Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Finally these pests can get hunted again.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printeditio ... 8060.story

The Bush administration will remove wolves in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Idaho and Montana from the endangered species list. Environmentalists hope Obama will reverse the action, or they'll sue.


Reporting from Washington -- Bush administration officials said Wednesday that they would remove gray wolves in the Midwest and the northern Rocky Mountains from the endangered species list -- the latest, but probably not last, chapter in the wolf's on-again, off-again federal protection.

Obama will reverse it.

The noble wolf will continue to roam, and continue to get unfairly blamed for everything.

dbackjon wrote:Obama will reverse it.

The noble wolf will continue to roam, and continue to get unfairly blamed for everything.

OK there dback. The NOBLE WOLF...funniest thing I have heard in weeks. It is awesome that our tax dollars were used to put more of the wolves back into the wild and then, the same tax dollars are constantly getting used to pay ranchers for lost animals and to game wardens to go out and remove packs monthly. The wolf will never ever get removed from the woods again. There are just too many and they are reproducing way too fast. The big game season in Western Montana has been down last year, and really really down this year. Wonder why??? You guessed it. WOLVES.

dbackjon wrote:Obama will reverse it.

The noble wolf will continue to roam, and continue to get unfairly blamed for everything.

If you were a cattle rancher and losing $10,000-$12,000 in income every year (like my sister and her husband) from wolfpacks, you wouldn't feel they were so "noble". Wolves kill DOZENS of their cattle every year.

grizzaholic wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Obama will reverse it.

The noble wolf will continue to roam, and continue to get unfairly blamed for everything.

OK there dback. The NOBLE WOLF...funniest thing I have heard in weeks. It is awesome that our tax dollars were used to put more of the wolves back into the wild and then, the same tax dollars are constantly getting used to pay ranchers for lost animals and to game wardens to go out and remove packs monthly. The wolf will never ever get removed from the woods again. There are just too many and they are reproducing way too fast. The big game season in Western Montana has been down last year, and really really down this year. Wonder why??? You guessed it. WOLVES.

And what proof is there that it is the wolves that are causing the drop in big game numbers?

dbackjon wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
OK there dback. The NOBLE WOLF...funniest thing I have heard in weeks. It is awesome that our tax dollars were used to put more of the wolves back into the wild and then, the same tax dollars are constantly getting used to pay ranchers for lost animals and to game wardens to go out and remove packs monthly. The wolf will never ever get removed from the woods again. There are just too many and they are reproducing way too fast. The big game season in Western Montana has been down last year, and really really down this year. Wonder why??? You guessed it. WOLVES.

And what proof is there that it is the wolves that are causing the drop in big game numbers?

Because it's all happening since the "reintroduction" of wolves, Jon. There have been very few other changes in the food chain. Don't blindly oppose a policy just because it's not YOUR party.

dbackjon wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
OK there dback. The NOBLE WOLF...funniest thing I have heard in weeks. It is awesome that our tax dollars were used to put more of the wolves back into the wild and then, the same tax dollars are constantly getting used to pay ranchers for lost animals and to game wardens to go out and remove packs monthly. The wolf will never ever get removed from the woods again. There are just too many and they are reproducing way too fast. The big game season in Western Montana has been down last year, and really really down this year. Wonder why??? You guessed it. WOLVES.

And what proof is there that it is the wolves that are causing the drop in big game numbers?

It's either wolves or global warming - and you are not allowed to shoot Al Gore, therefore it must be wolves.

My sister's husband has had to call Fish & Game 5 times on the SAME wolf pack. They kill cows (for sport, mind you, Jon! They don't even eat what they kill half the time...), husband calls F&G, F&G traps wolves, moves them across an entire mountain range into Idaho, couple months later they're BACK. Killing cows again.

It's an f-in' joke.

And the wolves that they were reintroducing into states were not the same as the local wolves. They were the larger version from Canada. But why should we have expected anything else?? This is the same government that was reintroducing Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout into a lake and a couple rivers in Eastern Montana for 10 years, then one day a guy at the hatchery realized that they had been breeding the wrong fish.

Dback, there is nothing that I, or anybody else, can say to change your mind. If you were a hunter, I know you are an outdoorsman, or rancher from Idaho/Montana you would understand the problem we are having up here.

grizzaholic wrote:And the wolves that they were reintroducing into states were not the same as the local wolves. They were the larger version from Canada. But why should we have expected anything else?? This is the same government that was reintroducing Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout into a lake and a couple rivers in Eastern Montana for 10 years, then one day a guy at the hatchery realized that they had been breeding the wrong fish.

Dback, there is nothing that I, or anybody else, can say to change your mind. If you were a hunter, I know you are an outdoorsman, or rancher from Idaho/Montana you would understand the problem we are having up here.

I happened to be IN Montana and at my sisters cattle ranch one day when F&G was there, and they'd brought the wolves over to my uncle's house before they transported them to Idaho. Fcukers were HUGE!

After Jurassic Park technology becomes a reality, it will only be a matter of time before F&G reintroduces the T-Rex.

AZGrizFan wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:And the wolves that they were reintroducing into states were not the same as the local wolves. They were the larger version from Canada. But why should we have expected anything else?? This is the same government that was reintroducing Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout into a lake and a couple rivers in Eastern Montana for 10 years, then one day a guy at the hatchery realized that they had been breeding the wrong fish.

