Wolf is in danger!

[blackwolfhell]

The grey wolf was taken off the endangered species list on May 4, 2009! I found this out the next day. I'm a little worried. Wisconsin is debating whether or not to re-instate wolf hunting. I'd like to hear you reactions to this.

[WereDragon25]

No! That's how they got on the endangered list in the first place! I say don't let them reinstate it.

[Baphnedia]

Ack. Yeah - I was afraid that would happen (I heard a couple of days ago, but thought something had already been posted here. Usually I hear about these things from The Pack first. If you don't mind, what part of Wisconsin? (you don't have to answer, or can send a PM if you don't want to answer publicly).

Back into the shadows for me...
*poof*

[Werewolf Warrior]

What the ****?! HOW DARE THEY! If they do that well end up having children asking what happen to the wolves, and their parents would say "oh they got killed because of those num skulls in the state, and federal government who had taken them off the endangered species list"...heck they still are endangered species, especialy the pandas, and so on.


Pordon my fowl language, I get angry when the state Government, and Federal Government act like this towards wolves.

I would suggest a protest against wolf hunting, and against removing them from the endangered species list.

[Bloodyredbaron]

Well then, it looks like the humans with guns are in control for once.

I don't see the point in hunting wolves, though. They aren't that impressive when you compare them to a bear or a mountain lion. If you're going to hunt a predator, why not hunt the apex predator? And the likelihood of them trying to kill you is even lower than the other predators you can pick a fight with, even a deer will try to attack you if you get to close and it feels cornered, although that's pretty rare. They just don't seem worth the effort...

[RedEye]

Hey, there:
It isn't the people with the guns. It's the commercial interests who see Wolves as a threat to their industries; such as cattle, or in Wisconsin, Dairy.

Possibly the Hunting Guide business is also involved, since Wolves tend to hunt the same deer that are easiest for the Guide to lead a hunter towards: the old, the sick, and the young. Never mind that one of these categories is illegal to hunt, most Guides don't care if you take a worthless animal with your tag; they have your money and want the hunt over as fast as possible so they can get on to another guiding job. Inedible and unusable are your problem, not theirs.

What would work best would be to contact the International Wolf center, which is also in that area and would have the best info on what to do about the situation.

[blackwolfhell]

yes! The DNR even has ways of protecting livestock on the internet

[Bloodyredbaron]

I don't doubt that, Redeye, but I was mostly joking though.

But with the price of ammunition as it is, I'd rather hunt something that I thought could provide me with some sort of challenge. Wolves...eh, just don't excite me.

Oh yeah, and the whole conservation thing too.

[blackwolfhell]

Ever read the dangerous game?
Gotta go!

[Bloodyredbaron]

Ever read the dangerous game?
Gotta go!

Do you mean the Most Dangerous Game?

Yes. And I've seen Predator.

As much as I'd like to hunt down certain people, skin them alive, and then hang them upside down from a tree, that's illegal. Hunting down animals, skinning them alive, and then hanging them upside down is perfectly legal, if not cruel and excessive, not to mention a waste of good meat.

On a related note, crawling to the top of a sky scraper with their skulls and roaring to the night sky is not legal. Remember that.

[MattSullivan]

if they took it off the endangered list that means they AREN'T in danger.

Yeesh.

[Baphnedia]

Agreed there. Even if they 'lead hunts' and whatever, it might be ugly, it might be painful to watch, but until said species (of whatever) is back under the protections of the Endangered Species Act, this is the way it is. Now, if some desire, it may be possible to raise the minimum protected population (i.e. if a population of 10,000 is the limit, some could act to try to get the limit raised to 15,000 or 20,000).

[Vagrant]

Wikipedia:List of Grey Wolf populations by Country

I'm thankful for Canada and Russia, there seems to be no stopping those Wolves, and hunting in Russia doesn't seem to be a big thing, anyway.

Those two countries are the home of Timber/Grey Wolves at the moment, and that's interesting. Despite Canada and Russia not really having laws against hunting Wolves, the Wolf numbers there are booming.

I find that fascinating, and I'm actually curious as to why that is, because maybe whatever is allowing the Canadian and Russian Wolves to thrive could be applied to wherever their numbers are dwindling.

[Xiroteus]

if they took it off the endangered list that means they AREN'T in danger.

Yeesh.

