The dirty little secret is an active controversy over wolves is good for the bottom line for those groups who solicit donations to “save the wolf” and yet put nothing into wildlife management, habitat restoration or anything else related to wildlife management.
ahhh... yes, but now you're attacking the religion of the pro-wolf zealots, who will promptly circle the wagons and pummel you with their "statistics" and other nonsense.
complete and total waste of time trying to engage in any sort of discussion with people whose ideologies and belief systems prevent them from having any grasp on reality.
the "ignore" feature here works wonders.
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
0
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Your right there is no reasoning with this type of person. They live in their little urban setting and are far from being in touch with reality and what goes on in the rural environment.
There is so much competition for elk in Idaho that IDFG has had to put limits on out of state tags for elk and other game due to "hunter crowding." It's not only the wolves who find these animals tasty.
The dirty little secret is an active controversy over wolves is good for the bottom line for those groups who solicit donations to “save the wolf” and yet put nothing into wildlife management, habitat restoration or anything else related to wildlife management.
ahhh... yes, but now you're attacking the religion of the pro-wolf zealots, who will promptly circle the wagons and pummel you with their "statistics" and other nonsense.
complete and total waste of time trying to engage in any sort of discussion with people whose ideologies and belief systems prevent them from having any grasp on reality.
the "ignore" feature here works wonders.
Note the consistency in the nomenclature used - "wolf slaughter." Used to evoke a highly emotional response.
Yes consistency used by Alta and Pro wolf groups. When used by others it is management objective. No different than anywhere else when these groups get involved in the meetings and layout a wolf recovery program. As soon as the objectives are met and the "agreed upon" are met they take it straight to court and challenge the objectives they were part of agreeing to. Talk about hypocrisy
Yes consistency used by Alta and Pro wolf groups. When used by others it is management objective. No different than anywhere else when these groups get involved in the meetings and layout a wolf recovery program. As soon as the objectives are met and the "agreed upon" are met they take it straight to court and challenge the objectives they were part of agreeing to. Talk about hypocrisy
Not to mention if you want to have a reasonable discussion about the topic, push back on the claims, or disagree with some or all of the "wolf slaughter" argument crowd's narrative or ideas, you are then deemed to be "in favor" of "wolf slaughter" and now not only are your ideas and knowledge about the topic wrong but you are, in fact, a bad person in general.
... which is why I have far too many entries in my ignore list, don't engage in many discussions here any more, and haven't bothered to post any trip reports for the last year or so.
But do have fun arguing about it.
I will be out looking for morels (or whatever type of fungi is in season at the moment.)
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
0
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Funny thing about this subject... nobody seems to ever want to address the elephant in the living room:
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife gets most of its operating budget money from sales of fishing licenses and hunting licenses.
As the years pass, and as the demographics change, and as hunting and fishing become less popular recreational activities, sales of hunting and fishing licenses have declined, resulting in WDFW now annually going hat in hand to the Washington State legislature to beg for money.
As game populations decrease, so in turn will sales of hunting licenses, and in turn the net revenue collected by WDFW from license sales, resulting in ever increasing budget shortfalls that either have to be made up by special appropriations from the State legislature, or budget cuts.
No doubt the "anti hunting" kooks are all for this. I'm sure they view this as a positive.
Question is: What happens when WDFW no longer has money to put boots on the ground in the form of badge-wearing, gun-carrying law enforcement officers?
But hey, maybe that's all just wild speculation and conjecture on my part, right??
Enjoy your little fantasies.
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
0
-------------- "I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Funny thing about this subject... nobody seems to ever want to address the elephant in the living room:
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife gets most of its operating budget money from sales of fishing licenses and hunting licenses.
As the years pass, and as the demographics change, and as hunting and fishing become less popular recreational activities, sales of hunting and fishing licenses have declined, resulting in WDFW now annually going hat in hand to the Washington State legislature to beg for money.
As game populations decrease, so in turn will sales of hunting licenses, and in turn the net revenue collected by WDFW from license sales, resulting in ever increasing budget shortfalls that either have to be made up by special appropriations from the State legislature, or budget cuts.
No doubt the "anti hunting" kooks are all for this. I'm sure they view this as a positive.
Question is: What happens when WDFW no longer has money to put boots on the ground in the form of badge-wearing, gun-carrying law enforcement officers?
But hey, maybe that's all just wild speculation and conjecture on my part, right??
Enjoy your little fantasies.
I've never understood desiring less wildlife as a means to prevent individuals from pursuing hunting.
"Let the predators increase and then they'll kill off the ungulates and then there will be a lack of prey for the predators and their population will decrease and then everything will be natural." AKA such people want less wildlife generally. AKA such people lack respect for the conservation model and accomplishments of the 20th century. All so you can impose your own moral relativism on others to control their actions which don't even affect you.
Hunting is natural. No one is walking around today because their ancestors did not hunt.
The literal only way to survive without harming some animal or plant is to forage for your own nuts, berries and legumes (possibly fungi as well). Any other version of sustainment requires animal or plant death.
Questioning Idaho's wolf management plan does not mean you are anti-hunting. I have absolutely nothing against hunting. While I don't hunt (I fish) one of my best friends is a fishing guide in Montana and also a huge hunter. His viewpoints on this subject align with mine. Hunting should be allowed to the extent it doesn't have any long term effect on the natural wildlife population and ecosystems. I think what we disagree with is what is that natural wildlife population. I also think Americans need to eat less beef (primarily because of environmental efficiency reasons, not moral reasons) and that we should not allow ranching on lands just because that is the way it always has been done. I also think those ranchers should be financially compensated for loosing livestock to wolves and there should be financial incentives for them to give up ranching on lands that are better suited for wolf and wildlife habitat.
From what I read about Idaho's current plan, it is unlikely they will be able to put a major dent on the wolf population no matter how hard they try. Only time will tell.
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 we earn from qualifying purchases when you use our link(s).
