the first place things would probably be running pretty smooth about now.

A predator cannot hunt it's prey to extinction - except for man.

[skeet]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

. . Now, however, it's too late and we try to fix it and NO ONE is happy about that on either side. Like I said, if we hadn't messed it up in the first place things would probably be running pretty smooth about now.
.

Well Wolfwoman...maybe you don't quite understand the facts. There were already wolves here..They were the remnants of the wolves that followed the herds of bison across the prairie. A little smaller than the Canadian wolves that they turned loose here. Of course like most things..they are pretty much gone now..if not killed off then bred out of existence. And if we hadn't messed it up in the first place WE wouldn't be here now! You are right nature isn't always pretty. I loved seeing what was as close as possible to real nature without the hand of man when I lived and worked in Alaska. Late 60's early 70's time frame..but even then wolves had been hunted...but the caribou herds waxed and waned even then through predation and disease and other factors. Don't blame all the extinction of critters on hunters though...man...including your forefathers helped. Know what a Buffalo jump is? Everybody says the indians lived with nature...bull crap... They changed things just as we did. Seems as though you use furs for some of the things you have pictured. Without the demand for such they would not be caught and used.. So remember we all impact the world surrounding us. Just a fact of life. Now just a question...what right does someone in New York City or Calipornia...or even Alaska have to make people in Wyoming Montana or Idaho live with an animal that really didn't need to be reintroduced...and then tell those same people that we HAVE to do things their way? I surely don't think I should be able to tell Alaska that they can no longer hunt ...say caribou. As I said...I am glad there are wolves in the world..but as you said..here man is changing things for the sake of change...and the ones doing it are usually not affected by the change. Heck we even have laws in place in some states protecting Sasquatch...a creature never even proved to have been seen. Sheesh..protect us from idiots that want to change the world...as long as it doesn't affect them.

[Wolfwoman]

I love a good wolf debate and hope it can stay civil!!

I guess I'm not making myself too clear on what I'm saying, not that THAT hasn't happened before I wasn't leaving the Native Americans out of it, they are humans too and screwed things up just as well as the rest of humanity.

(side note - my forfathers didn't have nuttin to do with what happened here, my gramma came over here from Poland when she was 16! )

I do use furs and make things from fur, but I don't kill off every single furbearer in my state that I use - that would kinda put me outta busisness... that's what happened with wolves and bison many years ago, there was a bounty on wolves and they were wiped out because back then we were too stupid to know what management was.

NOW they want to (or they have) put the wolves back but they don't have enough sense to know how to do it without a population explosion and THEN there comes a hunting season and everyone wants to kill em all off again. It's a vicious cycle with no middle ground and NO ONE wins.

I never said outsiders should manage your state, but now that the wolf has already been reintroduced, is your state going to manage or wipe them out again? Yes everyone has an impact on nature (well not everyone) but it's HOW they impact it that counts. If you want to hunt and trap an animal every year and there are only (for example) twenty of them in your area and you kill 18 of them, do you think you will be able to hunt/trap them the following year?

Let me ask this, there were wolves where you are before there were men and the cycle of nature did pretty well by itself. Why can't some resemblance of the balance be restored (you've already GOT the wolves, right?) and some of you make some money off trapping wolves and selling the fur and skulls?

My biggest issue is with man playing God and trying to determine which species of animal should become extinct.

[skeet]

And I doubt if you really want to. Humans (as you call us) already played God if you want to call what we did with the bison and other critters playing god. I really don't look at it the way you do. We were given dominion over the earth by Him. At least that is what I understand from the bible. OK so we as humans screwed it up..ok..so now we have a bunch of people screwing it up again. Just because we have people, such as you seem to be, feeling bad about what was done in the past these same people think they should intervene again. Do I want to see wolves erased from the earth??..of course not! Did we need them reintroduced..really the answer is no. There were already wolves here. But the do gooders just had to do their good deeds(which they lied about from day one) in someone elses back yard. Now that the problem has gotten into a runaway train type of thing. They will not let the people that live here fix the problem. Do the locals want to wipe the wolves out? No of course not. But the local people have had no say and are not allowed to even protect their own property from a problem created by the same outsiders.. They started out wanting 100 breeding pairs in the Yellowstone eco-system. Even at the lowest estimate they feel there are more than 500. That is WWWAAAAYYYY too many in this small an area. I live more than 80 miles from the Yellowstone area. Between the wolves Grizzlies and weather the elk in the area are hurting. Hunting seasons and limits are way down. Calling an elk in the area is like ringing a dinner bell for the wolves...and a shot draws a grizz...and the moose in many areas are almost gone completely. This isn't just about hunting. In an area as vast as Alaska..natural predation will work...but when you have an area populated as it is with ranches cows and sheep the decision to turn wolves into this small an area was at best stupid...at the worst near criminal. BTW even if you don't think so...this decimation of wolves and other things happened in Europe(even by your ancestrors in Poland) centuries ago.. What do you expect of people?? The people that live here just expect to be able to run their own state without interference from tree huggers from Calipornia...or Maryland...and especially Washington. They weren't able to kill all the wolves before...and they won't be able to now.

