Wolf Packs in Washington

[Turner89]

Again, precautionary measures to prevent success in that.

You're kidding right?  It clear that you have absolutely no idea how to manage animals.  A night shepard???  DO you know how big the FS leases are and how spread out the cattle are on that range?  How in the hell are you proposing they 'shepard' their animals?? 
I'm pretty critical of public land grazing, but the idea of hiring a ranch hand to babysit the cattle on range is totally ignorant.  How many dogs do you suppose it's going to take to protect 600 cattle sprinkled over 15 square miles?  What are they going to be eating all summer? 

Ideas like that sound good to people that haven't a clue about what's happening in the forests.

 

Who is giong to pay for the night watchmen? Wolf lovers going to donate thier time?

[WAcoyotehunter]

Again, precautionary measures to prevent success in that.

You're kidding right?  It clear that you have absolutely no idea how to manage animals.  A night shepard???  DO you know how big the FS leases are and how spread out the cattle are on that range?  How in the hell are you proposing they 'shepard' their animals?? 
I'm pretty critical of public land grazing, but the idea of hiring a ranch hand to babysit the cattle on range is totally ignorant.  How many dogs do you suppose it's going to take to protect 600 cattle sprinkled over 15 square miles?  What are they going to be eating all summer? 

Ideas like that sound good to people that haven't a clue about what's happening in the forests.

 

Who is giong to pay for the night watchmen? Wolf lovers going to donate thier time?

yeah right- you better than that.  The people that support ideas like this are neatly tucked away in their urban sancturies worrying about far more important issues, like what's on TV.

[boneaddict]

Like I said, less Disney more reallity.   

[Special T]

Thats wear we disagree. Can't make it work by giving up, so some of us move forward to try harder at making the right changes. A nameless friend of mine gave WDFW the perfect plan for wolves and coexistance(of which I won't recant because I don't know the full details) and was ignored because it doesn't play to their popularity/money game. There are two people on the panal wholding us back. They were dead center on the podium at the Spokane wolf meeting. One was an older woman. Those two need to be removed for both sides sake.
[/quote]

You have said one thing i agree on. This issue is about $$$. This issue has less to do with the environment, than who has to spend what and where. I would bet in your "studies" on the issue you have not done as much $ research as the environmental side. The ESA and all that goes with it are about bilking the States and Feds for $$$ mostly by nonprofits. You can talk till you are blue in the face about Wolves here, but the SOURCE of the problem is the way Nonprofits get $ by suing the Feds 

[sirmissalot]

Which is why there needs to be more use of livestock guardian dogs and night shepherds. Theres always a ranch hand looking for work, and I've seen it offered for the position of watching over herds at night.

This has got to be the most stupid thing you have said so far, and you have said a lot of really stupid sh!t

[hirshey]

Uh... never said that I ever had wolf experience. Not Once.

Look, I see the results of Idaho, but I feel(meaning that it's just my personal opinion) ID is a bit of an isolated incident. Yellowstone was nearly grazed to death and was looking like a desert. There's a picture of YS in 1992 looking bare and devoid of green life. Then there's a picture of the same shot 10 years later and it shows a flourishing landscape. Mind you, thats just Yellowstone, results are not the same everywhere else.

I also never said Washington was over-grazed, but we see what was happening to YS and I can guess that thats an influence on bringing wolves and grizzlies back(or allowing them to return, in our states case. I've heard the rumors of secret reintroductions, and nothing has been substantiated). Weyerhaueser has mentioned losses in revunue due to too many ungulates feeding on their saplings.

You have to realize Yellowstone was a very different beast because of the fires back in the 80's too... a lot of forested habitat was and still is lost... that changed the whole ball game as far as what was available for forage; there was no longer shrubby/woody species that normally helped to sustain big game; it takes a lot more succulent vegetation to sustain animals. Now, those shrubs are returning; so its not so much a product of the wolves, but the natural reestablishment of vegetation that has helped spread out the browse. Don't be mistaken by thinking the wolves "saved" the system. I also agree with others who have explained Yellowstone does not have hunting, therefore cannot be used as a "baseline" for ecosystems. If you are indeed "getting into hunting" as you say you are, recognize that you are also a predator that Yellowstone does not account for. What people are fighting the hardest for is their right to be recognized as a predator and would like their share of the game species, too. Some of us take pride in knowing where our meat came from and knowing the kind of life it lived. Game meat helps to sustain a lot of families in WA/ID/OR/MT/WY and beyond... it cannot be a tradition that goes to the wolves.

[rebal69972]

Just  wolves are about money and gun controls. We have wolves soon there will be no game no reason to hunt so therefor no reason to have guns but this issue is just like baiting and hound hunting when someone dies ( probably a little kid ) they have to turn to hunters and trappers to fix a problem that probably can't be fixed or undone. wolves are like bullets once there out of the Barral they can't be called back.

[humanure]

Just like anything i say, thats a theory. Just because it sounds plausable, that doesn't make it so.

[ribka]

Under the left wing radicals like Obama it is all about gun control (wolves)

With invasive species like Canadian grey wolves the Obama nazis want to kill all of the elk deer and moose and end hunting seasons. ( Like they did in Yellowstone NP)

No hunting no need for guns.


WOLVES equal GUN CONTROL

Just  wolves are about money and gun controls. We have wolves soon there will be no game no reason to hunt so therefor no reason to have guns but this issue is just like baiting and hound hunting when someone dies ( probably a little kid ) they have to turn to hunters and trappers to fix a problem that probably can't be fixed or undone. wolves are like bullets once there out of the Barral they can't be called back.

[humanure]

Now who's the crackpot?

[seth30]

Now who's the crackpot?

[WAcoyotehunter]

IMO wolves and gun control are miles apart.  Wolves can certianly limit hunting opportunites, but that is a different thing than the Right to Bear arms... the two are unrelated.

[boneaddict]

I wouldn't have bridged that gap with the two either, other than most of the people in ultra support for the wolves are probably the same group or genre that are antigun.    Two different agendas though. IMO

[jackmaster]

wonderful, human manure is on this thread as well with all his wisdom, why dont you take your wolf loven self and go live with a pack and see how great they are, then after you get ate up like this farmers live stock then your family is gonna demand that wolves need to be taken out of the state. it wont be be long till humans in this state or worse some little kid playn i n the yard get killed then what manure?

[xsf1]

Si if a man came onto a farmers land and was killing his livestock what would happen to him? just fueling the fire...