Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Wolves need our help NOW!
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
RickS
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 222 | TRs | Pics
RickS
Member
PostWed Aug 08, 2012 8:14 pm 
Who says wolves are cuddly? I don't believe cattle and livestock should be allowed on public lands at all. Ranchers are the cause of their own problems. up.gif up.gif up.gif
Rancher wrote:
You know, I'm heartbroken that many people don't like me. My family has owned the land on which we raise cattle since 1870. No, we don't use public land. We raise the beef you eat all on our own property, roughly 10K acres of it. Now, I'm told that the wolves belong to the state. That they are the property of the people. What happens when someone's dog trespasses on someone else's property and kills their livestock? That's right, the owner gets to make restitution. So what should happen when your wolf trespasses on my property and kills my $2500 steer? You know, it's people with holier-than-thou attitudes, like I've seen here, that make us keep our properties closed to the public. For all the supposed superior ethics and intelligence I see touted here, it's still the same people who cut fences, leave gates open, and carelessly manage their campfires and matches that claim that superiority. Everyone who disagrees with their fantasies about things like cuddly wolves is an ignorant redneck, who just can't see the higher values and the higher purpose. Well, I have news for you. I come from a long line of survivors; people who have fought the weather and tamed the land for generations. We're not about to go away quietly because you and your friends throw tantrums. And believe me, it'll be a cold day in the nether regions when the "No Trespassing" signs come down.

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


Joined: 08 Aug 2012
Posts: 3 | TRs | Pics
Rancher
Member
PostWed Aug 08, 2012 8:22 pm 
RickS wrote:
Who says wolves are cuddly? I don't believe cattle and livestock should be allowed on public lands at all. Ranchers are the cause of their own problems. up.gif up.gif up.gif
And I don't believe hikers, bikers, and ATVs should be allowed on public land. They cut fences, leave garbage behind, start fires, and generally create work for those who actually care for the land. These people are no more entitled to use the land than anyone else, so if you're going to talk about banning uses, let's start with those that create the most problems and don't pay a dime for the privilege.

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


Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 222 | TRs | Pics
RickS
Member
PostWed Aug 08, 2012 8:28 pm 
LOSS OF PREDATORS AFFECTING ECOSYSTEM HEALTH 4-9-12 The study this story is based on is available online: http://hdl.handle.net/1957/28411 CORVALLIS, Ore. – A survey on the loss in the Northern Hemisphere of large predators, particularly wolves, concludes that current populations of moose, deer, and other large herbivores far exceed their historic levels and are contributing to disrupted ecosystems. The research, published today by scientists from Oregon State University, examined 42 studies done over the past 50 years. It found that the loss of major predators in forest ecosystems has allowed game animal populations to greatly increase, crippling the growth of young trees and reducing biodiversity. This also contributes to deforestation and results in less carbon sequestration, a potential concern with climate change. “These issues do not just affect the United States and a few national parks,” said William Ripple, an OSU professor of forestry and lead author of the study. “The data from Canada, Alaska, the Yukon, Northern Europe and Asia are all showing similar results. There’s consistent evidence that large predators help keep populations of large herbivores in check, with positive effects on ecosystem health.” Densities of large mammalian herbivores were six times greater in areas without wolves, compared to those in which wolves were present, the researchers concluded. They also found that combinations of predators, such as wolves and bears, can create an important synergy for moderating the size of large herbivore populations. “Wolves can provide food that bears scavenge, helping to maintain a healthy bear population,” said Robert Beschta, a professor emeritus at OSU and co-author of the study. “The bears then often prey on young moose, deer or elk – in Yellowstone more young elk calves are killed by bears than by wolves, coyotes and cougars combined.” In Europe, the coexistence of wolves with lynx also resulted in lower deer densities than when wolves existed alone. In recent years, OSU researchers have helped lead efforts to understand how major predators help to reduce herbivore population levels, improve ecosystem function and even change how herbivores behave when they feel threatened by predation – an important aspect they call the “ecology of fear.” “In systems where large predators remain, they appear to have a major role in sustaining the diversity and productivity of native plant communities, thus maintaining healthy ecosystems,” said Beschta. “When the role of major predators is more fully appreciated, it may allow managers to reconsider some of their assumptions about the management of wildlife.” In Idaho and Montana, hundreds of wolves are now being killed in an attempt to reduce ranching conflicts and increase game herd levels. The new analysis makes clear that the potential beneficial ecosystem effects of large predators is far more pervasive, over much larger areas, than has often been appreciated. It points out how large predators can help maintain native plant communities by keeping large herbivore densities in check, allow small trees to survive and grow, reduce stream bank erosion, and contribute to the health of forests, streams, fisheries and other wildlife. It also concludes that human hunting, due to its limited duration and impact, is not effective in preventing hyper-abundant densities of large herbivores. This is partly “because hunting by humans is often not functionally equivalent to predation by large, wide-ranging carnivores such as wolves,” the researchers wrote in their report. “More studies are necessary to understand how many wolves are needed in managed ecosystems,” Ripple said. “It is likely that wolves need to be maintained at sufficient densities before we see their resulting effects on ecosystems.” The research was published online today in the European Journal of Wildlife Research, a professional journal. “The preservation or recovery of large predators may represent an important conservation need for helping to maintain the resiliency of northern forest ecosystems,” the researchers concluded, “especially in the face of a rapidly changing climate.” up.gif up.gif up.gif

