Who in their right mind would buy a wolf pelt? Hard to believe a market actually exists for such a thing.

Our poor wildlife, they're always the ones paying the price of our arrogance, greed and stupidity. How can anyone hurt animals, is beyond comprehension.

I knew someone with a full wolf pelt above their fire place. I walked in their beautiful house and there it was in all it's glory. I liked to puke.

It's like having my pet dog dead skinned and hung. I mean basically that's what they look like. I know their attitudes are very different, but they look like my dog in the back yard. Horrible.

I don't know what to do with the growing numbers though. I don't want them where I go camping. They are a lot different than bears. When these guys are hungry and want you they get you. They are smart and work together. Read up on the number of increased attacks.

The wolves they placed back into the wild had been acclimated to humans for decades. That makes them different than the wolves of the old west that stayed clear. More humans in their territory, too. More humans more incidences. We are soft stupid food, and everything around us is, too. Plus a lot of the wolves interbreed with dogs and that makes them doubly dangerous.

If the wolves of the old west were different and stayed away from humans, why were they mostly killed off? The old ranchers didn't kill the wolves for food did they? You sure the wolves weren't killed off because they were reeking havoc on the ranchers sheep, calves and other livestock? Lets just hope that the wolves don't get too frisky and start mating with some stray pitbulls, then all the bigfoots will be moving east.

I know about the coffee beans. The Kona coffee that is $40.00 a pound to tourists in Hawaii the farmers get $1.00 a lb.

"...That is why Todd Palin hunts wolves..."

There is no record that Palin ever hunted wolves.

"...The guys in Alaska use helicopters with shooters...."

Clarification---civilian hunters cannot hunt from aircraft. The aerial hunters are licensed government hunters.

Never let facts stand in the way of an agenda.

Anyone know where I can get a pair of fur lined gloves at? Wolf fur sounds too expensive, rabbit fur would be okay.

You people have no idea about what your talking about! How many of your donate to PETA? We in the western states will decide whats best for OUR state not you!

Hunting is part of the way of life for some of us, for food, to protect our domestic livestock, (Your food supply), and other wildlife and the Eco system. When it comes to OUR state keep your opinions to yourselves!

PS: if you want you could buy a wolf tag and live capture a wolf, it would make a great playmate for your kids, or maybe they'll be it's next meal!

Nasty Repub: "I dont know why anyone would hurt an animal"?

I have been in the cattle business for over 40 years, my family over 150 years. During my lifetime I have been crapped on, stomped, drug, knocked over, rammed, gored, poked, bite and kicked. Now everytime I bite into a hamburger I laugh my ass off.

Cant say about wolfs though. LOL

AZR,

Some of my family were in the livestock business years ago. I would assist them on occasion, and I can relate to your experiences.

I love your phraseology--stomped, drug, poked, etc. It reminded me of what an uncle of mine (an educated man) once told me, "You never get thrown by a horse, you get throwed". Rancher lingo. LOL

I read an article awhile back that said hunting wolves had not worked to control their population because it actually resulted in an *increase* in the wolf population. According to the article, the alpha male wolf in a pack gets to mate with all the females while all the other males go without. When the alpha male is killed, more males can mate with the females until another wolf has established himself as the alpha male. This means more wolves mating, more often and, consequently, an increase in the wolf population.

Wizard,

Exactly! Let the New Yorkers put them back in Central Park if they want them so damn bad. They were once all the way into the Carolinas!

We, in Idaho resented the feds bringing us the Canadian Gray. They found a few native wolves about the same time they wanted to introduced the canadian. Of course no one from the government ever mentions that one. They wanted the canadians here and, by God, "you in the west WILL have them!"

BTW, I was in Canada earlier this year and they were laughing their arses off about our desire for them. They told me they have plenty more, if we want them. I say, we'll take 'em as long as they get to be "introduced" east of the Mississippi...

Chris-537131

I just tried to find wolf pelts using yahoo and google. I found this on google, an add from glacierwear.com:

Wolf # 1112006

Description: Arctic Wolf 73" tip of nose to tip of tail. Heavy, Glossy, Silky. Lifesize pelt, all four paws & claws. Mountable. Nice markings. Case skinned. Fresh commercial garment tanned, very soft & stretchy leather.

Price: $325.00

So, there's proof that part one of your post was "factually incorrect" which is politically correct for a dam lie, which is unfortunate as some misguided, gullible, lazy person may actually believe your post.

About Todd Palin, what is your source? I can find no mention of him being a wolf hunter in any of his bio's, but if he is, so what? It is legal to hunt wolves in Alaska, there's even a bounty.

There's only one person in this thead that has it right, and that is: wizardsnest

It is the right of the State to set rules/seasons for hunting and/or trapping. The Federal Government has no Constitutional Right to regulate hunting in any State. Most States even have regulations that demand scientific research as a guide to determine what species can be hunted/trapped instead of emotion, which if know-nothing buffoons had their way there would be no hunting/trapping/fishing as it is cruel to animals in their puny brain, but then animals and bugs are killed for their veggies to grow...what a , dilemma....eat or starve? I vote to eat, because as all of us omnivores know, People Eat Tasty Animals!

If the wolves of the old west were different and stayed away from humans, why were they mostly killed off? The old ranchers didn't kill the wolves for food did they? You sure the wolves weren't killed off because they were reeking havoc on the ranchers sheep, calves and other livestock?

For the money... just like now, the livestock taken never equals what man does. Nothing like making a good party out of violence:

Suddenly the business of wolf hunting was lucrative, and for many years newly settled counties paid their state taxes with bounty money. By the middle 1800s the wolf hunt was a major social event. The hunts were conducted on foot or horseback and as many as 60 wolves could be ensnared during a day’s hunt. One of the last hunts in the area was held in 1856 in Brush Hill (later to become Hinsdale). Marion Knoblauch noted in the DuPage County Guide, “More than a 1000 men from Fullersburg, Downer’s Grove, York Center, Cass, and Lyons joined in a communal assault on wolf and deer by forming a circle and connecting their villages and converging on a pre-arranged spot, marked by a flag on a tall staff, about three miles south of the present center of Hinsdale. It was one of the last community hunts in Downer’s Grove Township. The wolf was rapidly retreating before the march of civilization.” The Will County historians note, “But though the profit derived was comparatively great, the propagation of the wolf was neglected, and now a wolf, should one be captured in the county, would be counted as a curiosity.” By 1860, wolves had disappeared from Illinois.

