Big Game Hunting Moose, elk, mulies, caribou, bear, goats, and sheep are all covered here.
 Nosler

Wolves and elk

Old 04-17-2010, 08:06 AM
  #81  
Spike
 
robert4570's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location:
Posts: 94
Default

Its all about money ,
All of these predator programs have a money trail with them at some point. Any critter that is under ESA protection has lots of grant money and other funding behind them. There are folks who make a living studying endangered species , be it predator's or mice. Never heard of any lack of funding when a rancher looses live stock to a wolf or in our case here in south florida to panther.
Once the money dries up , its over for the predators.



Wolf Wars come to Bowsite!
As the west struggles with less elk and more wolves we threw out a controversial hypothetical scenario. Over 600 responses in just 2 days!
Read Now

Last edited by robert4570; 04-17-2010 at 08:15 AM.
robert4570 is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 07:29 AM
  #82  
Spike
 
macman99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 37
Default

Actually, the wolves are not protected, they have been removed from the ESA, the antis are suing to put them back on the ESA. SSS era has passed us by, it is time to focus on strict management principles. However, what are folks to do if the wolf is placed back on the ESA? We currently sit at 6x the poulation the ESA called for.
They are actually still listed in some states - MN, WI, and MI among them. The proposed de-listing did not go through because some states (I forget which one(s)) did not have a viable management plan in place. Or maybe they were delisted, but in any case, they are still federally protected under ESA for the time being.

The thing that shocked my the most is how many "hunters" are supporting the pro wolf movement with sympathethic (pathetic in my view) statements about how they love to see wolves in the wild, many near their homes, and how they can't see any reason why they should be hunted. My guess is these "hunters" could really care less how much game they see on a hunt or if they are ever successful again in harvesting an animal.
You think hunters who don't hate wolves are "pathetic?"

What a coincidence: I think the same of hunters who think they're the only people in this country who should have a say about what goes on in our forests and woods. This may be a news flash to you, but ALL Americans have the same rights to enjoy the outdoors that hunters do. And they vote, too.

So lets just keep killing wolves illegally - or cheering on the killing and supporting it with the "SSS" stupidity - and maybe we can reap the backlash of it from the non-hunting public: more lawsuits, wolf populations increasing as the suits drag on, and once they're fully delisted everywhere, we just keep hating 'em and killing 'em and teaching our kids "SSS" until they get listed again. Then our kids get to deal with the same cycle and we'll just keep blaming the "antis" for our own ignorance. Good plan. Pure genius.

And we do this why? So that by eliminating wolves, we can make the U.S. into a giant hunting preserve (?), even though the vast majority of outdoor users may not even be hunters. Pretty selfish, not to mention unrealistic and unlikely to occur.

I hunt mainly because I enjoy being outside. That's the "success," for me and for a lot of other hunters. If I get something, great. If I don't, I certainly don't think of it as an "unsuccessful" day. If you're hunting just to kill sh*&, you might want to re-evaluate why you hunt or worse, what example you might be setting for others.
macman99 is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 07:40 AM
  #83  
Typical Buck
 
rather_be_huntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cedar Valley Utah
Posts: 977
Default

Originally Posted by macman99


You think hunters who don't hate wolves are "pathetic?"
That's not what I said...since you're putting words in my mouth there is no sense in addressing the rest.

In fact after reading your rant you're not even close to understanding what I said. Please go back and reread then let's try this again.
rather_be_huntin is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 08:06 AM
  #84  
Typical Buck
 
rather_be_huntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cedar Valley Utah
Posts: 977
Default

What the heck, I'm a little bored so I'll address this even though i have to reiterate you are WAY off.

Originally Posted by macman99

You think hunters who don't hate wolves are "pathetic?"
I never said that. You have me quoted so that's obvious. What I DID say is that it's pathetic to hear other hunters say that "wolves shouldn't be hunted." That's my opinion and you can say what ever you like about that. I'm sorry but if you're a hunter and you say that you are clearly confused and uneducated on the matter. You're an in the closet anti.......are you about to come out??

Originally Posted by macman99

What a coincidence: I think the same of hunters who think they're the only people in this country who should have a say about what goes on in our forests and woods. This may be a news flash to you, but ALL Americans have the same rights to enjoy the outdoors that hunters do. And they vote, too.
Agreed. I never said otherwise. However it should be noted that most hunters never had a voice in the reintroduction of the wolf.

Originally Posted by macman99

So lets just keep killing wolves illegally - or cheering on the killing and supporting it with the "SSS" stupidity - and maybe we can reap the backlash of it from the non-hunting public: more lawsuits, wolf populations increasing as the suits drag on, and once they're fully delisted everywhere, we just keep hating 'em and killing 'em and teaching our kids "SSS" until they get listed again. Then our kids get to deal with the same cycle and we'll just keep blaming the "antis" for our own ignorance. Good plan. Pure genius.
I have never advocated SSS, never. In my last post I did however say that SSS is not really an issue outside of the hunting community.

