Idaho's "governor" proves himself a complete jerk

[Rev. Coyote]

The story below shows Idaho's "governor" is a complete, utter, unadulterated jerk. In supporting the idiotic killing of wolves, he not only shows himself as a piece of trash, but burdens the legitimate hunting community with yet another image problem.

As a sustenance hunter and fisherman, I find Otter's actions deeply offensive and just plain wrong.

-----------------
Idaho Governor Calls for Gray Wolf Kill

January 12, 2007

[JP]

Tasty :naughty:

[Rev. Coyote]

Tasty :naughty:

Possibly. I'd like to see every S.O.B. shoots a wolf have to eat it.

[Sombeech]

In supporting the idiotic killing of wolves
or rather, "Killing of Idiotic Wolves".


Suzanne Stone said Otter's proposal would return wolves to the verge of eradication. "Essentially he has confirmed our worst fears for the state of Idaho"
If this is Idaho's worst fear, life must be pretty good there. :ne_nau:

Utah must suck, because my worst fear. in Utah, is my home getting broken into when my family is unprotected. Leaving 100 Elk slaughtering predators ALIVE, that fear is quite a few rungs down on the ladder.

But that's me, and that's Idaho.

[Rev. Coyote]

Utah must suck, because my worst fear. in Utah, is my home getting broken into when my family is unprotected. Leaving 100 Elk slaughtering predators ALIVE, that fear is quite a few rungs down on the ladder.

But that's me, and that's Idaho.


Amen to all of that.

Oh, and by "Elk slaughtering predators," are you referring to the governor and his butt buddies or to the wolves...?

And dammit, now I have a hankering for an elkburger.

[Iceaxe]

And dammit, now I have a hankering for an elkburger.

Hmmmm..... I has just thinking of BBQing up a nice wolf drumstick myself :eat:

[fourtycal]

Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter told The Associated Press that he wants hunters to kill about 550 gray wolves.

I hope they sell some out of state tags. I can't imagine a more challenging hunt.

I might not eat the predator but I sure would sell the pelt and buy some double cheeseburgers. :lol8:

[Sombeech]

Oh, and by "Elk slaughtering predators," are you referring to the governor and his butt buddies or to the wolves...?

Actually, just the butt.

[Rev. Coyote]

Actually, just the butt.

You said butt. Heh heh heh...

[Rev. Coyote]

I hope they sell some out of state tags. I can't imagine a more challenging hunt.

I might not eat the predator but I sure would sell the pelt and buy some double cheeseburgers. :lol8:


Tell you what, little man, for every wolf you get I'll shoot five open range welfare cows. That should be an even trade.

I think my old .308 Mauser would be right for the job!


YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-HAW!!!!

[shlingdawg]

Help me out here, was it in fact the gray wolf they reintroduced into the region or the non-native Timberwolf?

Please research your response thoroughly.

[Rev. Coyote]

Help me out here, was it in fact the gray wolf they reintroduced into the region or the non-native Timberwolf?

Please research your response thoroughly.

Read the article. But if AP got it wrong, killing wolves is still reprehensible.

[shlingdawg]

Help me out here, was it in fact the gray wolf they reintroduced into the region or the non-native Timberwolf?

Please research your response thoroughly.

Read the article. But if AP got it wrong, killing wolves is still reprehensible.


I fail to see the moral wrongdoing in killing a wolf. Is it any different than killing a coyote, jackrabbit, bear, moose, elk, etc. etc.?

Am I missing something?

[tanya]

Please research your response thoroughly.

Read the article. But if AP got it wrong, killing wolves is still reprehensible.[/quote]


Yeah :ne_nau: Killing animals is horrible!

[Rev. Coyote]

I fail to see the moral wrongdoing in killing a wolf. Is it any different than killing a coyote, jackrabbit, bear, moose, elk, etc. etc.?

Am I missing something?

I think killing an animal just for the kill (sport) is wrong compared to the killing of an animal for food (hunting). Sport killing gives hunting a bad name.

Plus, killing predators throws off the "natural balance." Predation helps herd improvement among deer, for instance. If you look at the deer population in my native state of Virginia, for instance, you can see how the lack of predators has made for an unhealthy herd. The annual hunt can't keep up with the population explosion. Wolves would help.

By the way, do you see anything wrong with killing bald eagles (loaded question, I know)? But they're predators and off the threatened list.

[tanya]

I think killing an animal just for the kill (sport) is wrong compared to the killing of an animal for food (hunting). Sport killing gives hunting a bad name.

Plus, killing predators throws off the "natural balance." Predation helps herd improvement among deer, for instance. If you look at the deer population in my native state of Virginia, for instance, you can see how the lack of predators has made for an unhealthy herd. The annual hunt can't keep up with the population explosion. Wolves would help.

By the way, do you see anything wrong with killing bald eagles (loaded question, I know)? But they're predators and off the threatened list.

Very good :2thumbs:

[Sombeech]

I think killing an animal just for the kill (sport) is wrong compared to the killing of an animal for food (hunting). Sport killing gives hunting a bad name.

So this whole thing is meant for sport? I thought it was to regulate the predator levels.

And anytime that humans are not figured into the "Natural Balance", the equation is flawed.

[shlingdawg]

I just don't understand the emotion that people tie to wolves. My aunt is a freak about wolves and is totally offended when this issue comes up. I see nothing wrong with thinning the previously protected packs of wolves.

