A
Tex creek area outside of Idaho falls
Wolves
- Thread starter wag13
- Start date
Tex creek area outside of Idaho falls
W
Yeah its definately one of my best, but its hard not to say all of my threads are amazing. :face-icon-small-coo
A
All i gotta say is did you know that there are thousands of innocent vegitables getting eating by vegetarians every day....
oh and kill the wolfs, and bears, i want more moose.
-Aksnopro
oh and kill the wolfs, and bears, i want more moose.
-Aksnopro
Fair enough. It's a complicated issue not easily compressed into a short post. IMO the presence of wolves and other big predators make the wilderness truly wild and personally I like that they're out there, but that's just my opinion. Despite my personal preference, I'm a state's rights guy and if the People of a state vote "No More Wolves" then they go.
I know most westerners see wolves as a threat to livestock and big game and they are to a point, but people can live and recreate in wolf country without "hurting" the wolves or endangering themselves. Potentially, antis could try and use "save the wolf" as an excuse to try and close areas to sleds but any rationale thay used could easily be disproved by using my state or the western Canadian provinces as examples...we ride some pretty remote country where we see wolves and our tracking up their home ranges has no appreciable impact on their numbers.
I guess I had two points: 1) Having wolves in your back yard is no big deal (so long as they're kept in check) and 2) Having wolves in your back yard is no reason to restrict motorized recreation
I'm fine with them if I can keep them in check without going to prison, states right doesn't mean anything any more, if it did we wouldn't be listening to the greenies argument and we would be managing them. They all say WY is a problem state and wont agree with the plan but its not WY that wont agree, they tried to change the rules after there was a plan to start with. If you look at the map there is a good reason why there are so few in WY outside of yellowstone. kept in check
A
Fourth wolf you live in Alaska where your not threaten as much by riding areas closing and you are in the biggest state, here in the Rockymountains many areas are at threat to be closed due to wolves and tree hugging granolas. Alot of people dont realize this but the greenies already have plans to close down are 2nd favorite riding spots after they get the ones they have started to try to close.
If we stop the non native wolves that are terrorists to are riding and living then we can stop alot of other things. Wolves are just more ammo for the greenies here in the rocky mountains.
If we stop the non native wolves that are terrorists to are riding and living then we can stop alot of other things. Wolves are just more ammo for the greenies here in the rocky mountains.
I think most agree (?) that we dont want to "erradicate" them... they DO NEED SERIOUS managemant though. What is different now than 100 years ago, is that #1: the land (wild) is actually much MORE abundant with all things with HUMAN management. Wolves werent overpopulated "then" because the land could not support them. TODAY.... RIGHT NOW... it can support thousands of wolves, but not for long. They should be rugulated, studied and managed just as they did with the elk herds in building them up what, 40 or so years ago?... just my opinion.
I think most will find this film VERY informative! Be prepared to sit and watch though, its about an hour long... it held my attention...
(will repost in a new "continued thread" so EVERYONE can see it)
http://vimeo.com/kingjd/cryingwolfmovie
I think most will find this film VERY informative! Be prepared to sit and watch though, its about an hour long... it held my attention...
(will repost in a new "continued thread" so EVERYONE can see it)
http://vimeo.com/kingjd/cryingwolfmovie
A
There not even heavily populated in Nevada yet and there not a native wolf. I dont think you realize wag13 started this thread because he is worried about wolves closing riding areas and other b.s. that goes with them. Did you not watch the video he posted?
W
Im sorry to say this, but after watching the 101 minute film by JD (which was amazing by the way) I think the only way we will get change is by something tragic happening. A little boy or girl gets killed or a couple hikers get attacked and killed and somebody gets it on video or something. Something bad just has to happen for people to open their dam eyes and take a look around at whats happening.
Last edited:
A
Its sad but probally true. I think its ignorent that some tree huggers have to be so ignorent let wolves be ignorent and hurt someone to prove its not a good point. It has ignorent all over it. 3 things I hate in life Wolves, tree huggers and ignorence. Oh wait all 3 are associated with each other.
R
This beast was killed in Idaho last week by a game warden.
Last edited:
A
That pic has been around for a couple years now.
The pic is an illusion, the largest wolf ever recorded was 129lbs (which is rare) the last time I researched it and the pic was around long before that. I took a pic of me at 6'6" picking up the malamute in the pic above and he looked just as big, he weighs 110lbs at the most. The average heavy wolf is around 109lbs.
R
Clearly I was fooled.
H
only good wolf is a dead a wolf, plan and simple
Fixed it for you:becky:
S
One would like to think that this would wake people up, but it most likely won't. In the foothills of the Sierra, mountain lion are thick as fleas thanks to no more hunting. A women got killed out jogging down by Auburn a few years ago and not a think has changed with regard to lions management.
Tree huggers have issues when people drill a coyote with a .22, that is trying to eat their little dog in Tahoe. Don't even get me started on the idiots that protect bears that need to go after they prove time and again that they are problems. The point being the general public doesn't have the guts to first of all admit there is a problem, and secondly to do actually do something about the problem.
Not really sure I understand the direction of your reply ARMY?... Anything on this earth doesnt have to be "native" or "populated in ones area" for that person to have an interest. I am partial to all wild animals (and I have an interest in wolves, I own 2 hybrids), I said I dont believe wolves should be "erradicted"... just because they are a tool for a land grab, or any other reason. Land grabs will continue. If the wolf is GONE 100%... the tree huggers will make something else their tool. Wolves, to me... arent a "riding area" specifice issue. I think they are an issue in co-existing with man because of the governments. Yes, in Nevada, there are no wolves. But our land use is under attack just like everywhere else. Heck... our 60+ mile mountain range only allows less than 1000 acres of sled access, and it has NOTHING to do with ANY kind of animal. Its simply because its "beautiful". I watched the video. I got the impression its to draw attention to the over-population and mismanagement altogether?(more directly towards the affect on wild game and human inter-action?) Didnt see anything that tied the problem to "closing down riding areas" SPECIFICALLY... my comment was "in my opinion, I dont think they should be ERRADICATED"...in response to the comment earlier: "If hunting them till there gone then thats what we will do"... and I stand by that. Currently... I suspect the "wilhorse" issue that we DO deal with here in Nevada may have the same agenda... but I dont think we should "wipe-out" the wild horse.
...and the wolf in general IS native, its been around as long as man, and everything else wild. I believe it has its place for existence, thats all.
Last edited:
..and I AGREE 100% with the video, so theres no confusion there. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE to de-list them and regulate them, as stated in the video. And I feel its the STATES individually that should have the right to manage them.
Similar threads