Originally Posted by macman99
And we do this why? So that by eliminating wolves, we can make the U.S. into a giant hunting preserve (?), even though the vast majority of outdoor users may not even be hunters. Pretty selfish, not to mention unrealistic and unlikely to occur.
Wolves are here to stay. What I would like to see is sound managment practices that takes all species into account. What I am frustrated and angered about is the political battle taking place that IS NOT taking into account the effect the wolf is having on other species and the fact that the wolf numbers ARE ABOVE REINTRO OBJECTIVES. If you really are a hunter (and not some troll anti crashing our boards) and have a brain in your head you will see the writing on the wall. The wolf is part of a plan to abolish hunting. Now can you see why supporting the wolf as a hunter makes one look a bit pathetic? You are sleeping with the enemy in essence. What's the deal with the "hunting preserve" comment? Dude this is hunting forum where we talk about hunting issues. Some of your comments are seriously in left field.

Originally Posted by macman99
I hunt mainly because I enjoy being outside. That's the "success," for me and for a lot of other hunters. If I get something, great. If I don't, I certainly don't think of it as an "unsuccessful" day. If you're hunting just to kill sh*&, you might want to re-evaluate why you hunt or worse, what example you might be setting for others.
Come on....."hunting just to kill sh*&"?!?! Really?!? you aren't even trying to address the issue, you're whole post is just you trying to be inflamatory. Rather than retaliate I choose to make you look silly. Nobody is real hunter if success is measured based on "kills". But on the other hand are you really hunting if you head up the hills with a bunch of guns, orange vests, and camping gear if there is no game in the area?

Seriously dude this issue is about preserving all species at a HEALTHY level. The wolf is over objective and there are lot deeper issues than SSS. Don't pin the SSS badge on me, I haven't said that once in this discussion.

Last edited by rather_be_huntin; 04-22-2010 at 09:09 AM.
rather_be_huntin is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 09:18 AM
  #85  
Spike
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 37
Default

It was my understanding at the time of reintroduction that they were being reintroduced so that they could be managed. If left on the endangered species list and allowed their ongoing expansion southward wildlife officials would have their hands tied. The whole point of bringing them back was to be able to control what was already happening. So much for that.........
They are here in Oregon now. Despite being trapped and relocated and road killed, along with numerous sightings our state has tried to deny their presence for years. And that is the real problem as far as I'm concerned. As a hunter I can tolerate wolves, but to me they are not a game animal and do not deserve special protections as a game animal nor should their presence be hidden or covered up. Solid wolf managment would only stipulate qutoas in my oppinion. If Idaho had a goal of 300 wolves, they should have started removing animals when that goal was acheived. Now we have the problem too and it comes at a time where our elk and deer herds are already in a substantial decline due to predation from cats, bears and habitat loss. A wolf tag shouldn't cost more than the paper it is written on, everyone should have the oppurtunity to get one, and there should be no seasons and no restrictions. When the management goal is reached by zone just shut it down till next year.
cataraft is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 09:26 AM
  #86  
Typical Buck
 
rather_be_huntin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cedar Valley Utah
Posts: 977
Default

Originally Posted by cataraft
It was my understanding at the time of reintroduction that they were being reintroduced so that they could be managed. If left on the endangered species list and allowed their ongoing expansion southward wildlife officials would have their hands tied. The whole point of bringing them back was to be able to control what was already happening. So much for that.........
They are here in Oregon now. Despite being trapped and relocated and road killed, along with numerous sightings our state has tried to deny their presence for years. And that is the real problem as far as I'm concerned. As a hunter I can tolerate wolves, but to me they are not a game animal and do not deserve special protections as a game animal nor should their presence be hidden or covered up. Solid wolf managment would only stipulate qutoas in my oppinion. If Idaho had a goal of 300 wolves, they should have started removing animals when that goal was acheived. Now we have the problem too and it comes at a time where our elk and deer herds are already in a substantial decline due to predation from cats, bears and habitat loss. A wolf tag shouldn't cost more than the paper it is written on, everyone should have the oppurtunity to get one, and there should be no seasons and no restrictions. When the management goal is reached by zone just shut it down till next year.
That's the way I see it as well cataraft. The wolf was treated with kid gloves because it obviously had such low numbers during reintro. Now that wolf is firmly established I too do not understand why it keeps being treated as if it's in a "fragile" state and needs all this protection.

The answer IMHO is the anti's and political battle that has ensued. The policies in the West with the wolf have little to do with sound management practices taking into consideration all species.

Many don't hate the wolf because it has teeth and eats elk, many hate the wolf because of it's current status and what it represents.
rather_be_huntin is offline  
Old 04-22-2010, 11:44 AM
  #87  
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
 
genesis27:3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: 30 miles from park city UT on 1,500 acres.
Posts: 884
Default

Originally Posted by macman99


I hunt mainly because I enjoy being outside. That's the "success," for me and for a lot of other hunters. If I get something, great. If I don't, I certainly don't think of it as an "unsuccessful" day. If you're hunting just to kill sh*&, you might want to re-evaluate why you hunt or worse, what example you might be setting for others.
Dude! seriously? cmon!
genesis27:3 is offline  
Old 04-23-2010, 09:02 PM
  #88  
Fork Horn
 
finnbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kittitas, Wa.
Posts: 462
Default yep

Originally Posted by genesis27:3
Dude! seriously? cmon!

