Coyote in the yard, kids playing

[Harve Curry]

Sumpnz,

Read the latest issue of Range magazine for the latest of the predations of wolves. Wolves do kill for fun they run down elk till they can't move from heat exhustion. That don't mean they eat all of them, some just don't recover and lay out and die. The ones that do get ate by wolves don't usually get killed first. The wolves just disable them then eat them from the butt forward while they cry out till they die.
Of the original 18 or so that were introduced into Yellowstone there are now 370 by USFW count, probably more. They range far outside of Yellowstone into the surrounding states.
We don't now how many are in New Mexico because it's a need to know kinda thing. Wolf reintroduction program costs tax payers about $1million dollars per wolf. You know the goverment cannot do anything simple, and college educated goverment employee's don't work cheap, and at the end of the day they don't have to worry about the bottom line dollar.

Wolf people like the Gila Watch, Forest Guardians based in Tucson are anti rights, anti hunting, anti-gun, anti ranching, anti lumbering, anti ag-business, and anti try and make a living with anything that has to do with the National Forest or BLM lands.
Run any business, a ag business, manage a family business, produce a product or service where your every day work has to amount to some form of profit as it will directly effect what your family is going to do and eat and you will have a different definition of live and let live.
Supporting the notion of the wolf people is akin to saying to Sarah Brady or slick willie, " it's OK we can still sit down and have lunch together."

 

[sumpnz]

Harve, sorry if I offended you in some way. I'm hardly a supporter of enviro-terrorists like Gila Watch (and implying that I do is a notion that I find offensive). But wolves are an important part of our eco-system. The over population of deer in the mid-west and east coast would likely not have happened, or at least not to the extent that it has if wolves had not been hunted to near extinction. CWD would not be such a problem in Wisconsin, and Colorado and other states if there was effective non-human predation of deer and elk. I don't dispute your characterization of wolves hunting techniques.

Nor do I dispute the cost of wolf re-introduction. When it comes to livestock, if it means that I have to pay an extra $0.50/lb for my beef becuase the cattle ranchers have to account for stock killed and for additonal protections from wolves, so what. Ranchers have to make a living, so if prices have to go up becuase of wolves, I'm okay with that. When it comes to pets, well lots already get eaten by coyotes anyway. If wolves come back, there will fewer coyotes because of competition for food, and wolves will kill some coyotes. In that sense, the balance is probably the same for pets. As for kids, well I already have to protect against coyotes and cougars. Adding wolves to the mix doesn't really change things that much.

People's fear of wolves is partially real, partially irrational. In the balance of things, wolves are a probably good thing to have. Just like any predator they can cause problems, though rancher's livlihoods do bear the brunt. In that sense I'd like to give them more leeway in how they are allowed to protect their animals, including shooting the occasional wolf.

 

[macavada]

No flame intended, but where did you get your $1 million per wolf figure?

 

[Harve Curry]

When a wolf kills cattle the burden of proof is on the livestock owner. When and if you get reimbursed it may not be the value of the animal.
Goverment employees wanting the program to look good, set the standard of proving whether the kill was by domestic dogs, coyotes or other.
You cannot shoot a wolf except in defence of human life or cattle. Dogs, cats, horses don't count legally. The goverment will come down on you same as a homicide of another human.
The dent wolves have put in population of elk, deer, and bison is measurable. Wolves have no enemy. Right now they're at the top.
Hunts have been put off in Wyoming and Montana. People who make a living guiding hunters will not be able to make a living at it.
Part of the big picture of the tree huggers is to keep hunters off public land.
Get the land back to pre-anglo.
Wolves have little redeemable value, all things have their time and place.

 

[sumpnz]

Harve, You obviously have very strong feelings regarding the value of wolves. I, obviously, disagree on many points.

Wolves have no enemy. Right now they're at the top.

And aside from humans and perhaps cougars and the occasional bear, what predator has ever been above the wolf? See the graphic from Stand_Watie about 34 posts back.

People who make a living guiding hunters will not be able to make a living at it.

Yeah, and 10 years ago when I was thinking about becomming an engineer in the aerospace industry people told me I was nuts becuase the aerospace industry had just finished laying off scads of engineers (and they wouldn't start hiring significantly more for a few more years). 30 years before that the industry couldn't get enough engineers, a situation we're in again although to a lesser extent. But even still we took a huge hit from an employment standpoint in the aftermath of 9/11. Why should hunting guides be immune to changes in circumstance? Sorry if that sounds cold but fortunes rise and fall for the rest of us too.

