Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Preparedness & Survival' started by druiseeker, Feb 12, 2018.
third power of S . . .
Wolves had there chance. And were pushed out by a better predator. Who's interests they dined upon.
They cant seam to play even halfway nice, like bears and mountain lions.
So they gota go.
I'll say this and leave it at that! I see all sides of the story and agree with things on both sides.
I do know this if I see one I'm not going to assume he's friendly. My guess is they are hunting and I'm dinner so I will leave with a couple new rugs for the man cave!
Just a question. I don't mean anything by it.
But have you noticed how much harder the ground is in the wintertime?
^ This. If I could hit the "Like" button more than once, I would, like a few hundred times.
Beyond that, I've been, more or less, following this in the newspaper Capital Press. Though, due to our location, we're not personally impacted (at least yet), I can most certainly understand the concern expressed by those who are.
Wolves are cool. It’s more fun being in the woods knowing I’m not at the top of the food chain.
There is a reason why wolves have been vilified through out history. They are a direct threat to humans and their livestock. During WW1 many soldiers in the Balkan countries were killed and eaten by wolves and they were armed. Wolves do not play nice, I would love to see a bunch of wolf lovers spend a night with a wolf pack in the forest. The survivors if any might have a different view.
This was a member of a pack of bear dogs. They were tracked down and attacked by a wolf pack. I have had good friends who were houndsmen for 40 years who quit running hounds altogether because it was a death sentence for the hounds in wolf country. There's no such thing as a good wolf. Canadian grey wolves are not native to the lower US. They are an invasive species planted by wildlife "experts". These are 200 pound predators evolved to take down bison and musk ox. They are not the 130 pound native timber wolves that they have replaced. They are wiping out elk and deer all across the northern states.
Wow. Thanks for all the input. This has definitely been an eye opener for me. I've started doing more reading and it seems that other than some extremist environmentalists, not many people who have had any real contact with the animals actually want them around.
Read the stories in the Capital Press.
As a former childhood laborer on a small registered Black Angus ranch the introduction of non indigenous species like the gray wolf is bad juju. Really bad juju.
Hell, let's just start breeding Cougars with saber tooth DNA....at least the Sabres were indigenous. But this would be a cruel joke on the homeless population which is growing everywhere.
I disagree with a lot of what has been said here as I think it defines wolves by their extremes rather than their normal behavior.
I'll be lazy and use Wikipedia as a source, apologizing ahead of time, but for example with regards to the "200 lb. wolves":
The gray wolf averages 85-99 lbs
The yukon wolf averages 97-111 lbs
Even the extinct dire wolf only averaged around 150 lbs
Of course those are averages; there is always some sort of distribution or curve, and outliers. I have anecdotally heard about 175 lb. wolves and seen pictures to match, but you can also root around and find 400 lb. humans. These are the exceptions, not the rule. I don't think there are whole packs of 200 lb. wolves out there, or at least I haven't seen any credible evidence of it. FWIW, I have also lived in British Columbia and I haven't seen any notable differences in the wolves there, although there is a theory that they increase in size (even within a species) in proportion with distance from the equator.
Likewise with the behavior. Having lived with malamutes and having been involved with a wolf rescue, wolves also have an entirely different side to them than simply being aggressive. In certain company they can be very kind and playful, family (pack) oriented animals, and their behavior can be very similar to northern breeds of dogs. That isn't to say that they would make good pets, but if you have lived with a dog, wolves will exhibit many of the same traits of love and loyalty to each other that you enjoy from Fido. They are extremely intelligent animals, and it is a great thing to observe.
That also isn't to say that wolves are all fun and games. Wolves have two very different sides to them, depending on whether they are aggressive towards you or not, and that just depends on the situation. I wouldn't want to be in front of a pack of angry wolves just as much as I wouldn't want to be in front of a pack of angry anything -- two legs or four. Simply put though, wolf attacks are also statistically rare, especially in North America. So rare that they can be cataloged in a relatively small table. You will note that most of these attacks take place in Russia where the density of wolves is substantially higher than anything seen in North America. The relatively few wolves that we have here (after the U.S. Government sponsored genocide up through the 1960s) are nothing close to what exists in Russia, so I don't think it would be fair to draw any parallels to the futures of wolf recovery. In the Pacific Northwest, they are simply coming back from the very brink of (human caused) extinction.
