West MT, CO, WY, NM, NV, UT, CA, ID, WA, OR, AZ, HI, AK

wolves

Old 04-24-2008, 11:29 PM
  #21  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 14
Default RE: wolves

wolves should have never been reintroduce into the lower 48. there is a reason that our ansesters whent to such great lenghts to kill them off!!!

jonyreb is offline  
Old 04-25-2008, 10:16 AM
  #22  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 232
Default RE: wolves

As hunters we may be the biggest stakeholders in this issue since it can be argued that wolves represent another predator that competes with us for a limited number of game animals. However, we are not the only shareholders in this controversy. Yellow Stone National Park and other federal lands belong to all U.S. citizens, not just the 7% ofus who hunt, and under our system of government the majority of shareholders, not stakeholders, decide howthese lands and the flora and fauna on themshould be managed. Re-indroduction of wolves into the lower 48 states appears to have the support of the American public. I do not have to like it, just like I do not like the ban on cougar hunting here in California, but I do have to accept it as the will of the majority of Americansand abide by their decision. It is our job to convince them that they have made the wrong decision and they should agree to steps to remedy the harm done.
SP10 is offline  
Old 04-25-2008, 12:23 PM
  #23  
Boone & Crockett
 
Lanse couche couche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
Default RE: wolves

Unfortunately, it is easy for the majority of stakeholders to support reintroduction of problematic species in an area where they dont live and therefore won't suffer the consequences. Isnt it possible to restock predators on isolated public lands where they aren't a problem. You then have hunting of them open in adjacent areas where they might start to exapand and do harm. Or is some version of that policy already in place.
Lanse couche couche is offline  
Old 04-29-2008, 10:53 AM
  #24  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,395
Default RE: wolves

ORIGINAL: Lanse couche couche

Unfortunately, it is easy for the majority of stakeholders to support reintroduction of problematic species in an area where they dont live and therefore won't suffer the consequences. Isnt it possible to restock predators on isolated public lands where they aren't a problem. You then have hunting of them open in adjacent areas where they might start to exapand and do harm. Or is some version of that policy already in place.
Lance

Wyoming has about 10% of there state coveredin a protected area. The protected area lists wolves as trophy game animals. The other 90% is a predator area. This allows people to shoot wolves on sight in 90% of the state.
IMHO This will thin out the problem wolves & keep the rest of the wolves in the protected area.
Wolf killer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MTdrahthaar
Trail Cameras
6
05-24-2009 06:04 AM
MTdrahthaar
Trail Cameras
20
05-18-2009 09:20 AM
blacktail slayer
Bowhunting
3
04-19-2009 03:09 PM
RandyL
West
47
04-02-2005 09:39 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Quick Reply: wolves


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.