Post by: Ridgeratt on January 28, 2019, 04:54:07 PM
Isle Royale Wolf Transfer - Emergency Action
URGENT NEED: Due to the US Government shutdown, the planned early January Isle Royale Wolf transfer project had to be cancelled. There was significant coordination time, money and energy all lost.
It's imperative the wolves get moved within the next few weeks.
Wolves are being moved from Michipicoton Island in Ontario, where there are low food sources, to Isle Royale, where they must adapt to their new location in time for early spring mating season.
The National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation(NPLSF) has worked hard to get approval to temporarily open Isle Royale and complete the wolf transfer. This requires non-government funding. NPLSF has guaranteed that funding. ** Even with the US Government opening for 3 weeks, this project is needed to make this transfer "shutdown proof", and have all green lights! **
However, we need your help to cover that cost. The whole project costs total is $50,000. Some of the amazing logistics include two separate helicopter teams, capturing wolves, transporting, releasing, monitoring - all in a winter wilderness environment.
Can you help save the Michipicoton wolves and help them find love on Isle Royale?
Your donation is tax-deductible. Any donations more that our goal will go towards additional wolf expenses including research.
The National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation (NPLSF) is a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to preservation of the natural resources and unique cultural heritage of Lake Superior’s five U.S. National Parks. NPLSF funds research, restoration, education, and resource protection projects for Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, Grand Portage National Monument, Isle Royale National Park, Keweenaw National Historic Park, and Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. The National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation has a proven record of funding projects both large and small providing more that $1.5 million in funding across all five parks.
Maybe the WDFW Professional Wolf Management team could assist in this.
Wolves from Canada to the US. Oh that's right it has never happened.
Post by: Mfowl on January 28, 2019, 05:31:14 PM
:peep: :sry: :puke:
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 28, 2019, 05:33:29 PM
Or this:
https://www.gofundme.com/isle-royale-wolf-transfer-emergency-action
Post by: TVHunts on January 28, 2019, 06:09:26 PM
:bfg: :bfg: :bfg:
Post by: HighlandLofts on January 28, 2019, 06:45:03 PM
Post by: greenhead_killer on January 28, 2019, 06:51:26 PM
Post by: Dan-o on January 28, 2019, 07:18:13 PM
I wonder how this is supposed to help?
Post by: Gobble Doc on January 28, 2019, 08:44:09 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 28, 2019, 08:57:34 PM
We could fund a relocation to San Juan island.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe the WDFW Professional Wolf Management team could assist in this. Your answer!! Yes they could :chuckle:
Post by: bearpaw on January 28, 2019, 09:09:44 PM
We could fund a relocation to San Juan island.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe the WDFW Professional Wolf Management team could assist in this. Your answer!! Yes they could :chuckle:
I would gladly donate to relocation efforts to San Jaun Island. If they want to get them from a closer location I'll also volunteer to drive them there! :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on January 28, 2019, 10:28:18 PM
http://www.isleroyalewolf.org
Post by: wolfbait on January 28, 2019, 10:38:59 PM
Isle Royale has been a wolf experiment for years. Not really going to impact much of anything. It’s a national park also.
http://www.isleroyalewolf.org
No Impact? The wolves will kill about everything that walks the island, then a bunch of wolves will die off from starvation because of low prey base, the prey will rebound and the cycle will start over agin. Wolves will inbreed, etc. and at some point a new wolf rescue will have to be performed by the same idiots that are doing the rescue now. Waste of $$$.
If I remember right this is the island that the BS study on the "balance of nature" was fudged.
Post by: jackelope on January 28, 2019, 10:49:43 PM
That island has been a giant science experiment for how long now? The damage is already done.
Post by: jackelope on January 28, 2019, 10:52:42 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190129/a4a24ccb9215c69f08388a0d8180a08a.jpg)
Post by: jackelope on January 28, 2019, 10:58:13 PM
The island already has documented wolf population.
I wonder how this is supposed to help?
Here you go, @Dan-o The wolves have all but died on Isle Royale. And the moose population is projected to double. Weird.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190129/acec70c659ee94b5b694c94c409f7d36.jpg)
Post by: Dan-o on January 28, 2019, 11:11:23 PM
I remember reading about these island wolves and the wolf population crash.
Just weird that they'd augment a struggling population with more wolves..... I bet the existing wolves will love their new friends.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 29, 2019, 05:04:26 AM
Post by: boneaddict on January 29, 2019, 06:23:56 AM
Post by: RJW on January 29, 2019, 06:46:11 AM
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 29, 2019, 08:14:04 AM
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/ontario-wolves-isle-royale-1.4913527
Ontario wolves to be trapped, transferred in effort to restore population on Michigan island
Weather permitting, wolves will be moved by helicopter in January
Amy Hadley · CBC News · Posted: Nov 21, 2018 7:30 AM ET | Last Updated: November 21, 2018
The first female wolf to be transported to the island this fall is captured by a remote camera, before emerging from her crate. The first four wolves to be cleared for transfer were from Minnesota. (U.S. National Park Service)
Wolves from Ontario will soon be moved across the border to try to help restore the dwindling population in Michigan's Isle Royale National Park.