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


Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 373 | TRs | Pics
Location: orting
rasbo
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 4:14 am 
deer and elk are my natural prey also.I pay well to harvest and eat them,right along side my home grown veggies..soon my own chickens and eggs will be from my own home..all free range,except the veggies,they are a high fence product...tell us what you eat rick,and the consequences of keeping yourself alive in the grand scheme of things.your not a resident here,do you reside on a small piece of land and live off it.Do you live in san francisco in a flat,and buy your produce from a farmer,or meat from a rancher.or a posh li'l market that buys meat and produce from a farmer or rancher.where do you get this magic food that comes from nowhere,to fuel you and your ilk that costs states and its taxpayers so much money,wolves are here to stay,not at all in danger of becoming extinct.With proper management, which is in place, why are you still shouting from the roof tops all your nonsense...Is the power running your computer from your own li'l wind farm?Or is it from a dam? Its not just rick out there,there are millions of people out there rick.They have to eat,and have to bang away on computers,cut trails through wilderness,pave roads.burn fuels.seems to me folks have it pretty much under control and getting better..This isn't the 1800's no more.changes have to be made,there will be sacrifices also,,Get real rick..

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


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 2093 | TRs | Pics
Location: the Oly Pen
trestle
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 6:36 am 
Snowbrushy wrote:
Imagine that the tide is out on a Olympic National Park beach and a family of Gray Wolf chase around after an elusive flock of seagulls. It's all for good fun. The gull's fly down to the other end of the beach, and the dog's run after them back and forth. And so on and so forth while you watch this scene from the log's. Wow, did I actually just see that happen?
Hey SB, all in good fun, but if the wolves can't get the seagulls and are really hungry, wouldn't they eventually notice you on the log (they are the top predators we need around afterall) and close in as a pack?
Quote:
We all like to eat a little cow now and then. Are we really any different than a hungry wolf? Or a cougar? I doubt it.
Wouldn't the observer on the log become the cow? lol.gif clown.gif

"Life favors the prepared." - Edna Mode
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schenk
Off Leash Man



Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 2372 | TRs | Pics
Location: Traveling, with the bear, to the other side of the Mountain
Schenk
Off Leash Man
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 9:31 am 
RickS wrote:
It also concludes that human hunting, due to its limited duration and impact, is not effective in preventing hyper-abundant densities of large herbivores. This is partly “because hunting by humans is often not functionally equivalent to predation by large, wide-ranging carnivores such as wolves,” the researchers wrote in their report.
I was not going to respond to anything RickS said again but this is just too hilarious to pass up: hahahaha...Such Irony up.gif up.gif up.gif MORE DEER, MOOSE, AND ELK TAGS need to be issued!!!! We are not doing a very good job as hunters.

Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
onemoremile
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1305 | TRs | Pics
Location: Sequim
onemoremile
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 9:56 am 
Schenck, I would kind of disagree. The hunters are willing and able to do a better job; they are an effective tool. The issue with that statement falls more to the failure of the wildlife managers.

