Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
I nominate Jennie to star as Little Red Riding Hood. RokJox and friends can take turns being the Big Bad Wolf. Not sure who gets to be grandma - ideas? Not LEB.
300 domestic wildlife - mostly sheep and cattle - allegedly killed in Idaho each year by 700+ wolves? That is, ferocious bloodthirsty rampaging giant Canadian wolves? Even if the number was twice that, it's a miniscule percentage of the domestic livestock in Idaho, who as has been mentioned, are often subsidized and cause substantial environmental damage.
And despite your fantasies, they must be either very smart or very lame wolves. A kill rate of even one domestic animal per wolf per year, that is double the claimed one domestic animal/two wolves, isn't pretty pathetic. It would also be a trivial proportion of their total prey - how long would a sheep feed an adult wolf for? Maybe a week?
The wolves' depredations on coyotes were predictable, as the animals share a niche, and wolves are the alpha predator. Also due to the coyote population exploded over the last century, and the extermination of wolves.
As for the wolves' impacts on other animals, that was to be expected, as the restored ecosystem comes back into balance.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
One of the things I find disturbing is all the California environmentalists who think of themselves as peaceful, maybe Buddhists and vegans even, and yet they seem oblivious to the reign of death and destruction they have wrought.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Let's see wolves, Idaho ranchers....wolves, Idaho ranchers.....hmmm, well wolves where there first and (best yet) they can't vote.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
It's bad enough here in Sin City. I can't imagine how bad it is with real wolves.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
that coyote is really going to town on that pu.....
Well, I guess i better not type that.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2011 - 05:34pm PT
|
http://www.newsinenglish.no/2011/11/10/fewer-wolves-in-norway-more-in-sweden/
“This is blamed on politics, not biology,” Petter Wabakken, wolf researcher at the College of Hedmark, told Dagsavisen. Norway has set a ceiling of three wolf litters annually, largely because of constant resistance to wolves from Norway’s powerful farmers’ lobby, and that goal will likely be reached this year. Norway's tiny wolf population is diminishing. Poaching and political pressure from farmers.
They're counting on Sweden to save the Scandinavian wolf population.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2011 - 05:38pm PT
|
Sweden has a larger area, with lots of forest and lake country on its west side - good brown (grizzly) bear and wolf habitat. Norway has less room, and if there wasn't a healthy bear and wolf population in Sweden, they'd probably die out in Norway.
It's a bit like the residual grizzly and wolf population in the north Cascades, which are quite dependent on the Canadian side. Of course, human boundaries mean nothing to the animals, and the wolves all across the mountains of western North America are inter-related. Their behaviours and characteristics vary based on environment, but all can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. The myth of the giant ferocious Canadian wolf is just agitprop.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2011 - 05:49pm PT
|
MH
great clarification.
|
|
ms55401
Trad climber
minneapolis, mn
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2011 - 05:54pm PT
|
more wolves and pissed-off Idahoans?
win/win
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 11:50am PT
|
agitprop My new word of the month! I hadn't thought of it in years. Quite appropriate for some of the nonsense on the political threads.
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 12:31pm PT
|
It appears we have a lack of fishermen on this thread, hence all the marveling about the "huge wolves."
Let me help you out.
I asked Heidi to pose with Ralph to illustrate Forced Perspective:
Forced perspective is a technique that employs optical illusion to make an object appear farther away, closer, larger or smaller than it actually is. It is used primarily in photography, filmmaking and architecture. It manipulates human visual perception through the use of scaled objects and the correlation between them and the vantage point of the spectator or camera.
Forced Perspective is frequently used by fishermen to "enhance" the size of their catch.
Got it?
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 10:25pm PT
|
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 10:32pm PT
|
Brilliant Fritz! Humans are so arrogant but the cockroaches are waiting in the wings- there will be revenge.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 11:33pm PT
|
I don't recall using the word "giant" or "monster"describing the Mackenzie Valley subspecies of gray wolf. Wildlife taxonomy is a field of scientific inquiry and most experts in the field concede that particular subspecies (Canis lupus occidentalis) is larger than the subspecies native to the U.S. Rocky Mountains as well as the Mexican and Eastern Timberwolf subspecies of gray wolf.
References to wolf taxonomy publications, academic papers, wolf worship websites, wolf hater websites have been posted here, in past years, by Rokjox, myself and others. Everyone gets their opinion here...but before accusing a poster of making up "facts"...a circumspect poster will at least investigate the reference material.
The central issue is not the size of the Mackenzie Valley subspecies but whether that wolf is appropriate for the niche emptied in the near extirpation of native wolves by federal marshalls in the 1920's and 30's...and concerns over this subspecies surplus killing of prey animals (such as one wolf slaying 100 plus sheep near Dillon, Montana and the butchery of hundreds of wild elk left unconsumed, seemingly killed but for sport.)
Whether one dislikes the introduced wolves...or wants to sit and bay the moon with them, there is significant body of information, collected by trained professionals confirming differences in size, anatomical characteristics, average pack numbers, habituation etc.between the various North American subspecies.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 11:42pm PT
|
Speaks for itself.
And if the wolves aren't slaughtering domestic animals in Idaho, why would they be doing so in Montana, Wyoming, or anywhere else? The repeated claim here is that the wolves generally are wreaking havoc on wildlife. The evidence, published by the Idaho Fish & Game Department (hardly supportive of wolves), clearly shows otherwise. Indeed, it seems that the entire Idaho state government is pretty much a captive regulator when it comes to these things, held captive by the hunting lobby, the farming lobby, the states rights crowd, and kooks.
As for real or imaginary wolf kills of wildlife - well, the wolves and the wildlife were here long before us two leggers. Maybe it will take a little while for an equilibrium to be found, as the wolves fill their niche, and the number of coyotes, elk, deer etc correspondingly decline. That is how nature works, and why should we tamper with it?
Noting that wolves may well have reintroduced themselves to Idaho from Canada, directly or via Montana or Washington.
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2011 - 11:59pm PT
|
MH: What?
You are usually more logical than this?
Do I fit into this category?
“Kooks.”
If wolves were proved to have killed 200-300 humans a year in Idaho or -----Vancouver, would that be significant?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2011 - 12:14am PT
|
So the wolves kill a few hundred sheep and cattle in Idaho each year. How many hundred of thousands, or millions, introduced sheep* and cattle* live in Idaho? The number killed by the wolves is trivial, a rounding error. And the cost of reimbursing ranchers for livestock truly lost to wolves insignificant.
I'd hardly equate the life of a sheep or cow to that of a human, and fantasies notwithstanding, wolves so rarely come near let alone attack humans that it's a non-issue.
Speaking of wolves and ungulates - moose, deer, elk, etc - domestic animals on federally subsidized grazing probably have a far higher negative impact on the ungulate population than a few wolves. They compete directly for habitat. There'll be lots more for hunters if you only kick out all the cattle.
Ho hum. All deja wolf.
* Not counting the ones who vote Republican, that is.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!