Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
I think it is possible to raise animals for food without mucking up the process or causing serious environmental damage to public land, but people are not inclined to make the effort.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
Ron,
Please expound upon that thought, leaving feedlots out of the equation.
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
Well Ron: there is one large predator whose population is completely out of control.
It doesn't look like human population control is a popular subject for the politicians.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
If that Buddhist reincarnation thingie of human souls into animals is true
it would be poetic justice if all the wolf loving Eco-morons get their souls stuck in an endless loop of reincarnating over and over just inside wolves who then get 'harvested'.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
i like wolves. but their population was expanding significantly. they don't need lots of help. but that doesnt mean i want to see them wiped out either.
someone said it....balance. us humans have already messed with the balance and it will just get worse.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
One of the reasons why the wolves (and cougars) have done so well, once they were reintroduced, or they stopped being hunter/trapped/poisoned as "vermin", is that ungulate populations have grown considerably over the last half century or more. There are lots more deer (especially), but also elk, moose, and sheep. The reason being the steady decline in hunting - although half of the animals killed are poached, there's still less hunting than there was. Plus habitat changes - deer thrive in clearcuts, and in suburban areas.
So if the manly hunters could only live up to their hot air, there'd be fewer ungulates, and wolf populations wouldn't grow so quickly. After all, if they're eating only one domestic animal each per year (if that), 99% of their prey must be wild animals.
Is their a wildlife biologist here, who could comment on how long it would take wolf-prey populations to come into equilibrium, once they're reintroduced?
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
So if the manly hunters could only live up to their hot air
on the contrary. i am sure that there are some hunters that think its more manly to kill a wolf. thats what they are doing.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
i still get a kick out of californians (who have bear on their flag extinct in that state), preaching to those who live in MT, ID and WY (those are generally the states with the highest wolf population) on how to manage their wildlife....
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
I may be stirring a hornets nest here, but I seem to remember seeing a film documenting the fact that wolves rely heavily on their local rodent population through the colder months.
Shoot them if they attack you or your livestock.
Otherwise, leave them alone.
|
|
Charlie D.
Trad climber
Western Slope, Tahoe Sierra
|
|
Hawkeye, with 37 million people in this state we've got a lot of preachers...on a lot of subjects!
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
What if the ranchers had to pay fair market value (no political sweetheart deals) for the public land that they use? How would that change land use practices? It'll never happen, of course - they're dependent on direct and indirect federal subsidies. But it's an interesting thought experiment.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
you guys beating on ranchers are hilarious...i doubt you even have a clue.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
Stinkeye posted: "They are already compensated for verified wolf kills." This is absolutely not true. Ask anybody involved. Maybe you do and maybe you don't. Occasionally some do get compensated. At the time of the last Oregon wolf attack, the rancher (who was raising a rare breed as breeding stock only, not to eat) learned to his chagrin and sadness that the fund ("Defenders of Wildlife") was out of money and he was S**t out of luck. It may still be out of scratch now, I don't know. It's not the government giving this compensation, but a private group. One which you can and should give some $ too.
Other states may have funds set up by now. Defenders was talking about ending the program when Wolves were delisted. You can google all this I don't know current status. Montana had been talking about it, Oregon hasn't done sh#t and we are looking to cut budgets now and don't have many wolves anyway: so that's out. Now, if any of you wolf lovers really want to do something, how about putting your money were your mouth is and putting some money into the ring. In fact, not just a one time donation, it will need to be funded continually going forward. So I'd suggest you defenders all send a check to Defenders of Wildlife to give yourself some standing in this issue. For myself, I do think that this is one to let biologists and ranchers, working together, have the ability to manage themselves. YES, wolves will be shot, trapped and killed. So will stock, and ranchers should be compensated for it too. But at the end of the day, wolves will learn to be wary around human habitation cause they won't get a free pass and are very smart animals.
Ron has that last one right Brandon. Wolves kill for fun. Furthermore, shooting one isn't really that easy. You wake up at 5 am to go do your chores and start the work day and find out that in the middle of the night, in a far pasture out of view, wolves killed some of your formerly live ...stock. At the point you (Mr and Mrs rancher) are looking at this bloody scene, the pack could be 10-20 miles away and loping further away by the second. As individuals they have a huge range, you can google it.
Thanks Jan, got it now.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
Most of the introduced wolf population in Idaho resides in the large expanse of wilderness in the central part of the state.
Idaho has the largest acreage of de facto wilderness in the lower 48. These roadless, undeveloped wilderness lands are marginably usable for livestock grazing around the perimeters.
Residents are more concerned about decimation of ungulate herds than the wolves impact on grazing livestock. Of course, the cattle, sheep and horse owners are very concerned. In Wyoming and Montana, where the wolf population is surging into both private and public grazing lands the emphasis is more upon livestock worries
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
According to Food and Agriculture Organization FAO statistics, only 9% of beef production is from grazing rangelands and grasslands.
Industrial feedlots and .integrated livestock-crop farming systems utilizing private pasture land and crop residues account for the remaining 91 %.
(A 2003 Colorado State University study that 80% of consumers in the Denver-Colorado area preferred the taste corn-fed beef to grass-fed beef.)
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
Good heavens! Several consecutive posts with useful and apparently non-biased information. What can the world be coming to?
If 365 domestic animals of all kinds were proven to have been killed by wolves in Montana two years ago, the compensation works out to $380.82 each. Probably more, in that some may not have been compensable. Still, not bad.
Still, 365 animals total is pretty lame - from what others have posted, you'd think that each and every wolf killed 365 domestic animals a year, or more. And such numbers don't do much to show that they're hunting for fun. Wolves hunting for fun would make short work of domestic cattle and sheep.
ps I don't eat a lot of red meat, but try to have supposedly free range beef when I can.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 04:37pm PT
|
Mmmmm gud happy free range wolf bait, albeit Utahn woofbait.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
I love it Anders, the hunters are just not manly enough!
I say; instead of blaze orange hunters should be wearing plaid pajamas and packing italian heat!
Wolves sneaking around at night won't have a chance. They'll be porch bait.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
The news story to the study I refer to in my above post just came out.
http://news.yahoo.com/study-yellowstone-wolves-help-trees-rebound-151833200.html
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — The return of gray wolves has dramatically altered the landscape in portions of Yellowstone National Park, as new trees take root in areas where the predators have curbed the size of foraging elk herds, according to scientists in a new study.
Stands of aspen, willow and cottonwood are expanding in areas where for decades dense elk populations prevented new growth, said study author William Ripple from Oregon State University.
While other factors may play a role, from a changing climate to wildfires, more than a decade of research has confirmed earlier assertions that the return of Yellowstone's elk-hungry wolves has spurred new plant growth, he said.
The findings from Ripple and co-author Robert Beschta will be published in the scientific journal Biological Conservation. The study already has been released online.
Wolves are "apex predators, on top of the food web," Ripple said. "They're more than just charismatic animals that are nice to have around. We're finding that their function in nature is very important."
Wolves have spin-off benefits, too, the researchers said: As trees grow taller, the stands provide more habitat for yellow warblers and other songbirds and more food for beavers, which in turn construct ponds that attract fish, reptiles and amphibians.......
You can click the link for the full story. Where's Rockjox to bitch on the wolves now?
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
BTW, right now, if you are a rancher and a wolf pack takes out half your herd, you get nothing - not a nickel, f*#ked in the ass with raw sand clean up the mess.
That should change.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!