This fall, officials at the park began a multi-year effort to move wolves from the mainland to the island, to try to restore the balance between wolves and moose on the isolated island, which is located on Lake Superior, not far from Thunder Bay, Ont.
The multi-year wolf transfer will involve capturing and moving mainland wolves from Michigan and Minnesota, but Isle Royale National Park superintendent Phyllis Green says they now also plan to move a pack from nearby Ontario.
The first wolves to be moved were trapped in Minnesota, but officials were hopeful that Canadian wolves would also be added to the mix. That plan has now been given the green light, said park superintendent Phyllis Green.
Canadian wolves may be added to U.S. park service's work to revive island population
U.S. National Park Service will soon transport wolves to Isle Royale
"Actually we were fortunate that Michigan's Governor [Rick] Snyder had a conversation with [Ontario's] Premier [Doug] Ford and talked about the importance of the project," she said.
"And so after that conversation we were able to have further conversations and we're definitely going to be — weather providing — receiving wolves from Ontario this winter."
The wolves will come from Michipicoten Island in northeastern Lake Superior, where a very different wildlife management problem has made headlines. While Isle Royale's wolf population has faced near extinction, wolves on Michipicoten were weakening the caribou population.
Dwindling caribou population being moved off Michipicoten Island — by air
If weather permits, suitable wolves will be trapped during a normal collaring exercise done by Ontario researchers in January and transferred to Isle Royale by helicopter, Green said.
Phyllis Green, superintendent of Isle Royale National Park in Michigan, stands in front of an empty crate that held one of the first wolves to be transported to the island. (National Park Service/John Pepin)
'Robust' Canadian wolves desirable for genetic strength
The Ontario wolves are desirable for several reasons, said Green, including the fact that the animals on Michipicoten are well-studied by Ontario researchers who will be able to identify alpha males and females that might be well suited to the trip.
"And also we actually know that they're actually pretty prolific on pups, and that's certainly what you would hope to see when you start a new population."
"And the other positive is that they're very robust genetically," Green added.
"On the U.S. side, we've had situations where the wolf population has dropped and then there's some incursion of coyote or dog genetics into the population."
A trail camera photo shows one of the female wolves transferred to Michigan's Isle Royale National Park this fall, as part of a multi-year effort to restore the population and balance the ecosystem. (U.S. National Park Service)
Two wolf fatalities so far
The wolf transfer is not without risks. During the first phase of the project this fall, a wolf that had been cleared for transfer died before it could be moved to Isle Royale, prompting changes to protocols in an effort to reduce stress on the animals.
One male and three females were successfully moved to the island, but in November, the National Park Service confirmed that the male wolf had been found dead. The cause of death is not known, Green said, but necropsy results expected in December should yield more information.
Some natural mortality is to be expected, Green said.
"It's unfortunate but in the wild population about 25 to 30 per cent of the wolves die annually," she said.
"It's a tough life out there for them."
The transferred wolves are being monitored using GPS technology and the other three are doing well, Green said.
The Isle Royale wolf relocation effort is expected to take three to five years, with the eventual goal of moving up to 30 animals.
Post by: bearpaw on January 29, 2019, 08:30:00 AM
Post by: boneaddict on January 29, 2019, 08:31:07 AM
Post by: KFhunter on January 29, 2019, 08:32:18 AM
When they import wolves it's no longer a natural experiment? :dunno:
They want those wolves to eat the ticks off the moose (and the flesh too)
Post by: boneaddict on January 29, 2019, 08:34:38 AM
Post by: SuperX on January 29, 2019, 09:43:34 AM
The island already has documented wolf population.the old pack all died off, the last female swam lake superior to shore north of Duluth and then was shot and killed with a pellet gun... probably while trying to eat some Grand Maris family's dog. (A real problem up there).
I wonder how this is supposed to help?
The island has moose which the wolves used to feed on. Getting more wolves out there is both to manage moose, and as a tourist attraction for them. A lot of people come to Isle Royal to see them.
Post by: jackelope on January 29, 2019, 11:11:10 AM
Quote
Date: November 13, 2018
Contact: Phyllis Green, 906-487-7140
Contact: Liz Valencia, 906-487-7153
HOUGHTON, MICH-- The National Park Service (NPS) has been monitoring the wolves that were captured in Minnesota earlier this fall and transported to Isle Royale as part of a multi-year project to restore predation in the remote park. Sixteen different wolves were captured on the Grand Portage Chippewa reservation. Seven of those wolves were collared and released either on Isle Royale or at the site of capture. Young wolves were ear tagged and released. Collaring and ear tagging contribute to the Grand Portage Band’s monitoring program. Ear tags have been invaluable in determining age of wolves for the Isle Royale project and in population estimates on the mainland.
Four of the 16 wolves captured on the Grand Portage Reservation were transported to Isle Royale. The four wolves were examined by wildlife veterinarians, documented, tagged and fitted with tracking collars. The wolves selected for translocation to the park fit the requirements determined by wildlife professionals and established in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) signed by the NPS Regional Director in June 2018. They were deemed generally healthy, between the ages of two and five, and not from the same pack. Capture, health exams, translocation and release of wolves has been a team effort involving numerous agency and university personnel.
https://www.nps.gov/isro/learn/news/wolf-relocation-update.htm
Post by: idaho guy on January 30, 2019, 01:02:01 PM
The island already has documented wolf population.