I didn't think they needed to be reestablished down here. Sure it might have been nice to have them back in Yellowstone, but they have legs and don't stay put. A few have now even been recorded in WA State - pure blood Timber wolf and a dog mix. There is no more room for a major predator.

there is little other use for them since they are an invasive species and the fact that they are decimating native wildlife populations.

??? Like which native species? Deer... elk... bunnies?

They found a few native wolves about the same time they wanted to introduced the canadian.

No... were they purebreds, or mixed with something else? Where were they? How many? Where they ranging up into Canada or just isolated in Idaho?

A dead Timber wolf was found just north of Spokane on the highway. That means others are into WA now. They've found a live one mixed with dog.

I would really be interested in knowing about these native Idaho ones.

The comment way above calling wolves an "invasive species" was totally stupid (not usually so mean, but...). If you fling around the term, you should know what it means. Wolves are (before being killed off) the native species. Who is the invasive species? Cattle. Cattle are NOT native to North America. Cattle can be killed by coyotes, much less wolves... but guess who the coyotes predator was? That's right... the wolf. If some cattle is lost... so be it! Better yet, replace cattle with NON invasive species that are NOT wolf prey (at least not in large numbers)... bison, the native "cattle". Sound extreme? Well maybe, and maybe not practical... but the point is, you shouldn't dare call a native species "invasive" in an attempt to sound educated!

Well sure, horses are an invasive species, and if their wild numbers are unchecked they wreak havoc on the land, other wildlife, and farmers and ranchers. However, I wasn't aware that wolves were an invasive species. In fact I'm pretty sure they are more native than most white people on the north american continent. Most scientific criteria do not define an 'invasive species' based upon human habitation patterns, and certainly not on ones that are less than 100 years old. Thinking outside of the box is all well and good, but there are times when it only amounts to a personal opinion speciously crafted to (attempt to) further an argument.

However, I know that many 'environmentalists' aren't very sympathetic to people that are trying to grow food to feed their families and other people, but 'economy' (and by that word I mean many, many things) is part of the picture people. Deal with it. To be honest, I'm not very sympathetic to the type of person who is trying to force a lifestyle down other people's throats because they the individual perceives it as more 'ethical'.

Now, that doesn't mean complete callousness. That doesn't mean 'shoot any wolf, or wild horse, or whatever on sight' because they may be detrimental, but there does come a time when one has to balance ones safety and livelihood with the surrounding environment. It is our instinct to alter our environment and exploit niches, and it is the extinct of animals to vie for resources as well. That often puts us in competition... Sometimes we are pushing against each other hard, and at the end of the day, if that means that I have to shoot a wolf/coyote/bunny rabbit/ whatever to protect my lifestock I will not hesitate.

where's superman (I mean obama) when you need him? blame bush!

actually I think if you're going to hunt wolves or bears for that matter, let's keep it fair, the hunter gets a bow and arrow, it was good enough for indians.

Chris,

Not sure where you live but I do live in Mont ana. Since I see firsthand how the wolves directly affect our livestock I am in favor of thinning the wolf population. Not eradicating but making it possible for them to be here and not have to sustain themselves on our beef and other livestock. It is most disheartening and financially devastating to have your herds cut down by predators of any kind. But to be told no you can not shoot these predators (wolves) because they didn't really mean to kill your calves is frustrating to say the least. We are allowed to shoot dogs that do this but not wolves who do so much more lethal damage. These same wolves come back to "visit' time and again. Is it right for some of the working population to bear the brunt of this financial loss? I would say no and so would any of you if you had any sense. But the government refunds you for losses you say. Bull! Have you dealt w/ the government when they owe you money?? You can imagine how that goes. 'You didn't really have cause to shoot that wolf sir-yes I know it's pack was scattering your herd and pulling down whatever it could as fast as it could and in front of witnesses. Sorry not good enough, here is your fine for shooting the wolf. Have a good day.' Maybe you don't care about cows, not pretty enough?? How about horses? Wolves don't care if that horse is a 4-h project and belongs to a girl who saved her $ up for the horse of her dreams. These animals they kill can be worth thousands of dollars. Do you know how we recoup our losses? We pass it on to the consumer. The only way to protect our cows and other livestock is to put them in "secure feed lots". We don't do that here in MT. Our livestock is naturally grass fed like nature planned. Not confined to a filthy feedlot fed who knows what. I am not opposed to predators. In fact I know we need them to keep other wildlife in balance health wise. I do think that when the predators are to many in # and can not stay where they were placed due to overpopulation that problems will arise. That problem being harassed and dead livestock.  You know that when a pregnantherd is run to hard that it can cause spontanious abortion and that in sheep they run so hard that they simply die? The whole herd, gone. Insurance will cover you say. Well prove it to the Insurance when the FWP dept won't verify wolf kill for you. Maybe before you all start to say oh, poor wolf, try looking at it from the other side. Most of us in MT are not in it to get a pelt for $. If that is the motivation for someone else to kill one, go ahead, I don't have time to go hunting myself. We just want to protect our livelihood, you know our jobs. How would any of you feel if you let your dog out the back door to do their business and looked out in time to see them become lunch-even big labs and hounds etc.? For some areas in MT people can not let their dogs and cats out, and no they do not live in a rural palace but in town w/ houses all around. I am not giving you scary made up stories. I personally know some of these folks. Just try to see it from the other side before you judge from afar will you? After all, you don't have to live w/ them like we do here in MT. We did not sign up for this, it was forced upon us from those who do not live here and don't have to clean up after them. I'm sure you think I am some redneck hick just because I live in MT. Think what you want. But if you go by who is spouting off w/out knowing the full story, then I think that speaks for itself. Have a better more informed day!

MT girl: Don't expect very many here to understand or accept your actual knowledge of life in Montana or your common sense. There are those who are not here to learn, discuss or even debate intelligently. Some have never traveled,worked in or lived in the wide open lands of the western states. All they know is their habitat....the concrete jungles of the city.

And your point is?

JoMan: In post1.3 you said:

I liked to puke.

I cannot imagine anyone liking to do that!

You are only partly right. The main reason that these wolves need to be killed is that they are killers who take livestock from the ranchers in ID and MT. They kill Elk and Deer inside Yellowstone park, and since they have been re-introduced to the park, the number of elk and deer is down by more than 1/2. How sad that you will never be able to go and enjoy seeing the huge herds of elk because they have all been killed by these nasty wolves, who by the way also kill for sport and leave the carcus behind to rot!

This is not true for the people in Montana. I happen to live in the Bitterroot valley and know that the wolves here are killed for game managment. As a hunter I know there is a threat to the deer and elk and even people that come in contact with these wolves. We are not looking to kill the animals for just for sport. If they kept multiplying at this rate we would be over run with wolves and have no deer, elk or livestock for that matter. They are even coming up to doorsteps and killing household pets. Why dont you city slickers get your facts straight before you go running your mouth. Worry about the issues in your precious cities and let us worry about ours.

If you raised cattle and sheep in the area this limited hunt would not be satisfactory. I think the environmentalists should be happy with the restrictions they have and realize that wolves are predators against deer, calves and lambs. They don't discriminate between male or female and whether they are raised for breeding or food production. These tree hugger fanatics that can't see the good in managing the predators in our wildlife should have to live among them and rely on their victims for sustinance. Where did these nuts come from?

Every reply here from anybody from Montana, Idaho and Wyoming is a load of bullsh-t.

If anyone wants to really know about how wolves interact with humans and their livestock, just go to websites based in Minnesota, where we have ALMOST THREE THOUSAND WOLVES living in a state that's not even HALF the size of those three put together.

Nobody here, including farmers and ranchers, in any way supports a hunting season on wolves. Ou wolf population has held steady at its current level since the 1990's. Our deer population is in fact exploding.

So for REAL facts, and the TRUTH, visit Minnesota websites on wolves.

"The hunter's claim they are doing natures work . . . ?" Actually the hunters should admit that they just love the simple-minded thrill of killing.

Good one....put a hunter at a bait pile and let the wolves sit in a tree stand and shoot. And they call it a sport!

I hope that all you folks who take jabs at hunters, practice what you preach.

If your home is infested with ants, roaches, mice, or rats---I hope you don't kill them, only capture and relocate. After all, they are only trying to reclaim their environment.

I don't think comparing the actions of animals that act out of instinct to humans who are rational creatures. We can make a moral decision about slaughtering animals, where wolves act out of instinct.

Also, saying that because people care about the environment and protection of animals does not also mean these people do not care about atrocities happening in third world countries where people are taken advantage of for the good of consumers in industrialized countries. Generalizations never help a discussion.

Heather,

Are you a vegetarian? If not, how do you think you get meat? It comes from animals! They have processing plants that do your killing for you so you do not have to participate in that icky process!

If you are vegan, do you really believe that no animals or bugs are killed so your veggies can grow unmolested? Do you believe there are no pesticides used? Did you know that once veggies are washed, they are "pesticide free"? It's a big bad world out there Heather, and reality is unkind to the uninformed.

I kill to eat! I kill deer, rabbits, squirrels, grouse, pheasants and fish on a regular basis, and you know what? I do it because I can legally provide for my family by buying a license to hunt what I want, or fish for what I want to eat, and there are no growth hormones used on wild animals, nor do they use antibiotics on wild creatures. There is also a lot less fat on wild meat. Wild game is much healthier that farm raised animals/fowl.

I do my own killing thank you very much, that makes me a realist v/s a coward who lets someone else do their killing for them!

its no worse than the wolves ripping the fetuses out of elk just for fun and leaving 15-30 complete carcasses. Believe it or not, wolves kill for pleasure too. Shooting them is quick and relatively painless; they kill their prey by ripping flesh open, hardly a way to go when compared to the luxury of a bullet.

Oh brother. Nice emotional plea. Save it. These wolves usually return to their kills.
Also, these kills are important to less dominant predators. Coyotes, foxes, lynx, bobcat, crow, jays, all sorts of birds, etc... Down to the things that chew the bones like mice and voles.

Leaving these big carcasses would cut down on the taking of livestock by the less dominant predators - everyone is happier.

Actually farmers are never happy. If one of their calves die and a bird pecks out it's eye they scream a coyote got it, then they get subsidized from the government. Then they hate the government anyway... see how that works.

joman,

Where do you live? Have you ever been involved in agribusiness? Ever shot a firearm? Ever hunted, or fished? Ever actually dressed out an animal? Ever spent a night more than 1/2 mile from a super-market? etc................................

I'm not talking about eating Arlene, or worshiping farmers, So much for your non-emotional arguments. I'm talking about the law and farmers getting double pay. I'm not getting into one of your weird rationals.

Importation of our food supplies? We spend most of our energy exporting our food supplies. What crop are you talking about? Kiwi's? I know all our apples and cherry's go zip right across to Japan. As for our other major crops... I think we like to share:

http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ag101/cropmajor.html

Spike - Obviously you would like to know. Did I push a button?

JoMan

Sure many farmers get government subsidies; many may even cry 'coyote' when it wasn't. However, they don't get paid squat for a coyote. In fact, they don't get compensated (out here anyway) for what a coyote does, not ever, even if they got a video of a pack of them in the act. Coyotes are considered vermin and are just part of the business. However, if there is a population spike and too many people are losing livestock to them, they have 'Government Trappers' that will come out and at least thin the population. But I don't know one single person who has ever been compensated for the loss of livestock to a coyote. You speak much of that which you know little.

A wolf however is supposed to be a different story. But ever since they reintroduced wolves into Yellowstone getting a government agency to admit that there are wolves in the area at all is like pulling teeth, and I'm not really sure why exactly. It's weird. Once again, even if you got video of a pack of them tearing apart one of your calves you are more than likely to get a verdict of 'dogs' and no one will do a thing. No compensation, not even a 'sorry there isn't anything we can do', no nothin'. Politics.

