The USFWS HAS GONE TO FAR NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Teh_DarkJokerWolf · Post by **Teh_DarkJokerWolf** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:35 pm

I just found this good site that has something very disturbing on it that I think you all should read because me personally am going to say sometime to them about this BS!!!!!!!!

http://www.hsus.org/wildlife

Darth Canis · Post by **Darth Canis** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:54 pm

M@#^%@ F*&^#@! sorry for my french i just can't think of anything else to describe it!

Renorei · Post by **Renorei** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:57 pm

I'm rather conflicted on this issue. If I owned livestock, and a pack of wolves killed one of my animals, I'd sure as hell want to retaliate. But at the same time I wouldn't want to further endanger an already threatened species.

Hamster · Post by **Hamster** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:04 am

BULL F@#$#@ S%$%!!!!!

Xodiac · Post by **Xodiac** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:44 am

What the f***??

The idea of killing wolves that private AND federal agencies are trying to bring back from the edge of extinction is stupid. Yes, there are justifications, and I'm willing to admit they might - MIGHT - be good ones. But that they ignored the rules saying they had to take certain steps... that falls way beyond wrong thinking. That's just plain malicious.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:58 am

Its hard to understand why killing the wolves is the answer. Especially when they are already endangered.

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:59 am

I'm not sure wether I'm more disturbed about the actual wolf killing, or the fact that they broke procedure on this.

Baphnedia · Post by **Baphnedia** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:39 am

I'd be more upset that they broke procedure - because there are good reasons to keep numbers down in certain areas. We call it NIMBY. Not In My Back Yard. If you have wolves in your back yard, it probably means that you used to own livestock too.

Yer just waitin for the wolves to finish eating it before you clean it up. Also, you can fit only so many wolves in any one given area. A population boom (or allowing one) could get out of hand, like rabbits in Australia.

But, musceling by a procedure that's designed to protect the species, is something I am bothered by. It says that it's OK to break our own laws and rules. Kinda like doing a pre-emptive nuclear strike on 'known' WMD caches. Which, at the moment is still illegal, but something else that might actually be legalized before the year is out. But, I only heard of this one via rumor, and I haven't found a reliable source yet, or a copy of the bill - to read it myself.

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:44 am

Baphnedia wrote:I'd be more upset that they broke procedure - because there are good reasons to keep numbers down in certain areas. We call it NIMBY. Not In My Back Yard. If you have wolves in your back yard, it probably means that you used to own livestock too.

See, I'm just not sure that killing them is the best answer either. I'm wondering why it wouldn't be feasable for them to trap the wolves and transport them somwhere else.

Baphnedia · Post by **Baphnedia** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:49 am

True - I wasn't trying to imply that killing them is the best answer. But sadly, we humans are sometimes to lazy to find a more equitable solution, and take the easy road over the right road.

We keep doing that, and we'll wind up either in the middle of nowhere, or a warzone. Or, who knows? Maybe we'd wind up with a warzone in the middle of nowhere. Oh, sorry... we already have that.

I'm not pointing anything at ya, Lupin, you make a great observation there.

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:02 am

Baphnedia wrote:True - I wasn't trying to imply that killing them is the best answer.

Oh sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like that. It's really really early, I'm tired (can't fall asleep) and my command of English grammar isn't really all that great right now. I was just questioning why the USFWS thinks it's necessary to break procedure and kill these wolves.

But sadly, we humans are sometimes to lazy to find a more equitable solution, and take the easy road over the right road.

Yep. I'm the posterboy for lazy. I'd provide an example but ehhh....

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:41 am

If they were justified in their decision, why'd they decide to sidestep the laws that their agency helped create?

Place your bets, who gets their head blown off first after 2008: George W. Bush or Gale A. Norton.

Teh_DarkJokerWolf · Post by **Teh_DarkJokerWolf** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:59 am

Terastas wrote:If they were justified in their decision, why'd they decide to sidestep the laws that their agency helped create?