I wonder how this is supposed to help?
Here you go, @Dan-o The wolves have all but died on Isle Royale. And the moose population is projected to double. Weird.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190129/acec70c659ee94b5b694c94c409f7d36.jpg)
Thank goodness they were able to study this for 50 years. The graph is fascinating it actually shows when wolves increase moose numbers dwindle and vice versa! Wolves dwindle and moose numbers explode. Wow what an amazing insight into the predator prey relationship :chuckle: I also like that they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more "robust" genetically great idea sure has worked great in Idaho getting those genetics freaks down here! :chuckle:
Post by: Tradhunter on January 31, 2019, 05:43:10 PM
Post by: Dan-o on January 31, 2019, 05:48:06 PM
Does anyone know a logical reason as to why they brought in a non-native wolf on this project rather than capturing what few native wolves that were around and building a rehabilitation off of that? Just seems weird to me why they couldn't put all this effort into rehabilitating the correct species before taking this BS action and wiping out ALL chance of ever finding a native wolf ever again. Also I'm pretty sure had they restored the NATIVE wolf where needed we would not have the issues we have now right?
They aren't non-native............ They are just "robust"............................. :dunno:
Post by: SuperX on January 31, 2019, 06:55:56 PM
Post by: Tradhunter on January 31, 2019, 08:48:29 PM
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 05:36:08 AM
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 08:26:57 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
Post by: Tradhunter on February 01, 2019, 08:59:41 AM
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 09:08:41 AM
Thats kind of the point I was getting at. Besides letting nature take its course we always think the right thing to do is interfere which can be problem #1. But as far as i know, importing these wolves to Yellowstone, they spread through Montana wiping out the last remaining native wolf they had there. Why couldn't they capture them and breed them out to rehabilitate them instead? At least to have a true native wolf within these few states in the Northwest. Im guessing because they aren't (robust) because the numbers have fallen off. if thats the case well...thats kind of nature isn't it?
true native wolf... what makes one gray wolf native and another not?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 01, 2019, 09:17:11 AM
Post by: Tradhunter on February 01, 2019, 09:22:53 AM
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 09:30:44 AM
I am still learning about all this wolf stuff but I was under the impression that in the northwestern states we had red wolves, a small timber wolf that doesn't live in giant packs and murder everything in sight. I do believe that Canadian wolves have been coming in and out of the US for ever but have never taken up residency and continued to move down as they are now with the assistance we are giving them.
Red Wolves are limited to the south eastern US, lately they have been determined by genetics to be 75% coyote and 25% gray wolf, not a different wolf species at all. that's the science of it... the politics differ. All the wolves in North America are gray wolves or gray wolf hybrids genetically.
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 10:03:33 AM
I am still learning about all this wolf stuff but I was under the impression that in the northwestern states we had red wolves, a small timber wolf that doesn't live in giant packs and murder everything in sight. I do believe that Canadian wolves have been coming in and out of the US for ever but have never taken up residency and continued to move down as they are now with the assistance we are giving them.
Red Wolves are limited to the south eastern US, lately they have been determined by genetics to be 75% coyote and 25% gray wolf, not a different wolf species at all. that's the science of it... the politics differ. All the wolves in North America are gray wolves or gray wolf hybrids genetically.
wolves are wolves and deer are deer. You made my point. Idaho, Montana etc had wolves that were wolves but their Canadian cousins that they dropped in our lap are way bigger, more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Biggest killer of wolves is wolves so goodbye smaller native wolf thanks to the genetic freaks they transported down. We had the northern rocky mountain wolf and they transported a MUCH larger and more damaging wolf from up north. Deer up north are larger right so are the dang wolves. Or should I say more "robust"
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 10:17:12 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 10:27:59 AM
Wolves and Dogs are cousins, wolves from Canada are just wolves even if they are born in Canada and move to Montana.I am still learning about all this wolf stuff but I was under the impression that in the northwestern states we had red wolves, a small timber wolf that doesn't live in giant packs and murder everything in sight. I do believe that Canadian wolves have been coming in and out of the US for ever but have never taken up residency and continued to move down as they are now with the assistance we are giving them.
Red Wolves are limited to the south eastern US, lately they have been determined by genetics to be 75% coyote and 25% gray wolf, not a different wolf species at all. that's the science of it... the politics differ. All the wolves in North America are gray wolves or gray wolf hybrids genetically.
wolves are wolves and deer are deer. You made my point. Idaho, Montana etc had wolves that were wolves but their Canadian cousins that they dropped in our lap are way bigger, more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Biggest killer of wolves is wolves so goodbye smaller native wolf thanks to the genetic freaks they transported down. We had the northern rocky mountain wolf and they transported a MUCH larger and more damaging wolf from up north. Deer up north are larger right so are the dang wolves. Or should I say more "robust"
Northern Rocky Mountain wolves were extirpated in Montana by the 1930's by people, not other wolves. This is a good read on the history of wolves in MT.
