OSU "research"

[JuryRig]

Here's the "science" behind wolf reintroduction:

Research: Less Major Predators, More Large Herbivores Harms Ecosystems, Diversity

http://www.cbbulletin.com/419340.aspx

Here's a great quote:
It also concludes that human hunting, due to its limited duration and impact, is not effective in preventing hyper-abundant densities of large herbivores. This is partly “because hunting by humans is often not functionally equivalent to predation by large, wide-ranging carnivores such as wolves,” the researchers wrote in their report.

So the problem with hunting is that we have seasonal, limited taking of game animals.  Got that?  So if WDFW got rid of seasons and license requirements, we wouldn't need wolves?  The science says so. 

[pianoman9701]

Gee, at least this "research" isn't at all biased. Oh, that's right. It's totally biased. It's funny that it says we need more predators because hunters don't kill enough herbivores. Wow, just wow.

[humanure]

So let hunters hunt as they please would be the fix? Where's the science to back that claim up? Serioulsy, not trying to talk smack. If your going to make that claim, please explain how it is a better route. Also, how are you going to regulate what and how people are hunting with that kind've leeway? I'm sorry, but I fear more for the herds at the idea of a limitless hunting season than wolves, cougar and bear.

[pianoman9701]

Gee what a surprise. Human manure is back to jack another thread. Iggy is a wonderful thing. I hope everyone uses it this time.

[wraithen]

First post I've stumbled upon. I believe it is called trolling. Take an obviously sarcastic post and try to argue about it. On the other hand, we need to stop these people from saying whatever pops in their heads and calling it research. Wolves are here to stay. Got it. I'm way past over it. Can they talk about realistic management someday instead of waiting until woolfie says there's enough of him. I guess they are intelligent and majestic enough to learn to speak english right?

[JimmyHoffa]

So let hunters hunt as they please would be the fix? Where's the science to back that claim up? Serioulsy, not trying to talk smack. If your going to make that claim, please explain how it is a better route. Also, how are you going to regulate what and how people are hunting with that kind've leeway? I'm sorry, but I fear more for the herds at the idea of a limitless hunting season than wolves, cougar and bear.

You can use history if you'd like.  Back in the day, humans (~1/5 the population too, 1900) had little to no regulations regarding hunting and killed off the game to the point of deer/elk almost being eliminated.  Pretty much the catalyst for national parks, forest reserves, hunting seasons, game departments, sportsmans movement, etc.  Humans can be much more effective than woofs.  Reasons they don't seem to be is they aren't allowed to be--short seasons, daylight only, no aircraft, etc.  If there really are problems with herd overpopulation, humans could easily handle the job....woofs aren't necessary, nice for some to have but not necessary.

[whuppinstick]

Here's the "science" behind wolf reintroduction:

What science are you contesting from the article?  It all seemed pretty straight-forward to me: ecosystems suffer when there is an overabundance of ungulates and predators play an important role keeping them in check, which helps keep the ecosystem healthy.

I did not see this as an anti-hunting.  The hunting quote you pulled specified that hunting is not sufficient in "hyper-abundant" populations.  Do we have any deer/elk hyper-abundance in Washington?  To me, this means places like back east where the limit is a deer-a-day and they still can't kill enough of them?  No argument there that hunting is not sufficient.  But the paper (or at least the summary we are reading) is not saying that hunting should or shouldn't be expanded; it's taking hunting as it stands now (limited to fall seasons) and then how a predator integrates into that system.

JimmyHoffa raises a good point, which is that humans probably could do the job of the wolves, but that is beyond the scope of the study you linked.  The linked study compiled the results of 42 other studies to reach their conclusions.  So by definition, this study is nothing new. 

[pianoman9701]

So let hunters hunt as they please would be the fix? Where's the science to back that claim up? Serioulsy, not trying to talk smack. If your going to make that claim, please explain how it is a better route. Also, how are you going to regulate what and how people are hunting with that kind've leeway? I'm sorry, but I fear more for the herds at the idea of a limitless hunting season than wolves, cougar and bear.