 

[Harve Curry]

Macavada,
The dollar figure comes from anti-wolf sources that I trust. When you consider that the planning of and wolf reintroduction program has been going on for over 15 years, the cost of studys, enviromental impact studies, facilities, raising the wolves, vets, field staff, legal staff, radio equipment, tracking equipment, 4x4's, helicopters, the list goes on. Then divide that figure by the actual number of wolves turned loose, then the number is probably on the conservative side. Soon the first generation of USF&W wolf emplyees will be retiring and we're paying them retirement and all they've done is to reintroduce a non productive predator at tax payer expense.

Another goal is the reintroduction of the grizzly bear in the south west, at the enviro's own statement in the Tucson paper Az Daily Star a few years ago, they realize they cannot win public support with out a successful wolf reintroduction first.

 

[Art Eatman]

I've followed the wolf-reintroduction efforts in the southwest; not super-close, but reasonably. Including info from USF&WS, Harve is pretty much correct.

Back some years ago, the USF&WS stated that a "do nothing" policy would cost $4 million per year. I'd like to have a job that paid $ 4million a year to do nothing...They went on to say that a full-effort restoration program would run about $18 milion a year. I've yet to see a government program that stayed within any projected budget.

Comments from Montana indicate that the so-called reimbursement program for the ranchers is so stringent about proof of kill that unless there is direct observation at the moment of kill, well, folks, tough stuff.

As far as comparing aerospace jobs and hunting guiding, that seems a bit apples-and-oranges to me. Hunting and hunting guiding has a long history, beginning long before technology as we know it. Technology changes. Hunting doesn't...FWIW

Art

 

[sumpnz]

Art, if you'll notice the point of my jobs comment was

fortunes rise and fall for the rest of us too.

At any rate, wolves pre-existed hunters and hunting guides. Cry me a river if a few guides loose their jobs becuase natural, non-human predators (that we previously wiped out by us humans) are brought back and start to prey upon their historical food source. I have no problem with hunting, hunters, hunting guides, etc. I'm hoping to go deer and elk hunting this year for the first time and, all else being equal I'd sure prefer a higher population so that I have a better chance of success (both in the draw and in the hunt). But if I miss out becuase wolves have killed so many deer and elk that hunt permits are reduced, oh well. I'll be disappointed for sure, but nobody said I'd get everything I want in life.

Now I do have sympathy for the ranchers who are loosing money becuase they aren't allowed to protect their livestock from wolves, and then not reimbursed for the ones that are lost as a result. Doesn't mean we should eradicate the wolves again, though a few politicians and enviro-weanies might be in order.

$18million/year is in the noise of the federal budget. I'm not defending it's expenditure, and there's certainly better ways it could be spent. But I have little problem with animals that we hunted to extinction (locally) being brought back so long as those who are directly affected by that action are able to protect themselves and their livlihoods in a reasonalbe fashion (which they are not right now). If it weren't for reintroduction efforts like these we wouldn't have any elk in Arizona, or anywhere but Yellowstone for that matter. The same govt. agency involved with the wolves is also working to restore antelope habitat in Arizona. Both of those efforts are greatly expanding hunting opportunities.

Anyway, this thread has really wandered off topic. Rather than continue with this hijack I'm simply going to finish my post with this: You (Harve and Art) have your opinions on this whole wolf matter and I respect it. Heck I can even to some extent agree with it. But I do not buy into the notion that "Wolves have little redeemable value."

 

[Art Eatman]

Aw, sumpnz, I'm not that far off. I guess it's the usual "It ain't what you do, it's how you do it."

I like the idea of the wolf reintroduction. I don't like the idea that working people's interests are for all practical purposes subservient to those of the wolves or the wolfophiles.

Were the government's system honest, there would be no need for "Shoot, shovel and shut up." It's the dishonesty and hypocrisy that gets my old red neck to glowing.

Art

 

[Harve Curry]

Like I said at first, get the latest issue of "Range Magazine"

 

[MolonLabe416]

One lesson learned here. If you have a variable scope, always keep it on the lowest setting.

You should have good luck over bait.