|
GuruBushHippie
MountainMan


Registered: 04/28/11
Posts: 3,434
Loc: USA
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17130162 - 10/30/12 12:07 PM (12 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Whatever dude. It's clear i've failed with this entire thread. I'm done.
-------------------- Two roads diverged in a wood, and I cut straight through the forest, and that has made all the difference.
|
psilocybeMAN
It gets so real sometimes.



Registered: 10/16/07
Posts: 1,249
Loc: California
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: psilocybeMAN] 1
#17130568 - 10/30/12 01:16 PM (12 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
|
GuruBushHippie
MountainMan


Registered: 04/28/11
Posts: 3,434
Loc: USA
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: psilocybeMAN]
#17232854 - 11/16/12 11:28 PM (12 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I feel this is pertinent.
-------------------- Two roads diverged in a wood, and I cut straight through the forest, and that has made all the difference.
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: GuruBushHippie]
#17272822 - 11/24/12 09:05 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Wolves play a key ecological role in the ecosystem. Both sides agree. However, to all of the idiots saying that the wilderness is so damaged that hunters are needed: shut up and get your head out of your ass. Populations of large herbivorous animals do not explode to the point where the cannot sustain themselves generally speaking, as they need to expend more and more energy into getting food. (This generally only applies to animals that are the among largest in the ecosystem; if this ideology applied to rabbits, which breed hundreds, if not thousands, of times faster then elk, then we would have problems)To all those who claim that all hunting should be banned: shut up and get your head out of your ass, it is not going to happen, and that just gives them more money that would not go into protecting the wild areas (not that they're doing a good job anyways, but still, some cash is better than no cash). Shoot all of the deer, elk, small game, etc that you want but leave large predators alone. Wolves were hunted out in CA? REINTRODUCE THEM! Take them from another area with proposed hunting, and put them in CA. If the people are so eager to catch wolves, let them assist in the capture and reintroduction. The same thing should apply to damn Europe. I love wolves, and they deserve to be restored to at least part of the prior range.
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17274916 - 11/24/12 05:53 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said: Wolves play a key ecological role in the ecosystem. Both sides agree. However, to all of the idiots saying that the wilderness is so damaged that hunters are needed: shut up and get your head out of your ass. Populations of large herbivorous animals do not explode to the point where the cannot sustain themselves generally speaking, as they need to expend more and more energy into getting food. (This generally only applies to animals that are the among largest in the ecosystem; if this ideology applied to rabbits, which breed hundreds, if not thousands, of times faster then elk, then we would have problems)To all those who claim that all hunting should be banned: shut up and get your head out of your ass, it is not going to happen, and that just gives them more money that would not go into protecting the wild areas (not that they're doing a good job anyways, but still, some cash is better than no cash). Shoot all of the deer, elk, small game, etc that you want but leave large predators alone. Wolves were hunted out in CA? REINTRODUCE THEM! Take them from another area with proposed hunting, and put them in CA. If the people are so eager to catch wolves, let them assist in the capture and reintroduction. The same thing should apply to damn Europe. I love wolves, and they deserve to be restored to at least part of the prior range.
You clearly don't understand that packs need a certain area in which to roam and that the current amount of wildlands have only a certain carrying capacity beyond which leads wolves to wander into developed areas as well as into conflict with each other. The wolf population in Idaho, for instance, is already stabilized at its carrying capacity. How is this known? Well millions of dollars are spent over years tracking packs and breeding pairs. Hunts are allowed in Idaho to cull the population back down to the current amount of wildlands carrying capacity. How are people unable to understand carrying capacity? You simply cannot have an unlimited number of wolves in one area and expect them to live peacefully. Historical numbers for wolf populations will never be reached because there simply is not that much wilderness left for them to roam.
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
explosiveoxygen
Prophet of TGMM


Registered: 07/10/09
Posts: 1,255
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17276678 - 11/25/12 12:13 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: Wolves play a key ecological role in the ecosystem. Both sides agree. However, to all of the idiots saying that the wilderness is so damaged that hunters are needed: shut up and get your head out of your ass. Populations of large herbivorous animals do not explode to the point where the cannot sustain themselves generally speaking, as they need to expend more and more energy into getting food. (This generally only applies to animals that are the among largest in the ecosystem; if this ideology applied to rabbits, which breed hundreds, if not thousands, of times faster then elk, then we would have problems)To all those who claim that all hunting should be banned: shut up and get your head out of your ass, it is not going to happen, and that just gives them more money that would not go into protecting the wild areas (not that they're doing a good job anyways, but still, some cash is better than no cash). Shoot all of the deer, elk, small game, etc that you want but leave large predators alone. Wolves were hunted out in CA? REINTRODUCE THEM! Take them from another area with proposed hunting, and put them in CA. If the people are so eager to catch wolves, let them assist in the capture and reintroduction. The same thing should apply to damn Europe. I love wolves, and they deserve to be restored to at least part of the prior range.
You clearly don't understand that packs need a certain area in which to roam and that the current amount of wildlands have only a certain carrying capacity beyond which leads wolves to wander into developed areas as well as into conflict with each other. The wolf population in Idaho, for instance, is already stabilized at its carrying capacity. How is this known? Well millions of dollars are spent over years tracking packs and breeding pairs. Hunts are allowed in Idaho to cull the population back down to the current amount of wildlands carrying capacity. How are people unable to understand carrying capacity? You simply cannot have an unlimited number of wolves in one area and expect them to live peacefully. Historical numbers for wolf populations will never be reached because there simply is not that much wilderness left for them to roam.
So what happens is the ones not adapted to the area die. Nature doesn't cause a population to go extinct because it went over carrying capacity.
While if hunters shoot them it's just the ones least camouflaged, biggest, or nearest the outer edge of the territory. This is really not a complex thing to understand.
-------------------- The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
|
Quote:
explosiveoxygen said:
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: Wolves play a key ecological role in the ecosystem. Both sides agree. However, to all of the idiots saying that the wilderness is so damaged that hunters are needed: shut up and get your head out of your ass. Populations of large herbivorous animals do not explode to the point where the cannot sustain themselves generally speaking, as they need to expend more and more energy into getting food. (This generally only applies to animals that are the among largest in the ecosystem; if this ideology applied to rabbits, which breed hundreds, if not thousands, of times faster then elk, then we would have problems)To all those who claim that all hunting should be banned: shut up and get your head out of your ass, it is not going to happen, and that just gives them more money that would not go into protecting the wild areas (not that they're doing a good job anyways, but still, some cash is better than no cash). Shoot all of the deer, elk, small game, etc that you want but leave large predators alone. Wolves were hunted out in CA? REINTRODUCE THEM! Take them from another area with proposed hunting, and put them in CA. If the people are so eager to catch wolves, let them assist in the capture and reintroduction. The same thing should apply to damn Europe. I love wolves, and they deserve to be restored to at least part of the prior range.
You clearly don't understand that packs need a certain area in which to roam and that the current amount of wildlands have only a certain carrying capacity beyond which leads wolves to wander into developed areas as well as into conflict with each other. The wolf population in Idaho, for instance, is already stabilized at its carrying capacity. How is this known? Well millions of dollars are spent over years tracking packs and breeding pairs. Hunts are allowed in Idaho to cull the population back down to the current amount of wildlands carrying capacity. How are people unable to understand carrying capacity? You simply cannot have an unlimited number of wolves in one area and expect them to live peacefully. Historical numbers for wolf populations will never be reached because there simply is not that much wilderness left for them to roam.
So what happens is the ones not adapted to the area die. Nature doesn't cause a population to go extinct because it went over carrying capacity.
While if hunters shoot them it's just the ones least camouflaged, biggest, or nearest the outer edge of the territory. This is really not a complex thing to understand.

Removing part of a full population does not impact nature that much, as they regenerate more quickly then they usually would. Wolves were hunted out of nearly, if not all of the states and then were reintroduced by taking a percentage to relocate. The same could apply to stable populations in the states.
Also, shut up about wolves attacking people if they are not hunted. The come into urban areas not because they are overpopulated, but because of the abundance of food. Also, coyotes are more of a danger to humans (specifically children). If you want to hunt a large canine, hunt one that is already in all its natural ecosystems (and some more).
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17279933 - 11/25/12 04:31 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said:
Quote:
explosiveoxygen said:
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: Wolves play a key ecological role in the ecosystem. Both sides agree. However, to all of the idiots saying that the wilderness is so damaged that hunters are needed: shut up and get your head out of your ass. Populations of large herbivorous animals do not explode to the point where the cannot sustain themselves generally speaking, as they need to expend more and more energy into getting food. (This generally only applies to animals that are the among largest in the ecosystem; if this ideology applied to rabbits, which breed hundreds, if not thousands, of times faster then elk, then we would have problems)To all those who claim that all hunting should be banned: shut up and get your head out of your ass, it is not going to happen, and that just gives them more money that would not go into protecting the wild areas (not that they're doing a good job anyways, but still, some cash is better than no cash). Shoot all of the deer, elk, small game, etc that you want but leave large predators alone. Wolves were hunted out in CA? REINTRODUCE THEM! Take them from another area with proposed hunting, and put them in CA. If the people are so eager to catch wolves, let them assist in the capture and reintroduction. The same thing should apply to damn Europe. I love wolves, and they deserve to be restored to at least part of the prior range.
You clearly don't understand that packs need a certain area in which to roam and that the current amount of wildlands have only a certain carrying capacity beyond which leads wolves to wander into developed areas as well as into conflict with each other. The wolf population in Idaho, for instance, is already stabilized at its carrying capacity. How is this known? Well millions of dollars are spent over years tracking packs and breeding pairs. Hunts are allowed in Idaho to cull the population back down to the current amount of wildlands carrying capacity. How are people unable to understand carrying capacity? You simply cannot have an unlimited number of wolves in one area and expect them to live peacefully. Historical numbers for wolf populations will never be reached because there simply is not that much wilderness left for them to roam.
So what happens is the ones not adapted to the area die. Nature doesn't cause a population to go extinct because it went over carrying capacity.
While if hunters shoot them it's just the ones least camouflaged, biggest, or nearest the outer edge of the territory. This is really not a complex thing to understand.