As I understand it (speaking of those wolves around the Teton Nat'l Park) is that Timberwolves were re-introduced into the area. This species of wolf had never previously existed in the region. Any time you introduce a non-native species of anything into an area, inbalance occurs.

What is the difference between the gray wolf and the timberwolf? Again, my understanding is that the gray wolf is much smaller and less aggressive than the Timberwolf. By introducing the non-native species, the imbalance is perpetuating itself more aggressively than planned. The Jackson Elk Herd, in the span of a few years has gone from a stong 13,000 head to less than 7,000. I would not consider this a natural flucuation.

I don't really care either way. I understand that there are people whose lives are dependent upon the elk and other huntable game (outfitters, guides, businesses of all sort that cater to the out-of-towner hunters) and their livelihood is at stake because of the imbalance of things.

I have a brother that lives in Star Valley. I was up there hunting coyotes last month and saw two wolves out on Palisades Reservoir. While neat to look at, they are nothing more than an overgrown, over-aggressive coyote. If delisted - I'll hunt them too.

About the bald eagle. Do I see anything wrong with shooting them? Yes. That, to me, is about the same thing as defacing a national monument.

[Rev. Coyote]

About the bald eagle. Do I see anything wrong with shooting them? Yes. That, to me, is about the same thing as defacing a national monument.


I know I baited you there, but you went directly to the emotional side of the issue.


Welfare cattle are non-native. And you can eat 'em!

Capish?

[shlingdawg]

That's what I'm looking for.......... what is the emotional side of the wolf deal? I don't get it.

[price1869]

I think killing an animal just for the kill (sport) is wrong compared to the killing of an animal for food (hunting). Sport killing gives hunting a bad name.


Okay,

I hear this all the time from non-hunters, and it really gets on my nerves. No one, and I mean no one in the United States of America needs to hunt for food. It's just not even close to a necessity. And if you eat the animal you hunted, that doesn't make it any different. You didn't need to kill the animal. Eat a hamburger. Eat soybeans for hells sake.

Hunting in this day and age is a sport. That's it. It costs you more to get your meat processed than it would to go buy hamburger.

All that being said . . . I support hunting. I think it's fun, and necessary. Eco-balance can certainly be acheived through hunting. Wolves, Elk, Buffalo, Turtles, Treehuggers, whatever. If there are too many of them, start handing out tags. :2thumbs:

(someone is going to come back with "well, i think there are too many of you(price) or humans." Well, if you really think so, go get a tag. I might be better at defending myself than your average whitetail.)

As far as shooting bald eagles - If there are too many in an ecosystem, or they are where they don't belong, start handing out tags. :2thumbs:

[Sombeech]

As far as shooting bald eagles - If there are too many in an ecosystem, or they are where they don't belong, start handing out tags. :2thumbs:

Ditto. This is the non-emotional fact of how the Fish & Game systems work. If there are too many Bald Eagles around, making all of the field mice become extinct & chasing off the other birds, then something will be done about it.

Those of you defending this breed of wolf; Can you tell me how many are needed to balance the ecosystem? No, you can't. You can only complain that killing them is wrong, unless it's for food.

Who has gone hunting for hunger? :ne_nau: We blasted the HELL outta them rabbits last month, and didn't ever consider eating them.

[Rev. Coyote]

Okay,

I hear this all the time from non-hunters, and it really gets on my nerves. No one, and I mean no one in the United States of America needs to hunt for food. It's just not even close to a necessity. And if you eat the animal you hunted, that doesn't make it any different. You didn't need to kill the animal. Eat a hamburger. Eat soybeans for hells sake.

Price, you make some astoundingly ignorant statements here. Maybe it's because you're an urbanite, or among only well-heeled people, but you obviously have no clue whatsoever as to the number of people out there who hunt to feed themselves -- people outside your insulated little world.

First off, I am not a non-hunter as you so glibly imply. Second, I know two people right now -- very good friends -- who keep their bellies full in part by hunting and fishing. Maybe you'd rather see them on food stamps, but they don't swing that way. They hunt and fish to stay fed because they're living so close to the bone that that is the way they survive.

Also, they are not suburban yuppies who take their game to a friggin' processor. I help one of these guys butcher deer every time he gets one. We hang out by a campfire all day getting good and bloody, usually with Neil Young tapes playing and a big honking pot of coffee on the fire. A lot of people in the U.S. South get by this way (some with Neil, some with Skynyrd). Your insinuating that no one needs to hunt comes from absolute blind ignorance.

As to the sense I get that you just hunt because you like the killing, I can only suggest you need to get laid more. And watch out tracking those "tree-huggers" -- a lot of them are real well armed.

[Sombeech]

P.S. I moved this to the Hunting forum.

[price1869]

P.S. I moved this to the Hunting forum.

Don't you mean the political BS forum?

and Coyote, key word "necessity". Read again.

Ha ha . . urbanite. Urbanites are the ones that think people actually have to hunt and fish to survive. Farmers, ranchers and the educated are the ones who understand supply, demand, etc.

In general, the hours spent hunting could easily be turned into hours spent working, and therefor, no need for killing little creatures. Seems you enjoy proving me wrong though, so your turn . . .

[price1869]

Price, you make some astoundingly ignorant statements here. Maybe it's because you're an urbanite, or among only well-heeled people, but you obviously have no clue whatsoever as to the number of people out there who hunt to feed themselves -- people outside your insulated little world.


