Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: bobcat on September 09, 2014, 09:53:28 AMTo me it's getting old hearing all the whining from the ranchers, blaming the state when their animals are eaten by wolves. You just can't hold the state responsible for something wild animals do. Wolves have to eat, they're going to eat whatever's available, and in this case it was sheep. Get used to it, it's now just a part of doing business and being a rancher. Be glad you had nearly 100 years without wolves. But now they're back, you want to be a rancher, deal with it and don't expect the state to take care of all your problems.and then you'll be whining about the prices of meat. When cost of business rises the consumers pay for it. Ranches like this feed our country. They should not be looked at as just a business.
To me it's getting old hearing all the whining from the ranchers, blaming the state when their animals are eaten by wolves. You just can't hold the state responsible for something wild animals do. Wolves have to eat, they're going to eat whatever's available, and in this case it was sheep. Get used to it, it's now just a part of doing business and being a rancher. Be glad you had nearly 100 years without wolves. But now they're back, you want to be a rancher, deal with it and don't expect the state to take care of all your problems.
Quote from: Stein on September 09, 2014, 02:39:57 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on September 09, 2014, 02:22:59 PMQuote from: bearpaw on September 09, 2014, 02:05:52 PMI think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.I think you are missing the point that this is a democracy and its not 1950 anymore. The public values its wildlife resources, including wolves, and does not want them reduced to 1950's levels...even if it places a hardship on ranchers. Those are the facts. Whether or not its fair...well, lifes not fair.A country where people can get stuff taken from them without recourse because the public "values" it isn't a democracy.I don't see anything about that in the definition of Democracy. I do see that the majority rules.de·moc·ra·cy1a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majorityb : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections2: a political unit that has a democratic government3capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy — C. M. Roberts>4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority5: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy
Quote from: idahohuntr on September 09, 2014, 02:22:59 PMQuote from: bearpaw on September 09, 2014, 02:05:52 PMI think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.I think you are missing the point that this is a democracy and its not 1950 anymore. The public values its wildlife resources, including wolves, and does not want them reduced to 1950's levels...even if it places a hardship on ranchers. Those are the facts. Whether or not its fair...well, lifes not fair.A country where people can get stuff taken from them without recourse because the public "values" it isn't a democracy.
Quote from: bearpaw on September 09, 2014, 02:05:52 PMI think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.I think you are missing the point that this is a democracy and its not 1950 anymore. The public values its wildlife resources, including wolves, and does not want them reduced to 1950's levels...even if it places a hardship on ranchers. Those are the facts. Whether or not its fair...well, lifes not fair.
I think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.
Dale....how can they get compensated when wolves don't eat livestock....only yotes? What a nightmare....red tape, forms out the ying yang...."sorry but you didn't protect the carcass enough from predation so you are SOL".....Sorry it was a cat...Sorry it was a stray dog...Sorry but it was "unconfirmed"....I will jump all over anyone that takes a shot at a wolf simply becaus they don't like them but call me a hipocrate but I wouldn't blink an eye at a rancher protecting their stock.
that's why we have a record of Americans on government handouts and not making a living for themselves.
Quote from: Stein on September 09, 2014, 02:39:57 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on September 09, 2014, 02:22:59 PMQuote from: bearpaw on September 09, 2014, 02:05:52 PMI think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.I think you are missing the point that this is a democracy and its not 1950 anymore. The public values its wildlife resources, including wolves, and does not want them reduced to 1950's levels...even if it places a hardship on ranchers. Those are the facts. Whether or not its fair...well, lifes not fair.A country where people can get stuff taken from them without recourse because the public "values" it isn't a democracy.The government is taking nothing. Did you mean the wolves? If so, they are called wildlife for a reason- they are "wild" and they go where they want and do what they want.
Quote from: h20hunter on September 09, 2014, 03:02:39 PMDale....how can they get compensated when wolves don't eat livestock....only yotes? What a nightmare....red tape, forms out the ying yang...."sorry but you didn't protect the carcass enough from predation so you are SOL".....Sorry it was a cat...Sorry it was a stray dog...Sorry but it was "unconfirmed"....I will jump all over anyone that takes a shot at a wolf simply becaus they don't like them but call me a hipocrate but I wouldn't blink an eye at a rancher protecting their stock.You are correct WDFW created a lot of wiggle room to escape payment. However, I would rather deal with WDFW than some people who want to refuse payments altogether. Thankfully WDFW is a little more honorable than that.
You are correct WDFW created a lot of wiggle room to escape payment. However, I would rather deal with WDFW than some people who want to refuse payments altogether. Thankfully WDFW is a little more honorable than that.
QuoteYou are correct WDFW created a lot of wiggle room to escape payment. However, I would rather deal with WDFW than some people who want to refuse payments altogether. Thankfully WDFW is a little more honorable than that. So ranchers are being compensated, then what's up with the title of this thread? If they get fully compensated for every animal killed by wolves, then why the complaints? Like I said, the whining is getting old. Some people will find any excuse just to complain about the government.
Quote from: AspenBud on September 09, 2014, 02:47:37 PMQuote from: Stein on September 09, 2014, 02:39:57 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on September 09, 2014, 02:22:59 PMQuote from: bearpaw on September 09, 2014, 02:05:52 PMI think the point being missed here is that from the 50's to 90's there were only small numbers of wolves that did not run in large packs and did not prey on livestock. Our current situation is a direct result of government introduction and government rules preventing protection of property, thus government should pay as they promised.I think you are missing the point that this is a democracy and its not 1950 anymore. The public values its wildlife resources, including wolves, and does not want them reduced to 1950's levels...even if it places a hardship on ranchers. Those are the facts. Whether or not its fair...well, lifes not fair.A country where people can get stuff taken from them without recourse because the public "values" it isn't a democracy.I don't see anything about that in the definition of Democracy. I do see that the majority rules.de·moc·ra·cy1a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majorityb : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections2: a political unit that has a democratic government3capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy — C. M. Roberts>4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority5: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracyWe are fast heading from a Republic (rule of law) to a democracy (rule of popular vote) - that's why we have a record of Americans on government handouts and not making a living for themselves.
Quote from: bobcat on September 09, 2014, 03:23:13 PMQuoteYou are correct WDFW created a lot of wiggle room to escape payment. However, I would rather deal with WDFW than some people who want to refuse payments altogether. Thankfully WDFW is a little more honorable than that. So ranchers are being compensated, then what's up with the title of this thread? If they get fully compensated for every animal killed by wolves, then why the complaints? Like I said, the whining is getting old. Some people will find any excuse just to complain about the government.Why do you write something you know is not true. You know that ranchers are not getting compensated for all their losses and that is what is frustrating for them and why Dashiel had to move his sheep.
Why do you write something you know is not true.
democracy = 2 wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner....