Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?

[pianoman9701]

It's a huge scam and should go away.

[wolfbait]

You're all extremist wolf haters! Can't you see how the rivers have been helped by the wolves eating all the ungulates?  I can't wait to hear our moderates chime in about how it's all about balance.

And lets not forget that beavers flourish

The lopsided telling of the story of the wolf is another aspect of the problem this paper seeks to address. While it's true beaver populations have increased dramatically since the reintroduction of the wolf all newspaper accounts fail to mention those 129 introduced beaver. I'm not saying that bringing them in and dumping them in the creek is the reason they swam upstream and recolonized Northern Yellowstone, but it sure might bear mention in a story about wolves returning beaver to the Park http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/16/1168581/--Science-is-self-correcting-on-Wolves


Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?
http://canadafreepress.com/print-friendly/77682

Thanks for posting That-DG

A well put together piece which explains the wolf introduction start to finish, except it isn't the finish, the USFWS, state game agencies and environmentalist are still implementing wolf introduction in states. Washington etc. is going through the same fraudulent introduction.

[SpringerFan]

That read is maddening. Who do these judges work for? Oh wait........a holes like Turner. 
 

[thatdamguy]

You're all extremist wolf haters! Can't you see how the rivers have been helped by the wolves eating all the ungulates?  I can't wait to hear our moderates chime in about how it's all about balance.

And lets not forget that beavers flourish

The lopsided telling of the story of the wolf is another aspect of the problem this paper seeks to address. While it's true beaver populations have increased dramatically since the reintroduction of the wolf all newspaper accounts fail to mention those 129 introduced beaver. I'm not saying that bringing them in and dumping them in the creek is the reason they swam upstream and recolonized Northern Yellowstone, but it sure might bear mention in a story about wolves returning beaver to the Park http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/16/1168581/--Science-is-self-correcting-on-Wolves


Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?
http://canadafreepress.com/print-friendly/77682

Thanks for posting That-DG

A well put together piece which explains the wolf introduction start to finish, except it isn't the finish, the USFWS, state game agencies and environmentalist are still implementing wolf introduction in states. Washington etc. is going through the same fraudulent introduction.

I had not seen that article mentioning the bias science, thanks for posting that wolfbait.

[Jerky]

I have hunted all of my life and still do.  I don't believe our wild lands should be managed as an eternal ungulate farm for us hunters.  I know I am in the vast minority here, so hate away...and don't believe everything you read on the internet even if it supports your views.

[pianoman9701]

Welcome to the forum. Interesting first post. Maybe you could tell us a little about yourself. Anyone who's been following the solf program since the USFWS started it has serious questions about many aspects, including the introduction of diseased animals into our ecosystems without first letting us know about the disease. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[Jerky]

I am educated as a wildlife ecologist and have studied the works of many of the founders of conservation and wildlife management.  I have worked for several state and federal agencies as a wildlife professional during my career.  I have been an avid hunter all of my life (>35 yrs) and have also followed wolf issues for many years.  I understand principles of population dynamics among wild animals and I too have concerns and issues with management and our legal system, but don't hold the same beliefs as many do here.

P.S.  Thanks for the welcome.

[pianoman9701]

Then, because of your vast wildlife knowledge, you understand that up to 60% of the wolves released in the GYA were infected with granulosus echinococcus, according to surveys done on captured and killed wolves by the IDFW and MTFWP. Does that bother you at all or does the "benefit" of introducing those wolves into our ecosystems outweigh the possible negative effects of infecting other wildlife, domestic animals, and the deception of the public at large?

