Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Meche has long been regarded as one of the world's leading authorities on wolf behavior, he has been around since the 50's. In one of his earlier books is an aerial photo of a moose in an open snowny field surrounded by a wolf pack of 15 or 16 animals. The moose was not killed or even harmed. It stood it's ground and each time a wolf closed in it was attacked and driven off. After only 5 minutes the wolves quit and left, unwilling to risk being kicked.
Meche, Doug Smith, and other researchers have found that when a large, dangerous animal, when attacked by wolves, does not run but stands it's ground and defends itself it's chances of survival goes way up. Wolves do not like to risk the very real chance of being kicked or gored. The worst thing the animal can do is to panic and run and try to break through the wolves, it then becomes vulnerable to being biten, seized, and killed. Moose and bison often will not run from wolves but stand and defend, deer, caribou, and elk prefer flight to fight, but not always. Many a bull elk has saved himself by facing the wolves with those big sharp antlers and powerful hooves and backing them off.
Bison, Moose and Bull Elk, that are healthy and in their prime, are certainly not on the top of wolves list to tackle, out of hand. Wolves aren't stupid. Come calving time gor those same, aforementioned, critters and things swing to the wolves favor, however. Then the buffet begins. Same with livestock. Cattle and sheep take some hard hits from wolves and coyotes.
I really wish that all these scientists, activists, politicians and such would get a grip on reality, learn from all the catastrophic past mistakes in messing with wildlife, and let things go. The wolf was taken out of the mix, right or wrong, it happened. We can't control this by trying to reverse engineer it. If we could clone extinct Pleistocene animals, and re introduce them, should we? Man needs to back off trying to introduce and re introduce wildlife.
You are wrong, wolves will and do kill just for th sport. They will kill large healthy animals and leave them to rot. Not sure were you get your information but it is won't. Very wrong.
Oh, you mean like humans kill for sport? Maybe we should eradicate humans? One is not better than the other.
From the article:
"Who are we to decide exactly how many wolves should be able to live? The gray wolf population isn’t even a fraction of its historic size back when they inhabited most regions of United States. State governments needs to let go of this unnecessary and merciless desire to control the population of animals who are just trying to simply survive."
How would you like 100 million buffaloes running through your neighborhood?
Wolves. I say kill 'em.
I live in a state where wolves are becoming a problem. Kill 'em.
I bet that Liberals will take the wrong position on this.
"Becoming a problem?"
I live in the state where they were introduced, 18 years ago.
What do you know about wolf problems? Nothing!
Keep you nose out of stuff you know nothing about.
Wolves are hardly the four legged relentless killing machines that eat everything in sight down to the last mouse. If they were, why did they not do so long before modern humans settled their domains? The concept of a few thousand wolves eating several million constantly reproducing herbivores and then going after our livestock, pets, and finally children, is absurd. An area will only sustain so many predators of the same species. Exceed that number and the population will naturally decrease through less reproduction, starvation, disease, migration, or killing each other. In some places, wolf populations have gone down. Yellowstone NP is one example, the poster child for the wolf reintroduction. The years of easy hunting are long gone, the massive elk herds are greatly reduced and they have adapted anti predator behavior in recent generations. Wolves lead extremely violent lives from the moment they are born, not many live to old age, past about 7 or 8 is an exception. Wolves are very territorial, and fight vicious pack vs. pack battles in which fatalities and serious injury is common.
There is the other side of the coin. Wolves are not the cute, fuzzy, playful, harmless, gorgeous creatures that the eco-freak tree hugging loons paint them to be. They do kill things. Lots of things. There are times when they kill things that they should not, and do harm. Wolves, (or bears and cougars) that attack or threaten livestock, pets, or humans must be either deterred, and if this is not possible, destroyed. That means being shot. There has been some evidence that wolves have had a negative impact on the native game animals. If indeed wolves in late winter are bypassing the tough fit bulls to kill pregnant cows in yarded up elk herds, and other things of this nature, that is certainly something to consider. Lots of strong emotions and opinions on both sides of this very controversial topic. Everything from the kill every last one of them crowd to the don't you dare harm one hair on them bunch, and everything in between.
I used to have a pet grey timber wolf named Volchok. They're majestic and intelligent animals.
I find it interesting that those screaming to kill wolves cite their abhorrent behaviour and gloss over the fact that humans do exactly the same things.
I do not know of anyone who advocates shooting wolves "indiscriminately." However, I do support culling wolves that encroach on towns and cities during the winter, or when the wolf population becomes so large that they threaten to depopulate the food source in an area. People, and their pets, should not have to live under the threat of wolf attacks. Nor should people dependent on wild game for their food be starved out by an uncontrolled growing wolf population.
Too bad you don't realize that it is humans that have encroached on the habitat of wildlife, not the other way around.
Starved? Do you have some facts to back up your claim that people are literally starving because the wolf population is so out of control & taking out all of the game, lol?
In his folly, man has really been jacking with the balance of things. "Science" is a dangerous new toy to play with. Wolves have been RE introduced, after a long absence, so, of course it tossed the scales. Whoda thunk. When you suddenly toss an apex predator BACK into the mix, like that, and stiffen up and ompetition with the other critters( bears and Mt Lions etc) in an area where game herds can't support it all, gee, wonder what bappens?
Personally, I like wolves. I think they are a beautiful example of a prime predator. But, for that same reason, they must be controlled. Yes, nature can do that. However, octen not until food sources have been wiped out and every critter is starving. We through the system out of balance by removing wolves to begin with, nature compensated, over time, then, we threw it out of balance again by putting wolves back in the mix. Sure...THAT makes sense. Sheesh.
So, we can remove certain numbers of wolves to try and control the balance. We should. But, it's just buying time. We can't control this. Doesn't mean we can't try, but, every time man has introduced species, or re introduced them, playing with wildlife, it has been a miserable, often very damaging, failure.
Cane Toads, rabbits, different snakes and birds, coyotes, wolves, just toss em' in and see what happens. Yea, watch and see
Wolves were not reintroduced to Alaska. They are not endangered or even threatened as a species. However, a successful wolf pack, if left unattended, will continue to grow in size until they have killed all the available critters in their territory. Not just in Alaska, but everywhere there are wolves in the wild. When that happens they begin to starve. When enough of wolves die off from starvation so that they can once again be sustained by critters in their territory they begin to repopulate. And so the cycle continues indefinitely, until something changes that natural cycle.
The Alaska Department of Fish & Game keep our wolves from overpopulating and decimating all the other critters in their area. They typically react, rather than have a strategy. For example, when the moose and caribou populations in the area around McGrath, AK, began to decline the ADF&G sought out the source of that decline. An overabundance of wolves proved to be the culprit. As a result, the ADF&G began to cull the wolf packs to a more sustainable level. Their motives were to increase the moose and caribou population in that area, not for the benefit of those critters, but for the benefit of the humans living in that are that require moose and caribou for their survival.
Personally, I think if you are going to live a remote area, then you should have to abide by the laws of nature that govern. Yes, it means moose and caribou will eventually be wiped out of that area, and the wolves will eventually starve (along with the humans living in that area) until they reach a sustainable number, but that is how nature has worked for millions of years. There was a very good reason why early humans were nomadic.
Generally, I approve what the ADF&G does. Particularly when it comes to managing the wild salmon population in Alaska. When escapements are not large enough to support sport fishing, they shut down the river, creek, or stream. Without this kind of oversight, humans would completely decimate Alaska's wild salmon population. Since the ADF&G assumed management in 1959, the wild salmon population has increased from 5 million to over 30 million. I consider that to be a good track record, even though I know they are motivated to benefit humans, not the critters they protect.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