Your insinuating that no one needs to hunt comes from absolute blind ignorance.


ignorantz? Learn to spell. :nod: Insult my intelligence without knowing anything about me? That's what ignorant people do. :nod:

[shlingdawg]

I help one of these guys butcher deer every time he gets one. We hang out by a campfire all day getting good and bloody, usually with Neil Young tapes playing and a big honking pot of coffee on the fire. A lot of people in the U.S. South get by this way (some with Neil, some with Skynyrd). Your insinuating that no one needs to hunt comes from absolute blind ignorance.

As to the sense I get that you just hunt because you like the killing, I can only suggest you need to get laid more. And watch out tracking those "tree-huggers" -- a lot of them are real well armed.

So this guy that you help butcher deer - he'll spend all his money on a truck, camper, gas and beer (you know you're not out there drinking coffee) to justify acquiring food for his family?

And here I thought that the stereotypes about the south were wrong. Where is that banjo music coming from?

[Rev. Coyote]

So this guy that you help butcher deer - he'll spend all his money on a truck, camper, gas and beer (you know you're not out there drinking coffee) to justify acquiring food for his family?

And here I thought that the stereotypes about the south were wrong. Where is that banjo music coming from?

Actually, he hunts on his land. He's got about 15 acres of deep swampy woodland where he's able to get a couple deer a year -- as many as he needs. So all he does is go out real early and sit on the ground against a tree. The deer sometimes walk right up to him. Then blammo. No truck, no camper. Just an old 50 cal. black powder rifle. One shot.

The "sportsmen" drive in from city and suburb in high dollar pickups with ATVs, dogs with radio collars, nice Browning shotguns and line up along the damn roads with walkie-talkies. Sportsmen. They usually take more than they need, get stupid drunk, then haul whatever they don't leave in the field to the processor because they're too lazy to butcher.

There's a special disdain those of us who live in the country learn regarding the weekend warrior and the wannabe redneck. I've seen 'em. They ain't hunters.

As far as beer while butchering, we usually do that stuff early in the morning after the deer hangs all night. Too early. Plus, drunkie and choppie don't mix.

But we both play in a bluegrass band, so you got me there!

[shlingdawg]

I still want to hear about this deal w/ the wolves. Why are you such an opponent of killing some of them?

[Rev. Coyote]

I still want to hear about this deal w/ the wolves. Why are you such an opponent of killing some of them?

I oppose extermination mentality.

I refer back to natural balance. We've followed an extermination policy regarding certain predators in this country, mostly to protect livestock. You ask about this stuff, and I wonder if you're at all familiar with the term "biodiversity." Kill a few wolves or coyotes because they threaten your welfare cattle, maybe I can understand -- but an all-out extermination policy is just stupid. That's why I take Idaho's chest-thumping cretin governor to task.

Just look at how modern forest management has gone terribly wrong with monoculture and with agressive fire supression. We now have unhealthy, unnatural woodlands prone to insect and disease. We did the forests no good at all "protecting" them from their natural enemies (strange term there, but we'll go with it).

The sport killing of wolves I object to based on moral precept -- because it is depraved to kill for killing's sake. Ask any criminal psychologist about this one -- about the kid who shoots songbirds with his Red Ryder and how he'll turn out.

I asked you about the eagle because I knew your response would be emotional. And there's a lot of folks out there feel emotional about wolves because they (like eagles) are beautiful creatures that represent freedom, independence, and strength. That's the emotional part for me, but I think deer are pretty too. But I'll eat a deer.

Call my a hypocrite if you want, but my arguments regarding the biodiversity angle are sound and well-known.

Ever hear the buffalo theory regarding beer and brain cells...?

Well, back to work. Have a good day up in Yankeeland!

[Sombeech]

I oppose extermination mentality.

I refer back to natural balance.

If it were extermination, I may have a problem as well. But, once again, how many wolves does it take to maintain that balance?

I admit that I do not know the answer, but I'd assume that if you're against reducing the pack numbers, that you would know.

[Rev. Coyote]

If it were extermination, I may have a problem as well. But, once again, how many wolves does it take to maintain that balance?

I admit that I do not know the answer, but I'd assume that if you're against reducing the pack numbers, that you would know.


If you're FOR reducing pack numbers, you should know as well...

Fact remains, we've killed enough wolves in this country to push them into threatened and endangered status. We have NO wolves, NO cougars, and just a few coyotes in Virginia and used to have lots (back in the old days). Now, deer populations are out of control.

Of course, so is the human population, but that's another story.

Is "vulpaphobe" a word...?

[Sombeech]

If it were extermination, I may have a problem as well. But, once again, how many wolves does it take to maintain that balance?

I admit that I do not know the answer, but I'd assume that if you're against reducing the pack numbers, that you would know.
If you're FOR reducing pack numbers, you should know as well...

I'm not taking any action, so I do not have the burden of proof. When the Gov made the call, he was informed of the balanced number.

Nobody in the opposition has stated otherwise. I would expect them to PROVE him wrong.

[Rev. Coyote]

I'm not taking any action, so I do not have the burden of proof. When the Gov made the call, he was informed of the balanced number.

Nobody in the opposition has stated otherwise. I would expect them to PROVE him wrong.


What disturbed me about the governor was his senseless wannabe-redneck bravado. His plan is to exterminate as many wolves as possible until the population reaches a level just above endangered status. Killing for killing's sake. Depravity.