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/management/wolf/history.html
Post by: bearpaw on February 01, 2019, 10:33:53 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
Post by: bearpaw on February 01, 2019, 10:42:33 AM
Wolf Advocates want to reclassify the 23 North American subspecies into 5 subspecies, anyone who has followed this wolf fiasco can see that these specific 5 classifications will benefit their goal of legitimizing transplants of larger species on top of smaller subspecies and will benefit protecting wolves in specific regions that they want to protected from being delisted.
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
Quote
North American wolf subspecies distribution according to Goldman (1944). These subspecies are included in MSW3 2005.
For North America, in 1944 the zoologist Edward Goldman recognized as many as 23 subspecies based on morphology.[44] In 1959, E. Raymond Hall proposed that there had been 24 subspecies of lupus in North America.[45] In 1970, L. David Mech proposed that there was "probably far too many sub specific designations...in use" as most did not exhibit enough points of differentiation to be classified as a separate subspecies.[46] The 24 subspecies were accepted by many authorities in 1981 and these were based on morphological or geographical differences, or a unique history.[47] In 1995, the American mammologist Robert M. Nowak analyzed data on the skull morphology of wolf specimens from around the world. For North America, he proposed that there were only five subspecies of gray wolf. These include a large-toothed Arctic wolf named C. l. arctos, a large wolf from Alaska and western Canada named C. l. occidentalis, a small wolf from southeastern Canada named C. l. lycaon, a small wolf from the southwestern U.S. named C. l. baileyi and a moderate-sized wolf that was originally found from Texas to Hudson Bay and from Oregon to Newfoundland named C. l. nubilus.[48][49] This proposal was not reflected in the taxonomic classification of Canis lupus subspecies in Mammal Species of the World (third edition, 2005).[9]
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 11:00:26 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 11:00:45 AM
Wolves and Dogs are cousins, wolves from Canada are just wolves even if they are born in Canada and move to Montana.I am still learning about all this wolf stuff but I was under the impression that in the northwestern states we had red wolves, a small timber wolf that doesn't live in giant packs and murder everything in sight. I do believe that Canadian wolves have been coming in and out of the US for ever but have never taken up residency and continued to move down as they are now with the assistance we are giving them.
Red Wolves are limited to the south eastern US, lately they have been determined by genetics to be 75% coyote and 25% gray wolf, not a different wolf species at all. that's the science of it... the politics differ. All the wolves in North America are gray wolves or gray wolf hybrids genetically.
wolves are wolves and deer are deer. You made my point. Idaho, Montana etc had wolves that were wolves but their Canadian cousins that they dropped in our lap are way bigger, more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Biggest killer of wolves is wolves so goodbye smaller native wolf thanks to the genetic freaks they transported down. We had the northern rocky mountain wolf and they transported a MUCH larger and more damaging wolf from up north. Deer up north are larger right so are the dang wolves. Or should I say more "robust"
Northern Rocky Mountain wolves were extirpated in Montana by the 1930's by people, not other wolves. This is a good read on the history of wolves in MT.
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/management/wolf/history.html
propaganda there was a small population of wolves documented in Idaho for sure(documented fact) before reintroduction and I believe Montana. They were smaller and native. Because of their smaller size they actually did feed on smaller animals not just elk and deer. They felt they were not self sustaining which is why they can say they were extirpated in montana. I will guarantee they are not self sustaining now. Wolves and dogs are cousins yes but whats that mean? look up the different subspecies of wolf you will get it then.
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 11:02:58 AM
How Conveneint!
Wolf Advocates want to reclassify the 23 North American subspecies into 5 subspecies, anyone who has followed this wolf fiasco can see that these specific 5 classifications will benefit their goal of legitimizing transplants of larger species on top of smaller subspecies and will benefit protecting wolves in specific regions that they want to protected from being delisted.
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupusQuoteNorth American wolf subspecies distribution according to Goldman (1944). These subspecies are included in MSW3 2005.
For North America, in 1944 the zoologist Edward Goldman recognized as many as 23 subspecies based on morphology.[44] In 1959, E. Raymond Hall proposed that there had been 24 subspecies of lupus in North America.[45] In 1970, L. David Mech proposed that there was "probably far too many sub specific designations...in use" as most did not exhibit enough points of differentiation to be classified as a separate subspecies.[46] The 24 subspecies were accepted by many authorities in 1981 and these were based on morphological or geographical differences, or a unique history.[47] In 1995, the American mammologist Robert M. Nowak analyzed data on the skull morphology of wolf specimens from around the world. For North America, he proposed that there were only five subspecies of gray wolf. These include a large-toothed Arctic wolf named C. l. arctos, a large wolf from Alaska and western Canada named C. l. occidentalis, a small wolf from southeastern Canada named C. l. lycaon, a small wolf from the southwestern U.S. named C. l. baileyi and a moderate-sized wolf that was originally found from Texas to Hudson Bay and from Oregon to Newfoundland named C. l. nubilus.[48][49] This proposal was not reflected in the taxonomic classification of Canis lupus subspecies in Mammal Species of the World (third edition, 2005).[9]
I prefer to think it is science getting better at genetic analysis than some hippy conspiracy.