Duude...... yes really...I don't think you've hunted much have U???
at 58 yrs I've gotten 14 elk I don't know how many deer ...but I do know I have came home more times M/T handed than with meat.....but I was HUNTING and that my friend is what it's all about!!!!!!!!! It's about U the hills and friends...not killin
finnbear is offline  
Old 04-24-2010, 05:16 AM
  #89  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
Default

Originally Posted by tangozulu
So you would get rid of the blackies, cats and grizzlies outside the parks. Od course this would kill off the grizzlies in short order within the parks too.
Why are some hunter so intollerant of the wild continueing to exist as it was created? Thirty years ago we would have been.
Okay, I've been away for awhile.

TZ, I suggest you take a step back from your position for a moment and read once more what I posted. I did not - I say again, DID NOT - infer the elimination of blackies, cats, and grizzlies outside the parks. That you appear to have jumped so quickly to that conclusion says a lot about the underlying tone and the assumptions of your arguments ever since.

You focus an awful lot on the "competition" piece of the argument, that hunters who don't want wolves simply can't stand for the competition. Having a Freudian moment? After thirty years in the field, I'll be more than willing to claim that human hunters have been far more disruptive to my hunts than have the mountain lions that we seem to have no limit to anymore in my home range. Yes, with the explosive population expansion of cats in the Black Hills of Wyoming and South Dakota, I've noted significant changes in deer behavior over what it was thirty years ago. As well, a decline in deer populations. And yet, I always seem to find myself passing a shot on a deer or two each season, knowing that there will be another.

Interestingly though, when cats were sparse thirty years ago, I never heard anyone react to them with a loud "SSS" comment. Instead, we'd boast that we'd found the tracks of the elusive and mysterious mountain lion. Now that the "elusive" and "mysterious" has evolved into my cutting nine sets of tracks in six days last fall, four in a single day, cats aren't such a special find anymore. And, the mystery gone, "SSS" is heard far more often.

As the cats became more common, their intrinsic and aesthetic value here decreased. So now also goes the wolf. When you see them digging in the same garbage cans the coyotes did, our societal opinion of them will be different.

I'd much rather have the hair on my neck stand up when I find wolf sign like it did after I cut my first set of cat tracks, or like it still does when I find grizzly sign. When it happens, I know I'm in the wild again. That's a big part of why I hunt.

And while I'm at it FinnBear....

One of the phenomena we cover when we teach hunters' safety is how individuals' perceptions of hunting evolve over the years. New hunters tend to focus on things like "limiting out", evolving into "trophy-seeking". Then we "specialize." Trust me, there are guys on the bowhunting section here who'll be repulsed by your avatar, standing over an animal holding a bipodded rifle. And eventually, we just become the old geezers that we are. We enjoy hunting for the fresh air, and the opportunity to commune with nature and tell tall tales in camp, whether we kill something or not. Rather than lecturing some of the younger people here, try understanding them a bit. Obviously, I think we want them all to experience hunting the way we do - but not until they've learned it the way we have. They have to earn it!
homers brother is offline  
Old 04-24-2010, 07:11 AM
  #90  
Spike
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 37
Default

Originally Posted by homers brother
As the cats became more common, their intrinsic and aesthetic value here decreased. So now also goes the wolf. When you see them digging in the same garbage cans the coyotes did, our societal opinion of them will be different.
This would be great if it were true, but I for one have not seen that trend among anyone other than biologists who have seen the impacts on the ecosystems where predators have overpopulated. I know that hunting seasons have been created for bears in states where it was illegal to hunt them for quite some time but also the sentiment from the public and the red tape that accompanied the hunts have not indicated an openness to it on a social or political level or a realistic view of the animals themselves. What I have seen is that the belief that man is unnatural and does not belong in nature has become our basic phycology when we think of nature. Man does not belong in nature is what we have been conditioned to think. Somehow cats, bears and wolves are entitled to kill but man is not, nor is it natural for him to do so. More and more the sentiment is that predators are natural and man is not, they indicate a healthy ecosystem, belong there, and should have the priority when it comes to wildlife management.
Furthermore when they come in contact with people, it is somehow our fault for their deprivement. Whoever's garbage cans those are is responsible for the plight of that coyote. When a person is attacked by a predator, it is somehow their fault. When a rancher loses livestock, it is his/her fault for encroaching into what should have been a perfect world were wolves are #1. When a coyote shows up in central park, man is to blame for that coyote's plight in life and the destruction of it's natural habitat. We are at fault for moving into their habitat and have no legitimate claim to be there or to even exist. The environmentalist's hatred of man and himself has grown so deep in American phycology that even hunters themselves believe that the problem in predator conflicts is human beings and not simply an ever present natural process.
cataraft is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.