Another round fired in Wolf War

[Buddhalux]

Bring them back is one thing, introducing a new apex predator that never exhisted here is something completely different.

 

[mortre]

Saying they are a new apex predator that never existed here before is a bit of a stretch. I'll give you it's a different strain of apex predator, but with that you have to admit that the closest thing we currently have to an apex predator are the coyotes. Cougar populations are not really high enough to fill that niche, and the coyotes wreak more havac on the newbornes as oposed to preying on weak adults. Neither situation is perfect, but it's what we have got, like it or not; and it's our own fault.

Also, the wolves in idaho will cross/are crossing the borders like it or not. Are only real option is management as a game animal. Shoot on sight is illegal and I seriously doubt it will be legalized. If people decide to take matters in their own hands and shoot/shovel/shut up, frankley I say they deserve every last day in jail they can possibly be given, they've earned it.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

 

[BroncoFan]

Saying they are a new apex predator that never existed here before is a bit of a stretch. I'll give you it's a different strain of apex predator, but with that you have to admit that the closest thing we currently have to an apex predator are the coyotes. Cougar populations are not really high enough to fill that niche, and the coyotes wreak more havac on the newbornes as oposed to preying on weak adults. Neither situation is perfect, but it's what we have got, like it or not; and it's our own fault.

Also, the wolves in idaho will cross/are crossing the borders like it or not. Are only real option is management as a game animal. Shoot on sight is illegal and I seriously doubt it will be legalized. If people decide to take matters in their own hands and shoot/shovel/shut up, frankley I say they deserve every last day in jail they can possibly be given, they've earned it.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

Morte - I'd suggest taking the time to view this video. These are not your Great Grandfather's wolves that roamed the PNW. There is no semblance of "management." The original agreement on "reintroduction" has been betrayed time and again by the Feds and Enviros. These Canadian Grey wolves are much larger than the original genus. They are in no way "endangered." How can you take an animal across a state or national border where they are plentiful and suddenly call them "endangered?" It's emotion, politics and control - not management. They have decimated the game populations in Idaho where I grew up.
Big Game Forever Wolf Video - YouTube

 

[mortre]

I agree 100 percent. However, it doesn't change anything I said. What we need is management though. Yes, unmanaged wolf populations have decimated big game populations. But on the flip side more than 1 species were saved by the wolves' introduction. Habitats were being destroyed by those over abundant populations of big game. That gets conviently forgotten by the big game crowd, just like the wolf lovers like to leave crap out to. Both camps are filthy liars pushing their agenda and to **** with anything else. Ecosystems are a delicate balancing act, and while we have done amazing things to rebuild our game populations over the last 100 years, the ecosystems as a whole, are still fubar in most of the country.

Hoof rot
Cwd
The coyote epidemic

Dig into the information produced by both, use some deductive reasoning. Now that montana and idaho have wolf tags out we should be able to pull some interesting data over the next few years, *if* they are able to slash the populations down to size. Complete removal of the only real apex predtor (again) would (continue) doing just as much damage as leaving them unregulated.


Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

 

[Buddhalux]

So with your train of thought then if a black bear population was endangered and they "reintroduced" grizzly bears to the same location to boost the population numbers then you'd be fine with that? Do you think that that wouldn't have a negative impact on the current ecosystem?

 

[mortre]

That example is not even in the same ballpark...

The actual strain of wolves that used to roam this area is not endangered, it's extinct. Period. Has been for nearly 100 years.

A more apt analogy would be if the North american black bear population was extinct, could they reintroduce Grizzly's instead. Possibly, I think there would be better options though. Just like their was better options for a wolf reintroduction. They chose the Canadian breed instead though, however flawed their reasoning for that may have been.

We can sit here all day and cry about which breed should have been reintroduced and about how states should have taken over management according to the original plan. But that leaves us right back where we started with nothing to show for it but wasted time. All the wholesale poaching recommendations on this thread does is strengthen the position of the people that keep pushing for them to stay listed and prevent management by the states.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Okay mortre, how about this then.
The ODFW says the eastern brook trout is an invasive species that is competing for food and habitat with the indigenous cutthroat and rainbows.
Therefore they want them eliminated from Oregon's ecosystem.
So how different is that?
They are still a trout.
They aren't competing for food any more then the wolf competes with cougar and bear.

Yet instead of calling a spade a spade, in the case of the Canadian grey wolf being an invasive species, they are knuckling under to animal rights groups and the federal gov't. (what happened to state's rights?) over the introduction of a vastly superior version of the wolf.

There are species of wolf that approximate our original version much more closely, but they don't want that one.
Why on earth would that be?

The parallel between the two is undeniable.

So the only possible explanation is that it boils down to politics and money, and the sportsman, who has supported game and wildland management for years being told to take the back seat and shut up.
All because the HSUS, PETA, The Audubon Society et al have the ear(s) and wallets of liberal politicians and activist judges.

Meanwhile your Pittman-Robertson funds are being used against you.

 

[mortre]

Does it boil down to money and politics, yes. I wholeheartedly agree. Do you think the Federal Gov will fess up that it's think tank was wrong? Do you think they will then pony up the money to remove the wolves and restart the wolf reintroduction program from scratch? In the middle of a huge budget crisis none the less. Even without the various groups lobbying for them not to they wouldn't. And if you think they will, you have a lot more faith in them than I do.