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 11:05:16 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
Sounds like Bearpaw was right they will remove subspecies to fit their agenda and cover their tracks. 23 subspecies are now going to be 5? really, has anyone seen them create less subspecies? Usually they create ten more salamander types so they can create a crisis
Post by: idaho guy on February 01, 2019, 11:08:03 AM
How Conveneint!
Wolf Advocates want to reclassify the 23 North American subspecies into 5 subspecies, anyone who has followed this wolf fiasco can see that these specific 5 classifications will benefit their goal of legitimizing transplants of larger species on top of smaller subspecies and will benefit protecting wolves in specific regions that they want to protected from being delisted.
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupusQuoteNorth American wolf subspecies distribution according to Goldman (1944). These subspecies are included in MSW3 2005.
For North America, in 1944 the zoologist Edward Goldman recognized as many as 23 subspecies based on morphology.[44] In 1959, E. Raymond Hall proposed that there had been 24 subspecies of lupus in North America.[45] In 1970, L. David Mech proposed that there was "probably far too many sub specific designations...in use" as most did not exhibit enough points of differentiation to be classified as a separate subspecies.[46] The 24 subspecies were accepted by many authorities in 1981 and these were based on morphological or geographical differences, or a unique history.[47] In 1995, the American mammologist Robert M. Nowak analyzed data on the skull morphology of wolf specimens from around the world. For North America, he proposed that there were only five subspecies of gray wolf. These include a large-toothed Arctic wolf named C. l. arctos, a large wolf from Alaska and western Canada named C. l. occidentalis, a small wolf from southeastern Canada named C. l. lycaon, a small wolf from the southwestern U.S. named C. l. baileyi and a moderate-sized wolf that was originally found from Texas to Hudson Bay and from Oregon to Newfoundland named C. l. nubilus.[48][49] This proposal was not reflected in the taxonomic classification of Canis lupus subspecies in Mammal Species of the World (third edition, 2005).[9]
I prefer to think it is science getting better at genetic analysis than some hippy conspiracy.
Better more precise science typically create more subspecies why is this the only one different?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 01, 2019, 11:10:49 AM
Yeah, they like to do that with fish. Each river being so specific, so they can't move fish around (like hatcheries). But if they applied that to wolves they couldn't move between specific habitats. Whatever suits the agenda.I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
Sounds like Bearpaw was right they will remove subspecies to fit their agenda and cover their tracks. 23 subspecies are now going to be 5? really, has anyone seen them create less subspecies? Usually they create ten more salamander types so they can create a crisis
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 11:17:01 AM
I think you're confusing precision (how thinly we can slice it) to accuracy (how much does it match another thing) When these species were named, we couldn't decode the genome at all, now that we have ways to do that, we can compare genetic code more accurately. This reduction in sub species has happened a lot recently in dinosaurs where they had lots of species identified by morphology (how they look) in the fossil record. Turns out they were just juvenile versions of already known species. Scientists love to name stuff they 'discover'.How Conveneint!
Wolf Advocates want to reclassify the 23 North American subspecies into 5 subspecies, anyone who has followed this wolf fiasco can see that these specific 5 classifications will benefit their goal of legitimizing transplants of larger species on top of smaller subspecies and will benefit protecting wolves in specific regions that they want to protected from being delisted.
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupusQuoteNorth American wolf subspecies distribution according to Goldman (1944). These subspecies are included in MSW3 2005.
For North America, in 1944 the zoologist Edward Goldman recognized as many as 23 subspecies based on morphology.[44] In 1959, E. Raymond Hall proposed that there had been 24 subspecies of lupus in North America.[45] In 1970, L. David Mech proposed that there was "probably far too many sub specific designations...in use" as most did not exhibit enough points of differentiation to be classified as a separate subspecies.[46] The 24 subspecies were accepted by many authorities in 1981 and these were based on morphological or geographical differences, or a unique history.[47] In 1995, the American mammologist Robert M. Nowak analyzed data on the skull morphology of wolf specimens from around the world. For North America, he proposed that there were only five subspecies of gray wolf. These include a large-toothed Arctic wolf named C. l. arctos, a large wolf from Alaska and western Canada named C. l. occidentalis, a small wolf from southeastern Canada named C. l. lycaon, a small wolf from the southwestern U.S. named C. l. baileyi and a moderate-sized wolf that was originally found from Texas to Hudson Bay and from Oregon to Newfoundland named C. l. nubilus.[48][49] This proposal was not reflected in the taxonomic classification of Canis lupus subspecies in Mammal Species of the World (third edition, 2005).[9]
I prefer to think it is science getting better at genetic analysis than some hippy conspiracy.
Better more precise science typically create more subspecies why is this the only one different?
Post by: bearpaw on February 01, 2019, 11:17:37 AM
I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
true, the northern rockies wolf, irremotus is most likely bred completely out of existance by occidentalis, which was transplanted from northern Canada
Post by: bearpaw on February 01, 2019, 11:19:25 AM
Yeah, they like to do that with fish. Each river being so specific, so they can't move fish around (like hatcheries). But if they applied that to wolves they couldn't move between specific habitats. Whatever suits the agenda.I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
Sounds like Bearpaw was right they will remove subspecies to fit their agenda and cover their tracks. 23 subspecies are now going to be 5? really, has anyone seen them create less subspecies? Usually they create ten more salamander types so they can create a crisis
:yeah: BINGO! Whatever suits the agenda.
