Wolves as Endangered Species

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Moni,

You have referred to hunters killing wolves for the "thrill of the kill" a couple of times, yet nobody in this thread is advocating that. It has been pointed out that hunting wolves is illegal in the US...so if anybody DOES do it "just for the thrill", they are facing some serious fines and possibly even jail time (unlikely, but possible). I'm sure there ARE people who still kill wolves purely for sport, but I believe they are in the minority. Most legitimate hunters aren't willing to risk the fines and penalties they would face for poaching.

And again, ALL the blame is placed on the rancher for "displacing" the wolf and invading it's territory. I don't completely agree with that, but I'll concede that the farmer HAS to accept the responsibility for protecting their livestock.

As for your earlier post, I've been giving a lot of thought as to whether or not I should even respond. The first part of my post was the ONLY part that was "aimed at you". I was stating that I had seen the same program and found it very interesting. I also agreed that wolves are beautiful and complex creatures, but it seems that where our agreement ends.

As for all the other statements in my original Post, you are correct - you never made ANY of those statements, so there was no reason for you to feel my reply was directed solely at you. I was giving my views on the primary issues and statements that had been raised by several different members throughout the thread. I'm sorry if you interpreted my response as a personal attack on you, because it certainly was not intended that way.

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: Moni, You have referred to hunters killing wolves for the "thrill of the kill" a couple of times, yet nobody in this thread is advocating that. It has been pointed out that hunting wolves is illegal in the US...so if anybody DOES do it "just for the thrill", they are facing some serious fines and possibly even jail time (unlikely, but possible). I'm sure there ARE people who still kill wolves purely for sport, but I believe they are in the minority. Most legitimate hunters aren't willing to risk the fines and penalties they would face for poaching. And again, ALL the blame is placed on the rancher for "displacing" the wolf and invading it's territory. I don't completely agree with that, but I'll concede that the farmer HAS to accept the responsibility for protecting their livestock. As for your earlier post, I've been giving a lot of thought as to whether or not I should even respond. The first part of my post was the ONLY part that was "aimed at you". I was stating that I had seen the same program and found it very interesting. I also agreed that wolves are beautiful and complex creatures, but it seems that where our agreement ends. As for all the other statements in my original Post, you are correct - you never made ANY of those statements, so there was no reason for you to feel my reply was directed solely at you. I was giving my views on the primary issues and statements that had been raised by several different members throughout the thread. I'm sorry if you interpreted my response as a personal attack on you, because it certainly was not intended that way.

Cerek,
If I am not mistaken, I was directly addressing Sir Krustin when I talked about hunting wolves for sport...the same person who in this very thread provided me with this link for reference on the size of Canadian coyotes vs American coyotes: Here

This site sells a video:

A Coyote and Fox calling video featuring 10 hunts along with instruction that will entertain you over and over. See them come into calls like never before. See what really happens in most circumstances

This appears to me to be a site dedicated to the thrill of the kill...let me quote some of one of the "hunting stories" posted on this site and tell me that these people are not out there for the sport alone and that it has been in no manner whatsoever been advocated in this thread...the link alone is advocation enough.

This was the spot to place the call...About 5 or 6 minutes into the call, I heard one coming...It wasn't a second and my ears rang from the blast out of my partners 22-250 and with a perfect shot out of that gun, one coyote lay dead without as much as a twitch...Then came the let down; the sound of an ATV broke the silence coming from down the road a ways. Into our stand he came, stopping every 50 yards or so listening for the dying rabbit..... maybe thinking it was a deer in need of rescue from a poaching hunter or who knows what...It was alot of fun and the best thing about the guy on the ATV was, he never did see us or find out what the sound was. Below is a picture of my buddy Paul from Michigan with his first coyote.

Tell me there is no thrill there.
Regardless if the post was provided to me for reference in the size of a Canadian coyote, there are plenty of other sites that could have been used without reference to hunting for sport.
Sir Krustin knew what I meant when I was talking to him and your misunderstanding I can only associate with you not fully following the conversations between the two of us.
He has since then stated publicly that there are no laws broken when hunting wolves in Canada but C.Y.A. does not make it the truth but I am not here to argue what cannot be proven. Of course people are not going to come into this forum and publicly advocate breaking the law!

