U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Idaho
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 04-16-2008, 09:53 PM
 
2,674 posts, read 2,834,134 times
Reputation: 1305
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPerkins33 View Post
you are awesome.
Well that was sweet. Thank you!
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-17-2008, 09:25 AM
 
Location: In the North Idaho woods, still surrounded by terriers
2,178 posts, read 4,305,244 times
Reputation: 902
Default Alpacas?

Do you sell their wool, Sage?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2008, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
558 posts, read 471,374 times
Reputation: 212
I think this is an interesting topic. From what little I've read, there seem to be compelling arguments on both sides. I've noticed that most people seem to feel strongly one way or the other with few moderates, so I'm sure some of the arguments on both sides are biased. Anyway, to add balance to this thread I'm going to play devil's advocate and post an excerpt from a thread on a hunting web site. They're discussing Wyoming, but there are discussions on other sites about Idaho, Montana, etc., with similar claims.

To answer the original question, rhetorical though it may have been, I think it's obvious they (the hunters) want to reduce the number of wolves mainly because they both compete for the same game animals. My own belief is that predators of the rifle carrying sort have done an effective job of filling the role of "apex predator", so it wasn't necessary to introduce Canadian Grey Wolves. I don't agree that they should have been eradicated in the first place, but that's history.

And I don't believe the wolves are so shy they won't kill dogs, if the dogs are in the wolves' territory.

Once again, I'm just presenting a counterview [because I enjoy ruffling feathers ]. I make no assertions to the accuracy of the information below.

Wolves impact on your hunting future! - Long Range Hunting - Online Magazine & Forums

> > 1. The US Fish and Wildlife Service introduced a non-native species
> > to the Yellowstone region. The native wolf was the Rocky Mountain
> > Wolf, which hunted in pairs and weighed 80 pounds maximum.
> > The Canadians
> > hunt in packs, sometimes as large as 27 wolves, and weigh in excess
> > of 150 pounds. NOTHING in the region can stand up to them. So the
> > USFWS, controlled by the wolf-worshippers, broke the Endangered
> > Species Act by introducing a non-native species.
> > 2. Wolves did not commonly inhabit Yellowstone.
> > Strong evidence shows
> > that wolves rarely entered Yellowstone in the 77 years prior to 1913
> > (National Park Service Documents, "The Wolves of Yellowstone" Weaver
> > 1978). Also, an official government document, Yellowstone Animal
> > Census, 1912, lists various animals and their numbers, but under
> > Gray Wolves the total is listed as NONE (Hornaday, Our Vanishing
> > Wildlife, pg 336).
> > 3. Wolves don't kill only to sustain themselves.
> > They often kill for
> > sport. In 2005 in one night a lone she-wolf killed
> > 29 sheep in
> > Pinedale. The USFWS came the next day, tracked it down by air from
> > its radio collar and found that it was 20 miles away, so they left
> > it alone. Two weeks later it returned to the same herd and killed 13
> > sheep. At the Camp Creek elk feedground a lone wolf killed five calf
> > elk, eating about 5 pounds of meat. Just having fun.
> > In spring of
> > 2006 about 40 sheep belonging to Jim Magagna were killed in a
> > pasture near Farson, Wyoming. Many many times we have found deer and
> > elk carcasses killed by wolves with only a little bit of meat eaten.
> > My friend, Royce Hoopes, resigned as elk feeder in the Gros Ventre
> > because every morning he would have to shoot 3 or 4 elk who were
> > maimed overnight by wolves. The most common maiming would be that
> > the noses and lips of the elk were eaten off, leaving the elk alive.
> > The wolves would run them out into the deep snow and when the elk
> > were so exhausted they couldn't go further, the wolves would eat on
> > them without killing them.
> > 4. The Dunoir Valley, northwest of Dubois, Wyoming was the home of
> > over 100 moose for the past 60 years. Now there are almost no moose
> > in the Dunoir, the Washakie Pack of wolves having eliminated them.
> > One of the very last moose calves was killed in the Dunoir within 20
> > feet of the house of Budd Betts. It had been living right next to
> > the house trying to avoid the wolves.
> > 5. The Betts family dog was killed on their front lawn in broad
> > daylight by two wolves right in front of Budd and his wife and kids.
> > Budd and a hired hand ran the wolves off by shooting over their
> > heads. You are damned right we are scared of the wolves!!!!
> > 6. The Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd numbered over 19,000 when they
> > introduced the wolves. Now they number about 7,000.
> > The only thing that has changed is wolves.
> > 7. The Final Rule For Introduction of the wolf promised that when
> > there were 100 wolves for 3 years, they would delist the wolf and
> > turn management over to the state. That threshold was met in 2002.
> > There are now over 1,700 wolves. The Environmental Impact Statement
> > examined the effect of 100 wolves on the Yellowstone ecosytem, and
> > 300 wolves in the tri-state areas of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho.
> > The present number of wolves exceeds the study by more than 5 times.
> > 8. If you wonder what the wolf is doing to our huntable wildlife out
> > west just do the math. According the feds, each wolf is responsible
> > for killing 1.9 elk per month or the equivalent.
> > That is 20 elk per year killed per wolf. We have, officially, 1,700 wolves. That is
> > 34,000 elk killed by wolves each year. It doesn't take much of a
> > mathematician to understand that there is a crash of epic
> > proportions happening.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2008, 11:58 AM
 
2,674 posts, read 2,834,134 times
Reputation: 1305
A few points: (I'm not trying to sound terse...just want to answer before the farrier comes to shoe horses)

1. I know a wolf will kill dogs. I also know they will avoid them if they can. I see this on my own place with bears, wolves and cougars. They won't risk being torn up unless there is a reason.