Bet he started off with ants and a magnifying glass.

HEY! There's a picture on the banner of you at Brigham's Unit! I was just there. Quite a stone boner.

[Sombeech]

HEY! There's a picture on the banner of you at Brigham's Unit! I was just there. Quite a stone boner.

What's Brigham's Unit?

[Rev. Coyote]

HEY! There's a picture on the banner of you at Brigham's Unit! I was just there. Quite a stone boner.

What's Brigham's Unit?

It's the rock at Arches that looks like a big old Johnson. That is you in that picture, right? On the rotating banner top of page?

That's the name I've heard applied to the rock. Is there another? The NPS doesn't put up a sign, interpretive trail, or anything. Sorry bastards!

[psl53]

Sombeech wrote:
Rev. Coyote wrote:
HEY! There's a picture on the banner of you at Brigham's Unit! I was just there. Quite a stone boner.


What's Brigham's Unit?


It's the rock at Arches that looks like a big old Johnson. That is you in that picture, right? On the rotating banner top of page?

That's the name I've heard applied to the rock. Is there another? The NPS doesn't put up a sign, interpretive trail, or anything. Sorry bastards

Everyone I know just called it .................. Penis Rock

[shlingdawg]

The tentative plan, or speculative plan for Wyoming is that there will be areas opened up to treat wolves as any other non-game predator. No license will be required to shoot a wolf if this legislation is passed. IF (or when) it passes, I will be joining my brother who lives in the area and I will try to bag a few. My reasons? Perhaps I am killing for killing sake, but I will also pay to have the entire animal taxidermied. I'm sure there are many wannabe hunters who would pay to have a full wolf mount in their cabin so they can impress their buddies and make them believe that they, themselves, killed the creature. Economics. I simply don't possess the same emotions as you regarding the wolf. No, I'm not a dog lover either. Or a cat lover. I shoot jackrabbits by the dozens for pure diversion. I shoot coyotes and praire dogs as well, just for fun. I don't shoot big game as it does nothing for me. I'll eat elk if it's prepared well. I also flyfish for fun and eat less than 1% of what I catch, but I do return everything back so I can catch it again. If I'm I catch a trashfish (carp) I'll throw it on the bank and watch it die.

I also enjoy air polluting snowmobiles, ORV's and many other eco-unfriendly activities. Conversely, I do enjoy backpacking, hiking and other tree-hugger, kumbahyaaaa circle jerk moments too.

I don't fault Idaho governor, but maybe I'll join him. :2thumbs:

[Rev. Coyote]

The tentative plan, or speculative plan for Wyoming is that there will be areas opened up to treat wolves as any other non-game predator. No license will be required to shoot a wolf if this legislation is passed. IF (or when) it passes, I will be joining my brother who lives in the area and I will try to bag a few. My reasons? Perhaps I am killing for killing sake, but I will also pay to have the entire animal taxidermied. I'm sure there are many wannabe hunters who would pay to have a full wolf mount in their cabin so they can impress their buddies and make them believe that they, themselves, killed the creature. Economics. I simply don't possess the same emotions as you regarding the wolf. No, I'm not a dog lover either. Or a cat lover. I shoot jackrabbits by the dozens for pure diversion. I shoot coyotes and praire dogs as well, just for fun. I don't shoot big game as it does nothing for me. I'll eat elk if it's prepared well. I also flyfish for fun and eat less than 1% of what I catch, but I do return everything back so I can catch it again. If I'm I catch a trashfish (carp) I'll throw it on the bank and watch it die.

I also enjoy air polluting snowmobiles, ORV's and many other eco-unfriendly activities. Conversely, I do enjoy backpacking, hiking and other tree-hugger, kumbahyaaaa circle jerk moments too. But not very often.

I don't fault Idaho governor, but maybe I'll join him. :2thumbs:


Spoken like a real man. Pathetic.

[shlingdawg]

Spoken like a real man. Pathetic.

Careful those blinders don't fall down and make you blind. How many times has name calling won a disagreement for you?

[DAA]

"Fact remains, we've killed enough wolves in this country to push them into threatened and endangered status."

Uhhh... 'scuse me? Wolves are not anywhere CLOSE to "threatened and endangered" in this country. Ever heard of Alaska? Or, moving outside the U.S., Canada? Wolves populations are thriving in areas where habitat to sustain them is still intact. Always have been. Always will. Wolves have never been in any danger of extinction - not even close. They were extirpated from most of the CONUS a generation ago. But there is a huge difference between local extirpation and the "threatened and endangered status" you are giving them. Which is not surprising. That is precisely what the PR campaign funded by the anti hunting groups most responsible for the introduction of the Yellowstong wolves has been aiming to do - brainwash people into believing wolves are threatened with extinction, which is simply not true at all. These are the same people that have been lobbying for endangered status for prairie dogs for crying out loud.

What the introduced wolves have enjoyed though, is "protected" status. It's that protected status that allows them to exist in the areas they had long since ceased to survive. Unlike coyotes, which have been even more persecuted than wolves (by a gigantic margin) and yet continue to increase their population and range despite well funded and hard fought erradication efforts spanning the entire history of the U.S. because they are an adaptable specie able to survive and thrive in almost any habitat and in close proximity to human population centers. Wolves on the other hand, are more specialized and have much more specific habitat requirements. Those requirements caused conflict with man, so the wolves, not possessing the adaptive qualities of the coyote, were rather easily extirpated. Since that time, the type of habitat required for wolves to exist without conflict with man has shrunk significantly. To the point that there just aren't too many places where wolves can roam free without causing economic turmoil for locals.