As for as exporting food, I do know that we export a lot of beef, and some grain, but I don't know the comparitive numbers. I don't know squat about apples or cherries either. I'll take your word on that.

Sad that human life means less to you than that of an animal. I rasie and hunt my own food. In the case of food I raise, it is very well cared for and killed quickly and painlessly. As for hunting, my dad taught me to never let the animal suffer. The first shot is a kill shot. Sorry, but I do have a family to feed and that soy vegan stuff won't raise HEALTHY kids. I don't want my kids growing up thin and pale because they can't get enough of the right nutrients. They are being raised to be self sufficient. Good luck teaching yours how to hunt that soy bean down when you need it.

[its no worse than the wolves ripping the fetuses out of elk just for fun and leaving 15-30 complete carcasses. Believe it or not, wolves kill for pleasure too. Shooting them is quick and relatively painless; they kill their prey by ripping flesh open, hardly a way to go when compared to the luxury of a bullet.]

Arleta, you are so completely and utterly full of @!$%# you don't even smell it any longer. Wolves kill the way every other animal kills, and almost across the board all deaths are going to be painful.

Are you really stupid enough to compare a wolf killing to humans? Clubbing seals, harpooning whales, finning sharks and dumping them back in the water alive. Do I really need to go on, because, of course, I can...I could fill up this blog with human atrocities. Additionally, unless you have PROOF of the wolves doing what you claim them to be doing - killing Elk because it's fun (because killing Elk is so easy for a wolf), ripping out fetuses, etc - you should probably just keep your misinformation to yourself.

And finally, yes, every human who fires a gun is a great marksman and makes the perfect shot. Right. Humans are the responsible ones, caring for wildlife and the living creatures of the world, but wolves are evil. Fool.

MT girl, are you saying human life is more important than any other animal life?

Additionally, are you saying growing your own food is somehow less worthwhile than being able to shoot your own food? A vegetarian lifestyle might not be for you, but it is in no way inferior or lacking in nutrients when compared to meat, especially when compared to mass produced animals jacked up with hormones and @!$%#ty corn fillers.

I can't really speak for MT girl, but I live in Montana too, and I don't feel that a vegan diet is necessarily less healthy, but it does take more work. I have a certain amount of respect for people that make that choice. It's hard. However...

While I personallydon't object to a diet/lifestyle choice per se; what I object to is people working to push legislation through that affects my life and lifestyle choices based on what many vegetarians/vegans/animal rights activists perceive as an ethical imperative. The reality is that much of this legislation makes often already difficult lives that much harder. It seems as if we are being punished for our own cultural ethics and lifestyle and forced to live a certain way because of another groups interpretation of what is ethical and what is not. Most of these people on an individual basis have never even been here, let alone actually try to understand the people here.

We are often condemned by vegans(and related) as unethical, ignorant, cruel, and narrow minded. We are painted as toothless, in bred, gun waving, heathens that are prone to physical violence against human beings as well because we choose to hunt, raise animals for food, or simply just eat meat. The primary tactic seems to be a grand smear campaign.

Most people that I know out here are not any of those things. In fact, I know a lot of people that are living in trailers, eating blue box macaroni and would still feed you and give you a roof if you were in trouble in spite of what little they have; add on top of that that half of these people have a fat old horse for the grandkids or some half blind, geriatric, dog teetering around that gets better medical treatment than they give themselves, it makes one wonder what 'ethical' really might be.

So please forgive me for being a little defensive and more than a little fed up with people that are making decisions that affect me, while they sling mud, when they have no idea what I really am.

You have your life style choices and I have mine. I'm not trying to make it more difficult for any vegans to get their food; so why are they making it so difficult for me and my friends and neighbors to survive? Ethics? Think about that for minute.

"are you saying human life is more important than any other animal life?"

Hmmm, tough one, hmmmm, HELL YES!

Unless you can reason out why you feel human life is somehow superior to any other animal life (and I'm almost positive I can turn any argument you present around on itself), your post is quite worthless.

Well said, Morgan, and I completely agree. Obtaining the food we need to survive is obviously of paramount importance. In fact, that basic need is the same for all living creatures, without exception, including wolves who are demonized because they hunt - go figure - penned up creatures that do know how to defend themselves because they are domesticated.

And unless I'm missing my mark, people are not killing wolves to eat them, they are killing them because a) they enjoy killing things, b) hunting predators is more exciting, and c) most of them have never killed a wolf before so it's unique. (big surprise since wolves have been hunted to near extinction. Numbering thousands or tens of thousands throughout the world is not a lot.)

So the same excuses a lot of people use to justify killing wolves are not extended to the wolves themselves to pardon their behavior, their survival instinct.

Well said Arletta, I don't have time to go through everyones rantings, but the simple fact that many of these people over look is how much money is put into the economy by outdoorsman. I did a study on it a few years ago and it was at $82 billion dollars then. That includes licenses, hunting and fishing gear, lodging, fuel, food (restauants and grocery stores) airline travel, taxidermists. I would have to dig out my paperwork to name everthing. Let's see how much money these animal rights groups put in, and lawyers and court costs don't count.

Arleta:

Montana just had a sheep rancher report somewhere around 133 sheep killed in one flock by wolves. They would kill a sheep, eat a little bit, then go off and kill another one.

Zimo

While you are at it, stay out of MT too!! PLEASE tell all your liberal friends!! we would pay you all to leave if we could!!

Wolves were there long before you, MT girl, why don't you leave if that is the philosophy you believe in?

Wolves piss you off, Arleta? Have they done something to personally offend you? Perhaps their being driven to near extinction really gets on your nerves? Perhaps them being run to a fear-driven exhaustion and then shot from helicopters and planes really annoys the @!$%# out of you? Or pups dying in the den when the parents are killed just makes you see red? How could those f'n wolves do all those things?

Yes, I can understand why you would be so angry at this animal...they are, after all, so very horribly, mating for life, caring for their young, living in a community off the land, within the natural balance of things. Inexcusable.

So they can't be near extinction and move to Canada? The two are mutually exclusive?

