Elk vs Wolve's

[Buck Hunter Vic]

Guy's I was just sent this in an email,check out the slide show,kind of make's you wonder,about the wild.
Save Our Elk

 

[Kentuck]

The sooner they start thinning out the wolves the better.

 

[tmoniz]

I'm sorry, but I'm sort of on the fence about this. I lived in a place where Wolves were common place.
If the Wolf in the lower 48 is taken off the Endangered Species List. Then Wolves will be treated like the Coyote?

 

[Kentuck]

The lower 48 wolves are due to be de-listed the end of this month. Of course we all know the wolf-lovers will sure to stop that. Idaho, Wyoming and Montana have hunting plans in place, ready to use. They will reduce the current wolf populations down to a certain number and try and maintain them there. The anti's are saying these numbers are too low but one less wolf is too much for them.

 

[fishnhunt]

They will probally be managed like a trophy animal....A draw like for deer or elk

 

[tmoniz]

I've got a problem with that web site. The kills look a little odd.

 

[fishnhunt]

I didn't realize there was a link attached.....Defentially coming from a bias with biased info.....Wolves aren't all good nor are they all bad. They are a native species that has coexisted with elk for thousands of years.

 

[DEERSLAM]

WY's plan is to have trophy areas for wolves were a hunter would have to draw a tag and then other areas where the wolves would be treated the same as coyotes.

 

[fishnhunt]

WY is why it took sooooo long to delist them.....They wanted to treat them like coyotes in all but a little area and the USFWS said no and that is why they are still listed in WY, MT, and ID. MT and ID plans were more cautious and recieved immediate approval

 

[tmoniz]

When I lived in Alaska I watched the interaction between a Caribou herd and a group of 5 Wolves.
We saw one kill on a calf. It was picked clean in one day.

Go figure.

That's why I said the pics of the kills on that web site look a bit odd.

I'm all for Wolves and such but they need to be kept in check or not be any where in the lower 48 at all.

We screw nature up and then we try to throw a bandage on it.

 

[Duknutz]

That's fine if they co-exist with the elk and deer,but keep the population in check.Let there be an annual harvest limit on them,be it special draw or short season dates for areas where the elk calve.Don't let them sit there and multiply and slaughter the elk and deer herds,just because they look pretty.Look at the distance these wolves have traveled since re-introduction.If it was California,they would let them eat every last four legged critters in the hills(and a few joggers)before they would even take a look at the cituation.

 

[barel74]

My cousin just came to visit from Chalis. One of the neighboring ranchers claims he lost 30 calves this year from wolves. Numbers like that can make a rancher go broke

 

[tmoniz]

barel

That's not a good thing for a rancher to suffer.
A livelyhood in jeopardy. To say the least.

 

[jindydiver]

How is it a good thing for that web site to use the same emotive arguments to describe what is happening in nature as the animal libbers use to describe what we as hunters do? The whole "and look, they didn't eat it all" arguement is rather lame. There is plenty of fresh blood around every one of those kills used as examples, it is plain to see the wolves aren't there eating the deer because the people are there taking the photos.
How can hunters claim a right to be part of the natural world (which we rightly do) and then turn around and claim that another animal has no such rights because we object to how they feed?

The guy on the website makes out it is just horrific that the baby elks are torn from the mother during birth, why is this? The deer are doing what they do and when we start to talk about them like they are making rational decisions about how they get a feed we are arguing the AL case that animals are sentient beings and we have no right to kill them ourselves. If the wolves are having an effect on the population of elk or deer that endangers the population then they should be hunted like any other animals, but if all they are doing is filling their roll as an apex predator (just like humans) then who are we to say it is wrong.

The loss of stock through wolf attack is another issue all together and is worthy of it's own discussion.

 

[jindydiver]

I had a look through the rest of their web site and the guys putting it up appear to be just as dishonest in their arguements as any animal liberationist.

They quote a study and claim it proves that elk <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

are now at a non-sustainable level and without intervention, will vanish from Banff National Park forever[/b]

And they attribute this to the presence of wolves.
The study makes no such claims. In fact they claim just the opposite<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Therefore, human exclusion of wolves and other large predators may seriously impact ecosystem dynamics. In conclusion, conservation and management plans based on the trophic importance of large carnivores (Terborgh et al. 1999, Carroll et al. 2001) such as wolves have increased support in terrestrial systems.[/b]