Wolves?

[luieb45]

People tell me that all the time at our muzzleloader club's shoots. They see me out their loading my own gun and they ask my dad if he taught me how to do all that. Then my dad tells them that I taught my dad all about cleaning, shooting, and handling muzzleloaders. They always find it odd that I clean my guns so well, too. This forum taught me almost everything I know about muzzleloaders and if it wasn't for the forum, I probably would have got frustrated and quit. Once again I'd like to thank everyone here on the forum whom I've ever gotten advice or tips from. :thumbsup:

 

[KHickam]

Hmmm - the computer says that the wolves introduced in Yellowstone and Idaho - were Mackenzie Valley wolves and/or canadian timber wolves

So, can someone break this down by

genus/subspecies for those of us that aren't biologists?

 

[John Wasmuth]

We loose many thousands of dollars worth of livestock every year to coytoes, mountain lions and bobcats. We dont have any wolves here but I understand completely what you are saying. When they start eating us outa house and home its a whole different out look.

 

[paulvallandigham]

It was my understanding of the observations during the first half of the 19th century, that wolf packs hunted buffalo herds, and only rarely went after Elk and mule deer. The Buffalo provided more meat per kill, thereby feeding the pack better. ( The Law of Conservation of Energy at work.)

With the buffalo still not being in sufficient numbers to allow the wolves to feed on them, we ARE out of balance, to what existed before, because Man screwed with the natural order of things. Introducing wolves back into YNP without first making sure there are sufficient varieties of prey species to feed the growing wolf packs IS the CAUSE of the imbalance. All the government types were thinking about was to let the wolves feed on the then- abundant elk numbers. That might have been fine when the number of wolves were very low. Its not working now that their numbers have exploded. That's the problem that seems to always arise when you let the " Scientists" use " Models" to extrapolate what will happen with wild life once its re-introduced. :cursing:

 

[JMinnerath]

That's the problem that seems to always arise when you let the " Scientists" use " Models" to extrapolate what will happen with wild life once its re-introduced. :cursing:

That pretty much hits the nail on the head.
It's also believed that Elk were more of a plains animal before the coming of guns when they began to move into the security of the high country.
There's places down in the Sweetwater country where there still are Elk thriving out in the open country where Antelope are generally more at home now.
None of those animals would ever have reached the numbers of the incredible herds of Bison that roamed across the prairie.
Supporting huge numbers of 2 legged and 4 legged predators.

 

[Brent]

It was my understanding of the observations during the first half of the 19th century, that wolf packs hunted buffalo herds, and only rarely went after Elk and mule deer. The Buffalo provided more meat per kill, thereby feeding the pack better. ( The Law of Conservation of Energy at work.)

The is no law of Conservation of Energy in ecological phenomena. Energy optimization, yes, but what you are talking about is in the domain of physics, not biology. At least not in a way that is relevant here.

I'd be interested to know specifically where you come by this assertion that wolves hunted buffalo primarily. I've never seen any quantification of this anywhere, ever.

With the buffalo still not being in sufficient numbers to allow the wolves to feed on them, we ARE out of balance, to what existed before, because Man screwed with the natural order of things. Introducing wolves back into YNP without first making sure there are sufficient varieties of prey species to feed the growing wolf packs IS the CAUSE of the imbalance. All the government types were thinking about was to let the wolves feed on the then- abundant elk numbers. That might have been fine when the number of wolves were very low. Its not working now that their numbers have exploded. That's the problem that seems to always arise when you let the " Scientists" use " Models" to extrapolate what will happen with wild life once its re-introduced. :cursing:

If you think there was insufficient "variety of prey species", I would sure like to see where this comes from as well. In fact, the variety is pretty much what it always was. All the species are there and one reason for the wolves was there were actually too many of them.

While arm chair biology passes for science on the internet where everyone can be an Einstein, somewhere, somehow, someone actually has to measure something, figure out what it really means and actually DO science. Those people who put the boots on the ground exist. The result of that work exists. You won't find it on internet forums and advocacy blogs. You find it in the primary literature. I suggest you all take advantage of your local university libraries if you really want to understand any of this. For those interested in the dynamics of wolves in the Rockies and YNP, I can provide a pile of references and a list of the folks who actually do this sort of stuff. But you gotta want to actually read science not just activist wannabe websites.

And for those that advise or brag how they will poach wolves, I have zero respect for such people. They will be the final coup de grace on hunting, and I frankly, despise such arrogance.