It doesn't matter who shoots them from helicopters...they are still being shot from helicopters. You think the wolves are running for their lives thinking "well, at least it's state and federal employees that are trying to kill me from the air, often wounding me and leaving me in terrible pain until they land and finish the job (because shooting from the air while moving is a bit tough)...but if it was any old average citizen Bob or Jane I'd really be upset!" How do you work these arguments out?

And lastly, wolves killing elk is a world away from humans killing wolves. Wolves run them down, wolves hunt as a pack (you do realize the size difference between a wolf and elk/moose, yes?), and wolves hunt to survive. And to finally kill this absurd line of reasoning, humans also kill elk and the calves are left parentless and very likely to die as a result. So where does that leave your poor elk argument? You do realize that wolves could never match the death toll humans put up when it comes to deer, elk, moose, caribou, etc, right? So your arguments all fall apart right at the seams.

The difference between hunting and killing for fun is, usually when hunting the body is used for something, like food or clothing. But I just can't see anybody chowing down on a wolf steak, or wearing a coat with the texture (and smell) of dog fur. These hunts are just your hick mentality of shooting something they ain't never shot at befure.

Of course those guys are sociopaths in closets, anyone who kill for sport, is !

Eating vegetables has also been shown to be sign of being a pedephile. No iron is in the blood causing a mutated gene which leads to socailism and communism!

Of course it shows how much I know about hunting, Arleta is it? Pretty name, I imagine it being said in one of those southern drawls only achieved by people with no teeth and such. I wouldn't care to educate myself about hunting because it's a disgusting "sport". How is it "quick, painless, and fair"? What the hell is fair about killing an animal who has does nothing to you but exist? It's not invading your land, it's not threatening your food source, your family, your livelihood. You kill it because apparently it's fun to take the life out of something, to watch soemthing die (which is not too different from any psychopatic killer). The fact that it's a wolf just baffles me, they're so much like dogs, it's like shooting your german shepard. If you knew anything about ethology (that's animal behavior for the less educated of you out there) wolves DO NOT massacre native animals. They're incapable of massacreing anything. Unlike humans, animals don't kill anything in sight and then horade it until they're ready to eat it. They kill when they need food, and one native elk, caribou, etc can more than suffice an entire pack of wolves. Native animals are likely being "massacred" by disease, hence why they're allowed to be hunted in the first place. Natural selection would take care of this through the course of time, but humans always feel the incessant need to lord over what isn't theirs. Apparently it's our god-given right to master this earth, we're no longer a part of it, we're it's masters.

It just baffles me that so many of these people who enjoy hunting also enjoy hiking outdoors and being in nature. I don't understand how killing and revering nature go hand in hand. These same people proclaim "leave no trace" on trails, and not disturbing the natural wonder of the outdoors, but they kill widlife mercilessly. How can we kill "diseased" or overpopulated wildlife, but eugenics and population control with the human race is unethical? It's digusting, the lot of you should end up on an island of General Zaroff, where the hunters become the hunted.

Also, Bertfw, I get what you're saying. If I were forced to be in a situation where I had to survive in the wild, I would make an attempt to find animal protein, and utilize all I could of the body, hide, fur, bone, etc. That's not the case in modern day hunting. These are not starving forgaing hunters/gatherers who need an animal to survive, they're people who delight in killing and making money. They're disgusting.

Arleta it seems like you're the only one on this post that knows what they are talking about.

Sociopaths?? A guy running around in a bear suit protesting at a bear check station, there's someone who's got it all together. Unbelievable.

It has no clue you're there, it's completely defenseless against your shotgun, and that's fun?

If the wolves have no clue that they are being hunted, then how is it that in over a week of hunting only 3 wolves have been taken in Idaho?

The fact is, wolves are extremely intelligent creatures with good eyesight and excellent smell. Sneaking to within rifle range (less than 400 yards) of a wolf is anything but easy. For those of you who are convinced that wolf hunting is so easy, go to Yellowstone and try to get within 400 yards of a wolf there. Those wolves are never hunted yet there are only a handful of people who are skilled enough to get that close.

Arleta, thanks for the bio.. you truly are smarter than us.

Do you think you're the only bi-lingual ex-military with a degree and an opinion?... me too, and I was born here, so does that make me better than you? ..more qualified?

Get over yourself

Arleta,

Congratulations on your families escape from Lebanon, I hope you feel much safer here rather than being in such a war torn and dangerous region. Thank you also for your service to our Nation! Thank you also for stepping up and showing the undereducated who call names and cast aspersions on others who have the nerve to have an opinion different than theirs, that we who choose to persue outdoor activities are educated and do not need to call names. We can site facts, and that blows them out of the water every time!

Again insulting my intelligence again. Stupid mistake. I suggest you drive to idaho and talk to the true outdoorsmen and women about wolves. the opinion you will hear is far from flattering. My friend has pictures of elk that were obviously ambushed by wolves and their fetuses were ripped out. Coyotes do not have massive paws either and they were obviously canine. I do believe that wolves leave native wildlife alone in most instances.

You might understand hunting, but you sure don't understand wolves and native wildlife. I don't get your comment about wolves leaving native wildlife alone in most instances? That's what they live off of - native wildlife. It doesn't matter how they kill them - it's their prerogative - they are wild they eat. You have a gun, you shoot things.

If your friend has a picture of an elk with a fetus ripped out of it, did you ever stop to think that maybe you guys disturbed the kill, or somthing did, and they had to leave it? Maybe you should prosecute the wolf for being so inhumane, not killing to your standards and then shoot it's head off.

obviously joman you have a hard time understanding so ill try and make myself clear.

You won't be able to do that. See, I agree with you on responsible hunting, you're the one that hasn't listened, read or understood. But you are the expert on what you are typing about: Wildlife, non-emotional arguments, clear reasoning, importing, exporting, and it's quite evident as you tell everyone over and over.

and in no way am i justifying killing them because of their natural instincts

If you weren't justifying killing them because of their natural instincts what were you doing? By telling the emotional horrible visual tale of the elk fetus laying in the frozen snow by it's poor uneaten mothers body in more than one post?

