royden
Senior Board Member
Posts: 1,349
|
Post by royden on Feb 26, 2008 22:05:08 GMT -5
I'm sure the two most effective means of controling wolves in the past (trapping and poisoning) are out  . Mt got sued monday according to news reports ... so the hunt here is on hold ... I was talking to a lion hunter and he made sense though. Our season should mimic the other predator seasons (Feb-april) - give the hunters time and we WILL figure out how to thin the population out.   I've got a few ideas .... |
|
smj
Forum Guide
Traditional Council
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by smj on Feb 26, 2008 23:58:57 GMT -5
There won't be any true "management" until TRAPPING of wolves is permitted. Allowing a hunting season is a step in the right direction. But, as stated, sport hunting probably is not going to be too effective in making a dent in wolf populations. I know the pro-wolf pinkos will absolutely scream. And that in itself may keep trapping out of the equation for wolf control.  They banned trapping with leg-hold traps in the State of Colroado. They put pictures of cute dog in traps where there would be no reason to set such a trap - like a #4 along a golfcourse pond - and show pictures of the poor dog waisting away. This leaves live traps, and instant death traps like the conibear. I used the conibear traps for muskrat when I was a kid - I don't think they make one to take a 150# wolf. www.nwtrappers.com/catalog/traps/ov/ovc.aspI suppose a deadfall might work, maybe a well placed snare - but wolves got to where you could not catch them in traps once they were hit hard. At least, the last time around this seems to have been the case from what I've read on it. They are tough to trap with a leg hold. Seems like poison is the ticket, but I doubt that one will ever fly again! For those of you who can trap the wolf in your area - I suggest taking a peek at these - For some reason I can't get this link to work right, hence, go this page and type in "wolf" in the "advanced search" box. (Green box in the upper left) www.nwtrappers.com/catalog/ |
|
|
|
Post by BT on Feb 28, 2008 16:17:20 GMT -5
Here is a statement from a friend of mine that I have not talked to in a very long time but who is very educated on her end of the issue.
I am not putting this out there for anything other than another point of view.
|
|
royden
Senior Board Member
Posts: 1,349
|
Post by royden on Feb 28, 2008 20:17:58 GMT -5
Gotta admit she has some valid points  So I looked for a knife gutted trophy ... saw a cow that showed a small cut or tear on the belly ... but every thing else looked to be well torn up. I looked for a road kill ... huh? snowcat's on an unplowed road - hows a car gonna kill an elk there? the only validit point I can agree with is that the video is made with an agenda which will of course get the oppositions hair up. Predator kills are nasty - pack kills (whether domestic dogs or wolves) are really nasty because the critter is eaten alive, bite by bite. Lions have to kill their prey cause they are single and dinner would run away if they didn't kill it. My only concern with the whole issue is that we get a handle on the number of wolves we have and get them back into some sort of balance - a few is ok; a lot is not. |
|
nodog
Junior Member
Posts: 152
|
Post by nodog on Feb 28, 2008 20:38:07 GMT -5
Here is a statement from a friend of mine that I have not talked to in a very long time but who is very educated on her end of the issue. I am not putting this out there for anything other than another point of view. Well I for one have believed for a long time that I can learn something from anyone. I thank her for the info. I'll keep her "very educated" info in mind. ;D |
|
nodog
Junior Member
Posts: 152
|
Post by nodog on Feb 28, 2008 20:41:13 GMT -5
Predator kills are nasty - pack kills (whether domestic dogs or wolves) are really nasty because the critter is eaten alive, bite by bite. Your just showing your bias, they'll "scavange a meal". LOL ;D |
|
|
|
Post by BT on Feb 28, 2008 21:00:37 GMT -5
|
|
smj
Forum Guide
Traditional Council
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by smj on Feb 28, 2008 22:29:28 GMT -5
Well here we go... the same problem exists on both sides - we all think the other side is stacking the deck in their favor. To be honest, pictures of cut up animals does not do much for me. Gross pics have a shock value that can be negative more times than positive. The other problem is whose "experts" do we believe in? The ones that say everything is OK, or the ones that say hunting as we know it is about to be gone? Last, how do we tell what is valid and what is hype? How do you make that determination? Answer that, and the facts step forward by themselves. To just off hand renounce anyones information without checking with the known facts is wrong to do so.
Some number of wolves in some of the national parks is probably the right thing to do. However, the numbers of wolves can not be controlled. The wolf they introduced is not the wolf that lived here before, at 150 pounds it is 50% bigger (I think I said 30% earlier, I goofed the math, from ~100 pounds to 150 pounds) No one knows how this will end up. However, to answer my above question about how do we know - we watch the numbers of big game animals and compare notes from pre-wolf to post wolf arrival. Time will provide an unbiased answer. I wonder if it will make anyone happy though... If you love seeing big game animals out there, you might not see them anymore. (In fact, Yellowstone elk and deer stay in the woods more now to make it harder for the wolves to get them. Plus, there are a lot fewer animals to begin with. If you like to hunt, there might not be much to hunt for anymore. Either way, the big game animals loose in this.
People say that it is OK if the wolf kills these animals, just so long as the animals are not hunted by man. It is the wolfs nature to do so...
Chief Sitting Bull said "When the buffalo are gone, we will hunt mice, for we are hunters..." At the risk of taking something out of context - I think he would have argued that it is our nature, too.
I'll shut up now. Sorry. Kind of...
|
|
|
|
Post by mtshooter on Feb 29, 2008 7:24:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BT on Feb 29, 2008 8:07:42 GMT -5
I dont know why you always want to "shut up" when you are on a roll ;D Very very well said SMJ  I wanted to interject the other side of the coin because (as you say) you need both sides in any argument in order to find the truth. By offering an opinion that is off the reservation , perhaps it will give pause....maybe it wont. Pause may find reason or it may not but we dont get merit for our own beliefs by simply stating that it is a belief  |
|
. 
I've got a few ideas ....