Dback, there is nothing that I, or anybody else, can say to change your mind. If you were a hunter, I know you are an outdoorsman, or rancher from Idaho/Montana you would understand the problem we are having up here.

I happened to be IN Montana and at my sisters cattle ranch one day when F&G was there, and they'd brought the wolves over to my uncle's house before they transported them to Idaho. Fcukers were HUGE!

They are 20lbs bigger than the local ones...if there are any of them left.

Oopsie!!! Sounds like maybe you're howling about the wrong cause here, Jon.

You should know that listing of the wolf on the endangered list has been one of the most controversial env acts in the west. Aww...fv(k it, go for broke...lets get Numbnutspelosireidbamaman to ban open range grazing. Red meat is just another way the white man tries to destroy the planet.

Poor wolf...




"AZGriz...you'z are a no good no, no, nothing lying man.
Thee gray wolfs a intelleejent enjendangereds speeches. Ha. Your jest a Conk head lying liar."

I got a bumber sticker the other day from a friend and it read...


Smoke a Pack a day

with cross hairs on a wolf

I understand the problems that wolves cause ranchers, and I really don't have a problem with them being hunted (within reason) outside of YNP, but anyone who says that they shouldn't have been reintroduced to the park doesn't understand how ecosystems work.

WTAG wrote:I understand the problems that wolves cause ranchers, and I really don't have a problem with them being hunted (within reason) outside of YNP, but anyone who says that they shouldn't have been reintroduced to the park doesn't understand how ecosystems work.

They were not just introduced into the park....allover MT and IDAHO. They are everywhere. I will try and find the numbers, but something like an estimated 1600 in Idaho and 1100 in MT already.

grizzaholic wrote:

WTAG wrote:I understand the problems that wolves cause ranchers, and I really don't have a problem with them being hunted (within reason) outside of YNP, but anyone who says that they shouldn't have been reintroduced to the park doesn't understand how ecosystems work.

They were not just introduced into the park....allover MT and IDAHO. They are everywhere. I will try and find the numbers, but something like an estimated 1600 in Idaho and 1100 in MT already.

Which is FAR below the pre-white numbers, and far below what the area can handle.


I understand the issue with livestock deprediation - and have SOME sympathy. But also understand that ranchers have been subsidized by taxpayers since day one, with below market grazing leases, etc.


Wolves BELONG in the ecosystem. They can co-exist. I don't have a problem eliminating ones that depend solely on livestock to live.

dbackjon wrote:

grizzaholic wrote: They were not just introduced into the park....allover MT and IDAHO. They are everywhere. I will try and find the numbers, but something like an estimated 1600 in Idaho and 1100 in MT already.

Which is FAR below the pre-white numbers, and far below what the area can handle.


I understand the issue with livestock deprediation - and have SOME sympathy. But also understand that ranchers have been subsidized by taxpayers since day one, with below market grazing leases, etc.


Wolves BELONG in the ecosystem. They can co-exist. I don't have a problem eliminating ones that depend solely on livestock to live.

SMFH

grizzaholic wrote: SMFH

You and Red Riding Hood both.

BlueHen86 wrote:

grizzaholic wrote: SMFH

You and Red Riding Hood both.

Red Riding Hood should have followed the 3 S's.

grizzaholic wrote:

WTAG wrote:I understand the problems that wolves cause ranchers, and I really don't have a problem with them being hunted (within reason) outside of YNP, but anyone who says that they shouldn't have been reintroduced to the park doesn't understand how ecosystems work.

They were not just introduced into the park....allover MT and IDAHO. They are everywhere. I will try and find the numbers, but something like an estimated 1600 in Idaho and 1100 in MT already.

Hell, there's more Californians than that moving into the area....hunt them...it's more fun and much more needed...they'll really fok up the environment and property values.....

Appaholic wrote:

grizzaholic wrote: They were not just introduced into the park....allover MT and IDAHO. They are everywhere. I will try and find the numbers, but something like an estimated 1600 in Idaho and 1100 in MT already.

Hell, there's more Californians than that moving into the area....hunt them...it's more fun and much more needed...they'll really fok up the environment and property values.....

Then you have more than just the enviro-wacko's on your back.

WTAG wrote:I understand the problems that wolves cause ranchers, and I really don't have a problem with them being hunted (within reason) outside of YNP, but anyone who says that they shouldn't have been reintroduced to the park doesn't understand how ecosystems work.

Agree, but I'm sure that's no surprise to TMan. If they don't need to be on the list, fine, take them off. But treat them like any other big game with a season and limits. They are needed in the environment a heluva lot more than the cattle on the subsidized grazing lands. But hunting them to near extinction levels (as we have done in the past) is unacceptable. Fok the ranchers...they get a tax break on the land and a can deduct the livestock loss from their taxes. If they can't run their business while:

1- incurring some losses
2- using taxpayer subsidized grazing leases
3- and without taxpayer subsidized killing of wolves, a natural predator

then is ranching a viable 21st century business? You know, that free-market thing the Republican ranchers claim to love so much....

That is the funny thing - ranchers have NEVER been a free market business. Ranching, while proclaiming freedom, etc, needs governmental subsidies to survive - always has.

dbackjon wrote:That is the funny thing - ranchers have NEVER been a free market business. Ranching, while proclaiming freedom, etc, needs governmental subsidies to survive - always has.

I know....the first people to yell about freedoms....and the first in line for government subsidized grazing rights... ....and let's not forget the government subsidized water that is needed for the fokking cows...