You are the only one on this post that has issues with it. Whats the matter? too disturbing?

You got on someones case and said in one of your posts to stop with the emotional arguments, yet you are the one who has been using them all the way through.

And I think the one that really did it was Wolves are an invasive species. ahh So are sagebrush is if you use that same reasoning they all traveled up from Mexico and over from Montana. EVERY THING IS. Wolves are not an evasive species. House cats are.

Hmmm again... I thought you said you were done.

Didn't mention anything about the "evasive" wolf species did you?

And about the emotional arguments... you said they shouldn't be used, yet you did and are. I don't need a dictionary.

Link to Damage Presentation: (it's a pdf file so you can have the exact thingy)

www.snoqualmievalleyelk.org/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=14 -

Department is obligated to pay damage by deer and elk for commercial agriculture/horticultural crops RCW 77.36 authorized $150,00 per year.

Damage control, herding, hazing, fencing, etc... including hunts. (fencing doesn't keep any of the animals out)

Which I know includes "large" tips. Call me a liar again, I don't really care facts are facts.

Nobody in their right mind would use a shotgun to hunt a wolf. What are you stupid? Never mind, thats obvious.

"Boycott all Idaho goods and services. Boycott all Idaho potatos. Inform your friends and coworkers and family to do the same.Stop this killing NOW !"

As for that comment... I was tying to remember the last reported wolf killing of a potato... Go pray to your Obama that he take our guns away. And then, try to take mine.

your an idiot lol

Wolves do not kill for sport. Again, post proof, not second-hand stories. Wolves do not kill for fun, them may kill to teach, but not for fun, not to mount heads, not for skins, not for tusts, not for fins. You claim to know wildlife, but you keep insisting wolves are invasive and kill for fun when they are neither, therefore your knowledge is not nearly as complete as you think it is.

Additionally, you can't have it both ways, Arleta. If the wolves aren't supposed to kill the deer and elk in the area, nor are they supposed to kill the unnatural herds of penned up animals on farms and ranches, what exactly are they supposed to eat?

Additionally, unless you post some authoritative information regarding dwindling populations of prey animal like deer, elk, etc. I find your claims very suspect. With the lack of predators in the United States, prey animals have populations never before seen in this country. Of course, with your absurd claims that wolves kills tens or hundreds of animals for the fun of it and leave their corpses lying around, maybe there is a population problem out west...those evil, oh-so-human wolves.

To the orignal posted, trying to pull Obama into this is pretty sad...I believe the states make their own laws on this matter and the Feds are the ones who delisted the wolves.

clearly that is the standard for an intelligent and compassionate human being...

Hunt Liberals instead of wolf. Liberal spirit is evil of the white man or maloto hakf breed party!

There are some bizarre statements in these posts.

First, wolves are not outside species, they are native to the entire west.

What has any of this to do with Obama? Nothing, these rules and quotas are not an edict put out by the President's office.

Boars are usually just domestic pigs that have gotten out in wild areas and gone feral. We have that problem up and down the coastal ranges in Northern California.

All animal encounters these days are problematic for the simple reason that there are too many people encroaching areas where animals have been trying to survive. We are having problems with mountain lions and coyotes, deer have always been eating from gardens, wild turkeys (also introduced for hunting many years ago) are all over the place. BUT, they deserve a right to live as much as we do. Hunting to cull is possibly a necessary evil, but it's usually because we don't want the natural predators so close to where we live or farm, so we get rid of them and then we have too many of their natural prey.

ehorth,

The problem (well reported elsewhere) with cougars, (not the 2 legged type =)) ) in California has been created by environmentalists and their desire to put animals first instead of people. In 1990 voters approved the California Wilderness Protection Act, which outlawed the sport hunting of cougars....this has produced a predator which has lost its fear of man, attacking and killing children and joggers, and of lesser importance pets. This is what happens when you put emotion ahead of scientific research.

Scientific opinion/research has been allowed in the issue of coyote hunting....The natural resources dept. in California says open season on coyotes!

But the fact of the matter is, man is his own worst enemy, trying to regulate mother nature.....or change things to benefit their feelings...I know, let's bring back a symbol from the California State Flag....the Grizzly Bear! That will generate a lot of warm fuzzy feelings among the libs! Especially if they run into Ursus Horribilis with an attitude...it will be running down their legs!

Thank you ehorth for you clarity and wise words. Trying to follow these posts is crazy. We have the vast cavern of the two sides and the misinformation in the middle.

From a Idaho Fish and Game report at the end of 2008 there were 846 wolves in Idaho and of those 39 were breeding pairs. There is no way to know the success yet of those individuals.

6,000... is a pipe dream. Their like crawelin' over our tents as we sleep. They'er as thick as skeeters.

["1350 wolves in idaho!? dont make me laugh. anybody that has hunted the past four years knows theres at least double that number (many at fish and game estimate 6,000!)."]

You seem to thrive on trying to pass off speculation and second-hand knowledge as truth or fact. It just ain't so. The 1350 might have been wrong, but your guess is no better.

I did not know about the cash. I usually kill these "beautiful wild animals" for killing my livestock. They dont look so beautiful when there tearing up a $900.00 cow. Thanks for the tip about the cash though, I may have to down a few more now instead of trying to run them off. That would kind of be their repayment for livestock destroyed program huh?? Thank You.

Azrancher - don't you get pay back from the government for these "killed cows"? We have a similar situation going on here with elk. The farmers receive money back.

They get to hunt the elk and put on huge expensive elk hunting parties, they make $10,000 + from. So they really like the elk on their land, but they complain real loud to the government about the refuge elk eating their crops - then they get a bunch of money to subsidize that. They are getting a load of money from both ends. It pays them to have the elk damaging their crops and being on their property. The have learned to milk the system.

Once again Arleta, I didn't say they weren't hard working, I said there's a double duty problem going on with animal reimbursements. Yeah, and they are so honest, like everyone else, please don't be so naive.

Farmers not making reimbursement claims for crop damage and then not taking advantage of the hunting later? Really? Any farmers out there like to say you're not doing that? You're crazy if you're not. Arleta, maybe you should farm too so you'd know all about that.

