Wolves as Endangered Species

[Timber Loftis]

Sorry about my laughing on that one, Cerek. Seriously, don't think me a dolt for thinking your statement was hypothesis rather than fact.

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Didn't mean to imply your were lazy, Thoran. As for the tree cover percentage: it's cyclical. VT is over 80% forested today. At the turn of the century, it was 80% deforested. Yes, some logging is good for a forest, unless you're going to allow wildfires, which serve the same purpose: clearing out underbrush.

I've seen pictures of my grandparents farm in western NY from the 1930's, there wasn't a tree to be seen except right around people's houses. That same area today is a magnificent managed forest around maybe 25% pasture.

My family has lived forest conservation for a LONG time. My Aunt Hilda was the first female graduate of the Ranger School in Wanakena NY(article here: http://www.lib.duke.edu/forest/Publications/coufal.pdf on Page 35... with a picture of her and my grandfather, she doesn't look like the typical Hilda [img]smile.gif[/img] ), and there's 4 generations now with attendees. We've always been the type to put our muscle where our mouth is, I remember whole weekends as a child spent planting seedlings (not a fun job).

[Thoran]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Thoran: and regarding the idea that a Wolf/Dog hybrid would be a good protector for your kids... even if this were the case it could be dangerous for your children. A dog will have no qualms about "correcting" behavior that it sees as improper in a subordinate pack mate. If that subordinate pack mate is a child... that child will be "corrected" by your dog, this can be pretty rough and could seriously injure a human child. Throw wolf in the mix and you have a very volatile animal, IMO such cross breeding is very irresponsible and done in large part by people who like the power rush of owning a dangerous animal. This is the same gang that buy Pit Bulls, Bull Terriers, and other fighting breeds and train them to attack/fight. They should face murder charges when one of their creations goes berserk and kills someone.

Or it could mean that the kid might grow up with better manners and discipline than the Human parents might have instilled, since the dog/wolf isn't inhibited by pop-psych child rearing techniques [img]smile.gif[/img]

Just a thought.[/QUOTE]If the dog was smart enough to go easier on humans (Human children are just not as durable as adolecent puppies) then you might be right. [img]smile.gif[/img] Today's child rearing techniques could be another whole "hot topic" and then some.

[Nachtrafe]

Originally posted by The Hunter of Jahanna: All of these opinions about wolves are quite interesting. I have to ask, just how many of you have actualy spent more than a few hours at a time outdoors? I wonder what some of you would do if faced with a wolf and 6 of his friends all intent on making you into dinner? "Inteligent and noble" are pretty words, but when you cut through all the B.S. all wolves realy are is sharks with fur. Just like a shark a wolf will eat anything it can get its jaws around and it is the master of its domain.As for farm animals,your average cow is over 1200 pounds and quite capable of crushing a 200 pound wolf like a grape. If livestock is dumb enough to stand there and let itself be eaten then it pretty much deserves its fate. I am against hunting wolves just to hunt them. If you arent going to eat them then you shouldnt kill them, unless they are trying to kill you. Dont give me the you cant eat a wolf crap either. If Korean people can eat poodles and rotweilers you can damn well eat a wolf.

Interesting post Hunter. And I have to agree. I gre up hunting/camping/hiking/fishing in the great outdoors. I've seen plenty of wolves(from a distance fortunately), and while they *are* usually pretty, in the way that just about any animal is pretty in the woods, they are stil lvicious predators. And like just about any predator they will hunt and kill whatever they can get away with. I once got up close and personal with a badger when I was young. I happened to have the misfortune of coming between it and it's den. Fortunately, back then I was skinny *looks at his waistline and heaves a wistful sigh* and practically levitated up a nearby tree. Eventually the badger got bored with reducing bits of the tree into smaller bits and went home. I hit the ground running and made it home in about three seconds flat.

