![]() |
If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Printable Version +- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com) +-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6) +--- Thread: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho (/showthread.php?tid=115788) |
Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Grace62 - 04-22-2011 kj wrote: kj Yes, we have two confirmed wolf packs in southeastern Washington. It was always the hope that the gray wolf would re-establish here, and in anticipation of that a conservation and management plan was developed 6 or 7 years ago and is under constant review as the wolves re-establish and as federal law changes. The existence of a management plan doesn't mean an immediate plan to kill off wolves, it's a federal requirement to have such a plan in place where endangered species are involved. The same potential conflicts between ranchers and hunters and conservationists will play out here should the number of wolves grow, and hopefully they will. Idaho officials have killed around 300 wolves since re-introduction and have allowed private citizens to hunt wolves. With a current population of 700, that cannot be described as sustainable. The current goal in Idaho to reduce the population to 150 is obscene. The state has been reducing the population around 10% each year, numbers higher than that definitely threaten the continued success of this re-introduction in the state. Half the Northern Rockies gray wolf population, through no fault of it's own, is living in Idaho. Idaho is 50% federal land, and wildlife conservation is not a "state limit" issue, it involves the entire ecosystem. It's ridiculous to claim that only people living inside your state can care about the wildlife and environment there, wolves aren't too familiar with state lines. Idaho also does have a huge percentage of wilderness, along with Washington, Arizona, and California, which doesn't square with your comment that "people are everywhere." Even so, wolves don't have to be separated from humans by great distances. They are the most adaptable of the big predators and only require a food supply and the ability to keep a moderately safe distance from human activity. They are not a safety threat to people, despite the propaganda from what you describe as "anti-wolf" people. They do kill livestock. I favor a system of reimbursement to ranchers for wolf-predation losses, but they should not be allowed to kill wolves on site. As for hunters, they should appreciate the wolf. Most antagonism against wolves is founded in ignorance and myth. His presence improves the ecosystem and is good for big game populations. But because of his highly intelligent, social nature and the fact that we don't eat wolf, I would never support the shooting of wolves by private citizens unless in self-defense, and the chances for that are nil. As I've said before, I'm a fan of Idaho and it's beautiful natural scenery and some of the most devoted naturalists and conservationists I know are from there, and that includes a few people who hunt, fish, and spend a lot of time in the outdoors. (Don't know any ranchers though.) This doesn't have to be so contentious if people would stick to fact and reason. At the current time your legislature and governor are not using reason. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Mac1337 - 04-22-2011 Is that the best you could find for an "adorable" wolf? Makes me wanna reach for my gun. It does not exactly invoke sympathy. One more thing, why is conservation always leads to mass killings of animals? If they could talk they would probably ask humans to please stop "conserving" them. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Acer - 04-22-2011 We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then, and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes—something known only to her and to the mountain. I was young then, and full of trigger-itch; I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters' paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view. ~Aldo Leopold Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Grace62 - 04-22-2011 Dakota wrote: There's a purpose to what this wolf is doing. You, I'm not sure. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Mac1337 - 04-22-2011 I didn't ask what wolf is doing. I am saying why is it that conservation policies end up having to massacre animals in the end. Just last month they shot 600, your heard it right, 6-0-0, deers in Valley Forge Park. And they weren't shot by tranquilizers either. Could you please spare them your "conservation"? Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Chakravartin - 04-22-2011 Dakota wrote: Not enough wolves. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Grace62 - 04-22-2011 If you still had wolves or even enough coyotes in Pennsylvania you wouldn't be overrun with deer. Due to a lack of predators, that population is off in many places, with potentially devastating results to the ecosystem. The example you gave is a good reason to focus on wolf re-establisment (maybe coyotes over there.) Did you you know that at Yellowstone when there were no wolves, the elk and other grazers were destorying the riparian environment, which means destruction to the streams and a lot of the wildlife it supports. Now that elk are nervous due to the presence of the wolf, they don't stay too long in one spot, and the ecosystem is recovering: beavers are back, and so are long lost species of butterflies, just to name a few changes. And let's tell the rest of that deer story: http://articles.philly.com/2011-03-28/news/29354267_1_valley-forge-deer-deer-population-agriculture-sharpshooters Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Acer - 04-22-2011 Deer management in PA is a very long story. Average current densities are 50 to 100% higher than what is sustainable for a healthy herd and productive forests. The balance is much worse in suburban areas where hunting is limited. If we had a balanced predator population, massive culls would not be needed. Since suburban Philly is not really a good place for wolves or other large deer predators, humans step in to provide that service. What they really needed was a smaller culling yearly program started 30 years ago. They'd be 30 years ahead in the effort to balance the herd, we'd have better results without the headlines, and we'd have one less bomb for a troll to toss. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Grace62 - 04-22-2011 Acer wrote: Thanks for that. Re: If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho - Mac1337 - 04-22-2011 Grace62 wrote: Oh great. Wolves roaming Rt. 23. Just what we needed. VF Park is not somewhere in Allegheny mountains. It is 5 minutes away from a Walmart. Only someone detached from all reality would suggest such a thing. Another reason people sitting thousands of miles away in their lofts sipping coffee should not be allowed to write laws for people and places they have no vested interest in . |