What it comes down to is this:
Wolves and humans were historically in conflict for the same food sources. Humans tended (and still do tend) herds of domesticated livestock that were/are an opportune source of food for wolves; wolves, like any other animal, need to eat, and so they do. Given the one tool at their disposal -- biting -- kills aren't necessarily going to be pretty either. They don't make clean, sanitary, one shot kills, but they don't have access to the same tools that the other two or four legged predators use to do this.
I think it's relatively disingenuous to sensationalize the visual process of them killing. What it really comes down to is that they're in competition with humans for food, and humans don't seem to take that very well.
Anyone can certainly beat the drum of the apex predator and claim that humans have a right to kill anything that competes with them or gets in their way. That's an approach, obviously one which some people embrace. However I don't think it is the only approach, or honestly, morally supportable. I don't think it jives with the respect that humans show for each others' lives, but somehow fail to extend beyond the boundaries of their species. With human ingenuity and modern tools and technology, I'd hope that people could rise above an approach of "they ate our food, let's bubblegum them up."
Just as background, I'm not a city dweller. I don't currently live in wolf territory, but we do have cougars and black bears around here on a regular basis and I carry a 12 ga. or a .45-70 to protect myself when I'm out alone. I'm at least moderately familiar with the danger of co-existing with predators. I also wouldn't mind living in an area with wolves. I will willingly put my money where my mouth is. I think there is a lot more tangible risk, by orders of magnitude, walking around with all the junkies, street kids, and Black Lives rioters in downtown PDX. It's an interesting point of comparison, though, that nobody would seriously suggest an eradication program for them, right?
I wouldn't suggest an "eradication" program, I DO suggest an initiative to arm potential victims (all American citizens) and maintaining a staunch innocent until proven guilty attitude for enforcement of the law. While many victims of the "zombies" in those scenarios "only" get robbed, raped, disfigured and/or crippled instead of killed, I see nothing wrong with preventing those who have given up honor from harming others in the future. Chances are said individuals WILL do it again. If someone has gone so far as to give up enough regard for the law or have had enough loss of control to commit many of the heinous acts committed in said scenarios, they should be doing so with the full expectation that their next victim will respond with with lethal force.
I see the same with the wolf situation. Yes they might not be very human aggressive, but does that pet or other piece of livestock that belongs to someone, have any less of a moral right to live than a wolf?
I don't advocate another genocide of the species. While cruel, I DO advocate the immediate termination of any individual wolf/pack that has attacked any human, pet, or other livestock as they do NOT have a track record of getting along with mankind. Bears and cougars get along with humans fairly well. Wolves should too. Maybe we need some Darwinism here.
Have not read the thread yet, but let me guess; 99% here are opposed to wolves (I would guess they are opposed to cougars and bears and coyotes too).
In general I support having predators in the wild - including wolves.
Yes violent amimals are a great danger and they kill beef cows.
Indy the Timberwolf (dog):
So do feral dogs, and coyotes, and cougars and bears.
2008 a friend a mile away from where I lived said a neighbor moved out of their [foreclosed] house and abandoned their wolf pet there. She was feeding him but he was stand offish. I watched him for a while and went to the fence and laid on my back.[submissive] After a while the wolf came to me and once he sniffed me, I waited a while and left. Repeating the procedure several times in a week I finally offered my hand. My friends then had the wolf as a pet and even the vet says it is a 100% wolf. I have taken care of him when they traveled, A nice animal actually kinda like a dog but different. 1)The best thing was sitting on the deck with my arm around his shoulder and we would howl together. 2) Children would know that it was a Wolf and their parents would tell the kids is wasn't a Wolf.
I'm confused. If you have a pet wolf or someone you know has one and you howl together then how is it you can say.
I know that there are two sides of the spectrum but brother you hit both
Progressive/Enviro-Mental urban dwellers have been enabling the predator populations of their cities to explode for a number of years now. Being that they're all about "fairness"....
....they are simply trying to make it so we can experience their same trepidation when we walk in the woods. They've already managed to share their urban clutter and pretty much ruin our wide-open vistas with their wind farms, and now they're working on making our woods more like their downtowns at night.
I think they're actually expecting us to be grateful