AZrancher - this article and my posts were specific to the new laws in Montana and Idaho.

I do understand your point, and furthermore respect farmers in general, the backbone of our Country.

I do however stand by my argument that by and large, these "hunters " (not farmers) are weak excuses for men, as their killing is for profit at the expense of a beautiful natural inhabitant of the lands, and are low in number.

well put

Maybe so but "mans best friend" cost me several thousand dollars in stock loss over the last few years along with his coyote cousin. So its fair game and good shooting when I see them. They cause me to lose money almost as much as the government.

AZrancher-

I take it that the very cheap rates you pay for leasing public lands to run your cattle on doesn't offset the money you've lost on dead stock?

I would have to reply that by your illogical asssumption you have made an "ass" out of yourself. I lease no public land or use any grazing permits. My livestock are all on my deeded land. Where and how you came up with this assumption is beyond me.

Besides if you own a car and park it on a public street because you pay for registration and can legally do this, does that make the vandalism of your car O.K.?? Would you like to come out and see your car windows smashed and tires cut and just shrug and say "its ok the cheap public parking off sets the damage."

ehorth - you obviously are familiar with the system. See my post 10.3 I'm interested to hear the answer. I'm thinking it might just because this farmer borders refuge land. But I have heard about sheep farmers being reimbursed for coyote kills, and then any dead or sick sheep being claimed as a coyote kill. It's a good way to make extra money.

The farmers here are crazy mad for not being able graze the public and refuge land. It totally ruins natural habitat.

No kill wolf. White man gone mad! White man kill senseless! Grey Wolf good spirit! No kill Spirit!

US Citizen please go take your meds. Hunting is cruel and hunting these animals, or any animal is just part of the macho attitude of this country. Unfortunately, we now have little girls taught how to kill also.

The only people endangering humans are the humans. Wolves, and most wild animals, don't want anything to do with us. You blame them?

"US Citizen please go take your meds. Hunting is cruel and hunting these animals, or any animal is just part of the macho attitude of this country. Unfortunately, we now have little girls taught how to kill also.

The only people endangering humans are the humans. Wolves, and most wild animals, don't want anything to do with us. You blame them"

I am well trained in both biology and medicine. And my commentary is not emotionally derived or irrationally contrived.

I object to your suggestion that I need to "take my meds" as being unnecessary, inflammatory, and not-to-the-point of the issue at hand. Please refrain from this irrational accusation directed at me personally in any future response to any post I may make.

Take a look at what animals do to one another when hunting and being hunted. This is exactly where "...being eaten alive..." comes from.

If the wolves are controlled so that they have enough territory to hunt in and feed themselves, then they are unlikely to hunt people. Otherwise, they expand into human territory and problems result.

The issue of wildlife maintenance cannot be solved with highly emotional methods. Only the non-political, low-emotional, rational approaches are likely to yield results useful to both wolves and people.

The future of the wolves outside of zoos is dependant on human handling of the habitats they live in, and population control so that the animals can exist in their habitat. Otherwise, it is inevitable that the wolves will have to be either removed or killed. Then we will only see them in zoos.

For those who feel the hunting of wolves is inhumane, I offer the difference between a fast and very probably less painful (instant shock) rifle shot, or the cruel and agonizing being eaten alive method which is natures way.

The only people endangering humans are the humans. Wolves, and most wild animals, don't want anything to do with us. You blame them?

Marie, not true.

Wolves confront women and their 3 dogs:

http://www.care2.com/news/member/605883445/865612

Six injured in wolf attack:

http://www.mexicanwolf.0catch.com/Human%20Toll%20articles/six_injured_in_rare_wolf_attack.htm

Mother and children attacked on beach:

http://wolfsaga.blogspot.com/2006/09/when-wolf-strikes-its-no-picnic.html

The issue of wildlife maintenance cannot be solved with highly emotional methods. Only the non-political, low-emotional, rational approaches are likely to yield results useful to both wolves and people.

You mean emotional methods like someone talking about and sharing over and over how wolves rip elk fetuses out of their bodies and just leave them lying there? Who would be doing something like that?

Stop being a female wolf Arleta. Read all my posts to see what I do. I bet I'm outdoors more than you are. But I understand why you feel the need to insult me.

Again you are the one milking the emotional verbiage and stories about elk and farmers, etc... and then you come up with this contradictory statement:

The issue of wildlife maintenance cannot be solved with highly emotional methods. Only the non-political, low-emotional, rational approaches are likely to yield results useful to both wolves and people

I figured since Arleta likes to tell people to use the dictionary to look up the word emotional that I would do it for him or her.

e⋅mo⋅tion⋅al

 /ɪˈmoʊʃənl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [i-moh-shuh-nl] Show IPA

Use emotional in a Sentence

See web results for emotional

See images of emotional

–adjective

1. pertaining to or involving emotion or the emotions.

2. subject to or easily affected by emotion: We are an emotional family, given to demonstrations of affection.

3. appealing to the emotions: an emotional request for contributions.

4. showing or revealing very strong emotions: an emotional scene in a play.

5. actuated, effected, or determined by emotion rather than reason: An emotional decision is often a wrong decision.

6. governed by emotion: He is in a highly emotional state of mind.

JoMan.. Just stop trying to argue with Arleta because all its going to do is make him or her just keep telling you the same thing over a nd over and that is "LOOK UP THE WORD EMOTIONAL AND GET BACK TO ME". Obviously everyone has there own opinions, even if you hate what they say we still have to respect what others say.

all is vanity

Arleta, where do you derive your notion that the wolf is an "invasive species"? Wolves are natural to the West - that is their habitat; deer, elk, rabbits, etc. are their natural food. What is not natural are cows, and peoples homes, streets, towns, ranches. Idaho and Montana are no longer they way they were 100 let alone 150 years ago.

An invasive species is not a species that already exist in that error for thousands of year. If anything hunters are more of an invasive species.