So we have conflict. And emotion. And drama. And lots and lots of decisions being made based on emotion. By people either simply ignorant of the cold hard facts, or worse, and unfortunately more common amongst the policy makers - decisions being made on emotion even when the facts ARE understood.

I don't want to see the introduced wolves extirpated again. Not that I think that will ever happen. But, the fact remains that the targeted number of breeding packs and over all wolf population goals of the introduction have LONG SINCE been exceeded. There are now far more of the wolves, in far more places, than anyone made any "official" management plans for. So, now the agencies charged with managing these wolves are trying to ease into the idea that they must indeed BE managed. No different than any other animal that has significant impact on resources and economies. That management will ultimately either end up with sport hunting to control population numbers, or professional removal. I have a very good friend who will be one of the people doing the "professional removal". Actually, he'll be doing it whether there is sport hunting or not. It's his job to go out and kill the problem wolves known to be causing livestock damage. But, if the various and disparate public agencies involved in trying to come up with a "wolf management plan" fail to provide a population control via sport hunting, he'll be killing them just for the sake of reducing their numbers.

So... Take your pick. Sport hunting or professional killing. Either way, the wolves need to be managed, and managed they eventually shall be.

- DAA

[Rev. Coyote]

I have a very good friend who will be one of the people doing the "professional removal". Actually, he'll be doing it whether there is sport hunting or not. It's his job to go out and kill the problem wolves known to be causing livestock damage.

He sounds like real high quality people....

I say we take five welfare free range cows for ever "problem" wolf killed by knuckle-draggers like your little friend. My .308 awaits the opportunity. It'll be fun.

And don't get all emotional. They're just cows. Cows sucking the public titty and ruining the native vegetation. Cows endangering predator species through people like your friend.

Really, that's where this whole battle needs to go -- take a wolf, lose some welfare cattle. I'm good with that. You ready?

[Sombeech]

Really, that's where this whole battle needs to go -- take a wolf, lose some welfare cattle. I'm good with that. You ready?

Those damned cows, roaming the hills wild and disrespecting their elders. That's an Apples to Apples comparison. In fact, cows are worse with those Wolves because the poop's bigger.

Kill 'em!

[Rev. Coyote]

Uhhh... 'scuse me? Wolves are not anywhere CLOSE to "threatened and endangered" in this country.


Oh, and by the way, there are wolves federally recognized as endangered and threatened in this country. Here's a link to get you started on the gray and the red wolves:

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/SpeciesReport.do

I don't entirely trust the gummint, but these findings are, I'm certain, more thorough than any you've attempted for damn sure.

[Rev. Coyote]

Those damned cows, roaming the hills wild and disrespecting their elders. That's an Apples to Apples comparison. In fact, cows are worse with those Wolves because the poop's bigger.

Kill 'em!

Come with me! I'll bring the bourbon, the Mauser, and the spatula. I cook a steak will make you want to smack your momma.

Can we use your Jeep...?

[Sombeech]

I cook a steak will make you want to smack your momma.

Mmmm, that sounds good. :slobber: I didn't realize you can get a steak from Wolves.

:eat:

[donny h]

I wouldn't be a popular land manager with most of y'all.

I think the wolf should be reintroduced throughout it's original habitat, coast to coast, Can to Mex.

I also want grizz back in their range, most of the west.

Utah clearly has the habitat for populations of both species.

Don't worry, the grizphobia and wolfphobia is widespread, it will never happen.

Fear of wolves in the back country is a sad joke, please find me a documented case of wolves killing a human in the U.S., ever. If your a cow, worry, if your a human, no worries.

Bears kill an average of six/year in North America. Six is so statistically insignificant it may as well be zero.

You are far more likely to be hit by lightning or die of a bee sting.

[JP]

Six is so statistically insignificant
Unless you are one of the six or related thereto :nod:

[donny h]

Six is so statistically insignificant
Unless you are one of the six or related thereto :nod:

True, and I carry bear spray when I hike, knowing that I still have far better odds on winning the lotto than being attacked by a bear.

Dogs, both wild and domestic, pose a far greater threat to our safety than bears and wolves.

Barnyard pigs also kill a fair number of people every year.

Snakes may kill 10 to 20 folks per year.

West Nile is killing over 100 people per year, if someone want's to worry about an actual animal risk, that's it.

I guess my point is that I think bearphobia/wolfphobia is just silly.

[Rev. Coyote]

I wouldn't be a popular land manager with most of y'all.

I think the wolf should be reintroduced throughout it's original habitat, coast to coast, Can to Mex.

I also want grizz back in their range, most of the west.

Utah clearly has the habitat for populations of both species.

Don't worry, the grizphobia and wolfphobia is widespread, it will never happen.

Fear of wolves in the back country is a sad joke, please find me a documented case of wolves killing a human in the U.S., ever. If your a cow, worry, if your a human, no worries.

Bears kill an average of six/year in North America. Six is so statistically insignificant it may as well be zero.

You are far more likely to be hit by lightning or die of a bee sting.


I'm completely with you. That's why I suggest for every wolf killed by some knuckle-dragger, FIVE free-range welfare cows need to go.

