Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Two dead wolves....

Yep. Until then, folks who live with the effects of the uncontrolled wolf populations will continue do what they need to do. At great personal risk from their "overlords". Some things are just that important. Shrug...

The "huggers" can moan, pizz, whine, cry, chit, puke, thrash, threaten, etc. when excess wolves are killed. It should (and does) happen. If they would put just a tiny fraction of their efforts towards allowing responsible management, regular folks would not be required to do their jobs for them.

Eradicating is not possible, or even wanted, as poison, trapping, snaring, bounty, etc. will not be used, as it was so many years ago. If EVERY hunter was issued a tag for a wolf along with the game tags that are purchased, there would STILL not be a high success rate. Wolves are a very effective predator & are rarely even seen.

Until the various state and federal treehugging bunch of [bleep] are purged, or by some miracle become reasonable, there are quite a few folks willing to do their part to clean up their messes.

The "Ethics" people here are a constant source of humor. Don't worry, some folks are less brainwashed by the .gov and their tree hugging lobby. They can determine and follow through with the correct actions.

It is nice to see new trolls, as the old ones were getting boring. Triple "S" is alive and well. Sadly, it is required. Gladly, it is becoming more common. Wisconsin DNR is a glaring example of a state agency, out of control. I really hope my home state wakes up & figures out how to wrest back control from the dirty bastards currently ruining the state.

oulufinn, I don't really have much problem with wolf hunting per se (as opposed to the wolf poaching that is preached by the choir here on 24hr). But who do you suppose that the uncontrolled wolf population in Minnesota allowed all those HUGE increases in deer populations over the last three decades?

The mighty here at that campfire, of course, have personally prescribed authority and bottomless knowledge to create their own variances in game laws, because they are superior beings. But that applies only to the choir members, sort of borrowing from the "Elitist Liberal Tradition" of course.

Has a sheep or cow EVER died on public graze land (more farmer subsidies) that wasn't killed by a lion, wolf or bear? I doubt it, esp if in areas where the farmer gets paid 7x market value if it just happened to be allegedly bit by a wolf. Oh, the socialized subsidies of it all!

'Tis a sad and sorry bunch so many "hunters" here have become.

Brent, whaddya say we introduce wolves in southern Iowa.
We'll see how that goes over. No one but a couple of soft shoes wanted them here in the first place.

Your generalization concerning the future of hunting is irresponsible and myopic. Hunters spend millions of dollars to protect it and it also provides an honest living to the many outfits throughout the states and Canada. And, believe it or not, in a very roundabout circle, it also keeps arrogant azzhats like yourself employed.

Show me. Show me a single--even halfway credible--survey of public opinion in Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho, that suggests those who oppose wolves outnumber those who support wolves. Show me-- from a legitimate polling organization. Show me--even from a local newspaper, that more people in those three states oppose wolves than support the existence of wolves in their respective states.

And I won't EVEN send you on the wild goose chase to try to find a national poll where there is a majority who say they oppose wolf restoration--'cause it doesn't exist.



This is a very good example of a small group of people continually reinforcing to one another a minority idea, and convincing themselves they are in the majority. They get mad when somebody offers countervailing ideas, and when they hear something they don't want to believe.

Archer, your posts in the past have seemed to be reasonably intelligent and a bit willing to look at other ideas, so that's why I'm picking on you.

So, show me where the majority of residents in the Northern Rockies oppose wolf restoration.


Casey

Where are those areas where you get paid 7x the market value if a wuff theatens to bite your stock ?

I wanna move my cow operation to one of those areas.

thankyou

That would be awesome! I'm all for it. But I'd like to see them in all of Iowa. And I'm still hoping we will soon, introduced intentionally or not, there are plenty of groceries for them.



Not really. Not even sorta. In fact, you can see the decline underway right now, and it will only get worse. And when folks like these here, become the mouthpieces and stereotypes for hunters everywhere, the decline will steep even more. Just a matter of time.