Place your bets, who gets their head blown off first after 2008: George W. Bush or Gale A. Norton.

That's what I'm talking about!!! On these DvDs I got from two different wolf sancturies one called: WOLVES: and another one called: WOLF: it shows the people of the USFWS helping capture wolves from the place and checking them to make sure their healthy and on another one it states that the USFWS are Proud supporters of reintroduction of wolves!!!! SO why...how could they turn their backs on something they themselves fought so hard to bring back? Maybe they have no choice in the matter, but I don't know, maybe that's what I want to be the case.....Anyway I will do some research myself and I'll also call up to Yellowstone National Park and see if they have any answer as I've been donating to them for some time I hope they can tell me something useful. I also call the sanctuary here in st. louis to see if they have anything on this as well...If any of you can find out anything else that can better explain this mess, please pot it here so we all know......

Thank You

outwarddoodles · Post by **outwarddoodles** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:37 pm

I'm a little pissed, and if everyone else is pissed, than why don't you do something about it?

As I said, its up to us as wolf lovers to make sure wolves do not do depredation on livestock, I know maybe it should be the farmers job, but if we create the tolerance - The only thing needed to keep wolves alive - then hopefully wolves will live, don't exepct others to do it on their own. If we sit here and cuss and think all our problems will go away from doing so, you suck. Ehtier educate others, or get something moving. Device a plan to keep livestock and pets safe, with the mentioned educating the people about keeping others safe, and a system for livestock, inwhich the farmers often can't just lock them up for the night like they can (and should!) for cats and dogs. Hello, we can fix it in a different, smarter, and nicer, manner. Why arn't we?

Other than my veiws on that, my veiws on the depredation; Well, if its a few cases a year, I wouldn't care much, it should be considered a natural thing, just the same as if lightning struck your cow, if it becomes too much, then action should be taken. If the population grows to big I don't think out right killing should be the best thing, yet I don't know what else to do for that.

Black Shuck · Post by **Black Shuck** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:51 pm

I'm pissed! I think we all ought to write a letter to the b*stards!

If we start killing wolves again, the population really won't stand a chance to increase

I'm with you on the natural thing. Who would you go after if you cow got struck by lightening? God? Allah? The Devine? Who?! I can't believe they have permits out now

Grrr!!!!!

outwarddoodles · Post by **outwarddoodles** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:16 pm

I think the permits are stupid. The only people that should be killing wolves would be under control of the service, and only for good reasons.

Yet a letter? People are already being told and ranted at. As I said, we need to build the tolerance and come up with a solution, don't expect others to do it!

Prowler · Post by **Prowler** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:25 pm

When wolves where re-introduced to Scotland farmers shot them, there was no reason to either. The radio trackers on them proved it.
It defies logic to see people permited to kill a endangered native species. No-one is permited to kill humans in there native land so why is it so different for wolves?

Black Shuck · Post by **Black Shuck** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:28 pm

That's why I suggested a letter. No one else is gonna do it for us and we shouldn't sit around while wolves are being killed. Mind you, this wouldn't be a bitchy, ranting sort of letter. Yes, it'd have strong emotion, but I think that's kind of key in persuasive arguments. If people need to kill a wolf because it's being a problem and all other methods of dealing with it have failed (like relocating it), then....

I personally find killing something just to kill something wrong. Honestly now, who makes wolf jerky? And I really don't find stuffing it and using as home decor and saying "Well, I didn't leave it to rot," a justifiable reason to go shoot at something or poison it. That's just me and my feelings though

outwarddoodles · Post by **outwarddoodles** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:08 pm

Well right a letter directly to the wolf lovers who are capable of setting up a plan to work, create the tolerance. Don't make The Service do it, have us do it. If you have an idea to help create the tolerance - the main key to their survival - it would be important to spread that word to others who will do it.