[donny h]

for every wolf killed by some knuckle-dragger, FIVE free-range welfare cows need to go.

If you're talking about shooting cows as revenge, that's just being a knuckle dragger with a different point of view.

[Rev. Coyote]

for every wolf killed by some knuckle-dragger, FIVE free-range welfare cows need to go.

If you're talking about shooting cows as revenge, that's just being a knuckle dragger with a different point of view.


I'm glad you understand the game.

[Brian in SLC]

Fear of wolves in the back country is a sad joke, please find me a documented case of wolves killing a human in the U.S., ever. If your a cow, worry, if your a human, no worries.

This is as close as I've ever heard of...

Been to Yakutat a couple of times...fun spot...

-Brian in SLC

Wolf attacks 6-year-old near Yakutat
by KAREN AHO Daily News reporter
Thursday, April 27, 2000

In what may be the first report of a wolf attacking a human in Alaska, a radio-collared wolf on Wednesday repeatedly bit a 6-year-old boy playing in a grove of alders at a logging camp northwest of Yakutat, Alaska State Troopers said.

The boy had tears on his back and puncture wounds, but he was not seriously injured, troopers said.

The wolf, an adult male that returned to the area shortly afterward and was shot, did not have any obvious signs of injury or trauma that would immediately explain aggressive behavior, troopers said. The wolf will be tested for rabies.

"This is exceedingly rare, and I don't know of any other cases like this, in Alaska," said Matt Robus, former Junea-area biologist and now deputy director of the Division of Wildlife Conservation.

The wolf's carcass was flown to Yakutat, where, in accordance with routine Fish and Wildlife Protection policy, the responding trooper burned its body.

The state Department of Fish and Game was to send the wolf's head to Fairbanks for a rabies test at the University of Alaska Fairbanks virology lab. If it is disease-free, state wildlife biologist Mark McNay will examine it further, although he's not sure what he'll determine from the head.

"There's not going to be a whole lot we can say about the animal. I expect what I'll see is the skull of a fairly normal wolf," McNay said. "I'd be surprised if the skull's going to tell us much."

According to troopers, the boy was with a 9-year-old friend and a dog Wednesday morning cutting alders and playing at a logging camp at Icy Bay when the wolf appeared. Startled, the boys began to run, said Fish and Wildlife Protection trooper Marc Cloward, who interviewed the boy in a Yakutat clinic.

"At that point, the wolf knocked him down, drug him down," Cloward said.

The 6-year-old was bitten three times, once in the lower back and twice in the buttocks. All were puncture wounds, with some tears on the lower back.

A camp carpenter ran out and threw rocks at the wolf, which let go of the boy, Cloward said.

About 10 minutes later, the wolf reappeared and was shot. The wolf's body was put in a bag. Both it and the boy were flown to Yakutat on an air taxi.

Cloward and two state fisheries biologists examined the wolf in Yakutat. They said it appeared to be an average size wolf and weighed about 75 pounds.

It had a radio collar, but it was unknown Wednesday which agency had put it on. Troopers said the collar was tight and that hair was missing from the wolf's neck. McNay said it's common for collars to affect hair growth on an animal's neck but that collars have never been known to affect an animal's behavior.

The boy was treated at the Yakutat clinic, where he received seven stitches and five surgical closure staples, troopers said.

Gov. Tony Knowles on Wednesday contacted the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Fish and Game to request a complete investigation.

"These types of incidents are extremely rare," the governor's spokesman, Bob King, said. "He just wants to follow through on this."

McNay said he knew of no documented reports of healthy wolves killing people in North America. He couldn't recall any reports of wolves attacking humans in Alaska.

History has recorded fatal wolf attacks in Europe and in India. In most cases, those wolves had become accustomed to humans.

Rabies would be the most likely explanation for aggressive behavior. According to the March 29 Alaska epidemiology bulletin, rabies is present in foxes in Western and Northwest Alaska, not Southcentral or Southeast.

However, wolves can range a great distance, McNay said.

[Gutpiler_Utahn]

The following link goes to a news article posted from the Idaho Press-Tribune and is quite graphic in nature. There used to be pictures in this link and they really drove the point home. PResently the pictures have been removed, but the details of the story paint a picture of what wolves are capable of. http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=9a1a529b3a667aed58b3bbedbd5d04 23&topic=93260.msg569837

With that being said, I'm sure it was an emotional thing for HIM when the Gov. layed this on the table. As far as I'm concerned, I applaud him for trying to nip a potential threat in the bud, and don't gimme any of that "wolves are beautiful creatures" and "we should honor them" and "there's never been any record of a wolf killing a person" or even "let's slaughter cattle in return." If wolves ever lost their fear of man, as many yotes have, there'd be a lot of hunters that would be in some serious danger. Just like the mtn. lion problems. They're becoming more and more abundant and many have no fear of man. How do they get the fear if man isn't a threat to their survival? At least coyote attacks have happened with just one at a time. Imagine if you tripled the size of those coyotes and gave them the instinct to hunt in packs. You can bet your ass that the government would be paying a hell of a lot more than $12 an hour for predator control (which is the going starter rate).