NW Wyoming. And of course, all your cows will mysteriously die of wolves, over night. Just like that.

You vote socialist no doubt. They will love you in Wyoming.

A pity throwing out insults don't constitute logic, else some folks here woulda won by a landslide.

But really, if they loosened up the regs everywhere so that wolves could be shot on sight, much as is legal for coyotes in many locations legal for lions in Texas, would wolves be actually extirpated anywhere?

I doubt it.

Birdwatcher

comparing the wolf to deer ratios in Minnesota is not as clear as you think it is Brentd.
Mn has a very large deer population in the southern half of the state. In fact hunting south of highway 2 is much better than any hunting north of the highway.
South of highway 2 there are no wolves. Its mostly open agracultural land with limited forestland that is suitalble for large predators.
I grew up in way north mn and can still remember when there was a trapping season on wolves. hunting was booming in the north then. people came "up nort" from allover to hunt.
There has been no control on wolves in the state since the 60's by anybody other than the fed's.
Deer hunting and deer populations in the south are booming, but hunting and deer populations in the north are not what they were when the state controlled wolves by allowing trapping.
The same senarios as are reported in Michigan and Wisconsin happen in Mn.
Wolves move in - deer populations nose dive.
If we have a high snow year it's even worse.
Deer yard up in deep snow and the wolves have a field day, reducing further a herd thats already struggling through a hard winter.
In small towns in the north it;s not unusual for wolves to come into town and snack on dogs and cats in peoples backyards.

Ungulate populations are tied to more than just wolf predation, such as weather and habitat- but to many wolves can have a fierce effect on overall numbers that most tree huggers choose to gloss over when romanticising about the "wilderness wolf"

Yep. Far NW WI is in the same boat. The lack of deer is astonishing.

Oh, I'm SURE they'd be very welcome in downtown Davenport.. Yeah, elementary schools with kids at recess... (Well, you said 'all' of Iowa)



I truly wanted to stay out of this little foray, but the comments of BrentD above show an incredible dearth of any common sense..

I'm sorry I started this entire thread.. I had no idea it was going to degenerate into such a pizzing match....

Birdy, they would be extirpated under those rules. Plenty of people scattered across the landscape in the lower 48--unlike Canada or Alaska.

Wolves do not have the densities of coyotes--a LOT more coyotes can live on the same acre of ground than wolves. For example, same thing exists with grizzlies vs blackies--grizzlies need many more acres than a black bear.

When Montana and Idaho took over management of the wolf this year, one of the important aspects was the change in status and the respective states rules concerning protection of property. Plugging a wolf that is threatening life or property (truely threatening) is now a lot easier without fear of legal reprecussions. (Meanwhile Wyoming continues to shoot itself in the foot--so to speak.....)

In Colorado, the law has always been one can shoot to kill any critter (including domestic animals) that are clearly a threat to life or property. And that goes a long ways towards keeping predators "honest".

I've plugged a lot of domestic dogs chasing my livestock, or deer and elk, on my property. And domestic dogs and cats are generally the biggest predators here in the west--they kill more sheep than all of the "wild" predators combined.


Casey

It always does with wolves.........


After a while,one can take only so many empty threats about illegally killing wildife..........



Casey

"Archer, your posts in the past have seemed to be reasonably intelligent and a bit willing to look at other ideas, so that's why I'm picking on you."

Much appreciated, Casey. Same for you, except the picking on part


You're not making a very strong case.

Mob rules.... right?

You're pitting city folks who don't have to deal with the wolves agaisnt an obvious minority of country folks who do.

Not fair. Not fair at all. ONLY the people who live there have a voice the way I see it. Cities filled with liberals who want to hear the howl of the wolves have no stake in it, other than their liberal agendas. And even if there is a majority in the country setting who want the wolves, do they want such high numbers of them? And if their livelihoods aren't being threatened do they really have as much of a say in it as those who are? Too many wolves is hurting some of the people. gov't won't listen to them. Feds are mandating something they've no business even watching, let alone making policy. The state and the locals are the only ones who should be at the table discussing it. It just ain't right, no matter how one looks at the problem, it jsut ain't right.