I perfer when dealing with issues not to take such a colorful, emotional veiw. Yet a more brought out one, alot of wolf lovers anthromorphisize real wolves and over romanticsize (I know, can't spell.). That doesn't help becuase it is untrue and over emotional. If you want to write them a useful letter put facts into it why keeping wolves are a good thing, rather than 'Wolves have rights because they are people too' or 'What did the wolves do, they're angels!'. Not talk about how romantic and beautiful they are, yet, add some emotion, but not so much its just a load of BS. With an emotional peice you are giving opinion, not facts. 'Wolves are beautiful and should thus stay' is an opinion, 'Destroying Wolves will ruin the enviroment and kill another native species' is a fact. Don't give opinion, give facts.

The best reason to write to them is with a solution to this problem. Currently killing the wolves is their current solution. Right now its a matter of coming up with a much better one, and helping out directly with it. We need to do it, not them. Create the tolerance and they'll live, we'll create a solution to help keep livestock safe. Thats all we need to do.

Black Shuck · Post by **Black Shuck** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:28 pm

What I want to do is change the wolf permit. Wolf lovers won't hunt wolves, but others will. I think that wolf lovers should get together to create alternative plans of action for the Service so that people won't be killing wolves. We don't have the authority to go "Hey! Rancher! You can't kill a wolf!" We can try to sway him, sure, but in my experiance, most people like that just won't move from their view no matter how hard you try. I'm not saying wolves are angels or are people too, but if we're supposed to be the superior ones I think we need to help protect them. I don't think the Service would respond to a letter filled with romantisized views about wolves. They'd probably look at it and laugh and think "Oh, at least they tried," or something. If we gather enough of us and have some sort of petition to change this, and stick with it, creating this tolerance, we can stop this permit thing.

I can't stop a wolf from going after some cow on the mountains. I can try to stop a hell-bent rancher from going after a wolf, but I doubt it will do much good. We can band together and try to stop the rancher, and that may work or it may not. He has a permit to shoot a wolf, and that permit gives him every right to do so. Would he really change his mind? I'm sure a few would, but I think most wouldn't. I think some of this rests on us and some of it also rests on the Service because they are the ones who make the rules.

Anubis · Post by **Anubis** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:35 pm

WHAT THE f***!!!!!!!!! The USFWS is going to meet my friend MR. C4!!!
Polotitions don't know that f*** they are doing!!! that why i lost faith in the f*** country!!

BLOOD I WANT TO TASTE THIER BLOOD!! as i rip them apart!:x

Prowler · Post by **Prowler** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:50 pm

and you'd just get arrested lol

WereDog · Post by **WereDog** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:54 pm

anyone got a permit to extinct USFWS, id like to borrow it.

Jamie · Post by **Jamie** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:14 pm

It is not justifiable for a number of reasons:
1) There are civilian groups who compensate farmers for these livestock losses, usually more than the cows were worth, just to make it so farmers have no monetary incentive to wage a war against wolves.
2) Killing wolves, coyotes or other predators tends to not be a solution until the predator is exterminated from a wide area. Why? Because fractured populations are more like to prey on livestock, plus, killing a wolf pack makes that territory a "wolf vaccum" which draws more wolves as long as a larger population of wolves is out there.
3) There has been great success with "training" wild predators not to attack livestock. It is cheap and easy. It is done by leaving out carcasses of livestock that have been poisoned with a nonlethal poison that makes the wolves feel very, very sick but does them no long-term harm. Predators quickly come to believe that livestock are poisonous, and teach that to the next generation. Most predators are fairly unlikely to kill any species of animal that they were never taught to kill by their parents, especially if those parents reacted with fear when they saw that species of animal.
4) Excess populations of predators VERY rarely occur in nature, unlike the case with herbivores. Many tales of excess predators in an area are actually just myths, exaggerated by farmers who fear for their livestock and hunters who see predators as competition.

Darum · Post by **Darum** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:08 pm

WTF? aren't wolves protected by law? being indangered and all. not even the government can brake the law! as my good buddy Jim Raynor would put it: 'this is bull[censored]....'