As for your explanation about the post you made earlier, IIRC, you normally address specific people with their names in different colors in your posts adressing more than one person and you will normally add you own views (pro or con) in a manner which makes it clear you are not speaking to anyone in particular.
I did seek the opinions of others here before posting as to whether or not your initial statements were directed at me (having them read before asking them how much of it was directed at me) and they did not see most of your post any differently that I had, even when I read it over again to be sure.

Thank you for making that clarification public and I do apologize if I caused you any upset by my reply but seriously, you've been a very kind sort of friend to me in PM's only to riddle your public posts to me with assumptions and derogatory remarks about my personal feelings which you know absolutely nothing about and the flip-flopping in your character (with me) really has me walking on eggshells where conversing with you is concerned...to the point where I'd really rather not.

Argh, sorry for mispelling your name Sir K....I think I've corrected them all lol.

[ 10-20-2002, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]

Originally posted by Moni:

Interesting because a deer's natural predator would be........a wolf.



No kidding, that was my point. There are either no wolves in the PA and mid-atlantic states or not nearly enough to do the job, so MAN does it for them. I will also say that being killed by a High Power rifle round has to be less excruciating than either a long drawn out death through disease and starvation OR being ripped to pieces by the jaws of a predator. Maybe hunters are just more humane than nature

To say that no hunting for sport is done in your state is only a generalization using people you know personally as an example. I've lived in the midwest (OH,and IN and have LOTS of family in PA) and there are plenty of people who pay for their hunting license to go out and kill for nothing more than sport. Strictly speaking, you cannot deny it does occur.


Im saying that technically since even IF the hunters are JUST hunting for sport, the STATE is using those people for the benefit of the heard...which is why they have specific numbers of permits each year for each type of game allowed to be hunted. Since the STATE is using the hunters for non-sport specific herd management I submit that no licensed hunting is "Just" for sport.

How do groundhogs and porcupines damage property (i.e. what property do they damage that warrants killing them) and how can they endanger livestock in a manner that would put that livestock's life at risk?


Ever seen what happens to a horses leg when it hits a groundhog hole?
Ever see what has to be done to those horses? Or how about when a groundhog burrow collapses and causes a tractor to roll on the farmer who is driving it?

Ever see what just a single porcupine can do to the wood used in a house, barn, doghouse or any other wooden structure? Not to mention the number of dogs that have to be put down due to tangles with porcupines. (quills piecing the throat, face, eyes and mouth. Not very pretty that either.

The brackets thing with the MW online dictionary is understandable. I have done something like that here myself at one point.
(You could still acknowledge that slaughter is an inappropriate term. [img]tongue.gif[/img] )


I suppose if slaughter is only to be used for food type killing I guess it is wrong. I didn't know that the secondary definition was geared toward human casualties. Hmmm now Im curious and will have to find the appropriate term [img]smile.gif[/img] arguments (discussions, debates..whatever) can be so educational [img]smile.gif[/img]

EDIT: for stupid typo's and spelling problems.
EDIT to the EDIT: for yet more typo's
[/QUOTE]

[ 10-20-2002, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Scholarcs: Just expanding on the idea ofI honestly believe that we have to be more careful when killing animals and plants, even to save livestock. Plants and animals are becoming extinct at more than 1000 times the rate at which they did before humans began to have a serious effect on the environment. It is very scary to see how much of the world is being lost. For that reason I believe that we should try and conserve wildlife wherever possible. There are millions, perhaps billions of livestock in the world, and in many species of wildlife only a few remain.

\


Dude, it has already been proven that this supposed extinction of species is ONLY theoretical model and when forced to name even one specific species that is predicted by the model that has gone extinct the guy who developed the theory admitted that he can't because the model is all mathematical theory and not based on actualy census of populations. It was on the Discovery channel a few moths ago. Another alarmist hoax just like the supposed disappearence of the south American Rainforest.

There is no evidence that we are killing the species off 1000 times faster than they were before man arrived. It is estimated that somewhere around 90% (an approximation obviously) of all species that ever existed on this planet went extinct before humans ever even arrived. Since no one can even tell you how many species exist at the present time, it is also impossible to state how many of them have up and deceased.

The people I call Eco-Nuts will say XXX number of species are killed every second and the people I call Industrial Idiots will say only some smaller value of XXX went exitnct and neither can prove its point because neither side is actually observing XXX number of species.

I submit that the leading cause of death and extinction in the world today is LIFE!

EDIT: Forgot to mention that I see no reason for man to go out of his way to be destructive and wasteful either. Efficient and respectful uses of resources and land are possible.

[ 10-20-2002, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

MagiK,
Nowhere did I ever say that I am against deer-hunting. I hope there is no misunderstanding there. Venison is on my list of the best in meats.
I honestly have no objections to the legal hunting of game for food!

I don't have the time to disect all of the previous posts to determine where the line was crossed in understanding that hunting wolves for sport is what I abhor, but I think I've made that clear a number of times already.

(Lots of homework to turn in tomorrow of the typed out and printed kind )

So, rather than having to type it all out again, you'll find my side of the gopher/porcupine argument on page 4 in a reply to The Hunter of Jahanna.

Originally posted by Moni: MagiK, Nowhere did I ever say that I am against deer-hunting. I hope there is no misunderstanding there. Venison is on my list of the best in meats. I honestly have no objections to the legal hunting of game for food! I don't have the time to disect all of the previous posts to determine where the line was crossed in understanding that hunting wolves for sport is what I abhor, but I think I've made that clear a number of times already. (Lots of homework to turn in tomorrow of the typed out and printed kind ) So, rather than having to type it all out again, you'll find my side of the gopher/porcupine argument on page 4 in a reply to The Hunter of Jahanna.

As far as I know, there is no legalized hunting of wolves in the continental US. There are specific rules for Alaska, but I don't remember what they are.
I don't see any reason for "sport" hunting of wolves, since all you can do is skin them for their pelts which aren't in demand and would be low dollar items. Predators aren't generally good eating so it wouldnt be for that. I know that there are people out there who do like to kill just for killing sake, but those people are defective anyway and should be removed from the gene pool.

Originally posted by pritchke: We are nature's guardians, or caretakers and we have been doing a very poor job.

Was there an office memo that I missed?

I must have been out sick that day

Though I will admit that in some areas we do a bad job of it, in others we are doing quite well. So as always we need to continue to try to do better, be more efficient andless wasteful.

Originally posted by Sir Krustin: quote: Originally posted by Neb: Then why the hell do dog/wolf hybrids exist? TELL ME THAT.

Simple - they don't. That was my whole point.[/QUOTE]
Uhh I know of a guy in Minnessotta that earns a living raising Dog/wolf hybrids and sells them as pets. I was only around them for an hour or so on a tour of the place, but the hybrids seem to live up to his assertions that they make good pets. These were specially bred by him. In nature Im not aware of nay historical intermixing of wolves and dogs. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Sir Krustin: quote: Originally posted by Neb: Then why the hell do dog/wolf hybrids exist? TELL ME THAT.

Simple - they don't. That was my whole point.[/QUOTE]
Uhh I know of a guy in Minnessotta that earns a living raising Dog/wolf hybrids and sells them as pets. I was only around them for an hour or so on a tour of the place, but the hybrids seem to live up to his assertions that they make good pets. These were specially bred by him. In nature Im not aware of nay historical intermixing of wolves and dogs. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened.[/QUOTE]Wild animals don't breed domesticated ones. The breeding of domesticated wolves with domesticated dogs is a whole other kettle of fish. I am not aware of any breed of wild hybrid.

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by Moni: Moni, Cerek, If I am not mistaken, I was directly addressing Sir Krustin when I talked about hunting wolves for sport...the same person who in this very thread provided me with this link for reference on the size of Canadian coyotes vs American coyotes: Here (big snip) Regardless if the post was provided to me for reference in the size of a Canadian coyote, there are plenty of other sites that could have been used without reference to hunting for sport.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any. That site happened to be one I knew that had Canadian examples on them. This site also happens to be from a geographic area near where the shop is. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Wolfz is definitely in for the thrill of it, I used to hunt with him but since then I've stopped hanging around him. (Nothing to do with his hunting habits, he's actually a safe and conscientious{sp} hunter)

But I have to ask this...if someone is following the rules and performing a valuable service for conservation, or simply just enjoying the meat does the thrill of the kill really matter??

Argh, sorry for mispelling your name Sir K....I think I've corrected them all lol.

Just call me Sir K or Krusty...most everybody does.

[ 10-20-2002, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Sir Krustin ]