At least in the short term, we need management. Restarting the program is the right answer, yes. I wholeheartedly agree with that. But it does no good to ignore unfettered invasive populations in the short run. Poaching will only prevent the states from managing them at all, as that is a prime excuse to keep them listed. All you will hear is "You can't delist the wolves! They are being poached at a incredible rate despite being listed. If you delist them, even more will be poached because the repercussions for being caught will be minor!". And yes, Government has a tendency to listen to emotional flawed logic like that. As to the question about why they introduced Mackenzie wolves, I believe their reasoning was that they were the ones most likely to expand into this range without outside intervention. Pretty flawed logic, and yes, government listened to it. No surprise there. Remember, these are the same people that were worried that increases in troops in Guam would capsize the island... seems like speeding up the original damage as opposed to mitigating it. But hey, I'm just a dumb hick that likes to shoot stuff, right?

What good will it do anyone if the elk/deer populations are wiped out because *sportsmen* are poaching the current wolves while trying to get the laws changed? What sense does that even make? If *sportsmen* are not going to follow the laws, why are they complaining about them. They obviously don't mean squat to them anyway, so they should shut their mouth and quit complaining. And yes, *sportsmen* is tongue in cheek. That isn't directed at everyone here, just the ones that want to ignore the laws do their own thing.

Frankly, if your not following the game laws, your not a sportsman IMO. Your nothing but a poacher, pure and simple.

 

[mortre]

That got a little long and heated. So to clarify, this is what *I* think should be done.

1. Management needs to be passed to the states. That's first and formost. State management needs to slash the wolf population down to 20 to 25 percent of it's current level, if not less.

2. We need to give it time and allow the ungulate populations to normalize and come back up to management goals. Hopefully the coyote populations will be decreased during this time. Have their even been any studies on the coyote populations in the high density wolf areas? I'd like to see that information.

3. Once that has happened the wolf reintroduction program needs to start back up by bringing in a more appropriate species of wolves, but leave management in the hands of the state. States should close the GMU's where the new, smaller wolves are introduced to allow them to take hold. All the while increasing tag numbers and decreasing costs to increase harvests in legal wolf GMU's to decrease/wipe out the populations of these current larger and more predacious Mackenzie's.

 

[Dave Workman]

Okay mortre, how about this then.
The ODFW says the eastern brook trout is an invasive species that is competing for food and habitat with the indigenous cutthroat and rainbows.
Therefore they want them eliminated from Oregon's ecosystem.
So how different is that?
They are still a trout.

Actually the brookie is a member of the char family. It is not a true trout at all.

 

[mortre]

Speaking of trout, and somewhat on subject, Brook trout are native to the area I grew up (Northeast TN). And were mostly replaced by stocked rainbow's in area's where the brookies were lost due to habitat destruction. Pretty big size difference between those two species.

I have to admit that I do like catching brookies around here, brings back fond memories. If they are an invasive species that are causing problems for native ecosystems, they should go.

 

[BroncoFan]

Speaking of trout, and somewhat on subject, Brook trout are native to the area I grew up (Northeast TN). And were mostly replaced by stocked rainbow's in area's where the brookies were lost due to habitat destruction. Pretty big size difference between those two species.

I have to admit that I do like catching brookies around here, brings back fond memories. If they are an invasive species that are causing problems for native ecosystems, they should go.

Mortre - Hope you don't feel piled on - I'm sure you're a stand up guy and I appreciate your point of view, but your circular line of logic is exactly what drives me nuts about the other side of this issue. In an earlier post you say it's ok to bring in an animal into an ecosystem where it's never been (Canadian Grey Wolf) even though it's unmanaged (wishing it to be managed doesn't make it so) decimating the native ecosystems (Ie., game animals). In the next breath you say an invasive species that are causing problems for native ecosystems should go (Brook trout).

The original wolf is gone - I'll give you that its extinction was probably not a good thing but two wrongs do not make a right!

BTW - so the brookies have moved out the dolly varden. So what? What "damage" has been done? Especially relative to the decimation that the Grey Wolf is doing to the game populations? The water is still clear, the racoons still have fish, and fishing opportunities for sportsman is excellent.

 

[BroncoFan]

A little size perspective...

 

[mortre]

I'm sure you mean well also. But if you go back and read my posts you'll see there is no circular logic in my arguments. As a matter of fact you will see that what you are stating is my posistion, isn't even close to what I have said.

And all your points against what you *think* my position is, can be applied diectly against your last post...

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

 

[Jamie6.5]

Actually the brookie is a member of the char family. It is not a true trout at all.

So are the Bull and lake trout, as well as the dolly varden.
But ODFW still regulates them as trout.

 

[hermannr]

Well back to the OP. First for me, saw a single wolf trailing a deer on my way to the mailbox. Probably a yound male as he would probably go 100lbs. Been wondering why we are not seeing as many deer (or turkey) this year....We are only 11 miles south of the Canadian border so I am not that surprised, but we have lived on this mountain 6 1/2 years, and this is a first for a wolf sighting.

I guess that will be just another reason (beside the bear reason) to carry the 1/2 mile out to the county road to get the mail.