If you know much about the relationship cycles between yotes and bunnies, then you'll note that when the bunny population soars, so does the yote population. When the bunny population takes a nose dive, so do the yotes. If the wolves continue to grow and grow, then you'll see the same trend with big game and the wolves... and if you think death by gunshot is a terrible death, then you've never seen an animal die via starvation. Nature is a cruel bitch. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ1vbKm7BnE) (Warning: The video posted is quite graphic in nature and not intended for the weak of heart or stomach)

Personally, I know a great taxidermist (Lady_T on gutpilestyle.com) who would LOVE to get her hands on a wolf to mount, and if they okay the wolf hunt, you can bet your rear that I'd be MORE than happy to go out and buy a whole new outfit specifically for the purpose of this hunt and would gladly head up there with anybody here.

P.S. - If this DOES go through and anybody here wants to head up that way, lemme know so I can make arrangements with work. :2thumbs:

[Rev. Coyote]

If wolves ever lost their fear of man, as many yotes have, there'd be a lot of hunters that would be in some serious danger. Just like the mtn. lion problems.


What sort of armed individual would fear a wolf? Maybe it will make the sport more "sporting."

Are you sure, by the way, that the woman you referenced " would LOVE to get her hands on a wolf to mount," isn't actually looking to be mounted by a wolf? Sounds more likely.

Dog killers are scum.

[Sombeech]

What sort of armed individual would fear a wolf?

Probably the ones who aren't out to hunt the wolves. I'd hesitate to shoot a wolf if I was deer hunting.

[Rev. Coyote]

I'd hesitate to shoot a wolf if I was deer hunting.

That's silly. You'd use your gun if being attacked, whether by wolf, crack addict, or batallion of Nazis.

[Sombeech]

I'd hesitate to shoot a wolf if I was deer hunting.

That's silly. You'd use your gun if being attacked, whether by wolf, crack addict, or batallion of Nazis.

Attacked, yes. Do I want to be attacked though......

The other side of this is, will they attack hunters only? Or will they lose their discrimination and start heading for hikers?

[Rev. Coyote]

The other side of this is, will they attack hunters only? Or will they lose their discrimination and start heading for hikers?

The wolf is unlikely to eat the rawbone hiker, which frequently tastes of patchoui -- bitter to the palate. However, the common American hunter is quite plump and savory.

[Sombeech]

However, the common American hunter is quite plump and savory.

No, I think you mean ATV riders.

[Cirrus2000]

However, the common American hunter is quite plump and savory.

No, I think you mean ATV riders.

Same $#it, different pile. :roflol:

Oh, come on. I'm kidding!

[Sombeech]

However, the common American hunter is quite plump and savory.

No, I think you mean ATV riders.

Same $#it, different pile. :roflol:

Oh, come on. I'm kidding!

Yeah, me too. :cool2:

[Gutpiler_Utahn]

If wolves ever lost their fear of man, as many yotes have, there'd be a lot of hunters that would be in some serious danger. Just like the mtn. lion problems.


What sort of armed individual would fear a wolf? Maybe it will make the sport more "sporting."

Are you sure, by the way, that the woman you referenced " would LOVE to get her hands on a wolf to mount," isn't actually looking to be mounted by a wolf? Sounds more likely.

Dog killers are scum.

Wow... your vast knowledge of wolves is simply astounding... Seriously, wolves hunt in packs and that doesn't mean they all "dogpile" on the prey. They're clever. I'd NEVER go hunting a wolf on my own, cause I know there's a good chance I'd fall into a trap and end up becoming the hunted. If wolves lost their fear of man, as coyotes have, then man would become another food source for them. It wouldn't just be hunters, but anybody living or traveling through their territory. Take your average dog, for instance. When dogs go feral, they group together in packs and become a danger to everybody and every animal in the area. Ever see the reports on abandoned dogs in New Orleans? The dogs were attacking news crews, military personel, and any other person or animal they came across. They weren't attacking to be aggressive or territorial, but to kill for food. Most dogs don't get close to 100lbs, whereas the candian gray wolf can (and has before) reach an astounding 175lbs.

Oh, and your personal attacks on sombody you've never met, spoken with, nor even heard of shows a person with TRUE character. No, you know what? I'm done with this conversation. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. :2thumbs: Have a nice day...

[donny h]

The following link goes to a news article posted from the Idaho Press-Tribune and is quite graphic in nature. There used to be pictures in this link and they really drove the point home. PResently the pictures have been removed, but the details of the story paint a picture of what wolves are capable of.

I heard about that incident when it first happened, it didn't change how I feel one bit. If you send domestic animals into the woods, and they are attacked by a wild animal, whose fault is that, really?

Are we supposed to manage wildlife areas to make them safe for domestic dog packs to run free? Here's a solution: Don't hunt with dogs.

As an aside, some folks consider shooting a treed animal to be cowardly, and despicable. To me, that's no different than blasting a caged animal.


I'm sure it was an emotional thing for HIM when the Gov. layed this on the table.


and don't gimme any of that "there's never been any record of a wolf killing a person"

Yes, let's not let any facts into this purely emotional and superstitious discussion.


If wolves ever lost their fear of man, as many yotes have, there'd be a lot of hunters that would be in some serious danger.

If my aunt was a dude she'd be my uncle. That's a BIG if, just like wolves adding humans to their prey list. If any large predators in North America wanted to consume humans, no woods or oceans would be safe for us to enter. The list of predators in N.A. with no natural fear of man is a list of one: polar bears.


If you know much about the relationship cycles between yotes and bunnies, then you'll note that when the bunny population soars, so does the yote population.