Unless they allow something wrong to happen (hunting) thus starting this problem all over again.

People leaving them alone would be a good idea.

[blackwolfhell]

and don't forget. Farmers can say, "Oh, it was in self defense," when they shoot a wolf way off their property.

[Terastas]

if they took it off the endangered list that means they AREN'T in danger.

Yeesh.

And if Bush says Iraq has nuclear missiles, that must be true as well.

I find it suspicious that they are considering bringing back wolf hunting mere days after they were taken off of the endangered species list. The problem with hunting is fairly juvenile: it's what put wolves on the endangered species list to begin with. Legalizing wolf hunting again will just put wolves on the endangered species list again.

This is Wisconsin's way of saying: "We don't care, lets get down to business."

Just because somebody decided to take wolves off of the endangered species list does not guarantee that they are not actually in danger. People were lobbying for wolf hunting even before they came off the endangered species list -- they don't care if they are endangered or not. All they care is that it's cheaper to legalize hunting than it is to build better fences around their property, and they can always count on a bunch of douche bags that think guns are what makes them men to flock to their state and kill off whatever they think they can get away with killing.

To quote a certain ranting griffin, just because you have the capacity to do something doesn't mean you have to. If your only motivation to hunt is for the thrill of it, try joining animal control and give your "hobby" the added challenge of having to take everything alive.

A better course of action, however, wouldn't be the petition against wolf hunting (because trust me, they're already getting plenty of it and couldn't give a crap less), but to petition for a boycott of Wisconsin products. That's the only thing that could encourage them to leave wolves protected; if the legalization of wolf hunting took a greater toll on their revenue than the wolves themselves ever could.

[Werewolf Warrior]

Actually the only reason why they hunt the cattle is because humanity build stuff in their hunting grounds O.O not that they are punishing them for doing so, but still.

[Vagrant]

@Terastas: I couldn't agree with you more, and I like that ranting Griffin, he's got a good head on his shoulders.

That said...

There are so many ways that this could be dealt with, but I'm still baffled by the situation. When you look at other large land-masses such as Canada and Russia, you have a relative number of Wolves, despite the hunting. In fact, Canada's Wolf count never ceases to amaze me. Yet the United States is huge, but yet it rarely ever has more than 20,000 Wolves to its name. According to the list I posted above, there are countries a quarter of the size of the US which are quickly approaching upon the numbers of Wolves that the US has.

I think that fact needs to be turned into a campaign, because maybe that would let people realise there's something wrong. I admit though that I don't know what exactly is wrong, because there's hunting in Russia and Canada. Hunting is a major concern, but I don't think it's the primary one.

Is it the industrialisation? Is it a mix of commercial efforts and the availability of guns that's making hunting easy? There's something going on there that is either making Wolves less comfortable or hunting more comfortable (or both).

Maybe it would be a good idea to look at the sources of the problem and take away the elements, perhaps if it wasn't so easy to hunt, or if Wolves were granted more sizeable roaming regions, then the situation might improve, but again... these are just guesses, but I really think that the disparity needs to be given public attention. I think it's a real eye-opener.

Sorry to hark back to this again, but I had to get this off my chest. Perhaps simply making hunting illegal isn't the only answer we need, it's a good one, but maybe there are other approaches which could be considered.

[vrikasatma]

I never support wolf hunting. The Obama Administration really dropped the ball on this one, but wild animals aren't really his strong suit. He's a 100% city boy.

I do support livestock loss compensation and relocation before instigating a hunt. Defenders of Wildlife are working hard but I think they're taking the wrong tack. They do have a program where you "adopt" a wolf pack and groups — like families — are allowed to pool their money for such an adoption.

We were talking about adopting wolves and/or wolfpacks a couple years back, as a group entity. Nothing ever came of that but I'd be more than happy to spearhead a Pack community adoption through Defenders of Wildlife if we can agree to go through with it this time.

The other thing we can do is see about setting up a fund to compensate ranchers for animals lost to wolf depredation. It's not as expensive as you think: a cow is $500 - $700, a sheep is about $50. And dollars from a private charity = dollars from a motorist that hit their animal on an open range = dollars from a feedlot = dollars from a slaughterhouse.

