If you don't hear from me for a while I might be in jail over in Idaho

[Pops]

I wonder how many dogs were killed by pick up trucks.

[Chakravartin]

billb wrote:
61 if you read past headlines...

No, those are reports of dogs killed by wolves. Not actual tallies.

83 dog deaths in the whole of the U.S. were attributed to wolves since 1985.

If you'd read the other news reports on that story, you'd have seen that the dog disappeared while chasing a bear and was found with half his torso ripped away. The wolves were scavenging his corpse. A bear killed him. The hunter blamed the wolves and shot a female.

Whenever a bear, coyote or cougar attacks a dog, the locals blame the wolves.

Whenever a local poisons a dog, half the residents blame the wolves.

And as it turns out the leading cause of death for dogs in Idaho is dying from eating poison left for wolves. They use strychnine, cyanide, rat poison and a nasty pesticide called "compound 1080" that leads to the painful death of both the animal that eats it and to all of the scavengers that go after its body. One man who was convicted of poisoning wolves in 2005 was linked to over a dozen dog-deaths.

People leave sausages and meatballs made with the stuff all over the back trails in Idaho. There's an organization called the Idaho Antiwolf Coalition that advocates the extinction of wolves by any means necessary.

What a great place to bring up a family!

...

Oh, BTW: There have been no human deaths or injuries attributable to the reintroduction of those wolves. Zero. Zip. Nada. Not even an unattended infant in a bag full of bacon.

[Acer]

Not even an unattended infant in a bag full of bacon.

(obligatory)

[RgrF]

billb wrote:
[quote=Chakravartin]
[quote=rjmacs]
How many people have been killed by this 'clear and present danger' over the last five years?

None.

They've been accused of killing a dog and several cows. They did kill a few cows, but others were probably killed by cougars and coyotes. "
61 if you read past headlines:

and those are reported kills.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2516290/posts



For where in Idaho the populations are becoming a problem you can actually read the Idaho Fish and Game management plan.
It addresses the successes and current problems without many of the political distortions and lies.
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlif...gePlan.pdf
Says the "independent" poster who quotes from and links to FREEP.

[kj]

Fwiw, even the people who are anti-wolf are peeved at otter for being such an idiot on this issue. A couple weeks ago I talked to a guy I know that works at Fish and Game, and he said they are in a difficult position, in that they are funded largely from people who recreate here, so they have to try to make people happy. But they want to do the right thing. One thing to be clear about here is that there is no question the population of wolves here is sustainable. They are not teetering on the edge. If we let them be here, they're going to proliferate. It's all a question of management/values.

At any rate, there's a whole lot of BS flying around on both sides of the argument. Wolves have to be managed. People have this idea that Idaho is nothing but wilderness, but the fact is there is almost no land here that is not used by people for something. Compromises have to be made. Fish and Game has limited resources, and if the population gets out of control, they're going to have problems to deal with.

It's easy for all you "city folk" to post cute pics of wolves and get all emotional, but I'm not sure you have the right to decide wolves get to live here. The people who live here have some say, and for the most part don't want them. Before you get on your conservationist high-horse, you might want to think about where your state's wilderness is. What's the status on your wilderness there cbelt? Same with most states. Idaho has more designated wilderness than any other state in the lower 48. The ranchers are protecting their livelihood, but man, compare that to corporate greed elsewhere. There's no comparison. How many wolves do you have over there in Washington State, Grace? What has your state done to re-establish wolves? Did you know a pack (probably from here) has already strayed over, and there are already management plans being made? Are you protesting those plans yet?

Btw, I spend a lot of time on trails, have hunted elk, etc., many of my friends are avid hunters, and they've never seen nor even heard of people throwing poisoned sausages all over the state. That's just ridiculous. I'm sure it happens, but it's deviant. At any rate, I'm all for reasonable debate on the issue, but stuff like this, "What a great place to bring up a family!" is (again) ridiculous. There's no _better_ place in the country to bring up a family. Wolves belong here, but they have very little to do with "raising a family". kj.

[Lux Interior]

kj wrote: but the fact is there is almost no land here that is not used by people for something.

Especially when you include white supremacist compounds and buried nuclear accidents.

[kj]

Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=kj]but the fact is there is almost no land here that is not used by people for something.

Especially when you include white supremacist compounds and buried nuclear accidents.
I know you're just being silly, but what buried nuclear accident are you referring to? INEL? Just curious. kj.

[Lux Interior]

kj wrote:
I know you're just being silly, but what buried nuclear accident are you referring to? INEL? Just curious. kj.

SL1, or what I like to call, "What Happens When You Give the Army a Nuclear Reactor."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1

[Chakravartin]

kj wrote: "What a great place to bring up a family!" is (again) ridiculous. There's no _better_ place in the country to bring up a family. Wolves belong here, but they have very little to do with "raising a family". kj.

...But poisoning hundreds of dogs, coyotes, birds and other scavengers on the off chance that your poison might kill a protected wolf is true family values.

Riiiiiiiiight.

[OWC Jamie]

RgrF wrote:
[quote=billb]
[quote=Chakravartin]
[quote=rjmacs]
How many people have been killed by this 'clear and present danger' over the last five years?

None.

They've been accused of killing a dog and several cows. They did kill a few cows, but others were probably killed by cougars and coyotes. "
61 if you read past headlines:

and those are reported kills.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2516290/posts



For where in Idaho the populations are becoming a problem you can actually read the Idaho Fish and Game management plan.
It addresses the successes and current problems without many of the political distortions and lies.
http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlif...gePlan.pdf
Says the "independent" poster who quotes from and links to FREEP.

You don't have to click the link if it will soil your rose colored glasses.