Free: Contests & Raffles.
My understanding is that if you are of slightly open mind, that no matter if you are pro-wolf or anti-wolf, your viewpoint is likely to become slightly weakened and you will appreciate the other side ever so slightly.We'll see
FYI - Many people in Idaho and Montana lay blame on Niemeyer as a key player in downplaying the impacts and helping to establish the extremem numbers of wolves in Idaho and Montana. Ultimately it's these same wolves that will impact Washington herds.I will not be buying his book ever.
It's good to see that you are keeping an open mind
will look for it. When you readl Flowers books on bears you will note later in life he was involved in developing alternative methods of dealing with bear damage to reduce the need to kill bears. I think if a person spends enough time working closely with one species they tend to have a better more full understanding of that animal.
There is quite a difference between "Black Bear and Flowers" verses "Wolves and Niemeyer". May I suggest an opposing view to Niemeyers that won't even cost you to watch it? The facts coming out of Idaho and Montana support the fact that the wolf is not all the wolf lovers have cracked it up to be!
Quote from: runamuk on September 13, 2011, 08:22:27 AMwill look for it. When you readl Flowers books on bears you will note later in life he was involved in developing alternative methods of dealing with bear damage to reduce the need to kill bears. I think if a person spends enough time working closely with one species they tend to have a better more full understanding of that animal. There is quite a difference between "Black Bear and Flowers" verses "Wolves and Niemeyer". Bear have not devastated the best elk herds in the world and have not been lied about in order to get higher numbers of them in the states. Flowers to my knowledge did not provide misleading information about black bears to further his agenda. May I suggest an opposing view to Niemeyers that won't even cost you to watch it? The facts coming out of Idaho and Montana support the fact that the wolf is not all the wolf lovers have cracked it up to be! 5 or 10 years from now Washington will be just like, or even worse off than Idaho is today, let's revisit this discussion in 10 years and see who was closest to being correct, WARNING (history is on my side). http://cryingwolfmovie.com/apologies for threadjacking...
Quote from: bearpaw on September 13, 2011, 01:11:21 PMQuote from: runamuk on September 13, 2011, 08:22:27 AMwill look for it. When you readl Flowers books on bears you will note later in life he was involved in developing alternative methods of dealing with bear damage to reduce the need to kill bears. I think if a person spends enough time working closely with one species they tend to have a better more full understanding of that animal. There is quite a difference between "Black Bear and Flowers" verses "Wolves and Niemeyer". Bear have not devastated the best elk herds in the world and have not been lied about in order to get higher numbers of them in the states. Flowers to my knowledge did not provide misleading information about black bears to further his agenda. May I suggest an opposing view to Niemeyers that won't even cost you to watch it? The facts coming out of Idaho and Montana support the fact that the wolf is not all the wolf lovers have cracked it up to be! 5 or 10 years from now Washington will be just like, or even worse off than Idaho is today, let's revisit this discussion in 10 years and see who was closest to being correct, WARNING (history is on my side). http://cryingwolfmovie.com/apologies for threadjacking...I will have to read the work in order to form an educated opinion....I have no idea who niemeyer is even so until I find and read what is being discussed....just saying there are two sides to this issue and neither polarity is completely right...