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 11:22:43 AM
Yeah, they like to do that with fish. Each river being so specific, so they can't move fish around (like hatcheries). But if they applied that to wolves they couldn't move between specific habitats. Whatever suits the agenda.I don’t know that area either but I don’t agree that the wolves from Canada are genetically the same as lower 48 wolves even if it seems like the only difference is an imaginary line between the two countries. They already stated they are importing Canadian wolves because they are more “robust “ than what they have or had. I take that to mean bigger, faster, stronger more able to kill and less likely to be killed. Why would they say they have better genes if they are identical cousins? The people running the show said they are genetically superior and that’s why they are importing them. Look at a whitetail deer in Idaho and compared to a whitetail in Canada both whitetail s but the Canadian body size is way larger. The wolves we have now which we’re imported from Canada also are way larger than what was here already. By doing this they did eliminate any hope of bringing back Idaho’s true native wolf seems the same in this area
More robust in terms of diversity, replacing a population that had problems with in-breeding. Genetically they are all the same species, body size is an adaptation to cold, that's why southern whitetails are small even though the racks on mature bucks are larger down south. It's like height being passed down.
Idaho didn't ever have it's own wolf species
We had Canis lupis Irremotus the candians transplanted are canis lupus occidentails. Different subspecies. We had a small population of wolves in Idaho before reintroduction that were smaller. Size matters and whether they got huge by geography or temperature doesn't matter. They will kill whatever native wolf population is here and do WAY more damage to deer and elk. SIZE matters in the wild
:yeah: With the transplanting of occidentalis (known for being a very large wolf) it has virtually guaranteed the extinction through breeding of the smaller sized native subspecies!
Wolf Subspecies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus
C. l. irremotus -- A medium to large-sized subspecies with pale fur.[58] The northern Rocky Mountains
C. l. occidentalis -- A very large, usually light-colored subspecies.[68] Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northwestern United States
BTW, the subspecies irremotus has been removed as outdated and they consider them all to be just grey wolves genetically.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love wolves or want them 'reintroduced' any more than they already have been. My hope is to see wolves managed like any other game species with seasons and limits.
Sounds like Bearpaw was right they will remove subspecies to fit their agenda and cover their tracks. 23 subspecies are now going to be 5? really, has anyone seen them create less subspecies? Usually they create ten more salamander types so they can create a crisis
Yeah that agenda is the political reality of this, but it doesn't make the science wrong or manipulated. It doesn't matter if there are thousands of wolves in Canada, we in the US pretend they are extinct unless they occupy our land too. In the case of wolves, they apparently also have to be in exactly the spaces they occupied before humans. That is complete bs but that doesn't mean we have to make up ravening super wolves that don't really exist.
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 11:35:14 AM
https://idfg.idaho.gov/question/there-difference-between-idaho-grey-wolf-and-northern-canadian-wolf
Post by: bearpaw on February 01, 2019, 11:43:34 AM
here is another good read on the whole idea of northern canda wolves vs. native ID wolves from ID fish and game
https://idfg.idaho.gov/question/there-difference-between-idaho-grey-wolf-and-northern-canadian-wolf
They are certainly trying to hide their tracks of guaranteeing the extinction of a sub-specie with the transplant. :chuckle:
If you want to believe the hype that on one hand that all wolves are the same and on the other hand that all salmon are different that's your choice!
a wolf is a wolf is a wolf... :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: SuperX on February 01, 2019, 12:54:27 PM
Species are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?here is another good read on the whole idea of northern canda wolves vs. native ID wolves from ID fish and game
https://idfg.idaho.gov/question/there-difference-between-idaho-grey-wolf-and-northern-canadian-wolf
They are certainly trying to hide their tracks of guaranteeing the extinction of a sub-specie with the transplant. :chuckle:
If you want to believe the hype that on one hand that all wolves are the same and on the other hand that all salmon are different that's your choice!
a wolf is a wolf is a wolf... :chuckle: :chuckle:
I agree in a way that a wolf is a wolf, and think that what we see happening with wolf / game interaction is basic wolf behavior. Wanton killing, blood lust, killing every animal in a herd, eating prey alive, etc., is what wolves do. it's the harder side of nature. Only humans believe in mercy and fairness.
The problem is anthropomorphism. Humans who don't realize what wolves and nature truly are like are in charge of putting these killing machines in our best elk and deer habitat. All done in the name of some sort of ideology that is based on emotion not facts.
Post by: Alchase on February 01, 2019, 07:27:13 PM
Quote
Species are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
Post by: SuperX on February 02, 2019, 09:31:47 AM
Actually I was referring to his confusion of the nomenclature. Salmon are of the genus Oncorhynchus with 7 different species indicators (in the pacific). For example King salmon are Oncorhynchus tshawytscha while pink salmon are oncorhynchus gorbuscha.QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
Wolves are genus Canis with species Lupis, along side coyotes being genus Canis species latrans, and a few others like dingos which are peer species with Lupis. Sub species don't exist for salmon which bearpaws compares to wolves, implying wolves can't be the same if salmon are different. That isn't true because of subspecies. Wolves have sub species, notably Canis Lupus Familiarus - note the extra subspecies name - which designates dogs are a sub species of wolves not of coyotes. So they really can't be compared in the way he says.
Since this is 10th grade biology I assumed he was talking about something more complex, like the recent wild fish vs. hatchery fish debates and the legal challenges to hatcheries for steelhead in WA. That wild and hatchery salmon are the same species seems like a true statement.
Post by: bearpaw on February 02, 2019, 01:18:10 PM
QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
:yeah: Exactly, the hypocrisy is deafening...
Post by: idaho guy on February 02, 2019, 06:16:52 PM
Actually I was referring to his confusion of the nomenclature. Salmon are of the genus Oncorhynchus with 7 different species indicators (in the pacific). For example King salmon are Oncorhynchus tshawytscha while pink salmon are oncorhynchus gorbuscha.QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
Wolves are genus Canis with species Lupis, along side coyotes being genus Canis species latrans, and a few others like dingos which are peer species with Lupis. Sub species don't exist for salmon which bearpaws compares to wolves, implying wolves can't be the same if salmon are different. That isn't true because of subspecies. Wolves have sub species, notably Canis Lupus Familiarus - note the extra subspecies name - which designates dogs are a sub species of wolves not of coyotes. So they really can't be compared in the way he says.
Since this is 10th grade biology I assumed he was talking about something more complex, like the recent wild fish vs. hatchery fish debates and the legal challenges to hatcheries for steelhead in WA. That wild and hatchery salmon are the same species seems like a true statement.
Wtf? There was a different subspecies of wolf here . A different much larger wolf was transplanted. We had wolves here before the transplant that is a documented fact. They felt they were not self sustaining and That wolf is most likely gone.They are now removing the original subspecies to cover up screwing us with a much larger wolf which is a lot more problematic to deal with. Besides dinasour s which are all wild azz guess’s based on ancient bones name one North America animal or fish they have taken 23 subspecies and combined them to 5? I have only seen them “discover “additional sub species. And a lot of the new ones seem to be based on little more than location and size.Its not rocket science it just is what it is. I am going wolf hunting tomorrow that’s all we can do at this point.
Post by: SuperX on February 02, 2019, 06:19:11 PM
I agree that interbreeding will make the sub species disappear, but that's a distinction without a difference. There haven't been more than a small inbred handful of smaller less violent northern rocky wolves for almost 100 years. How do we build it up if we could even identify it in the first place. So while I agree with you both on the lunacy of "wild steelhead" or salmon in this day and age, and I don't think I'm being hypocritical about it. I have no agenda except boredom :) This story was about my home area.QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
:yeah: Exactly, the hypocrisy is deafening...
Post by: bearpaw on February 02, 2019, 06:24:52 PM
I agree that interbreeding will make the sub species disappear, but that's a distinction without a difference. There haven't been more than a small inbred handful of smaller less violent northern rocky wolves for almost 100 years. How do we build it up if we could even identify it in the first place. So while I agree with you both on the lunacy of "wild steelhead" or salmon in this day and age, and I don't think I'm being hypocritical about it. I have no agenda except boredom :) This story was about my home area.QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
:yeah: Exactly, the hypocrisy is deafening...
We didn't have to import wolves from up north, they were already migrating in from lower BC and Alberta naturally. Eniro whackos planted larger northern wolves!
Post by: SuperX on February 03, 2019, 08:56:28 AM
I agree that interbreeding will make the sub species disappear, but that's a distinction without a difference. There haven't been more than a small inbred handful of smaller less violent northern rocky wolves for almost 100 years. How do we build it up if we could even identify it in the first place. So while I agree with you both on the lunacy of "wild steelhead" or salmon in this day and age, and I don't think I'm being hypocritical about it. I have no agenda except boredom :) This story was about my home area.QuoteSpecies are different than subspecies or are you saying hatchery salmon are the same as wild salmon genetically?
Your analogy just made Bearpaw’s case.
Can you tell a wild salmon from a hatchery fish without a DNA sample? I seriously doubt it in Washington. They have been releasing unclipped hatchery fish for decades with the wild salmon.
If they do the same with wolves nothing will stop the interbreeding and it would take a DNA sample to determine which is pure sub species or hybrid combination. And after a few generations what do you have?
:yeah: Exactly, the hypocrisy is deafening...
We didn't have to import wolves from up north, they were already migrating in from lower BC and Alberta naturally. Enviro whackos planted larger northern wolves!
Agree. If wolves show up, I'm OK that they exist, and if they are causing a problem, I insist they be hunted and managed same as game animals, but I see no reason they need to be imported.
There's no endangerment of wolves in north america, there's just people who think there is because they think the US is the same thing as North America. If EVERY wolf in america is really just the same species of wolf, optimized for their local environment to be true, but the same genetically as those that are out of control in Canada and Alaska, then HOW can they be considered endangered? It follows, that if they aren't really endangered in NA, then WHY import them?