The approx. 80 years is a "nothing" in time for these wolves as they have clearly been able to re-establish themselves. What is the problem is our human need to corral, manage, control, and convince ourselves that we're somehow "helping" animals because in the wild, left on their own, they will just die useless (useless to humans) deaths. Of course, being eaten, being left alive is cruel and terrible, but we're just kidding ourselves if we think that we're somehow "helping" animals by hunting them. These are just the animals we see. What about all the other thousands of wild animals who are perfectly capable to live and die all by themselves, without human interference?

Are we killing wolves because they're hunting what we want to hunt, i.e. elk and deer? Are we killing wolves because they're eating livestock? There are two completely different motivations in each case, because one is to keep them from interfering with our recreation and the other is to keep them from eating our food.

If you want sport and to challenge one's self go out there with a big set of teeth and then face a pack. Don't fool yourself. If you just want to blow the crap out of something, get in a plane with your super gun and get er' done.

Oh brother. :D See, why do you think I said that?

Gee Cram, if it moves or preys kill it, unless it's a wolf? Talk about pick and choose! By the way, there is nothing peaceful about a wolf or its life, anyone who has studied mammals knows that. Besides, I thought the Bear was sacred to Indians...has that changed?

I read the article, I feel sorry for the poor sheep because they do panic and have no defense from wolves, but I don't believe 2 wolves killed 120 sheep and piled them up like the rancher said in the article, I think it just sounds a little fishy, but I'm sure you were expecting me to say as much. FYI, both my granddads were sheepherders in the state of Idaho, and I know it pretty well. Back in 1995 when the wolves were re-introduced to Idaho there were a number of meetings held where the public attended, and there were more wolf supporters in attendance than opponents, at every meeting in the west except Cody, WY this was true.. so the Federal Government did not do anything against the States will. Check it out on the internet "Overview and History of Central Idaho Wolf Reintroduction" by Ralph Maughan.

You have never seen wolves in a killing frenzy. They will get so worked up they will attack each other and if one goes down they will eat the other wolf too. Individually or in pairs they are more cautious and seldom attack groups of animals but in packs they are very dangerous. Feral dogs are also and maybe even more so then the wolfs.

AZ,

It is a fact that feral dog packs are more dangerous than wolves...in general, but in Saskatchewan a young man was ran down and killed by a pack of wolves in 2005. This has disturbed many as for the most part wolves have stayed away from human contact..primarily because of their fear of a superior predator.

Very true sir, and many do learn to avoid domestic and human contact. Many times just scent trails will keep them away. I usually try to scare them or shoot close and drive them away if possible. I dont advocate the gunning down of every wolf I see, but there are those that once they have the taste they will go after cattle, sheep and even humans. Then all you can do is shoot them. People are liek that to though. Most get along, some have friction with others but there are those rare few that prey on the weak and helpless..they need to be put down too but thats another story line.. Thanks.

"..They are the most social of all pack animals and would never attack a human unless provoked or sick...."

To a wolf, a human is just like a pork chop. Do a little checking.

e.g.---"...in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, from March to October 1996 and March to April 1997, a wolf or wolves killed or injured as many as seventy-four Indian children, almost all of them under the age of ten...."

MF, It must be blissful there in your village in CT, have they reported you missing? Defenders of Wierdlife is one of the worst sources to cite...they have no credibility in the real world, just in a fantasy world. They would rather you end your life than take the life of an animal for any reason. Wolves have killed people recently, and they were not sick or injured, they were hungry, and not afraid of man...just a poor 22 yr. old kid who was out for a run....

For bringing Palin into the discussion I award you the unique position of threadiot. What pray tell does she have to do with hunting in Montana or Idaho? The fact is, Sarah Palin did what many governors opt to do...she let the professionals decide what methods are most effective....definitely something someone who refers to the D of W would never do.

I am wondering if you are a Bible reader.  I have found nothing that says killing any animal is a sin.  I have found that we are to be stewards of such things though.  I live in North Idaho and have seen first had the unnecessary hamstringing of heards of elk.  I have heard that this is done when game is abundant and the elders of the pack are teaching the juveniles to hunt.  Whole carcasses left on snowmobile trails with nothing but the anus and liver eaten.  It has come to a point where the locals are no longer purchasing tags to hunt because of the decimation.  I think if you check you will find that no organization gives as much money that goes directly to the preservation of animals as hunting fees.  In essecence the forest will be degraded because of this decesion by our Federal Government.  I wonder what the real agenda is?

If wolves need to remain on the planet their population needs to be controlled. Controlled hunting is a good way to do this. Fees paid to hunt goes toward the managment of our wildlife. There is more game animals in this country today than when it was originally settled, thanks to hunters and animal management -- not environmental whackos.

Are you talking about settled by American Indians or European colonials? Would you consider bison a game animal? How many of them were left alive by "hunters"? LOL

However Caribou have no nutritional value for humans. If you where to eat soley Caribou meat you would starve to death. So Caribou are a food source for who...???...WOLVES and Bears. Do you honestly believe that this is about land and wildlife management? Seriously? Do you trust these groups people and weirdos that much?

Winterhawk,

I sure don't trust anyone who says there is no nutritional value for humans in Caribou meat. That is sheer ignorance and stupidity. If it were true, then why do so many Inuits hunt them eat them and jerk their meat? Why do I love the flavor so much? Many a hunter or person who has gone to a wild game restaurant/dinner would question the sanity of whoever made that comment.

You are right, it is not about wildlife management, it is about control. Government control over land, not land management.

Where have you been hiding out, "they only attack sick or injured livestock my butt". These wolves and coyotes attack anything they want to. I have had them attack cattle, sheep, horses even if mounted by a rider. Feral dogs are almost as bad too. Wherever you read that misperception it is definately wrong.

FlyinV... Guitar, player right?

What do you have against wolves, or people who care about wildlife?

Perhaps he's afraid that the wolves will prevent him from getting to his "Grow Operation" why is it that human always seem to believe that they can "Manage" Nature better than Nature can operate on it's own. If it weren't for for extremely negative use of resources by us Wolf populations wouldn't need controlling or perhaps Man might start seeing ourselves as a part of nature and not above or beyond it. I despise the arrogance of both the "Environmental Whackos" and the "Predatory Self Serving Manifest Destiny/Divine Right we own there can rape the Earth Idiots"