ETA after doing a bit of research
Here's the DoW page for wolf-saving gifts. They're proven techniques and compensation for a sheep is less than I thought it would be.

https://secure.defenders.org/site/SPage ... wolfsaving

Here's the DoW page for wolf and wolf pack adoptions:

https://secure.defenders.org/site/SPage ... c_graywolf

[Silent Hunter]

@Vagrant

Part of the reason I would say wolves are growing in number is that both countries are not very populated by humans. This lets wolves go undisturbed and in turn, this lets them grow. I know that the same could be said for parts of the US but to be honest the US is a lot more "busy" and it seems people seem to be near more wolf ranges.

The availablity of guns, in my mind could be part of it but not something that is of a great influence. Weapons can be gotten for hunting in both Russia and Canada. On top of that, the US would be unwilling to make guns less available.

The US also has a powerful lobbying group for ranchers and various other groups who would want to see the tail end of wolves. This gives added pressure.

In conclusion I think this is a hard problem to crack. Education can always do good but stronger groups defending wolves and ways of making sure farmers are not so angry like comphensation or more effective anti wolf efforts are key. Vrikasatma is right on the ball.

[Gevaudan]

Even though gray wolves were taken off of the endangered species list, aren't they still legally protected in most states except Alaska? I know that the law isn't going to stop hunters, but surely something is being done, right?

[vrikasatma]

New development:

The grey wolf has been taken off the Endangered Species List — but only in the Yellowstone Basin and the northern Rocky Mountains, i.e. Montana and Idaho.

In the case of Idaho — well, that's easily answered. The governor is a tub-thumping redneck who's almost as bad as Sarah Palin in terms of conservative bloodthirstiness. He knows there are better ways to control wolves; he doesn't give a rusty f***, he just wants to kill a wolf. It's true that his state has a lot of sheepherders but those are primarily Basques, who have their own ways of dealing with wolf predation.

One of my colleagues on the Obama campaign last year is running for the office of Governor in Idaho next year. He's a Democrat and favours relocation, compensation and science over itchy trigger fingers.

As for Montana and Wyoming — yeah, I think it's the hunting lobby. They want more deer, elk, sheep, moose, what have you. The good news is, all of those states have fairly large Native American populations and, hence, reservations where wolves are respected and welcome. There's another avenue to ameliorate the Redneckistan hunts, and God knows the Lakota, Crow, Shoshone, Grand Ronde and Nez Perce need allies right, left 'n centre.

[MattSullivan]

So you're equating The forest service with the Bush administration now?

[silver1]

i say they should put the grey wolf back on the endangered species list.

[Terastas]

@Vagrant

Part of the reason I would say wolves are growing in number is that both countries are not very populated by humans. This lets wolves go undisturbed and in turn, this lets them grow. I know that the same could be said for parts of the US but to be honest the US is a lot more "busy" and it seems people seem to be near more wolf ranges.

Beat me to it. Russia and Canada have such large land masses because most of it is land that nobody wants. It's unfit for settling, which leaves the natural order relatively undisturbed. The only region of the U.S. comparable to Canada's is Alaska, where the people are so progressive and environmentally conscious they hunt wolves from helicopters so they can waste fuel while they're at it.

And Silent Hunter pretty much hit the nail on the head: the farming and hunting industries/lobbies would frankly prefer it if wolves went extinct completely. Wisconsin's primary interest is in protecting its dairy stock before its wildlife reserves, and the Gov. Butch Otter is a total [expletive] that's been hamming it up for the small arms and hunting industries for years. For him, it's all about money: wolves are killing for food animals that hobby hunters would have otherwise come to his state to kill for sport, so he likely thinks he can make a ton of money by offering bids on the right to kill the wolves which will in turn leave open for commercial hunting the various game the wolves would have otherwise been hunting. Once again, it's all about money.

So my solution to stop hunting in Idaho would be the same as to stop hunting in Wisconsin: boycott everything from Idaho.

And not just the companies/industries that are specifically lobbying for the legalization of wolf hunting. I mean the states as a whole. The hunting and farming industries will probably just consolidate their losses and thumb their noses at us, but if any companies that had nothing to do with this start hurting as a result, that could encourage them to lobby against wolf hunting (lets see how big Butch thinks his nads are when he's got Dell and Hewlett-Packard looming over him). Ultimately, the only bottom line any corporation will ever be interested in protecting is their own, so if one industry reflects negatively upon another, they will respond in kind.