Counting Elk And Distorting/Withholding Information

[BoomWhop]

I don't know what bagdad Bob means.  Iceman, I like you comment on pushing hunters out of the equation because of wolf impact.  That seems like it could definitely happen.

Baghdad Bob was the Iraqi spokesman who said It was impossible for the Americans to ever enter Baghdad during the Gulf War.  He said Iraq was kicking kicking the U.S.A's ass even as the CCN split screen showed American tanks roling down the streets of Baghdad a couple blocks away.   Kinda like saying that wolves are not at the center of the issue in the declining herds in Yellowstone, Idaho and Wyoming and soon to be Washington.   There were good reasons to mostly eliminate them from our ecosystems. 

[kerrdog]

I served in the gulf war (101st Airborne Division Band - Guitar Player), and don't remember Bagdad Bob.  I do remember a woman that broadcast music and propaganda on the radio. Bagdad Betty?  We used to listen to her late at night and laugh....nervously.  Were you there?

[Wacenturion]

Kerrdog, you don't know where you stand on the issue of wolves? Are you a hunter?  Do you wish to have game populations "managed" by wolf populations....or by hunters? This issue is pretty simple to me. I don't feel that I need to study the issue much more. Wolves, like cougars, like other predators are in direct competition for the game I choose to hunt. If the wolves diminish the game populations to a large degree, I expect our beloved game department to reduce the human hunter impact on the resource. Wolves, along with tree huggin wildlife policies will push hunters out of the equation IMHO.

Completely agree.  I have been alluding to that in several discussions in the past.  The article pretty much puts it right there in front of us....from over a 1000 permits to 100 in a few short years, not to mention the elimination of the late season altogether.  A tree huggers dream...hunting eliminated because there is only enough of the resource for the "natural'" type of harvest. 

Coming soon to a theater near you...........

[Rockholm66]

Here we are once again debating on a hunting forum, with non hunting members of this forum.

This was a well thought out, indisputable argument. Not one anti hunter had one fact to dispute any of it. 

It is very difficult for me to stomach the writings in these WH forums, Riddled with anti hunters.

[ICEMAN]

I am a little concerned if you cannot "stomach" the conflict. You may wish to reconsider your thoughts on what you interpret as a debate. IMHO no argument or debate is "indisputable" as you stated. I am sure you find mostly supportive members here and on other hunting sites, but there is always going to be discussion......

Isn't open discussion of the topic your goal? Without the discussion and debate, nothing will change.

Besides, this isn't really just an issue for hunters anyway. I know alot of folks who do not hunt who agree with our point just on principles. If you think the only way you are going to cause change is to convince hunters of anything, prepare to be disappointed. Hunters are a minority in this society.

[Wenatcheejay]

Iceman, I am quickly learning this issue is about money and control. (As it always is with politics and politicians.) In fact it seems the entire Environmental movement is about money and control, hey more argument that it is a cult.

[baldopepper]

As stated earlier by a poster, this is not an easy issue.  I was invloved some years ago in the fisheries battle that came about as a result of the Bolt decision.  While that battle was not scewed by non fishermen as much as the wolf issue is by non hunters, it's very similar in some respects.  First of all, my dealing with most legislators at that time found them to be people who  really had very little knowledge on the issue, and really not much of an opinion.  It is not hard to get an appointment to go in and set down with them, just call and set it up.  I do know that if you went in and stated your case reasonably and backed it up with statistics and facts, you generally got their attention.  Quite honestly most were looking for a constituents opinion to hang thier hat on and "make them smart".  Problem there was that there were really no well organized sports organizations that could truly represent our interests and had the financing to stay with it like the tribes and commerical fisheris had.  The wolf issue is somewhat the same.  We have some pretty hard core (and well financed ) wolf supporters (not necesarily actual enviromentalists) and some very well financed "eradicators" (ranchers and livestock owners who are usually not necessarily the sportsmens best friend)  I guess my point is, that we as "run of the mill" hunters, that is we can't afford guided hunts on private propperty etc., we just love the out of doors and and the opportunity to get out and hunt , are not very well organized and never seem to be able to represent ourselves very well. I'm not sure of what my opinion is on the wolf issue yet (that is why I enjoy a post like this one as it is reasonable and states some facts that I can actually check into and help me form a better educated opinion)  All I can suggest is that if many of you have strong opinions and can get together an idea of what you'd like to see happen, put it together, get an appointment with your local representative and go tell him!!!  Might surprise you - I know it did me when I got involved. Ranting, raving, name calling  and false accusations will get you nowhere.  You have to try to be as smart as your opposition.  Hard to have a discussion with someone who starts out by calling you a crook or an idiot.  Remember, the people you disagree with are as fervent in their belief as you are in yours.