“Arbolist? Look up the word. I don’t know, maybe I made it up. Anyway, it’s an arbo-tree-ist, somebody who knows about trees.” G.W. Bush
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RickS
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 222 | TRs | Pics
RickS
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 11:04 am 
Wolves are perfectly capable of keeping the deer, elk, moose, etc in check. Wolves hunt year round. up.gif up.gif up.gif

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


Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 222 | TRs | Pics
RickS
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 11:06 am 
Not as effective as wolves. Wolves hunt year round, so they do a much better job keeping the elk, deer, moose, etc in check. up.gif up.gif up.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schenk
Off Leash Man



Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 2372 | TRs | Pics
Location: Traveling, with the bear, to the other side of the Mountain
Schenk
Off Leash Man
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 11:20 am 
RickS wrote:
Hunters destroy more wildlife than wolves yet they demonize wolves for when they kill elk, deer, moose, etc.
You said it, not me. So which postition do you take? Wolves kill more, or less, game than hunters...you get to choose one, not both RickS And to set the record straight: What you actually hear are hunters complaining when wolves decimate a local population of game animals, and it sure looks like the very study you have quoted supports their claim! Thanks for the chuckle, you're funny rotf.gif

Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Dave Workman
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 3684 | TRs | Pics
Location: In the woods, by the big tree
Dave Workman
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 12:07 pm 
Schenk wrote:
RickS wrote:
Hunters destroy more wildlife than wolves yet they demonize wolves for when they kill elk, deer, moose, etc.
You said it, not me. So which postition do you take? Wolves kill more, or less, game than hunters...you get to choose one, not both RickS And to set the record straight: What you actually hear are hunters complaining when wolves decimate a local population of game animals, and it sure looks like the very study you have quoted supports their claim! Thanks for the chuckle, you're funny rotf.gif
Interesting observations.

"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted." - D.H. Lawrence
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Snowbrushy
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2003
Posts: 6670 | TRs | Pics
Location: South Sound
Snowbrushy
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 12:46 pm 
johnson37 wrote:
all in good fun, but if the wolves can't get the seagulls and are really hungry..
It's all about good fun and the experience. I saw a huge bear and I heard a wildcat. I hid in my tent. When I'm alone out in the middle of nowhere I hide, mostly.. I can hear the critters at night so I usually go to my bag. If you get afraid sometimes you are a healthy human. It's the experience. That is why you went into the woods and wilderness - like a moth to a flame. Johnson, if you want a .22 revolver for security then ask Dave to train you. It could be important if you want to take a women and kid's with you. (is that sexist or what?). This is the wilderness. It's supposed to be scary. Let's keep it that way. Personally, I hide in my tent.

Oh Pilot of the storm who leaves no trace Like thoughts inside a dream Heed the path that led me to that place Yellow desert stream.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RickS
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 222 | TRs | Pics
RickS
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 12:53 pm 
No question, when it comes to just wildlife in general, hunters by far kill much more wildlife than wolves. up.gif up.gif up.gif
Schenk wrote:
RickS wrote:
Hunters destroy more wildlife than wolves yet they demonize wolves for when they kill elk, deer, moose, etc.
You said it, not me. So which postition do you take? Wolves kill more, or less, game than hunters...you get to choose one, not both RickS And to set the record straight: What you actually hear are hunters complaining when wolves decimate a local population of game animals, and it sure looks like the very study you have quoted supports their claim! Thanks for the chuckle, you're funny rotf.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schenk
Off Leash Man



Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 2372 | TRs | Pics
Location: Traveling, with the bear, to the other side of the Mountain
Schenk
Off Leash Man
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 1:13 pm 
Survey says: Hunting is an effective way to manage wildlife populations. Thank you.

Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
onemoremile
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1305 | TRs | Pics
Location: Sequim
onemoremile
Member
PostThu Aug 09, 2012 1:32 pm 
RickS wrote:
No question, when it comes to just wildlife in general, hunters by far kill much more wildlife than wolves.
Well, that depends on WHERE. Washington only has about 100 wolves (maybe more) compared to 70,000 elk hunters for 2011; so of course hunters will take more. Using the findings from Yellowstone, the wolves were killing 23-24 elk per wolf per year. So figure that for Washington it will be about 2400 wolf killed elk/yr (maybe less since they are busy killing cattle in the NE and Methow, and sheep in the teanaway). The wolves double in population every 3 years. Also RickS, wolves hunt year round (like you mention) and mostly start off with calf elk, then pregnant cows, then sick/weak/injured/lone bulls. Humans are restricted to about 2 weeks a year and in most cases limited to 3 pt bulls on the westside and spike bulls on the east side. Wolves can hunt at night and in refuges/national parks. Reasons for all the restrictions are that humans are actually WAY more effective than wolves.

“Arbolist? Look up the word. I don’t know, maybe I made it up. Anyway, it’s an arbo-tree-ist, somebody who knows about trees.” G.W. Bush
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 need our help NOW!
  Happy Birthday marcoramius, Just_Some_Hiker!
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