2. Not to be rude, but the last place I'd consider an unbiased source about wolves and their effect on the elk and moose population is from a hunting magazine.
I'm pro-hunting but I'm not at all interested in wiping out an indigenous species (again) to make it easier for outfitters to make a buck chauffering city boys to their big kill. People in my neck of the woods hunt for sport...sure. But they hunt to eat in most cases I see. And there is deer aplenty for that purpose.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2008, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
558 posts, read 471,374 times
Reputation: 212
To clarify, I wasn't trying to offer an unbiased source, which is why I mentioned I was "going to play devil's advocate and post an excerpt from a thread on a hunting web site". That being said, I don't think the hunting articles are any more (or any less) biased than most of the environmentalist stuff I read/see in the mainstream media. I agree with Sage's posts. Yours sound reasonable too.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2008, 05:32 PM
 
2,674 posts, read 2,834,134 times
Reputation: 1305
I do consider a hunting magazine to be very biased. The hunting lobby here has been very vocal and active in the debate about having both grizzlies and wolves delisted from the endangered species list.
I'm neither an avid hunter nor an enviromentalist. But I do live here and ranch on a small scale. All I can offer is my own experience in having wolves and grizzlies very close by (and actually on my land) and not having any problems with them at all.
If as the magazine says, they kill dogs and game for sport...you'd kind of think we'd see some evidence of it. Especially now during lambing season. Lot's of enticing scents on the air and just two Great Pyrenees holding back the predators.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2008, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
558 posts, read 471,374 times
Reputation: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistyriverranch View Post
...you'd kind of think we'd see some evidence of it. Especially now during lambing season. Lot's of enticing scents on the air and just two Great Pyrenees holding back the predators.
There's no need for sarcasm. As I stated previously, I thought your posts sounded reasonable.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2008, 11:08 PM
 
Location: Sandpoint, ID
2,670 posts, read 5,433,655 times
Reputation: 1704
This was barely sarcastic. A bit tongue-in-cheek perhaps...
__________________
Regards,

Sage

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. - P. J. O'Rourke

*** Please read the CDF Terms of Service ***
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 04:14 PM
 
1 posts, read 2,953 times
Reputation: 11
Thank you for a common sense attitude. Wolves are a valuable part of the eco-system. Unlike the propaganda of some groups they serve as a population control mainly in the removal of the weak. By the way I have owned cattle, and I support the right of the Wolf to exist in the lands he once freely roamed. He is a Sacred Teacher to American Native populations of Idaho. As far as I am concerned extermination of the wolf infringes on the Native American population of Idaho to practice its spiritual beliefs. I have yet to understand why we Whites seem to feel that we are superior to creatures of the forest and those who occupied this land in the first place. The land over which treaties were broken by us and signed by leaders more honorable than ours.

The attitude of Wolf eradication is medieval and barbaric, but quite in line with the current practices in the State of Alaska, where the only good wolf is considered to be a dead wolf. Wolves are a primary example of what a family is; faithful to their mates for life, guardians and protector of their off spring, which is more than we can say for ourselves as humans considering divorce and child abuse statistics.


Wolf control programs are no better than a form of specie genocide, and the most corrupt and ignorant form of politics.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2008, 05:01 PM
 
Location: Sandpoint, ID
2,670 posts, read 5,433,655 times
Reputation: 1704
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfheart View Post
Thank you for a common sense attitude. Wolves are a valuable part of the eco-system. Unlike the propaganda of some groups they serve as a population control mainly in the removal of the weak. By the way I have owned cattle, and I support the right of the Wolf to exist in the lands he once freely roamed. He is a Sacred Teacher to American Native populations of Idaho. As far as I am concerned extermination of the wolf infringes on the Native American population of Idaho to practice its spiritual beliefs. I have yet to understand why we Whites seem to feel that we are superior to creatures of the forest and those who occupied this land in the first place. The land over which treaties were broken by us and signed by leaders more honorable than ours.

The attitude of Wolf eradication is medieval and barbaric, but quite in line with the current practices in the State of Alaska, where the only good wolf is considered to be a dead wolf. Wolves are a primary example of what a family is; faithful to their mates for life, guardians and protector of their off spring, which is more than we can say for ourselves as humans considering divorce and child abuse statistics.


Wolf control programs are no better than a form of specie genocide, and the most corrupt and ignorant form of politics.
Wow...tell us how you really feel.

Seriously though, thank you for sharing your views on this hotly debated issue. While I hold a different general social view than you, I can appreciate the points you're making here and as I said, I'm certainly not one that has a handle on how to resolve the issue from this point forward...
__________________
Regards,

Sage

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. - P. J. O'Rourke

*** Please read the CDF Terms of Service ***
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Idaho

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top