 

[Robby]

The true arrogance, are the so called scientists that won't listen to the people on the ground, the ones that have to live with their agenda driven decisions, that have the full weight and power of an increasingly centralized government to prop up their haughty behavior.
Robby

 

[Vaino]

In summation....this topic has degenerated into "who knows or dosen't know" asre wolves and the last post espouses anti -science and anti- gov't sentiments. As on most blogs the participants { me included} "spout off" but w/ little actual knowledge and use parochial, self serving knowledge that happens to agree w/ their viewpoint. Evidently "wolves" is a thought provoking topic that engenders deep feelings which aren't a substitute for the facts as known today...these facts are fluid and no one can predict the future, only offer guesses and this.... :dead: ....Fred

 

[Robby]

"In summation....this topic has degenerated into "who knows or dosen't know" asre wolves and the last post espouses anti -science and anti- gov't sentiments. "
Well Fred, I was responding directly to Brent, there is no degeneration off topic, because, All, these things play into the subject. I love science and learning of the new discovery's they they share, I don't care the subject. The twisting of science to help a political agenda infuriates me, and there are many sciences that are becoming nothing more than the tool of the lefty's in government, does global warming ring a bell, in your left ear! The bureaucracy is so infiltrated with left wing, I know more about what is good for you than you do, so we will do it my way, that they are building their version of a utopian society based on lies. The anti-gun, anti hunting groups, within the bureaucracy are symbiotic in this. No game, no need for guns, no guns, no hunting. An over simplification, yes, but don't believe that it isn't happening. With every impediment they put in the way of hunters and gun owners, there are a certain percentage of hunters, gun owners that throw up there hands an say the heck with it I'm done, they know this! Less numbers less power, the constitution be damned.
Anti government? If you mean this government, you bet! I have been fighting the communists virtually all my life. I have read my constitution and I understand it, I believe in it, I have sworn to protect and defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic. You might try reading it, but I think you would give it as much time as you did the web site Green Mountain Boy provided you.
Speaking of Green Mountain boy, I don't know him from Adam, but based on his postings here, I think he is a straight shooter, and would trust him way before I would some tin horn bureaucrat with questionable motives, and I would share a fire with him anytime. He is the only one suffering personal attacks with regard to this subject.
Robby

 

[Greenmtnboy]

sorry fred when it comes to uneducated :bull: I have tollorance.

I think that just about says it all. :yakyak: :youcrazy:

Don't jerk me off buzzy you know what I ment.
And it's your :bull: I have no tolerence for.
You sitting in a city in Ohio, what the hell do you know about the west, the woods. and effect of non native wolves on the local population.
you sound like a tofu fartin' fairy mole.

 

[JMinnerath]

There's one more thing that's pertinent here.
That's the distain, in the professional scientific community, for the layman's opinions and ideas.
If you're not a vetted member of their august club, your comments are meaningless.

 

[Pete Gaimari]

sorry fred when it comes to uneducated :bull: I have tollorance.

I think that just about says it all. :yakyak: :youcrazy:

Don't jerk me off buzzy you know what I ment.
And it's your :bull: I have no tolerence for.
You sitting in a city in Ohio, what the hell do you know about the west, the woods. and effect of non native wolves on the local population.
you sound like a tofu fartin' fairy mole.

:rotf:

 

[Greenmtnboy]

sorry fred when it comes to uneducated :bull: I have tollorance.

I think that just about says it all. :yakyak: :youcrazy:

Don't jerk me off buzzy you know what I ment.
And it's your :bull: I have no tolerence for.
You sitting in a city in Ohio, what the hell do you know about the west, the woods. and effect of non native wolves on the local population.
you sound like a tofu fartin' fairy mole.

sorry that was inmature.
BRENT,
ONE QUESTION,
DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE THAT THE NON NATIVE OUT OF CONTROL POP OF GREY WOLVES NEED TO BE BALANCED OR NOT.

I HAVE GIVEN YOU ALL THE PROOF!
YOU HAVE YET TO READ ANY OF IT.
IT'S FOLKS LIKE YOU UNWILLING TO ADMIT THAT YOUR NON CONSERVATION MINDED ENVIORNMENTAL URBAN GROUPS COULD ACTUALLY BE WRONG.
AND WE, OLD SCHOOL CONSERVATIONIST WHO OVER THE LAST 100 YRS BROUGHT BACK ALL GAME SPECIES TO AN ALL TIME HIGH, MIGHT ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE HELL WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
BRET HAVE YOU EVER SEE GREY WOLVES CUT SEVERAL PREGNANT COW ELK OUT OF A HERD AND KILL THEM AND ONLY EAT THE UNBORN FETIS AND LEAVE THE REST TO ROT.
GO TO SAVEELK.COM AND SEE IT FIRST HAND, NOT THE HUNTING PRACTICE OF THE SMALLER NATIVE TIMBER(ROCKY MT) WOLF.
I COULDEN'T BELEVE THAT A WILD ANIMAL WOULD HUNT SUCH A WAY UNTIL I SAW IT WITH MY OWN EYES IN MT LAST SPRING.
NATHAN

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Naw! It wasn't immature.