Take a vote among only the ranchers and farmers where the wolves are causing problems. If things are going to skewed towards one side of the debate or the other, why must it be skewed in favor of the liberals and the govenment? Doesn't make sense. And it really doesn't fit with the picture I've always had of you in my mind. You've always seemed a very reasonable fellow with what's best for the liberty and freedoms of Americans in general at the forefront of your thinking. I'm sure there'll always be things you and I disagree on but for the most part those are few and minor. In this topic you seem willing to allow government to overstep the boundries. Most on here agree, myself included, wolves are fine and dandy. But I beleive, from what I read of posters who live there, they need to be thinned drastically and the federal government needs to get the hell out of the way and put back in DC where they belong, as is always the case...

Um........ WHAT?

wiki better update it's data. MN is in a deer slump friend. I know you are just going to run to some fountain of data & post estimated populations which will likely contradict my statement here.

But the deer harvest right now is down, (it really is & you cannot dispute that fact) and it isn't because we all forgot how to hunt.

Now I'm not going to tell you the wolves ate all the deer or anything as simple as that.

Population (deer) is & has been increasingly out of control in metro areas which coincidentally are not populated as heavily if at all by wolves. (unfortunately these deer do count as part of the state's population even if nobody wants to hunt them)



There are pockets of deer. Like anyplace else we don't have an even population per sq mile across the state. Lots of things determine where the deer hold up. Food, snow depth, cover, predators etc.


Wolves are not holding tight to the timber any more. They are becoming open country roamers. Transition areas where ag land meets forest areas are common places for wolf sightings. It is becoming more common to see wolves out in open country that only offers small wooded parcels here & there. They are really stretching out from the timber to hunt. This is causing problems for turkey farms, cattle.. any livestock operation as well as for rural homes with pets.

The wolves eat plenty of deer but the real cause for the recent slump in our deer harvest IMO is too many years of bonus & management tags sold to hunters. For many years now hunters have been able to take as many or more than 6 deer per hunter. It's been too much for too long & they have run the populations down in the greater traditional hunting areas of the state. What deer are left are hunted & pressured 24/7 by wolves so even if they don�t fall to the tooth of the wolf many will fall to the elements being forced to herd up out in the wind of the frozen tundra where they can watch for predators. If mother nature throws a hard winter into the mix it�s going to wipe a lot of deer out & we�ll be back to the old days of bucks only tags ( for areas open to deer hunting), applying for a doe tag in areas accepting applications and many hours of sitting out in the woods and watching squirrels & birds�. No deer.

Well, he DOES work for the dnr, so.....

If you survey 1000 residents of a college town in Montana you will, no doubt, find sympathy for wolves.

If you ask 1000 residents of rural NW Montana I doubt you will find little sympathy, if any! I wonder why?

If you are going to assess "public opinion" you really need to be talking with the stakeholders. Urban elitists don't have a clue when it comes to living and earning a living in the country.

WN

Get used to living in Fascist (not Socialist!!!) Country controlled by the metro bi-coastal elites. It'll last a few years until the bubble really bursts and the food wars begin.
Then we'll see who thinks a bear or wolf is worth protecting....LOL! They (the wingnut's lovers) be eating each other in Chicago!

Hmmmm , the data at this site

http://www.defenders.org/resources/...e_foundation_wolf_compensation_trust.pdf


shows a net of $362 per head paid out for verified cattle , sheep , and other domestic animals lost to wolves since the Yellowstone reintroduction . Hardly 7x the value .


I love how a guy that is probably !00 % on the govt. payroll throws around the word "socialist"


But yeah , I think I would get along well with most of the folks in Wyoming .

If the domestic dogs were protected,and you went to jail for shooting them,then you would know how alot of people feel about wolves.