[Jonathan_S]

 

[Jerky]

I am unfamiliar with this issue, but a quick search reveals Echinococcus granulosus is a tapeworm found in canids that requires an intermediate host, usually a wild or domestic ungulate which typically included domestic cattle and sheep and could also include deer, elk, etc.  You say 60% of released wolves were infected, but this infection rate was from wolves captured and killed in Idaho and Montana.  Were the wolves that were captured and killed the same individuals that were earlier relocated, or were they wolves descended from relocated individuals?  Could the infected wolves have acquired this parasite from domestic sheep or cattle after release?  Just because the genetics are believed to be Eurasian does not mean it was brought here from relocated wolves.  If they came directly from Eurasia your argument would be more plausible but it is not clear how a Canadian wolf acquired a parasite that may have originated in another continent.  I honestly don't know the answers and am interested in if the parasite was detected in captured wolves or if it is prevalent in wolf populations that relocated individuals came from.  BTW, "vast" is the word you used to describe my wildlife background and not mine.  I was merely providing you with a little information about myself that you had requested.  I'm not just stirring the pot so to speak, just voicing my opinion on a public forum even though it may not be a popular one.

Are you familiar with this article about this parasite in the U.S.?  http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/wildlife/diseaseEchinococcusWolves.pdf

[Jonathan_S]

If it isn't plausible that a wolf not of direct Eurasian descent was carrying the parasite then I'd go ahead and say it's not plausible that the wolves caught it from cattle or sheep 

[pianoman9701]

I am unfamiliar with this issue, but a quick search reveals Echinococcus granulosus is a tapeworm found in canids that requires an intermediate host, usually a wild or domestic ungulate which typically included domestic cattle and sheep and could also include deer, elk, etc.  You say 60% of released wolves were infected, but this infection rate was from wolves captured and killed in Idaho and Montana.  Were the wolves that were captured and killed the same individuals that were earlier relocated, or were they wolves descended from relocated individuals?  Could the infected wolves have acquired this parasite from domestic sheep or cattle after release?  Just because the genetics are believed to be Eurasian does not mean it was brought here from relocated wolves.  If they came directly from Eurasia your argument would be more plausible but it is not clear how a Canadian wolf acquired a parasite that may have originated in another continent.  I honestly don't know the answers and am interested in if the parasite was detected in captured wolves or if it is prevalent in wolf populations that relocated individuals came from.  BTW, "vast" is the word you used to describe my wildlife background and not mine.  I was merely providing you with a little information about myself that you had requested.  I'm not just stirring the pot so to speak, just voicing my opinion on a public forum even though it may not be a popular one.

Are you familiar with this article about this parasite in the U.S.?  http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/wildlife/diseaseEchinococcusWolves.pdf

I am quite familiar with that article. Although, according to Jim Beers, a former USFWS employee who worked on the program, they knew the wolves carried the parasite and ignored it. He's written several papers on the release of these animals and the many frauds committed to achieve it, among them, the misappropriation of $millions in PR funds. As a student of conservation, these should be of great concern to you.

[Jerky]

There are published accounts of Echinococcus granulosus occurring in Idaho domestic sheep in 1969 and elsewhere in the West shortly thereafter, and in humans dating back to 1948.  There appear to be 4 potential sources in Idaho.  1 and 2: Already there and spread by reintroduced wolves.  3: introduced by  relocated wolves that were treated for such parasites prior to release. 4: Brought in by migrant wolves. Wolves are known to carry it in AK/BC so yes it does concern me that wolves likely had a hand in increasing prevalence of this parasite.  However, this life cycle is normally detrimental to the canid rather than the intermediate host, since if it killed the intermediate host before maturation it would never infect a canid.  I am always concerned about misappropriation of Fed and State conservation funds (Pittman-Robertson, Dingell-Johnson, Migratory Bird stamp, etc.).  I trust Don Young and his legislation closed that loophole in 2000.  I don't think this is a discussion of misappropriated gov't funds though.

[pianoman9701]

The misappropriated funds are just one aspect of the whole fiasco. The entire program was mishandled and continues to be. The residents of the NE part of this state are forced to suffer fools who have no skin in the game telling them they need to be employing non-lethal management tools to try and prevent losing their stock and pets, and very likely their kids, sooner or later. With 13+ confirmed packs within a hundred mile radius, it's time to start killing wolves and teaching them fear of man for the benefit of both the wolves and man. I don't have a problem with biological diversity. What I have a problem with is mindless regulation and lack of management to keep these things deep in the wilderness where they belong. They don't belong among humans ruining their livelihoods.

[WALLEYEGUY]

The anti's are playing the game way better than we are, bottom line we loose.