It was funny.

 

[Vaino]

This isn't meant for you personally but to all who contributed to this "erudite discussion?" It seems that any "moderate" viewpoints are "verboten" in a discussion such as this. The "true believers" on both of the radical sides of the arguement can't fanthom how the "others" are unable to "see" their point of view and when this happens, rancor and personal attacks prevail. When this occurs, the discussion becomes a "verbal fight" and seeing we're all just expressing "what we think", which most of the time, isn't backed up by actual facts. In reality, we're "armchair quarterbacks" w/ no scientific or factual knowledge which equates to being "uninformed observers". "Doing what the people want" {what people?} sometimes leads us down the wrong road because of faulty thinking, biases or errant data. I have a moderate view asre wolves...controlled numbers, but not annihilation, but the "natural progression" and "annihilation" viewpoints don't allow for any moderation. Too bad....Fred

 

[Greenmtnboy]

isn't backed up by actual facts.

Fred the facts are there, you just need to open your mine and eyes and read them.

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Fred,

If you look back in the posts, you'll see I said put things back in balance. I never talked about annihilation.

Aren't you getting a little extreme yourself? In your own way, you're insulting all of us.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Can we agree to disagree? The law of Conservation of Energy( movement) applies to all living creatures- even mankind when in survival situations, and without the trappings of civilization.
I see the " Law" in action in the footprints( tracks) of game animals I track and hunt. When a hunters shoots at an animal, and misses, the animal can do everything from stand there, wondering what made the loud noise, to flinching, leaping, and running away. However, unless the animal sees something that scares it- like waving arms and hands on some man-- it puts the closest object, or cover between it, and where it was when the shot was fired. Then, it often stops to listen and look behind it to see if its being followed. If not, it will walk a short distance and go back to whatever it was doing before the incident.

Like many members here, I have been on shooting ranges, when all manner of wildlife have decided to walk, trot, or fly across or down into the range. Shooting alone simply does not bother them. Sighted species include deer, fox, pheasants, ground hogs, ground squirrels, rabbits, doves, other game and non-game species of birds, including crows, and coyote.

We even had a bald eagle visit our gun club one day when we were shooting. It could have cared less. It landed in the upper branches of a tree off the end of our firing line, then moved around the barn, and landed on a tree that was growing out of our backstop.

Not all science is done in labs. Some of the best science is done in the field, literally, where my years spent reading and following animal tracks have disclosed all kinds of information that lab types don't know. :hmm: :thumbsup:
http://www.wildwoodtracking.com/limbdominance/pveyedominance.html
http://www.wildwoodtracking.com/limbdominance/pvedsecondary.html
http://www.wildwoodtracking.com/limbdominance/ld07.html


Oh, the Law of Conservation of Energy is discussed in many Hunter Safety Classes- at least in my state of Illinois. Prey species will stay still, using their natural camouflage to help them evade detection while a predator( human or animal) walks by. A prey species will walk if it can't sit; run if it can't escape by walking; and fly only if it can't escape by running. Each level of activity( movement) involves more use of stored energy. When an escape is made, these same animals will stop, to reduce their use of stored energy.

Predators are really no different. Just watch a cat stalk a bird or rabbit in your back yard. Canines, in hunting mode, will use many of the same techniques used by cats, depending on the species of prey they are hunting. :hmm:

 

[Goldhunter]

For those interested in legislation on this issue. I received this email from a group I support as a sportsman:

"TWO bills have been introduced into Congress. H.R. 6028 in the House and S.3919 in the Senate. Both bills take wolves off the Endangered Species list nationwide and end the thoughtless years of litigation and technicalities which have been used to stop decisions by the Bush and Obama administrations to delist wolves. Many Senators, Congressmen, Republicans and Democrats across the country have come out in support of these important bills including the entire Congressional delegations of Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, select Senators and Congressmen in Montana, Arizona, Nevada, Minnesotta, Wisconsin, Texas, Arkansas and other states. Thousands of Sportsmen from 47 states have signed the Big Game Forever wolf delisting petition."
:v

UT is eagerly watching this issue. We are starting to have confirmed sightings in the northern part of our state. So far the mentality here is "we have no wolves in UT, just REALLY big coyotes."

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Best post in the thread. :thumbsup: