| Previous :: Next Topic |
| Author |
Message |
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11279 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here |
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
|
 Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:30 am |
|
|
Also, stating that somebody intentionally put their cows near a den because they are against the wolf reintroduction would indite quite a large population of E. Warshington residents. Words do NOT mean action is taken.
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
|
| Back to top |
  
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Sun Oct 23, 2016 11:13 am |
|
|
^ Well... the deal was what... a month or so back?
I'm not going to go through and dig through all the posts, but Wielgus' statements were debunked by a credible source - it's in one of the cited articles here or in the "Profanity Pack" thread.
Go find it and read it. Do your own homework.
This nonsense above is exactly the same tactic used by Fox News: repeat and recycle the same fabricated story over and over and sooner or later some people will start believing it. I believe there's at least one political candidate using the same tactic right now.
See also: Josef Goebbles Big Lie
Same/same. There is nothing new under the sun.
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
| Back to top |
|
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11279 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here |
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
|
Sun Oct 23, 2016 1:53 pm |
|
|
Ski, calm down. I am saying that just because a rancher is against wolves does not mean he took deliberate action. If the wolves are like spotted owls and archy sites, the info on where they den would be top secret. Which means that cows can easily end up near a den if the rancher does not know locations of dens. Sigh...trying to get a point across and ........failing I guess.
Now, a large population in this state is not in favor of having wolves around. Some even make statements saying so! Does that mean that they are guilty of moving cows around also? Is not being in favor of having wolves around a crime? Where are the thought police?
It is time the cows start going home now until next May. We shall see if they stay safe on their home range.
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Sun Oct 23, 2016 2:15 pm |
|
|
I'm calm - just tired after having driven over 1300 miles in the last 72 hours.
The comment above wasn't directed at you, tw, but rather the nonsensical comments above. There is no evidence that McIrvine unloaded his stock anywhere near any den site, and the statement (made by Wielgus) that he did so was credibly refuted.
Just the speculation about it serves only to perpetuate the myth.
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Humptulips
Member
Joined: 08 Nov 2012
Posts: 234 | TRs | Pics
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:47 pm |
|
|
^ perhaps even for wolves there's a Rubicon somewhere.
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
| Back to top |
|
|
timberghost
Member
Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 1332 | TRs | Pics
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
monorail
Member
Joined: 06 May 2012
Posts: 267 | TRs | Pics
|
|
monorail
Member
|
Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:43 pm |
|
|
| Ski wrote: | In other words, you have absolutely nothing to substantiate your statements above. If you did, you would have posted it or provided links.
Thanks very much, but I'd prefer this remain a reality-based discussion.
| monorail wrote: | | "...McIrvine moved the cattle to the site of the den...". |
^ This statement is particularly outrageous, in that it's a total fabrication that Wielgus made from whole cloth. You have nothing to substantiate that statement. |
It seems you don't read very carefully. As I stated previously, quoting the WSU statement which you yourself cited:
| Quote: | | In fact, the rancher identified in the article did not intentionally place livestock at or near the den site of the Profanity Peak wolf pack |
",,,did not intentionally." Meaning: it happened, but (according to WSU) was not intentional. Intent is the source of disagreement, not the fact that it happened.
More information can be drawn from the 9/2 press release of the WAG, by WDFW's Danny Martorello. It's spun heavily towards the idea that it was unintentional, but the basic facts are there--- including the fact that McIrvin placed salt blocks at the wolves' rendezvous site, drawing cattle to that location. http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/advisory/wag/WAGWolfManagementUpdates.pdf
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:12 pm |
|
|
| Robert Strenge, in the August 31, 2016 press release from Washington State University wrote: | | "In fact, the rancher identified in the article did not intentionally place livestock at or near the den site of the Profanity Peak wolf pack, and Wielgus subsequently acknowledged that he had no basis in fact for making such a statement. In actuality, the livestock were released at low elevation on the east side of the Kettle Crest more than 4 miles from the den site and were dispersed throughout the allotments based on instructions found in the Annual Operating Instructions (AOI). The CC mountain allotment is more than 30,000 acres and livestock are generally moved from pasture to pasture following an established rotation.
In fact, the rancher identified in the article has held a term grazing permit for 73 years and has worked with both the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife and the U.S. Forest Service in the management of livestock in order to avoid conflict – following procedures outlined by the Washington Wolf Advisory Group. In order to reduce wolf/livestock conflict, the rancher has modified livestock rotation practices and utilized range riders to ensure livestock safety. |
There's nothing mentioned in any of what you've cited above about any salt block, and the rest of your statement above simply doesn't jibe with the statements of either WSU or WDFW.
I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by simply making up stuff without any supporting evidence, of which you've provided none.
Again, I would respectfully request you endeavor to keep this discussion one that is reality based.
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
| Back to top |
|
|
monorail
Member
Joined: 06 May 2012
Posts: 267 | TRs | Pics
|
|
monorail
Member
|
Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:01 pm |
|
|
| Ski wrote: | | There's nothing mentioned in any of what you've cited above about any salt block |
What?! Yes there is. As I said, in the 9/2 entry from the link I cited above:
| Quote: | | In one situation, the wolf rendezvous site overlapped with part of the grazing path, where livestock were concentrated with the use of salt blocks. |
You have repeatedly accused me of making stuff up and not providing evidence, when in fact I've provided links backing up every point I've made. It seems to me that you are unconsciously filtering out any words which do not align with your worldview. There's nothing I can do about this-- I cannot cause the words to enter your brain-- so I don't think I'll argue further.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11279 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here |
|
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
|
Fri Oct 28, 2016 6:22 am |
|
|
Monorail, can you answer this question? Oops, the next one that is.