Anyway...point being, Wolves, and other predators *ARE* dangerous and people have the right to protect themselves when they are threatened. Then again, so do the wolves. Fortunately, *we* have the guns. And, dont you think that, if the wolves were so 'intelligent', they might use the guns to shoot back? Or would that make then not 'noble'? HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE

Originally posted by Thoran: Today's child rearing techniques could be another whole "hot topic" and then some.

I know [img]smile.gif[/img] Thats why I said it [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img]

[Nachtrafe]

Originally posted by MagiK: What Im talking about is that I have read some...rather non-mainstream literature ment for the local wicca and crystal groups and to hear them talk the wolves have a university out in the woods somewhere. I get irritated when people who have never really spent any timein the woods start publishing books on what animals are like, what hunters are like, how bad humans are and how good and noble animals are compared to humans....it just makesme want to barf is all but that really has nothing to do with what you were saying.

Hiya Magik. I saw this and just had to comment.

I've read, and even enjoyed some of the fiction you're talking about. But I too get extermely irritated when these fluffy-bunny types begin ranting about how bad we humans are and how wonderful the Horse/Eagle/Wolf/Three-Toed Sloth is. I'm thinking that they should all be sent into the woods for a little real life survival drill. I've noticed that a whopping great dose of reality tends to change people's world views in a BIG hurry.

Some one asked why we used the word vicious when refering to predators. I direct your attention to the definition labeled 4a and 4b. Definitions 1-3 and 5-6 would not apply when refering to animals.

We use the term because it is the proper word, unlike murder, good, evil, or noble which do not apply.

Main Entry: vi·cious
Pronunciation: 'vi-sh&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French vicieus, from Latin vitiosus full of faults, corrupt, from vitium vice
Date: 14th century
1 : having the nature or quality of vice or immorality : DEPRAVED
2 : DEFECTIVE, FAULTY; also : INVALID
3 : IMPURE, NOXIOUS
4 a : dangerously aggressive : SAVAGE (a vicious dog) b : marked by violence or ferocity : FIERCE (a vicious fight)
5 : MALICIOUS, SPITEFUL (vicious gossip)
6 : worsened by internal causes that reciprocally augment each other (a vicious wage-price spiral)

Originally posted by Nachtrafe: Hiya Magik. I saw this and just had to comment. I've read, and even enjoyed some of the fiction you're talking about. But I too get extermely irritated when these fluffy-bunny types begin ranting about how bad we humans are and how wonderful the Horse/Eagle/Wolf/Three-Toed Sloth is. I'm thinking that they should all be sent into the woods for a little real life survival drill. I've noticed that a whopping great dose of reality tends to change people's world views in a BIG hurry.

Howdy Nachtrafe, [img]smile.gif[/img] haven't seen many posts from you in a while. I guess I should ammend my statemnet a little, I enjoy the fiction well enough (like the Elfquest and other fantasy works) but it is when real humans start to believe in the fantasy and try to apply it to the real world thats what irritates. I think it is dangerous to blur the line of reality and fantasy and it can cause people to get hurt.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Sorry about my laughing on that one, Cerek. Seriously, don't think me a dolt for thinking your statement was hypothesis rather than fact.

Hypothesis?? Which one?? The FedEx driver or myself??

If it's the FedEx driver, there is NO speculation. I am repeating what he said he was told by the doctor.

If it's about my OWN clumsiness, then no worries. I still think that's why my leg didn't break. I was actually jogging/trotting back to the car. Suddenly, my right leg just literally "disappeared" into the ground.

MAN! was that ever EMBARASSING!!!! There were only about 400 people there that "saw me". BTW, when my leg went into the hole, I pitched forward so hard that I almost smacked my forehead on the ground. BUT, the hole was only SLIGHTLY larger than my leg....and, it was so deep that my ENTIRE leg just disappeared (my left one folded up like an accordion under me). I DO believe that - if the hole had been more shallow - there is a good chance my leg would have been broken...but you're right, that is JUST a theory on my part.

[Timber Loftis]

Both. I had no idea your first statement about holes was fact. After you pointed it out, I felt insensitive. I'm going to cry to my shrink now.

LOL