Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Wolves
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 9:27 am 
I will let the summary of all your posts on a hiking website speak for it's self.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster



Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 364 | TRs | Pics
Location: Wa
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 9:40 am 
Sky Hiker wrote:
I will let the summary of all your posts on a hiking website speak for it's self.
Ok so because I have been a lurker for several years and finally decided to set up a profile my evidence I proposed is invalid. Then you choose to use borderline passive aggressive personal attacks rather than posting anything of worth or evidence to support your opinion. Did I get that right? And in the interest of defending myself which is appalling that I have to do since I have been a member for less than 24 hours. The reason I have been a lurker for so long is because work has forced me to go to North Dakota for the last 6 years and I don't post anything unless I can actually contribute to the topic. I am relatively a new hiker with only 4 multi night excursions under my belt and a lot of day hikes so most topics I can't contribute much. I will be returning shortly and am looking forward to being back to the PNW and leaving North Dakota for good. The reason I chose this topic to start posting was my experience in Minnesota actually gave me perspective on the topic.

I may not be the smartest, I may not be the strongest, but I don't want to be. I only want to be the best I can be.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 10:12 am 
Well welcome to the PNW if that ever materializes. I look forward to your hiking contributions to the site. Perhaps it should interest you to find that there is a bill being proposed to relocate wolves from NE Wa to other parts of the state to share in benefits.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster



Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 364 | TRs | Pics
Location: Wa
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 10:18 am 
It certainly will materialize I am originally from WA, just returning. I will look into that bill thank you

I may not be the smartest, I may not be the strongest, but I don't want to be. I only want to be the best I can be.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 10:34 am 
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 12:08 pm 
Sky Hiker wrote:
"...to share in benefits..."
^ Specifically what would those "benefits" be? Kindly list them.
Sky Hiker wrote:
"...a bill being proposed..."
^ That's rather curious, considering the original Washington State Wolf Management Plan didn't include any provisions for translocation.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 12:31 pm 
While talking with the lady on the phone at the Legislative Hotline about HB2771 and telling her to tell my elected representatives that YES, I'm all for this HB2771, but only with the proviso that the first wolves translocated be dropped off in Westlake Center in downtown Seattle, she started laughing and asked "Have you called and left this message before?" When I asked her why she would ask me that she said she was certain I had already called because she'd already gotten that same message from a few other people already. lol.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 1:03 pm 
Well Ski I am not able to come up with any benefits at this time, maybe burck17 might be able give some.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Kascadia
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Posts: 651 | TRs | Pics
Kascadia
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 1:04 pm 
burck17 wrote:
As you can see the population definitely decreased for elk but the population has stabilized at a more sustainable number, moreover the population of beavers increased as did nearly all forest growth and bison numbers in Yellowstone... Now the wolves and elk have leveled off and found a healthy balance also as you can see it did not entirely eliminate the population as previously suggested.
Of course it didn't, lol, they've lived along side each other for thousands of years. . . In other words, I'm completely agreeing with you.

It is as though I had read a divine text, written into the world itself, not with letters but rather with essential objects, saying: Man, stretch thy reason hither, so thou mayest comprehend these things. Johannes Kepler
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster



Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 364 | TRs | Pics
Location: Wa
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 1:29 pm 
If you read through the study I posted you will see the only population wolver hurt were the elk of those listed all other increased to include forest growth... That's a benefit and I am a hunter and will be elk hunting fyi. That is the only factual benefit I can offer, I personally think restoration of a species killed out is a benefit because they naturally belong there and it was there home before ours. I understand not everyone feels that way and I respect that opinion, obviously not everyone can always be in agreement just look at our country as a whole at this point... But just to play devil's advocate to those who don't support wolves in our forest. How does eradication of an entire population play with the leave no trace principal we all are so quick to preach?

I may not be the smartest, I may not be the strongest, but I don't want to be. I only want to be the best I can be.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 1:52 pm 
Who mentioned total eradication? You think that wolves haven't been here before the pilgrimage from Yellowstone?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12832 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 2:01 pm 
Sky Hiker wrote:
Well Ski I am not able to come up with any benefits at this time, maybe burck17 might be able give some.
Well... you guys be sure to let me be the first to know when you come up with something that call be considered "benefit" that is happening within the borders of Washington State and that hasn't been quoted out of some paper authored by Mssrs. Beschta and Ripple. I'm all ears. wink.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster



Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 364 | TRs | Pics
Location: Wa
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 2:07 pm 
Basically the south and Cascades from about Snoqualmie down... I've never heard of or seen a wolf and according to wdfw they are not there either https://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/ I know they have been in NE Washington for a long time but thats not the point, what we should stick for is to reintroduce them to as much of their historic range as possible http://graphics.latimes.com/towergraphic-la-me-wolves/

I may not be the smartest, I may not be the strongest, but I don't want to be. I only want to be the best I can be.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sky Hiker
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1469 | TRs | Pics
Location: outside
Sky Hiker
Member
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 2:07 pm 
The benefits are so when the grizzly bears are reintroduced they have someone to play with. smile.gif There will be more beavers, willows, cottonwood, bison, but at the expense of elk and deer populations. You will able to have reason to pack your firearm to protect you dog which has to be on a leash for fear of getting eaten. The price of beef and sheep meat will go up to off set their loss. That's the benefits.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster



Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 364 | TRs | Pics
Location: Wa
SwitchbackFisher
Boot buster
PostMon Feb 26, 2018 2:08 pm 
Ski wrote:
Well... you guys be sure to let me be the first to know when you come up with something that call be considered "benefit" that is happening within the borders of Washington State and that hasn't been quoted out of some paper authored by Mssrs. Beschta and Ripple. I'm all ears. wink.gif
Again read the study done I posted much earlier.

I may not be the smartest, I may not be the strongest, but I don't want to be. I only want to be the best I can be.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Wolves
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

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