[Wolfwoman]

What does "And I doubt if you really want to." mean?

I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale. I am not Christian either, so the bible doesn't hold water with me. I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US. There needs to be a middle ground, but the opposing sides will never see that. YOU many not want the wold extinct, but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out and do everything in their power (SSS) to make it illegally so.

You should be able to run your own state, but when so many there want the wolf gone completely, then that's when the tree huggers jump in and say no.

There is a difference between having dominion over them and wiping them from the face of the earth too. If I'm correct, somewhere in the bible the woman has to be subservient to man also (or something like that). That didn't work out so well either.

Here's another thing, I used to be closer to the views of the tree huggers when it came to wolves, many years ago. I didn't think it was right to kill wolves. Sine then, I've done a TON of reading and I've talked with MANY people here in Alaska that trap wolves and live in areas where wolves, bears, fox, moose, caribou directly affect their lives and I became more aware of the place of the predator in nature. And that we could take out many of these predators without harming the natural balance of nature. It IS possible to live with all the animals in the same place as man, it happens in sever areas up here. And even tho Alaska is bigger than most states, it's broken down into areas that are similar to a lot of states, so there's really no difference.

I can still learn things and still change the way I think.

Gotta get to the store, have a good day!

[skeet]

[QUOTE=Wolfwoman;329515]
"I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale."

I'm set in my ways?? Pot calling the kettle black for sure. Not debating. Just asking why the people that make these decisions must impose their will on others that have to live with it. what larger scale??


"I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US."

As do I. As long as you don't impose your will on me from long distance without having to live with the consequences.

," but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out"

I have had these same types of debates with others who only want to impose their will on others who feel we ruined the balance of nature and THEY need to make the decisions to change that. Did you not understand there were wolves still here? You've seen wolves in the wild, I am sure. Would you forget what they look like? Doubt it.... The part I think you don't understand is there are people who feel the way you say you used to feel. That we are interlopers on the animals land. It just isn't true. Man by his natue is destructive. Can we change that?? I doubt it. Wolves by their nature are destructive also. Most predators are. I truly believe man will eventually destroy himself but that is a debate left to other venues. As far as Christian or whatever you happen to believe really doesn't matter. You accuse one side of wanting to destroy everything but fail to see the other side of the argument. I know many hunters outdoorsmen and women, ranchers, farmers and people from many walks of life and have yet to hear even one say we should wipe wolves from the face of the earth. What I do hear is people saying it is wrong for people who do not live in this area to be able to control the actions of this constituency. It really torqs 'em off. Even though I am not originally from here I can understand why


"You should be able to run your own state, but when so many there want the wolf gone completely, then that's when the tree huggers jump in and say no."

And there is the statement that is where you are completely wrong. The tree huggers are the ones that imposed their will on the people of this area (correcting the inequities of the past?) by reintroducing an animal that was already here. ..imposed the endangered species act on the animals introduced...and then when the GOALS they had set were exceeded again imposed their will on the residents and kept em on the list. Not even a sorry Charlie..just live with it.... The part about the above statement that REALLY stands out is the word BUT followed by a statement that you really don't know to be true. A supposition if you must. I live here and don't hear it. It seems you want to believe that all others want to destroy 'em all...and that belief is what, after all is said and done, creates the real problem. We have to be protected from ourselves. What self serving BS from the Tree huggers!! And saying that kind of drivell is what perpetuates the lies

[Wolfwoman]

[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

"I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale."

I'm set in my ways?? Pot calling the kettle black for sure. Not debating. Just asking why the people that make these decisions must impose their will on others that have to live with it. what larger scale??

Hmm, no I already said that I'd changed my views years back when I did research and talked with people that had to deal with wolves. I used to BE that WolfLover that said DO NOT KILL ANY. Now I understand and actually use wolf fur. I wouldn't say that makes me set in my ways.


[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

"I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US."

As do I. As long as you don't impose your will on me from long distance without having to live with the consequences.

I'm not imposing my will on anyone, I'm just talking with someone of differing views. I'm sure you have enough people of varying opinions in your own state (pro and con) that you should be able to handle it yourself.

[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out"

I have had these same types of debates with others who only want to impose their will on others who feel we ruined the balance of nature and THEY need to make the decisions to change that. Did you not understand there were wolves still here? You've seen wolves in the wild, I am sure. Would you forget what they look like? Doubt it.... The part I think you don't understand is there are people who feel the way you say you used to feel. That we are interlopers on the animals land. It just isn't true. Man by his natue is destructive. Can we change that?? I doubt it. Wolves by their nature are destructive also. Most predators are. I truly believe man will eventually destroy himself but that is a debate left to other venues. As far as Christian or whatever you happen to believe really doesn't matter. You accuse one side of wanting to destroy everything but fail to see the other side of the argument. I know many hunters outdoorsmen and women, ranchers, farmers and people from many walks of life and have yet to hear even one say we should wipe wolves from the face of the earth.

I can give you links to several forums where I've seen people say that there shouldn't be any wolves in MANY various areas where they USED to be and have been reintroduced and are now overpopulated. They don't want ANY wolves, bottom line. YOU are different, you don't think they should be wiped out, that they have a place, but that they shouldn't be reintroduced in many places... I understand that, but it's too late, they've already done it... so why go through the cycle again?? It's a no-win situation!


[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

The tree huggers are the ones that imposed their will on the people of this area (correcting the inequities of the past?) by reintroducing an animal that was already here. ..imposed the endangered species act on the animals introduced...and then when the GOALS they had set were exceeded again imposed their will on the residents and kept em on the list. Not even a sorry Charlie..just live with it.... The part about the above statement that REALLY stands out is the word BUT followed by a statement that you really don't know to be true. A supposition if you must. I live here and don't hear it. It seems you want to believe that all others want to destroy 'em all...and that belief is what, after all is said and done, creates the real problem. We have to be protected from ourselves. What self serving BS from the Tree huggers!! And saying that kind of drivell is what perpetuates the lies

I never said ALL others wanted to destroy them all, I also know a lot of hunters and trappers that love to see wolves in the wild, but I also know a LOT that hate the sight of them anywhere. The same goes for coyotes in many places... and mountain lions in others... there will always be a percentage of people that want them wiped out, there will be a percentage that want none killed and in-between are those that have enough sense to know that a certain healthy population can thrive with the prey... that in-between percentage is WAY too small and the other two sides will always fight... like wolves over a kill.

I guess at this point we can just agree to disagree and see if anyone else has anything to say. I hope I haven't made you mad as I love talking wolf politics, it's the ONLY politics I like

[wrenchman]

many of the laws that have been in place till now in my state have realy made it hard for some of the locals they have been takeing pets and live stock this is real over due.

[Wolfwoman]

So what's changed in your area wrenchman? and will it make things better or worse in your opinion?

[wrenchman]

Better you could not kill a wolf to protect pets or live stock many pets have been snatched by them and the dnr was not allowed to dispatch problim wolfs they had to
relocate them and we know what happens with that.
If you have live stock killed they are supposed to reinberse you but pets dont count or hunting dogs.
The other problim i have hurd of is by the time the dnr arrive coyotes have been on it to and sense most the time they kill calfs it makes it hard to tell witch has killed it.
There have been lots of disagrements becouse of wolfs in mich locals have went frome being real tolerent to killing them and in the past were the best help the dnr had.
There are all typs of problims when you take away local controll that should no more then the then the do gooder in Dc.
Just the changeing of the clasification can change how things are handeled here even if they do not intend on a seasen any time soon here.