THE PACK Message Boards

I like meat way to much especailly steaks. mmmmmm

True wolf lovers should boycott any open range meat, including beef (unless its predator-friendly). This abuse of the few remaining wildlands is what led to the government's abhorrent extermination of wolves in the U.S. between 1910 and 1950, and remains deadly to all wildlife in the U.S. today thanks to greedy, self-interested ranchers who whine abotu the tough life even as they have inexexcusably lax labor and environmental laws, receive sweetheart deals and very little enforcement of immigration laws among their laborers. The Department of Agriculture and other federal, state and local governments have disgustingly high levels of corruption; collusion was proven in court of law by whistleblowers where ranchers and D.O.A. inspectors would conspire to slaughter sick calves in the field as bait to draw in wild carnivores to feed on the carrion, then have it filed as depredation to get government funds and right to slaughter wild predators.

So, how does your hamburger taste with the blood of wolves?

And before you raise that "don't preach at me" crap, I am not even a vegetarian; I simply boycott all open-range meat ... and it is a very lame cop-out for giving money to a filthy industry that's getting away with horrific things. Would you buy from Wal-Mart if you knew they had ties to neo-Nazis? You are responsible for the choices of where you put your money and responsible for your own choices and values. If you give money to people to slaughter wolves, then I hope you are comfortable with that.

Chibiabos wrote:You are responsible for the choices of where you put your money and responsible for your own choices and values. If you give money to people to slaughter wolves, then I hope you are comfortable with that.

Guilt trip.

I am responsible for the choices I make when I give people money. I, however, am not responsible for what they do with that money after I give it to them. What they do with it after I give it to them they do of their own free will, and while I may factor into their decision making process, the choice is ultimately theirs.

Vilkacis wrote:

Figarou wrote:The pounds can come off quickly if you avoid greasy foods, meat and exercise.

Well, at least I'm good at doing one of those three: avoiding exercise...



-- Vilkacis

I meant to say..... avoid greasy foods, meat and get plenty of exercise.

Figarou wrote:I meant to say..... avoid greasy foods, meat and get plenty of exercise.

I knew what you meant. I was being facetious.


-- Vilkacis

Chibiabos wrote:True wolf lovers should boycott any open range meat, including beef (unless its predator-friendly). This abuse of the few remaining wildlands is what led to the government's abhorrent extermination of wolves in the U.S. between 1910 and 1950, and remains deadly to all wildlife in the U.S. today thanks to greedy, self-interested ranchers who whine abotu the tough life even as they have inexexcusably lax labor and environmental laws, receive sweetheart deals and very little enforcement of immigration laws among their laborers. The Department of Agriculture and other federal, state and local governments have disgustingly high levels of corruption; collusion was proven in court of law by whistleblowers where ranchers and D.O.A. inspectors would conspire to slaughter sick calves in the field as bait to draw in wild carnivores to feed on the carrion, then have it filed as depredation to get government funds and right to slaughter wild predators.

that's even worse than artificial food! so.... where are we supposed to get meat? i cant exactly go hunting, no camo and no weapon...

Vilkacis wrote:

Figarou wrote:I meant to say..... avoid greasy foods, meat and get plenty of exercise.

I knew what you meant. I was being facetious.


-- Vilkacis

Take that you facetious werewolf you!

Lupin wrote:Guilt trip.

Gee, what a concept: guilt for the guilty. You give money to someone knowing what they do with it, you share responsibility for it. Because you pay someone to kill someone else, that does not eliminate your responsibility for murder ... by the same token, giving money to the beef industry eliminate your responsibility for the wildlife slaughter (including wolves and other predators and now wild mustangs thanks to a recent law change courtesy Congress and Dubya) and environmental destruction they wreak.

So long as you continue to give them money to do what they do, they will continue to do it. It is as simple as that.

Chibiabos wrote:So long as you continue to give them money to do what they do, they will continue to do it. It is as simple as that.

Sorry, but I live in the real world; life is never simple. Once again: they have free will, they choose to do this. They can also choose not to do it. I am not responsible for the choices made by others. Otherwise, why should I be sreponsible, my employer gave me the money. If they hadn't don that then I would be wouldn't be able to buy the meat. The buck has to stop somewhere, and it should stop with the person making the actual decision.
People need to be responsible for their own actions.

Chibiabos:

We as humans need to eat, just like a wolf. We have learned a unique art and have thus advanced from the primitive 'hunt and gather' way of life style. Such is agriculture. We raise our meat and plants to eat. This is how we get our food.