You can use history if you'd like.  Back in the day, humans (~1/5 the population too, 1900) had little to no regulations regarding hunting and killed off the game to the point of deer/elk almost being eliminated.  Pretty much the catalyst for national parks, forest reserves, hunting seasons, game departments, sportsmans movement, etc.  Humans can be much more effective than woofs.  Reasons they don't seem to be is they aren't allowed to be--short seasons, daylight only, no aircraft, etc.  If there really are problems with herd overpopulation, humans could easily handle the job....woofs aren't necessary, nice for some to have but not necessary.

And you have to remember that it was hunters who passed the regulations necessary to bring that game back from near extinction to their abundant levels today, through the Lacey Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and The Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman Robertson). Wolves were killed off after the conservation movement began because they competed with man for both game and his livelihood. Man has replaced the wolf in our ecosystems as the top predator. And, if the ungulate populations are too high, I suggest more tags be given out. There are never more elk or deer than we can kill.

[xsf1]

I'm excited for the hunting season that will come eventually, that would be awesome to go out and kill a Wolfe. Imagine hunting a pack!

[Humptulips]

I'm excited for the hunting season that will come eventually, that would be awesome to go out and kill a Wolfe. Imagine hunting a pack!

I wouldn't hold my breath for that. That is going to be a long time coming.

[humanure]

Man has replaced the wolf in our ecosystems as the top predator.

How is that idea natural? Man does not know everything, we learn as we go and some knowledge is shown to have been false. How can we honestly(and gloatingly) say we have replaced a key-stone predator and assume that we can do a better, no, a sufficient job? You do realize there are alot of hunters who could care less about the ecosystem? Man is not infallable. Infact, man is a very flawed species. We trip over our own dicks all the time and try to act like we meant to do it. What I'm saying is, YOU guys might have well meaning idea's, but the rest of the hunting world probably doesn't feel the same. Some are out there just to shoot something and don't care what it is or if it's ethical. We need to regulate ourselves.

[724wd]

Man has replaced the wolf in our ecosystems as the top predator.

How is that idea natural? Man does not know everything, we learn as we go and some knowledge is shown to have been false. How can we honestly(and gloatingly) say we have replaced a key-stone predator and assume that we can do a better, no, a sufficient job? You do realize there are alot of hunters who could care less about the ecosystem? Man is not infallable. Infact, man is a very flawed species. We trip over our own dicks all the time and try to act like we meant to do it. What I'm saying is, YOU guys might have well meaning idea's, but the rest of the hunting world probably doesn't feel the same. Some are out there just to shoot something and don't care what it is or if it's ethical. We need to regulate ourselves.

What do you think hunting seasons and bag limits are, if not regulations we've placed on ourselves?  with the proliferation of people, moving west, building cities, farming... we've changed the landscape.  for wolves to come back as THE apex predator, man would have to vacate the land.  man has superior firepower, superior intellect (when's the last time you saw a wolf build a microchip?), superior numbers.  and it's the numbers that are at issue here.  in a state a populous as washington, is there "room" for wolves?  what happens once wolves find much easier pickings in the suburbs of seattle or spokane, with little fear of man (since they can't be hunted), how long before a child gets nabbed off a soccer field or a high school cross country runner never makes it to the finish line? 

[pianoman9701]

Pro-wolf zombies will never, ever get off their stump. You have to ignore them.

As far as the study is concerned, it seems obvious that its "scientific data" was compiled by someone with an agenda. You can prove anything you set out to prove and it's clear that is the case with this "study". It is clear from the ridiculous argument about overpopulated wildlife. We could solve that problem within a week or two with firearms. The idiots doing the study use this as a reason to justify tolerating wolves.

[humanure]

Live life by 'what if's?'?

[WAcoyotehunter]

I've wrestled with this idea for a while and I have to agree that hunting alone is not adequate management for ungulates in our altered systems.  Hunting, coupled with hazing and more consistant pressure would maybe do it.  Hunting seasons in the fall don't manipulate wildlife movements and create the necessay instability that wolves do.  People laugh about the wolves helping the riparian zones, but I can see that being quite possible.  It would require more frequent hazing and movement year 'round for people to replicate that.