It should be noted here that yotes breed to fill their environment, ample food and space cause population explosions, limited food and space will cause smaller and less frequent litters of pups. It doesn't matter if the food source is bunnies or terriers.

One way to garauntee a population explosion is to kill a bunch of yotes in the same area.

The best way to control yote numbers in urban areas is to police our trash, keep dog food inside, and don't let cats and lapdogs free to roam the neighborhood. Yotes love kitties and poodles.

The best way to control yotes in wilderness areas is by introducing their number one natural predator, wolves. Yote numbers are way down in Yellowstone.

[Rev. Coyote]

Oh, and your personal attacks on sombody you've never met, spoken with, nor even heard of shows a person with TRUE character. No, you know what? I'm done with this conversation.

The fact you get your jollies killing wolves is all I need to know. What amuses me is how you people try and mask your perversion by claiming you're providing some sort of a public service. It's no mission from God, bubbba.

Now go play in your gutpile.

[packfish]

No matter what your opinion is, whether it be pro or con, the wolves in the West are going to be controlled by man. Now if you want to be involved in how that happens that is up to you. It isn't 1850 and man has changed the West and it's enviroment for ever. For good or bad it's just a fact that the wolves are going to be kept at a certain number and that number will be determined by man and not nature.

[Rev. Coyote]

No matter what your opinion is, whether it be pro or con, the wolves in the West are going to be controlled by man. Now if you want to be involved in how that happens that is up to you. It isn't 1850 and man has changed the West and it's enviroment for ever. For good or bad it's just a fact that the wolves are going to be kept at a certain number and that number will be determined by man and not nature.


Absolutely. The deer population in VA is over the top because they have no predators. The hunters can't keep up, even. It's a fake world we inhabit.

[donny h]

Rev Coyote, you may find that folks are more willing to consider your point of view in these discussions if you refrain from calling names like:

piece of trash
S.O.B.
butt buddies
little man
wannabe-redneck
sorry bastards
knuckle-draggers
scum
bubbba

It all comes across as so... seventh grade.

Have a nice day.

[LibertyN8]

LOL I want to be called a name too! so I should say somthing like "DIE WOLF" dang Rev if they don't control the wolves your buddy that kills deer when he gets hungry, because he is to proud to get a job, will run out of deer to poach. then he will have to eat stinkin' wolves...yuck!

It is hard for me understand why some people think that killing one species is wrong and another is ok? It doesn't matter if it is a deer, elk, jackrabbit, or Saddam Hussien the result is always the same, DEAD ANIMAL! this whole topic makes me laugh! please don't get mad and stop posting Rev Coyote I respect your right to a opinion and enjoy reading your posts. and I do agree with you that the Gov is a moron, he will say what the crowd wants to hear. if he was speaking in front of a animal rights group he probably tell a different lie.....

[Rev. Coyote]

Rev Coyote, you may find that folks are more willing to consider your point of view in these discussions if you refrain from calling names like:

piece of trash
S.O.B.
butt buddies
little man
wannabe-redneck
sorry bastards
knuckle-draggers
scum
bubbba

It all comes across as so... seventh grade.

Have a nice day.


You forgot "rim job."

[donny h]

You forgot "rim job."

Um, since I actually know the definition of rim job, I rarely use that phrase.

[HEADHUNTER]

I still want to hear about this deal w/ the wolves. Why are you such an opponent of killing some of them?

Where can I get my wolf tag in Idaho? I'd be more than happy to shoot a wolf or two or three..... I have no problem whatsoever with killing an animal for the sport, i.e, jackrabbits and coyotes.

There is nothing emotional about it - just put the cross hairs on the shoulder and squeeze :rifle:

Call me what you want - it doesn't bother me.

[shagster]

I still want to hear about this deal w/ the wolves. Why are you such an opponent of killing some of them?

Where can I get my wolf tag in Idaho? I'd be more than happy to shoot a wolf or two or three..... I have no problem whatsoever with killing an animal for the sport, i.e, jackrabbits and coyotes.

There is nothing emotional about it - just put the cross hairs on the shoulder and squeeze :rifle:

Call me what you want - it doesn't bother me. :roflol: :roflol: :roflol:

I love it. You know I wouldn't mind shooting a wolf. Sounds like a good time and a challenging hunt.

[snatch]

i'm all for controlling the wolf population. as an avid hunter in idaho i have personally seen a decline in elk herd populations in areas where wolves have migrated to. i asked a fish and game warden and he said the wolves had decreased elk populations by 30%. that has translated into few elk tags issued.

another note, wolves do migrate. they have not stayed in the remote areas where they were initially reintroduced because of their exponential growth. their numbers grow so quickly because they are at the top of the food chain. diseases are the only things that kill the wolves.

with the growth of wolf numbers comes other consequences. wolves have taken over territory once dominated by coyotes. the coyotes are now forced to migrate. as a result, coyotes are now seen in regions once dominated by the fox. the fox, has had no place to migrate to and are in constant direct competition with the coyotes. as a result, fox numbers are now dwindling very very low.

along with the coyotes' migration comes other conflicts. a larger number of coyotes are now forced to share open range space with cattle. young calf killings by coyotes has skyrocketed.

all this information comes from an idaho fish and game warden. he also stated that studies are now indicating the fox may eventually die off.

so, it seems that the wolf has been reintroduced at the expense of the fox.

the solution is a simple. control the wolf population! the only way to do that is by issuing tags.