Open range is what I perfer, I enjoy an animal with a good lifestyle before it goes into my tummy. Cows deserve just as much as wolves do. These seem to create problems as cows are attacked and people become unhappy. Farmers NO NOT create the problems, WOLVES do. Farmers do not choose depredation to occur on their livestock, it was the wolf who had attacked them, and because wolves don't know any better, it is NO ONES FAULT. Only we can prevent it.

We humans have as much right to stick our cows on those lands (infact, I perfer it.). I think the only way to prevent this problem is for wolf lovers to create a plan to free of charge (Theres no reason why a farmer should pay for something the wolves are doing and people releasing wolves have helped to create.) create a system to give to farmers to protect their cattle. Farmers are paid for depredation, but even so the money is bad and they usually arn't given it anyway.

If we wolf lovers help stop this from happening from use of Tolerance, and protecting the livestock, and people, then we can solve it. Its not a 'one or the other' kind of thing here.

Oh, and to say. Wolves DO attack animals. Wolves have very well attacked humans. Alot of wolf fans always try to make the wolf all better and anthropomorph them alot. Just as Anti Wolf people always talk about the bad things about wolves, alot of Wolf Lovers always talk about the good stuff and change alot of facts to make them shed a better light.

The only way to tackle the wolf problems is to remeber both the good and bad. Wolves don't usually attack animals but they sure do at times. We need to look at them as wolves, and aknowledge them fully as to what they really are, good and bad.

Being against free range animals, in my opinion, is stupid, and sorta of cruel.

outwarddoodles wrote:Oh, and to say. Wolves DO attack animals. Wolves have very well attacked humans. Alot of wolf fans always try to make the wolf all better and anthropomorph them alot. Just as Anti Wolf people always talk about the bad things about wolves, alot of Wolf Lovers always talk about the good stuff and change alot of facts to make them shed a better light.

Sorry, but there has never been a recorded event of a healthy wolf ever attacking a human in North America.

Lupin wrote:Sorry, but there has never been a recorded event of a healthy wolf ever attacking a human in North America.

It only took me two seconds to dig this up on Google:

http://www.usa4id.com/Documents/Documen ... ttacks.htm

EDIT: The links at the bottom were broken (the documents moved), so I tracked down what I believe are the correct links:

http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/pubs/tec ... hb13p1.pdf
http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/pubs/tec ... hb13p2.pdf
http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/pubs/tec ... hb13p3.pdf
http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/pubs/tec ... hb13p4.pdf

-- Vilkacis

Lupin wrote:

outwarddoodles wrote:Oh, and to say. Wolves DO attack animals. Wolves have very well attacked humans. Alot of wolf fans always try to make the wolf all better and anthropomorph them alot. Just as Anti Wolf people always talk about the bad things about wolves, alot of Wolf Lovers always talk about the good stuff and change alot of facts to make them shed a better light.

Sorry, but there has never been a recorded event of a healthy wolf ever attacking a human in North America.

Well, in the Wolf Sapporter thread I did rant a bit on how people veiw wolves incorrectly. I would love for you to read that post, which explains quite a bit on how I think the 'never have, never will' notion is getting quite silly:
http://www.calypso-blue.com/werewolf/vi ... ght=#34430
I also mentioned on the 'There has never been a recorded event of a healthy wolf ever attacking a human in North America.' thing too, and even as the incorrect version you stated, North America isn't the only contitent with wolves on this earth, wolves DO attack. Theres no need to deny it, its good to keep that in mind because we do need to know to make sure people are safe incase something happens. Ignoring something that could lead to injury = stupid.

no offence that seems like a load of BULL [spoiler]s***!![/spoiler] never trust anything on the internet it could be some dip [spoiler]s*** [/spoiler] that are trying get the wolf killed. but thats just me

Anubis wrote:no offence that seems like a load of BULL [spoiler]S#@^!![/spoiler] never trust anything on the internet it could be some dip [spoiler]s*** [/spoiler] that are trying get the wolf killed. but thats just me

No, saying wolves never have attacked is a load of bull [spoiler]s***[/spoiler].

Did you read that inwhich I have talked about in the wolf Sapporter thread? It is true and it isn't smart to say otherwise.

I sapport wolves and want them restored, and I understand that inorder to do that we need human tolerance, inwhich we need to make sure wolves do not attack humans, pets, or livestock to help keep them safe and people happy. To help wolves we need to know they have and can very well attack. I do not want wolves killed, its quite the contray, I aknowledge and tell that to help the wolves. People need to know whats correct.

