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.
The scientists that participated on this committee are all very respected. I'm sure they've all been published in the scientific journals that you're so impressed by. You might try taking a look at the "book's" bibliography.
I really don't know why it's such a problem for you that indigenous people practiced denning. And no, I've never used that to support the practice of aerial wolf hunting; I don't support the practice at all.
And unlike you, I can actually do something about it. I can vote on it.
Because denning no doubt had less of an impact on the environment, when there was less population, a clean rather than toxic environment, and no global warming. The environment could rebound from the relatively low impact of denning. That is no longer the case.
No, it absolutely is NOT just an issue for Alaska. To state such an absurdity reflects your lack of knowledge about how ecology functions. If Alaska's population of wolves is irresponsibly "controlled," this can have profound effects on various ecosystems, which in turn have profound effects on the rest of the world. Ecology 101.
You mean people like conservationist? People who would want all their wildlife not just the 9000 wolves. Why don't you check out wolf populations in the US. Alaska has a unique environment to the US. But you would have people in Florida tripping out over wolf populations because they don't have many.
I'm not an anthropologist, I'm a historian, though I took a couple anthropology classes in college. It doesn't take an anthropologist, however, to read about the Alaskan Natives and their traditional ways. Lots of good books out on the subject, and I still have access to journals via databases. What I stated about them is entirely correct: in order to keep the wolf population from getting too high to where the wolves were overpopulated and destroyed their prey populations (the moose, caribour, etc., that the Natives depended on for survival), they killed wolf pups in their dens. The Natives were smarter than you seem to be giving them credit for. If they were still allowed to do so I doubt the aerial predator control would be needed for the most part, but then we'd have 300 threads here on how the Alaskan natives are evil wolf killers and Palin hasn't stopped them from exterminating wolves.
Traditions sometimes have to be left behind. I'm liberal--more to the left of liberal, in fact--but I draw the line at political correctness.
You mean people like conservationist? People who would want all their wildlife not just the 9000 wolves. Why don't you check out wolf populations in the US. Alaska has a unique environment to the US. But you would have people in Florida tripping out over wolf populations because they don't have many.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time this evening to explain why Alaska's "unique environment" does not belong to Alaska alone. And why irresponsible predator control anywhere has long-range effects everywhere.
The fact that Frau Palin condones this barbaric practice is not as horrific as the fact she actually participates. It will be so good when she finally fades back into the woodwork and we are no longer subject to hearing her obnoxious voice, listening to her programmed rhetoric and looking at her void of soul face.
You are very misinformed. The State of Alaska has an active wolf control program, and this program began before Palin was the governor. The Governor of Alaska, regardless of who he or she may be, must govern in accordance to the Alaska's Constitution. Also, in the last elections this year, a majority of Alaskans voted YES to continue the wolf control program.
Traditions sometimes have to be left behind. I'm liberal--more to the left of liberal, in fact--but I draw the line at political correctness.
I think all he was trying to do was provide a little information. Barbie started screeching at him for posting CRAP, in her own words.
I know that I'm not particularly arguing for a return to the practice--and I also know I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it still doesn't take place in the bush.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time this evening to explain why Alaska's "unique environment" does not belong to Alaska alone. And why irresponsible predator control anywhere has long-range effects everywhere.
Okay I'll make it simple......explain why irresponsible and the largest wolf population in the US aren't intermingled to you.
Would irresponsibility not have the wolf population much lower?
You don't really need to answer because at this point the only thing you have to stand on is you're political agenda which removes you're ability to think rationally and without bias.
Last edited by BigJon3475; 10-08-2008 at 08:59 PM..
Reason: correction
You are very misinformed. The State of Alaska has an active wolf control program, and this program began before Palin was the governor. The Governor of Alaska, regardless of who he or she may be, must govern in accordance to the Alaska's Constitution. Also, in the last elections this year, a majority of Alaskans voted YES to continue the wolf control program.
Don't when wolf populations increase domestic pet populations decrease?
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.
