Post by: bearpaw on May 04, 2014, 05:31:02 PM
April 24, 2014 LTE - Idaho Statesman by Mark Lung, Boise
I am a former professor of biology and have conducted research on elk/wolf biology for 10 years. The Idaho Fish and Game issued a plan for Idaho's wilderness area for the elimination of 60 percent of wolves. This action was based on declines in elk numbers, which the report concludes is due to "low reproductive success" (page 1) of female elk caused by wolves.
This conclusion that wolves are the primary cause is not supported by the body of scientific evidence. Rather, evidence shows that hunters and nutrition are important contributors. For example, the Journal of Wildlife Management recently published a study that compared the impact of hunters versus wolves on the reproductive potential of female elk. The percentage of reproductive female elk killed by hunters was 58 percent, by wolves it was 7 percent. More than 50 percent of female elk killed by hunters were pregnant and almost none killed by wolves. The overall effect is that hunters have a 32 percent higher impact than wolves on the reproductive success of female elk.
We may not always make the best decisions, but we can be confident that the better decisions are those based on the careful review of all the information that is available.
-- --
Rebuttal:
by Layne Crea - University of Idaho April 28, 2014
Wolves are a very passionate and emotional subject for many people. Passion and emotion tend to cause people to ignore facts and relevance. Some of these responses seem to ignore the point I was making in my response to the letter, so I will attempt to make my point perfectly clear.
I am not questioning the validity of the study that Mr. Lung quotes from. For all I know, it is a valid study, but that is not even pertinent to the point I am making. What is NOT valid, is using the data of the study he quotes, (cow elk mortality from hunting) and trying to apply that to the Central Idaho Wilderness Area, which has no cow elk hunts. How is that relevant?
If Mr. Lung had instead focused on the other issue he mentioned, nutrition, we could have had a discussion that was relevant. The many fires in that area have likely increased the nutritional value for the elk in the heavily forested areas. Should we fight fires in the National Forest areas surrounding the wilderness area?
Mr. Lung overlooking (or ignoring) the fact that there are no cow-elk hunts in the Central Idaho Wilderness Area begs the question: Was he intentionally trying to deceive and mislead with data that is not relevant? Perhaps Mr. Lung would like to weigh in and explain his motivations.
Source and more comments: http://tinyurl.com/lj48qz2 (http://tinyurl.com/lj48qz2)
Post by: buckfvr on May 04, 2014, 06:10:41 PM
Post by: wolfbait on May 04, 2014, 11:02:54 PM
Another great study, the wolves are innocent, hunters are bad, and more habitat is needed. How many studies will WDFW perform before they come to the same conclusion, wolves kill everything and leave nothing, non-leathal predator control methods only work for a short time and the list goes on as the money is flushed.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on May 05, 2014, 06:57:08 AM
"I am a former professor of biology and have conducted research on elk/wolf biology for 10 years." Another over educated idiot, that spends too much time with DoW, begging money from people who have no clue.
Another great study, the wolves are innocent, hunters are bad, and more habitat is needed. How many studies will WDFW perform before they come to the same conclusion, wolves kill everything and leave nothing, non-leathal predator control methods only work for a short time and the list goes on as the money is flushed.
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: I would much prefer an "over educated idiot" to an undereducated idiot that thinks he knows it all. ;)
Post by: wolfbait on May 05, 2014, 07:31:04 AM
"I am a former professor of biology and have conducted research on elk/wolf biology for 10 years." Another over educated idiot, that spends too much time with DoW, begging money from people who have no clue.
Another great study, the wolves are innocent, hunters are bad, and more habitat is needed. How many studies will WDFW perform before they come to the same conclusion, wolves kill everything and leave nothing, non-leathal predator control methods only work for a short time and the list goes on as the money is flushed.