Vilkacis wrote:

Lupin wrote:Sorry, but there has never been a recorded event of a healthy wolf ever attacking a human in North America.

It only took me two seconds to dig this up on Google:

http://www.usa4id.com/Documents/Documen ... ttacks.htm

I've already seen it. The historical is inaccurate; there's no way to tell now if those wolves weren't rabid. Most of them weren't even caught. They give me no way to confirm the story with the 16-year-old girl. The only place I can find the name "Zack Delventhal" on the internet is that one article. And the wolf that attacked John Stenglein had become habituated to humans and wasn't wild anymore.

Wolves have varied personalities, just like humans do. It is nonsense to claim that Wolves have Never harmed a Human unless Rabid. In all the history of Human and wolf contact, I am certain that a human has encountered an aggresive, mean, Jack@** of a wolf that didn't have enough sense NOT to attack a human. There are idiot wolves out there too.

It happens...but it is less common and likely than being struck by lightning. Seriously...People are attacked by domesticated Goats 10,000 times more often. ...and housepets 1,000,000 times more...every second.*

(*random, unresearched estimates...numbers not intended to be taken literally)

We can argue as much as we want the facts remain sad. If we want to ensure better lives for cattle that we feed upon we need open range farming. If we want to put them in dank huge barns full of feces and hundreds of cattle shoulder to shoulder and ensure better lives for for wild wolves. That is the choice we all choose but you know their is never a win win situation reguarding all this. Its sad its very true if there was some way around it believe me i would be all for it but right now the only thing we can do is compromise. Both the wolves and the farmers are the good guys as long with the bad guys. There is no way around this by being the dominant species on the planet we have excepted this fate and the responsibility to make it right. Somehow....

Fighting to control my temper, I have only this to say on the matter:

It is my opinion that we did not have a right to move in on the territory of the wolf. The moment a farmer decides to raise cattle near or in an area populated by wolves, he is signing a contract that states he understands the possible consequences of his actions. Just as people must consider the natural disasters that might strike them, they must also understand and RESPECT the wildlife they decide to neighbor and it's THEIR job to protect their animals.
I do NOT agree with farmers destroying wolves. Death is never the answer, least of all a predator that is not malicious by nature...only hungry and only an opportunity killer. Wolves don't live happy fun free-ranging lives. They battle against large, powerful prey that's quite capable of killing them back. It only makes sense in their minds to turn to easier prey if it's thrown in front of them. Farmers should take extra measures to protect their stock if they're dim enough to set themselves up right next door to wolfies. Wolves don't know any better; humans do.
Besides, the most problematic area for most farmers with wolf problems would be the area around Yellowstone. And they only use this land because it's cheap leasing. However, that land belongs to the American republic, and as such we should all get a say as to its use. I say Save the wolves, make the farmers leave. There are far too many wolf-free areas...they should take their pick or quit complaining. They could invest in their own land or lose a few cows. Their losses to wolves are so minimal as to be nonexistant. If it's not wolves, it'd be bears, coyotes, or wild dogs in general...their complaints are unfair and, I think, made in ignorance.
As for wolves being dangerous toward people...I do not think that a healthy, well-established wolf pack is dangerous toward human beings. Otherwise, researchers wouldn't be safe in the field. They couldn't shove cameras down the dens to look at the pups. The wolves wouldn't run like hell if they so much as catch a sniff of humans.
Any wolf 'attacks' are a result of rabid or sick animals, starving or old animals too slow to catch larger prey, or wolves accustomed to humans that don't usually shoot at them from helicopters. When we step into THEIR neck of the woods, we are setting ourselves up. The same as we are knocking on Old Man Grizzly's door, or Mr. Cougar's. I don't think wolves are invading maurauders out for our blood. I think stupid people too willingly show no respect for these animals, and then act shocked when said animals try to protect themselves in fear or illness. And a lot of people couldn't tell a wolf from a german shepherd. (I know, we have a sable that EVERYONE thinks is part wolf, and she's purebred German stock.) So wolf hybrids or wolfy looking breeds like tervurens, shepherds, and husky crosses gone wild often catch a good deal of blame for livestock slaughter.

I just think that the solution is to devise a plan to protect cattle better, and not something farmers should do themselves. I think the wolf lovers should figure out how to keep wolves away with some system, whether it be noise, safe electric fencing, or any other smart witty idea. Something the wolf lovers would pay and operate, not something a farmer should do. Its not a farmer's fault a wolf slaughtered a cow, and there has very well been cases where wolves ran through a herd of livestock like a chainsaw. If we could do this we coukd help save the wolves. Tolerance is the main key here.

Except that it's the FARMER's job and obligation to protect their stock. If they're foolish enough to move in next to wolves, THEY should take care of their stock. Nobody else should take responsibility for their actions. It'd be a nice thing to do on the wolf lovers' part, but it is still ultimately the farmer's job FIRST.
They're getting free grazing land on GOVERNMENT property! There is NO reason they should be unable to better protect their animals. It's not our job; it's theirs. Losing a cow here and there is by far cheaper than buying feed for hundreds/thousands of cattle. The loss to wolf predators isn't even a tip off the ice berg of the cattle industry!
If someone's pet gets eaten by an alligator because they live right next to the everglades, it's not the job of the fish and wildlife game department to build them a poodle-proof fence! They're responsible, and if they don't like it, they need to quit complaining. The cattle loss is NOT so great as to shut down the cattle industry as we know it. Nor to take THAT much money out of their own pockets.

A) I suppose vegetarianism is alright, but I'm not about to willingly be demoted in the grand food chain: I should eat more fruits and vegetables, but, what's the point of no meat ever?
Never, I say. I will have a sideorder of fruit to go with my ribs, though.
B) Walmart is known to be a shifty organization, one that has been known to build on top of graveyards and other burial sites, but I strongly suspect that Neo-Nazi ties are simply nasty rumors.
C) Free-range beef is ok, though it's the rancher's fault if they graze their cattle into wolf-territories, that, and they should put up wolf-proof fencing.
D) I strongly doubt that a pack of wolves wouldn't attack a person, given the opportunity, depending on whether or not the wolves were hungry, or if the person was antagonizing them in some way.
and
E) Love the world, not argument: eat a vegetarian.

I strongly doubt a healthy wolf pack would. Most wolves flee from humans...ones accustomed to human presence might not. But if the human's in wolf territory, it's his choice and he shouldn't blame the local wildlife for disliking him.

NarnianWolfen wrote:Except that it's the FARMER's job and obligation to protect their stock. If they're foolish enough to move in next to wolves, THEY should take care of their stock. Nobody else should take responsibility for their actions. It'd be a nice thing to do on the wolf lovers' part, but it is still ultimately the farmer's job FIRST.
They're getting free grazing land on GOVERNMENT property! There is NO reason they should be unable to better protect their animals. It's not our job; it's theirs. Losing a cow here and there is by far cheaper than buying feed for hundreds/thousands of cattle. The loss to wolf predators isn't even a tip off the ice berg of the cattle industry!
If someone's pet gets eaten by an alligator because they live right next to the everglades, it's not the job of the fish and wildlife game department to build them a poodle-proof fence! They're responsible, and if they don't like it, they need to quit complaining. The cattle loss is NOT so great as to shut down the cattle industry as we know it. Nor to take THAT much money out of their own pockets.

Sorry, but its the wolf lovers out there setting the wolves loose in the first place, thanks to that is what has caused depredation, its praticly our fault, mainly because we arn't helping to protect the cattle. Wild animals have very well effected cattle farms, a cows worth alot of money. Its not a livesotck owners fault much anymore of moving into wolf country, truly wolves are growing (which is such a good thing indeed.) and us letting wolves free in certain areas.

Secondly, we should just do it to do it! If we help protect livestock, pets, and even people, people would be much more accepting and tolerant to allow wolves in their area. Though it could be the people's job who live there, we should do it for the sake of the wolve's survival and people's tolerance.

Sorry, but its the wolf lovers out there setting the wolves loose in the first place, thanks to that is what has caused depredation, its praticly our fault, mainly because we arn't helping to protect the cattle.

No, it's wolf conservationists releasing wolves. And actually, the most major uproar you hear about wolves making lunch out of cattle is around the YELLOWSTONE area, where a great majority of wolves are being released. Except that wolves were there FIRST, and farmers grabbed land deals because it was cheap. Show me numbers to prove that wolves are actually making a serious dent in the cattle industry and maybe I'll reconsider my stance, but I'm sorry...I feel no sympathy for these farmers and their free land. No sympathy whatsoever. If I could afford to properly fence in THEIR property, I would. But they need to do it themselves or quit making excuses for more government freebies.