Post by: SuperX on February 06, 2019, 05:50:52 PM
hehe
Post by: bearpaw on February 08, 2019, 03:09:25 PM
Post by: SuperX on February 09, 2019, 08:08:44 AM
It's a park, if they don't want to let hunters solve the moose over population problem, then they should let mature take it's course!
In MN moose is a OIL draw, one of the only 2 draws I can remember in the whole state - the other is for one bull elk out of the NW herd that they nurture along. Isle Royale may be one of the spots you can draw to hunt, if they ever recover the moose population enough to have draws again.
Post by: jackelope on February 09, 2019, 08:49:31 AM
It's a park, if they don't want to let hunters solve the moose over population problem, then they should let mature take it's course!
In MN moose is a OIL draw, one of the only 2 draws I can remember in the whole state - the other is for one bull elk out of the NW herd that they nurture along. Isle Royale may be one of the spots you can draw to hunt, if they ever recover the moose population enough to have draws again.
Over the winter of 2016-2017, surveys indicated 1600 moose on the island. Scientists said the population could double over the next 3-4 years. They indicated a concern for the health of the trees in the forest due to so many moose and indicated a concern for moose starving to death. When is the population recovered enough to hunt them? Oh and it’s a national park. Look at the mountain goats on the OP. A literal act of congress to hunt them didn’t happen.
The googler gave me my info.
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/outdoors/2017/04/18/moose-population-isle-royale/100592498/
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on February 09, 2019, 09:32:33 AM
https://northernwoodlands.org/outside_story/article/where-beaver-lead-moose-follow
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on February 09, 2019, 09:58:10 AM
I agree that interbreeding will make the sub species disappear, but that's a distinction without a difference. There haven't been more than a small inbred handful of smaller less violent northern rocky wolves for almost 100 years. How do we build it up if we could even identify it in the first place. So while I agree with you both on the lunacy of "wild steelhead" or salmon in this day and age, and I don't think I'm being hypocritical about it. I have no agenda except boredom :) This story was about my home area.
Not necessarily. If the original wolves were smaller and "less violent" there was a genetic reason for this. If interbreeding occurred, those genetic traits will still be in the gene pool and if the genetic reason still exists, those genes may eventually rise up again as the ones that make the animals most successful at surviving. For example, for the most part, animals of the same species in North America are smaller in body mass the further south you go. Has nothing to do with feed and everything to do with retaining heat in cold northern climes and being able to cool off in southern climes. A good example is Whitetail deer. Northern Whitetails tend to be much larger bodied than southern Whitetails. Body mass helps keep you warm in long cold winters. As for aggressiveness, that tends to come from how hard an animal has to work for it's food. Take grizzlies for example. In Alaska, interior grizzlies don't have the food sources that the coastal grizzlies, or Brownies, have. Genetically, they are the same bear. But the coastal bears have massive salmon runs to feed on. The interior bears are always on the move looking for food. And while it's possible to have a run in with a coastal Brownie that turns out badly, the interior brownies are more likely to hunt you down just to eat you. They are much more aggressive than a coastal brownie.
As for wolves being smaller than the transplanted ones, you must be forgetting the Great Plains Wolf, also called the Buffalo Wolf. They were wiped out in the early 1900s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plains_wolf
Post by: SuperX on February 09, 2019, 10:43:04 AM
It's a park, if they don't want to let hunters solve the moose over population problem, then they should let mature take it's course!
In MN moose is a OIL draw, one of the only 2 draws I can remember in the whole state - the other is for one bull elk out of the NW herd that they nurture along. Isle Royale may be one of the spots you can draw to hunt, if they ever recover the moose population enough to have draws again.
Over the winter of 2016-2017, surveys indicated 1600 moose on the island. Scientists said the population could double over the next 3-4 years. They indicated a concern for the health of the trees in the forest due to so many moose and indicated a concern for moose starving to death. When is the population recovered enough to hunt them? Oh and it’s a national park. Look at the mountain goats on the OP. A literal act of congress to hunt them didn’t happen.
The googler gave me my info.
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/outdoors/2017/04/18/moose-population-isle-royale/100592498/
If they could move the moose and "transplant" them in to the mainland they would be better off than trying to import wolves to do it for them, especially when they can just walk to shore on the ice. While there are tons of moose on the island, the state herd has collapsed dramatically over the past 10-15 years. According to the numbers you posted and the 2018 areal survey estimations (90% confidence) of NE Minnesota, the island holds almost as many moose as the whole arrowhead region.
For some reason IR is treated delicately when it comes to game management, like maybe the year round residents don't allow it? I don't recall hearing of anyone hunting the island for deer or moose, they are very tame up there, they only see tourists as a rule.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 09, 2019, 10:52:35 AM
Post by: SuperX on February 09, 2019, 12:10:59 PM
I thought I heard a few years ago that the prediction was the wolves would starve to death because the moose have liver fluke and the population was crashing.something(s) is killing the moose, there are a million theories from flukes to ticks to wolves to weather. the cow/calf ratio is always below 50% with a calf, usually in the 30's.