How can anybody know where the wolf territory is if it is secret? How can one be sure salt blocks are not in that area if the rancher isn't told where the wolves are?
Now why do you think that salt blocks were intentionally placed when the location was not shared?
Try using some common sense. In the Okanogan Chronicle, there is an article stating that that rancher was found by the state wildlife folks to have followed all the rules.
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
|
| Back to top |
|
|
monorail
Member
Joined: 06 May 2012
Posts: 267 | TRs | Pics
|
|
monorail
Member
|
Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:48 am |
|
|
As I mentioned eaerlier, the rancher had access to live GPS data from the wolves' radio collars. McIrvin had access to this data because he employed range riders, ostensibly to prevent conflict. I cited a Spokesman-Review article earlier which describes the range rider/GPS program
In fact, this is why I'm still concerned about the issue: I think that GPS program needs some serious reevaluation. It seems like a good idea: ranchers can use the GPS data to avoid wolves, saving their cattle and preventing conflict. But what happens when a rancher who is determined to eradicate wolves gets access to that data? What if they use the data to create conflict, which they know will lead to the destruction of the wolves? What if they.. oh, I don't know.. use the data to determine den and rendezvous sites, and then place salt blocks at those locations to draw their cattle?
In July, during the time WDFW claims McIrvin was trying his darnedest to cooperate with the wolf program, this is what he had to say at a Ferry County meeting: | Quote: | | "Mr. Len McIrvin asked Sheriff Maycumber to make sure the Sheriff sees proof of the dead wolves, not just take WDFW's word for it." |
Now, I don't care whether McIrvin is good or evil, or whether people love him or hate him. I do care about the fact that someone with this attitude is granted access to wolves' GPS data. And I think it's a bad idea.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum |
Bang bang bang! 
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Humptulips
Member
Joined: 08 Nov 2012
Posts: 234 | TRs | Pics
|
| monorail wrote: | As I mentioned eaerlier, the rancher had access to live GPS data from the wolves' radio collars. McIrvin had access to this data because he employed range riders, ostensibly to prevent conflict. I cited a Spokesman-Review article earlier which describes the range rider/GPS program
In fact, this is why I'm still concerned about the issue: I think that GPS program needs some serious reevaluation. It seems like a good idea: ranchers can use the GPS data to avoid wolves, saving their cattle and preventing conflict. But what happens when a rancher who is determined to eradicate wolves gets access to that data? What if they use the data to create conflict, which they know will lead to the destruction of the wolves? What if they.. oh, I don't know.. use the data to determine den and rendezvous sites, and then place salt blocks at those locations to draw their cattle?
In July, during the time WDFW claims McIrvin was trying his darnedest to cooperate with the wolf program, this is what he had to say at a Ferry County meeting: | Quote: | | "Mr. Len McIrvin asked Sheriff Maycumber to make sure the Sheriff sees proof of the dead wolves, not just take WDFW's word for it." |
Now, I don't care whether McIrvin is good or evil, or whether people love him or hate him. I do care about the fact that someone with this attitude is granted access to wolves' GPS data. And I think it's a bad idea. |
Really seems like a lot of speculation on your part. I do not think WDFW people are stupid and could see what is going on if what you think is happening is true. Someone has to decide yea or nay and the Department must have thought the kill order was justified.
The alternative is not working with the ranchers and I don't think that will go well for the wolves.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:20 am |
|
|
| monorail wrote: | | It seems you don't read very carefully. |
No... I just didn't read that far. I was only reading to the point where the Wielgus story came up.
So... sorry I missed that part, which is actually kind of interesting:
| Donny Martorello, WDFW Wolf Policy Lead wrote: | | "Four livestock producers operate on the allotments in the area and graze a total of about 1500 cattle."
"One livestock producer set out his cattle (198 pairs of cows-calves) around June 10 in a 30,000 acre allotment, which has only one road access point. The cattle turnout area was four to five miles from the Profanity Peak packs den, but the den site wasn't known or confirmed at the time."
"During the first week of June, Department employees started trapping to place radio collars on Profanity Peak wolves to monitor the pack. There were no collars in this pack prior to that time. We captured and collared an adult male on June 10 and an adult female on June 12."
"As cattle continued to disperse through the allotment they inevitably crossed paths with the den site and later with rendezvous sites."
"In one situation, the wolf rendezvous site overlapped with part of the normal grazing path, where livestock were concentrated with the use of salt blocks. Once that overlap was detected, the Department contacted the producer, who removed the salt blocks from the area." |
From the WDFW statements, we know:
-There are no fewer than four livestock producers using that particular allotment.
-The cattle were released four to five miles away from the den site, the location of which was not known at the time.
-Prior to the release of those cattle, none of the wolves in the area had been collared, and it therefore would have been impossible for McIrvine (or anyone else) to know of the den's location.
-Cattle, animals that have a propensity for wandering around, eventually stumbled upon the area where the den was located.
-The aforementioned salt block was located in a "rendezvous" area and was removed by the livestock producer at the request of WDFW.
So thanks for bringing that to my attention, because it shows that your statements above are all speculation:
The cattle were not released "on top of" any den site. At the time of their release nobody knew where the den site was.
Cows wander around. That's what they do. It's clear you've never been around cows. Some of them end up in the damnedest places (like up on the porch at the cabin.)
The salt block could have been set out by any of four livestock producers that were using the area. The salt block could well have been there prior to the release of the cattle on June 10.
Again, it's clear you haven't been around cattle. Salt blocks aren't just placed willy-nilly - they're usually set out in the same place. (They're also pretty heavy when they're new.) (edit: per Del's Farm Supply (phone): 50 pounds.)
Again, thanks for bringing that to my attention, because it disproves everything you've said above.
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate NWHikers.net earns from qualifying purchases when you use our link(s). |