Removing part of a full population does not impact nature that much, as they regenerate more quickly then they usually would. Wolves were hunted out of nearly, if not all of the states and then were reintroduced by taking a percentage to relocate. The same could apply to stable populations in the states.
Also, shut up about wolves attacking people if they are not hunted. The come into urban areas not because they are overpopulated, but because of the abundance of food. Also, coyotes are more of a danger to humans (specifically children). If you want to hunt a large canine, hunt one that is already in all its natural ecosystems (and some more).
I never said wolves attack humans or that it was a problem. The problem is that wolves attack farm animals. Also, the population that the current amount of wild lands is finite. get that through your thick skull.
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17280242 - 11/25/12 05:08 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
My skull may be thick, but even I know that (*for example*) Northern CA could use a few packs of wolves to balance the ecosystem before we resort to hunting. I am not against hunting populations that are stable unless there is a population (or lack of) somewhere else that could use new breeding stock.
I also think that hunters should only hunt black wolves (the ones with domestic dog genes in them). The pollute the breeding stock, and if not regulated, could forever change North American wolves.
Edited by poke_poke (11/25/12 05:14 PM)
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17280268 - 11/25/12 05:13 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said: My skull may be thick, but even I know that northern CA could use a few packs of wolves to balance the ecosystem before we resort to hunting. I am not against hunting populations that are stable unless there is a population (or lack of) somewhere else that could use new breeding stock.
I also think that hunters should only hunt black wolves (the ones with domestic dog genes in them). The pollute the breeding stock, and if not regulated, could forever change North American wolves.
1. if they reintroduce wolves to northern cali they will be covered under the ESA and not be allowed to hunt until populations stabilize. it would be the same scenario as when they were reintroduced to Idaho and Montana. 2. type of wolf is irrelevant if the population has exceeded the carrying capacity of their environment.
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17280292 - 11/25/12 05:17 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
1. Exactly. Your point?
2. Type of wolf is relevant, as if you have wolves that are say, 25% damn dog, then those are crossing with the pure wolves, then that makes the whole population weaker. As far as populations exceeding the carrying capacity, large predators do not overpopulate as the run out of food very quickly and are only as large as their food population permits them to be.
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17280328 - 11/25/12 05:23 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said: 1. Exactly. Your point?
2. Type of wolf is relevant, as if you have wolves that are say, 25% damn dog, then those are crossing with the pure wolves, then that makes the whole population weaker. As far as populations exceeding the carrying capacity, large predators do not overpopulate as the run out of food very quickly and are only as large as their food population permits them to be.
1. wolves can be hunted legally in idaho to control their population because they now exceed the carrying capacity of the wild lands where they roam. not sure about montana since i don't live there. ie, the whole crux of my argument. duh. 2. wtf are you talking about. where is this even a problem?
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17280368 - 11/25/12 05:28 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: 1. Exactly. Your point?
2. Type of wolf is relevant, as if you have wolves that are say, 25% damn dog, then those are crossing with the pure wolves, then that makes the whole population weaker. As far as populations exceeding the carrying capacity, large predators do not overpopulate as the run out of food very quickly and are only as large as their food population permits them to be.
1. wolves can be hunted legally in idaho to control their population because they now exceed the carrying capacity of the wild lands where they roam. not sure about montana since i don't live there. ie, the whole crux of my argument. duh. 2. wtf are you talking about. where is this even a problem?
1. Not exactly disagreeing with you... just saying that they could be relocated before hunted, as that would grant a new area a better ecosystem. I am not anti hunting dude.
2. Ever seen a black wolf? Yea, that is a dog/wolf hybrid. Lots of people simply ignore this, and wolves' genes are being polluted by domestic dogs. Hunters should take dog/wolf hybrids rather then pure wolves until that problem is straightened out.
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17280422 - 11/25/12 05:33 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said:
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: 1. Exactly. Your point?
2. Type of wolf is relevant, as if you have wolves that are say, 25% damn dog, then those are crossing with the pure wolves, then that makes the whole population weaker. As far as populations exceeding the carrying capacity, large predators do not overpopulate as the run out of food very quickly and are only as large as their food population permits them to be.
1. wolves can be hunted legally in idaho to control their population because they now exceed the carrying capacity of the wild lands where they roam. not sure about montana since i don't live there. ie, the whole crux of my argument. duh. 2. wtf are you talking about. where is this even a problem?
1. Not exactly disagreeing with you... just saying that they could be relocated before hunted, as that would grant a new area a better ecosystem. I am not anti hunting dude.
2. Ever seen a black wolf? Yea, that is a dog/wolf hybrid. Lots of people simply ignore this, and wolves' genes are being polluted by domestic dogs. Hunters should take dog/wolf hybrids rather then pure wolves until that problem is straightened out.
1. you don't know much about idaho do you? most of the state is roadless wilderness area. in fact, much more so than northern cali. also, the wolf population is doing so well in idaho that wolves from idaho are now migrating into WA and OR and Nevada to find more room. this is a good thing.
2. i've seen 1 wolf in idaho and it was not a black wolf. it was a huge ass mutha fucker. probably 4 feet tall and close to 200 pounds. not a mix at all.
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17280469 - 11/25/12 05:39 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|

See the black one? Most packs have this problem. European packs (the remaining ones anyways) do not have as much trouble with this.
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17280491 - 11/25/12 05:42 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What the hell does Idaho's terrain have to do with anything? Also, I was just using CA as a example (mostly because its were I am, and because northern CA is really big so there is lots of undisturbed area). Wolves could easily be captured and relocated (maybe that would be a better use of the helicopters then the pussy in the video).
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17280530 - 11/25/12 05:47 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
poke_poke said: What the hell does Idaho's terrain have to do with anything? Also, I was just using CA as a example (mostly because its were I am, and because northern CA is really big so there is lots of undisturbed area). Wolves could easily be captured and relocated (maybe that would be a better use of the helicopters then the pussy in the video).
they could be relocated. i'm not sure about historic wolf populations in CA. I do know however that Idaho had a long history of wolves before they were hunted out of the area by early settlers. also, if you want to know anything about the reintroduction of wolves to an area you should probably look up what happened in idaho. an astonishing success. you might even learn a thing or two or more than that
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: SlashOZ]
#17280590 - 11/25/12 05:54 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SlashOZ said:
Quote:
poke_poke said: What the hell does Idaho's terrain have to do with anything? Also, I was just using CA as a example (mostly because its were I am, and because northern CA is really big so there is lots of undisturbed area). Wolves could easily be captured and relocated (maybe that would be a better use of the helicopters then the pussy in the video).
they could be relocated. i'm not sure about historic wolf populations in CA. I do know however that Idaho had a long history of wolves before they were hunted out of the area by early settlers. also, if you want to know anything about the reintroduction of wolves to an area you should probably look up what happened in idaho. an astonishing success. you might even learn a thing or two or more than that 
CA had a shitload of wolves, then a bunch of idiots hunted them, beavers, bears, and even stuff like the california condor (they are badass-but now there are like 160 in the world, which is a huge improvement). Coyotes then moved in, and are bold as hell, even killing children because they reside in even the most urban of areas in places like where I live, San Diego. If wolves were reintroduced, they would kill off a few of the coyotes, strengthen up the deer, and once stable, provide a source of revenue. Sucks to be missing all large predators... we have problems, even in suburban areas, with deer. I'm pissed off because people like killing rattlers in large amounts, when they control the rats...
Well nice debating with you man.
|
passifloracaerulea



Registered: 11/13/10
Posts: 10,485
|
Re: The killing of wolves in the wild... [Re: poke_poke]
#17282679 - 11/26/12 01:34 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
the california condor population dropped because of lead bullets. when you shoot a gel cube or body, the leads breaks up into thousands of tiny pieces which the condors can easily and mistakenly eat. the solution is to switch over to brass bullets which stay together as a whole slug.
|
poke_poke
Creepy old guy in your bushes



Registered: 11/18/12
Posts: 123
Loc: CA
Last seen: 12 years, 27 days
|
|
Condors were also hunted because people disliked them, and as they were so large, they were easier for people to shoot then typical vultures. Feathers were also sold occasionally, which prompted more to die. Lead bullets were probably one of the bigger factors, though.
|
|