I don't advocate adding man into the mix. Man is ALREADY in the mix. Even if we are not hunting, our growing of crops, raising cattle, building cities, harvesting timber, flying airlines all will affect the populations.
So since you see how much damage we can do via indirect methods, how can direct methods be much better? Indirect man in the mix is harmful enough, and nature is one of those things that is so finely balanced that direct actions should only be taken after careful consideration of every possible repercussion.
As such, I am advocating that we also take it upon ourselves to help regulate the populations in BENEFICIAL ways as well.
And your definition of this would be blasting the crap out of a bunch of wolves? I reread that article, and didn't see anything that looked like concern or disappointment with how many wolves they have. On the contrary, they seemed rather pleased with their success. They don't seem to think that there is an overpopulation issue. And if there was, then perhaps some sort of regulation would be in order, but as it stands, regulating things that don't need regulating has NEVER worked to the benefit of anyone, wouldn't you say?
You apparently believe mother nature gets everything right and we live in a world where everything survives except for the interference of EVIL MAN.
Not at all. I simply believe that mother nature rarely makes mistakes that she can't fix, and that most of the environmental issues facing us today are mistakes that man made, not her. Even so, she does a pretty good job of fixing our mistakes as well, however, we should certainly be trying to do more to clean those up ourselves. That being said, I don't see any evidence that would lead me to believe that the wolf population is a mistake that nature can't fix by itself...if it's a mistake at all.
Hunting and game management are beneficial to animal populations.
Hunting and game management are beneficial to game populations.
Hunting and game management are beneficial to game populations.
Is that clear? Ignoring our responsibility within nature thinking that it is best left alone is foolish.
We are already a part of nature.
Hunting and game MANAGEMENT are beneficial. I don't see any management in declaring it open season on an animal that is only just starting to recover, and has such a bad rep to boot. I mean really, people love to shoot wolves. There's some primal, instinctual fear of them that is best assuaged by killing one or a few, and making it legal to take as many as you want anytime you want is not a good idea for an animal that conjures that type and that level of emotion. As I said before, if you're going to hunt them, go for it, but if you don't maintain some type of control on the time or amount of animals that can be harvested it won't be long before they find themselves back in the same position they were in before. I'm not saying ignore our responsibilities, I'm saying be responsible while you're trying to attend to them. Also, unless you live off the land in the forest, the part we play in nature isn't all that great. I mean really, unless you're in there competing for food and shelter with the wildlife, our part in nature is to observe. Heavy handed measures for delicate systems will never work well.