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: I would much prefer an "over educated idiot" to an undereducated idiot that thinks he knows it all. ;)
Maybe if you didn't hover around Fitkin and DoW so much, and read the book, The Real Wolf, you could graduate past the undereducated class. You talk like you know it all, but I have noticed that you either think WA has a different wolf, or WDFW has a plan that will curtail the wolves from slaughtering WA's game herds. Get the book Wacoyote, expand your knowledge a bit.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on May 05, 2014, 07:34:48 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 05, 2014, 08:31:18 AM
Now, this perfect storm of problems for the ungulates doesn't seem to make any sense...that is unless you come to the conclusion that what the greenies are attempting is an end to all hunting. Voila! This group of extremists, in some sort of completely warped thinking, believes that man not only shouldn't kill animals, but that he's not a part of nature. And, our DFW panders to these freaks. I believe the author of this article is one of them.
Post by: bobcat on May 05, 2014, 08:47:05 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 05, 2014, 08:51:27 AM
"I am a former professor of biology and have conducted research on elk/wolf biology for 10 years." Another over educated idiot, that spends too much time with DoW, begging money from people who have no clue.
Another great study, the wolves are innocent, hunters are bad, and more habitat is needed. How many studies will WDFW perform before they come to the same conclusion, wolves kill everything and leave nothing, non-leathal predator control methods only work for a short time and the list goes on as the money is flushed.
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: I would much prefer an "over educated idiot" to an undereducated idiot that thinks he knows it all. ;)
Maybe if you didn't hover around Fitkin and DoW so much, and read the book, The Real Wolf, you could graduate past the undereducated class. You talk like you know it all, but I have noticed that you either think WA has a different wolf, or WDFW has a plan that will curtail the wolves from slaughtering WA's game herds. Get the book Wacoyote, expand your knowledge a bit.
Not sure but I believe lying or dishonesty (*misspoke is the liberal term) were the original point. as for Over/Under educated.....Tell me a boatload of lawyers just sank please
Post by: snowpack on May 05, 2014, 09:05:18 AM
Post by: woodswalker on May 05, 2014, 03:59:29 PM
I wonder where this biology professor thinks food comes from?
The store of course...what do YOU think>?????? :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: villageidiot on May 08, 2014, 10:36:43 PM
Post by: timberfaller on May 09, 2014, 09:16:35 AM
How old are you, bobcat??
Have you ever worked in the timber industry??
Post by: idahohuntr on May 09, 2014, 03:09:34 PM
"fully supportive of Smokey the Bear and the policy of putting out all forest fires."what the heck do age and employment in the timber industry have to do with a century of stupid fire policy?
How old are you, bobcat??
Have you ever worked in the timber industry??
Post by: Special T on May 09, 2014, 03:12:37 PM
Post by: bearpaw on May 09, 2014, 03:28:50 PM
I am not opposed to all wolves, I am opposed to unmanaged wolves, that's also where it gets sticky.
Post by: wolfbait on May 09, 2014, 07:45:44 PM
I would agree with letting the wilderness areas burn as long as neighboring private land owners and public timber holdings could be assured safe haven. That's where it gets sticky.
I am not opposed to all wolves, I am opposed to unmanaged wolves, that's also where it gets sticky.
Fire is good in many ways, many of us have seen the reaction. Take the Okanogan and the bitter brush, which is explosive, when burn't off grass grows again.
The orchardist are the main reason elk were not allowed in the Methow Valley for many years $$$. But not to worry WDFW planted Barnaby thistle in the Methow, they said it was for the deer to eat, whats one more screw up from WDFW?
Manage Wolves? :chuckle: WDFW can't even manage their lies, and it always come back and chews chunks out of their sit-down area. Which really doesn't matter to them because they just invent another. WDFW and Benghazi have a lot in common. In the end the truth will be known, but by that time it will be too late.
Post by: mkcj on May 09, 2014, 08:00:14 PM
Post by: wolfbait on May 09, 2014, 08:15:08 PM
I notice that Mr. Lung has NOT replied back yet in the comments.
Maybe he is lost in thought>>> :bfg: